Employees&Productivity

[Bob Owens]

To add, it is only because airlines are still treated like utilities that there is the level of data exchanged.
As Jim notes, it is up to each individual "side" to decide how to extract that data and use it for their benefit. Subscriptions to these data sources are relatively low priced in contrast to the value that could be brought to bear in debating AA's position in labor negotiations, if labor will take the time to learn to use the data. Or you can hire a consultant who has access to the data.

Absent labor having data, AA (or any other company/analyst) can make whatever conclusion they want.
.
It is absolutely true that the data is indeed valid when compared with what is known; if nothing else, labor leaders at AA or any other airline have enough data that they should be able to "sniff check" some of the conclusions - including the numbers of personnel, flight schedules, etc.
.
Arguing that the data is flawed and the company is manipulating it while providing nothing to counter it is a recipe for allowing the company to control the conversation.

In reality its a converstation that we really dont have to have. CASMs, RASMs, profits, none of that is relevant to our negotiations and what we should charge for our labor because we have zero control over any of it, what we need to know is what do other carriers pay their mechanics, what are the workrules, what are the benefits and what is the status of their agreements. In other words what carriers pay that are in negotiations or come up shortly doesnt matter because its a backwards view, we dont set rates in 2011 based on what the courts put in place back in 2002, the bargaining patten in this industry is to leapfrog off one another in an attempt to keep up with inflation. Do other people who sell stuff to AA care about AMRs CASM, RASMs and profits and use them to determine what they are going to charge AA?

This round does present some interesting twists due to all the BK turmoil of the last decade and the mergers so really the only figure thats reliable is WN. With USAIR, UAL in mediation and Jet Blue and Delta non-union evn matching WN would not impair AA's postion for very long, the others would all surpass us within a short amount of time. UAL because they would settle for nothing less, USAIR for the same reason and the other two so their guys dont go Union, Jet Blue already raised their top pay to over $40/hr.

 

[commavia]

In reality its a converstation that we really dont have to have. CASMs, RASMs, profits, none of that is relevant to our negotiations and what we should charge for our labor because we have zero control over any of it,

Labor has "zero control?" Seriously? No wonder the NMB ignores the TWU.

I'm totally with you on going for the best possible deal you can get, negotiating hard, squeezing out of the company every last dime you can, but how can you possibly suggest with a straight face labor does not contribute to cost? Cost per ASM is a fairly straightforward metric: the higher the cost, and/or the lower the ASMs generated, the higher the CASM.

You're of course right that, generally, mechanics cannot impact ASMs generated by the fleet (the pilots, through things like SCOPE and longhaul flying, certainly can, though). But of course the mechanics' contract - just like the contract with every other union, and the pay and benefits in general that the company spends on every employee (union or not), obviously has an impact on cost. That's sort of common sense (I would think).

Have we now reached the farcical point where the union no longer debates with the company what the cost of the union contract is, and instead now just suggests the thousands of mechanics have no cost?

what we need to know is what do other carriers pay their mechanics, what are the workrules, what are the benefits and what is the status of their agreements. In other words what carriers pay that are in negotiations or come up shortly doesnt matter because its a backwards view, we dont set rates in 2011 based on what the courts put in place back in 2002, the bargaining patten in this industry is to leapfrog off one another in an attempt to keep up with inflation.

Indeed - what do other carriers pay their mechanics? And what do the third parties those other carriers outsource to pay their mechanics? Questions I would absolutely love to know the answer to, frankly.

Do other people who sell stuff to AA care about AMRs CASM, RASMs and profits and use them to determine what they are going to charge AA?

Absolutely. It's sort of one of the basics of capitalism (i.e., sales 101). A big factor in determining what to charge is your perception of the counter-parties ability and capacity to pay. Thus, witness Boeing and Airbus spending weeks and months (reportedly) working and re-working their financing and aircraft deals ("what they are going to charge AA") with AMR based entirely on the company's costs, profits (lack thereof), and thus the company's ability to pay.

This round does present some interesting twists due to all the BK turmoil of the last decade and the mergers so really the only figure thats reliable is WN.

