AA vs. SWA - Maintenance
- Thread starter AAmech
- Start date
- Aug 20, 2002
- 7,319
- 1,555
Jun. 19--Southwest Airlines Co.''s moneymaking formula leans heavily on this number: 7.5.
That''s how many cents the Dallas-based carrier typically pays to fly one plane seat for one mile, what airline bean counters like to call a unit.
Southwest''s competitors pay 9, 10 or 11 cents or more giving the low-cost airline a crucial cost advantage that''s financed its three decades of profitability.
But Southwest is now feeling inflationary pressure that could force up its unit costs. The carrier recently has signed or extended five labor contracts that include wage increases and more benefits for its workers. A sixth labor deal this one for its flight attendants could be near.
So Southwest has turned to technology and automation to keep its costs at or just slightly below that golden 7.5-cent mark.
That number is going to creep up and they admit it because there''s a lot of pressure on it, said Ray Neidl, an airline analyst for Blaylock & Partners in New York. But they''ve been doing a really good job on managing their costs.
Spending millions on technology today will rein in costs for the long term, Southwest''s executives believe.
This is all about trying to do the task at hand more efficiently, said Gary Kelly, chief financial officer and the technician behind the cost-containment efforts.
High-tech already is paying dividends for Southwest, which gets more than half its customer revenue from its online booking site, www.southwest.com. That''s an industry benchmark.
But in other areas, such as its maintenance operations, Southwest has been decidedly low-tech. Until recently, each airplane repair created a huge paper trail, forcing mechanics and managers to manually enter loads of data into an outdated computer system and sort through reams of data.
Planes have to come in for a host of checks and inspections depending on the time each spends airborne. Trouble was, Southwest didn''t have a good handle on each plane''s scheduled maintenance. One Boeing 737 would come in for a scheduled check and be back in the hangar just a couple of weeks later for a separate check.
Ideally, both could be done in one visit to save time and money.
To make the system more efficient, Mr. Kelly and vice president Jim Wimberly, Southwest''s chief of operations, have installed computer programs that keep track of scheduled maintenance for the carrier''s 390 planes.
That''s going to turn into real money, Mr. Kelly said.
Southwest now spends $400 million to $450 million a year on its maintenance operations. The carrier estimates the computers could shave 10 percent or more from that total.
Southwest''s mechanics face other low-tech inefficiencies in the hangar. On each repair, mechanics must sort through paper files to figure out the plane''s maintenance record. New problems have to be reported on a cumbersome form.
A new system being installed by Sinex Aviation Technologies will arm the mechanics with hand-held devices that will allow them to access a plane''s history in an instant. And if something needs fixing, a mechanic will be able to tap up a repair order in seconds.
We used to lose most of an eight-hour shift when we had to write something up, said Greg Jones, a supervisor of Southwest''s heavy maintenance group, during a tour of the company''s hangars next to Dallas Love Field. Now we''ll be able to get it fixed within 30 minutes.
Sinex, based in Duluth, Minn., estimates its software and computer products can cut maintenance labor costs by 25 percent to 30 percent and reduce the amount of time a plane has to be in the hangar by about a quarter. US Airways Inc. and Air Canada Inc. have already seen such cost and time savings by using Sinex products, company spokesman Peter Miller said.
Southwest is quick to emphasize that efficiency won''t mean layoffs. The company says, in fact, that the new technology could lead to more work. That''s because Southwest currently outsources its heaviest aircraft work and expects to bring those operations back in-house as the maintenance system becomes more efficient.
We''re not looking at taking jobs away, Mr. Wimberly said.
Southwest also is using automation to change its customers'' airport experience.
When Southwest did away with its brightly colored plastic boarding passes a year ago, it was a major culture shock to employees and customers. Rather than being grouped by the color of each pass, travelers had to adjust to traditional boarding cards.
A month later, the airline introduced Rapid Check-In, its self-serve kiosks. In less than a year, the kiosks are in every Southwest market except St. Louis and are being used by about 20 percent of passengers who have e-tickets.
Customers are in for another automation jolt this fall when they will be able to get transfer boarding passes for each leg of their trip when they first check in at the self-serve kiosks. Everyone will appreciate standing in one less line, Southwest spokeswoman Beth Harbin said.
