American expects to cut management jobs

[1 VF-1 2NV]

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080626/american_ai..._cuts.html?.v=1

That's it 🙄 . Wonder how many union jobs are going to be lost? :down:

 

[AMFAMAN]

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080626/american_ai..._cuts.html?.v=1

That's it 🙄 . Wonder how many union jobs are going to be lost? :down:

Meanwhile their hiring more managers at DFW...

 

[TWU informer]

Meanwhile their hiring more managers at DFW...

Yeah, need to hire 5% quickly, then lay-off 8% while really shuffling 3% to other jobs out of view of current within eyesight employees.

 

[eolesen]

I know you think management has job security for life, but I know of a couple folks at HDQ who recently found jobs outside of AMR and simply didn't want to wait to see if they'd be cut or if they'd be able to get a package. I'd be shocked if the same thing isn't happening elsewhere.

At some point, the people who can get more money elsewhere are going to start to do so, and AA's going to have to backfill those positions once they fall below what they see as the post % minimum. This has happened every time there's been warnings of a layoff in management, and every time y'all show the same faux disbelief...

 

[TWU informer]

I do not think or ever said that management has job security for life, you are confused with my beliefs regarding the TWU appointed leadership.

But AA Management always mis-represents the truth about the number of management cuts made.

 

[FrequentFlierCA]

The middle and lower levels of management are going to bear the brunt of this right along with the front line work groups. You won't be seeing the backs of Arpey, Reding, etc., but plenty of good people who work hard for AA are going to lose their jobs. It's a shame for ALL of them.

 

[jimntx]

It will probably be done the way they used to do it in Information Technology at Texaco when I was there. They would announce that they were eliminating 15 management jobs and boxes on the org chart. They would then publish they new org chart. Wonderful!

Two weeks later, they would fire 15 programmers, put those 15 managers (some of whom hadn't programmed in 15-20 years, if ever) in those jobs with no cut in salary and only a change in job title. Those 15 would sit around doing nothing but bemoaning their fate and pointing out how it was some other manager who should have been axed. In the meantime the remaining worker bees were expected to pick up the slack and cover the work of the 15 who were fired.

 

[Hopeful]

It will probably be done the way they used to do it in Information Technology at Texaco when I was there. They would announce that they were eliminating 15 management jobs and boxes on the org chart. They would then publish they new org chart. Wonderful!

Two weeks later, they would fire 15 programmers, put those 15 managers (some of whom hadn't programmed in 15-20 years, if ever) in those jobs with no cut in salary and only a change in job title. Those 15 would sit around doing nothing but bemoaning their fate and pointing out how it was some other manager who should have been axed. In the meantime the remaining worker bees were expected to pick up the slack and cover the work of the 15 who were fired.

JFK hiring 3 more managers (actually supervisors) to the existing 11. Almost a 30% increase in management at JFK alone. So if the 8% reduction even happens at JFK, 1 manager will get let go. Typical AA shell game.

I wonder how many managers would be required for 350 employees in other industries?

 

[The Goose]

I know you think management has job security for life, but I know of a couple folks at HDQ who recently found jobs outside of AMR and simply didn't want to wait to see if they'd be cut or if they'd be able to get a package. I'd be shocked if the same thing isn't happening elsewhere.

At some point, the people who can get more money elsewhere are going to start to do so, and AA's going to have to backfill those positions once they fall below what they see as the post % minimum. This has happened every time there's been warnings of a layoff in management, and every time y'all show the same faux disbelief...

Such a difference in perspective! Damn - where is this company at you're talking about? I haven't seen it during my employment at American. You're really not attempting to say things really happen the way you describe, are you? That would imply your belief those of us who have watched this come down a number of times didn't really see what we saw. You know the line: "Who are you going to believe - me or your lying eyes?"

During the last significant layoff (TUL), new positions were created and the management losers shuffled into them with the only loss being that of a job title. Only a few supervisors were sent out and those were the ones who could get their people to work get along with them - only the dregs were kept. No - the ones who left did not do so voluntarily either, so don't try that explaination.

Sorry, Mr. eolesen - management layoffs are no more than a popularity contest (suction evaluation) and a sham for the benefit of the workers here at American or any other company I've worked in my years.

 

[LAX Short Timer]

It is about time management gets their butts cut for the idiotic decisions they make. I have never seen a bunch of fools run a company so bad as I do AA management. I am happy they are getting chopped because they cannot make proper decisions for the company!

 

[WingNaPrayer]

AMR's announcement said they expected to cut 8% of management and support jobs which could mean 10 managers and 700 support jobs they way Reding and Horton do math. In that statement alone I am forced to believe that "support jobs" are the people who will bear the brunt of that ouster. Overall, the non-represented work groups will most likely take the biggest hit as well.

 

[lpbrian]

Such a difference in perspective! Damn - where is this company at you're talking about? I haven't seen it during my employment at American. You're really not attempting to say things really happen the way you describe, are you? That would imply your belief those of us who have watched this come down a number of times didn't really see what we saw. You know the line: "Who are you going to believe - me or your lying eyes?"

During the last significant layoff (TUL), new positions were created and the management losers shuffled into them with the only loss being that of a job title. Only a few supervisors were sent out and those were the ones who could get their people to work get along with them - only the dregs were kept. No - the ones who left did not do so voluntarily either, so don't try that explaination.

Sorry, Mr. eolesen - management layoffs are no more than a popularity contest (suction evaluation) and a sham for the benefit of the workers here at American or any other company I've worked in my years.

Goose is right. All AA does is eliminate positions in management, not the individuals themselves.

 

[eolesen]

I guess I hallucinated about all the empty cubes created during the six different management cuts that happened during my 15 years at HDQ.

If you're right about having 11 supvs/managers for 350 employees, perhaps you've probably got too few supervisors...

Typical management/front line ratios for shift work should be around 1:20 -- this looks like 1:31

 

[Hopeful]

I guess I hallucinated about all the empty cubes created during the six different management cuts that happened during my 15 years at HDQ.

If you're right about having 11 supvs/managers for 350 employees, perhaps you've probably got too few supervisors...

Typical management/front line ratios for shift work should be around 1:20 -- this looks like 1:31

Typical by who's standards? The last restructuring eliminated the Level 4 supervisors for a/c maintenance and made them all level 5. Their function has not changed except for the fact that some of their duties were passed down to the crew chiefs.
My point was that since they are all now considered "managers" and not "supervisors" anymore, how many employees should be in their charge now, especially that the crew chiefs have taken on some of their duties?

 

[The Goose]

I guess I hallucinated about all the empty cubes created during the six different management cuts that happened during my 15 years at HDQ.

I haven't any interest at all as to the goings-on at HDQ nor was I commenting about HDQ - I was speaking for TUL and what I've seen there during the prior management "layoffs".

If you're right about having 11 supvs/managers for 350 employees, perhaps you've probably got too few supervisors.
Typical management/front line ratios for shift work should be around 1:20 -- this looks like 1:31

How, then, did other places I've worked manage to squeak by with much thinner management coverage than AA if the company doesn't pad its ranks with fishing buddies?