Every 8 days

[eolesen]

Folks,we have a major problem at TULE and if you are out in the system you may not be aware of the problem.We have management directing and supervising heavy aircraft maintenance that have absolutely NO EXPERIENCE OR BACKGROUND in aircraft maintenance.How would you like having a plumber supervise your open heart surgery?
As a 25 year veteran of heavy aircraft maintenance we use to have people managing aircraft maintenance who actually had a good idea of what they were doing because they came out of aircraft maintenance to become management.This started changing in late 1990's and now we have management who came from Home Depot SUPERVISING HEAVY AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE or planners who have NEVER TURNED A WRENCH.

Really? When I was looking at management jobs in TUL, everything in the shops and hangar required an A&P, with the exception of a couple jobs in time & attendance. Anything else with a direct or indirect reporting relationship to mechanics required a license.

So if there are people working there without an A&P, that's a new develoipment. It's possible that someone with an A&P could find nothing better than working for Home Depot (I know at least two of us here had to don the orange apron while also working for AA, and at one point, there were four of us management employees from HDQ working at the Southlake, TX store).

You might be correct they have no line or overhaul experience, but if they hold a ticket, that counts as background more than taking a guy who supervised TWU employees on the ramp for 20+ years or a furloughed pilot.


As for "all the wealth that management sucked out of AMR" comments.... More myth than fact. Yes, a couple people in management got raises. No argument with that. But not a dime of the PUP/PSP came out of the operating revenues. It was all new stock issued for the purposes of meeting contractually required incentive compensation.

If you're interested in being paid in stock, please contact your negotiators. So far in the past seven years, there have been no takers.

 

[MCI transplant]

If AA had only kept flying DC-3's, or better yet Tri-Motor's think how much they could have paid the employees all these years...

Jim

<_< ------ Don't be a smart a$$!!!

 

[MCI transplant]

No, it's not the same as you not replacing your old car, since you don't drive your car 10-12 hours per day, 365 days per year like AA does with its airplanes. A typical AA MD-80 burns about 3.5 million gallons of fuel per year and at current prices that's nearly $8 million per year per MD-80. If you could make the car payments on a new car with the money you'd save on gas by buying a new fuel efficient car, then you'd replace your old car with the new car. But you only drive your car a part of the day and not 10-12 hours each day. Your relatively small gasoline bill (as a percentage of the price of a new car) is why gassing up the old car instead of making large new car payments makes economic sense for you. Not so with AA and its MD-80s, which fly at least 10 hours per day on average.

The fuel savings by flying a new 738 instead of an MD-80 more than makes the payments on the new 738. That makes the purchase of a new 738 a cash-positive activity. It gets even better when you factor in the maintenance savings (parts and labor) on a brand-new airplane that's still under warranty. When oil again climbs above $100/bbl or $140/bbl (as it surely will), the decision to buy the 738s will look even more impressive.

As an aside, AA isn't paying anywhere near $80 million for each new 738 as you allege; its actual purchase price is less than half that amount. Boeing's list prices are its wish list, not a statement of what large airlines like AA pay when they order 80+ copies to be delivered in three years.

As I've posted before, AA's line maintenance employees deserve to be paid similarly to those at UPS, FedEX and WN. Problem is, AA will never pay the overhaul base mechanics in Tulsa anywhere near those wages. Not when their current wages are higher than at the MROs and allow the Tulsa employees to live high on the hog. Increase their pay to $45/hr or $47/hr or more? Not gonna happen. Figure out how to unhitch yourselves from those boat anchors and perhaps the line maintenance employees might see $45/hr or more.

<_< ------- No, flying an Aircraft ain't like driving your car! That Aircraft, new or not, don't move one inch without a signature from a licensed AMT in the Log Book, that that Aircraft is fit to do so! So what good is it if it legally can't fly?-------- After all, "bottom line" is your paying that AMT to take legal responsibility for the safety of those passengers, and crew! That includes both overhaul, and line mechcanics!-------- Now what's that worth to you??? :huh:

 

[Bob Owens]

