Delta Air Lines to Build Heavy Maintenance Facility in Queretaro, Mexico

[southwind]

Just curious if the DL mechanics have anything to protect more work from being done in the new Mexican facility in the future?

Just curious if AA mechanics have anything to protect them from paycuts, layoffs or outsourcing in the near future ? Does "ANY" airline mechanic ?

But to sum it all up, they have zero protection should the company decide to shift more work to Mexico, correct? I had pretty much expected a page long response, while still skirting around the real issue.
Not to mention the future in house work that this could take away as well. I must say that this is the first time that I have seen someone attempt to put a positive spin on a US company promoting jobs in Mexico.

Not putting a positive spin on anything here but, see reply above!

It's a global business, but you know damn well why the airlines have resorted to going out of the country for their mtc needs. Cheap labor, and it enables them to reduce their own headcount. I don't really have to spell it out for you do I? Same crap with outsourcing res and ramp work. It's been monkey see monkey do with cutting away at decent airline jobs, but being that you were management, I have to remember how you view it.

Not sticking up for the Man here but, there are a lot more reasons company's outsource, than just cheap labor ! Try "Regulations" ! EPA, FAA,OSHA,ETC. and don't forget the "Anointed One's" 4200 new regulations ! Hell............who "COULD" afford to run a business in the U.S.

No one said it was the exclusive domain of DL; this thread just happens to be discussing them. A lesser problem =/= no problem.
It wouldn't surprise me. BTW, is the loss of 13's as big of deal down there as people are making it sound? Might be another straw on the camel's back...

Yes............a lot of pissed-off people over the 13's ! Each shift had there benefits. M-Th days 10hrs, had night's and weekends to spend with their family,M-Th 2nds 10 hrs, had weekends with their family. Fri-Sun days 13.3 had 4 days a week off and now has been changed to 4 10hr days Fri-Mon. And yes I was working the 13's.............no benefit to me now, so bidding 4 10's Mon-Th !

Ouch. I had not seen that little tidbit.
I do remember Richard's statement about not being in the maintenance business. He has not changed since his Larenzo lawyering days.

"Delta moving its hangars in that area to former Ford plant land the airport acquired last year."
Big deal ! Hell, I think they need to move Engine Maint. to Tara Field, down by the racetrack !

Why didn't DL gut the entire maintenance system during Chpt 11? You can say higher valve work stayed in house, Yea that is the sound bite. The truth is they couldn't find anyone at the time that could promise the PSV work on the time frame they wanted. Everyone wanted more time to do the checks. A prime example is the NW fleet which is still mostly done at MRO's. An L check on a 757 takes 11 days. We just did one in ATL. We turned the aircraft in seven days, under budget. Another is in the dock in the TOC. I think the turn times on the Airbus are also down for the ones done at the TOC. We are going to be doing another line of them next year while there is slack in the 737 line.

Say WHAT ? All that, without union representation ?

Not playing until you recognize that a job lost in city X is still a job lost. You can sing about DL "shifting resources" all you want. At the end of the day, if the person doesn't go, they've lost their job. it's even worse when you factor in that DL employees don't own their seniority, and can't exercise on the system during a reduction in force.
Furthermore, as people are retiring or taking EO packages, those positions aren't being backfilled. The (now vacant) positions simply vanish into the ether...

Really ? I seem to be remember exercising my seniority, along with all of maint. during the Rif's we went though !
Hmmm, TechOps' was hiring AMT's and ASM's up until a month ago !

Kev, ever think about moseying over to a job in the defense industry? Government money and highly unionized, a lot of it IAM.

I second that !

Some people see things one-sided. Sometimes you actually have to look beyond the box.(see signature).

I've worked non-union shops. My experience-raises are far and in between, work gets harder, termination can occur at any screw-up, etc., so basically a negative experience. I've been union since 1983...then came the ATCs...and found that unions had to settle, and blah blah blah. I know where I stand with my union and am ok with it.

The thing is that talking to non-union employees, they are very happy with their wages and benefits, and have no fear that their job will be abolished. Perhaps it takes a certain person to be ok without unions. Me? I wouldn't make it! But you can't accuse Delta of intimidating employees, if they've been there for years they like, er, ah, love their jobs.