Okay, so continuing on my unanswered question from the other thread: how, then, should AA pattern their M&E union contracts after Southwest, when Southwest outsources overhauls? Should AA then follow what appears to be the Southwest (and indeed, just about every other airline besides AA) approach: outsource overhauls, and then give the (relatively) few remaining a big raise?

 

[limit]

Indeed - what do other carriers pay their mechanics? And what do the third parties those other carriers outsource to pay their mechanics? Questions I would absolutely love to know the answer to, frankly.



You said before the average wage should include what other carriers pay their third party overhaul workers.
This is not really that clear a situation, at least in my eyes .
Others pay a company an hourly rate for work performed.
This rate includes many costs the carrier used to have when they performed the work themselves,plus some it did not have before .
One is the profit margin of the third party,... which in cases when you are talking about overseas work can be rather large when you consider what the
workers there make a pittance.
So ,is this margin to be added as labor cost (thus raising the average) or something else?

I guess the answer would vary depending if you are labor or management.

Even worse ,it would be practicably impossible ,unless you are AA management and know the costs of the third party to actually know or even been able to come close to such information.

 

[commavia]

You said before the average wage should include what other carriers pay their third party overhaul workers.

... only because I was responding to a comment that other airlines (as opposed to AA) have "tak[en] care of their workers first" by - apparently - paying their mechanics a bit more on average but employing far fewer of them.

Is this the position the TWU should being working towards - incentivize the company to offer a huge buyout package and get rid of tons of mechanics, outsource overhauls, and then through system protection and attrition reallocate the remaining work to a better-paying and more robust line maintenance organization?

This is not really that clear a situation, at least in my eyes .
Others pay a company an hourly rate for work performed.
This rate includes many costs the carrier used to have when they performed the work themselves,plus some it did not have before .
One is the profit margin of the third party,... which in cases when you are talking about overseas work can be rather large when you consider what the
workers there make a pittance.

It may not be a "clear" calculation, but it is nonetheless a critically important one. Because the conversation of what the average AA mechanic makes versus the average mechanic at JetBlue, or Southwest, or just about any other U.S. airline, is sort of meaningless and academic when AA employs in-house 2-9x (depending on the airline, and which numbers you use) mechanics relative to fleet size as other carriers.

Which, yet again, leads me back to my earlier question: would the TWU prefer that AA take the approach of basically every other airline - outsource thousands of jobs currently done in TULE/AFW to third parties (or, I suppose, just spin the overhaul bases off entirely) and then use some of the savings to give the remaining mechanics a raise?

So ,is this margin to be added as labor cost (thus raising the average) or something else?

I defer to your and others' judgment. To me, to get a true, realistic, and "fair" comparison between the cost of an AA mechanic overhauling a 737 in, say, TULE and, say, an Aeroman mechanic in El Salvador overhauling a JetBlue A320, you would have to fully burden that outsourced mechanic's direct labor rate with the vendor's profit margins, etc.

But, I do wonder: when you fully burden the "prevailing wage" of a mechanic at Aeroman, or HAECO, or even TIMCO, with all the additional ancilary costs, profit margins, etc. on top of it, where does it stack up compared with a comparable fully-burdened in-house AA mechanic at TULE? Shouldn't the TWU know the answer to this?

Even worse ,it would be practicably impossible ,unless you are AA management and know the costs of the third party to actually know or even been able to come close to such information.

Well, true, I wouldn't expect anywhere here to know the actual price - including the direct labor rates, turn times, profit margins, etc. - that third parties are quoting airlines like AA to do maintenance work. But, considering how often on here everyone is so quick to both: 1) compare AA maintenance employees' pay scales to that of maintenance employees at other airlines, and 2) describe the inferior quality of the work performed by third-party maintenance providers, that somebody here would have some sense of what the going rate is for the mechanics a third parties (if not in foreign countries) that are performing substantial amounts of work on other airlines' aircraft.

 

[Deleted member 14439]

AH, "PRODUCTIVITY" my pet peeve. Pisses me off everytime I hear it thrown around. While I agree ALL 3 unions on the property could make improvements. Our biggest problem in maintenace is the process. Here is but one of many examples. I send out a "part" to be reworked by the shop. Due to the "process" I have to provide that shop with a AMT to cad plate the bushings, NDT to do the FPI and QA to do the visual. Now does this make sense? I should be able to send them the part and then it returned to me in a reasonable time. Instead, I must pull manpower from my airplane to support the shop in dooinfg their job. This is but one example. I could easily provide one or two everyday. I can not change that process. I`m but a mere crew chief. Management has to change these type of things, but they can`t be bothered with such matters. Out.

