Is 3rd Party Maintenance Unsafe?

[ClueByFour]

How come Southwest, Fed Ex, United and the entire U.S. Military (Air Force, Navy, Marine, Army, & Coast Guard units) all outsource overhaul and do not have any maintenance problems?

Quite frankly, if it's necessary to save costs by outsourcing Airbus work, surely you believe that it would be fair game to outsource Airbus flying to Mesa, right? I'm sure it's cheaper for Mesa to fly the planes, and by your logic, ALPA should not complain if the company were, perhaps, to unilaterally alter your CBA to do it?

 

[savyinvestor]

Clue, You won't get a response since it involves his livelyhood! Savy :down:

 

[savyinvestor]

Well Chipper?

 

[USA320Pilot]

Clue:

Clue said: Quite frankly, if it's necessary to save costs by outsourcing Airbus work, surely you believe that it would be fair game to outsource Airbus flying to Mesa, right? I'm sure it's cheaper for Mesa to fly the planes, and by your logic, ALPA should not complain if the company were, perhaps, to unilaterally alter your CBA to do it?

USA320Pilot answers: Clue, the difference here is that providing Airbus flying to Mesa would effect current mainline flying, however, that's not the case with the mechanics. The current plan to have 10 A320 family aircraft overhaul performed by a contractor does not cost any jobs.

US Airways has never done Airbus norrowbody heavy maintenance and for this work to be done in-house, it would require recalls and another hanger.

Did you miss that point?

Meanwhile, it appears that the IAM agrees with my point that they now believe that there could be a way to cost competitively conduct the work in-house.

See Story

Clue, who was the first person on this message board to suggest this idea?

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[sentrido]

The current plan to have 10 A320 family aircraft overhaul performed by a contractor does not cost any jobs.


US Airways has never done Airbus norrowbody heavy maintenance and for this work to be done in-house, it would require recalls and another hanger.


:huh:

I guess it depends un what your definition of "cost" is, hun?


Anyway, I was under the impression that the IAM always thought they could do the airbus work cost competitively in-house?WTF?

 

[700UW]

Clue:

USA320Pilot answers: Clue, the difference here is that providing Airbus flying to Mesa would effect current mainline flying, however, that's not the case with the mechanics. The current plan to have 10 A320 family aircraft overhaul performed by a contractor does not cost any jobs.

US Airways has never done Airbus norrowbody heavy maintenance and for this work to be done in-house, it would require recalls and another hanger.

Did you miss that point?

Meanwhile, it appears that the IAM agrees with my point that they now believe that there could be a way to cost competitively conduct the work in-house.

See Story

Clue, who was the first person on this message board to suggest this idea?

Regards,

USA320Pilot

Oh yes it does, ask the up to 300 mechanics that were suppose to be recalled to perform the work!

Wrong again, US Airways does and has been doing the C-11 HEAVY MTC CHECK since we got the Airbus. It was done in CLT Base now it is done in PIT Base. It is a three to four day HEAVY CHECK. And currently the C1 thru C10 checks on the narrowbody airbii are done in LAX, DCA and occasionally in CLT and BOS (it use to be done in CLT nightly until LAX and CLT swapped overnight checks).

AND GUESS WHAT AN AIRBUS S-CHECK IS MR?

IT is the C1 thru C11 CHECKS COMBINED!

And lets go back in time for all the airlines that US was to make it what it was.

Lets see, we flew DC-9s, MD-80s, 737-200/300/400, F28-1000/4000, F100, 757, 767, 330.

Lets see when those planes were new and introduced to the fleet we never did a heavy check on them until they were due. The company went as far as to send PIT base mtc mechanics to AMS, to work along side with Fokker to do the first Q-checks on the F100. So your logic is flawed on your statement we never did it before.

And once again your slant the facts, the meeting with the IAM and company was about cost savings ideas that the IAM has provided the company since May of 2003 that has gone on deaf ears, NOTHING TO DUE WITH THE CONTRACT.

From the article:

"These (ideas) would be ways the company could save money without making any changes to our collective bargaining agreement," said IAM spokesman Joe Tiberi.

The union still rejects negotiating more concessions, he said. Mechanics and baggage handlers gave back about $286 million in annual wages and benefits in 2002.

Where do you come up with your so-called "facts". Because it is apparent your source of information is not right.

 

[sentrido]

Actually, the 737 and 320 will be replaced by the emb170 etc....
Probably flown by mesa.

 

[AOG-N-IT]

Bob,

In the truest sense of the term..."you Sir are dead balls accurate" !!

The Airbus threat is not the only threat to current work...The new EMB-170's and the possible -190's will be eating away at our beloved B737-300/400's whenever and wherever possible too. Bet your last nickle on that observation.

Acft 429AU... -400 was flying out of PIT tuesday , returned to lessor/lesser (whatever)?

726 , 728 and 729 all A319's have been returned from storage in GYR within the last week....returned and in need of attention I might add. So you can see the trend here...well most of us can anyway.

 

[MarkMyWords]

700 or anyone in the know......

Any chance you can give us some examples of the things being proposed to the company?

 

[700UW]

I can find out more tomorrow, but I know some of it has to do with the PHL situation.

Another is the airbus APU and numerous other rotables that we send out to a vendor that could be done cheaper and faster inhouse.

I will find out more tomorrow and post it probably late tomorrow night or Friday morning.

 

[ClueByFour]

USA320Pilot answers: Clue, the difference here is that providing Airbus flying to Mesa would effect current mainline flying, however, that's not the case with the mechanics. The current plan to have 10 A320 family aircraft overhaul performed by a contractor does not cost any jobs.