Yes, I am
V V V V V

I have "YET" to see an employee lose his job, for "ANYTHING" other than a failed drug test ! Seen them walked-out and walked back in, after using the resolution council.........almost as if they had a union !

Those Delta sheep will never threaten to get a union to push their wages up..They are drinking the kool-aid over there. They are content riding the coattails of union members at other companies who fight for industry wages they enjoy today and they do not have to pay union dues. FX is the same way these guys are paid second only to UPS and they too have never had to fight for what they have.

Err.............our wages just went up and are going up again in January ! Mind telling us whose coattails we rode this time ?

 

[BoeingBoy]

Jim,
I complete agree with the idea that the value of outsourcing can be measured based on the value of work lost to American workers if that is the intent. That, however, is not the basis for determining total maintenance costs – that is done on the basis of the value of the contract for outsourcing compared to DL’s total maintenance costs.
You could equally argue about the value of manufacturing jobs lost to China but, honestly, what is the point? Walk into Best Buy and try to buy a product built in the USA and there will be huge swaths of the store where you won’t find a single product in a category.
The question is whether there are ANY products or services that are still made in the USA – and the answer is unequivocally that there are.

If all you're concerned about is the total cost of maintenance for an airline, there would be little in-house maintenance left - possibly some line maintenance at the hubs. Everything else can be outsourced and airline maintenance will look like much of a Best Buy store. So much for U.S. airline employees sharing the rewards of a successful company - despite your remarks that employees should do so.

You still haven't admitted that using dollars as a measure of off-shore maintenance under-reports the amount of outsourcing. If a heavy check costs $100,000 to perform in a carrier's U.S. facilities but only $80,000 to have it done in Latin America/Asia, the $20,000 difference shows up as lower cost but not as outsourced maintenance. Yet it represents work lost to U.S. based mechanics So management gets a bigger bonus for cutting costs while workers get laid off. Again, where does your rhetoric about workers sharing in the good times fit into this?

Jim

 

[Kev3188]

Not sticking up for the Man here but, there are a lot more reasons company's outsource, than just cheap labor ! Try "Regulations" ! EPA, FAA,OSHA,ETC. and don't forget the "Anointed One's" 4200 new regulations ! Hell............who "COULD" afford to run a business in the U.S.

I'm actually a big fan of DL's both their Environmental program(s), and the participation in OSHA's VPP projects. It's much more involved at the local level than NW was. Safety & health themselves have a long way to go, though...

Yes............a lot of pissed-off people over the 13's ! Each shift had there benefits. M-Th days 10hrs, had night's and weekends to spend with their family,M-Th 2nds 10 hrs, had weekends with their family. Fri-Sun days 13.3 had 4 days a week off and now has been changed to 4 10hr days Fri-Mon. And yes I was working the 13's.............no benefit to me now, so bidding 4 10's Mon-Th !

I'm truly sorry to see that. If we had 13.3's in ACS, I'd jump on it in a heartbeat. They're also a fairly simple (and cheap) way to keep people happy. Why fix what's not broke? The reasons cited by mgmt. seem like a reach to me?

Really ? I seem to be remember exercising my seniority, along with all of maint. during the Rif's we went though !
Hmmm, TechOps' was hiring AMT's and ASM's up until a month ago !

Can't do it in ACS.

I have "YET" to see an employee lose his job, for "ANYTHING" other than a failed drug test ! Seen them walked-out and walked back in, after using the resolution council.........almost as if they had a union !

Transfer to ACS or IFS. You can see plenty of them.

 

[southwind]

To be honest about the 13.3 hour work day, most of us believe it was some of the "NEW" management that didn't like the fact, that if you were topped out, with 4 weeks vacation, 7 ppt days and 10 holidays and worked no OT all year, you were on the premises approx. 130 out of the year !
Didn't matter that you still put your 40 a week in, gave your weekends up, got the same amount of days off that someone working 8 and 10 hour shifts. I think that 130 days a year just got under someones skin !
And btw, weekend shift, in our shop , had more output than all other shifts !
So, Kev, while I don't promote a union, I will still be honest about my likes and dislikes !
This move did not benefit our shop, and I'm sure many others, one bit and am sure that by this time next year, they'll realize it bit them in the ass !

