Jim Little Response To Ken Mactiernan
- Thread starter James T. Kirk
- Start date
Johnny Lunchbox
Advanced
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2004
- Messages
- 159
- Reaction score
- 0
Buck, actually the cost per mechanic unit is much higher. Now Gary Oliphant is probably the one that should respond here as my facts are only close, but I believe we were initially around $90/hr. while TIMCO and such are at approx. $49/hr...through the work of Gary and his org. they have convinced and persuaded the company to drop that figure considerably, I do not have the correct figure so I will not speculate. The company believes, and it does make sense, that they can demand higher wages/hr. because their AMT's and related personnel put out an a/c ahead of schedule and under budget. This saves the clients money in lost revenue. I believe the company is doing what it can to begin this process.
Thanks to AMFA there is now $$$$ to be made in 3rd party work...huh? AMFA could save my job?
Thanks to AMFA there is now $$$$ to be made in 3rd party work...huh? AMFA could save my job?
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 7,319
- Reaction score
- 1,555
I know the actual labor cost is high. I did mean the hourly wage.
So by adjusting the work rules through concessions and lowering the wage rate, the company can draw in 3rd Party work?
T%his does fit in with the industrial union philosophy.
So by adjusting the work rules through concessions and lowering the wage rate, the company can draw in 3rd Party work?
T%his does fit in with the industrial union philosophy.
Bob, I disagree with your assertions about MCI. First, MCI is capable of expansion where as Tulsa Im told is landlocked and no growth?
Is expansion what they are looking for?
Aliance, Perot wants it back, says there is no moneyin maintenace, wants to ter down the hanger and build apartmetn complex?
Appartments for what? Alliance provided the jobs that sparked the demand for housing. Remove alliance and real estate prices and the demand for housing would decrease.
Maybe AA has wondered about lawsuits, lawsuits that if they do shutdown andlay off senior mechanics they fear will file lawsuits and win, over senority issues, like the ones pending in StLouis?
Based on what? The contract? The company would claim other reasons for picking MCI, such as the fact that its old.
Higher rates of sick leave? check the balnace, I understand of the 3 bases MCI has the highest average of perfect attendence?
Health problems? thats news to us, you make it sound as if we are sick and handicapped
If your average age is high then the odds are that more of your workers will come down with long term serious illnesses. This would be a long term trend.
You raise the cost of living again, it is true our cost of livingis cheaper than where you are and Im sorry about that, but maybe AA looks at that also, and thinks about managements cost of living also?
Our local and the international were successful with negotiations to secure a lease here, AA received alot in return. Maybe now is not the time to add on, but with MCI there is that option, thousands of square feet available, for super state of the art hangers?
Your local secured a lease? So the Local is the lessee? What you mean is the company secured a new lease under favorable terms as your local sat there like a lapdog insuring the creditors that they would be desperate enough to do anything to keep the base open.
About MCI being antiquated, its a fact, that MCI is newer than Tulsa, Tulsa has been refurbished where MCI has been neglected, but still has capabilities. And 737 cleared the hanger here, the docks sent here would fit at Tulsa, even 757 fit nicely inside and able to swing gears
Bob we do in fact have options to do third party work, Another plus we are told between us and Alliance is, the ferry fees that is charged to bring aircraft toAlliance? I feel we should all try to help each other rather than tear down one base, In no way was I stating this in hopes to shut down one and keep us open, I beleive TWU has been successful in keeping all of us working
I too would rather see all the bases kept open, but at what price? At the price of lowering our wage to the point that out here on the line morale is so bad that flights are cancelled or late because mechanics lack the will to dig in and give 110%? Many of our guys have gone back to working two full time jobs. How much energy, or interest do you think they have left when they report to work, especially night shift? They just dont care anymore. One guy said "Well the company is trying to see how little they can pay us before we quit so we are going to see how little we can do before they fire us". What you guys dont realize is that without us getting those airplanes out of here, making money, there wont be any job for you with this company there, no matter how low you go.
