First 757 to outsourced MRO

[texasreb]

On a related note to the original topic...... I just found an old hardcopy of the M&E Plans Book from 1999....

In Section 12 - Economics... they have a table for the learning curve on major base visits & mod programs.

Aircraft Sequence      Multiplier
-----------------      ----------

 Initial               2.44x
 Second                1.95
 #3                    1.76
 #4                    1.56
 #5                    1.48
 #6                    1.41
 #7                    1.33
 #8                    1.25
 #9                    1.22
 #10                   1.19
 #11                   1.16
 #12                   1.13
 #13                   1.09
 #14                   1.06
 #15                   1.03
 #16                   1.00

This table is for planning purposes only. It is intended for use prior to
the start of new check lines and mod programs and is based on the
estimated level-off man hours required.

These numbers are based on worse case learning curve possibilities.

Man-hour costs level off at the sixteenth aircraft when using the
same work crew with nose-to-tail schedules. Use the same table for 
each production line when more than one line is involved in the 
same program.

In all the haste to condemn how long it took for the first or second checks compared to an experienced line, perhaps you might want to reconsider... If AA has to admit it takes 2.4x more time in TUL or AFW for a first check, then it is a fair bet that it would take at least 2.5x to maybe 3x as long for the first check.

The learning curve has more to do with management and engineering than mechanics. I can not tell you how many times that we have finished a check when all of the sudden another check card suddenly appears as management has reopened the bill of work making our check late.

 

[chris perry]

On a related note to the original topic...... I just found an old hardcopy of the M&E Plans Book from 1999....

In Section 12 - Economics... they have a table for the learning curve on major base visits & mod programs.

Aircraft Sequence      Multiplier
-----------------      ----------

 Initial               2.44x
 Second                1.95
 #3                    1.76
 #4                    1.56
 #5                    1.48
 #6                    1.41
 #7                    1.33
 #8                    1.25
 #9                    1.22
 #10                   1.19
 #11                   1.16
 #12                   1.13
 #13                   1.09
 #14                   1.06
 #15                   1.03
 #16                   1.00

This table is for planning purposes only. It is intended for use prior to
the start of new check lines and mod programs and is based on the
estimated level-off man hours required.

These numbers are based on worse case learning curve possibilities.

Man-hour costs level off at the sixteenth aircraft when using the
same work crew with nose-to-tail schedules. Use the same table for 
each production line when more than one line is involved in the 
same program.

In all the haste to condemn how long it took for the first or second checks compared to an experienced line, perhaps you might want to reconsider... If AA has to admit it takes 2.4x more time in TUL or AFW for a first check, then it is a fair bet that it would take at least 2.5x to maybe 3x as long for the first check.

The scale is all good for a line that has 0 employee turn over in a year,but theTimco's of the world have near or over a 100%.

 

[Flying low]

The scale is all good for a line that has 0 employee turn over in a year,but theTimco's of the world have near or over a 100%.

Proof?

 

[Buck]

Proof?

AAR did state that at $28, they couldn't keep experienced mechanics.

 

[eolesen]

There's a huge difference between not being able to hold onto mechanics at Timco's TOS, and 100% (or greater) turnover.

100% turnover implies that nobody at Timco has been there for more than one year, which I find a little incredulous, even for this forum.

 

[Flying low]

AAR did state that at $28, they couldn't keep experienced mechanics.

But, what is their turn over rate?

 

[Buck]

The Farming Ground for Aircraft Mechanics?

ARTICLE | JANUARY 1, 2012 - 1:00PM

The other morning, I was listening to Morning Edition on NPR when the subject of aircraft maintenance came up. Wade Goodwin did a piece titled Airplane Mechanics: A Farm Team for Everyone Else? The story talked about AAR Aircraft Services in Oklahoma City. Right off the bat the story said that it was ironic that given the current economic times and the difficulty many people are having finding jobs, aircraft mechanics are in great need at AAR. Anita Brown, the head of human resources for AAR’s Oklahoma City facility told Goodwin that airplane mechanics there start at $12-15/hour. Veterans with an A&P top out at $28/hour.

And AAR says it is having a hard time filling open positions. Brown said that the company has around 600 open positions. AAR’s Oklahoma City operation loses workers to Tinker Air Force Base and to American Airlines in nearby Tulsa where mechanics can make $5-10 more per hour.

