This is what you can expect if you sign a card

Checking it Out

Apr 3, 2003

Sending Your Work to CHINA?

AMFA represented Northwest Airlines has the distinction of being one of only two U.S. airlines (along with FedEx) that has its aircraft maintained by Taecho, in the Peoples Republic of China. (
The AMFA contract generously allows Northwest to farm-out maintenance repair and overhaul to foreign countries like China. The concession AMFA granted in their last round of negotiations is a cost based formula that heavily skews the amount of technician work that goes to countries that have low labor rates like the $8 per labor hour (all inclusive) in Southeast Asia.
The importance of this cost differential is the main reason Northwest maintains their 747 and DC-10 fleet in either Singapore or China.
Of course you know the IAM retained a contractual ban on foreign overhaul repair work in the UAL agreement – even while UAL was in bankruptcy.
During the ’94 AMFA raid, their hired gun Lee Seeham said, while talking about these exact types of farm-out protective provisions AMFA intends to incorporate the protection clause that should have been in our contract for the past 50 years…

This is an example of the typical hype from AMFA; they chastise the IAM for weak language, but are unable to secure any of the language in their own contracts.

Want to know the difference between your Union, the IAM/TWU and amfa? It’s in your contract book!

On 5/25/2003 5:08:29 PM Checking it Out wrote:

This is an example of the typical hype from AMFA; they chastise the IAM for weak language, but are unable to secure any of the language in their own contracts.

Give us the TWU language that prevents our work at AA from going overseas?

Article Number and Paragraph will do!

I notice you give credit to the IAM for a restriction but fail to mention any TWU restrictions in the contract. You are so out of touch with your own world you have to resort to IAM propaganda against AMFA and it really slams your own unions actions, or lack thereof that is! Are you now an IAM organizer?

Now I am going to resort to Copying and scanning the servicable parts tags of AA work going overseas. I will begin with Combustor Modules which I know go to Singapore. Of course it is really AA and NWA management doing the outsourcing not AMFA or the TWU. Is it only COMPANY UNION men that do not understand the difference between UNION Decisions and MANAGMENT Decisions. Contraray to Checking it Out's assertions, there is a difference!

The TWU is not negotiating contract language to PREVENT WORK from overseas. They are simply relying on politicians and the FAA.

Note that there is NO restriction on overseas work any TWU contract. In fact, the TWU is only in pursuit of "Safety Audits" of foreing maintenance bases. This is NOT a restriction, it simply the same standard with failed oversight that we are facing.

Want Proof? OK, here is the screen capture from
Screen Capture from [url=""][/URL]


Checking it Out,

Do you know difference between PREVENTION/RESTRICTION on work going overseas versus OVERSIGHT INSPECTIONS of overseas maintenance bases?

All the TWU is doing is making Government BIGGER in typical liberal fashion. Who do you think is going to pay for this expanded Governement Oversight? The Working Man thru his own paycheck that's who!
The fact AMFA is opposed to overseas outsourcing and is active in the battle against such practice!

If Checking it Out had half a brain, he would know UNIONS do NOT OUTSOURCE WORK, the CARRIERS DO! If you dispute that, show us proof that AMFA outsourced any work to overseas maintenance. It is only the company union minded fools that believe the UNION and management are the same thing.

November 12, 2002

Mr. Brian Huckaby
Office of Aviation Safety
U.S. Department of Transportation Office of Inspector General
Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center
61 Forsyth Street, N.W.
Suite 17T60
Atlanta, GA 30303

RE: Review of Air Carriers’ Use of Repair Stations

Dear Mr. Huckaby,

I have included a synopsis for your evaluation regarding our opinion of the relationship of the airline industry in the United States and repair stations (3PMP). This information is based upon many certified aviation technician’s experiences in the field, newspaper articles, independent surveys and documentation from aircraft fatal accidents.

There are many factors that have contributed to the multitude of issues regarding repair stations that have surfaced in the aviation industry by the turn of the century, some obvious and others shrouded. Of interest is that a Boeing study of commercial jet airplane accidents from 1988 through 1997 cited only 6% maintenance attributed accidents during that time frame. The programs and regulatory structure that were intended to enhance aviation safety since the Boeing study have been overshadowed by a lack of oversight in recent years, as future statistics may prove. Recent National Transportation Safety Board findings determined that maintenance has played a major role in at least 50% of major aviation incidents as compared to 25% just a few years ago.

Following is information though not complete resulting from space constraints but that may provide insight into the shortcomings of Federal Air Regulation 145 and the current relationship between air carriers, repair stations and the Federal Aviation Agency.