The fact is we cant survive out here on what you have forced upon us. And I say you because you have stated that you supported the concessions. You supported surrender instead of fighting. You still get your holidays and weekends off and a paycheck that can support a household. We get none of that. There are other ways for a union to protect jobs than to simply give into every demand from the company. They should have said no to the excessive concessions demanded, they should have said that the work is ours, our costs are still competative due to the concessionary structure that our contracts have had for the last twenty years and that if the company tries to abrogate our contract and impose such draconian concessions that we would strike. And if this union had said no to the companys uncalled for concessions the line guys would have been willing to strike, we know that the loss of overhaul would have a negative effect, especially if they could bump to the line. If this union had been willing to act like a union and called for us to all stick together we would have. But this union did not do that, they specifically targeted the concessions to hurt the line workers disproportionately since they knew that the line wants AMFA anyway. They took away pay, which hurt us more because we could not afford it like the overhaul workers in Tulsa and MCI. They took away shift premiums, most line workers do not work day shift. They took away 5 holidays and reduced the remining five to half pay for working, the bases usually have the holidays off so the half pay did not affect them.
This union should have said that they would consider reasonable concessions on a temporary basis to help the company through their current financial difficulties,however the companies proposal was unreasonable and far below industry standard. That would have forced the governments hand, maybe they would have rejected AMTRACK funding as a result but that is another fight. There is no way that the government could let AA go on strike due to the fact that AA had the largest market share of the passenger airline industry. Under the RLA government intervention can only lead to a maintenance of the staus quo. There has been no precident where the government imposed concessions on workers in the private sector. They may have pressured but they cant force us to work for a wage to which we do not agree to without an extremely good reason, the bottom line of the company is not such a reason.
The fact is that AA was the healthiest airline out there. Thier 10K had such dubious claims of losses such as $988 million in "Goodwill". It inducated that they had prepaid leases. Similar things happened in 1995 when the TWU stuck us with a six year concessionary contract, just as the company was about to embark on the greatest period of expansion and profitability in their history. A period of excess where the company spent money with abandon, buying equipement, rebuilding terminals and numerous other expenditures that went beyond the pale. In the meantime we were left out of the prosperity as our real earnings took a nosedive-the TWU did ok though, getting thousands more dues paying members. You claim that you are willing to take a paycut to give someone else a job, yet are you willing to allow us out here on the line to earn a comparable wage for the area where we live?
The fact is that there is a division between overhaul and the line that should not exist, or more specifically between Tulsa, MCI and the line. Many in AFW are from the line and have not forgotten where they came from. It has been here for decades. Not speaking about it does not mean it does not exist. The fact is that overhaul has the power but they have not used it like a union should. They have refused to fight concessions because the effect of those concessions has been tolerable for them and they could care less about how their union brother out on the line is harmed. We have heard from union officials from Tulsa that "majority rules and since we are the majority too bad for you". Basically their position is that since they are the majority our concerns are irrelevant. That is no way to run a union. This union stifles the free exchange of information. They have never attempted to illuminate those in overhaul to the difficulties that we face out here on the line. I believe that most in overhaul are decent people who if given such information would be willing to address it and not just say "We are the majority so too bad for you". We need a union that will unite us not use our division to hide their motive of increasing per capita. We need a union that recognizes that we are all A&P mechanics who want a good standard of living to support our families. The TWU will never be that union. The TWU does not see a problem with the way they are doing things, they are expanding their dues base and we are still making double of what their average member males. To them there is no difference between an A&P mechanic in NY and a school bus driver in Alabama, for us one size fits all. However this same concept does not extend to the International where even the secretary makes over six figures, or $50/hr. At least with AMFA we have a chance at starting off the right way to a better future, we will be joining a union where we lag the rest of the union. A union that believes and will fight to get us more.
Is expansion what they are looking for?
Aliance, Perot wants it back, says there is no moneyin maintenace, wants to ter down the hanger and build apartmetn complex?
Appartments for what? Alliance provided the jobs that sparked the demand for housing. Remove alliance and real estate prices and the demand for housing would decrease.
Maybe AA has wondered about lawsuits, lawsuits that if they do shutdown andlay off senior mechanics they fear will file lawsuits and win, over senority issues, like the ones pending in StLouis?
Based on what? The contract? The company would claim other reasons for picking MCI, such as the fact that its old.
