3 Maintenance Bases - Not enough capacity

[Bob Owens]

That's not right; since 2003, AA has retired 48 widebodies: 14 762s and 34 AB6s. In the same time, AA took delivery of what, four 777s? That's a lot fewer widebodies than AA flew in 1999-2002.

And how many narrowbodies have they retired?

Their point was the fleet was smaller but we have three maint bases.

The figures given were from the early 90s and the ratio of widebodies was greater now than it was then.

 

[eolesen]

In 1993, the WB ratio was 23% (156 out of 667).

The WB ratio at the turn of the century was 20.1% (133 out of 661).

Today, you've got 19.8% (120 out of 604).

So you're right -- the ratio is smaller than it was in 1993. And it's smaller than it nine years ago by 0.3%

You also had 11 distinct fleets in 1993, 12 in 2000, and only 6 in 2009. Fewer fleets means fewer distinct overhaul lines, and a lot less need for B check locations...

How many overhaul lines does DWH add, and how many were at MCIE? Seems to me the number of overhaul lines is way down with the realignment, and that there's more centralized capability at DFW to do mods which were previously done in the other class 1 cities.

 

[Hopeful]

We are closing one but opening another. We just opened a MX base in DFW. So at the moment we have 4 bases, at least till they close MCI.
.

Maybe it's a matter of geographics..An aircraft usually will have to be ferried to MCIE where as it would be much easier to route an aircraft thru DFW with it's volume of flights.

 

[Tex-Mech]

Which local will it fall under?

The questions and answers sheet that were floating around sayd Local 565 for title 1 and Local 513 for title 2. It does make sense since it is at DFW.

 

[AA767JET]

Does anyone know if there is going to be any vacancies for this new DWH maintenance base ? Or are they just going to use the existing headcount from line maintenance.

 

[Texas Blues]

We've heard rumors for a while now that the company wants to move the support shops that directly supply the field station, "slide, coffee maker / oven, battery", over to DFW. Having DWH as an overhaul base will allow them to do that, using the OSMs.

 

[AA767JET]

Yes i heard of the shops moving there but any word on new AMT vacancies ?

 

[Tex-Mech]

Yes i heard of the shops moving there but any word on new AMT vacancies ?

Called over to my future local and they said they only have like 20 people working in this hangar, the company would have to create a lot of vacancies in order to bring over shops. There also can't be any OSM shops there until we get a contract, and when OSM's are there, the ratio of OSM to AMT's will be based only on the number of AMT's at DWH, not DFW. So if a contract was signed today, they could have a total of 5 OSM's.

 

[AA767JET]

Thanks Tex-Mech

 

[Runwaysticker]

Yes i heard of the shops moving there but any word on new AMT vacancies ?

Thats under the current contract, you can bet the company wants as many OSMs in that hanger as the TWU will let them, I can see the ratio of AMTs vs OSMs increase. You give me this I give you that BS. We should not give up anything.............................

 

[777 fixer]

I think you over-estimate the impact the CHS assembly line for Boeing will have on your contract and the market.

I'm sure they have AMT's for the flight test and delivery process, but what I recall is most of the guys working on the assembly floor are just well paid unlicensed technicians and machinists. That's a skillset they're just as likely to fill with former UAW workers as they will from the IAM or TWU....

Correct, the people working the production lines do not need A&P's. You will have some working the delivery line but that's about it.

 

[frontline]

I realize that it suits the agenda of the Bob Owens and TWU Informer types to say that AA is not really interested in third party work, but that just isn't the case. The problem is that US-based airlines have stopped caring about American jobs and are shipping the work overseas to reduce expenses (and quality?). AA is the only one who hasn't done that. If Delta wants their MD80s serviced by AA mechs, we're ready.

 

[KCKKen]

I realize that it suits the agenda of the Bob Owens and TWU Informer types to say that AA is not really interested in third party work, but that just isn't the case.

And just where the (text excised) have you been? Didn't you see the posting about AA not wanting to do the heavy work for Allegiant (due to not enough capacity) then announcing the closure of MCI due to "too much capacity"?

If Delta wants their MD80s serviced by AA mechs, we're ready.

Sure hope they don't need another "nose job" like the LAX plane -- since MCI was the place that did that one, and one after that, and a few more big metal repairs on some others. Those drop-ins are really going to make a mess of their dock plan.......

Frankly, I can't wait to hear when they're going to start offering SIS at MCI -- I might take it immediately!

 

[MCI transplant]

<_< ----- Ken, AA claims it's not interested in putting in a bid for doing Allegiant's heavy maintenance. But word out on the street is saying it's the other way around!----- Allegiant is still pissed at AA/TUL for putting out a MD80 and leaving out some boro-scope plugs! ------But you know, as well as I, that there can't be any truth to this!!!!? :unsure: