Many airline passengers probably don’t think much about how flight attendants can bid for the trips that they are assigned, and ultimately, how they can trade them with other flight attendants.
Along those lines, United Airlines seems to have an increasingly big problem with senior flight attendants selling trips to colleagues for profit — essentially, think of them as trip “pimps.” Unfortunately this practice is catching up with some employees at the airline, and is getting them fired.
In this post:
Why flight attendant trip trading has become problematic
Let’s start with a little bit of background. Flight attendants at virtually all airlines in the United States are assigned their schedules based on seniority. They can bid on their schedule for each month, and then a computer system will assign them trips based on their preferences (and other metrics), in order of seniority.
As you’d expect, some trips are much more senior than others, as you’ll notice as a passenger when boarding certain flights. 😉 Like, the crew on a San Francisco to Singapore flight is generally going to be more senior than the crew on a San Francisco to Los Angeles flight. It’s about the number of flight hours they can rack up in a trip, how desirable the destination is, etc.
If you need to fly 100 hours per month, it’s easier to take four long haul trips per month, rather than taking 50 short haul flights per month. Once flight attendants are issued their schedules, they’re able to trade trips, again, within certain parameters. The idea is that as long as all flights are covered, it doesn’t matter who works what flight. Fair enough, right?
Well, this is where the issue comes into play. Some senior flight attendants have turned their lucrative seniority into a side hustle. Essentially, they’ll bid on lucrative trips that they have no intention of flying, just to be able to sell them to more junior flight attendants. Yes, essentially some senior flight attendants are looking to get paid not to fly.
The idea is that it’s a win-win. A junior flight attendant can often get a lot of flight hours on these long haul trips, and then part of that pay goes back to the senior flight attendant. On the surface, this undermines the whole point of the seniority system, and it’s unfair to those playing by the rules.
What’s interesting is that not all airlines actually have rules against trading trips for cash. This is the policy at the “big three” US carriers (American, Delta, and United) but at Alaska, Frontier, JetBlue, and Southwest, there are no rules against trading trips for cash.
United firing flight attendants for increased trip trading
PYOK reports how United is increasingly cracking down on flight attendants selling trips to their colleagues. In recent times, the AFA-CWA, which is the union representing United flight attendants, says it has seen a “significant increase” in the number of flight attendants who are being terminated for violating the carrier’s rules on trip trading.
The union claims it’s going to “push back on every case” of flight attendants being fired, and demand they be reinstated, at least if they believe it wasn’t with cause. Per a memo:
“We demand a proper investigation, we demand a proper notice of this new reality, we demand a decision be made on fact and not suspicion, and we demand progressive discipline be adhered to when and ONLY IF wrongdoing is truly established.”
I would think that United would only be terminating flight attendants if they’re positive that they’re engaged in this practice. At the same time, there’s definitely some financial upside here for the airline. Flight attendants are paid based on their seniority, so it’s less expensive for a flight to be staffed by junior flight attendants than senior flight attendants. Of course go figure it’s the senior flight attendants here who would be fired.
Bottom line
United’s flight attendant union is warning that an increasing number of members are being fired for trip trading. The idea is that senior flight attendants get the lucrative trips, and then sell them to more junior colleagues. The senior flight attendants get paid some money to stay home, while the junior flight attendants get to travel somewhere fun, and possibly still get paid more than they otherwise would, even after paying off their colleague.
While airlines like Southwest have no rules against this, United strictly prohibits it, given that it undermines the point of the seniority system.
What do you make of this trip trading for money phenomenon?
Excellent, finally some accountability to flight attendants who think they are above the rules and show personal favoritism. They hardly ever deal with their direct supervisor anyhow. They get away with way too much
Some senior flight attendants need to find something else to do. They come across as angry and disgruntled. After decades doing the job, if you’re no longer happy then move on. The attractive benefits and pay keep them anchored to the job and not a desire to provide safety. Also, at that point they are no longer suitable to be customer facing.
Unfair, unethical, against the rules, mobesque behavior. Out they go.
The whole seniority system for Pilots and Flight attendants is unique to this part of the Airline industry.
All other Airline workers just get a roster based on their union agreement with their company.
