New TWU president talks tough against DOJ lawsuit, American Airlines layoffs, industry outsourcing

[Thomas Paine]

See this is where you are ultra focused on one thing, layoffs. Very important I agree however what you do not say is if SWA had maintained status quo on HC and lines of work there should be at least 8 lines of heavy overhaul but there is not. AMFA conceded in several of the negotiated extensions to give up job growth that was merely maintaining status quo for a wage increases. True that is what your members wanted but our members at AA always asked us to draw the line on outsourcing. And the TWU did that. Year over year the outsourcing percentage has been one of the lowest in the industry while every other airline change the status quo for outsourcing to more and more. The new status quo for outsourcing has been put in place by AMFA, IBT, and the IAM. AA BK attorneys used all of your CBA's to bash the outsourcing cap in place in the TWU contract as unreasonable and now you throw the fact that we fought to keep those jobs in-house as a problem. It is that fact that you hide or divert attention from and throw up higher wages and no layoffs at SWA as honorable when your union AMFA has led the charge when it comes to selling out good paying stable jobs. Working as a temp at AAR, ATS, or helping grow jobs in El Salvador is not honorable...it's reprehensible.

You left out the fact that AA led the Legacies in outsourcing for decades, the CR Smith letter memorialized this, then on top of that the TWU gave AA OSMs that drove AA's average wages even lower, then on top of that when other carriers were fighting in bankruptcy to get 14% the TWU , outside of bankruptcy gave the company in excess of 25%. Perhaps if the TWU had never agreed to these things SWA would have brought more work in house and many of AA's competitors would not have switched to outsourcing as much to try and close the cost advantage that AA had long before 9-11. You claim the members asked "us" to draw the line on outsourcing and "that's what the TWU did". (I thought you weren't International, you separated yourself from The membership on that one, oops) Well who asked? From what I've read and was told the International decided that was the way to go, both in 2003 and 2012, they hid behind the lie of trying to save jobs when in fact all they were doing was maximizing the concessions AA was getting. Honorable? what in the world would you know about that? Talk about reprehensible!!

 

[Thomas Paine]

AMFA conceded in several of the negotiated extensions to give up job growth that was merely maintaining status quo for a wage increases.

In other words they sought higher wages and better working conditions for their members at the expense of increased dues flow for the Union. Does a Union exist for the good of the members paying dues or do the members exist for the good of the Union? You are advocating discounting the hourly rate of members so the Union can gain more members, and you don't see anything wrong with that. that's why we know you really aren't a Union man, you may act in some capacity for the International but you are not a Union man. By the way we gave up job growth, even job protection and gave up wages and benefits. So at SWA, in the middle of everyone else giving in to job reductions in addition to cuts in compensation you are attacking SWA for not only not having anyone get laid off but getting wage and benefit increases at the same time. Now I know why the call you Overspin! According to you the TWU is to be praised for extreme compensation cuts because up till now they have cuts fewer heads, but they did agree to concede on every front, that the TWU did a good job because the company did not get their entire "ASK", but you are criticizing AMFA at SWA which did not lose on any front, for not making advances on every front .

 

[Thomas Paine]

True that is what your members wanted but our members at AA always asked us to draw the line on outsourcing. And the TWU did that.

Not only is it a lie, but apparently a slip up. the fact is the TWU never made much of a fuss on outsourcing till it became a means to hide what they were really doing, giving AA the lowest paid mechanic workgroup in the industry. The TWU did put in system protection, at a time when the carrier was seeing rapid growth, then when the carrier started shrinking rolled it back, then totally eliminated it. If you read the CR Smith letter, which stayed in place for 50 years it cites how the goal is to do exactly what Southwest has agreed to do, outsource work and only hire enough mechanics to do steady work so they don't have to lay people off when work slows up. Only thing is AA still had layoffs, SWA never has.

 

[Overspeed]

You claim to be an old timer, “the claim has always been”, well SWA has only made a lot more than us since we gave concessions in 2003. You want to discuss the cost of the contract but not discuss the total costs of outsourcing including the loss of the use of the aircraft for longer periods of time, rework and reliability issues let alone what they end up paying those places.

Delta is Non-Union, are you saying that we should not expect more from being in a union? Ever consider the fact that the line could be used as leverage, instead of being sold out, to keep more work in house than Non-Union companies?

Decimated means one in ten, counting MCI and AFW Overhaul is way beyond decimated already. The language is useless,and you know it, it will never bring work back in house because you barely got this passed, do you really think that six or seven years from now the mechanics that are still here , earning far less than their peers in the industry will not give up that language , which is full of holes anyway, to get industry standard compensation and working conditions? Do you really believe they would forgo decent compensation that so AA can hire kids out of Spartan who will use AA as a place to get experience and go to carriers that pay better?

You said that its better to accept less pay, and accept concessions, than going to “Zero dollars”, IIRC on more than one occasion. You claim that’s what happened to mechanics at NWA and implied we would share the same fate if we chose to fight instead of roll over. That’s exactly what Union Busters say as well.