Transfer passes will be limited at Dallas Love Field, where the Wright Amendment requires passengers to buy separate tickets unless they''re flying to destinations in Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama or Kansas. A passenger flying from Dallas to Corpus Christi and connecting through Houston will be able to get a transfer pass. A traveler going from Dallas to Phoenix, with a stop on Albuquerque, N.M., won''t.
The transfer pass technology will not replace ticket agents.
We''re giving our customers options, Ms. Harbin said. If our customers want to use a machine, that''s fine. But we''re not going to say you have to do one or the other.
With more passengers checking themselves in, Southwest can provide more attention to customers who want personalized service, she added.
Southwest hasn''t calculated how much it will save from implementing electronically issued boarding passes and kiosks, Ms. Harbin said. But industry experts say the transfer passes are important as Southwest faces more competition from JetBlue Airways Corp. and other low-cost carriers.
People will stand in lines for a low fare, but when there are other low-fare carriers that don''t make them stand in a second line, they''ll use them, said Mo Garfinkle, an independent aviation consultant based in the Washington, D.C., area.
The transfer passes also may encourage more Southwest passengers to use connecting flights, Mr. Garfinkle said. The vast majority of its passengers 76 percent travel from one city to another without connecting.
This will certainly make life easier for connections, Mr. Garfinkle said.
The downside is that an increase in connecting tickets could chip away at Southwest''s profit margin, since point-to-point tickets are more profitable. But with its airplanes running at about 70 percent full, there''s still plenty of capacity to take on connecting customers, Mr. Garfinkle said.
The drive to control costs has become harder for Southwest because its growth has slowed in recent years. Before the recession that began in early 2001 and the drop in passengers related to Sept. 11, Southwest grew at a 10 percent clip or better each year.
That kind of growth allowed the carrier to spread its costs over a growing number of seats or air mile units.
Southwest is still growing while nearly all other carriers are shrinking quickly but its annual rate has been slashed to about 4 percent to 5 percent. Southwest won''t add new cities to its network this year or next.
Still, Mr. Kelly said, more technology initiatives are on the way.
We''re studying everything, he said. We''ll go after the things that make sense to us.
By Eric Torbenson and Suzanne Marta
That''s how many cents the Dallas-based carrier typically pays to fly one plane seat for one mile, what airline bean counters like to call a unit.
Southwest''s competitors pay 9, 10 or 11 cents or more giving the low-cost airline a crucial cost advantage that''s financed its three decades of profitability.
But Southwest is now feeling inflationary pressure that could force up its unit costs. The carrier recently has signed or extended five labor contracts that include wage increases and more benefits for its workers. A sixth labor deal this one for its flight attendants could be near.
So Southwest has turned to technology and automation to keep its costs at or just slightly below that golden 7.5-cent mark.
That number is going to creep up and they admit it because there''s a lot of pressure on it, said Ray Neidl, an airline analyst for Blaylock & Partners in New York. But they''ve been doing a really good job on managing their costs.
Spending millions on technology today will rein in costs for the long term, Southwest''s executives believe.
This is all about trying to do the task at hand more efficiently, said Gary Kelly, chief financial officer and the technician behind the cost-containment efforts.
High-tech already is paying dividends for Southwest, which gets more than half its customer revenue from its online booking site, www.southwest.com. That''s an industry benchmark.
But in other areas, such as its maintenance operations, Southwest has been decidedly low-tech. Until recently, each airplane repair created a huge paper trail, forcing mechanics and managers to manually enter loads of data into an outdated computer system and sort through reams of data.
Planes have to come in for a host of checks and inspections depending on the time each spends airborne. Trouble was, Southwest didn''t have a good handle on each plane''s scheduled maintenance. One Boeing 737 would come in for a scheduled check and be back in the hangar just a couple of weeks later for a separate check.
Ideally, both could be done in one visit to save time and money.
To make the system more efficient, Mr. Kelly and vice president Jim Wimberly, Southwest''s chief of operations, have installed computer programs that keep track of scheduled maintenance for the carrier''s 390 planes.
That''s going to turn into real money, Mr. Kelly said.
