Third Circuit Ruling

[N628AU]

History shows what third party maintenance does. It is no secret. Look at the history even of late. Read into that what you like. Fact is fact. Third party maintenance is all about reducing cost. Even 'U' has stated that.


--Gee, did you hear about the first Airbus that came out of that place?

Please explain to me why WN has a near flawless safety record then.

My thoughts exactly

Maybe the company should use more caution than they have so for in picking vendors. I think they have done poorly.

The biggest issue with WN is that they set up their maintenance system from the start of the airline to work those issues, and have the appropriate QA people and procedures in place to ensure the work is done properly.

The issues with AC 700 (including items coming out of S-Check on MEL) and the 737 lap joint issues, shows this company has not yet proven they can do that.

 

[BoeingBoy]

If the IAM goes the expedited arbitration route, be prepared for "expedited" to mean 6 months to a year. Management has honed it foot-dragging skills with the pilots. Why hurry to get an arbitrator's ruling when you can put it off and do what you want in the meantime if you're management?

Jim

 

[delldude]

If the IAM goes the expedited arbitration route, be prepared for "expedited" to mean 6 months to a year. Management has honed it foot-dragging skills with the pilots. Why hurry to get an arbitrator's ruling when you can put it off and do what you want in the meantime if you're management?

Jim

i hear , but if IAM prevails and gets a TRO...DUH???
BIG WIN FOR NOBODY,NOTHINGS CHANGED.
lets see what the future has to deal.......
54 yrs of maintenance in house and how will the company explain this doesn't count now??we'll see soon...BTW,AFA got expedited arbitration in about 2 weeks i believe....
lot of diatribe for nothing on this post i see....."yall should geta life".
have a nice day...you too USA320PILOT....

 

[AOG-N-IT]

History shows what third party maintenance does. It is no secret. Look at the history even of late. Read into that what you like. Fact is fact. Third party maintenance is all about reducing cost. Even 'U' has stated that.


--Gee, did you hear about the first Airbus that came out of that place?

Please explain to me why WN has a near flawless safety record then.

My thoughts exactly

Maybe the company should use more caution than they have so for in picking vendors. I think they have done poorly.

The biggest issue with WN is that they set up their maintenance system from the start of the airline to work those issues, and have the appropriate QA people and procedures in place to ensure the work is done properly.

The issues with AC 700 (including items coming out of S-Check on MEL) and the 737 lap joint issues, shows this company has not yet proven they can do that.

The issues with 700UW was NOT about departing Heavy Maintenance with just simple MEL's !! The issue was with an Acft departing an HMV (Heavy Maintenance Visit) ..and not being able to complete a single revenued day without a major problem that lead to the Acft in question being chased with King Air 90 "Air Charters" with parts and mechanics on board on three consecutive nights and still ending up being repaired in CLT after 3 added days of "Down Time" to be corrected to operational and safe levels.

My biggest hope is people like USA320pilot and Itrade have to endure on a routine basis what ST Mobile Aerospace happens to provide them between now and when an arbitraition can be resolved, Just maybe when they find thier safety and convienience jeopardized enough..they just might shut thier collective Pie holes about cost benefits over doing it right to begin with? We can only hope !!

628AU...before you try to mediate or smooth things over between different sides of the spectrum...at least consult those whom have dealt with the FACTS of the circumstance first.

Simply put...700UW was a "basket case" that cost U plenty to correct...and paying outside the contract for labor for second rate work is not a cost effective answer..if 700UW would have taken a few days longer in PIT or CLT in the first place ?..at least it would have been available as rob-bait....in Mobile it was nothing more than a liability inching toward becoming a ticking bomb !!

Weigh your views in much broader and informed terms hince forth.

 

[N628AU]

The issues with 700UW was NOT about departing Heavy Maintenance with just simple MEL's !! The issue was with an Acft departing an HMV (Heavy Maintenance Visit) ..and not being able to complete a single revenued day without a major problem that lead to the Acft in question being chased with King Air 90 "Air Charters" with parts and mechanics on board on three consecutive nights and still ending up being repaired in CLT after 3 added days of "Down Time" to be corrected to operational and safe levels.