You can swap with other staff if you need a specific day off but everyone is on the same level.
This bidding system also costs the airlines millions to administer and should be phased out over time.
Maybe I'm missing something, but how exactly does this work? If an FA has to work a minimum of 100 hours / month (to use your number), and they trade a desirable flight like sfo-sin to a junior, then they need to pick up something else to meet their minimum. So they're going to fly 10 turns of sfo-lax instead?
Is that what's happening? If so, I'm kinda surprised a senior FA would be willing...
Maybe I'm missing something, but how exactly does this work? If an FA has to work a minimum of 100 hours / month (to use your number), and they trade a desirable flight like sfo-sin to a junior, then they need to pick up something else to meet their minimum. So they're going to fly 10 turns of sfo-lax instead?
Is that what's happening? If so, I'm kinda surprised a senior FA would be willing to get rid of the original flight and take on such a crappy schedule instead, unless we're talking substantial money (in which case, what's the point for the junior FA, since they're paying it out of whatever they might earn from that flight?).
Am I missing something?
Don't worry about missing something , just be happy you won't have the senior FA grouching .
@Lune - maybe they bid for 150 hours of desirable routes, sell off the first 50 in the first week of the month, then work their required 100 hours in weeks 2-4?
Illegal, unethical and immoral.
Yep ... this is the problem with the law of the jungle . Not classy .
No system is perfect, but this may improve with a different microeconomic currency. Labor incentivizes seniority, Management incentivizes low cost, both currencies distort this economy (as comments note). If flight bidding was incentivized by ranking doing a good job and not being an ashat, the grey-economies that form would be less disruptive. It has downsides, but perhaps fewer downsides to seniority or pay-based bidding. Who does the ranking would have to be transparent and in...
No system is perfect, but this may improve with a different microeconomic currency. Labor incentivizes seniority, Management incentivizes low cost, both currencies distort this economy (as comments note). If flight bidding was incentivized by ranking doing a good job and not being an ashat, the grey-economies that form would be less disruptive. It has downsides, but perhaps fewer downsides to seniority or pay-based bidding. Who does the ranking would have to be transparent and in the hands of both management and labor. But, grey-economies where a well performing, friendly FA sells their routes to grumpy ashats may be a problem, but it at least rewards the right thing and less likely for mgmt to take advantage of labor, or labor of management. And as good people are often the first to leave toxic spaces, in some industries, seniority does seem to have a partial correlation to grumpyashatism.
Isn't this the airline that gutted the pension fund and gave it's execs multimillion dollar bonuses while laying off thousands of employees and then declaring bankruptcy, receiving a bailout? And there's a news story about senior employees who are paid so little they sell their shifts? And there are people here who think they should go to jail for unreported income???
As a flight attendant, I wish the airlines would get rid of seniority as the basis for everything. It makes the job somewhat miserable for junior flight attendants, and makes it so lucrative for the seniors that they never want to leave, which in turn puts more burden on the juniors.
Of course you wish for that you are at the bottom you are the Pleco fish now but you forgot that everyone else went through that and worst so stop whining and pay your dues just like everyone else, you whine and complain too much and you haven’t flown 50hrs yet you just got out of IOE that why you were anonymous. Option two go back to your old job or school simple
When the seniors don't want to leave , it also puts a burden on the passengers . The law of the jungle ought to be the benchmark .
Everybody forgets that senior people have paid their dues and so will you
-most jobs have seniority, base systems, police, fireman, nurses, etc.
That being said many foreign carriers just divide trips and put them on a roster and no matter what seniority everybody flies, but seniority still can choose certain trips at certain times
. You can’t just wall into a flood attendant job. I think you’re going to get Christmas...
Everybody forgets that senior people have paid their dues and so will you
-most jobs have seniority, base systems, police, fireman, nurses, etc.
That being said many foreign carriers just divide trips and put them on a roster and no matter what seniority everybody flies, but seniority still can choose certain trips at certain times
. You can’t just wall into a flood attendant job. I think you’re going to get Christmas off while someone with 40 and 50 years has to fly. It’s not reality and it’s not how the airline business works.