 

[strikeforce]

AH, "PRODUCTIVITY" my pet peeve. Pisses me off everytime I hear it thrown around. While I agree ALL 3 unions on the property could make improvements. Our biggest problem in maintenace is the process. Here is but one of many examples. I send out a "part" to be reworked by the shop. Due to the "process" I have to provide that shop with a AMT to cad plate the bushings, NDT to do the FPI and QA to do the visual. Now does this make sense? I should be able to send them the part and then it returned to me in a reasonable time. Instead, I must pull manpower from my airplane to support the shop in dooinfg their job. This is but one example. I could easily provide one or two everyday. I can not change that process. I`m but a mere crew chief. Management has to change these type of things, but they can`t be bothered with such matters. Out.

Management has been spoon fed that information about the process from guess who.....the crew chiefs and amt's. IF management had half-a-brain lots of these processes would change. You're right, one or two a day, everyday for the last 25 years. Others in management are afraid to shake things because of retailiation from the workforce and their bosses. The whole process stinks!

 

[chris perry]

AH, "PRODUCTIVITY" my pet peeve. Pisses me off everytime I hear it thrown around. While I agree ALL 3 unions on the property could make improvements. Our biggest problem in maintenace is the process. Here is but one of many examples. I send out a "part" to be reworked by the shop. Due to the "process" I have to provide that shop with a AMT to cad plate the bushings, NDT to do the FPI and QA to do the visual. Now does this make sense? I should be able to send them the part and then it returned to me in a reasonable time. Instead, I must pull manpower from my airplane to support the shop in dooinfg their job. This is but one example. I could easily provide one or two everyday. I can not change that process. I`m but a mere crew chief. Management has to change these type of things, but they can`t be bothered with such matters. Out.

I finally hear the magic answer "THE PROCESS",I have been watching this board....Waiting. Pisses me off also,I mentioned it briefly in the past.
Another example,AOG parts ordr parts for aircraft,fly them in land,and taxi to gate next to aircraft that needs the paart. What do we do? Send it to the hanger of course, 2 miles away from the airplane. Then we have to reorder ship back to aircraft sometimes taking 2 hrs or more. All that when ....It was 100 feet from it's destination to begin with. There is so many more to mention and was brought up many many times.... all on deaf ears(management). That's one of the main reasons employee's are so pissed......Nothing ever changes it gets worse. Then they say it's all our fault go figure... This place is fixable,but needs a little common sense.. Im not seeing any here...

 

[chris perry]

IT TOOK 3 1/2 HOURS JUST TO FIND SOMEONE TO SIGN MY AOA BADGE PAPERWORK..."THE PROCESS"

 

[wrencher]

I finally hear the magic answer "THE PROCESS",I have been watching this board....Waiting. Pisses me off also,I mentioned it briefly in the past.
Another example,AOG parts ordr parts for aircraft,fly them in land,and taxi to gate next to aircraft that needs the paart. What do we do? Send it to the hanger of course, 2 miles away from the airplane. Then we have to reorder ship back to aircraft sometimes taking 2 hrs or more. All that when ....It was 100 feet from it's destination to begin with. There is so many more to mention and was brought up many many times.... all on deaf ears(management). That's one of the main reasons employee's are so pissed......Nothing ever changes it gets worse. Then they say it's all our fault go figure... This place is fixable,but needs a little common sense.. Im not seeing any here...

I have to say when we worked at MCIE, AA continued on with the process we pretty much always had and they loved it and ended up complicating that process as well. As you all know we were not supermen just came in and did our jobs and LOOK THEY STILL SHUT US DOWN. So look at history it does not matter what you give them they AA will still piss it away. They say at the roadshows how they should not have shut MCIE down but they won't correct their mistake, man what arrogance. On this board I've read more bull against the opening of MCIE than the farm out of the work. Now I know how the likes of GORDON CLARK get into office and stay in, trust me boys they the local did not or where not anything like the majority of the mechanics at Kansas City we just wanted to do our jobs working on planes not run for some political position in a non demcratic union such as the TWU hell look at what they did with our seniority. Don't want to stir the pot but the facts are facts. What will be real interesting is if US air were to buy AA and don't be so arrogant as to think it ain't possible, they are represented by the IAM you fellas know how we came out on the seniortiy issue. Just remember the TWU is representing you. I would hope nothing like happened to us would ever happen to any union members EVER.Let me rimind eveyone we at TWA gave up concessions for years to save an airline that AA bought we the hand full of employees that are left did not ask for any of this good or bad but this is not are first rodeo either.