Southwest now spends $400 million to $450 million a year on its maintenance operations. The carrier estimates the computers could shave 10 percent or more from that total.
Southwest''s mechanics face other low-tech inefficiencies in the hangar. On each repair, mechanics must sort through paper files to figure out the plane''s maintenance record. New problems have to be reported on a cumbersome form.
A new system being installed by Sinex Aviation Technologies will arm the mechanics with hand-held devices that will allow them to access a plane''s history in an instant. And if something needs fixing, a mechanic will be able to tap up a repair order in seconds.
We used to lose most of an eight-hour shift when we had to write something up, said Greg Jones, a supervisor of Southwest''s heavy maintenance group, during a tour of the company''s hangars next to Dallas Love Field. Now we''ll be able to get it fixed within 30 minutes.
Sinex, based in Duluth, Minn., estimates its software and computer products can cut maintenance labor costs by 25 percent to 30 percent and reduce the amount of time a plane has to be in the hangar by about a quarter. US Airways Inc. and Air Canada Inc. have already seen such cost and time savings by using Sinex products, company spokesman Peter Miller said.
Southwest is quick to emphasize that efficiency won''t mean layoffs. The company says, in fact, that the new technology could lead to more work. That''s because Southwest currently outsources its heaviest aircraft work and expects to bring those operations back in-house as the maintenance system becomes more efficient.
We''re not looking at taking jobs away, Mr. Wimberly said.
Southwest also is using automation to change its customers'' airport experience.
When Southwest did away with its brightly colored plastic boarding passes a year ago, it was a major culture shock to employees and customers. Rather than being grouped by the color of each pass, travelers had to adjust to traditional boarding cards.
A month later, the airline introduced Rapid Check-In, its self-serve kiosks. In less than a year, the kiosks are in every Southwest market except St. Louis and are being used by about 20 percent of passengers who have e-tickets.
Customers are in for another automation jolt this fall when they will be able to get transfer boarding passes for each leg of their trip when they first check in at the self-serve kiosks. Everyone will appreciate standing in one less line, Southwest spokeswoman Beth Harbin said.
Transfer passes will be limited at Dallas Love Field, where the Wright Amendment requires passengers to buy separate tickets unless they''re flying to destinations in Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama or Kansas. A passenger flying from Dallas to Corpus Christi and connecting through Houston will be able to get a transfer pass. A traveler going from Dallas to Phoenix, with a stop on Albuquerque, N.M., won''t.
The transfer pass technology will not replace ticket agents.
We''re giving our customers options, Ms. Harbin said. If our customers want to use a machine, that''s fine. But we''re not going to say you have to do one or the other.
With more passengers checking themselves in, Southwest can provide more attention to customers who want personalized service, she added.
Southwest hasn''t calculated how much it will save from implementing electronically issued boarding passes and kiosks, Ms. Harbin said. But industry experts say the transfer passes are important as Southwest faces more competition from JetBlue Airways Corp. and other low-cost carriers.
People will stand in lines for a low fare, but when there are other low-fare carriers that don''t make them stand in a second line, they''ll use them, said Mo Garfinkle, an independent aviation consultant based in the Washington, D.C., area.
The transfer passes also may encourage more Southwest passengers to use connecting flights, Mr. Garfinkle said. The vast majority of its passengers 76 percent travel from one city to another without connecting.
This will certainly make life easier for connections, Mr. Garfinkle said.
The downside is that an increase in connecting tickets could chip away at Southwest''s profit margin, since point-to-point tickets are more profitable. But with its airplanes running at about 70 percent full, there''s still plenty of capacity to take on connecting customers, Mr. Garfinkle said.
The drive to control costs has become harder for Southwest because its growth has slowed in recent years. Before the recession that began in early 2001 and the drop in passengers related to Sept. 11, Southwest grew at a 10 percent clip or better each year.
That kind of growth allowed the carrier to spread its costs over a growing number of seats or air mile units.
Southwest is still growing while nearly all other carriers are shrinking quickly but its annual rate has been slashed to about 4 percent to 5 percent. Southwest won''t add new cities to its network this year or next.
Still, Mr. Kelly said, more technology initiatives are on the way.
We''re studying everything, he said. We''ll go after the things that make sense to us.
By Eric Torbenson and Suzanne Marta
----------------
On 6/20/2003 3:16:05 PM AAmech wrote:
Well its good to see for once AA is at least better in one area than SW.
----------------
HUH?On 6/20/2003 3:16:05 PM AAmech wrote:
Well its good to see for once AA is at least better in one area than SW.
----------------
and all this time the TWU has been telling us they are for better wages, benefits, working conditions. Now we find out, they are really about more dues payers, at the expense of the profession.
The TRUTH is finally coming out!
- Aug 20, 2002
- 7,319
- 1,555
----------------
On 6/22/2003 9:43:18 AM AAmech wrote:
What in the heck are you talking about? Im commenting about how AA seems to have a much more efficient system to link up the proper paperwork with the planes undergoing maint checks.
----------------
Since the story was about lowering maintenance costs through the use of technology, it appeared to me that your post "Well its good to see for once AA is at least better in one area than SW" was indicating that you believed that Americans higher cost was a good thing?On 6/22/2003 9:43:18 AM AAmech wrote:
What in the heck are you talking about? Im commenting about how AA seems to have a much more efficient system to link up the proper paperwork with the planes undergoing maint checks.
----------------
- Aug 20, 2002
- 7,319
- 1,555
----------------
On 6/22/2003 10:22:44 AM KCFlyer wrote:
----------------
No, AA is not doing what Southwest is going to implement. Before the industry downturn, AA was going to add a tablet type device and it had made the testing stage. However AA has moved quite a bit of their paper to computer and is moving more everday. As for the dues issue, since you appear to be answering me, I said nothing concerning anything about dues. But I do understand RV4's position, AAmech condones every move by the TWU to maintain dues payers at the expense of wages and benefits. But we are all digressing, the topic concerns the lowering of Available Seat Miles through the use of technology. Thereby lowering the full maintenance cost and enabling Southwest to continue to pay the mechanics a substantial amount over that of the AA/TWU mechanics. The question then is how can Southwest pay so much more than American and commit to bring their heavy aircraft work in house?On 6/22/2003 10:22:44 AM KCFlyer wrote:
----------------
On 6/22/2003 9:58:44 AM Buck wrote:
----------------
Odd, what I picked up from AAMech was that AA must already be doing what Southwest is going to implement. I gathered absolutly nothing from te article about the TWU's desire to maintain dues paying members, although when you think about it, it seems that most businesses that depend on dues would want more members. Or do AMFA members still have to pay dues during layoffs to maintain their recall status?On 6/22/2003 9:58:44 AM Buck wrote:
----------------
On 6/22/2003 9:43:18 AM AAmech wrote:
What in the heck are you talking about? Im commenting about how AA seems to have a much more efficient system to link up the proper paperwork with the planes undergoing maint checks.
----------------
Since the story was about lowering maintenance costs through the use of technology, it appeared to me that your post "Well its good to see for once AA is at least better in one area than SW" was indicating that you believed that Americans higher cost was a good thing?On 6/22/2003 9:43:18 AM AAmech wrote:
What in the heck are you talking about? Im commenting about how AA seems to have a much more efficient system to link up the proper paperwork with the planes undergoing maint checks.
----------------
----------------
----------------
Pay dues on layoff status? Ya know even when I was drinking I never came up with that one.
On a side note, before J7915 attacks: No I do not know what the dollar per hour of the Southwest Heavy maintenance mechanic is. But can you answer me a similar question? What is the average wage of the Southwest maintenance program for the mechanics involved? Is it more or less than the SRP/OSM package?
KCFlyer
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 11,294
- 1,427
----------------
On 6/22/2003 9:58:44 AM Buck wrote:
----------------
Odd, what I picked up from AAMech was that AA must already be doing what Southwest is going to implement. I gathered absolutly nothing from te article about the TWU''s desire to maintain dues paying members, although when you think about it, it seems that most businesses that depend on dues would want more members. Or do AMFA members still have to pay dues during layoffs to maintain their recall status?On 6/22/2003 9:58:44 AM Buck wrote:
----------------
On 6/22/2003 9:43:18 AM AAmech wrote:
What in the heck are you talking about? Im commenting about how AA seems to have a much more efficient system to link up the proper paperwork with the planes undergoing maint checks.
