NO to OUTSOURCING!!!

AOG-N-IT

Veteran
Aug 19, 2002
1,132
1
www.usaviation.com
As many have already heard of read, Dave is approaching us with language requesting the rights to outsource a number of positions currently filled by USAirways Employees.
Outsourcing in itself is contrary to Labor Friendly pursuits Dave approached the rank and file with..and will only cheapen our product , instead of making it cheaper to operate as he desires.
Regarding Maintenance...Outsourcing of routine line maintenance will hamper day to day domestic operations. This will ultimately rain havoc on clearing MEL''s during thru-flights as well. This in itself is bad for a company operating in Chapter 11..Issues such as our MEL count are watched closely by the FAA..along with other things that current maintenance staffing keep in check to perfection. The flying public deserves and should demand nothing less!!
Contract Maintenance rarely if ever..delivers quality work , muchless timely results while doing so. This could prove a very hampering issue to Hub and Spoke flow-thru operations which USAirways is very dependant upon.
Many times contract labor has been used in stations where we either had maintenance at one point..or where we never had our own maintenance before. The results with the exception of Overseas operations have often led to delays or outright cancellations of flights. Some of this can be attributed to the contract work getting in the way of thier own companies obligations...or the complete lack of ability to handle the given task. This runs into costly Roadtrips from our major hubs , so the job can be done properly to begin with...So why multiply this issue any further?
The lessons of outsourcing are painfully obvious when one takes into account the issues brought about with the 1995 ValuJet accident and thier use of a company called SabreTech. Then consider the issues that occured from Engine repairs being performed by suspect third parties in Turkey for example. This type of scenario may have cost them less money for awhile..but look what it did in the not so long term. Sure ValuJet was able to roll thier remaining assets and cash into another carrier called AirTran...and eventually resume operations at a profit..but what they were is no longer as we knew it. That''s not a bad thing..but it''s a horrible way to learn a lesson , when lives are jeopardized and lost while doing the learning.
This issues regarding ValuJet''s problems is something that should continue to strike fear into every U employee..and the flying public as well.
Non-Maintenance related issues.
Studies and stories done by the media in the post Sept 11th world have been very critical of outsourcing...and rightfully so I might add.
Numbers of Subcontractors with AOA (Aircraft Operating Area) clearance have been found to be direct sources of potential security and safety related issues. The numbers of Sub-Contract Companies found to have forged documentation regarding ID issues and Citizenship is staggering. This is but another open invitation to allow enemies of our nation to exploit our weaknesses driven corporate concerns about profit..instead of public flying safety.
Subcontractors are also noted for having poor training programs..or little to no expierience with dealing with Acft themselves period. In many if not most cases , You have a person of limited education , suspect skills making a career choice. They ask themselves, Should I flip burgers or work at an airport? The fact that those options are financially inter-changeable should horrify John and Jane Q.Public to no possible end.
Issues of introducing more people like this into our work enviroment will ultimately lead to increased numbers of Ground Damaged Aircraft...thus chopping into our companies bottom line even farther. The securtity and training concerns only deepen the concerns that everyone should have.
I am always leary of companies that employ people to perform jobs..that a given company should be doing themselves...I have seen this in regard to many service related industries..Cable Television and Sears are two operations that quickly come to mind when I ponder lack lustre service from what it was prior to outsourcing it''s labor.
Weak comparison? Maybe?...but at least they are not working near or having free access to Aircraft that the general public and our combined families are flying on.
The aircraft operating area is no place for added Sub-Standard people..look at the turn-over among Sub-Contractors in Aircraft Fueling , Cleaning, and Frieght Handling...it''s beyond any acceptable reason. A given Subcontractor would go broke trying to keep things honest ..or keeping people properly trained with the revolving door of people they have. This is an area that major airlines never have to contend with...and this is related to getting the quality that they are , or should be obligated to pay for.
I suggest that all employee''s and valued customers register thier concerns with our leadership. The savings thier ideas pose will not be passed along...but what you will see or get on the surface , will be comprimised out of sight.
Enough is Enough...This company had better get cracking on fixing the real problems of revenue...instead of looking for placebo fixes that will create deeper problems for everyone in the end.
 

