Iam Heading To Arbitration
- Thread starter pitguy
- Start date
More Facts and Less Emotion
Member
- Feb 10, 2004
- 79
- 0
I am all for the facts. The facts are in this article we have two terrible accidents involving aircraft where the mainenance was outsourced. But the facts end there. Drawing conclusions further than that are misleading.
So, as a result of the article are the following statements true statements?
1. Outsource maintenance equals accidents
2. Insourced maintenance never equals accidents
It ain't that simple. And there are plenty of mechanical related accidents in history that were done by insourced maintenance. Oh, and by the way, the ValuJet accident was caused by a vendor maintenance company but not because of work done on the plane. It was because oxygen canisters shipped by the company as cargo caught on fire in the cargo bay. It was actually a dangerous goods shipment that caused the accident, not their maintenance. They were not charged with faulty maintenance, they were charged with improper shipping.
To be clear, I for one don't want to get in a plane, train, car or elevator that is not maintained properly. And who does? But it may be stretching the truth to say ALL outsourcing compromises safety. And paying more does not equal better safety either. Southwest airlines outsources maintenance, operates hundreds of planes and has a great safety record.
So far, I have concluded that the facts are:
1. Improper training of mechanics adds safety risks
2. Limited oversight of maintenance adds safety risks
Neither of these two facts have anything to do with insourced or outsourced.
So as long as maintenance is done with properly trained mechanics and properly supervised it does not matter whether the work is insourced or outsourced - Southwest has proven that.
Let's cut to the chase. Isn't the real issue here protecting jobs and protecting pay checks? So insourced vs. outsourced comes down to some simple questions that I have not seen enough facts on regarding economics. So here's some real questions that I don't know the answer to but would be healthy to insert as facts in this thread and most everyone would appreciate:
PAY RATES
What is the cost of the average outsourced inspection for an A320
What is the cost of the average insourced inspection at US for an A320
(Are we talking a million, 50 million or 200 million in savings for US)
Additional Costs
What is the cost of ferrying the plane to Alabama vs. doing the work in PIT
Quality Ratings
Are there ratings for maintenance facilities conducted by the FAA that rate the quality/track record of each facility and if so, is there a list of where Southwest does their work and is the rating the same as the Mobile company?
Time Is Money
Is Mobile more time efficient? Is the aircraft out of service more time or less time than if it were insourced. Every day of difference is lost revenue of $40,000(If accurate? - I read that here recently)
Monty Hall - Let's Make a Deal
Has the IAM constructed a counterproposal to outsourcing to get the rates competitive with what Southwest?
Just facts please. Do you guys know the answers? Or where to find them?
So, as a result of the article are the following statements true statements?
1. Outsource maintenance equals accidents
2. Insourced maintenance never equals accidents
It ain't that simple. And there are plenty of mechanical related accidents in history that were done by insourced maintenance. Oh, and by the way, the ValuJet accident was caused by a vendor maintenance company but not because of work done on the plane. It was because oxygen canisters shipped by the company as cargo caught on fire in the cargo bay. It was actually a dangerous goods shipment that caused the accident, not their maintenance. They were not charged with faulty maintenance, they were charged with improper shipping.
To be clear, I for one don't want to get in a plane, train, car or elevator that is not maintained properly. And who does? But it may be stretching the truth to say ALL outsourcing compromises safety. And paying more does not equal better safety either. Southwest airlines outsources maintenance, operates hundreds of planes and has a great safety record.
So far, I have concluded that the facts are:
1. Improper training of mechanics adds safety risks
2. Limited oversight of maintenance adds safety risks
Neither of these two facts have anything to do with insourced or outsourced.
So as long as maintenance is done with properly trained mechanics and properly supervised it does not matter whether the work is insourced or outsourced - Southwest has proven that.
Let's cut to the chase. Isn't the real issue here protecting jobs and protecting pay checks? So insourced vs. outsourced comes down to some simple questions that I have not seen enough facts on regarding economics. So here's some real questions that I don't know the answer to but would be healthy to insert as facts in this thread and most everyone would appreciate:
PAY RATES
What is the cost of the average outsourced inspection for an A320
What is the cost of the average insourced inspection at US for an A320
(Are we talking a million, 50 million or 200 million in savings for US)
Additional Costs
What is the cost of ferrying the plane to Alabama vs. doing the work in PIT
Quality Ratings
Are there ratings for maintenance facilities conducted by the FAA that rate the quality/track record of each facility and if so, is there a list of where Southwest does their work and is the rating the same as the Mobile company?
