The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 9.24 MKBHD Situation is Crazy, Doctor Mike vs Lunchly, Elon Musk Gives Up, The Flight Attendant Problem &

Episode Date: September 24, 2024

Some people are overreacting BUT this is a big big miss… Just go to https://www.zocdoc.com/phil and download the Zocdoc app for FREE. Then find and book a top-rated doctor today!  Go to http://hellofresh.com/freedefranco to get one free breakfast item per box while subscription is active. New Limited Drop @ https://BeautifulBastard.com is LIVE AND YOU CAN GET 20-60% OFF on Drop Week! 42 Days Until Election Day! Make Sure You Are Registered to VOTE: https://Vote.org  – ✩ TODAY’S STORIES ✩ – 00:00 - MKBHD Responds to Backlash After Launching Panels App 05:12 - Elon Musk Backs Down in Brazil & Agrees to Comply with Judge’s Orders 08:01 - Sponsored by ZocDoc 09:12 - One Third of Former NFL Players Believe They Have CTE 11:00 - Health System to Pay $65 Million Settlement After Hackers Leaked Patient Images 13:24 - Rep. NE Senator Stops Effort to Change State Electoral Rules in Favor of Trump  16:32 - Sponsored by HelloFresh 17:30 - Despite the Glamorous Reputation, Flight Attendants Are Overworked & Underpaid ——————————   Produced by: Cory Ray Edited by: James Girardier, Maxwell Enright, Julie Goldberg, Christian Meeks, Matthew Henry Art Department: William Crespo Writing/Research: Philip DeFranco, Brian Espinoza, Lili Stenn, Maddie Crichton, Chris Tolve, Star Pralle, Jared Paolino Associate Producer on Flight Attendants: Jared Paolino Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sup, you beautiful bastards. Welcome back to the Philip DeFranco Show, your daily dive into the news, and we have a wild one today. So you know what? I'm just gonna hit you with that monkey and let's jump into it. This is a news show.

So in surprising online drama news, it was actually one of the most requested stories today. MKBHD, aka Marques Brownlee, is coming under fire, and it doesn't appear that everyone is on his side this time. Right, and that because a lot of people have said he just released a shameless cash grab. With this coming from him launching an app called Panels,

which offers curated wallpapers for iPhones and Androids. With him writing yesterday, I'm so pumped to be launching this app. People have asked where I get wallpapers forever, so this is the answer. Now and forever, Panels. With Marques also announcing this in his most recent video. And one of the big things is that there are two ways

to sort of experience this app. The first is for free, right? No subscription. And the second is by paying for a version called Panels Plus and that costs either $50 annually or $11.99 per month. With that reportedly being ad free, having more collections and offering higher quality images. And based on a quick flyover of the app,

you need it to unlock full resolution of a wallpaper or without the subscription, you watch an ad to unlock a lower resolution. Right, and this subscription model plus a few other features, it really seems to have pissed people off. With people saying things like, "'Insane how the biggest tech reviewer

"'who is all about honesty and advocating for good quality "'releases a cash grab app with a laughable UI design "'full of ads with mediocre wallpapers. "'It just feels like Marques slapped his name "'onto something not worthy of his name. Others noting at that monthly rate, you're paying the same amount for wallpaper access that you are with Spotify.

You also had tons of people upset about all the data disclosures with people getting notifications, asking to track location and app activity. Others adding, this is insane for a dude who shits on products people work for years to bring to market. Like stay on the sidelines, why lose stature for this?

And if you go to that latest video of his, all the top comments are negative and some even acknowledging that, saying it's a rare occurrence, but MKBHD is actually getting cooked in his own comment section. The with all this, we actually saw Marquez responding to all the backlash this morning,

writing, part of building in public is getting mass feedback immediately, which is pretty dope. Almost exactly like publishing a YouTube video. And adding, first thing we're doing is fixing the excessive data disclosures as people rightfully brought up. For transparency, we'd never actually ask for your location, internet history, etc.

The data disclosures that everyone is screenshotting is likely too broad and largely driven by what the ad network suggests. Working to fix that ASAP. Then, regarding the pricing criticisms, he said he hears the concerns and noted two things. Arguing, one, that it's a challenge to deliver high value for the premium version, but also noting that ad frequency will be dialed back on the free version. We also saw him reply to more direct criticisms, like when someone shot back that it was silly to even bring a wallpaper app to the market.