wings396

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
3,672
1,122
I agree with you on this, I have seen what contract fleet labor operates like first hand..a higher turnover rate than Burger King..especially when the winter deicing hits..they say the heck with this and many don't show up ever again. We will only have 16 fleet service employees left after the Jan. cut. Will getting rid of these save the company enough $$$ to turn a profit...hell no, and they know it. Our productivity rate is as high as you can go, we do everthing to the a/c except repair it..what more can you ask for. Replacing all the fleet work in the 28 flight or less stations won't help stop the bleeding of cash one bit...they focus on the small stuff and lose sight of their real problems..maybe they can save a few thousand dollars on this while they continue too lose 1.7 million a day..another big help. What a bunch of morons we have. Why would you want to eliminate your trained experienced workers who care about what they do and replace them with a bunch of careless teenagers that could care less about the company or the a/c. Perhaps even a deicing mistake or two...safety out the window, save now pay in the long run.
 

mrplanes

Advanced
Sep 17, 2002
224
0
AOG:

You're way off the mark. If Dave wants outsourcing, he'll get it. With or without your approval. This baby is going to the BK judge IF the BOD allows it to. They might just say to liquidate the whole thing on Dec. 3rd. Because there is NO WAY all of the unions are going to be negotiating after what this company did on Tuesday.

It is irrelevant where Wolf is. It is irrelevant how we voted before. This thing is going to be decided in the courts. And the ONLY recourse you or I have is to strike if we don't like what the judge allows. All the talking and BSing is over.
 

Biffeman

Senior
Nov 25, 2002
447
0
www.usaviation.com
Dave will not get outsourcing, you are wrong. AOG you are 100% right[BR][BR]Here is our agreement with the company:[BR]
[P]Scotty Ford[BR]President and General Chairman[BR]International Association of Machinists[BR]and Aerospace Workers – District 141M[BR]321 Allerton Avenue[BR]South San Francisco, CA 94080[/P]
[P]Re: Restructuring Program[/P]
[P]Dear Mr. Ford:[/P]
[P align=justify]The modifications to the 1995 Mechanical and Related Agreement (the "Modifications") reached in connection with the 2002 Restructuring Program of the US Airways Group, Inc. and US Airways, Inc. (together, the "Company") were agreed to by IAM in furtherance of the Company’s effort to successfully restructure its operations and capital structure and in consideration of the Company’s waiver and agreements herein. The Modifications were embodied in the revised collective bargaining agreement between IAM and the Company described as the "IAM Restructuring Agreement."[/P]
[P align=justify][/P]
[P align=justify]This Letter of Agreement is a part of the Modifications and the IAM Restructuring Agreement, and is effective only if and when the IAM Restructuring Agreement becomes completely and unconditionally effective, and there are no conditions subsequent to its continuing effectiveness.[/P]
[P align=justify][/P]
[P align=justify]The Company believes that:[/P]
[P align=justify][/P]
[UL]
[LI]The Modifications are based on the most complete and reliable information available to the Company; [/LI][/UL]
[P align=justify][/P]
[UL]
[LI]The Modifications permit the Company to avoid irreparable harm and provide for all the appropriate modifications to the 1995 Mechanical and Related Agreement that are necessary to permit the successful restructuring and reorganization of the Company.
[LI]The balance of equities favors the IAM Restructuring Agreement and the Company’s adherence thereto. [/LI][/UL]
[P align=justify][/P]
[P]The Company agrees that if a petition for bankruptcy is filed with respect to either US Airways Group, Inc. or US Airways, Inc., during the calendar year 2002 (the "Filing"):[/P]
[P align=justify][/P]
[OL]
[LI]Neither the Company nor any affiliate will file or support any motion pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sections 1113, 1113 (e), 1114, 1114 (h) or any other provision of the Bankruptcy Code, seeking rejection or modification of, or relief or interim relief from, the IAM Restructuring Agreement.(a "Motion").
[P align=justify][/P]
[LI]The Company and its affiliates will actively oppose any such Motion if filed by another party.
[LI]It is expressly recognized and agreed that if the IAM Restructuring Agreement is not completely and unconditionally effective, and the 1995 Mechanical and Related Agreement therefore remains effective without the Modifications, the above two paragraphs are inapplicable and have no force or effect, and the Company may make or refrain from opposing any such Motion with regard to the 1995 Mechanical and Related Agreement. [/LI][/OL]
[P align=justify][/P]
[P] [/P]
[P]In the event that the Company files a petition for bankruptcy and US Airways determines to request additional modifications to the IAM Restructuring Agreement to support reduced cash flows, to secure debtor-in-possession financing, and/or attract capital, the Company and IAM will meet to negotiate regarding such additional modifications to the mutual satisfaction of both parties within fifteen days of such determination. Neither party will be required to reach agreement regarding such modifications and the failure to reach such agreement will not affect the commitments in this letter.[/P]
[P]Please indicate your agreement to the foregoing by signing below.[/P]
 