Anyone with any brains at all knows that an airline needs to keep buying new aircraft on a constant basis.The issue is how much wealth the management of AA has took out of the company for themselves since we made concessions in 2003 I guess if pointing this out makes someone bitter then there are a whole lot of bitter employees at AA
Folks,we have a major problem at TULE and if you are out in the system you may not be aware of the problem.We have management directing and supervising heavy aircraft maintenance that have absolutely NO EXPERIENCE OR BACKGROUND in aircraft maintenance.How would you like having a plumber supervise your open heart surgery?
As a 25 year veteran of heavy aircraft maintenance we use to have people managing aircraft maintenance who actually had a good idea of what they were doing because they came out of aircraft maintenance to become management.This started changing in late 1990's and now we have management who came from Home Depot SUPERVISING HEAVY AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE or planners who have NEVER TURNED A WRENCH.
It is pretty clear that the management at TULE is not interested in keeping heavy maintenance in the support shops because they are unwilling to invest the money necessary for modernizing the test stands and equipment needed to do the work on B737 B777 and B787 COMPONENTS.
Just as we need new aircraft on a constant basis we also need to continually upgrade our test equipment and stands to perform maintenance on the newer fleet.

Telebender, theres a reason for that lack of investment. Tulsa will continue to shrink. Think about it, how much of Tulsa's work revolves around the MD-80? Of the work that remains (777, 767, 757) how much of that can be accomplished at AFW and DWH? It costs hardly anything to tow or even taxi an aircraft to DWH, it costs around $16,000 to ferry it to AFW and at least double to triple that to Tulsa. They are replacing MD-80s at the rate of around one every 8 days. As the MD-80s go away , being replaced by , as FWAAA points out, low maintenance 737s, the workload in Tulsa will drop off. You are being asked to fund the elimination of maintenance jobs.

Lets say it costs $50,000 to ferry an aircraft to Tulsa, including Crew costs. And it costs $200(including the mechanics pay) to tow it to DWH. The savings would pay a crew of 40 mechanics a week. How long does a light C take? Both the 777 and the 757 have RR engines on them, AFW makes perfect sense for heavy checks, pull the engines and wheel them over the the shop while they work the airframe. Who does our 737 engines? If Tulsa did them that would make the base pretty secure but isnt there an issue with that?

If you look at other workgroups most are near SWA wages, we earn over $11/hr less , around $15/hr when you factor in the Holidays, vacation, sick time, tool allowances etc etc. We are funding the purchase of aircraft that will eliminate demand for aircraft mechanics, no other workgroup is affected this way, the 737s will still need as many FAs, two crew members up front and just as many people to load it but they will need much fewer OH mechanics for at least the first 10 years. Fewer line mechs as well but OH will bear the brunt of it.

We can not stop this, the new aircraft are coming, the question is do we help fund our own demise by continuing to work for less or do we do like all the other workgroups and get a wage close to SWA? We should not help pay for something that will be used to get rid of more maintenance jobs by agreeing to work for less. Personally with around 500 mechs retiring every year I dont think that you will end up on the street but you may not be able to stay in Tulsa. It may be possible that when the MD-80s are gone they could do it all between AFW and DWH. I could see them sending all the heavies to AFW and keeping the lighter ones at DWH, stepping up the B-checks at its five hubs (DFW,LAX, MIA, NY1 & ORD) to carry more of the load, having most of its spares in DFW makes sense logistically because they can just ship the parts on their own planes and if not theres more options because more carriers fly out of DFW than TUL, but you would know that better than I if thats feasable. Admittedly I dont know the intimate details of how OH operates.

I think the company would like to keep Tulsa but they want to turn it into an MRO, and pay MRO wages. Theres a talent base there thats unmatched anywhere, Lufthansa is probably the only thing that comes close.They want to use that to guarantee that they have the lowest line wages as well. The TA pretty much made that clear. They wanted to flood the floor with low paid SMAs, creating vacancies for them by basically freezing Base AMT pay and use the line premium to lure the AMTs out to the line for the higher pay. Look at the transfer list from AFW to DFW. They also wanted to include language to spin off up to 20% of the value of the maintenance operation and they would not bring up system protection to DOS like they've done for the past 25 years. How much "market value" does the Tulsa base have? Looking at MCI I would guess, not much, compared to the value of the facilities they hold in DFW, MIA, ORD, LAX, NYC and BOS, most of which are prime real estate. In LGA they hold 75% of the hangar space. Because of its location, JFK and LGA real estate probably carries more value than the entire base in Tulsa. Nobody can build a hangar at LGA, there's no room, if they need space they pretty much have to go to AA. Why did they pick that date 6/6/2000? Obviously they had a number figured out that they needed to be left unprotected. Basically all the TWA guys plus some. At 500 mechs a year we could have around 2500 without system protection by 2012. At one every 8 days we could have another 136 B737s by then and most of MD80s could be gone.

