Mechanics target overseas airline maintenance

[eolesen]

FFCA, your last sentence says it all --- if there is degredation of service.

Unfortunately, if you look at completion factors, on-time dependability, and the other quantifiable measures available, there's been no measurable degredation of service with the practice of offshoring. If anything, the carriers who have large portions of their maintenance outsourced seem to have better than average dependability and completion factors (flights operated vs. canceled).

I am by no means in favor of sending work overseas that can be done here in the US by US citizens.

That doesn't change the fact that the same quality of work can be (and regularly is) achieved in any maintenance shop, be it in TUL or KUL, SFO or SJO, any other number of MRO's scattered about the globe. It's all about attention to detail and skill.

Some mechanics here will tell you that only U.S. citizens (I won't say Americans because Mexicans, Colombians, Costa Ricans or Canadians, who are also technically Americans in the global sense that many are too ignorant to recognize) holding the hallowed FAA issued A&P certificate are capable of maintaining aircraft safely, because it's inconceivable that anybody outside the US is capable of reading English maintenance manuals.

Practice shows otherwise.

Here's a list of incidents and accidents attributed to aircraft maintenance:

http://aviation-safety.net/database/dblist.php?Event=MA

Ironically, maintenance was insourced at most of the US hull losses.

Here's the list of accidents attributed to airframe:

http://aviation-safety.net/database/dblist...ang=&page=8

Same song, different verse.

The facts here support the notion that aircraft maintained outside the US aren't falling out of the sky.

Again, I'm not a proponent of sending the work offshore, but y'all are going to need to come up with better arguments than the perennial "because we say it's unsafe" to justify anyone taking action.

 

[Hopeful]

.

The facts here support the notion that aircraft maintained outside the US aren't falling out of the sky.

Again, I'm not a proponent of sending the work offshore, but y'all are going to need to come up with better arguments than the perennial "because we say it's unsafe" to justify anyone taking action.

I can tell you from experience having gone on field trips to Central and South American cities to work out of service AA aircraft, that the mechanics there that are either employed by AA or contracted out are indeed qualified with their mechanic abilities. But what I have found is their understanding of the maintenance manuals. Some barely speak English and cannot interpret the manuals which are in English. They refer to someone a little more fluent in English to interpret maintenance manual and GPM instructions.
We are not speaking about someone who could understandably misinterpret a document but rather someone who can misinterpret a word.

As for safe, let's go down a different argumentative path. The security at some of these facilities is a joke compared to what we have in the states. Take SDQ where those employees lucky enough to own a car actually drive into the airport and park on the ramp next to an aircraft.

I doubt many of these employees in non US cities go throught the same screening process we do here to get an airport access ID.


In some ways the FAA is a joke. The same agency that is suposed to enforce airline safety should not have a dual role in promoting airline travel.

 

[Bob Owens]

FFCA, your last sentence says it all --- if there is degredation of service.

Unfortunately, if you look at completion factors, on-time dependability, and the other quantifiable measures available, there's been no measurable degredation of service with the practice of offshoring. If anything, the carriers who have large portions of their maintenance outsourced seem to have better than average dependability and completion factors (flights operated vs. canceled).

Some mechanics here will tell you that only U.S. citizens (I won't say Americans because Mexicans, Colombians, Costa Ricans or Canadians, who are also technically Americans in the global sense that many are too ignorant to recognize) holding the hallowed FAA issued A&P certificate are capable of maintaining aircraft safely, because it's inconceivable that anybody outside the US is capable of reading English maintenance manuals.

Really who? I dont see anybody complaining about JAA certified mechanics, but chop shops in central America or Aisia would have me concerned. Yes there's a lot of redundancy built into aircraft but often a faulty repair doesnt kill anyone till years later such as the faulty repair done in Tiawan in 1980 that failed in 2002 on China Air. Yes a lot of those guys can be very resourceful but OH is when the aircraft should be brought back to factory OEM specs.

Practice shows otherwise.

Here's a list of incidents and accidents attributed to aircraft maintenance:

http://aviation-safety.net/database/dblist.php?Event=MA

Ironically, maintenance was insourced at most of the US hull losses.

Here's the list of accidents attributed to airframe:

http://aviation-safety.net/database/dblist...ang=&page=8

Same song, different verse.

The facts here support the notion that aircraft maintained outside the US aren't falling out of the sky.

Again, I'm not a proponent of sending the work offshore, but y'all are going to need to come up with better arguments than the perennial "because we say it's unsafe" to justify anyone taking action.

Just going by straight numbers isnt really a fair comparasion. If we have 10,000 flights a day and have 2 accidents a year attributable to maint and some other country has 1000 a day and 1 accident attributable to maintenance you can say they had half as many accidents due to maintenance but its grossly misleading to say that their record is as good as ours since we had 10 times more flights.