Higher rates of sick leave? check the balnace, I understand of the 3 bases MCI has the highest average of perfect attendence?
Health problems? thats news to us, you make it sound as if we are sick and handicapped
If your average age is high then the odds are that more of your workers will come down with long term serious illnesses. This would be a long term trend.
You raise the cost of living again, it is true our cost of livingis cheaper than where you are and Im sorry about that, but maybe AA looks at that also, and thinks about managements cost of living also?
Our local and the international were successful with negotiations to secure a lease here, AA received alot in return. Maybe now is not the time to add on, but with MCI there is that option, thousands of square feet available, for super state of the art hangers?
Your local secured a lease? So the Local is the lessee? What you mean is the company secured a new lease under favorable terms as your local sat there like a lapdog insuring the creditors that they would be desperate enough to do anything to keep the base open.
About MCI being antiquated, its a fact, that MCI is newer than Tulsa, Tulsa has been refurbished where MCI has been neglected, but still has capabilities. And 737 cleared the hanger here, the docks sent here would fit at Tulsa, even 757 fit nicely inside and able to swing gears
Bob we do in fact have options to do third party work, Another plus we are told between us and Alliance is, the ferry fees that is charged to bring aircraft toAlliance? I feel we should all try to help each other rather than tear down one base, In no way was I stating this in hopes to shut down one and keep us open, I beleive TWU has been successful in keeping all of us working
I too would rather see all the bases kept open, but at what price? At the price of lowering our wage to the point that out here on the line morale is so bad that flights are cancelled or late because mechanics lack the will to dig in and give 110%? Many of our guys have gone back to working two full time jobs. How much energy, or interest do you think they have left when they report to work, especially night shift? They just dont care anymore. One guy said "Well the company is trying to see how little they can pay us before we quit so we are going to see how little we can do before they fire us". What you guys dont realize is that without us getting those airplanes out of here, making money, there wont be any job for you with this company there, no matter how low you go.
The fact is we cant survive out here on what you have forced upon us. And I say you because you have stated that you supported the concessions. You supported surrender instead of fighting. You still get your holidays and weekends off and a paycheck that can support a household. We get none of that. There are other ways for a union to protect jobs than to simply give into every demand from the company. They should have said no to the excessive concessions demanded, they should have said that the work is ours, our costs are still competative due to the concessionary structure that our contracts have had for the last twenty years and that if the company tries to abrogate our contract and impose such draconian concessions that we would strike. And if this union had said no to the companys uncalled for concessions the line guys would have been willing to strike, we know that the loss of overhaul would have a negative effect, especially if they could bump to the line. If this union had been willing to act like a union and called for us to all stick together we would have. But this union did not do that, they specifically targeted the concessions to hurt the line workers disproportionately since they knew that the line wants AMFA anyway. They took away pay, which hurt us more because we could not afford it like the overhaul workers in Tulsa and MCI. They took away shift premiums, most line workers do not work day shift. They took away 5 holidays and reduced the remining five to half pay for working, the bases usually have the holidays off so the half pay did not affect them.
This union should have said that they would consider reasonable concessions on a temporary basis to help the company through their current financial difficulties,however the companies proposal was unreasonable and far below industry standard. That would have forced the governments hand, maybe they would have rejected AMTRACK funding as a result but that is another fight. There is no way that the government could let AA go on strike due to the fact that AA had the largest market share of the passenger airline industry. Under the RLA government intervention can only lead to a maintenance of the staus quo. There has been no precident where the government imposed concessions on workers in the private sector. They may have pressured but they cant force us to work for a wage to which we do not agree to without an extremely good reason, the bottom line of the company is not such a reason.
The fact is that AA was the healthiest airline out there. Thier 10K had such dubious claims of losses such as $988 million in "Goodwill". It inducated that they had prepaid leases. Similar things happened in 1995 when the TWU stuck us with a six year concessionary contract, just as the company was about to embark on the greatest period of expansion and profitability in their history. A period of excess where the company spent money with abandon, buying equipement, rebuilding terminals and numerous other expenditures that went beyond the pale. In the meantime we were left out of the prosperity as our real earnings took a nosedive-the TWU did ok though, getting thousands more dues paying members. You claim that you are willing to take a paycut to give someone else a job, yet are you willing to allow us out here on the line to earn a comparable wage for the area where we live?