 

[commavia]

So comical - one just has to laugh.

Labor criticizes management for not investing in new, more fuel efficient aircraft, and then labor criticizes management for investing in new, more fuel efficient aircraft.

These passion plays are just ridiculous - if only they didn't spend money on X, they could give us back what we "deserve." And to be clear: I'm not saying that you are or aren't worth anything - that's up to the market to decide. But obviously, the market has spoken loud and clear, and you don't like it. Consumers don't seem to value your labor as highly as you do, since every day consumers think nothing of (meaning either they don't know, don't want to know, or know and don't care) stepping onto airplanes overhauled by non-airline third party MROs or in other countries. So it seems to me that rather than hating Arpey for having to deal with competitors who are all now outsourcing their maintenance entirely, maybe you should examine why it is that he has to be dealing with this issue in the first place.

But as long as we're playing the "what if" game, how about we examine what profits AMR could be reporting (since they are underperforming the entire industry) if they had cut your pay even more, laid off even more people, outsourced all overhauls, frozen and/or dumped all the defined-benefit pensions, and exacted even more severe work rule changes from labor. Every one of AA's legacy peers has at some point or another done some or all of those things - at least once - through the bankruptcy process.

How would that have affected the outcome?

http://www.wfaa.com/video?id=105401343&sec=552897

A new plane every 8 days, now we know why they say they cant pay us.

Nice try, but no.

The reason they can't afford to pay you is that for all of your fuzzy math about how cost-competitive AA's labor is (except, of course, for the ultimate cost per ASM number that you can't avoid), your ultimate competition is always going to be cheaper than you whether you want to admit it or not. I don't care how efficient, experienced or skilled you are at your job - as long as your competition is El Salvador, Korea and China - and, increasingly, like it or not, it is - you will never be cost-competitive.

So rather than continuing to exercise the demons of Arpey's alleged evilness, why not do something useful for your cause in the long run and start working Capitol Hill to pass legislation requiring MRO work to come back here to the U.S. Over the long term, that would be the only chance you'd ever have of even coming close to being cost-competitive.

A new 737 costs around $80 million,(show me where they get them for half price)

Show me where they're paying full price. If your logic is to make a statement and then ask anyone to prove you wrong - I'll ask you to do the same.

It is well-known within the airline industry - and generally excepted by just about everyone (except you, apparently) - that airlines, particularly those that are large customers placing large orders - do not pay straight list. The ultimate discount a massive customer like AA would ultimately get from Boeing is contingent on all sorts of variables like credit rating, financing Ts&Cs, etc., and obviously highly proprietary, but it is extremely unlikely that AA is paying $72.5M (Boeing's low-end 737-800 list price) let alone $81M.

Besides that, this argument of yours is patently false to begin with. Investing in new, more fuel efficient airplanes makes the entire enterprise more efficient and reduces a massive cost item - fuel - substantially (not to mention the lower costs in many other areas that the newer aircraft bring). You should be applauding that. By helping lower AMR's overall cost structure, it makes the company that much more competitive with its already-lower-cost post-bankruptcy peers.

 

[Interested]

I don't think Tulsa work load will decrease that much. Some, but not as much as you think. AA was able to extend the interval from 1 year to 2 years for light C checks, and 5 to 6 years for heavy c checks, these intervals are now at the point where the planes are going to be nose to tail. The light c line is going to suspend their "retro" work soon and go back to strictly light C's. The heavy checks will start up next month. It won't be long before the newer jets 3DL and up will need light C's done.

As far as MRO work, many in Tulsa think that AA wants no part of it. At least airframe type work. After all, they kicked Allegiant and North American out. Used the excuse that we didn't have the room. Word on the floor was that Allegiant was extremely happy with the quality of work being done on their aircraft.

