The United Airlines flight attendants union, AFA-CWA, has seen its negotiations with the airline drag on. They’ve been without a new contract since the last one become amendable in August 2021. And they have been talking up strikes.
Keyed to the airline’s announcement of an order for 110 new planes, flight attendants union President Ken Diaz put out a statement suggesting the airline is prioritizing planes over people.
United management has made it clear once again: there’s plenty of money and desire to invest in the airline. New planes, new gates, new service, new lounges. The time is now for an industry-leading and industry-groundbreaking United Flight Attendant contract.
He went on to threaten strikes:
Time is up for United management to make good on “good leads the way” with the contract improvements we have earned. Our union is prepared to press forward on these negotiations for near-term resolution and will redouble efforts to back up our Negotiating Committee with action, and, if necessary, a strike vote and CHAOS™ preparations.
However criticizing aircraft orders as somehow harmful to employees misunderstands how airlines work. And since he certainly knows better, he’s mocking his own members as simpletons as he riles them up.
- Airlines need planes to fly places. Without them they do not need flight attendants.
- United needs planes to replace aging aircraft. Without them, they’d need fewer flight attendants.
- They’re also ordering planes in order to grow, which means they will need more flight attendants.
More planes are, in general, good for airline workers. If you want to make a nuanced case against United’s order in particular and claim it is too large for their balance sheet, and overly optimistic, that’s one thing. If the carrier winds up in bankruptcy that’s bad for labor (since labor contracts may get rewritten).
This is why AFA-CWA’S Sara Nelson so vigorously supported pandemic-era airline bailouts with the ruse that they protected worker pay. They were subsidies to shareholders and creditors mostly (indeed, the second and third payroll support programs were over 80% subsidies to the airline itself) but that almost certainly averted bankruptcy at American and possibly at United, too.
But United’s flight attendants union isn’t making the case that they know better than management how to manage the airline’s balance sheet. They’re making the rather specious claim that United is (1) flush with cash, but (2) wasting that cash on planes rather than workers, squandering available money on something less important than employees. AFA-CWA leadership aren’t rubes, but they clearly think little of the intellectual chops of their membership.
Meanwhile AFA-CWA’s reliance of “CHAOS” (Create Havoc Around Our System) is an alternative to strikes. They walk out on specific flights on particular days instead of striking broadly, because it’s low cost to workers (most of whom get paid for most of their trips) knowing that flight attendants don’t have the financial wherewithal to withstand an extended walkout without pay.
Sara Nelson would make Stalin blush
Gary, you have too much time on your hands, and maybe a tad b it of envy. Nelson is a very effective advocate for her troops. Yes, unions do argue for more wages when company liquidity allows for large orders of aircraft. But your claim that Nelson doesn’t know her members, or your trope that she disrespects her members is belied by the fact that she’s been elected by those members repeatedly due to her effectiveness. Despite her ability to get result for her members, she still has close ties to United leadership. They and she know that they both win when the airline is successful.
@jw – Nelson runs the AFA-CWA, not the union local which represents United.
And being elected by membership doesn’t mean the leader respects the members. Just look over at American and google “Laura Glading” and also google “american airlines bob ross arbitration”
Step aside SPECTRE and James Bond, we have CHAOS and Sarah Nelson.
Gary, after rereading your post I disagree with your evaluation. My read on the above is that the union sees United spending money like a drunken sailor on leave on everything but the flight attendants and that looks pretty valid. If United had acted in better faith and not kept the union in limbo for years without a contract I might be inclined to cut the company a little more slack and the union less but it’s tough to read United’s actions or lack thereof in any positive way for the FA’s. United is just acting in particularly bad faith.
The more accurate takeaway is that United’s FA union, and all unions, only care about short term wins that they can tout to their members. They don’t care if their actions bankrupt the company or destroy the industry…like the American automobile industry. This is on full display as they transparently use mafia tactics to destroy the company that employs its members. It is the height of shameless to accuse others of greed while demanding more money for yourselves. United, and AA, need to grow a set, say no, lock out the union, and hire fresh new FAs that aren’t bitter grumpy old hags, and that actually want to do the job with a smile on their face. Short term pain for sure, but long term their business will be much better off free from the constant threats of terrorist union bosses.
Thank goodness for unions.
Corporate greed knows no bounds, good to see them being called out on it from time to time
@ Gary,
Unions do not care about new jobs/new members. They car about existing members getting paid more than they are worth.
Union scum being union scum.
@Ann – Don’t tell the others. They might realize that without unions they’d be living on $7.25 an hour since corporations could do anything they want to regular people. It’s rather strange that the commenters don’t mind benefiting from unions while tossing out childish insults rather than arguments.
@Christian – OK, bootlicker, whatever. No union has every helped me personally, or anyone in my industry. My one brief sojourn in a field where I was legally required to be in the union or I couldn’t work – THAT’s a problem right there. Union scum being union scum. I have NEVER benefited from a union.
It’s not 1895 anymore. Unions should be illegal.
@Walter. Nice job owning the childish comments! No actual lucid arguments but lots of third grade insults. Given your apparent educational level the third grade part seems pretty accurate. For your edification (look it up), Google West Virginia Coal Wars or Carnegie Steel to learn how unions have vastly benefited you.
They haven’t benefited me, dipshit. My family was never involved in those industries, or even those regions. I repeat – union bootlicker being a union bootlicker.
Walter, you obviously have no clue what you’re talking about. All of the laws in place to protect workers’ safety on the job? Every single one of them is thanks to a union at some point in time. That’s just one simple example of how unions, whether directly or indirectly, have helped us all. Now, go back to being a corporate stooge.
AA,SW AND UAL FLIGHT ATTENDANTS, NO CONTRACT?
SHUT IT DOWN!!
THE HOLIDAYS ARE COMING!
BRACE FOR IMPACT!