 

[Frank Szabo]

Bck to the actually topic -

Even the salaried boys that post here (those of supposed great stature and having been well learned in there days), after having been asked what exactly these "productivity gains" are the company wants, can't answer as they haven't a clue. The word seems to have been beaten to death - to the point it has no meaning anymore or it's meaning has become grossly distorted by a group of fools by daily use.

There are many words in the language now that have lost their original meaning - "racist" used to mean a dislike of someone for no reason other than their ethnic appearance. Now, it's come to mean "disagreeing with someone of a race other than the one disagreeing".

The word "productivity" is thrown around to the point it's useless. Arpey and company got productivity gains at first but after the company and union lies became obvious even the "hitters" said "piss on it".

Here we are, right about here. What manner of games do we play now? Do we have a new word to banty about?

Define exactly what is wanted. Do so in such a manner it can't be mistaken. We realize being concise screws up whatever advantage management believes they have but being concie is a tactic not tried - yet.

Do it here or in an email or in a letter but, regardless of the format, do it or shut the hell up. We can recite any single word as well as the accountants in Centrepork and it will have the same, insipid and shallow meaning.

 

[eolesen]

Frank, I don't think the productivity gains apply as much to the TWU as they do to the APA and APFA. If you look at hours worked vs. hours paid, there's a wider gap in the wrong direction for the pilots and FAs. Other airlines get to schedule them for more hours a month, and fewer seem to be getting paid their guarantee without setting foot on an airplane.

I was reading a newsletter from a CO pilot who claimed AA pilots on average get five days off per month more than the guys at CO do:

American lineholders averaged five (5) additional days off that month, compared to the average Continental lineholder.  That is sixty (60) additional days off per year, and six hundred (600) additional days off per decade.

Take that number across 6,000 pilots (or whatever AA has now), and you've got a lot more pilots at AA. And hundreds of man-years in wasted productivity.

I don't claim to know how things are staffed in the shops, but I'm sure there are probably a few that are rocking chair jobs and a few where the guys don't stop moving except to go to lunch. Same on the line. Someone was complaining about outstations where line had been contracted out. I know that you guys don't make up the schedule, but why pay a full timer if you only need someone there 4 hours a day?

Creating busy work isn't the answer to low productivity, either. I remember hearing how having the overnight crews packing headset bags was cheaper than buying plastic wrapped disposables for $0.50 per unit. The only reason it made even just a little sense is because there were all these Cabin Service people sitting around, and it was seen as better than paying them to watch Oprah reruns or play cards. And AA had no ability at the time to make that a part time job for just the hours the airplanes were there to be cleaned... Nobody ever sat down to argue that paying someone to pick up the headsets, move them, "clean them" and repack them was costing more in labor than the "savings" from reusing the headsets.

All AA has ever wanted from the TWU is 8 hours work for 8 hours pay. It is time to get rid of all the rocking chairs.

 

[Bob Owens]

Labor has "zero control?" Seriously? No wonder the NMB ignores the TWU.

I'm totally with you on going for the best possible deal you can get, negotiating hard, squeezing out of the company every last dime you can, but how can you possibly suggest with a straight face labor does not contribute to cost? Cost per ASM is a fairly straightforward metric: the higher the cost, and/or the lower the ASMs generated, the higher the CASM.

You're of course right that, generally, mechanics cannot impact ASMs generated by the fleet (the pilots, through things like SCOPE and longhaul flying, certainly can, though). But of course the mechanics' contract - just like the contract with every other union, and the pay and benefits in general that the company spends on every employee (union or not), obviously has an impact on cost. That's sort of common sense (I would think).