Marquez saying the target market for this is insanely small. Most people don't download a wallpaper app. This is for those who have been asking. If you're not into it, don't worry about it. And clarifying that profits are shared with the artists who make the wallpaper. We also saw him address rumors that he just bought the IP of an app developed back in 2021

and threw a logo and a price tag on it by explaining, it's just false. The Twitter account is from 2021 because it's a salvaged username from an inactive account. The app was built from scratch. But of course, with all that, you still have people upset about the pricing. Some even saying Marquez needs to be careful and make sure this is in his own lunchly situation. Though there, I would say that is a crazy oversimplification, right? One is a YouTuber releasing an app that I personally wouldn't buy

and in the eyes of many is excessively priced. And it also opens them up to criticism because you have people saying this app, it goes against things that he's bashed other companies for. Whereas a big core of the Lunchly criticism is you have food that isn't necessarily great for kids being pushed to kids based off of the three creators that are behind.

And in fact, on the note of nutritional concerns, especially for a product that's geared towards children, Dr. Mike just did a great video on it. Let's look at the recently passed nutrition standards set forth by the USDA for school lunches and see how Lunchly compares. Going line by line here, less than 10% of calories should come from saturated fat. Lunchly turkey, 23% of calories come from saturated fat. But this is where things get really interesting, and for some reason, no one has pointed this out. You see, USDA caloric guidelines say that a lunch meal

for kids K through eight should contain around 625 calories. Kids need energy to function, and calories give them that energy. Lunchly turkey contains only 230 calories, which would mean a kid would need to eat about 2.7 portions to consume enough calories. And if they did that, they'd get nearly 1300 milligrams of sodium, which is also significantly over the USDA standards. So they'd be either under eating calories or overeating

sodium. But going back to MKBHD, I will say, one, I am still very much an MKBHD fan, though two, it is hard for me to look at this as something that's not a miss. Separating the small market and pricing issues that people have with this app, I do feel like he opened himself up to valid criticism, with people noting that in the past, when he was talking about someone else's product, he said, "'Never buy a product based on the future promise

of updates to it.'" But then pointing to the announcement he made in his video where about his product, he said, "'And we have some pretty big plans for this thing. So it's starting off as a wallpaper app now. I don't wanna over promise too much, but it's going to be pretty consistently improving over time, which is part of the reason why we're offering a subscription

to support it. And so if anything, I'm wondering if this whole situation, the reactions, like what impact it has on him. Will he end up seeing that as like, oh, I broke one of my own rules or, oh, I've been too hard on other companies. So for me, the most interesting part of this whole situation and story is what's going to happen next.

And then Elon Musk probably hating looking at headlines with his name right now. Probably going to make the man recoil even further into his own personally owned echo chamber. Or because they are now saying that he is buckling, backing down and bowing to pressure. And this in the face of his recent boisterous bullshit. Right, and all of that,

because this has to do with the fact that X is reportedly giving up its fight against the judge who banned the platform in Brazil last month. Which if you don't remember, I mean, we talked about it. There's this really controversial justice on the Brazilian Supreme Court. And since 2022, he's had broad authority to order tech companies to take down content

considered a threat to the country's democratic institutions. With that largely having to do with the lies spread by former right-wing president, Jair Bolsonaro. A man who's been barred from office until 2030 after being found guilty of abusing his power and peddling conspiracies about voter fraud. He's also been accused of other things like embezzling $1.2 million worth of jewelry

while he was president. He's also still being investigated for his role in what's been described as an attempted coup. But in any case, back in April, Musk announced that he would be lifting restrictions against accounts banned under the judge's authority. But the judge then quickly opening an inquiry into Musk, and within days we saw X doubling down in defiance

and accusing the court of acting illegally. Which then, fast forward to last month, and you had Musk closing X's office in Brazil after the judge threatened arrests against employees. And then within weeks, X was finally banned in the country. Now Musk, for his part, was keeping up the same kind of insults that he'd been making against the judge the whole time, calling him Brazil's Voldemort and a dictator.

And in fact, he actually launched an X account dedicated to exposing alleged abuses of power by the judge, which is why so many people were shocked that now, less than a month later, X is seemingly doing exactly what Musk promised it never would, because on Friday, it reportedly took down the accounts that the judge had ordered removed. And then, along with that, the company complied with orders to pay fines and name a new formal representative in the country. But then the next day, the court acknowledged the company's actions, but said it had not done the proper paperwork.