Time Is Money
Is Mobile more time efficient? Is the aircraft out of service more time or less time than if it were insourced. Every day of difference is lost revenue of $40,000(If accurate? - I read that here recently)
Monty Hall - Let's Make a Deal
Has the IAM constructed a counterproposal to outsourcing to get the rates competitive with what Southwest?
Just facts please. Do you guys know the answers? Or where to find them?
EyeInTheSky
Veteran
I am beginning to think Usfliboi is not real and is some vast right-wing (pardon the pun) conspiracy that usa320pilot has concocted as an alter ego. The grammar and word usage is deliberately bad enough to make me believe it's a sham.
More Facts and Less Emotion
Member
- Feb 10, 2004
- 79
- 0
Who does Southwest use to perform thier heavy maintenance?
You heard correctly because I worked closely with one for years that went there dropping out of the union and even took a pay cut just so he could be in management. I can give you his full name and his address; he is in the local airport area. He holds zero licenses, was too lazy to get them and wanted a cushy job in management, his words.pitguy said:
OP
pitguy
Veteran
- Aug 21, 2002
- 1,509
- 0
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #21
More Facts and Less Emotion states:
""2. Limited oversight of maintenance adds safety risks
Neither of these two facts have anything to do with insourced or outsourced.""
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you reread the article carefully this issue was dealt with within the text. Outsource maintenance is not as closely monitored by the FAA as stated in the report. Also a company does not have as much control over it as when it is done in house. I can give you facts, but you must be able to comprehend them.
--Besides all of this it is in the contract that management agreed to.
""2. Limited oversight of maintenance adds safety risks
Neither of these two facts have anything to do with insourced or outsourced.""
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you reread the article carefully this issue was dealt with within the text. Outsource maintenance is not as closely monitored by the FAA as stated in the report. Also a company does not have as much control over it as when it is done in house. I can give you facts, but you must be able to comprehend them.
--Besides all of this it is in the contract that management agreed to.
More Facts and Less Emotion
Member
- Feb 10, 2004
- 79
- 0
Thanks Pitguy for the re-direct, I did read the article again. To be balanced, some facts missing is the number of violations found on insourced maintenance. Here's what I would like to know is:pitguy said:
-on average how many violations happen per insourced plane?
-on average how many violations happen per outsourced plane?
More specificly, since Southwest outsources maintenance and US insources, does Southwest have more violations than US? Not a debate about whether or not there is a contract or any concession issue, just is US more safe than Southwest because of maintenance practices? If it is TRUE, then that is the story that the reporter should be writing about.
BillLumbergh
Veteran
If you folks don't straighten up and fly right on the comments and postings, you're going to be in for a very long month or so.
For the last time, comment on the comments; not on the posters.
For the last time, comment on the comments; not on the posters.
to much time to quit
Senior
- Jun 17, 2003
- 318
- 7
aerosmith
Senior
Didn't Usair express have a B1900 go into the drink off of Hyannis , Ma. last summer that was blamed on third party mtc. 2 pilots died but not much was made of it because it was a non revenue ferry flight.
usfliboi
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 2,070
- 270
you should be ashamed for not being informed and not having an informed opinion . My opinion is just that MINE! Get over it.! the fact are theres two or more different opinions in this world. WHO DOES SOUTH WEST MAINT? Kitty i didnt know we were chatting for you not to respond?ktflyhome said:
- Banned
- #28
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS AND AEROSPACE WORKERS
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Appeals Court Sends IAM-US Airways Subcontracting Dispute to Arbitration
Washington D.C., March 3, 2004 - The U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals today denied an International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) request for the full thirteen-member court to rule on whether US Airways’ subcontracting of Airbus heavy maintenance constitutes a major dispute under the Railway Labor Act. On February 3, 2004 a three-member panel of the court ruled the dispute to be minor, reversing an October 21, 2003 District Court injunction that prevented US Airways from subcontracting heavy maintenance.