The fact is that there is a division between overhaul and the line that should not exist, or more specifically between Tulsa, MCI and the line. Many in AFW are from the line and have not forgotten where they came from. It has been here for decades. Not speaking about it does not mean it does not exist. The fact is that overhaul has the power but they have not used it like a union should. They have refused to fight concessions because the effect of those concessions has been tolerable for them and they could care less about how their union brother out on the line is harmed. We have heard from union officials from Tulsa that "majority rules and since we are the majority too bad for you". Basically their position is that since they are the majority our concerns are irrelevant. That is no way to run a union. This union stifles the free exchange of information. They have never attempted to illuminate those in overhaul to the difficulties that we face out here on the line. I believe that most in overhaul are decent people who if given such information would be willing to address it and not just say "We are the majority so too bad for you". We need a union that will unite us not use our division to hide their motive of increasing per capita. We need a union that recognizes that we are all A&P mechanics who want a good standard of living to support our families. The TWU will never be that union. The TWU does not see a problem with the way they are doing things, they are expanding their dues base and we are still making double of what their average member males. To them there is no difference between an A&P mechanic in NY and a school bus driver in Alabama, for us one size fits all. However this same concept does not extend to the International where even the secretary makes over six figures, or $50/hr. At least with AMFA we have a chance at starting off the right way to a better future, we will be joining a union where we lag the rest of the union. A union that believes and will fight to get us more.
Johnny Lunchbox Posted: Mar 1 2004, 04:18 AM
Member
Group: Member
Posts: 16
Member No.: 3,543
Joined: 28-February 04
Buck, actually the cost per mechanic unit is much higher. Now Gary Oliphant is probably the one that should respond here as my facts are only close, but I believe we were initially around $90/hr. while TIMCO and such are at approx. $49/hr...through the work of Gary and his org. they have convinced and persuaded the company to drop that figure considerably, I do not have the correct figure so I will not speculate. The company believes, and it does make sense, that they can demand higher wages/hr. because their AMT's and related personnel put out an a/c ahead of schedule and under budget. This saves the clients money in lost revenue. I believe the company is doing what it can to begin this process.
Thanks to AMFA there is now $$$$ to be made in 3rd party work...huh? AMFA could save my job?
--------------------
Peanut butter jelly, Peanut butter jelly, Peanut butter jelly, and a baseball bat!
_______________________________________________
JohnnyLunchbox,
Exactly when did AA settle on a cost of $90/hr for AMTs'...the figures I have indicate that early in the "concessions negotiations" AA figured the costs much lower.
It was not until the Maintenance & Related, AMT, Presidents came back with a proposal to satisfy the entire "concessions target" through increased productivity and layoffs, that the Company began raising the cost/hour for AMTs.
Member
Group: Member
Posts: 16
Member No.: 3,543
Joined: 28-February 04
Buck, actually the cost per mechanic unit is much higher. Now Gary Oliphant is probably the one that should respond here as my facts are only close, but I believe we were initially around $90/hr. while TIMCO and such are at approx. $49/hr...through the work of Gary and his org. they have convinced and persuaded the company to drop that figure considerably, I do not have the correct figure so I will not speculate. The company believes, and it does make sense, that they can demand higher wages/hr. because their AMT's and related personnel put out an a/c ahead of schedule and under budget. This saves the clients money in lost revenue. I believe the company is doing what it can to begin this process.
Thanks to AMFA there is now $$$$ to be made in 3rd party work...huh? AMFA could save my job?
--------------------
Peanut butter jelly, Peanut butter jelly, Peanut butter jelly, and a baseball bat!
_______________________________________________
JohnnyLunchbox,
Exactly when did AA settle on a cost of $90/hr for AMTs'...the figures I have indicate that early in the "concessions negotiations" AA figured the costs much lower.
It was not until the Maintenance & Related, AMT, Presidents came back with a proposal to satisfy the entire "concessions target" through increased productivity and layoffs, that the Company began raising the cost/hour for AMTs.
