Is 3rd Party Maintenance Unsafe?

[700UW]

These statements are more of an argument that US shoud start outsourcing some heavy mtc than keep it all inside.

Sorry to burst your bubble but the collective bargaining agreement means it is IAM covered work, the company had two rounds of concessions to ask for relief, they did not, they do not have the right to steal what they failed to negotiate

 

[700UW]

How come Southwest, Fed Ex, United and the entire U.S. Military (Air Force, Navy, Marine, Army, & Coast Guard units) all outsource overhaul and do not have any maintenance problems?
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot

Here is what happened to a UAL A319 after landing from having its nose gear reworked by Foriegn Owned Mobile Aerospace.

Do you not call that a problem?

 

[PITMTC]

320 -

Your mantra has not changed, perhaps the essence of the data has, but the chant is the same -- it just happens to be two years later. Everyone has your number. You may, indeed, have a stake in the decisions, you do not, however, have a vote in their process. It would behoove you to resist the constant drum beating, these individuals will do exactly what is best for them, and all of your repetitive posts will not, I repeat, will not change their minds. It only serves to bait and anger them, and that is neither productive nor positive.

Well this should go for others on this board repeating the same thing over and over then?

 

[BillLumbergh]

Sorry to burst your bubble but the collective bargaining agreement means it is IAM covered work, the company had two rounds of concessions to ask for relief, they did not, they do not have the right to steal what they failed to negotiate

Hmmm. A federal court was not so sure about that one.

Now, back to lurking...

 

[700UW]

Hmmm. A federal court was not so sure about that one.

Now, back to lurking...

Bill your information is not correct, the court only ruled on the major vs minor dispute, they did not rule on the contract language, that is why the whole thing is going to arbitration.

Getting your info from a certain Airbus Captain?

From the IAM:

Appeals Court Sends IAM-US Airways Subcontracting Dispute to Arbitration

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."

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."

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.

From the Reuters:

February 3, 2004
A federal appeals court on Tuesday overturned an injunction preventing US Airways from outsourcing heavy maintenance on some of its Airbus aircraft.

The 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia said the disagreement between the International Association of Machinists and US Airways was a "minor" one, and therefore the district court that had issued the temporary injunction lacked the jurisdiction to do so.

The appeals court did not rule on whether outsourcing the maintenance work violated the IAM's labor agreement with the company. Instead, the court said the issue must be resolved through binding arbitration, under rules in the Railway Labor Act governing minor disputes.

IAM spokesman Joe Tiberi said the union's attorneys were reviewing its options.

The union could decide to seek arbitration on the matter or it could choose to appeal Tuesday's ruling.

In the meantime, the Arlington, Virginia-based airline will resume maintenance on the nine Airbus A319 aircraft that was scheduled to be completed by the end of last year, spokesman David Castelveter said.

The IAM claims its collective bargaining agreement requires US Airways to use IAM employees to perform the heavy maintenance work, while the company has sought to outsource the work as it tries to cut costs.

"We will not allow the airline's arrogance and disregard for the employees that rescued the company to go unchallenged," IAM General Vice President Robert Roach said in a statement.

In October, US District Judge Robert Cindrich permitted a private contractor, ST Mobile Aerospace Engineering, to finish work on one of the planes that had already been started. But he blocked the airline's plans to complete servicing up to nine other narrowbody planes.

US Airways issued a statement on Tuesday saying it was prepared to quickly arbitrate the matter.

"The court's decision validates the company's consistent legal opinion that this issue is a minor contract dispute under the Railway Labor Act that must be resolved through arbitration," the company said.

The Federal Aviation Administration requires heavy maintenance -- which involves checking planes for major structural weaknesses -- every five years.

US Airways emerged from bankruptcy 10 months ago and is still struggling to cut costs to survive. It is reportedly considering the sale of some of its assets, and four US airlines have bid on various pieces of the airline, according to banking sources.

(Reuters)

 

[usfliboi]

700 heres a prime example of where reality interferes with "your" facts. Lets assume that your 100% correct. The courts hasnt made that judgement Who is doing the checks now? Whats the likelihood of it returning without major concessions on iam 's part? So you see just because your facts maybe indeed a fact, reality isnt the same is it? You spend so much time spewing "facts" inside of a "fact", you keep missing the over all view. Just annother observation and opinion and your welcome to it.

 

[700UW]

I'M DELETING THIS POST BECAUSE 700, ITS CLEAR THAT YOU CANNOT POST A REPLY WITHOUT INSULTING, BASHING, OR MAKING A PERSONAL ATTACK.

YOU ARE PUBLICLY WARNED AGAINST FURTHER ACTION.

 

[PITMTC]

I'M DELETING THIS POST BECAUSE 700, ITS CLEAR THAT YOU CANNOT POST A REPLY WITHOUT INSULTING, BASHING, OR MAKING A PERSONAL ATTACK.

