Keep AA planes maintained by AA

[swamt]

 
Oh I do. SWA is above 45% of its maintenance budget which is way more than any other airline even non-union ones. Way to go AMFA.

Once again get a clue.  It is not AMFA's fault of the large outsourcing at SWA.  It was the IAM (yes the IAM) and the ibt who represented the SWA mechanics for well over 30 years that allowed the amount of outsourcing at SWA.  Since AMFA has been here (less than 10 years) they have brought in house more maint and backshop work than any other union at SWA, for the entire time SWA has been in business.  The ibt/teamsters were the worse of them all, as it was their verbiage that allowed the outsourcing to go out of the country.   Keep posting O'spin, keep posting...

 

[swamt]

Now Overspin, you should know better than that. first off those mechanics are not in our contract group, and most likely they are glad about that because they get paid a lot more than we do and have much better benefits than we do. The fact is that the contract you voted YES for allows them to do any check, not just PS or Acks but even B-checks, and ECOs and not because they ran out of time, they can schedule any line maintenance they want overseas as long as the don't go over 15% of Total spend, they can also send that work to South America as well. B-checks at Aeroman? nothing stopping them, thanks to you. Even the UPS contract does not allow that. In other words our line maint has the worst scope clause in the industry.

What is sad is, most out here do not understand, (and OS would not admit to, or, include) the fact that the 15% outsource allowed for line maint. is on top of the 35% of spend which is allowed for the outsourcing, which could very well be in excess of 50% or higher of total maint done.  Matter fact I would be willing to bet that AA could, and very well, will do more outsourcing than SWA as a percentile of total maint. done, with this crazy -a$$ bean counter math within the contract that allows it, and let's not forget, your freakin union agreed to, sold it to the membership, and highly recommended a yes vote,  PATHETIC I tell you, Pathetic...

 

[Bob Owens]

What is sad is, most out here do not understand, (and OS would not admit to, or, include) the fact that the 15% outsource allowed for line maint. is on top of the 35% of spend which is allowed for the outsourcing, which could very well be in excess of 50% or higher of total maint done.  Matter fact I would be willing to bet that AA could, and very well, will do more outsourcing than SWA as a percentile of total maint. done, with this crazy -a$$ bean counter math within the contract that allows it, and let's not forget, your freakin union agreed to, sold it to the membership, and highly recommended a yes vote,  PATHETIC I tell you, Pathetic...

No the 15% line maint outsourcing would be part of the 35%. Line maint outsourcing could not make up 35% of the spend because they can only outsouce 15% of line maint, but nothing is stopping them from outsourcing pretty much 100% of OH if that's what it took to get to the 35%.

 

[swamt]

No the 15% line maint outsourcing would be part of the 35%. Line maint outsourcing could not make up 35% of the spend because they can only outsouce 15% of line maint, but nothing is stopping them from outsourcing pretty much 100% of OH if that's what it took to get to the 35%.

Bob below is where I read about the 35% and the 15%.  As it states here it says "Further" and then explains the 15%.  Believe me, I have been thru weeks upon weeks on what one word means, or it's intent to mean.  Unless it is agreed to differently (and hopefully) in writing, Further is very easily accepted or meant as in addition too.  Am I reading this wrong, or is this even your language from the contract as it was posted by someone that has nothing to do with AA.  Here it is Bob:
 
e) Contracting Out of Work. To allow the company certain flexibility in outsourcing Aircraft-related Maintenance, the company and the Union have agreed to establish limits on the amount of work the company may outsource, including the work that is currently outsourced. "Aircraft-related Maintenance" shall be defined as work involving the maintenance, repair, servicing, overhaul, inspection or modification of engines, components or aircraft. The Company and the Union agree to limit the percentage of all outsourced Aircraft-related Maintenance to not exceed 35%, subject to exclusions or modifications described elsewhere in this agreement. Further, the parties also agree that no more than 15% of Line Maintenance work will be contracted out.