When a union steward or local officer other than the president goes on UB and agrees to Pay Continuence the local is billed the employees wages plus 9% to cover SSI and benifits. So when we were getting $35/hr the union paid the company around $38.50.
So that is closer to the real cost, not $90/hr, an obviously exaggerated figure. Maybe another 5% for the pension.
If the company says that we cost that much I would agree to forgo all benifits and just give me the $90/hr in my paycheck.
Years ago when we had full benifit packages such numbers may have been feasable, nowadays we cover much of those costs through Flex benifits, pre funding , high deductables and copays.
So that is closer to the real cost, not $90/hr, an obviously exaggerated figure. Maybe another 5% for the pension.
If the company says that we cost that much I would agree to forgo all benifits and just give me the $90/hr in my paycheck.
Years ago when we had full benifit packages such numbers may have been feasable, nowadays we cover much of those costs through Flex benifits, pre funding , high deductables and copays.
direct quote from Bob Owens. . .
"Dont worry so much and always, always go for the money before the promise of security."
Good job Bob, maybe amfa should use your quote as their new campaign slogan. VOTE FOR AMFA!!!! WE WILL TRY TO GET YOU SOME MORE MONEY BUT WE CAN'T GUARANTEE THAT YOU WILL EVEN HAVE A JOB WHEN WE ARE DONE!!!!!
Thanks for the insight Bob.
And again typical amfa mindset!!!
"Dont worry so much and always, always go for the money before the promise of security."
Good job Bob, maybe amfa should use your quote as their new campaign slogan. VOTE FOR AMFA!!!! WE WILL TRY TO GET YOU SOME MORE MONEY BUT WE CAN'T GUARANTEE THAT YOU WILL EVEN HAVE A JOB WHEN WE ARE DONE!!!!!
Thanks for the insight Bob.
And again typical amfa mindset!!!
Hey Mojo,mojo13 said:
I think Bob and these other amfa wannabes are prepping you for what WILL happen if amfa gets in as BA. They don't want it to come as such a shock when it DOES happen.
I guess they forgot to prep the folks at UAL and NWA huh???
HEEEEERE'S AMFA!! OOPS THERE GOES YOUR JOB, SORRY, WE FORGOT TO WARN YOU!!!!!
Johnny Lunchbox
Advanced
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2004
- Messages
- 159
- Reaction score
- 0
Bob and Buck...I'm not sure, but I think more than just hourly wage and benefits is figured in on the rate. As stated before, either Gary Oliphant or Ed Bright would be better to answer that as they have been in the meetings I believe.
Ken MacTiernan
Veteran
JL, please copy and paste where I say I do not "give a darn" about MCI. My loyalty is to our profession. Why should I be "loyal" to an organization that does not protect our profession? Now post your facts. You have another two weeks before we file so chop-chop!Johnny Lunchbox said:
Johnny Lunchbox
Advanced
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2004
- Messages
- 159
- Reaction score
- 0
Really Mctiernan, I don't care what you post nor do I give it any credit for it's content. By your promotion of AMFA you show you do not care for MCI. Your profession is AMT, not politics, stay in your field.
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 7,319
- Reaction score
- 1,555
The $90 is the fully allocated maintenance rate. This all costs, labor, engineering, R&D, HR and things like machine time etc...
The question is can AA (MCI) draw in the work by contractually guaranteeing turn times to offset the hirer labor rate. Management MD80 said something about Timco being around $45-$50 an hour and AA being $90. Timco 's Heavy C check is about 55-60 days, where AA is at somewhere around 18 - 22 days. Those existing 3rd Party facilities do not have all the overhead that AA has. So the customer, in theory would agree to a higher labor rate because he can get his product back in service quicker.
The question is can AA (MCI) draw in the work by contractually guaranteeing turn times to offset the hirer labor rate. Management MD80 said something about Timco being around $45-$50 an hour and AA being $90. Timco 's Heavy C check is about 55-60 days, where AA is at somewhere around 18 - 22 days. Those existing 3rd Party facilities do not have all the overhead that AA has. So the customer, in theory would agree to a higher labor rate because he can get his product back in service quicker.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
Alaska Airlines F/A's vote in favor of a new contract- Latest: Jalsporteam