When management decides that despite losses they need to remodel terminals , ready rooms and even landscape the entrance to the hangar we have no control over that, When they decide to take on all Eagles Debt and add another $300 million to their losses that year we have no control over that. When they buy an aialing carrier and take on those liabilities we have no control over that. When they decide to do Mods and outsource their Overhauls , instead of deferring the mods till they catch up on the overhauls(thus doubling up on their maintenance costs) we have no control over that. When they place the largest aircraft order in history, we have no control over that either. We have no control over the routes they fly or the price they charrge either.

Have we now reached the farcical point where the union no longer debates with the company what the cost of the union contract is, and instead now just suggests the thousands of mechanics have no cost?

I guess the tactic here is if you cant ague the points made make up points to argue.

Indeed - what do other carriers pay their mechanics? And what do the third parties those other carriers outsource to pay their mechanics? Questions I would absolutely love to know the answer to, frankly.

What difference does it make what 3P providers pay their mechanics? Whats relevany is what would AA pay the 3P provider. I'd like to know as well.

Absolutely. It's sort of one of the basics of capitalism (i.e., sales 101). A big factor in determining what to charge is your perception of the counter-parties ability and capacity to pay. Thus, witness Boeing and Airbus spending weeks and months (reportedly) working and re-working their financing and aircraft deals ("what they are going to charge AA") with AMR based entirely on the company's costs, profits (lack thereof), and thus the company's ability to pay.

Its also done through trial and error, raise prices till sales fall off, like the oil companies have ben doing.

Okay, so continuing on my unanswered question from the other thread: how, then, should AA pattern their M&E union contracts after Southwest, when Southwest outsources overhauls? Should AA then follow what appears to be the Southwest (and indeed, just about every other airline besides AA) approach: outsource overhauls, and then give the (relatively) few remaining a big raise?

Which airlines have taken that approach? None. Show me one airline that had OH in house, farmed it out then gave their remaining mechanics a big raise. The fact is Southwest never had OH facilities like AA. Same with UPS and the pay difference between us was small compared to today. Management has never even claimed that in house is not cost effective, in fact over the last few years they have insourced more work and hired hundreds more mechanics. If it was not cost effective why would they bring in additional work that they are not contractually bound to? You want to quote econ 101, try this one "Economies of scale". Southwest has gradually brought more work in house over the years as "Economies of scale" kick in. Obviously if you cant run a continuous C-check it doesnt make sense to bring that work in house. Now with all the majors paying around $10 to $15/hr less and a general shortage of mechanics it makes it that much harder to bring work in, my guess is the with a singular fleet type Southwest also gets the best rates from 3P providors as well. So while it may sound good and move expense off the "labor costs" line when a carrier outsources nobody has ever revealed what the carriers actually pay these 3P providers to do a Heavy check.

 

[Bob Owens]

All AA has ever wanted from the TWU is 8 hours work for 8 hours pay. It is time to get rid of all the rocking chairs.

When mechanics work 8 hours of an 8.5 hour shift the company calls it a job action and goes to court to get an injunction telling us not to work by the book.

 

[chris perry]

When mechanics work 8 hours of an 8.5 hour shift the company calls it a job action and goes to court to get an injunction telling us not to work by the book.

Right to the point,they get nasty if you work 8 hours.....Start talking f29....

 

[nbmcg01]

Right to the point,they get nasty if you work 8 hours.....Start talking f29....

Much of the productivity issue re: the APFA could be resolved by a better computer system. There is WAYYYYYYY too much sitting and most f/as want to get on the plane and do their job. All f/as should be required to be qualified on all equipment. (regardless of base) The trading rules should pretty much be abolished. Why should AA care who works the flight as long as its covered and the f/a is qualified? Sick calls would almost disappear with less retrictive trading rules.....NO NOT BECAUSE the bulk of people call off if they cant get a trade but because many would use a trade rather than call off for a minor illness. (or childs illness) AA is trying to "manage" adults like they did in the 60s-70s. It remains the paternalistic, under the thumb, total control as opposed to a more "modern" participatory management style. Don't count POs as a negative. If the reserves aren't being utilized to the maximum, offer PVDs or even time off without pay. AA "cries" more hours, more productivity but until they fix the inner problems (like the computer sysytem to produce more productive flight schedules) it will be just more hours.