Now as far as On time dependability OH is only a part of that formula. Line maintenance is equally critical to that figure. The fact is that AA's on time performance could be much better, I think we get a better quality product out of OH but our Line guys are so discouraged that they really dont deliver their full potential, why should they when they are getting 40% less pay? Is it realistic for AA to expect the same performance from their $32/hr line mechanics as their competitors get who pay $45/hr? Sorry that aint going to happen. Like I told one of the companys negotiators, If you want us to make you number one you have to make us number one first. I expect things at AA to get even worse as time goes by.


Right now SWA has a contract that will put them up to $45 by 2012, Fed Ex gets $41, Continental is asking for close to $45 and rumor is that UPS is going for $50. Now you can try and spin it any way you want but the fact is those are our peers. They are A&P mechanics doing line maintenance on heavy turbine aircraft. Their skillsets, conditions and responsiblities are as close to identical as we can get. They all work for carriers under the RLA that have not declared BK in the last 10 years.

I suspect that AA will try and have a TA in place before we hear what UAL/IBT is demanding and if the changes in the RLA go forward and the IBT annouces a drive to organize the mechanics at Delta they will shoot up to over $40/hr as well. So even our peers that went through BK recently will be doing better than us.

As the Gap between us and our peers grows its reasonable to expect that our performance will degrade as well. Why would we want AA to succeed if their success is built on our economic decline?? We would be better off to see it fail and let a carrier that pays better pick up the routes and passengers and put in our applications there, and the only way they would be able to do that is if AA failed. When EAL and then PAA shut down American did just that. (I dont know of any EAL guys who say they should have accepted Lorenzos ultimatum and kept EAL going)They took the routes then took the workers. AA was dying for mechanics in the late 80s, in New York they were leaving faster than they could hire them, we used to get forced OT nearly every night. The failure of EAL and PAA helped AA. Both EAL and Pan Am either had slashed or were trying to slash their mechanics pay to far below competitors levels in order to compete. Maybe the failure of AA could help SWA, Continental, UPS and Fed Ex? As professionals wouldnt it be better to see the airlines that pay us $40 or more an hour succeed than the ones that only want to pay us $30? Does the color of the paint on the tail matter more than the size of the paycheck?

 

[FrequentFlierCA]

eolesen: your points are well taken, and I'll circle back to say that what I'm really coming out in favor of is FAA oversight of these shops. I'm certainly glad there haven't been any incidents yet, but my fear is that an existing or new operator will switch to a vendor that doesn't keep up with industry best practices. FAA has a statutory mandate to oversee this stuff, and I think they need to get out from behind their desks and get to it.

 

[MCI transplant]

eolesen: your points are well taken, and I'll circle back to say that what I'm really coming out in favor of is FAA oversight of these shops. I'm certainly glad there haven't been any incidents yet, but my fear is that an existing or new operator will switch to a vendor that doesn't keep up with industry best practices. FAA has a statutory mandate to oversee this stuff, and I think they need to get out from behind their desks and get to it.

<_< ----- I think the current mandate in business today is "less" Government oversight, not "more"! And I feel the Airline Industry could be considered part of that statement.

 

[Tbag]

Associated Press
Mechanics target overseas airline maintenance
By JOSHUA FREED , 12.16.09, 12:01 AM EST


The union that represents mechanics at American Airlines plans to launch a publicity campaign on Wednesday aimed at steering travelers away from airplanes maintained overseas.

forbes

Don't know why AA TWU is focusing on this subject!!!! They should be trying to get us a new contract!!!!!!!

Chairman MAO is laughing his ass off.
UAL and JetBlue are at the top of that dung-pile. Does anyone have a list of the dung-pile airlines on the web?

 

[MERV]

The outsourcing report flyer beware
linktv.com outsourcing vid

 

[Hopeful]

They should outsource executives and save a bundle.

 

[tech2101]

Is it realistic for AA to expect the same performance from their $32/hr line mechanics as their competitors get who pay $45/hr? Sorry that aint going to happen.

Yes it is realistic for a business to expect the same performance from their employees as the competitors.

I know my work ethic did/does not change based on the amount of my pay.

You are a union rep?

You just announced to the company that you do not work as hard since you consider yourself underpaid...and you champion that attitude to the membership. What incentive is there for the company to give you a raise with that perspective?

Firm's do not give raises to people who are under-performing with hope that the raise will give them the incentive to give 100%. I know of no business that does that. If you owned a business, would you?

So, if even you get a $6/hr raise, if you are still below the competitors, you will not work as hard as you could to help the business be successful?

As you know, none of us are ever paid what we are worth...

 

[Hopeful]

As you know, none of us are ever paid what we are worth...

True, but the suits at the top get paid far more than their worth.

 

[tech2101]

True, but the suits at the top get paid far more than their worth.

My point was sarcastic.

No employee (or executive) ever feels overpaid, do they?

