Every 8 days
- Thread starter Bob Owens
- Start date
FrugalFlyerv2.0
Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2003
- Messages
- 2,931
- Reaction score
- 3,341
Even if they were getting rid of a plane every 8 days, they still could not afford restore and more.
MikeCobbAFW
Member
Please share with us why they can't restore our contract from nine years ago. And why you are qualified to know. Are you AA management perhaps? Thank you, we will wait patiently for your answer...
He doesnt know, he's just here to do managemnts bidding.
Restore would cost around $150 to $170 million.
Figure we gave up $315 million lost 35% of the headcount, got back 7% of the 17,5% wage cut ($55million) .
315x .65=205-55=$150million
Around 16 days worth of 737-800s.(2)
Boeing Airplane Prices
I'd rather have a brand new car sitting in my driveway than another brand new airplane sitting at the gate. The new car means less unpaid work for me while the new airplane means less paid work for me!
Please share with us how not replacing old, inefficient MD-80s with much more fuel efficient 738s would cause AA to have substantially more money with which to pay you more money. Thank you, we will wait patiently for your answer...
Lenders are willing to loan AA the purchase price for new, fuel efficient airplanes so that AA gives less cash to the oil companies. Lenders generally are unwilling to loan a company money if the proceeds will be used to increase the pay of workers.
The same way keeping my old less efficient car instead of borrowing to buy a new more fuel efficent one gives me a better shot at being able to pay my increased medical expenses, electric bills, food costs, property taxes etc. Will the savings from the fuel pay for the replacement of the car(airplane) once you factor in all the other costs and servicing of the debt? Are you saying each of the new 737s will burn more than $80 million less in fuel?
Lets say they got a new plane once every 10 days instead of eight, that would be $720 million less spent/borrowed for the year. They only need $150 million to restore us.
FrugalFlyerv2.0
Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2003
- Messages
- 2,931
- Reaction score
- 3,341
If you, an airline employee, are unable to figure out why AA can't restore your contract from 9 years ago, then no amount of explaining by me (joe public) is going to help.
FrugalFlyerv2.0
Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2003
- Messages
- 2,931
- Reaction score
- 3,341
What? You only gave up $150 million? I thought it was much much much more, as you have on numerous occasions bragged. Well, if all you gave up was $150 million then there is obviously more the company can take from you.
Mr Red
Veteran
- Joined
- May 11, 2010
- Messages
- 612
- Reaction score
- 182
Almost all the major auto builders filed BK did u notice 90.00 dollar abn hour labor rate decline ?I didnt think so. I maintain a 40 million dollar airplane, and i'm not worth 45.00 an hour !!!
No explaining can help U !!!
Attachments
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.
I want a raise and yes I am frustrated at the pace of negotiations but I will never criticize the replacement of aircraft. That is the best spend money the company can spend. I wish they would also announce we where getting some widebody aircrafts and start growing again. I bet the majority of employees feel like that. But the one that are bitter are the one that scream the loudest.
telebender1956
Member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2010
- Messages
- 88
- Reaction score
- 3
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.
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.
A new 737 costs around $80 million,(show me where they get them for half price) they are getting one every eight days. If a new 737 is 10% more efficient then it would burn 31.5 million gallons per year or $7 million a year in fuel, it would take 80 years for the fuel savings to pay off the aircraft. Even if they only pay $40 million it would take 40 years.
Exactly. So what you are saying is I should continue to agree to work for less so AA can buy more new aircraft and get rid of more mechanics, which in turn would create a surpluss of mechanics and drive my wages down even more. Sure buying new aircraft makes sense for the company, but buying all these new aircraft makes it look like the companys debt and expenses are way out of control. What doesnt make sense is for mechanics to agree to fund these purchases by continuing to work for less. They can buy all they want, just dont try and use the expense and debt that decision causes, and their BS insinuation that we are already paid too much, as an excuse as to why they cant pay us what SWA or UPS pays.
Tulsa workers dont have to compete with MRO wages because they dont work for an MRO, they work for an Airline. If AA got mechanics at MRO wages they would have a huge cost adavantage over competotors who pay MROs a huge markup on the labor they sell to carriers.
Similar threads
- Locked
