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

[wings396]

Any time for any reason...

I have seen several people shown the door over my career, some here prior to being unionized, and some at another employer. When the company is in that position, they can make anything look anyway they wish. Without the employee having a fair grievance procedure in place, they are screwed.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Costs that are used in negotiations are not publicly cited statistics. Of course, companies calclulate costs for purposes of negotiations but those numbers are used in the negotiations. They do not form the basis of incurred costs.

Companies DO NOT account for costs on their financial statements that are not incurred. Maintenance that COULD have been done in-house but was outsourced is not a cost companies carry on their financial statements.

The original citation was to BTS and SEC statistics which do reflect the financial statements of a company.

Once again, I don't disagree w/ your purpose -that is just not the way accounting works.

If you wish to highlight the costs that have been avoided through outsourcing, then get someone besides the company that keeps the books to keep the tab going... because they won't do it.
And then you can figure out how to use the numbers when you actually come up with them.

Just be sure that you include the value of insourcing - because it is a two-way street even if some people don't want to acknowledge that reality.

Let me know how you will implement your plan.

I have seen several people shown the door over my career, some here prior to being unionized, and some at another employer. When the company is in that position, they can make anything look anyway they wish. Without the employee having a fair grievance procedure in place, they are screwed.

And your assumption is that there is not a fair grievance procedure just because DL is non-union.

The fact is that DL does have appeals processes for HR decisions and the process is cited in DL documents which all employees have access to - and so do lawyers.

The notion that DL capriciously lays off people without reason or documentation is simply not accurate.

Kev might want to check all of the documentation that is available on his employer's internal website... those processes are well detailed.

 

[wings396]

I'm not refering to furloughs, we're talking terminations here. I've seen some shady stuff take place, and it was at a major company outside of the industry. Documentation is easy to build, and can be done in a one sided fashion without the employee even knowing a case is being built against them. Can you honestly say that you have never witnessed anyone ever terminated from Delta just because someone perhaps had it out for them? People can be setup to fail if there is enough force behind it.

 

[WorldTraveler]

and there is a documented termination process and an appeals process. Yes, anyone can have a vindictive boss which is exactly why there is an appeals process... and you don't have to wait until you are terminated in order to start using it.

Attempts to paint a non-union environment as unable to provide employee protection that a union environment could is simply not accurate. If Kevin looked at the same documentation he wants others to look at to build his case, he would find that what he says is simply not accurate.
He stopped at the first page of a manual that contains hundreds if not thousands of pages and in so doing construed far more from two paragraphs than what is actually said.

DL has an appeals process as does any employer of DL's size - unionized or not.

The notion that unions can protect employee jobs for offenses that a non-union employer does terminate employees is patently false.

 

[Kev3188]

I have seen several people shown the door over my career, some here prior to being unionized, and some at another employer. When the company is in that position, they can make anything look anyway they wish. Without the employee having a fair grievance procedure in place, they are screwed.

Exactly.

And your assumption is that there is not a fair grievance procedure just because DL is non-union.

Not only is there no "fair" grievance procedure, there's NO grievance procedure. If you think one exists for non-contract people, by all means point us to where we can find it.

The fact is that DL does have appeals processes for HR decisions and the process is cited in DL documents which all employees have access to - and so do lawyers.

You mean the CRP? The one where a manager still can overturn the verdict, even when an employee's peers recommend a return to service?

The notion that DL capriciously lays off people without reason or documentation is simply not accurate.

You sure? There's plenty of people now on the street that would disagree with you.

Kev might want to check all of the documentation that is available on his employer's internal website... those processes are well detailed.

You mean the documentation that you claimed to be well versed in, only to later backpedal and admit you hadn't read it in a few years?

Yep, there's lots in there. Here's what you WON'T find:

The right to a witness while being questioned by the company
The right to refute statements made against you
The right to cross examine (my term) your accuser
The right to provide evidence on your behalf
The right to read/review documentation made in your employee file

And of course, kicking off that "lots of documentation" is the ol' "at any time for any reason" preamble. Which of course is followed by the "reserving of the right to modify" said policies and procedures at any time...

I'm not refering to furloughs, we're talking terminations here. I've seen some shady stuff take place, and it was at a major company outside of the industry. Documentation is easy to build, and can be done in a one sided fashion without the employee even knowing a case is being built against them. Can you honestly say that you have never witnessed anyone ever terminated from Delta just because someone perhaps had it out for them? People can be setup to fail if there is enough force behind it.