Seniority is the basis for almost everything. It what's you have earn after being there for years. It took me almost 22 years to get to #3 on the Seniority list where I work. I pick the schedule I want, the vacation I want. I'd be a bit peeved if someone whose only been there for two years gets to pick their shift or vacation before I do.
Across PYOK, VFTW, and now OMAAT, every post in the blog-space diagnoses the symptoms or points to Southwest’s barter model, yet nobody actually offers a viable cure. That’s probably because there is no clean, one-size-fits-all solution for how to best allocate and exchange finite, subjectively "good" or "bad" trips without destroying flexibility or creating a shadow economy.
Seniority with open trades creates landlords extracting rent from junior staff. Strict bans kill emergency flexibility. Southwest's bounty...
Across PYOK, VFTW, and now OMAAT, every post in the blog-space diagnoses the symptoms or points to Southwest’s barter model, yet nobody actually offers a viable cure. That’s probably because there is no clean, one-size-fits-all solution for how to best allocate and exchange finite, subjectively "good" or "bad" trips without destroying flexibility or creating a shadow economy.
Seniority with open trades creates landlords extracting rent from junior staff. Strict bans kill emergency flexibility. Southwest's bounty boards create middleman brokers. Corporate auction boards would lead to company-run scalping, which labor would wisely oppose.
Like, does anyone have actual better ideas for this? No, bashing unions and making disparaging remarks about crews don't count.
Of course we have ideas. Airlines all over the world do this with no problem at all and deliver better service at a lower cost
When unions are the heart of the problem, bashing them is fine
Ghost: "Of course we have ideas"—and then offers zero actual ideas.
Even in non-union environments, allocating a fixed pool of desirable routes to thousands of employees creates a high-demand asset. If you don't use seniority, what are you using? Favoritism? Pay-to-work? I see drawbacks there.
So, I'll ask again: under US labor law, how do you structure an exchange system that preserves genuine emergency flexibility without creating a secondary cash market or handing company...
Ghost: "Of course we have ideas"—and then offers zero actual ideas.
Even in non-union environments, allocating a fixed pool of desirable routes to thousands of employees creates a high-demand asset. If you don't use seniority, what are you using? Favoritism? Pay-to-work? I see drawbacks there.
So, I'll ask again: under US labor law, how do you structure an exchange system that preserves genuine emergency flexibility without creating a secondary cash market or handing company scheduling over to third-party brokers? Still waiting on those "ideas."
Rent-seeking only becomes attractive when rules create artificial scarcity without transparency. A well-designed system - for example, limiting the number of trip trades, prohibiting cash compensation, requiring equal-value exchanges, or using a points-based allocation that expires each bid period - can preserve flexibility.
Seniority isn't inherently bad; the issue is whether it grants perpetual control over desirable trips. Seniority can still determine initial awards while allowing subsequent reallocations based on transparent rules that give everyone...
Rent-seeking only becomes attractive when rules create artificial scarcity without transparency. A well-designed system - for example, limiting the number of trip trades, prohibiting cash compensation, requiring equal-value exchanges, or using a points-based allocation that expires each bid period - can preserve flexibility.
Seniority isn't inherently bad; the issue is whether it grants perpetual control over desirable trips. Seniority can still determine initial awards while allowing subsequent reallocations based on transparent rules that give everyone opportunities to access long-haul trips.
Thank you, Willy. Now, those are actual ideas, at least. A points-based model with expiring allocations is probably the closest thing to a pseudo-market solution.
But still, how do we 'police' off-book compensation? Prohibiting cash is already company policy. When a senior FA drops a Paris turn directly to a junior FA under an "equal value" or "points swap" framework, the airline's computer only sees a valid system trade. It can't see the $300...
Thank you, Willy. Now, those are actual ideas, at least. A points-based model with expiring allocations is probably the closest thing to a pseudo-market solution.
But still, how do we 'police' off-book compensation? Prohibiting cash is already company policy. When a senior FA drops a Paris turn directly to a junior FA under an "equal value" or "points swap" framework, the airline's computer only sees a valid system trade. It can't see the $300 Venmo or Zelle transaction that happened 5 minutes prior. How do you enforce "no cash" when the payment happens entirely outside the company system?
Willy ... first paragraph says nothing , really . Give us an actual example . Second paragraph is wrong ; seniority is inherently bad in first cabin .