And so with that, it gave X and Musk five days to provide the necessary documentation proving its compliance. So we're seemingly now just waiting for them to dot some I's and cross the T's. And barring any surprises, Brazilian should be back on X soon. You know, that's a big deal for Brazilians,

but also for the company. Because if you didn't know, Brazil is one of X's most important international markets with analysts estimating that it has more than 20 million users there. And while a lot of people there did try to keep using X with VPNs, we also saw a lot of people flocking to Blue Sky and Threads.

So of course, the longer X stayed blocked, the more it risked losing users. And this is notably on top of all that, this whole thing was starting to bleed Musk's other companies as well. With for example, this month, the Brazilian Supreme Court taking $2 million from Starlink to cover unpaid fines that it issued against X.

Now as of filming, Musk for his part has not commented publicly on any of this. Though notably when he first announced he'd be reinstating demand accounts in April, he said, principles matter more than profit. Though of course that seemingly was always up for debate. And it's something that at the very least, many have questioned.

Because if you take a closer look, the platform under his leadership reportedly approved 83% of censorship requests by authoritarian governments. And so now with this recent news, you have supporters or those that are kind of Musk agnostic, maybe being given more reason to question his principles or his commitment to them. And that is something separate from whether or not

you agree with what he's saying in the first place. But then take it a quick 60 second break from the news. You know, when looking for doctors, I've used ZocDoc and I've found success with the service. And so I'll use them again when needed, no doubt. Especially because it's extremely important to find the right doctor for you. Someone you feel gets you, prioritizes your health needs.

And a big one, you know, before you book, if they take your insurance. Especially if you have a lingering ailment of any kind. I mean, you gotta check out ZocDoc, who by the way, I wanna thank for being a sponsor of this PDS. Because with ZocDoc, you can find and book doctors who make you feel comfortable, listen to you, and prioritize your health. You search by location, availability, and insurance, and there's no compromise here because you've got more options than you know.

ZocDoc is a free app and website where you can search and compare high-quality in-network doctors, choose the right one for your needs, and click to instantly book an appointment. I mean, we're talking about in-network appointments, choose the right one for your needs and click to instantly book an appointment. I mean, we're talking about in-network appointments with more than 100,000 healthcare providers across every specialty, from mental health to dental health, eye care to skincare and much more. Plus ZocDoc appointments happen fast,

typically within just 24 to 72 hours of booking. You can even score same day appointments. So just go to ZocDoc.com slash fill and download the ZocDoc app for free. Then find and book a top rated doctor today. That's Z-O-C-D-O-C.com slash Phil. That's ZocDoc.com slash Phil. And then one third of living former football players

believe they have CTE. And that is just one of the troubling statistics that came from a report published in the JAMA Neurology Medical Journal. Though honestly, I'm surprised the number's not higher. Cause I mean, do you remember some of the hits players used to take? Like the stuff players get penalized

and even suspended for now, those were part of highlight reels that came out weekly. Right, and that's notable here because this study was conducted at Harvard between 2017 and 2020, and they spoke to former professional players from 1960 to 2020. And on top of the study finding

that 34% reported perceived CTE, it also found that perceived CTE was associated with a number of health problems. For example, around 25% of participants with perceived CTE reported suicidality. And even after adjusting for established predictors, the study found that men with perceived CTE remained twice as likely to report suicidality.

Also 20% of players with perceived CTE reported being diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease or forms of dementia. And all of this is a very big deal because as NPR explained, "'This study is one of the broadest surveys to date "'of former NFL players' perception "'of their cognitive health

"'and how widely they report symptoms linked to CTE.'" Right, and as a refresher, CTE is thought to be caused by concussions and hits to the head, something that football players and other contact sports athletes experience at higher rates. And even though it might sound kind of odd to do a survey on whether or not people think that they

have a disease, the thing is, CTE is super complicated. And as the study's lead researcher explained to CBS, it's actually only officially diagnosed in an autopsy. Right, so after someone has died, with her also adding, we actually can't know whether any of the players in our study actually have CTE, but what we can look at is how do they feel about it? With the hope being that with more research, there will eventually be a way for doctors to diagnose people with CTE while they're alive. Because you know, over 300 NFL players have been diagnosed with CTE after they died, and many of them had reported symptoms of cognitive decline while they were alive. And in some of those cases, the players took their own lives. So it's a deeply serious and troubling