YOU ARE PUBLICLY WARNED AGAINST FURTHER ACTION.

Clearly about time.

Please slip up again 700.

 

[JetMech]

I would like to clarify some points with regards to contract maintenance. First, i would like to say that to make the statement that "all contract maintenance is unsafe" is ludicrous. But on the other hand it is just as ludicrous to say that contract maintenance is as safe as the in house maintenance. The issue is alot more complicated. Contract maintenance if done with adherene to the FARs and placing QUALITY ahead of cost is just as safe as in house maintenance. As a matter of fact alot of "contractors" are airlines. United, Eastern, and even USairways used to do alot of maintenance for other carriers. The quality was just as good in contract as it is for its own fleet. The key to this is that in these operations a high pertentage of mechanics are lincensed and the QA oversight as well as the engineering support are excellent. Many operators choose to use these types of operations more because of the lack of resources or because in their case it would much much cheaper than to have EQUAL support in house. Today we have gotten away from these types of operations and driven more to the "walmart" types of operations. In these operations a very low percent of mechanics are certified. To make matters worse of the ones that are, many are sub contractors. They dont actually work for the entity itself. They are aviation "Kelly girls" who work for personel services. Moving for place to place often times workin 16 hour plus shifts when work is available. When actual aircraft work stops as it would during for example painting, then there is no work. From personal experience the quality of these mechanics is less than stellar. And there is a high degree of alcohol and drug abuse. To make matters worse the direct oversight by the carriers is shady at best. Often times the oversight is only by a few individuals and done on "day" shift while work continues around the clock. The amount of time the aircraft is in overhaul is an irrelevant issue because it is after all.... an inspection!!! If there are less descrepancies found there is less to do!! Hence the low low cost. The real culprit in this issue is the FAA because they allow the practice to exist and provide very little direct oversight. We in the maintenance sommunity at the airlines CANNOT compete with these types of operations because it is not a level playing field. They simply fudge the rules. In the coming months you will see more on this subject as a direct result on 3 recent accidents. The Air Midwest and Colgan Beech 1900 accidents and the Emery DC8 accident. Anyone wishing to read the NTSB findings can do so by accesing www.NTSB.gov . I know the IAM together with ALPA and the AFA are already discussing the issue with members of the Senate. Updates will be posted on the IAM District 141M website. Just wanted to pass on ACTUAL verifyable information

Thanks

 

[700UW]

I'M DELETING THIS POST BECAUSE 700, ITS CLEAR THAT YOU CANNOT POST A REPLY WITHOUT INSULTING, BASHING, OR MAKING A PERSONAL ATTACK.

YOU ARE PUBLICLY WARNED AGAINST FURTHER ACTION.

ANd how was it an attack? I disputed everything he said, is that an attack?

 

[BillLumbergh]

I guess you forgot the part about "serving cokes".

 

[700UW]

Excuse me have you flown on a commercial jet?

Last time I did the F/A served cokes and various other drinks.

 

[700UW]

if you dont believe my posts, here is one from the company, are they putting out false facts too?

US AIRWAYS ISSUES STATEMENT ON THIRD CIRCUIT COURT'S DECISION ON HEAVY MAINTENANCE WORK FOR AIRBUS AIRCRAFT
ARLINGTON, Va., Feb. 3, 2004 -- US Airways issued the following statement in response to today’s ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Philadelphia regarding the use of a third-party maintenance repair provider.

"The Court's decision validates the company's consistent legal opinion that this issue is a minor contract dispute under the Railway Labor Act that must be resolved through arbitration between US Airways and the International Association of Machinists. We are prepared to quickly arbitrate this matter as our collective focus must be to meet the travel plans of our customers without interruption."

Reporters needing additional information should contact US Airways Corporate Affairs at (703) 872-5100.

http://www.usairways.com/about/press/nw_04_0203.htm

 

[700UW]

It is just simply baffiling that certain posters on this board gets away with posting everything and anything and get no action taken against them, but when one of the ProUnion posters does the same they get warned or a trip to the cornfield.

I have no problems with the rules of the board, it just seems that they are not applied fairly or evenly to all the posters.

 

[GeezLouis]

According to reports it takes US Airways' Maintenance Department 18 days to do an overhaul and a contractor 13 days. In addition, the extra 5 days the aircraft is in overhaul the company loses 5 days of revenue generation.

I had to go to USAir's Clt Heavy Mtc Hangar about a month ago to get some tooling for a company that I work for now, and quess how many mechanics were assigned to the A330 on the shift that night. Five!!!

This is the biggest bird in our fleet and you only assign five mechanics to work on it??? I've seen more mechanics than that assigned to checks on KingAirs at local FBO's. Please, it's clear that management doesnt' want these checks to leave on time.

Regards