Oof. While Ghost took the bait on unions; Alert did on crews. Unlike Willy, both of you offered no actual ideas. *facepalm*
Which is illegal, unethical and immoral: The senior flight attendants side hustle or corporate for using the opportunity to thin out the senior ranks? I'm not too keen on passing judgment; I prefer to just treat this article as it is written--it's informational only and my feelings and opinion are irrelevant to the matter.
Lawrence, my original comment was focused on solutions for the underlying system design problem, not more judgment (the rest of the comment section has that covered.)
The flaw in viewing this as "management vs. senior crew" is that it ignores who actually pays the price. Airline executives don't lose money on these Venmo trades; junior flight attendants do. When senior crew hoard line items to extract cash, it’s lower-paid workers taking the hit. There should...
Lawrence, my original comment was focused on solutions for the underlying system design problem, not more judgment (the rest of the comment section has that covered.)
The flaw in viewing this as "management vs. senior crew" is that it ignores who actually pays the price. Airline executives don't lose money on these Venmo trades; junior flight attendants do. When senior crew hoard line items to extract cash, it’s lower-paid workers taking the hit. There should be a better way that preserves fairness and flexibility. Some have shared their thoughts on new mechanisms, as have I (below, blind pools, 72-hour drops, etc.) If you have some ideas, feel free to share. Otherwise, enjoy the discussion.
If you trade 100% of your trips in a month you lose 40 years of seniority in the next allocation.
50% of your trips: 20 years etc.
Applies to both parties so seniors can't pressure juniors to say they were the instigators.
Doesn't prevent those who need to swap for urgent issues - they just get less desirable trips the next month.
Juniors getting better trip one month willing to have...
If you trade 100% of your trips in a month you lose 40 years of seniority in the next allocation.
50% of your trips: 20 years etc.
Applies to both parties so seniors can't pressure juniors to say they were the instigators.
Doesn't prevent those who need to swap for urgent issues - they just get less desirable trips the next month.
Juniors getting better trip one month willing to have a weaker starting point the next.
Does discourage bidding for desirable trips the bidder doesn't actually want to work.
Albert ... Law of the jungle .
Credit to Albert for actually proposing a specific formula. However, docking 20 or 40 years of seniority based on trade volume seems pretty extreme. Demoting a 30-year veteran to the bottom of reserves, say, due to a family emergency, is overkill. Besides, most CBSs strictly protect seniority, so the companies won't be able to dramatically alter hire-date status.
To overcome this 'black market,' I've been thinking of a system of blind clearing 'pools.' Like,...
Credit to Albert for actually proposing a specific formula. However, docking 20 or 40 years of seniority based on trade volume seems pretty extreme. Demoting a 30-year veteran to the bottom of reserves, say, due to a family emergency, is overkill. Besides, most CBSs strictly protect seniority, so the companies won't be able to dramatically alter hire-date status.
To overcome this 'black market,' I've been thinking of a system of blind clearing 'pools.' Like, first, no one would be able to drop a trip into a specific employee ID, unless it's an equal-value trip-for-trip swap. Then, any unwanted trips would go into a central automated pool that awards based on contractual criteria (seniority or first-come, etc.) Require drops to enter the pool at least 72 hours before check-in. This way, no one is collecting 'rents' or holding trips 'hostage' from anyone else.
It really is challenging to stay within the applicable labor laws, contracts, company policies, and still achieve some sense of fairness and flexibility. Challenging, but still possible. May have to try some new things. Some of it may work; some of it will probably fail, again. Worth trying regardless.
I was suggesting the docking of seniority only for the next allocation.
The following one back to where one was.
For a family emergency one does it; for extracting cash it's a deterrent, even if for some FAs it might be worth cycling between high seniority and low seniority months.
I was taught many years ago how FA & FO can manipulate their schedules and vacation weeks to literally have an entire month off.
Let’s use week 42 in the middle of October. They are also a very senior FA. The bid an international line this month and only have to fly 2x during the month of October. If the first trip - say 5 day - ends and it touches the vacation week,...
I was taught many years ago how FA & FO can manipulate their schedules and vacation weeks to literally have an entire month off.