issue. But then, shifting gears, I want you to imagine naked photos of yourself taken for a cancer treatment being stolen and then posted on the internet. Because that is the horrifying reality of these people who fell victim to a ransomware attack against a Pennsylvania healthcare system. With that system, Lehigh Valley Health Network being in the news today because it's now agreed

to pay $65 million to settle a class action lawsuit. Because the network was accused of failing to safeguard sensitive patient information, including nude photos of hundreds of cancer patients. You see lawsuit because the network was accused of failing to safeguard sensitive patient information, including nude photos of hundreds of cancer patients. You see, because the hack actually happened back in February of last year. And according to the lawsuit, a cyber criminal gang stole the photos

and other sensitive information and then demanded a ransom. But when Lehigh refused to pay, the hackers leaked the photos online. Also, as far as who was affected, a spokesperson for Lehigh said that the attack was limited to a network supporting a single physician practice in Northeast Pennsylvania.

And they confirmed they did not pay the ransom. And as far as a class action on the payout, it was filed on behalf of the thousands who were impacted by the hack. But notably, the settlement agreement specifically states that 80% of the 65 million will go to those whose nude photos were posted online. Like with the lead plaintiff,

an unnamed woman in her 50s who had photos taken during a radiation treatment end up on the dark web. And so while for now, we're gonna have to wait to see if this settlement gets approved by the judge, it's also worth mentioning the impact this case could have on the wider healthcare industry. Because according to Carter Groom, the chief executive of the cybersecurity firm

First Health Advisory, this settlement, quote, shifts the legal, insurance, and adversarial ecosystem. And adding, if you're protecting health data as a crown jewel, as you should be, images or photos are going to need another level of compartmentalized protection. With the case also highlighting a growing predicament for healthcare organizations, right? The more sensitive the information, the more valuable it is to hackers and patients.

It's there you had Groom saying that there is potential for this to become a continuous cycle. Hackers will seek out more and more personal and sensitive data, and then healthcare providers have to settle more and more claims outside court, which then could also prompt some providers into paying ransoms for stolen patient data, with Groom saying, other organizations will look at this case and say, "'Well, maybe if I do pay five or $10 million in ransom, "'maybe I won't have to face a class action lawsuit.'"

But then of course, paying those ransoms may just encourage more attacks and the problem just never stops. And while some may say the solution is obvious, just get better defenses, right? Well, as some experts have noted, there have been significant improvements made in the healthcare industry's cyber defenses, but they're still vulnerable. And part of that is actually due to their complexity, right? Well, as some experts have noted, there have been significant improvements made in the healthcare industry's cyber defenses,

but they're still vulnerable. And part of that is actually due to their complexity, right? Because healthcare networks need to connect physicians, insurers, pharmacies, and countless vendors. So the development of better defenses for something so interconnected and all over the place, it's no easy feat. And then in general, there's always just this feeling

of hackers will always be one step ahead, whether from tech vulnerabilities that end up getting exposed or just classic phishing scams. But then, shifting gears to political news, we gotta talk about how one man's decision this week may sway the outcome of the 2024 presidential election. Meet Mike McDonald. He's a Nebraska state senator,

and he has now officially confirmed that he will not be helping his fellow Republicans change how the state's electoral votes are awarded to help get Trump elected. Also, if you're going, what are you talking about? Why is this such a big deal? The first thing that you need to know is that Nebraska is currently only one of two states that does not award

its electoral votes on a winner take all basis, right? It's them and Maine, right? And in Nebraska, two electoral votes are given to the candidate who wins statewide, and the other three are allocated to the winner in each congressional district. And a very key thing is that in 2020, it was only the second time ever that Nebraska

did not award all its electoral votes to the Republican candidate, with Joe Biden getting that electoral was only the second time ever that Nebraska did not award all its electoral votes to the Republican candidate, with Joe Biden getting that electoral vote from the second congressional district, which I mean, the only other time that happened was Obama in 2008. And if that were to happen again in 2024, there's actually one scenario

where that one district could decide the entire election, because a presidential candidate needs 270 out of the 538 electoral votes to win. And of course, as I bludgeoned you with pretty much every week for the last two years, a lot of it comes down to the seven swing states. So let's say Kamala Harris wins Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania,

while Trump wins the other four, North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada. In that specific case, if you don't count Nebraska yet, Harris would likely have 269 electoral votes and Trump would have 264. Right, so if Nebraska's second congressional district voted blue again, that one extra electoral vote would bring Harris victory.

