WeAAsles said:
Have some fun here my Brother. Look at each airline and look at how many In House employees they have for each aircraft. That will solve the puzzle for you.
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/Employees&Productivity.html
Get those numbers down and you can catch up to those other airlines if that's what you want.
Sad when people who claim to be pro-union don't consider employees to be Assets and instead look at them as liabilities.
Sad when so called pro-union people agree and repeat the companies lies that if they choose to run their business by controlling the quality of their product in-house they should get a discount for volume from the workers who perform that work and deliver that quality.
What the figures you cite lack is specificity, counted among the number of mechanics are positions that the TWU helped AA put in place that are not staffed by A&Ps or similarly High Skilled workers but rather workers that are paid much less than even many of the Domestic MRO's.
For a long time we have seen Overspeed , NYer and other pretenders cite this same lie now we see FSC's citing it as well. The fact is that if we look at line operations we are likely understaffed compared to our peers in the industry, even WN and UPS. Donnelley tried to spin out the UPS numbers by including airacraft that never operated in the US and were subcontractors around the world that UPS hired. I contacted the Pilots Union to get an accurate number of actual UPS Aircraft and the ratio was much closer than the numbers that Donnelly spun out. (Donnelley now works for WN management, so basically he stopped working for AA management and now works for WN management).
Another thing that you guys leave out is quality. Sure Delta, WN and United outsource a lot of Overhaul, and on paper save money, but what MIT misses is the rework and associated costs that are driving up OT and headcount in the line at those carriers, UAL built a new line maintenance Hangar in EWR to help handle the extra work. As Overspeed finally admitted there are no perfect comparators, AA still had higher maintenance costs because AA operated an older fleet, but on the flip side their cost for Aircraft would be lower since they weren't paying off new aircraft.
Our in house Overhaul put out a quality product which meant less breakdowns when they returned to service.
So you come here and say that quality means nothing, and insinuate that if we want the pay of other carriers we should shed headcount, in other words you are saying we are a liability to the company and should discount our labor. What kind of Union man would say that?
You should be ashamed of yourself.