delldude

Veteran
Oct 29, 2002
28,242
5,881
Downrange
www.youtube.com
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 11/28/2002 8:23:20 PM mrplanes wrote:
[P]AOG:[BR][BR]You're way off the mark. If Dave wants outsourcing, he'll get it. With or without your approval. This baby is going to the BK judge IF the BOD allows it to. They might just say to liquidate the whole thing on Dec. 3rd. Because there is NO WAY all of the unions are going to be negotiating after what this company did on Tuesday. [BR][BR]It is irrelevant where Wolf is. It is irrelevant how we voted before. This thing is going to be decided in the courts. And the ONLY recourse you or I have is to strike if we don't like what the judge allows. All the talking and BSing is over. [/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P][EM]i think daveys going to try and walk away from that 3 billion pension problem over the next 6.5 years.with that off the books he won't need any more givebacks and will probably meet the ATSB loan framework.they wouldn't be moving hvy maint and engine shops too if the end was near and cash was low.[/EM]
 

Biffeman

Senior
Nov 25, 2002
447
0
www.usaviation.com
Tug it is in our new contract, I got if from the district web page:[BR][BR][A href="http://www.iam141m.org/usairways4.htm"]http://www.iam141m.org/usairways4.htm[/A][BR][BR]And here is all the new language in a PDF format:[BR][BR][A href="http://www.iam141m.org/USA.141M.Agreement.02.PDF"]http://www.iam141m.org/USA.141M.Agreement.02.PDF[/A]
 

WNjetdoc

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
532
0
www.usaviation.com
You gotta love Dave, he dresses up as Austin Powers, trying to be cute and a media darling. He then wacks the TPA hangar and 300 people are displaced a few days before Thanksgiving. Throw on top of that the out sourcing he is trying to get...yikes. Trying to be a clown on the outside but is really something different on the inside, IMO. Goodluck to all my U friends/family during this Holiday season.
 

wings396

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
3,672
1,122
The key to this all rests upon the IAM's ability to stand up for the dues paying members.We all know that this has not been the case in the past, but this time is a must. Granted some of the companys requests such ad R&D and maybe deicing by fleet service are legit. Most of the competiton does it this way and it is a reality. The outsourcing is a buch of crap, as the savings will be small compared to the problems they will bring. Our main problem contiues to be the market share we give away. We may be cutting some of our loses, but we are cutting revenue along with it. At the current rate, we could close most of our stations to mainline and still not make a profit. Let's focus on the real issues already instead of the employees.
 

wings396

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
3,672
1,122
The sad thing is we have no time, and it was planned this way by the company...come to the unions on Tuesday...put the Holiday weekend in there and want an answer by Monday.
They will run to the Judge crying about us bringing them down so they can get the 1113 they wanted.
 