Let’s use week 42 in the middle of October. They are also a very senior FA. The bid an international line this month and only have to fly 2x during the month of October. If the first trip - say 5 day - ends and it touches the vacation week, they will not work that 5 days trip. If their 2nd trip in the month starts touching the end of their vacation they don’t work the second flight that month. So a 1 week vacation becomes a 2 week paid vacation. The new FA ratified TA will offer the FA group - not sure about the FOs - 10 weeks and 3 days - if they play the system efficiently - there is a likelyhood that will only work 2 months of the year - and that equates to 2 5-days international flight for those 2 months. Total away from home, 20 days per year.
I’m not saying there isn’t a very savvy FA who has figured this out - but it is a possibility.
It costs the company money b/c you have senior attendants getting paid benefits and sitting on lines they don't fly. Plus it creates a predatory work environment where you have senior employees monetizing their seniority. This is not the same thing as trading trips or picking up a trip from open time; it's also not the same thing as a senior attendant offering money to another attendant to fly the trip.
"Yes, essentially some senior flight attendants are looking to get paid not to fly."
I was under the impression that the FAs could *trade* trips. How does an FA "selling" a long-haul to a more junior FA allow the senior FA not to have to work at all?
It's considered a "trade" even if it's a one-way trade where one F/A gives the other F/A trip without a trip in exchange. Think of it in terms of trading your trip with another F/A's days off.
Ben , you used a bad street word in your second paragraph .
When is your 12th birthday? Only asking because I'd like to throw you a party (and serve girl food, of course).
having senior employees getting rid of their lucrative bid lines does cost the company because they get benefits which could be 33%-40% of their salary.
The big 3 would rather have senior FAs that don't want their trips to just retire rather than have to pay their benefits.
Better yet , have no more FAs . Law of the jungle .
If FAs want to act this way, the airlines should auction off the best trips. How much is a FA willing to pay the airline to work an awesome trip and shorten their work days for the month? One 12.5 hour round trip just ate 1/4 of your monthly work requirement.
So many questions
1) what the amount of $$$ exchanged
2) how to the airline work this out? (programmatically or is there a forum for trading)
Every flight attendant knows selling trips is strictly forbidden. And no it's not a way of getting rid of senior flight attendants. What a dumb remark.
Just an easy way of an airline getting rid of a high cost employee.
High cost employees don't get to break company policies. They should be canned and reported to the IRS, so they can verify the additional income was included in their taxes.
I'm fully with UA on this one, senior (or any, for that matter) FAs that are engaging in activities that go against company policy should be terminated.
Heck, I'd go as far as saying that this concept of "trading trips" shouldn't even exist in the first place: If an FA can no longer take a trip, the system should make that trip available to anyone, not to a specific person. At most and if...
I'm fully with UA on this one, senior (or any, for that matter) FAs that are engaging in activities that go against company policy should be terminated.
Heck, I'd go as far as saying that this concept of "trading trips" shouldn't even exist in the first place: If an FA can no longer take a trip, the system should make that trip available to anyone, not to a specific person. At most and if time allows, offer it under the same seniority/conditions it was offered in the first place. Otherwise you end up with this sort of situations, where senior FAs get an undeserved gain (be it monetary, social/favors or whatever) while profiteering off of their junior colleagues, all while undermining the entire seniority system.
As long as there is proof of direct or indirect gain for the senior FA (difficult for non-monetary gain, and even for monetary not sure how easy that is to obtain in the US), UA and other airlines should make an example of those abusing the system, otherwise it will be a never-ending cycle of abuse.
I am with you Ben. In addition, the Union's response is appalling. Instead of blasting UA, they should be blasting their members for even doing this.
Are the FA's who are selling the trips reporting the cash income on their tax returns?
I would assume not and the government doesn't like it when people don't pay their "fair share."
Which puts United in a precarious position of potentially facilitating tax evasion.
Or at least this is how it was explained to me 30 years ago when I worked at the airport and people were throwing cash around to cover shifts.
All of those years of service, dealing with disruptive passengers, weather delays etc all for maybe a few thousand dollars if they can keep it up undetected. Not. Worth. It.
So eliminate the FAs . Law of the jungle .