How Could The Ramp Be Changed For The Better?
- Thread starter Ramp Rogue
- Start date
Let me take a stab at it...it's done that way be cause the agents want it that way. Wait a minute....lemme re-think. Things are seldom done the way agents want them done, so it must be done this way BECAUSE SOMEBODY IN UPPER MANAGEMENT SAID 'THIS IS THE WAY IT WILL BE DONE!' (And it won't be changed until someone in upper management says..."we" are going to change it!
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,988
- 9,428
700UW said:
Clarification, 700....
MAGSA rates are intended to be "drop-in" rates, i.e. you have an aircraft drop into an off-line city, and need services. They in no way preclude a MAGSA signatory carrier from negotiating a lower rate with another signatory for an on-going contract. In other words, UA could offer to dump lavs for U at $10/trip if its part of a ground handling contract.
You also ignore other pieces of the economic puzzle. You can't just take the hourly rate of the utility folks and compare that against to a vendor who provides the truck, chemicals, etc.
I'm not a fan of outsourcing, but it's hard to argue the economics. Based on personal experience, assuming there's proper oversight, the quality provided by a vendor for cabin cleaning is usually better than when it was insourced. But you have to have oversight.
- Thread Starter
- #64
TheLazarusman said:Oh, and Ramp Rogue, I am serious about my answer. If we had more guys that held themselves accountable for their actions, the ramp would be a better place. If more guys took responsibility, instead of expecting others to carry all the weight, the ramp would be a smoother operation. It's better to have too many chiefs and not enough indians than the other way around. If we removed the dead weight, it would be surprising how much more efficient an operation we would have. And I think morale would improve drastically as well. So let's trim the fat, and get rid of the old, and young, guys who are too lazy to be here anyhow; and I think you'll see just how much better the ramp can really be.
[post="196484"][/post]
Yes Lazarus,
I do agree with you. The way to begin to correct this is to go to a hire date seniority system. The reason for this is because we have too many people that are considered senior that are actually junior. I'll give you an example. When you have a person that is hired first, but someone that is hired after him is allowed to bid everything before him, how do you think that person is going to feel? You now have a situation where there have been arguments when it comes to doing the job at hand. Such as, you get in the bin, I'm senior because i bid before you do. Or I don't care if you do bid before me, I'm senior because i was hired first. This current system causes nothing but animosity between the workforce.
By going to a HDSS it would weed out a lot of the bad apples. What happens is that they think that because the current system makes them senior when they know they aren't, it causes the true senior people to pull the extra weight to get the job done. I know this isn't true for all cities, but for the greater percentage it is true. As soon as a HDSS is established, you will see those that are trully senior continue to down a remarkable job. Those that are trully junior, will soon quit because they know they are in their rightful place and will now have to pull their own weight or get the hell out. Those that are trully senior wll make sure of that. No more of this three tier seniority system. Then and only then will the moral at USAir have a chance to as positive as it once was.
Another thing that bothers me is that I don't think we need as many leads as we currently have. For anyone that has reached top of scale, you shouldn't need a lead. You should know what to do without being told for each flight that you work. If you have to be told what to do after doing the job for 15 years, you are either lazy, stupid, dumb, incompetent, or you just don't give a damn. Therefore I suggest making some of our leads agents, and getting rid of the dead weight agents. Or getting rid of the dead weight leads.
Lazarus,
If I haven't answered your question, pitch it to me again and i'll give it another swing.
- Thread Starter
- #65
wings396 said:
I have looked at it all based on hours worked. During the time period between 1979 and the mid 90's each station treated parttimers differently. In one station a p/t might only get 2 or 3 hours a day. In other stations a p/t might get 4 to 6 hours a day. So it is very unfair to use this method of calculating hours worked. It is very unfair to have 3 different seniority systems for doing the same work. 1979 and before - hire date. 1980 to the mid 1990's adjusted classification date. Mid 1990's to the present - hire date. 3 different systems, all for the same work. It wasn't fair back when it was instituted, and it's not fair now. Especially when senior people are being furloughed and junior people are still working.
Justaramper said:
The Company did change the Seniority!! All of Customer Service went to DOH except the Ramp, and that was because we were in Status Quo, we would have been changed to DOH along with the rest of Customer Service, because we were Customer Service Agents before the Union election!!
- Thread Starter
- #68
When an opening becomes available on the ramp, what date do we go by to see who gets awarded the position? Hire date or class date?
D M G said:
D M G, how can that be? you already have more head count per airplane than LUV JBLU AWA. time for the ramp to get out of the doldrums and do their jobs.
skyflyr69 said:
Could it be because we don't fly one aircraft type like LUV, and have heavier loads out of PHL than JBLU and AWA? You can work 737s with 3 agents a lot faster than you can 757s, 767s, 330s, and 321's. Mix in the facility and equipment problems that plague PHL and it adds up to more than average staffing needs.
Time for you to know the facts before slamming ramp agents
How about removing Utility from the IAM-M contract and combining it with the IAM-FSA contract? Then integrate the Utility and FSA work groups into on job classification called Ground Personnel and cross utilize workers to increase productivity.
This would undoubtedly eliminate the total job positions, but the increase in productivity could count towards the cost cut target.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
This would undoubtedly eliminate the total job positions, but the increase in productivity could count towards the cost cut target.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
- Thread Starter
- #75
The ramp could become better and help to make extra money for USAir by not ramp transferring baggage from airline to airline. Let the passengers carry their own overweight bag from whatever airline they are going to or coming from. That way we can charge them for having too many bags, and for the overweight bags when they show up at our ticket counter. We can then stop paying those bag transfer companies all of that money fro something the passengers can do themselves. Once the passengers realized they would have to carry their own bags, we'd see a drop in how many bags they carry, and they'd stop overpacking them because they know they would have to carry them themselves. Which means the less baggage weight on the planes, the more freight and mail we could carry. Or we would need less fuel. Either way USAir wins in these situations.