See above...

and there is a documented termination process and an appeals process. Yes, anyone can have a vindictive boss which is exactly why there is an appeals process... and you don't have to wait until you are terminated in order to start using it.

See above.

 

[wings396]

Come on WT, all a Mgr. needs is one of his good old boy buddies a little further up the food chain to help him squash any hopes the said employee may have had at his fair shake. I'm sure you've seen all of the Managers buddy-up at those meetings over the years, hell I'm not a mgr, and I have seen what goes on when a regional comes to visit.
I have yet to see anyone from upper management make one of their own look bad to save an employees arse.

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

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 .

You have to be kidding us.

So Delta is going to keep the OH in the vast open hangar space in the United States because they (their AMT's) are the best provider.

AA will keep AFW because their turn times are far superior to any other facility in the world that does the same work.

No need for a union scope clause with all that going for them.

Is that why the new facility is being built in Mexico?

Yep, no need for scope clause with all that.

You contradict yourself with your pandering.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Costs that are used in negotiations are not publicly cited statistics. Of course, companies calclulate costs for purposes of negotiations but those numbers are used in the negotiations. They do not form the basis of incurred costs.

Companies DO NOT account for costs on their financial statements that are not incurred. Maintenance that COULD have been done in-house but was outsourced is not a cost companies carry on their financial statements.

The original citation was to BTS and SEC statistics which do reflect the financial statements of a company.

I guess we're back to the BTS data (and that derived from it) being good or bad depending on whether it makes your "facts" right...

At least you finally admitted the truth - companies use non-incurred cost data all the time but don't necessarilly make it publicly available. Except for when it's to management's benefit to make it available...an anticipated non-incurred fuel expense because of a refinery purchase comes to mind...(wasn't that in financial statements???)

So I'd say that that's close enough to be an admission that you want to stick labor with using only metrics "with a meaning" you'll accept while management gets free reign to pick and use whatever metrics make their case...

Jim

 

[WorldTraveler]

Jim,
The obvious reason why non-incurred fuel data is shown on financial statements is because it is HEDGED in a financial transaction for which the company exchanges money or the promise of it if they are wrong. There is no hedging of labor costs, unionized or not.
Non-incurred labor costs do not show up on any company’s financial statements in any form.
Companies –and labor unions - compare incurred and non-incurred costs for the purpose of negotiating labor contracts – but only the final costs of the agreed upon contract become public.
That’s the way the process works, Jim.
If you want to convince companies to change the way they are required to account for costs to show the costs they did not incur, go for it. And let me know how it all works out.

Glenn,
Any airline is going to use the same principle for its maintenance work as it uses for any other cost – seek the best quality at the lowest cost. If you or others expect that DL will pay its mechanics just to keep a US payroll large, you will be in for a surprise. Thankfully, few DL mechanics believe that line of thought and do high quality work that competes with the best global providers.
The Mexico hangar is being opened because it is part of the maintenance joint venture with AM in which each partner does work which it is most specialized in and capable of doing on the same basis – best quality and lowest price. That is why DL’s effective outsourcing is about 15% if you factor in the insourcing DL does and even that number is bloated because of the aircraft mods that DL is doing.
Your own peers acknowledge that ATL’s Tech Ops facilities are full and they fill available space with work when it becomes available.
Given that DL is retiring a number of older aircraft in the next few years and its burst of mod activity will die down, Tech Ops is likely the right size for Delta.
BTW, in your fears that DL will outsource more maintenance, you might want to factor in that AA is soaking up huge amounts of MRO capacity as it implements outsourcing contracts in a very short order that will far surpass the size of NW’s.