Biffeman

Senior
Nov 25, 2002
447
0
www.usaviation.com
Once again , Wings you are wrong, since 1983 when 1113 was enacted no company has broken one, and this language is in all the agreements:[BR][BR]
[P]Scotty Ford[BR]President and General Chairman[BR]International Association of Machinists[BR]and Aerospace Workers – District 141M[BR]321 Allerton Avenue[BR]South San Francisco, CA 94080[/P]
[P]Re: Restructuring Program[/P]
[P]Dear Mr. Ford:[/P]
[P align=justify]The modifications to the 1995 Mechanical and Related Agreement (the "Modifications") reached in connection with the 2002 Restructuring Program of the US Airways Group, Inc. and US Airways, Inc. (together, the "Company") were agreed to by IAM in furtherance of the Company’s effort to successfully restructure its operations and capital structure and in consideration of the Company’s waiver and agreements herein. The Modifications were embodied in the revised collective bargaining agreement between IAM and the Company described as the "IAM Restructuring Agreement."[/P]
[P align=justify][/P]
[P align=justify]This Letter of Agreement is a part of the Modifications and the IAM Restructuring Agreement, and is effective only if and when the IAM Restructuring Agreement becomes completely and unconditionally effective, and there are no conditions subsequent to its continuing effectiveness.[/P]
[P align=justify][/P]
[P align=justify]The Company believes that:[/P]
[P align=justify][/P]
[UL]
[LI]The Modifications are based on the most complete and reliable information available to the Company; [/LI][/UL]
[P align=justify][/P]
[UL]
[LI]The Modifications permit the Company to avoid irreparable harm and provide for all the appropriate modifications to the 1995 Mechanical and Related Agreement that are necessary to permit the successful restructuring and reorganization of the Company.
[LI]The balance of equities favors the IAM Restructuring Agreement and the Company’s adherence thereto. [/LI][/UL]
[P align=justify][/P]
[P][FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00"]The Company agrees that if a petition for bankruptcy is filed with respect to either US Airways Group, Inc. or US Airways, Inc., during the calendar year 2002 (the "Filing"):[/FONT][/P]
[P align=justify][FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00"][/FONT][/P]
[OL]
[LI][FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00"]Neither the Company nor any affiliate will file or support any motion pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sections 1113, 1113 (e), 1114, 1114 (h) or any other provision of the Bankruptcy Code, seeking rejection or modification of, or relief or interim relief from, the IAM Restructuring Agreement.(a "Motion"). [/FONT]
[P align=justify][/P]
[LI][FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00"]The Company and its affiliates will actively oppose any such Motion if filed by another party. [/FONT]
[LI][FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00"]It is expressly recognized and agreed that if the IAM Restructuring Agreement is not completely and unconditionally effective, and the 1995 Mechanical and Related Agreement therefore remains effective without the Modifications, the above two paragraphs are inapplicable and have no force or effect, and the Company may make or refrain from opposing any such Motion with regard to the 1995 Mechanical and Related Agreement. [/FONT][/LI][/OL]
[P align=justify][/P]
[P] [/P]
[P]In the event that the Company files a petition for bankruptcy and US Airways determines to request additional modifications to the IAM Restructuring Agreement to support reduced cash flows, to secure debtor-in-possession financing, and/or attract capital, the Company and IAM will meet to negotiate regarding such additional modifications to the mutual satisfaction of both parties within fifteen days of such determination. Neither party will be required to reach agreement regarding such modifications and the failure to reach such agreement will not affect the commitments in this letter.[/P]
[P]Please indicate your agreement to the foregoing by signing below.[/P]
 