But if Republicans won all five votes, it would create a 269, 269 tie, which very notably then would throw the final decision to the House of Representatives where each state would have one vote. And of course, that is a situation that would favor Trump. And so with all of that in mind, you have Republicans in Nebraska wanting to return

to a winner take all rule for years, but they've just never been able to get the two thirds legislative supermajority required, which is also why they were so damn excited when back in April, McDonnell, he actually switched parties, citing the Democratic Party's censure of him last year for supporting restrictions on abortion,

meaning that Republicans held 33 of the 49 seats in the legislature, exactly a two-thirds majority, and that leading to a huge new push for winner-take-all, with even Lindsey Graham last week pushing really hard to make this real. But now we've gotten decisive word from McDonald that he will not be voting for that with him saying, after deep consideration,

it is clear to me that right now, 43 days from election day is not the moment to make this change. Which then unsurprisingly led to many, including Trump himself, attacking him online. Click clack it on Truth Social that unfortunately a Democrat turned Republican, question mark,

state Senator named Mike McDonald decided for no reason whatsoever to get in the way of a great Republican common sense victory. Just another grandstander. And personally, I will say I agree with Donald Trump. These arbitrary nonsensical rules around the election, they're stupid, but it's not a Nebraska issue. Let's just get rid of the electoral college.

Let's let actual people elect our national leaders. A president for all people, not all states. I mean, I just think back to 2020 and those 6 million Republican voters who live in California just knowing that their vote towards president, it's not gonna matter. And I mean, there's an argument to be made that there's actually way more Republican voters

in the state that would come out if they felt like their vote towards president would matter. But I will say, I understand Republicans' reservation about undoing the electoral college. A Republican president has not won the popular vote since 2004. But hey, with all that, I gotta ask, what are your thoughts specifically today

regarding the Nebraska case or just the whole Electoral College in general? But then just having another breather from the news, you know, we all know that home-cooked meals are so much better for you, but who has the time to pull it off? Well, with the help of today's sponsor, HelloFresh, it's like they find the time for you

by handling all the meal planning, shopping, and most of the prep, making it quick and painless to get dinner on the table. I mean, seriously, HelloFresh has everything you need to make delicious meals delivered right to your door, pre-portioned and fresh. They even include step-by-step recipe cards to make cooking simple.

And there's always new flavors to explore with an ever-changing menu of 50 recipes to choose from every week. You just pick your meals, your delivery date, and it's that simple. And for us, you know, personally, we like how you can customize meals week to week and swap out protein or veggies.

So it's exactly what we want in the time we want. Plus, HelloFresh has been a great way to get our boys involved in the cooking process, which is paying off, by the way, with quality family time and helping with building independence. And get this, you'll get free breakfast for life by going to hellofresh.com slash free to Franco.

There's one free breakfast item per box while your subscription's active. That's free breakfast for life by going to hellofresh.com slash free to Franco. There's one free breakfast item per box while your subscription's active. That's free breakfast for life just by going to hellofresh.com slash free to Franco. And then, you know, for decades, Hollywood, the media, and airlines themselves have glamorized flight attendants as having a fast-paced, fun-filled, globetrotting lifestyle. But the thing is, among other problems in the industry, there is a problem with that depiction. Because not only is it often inaccurate, in some cases it couldn't be further from the truth. Right, because while many may love

the opportunities the job offers, there are things specific to this line of work that make turning it into a career an incredible challenge, even leading to some facing homelessness and hunger. Because you know, on paper, airlines promise flight attendants double digit hourly rates, but the actual take-home pay doesn't really reflect that. You see, many flight attendants only get about 75 hours

of hourly pay a month, but they're actually working a lot more. And that's because at most airlines, flight attendants aren't clocking paid time until the aircraft doors are closed. All the time outside of flying hours, right? The time spent at the airport waiting for their next flight, the time that it takes to get people and their bags on board

and in their proper places, and the time to get everyone off, that is either unpaid or paid at a fraction of the hourly rate. In fact, there's only one major airline that actually pays flight attendants for boarding time, and that's Delta, which is interesting because they're also the only major US airline whose flight attendants are not unionized. So notably in 2022, after and possibly because of a huge push to unionize, that's when Delta decided to begin paying flight attendants during boarding. But still notably, they only began paying flight attendants at half their hourly rate for the 40 to 50 minutes scheduled for boarding. But still notably, they only began paying flight attendants at half their hourly rate

for the 40 to 50 minutes scheduled for boarding. And if you've ever flown, you know it's not at all uncommon for that to take even longer, not to mention the fact that flight attendants often have to be at the airport long before and after boarding. Right in Canada, for example,

where flight attendants also are not paid for non-flight hours, it's estimated that flight attendants work an average of 35 hours every month without being paid. And on the American side, Rich Henderson, a long time flight attendant who runs the two guys on a plane meme account with his husband, he told the Washington Post,