My biggest hope is people like USA320pilot and Itrade have to endure on a routine basis what ST Mobile Aerospace happens to provide them between now and when an arbitraition can be resolved, Just maybe when they find thier safety and convienience jeopardized enough..they just might shut thier collective Pie holes about cost benefits over doing it right to begin with? We can only hope !!

628AU...before you try to mediate or smooth things over between different sides of the spectrum...at least consult those whom have dealt with the FACTS of the circumstance first.

Simply put...700UW was a "basket case" that cost U plenty to correct...and paying outside the contract for labor for second rate work is not a cost effective answer..if 700UW would have taken a few days longer in PIT or CLT in the first place ?..at least it would have been available as rob-bait....in Mobile it was nothing more than a liability inching toward becoming a ticking bomb !!

Weigh your views in much broader and informed terms hince forth.

Really? No kidding? Well gee, I must be an out of work country bumpkin!

I know that it coming out with MELs is not the whole story, nor even the tip of the iceberg!

My point was that probably no one could tell the major issues this aircraft would have when it left the Ole Bama Aircraft Repair and Pencilwhipping Service. The fact that it came out with items on MEL should have been a red flag to any Quality Assurance person that this aircraft was not truly ready for revenue service in the first place, just something released to make an arbitrary "deadline" to avoid financial penalties to the Bama Boyz. In all likelyhood, with WN's structure, they would have never allowed one of their aircraft to leave a 3rd party vendor in such manner.


And AOG-N-IT, before you start dictating to me how I should try and "smooth over and mediate" something between two parties, you might just want to see if that is my intent.

Don't try to put words into my mouth or try to discern my intent henceforth.

 

[AOG-N-IT]

The issues with 700UW was NOT about departing Heavy Maintenance with just simple MEL's !! The issue was with an Acft departing an HMV (Heavy Maintenance Visit) ..and not being able to complete a single revenued day without a major problem that lead to the Acft in question being chased with King Air 90 "Air Charters" with parts and mechanics on board on three consecutive nights and still ending up being repaired in CLT after 3 added days of "Down Time" to be corrected to operational and safe levels.

My biggest hope is people like USA320pilot and Itrade have to endure on a routine basis what ST Mobile Aerospace happens to provide them between now and when an arbitraition can be resolved, Just maybe when they find thier safety and convienience jeopardized enough..they just might shut thier collective Pie holes about cost benefits over doing it right to begin with? We can only hope !!

628AU...before you try to mediate or smooth things over between different sides of the spectrum...at least consult those whom have dealt with the FACTS of the circumstance first.

Simply put...700UW was a "basket case" that cost U plenty to correct...and paying outside the contract for labor for second rate work is not a cost effective answer..if 700UW would have taken a few days longer in PIT or CLT in the first place ?..at least it would have been available as rob-bait....in Mobile it was nothing more than a liability inching toward becoming a ticking bomb !!

Weigh your views in much broader and informed terms hince forth.

Really? No kidding? Well gee, I must be an out of work country bumpkin!

I know that it coming out with MELs is not the whole story, nor even the tip of the iceberg!

My point was that probably no one could tell the major issues this aircraft would have when it left the Ole Bama Aircraft Repair and Pencilwhipping Service. The fact that it came out with items on MEL should have been a red flag to any Quality Assurance person that this aircraft was not truly ready for revenue service in the first place, just something released to make an arbitrary "deadline" to avoid financial penalties to the Bama Boyz. In all likelyhood, with WN's structure, they would have never allowed one of their aircraft to leave a 3rd party vendor in such manner.


And AOG-N-IT, before you start dictating to me how I should try and "smooth over and mediate" something between two parties, you might just want to see if that is my intent.

Don't try to put words into my mouth or try to discern my intent henceforth.

Your words were your words...and nothing else can be taken from them...and the detractors will home in on as much !!

Keep in mind the fact that many do not have the far reaching grasp of the simply implied as you yourself presented in that post....and yes I feel a definate need to correct that.


Whether of not you are employed ? or a Bumpkin? has nothing to do with projecting this ordeal for what it is...that was the sole failure in what you projected , and that is what the less aware will gravitate toward in defense of thier mindless positions on the subject.....and if it takes a skermish with a friend to present it correctly and accurately? So be it !!! :angry: