Aircraft maint issues

Those guys were the biggest pieces of poo. The best CCs I had, had good seniority smart good experience and cared about doing a good job. You know guys that did more in their career then placard coffee makers. We all know the type of crew chief I’m referring to.
I hear you, you have good ones and bad ones
 
[QUOTE You don't want to go that extra mile to make passengers happy if it means it will cut into profits.[/QUOTE]

The same can be said about AA and it's employees, obviously.
 
This new management team only looks at load factors and profit margins. You can gauge the load factors by looking at how many non revs don't get on. Passengers can complain and airport authorities can as well but as long as the loads are high that's all that matters to management. The company can tweak few things here and there but as long as it is cost effective. You don't want to go that extra mile to make passengers happy if it means it will cut into profits. I'm sure there is plenty of blame to go around but it always starts at the top to lead by example. I wonder how other airports compare to the west coast? Every city has weather issues and security issues.
They did not seem to care that some of their maintenance people were living in trailers out in the LAX parking lot because they had their step pay taken away. How can any company making billions justify taking money away from people who moved to a high priced location because AA promised to contractually lower the top out time to get people to work there.
 
images.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • images.jpeg
    images.jpeg
    11 KB · Views: 81
Those guys were the biggest pieces of poo. The best CCs I had, had good seniority smart good experience and cared about doing a good job. You know guys that did more in their career then placard coffee makers. We all know the type of crew chief I’m referring to.
I hear you, you have good ones and bad ones
I have always advocated against Crew Chief positions being based solely on occupational seniority. The last thing the crews need is an incompetent, lazy Crew Chief. There (if there is not already) should be a way for a crew to remove a Crew Chief who is unfit for the position, say a vote of no confidence.

There is something fundamentally flawed about a system who's only qualification for leadership is an occupational seniority date.
 
Pardon the intrusion of your topic. For you fellas following the industry, I just posted our unions updated T/A with all the articles and changes or no changes, in the SWA thread. RS schedule is attached as well.
 
I have always advocated against Crew Chief positions being based solely on occupational seniority. The last thing the crews need is an incompetent, lazy Crew Chief. There (if there is not already) should be a way for a crew to remove a Crew Chief who is unfit for the position, say a vote of no confidence.

There is something fundamentally flawed about a system who's only qualification for leadership is an occupational seniority date.
Even with ours for lead, you carry your seniority, you still have a probation period, and we have had guys that have not made it. I will help the guys , and get their parts, plus when they need to leave for something , they can.
 
ELIMINATE THE ASSOCIATION UPDATE

WE HAVE REACHED OUR $10000 GOAL
MEETING WILL BE NEXT
TUESDAY NIGHT AT 6:30 PM
ON TULSA BASE.
PLEASE COME AS WE MAKE HISTORY
YOU GUYS ARE SO AWESOME!!!!!

Absentee ballots for those who cant make the meeting.

CARD SIGNING TO BEGIN SOON
Next goal
2500 cards signed Tulsa Base
9000 cards signed system wide by Labor Day

HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY EVERYONE

SOUNDS GOOD.....But wait until the IAM tells its members they will lose their IAMNPF if they leave the IAM....
Just wait.........
 
SOUNDS GOOD.....But wait until the IAM tells its members they will lose their IAMNPF if they leave the IAM....
Just wait.........

I’m curious and we have discussed this in the past.

Do you feel that if the Mechanics were no longer being represented by the IAM that the IAMNPF should continue to collect funds from AA for individuals that they are no longer representing moving forward?

They wouldn’t tell them they’re going to lose their Pension and I’d hope no Mechanic is uneducated enough to believe that anyway.

They would tell them that their Pension will be frozen and until they have a new agreement with the Airline, AA would have to either hold or find a way to distribute the members contributions to them.

AA might have to put it in some type of bank account under their name and those Members might not be able to touch that money until they retire since the agreement was for retirement purposes?

Now I have heard arguments that AA doesn’t have to do anything and since the IAMPF will likely no longer accept contributions, those monies could be forfeit? I HIGHLY doubt that but I can understand the confusion.

And I don’t think as many LUS Mechanics are tied to the IAMNPF as you think Metal? Otherwise the IBT a few years back wouldn’t have received the votes they got.
 
I’m curious and we have discussed this in the past.

Do you feel that if the Mechanics were no longer being represented by the IAM that the IAMNPF should continue to collect funds from AA for individuals that they are no longer representing moving forward?

They wouldn’t tell them they’re going to lose their Pension and I’d hope no Mechanic is uneducated enough to believe that anyway.

They would tell them that their Pension will be frozen and until they have a new agreement with the Airline, AA would have to either hold or find a way to distribute the members contributions to them.

AA might have to put it in some type of bank account under their name and those Members might not be able to touch that money until they retire since the agreement was for retirement purposes?

Now I have heard arguments that AA doesn’t have to do anything and since the IAMPF will likely no longer accept contributions, those monies could be forfeit? I HIGHLY doubt that but I can understand the confusion.

And I don’t think as many LUS Mechanics are tied to the IAMNPF as you think Metal? Otherwise the IBT a few years back wouldn’t have received the votes they got.

Not trying to argue here, but para 3 and 4 are not accurate. The soon to be asso. (TWU/IAM) did in fact tell the members last time that they would lose, "LOSE" their pension when the card drive kicked into high gear. They (asso., TWU/IAM) never said it would only be frozen until renegotiated or a new retirement program was brought in until it was too late and all the mechanics were flooding the unions and the international. The soon to be asso. di use the pension as a tool to keep some members from signing cards and it did work for some.
Not insinuating anything here, but, a lot of folks did believe the unions that they would in fact lose their pensions, I along with a few others in the forums at the time was trying to get it across the membership that they would NOT lose their pensions that it would simply get frozen until something else was worked out with the new union coming in.
The big change was when the teamsters got involved and promised to get them into their pensions. The exact sake promises they made to the UAL guys and never came thru.
Again, not arguing, just pointing out facts from the past and they are still in those old forums that were started when the announcement of this asso. being created was announced. Feel free to research for yourself as there are hundreds and hundreds of pages to read thru as it went on for over a year.
Weez you were not in those forums from the very beginning, I believe you didn't start coming in until the TWU/IAM started feeling the drive was in fact starting to be felt by the two unions.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top