Skip Nav

Archived Surplus/Closure

June 25, 2003 Frequently Asked Questions:

Q: If Section 22.J.3.b. states that “Flight Attendants deemed to be surplus will be permitted to put a bid on file for all domiciles on the system,” then why weren’t LAS and PHL included on the bid page?
A: An agreement to keep LAS and PHL open as modified co-terminals was not reached until after the closing of the Miami surplus bid.

Q: Since LAS and PHL Flight Attendants are now able to remain in those locations, why can’t the same thing be done for MIA surplus Flight Attendants?
A: AFA has advocated for many ways to keep MIA Flight Attendants from being surplussed. The surplus exists because of United’s decrease in scheduled flights out of Miami. Conversely, the flying in PHL and LAS has not changed. The company had simply intended to schedule that flying from different Flight Attendant domiciles.

Q: Why won’t the Company open the LAS and PHL base closure vacancies for a system transfer now that LAS and PHL Flight Attendants will not be taking those slots?
A: The vacancies posted for the LAS and PHL transfer bid were identified because the company planned to shift flying to other domiciles. This created the need for more Flight Attendants in those domiciles. Since LAS and PHL will remain open as modified co-terminals, the flying will continued to be scheduled with Flight Attendants based in these locations. This in turn cancels the vacancies for transfers to other domiciles.

AFA will continue to advocate that United run system transfers.