Stupidity 101...or USAirways Economics?

AOG-N-IT

Veteran
Aug 19, 2002
1,132
1
www.usaviation.com
Tonight I discovered yet another example of why USAir is continually losing money by the truck load.
I had the chance to talk to a good friend of mine in the CLT Hangar prior to coming on duty, The conversation after the initial pleasantries , evolved into the subject of work. My friend informed me that he was being Bumped from CLT heavy maintenance on 3rd shift....to CLT Line Maintenance on 3rd Shift. No big deal so far!! Right?
The conversation progressed to the subject of required indoctrination training prior to assuming a Line Mechanics position.....again No Big Deal! Right?
Here''s the Kicker for you aspiring airline economists....The Indoc Training is only taking place in PIT (Mecca).....Is CLT not the larger of the two hubs?....especially in regards to Line Maintenance functions?......certainly it is when you wiegh the number of flights operated per day.
Why would an operation the size of CLT have to send Mechanics anywhere for an orientation on a subject that takes place routinely?
Here''s where the money is lost....for arguement sake we will say that 10 CLT Mechanics will have to go at company expense to PIT for training next week. That''s 10 Mechanics out of the production loop....as well as 10 Mechanics having to be put up in Hotels for 5 to 7 days....again at company expense. Surely the course of instruction does not require facilities...or materials that could have easily been facilitated by either (A)...CLT having it''s own Indoc Training....or (B) Send 1 or 2 Trainers from PIT to CLT at company expense to CLT. After all....1 or 2 Hotel Rooms X 5 to 7 days.......is way cheaper than 10 Hotel Rooms X 5 to 7 days. Multiply Stupidity like this....across the entire system...and various departments.....and you can clearly see why we can''t make money..........but then again, it''s only your concessions and furloughs funding this kinda stupidity....So where''s the big deal? Right???
6.gif'']
 

N628AU

Veteran
Aug 22, 2002
909
106
www.usaviation.com
Don't forget per diem. I guess our aircraft must go through some metamorphisis going from the line to heavy and vice versa. The simple idea a 13 or 14 year mechanic must even be retrained just because they go from the hangar to the line is ridiculous. I guess this is more of that we don't see the big picture sort of mentality we keep seeing.
 

delldude

Veteran
Oct 29, 2002
28,248
5,882
Downrange
www.youtube.com
Wann heyuh moe stoopidity?Pit FAB inspectors needed borescope training...to solve this problem they trained the line inspectors.most of their experienced FAB inspectors retired.a few bumped to Heavy Maintenence.on occassion they'd farm bumped heavy inspectors to FAB.line doesn't seem interested in FAB 'scope work....suddenly Donnie Mueller(411 manager)wakes up and decides to train FAB inspectors...but WHOA....All PIT 'scope trainers RETIRED.Whats a mother to do?ANSWER:WE'LL SHIP A CLT TRAINING GUY UP TO PIT,PUT IM UP FERA WEEK>>>CLASSIC DUH?how they saytouche
14.gif']
 
OP
A

AOG-N-IT

Veteran
Aug 19, 2002
1,132
1
www.usaviation.com
Thanks for the replies folks......Here again, wasted money and motion are every bit as big of an impact on the companies bottom line.

This board is rampant with this person of that complaining about this or that.....but few are doing anything to expose what's actually wrong with USAirways.

All the concessions in the world will never begin to bridge the difference between a depressed economy.....and a continuation of the That's the way we've always done it mindset. Surely to God , somebody is going to wake-up before it's to late?

The way we've always done it.....simply stated , Does not make muster anymore!! Actually it never did!! Imagine the immediate impact that 'Intelligent Utilization of our organic resources would have on our budget and operating expenses? I feel certain , that if enough people spoke up about issues in thier own work areas...that frankly make no practical sense....enough could be saved , then applied toward emerging from bankruptcy.....and hopefully aid in keeping our people from being shown the door everyday.

Furloughs alone are carving away at our ability to function....people being displaced has a profound impact.....and people being bumped into areas where they have no real concept of what's needed from them..or required of them? Only continues to eat away at our companies capabilities. The retrograde in morale is just an added aspect to what's quickly becoming a nightmare for some to continue with.

I have spoken to a number of individuals that are willing to accept Voluntary Furloughs....rather than being subjected to Bump into another work area....that does not suit them for reason of schedule changes...or simply not liking the prospects of what the new job entails.

My work group....un-like many others, has never been offered the chance to take a voluntary furlough....Why is this? Wouldn't it make better financial sense to allow someone senior to leave with a severence , that is willing to go.....as opposed to just killing off someone junior who's willing to work? This would not violate any Union Rules of Senority....this would just allow options , that would in the long run , benefit the companies bottom line , should the senior just be willing to walk away with no different of a severance package than the Involuntary Furloughee will be taking.
 

Res

Senior
Aug 20, 2002
361
1
www.usaviation.com
Here's another one..in res we are letting employees go that
make 10.00 to 13.00 an hour ..and paying overtime to TOS employees at 21.00 an hour...all TOS scale employees have tons of vacation time...where the new employees very little...and in res the senior employees will take VTO without pay, if things are quite....some things just don't add up...? makes ya go huh???..
 