The story discussed how AAR hires workers with a degree in sheet metal repair from a local trade school. These workers typically hire on for just $12/hour, but could be making more than $23/hour within a few years, as was evident by an interview with one of the company’s sheet metal workers. But once those workers reach that higher pay and experience level, AAR says that is when they are at the greatest risk to leave. And Tinker and American aren’t the only companies snatching up talent. Other industries such as the natural gas industry which is thriving in Oklahoma,also recruit A&Ps and other skilled workers away for higher-paying jobs.

So why doesn’t AAR just pay its workers more money to slow down the tide of employee turnover? It says it can’t afford to. Wayne Jamroz, the facility’s general manager said, “You take your car into an automotive place and you’re paying $75 to $100 an hour. We sell our labor at $48 to $49 an hour.”

And who is to blame? Well, for those wishing to play the blame game, there seems to be plenty to go around.

Some would blame the airlines who figured out years ago that it was a lot less expensive to slash their maintenance department, which was typically made up of all A&P mechanics, and send that work to third-party repair stations. Can the airlines be blamed for trying to save a buck?

Some would blame the unions. They were able to successfully negotiate lucrative contracts for their workers for decades. Even as airlines hemorrhaged money by the millions each quarter, unions were often able to negotiate strong contracts for their members until the last decade or so. Can the unions be blamed for trying to secure the best pay and benefits for their workers?

Some would blame the repair stations. They were able to provide aircraft maintenance at a lower cost structure than the airlines could. Can the repair stations be blamed for business-minded thinking?

Some would blame the FAA for not mandating that all aircraft maintenance be performed by A&P mechanics at a minimum. Can we blame the FAA for realizing there are not enough A&Ps to go around to meet that need?

Some would blame consumers who are no longer loyal to an airline brand, but instead shop the internet for the best deal, often making decisions for as little as a few dollars saved. Can we blame consumers for being frugal with their money?

Goodwin closed the segment by saying, “Of course, this drives AAR mad with frustration, as if it’s some farm team for everyone else’s highly trained mechanics.”

It is a mess we are in. But how do we get out of it? Can we even get out of it

 

[chris perry]

The turn over rate is dictated by the workload,13 to 20% are contract workers on a 3 month contract. Source OIG,DOT and FAA reports. The remaining 80% of mechanic's only(not Including Management and Engineering) have a turnover rate very high sometimes exceeding 100%. Source same. Their is a lot of reports to dig through but it's all there. This goes for the top 11 third MRO's Here in the US,not all the same but,some worse than other's.

 

[Buck]

And on another note:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/story/2012/03/18/aveos-layoffs-air-canada.html?cmp=rss

Be sure to read the comments including all comment pages.

 

[eolesen]

Not really interested in reading 50 pages of comments.... but it does make you wonder how strong of a business case there really is for AA to be spinning off MRO into its own entity. Maybe this is why it wasn't suggested.

 

[TWU informer]

Not really interested in reading 50 pages of comments.... but it does make you wonder how strong of a business case there really is for AA to be spinning off MRO into its own entity. Maybe this is why it wasn't suggested.

But wait a minute Eric, that would take away the fear mongering and blame game that is going on.
Our group is more interested in fantasy based fear beliefs and finger pointing and you are getting in the way with comments like that one.

 

[Buck]

Not really interested in reading 50 pages of comments.... but it does make you wonder how strong of a business case there really is for AA to be spinning off MRO into its own entity. Maybe this is why it wasn't suggested.

And the 2400 mechanics who will hit the MRO system, in an industry that has a high turnover. Now all we need is a stroke of the pen to allow Canadian mechanics to work on U.S. aircraft...

"According to the FAA, it does not maintain a listing of outsourced maintenance that is required in FAA's D91 form. That, it says, is property of the airline."



and this link to investigating work shop, along with MRO maintenance search in the sites search window for American Airlines.

http://investigativereportingworkshop.org/

 

[Bandit6794]

I get calls and emails for AAR positions monthly..No thank you. Rather scrub toilets for mininmum wage than work at those chop shops

 

[chris perry]

http://accidents-ll.faa.gov/ChinaAirlines120/Okinawa_accident_report.pdf

Interesting report maintenance Taiwan Overhaul, 737 fire.

 

[eolesen]

Chris, did you read the part where China Airlines apparently insources their maintenance?

According to the maintenance records of the Company, the Aircraft underwent scheduled maintenance (C Check) at the Company base at Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport from July 6 to 13, 2007. During this period, on July 6, a maintenance work was performed to prevent the loosening of the nut on the downstop assembly in accordance with a Engineering Order (EO) that was prepared based on the Service Letter (737-SL-57-084A), and for which there were no abnormalities entered on the job record.