----------------
Since the story was about lowering maintenance costs through the use of technology, it appeared to me that your post "Well its good to see for once AA is at least better in one area than SW" was indicating that you believed that Americans higher cost was a good thing?On 6/22/2003 9:43:18 AM AAmech wrote:
What in the heck are you talking about? Im commenting about how AA seems to have a much more efficient system to link up the proper paperwork with the planes undergoing maint checks.
----------------
----------------
- Aug 20, 2002
- 7,319
- 1,555
----------------
On 6/22/2003 11:17:48 AM will fix for food wrote:
I suspect the answer might lie with the 22 billion dollars of debt and the 6 billion dollars of retirement obligations AMR has to pay off. How much debt is SWA carrying?
----------------
I will be the first to admit that I know little about the financial side of the equation. American Airlines has for years posed the question, why can we not be like Southwest? It would appear that if labor costs are a key factor, then Southwest has 17% advantage over American, just at the top of the payscale. Then throw in the OSM/SRP classification and that number increases. Also remembering that Southwest has yet to bring their heavy maintenance in house. Southwest labor cost for their out sourced work is comparable to American "Outsourcing their maintenance In House" Which brings up another question. What is the outsourcing percentage at American? And when this question is answered, please answer in percentage of what amount of what part of the budget.On 6/22/2003 11:17:48 AM will fix for food wrote:
----------------
On 6/22/2003 10
28 AM Buck wrote:
The question then is how can Southwest pay so much more than American and commit to bring their heavy aircraft work in house?
----------------
On 6/22/2003 10
28 AM Buck wrote: The question then is how can Southwest pay so much more than American and commit to bring their heavy aircraft work in house?
----------------
I suspect the answer might lie with the 22 billion dollars of debt and the 6 billion dollars of retirement obligations AMR has to pay off. How much debt is SWA carrying?
----------------
will fix for food
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 664
- 50
----------------
On 6/22/2003 1028 AM Buck wrote:
The question then is how can Southwest pay so much more than American and commit to bring their heavy aircraft work in house?
----------------
On 6/22/2003 10
28 AM Buck wrote: The question then is how can Southwest pay so much more than American and commit to bring their heavy aircraft work in house?
----------------
I suspect the answer might lie with the 22 billion dollars of debt and the 6 billion dollars of retirement obligations AMR has to pay off. How much debt is SWA carrying?
Quote from Buck:
much deleted
>>>>No, AA is not doing what Southwest is going to implement. Before the industry downturn, AA was going to add a tablet type device and it had made the testing stage. However AA has moved quite a bit of their paper to computer and is moving more everday. As for the dues issue, since you appear to be answering me, I said nothing concerning anything about dues. But I do understand RV4''s position, AAmech condones every move by the TWU to maintain dues payers at the expense of wages and benefits. But we are all digressing, the topic concerns the lowering of Available Seat Miles through the use of technology. Thereby lowering the full maintenance cost and enabling Southwest to continue to pay the mechanics a substantial amount over that of the AA/TWU mechanics. The question then is how can Southwest pay so much more than American and commit to bring their heavy aircraft work in house?
Pay dues on layoff status? Ya know even when I was drinking I never came up with that one.
On a side note, before J7915 attacks: No I do not know what the dollar per hour of the Southwest Heavy maintenance mechanic is. But can you answer me a similar question? What is the average wage of the Southwest maintenance program for the mechanics involved? Is it more or less than the SRP/OSM package?"
much deleted
>>>>No, AA is not doing what Southwest is going to implement. Before the industry downturn, AA was going to add a tablet type device and it had made the testing stage. However AA has moved quite a bit of their paper to computer and is moving more everday. As for the dues issue, since you appear to be answering me, I said nothing concerning anything about dues. But I do understand RV4''s position, AAmech condones every move by the TWU to maintain dues payers at the expense of wages and benefits. But we are all digressing, the topic concerns the lowering of Available Seat Miles through the use of technology. Thereby lowering the full maintenance cost and enabling Southwest to continue to pay the mechanics a substantial amount over that of the AA/TWU mechanics. The question then is how can Southwest pay so much more than American and commit to bring their heavy aircraft work in house?