MCORORES

Senior
Aug 19, 2002
317
0
www.usaviation.com
Excellent point Res...the company has not used VTO to its full advantage. Goodness knows how many days I have gotten paid to read instead of the company giving out VTO which is the best way to control costs. The company made more money from me when it came to VTO than what concession package we currently have in place. My response to that is I take less VTO so I am actually coming out ahead in the game instead of behind.
 

757fixer

Advanced
Aug 20, 2002
226
2
I'm going to CLT tuesday for my annual 8 hr Airbus recurrent.We've been sending guys to PIT and CLT all month for this training.Would it not make more sence from an economic stand point to send the instructor to the station.You could conduct the training on pre or post shift o/t and be done in 2-3 days.As far as the indoc training,thats an FAA requirement.Most of the paper work we're involved with on the line differs from the shops and hvy mtc.
 

autofixer

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
1,804
241
www.usaviation.com
757fixer, You must understand that one of the beni's of being an instructor is to be home every night. To make them travel would be a hardship! This is why the lowly line swine of all employee groups must travel at company expense to Mecca. Some pilot Airbus recurrent is held in PIT, even though the CLT based pilots could go to the CLT training center at little or no cost. I am sure some PIT based pilots, must travel to CLT for the same reasons.
 
OP
A

AOG-N-IT

Veteran
Aug 19, 2002
1,132
1
www.usaviation.com
[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/10/2002 1:52:27 PM autofixer wrote:

757fixer, You must understand that one of the beni's of being an instructor is to be home every night. To make them travel would be a hardship! This is why the lowly "line swine" of all employee groups must travel at company expense to Mecca. Some pilot Airbus recurrent is held in PIT, even though the CLT based pilots could go to the CLT training center at little or no cost. I am sure some PIT based pilots, must travel to CLT for the same reasons.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Well, It's plain to see , That those Beni's for a very select few...are costing this company a bundle when the situation is multiplied out over the course of a year. Again , They way we've always done it is simply not cost effective.

Attn. Doctor Dave. Heal thyne self!!
 

1ab

Advanced
Aug 21, 2002
147
0
well would you not assume that training is an issue that the cost of which can be written off ?
 
OP
A

AOG-N-IT

Veteran
Aug 19, 2002
1,132
1
www.usaviation.com
[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/10/2002 4:01:29 PM 1ab wrote:

well would you not assume that training is an issue that the cost of which can be written off ?

----------------
[/blockquote]
Write-offs are not an immediate cash in hand substitute...We are trying to emerge from BK..and obtain the ATSB Loans...all of this is predicated on luquidity...and the ability to show a 7% margain of profit to qualify.

People are being furloughed like mad , to make immediate impacts to our cost structure...So if that has to be immediate? , waiting for a portion of what write-offs become doesn't make immediate impacts either.

This is about the over-all cost structure...and using your resources wisely!!
 

UAL777flyer

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
730
0
AOG-N-IT,

Forgive my ignorance, but could this requirement be contractual? I remember when I was at TWA, many of the mechanic training requirements, in terms of who did the training and where, were contractual items that the company had little control over. I'd be curious if this is the case. If not, than I think you've hit yet another cost issue that must be analyzed. Any training that can be conducted locally is probably more cost efficient than having to send people to another city and overnight them at company expense with a per diem.
 
OP
A

AOG-N-IT

Veteran
Aug 19, 2002
1,132
1
www.usaviation.com
[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/11/2002 3:38:51 PM UAL777flyer wrote:

AOG-N-IT,

Forgive my ignorance, but could this requirement be contractual? I remember when I was at TWA, many of the mechanic training requirements, in terms of who did the training and where, were contractual items that the company had little control over. I'd be curious if this is the case. If not, than I think you've hit yet another cost issue that must be analyzed. Any training that can be conducted locally is probably more cost efficient than having to send people to another city and overnight them at company expense with a per diem.
----------------
[/blockquote]
UALFlyer777,

Yes Sir, Contractual issues do have a degree of bearing here, However CLT as well as PIT , have a Training Dept. Staff on hand. This is an area that can easily be bridged via Cross-Utilization...or a simple matter of the much needed Work Rule Changes that have needed to take place since the dawn of time. Lack of flexibility is hurting us.

CLT if you will remember , Was the primary maintenance focus base for Piedmont before the merger...and CLT is still the biggest player in terms of daily departures...and the subsequint need for Thru-Flight Line Maintenance Activity, based on numbers alone.

The above fact lends credence to the constant need of an organic/indiginous resource...as does PHL warrant this need , for alike reasons. again, It's time to break the mold of This is how we have always done it

The above statement/attitude is exactly what has lead us down the slippery slope we're on . Anything close to disputing that fact is an arguement based on arguement alone.

We need to position ourselves to be able to be pro-active...we are hog-tied from always having to be re-active on too many issues.