WorldTraveler said:
thank you for agreeing that the labor-mgmt. environment in the industry HAS cost jobs. NW was tired of dealing with its own mechanics and wasn't about to give outside work which would inflate their numbers.
There is no question about it.
This is the problem I have with the industry. Labor is stuck in the 1960s. Good management is nearly impossible to find.
WorldTraveler said:
NW isn't alone among airlines that have chosen not to insource to reduce the influence of unions.
I wont say that is the complete reason.
One thing you have to remember is the "me too"
During BK, even at Delta, cuts had to be across the bored and fair. Didn't matter, in some cases, what the costs were but were more about not pissing the other work groups off.
I mean how do you go to pilots and ask them for 300 76 seat jets for DCI but don't outsource any maintenance? And the effect wall street has on airline outsourcing, but having very very little data to know what the real costs are.
WorldTraveler said:
DL Tech Ops is willing to insource in large part because unionization has the least chance of working in Tech Ops of other large depts. at DL. and I would also bet you that DL mgmt. is only now beginning to increase MSP maintenance again because they are 1. comfortable that Tech Ops won't unionize and 2. to show other MSP work groups what happens when you play nice with the company.
only part of it.
The fact of the matter is ATL is full. ATL is so full Bay 10 (a paint bay) is used for DeltaNorth work and they have even been doing c checks in bay 12(also a paint bay) Why? they have no room.
To bring in two lines of 330 c-checks Delta had to 1) build a new hangar 2) use MSP. Well hard to justify a new hangar when MSP is only drop ins and two bays of c-checks.
Delta isn't just now building up MSP. They have been doing drop in engine work and V2500 QEC work for a while and started doing the t-tail work not long after the merger (when 320 c-checks took the tail space here)
I imagine Delta wishes they still had the Eastern hangar. But it is what it is now.
WorldTraveler said:
LH certainly does believe in a complex fleet and has the maintenance capabilities to both support it but also benefit by selling its own services.
LH is, exactly, what I think TechOps "should" be. (even AF/KL E&M is a good goal for DTO)
I don't believe there is any work that we cant do better and cheaper than most of the vendors.
WorldTraveler said:
But look at other parts of the airline (dept) and they outsource far larger parts of their own operation. The German Wings accident was a reminder that European airlines have outsourcing of mainline aircraft size "domestic" operations.
Not really apples to apples. Euro carriers can't really be compared to US carriers. A big reason, that we don't have in this country, low cost high speed train options.
having said that. LH is well under the amount of airplanes they outsource compared to Delta. True Delta has only 76 seaters or under, but that is due to much better Unions in the US than Europe. Don't think for a minute Delta wouldn't have done the same in BK if they could have.
They wanted to.
WorldTraveler said:
Mgmt is just like any other discipline - there are "fad" ideas that everyone jumps on including outsourcing.
exactly.
WorldTraveler said:
I'm not defending the decisions but simply noting that you are correct but things have gone both ways. And remember that DL's current mgmt. is more contrarian to the status quo than any other airline in the US - owning a refinery which is now profitable, buying used aircraft, and yes, growing maintenance insourcing.
Right now I agree. I still don't think they are doing enough though.
WorldTraveler said:
and I am absolutely hoping that DL will grow Tech Ops more and more and the way to do it is prove that Tech Ops can very reliably and cost effectively do DL's own work and bring work in and be profitable doing it - and not everything that DL does can be done inhouse or for others. DL went both ways with maintaining Deltamatic which is also the only single airline inhouse only large mainframe CRS in the industry.
This is where I think AA's unions are screwing up. Some of them want to drive costs way up, others "only care about AA work"
Both are equally stupid and short sighted. I want Delta to do basically all of its MX work in-house...but I also want them overhauling other airlines engines, components, APUs, gear, airframes etc. I think the best chance we have as a craft is to work with management to get something cost effective that saves the company on its fleet and makes the company money on other fleets.
WorldTraveler said:
and let's remember that DL is growing mainline while shrinking regional carrier operations faster than AA or UA; this year alone AA is retiring more mainline jets than they are buying new ones while regional carrier operations are growing.
Not apples to apples. AA is ~200 frames bigger than Delta with a plan of staying just south of 1,000 airplanes. They are growing on the big end and the little end.
Delta is quickly becomes a short haul airlines with the minimum wide body fleet. DALPA needs to knock that scope out of the park with this contract. If not they will be northwest..... 2.0.
(and yes it matters to me, big planes need more man hours, this more staff thus making TopDawg even more senior. QOL and all that
🙂 )
WorldTraveler said:
The pendulum does swing. and DL's current mgmt. team recognizes more and more the value of doing work inhouse where it can be done - in contrast to what other airlines are doing and bringing work in to DL to a larger extent than many other airlines are doing.
Thats not quite true just yet.
Lets see what happens at AA before we throw that card on the table.
having said that the trend is going the right way. I still think we have a long way to go and hope to see it keep moving up. As i have told you, still a lot of items, even outside of airframe overhauls, Delta needs to bring in house. Really want that total outsourcing % to be in the 30-35% range.(and i mean not counting insourcing revenue) (I really want to see it at about 0-5% honestly, but baby steps)