Pay dues on layoff status? Ya know even when I was drinking I never came up with that one.
On a side note, before J7915 attacks: No I do not know what the dollar per hour of the Southwest Heavy maintenance mechanic is. But can you answer me a similar question? What is the average wage of the Southwest maintenance program for the mechanics involved? Is it more or less than the SRP/OSM package?"
KCFlyer
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 11,294
- 1,427
----------------
On 6/22/2003 1028 AM Buck wrote:
On 6/22/2003 10
28 AM Buck wrote:
Pay dues on layoff status? Ya know even when I was drinking I never came up with that one.
----------------
I''ll tell you why I came up with that one. RV4 slams the TWU because he believes that they are only interested in having dues paying members. But AMFA is first and foremost a business....just like AA and the TWU. RIght now, their strategy seems to be to increase the number of dues paying members by converting the other airline mechanics to join their union. That''s a great business strategy. But what happens down the road when every airline has AMFA representing their mechanics, and in order to protect wages and benefits, the AMFA fights to have the source of their income laid off? The only business decision that I can see being made then (to cover the losses to the unions bank account) is to opt for some "reverse concessions" in the form of increased union dues to the remaining members. Does it matter if the extra dollars go back to the company or over to the union? Either way, it would appear that the net effect is the same. That''s why I wonder if you''ll have to pay dues on layoff, since without the source of funds, the union becomes financially weaker when implementing it''s plan of protecting the wages and benefits of it''s members. Sorry - but a business - even the business of a union, has to keep tabs on income. When income drops, something has to give.
- Aug 20, 2002
- 7,319
- 1,555
----------------
On 6/22/2003 2:18:21 PM KCFlyer wrote:
Pay dues on layoff status? Ya know even when I was drinking I never came up with that one.
----------------
I''ll tell you why I came up with that one. RV4 slams the TWU because he believes that they are only interested in having dues paying members. But AMFA is first and foremost a business....just like AA and the TWU. RIght now, their strategy seems to be to increase the number of dues paying members by converting the other airline mechanics to join their union. That''s a great business strategy. But what happens down the road when every airline has AMFA representing their mechanics, and in order to protect wages and benefits, the AMFA fights to have the source of their income laid off? The only business decision that I can see being made then (to cover the losses to the unions bank account) is to opt for some "reverse concessions" in the form of increased union dues to the remaining members. Does it matter if the extra dollars go back to the company or over to the union? Either way, it would appear that the net effect is the same. That''s why I wonder if you''ll have to pay dues on layoff, since without the source of funds, the union becomes financially weaker when implementing it''s plan of protecting the wages and benefits of it''s members. Sorry - but a business - even the business of a union, has to keep tabs on income. When income drops, something has to give.
On 6/22/2003 2:18:21 PM KCFlyer wrote:
----------------
On 6/22/2003 1028 AM Buck wrote:
On 6/22/2003 10
28 AM Buck wrote:
Pay dues on layoff status? Ya know even when I was drinking I never came up with that one.
----------------
I''ll tell you why I came up with that one. RV4 slams the TWU because he believes that they are only interested in having dues paying members. But AMFA is first and foremost a business....just like AA and the TWU. RIght now, their strategy seems to be to increase the number of dues paying members by converting the other airline mechanics to join their union. That''s a great business strategy. But what happens down the road when every airline has AMFA representing their mechanics, and in order to protect wages and benefits, the AMFA fights to have the source of their income laid off? The only business decision that I can see being made then (to cover the losses to the unions bank account) is to opt for some "reverse concessions" in the form of increased union dues to the remaining members. Does it matter if the extra dollars go back to the company or over to the union? Either way, it would appear that the net effect is the same. That''s why I wonder if you''ll have to pay dues on layoff, since without the source of funds, the union becomes financially weaker when implementing it''s plan of protecting the wages and benefits of it''s members. Sorry - but a business - even the business of a union, has to keep tabs on income. When income drops, something has to give.
