TWU Local 556 Negotiation Update #23

The TWU Local 556 Negotiating Committee met with Southwest Airlines for a three-day session on March 3-5. During this session both teams presented counterproposals for the following Articles:

Article 29 – Domiciles
Article 15 – Leave of Absence
Article 16 – Sick Leave/OJI
Article 35 – Hotels and Transportation
Article 28 – Scheduling Policy
Article 24 – General and Miscellaneous

Day One:

The NT provided the Company with our counterproposal for Article 29: Domiciles. The Company presented counterproposals for Articles 15: Leave of Absence and Article 16: Sick Leave/OJI, both of which contained little to no movement from the Company’s previous pass for these Articles. 

Both parties agreed to spend the second day of our session in caucus to allow each team to review what had been presented. 

Day Three:

Counterproposals were proposed for Articles 15: Leave of Absence, Article 16: Sick Leave/OJI, and Article 24: General and Miscellaneous. The Company’s movement with respect to Articles 15 and 16 has come to a grinding halt. Because we cannot negotiate against ourselves, there were few changes made in our proposals for Articles 15 and 16 as we continue to seek many of the improvements and protections that you, our Members, have expressed are important. 

As explained in our September 25, 2019 update, the Company has proposed changes to Article 24, Section 6, which currently requires the Company to negotiate “rates of pay, rules and working conditions in the event that the Company places into service an aircraft other than the Boeing 737-200/300/500/600/700/800/MAX-7/MAX-8 and 717, institutes meal service, or international flights to destinations other than those stipulated in Article 5.” The Company has proposed the elimination of this important language; and instead they only want to negotiate with your Union in the event it places into service a wide-body aircraft or an aircraft with a seating configuration requiring less than three Flight Attendants. The Company passionately expressed its position that this was very important and something it needed.

We advised the Company we would welcome negotiations over rates of pay, rules and working conditions in the event a new aircraft type is introduced, but we cannot do so in the dark. We pointedly asked whether there was concrete information regarding a new aircraft type for which the parties may negotiate, but, according to Company negotiators, allegedly there are no solid plans for a different aircraft type at this time. Instead, the Company wants you to relinquish this important negotiation language simply to provide them with greater flexibility. We advised the Company we are unwilling to give away hard-fought contract language protecting the right to negotiate based simply on unknown requests for flexibility. We pointedly asked for greater transparency regarding future plans, as opposed to hiding behind the guise of flexibility.

The Company provided counterproposals for Articles 28: Scheduling Policy, 29: Domiciles, and 35: Duration and Termination. We are currently reviewing these proposals in an effort to reach an agreement.

While this session seemed less contentious than last week, we still hold significant concerns regarding the nominal changes being made by the Company in Articles 15 and 16. In recent sessions, the Company has attempted to justify its failure to make meaningful movement on these Articles by referencing the “current approach to negotiations.” We find this  alarming. The Company undoubtedly prefers a rushed negotiation, as evidenced by the comprehensive push for a quick deal. Having failed to achieve this is no excuse for the Company’s continued engagement in non-movement at the table. We hope they realize this sooner rather than later so that we may return to a more productive style of negotiations. 

The next bargaining session is scheduled for March 24-26.