 

[Bob Owens]

I don't think Tulsa work load will decrease that much. Some, but not as much as you think. AA was able to extend the interval from 1 year to 2 years for light C checks, and 5 to 6 years for heavy c checks, these intervals are now at the point where the planes are going to be nose to tail. The light c line is going to suspend their "retro" work soon and go back to strictly light C's. The heavy checks will start up next month. It won't be long before the newer jets 3DL and up will need light C's done.

As far as MRO work, many in Tulsa think that AA wants no part of it. At least airframe type work. After all, they kicked Allegiant and North American out. Used the excuse that we didn't have the room. Word on the floor was that Allegiant was extremely happy with the quality of work being done on their aircraft.

For the next few years I think you are right, we have more work than we can handle with the amount of workers we have, thats why they got rid of 3P (the line recall list as pretty much been exhausted except for a few class II stations). From rumors I've heard AA may even have to send some out since we have so much right now. But as the MD-80s go away and the 737s come in there will be a gap before they start needing as much maint as the MD-80s did.

Are you talking about the MD-80 Cs or 737Cs? Could the 737 light'c be done in DWH once it gears up?

With the line stations recalls pretty much exhausted the company will start to experience what AAR is already experiencing. Nobody out there. Since 2001 the FAA has only been issueing around 6000 new Maintenance certs a year. They have yet to reply to my query as to whether they count an A&P as 2 certs or one. If so, that means only 3000 new A&Ps a year. AA alone loses 500 a year. That would leave 2500 for the entire aviation community. There are 14000 airports in this country, 87000 flights a day and 374,161 aircraft registered in the US with the FAA. At one time the airlines paid premium pay, they could draw workers from other parts of the Aviation industry, the Major airline AMT was at the top, thats no longer the case. Business jets pay more, and in many cases the LCCs where we used to go to get our five years of experience now pay more and are often based out of low cost cities. AA wants to work out of LAX, NY1, ORD, MIA and DF1. Well all of them except Dallas are reletively high cost cities and they wont be able to compete with Utilities, mass transit and other industries. We have middle aged guys quitting and leaving the Industry on a regular basis. If you look at the swearing in photo of the First Local 562 EB in late 1999 its all guys in their 20s, 30s or early 40s but only one still swings a wrench at AA. One out of seven. Three quit the company, one died, one went to the International and one is me.

I think their plan was to tap the bases for the AMTs they will need. We already see them sending upgrades directly to the line because thats where the need is.

 

[Bob Owens]

The reason they can't afford to pay you is that for all of your fuzzy math about how cost-competitive AA's labor is (except, of course, for the ultimate cost per ASM number that you can't avoid), your ultimate competition is always going to be cheaper than you whether you want to admit it or not. I don't care how efficient, experienced or skilled you are at your job - as long as your competition is El Salvador, Korea and China - and, increasingly, like it or not, it is - you will never be cost-competitive.

Prove it. Do you have the figures? Are you aware of the problems that those carriers that ship that work out have? This industry is smaller than you think, we know people at other carriers and we talk. Delta tried to subcontract another carrier to an outside vender and that carrier said "No way" they contracted with Delta and they demanded that Delta mechanics do the work. Other guys have reported that it takes up to three weeks to clean up the aircraft (mechanically)when they get them back from those chop shops, even the domestic ones. You may claim it doesnt make a difference but the people who know what they are talking about know that it does. Like Bethune said years ago "you can make Pizza so cheap that nobody will buy it".

Show me where they're paying full price. If your logic is to make a statement and then ask anyone to prove you wrong - I'll ask you to do the same.

Thats what they list the price at, sure you can pick the lower figure but the burden of proof shifts to you when you claim they pay even less than what the Boeing website says they cost. I have Boeings list, what do you have except what you claim is "well-known"?

It is well-known within the airline industry - and generally excepted by just about everyone (except you, apparently) - that airlines, particularly those that are large customers placing large orders - do not pay straight list. The ultimate discount a massive customer like AA would ultimately get from Boeing is contingent on all sorts of variables like credit rating, financing Ts&Cs, etc., and obviously highly proprietary, but it is extremely unlikely that AA is paying $72.5M (Boeing's low-end 737-800 list price) let alone $81M.