Kev,
DL does have a peer appeal process and if you aren’t aware – I’m sure you really are, though – search for “appeals process” and then look at the HRPM and APM, some of which you must be on a DL owned computer to access.
The process you described is a criminal law process. If unions have succeeded in creating a process based on criminal law, then they are not addressing the real issue since employment is governed by employment.
DL’s appeals process absolutely does result at times in employees walking out of the appeals process and back onto the job. One of your own active employee colleagues has stated as much. It is fantastical to think DL is capable of stacking the appeals process with your peers of DL’s choosing that will continually back mgmt at the expense of their employees is not supported by the reality that your peers very much do side with employees – and there are statements showing that to be true.
If your expectation is that there will never be expectations of performance for DL employees and that any attempt to hold employees to that standard is wrong, then you will be mistaken and you will also find little support from your DL peers on that point. At times, there will be DL employees, as with any large group of employees who either are not capable of producing at the levels DL expects or who engage in activity or behavior which DL says is incompatible with even reasonable expectations between a company and an employee.
The vast majority of people in the US do not want to work alongside someone who cannot or will not do their job – and the 99+% of employees who do their job have absolutely no problem with expectations about doing their job and being held to those standards via a performance evaluation process.
There are a lot of PMNW employees who now subject to performance evaluations after years of not being a part of that process. It is a given that there will be employees, regardless of PMNW, PMDL, ex-PA, or new hire within 6 months that will wash out of the process.
But there is indeed a process for informing those personnel that their performance is lacking, detailed expectations about what has to be done to correct that performance, and definite timelines for avoiding escalation of the matter.
Four years after the merger was announced, it is obvious that your goal remains to convince DL people that they need unions. I commend you for your convictions and your willingness to fight for what matters to you. But since you have taken your campaign to a non-DL employee website, presumably to reach a bigger audience, then you subject yourself to being fact-checked by people like me who do know the truth, even if I, like Wings, will never decide the issue regarding representation.
The reality is that your peers don’t see the problem you see or at least don’t believe a union can fix the problem if they do see it.
Keep fighting for what you believe. Just don’t be surprised if there are people who don’t support you inside DL because they do not object to DL’s expectations, they are capable of meeting DL’s expectations, and have no desire to defend those that don’t or can’t meet those expectations. Don’t be surprised if there are people outside of DL who challenge the basis of the claims you make regarding the need for representation.
If your peers believe there is a need for a union, they will start the process and if the company is negligent, the employees will seat a union or two. History, once again, shows that DL employees outside of the pilots in the major groups, have not been capable of garnering enough support for the idea that DL employees are worse off than their union peers.

 

[Kev3188]

For a guy that loves to tout the "marketplace of ideas," your ability to ignore what others have written never ceases to amaze me...

Kev,
DL does have a peer appeal process and if you aren’t aware – I’m sure you really are, though – search for “appeals process” and then look at the HRPM and APM, some of which you must be on a DL owned computer to access.

Already covered. Did you not see where I mentioned the CRP in the post you just quoted?

It is fantastical to think DL is capable of stacking the appeals process with your peers of DL’s choosing that will continually back mgmt at the expense of their employees is not supported by the reality that your peers very much do side with employees – and there are statements showing that to be true.

Nobody said anything about employees continually backing management. What part of "management can still overturn a verdict, even if the CRP recommends a return to service" was unclear?

If your expectation is that there will never be expectations of performance for DL employees and that any attempt to hold employees to that standard is wrong

Never said that, though I will add that the metrics used are now subjective, as opposed to objective. I disagree with that.

The vast majority of people in the US do not want to work alongside someone who cannot or will not do their job – and the 99+% of employees who do their job have absolutely no problem with expectations about doing their job and being held to those standards via a performance evaluation process.

Again, no one said otherwise. Why are you trying to frame the discussion this way?

But since you have taken your campaign to a non-DL employee website, presumably to reach a bigger audience, then you subject yourself to being fact-checked by people like me who do know the truth, even if I, like Wings, will never decide the issue regarding representation.

If I want to reach a larger audience, this isn't the board to do it on...

As for "fact checking," with all due respect, someone that has been gone from the company for several years, and relies on quit chats with gate agents while non-revving will have a less clear picture of what is currently happening than someone on the inside. Same story with someone who admitted they hadn't read the HRPM in quite awhile.

The truth is, you either do not know "the truth" about what happens here anymore, or are intentionally choosing to ignore it. I'll let you decide which answer is correct.

The reality is that your peers don’t see the problem you see or at least don’t believe a union can fix the problem if they do see it.

Thousands of signed A-cards across both legacy groups, and multiple divisions at the very least says otherwise.

