Dallas Business Journal Article

[aapitbull]

I sorry if I offended you but your lack of knowledge of basic AMFA issue coupled with you showing up with the usual TWU suspects made me believe you where Twu

GO TO WWW.NMB.GOV CASE NO R-6788 FOR MORE DETAIL THAN WHAT IS BELOW.

WWASI and EASI



WWASI and EASI are wholly-owned subsidiaries of AMR Eagle Holdings Corp., and separately incorporated companies which provide heavy maintenance. EASI provides maintenance for entities other than Eagle, including Mesaba Airlines, Business Express, CCAir, MC Finance, Fairbrook Leasing, Mellon Bank, and Kelley-Springfield. EASI Mechanics wear EASI - supplied uniforms with Eagle Aviation insignia. WWASI Mechanics wear uniforms supplied by WWASI with the WWASI logo. WWASI and EASI Mechanics have no seniority at Eagle or RAMCI.



WWASI and EASI do share corporate officers and directors with Eagle and RAMCI. Management officials from WWASI and EASI provided evidence that they direct and control the WWASI and EASI employees in the performance of their jobs, in the maintenance of discipline and in the resolution of employee complaints. Rates of pay, hours, and working conditions at WWASI and EASI are not the same as on Eagle and RAMCI. Eagle's Employee Relations Counsel, Robert Granger, does not have any labor relations contact with EASI and WWASI.

THAT IS AAPITBULL NOT A$$HOLE BUT SOME SAY THERE ONE IN THE SAME.

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

KCFlyer,
Thanx for the info.

Republicrat, You gotta love it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

NH/BB's

 

[Buck]

NHBB: I heard a funny one this morning....

It is sort of like your Republicrat??

The term is Democommie......

 

[j7915]

RV4, you are correct I am try not to reply too often. I'll make a boilerplate answer and post once a month, like AMFA has to do per judges ruling.

Whether you are posting the truth I can't judge, if it were AMFA would be the mechanics union. I think you are a line mechanic, and have forgotten what overhaul entails. It is not all high tech, signing log books. The airlines are going where the OEMs have always been.

If you don't accept as thruth the fact that it makes sense to fix seats and tires with task specialized workers, rather than farming the work out then what is truth?

Do you go to WalMart for tires and insist on having a certified lincesed car mechanic install them?

This is getting to be line Planebusiness, so don't reply. I had asked the sysop to remove my registration but so far they haven't done it.

Bye.

 

[RV4]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/8/2002 12:23:41 PM j7915 wrote:

If you don't accept as thruth the fact that it makes sense to fix seats and tires with task specialized workers, rather than farming the work out then what is truth?

Do you go to WalMart for tires and insist on having a certified lincesed car mechanic install them?

This is getting to be line Planebusiness, so don't reply. I had asked the sysop to remove my registration but so far they haven't done it.

Bye.
----------------
[/blockquote]

Sniffle, Sniffle,

You poor thing, I did not mean for you take your ball and go home.

The anwers to your questions are below:

Regarding the seats and tires- If your family is on an aircraft that has evidence of smoke, and lands just as the onboard fire begins to engulf the cabin. At that point, you hope and pray that the seatbacks breakover setting, the recline dimensions are proper, and the emregency lighting on the side of the seats are properly working. If they fail, due to oversight by a semi-skilled technician, and thus your family fails in the emergency exit attempt, then what?

On tires,

Ask those that witnessed the concorde accident about how important a tire can be to safe operation of an aircraft. Most highly skilled technicians can easily explain the difference between a automobile having safety issues versus an airplane. But maybe we should continue your simpleton analogy and stick to ground transportation to debate safety. Simply go ask the families of those killed by the Firestone Tire defects before you come out in public acting as though tires are tires and dont need a high skill work force. I remember something being said about the production of those tires being done by replacement workers after a strike. I bet that COMPANY thought as you, Tires do not need high skill, we can pay a lower wage and get the same quality.

You are spewing more of your industrial union simpleton philosophies. Fact is, even the TIRE COMPANY will now testify that a simple error in inflation could result in castastrophic tire failure and kill an innocent victim. You keep on going to walmart and having the semi-skilled service your tires, meanwhile I'll be going to a specialized tire store, paying extra for good tires and service, and not only watching what takes place on my car, I am also double checking all work performed.

Now go ahead and run home with your ball and tell everyone that the neighborhood bully just gave you another dose of truth that made you cringe and run for cover.