But the fact is you dont know and you have no evidence to support your claims, I at least have Boeings quote. With Lockheed and Douglas out of the business and the addition of former Soviet block nations to the market Boeing isnt as desperate as Lockheed and Douglass were. When I was in China a few years back I booked a flight from Shanghai to Bejing on a domestic Chinese Airline, I expected an old Tupolev clunker, instead it was a new 747.

Besides that, this argument of yours is patently false to begin with. Investing in new, more fuel efficient airplanes makes the entire enterprise more efficient and reduces a massive cost item - fuel - substantially (not to mention the lower costs in many other areas that the newer aircraft bring). You should be applauding that. By helping lower AMR's overall cost structure, it makes the company that much more competitive with its already-lower-cost post-bankruptcy peers.

My position is that we should not allow those purchases and the debt incurred be used as an excuse to keep our wages low. If I buy Solar Panels for my house I doubt the Electric Utility will accept lower payments for the electric they sell me to pay for them, thats what the company is asking us to do. We will not be the primary benificiaries of this, in fact it will result in a lowering of demand for what we sell, maintenance labor. AA and its pundits, like you, are the ones who claim they cant afford to pay us, yet they can afford to get a new plane every 8 days. They can buy and invest all they want, just dont turn around and tell us that we have to continue to do without, pay us, even if it means getting a new plane every 10 days instead of 8.

 

[commavia]

Prove it. Do you have the figures? Are you aware of the problems that those carriers that ship that work out have?

Well, I guess the "proof" I have is that for all the talk about how skilled and valuable you are, AMR is the only airline in America that still overhauls its own planes.

And for as low-quality and cheap as these third-party MROs and foreign shops are, that doesn't seem to have stopped Delta, Northwest, United, Continental, JetBlue, etc. from shipping work to them, and nor has it stopped the millions of customers of those airlines from flying on those planes.

It really doesn't matter what I - one individual - think. I am merely one consumer. Airliners cater to literally hundreds of millions of consumers every year. And again, whether you want to accept and/or admit it or not, the reality is that the vast majority of those consumers could not care less where the plane is maintained. They don't care about who you are, and are more than willing to accept somebody in El Salvador doing the work for half the pay. Until planes start falling out of the sky, that isn't likely to change. Either accept that, or you aren't living in reality. Sorry.

Thats what they list the price at, sure you can pick the lower figure but the burden of proof shifts to you when you claim they pay even less than what the Boeing website says they cost. I have Boeings list, what do you have except what you claim is "well-known"?

But the fact is you dont know and you have no evidence to support your claims, I at least have Boeings quote.

This isn't a hard concept. Boeing is going to advertise a high list price knowing full well that huge volume customers won't pay that. But they aren't going to advertise the lower price on their website so that starts out being the basis for negotiation with every future airplane purchaser. This is sort of negotiation 101. I would think a unionist like yourself would understand the concept of starting out high on your "opener."

But, as long as we're now taking website marketing as sacrosanct since none of us have the ability to get at the reality that isn't publicly discussed, I guess that means we should all now take AANegotiations.com as entirely accurate? Is that the new standard? Sure, people on AirlineForums.com claim there's more going on, but since I can't really be sure, and you can't "prove" it to me, I guess I'll just go with AA's company line?

My position is that we should not allow those purchases and the debt incurred be used as an excuse to keep our wages low.

When are you going to get it? The reason they can't afford to pay you more isn't because they're buying new airplanes. It's because you cost more than most of your peers doing the same job!

This isn't rocket science.

AMR's labor - and - maintenance costs are both basically the highest in the U.S. on a unit basis.

And you can spend pages and pages of thread after thread here talking about how the numbers are bogus, how they don't tell the whole story, and others can imply that the accounting numbers reporting publicly are falsified, etc.

The bottom line is, again, this simple: a U.S. citizen in Tulsa or Fort Worth with a defined-benefit pension plan, medical and dental benefits, and base pay scales higher than even many of your U.S. counterparts (those that are still left), is no longer competitive with maintainers in El Salvador, Mexico, Korea, China, etc. It's just that simple.

You can claim that the quality of the work is lower, that there are more open items on the plane when it gets back stateside, etc., but all of that is largely moot if - overall - it still costs less to overhaul the plane there.

