Archive for Class Action Grievances

Union and Company Settle Grievance #009-2013

in the service of
as represented by

This Grievance Settlement Agreement (hereinafter “GSA”) is made and entered into in accordance with the provisions of Title II of the Railway Labor Act, as amended, by and between NETJETS AVIATION, INC., its successors and assigns (hereinafter “Company” or “NetJets”) and the Flight Attendants in the Service of NetJets as represented by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Airline Division (hereinafter “IBT” or “Union”).

WHEREAS, the Union filed a Class Action Grievance (# 009-2013) – which was modified to withdraw certain Union concerns subsequent to the grievance hearing – that alleges it is a violation of the Agreement for NetJets to require a Flight Attendant to respond to a Company Letter of Investigation when the Flight Attendant is not on duty (hereinafter “the dispute”); and

WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to settle all issues related to the dispute that have not previously been resolved.

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties stipulate and agree as follows:

1.  NetJets will issue a Letter of Warning to one of the 93 Flight Attendants who were sent a non-disciplinary Letter of Counseling by the Director of Operations on or about October 18, 2013. The Letter of Warning will be issued to the Flight Attendant identified to the Union in lieu of NetJets issuing a planned Letter of Warning with a one-day unpaid suspension.

2.  In lieu of issuing a planned Letter of Warning to an additional 12 of the 93 Flight Attendants referenced in Paragraph 1 above who NetJets asserts have not come into compliance with the submission of expenses, NetJets will issue a second non-disciplinary Letter of Counseling (“LOC”). The LOC will state that, among other things, as measured from the date of receipt of the LOC, the Flight Attendant will have seven (7) business days to get all expenses identified in the LOC properly submitted into Concur.

3.  If a Flight Attendant who receives an LOC pursuant to the terms of this GSA does not, for reasons within his or her control, properly submit into Concur all expenses identified in the LOC, NetJets intends to issue a Letter of Warning and another directive to the Flight Attendant requiring compliance within seven (7) additional business days, as measured from the date of receipt of the Letter of Warning.

4.  A Flight Attendant who fails to comply with the directive in the Letter of Warning referenced in Paragraph three above by the established deadline will no longer be covered by this GSA, and will instead be handled in accordance with Section 2 (“Management’s Rights”) of the 2006 Basic Agreement.

5.  A Flight Attendant is not obligated to complete a Company Letter of Investigation while in Prospective Rest, as that term is defined in subsection 3.35 of the 2006 Basic Agreement.

6.  A Flight Attendant who is not in Prospective Rest is required, upon receipt of a Company Letter of Investigation, to be responsive; provided, a Flight Attendant may request, and the Company will not unreasonably withhold, a reasonable extension of the response deadline for good cause.

7.  Within five days of the date this GSA is executed, a member of the Flight Attendant Executive Council (“FAEC”) or authorized representative of Local 284 will telephone and discuss the specific terms of this GSA with each Flight Attendant who will receive a second non-disciplinary Letter of Counseling or Letter of Warning. During the discussion with each Flight Attendant, the Union will in good faith also represent that this “clean slate” GSA is representative of a partnership between the parties, and that the parties share the expectation that the Flight Attendant will remain in compliance with the business expense policy on a go-forward basis.

8.  This GSA will apply only under the circumstances addressed herein and will not set a precedent for the handling of any disciplinary matter in the future. Further, this GSA will not be cited as evidence of “disparate treatment” in any future arbitral proceeding over discipline that may be issued to a Flight Attendant.

Signed this ___ day of December 2013

For the Company
Mark Okey
V.P., Labor Contract Compliance

For the Union
Paul Suffoletto
Treasurer-Secretary, International Brotherhood
of Teamsters, Local 284

Flight Line 11/10/13

CAG filed over Lampert Email
Dear Flight Attendants,

The Union has received many calls from Flight Attendants about the email sent out by Mr. Lampert on November 5, 2013 concerning expense reports. We encourage you to respond to his email and his (5) questions .  However, the Union has also notified the Company that this email is in direct violation of our contract, in that it ordered Flight Attendants to respond to the email-Letter of Investigation, including by answering questions about their understanding of Company policy, even if Flight Attendant was not on duty during the three (3) day period, e.g., on vacation, sick leave, a leave of absence, a day off or in rest.  Accordingly, the Union has filed a Class Action Grievance over this matter seeking that the Company do the following to remedy the violation:

1.    Cease and desist requiring Flight Attendants to respond to Company emails when they are not on duty and/or not on a duty day.
2.    Cease and desist requiring Flight Attendants to submit expense reports when they are not on duty and/or not on a duty day.
3.    Pay one (1) extended day to Flight Attendants who were

not on duty and/or not on a duty day for the three (3) day period and responded to the email.
Similar letters were also sent to numerous Pilots, and NJASAP has also filed a Class Action Grievance over this matter.
Please be sure to respond to Mr. Lampert’s email along with answering the 5 questions posed and we will keep you notified of the status of the grievance.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact a member of the FAEC.
Thank you,