Aloha's unions reject pay cut-for-jobs tradeoff
By Susan Hooper
Advertiser Staff Writer
Unions representing Aloha Airlines' employees have rejected the company's proposal that most workers take off two days a month without pay as a way of bringing back 250 employees furloughed after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
Advertiser library photo
In a letter to Glenn Zander, Aloha's president and chief executive officer, officials with the company's five unions said the request amounted to donating two days' pay to the company. They listed several reasons for rejecting the proposal, including concern the airline had not proved that the furloughs were caused by business lost after the attacks.
Officials with Aloha Airlines' five unions said the company's proposal amounted to donating two days' pay to the carrier.
In their letter, union officials said they were concerned the furloughs were "hasty, ill-planned and in excess of the company's real needs. ... Should the company reconsider and provide such information, facts, figures and detailed business plans and projections, we may be able to reconsider our decision."
The letter came a day before the response deadline set by the company. Aloha had proposed that all but about 740 employees take the two days off without pay. It needed the approval of all its employee groups to go ahead with the plan.
Most of the 250 furloughed employees have been out of work for more than five weeks. Aloha could not say when the furloughs now might end, said spokesman Stu Glauberman.
"We're monitoring the market ... to see when business returns," he said.
Glauberman said Zander would respond to the unions' specific concerns in a letter.
Zander said last night in a statement: "This was an offer to trade two days off for bringing back furloughed workers. Notwithstanding our written proposal and further clarifications, they (the union leaders) have chosen to misinterpret what we offered because they are apparently unwilling to make that trade. We are most disappointed for the workers who are on furlough."
Randy Kauhane, president of the Hawaii State Machinist Council of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, which represents clerical and office workers, said the letter represented the feelings of workers.
"We've had our meetings with our membership, and generally that was the consensus of the membership — that we rejected the plan. And that was why we are sending a letter to the company regarding this," said Kauhane, one of the five co-signers.
Officials with unions representing Aloha's pilots, flight attendants, transport workers and mechanics and related employees also signed the letter, which Kauhane said was mailed to Zander Tuesday.
Aloha had about 3,000 employees before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Like other airlines across the country, it saw a sharp drop in business after the hijackings of four commercial jets and the deaths of thousands of people.
Aloha reduced its flight schedule by 26 percent and furloughed about 8 percent of its work force to compensate for the loss of business.
The company has said payroll savings under its proposal would equal that of the furloughs. Union representatives believe, however, that the money saved would exceed that from the furloughs, Kauhane said.
In their letter union leaders said Aloha had shown a "reluctance to demonstrate a marketing program to regain our interisland market." They also accused Aloha of transferring interisland flights to the company's subsidiary, Aloha Island Air, "in violation of commitments made to Aloha's unions..."
Furthermore, they said, "... we do not wish to act prematurely before an accurate picture emerges of the longer term situation facing the Hawaiian air travel industry," including factors such as governmental assistance, market recovery and falling fuel prices.
Karen Nakaoka, vice president of Local Council 54 of the Association of Flight Attendants, said last night that Aloha's unions all had similar concerns about the proposal.
"I think the one thing that concerned us the most is that the company wasn't able to provide us with a financial plan that went along with the recovery plan," she said. "They weren't able to show us the need or the numbers that would go along with the plan, and that was our primary concern.
"We were told that there wasn't one, which I find very difficult to believe," she said. "We'd absolutely be open to anything — to additional discussions, or further discussions, if they are able to provide us with more information."
