Aircraft maint issues

Buck if there is any increases in outsourcing for either of our groups that for whatever reason is sent back to us and we find that unacceptable, we have a vote to send them back to the table and keep going.

And after seeing that vote of a 95% No before changes on that UAL IBT TA all Union leadership should have taken note of what we will and will not accept at this point in time.

BTW it’s 7% above. Don’t let anyone short change us.
Are they trying to buy your language for money? If they are doing that and it becomes your T/A eventually would it pass or not?
 
Are they trying to buy your language for money? If they are doing that and it becomes your T/A eventually would it pass or not?

I’m sure if you put it into the perspective of Management they would still say that AA has and will continue to have more in house Maintenance than all the competitors. Won’t know exactly for sure what they want until something is accepted and put out for a vote.

And what would pass or fail as always depends on what is presented to the Membership.
 
I’m sure if you put it into the perspective of Management they would still say that AA has and will continue to have more in house Maintenance than all the competitors. Won’t know exactly for sure what they want until something is accepted and put out for a vote.

And what would pass or fail as always depends on what is presented to the Membership.
You guys,will always have more work than us, even if they contract, some work out.Your right on how it is presented,
 
I’m sure if you put it into the perspective of Management they would still say that AA has and will continue to have more in house Maintenance than all the competitors. Won’t know exactly for sure what they want until something is accepted and put out for a vote.

And what would pass or fail as always depends on what is presented to the Membership.

What we do know, via the rumor mill, is the company is only willing to protect 3300 overhaul jobs vs the 4700ish we have now. There is a fairly strong consensus and evidence that the back shops will NOT be included in that number. As an example take a look at the dwindling headcount in the shops at DWH. In steady decline with no back filling. We also have guys moving across the runways to DFW. It sounds as if they will not be replaced either. Our current AMT,CC,INSP # is 341 heads. Word last night is this number is going down to 307 thru transfer and "attrition". Good times at the pit of misery known as DWH. Dilly Dilly!
 
What we do know, via the rumor mill, is the company is only willing to protect 3300 overhaul jobs vs the 4700ish we have now. There is a fairly strong consensus and evidence that the back shops will NOT be included in that number. As an example take a look at the dwindling headcount in the shops at DWH. In steady decline with no back filling. We also have guys moving across the runways to DFW. It sounds as if they will not be replaced either. Our current AMT,CC,INSP # is 341 heads. Word last night is this number is going down to 307 thru transfer and "attrition". Good times at the pit of misery known as DWH. Dilly Dilly!
So if it satisfies the line guys, do they outvote some of the overhaul guys, that would vote no, because some would vote yes?
 
So if it satisfies the line guys, do they outvote some of the overhaul guys, that would vote no, because some would vote yes?

IDK. Guess it depends on the totality of the deal. Some will vote NO on anything offered. I will look at the entire thing and then decide on my vote. There are sure to be things guys won`t` like. As far as line vs overhaul voting. It will probably be a pretty close split. There will be many who don`t vote at all in both groups.
 
IDK. Guess it depends on the totality of the deal. Some will vote NO on anything offered. I will look at the entire thing and then decide on my vote. There are sure to be things guys won`t` like. As far as line vs overhaul voting. It will probably be a pretty close split. There will be many who don`t vote at all in both groups.
I hear you, the only time we get guys to vote is contract time. During union elections, you're lucky if 22% vote. Same as people showing up for union meetings.
 
What we do know, via the rumor mill, is the company is only willing to protect 3300 overhaul jobs vs the 4700ish we have now. There is a fairly strong consensus and evidence that the back shops will NOT be included in that number. As an example take a look at the dwindling headcount in the shops at DWH. In steady decline with no back filling. We also have guys moving across the runways to DFW. It sounds as if they will not be replaced either. Our current AMT,CC,INSP # is 341 heads. Word last night is this number is going down to 307 thru transfer and "attrition". Good times at the pit of misery known as DWH. Dilly Dilly!

"Pit of misery" Dilly-Dilly!!! Thx. LMFAO...
 
This management's team history is to get rid of as many shops as possible and contract out the work. The legacy US mechanics saw that in CLT.
 
This management's team history is to get rid of as many shops as possible and contract out the work. The legacy US mechanics saw that in CLT.
We didn’t lose the shops at US under Parker, Bruce Lakefield was CEO at the time.

It was done after the CBA was abrogated in the second bankruptcy.
 
We didn’t lose the shops at US under Parker, Bruce Lakefield was CEO at the time.

It was done after the CBA was abrogated in the second bankruptcy.
Exactly when we were in negotiations to merge with America West in bankruptcy. America West management surely had a imput in what the company would look like when they took control.
 
Last edited:
F859D9D9-74A1-4D55-AB4B-28039F8C86A8.jpeg
4238E2B2-B340-4A1A-A575-0DD1892B5831.jpeg
 
American Derails Negotiations:

In this period between scheduled negotiating sessions, the Association leadership met with American Airlines management principals in the hope of better understanding each other’s position on the outstanding issues that need to be resolved in order to conclude negotiations. Significant issues, including wages, job scope protection, pensions and medical benefits remain open.

The Association entered these meetings expecting to set the stage to conclude negotiations in our next full negotiating session. If American management had that same goal, a tentative agreement to present to you for your consideration and vote would have been close. Unfortunately, American management had a different plan.

American Airlines Executive Vice President Steven Johnsen, who had never participated in a single negotiating session since opening proposals were shared more than two years ago, led the discussions for the company. Johnsen’s presence not only failed to bring us closer to an agreement, but he single handedly derailed the significant and steady progress that both sides had been making in these negotiations. As a result of Johnsen injecting himself in the process, we are now further away from a tentative agreement than we were a month ago.

Johnsen, who American Airlines paid more than $30 million over the last four years, delivered the message that American could not afford to provideproper healthcare, job security and retirementincome for Association members.

In discussing profit sharing, he said no improvements were possible. This completelycontradicts CEO Doug Parker who acknowledged American’s sub-par profit sharing scheme in a discussion with employees on January 18, 2018 and said it had to be improved in negotiations.

American Airlines is demanding that legacy US Airways members lose the healthcare that theyearned through a strike and which has survived two bankruptcies. The Association’s position is that the better healthcare should be extended to cover all Association members, the cost of whichwould be less than the annual compensation of the carrier’s top three officers.

Johnsen also refused to discuss defined benefit pensions for Association members. Instead, he wants to mandate major employee concessions when the airline is making more than $3 billion a year in pre-tax profits.

Negotiating is a process where both parties engage in discussions to reach a common agreement. There must be give and take from both sides. Steven Johnsen is not interested in negotiating. He is not interested in agreement. He is only interested in the Association acquiescing to his will. The Association, however, responded to his demands appropriately, which resulted in Johnsen having a tantrum, leaving his other company negotiators in the lurch and storming out of the room.

Steven Johnsen’s presence has marked a dramaticshift from the productive discussions we had beenhaving with American’s experienced negotiators. In these meetings Johnsen displayed a uniquecombination of arrogance and ignorance that will prevent us from reaching an agreement.

The entire Association negotiating committee will meet next week in Washington, D.C. to discuss the sudden and insulting shift American has taken. We will also discuss the coordinated mobilization of the Association’s more than 30,000 members in response to Steven Johnsen’s deliberate sabotaging of your career, your future and your contract negotiations.

The Association is committed to quickly concluding negotiations. But we must have a willing partner across the table to do so.

Fraternally,
Alex Garcia,
TWU International Executive Vice President
TWU/IAM Association Director

Sito Pantoja
IAM General Vice President
TWU/IAM Association Vice Director