 

[Kev3188]

To be honest about the 13.3 hour work day, most of us believe it was some of the "NEW" management that didn't like the fact, that if you were topped out, with 4 weeks vacation, 7 ppt days and 10 holidays and worked no OT all year, you were on the premises approx. 130 out of the year !

Obviously I'm not there, but that's kind of the vibe I got, with a weak rationale as a "cover" reason...

And btw, weekend shift, in our shop , had more output than all other shifts !

Funny how that works, isn't it?

This move did not benefit our shop, and I'm sure many others, one bit and am sure that by this time next year, they'll realize it bit them in the ass !

I suspect you're right- all the more so if some people are granted "hardships" to stay on them, while others are not.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I second that !

Glad you two are communicating but I DON’T want Kev to leave DL nor do I want to promote the message that he or anyone who disagrees w/ what DL is or does should leave. That is NOT healthy for ANY organization.
The challenge is to learn to resolve conflict peacefully and constructively and it is one of the most difficult tasks on the planet; there is much more likelihood of casualties than successes.

If all you're concerned about is the total cost of maintenance for an airline, there would be little in-house maintenance left - possibly some line maintenance at the hubs. Everything else can be outsourced and airline maintenance will look like much of a Best Buy store. So much for U.S. airline employees sharing the rewards of a successful company - despite your remarks that employees should do so.

You still haven't admitted that using dollars as a measure of off-shore maintenance under-reports the amount of outsourcing. If a heavy check costs $100,000 to perform in a carrier's U.S. facilities but only $80,000 to have it done in Latin America/Asia, the $20,000 difference shows up as lower cost but not as outsourced maintenance. Yet it represents work lost to U.S. based mechanics So management gets a bigger bonus for cutting costs while workers get laid off. Again, where does your rhetoric about workers sharing in the good times fit into this?

Jim

I never said cost was the sole metric for anything… but DL is a profit-motivated business which means they cannot ignore costs indefinitely.

And there are indeed many airline employees that receive profit sharing because on the company’s ability to improve profitability. It is not at all a given that labor will suffer at the hands of mgmt – but it makes a good emotional soundpoint – until someone points out that it is only partially true.

I have indeed spoken about measuring outsourcing in US dollars as the basis of the value of the work that was lost.
Other than for the purposes of highlighting that value to labor, the statistic is w/o meaning –or ability to act on it. Someone can correct me, but I don’t think any US airline has any scope restrictions that are based on the value of work that has been lost – but rather on limits to what outsourced work can do.
It doesn’t make any more sense to measure outsourced work on the basis of what it would have cost if the work had been in the original shop than it is to stick a note on the side of one’s computer showing how much the computer would have cost if all computers had been made in the US. Even if “your” computer is made in the US, there was an enormous cost to US workers in moving electronics manufacturing (as it existed at the time) out of the US.

And the real question is what you do with that info… which is why it is more valuable to promote the jobs of as many US workers as possible.

But, once again, the calculation for DL and other carriers that insource MUST include the value of the work that is done there.
And let’s keep in mind that the work that DL Tech Ops lands in the US is paid for in US dollars at rates that pay the salaries of US workers…. thus, on a dollar for dollar basis of insourcing vs. outsourcing, DL Tech Ops outsources a net of about 15% of its total maintenance spend, and that is after merging w/ a carrier that had virtually no in-house maintenance capabilities left and also while DL is doing a massive amount of fleet mods. Since some of DL’s fleet mods are being done in-house, it is hard to know how much is done via outsourcing but the COMBINED value of DL’s insourcing plus what DL is spending on fleet mods (regardless of whether in-house or outsourced) is more than $1B per year – which is 25% more than they spend on outsourced maintenance.

Can't do it in ACS.


Transfer to ACS or IFS. You can see plenty of them.