 

[Overspeed]

Now Overspin, you should know better than that. first off those mechanics are not in our contract group, and most likely they are glad about that because they get paid a lot more than we do and have much better benefits than we do. The fact is that the contract you voted YES for allows them to do any check, not just PS or Acks but even B-checks, and ECOs and not because they ran out of time, they can schedule any line maintenance they want overseas as long as the don't go over 15% of Total spend, they can also send that work to South America as well. B-checks at Aeroman? nothing stopping them, thanks to you. Even the UPS contract does not allow that. In other words our line maint has the worst scope clause in the industry.

 
I voted for a cap on spending on outsourced maintenance. I merely pointed out that ETOPS checks I believe are done in Europe by AA AMT's (not TWU but they are union).

 

[Overspeed]

Once again get a clue.  It is not AMFA's fault of the large outsourcing at SWA.  It was the IAM (yes the IAM) and the ibt who represented the SWA mechanics for well over 30 years that allowed the amount of outsourcing at SWA.  Since AMFA has been here (less than 10 years) they have brought in house more maint and backshop work than any other union at SWA, for the entire time SWA has been in business.  The ibt/teamsters were the worse of them all, as it was their verbiage that allowed the outsourcing to go out of the country.   Keep posting O'spin, keep posting...

 
Did they bring in significant new work as SWA added aircraft? One line of overhaul that's it. 

 

[Overspeed]

What is sad is, most out here do not understand, (and OS would not admit to, or, include) the fact that the 15% outsource allowed for line maint. is on top of the 35% of spend which is allowed for the outsourcing, which could very well be in excess of 50% or higher of total maint done.  Matter fact I would be willing to bet that AA could, and very well, will do more outsourcing than SWA as a percentile of total maint. done, with this crazy -a$$ bean counter math within the contract that allows it, and let's not forget, your freakin union agreed to, sold it to the membership, and highly recommended a yes vote,  PATHETIC I tell you, Pathetic...

 
The 15% is not additive, it's include within the 35%. Only 15% of the line MX spend can be on outsourcing. You are misreading the language.

 

[Overspeed]

They have a lot of old planes, old planes drive up maintenance costs, even at AA where we gave up pretty much everything- pay, vacation, Holidays, Sick time etc, -our maintenance costs where still among the highest in the industry if not the highest, on the flip side AA was devoting a lot less money towards aircraft payments than their peers with newer fleets. Just like the fact that I spend probably a lot more than what my neighbor spends on maintenance of her car, and I do the work myself, in house if you will, while she outsources it all, but I don't have any car payments. In the end much less of my total budget goes towards my car compared to her.

 
AA fleet age is 14.2 and SWA is 11.
 
So you are saying AA would save money if they did their own maintenance with "free" in-house labor like when you work on your own car? AA would love that deal! Well first off your labor on her car is not free? Did you buy the tools to fix it? Do you eat? Did you fix it in your garage or driveway? Did you wear clothes? Did you use any supplies? 
 
Let's look at it this way. Since your car only needs part replaced once a year and you own all the tools, the garage, and you eat that means you paid for facilities and labor for 365 days while only using a few hours of the capacity once per year. 
 
The neighbor got a new car using less gas and relatively routine maintenance probably covered under a service agreement. They don't need a garage, tools, and food to standby for work or have to look for another way to make use of the underutilized capacity. 
 
A new 737 MX cost runs around $350 per flight hour for the first five to seven years. A 15 year old 737? Around $1000 per flight hour. Add in higher fuel costs for older aircraft and the newer plane is cheaper to operate initially. 

 

[topDawg]

For all the hand-wringing over Asian MRO's operating practices, why is it that crash related deaths at record historical lows while the number of airframes being sent to Asian MRO's are at record highs?...
 
The last structural failure I can think of due to maintenance was the Alaska MD80 whose jackscrew let loose.  And that plane wasn't maintained by anyone other than union represented mechanics.  

because the airlines do a better job of covering it up. I know its not rare at all to see an aircraft come back from a check and sit in ATL for an extra week getting work done. 
I don't know about UA, but Delta has been shifting vendors like wild fire. In the 5 or so years the work has been out most of the fleets are on vendor number 3. The original contracts were for 5 years.......
 
Also this is one of the reasons Delta is trying to build its own outsourcing operation now.