----------------
The TWU needs to be slammed. They are only interested in the dues. They are not interested in the mechanic profession. What AMFA is, is an outlet that to remove the current form of union representation. I will tell you right now that if AMFA is not the answer, they will be removed. The difference is the member has rights under AMFA. AMFA is nothing like the TWU. The TWU is a socialist based organization, even to it''s constitutional core basics. Even the Stock Clerks have stated in TUL that every one in the TWU should be paid the same, except for the mechanic license premium. AMFA is not converting anyone. The membership of the industrial unions have pushed the mechanic craft and class to the edge. AMFA is just the administator of a grassroot movement to bring the mechanics under one umbrella. AMFA recognizes that the mechanics are skilled professionals and so should the airlines and public. The industrial unoins goal is to depress the wages of the mechanic to keep other members employeed. After all it is about cost to the airline. Look at the structure that Southwest operates under. Do you really believe that the TWU would allow the flight crews to pick up the cabin between flights? Prior to 1983 at American Airlines the airline industry was cyclical. As the economy shifted so did the employment at the airlines. Along comes the TWU and the B-scale and the union gains a permanent workforce; i.e. dues payers, and American gains lower cost and expansion. But it does not stop there. When good times returned the B-scale or the C-scale or SRP/OSM, what ever you want to call it, continued. The company prospered, the union kept it''s dues payers and everything was fine. Then mismangement, economic downtown, 9-11 and the internet hit the industry. At a time when the workforce needs to be streamlined, the TWU makes a deal to keep more workers; i.e. dues payers, at the behest of wages and benefits. And the rest of the industy just begging to follow the leader. So even if AMFA were to negotiate a contract that laid off workers, at least the wages and benefits that unions have historically fought for would remain. A tenet of the AFL-CIO is to better yourself through collective bargaining, not to concede. All of the old hands preached at me for years. Never, never give anything back. Yet these same people rolled over at the behest of the TWU to save dues payers. Unions do not need to worry about a bank account. Unions should be non-profit. Unlike the TWU, where in TUL they hold around $10,000,000.00 .....
So are you advocating that unions raise dues without the consent of the mebership?
Yes it matters where the dues go, if there is an excess then it should be returned to the membership. If there needs to be more revenue, then place this issue before the membership to vote on. The net effect is not the same. Why not try a little democracy and give the member some choice?
When income drops something has to give? Of course it does, you lay people off and or the airline raises fares. If the public does not like it they do not have to fly. It will work itself out.
KCFlyer
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 11,294
- 1,427
----------------
On 6/22/2003 2:52:23 PM Buck wrote:
When income drops something has to give? Of course it does, you lay people off and or the airline raises fares. If the public does not like it they do not have to fly. It will work itself out.
----------------
YOu miss my point. I''m not talking about the airline. I''m talking about the business of the union. When income falls because the membership is laid off, something has to give. How many votes will the AMFA allow before they either raise dues on their own, or before the AMFA becomes more focused on "job security"? How long will AMFA be willing to operate at a reduced income level while waiting for a vote. Will the shorfall in dues come from an affected airline, or will the increase be spread accross the other airlines? It''s admirable that a union purports to be their for mechanics. But never forget that they are a business - just like AA. When the "customers" are faced with increased fees, what option will they have?On 6/22/2003 2:52:23 PM Buck wrote:
When income drops something has to give? Of course it does, you lay people off and or the airline raises fares. If the public does not like it they do not have to fly. It will work itself out.
----------------
KCFlyer
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 11,294
- 1,427
----------------
On 6/22/2003 4:48:59 PM Buck wrote:
No I understand your point. The AMFA constitution limits the organization from doing just that. The members must decide. Even if the leadership of a local or at the national level attempt to implement a "business" increase it must be voted on per the constitution. If the leadership steps over this boundry they can be removed from office by the membership. This method has been removed from the TWU.
----------------
I respectfully submit to you that when the "business" of the union becomes severely impacted, you will see one of two things - an ammendment to their constitution, or the failure of their business.On 6/22/2003 4:48:59 PM Buck wrote:
No I understand your point. The AMFA constitution limits the organization from doing just that. The members must decide. Even if the leadership of a local or at the national level attempt to implement a "business" increase it must be voted on per the constitution. If the leadership steps over this boundry they can be removed from office by the membership. This method has been removed from the TWU.
----------------
