Can anyone here give me any information on what is going on in New York. Flight 1385 from JFK to BGI and flight 1384 from BGI to JFK operated by a 757 has been experiencing come cancellantions due to aircraft shortage. I have heard that AA has been taking flights out of random mainly those that go to 'third world' countries to make up for the shortage of 767 aircrafts that are experiencing mechanical problems (the 767-200 aircraft). Can anyone inform me if this true and if so, how can AA accomodate a 757 aircraft to fly routes such as LAX and SFO?
Does AA have 767 problems?
- Thread starter Andre1980
- Start date
jetmechjer
Advanced
- Aug 8, 2004
- 168
- 50
Because the aircraft technicians at AA have a new modo, due to corporate greed!!!
AA PAYS ME JUST ENOUGH NOT TO QUIT....SO
I DO JUST ENOUGH NOT TO GET FIRED!!!!
One day the assenine company will realise that one happy employee can do more work than 10 disgruntled employees!!!!
Seems to work for SouthWest, UPS and Fed Ex!!
Wake up Mr. OurPay
or this ship will surely sink!!!
AA PAYS ME JUST ENOUGH NOT TO QUIT....SO
I DO JUST ENOUGH NOT TO GET FIRED!!!!
One day the assenine company will realise that one happy employee can do more work than 10 disgruntled employees!!!!
Seems to work for SouthWest, UPS and Fed Ex!!
Wake up Mr. OurPay
or this ship will surely sink!!!
Hopeful
Veteran
- Dec 21, 2002
- 5,998
- 347
Used to be a time when mechanics literally ran out to make repairs on out of service aircraft. But the demoralization of the airline workers while the executives continue to receive their obscene compensation and country club memeberships have degraded our attitudes. No one does more than they have to.
I will be the first to admit that it is the passenger who suffers. But the passengers to need to bear some responsibility because they won't fly an airline unless the ticket prices are as low as cab fare.
Not their fault that the only way to lower ticket prices is to take away pay and benefits from airline workers but not the fat cats at the top.
They don't care about air safety unless their loved ones die in a crash or they themselves are injured. Then it's off the the courts.
I will be the first to admit that it is the passenger who suffers. But the passengers to need to bear some responsibility because they won't fly an airline unless the ticket prices are as low as cab fare.
Not their fault that the only way to lower ticket prices is to take away pay and benefits from airline workers but not the fat cats at the top.
They don't care about air safety unless their loved ones die in a crash or they themselves are injured. Then it's off the the courts.
Gordon Bethune the former(?)CEO of Continental Airlines wrote a book about his strategy for turning around the twice bankrupt airline. (From Worst to First) In one chapter he talks about aircraft mechanics.
He said mentioned how if a mechanic is pissed off he simply will not fix the airplane, sure he will work on it all night and day but you wont get it for when you want it. He also said that when mechanics are doing this that there isnt much you can do about it. There is no way of telling what is going on inside the mechanics head. Is he really trying to fix this or just going through the motions, does he know whatsw causing the problem or not? however when they are motivated they often take on fixing it in time for a flight as a heroic(if only in their own minds) challenge and take great satisfaction in getting it out on time.
One of the reasons why AA is not earning as much as they could is because of all the aircraft that go out of service everyday and the extra aircraft they have sitting around to cover for cancellations. As AA and the TWU continue to play mind games on the line mechanics, thinking that they will come to accept their reduced standard of living and go back to the days when we all took on our daily heroic challenges, which is not going to happen, the company continues to lose money. Its sad because we are only talking about 4000 or less mechanics where if their pay hadnt been so drastically cut not only could the company continue to reduce headcount through attrition but they would likely see a dramatic reduction in delays and cancellations. The company could have enjoyed better productivity than SWA when you factor in that AA has multiple fleet types and ETOPS.
He said mentioned how if a mechanic is pissed off he simply will not fix the airplane, sure he will work on it all night and day but you wont get it for when you want it. He also said that when mechanics are doing this that there isnt much you can do about it. There is no way of telling what is going on inside the mechanics head. Is he really trying to fix this or just going through the motions, does he know whatsw causing the problem or not? however when they are motivated they often take on fixing it in time for a flight as a heroic(if only in their own minds) challenge and take great satisfaction in getting it out on time.
One of the reasons why AA is not earning as much as they could is because of all the aircraft that go out of service everyday and the extra aircraft they have sitting around to cover for cancellations. As AA and the TWU continue to play mind games on the line mechanics, thinking that they will come to accept their reduced standard of living and go back to the days when we all took on our daily heroic challenges, which is not going to happen, the company continues to lose money. Its sad because we are only talking about 4000 or less mechanics where if their pay hadnt been so drastically cut not only could the company continue to reduce headcount through attrition but they would likely see a dramatic reduction in delays and cancellations. The company could have enjoyed better productivity than SWA when you factor in that AA has multiple fleet types and ETOPS.
MCI transplant
Veteran
- Jun 4, 2003
- 5,311
- 587
<_< ----Bob, Just curious! Did you get a rough total on AMT head count, or are you still working on it? Is that 4,000 number about right?
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,988
- 9,428
Ah, I see that the Malcontents are out in full bloom again.
Unless AA's AMT's are skilled enough to rebuild the 767 which burnt up on the ramp in LAX two months ago, this shortage has nothing to do with how unproductive some of the blowhards around here claim to be. It's simply a matter of not having an aircraft to replace the one which burned.
