Did Lombardo ok this?

Does anybody know if local 514 reps or IAM reps get treated the same way by Wroble or is this just a GP event.
 
bigjets said:
Does anybody know if local 514 reps or IAM reps get treated the same way by Wroble or is this just a GP event.
thats a good question.i have talked to a few people at local 567 and they get the same treatment. basically this is what we are going to do if you dont like grieve it!
 
FWAAA said:
Seham is a very capable and accomplished lawyer, and I'd trust his judgment on whether the prayer for relief in his complaint is adequate to achieve the desired results.

I am a lawyer and I agree with toroshark. Seham (and I) are completely unqualifed to question the work of a licensed AMT in fixing an aircraft, and my guess is that very few people here are qualified to question Seham's work in this case (I'm certainly not qualified to question it).
 
It's not a question of how to fix the aircraft, but to put and injunction on how the mechanics were alleged to being treated. The injunction is for the representatives, it doesn't mention the Members.
 
That's the concern.
 
I don't think the Int'l can tell a local which lawyer they can and cannot use if the fees are paid by the local. Seham, while I don't like his work he is just another attorney that is for hire. His long time affiliation with AMFA should not be a reason for not using him. Legally the Int'l could not put the local in receivership.
 
Does anyone know if aircraft have been grounded by the FAA due to the lawsuit/injunction?
 
Where is a link to the actual full text complaint?
 
Overspeed said:
I don't think the Int'l can tell a local which lawyer they can and cannot use if the fees are paid by the local. Seham, while I don't like his work he is just another attorney that is for hire. His long time affiliation with AMFA should not be a reason for not using him. Legally the Int'l could not put the local in receivership.
 
Does anyone know if aircraft have been grounded by the FAA due to the lawsuit/injunction?
 
Where is a link to the actual full text complaint?
 
The FAA is not going to ground aircraft because of a lawsuit.
 
NYer said:
 
The FAA is not going to ground aircraft because of a lawsuit.
 
 
I've worked at AA for 20+ years, and I have never been asked to sign or pressured to sign anything off.
 
I'm willing to bet that if the FAA was concerned with something, the fleet would be grounded. 
 
A little secret for non mechanics, mechanics don't take planes OTS, management does, they ask our input then they decide. 
 
bigjets said:
 
 
I've worked at AA for 20+ years, and I have never been asked to sign or pressured to sign anything off.
 
I'm willing to bet that if the FAA was concerned with something, the fleet would be grounded. 
 
A little secret for non mechanics, mechanics don't take planes OTS, management does, they ask our input then they decide. 
 
Where do you work?
 
bigjets said:
 
 
I've worked at AA for 20+ years, and I have never been asked to sign or pressured to sign anything off.
 
I'm willing to bet that if the FAA was concerned with something, the fleet would be grounded. 
 
A little secret for non mechanics, mechanics don't take planes OTS, management does, they ask our input then they decide. 
 
Mechanics don't take planes out of service?  In my 29 years, I have personally taken many aircraft out of service without management anywhere in the area, especially at a class 2 station.
 
Look, times have changed.  The days of just being able to go out to an aircraft on a live trip to replace a burnt out indicator light, and a quick logbook sign off are over.  Now, you have to find the correct referrence in the maintenence manual, get all the right tooling or equipment, find and pull and collar the right C/Bs.  Then sign off the logbook I/A/W.  Point being, what was once a 10 minute job, is now a 20 minute or more job.  Depends how the computers are running.  We work with the system that management put in place.  The cheapest maintenance manual programs management could find, inadequate vehicles, parts shortages, the list goes on.
 
NYer said:
The injunction is for the representatives, it doesn't mention the Members.
 
What are talking about? You posted the text of the sought after relief:

"C.."Ordering AA, its officers, agents, employees and all persons acting on its behalf to treat with Local 591 and its representatives with respect to complaints of harassment and coercion complaints related to AMT adherence to FAA/IAW maintenance standards."

II. Award punitive damages in favor of the plaintiffs and against the defendant."

When it refers to "Local 591 and its representatives", that means everybody. You need to get past your bias. It is clearly showing here.
 
bigjets said:
 
 
I've worked at AA for 20+ years, and I have never been asked to sign or pressured to sign anything off.
 
I'm willing to bet that if the FAA was concerned with something, the fleet would be grounded. 
 
A little secret for non mechanics, mechanics don't take planes OTS, management does, they ask our input then they decide. 
 
Yeah. If THEY'RE concerned about something. A lawsuit by itself won't cause to react in that way.
 
As a matter of fact, according to the lawsuit they've been investigating this issue for quite some time and they haven't seen the need to take any such action, yet.
 
Glenn Quagmire said:
What are talking about? You posted the text of the sought after relief:

"C.."Ordering AA, its officers, agents, employees and all persons acting on its behalf to treat with Local 591 and its representatives with respect to complaints of harassment and coercion complaints related to AMT adherence to FAA/IAW maintenance standards."

II. Award punitive damages in favor of the plaintiffs and against the defendant."

When it refers to "Local 591 and its representatives", that means everybody. You need to get past your bias. It is clearly showing here.
 
So now, the Members can be referred to as "representatives"?
 
That borders on the ridiculous, but if you need people to believe it then I guess you want to defend it. Copy.
 
sheds light on the question I asked about the spike in maintenance cancellations on the M80 fleet that was unanswered.



"According to flight data firm masFlight, the percentage of McDonnell Douglas MD-80 flights shot from none on Dec. 1 and four of 569 flights on Dec. 2 to 12 on Dec. 3 and 4, 53 on Dec. 5, 14 on Dec. 6, 40 on Dec. 7, 51 on Dec. 8, 11 on Dec. 9 and 22 on Dec. 10 before falling back to the single digits after that."



all the best to those of you in the frontlines of maintenance as you resolve this. I wish you well.
 
bigjets said:
Does anybody know if local 514 reps or IAM reps get treated the same way by Wroble or is this just a GP event.
514 is mostly made up of Maint. BASE employees who are not under Mr. Wrobilly's reign..
And in my view the Base management is doing everything it can to make us less efficient!
 
NYer said:
So now, the Members can be referred to as "representatives"?
 
That borders on the ridiculous, but if you need people to believe it then I guess you want to defend it. Copy.
"Local 591" legally means all the members that belong to that Local.

Hence the way the suit is written, "Local 591... ... ... and its representatives"

Comprehension is obviously not your strong suit.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top