American Airlines and Labor Negotiations

[we're screwed]

Still waiting for ASSociation side by side comparison

In my opinion it's not coming. We are all just a bunch of mushrooms. Enjoy eating your s**t in the dark.

 

[WeAAsles]

In my opinion it's not coming. We are all just a bunch of mushrooms. Enjoy eating your s**t in the dark.

The Association has now decided to discontinue and refrain from any further communications with nitwits, knuckleheads, dimwits, goofballs, ignoramuses, malcontents and any other assorted groups of deplorable baskets of mentally challenged rock throwers.

It’s not a super long list but it is still fairly lengthy unfortunately.

 

[WeAAsles]

Well since the association has already agreed to 50% outsourcing in overhaul, I`d say no. This entire charade and posturing over "scope" and "jobs" has been a farce. A smokescreen to draw attention away from whatever the associations real intentions are.

With compliments from a friend.

Right now LUS farms out 50% of billable hours of heavy maintenance, and 100% of components can be farmed out and no line maintenance can be farmed out.

At LAA AA has the right to far out 35% of the maintenance budget which is heavy and line.

The Association ask is a protected headcount at Base, and minimum amount of line stations. And a small percentage of line to be outsourced. Also they are asking for a protected headcount for the shops. So the shops headcount is equal to a minimum of 25% of heavy maintenance headcount, this number is separate from the protected headcount in base.

So in reality more work will come back in-house under this proposal.

What is posted on the Association’s website is a PROPOSAL, not a TA.

No scope language has been agreed too.

 

[Deleted member 14439]

With compliments from a friend.

Right now LUS farms out 50% of billable hours of heavy maintenance, and 100% of components can be farmed out and no line maintenance can be farmed out.

At LAA AA has the right to far out 35% of the maintenance budget which is heavy and line.

The Association ask is a protected headcount at Base, and minimum amount of line stations. And a small percentage of line to be outsourced. Also they are asking for a protected headcount for the shops. So the shops headcount is equal to a minimum of 25% of heavy maintenance headcount, this number is separate from the protected headcount in base.

So in reality more work will come back in-house under this proposal.

What is posted on the Association’s website is a PROPOSAL, not a TA.

No scope language has been agreed too.

The company wants 50% overhaul man hours. The association proposes 50% overhaul man hours. Looks like that piece is pretty much a done deal to me. More work coming back in house?
Now thats funny.

 

[Kev3188]

This is where 700 came in handy. He knew how it all worked. But...

...but he repeatedly showed he couldn't control himself, and got bounced...

 

[dfw gen]

How about the IAM showing its support!

Dont be silly now. They dont do that.

 

[WeAAsles]

The company wants 50% overhaul man hours. The association proposes 50% overhaul man hours. Looks like that piece is pretty much a done deal to me. More work coming back in house?
Now thats funny.

Dude I’m not going to go back and forth on this with you. I told you that it’s not my area of expertise and I was only sharing what I asked a friend to write for me.

All the posters who had the most technical expertise were run off of here long ago.

I use to really enjoy reading their input.

 

[WeAAsles]

Dont be silly now. They dont do that.

You’re minimizing the contributions of those like that guy in FLL who are. He was there last Friday also. He’s an IAM Committeeman.

 

[ALUS78]

It's pretty clear that some people on here have no idea what outsourcing actually costs.



And we usually expect you to respond w/o fully understanding the post you're replying to. You did not disappoint.

Yeah the Weez just jumped down my throat then tried to justify it,Usually you do that with a love one,so im kind of flattered

 

[ALUS78]

I guess I should have been clear when speaking of the Ass deicing proposal.
I’m speaking of the additional cities they are asking for not the ones that the company has proposed remain with deicing
And I don’t agree that outsourcing cost more than us doing the work if that were true then why in the hell would the company want that. The total package of us doing work that only is done a portion of the year and maintaining the workforce to do it with paying our higher pay and benefits is more than a single outsourced contract.
I’m not saying we should just turn it all over but the company has allowed for some stations to maintain some of this work.
Again the Ass needs to look into other areas that would be agreeable to break this stalemate if that’s even possible at this point

I explained the situation and circumstances in one station.No extra people are hired for the task just OT.You also might want have to take a look how conscientious the contract people are performing deicing.You want someone who knows what theyre doing .

 

[ALUS78]

I'm not sure I understand why some folks don't see the picture. Instead you just continually harp on the Ass for this and that.. I don't care what comparo they put out, the company's crap is just that, crap. The scope alone should be enough to stop you in your track, article 5 missing, alone should be enough, all the other things I've brought up after listening to the podcasts should be enough.

Think about it, on the line, getting rid of close to 600 move crew jobs, 500 avionics jobs from around the system is going have a huge ripple, forcing lots of people back to midnights. Those jobs are premium shift and days off jobs,. Now lets take it one step further, the company proposal is for move crew to just move ots, well the vast majority of moves are in service, making room on the gates for inbound flights. So, fleet wont be doing the moves, there scope limits them to loading and unloading. So, whom do you think is going to do all those moves?

A VENDOR..

This piece alone should give anyone cause to think hard before wanting to vote on the companies crap. Not to mention all the other things.

No fleet did it at LUS at.least at LGA reluctantly i might add the DR3 could be a pain for some Our AMTs didnt want to do ii,we are a small but extremely busy airport pain to get on taxi ways

 

[1986Mekanic]

I think the Company actually does want to transfer flight movements on to us in Fleet. Obviously under any other circumstances we would welcome capturing that work but as of now it’s Fleets contention that that work is yours.

In a perfect World I’d love it if we picked back up Mail handling and you keep your move crews.

I believe it would be wrong to migrate work from one class to another, especially in light of the amount of AMT positions lost off the seniority list as a result.

Im remiss to say I have not listened to or read the crap the company put out on fleet side. Is there language giving you guys moves?

 

[WeAAsles]

I believe it would be wrong to migrate work from one class to another, especially in light of the amount of AMT positions lost off the seniority list as a result.

Im remiss to say I have not listened to or read the crap the company put out on fleet side. Is there language giving you guys moves?

Company proposal.

 

[bigjets]

Company proposal.

View attachment 14453

Is this same type of language in all contracts? I know our tech crew chief instructors go to out stations and train FSCs to run APUs talk on radios brake ride and tow airplanes on taxiways. And that was over 15 years ago.

 

[Rogallo]

Except he was not lying. Here is a quote from yesterdays association update.

"We know that some portions of these original proposals would have forced the Company into hiring more members than maybe they wanted, but as the world’s largest airline, it seemed to the Association that this fell in line with their promise of doing the right thing for their workers."

Ok, not that time!