Just as with the proverbial tree falling in the forest, if a plane is maintained in China (or at TIMCO, et al), and comes back with more issues on it, but was overhauled just as fast and for 1/3 less cost, does anybody really care that it wasn't maintained here? Answer: thus far, for the vast majority of consumers and every U.S. airline except AA, no.

 

[Bob Owens]

Well, I guess the "proof" I have is that for all the talk about how skilled and valuable you are, AMR is the only airline in America that still overhauls its own planes.

Wrong again, many carriers still do overhaul AA just does the most.

And for as low-quality and cheap as these third-party MROs and foreign shops are, that doesn't seem to have stopped Delta, Northwest, United, Continental, JetBlue, etc. from shipping work to them, and nor has it stopped the millions of customers of those airlines from flying on those planes.

It really doesn't matter what I - one individual - think. I am merely one consumer. Airliners cater to literally hundreds of millions of consumers every year. And again, whether you want to accept and/or admit it or not, the reality is that the vast majority of those consumers could not care less where the plane is maintained. They don't care about who you are, and are more than willing to accept somebody in El Salvador doing the work for half the pay. Until planes start falling out of the sky, that isn't likely to change. Either accept that, or you aren't living in reality. Sorry.

I agree, the public doesnt care and wont care until they see planes falling out of the sky. Hopefully nobody you know will be on that plane. What I'm waiting for from you is proof that it makes business sense to ship the work off. AA had an advantage over all its compitors back in 2003, OSMs. AA also was able to outsorce more than other carriers were, in fact we were the leader in outsoucing of the legacy carriers for many, many years. (Ironically, probably in part due to the increased outsourcing of others AA now outsources less than ever, its cheaper to do it in house).Other carriers also had fully paid AMTs working all the back shops so there was no way they could compete with AA. So they used BK as a way of getting out of that. Watch and see what the combined UAL/CAL and DAL/NWA do. Neither have shed mechanics, instead watch as they keep them and gradually bring more back in house. They will push for and get what AA has had for 15 years (delta already has it and so does UAL to a limited degree). When is the last time you saw a merger with no layoffs?

But, as long as we're now taking website marketing as sacrosanct since none of us have the ability to get at the reality that isn't publicly discussed, I guess that means we should all now take AANegotiations.com as entirely accurate? Is that the new standard? Sure, people on AirlineForums.com claim there's more going on, but since I can't really be sure, and you can't "prove" it to me, I guess I'll just go with AA's company line?

Do as you like, you seem to believe whatever the company tells you anyway. I could care less what you think I just reply for the sake of my peers who read the junk you spew.

When are you going to get it? The reason they can't afford to pay you more isn't because they're buying new airplanes. It's because you cost more than most of your peers doing the same job!

Now you are really showing your ignorance. Even the company website admits thats not the case.

This isn't rocket science.

For you it may as well be, by the way people with our skillsets maintain rockets and we probably have a more comprehensive grasp on the science of it than you do.
IIRC more than 80% of OH is still done stateside, some by domestic chopshops, some by most of the major carriers. The domestic chop shops arent paying those guys a third of what AA pays. In fact its pretty close to what AA pays and lets not forget, just like when you get your car worked on and are charged $90/hr the mechanic isnt getting that and you dont pay the mechanic directly. So even if a mechanic at TIMCO makes $25 an hour that doesnt mean thats what Delta, UAL or AA would be paying and it doesnt make him our competitor, with the growing shortage, it makes AA TIMCOs competitor for the mechanics! Where do you think some of those(who chose to stay in the industry) went when UAL and othhers cut back their OH?

The fact is that right now AA outsources less than ever before and they have 1200 workers without system protection, if they could find a place to do it cheaper they could lay them all off, but they havent. In fact they are recalling workers across the system, most decline the recall, others accept but dont show up ( I guess its their way of saying F-U), for 10 they are lucky if they get 3. Guys are upgrading to the line with no experience, when I was hired we had to have five years of experience on heavy turbine aircraft to work the line.

What's your reasoning for AA trying to recall workers and keeping work in house if as you claim they can get it done for 1/3 the price somewhere else??