To clarify – I’m not sure that Southwind is answering the correct question – can DL Tech Ops employees bump another employee out of an existing position. He or another Tech Ops employee can reply but I don’t think they can – but I am certainly willing to be shown wrong.
DL’s policy in every other ground dept. is that an employee cannot bump another employee out of their job INCLUDING in a reduction in force. If Tech Ops allows RIF bumping by system seniority, they are the only ground department that allows it, so far as I know.
Just because an employee is walked out doesn’t mean that DL is capriciously terminating them w/o cause. I can almost guarantee you that there is no shortage of documentation regarding performance and there has been ample opportunity for the employee to respond.
If a DL employee is being terminating w/o documentation, then they should see a lawyer.
Unionized airlines might not do performance evaluations but it is most certainly possible to be terminated for some of the same issues that DL uses to terminate employees – with cause.
Focusing on the lack of a system seniority policy during RIFs raises the question of what value that policy actually would have.
Has DL closed any ACS station since the merger? What existing stations are vulnerable to closure if that policy is needed? The other side of the equation is that DL uses ready reserves as a buffer to help protect the jobs of FT employees – and it has been that way for decades. In ACS, the use of RR’s probably eliminates any cost advantage of closing an existing station to DL mainline personnel and then replacing them w/ contract employees. If DL has to lay off FT personnel in ACS, the company as a whole will either be in very serious trouble or the whole category of ACS employees will be eliminated, making a system bumping policy mute.
Help me if I am missing something here.

 

[BoeingBoy]

I never said cost was the sole metric for anything…

<snip>

Other than for the purposes of highlighting that value to labor, the statistic is w/o meaning &ndash;or ability to act on it..

True, you never claimed that there weren't other metrics for measuring outsourcing, just that those other metrics were without meaning. Leaving only one meaningful metric that could possibly be used...

A "statistic w/o meaning"....precisely what management likes. Any meaning desired can be given to a "statistic without meaning." And you ask for an example of another carrier who uses the cost of the work that is being outsourced as a basis for comparison when management loves such slippery language as you espouse.

It doesn&rsquo;t make any more sense to measure outsourced work on the basis of what it would have cost if the work had been in the original shop than it is to stick a note on the side of one&rsquo;s computer showing how much the computer would have cost if all computers had been made in the US. Even if &ldquo;your&rdquo; computer is made in the US, there was an enormous cost to US workers in moving electronics manufacturing (as it existed at the time) out of the US.

It should make absolute sense to a union negotiating a contract that allows outsourcing, no matter what is being outsourced - RJ flying, ground handling, maintenance, whatever. As I've said, outsourcing to the lowest bidder understates the amount of outsourcing so a contract written to define the allowable amount of outsourcing to a percentage of total spend allows more outsourcing than the percentage allowed based on previous cost of what is to be outsourced. That equals more lost jobs, full time forced to part time, etc. In other words, a recipe for maximizing the jobs lost. Hardly keeping the most jobs possible.

For the more obtuse, a simple example using relatively small round numbers. Carrier A spends $100 million on in-house maintenance and wants to outsource 25% of that. (NOTE: sounds like $25 million can be oursourced) Union signs contract allowing "25% of total maintenance expense can be outsourced. So outsourcing reduces maintenance spend to $80 million, of which 25% can be outsourced - another $20 million on top of the $20 million already saved. That 25% outsourcing maximum results in $40 million of previous in-house maintenance work being lost - NOTE that that's 40% of previous in-house spend. Language that was supposed to save 3 of every 4 jobs ends up costing 40% of the workers their jobs.

But by all means continue touting that "only meaningful statistic" for measuring outsourcing...

Jim

 

[WorldTraveler]

I don't disagree with you, Jim.
I'm simply saying that the value of outsourced maintenance is expressed as the cost of maintenance NOT done in house relative to the total spend - which includes the total of insourced and outsourced maintenance costs.

From the perspective of keeping a lid on growing outsourcing, the wrong metrics are not being used which means the problem will likely only grow.
But the other side is that I haven't heard labor say they are able to hold mgmt's feet to a stricter definition which raises the issue of how effective scope clauses really are if they don't measure the right thing.