 

[RV4]

Something else for all of those advocating concessions.

United Airlines announced Friday that it plans to lay off an additional 2,700 flight attendants beginning in January, citing a reduced flight schedule for next near.

Look at what happens!

First you give into concessions and paycuts to save jobs, then the company will cut jobs anyway.

J7915 and the other company union men claim lower pay saves jobs from being outsourced. Ask them for one example of jobs being saved.

 

[Bear96]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/9/2002 10:44:52 AM RV4 wrote:

Something else for all of those advocating concessions.

"United Airlines announced Friday that it plans to lay off an additional 2,700 flight attendants beginning in January, citing a reduced flight schedule for next near".

Look at what happens!

First you give into concessions and paycuts to save jobs, then the company will cut jobs anyway.

J7915 and the other company union men claim lower pay saves jobs from being outsourced. Ask them for one example of jobs being saved.
----------------
[/blockquote]

Just to clarify, it is inaccurate to say the UAL F/As gave concessions to save jobs. So far we have not given any concessions, though obviously they are coming; the timing of this announcement actually ensures that the membership ratification process will be taking place at the same time the furloughs are occurring.

Plus at least as far as F/As are concerned, I don't think it is accurate to correlate concessions directly with job losses per se. UAL is going to shrink, and the new smaller UAL will simply need fewer F/As to staff it, regardless of what we are paid. (And if the unions fail to agree to concessions, UAL will probably ultimately get what they want to through the bankruptcy process anyways.)

I hope AA employees are closely following what is happening with us and USAirways. We at UAL are only three to six months behind the events at USAirways; AA is probably only three to six months behind us. I fear concessions are coming for ALL of us at the traditional hub-and-spoke carriers, regardless of what a CEO may be saying right now about not needing concessions from employees. But I do hope I am wrong.

 

[RV4]

Hmmmm,

Sunday, 27-Oct-2002 7:25PM

CHICAGO (AP) -- United Airlines' flight attendants union, one of five unions negotiating with the airline to cut labor costs by billions of dollars and stave off bankruptcy, has offered to take a 3.6 percent cut in pay, a union spokeswoman said Sunday.

Sara Dela Cruz of the Association of Flight Attendants said the proposal made to the financially strapped airline last week includes an agreement to forego a lump sum payment in 2003 and a raise in 2004.

Dela Cruz said the 25,000-member union is the first of the five unions in negotiations with the company to inform its members of a proposal. Earlier this year, the flight attendants refused to parti****te in financial recovery talks initiated by management.

The nation's No. 2 carrier is seeking $5.8 billion in cutbacks over 5 1/2 years.

Dela Cruz would not say how much money will be saved with the 3.6 percent pay cut.

NOTE: The only reason one would vote in favor of a paycut, would be to SAVE THEIR JOB!

Just my opinion of course.

 

[Boomer]

One of the interesting aspects of this discussion would be a real comparison of our wage structures with other carriers so that we can identify the concessions we made years ago that others never made.

In the case of the Pilots, our Pilots never gained the contracts that Pilots at United and Delta negotiated: AMR has a cost advantage against the others in that respect.

In the case of Mechanics, we gave up receipt and dispatch along with accepting unlicensed personnel in many of our backshops. During the U negotiations with the IAM, U costed R&D at $2.00/labor hour; UAL has the same situation with their mechanics performing R&D and it should be assumed that with their greater labor rate, the cost application would be at least that of U. At other major carriers including U and UAL, de-icing is performed by ramp personnel.

In the case of the Ramp, we have a potential for as much as 30% part-time. The problem is that PT only makes sense when you are running large banks of flights with down time in between due to the benefit costs associated with all AA employes. As the major hubs are depeaked, the need will arise for a much higher percentage of full time employees: the result is that since all employees are given benefits; the competitive advantage again shifts to AA because you will now have more labor hours of productivity over which you average the relative constant costs of those benefits. This is due to the fact that AA is self-insured and only pays to have the benefits administered by an outside agent.

Labor never chose Yield Pursuit over the Pursuit of Operational Efficiency. Before Labor takes a hit; let's see the implementation of the Efficiency Model and talk after the numbers are in. As far as pursuing the changes made by our competition; look to SWA, they have the largest percentage Unionized workforce in the industry yet make as much or more when Mechanics and the Ramp are compared.