 

[Bob Owens]

Yes it is realistic for a business to expect the same performance from their employees as the competitors.

I know my work ethic did/does not change based on the amount of my pay.

You are a union rep?

You just announced to the company that you do not work as hard since you consider yourself underpaid...and you champion that attitude to the membership. What incentive is there for the company to give you a raise with that perspective?

Firm's do not give raises to people who are under-performing with hope that the raise will give them the incentive to give 100%. I know of no business that does that. If you owned a business, would you?

So, if even you get a $6/hr raise, if you are still below the competitors, you will not work as hard as you could to help the business be successful?

As you know, none of us are ever paid what we are worth...

You my friend live in a different world, or are oblivious to the one you are in.

The fact is we increased our productivity by double digits and instead of raises the company wants more concessions, so your management through reward theory is debunked. Now you may go out there and give the company the same effort regardless of pay but answer this, if everyone thought like you, what would be the incentive for the employer to give you a raise?

Why would a company pay you $40 if they knew you would show up and give them the same performance and effort if they only gave you $30/hr? Would you? If you would then its clear why you dont run a business and just work for one. With rare exceptions Fezziwigs dont run corporations, Scrooges do.

 

[tech2101]

The fact is we increased our productivity by double digits and instead of raises the company wants more concessions, so your management through reward theory is debunked.

If you have shown that at the negotiating table, in front of the mediator, then I think you have a strong position to argue for a competitive compensation package.

The problem I see with your situation is that you have a membership that will not strike if you force their hand. If you think they (the membership) will strike, you are mistaken. We found that out at NWA.

It would be worse for you now than it was for us then.

 

[Bob Owens]

If you have shown that at the negotiating table, in front of the mediator, then I think you have a strong position to argue for a competitive compensation package.

A mediator is not an arbitrator. It doesnt matter to him what we have done, he only cares if we are making progress towards a new agreement or if we are at an impasse.

The problem I see with your situation is that you have a membership that will not strike if you force their hand. If you think they (the membership) will strike, you are mistaken. We found that out at NWA.

Well if we want a livable wage we have to. The difference between our situation and yours is
a) the real wage is substantially lower
B) the companys offer would lower the real wage by another 12% or more (on top of the 40%)
c) the supply of mechanics is lower
d) the other workgroups are either in the same union or are gearing up for a strike themselves, we would have their support.
e)NWA had maintenance management with experience who could actually work on the aircraft

It would be worse for you now than it was for us then.

Perhaps, but only because you guys were wise enough to hold on to full pay till the last day, so if you were smart you were able to get your financial affairs in order prior to the strike, but I think the end result would be different. You have to remember that you guys were not only fighting the company but all the other unions on the property, we see how much good that did them.

The fact is NWA lucked out, they had the cooperation of the other Unions and there was still a substantial number of A&Ps who were willing to work for the wages offered. AA had a list of 298 names for recall at NY1, they got around 16 to come back, the others refused the recall. We have guys who are in their mid 40s quitting and leaving and many others who use thier down time to study for other occupations. The tide has turned to labors favor but I fear that by the time we realize it the pendulem will be headed back the other way.

 

[tech2101]

Perhaps, but only because you guys were wise enough to hold on to full pay till the last day, so if you were smart you were able to get your financial affairs in order prior to the strike, but I think the end result would be different. You have to remember that you guys were not only fighting the company but all the other unions on the property, we see how much good that did them.

Most of us at the out stations knew our job was gone. They simply spent too much time, money, and effort in finding our replacements to let go to waste. My manager for my station told us as much. I believed him. Many did not.

The fact is NWA lucked out, they had the cooperation of the other Unions and there was still a substantial number of A&Ps who were willing to work for the wages offered. AA had a list of 298 names for recall at NY1, they got around 16 to come back, the others refused the recall. We have guys who are in their mid 40s quitting and leaving and many others who use thier down time to study for other occupations. The tide has turned to labors favor but I fear that by the time we realize it the pendulem will be headed back the other way.

They still have a large pool of people willing to take your job at the pay you are now making. That is a fact.

How many of these OSM's have A&P licenses that would be willing to take your line job at your current pay?

It is a good thing that many are studying for other careers. I am only now in my mid/late 40's. I started a new, lucrative career, post NWA strike. It would not have happened if I had not started back to college 6 months prior to the strike. My degree, coupled with my many years of aviation maintenance experience opened many doors.

It seems that maybe your fellow unions are also fed up. I hope you all can harness that. The company will target one group (the weakest) for an agreement, then pit them against you. I am sure you know all this. I wish you luck.

I know as an AMFA member, we (the vast majority) kept up our high standard of maintenance until the last day on the job; the day we were escorted off the property. That is why I was dismayed at your earlier statement regarding working hard relative to pay. Of course that was easier knowing that we had not caved in to concession demands at the whim of the company.