Heavy Checks As Warantee Item

[Rob]

Question out of ignorance: What's to stop US from modifying current or executing new aircraft leases to make heavy checks a warranty item? Sort of like GE's "Power by the Hour" program.

Airbus/Embraer/Bombardier could then do the subcontracting/outsourcing.

 

[JS]

The purpose of a warranty is to cover unexpected repairs. A heavy check is certainly an expectation.

Sure, you could add a heavy check to a warranty, but you'll end up paying for the heavy check + overhead & profit. It makes as much sense as buying an insurance policy for your annual automobile tag fees.

 

[Teflon]

Plus it is the IAM represented work, did you not just see Judge Cindrich's order?

 

[Phantom Fixer]

Thanks for stepping up on this Teflon.

I guess what just transpired this week completely escapes some people. :huh:

 

[T-bone]

Question out of ignorance: What's to stop US from modifying current or executing new aircraft leases to make heavy checks a warranty item? Sort of like GE's "Power by the Hour" program.

The contract is what stops them.
Think of it this way; What do you think the companys response would be if we said we're thinking of letting you stay on Dave and we're open to negotiating your new lower rate?
Sounds absurd, but thats exactly what the company is asking of maintenance.
I think it's time he scurries out of here!

 

[Rob]

OK, so ... What if the company decided to lease A380's? (Absurd, I know.) And what if Airbus as part of the package said "We will do certain portions, i.e. heavy checks, of all scheduled maintenance for the first seven years either at our own facility or at any other facility of our choice, approved by the FAA."

Would IAM still "own" the work and have a case to invalidate the lease contract?

 

[Phantom Fixer]

Rob,
Dave and Crew applied the "What If" card on the A319/320/321's. The Acft type has NO bearing on the situation.

It's a very simple scenario...If it flies with U colors on it? It's the IAM's work.

U does not have the ability to negotiate with Airbus on your example A380...and package maintenance out of the scenario...beyond possible engine and the usual vendor items currently allowed on the present fleet.

If you were to go to the IAM-141M's website.....you would see how the judge ruled...you will also see the appeals shot down in flames too.

Again....U does not have the luxury of picking and choosing on our work....nor do they have the ability to negotiate contracts outside of the contracts they are forced to honor with the IAM.....and Yes , Forced is the operative term....they lack the integrity to own up to the commitments they've made on thier own....That should be obvious

 

[Rob]

Thanks for the comprehensive reply. You are right, the judge's memorandum answered all my questions.