  • MSG-3 Maintenance Program (Maintenance Steering Group – 3); Accepted by the FAA in 2001, MSG-3 allows air carriers the flexibility to adjust maintenance, inspection, and overhaul intervals based upon reliability data collected without prior FAA approval. The program requires three parameters to be used as a continuous review to determine when and if modification of the program is required – Aircraft performance, reliability and maintenance accomplished data. The recent submission to the NTSB crash investigation of Alaska Airlines Flt. 261 by AMFA states in part: that AMFA believes the MSG-3 process is flawed, in that it allowed the extension of maintenance intervals to escalate beyond a reasonable requisite. A Seattle Times article dated November 8, 2002 stated that: the NTSB in the draft report from the Flt. 261 investigation, as expected, concludes that the probable cause of the crash was failure of the jackscrew mechanism. The report also states that Alaska, with the FAA’s approval, reduced the frequency with which it lubricated the mechanism, increasing the likelihood of excessive wear. MSG3 focuses maintenance tasks on limited areas of an aircraft. A most recent example of is that of United Airlines mechanic George Gulliford, who was reprimanded after reporting a crack in the frame of an aircraft that was not in the assigned inspection area. Gulliford filed a complaint with the Secretary of Labor-OSHA and was afforded relief from discrimination from his employer, United Airlines. How would a non-certified mechanic supervised by George Gullifod’s supervisor have responded to a similar situation? Reference: Yahoo newswire, Tuesday January 15, 2002 “AMFA Attorney Earns Victory for Aircraft Mechanicâ€.

  • A Subcommittee on Aviation Hearing on Capitol Hill in August 2002, titled Adequacy of FAA Oversight of Passenger of Aircraft Maintenance analysis by AMFA states; Even though the (Continuing Analysis and Surveillance System (CASS) program has merit, the program is left incomplete, subject to erroneous data collection, with final analysis left to the carrier itself. The CASS is a program designed to provide surveillance and analysis of the air carrier’s continuous airworthiness maintenance program for performance and effectiveness and to implement corrective action for any deficiencies, yet in our opinion will fall far short of the intent. The reality is, that the checks and balances in the CASS program leaves the responsibility of compliance (data collection that may be obscured) to the carrier itself that is reviewed by the FAA ATOS program guidelines. The agency is already over burdened and understaffed as stated in a April 9, 2002 Wall Street Journal article by the Transportation’s Department Inspector General, faulting the FAA for failing to carry out adequately, an enhanced inspection regime designed to keep close surveillance on the nation’s largest carriers.

  • Aviation maintenance is unique in that the complex equipment that personal are required to maintain requires an individual with a multitude of skills acquired over a period of many years. In our opinion, the number of experienced certified technicians performing maintenance on aircraft is directly proportional to overall air carrier safety. The question could be asked; Is it physically possible to provide close supervision of maintenance personal as some may suggest as a solution to the future shortage of qualified technicians? Even if the ratio were one supervisor for each non-certified mechanic, the reality is that an atmosphere would be created where there would no longer exist a series of checks and balances that the current system has. The lower level manager/supervisor employed by an air carrier usually receives a bonus based on measured accomplishment of goals which creates a tremendous pressure to shortcut maintenance. Historically, supervisors have been loyal to the needs of the air carrier’s philosophy of providing a product at cost whereas the FAA certified technician has an ethical and legal responsibility to perform maintenance flawlessly as that responsibility is imprinted in a signature. The non-certified individual’s performance is measured by criteria that the airlines establishes, unlike the influence that the Federal Air Regulations have on a certified technician’s performance. The typical air carrier/third party maintenance contract incorporates a penalty clause that heavily fines the repair station for each day the aircraft is overdue from a scheduled overhaul. The relationship between supervisory and the non-certified mechanic in a repair station environment that fosters maintenance shortcuts to meet schedule promotes unsafe practices in our opinion.

In summary, Federal Air Regulation 145 provides air carriers with self-regulating authority and the responsibility to monitor the results of aircraft maintenance performed by repair stations. That authority coupled with the MSG-3 maintenance program encourages shortcuts to expedite maintenance. A recent survey of 16 airlines with responses from over 1500 certified mechanics indicates that the system promotes unsafe practices. The question was asked; Have you experienced/discovered maintenance discrepancies (safety of flight issues) on aircraft shortly after being released from a maintenance check accomplished by a 3PMP (third party maintenance provider/repair station)? Fifty-eight percent (58%) answered yes and thirty percent (30%) answered no. Yet, if the answer was yes: Do you feel your airline has taken corrective action to eliminate the problem? Ninety percent (90%) answered no.

Major air carriers, having extensive overseas route structures, attempt to balance costs vs. safety by reducing maintenance performed by certified technicians in this country by sending the maintenance to a third party overseas. Air carriers are utilizing the language of FAR Part 145 that allows a foreign repair station to operate under different rules and far greater initial cost savings in countries such as China. A United States air carrier was recently forced to remove a Boeing 747 from service resulting from the discovery of over 2,000 maintenance discrepancies found by certified technicians after the aircraft recently returned to the United States from an extensive 3PMP overhaul in China.