“The appellate court has not ruled that US Airways has the right to subcontract our work,†said IAM General Vice President Robert Roach, Jr. “They have only ruled that the dispute should be settled through arbitration. Although we disagree, we will expedite the process and we are confident that our members will prevail once an arbitrator reviews the issue and the clear and unambiguous language in our contract.â€
Under the Railway Labor Act, the law governing labor relations in the airline industry, minor disputes must be resolved through an established arbitration process. The IAM will seek an expedited arbitration decision to include damages for members affected by US Airways’ flagrant contract violation.
“US Airways has taken airplanes out of service rather than having their own employees perform their maintenance, †said IAM District 141-M President Scotty Ford. “Such arrogance toward employees and passengers hasn’t been seen since Frank Lorenzo was banished from the industry.â€
Maintenance is currently being performed on US Airways’ Airbus aircraft at foreign-owned Singapore Technologies Mobile Aerospace Engineering in Mobile, AL.
The National Transportation Safety Board recently cited poor maintenance practices by another independent maintenance provider as a factor in last year’s Air Midwest crash of a Beech 1900D in Charlotte, NC. “Subcontracting maintenance work can be a very costly way to save money,†said Roach.
IAM District 141-M represents 5,000 Mechanic & Related employees at US Airways. IAM District 141 represents the airline’s 4,450 Fleet Service Employees. More information about the Machinists Union can be found on our web site at www.goiam.org.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Appeals Court Sends IAM-US Airways Subcontracting Dispute to Arbitration
Washington D.C., March 3, 2004 - The U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals today denied an International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) request for the full thirteen-member court to rule on whether US Airways’ subcontracting of Airbus heavy maintenance constitutes a major dispute under the Railway Labor Act. On February 3, 2004 a three-member panel of the court ruled the dispute to be minor, reversing an October 21, 2003 District Court injunction that prevented US Airways from subcontracting heavy maintenance.
“The appellate court has not ruled that US Airways has the right to subcontract our work,†said IAM General Vice President Robert Roach, Jr. “They have only ruled that the dispute should be settled through arbitration. Although we disagree, we will expedite the process and we are confident that our members will prevail once an arbitrator reviews the issue and the clear and unambiguous language in our contract.â€
Under the Railway Labor Act, the law governing labor relations in the airline industry, minor disputes must be resolved through an established arbitration process. The IAM will seek an expedited arbitration decision to include damages for members affected by US Airways’ flagrant contract violation.
“US Airways has taken airplanes out of service rather than having their own employees perform their maintenance, †said IAM District 141-M President Scotty Ford. “Such arrogance toward employees and passengers hasn’t been seen since Frank Lorenzo was banished from the industry.â€
Maintenance is currently being performed on US Airways’ Airbus aircraft at foreign-owned Singapore Technologies Mobile Aerospace Engineering in Mobile, AL.
The National Transportation Safety Board recently cited poor maintenance practices by another independent maintenance provider as a factor in last year’s Air Midwest crash of a Beech 1900D in Charlotte, NC. “Subcontracting maintenance work can be a very costly way to save money,†said Roach.
IAM District 141-M represents 5,000 Mechanic & Related employees at US Airways. IAM District 141 represents the airline’s 4,450 Fleet Service Employees. More information about the Machinists Union can be found on our web site at www.goiam.org.
IMHO, The problem with the outsourcing issue at Usair has nothing to do with 3rd party maintence,,..........The problem is HOW the company is trying to get the right to outsource heavy maint! NUMEROUS times they stated they would NOT go after heavy maint !!! One reason they were successful on the SECOND IAM VOTE were due to these statements!!! Actions such as this plainly show management CANNOT be trusted...So, as we await the verdict from the 13 Pennsylvania judges, I would like to think that 7 out of the 13 judges have enough INTEGRITY to make the RIGHT decision !!!! .As usual, time will tell .More Facts and Less Emotion said:
- Banned
- #30
WN's is bringing more and more maintenance in-house.
They currently perform their own C-checks and 1/4 D-Checks in-house, they have several of their own in-house repair and overhaul shops for componants.
WN's primary vendor is TRAMCO, which at one time was owned by Boeing and now owned by Goodrich I believe.
Southwest only vendors out a complete D-Check now.
They currently perform their own C-checks and 1/4 D-Checks in-house, they have several of their own in-house repair and overhaul shops for componants.
WN's primary vendor is TRAMCO, which at one time was owned by Boeing and now owned by Goodrich I believe.
Southwest only vendors out a complete D-Check now.