The best "scope clause" is demonstrating your ability to compete against the best providers in the world.... you might not be able to do every job they can do at the same price they can charge, but there are alot of things that Americans can do and compete w/ the world, esp. in a world like aviation where there really are fairly consistent global standards - often set by the manufacturers. Other industries are far more fragmented and thus more susceptible to significant swings in quality which allows low quality outsourcing to develop.

 

[BoeingBoy]

I don't disagree with you, Jim.
I'm simply saying that the value of outsourced maintenance is expressed as the cost of maintenance NOT done in house relative to the total spend - which includes the total of insourced and outsourced maintenance costs.

Nope, you've said that that is the only meaningful metric than can be used...anything else is "a statictic w/o meaning."

By pushing the "dollars outourced vs total spend" you're pushing an agenda of more outsourcing - I've said and demonstrated how the "outsourced/total spend" argument allows more outsourcing. Of course, the BTS and MIT aren't talking about their jobs being outsourced because of the metric they chose so it's just a matter of math to them - just reporting "the facts" as you like to say. And management will gladly go along with that "standard" since it allows more outsourcing than advertised. You just need to say whether you're on the "more jobs" for the workers side or the management side...

Jim

 

[WorldTraveler]

You would like to turn it into an us vs them discussion but it is a matter of how money is accounted for because that is the way businesses operate. They don't account for costs they don't incur.

If you'd like to start a campaign to revamp accounting practices, jump right in. I might even support your logic on this one.

If the purpose is to account for the way labor unions account for lost jobs, you might want to start your campaign with them.

 

[Kev3188]

If a DL employee is being terminating w/o documentation, then they should see a lawyer.

For what?

For someone that claims to have a wide swath of knowledge regarding employment law, you repeatedly (purposely?) dismiss the At Will employment doctrine, and just what that entails. Why is that? What part of "... at any time, for any reason" do you not get? The ONLY recourse would be if a termination were explicitly against protected class status.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I don't dismiss it... I just don't buy that DL walks away from its corporate standards just because they can. DL doesn't have 50 sets of employment practices in the US; their processes of documentation meet the standards of even states that are not At Will.

If this avalanche of dismissals were really based on DL's practice to walk people out, there would be far more coming to light.

The reality is that there are people who don't cut the mustard and DL does have the right in ANY state to terminate an employee who fails to perform according to the performance standards that have been established. And there is documentation to show that those people were counseled and did not respond to the counsel... certain activities such as theft of property or money don't require multiple warnings as long as there is proof showing that what was alleged actually occurred. Theft includes unauthorized and willful circumvention of DL's revenue control systems for personal gain, BTW.

Your goal obviously is to show that only a union can provide your expectations of pay, benefits, and job security.

My question - a very reasonable one - is to ask for proof that DL employees are really any worse off - or that unionized employees are really better off - and I have yet to hear of much in terms of valid arguments. Dawg does the best job with his comments about UA mechanics.... and my comment to that is that comparisons between companies are never constant and there genuinely are differences between certain classes... but there are also factors that get glossed over and that I bring to light. If it is worth leaving to chase a salar benefit for a few years - and perhaps longer, then go for it.

Discussions of numerous ad hoc cases of dismissal which really can't be proven and about which you really don't know what has transpired between DL mgmt and those employees is not sufficient proof to show that DL employees are being capriciously walked off the job.

I'm truly open to hearing the proof- I just haven't heard it presented yet.

No more discussion about the system RIF protection?

 

[Kev3188]

Any time for any reason...

 

[WorldTraveler]

theoretically, yes, but in practice not yet proven.

 

[BoeingBoy]

You would like to turn it into an us vs them discussion but it is a matter of how money is accounted for because that is the way businesses operate. They don't account for costs they don't incur.

How wrong...

Every company accounts for costs that can be eliminated and thus not incurred. Every negotiating session accounts for costs that may be incurred or eliminated if the company agrees with the union on higher pay rates, different outsourcing formulas, changes to benefits. You see, management wants to know what costs it may incur less or more of and how much less or more. How wlse would they know whether outsourcing is desirable or not?

Apparently you're fine with management using statistics "w/o merit" but don't want the employees to have the same freedom...

Jim