Another area of concern is that uncertified mechanics employed by repair stations both domestic and abroad are not required to comply with the Federal Air Regulations that are quite specific regarding random drug and alcohol testing.

Security is another concern resulting from a recent arrest of an al Qaeda operant employed by a 3PMP in Singapore after many years of employment. Background checks are questionable in many countries outside of the United States.

In addition, the effectiveness of the regulatory authority of the Federal Aviation Agency is in question as the current shortage of airworthiness inspectors suggests.

Thank you for the opportunity to participate in this most important investigation. The Aircraft Mechanics Fraternal Association (AMFA) would be pleased to offer your office any further assistance in gathering information from those in the industry, the certified aviation technician, whose primary job function is insure the safety of flight on a daily basis.

The Aircraft Mechanics Fraternal Association (AMFA) currently represents certified technicians from six air carriers that include Alaska, Atlantic Coast, American Trans Air, Horizon, Mesaba and Northwest Airlines. Our motto “Safety in the Air Begins With Quality Maintenance on the Ground†echoes the tremendous responsibility of certified technicians in the aviation industry today.


Frank Boksanske
AMFA National Safety and Standards Director

c.c. O.V.Delle-Femine, National Director

Terry Harvey Assistant, National Director

Maryanne Demarco, AMFA Labor Administrator
(Checking it Out)

Does doing maintenance in Mexico count as foreign?
Ask UAL mechanics what they think.
On 5/25/2003 5:08:29 PM Checking it out 1994 amfa has negotiated 5 contracts and NOT A SINGLE ONE HAS LANGUAGE TO PROTECT THEIR WORK FROM GOING OVERSEAS!
Want to know the difference between your Union, the IAM/TWU and amfa? It’s in your contract book!



And if we don''t sign the cards what will be the next concession we give up in 5 years?

We have three choices.

1 We can do nothing and wait to be screwed again the next time the twu opens our contract. Remember 1983 B SCALE 1986 C SCALE 1989 FLEX BENEFITS 1995 SRP 2003 CONCESSION.

2 We can sign the cards and change unions and see what AMFA can do. Like Northwest, Southwest,Alaskan,Horizon, American Trans Air,Mesaba,ACA and soon to be United.

3 We can form our on union and strike out on our own. I for one prefer AMFA but I will be Happy to sign cards for our own union if someone wants to start one.
On 5/25/2003 6:53:29 PM F4ams wrote:

(Checking it Out)

Does doing maintenance in Mexico count as foreign?
Ask UAL mechanics what they think.


Checking it Out counts nothing except what he is told down on Pine Street. He is the first sheep to the popcorn, first sheep to the soda-pop box, and never gets sheared!
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #7
This is what you can expect if you sign a Card!
NW Mechanic in MSP;
I like the idea of teaching the UAL Mechanics a lesson too. But, I couldn''t wish AMFA on anyone. I can''t stop thinking about their families, their children and their careers. It''s been so hard to watch 1/2 of our people hit the street and we''re not even in Bankruptcy. You know AMFA is trying to make a big deal out of the closing of one of their bases in California but I talked to a UAL mech today and he told me that nobody lost their job there. They do have to transfer to Oakland I believe he said but they get to keep their jobs. Unlike NWA with Memphis now being virtually closed that makes Two maintenance bases and 5 Line Maintenance bases shut down on NWA and people did lose their jobs. The new figures for NWA as of this week are 5,100 AMFA members on the street according to Gordon Eldridge AMFA Local 33 Treasurer and Jim Atkinson AMFA local 33 President. That''s way over half now. Can you imagine if we go into Bankruptcy now as well? Maybe there will be 3,000 left out of 9,000 total. On a final note, you know we all talk about the Mechanics but lets not forget the Cleaners and Custodians. They have really been boned by AMFA. I have to just guess but an educated guess would be that nearly 65% of them have lost their jobs here at NWA since AMFA got in. AMFA seems to have very little concern when it comes to the Cleaners and Custodians. T6
The great experiment gone bad.
NW Mechanic in MSP;

I got my layoff slip tonight. July 90 and out on the street. Aint AMFA great? 12 years and gone. I''m so glad I went to school for this career just so AMFA could screw the whole industry up. Now all the airlines will want parity with the NWA (38%) Farm Out language. Wonderful. Not only did AMFA break the Union at NWA, Horizon and Southwest they are now promoting Farm outs to the entire Industry. Oh yeah, how''s that AMFA look now everyone?
NW Mechanic in MSP;
Got the word today. Memphis is being closed up except for about 20 Line Technicians. The junior Line guy is 1978 and the Junior Hanger Mech has about 18 years. That makes 2 AMFA NWA Maint Bases and 4 AMFA NWA Line Stations closed this year and we are not even in Bankruptcy. Real Iron Clad Language AMFA. Hell of a job. How are you going to blame the members this time. You were the ones telling us that our NWA Contract was the greatest. I think you said it was "Industry Changing." Perhaps you''d like to explain what you meant when you said that Delle?