If your peers believe there is a need for a union, they will start the process

See above.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I have never discounted your perspective on the ground as an active employee.
What I have countered is your notion that DL doesn’t have an appeals process, that it isn’t fair, and that DL employees can’t survive the process at the hands of tyrannical management.
DL does have an appeals process that is well documented and accessible to DL employees and there are descriptions of it in public court records where DL employees have taken DL to court.
Fair to you might mean using the same process as the union used but fair should be defined by the possibility of bringing information to the case which reverses previous decisions. DL’s peer driven process does overturn previous decisions that have been made so there is at least some fairness to the process; since neither you or I have exact numbers, then the assessment both of us can offer is subjective. Add in that neither you or I really have any idea about the process that occurred up to those terminations, and our assessements can only be subjective. Yours AND mine.
Your own fellow DL colleagues have noted that DL employees who have been terminated and used the appeal process do return to their jobs.
I have full access to the same written documents that you do. The fact that I didn’t bother to keep up with them for years doesn’t change the fact that I could have or might have more recently. The fact that it took me about 10 minutes to find documentation for processes that you say don’t exist prove it isn’t that hard to find.
Whether the discussion is market share in NYC or the presence or absence of an appeals process, if there is factual data, then that part of the discussion is not subjective.
Again, I commend you standing up for your values and pursuing what matters to you. But if you choose to argue that DL employees don’t have specific protections when it is apparent they do, then you shouldn’t be surprised when I or someone else manages to find them.
And again the question is not whether I find them or not but whether your coworkers find them since they are the ones who have voted and will vote for union representation should additional elections take place.
As I have stated many times before, DL has a different system for employee relations than what exists at most other airlines. DL’s system does work but it admittedly is not for everyone. There is a mechanism for DL employees to use if they want to change the system and seek representation.
I strongly encourage you to continue fighting for what matters to you and if your peers believe DL is not providing protections that really matter to them, they can and should vote in a union.
In 9 years of interacting with you on aviation chat forums, I continue to respect you for your intelligence, form of communication, and passion for what you do. In the midst of a complex world full of competing ideas, my desire is for you to achieve the goals that matter to you.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Jim,
The obvious reason why non-incurred fuel data is shown on financial statements is because it is HEDGED in a financial transaction for which the company exchanges money or the promise of it if they are wrong.

It really is impossible for you to admit when you're wrong, isn't it???

Where did I say a word about hedging fuel? I mentioned the refinery purchase, which DL has said (in financial statements, no less) will result in incurring about $300 million less in fuel expense per year when it's in full operation. When a company concludes contract negotiations it's not unusual for it to say something about the higher/lower labor cost attached to that contract even though the higher/lower costs haven't been incurred yet.

Heck, you won't even say that labor should be able to use the same metrics as the company when negotiating a new contract - you'd still limit labor to discussing incurred cost only. Why is that no great surprise....

Jim

 

[WorldTraveler]

Since your objective is clearly to find me wrong, then you will be disappointed that I don't admit that I am wrong if I am not.

You are the one that has attempted ENDLESSLY to justify noting costs which don't actually occur. it doesn't work that way, Jim, even if you don't agree it is right. If you succeed at changing the way accounting is done, then that is your challenge.

You mentioned fuel and said that that airlines do account for costs that are NOT incurred and I responded that is because fuel CAN BE hedged. That is the only basis for putting a cost on a financial statement that is not incurred - and there is a cost to obtaining those hedges.

Labor costs are not hedged, Jim, There is no basis for putting labor costs that have not been incurred on financial statements of the company.

If you want to start a campaign to note the actual number of American jobs that have been lost and convert that into lost American dollars on the payroll, then go for it, making sure that you note that the benefits brought in by insourcing AT SOME AIRLINES offset what is outsourced.

 

[Kev3188]

It really is impossible for you to admit when you're wrong, isn't it???

Jim--

When WT is espousing a point of view, it's a "marketplace of ideas." When anyone counters that, it's a "campaign."

The Whole Truth is that despite repeated posts indicating otherwise, it is impossible for him to acknowledge that anything deviating from the narrative he wishes to create might have merit.

Carry on.

 

[WorldTraveler]

No, the marketplace is very active and involves buyers and sellers. Problem is that some want to sell ideas that are, shall we say, half-baked and without the "Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval."

Fermented fruits might well include denial of obvious facts and attempts to reframe current reality in ways that no one else seems to recognize as valid.

Discriminating buyers can find merchandise that is not only trustworthy but also has been produced under practices of fair trade.

By all means, exchange ideas as if they are rare finds sourced from the greatest markets on earth. But don't be surprised that in order to close the sale, intense scrutiny of those products will be required.