Biffeman

Senior
Nov 25, 2002
447
0
www.usaviation.com
Bob, I think you need to go back to college, if the IAM did not bring back the contract for the second vote the judge would have abrogated the contract and the company would have vendored out basically the whole maintenance department and the employees would have no recourse as we would have been employees at will at the company's mercy. [BR][BR]Now this judge abrogated $600,000,000 of aircraft debts and leases on the first day. Also if the IAM mechanic and related did not take concessions or have the contract abrogated in court the $500 Million in DIP was gone, the $900 Million ATSB loan gaurantee was gone and the $240 Million sponsorship was gone. Seven out of eight labor groups agreed to concessions, now the judge has only two responsiblities in the procedings, one to ensure the company emerges bankruptcy with a sound business plan and two to ensure the creditors get paid as much as possible. Also even if the judge abrogated the contract the DIP and equity sponsors could have walked.[BR][BR]So what do you think Judge Mitchell would have done? Abrogate or liquidate?
 
OP
A

AOG-N-IT

Veteran
Aug 19, 2002
1,132
1
www.usaviation.com
Biffeman and Bob , Jez, I fell like I'm addressing a Surfers Convention or something? (LOL)
Drop this back and forth you are having about what did happen regarding things ..it's now old and invalid with the new climate brought to bare

Dave has now created every reason to believe with almost a 100% certainty that this topic and new ones , will have to be re-fought all over again soon. Most likely with everything on the line to win or lose....Lose being the likely scenario regardless of what's negotiated....if the last encounter and ultimate results are an indication? , which I believe it is!!

If any of our unions have one ounce of integrity...or any thread of concern about those whom they are paid to represent?. They will not only be saying No to Dave on December 2 regarding our participation on further concessions or work rule changes....They should tell him in most direct and certain terms to go take a "Flying Leap"....and when he does? I hope to hell he needs a push-back and to be de-iced prior to his trip aloft.

Dave has convinced me , that there is no foreseeable limit , no defined end , or nothing too much to ask of us..or from us. We all gave in good faith.....and mistakingly I supported this once. I now clearly see that this has opened up Pandora's Box......and giving until we bleed from every orifice and pore is simply not going to be satisfactory enough for his un-disclosed master plan.....nor will it off-set the absolute failures to rectify a broken business model itself.

We can either make a stand here...and risk him liquidating the airline? , Or we can take our chances and find ourselves many more thousands of employee's short yet again..and not be making acceptable wages , with greatly reduced benefits as an added bounus. Then we will have the disgraceful dis-pleasure of tripping over an army of sub-standard sub-contracted suedo-scabs.....not a pleasant thought is it?

Let Dave take the S1113 agreements to the judge.....we certainly will not fair any worse than what he invisions for us this time....or the next... or the next.

I promised myself in the beginning...and I stated it publically here , that I was willing to give Dave his chance by saying Yes one time....and one time only!! He's flunked out now...and I'm not willing to gamble further cuts that will decrease my future un-employmnet benefits...if and when it fails again...or if more "Draconian Measures" are thrust upon us at a whim. Do not let the measures used in TPA to be forgotten , EVER!!

You folks do not have to follow my lead....and I prefer that you think for yourself.....but I will not lay-down for more let-downs....for me or anyone else to be victimized by. They are going to have to take...cuz I ain't giving!!

In closing....You can either risk what you have at present or as it dwindles to be more exact , coupled to everyday having become a risk here. Or you can attempt to hang on if your particular work group isn't " going to be Jack-Hammered" to pieces?...and end up working for something void of pride and integrity with nothing tangible to off-set the humiliation of doing so.

Dave's plans are not for a "Business as Usual" enviroment for those that remain here....So nows the time to set the tone of your tolerance...or lack there of. NO to Dave is the one and only logical awnser....his reply will be negative either way!!
 

dashflyer

Member
Aug 20, 2002
85
0
Remember when Wolf said you can't shrink an airline into profitability? I guess Dave thinks he can "outsource" one into profitability.

Good luck