On 5/26/2003 6:51:12 PM Checking it Out wrote:


However, when we look into the AFL-CIO list of reasons people join unions, we do not find listed, concessions in exhange for jobs.

Screen Capture from AFL-CIo_Org website:

Tell us CIO,

How does the latest TWU concession translate into a stonger tax base for our communities?

How does the concession build better shools, infrastructure, and healthier local economies?

How does the give back of 5 Piad Vacation Days, and 5 Paid Holidays mean we can spend more quality time with our families?

How does an agreement "without further ratification" give workers a voice?


We''ve all had time to see AMFA in action at Alaska and NWA. What have they accomplished? Zip, Zilch, NADA!!! What happened to the RESPECT that mechanics were going to get? Remember? Mechanics were going to be like Pilots once they threw off those slacker parisite bag smashers. Management was going to go on a "Slash and Burn" campaign thru the bag smashers pay and benifits once they didn''t have the mechanics to prop them up, and move that pay over to the skilled mechanics where it belonged!!! After all these years amfa looks more and more like the Iam, IBT or TWU. Only more inept! But they dont'' care. The purpose of amfa is to line the pockets of Delle-femine, Seham and the McCormicks and in that respect it excells!!
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #12
This is what you can expect if you sign a card!
How much are AMFA dues?

According to local 19 2001 LM-2, Labor Organization Annual Report, their dues were stated as $15.93 to $58.48.

Their AMFA constitution allows for two times the base hourly rate. However, there other ways for AMFA to collect additional monies from their members. These methods are calls ASSESSEMENTS and have freequently been used by AMFA through out the years.

According to AMFA the total costs of contract negotiations at NWA were approximately $2,100,000.00 (2.1 million). This caused a big problem as EACH LOCAL IS RESPONCIBLE FOR THEIR FAIR SHARE OF THE 2.1 MILLION. The 40% of the dues the National keeps are exempt from tnegotating costs. Also any and all contact with the AMFA National Legal and Administrator are billed directly to each local. Ever time a local representative contacts either Seham or McCormick they are billed for their time.

Presently all members of local 14 are paying a $5.00 per month assessment for legal fees incurred in the last round of negotiations. AMFA tried to impose similar assessments on other locals , but they were voted down. In the case of the local 35 membership the ASSESSEMENT would have been $10.00 per month.

The fact the each locals are responsible for these costs has caused a lot of financial problems. To correct these problem the National took action at their last “SPECIAL CONVENTIONâ€￾.

Remember they had to call this “SPECIAL CONVENTIONâ€￾ because Delle-Feminee attempted to declare the referendum election, on the changes to the AMFA Constitution, NULL AND VOID.

Local 33 had to sue the National to allow the members to vote on ALL the changes to the AMFA Constitution. Local 33 had to get a restraining order against the National in order to allow the vote to continue. However not all the proposed changes were voted and a “SPECIAL CONVENTIONâ€￾ was called to address those remaining issues.

Well after a week of beer drinking and gorging on food paid for by the National, Dell was able to get these LITTLE change put into the 2001 AMFA Constitution.

Article VI section 3
During the times of negotiations commencing at the acceptance of proposals, or after and ending at the date of signing, any Local may choose to institute an assessment up to 0.5 (50%) the base hourly rate per month of the affected members in negotiations.

XII, section 5
No other fees, dues, or assessments of any kind besides those stated in Section 3 of this Article and Article VI, Section 3 shall be levied without prior approval by secret ballot of the majority of members.

Now the road is paved to allow each local to impose a 50% increase in their members dues from the time section 6 openers are delivered until the day the contract is signed.

This means that members could pay an additional $14 per month in dues for as long as it takes to get a contract with out so much as a vote.

If this was in effect the last time at NWA members would have paid the ASSESSEMENT for over six years. This would have cost each AMFA member an additional $1,008 in dues.

Sign a Card and Expect THIS!

Screen Capture AMFA Constitution Article I Section 9

Compare that to Jim Little's "without further ratification" concessions!
And the TWU has never found "no merit" in a grievance and withdrawn the complaint?

Yeah right!

I know of more than one of my own personal greivances withdrawn by the TWU.

That is why I will never authorize the TWU to act on behalf again. is your source. Come on! They have been proven to post false and fabricated documents.