"'It's pretty common to work six hours of flight time, "'but you're actually working for 12 to 14 hours.' Saying, we have a lot of time at work, we don't get paid." And all of this is especially hard on people just breaking into the industry. I mean, for one, most flight attendants have to first attend training for about three to six weeks, and that training is often unpaid.

And then even more than that, most new flight attendants work what's known as on reserve, meaning they can sometimes spend days waiting to be assigned flights. So according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the median pay for flight attendants was a little less than $70,000 in 2023, but the projected yearly pay for first year flight attendants

is much lower than that. In fact, according to numbers provided by America's largest flight attendants union, the AFA, it is roughly $23,000 at Frontier, $25,000 at Alaska, $27,000 at American, and $32,000 at Delta. And in fact, just this year, an employment verification letter from American Airlines showing a projected starting pay of just over $27,000 per year recently went viral, with some calling that a poverty verification letter that could be used to apply for government assistance programs like food stamps. And to that point, when flight attendants, especially early career flight attendants, are complaining about their pay, it's not just that they feel like they deserve more,

it's that they're literally barely scraping by. With the Washington Post, for example, interviewing 18 current or former flight attendants and finding that it is common for them to take side jobs like bartending and truck driving or even being makeup artists and church musicians. And this is some said that they were struggling to feed their families or they're living out of vehicles. And you know, that tracks with what the AFA is saying. Right in a news release from this year, the union claimed that many members have reported financial insecurity, including some that have quote, experienced homelessness, lived in their car, lived in a shelter, or endured some combination of these circumstances. And in fact, there's a Facebook group for Alaska Airlines flight attendants experiencing hunger and homelessness that's grown to nearly 800 members. And then also, I mean, there's these groups with thousands of

members to help flight attendants find what are known as crash pads, which you know is just shared group housing where people rotate in and out on a temporary basis, which is something necessary because the hubs of major airlines are typically all the biggest and most expensive cities in the U.S. And with that, you had several flight attendants who spoke to the Post saying they are angry that they make less than they would be working comparable hours at a fast food restaurant despite their extensive safety responsibilities, regular training, and demanding lifestyle. Now with that, you know, I will say everyone deserves a living wage. This is not about putting one group of everyday workers against another group of everyday workers. But at the same time, of course, you might get their

frustration. I mean, for one, flight attendants have to be ready to deal with all types of emergencies, right? I mean, they get weeks of initial training and yearly refreshers on things like providing onboard first aid and administering CPR. With lithium batteries increasingly overheating and sparking fires onboard planes, they're ready to fight fires. And then of course, if shit really hits the fan,

they're supposed to be ready to lead the evacuation. Plus on top of all that, many flight attendants say that their jobs have just gotten harder since the COVID-19 pandemic began in 2020. But I mean, one, they obviously had to worry about exposure to the virus itself, but then also, two, they were having to enforce controversial rules like the mask mandate

and having to deal with just a surge in dickhead passengers. And that, along, of course, with airlines being hit, their profits generally dropping. Though there, I will say the CEOs of Delta and American, for example, each made more than $31 million last year. Also, regarding pay, going back to those unpaid hours, airlines have tried to argue that those hours are actually compensated, with, for example,

a statement on Alaska Airlines website saying, "'Contrary to union narratives, "'we do pay flight attendants for boarding time "'through a pay mechanism that was negotiated "'with the union in previous contract cycles.'" But notably, the statement doesn't detail what the mechanism is, and according to Sarah Nelson, the president of the AFA,

which represents flight attendants at Alaska and a number of other airlines, that statement at the very least is misleading. She says that it is common for airlines to guarantee one hour of paid flight time for every two hours on duty. So let's say a flight attendant gets to the airport early in the morning for their first flight

and finishes up their day 12 hours later. In that case, they are guaranteed six hours of pay, even if they're not in the air for six hours. But of course, for everyone else, that sounds crazy. If an employer is asking for 12 hours later. In that case, they are guaranteed six hours of pay, even if they're not in the air for six hours. But of course, for everyone else, that sounds crazy, right? If an employer is asking for 12 hours of your time, you expect to be paid for 12 hours. In fact, you probably think that it's required by law, but notably, in this case, it's not. You see, flight attendants and other aviation workers, they're largely exempt from something called the Fair Labor Standards Act because their job is considered essential to the economy. And notably, that's not the only way that being deemed essential is a disadvantage, right?