Bluntly, planes should go where the money is. The flight to LAX and SFO is more profitable, so that's where the larger plane is going to be routed, not to mention the fact that they're carrying a fair amount of time sensitive cargo that's not able to be carried on a 757.
As for cancelling/downgrading flights to "third world countries" ---- that makes up about 40% of the flying out of JFK, so odds are that if something is cancelled or downgraded in the morning, it's to the Caribbean.
Plus, the difference in seats on the 757 and 767 isn't as great as you'd think. The bigger difference is cargo capability, and at this time of year, that's not as much of a concern to the islands as it is during the winter months.
Unless AA's AMT's are skilled enough to rebuild the 767 which burnt up on the ramp in LAX two months ago, this shortage has nothing to do with how unproductive some of the blowhards around here claim to be. It's simply a matter of not having an aircraft to replace the one which burned.
Bluntly, planes should go where the money is. The flight to LAX and SFO is more profitable, so that's where the larger plane is going to be routed, not to mention the fact that they're carrying a fair amount of time sensitive cargo that's not able to be carried on a 757.
As for cancelling/downgrading flights to "third world countries" ---- that makes up about 40% of the flying out of JFK, so odds are that if something is cancelled or downgraded in the morning, it's to the Caribbean.
Plus, the difference in seats on the 757 and 767 isn't as great as you'd think. The bigger difference is cargo capability, and at this time of year, that's not as much of a concern to the islands as it is during the winter months.
Would gladly rebuild it, but would make no sense considering it's worth more in a insurance write-off then the cost to rebuild. But hey it wouldn't be the first dumb decision that management makes, time to breakout the tools.
MCI transplant
Veteran
- Jun 4, 2003
- 5,311
- 587
<_< ----- First mistake aa made was to send a curtain Manager from here at MCI to evaluate the damage to that burnt up aircraft! No offense Boss, but you don't call the Horizontal Stab. "the little wing in the back"!!!Would gladly rebuild it, but would make no sense considering it's worth more in a insurance write-off then the cost to rebuild. But hey it wouldn't be the first dumb decision that management makes, time to breakout the tools.
Yea! We have them too!!!! 
Ken MacTiernan
Veteran
You are correct Sir!
Let's see, last week there were only FOUR AMTs working night shift. One was an Acting Crew Chief, (one of the two were laid off so we have only one and he was on vacation), three AMTs of which I was one. Since we only had 24 man hours in which to complete all the RON inspections, (let alone work any items), we were unable to work on an OTS 757 with a out of limits vibration on the rh engine, a fuel leak on the rh engine and an "elev assymetry" EICAS message. (This was a hard fault and not a nuesance message. The actuator was bad.) So, we accomplished our RON inspections and then overtime was asked to stay in the morning to put this a/c back into service. As Bob states above, this scenario would not have been much of a problem in the past but today...
I was aksed to stay but I have not worked overtime since we lost AMTs after the concessions. (Sorry, I don't work o/t when my fellow AMTs are on the street.) Of the other three AMTs one left on vacation the next day and one who originally was assigned this a/c was simply frazzled because he was alone on the a/c and didn't stay and the last AMT simply refused. Day shift came on shift with ONE AMT! So...... LAX sent down a field trip of 4 AMTs for the vibration problem. They took care of that and then replaced the fuel pump while the ONE day shift AMT changed the elev actuator. The a/c was placed back in service good as new. This scenario did NOT have to take place. In the past we would have addressed this a/c like we do all the others.
Ken, do you realize that by not working OT you are making it more likely that AMTs won't be recalled?
OT is a red flag that there aren't enough people to do the work. If you have too much work for 4 guys and are constantly using OT, then they're going to add more guys.
Instead of being stuborn and stupid about it, why don't you show that you need more people? Perhaps using economic reasons rather than emotional ones will get you farther.
local 12 proud
Veteran
- Mar 5, 2004
- 4,265
- 4
So calling a field trip because lack of interest in OT will negate the fact that AA is short handed?
Many guys have second jobs to supplement their income and choose to turn it down because its sporadic. Its not about being stuborn, or trying to hose the company. Its about making ends meet which those in ivory towers have no clue!
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,988
- 9,428
At a macro level, it will show that AA is short handed, but it's more likely to benefit LAX when heads are increased, as opposed to SAN who had the real need in this case.
Ken MacTiernan
Veteran
oneflyer,
You are wrong. There are AMTs here who believe that working as much o/t as possible will show the company that more heads are needed. But that experiment did not work because more heads were not added/recalled. (I didn't work then either.) So now not working the o/t has not increased head count either. Look, the company is willing to take delays and ots aircraft with a continuing reduced manning.
Here's an example. This last round of layoffs we were told that SAN was properly manned and not to worry. Lo & behold we lost 4 AMTs, one AMT Crew Chief and one stock clerk. We were told that this was to be our new level of manning in maintenance. OK. You with me so far?
Then after all the dust settled and the laid off guys transfered out we had our so called proper manning for our operation. One of the uneffected AMTs put a bid in for LAX as a Crew Chief. He left and we are one man down per the stated head count that is needed for SAN. We asked when this AMT would be replaced with a recall. Guess what? The company said they WILL NOT replace him!
Wait a second! Per the company's own statement we WERE manned to the proper level with the reduced head count. Now we are undermanned and everything is fine? Sure, go ahead and work all the o/t you can. Work twice as hard for half as much. Either way the company will not recall AMTs.