 

[Interested]

For the next few years I think you are right, we have more work than we can handle with the amount of workers we have, thats why they got rid of 3P (the line recall list as pretty much been exhausted except for a few class II stations). From rumors I've heard AA may even have to send some out since we have so much right now. But as the MD-80s go away and the 737s come in there will be a gap before they start needing as much maint as the MD-80s did.

Are you talking about the MD-80 Cs or 737Cs? Could the 737 light'c be done in DWH once it gears up?

From what I understand DWH will mainly be for mods and out of service aircraft. Starting at the first of the year 757 gear changes will be moving there, and I'm assuming the pylon mod also. Take a look at the TUL dock plan, it says that that work is moving to DWH while the crew moves to hanger 5. Rumor has it a 757 light C line is starting up. There is also supposed to be a MD-80 light C line starting up again. I've heard from a couple people on the 737 retro lines who (are being forced to 7 day coverage) plan on bidding that line.

Since I don't know how DWH is going to be set up, I'm not sure if it will have the support for light C's. Meaning back shops, etc...

 

[737823]

So comical - one just has to laugh.

Labor criticizes management for not investing in new, more fuel efficient aircraft, and then labor criticizes management for investing in new, more fuel efficient aircraft.

It's the union way doing business. Let's not forget Dan Akins, the economist hired by the APFA is on hand saying "AA flight attendants are the most expensive and least productive" when you adjust the hours AA flight attendants work and their wages.

It is well-known within the airline industry - and generally excepted by just about everyone (except you, apparently) - that airlines, particularly those that are large customers placing large orders - do not pay straight list. The ultimate discount a massive customer like AA would ultimately get from Boeing is contingent on all sorts of variables like credit rating, financing Ts&Cs, etc., and obviously highly proprietary, but it is extremely unlikely that AA is paying $72.5M (Boeing's low-end 737-800 list price) let alone $81M.

Besides that, this argument of yours is patently false to begin with. Investing in new, more fuel efficient airplanes makes the entire enterprise more efficient and reduces a massive cost item - fuel - substantially (not to mention the lower costs in many other areas that the newer aircraft bring). You should be applauding that. By helping lower AMR's overall cost structure, it makes the company that much more competitive with its already-lower-cost post-bankruptcy peers.

Now I feel even better each time I board a new 737-800 knowing that it is providing cost savings to the company on the labor front.

Prove it. Do you have the figures? Are you aware of the problems that those carriers that ship that work out have? This industry is smaller than you think, we know people at other carriers and we talk. Delta tried to subcontract another carrier to an outside vender and that carrier said "No way" they contracted with Delta and they demanded that Delta mechanics do the work. Other guys have reported that it takes up to three weeks to clean up the aircraft (mechanically)when they get them back from those chop shops, even the domestic ones. You may claim it doesnt make a difference but the people who know what they are talking about know that it does. Like Bethune said years ago "you can make Pizza so cheap that nobody will buy it".

The hogwash from the unions that foreign operated maintenance facilities are not in compliance, have illiterate, incompetent workers is simply ridiculous. I've flown countless segments on jetBlue, Delta, and Continental who all use foreign contractors and I've yet to have a major mechanical problem or felt my safety was compromised. Sometimes the truth hurts and I know the big ego unionists don't like seeing workers overseas undercut their services. I've had more mechanical troubles on your airline due to you AAntique MD-80s and was stranded for a day in 2008 during the wiring disaster, which AA was found negligent and fined accordingly the largest FAA imposed penalty.

My position is that we should not allow those purchases and the debt incurred be used as an excuse to keep our wages low. If I buy Solar Panels for my house I doubt the Electric Utility will accept lower payments for the electric they sell me to pay for them, thats what the company is asking us to do. We will not be the primary benificiaries of this, in fact it will result in a lowering of demand for what we sell, maintenance labor. AA and its pundits, like you, are the ones who claim they cant afford to pay us, yet they can afford to get a new plane every 8 days. They can buy and invest all they want, just dont turn around and tell us that we have to continue to do without, pay us, even if it means getting a new plane every 10 days instead of 8.

You're actually completely wrong because electrical utilities will allow customers to sell surplus power back to the grid at retail rates. Labor is one of AA's inputs and if they can substitue capital investment in new 737-800s and reduce the airlines payroll while better serving customers I say great.