Because under federal law, it's actually illegal for airline workers to strike unless they get permission from the federal government. Weirdly, that's because of something called the Railway Labor Act, which placed severe restrictions on the ability of railroad employees to go on strike when a contract expires.

But since 1936, it's also applied to airline workers. And basically what it means today is that when a union wants to negotiate its contract, it can file for a federal mediation. And if then negotiations come to a standstill, the union or company management can ask federal mediators involved to declare an impasse. And then if that happens, the union can go on strike

or management can lock out union workers after 30 days. But then the president can also step in at the last moment and order workers to stay on the job for two additional month-long cooling off periods while trying to come up with another solution. And then finally, if the two sides still can't reach a deal during that 60-day period, Congress could step in and stop the strike. And a huge thing here is that that is what happened a couple of years ago when Congress voted to force a contract on rail workers unions to keep the railways operating. And so with that, some say

that it is very likely that Congress would do the same if any of the four major carriers tried to go on strike. And in fact, last November, for example, federal mediators refused to declare an impasse to stop American Airlines flight attendants from striking. And actually, the last time a major airline was grounded by a strike was 25 years ago when Northwest Airlines pilots went on strike for two weeks. Which notably, you know, Northwest was the fourth largest US airline back then. But since then, the 11 largest US airlines have merged to become the four largest carriers today, which carry about 80% of US air traffic between them, which then also means that the government's

gonna be even less likely to approve a strike, because the impact of that, it would just be massive. And so with that, you have people like Julie Hedrick, a flight attendant for American Airlines and president of another union, the APFA, saying, UPS, Writers Guild, the Actors Guild, and not that they've all gone on strike, but they've pushed it to that point

and they've been able to get the contracts that they deserve. But then also with all that said, voting to authorize the strikes, even though they'll likely never happen, that's still a common negotiating tactic taken during talks. Right, there has been some progress. For example, since COVID-19 put a pause

on most contract negotiations, airline workers across the industry have been pushing their employers for pay increases and better working conditions. You know, first, I mean, you had pilots at all four major airlines winning billions of dollars worth of raises in the past couple of years. And now we're seeing flight attendants

really stepping up their efforts. For example, in February, tens of thousands of flight attendants across three different labor unions and several airlines held protests at over 30 major airports across the US. And at that time, flight attendants at most of the largest airlines hadn't received pay increases since before the pandemic,

but over two thirds of flight attendants in the US were in new union contract negotiations. With this then, seeing in April, just a few months after a union representing Southwest flight attendants voted to authorize a strike, they ratified an agreement to raise pay about 33% over four years. And also that month you had Delta Airlines

raising their pay by around 5%, possibly due to another attempt to get flight attendants to unionize. And then last summer, American Airlines flight attendants landing a new contract. But still with all that, while these deals seem like pretty big wins for the unions, we haven't necessarily seen the kind of sweeping changes

that some have been hoping for. And of course at other airlines, the fight is still on. With a seeing, for example, in August, United Airline flight attendants overwhelmingly voting to authorize a strike, and flight attendants at Alaska Airlines, which is the country's sixth largest carrier, rejecting a new contract.

And in fact, to connect it to the election that's coming up, while it's not a top five issue, according to polls for most Americans, for people in the industry, it's worth noting that while Biden has been cracking down on airlines, Trump has generally had policies backed by the companies. And this is a lot of people say

that Trump's record is anti-union. Though again, really no matter, the president does feel like the system and we'll say recent history, has not put many of these workers in a good position, either now or in ability to negotiate. But like with so many things we talk about on this show, for now, we'll have to wait to see what happens.

And of course, in the meantime, especially if you are someone in the industry, I'd love to know your thoughts. But that, it brings us to the end of your Tuesday evening, Wednesday morning dive into the news. Of course, with any and everything we talked about today, I'd love to know your thoughts in those comments down below.

But regardless, as always, my name's Philip DeFranco. You've just been filled in. I love yo faces, and I'll see you right back here tomorrow.