US Airways has never done Airbus norrowbody heavy maintenance and for this work to be done in-house, it would require recalls and another hanger.

Did you miss that point?

Meanwhile, it appears that the IAM agrees with my point that they now believe that there could be a way to cost competitively conduct the work in-house.

See Story

Clue, who was the first person on this message board to suggest this idea?

Regards,

USA320Pilot

You basically just told a fib, on behalf on the IAM. Nowhere in that article does it say anything to suggest that the IAM is willing to change anything to do "the work" in house (in RE: "the work" being the airbus heavy checks). So don't break your arm patting yourself on the back for "breaking" news that is supported by a total fabrication at best and a bad spin job at worst.

Again--there is no defendable difference between outsourcing the maintenance of the airbus fleet and the flight operation of the airbus fleet. None. Zip. Zilch. Even at a stretch, it suggests than any new fleet type (including, let's say, the A330-200 in a few years) should go to Mesa.... Or any other affiliate for that matter.

Mesa would do at much less cost than U ALPA. So why not do it? A history of work? A scope clause? All things the IAM has, chief.

I find the mantra that "cost savings" and "working with the company" should come at the expense of every labor group on the property except the top 2/3s of the ALPA seniority list to be amazing, especially in light of the little beatdown over the CLT Observer incident.... YMMV.

 

[700UW]

Great Post Clue!

Calling him out for what he really is!

 

[700UW]

Here for a certain pilot:

IAM Members Protest US Airways' Management Tactics

Members of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) today are conducting informational picketing at four US Airways airport terminals to protest the airline's treatment of its employees and passengers. Informational picketing is occurring in Boston, MA; Pittsburgh, PA; Philadelphia, PA; and Charlotte, NC. IAM members are asking US Airways customers to contact the airline's CEO, David Siegel, and urge him to focus on building the airline rather than forcing employees and loyal customers to pay for his mismanagement.

"The IAM has identified ways US Airways could save $80-100 million annually within the framework of our current collective bargaining agreements," said IAM General Vice President Robert Roach, Jr. "There is no logical reason why the airline would rather pick our members' pockets instead of their brains."

US Airways has violated its contract with the IAM by subcontracting maintenance of aircraft, blamed employee unions for management's failure to produce an effective business plan and threatened to sell off some of the carrier's most profitable assets, including its east coast shuttle operation, if employees don't agree to amend their labor contracts.

"US Airways' passengers, employees and shareholders deserve true leadership," said IAM District 141 President Randy Canale. "Management has failed miserably in generating a successful business plan that would unify employees and provide the superior product US Airways' customers expect and deserve."

"The airline is in crisis, and management is attacking employees to divert attention from their inability to run the airline," said IAM District 141-M President Scotty Ford. "A company that doesn't recognize that employees are their most important asset is headed for disaster."


Another one for you:

February 26, 2004

US AIRWAYS IAM MEMBERS OF DISTRICT LODGE 141-M

Today Thursday February 26th, I read with interest CEO David Siegel’s comments to Aviation Daily.

Siegel is quoted “making good progress†with the carrier’s labor groups.

Siegel is also quoted that he believes management is entering a “constructive phase†in its labor talks after both sides “vented†frustrations.

I am confused. Siegel would have us believe that talks have been on going with all the labor groups on US Airways. Once again, Dave has it wrong. There have been NO meetings with the IAM concerning further concessions.

Siegel also said, “we have no choice but to rally togetherâ€. I assume he means that the employees should rally around the flag to once again reach into our pockets and pay for his mismanagement of our past generosity.

I guess he is suggesting that there is some spirit of cooperation within the employee groups and we are all eager to make further concessions to help him further mismanage US Airways.

Do I have to remind you how David choose to spend many of the dollars that we contributed to his management team in order for the carrier to exit bankruptcy? I probably don’t but I will any way. He has spent money for attorneys in an attempt to violate our contract by farming out Airbus heavy maintenance. Remember, these are attorneys paid for by our own dollars.

That fight continues to this day.

His management team has spurned every suggestion from the IAM on ways the carrier can improve operations and methods on every day procedures that would save millions of dollars a year. You workers know exactly what I am talking about.

I guess a word about labor relations should also be addressed. You would think that a company that’s very survival hinges on it’s employees moral might work a little harder to earn the goodwill of it’s employees. Instead simple grievances are being denied continually and District 141-M is forced to arbitration, which is costly, frustrating and time consuming. Is this any way to win friends and influence people? I think not.

I don’t know what the other US Airways labor groups are doing but I do know that if David Siegel expects meaningful discussions with District 141-M of the IAM, then he and his team better start showing a change of attitude or he may find himself the awkward teenager at the school dance going home disappointed and lonely.

Sincerely and fraternally,
Scotty Ford
President/Directing General Chairman

 

[ktflyhome]

I posted this about Mesa several days ago and got really shot down. I believe who ever responded treated me like Martha Stewart. No matter. I don't have her money. Anyway. I have a very good friend you is the Station Manager in my home town which is run my AirMidwest (owned by Mesa) and she spesificcally told me that Mesa is the up and coming one to contend with. She Asvised me, that If I had any money to play around with,,,,,,,look to Mesa!!!!! I am not saying I know anything. (Duh) but after I talked with her there sure has been alot of HOOPLA latley about MESA generating on these boards lately. I am beginning to wonder <_< .

 

[MarkMyWords]

I can find out more tomorrow, but I know some of it has to do with the PHL situation.

Another is the airbus APU and numerous other rotables that we send out to a vendor that could be done cheaper and faster inhouse.

I will find out more tomorrow and post it probably late tomorrow night or Friday morning.

Thanks 700 -

Greatly appreciated.