For you it may as well be, by the way people with our skillsets maintain rockets and we probably have a more comprehensive grasp on the science of it than you do.
IIRC more than 80% of OH is still done stateside, some by domestic chopshops, some by most of the major carriers. The domestic chop shops arent paying those guys a third of what AA pays. In fact its pretty close to what AA pays and lets not forget, just like when you get your car worked on and are charged $90/hr the mechanic isnt getting that and you dont pay the mechanic directly. So even if a mechanic at TIMCO makes $25 an hour that doesnt mean thats what Delta, UAL or AA would be paying and it doesnt make him our competitor, with the growing shortage, it makes AA TIMCOs competitor for the mechanics! Where do you think some of those(who chose to stay in the industry) went when UAL and othhers cut back their OH?

Regardless of a workers direct earnings, they impose a higher cost on the employer through benefits, training, compliance and other overhead expenses. I'd really like to see AA keep the United States but if labor is unwilling to cooperate with management to mutually agreeable terms, I fully condone management's efforts to outsource your work. Time to unload some bricks from the backpack!

Josh

 

[telebender1956]

Really? When I was looking at management jobs in TUL, everything in the shops and hangar required an A&P, with the exception of a couple jobs in time & attendance. Anything else with a direct or indirect reporting relationship to mechanics required a license.

So if there are people working there without an A&P, that's a new develoipment. It's possible that someone with an A&P could find nothing better than working for Home Depot (I know at least two of us here had to don the orange apron while also working for AA, and at one point, there were four of us management employees from HDQ working at the Southlake, TX store).

You might be correct they have no line or overhaul experience, but if they hold a ticket, that counts as background more than taking a guy who supervised TWU employees on the ramp for 20+ years or a furloughed pilot.


As for "all the wealth that management sucked out of AMR" comments.... More myth than fact. Yes, a couple people in management got raises. No argument with that. But not a dime of the PUP/PSP came out of the operating revenues. It was all new stock issued for the purposes of meeting contractually required incentive compensation.

If you're interested in being paid in stock, please contact your negotiators. So far in the past seven years, there have been no takers.

IT is not a new for NON-AMT's to be managers or supervisors of aircraft components such as pneumatic valves or electrical generators.

The issued stock options to the executives DILUTED the VALUE of my stock and everyone else who holds AMR stock so that is taking wealth out of the company.This is AMR stocked that I held before the 2003 concessions.

And in case you have lived under a rock since 2003 the 2003 concessions forced 300 shares of AMR common stock on us for partial compensation but at a price.It cost us $5.00/share to have stock options forced down our throat.

It is quite obvious that you are management because you are a defender of their incompetence and if by chance you are not you should be.

 

[telebender1956]

Mr.Bob Owens, most of the planes that are inducted into H/C and L/C checks are flown to Tulsa as revenue flights and then removed from service.I agree that AA management is on a fast track to convert TULE into a MRO only base with MRO wages.
I hope that about 50% of the AMTS will retire or quit when TULE is operating as an MRO at MRO wages.This will leave a huge lack of experience vacuum at TULE and serve AA management right.

 

[chris perry]

Really? When I was looking at management jobs in TUL, everything in the shops and hangar required an A&P, with the exception of a couple jobs in time & attendance. Anything else with a direct or indirect reporting relationship to mechanics required a license.

So if there are people working there without an A&P, that's a new develoipment. It's possible that someone with an A&P could find nothing better than working for Home Depot (I know at least two of us here had to don the orange apron while also working for AA, and at one point, there were four of us management employees from HDQ working at the Southlake, TX store).

You might be correct they have no line or overhaul experience, but if they hold a ticket, that counts as background more than taking a guy who supervised TWU employees on the ramp for 20+ years or a furloughed pilot.


As for "all the wealth that management sucked out of AMR" comments.... More myth than fact. Yes, a couple people in management got raises. No argument with that. But not a dime of the PUP/PSP came out of the operating revenues. It was all new stock issued for the purposes of meeting contractually required incentive compensation.

If you're interested in being paid in stock, please contact your negotiators. So far in the past seven years, there have been no takers.

The head guy at Dfw has no A&P and no respect....