UA has been recalling mechanics, so has even non-union Delta. Recall is recall, does it really matter whether its to work AO or some other maintenance function? Are you saying that Airframe Overhaul deserves some type of protected status above all other types of Aircraft Maintenance and we should all be willing to accept bottom of the industry wages, not to try and ensure that we keep our jobs, but to make sure that type of work stays in house? Why should AO, which as you admit most other carriers have outsourced because they cant do it cost effectively in house, enjoy such an exclusive protected status? You are basically saying that we all should work for bottom of the industry wages so they can pay AO above market rates. out here on the line we have seen scores of stations close as far as in house line maintenance, never to reopen, there was no call to give concessions to save those places, we accepted it as part of the price we pay for the career choice we made. MCI closed, AFW closed, why should Tulsa be considered sacred? Wouldn't keeping System protection as a strike issue have made more sense than your phony bologna 35% cap (35% if they keep the partnership with RR, if they keep facilities, if they have the manpower, if they get tooling, if we are qualified, if, if, if) that when you really read it realize it protects nothing and nobody on the property?

SWA made money why after 2003? Could it be that they had all those hedges at $25/bbl why all others were paying $100/bbl? Longer OTS? Maybe but we haven't been outsourcing airframe until last year. DL, US and UA have all been doing their AO outside since 2003/2004. SWA has always been doing it. Not saying it's good to outsource I also think better quality and turn times result from a well managed maintenance program and would therefore lower operating costs. Problem is no contract can compel an airline to manage well, so it seems that since they can't run it well in-house upper management outsourced the whole thing.

Delta always raises their rates just enough so they can keep a union out. That's why DL AMTs rejected AMFA coming over with the NWA employees.

I have worked here a long time long enough to remember that in the late 80s AA had around 7,500 Title I, 575 aircraft, and one overhaul base. Prior to the BK CBA AA had three bases, 14,000 Title I, and 600 aircraft. I would agree our work force was decimated if we dropped below 8,000 and still did everything in-house. The 18,000 oft quoted number is when AA and TWA had become one and had over 800 aircraft with probably 12 different fleet types. You need to look at the whole picture and not exclude relevant facts.

Accept less pay? No I am not an advocate of that. I would expect that if we were able to maintain what we did in the late 80s with a similar HC we could get SWA wages for all of us including AO. Sad that you are willing to accept the new status quo on outsourcing brought on by others.

And thanks for showing your true colors, you are willing to sacrifice other people's jobs (TUL) for your fatter paycheck. It's the AMFA way. What happens when management comes after the line? NWA management showed it could be done. The new VP of AA came from NWA and he knows how to do it. So let's go to war!

 

[Overspeed]

You left out the fact that AA led the Legacies in outsourcing for decades, the CR Smith letter memorialized this, then on top of that the TWU gave AA OSMs that drove AA's average wages even lower, then on top of that when other carriers were fighting in bankruptcy to get 14% the TWU , outside of bankruptcy gave the company in excess of 25%. Perhaps if the TWU had never agreed to these things SWA would have brought more work in house and many of AA's competitors would not have switched to outsourcing as much to try and close the cost advantage that AA had long before 9-11. You claim the members asked "us" to draw the line on outsourcing and "that's what the TWU did". (I thought you weren't International, you separated yourself from The membership on that one, oops) Well who asked? From what I've read and was told the International decided that was the way to go, both in 2003 and 2012, they hid behind the lie of trying to save jobs when in fact all they were doing was maximizing the concessions AA was getting. Honorable? what in the world would you know about that? Talk about reprehensible!!

CO started the outsourcing under Lorenzo in the mid-80's. Come on man, tell the truth. OSM's came after NWA and DL started outsourcing. SWA was always used to beat us up don't you remember Crandall saying that over and over that they outsource and have way more flexible work rules? You are really making crap up now as you go along.

"We" is correct. I am TWU. I checked the job security and keep jobs box on my survey in 1994.

 

[Overspeed]

Not only is it a lie, but apparently a slip up. the fact is the TWU never made much of a fuss on outsourcing till it became a means to hide what they were really doing, giving AA the lowest paid mechanic workgroup in the industry. The TWU did put in system protection, at a time when the carrier was seeing rapid growth, then when the carrier started shrinking rolled it back, then totally eliminated it. If you read the CR Smith letter, which stayed in place for 50 years it cites how the goal is to do exactly what Southwest has agreed to do, outsource work and only hire enough mechanics to do steady work so they don't have to lay people off when work slows up. Only thing is AA still had layoffs, SWA never has.

The CR Smith letter has to do with maintain stable employment and keeping maintenance as per the normal practice. That usually kept work at 15% of total spend on outsourcing.

Keep making stuff up

 

[Thomas Paine]

SWA made money why after 2003? Could it be that they had all those hedges at $25/bbl why all others were paying $100/bbl?

SWA always made money. Hard to blame other carriers for outsourcing in 2004 when we gave AA OSMs in 1995. Surprised they were able to hold out 9 years.

 

[Thomas Paine]

I have worked here a long time long enough to remember that in the late 80s AA had around 7,500 Title I, 575 aircraft, and one overhaul base. Prior to the BK CBA AA had three bases, 14,000 Title I, and 600 aircraft. I would agree our work force was decimated if we dropped below 8,000 and still did everything in-house. The 18,000 oft quoted number is when AA and TWA had become one and had over 800 aircraft with probably 12 different fleet types. You need to look at the whole picture and not exclude relevant facts.

Yep and that's when we had system protection, when we went from 7500 to 18000. In other words System protection had zero real value, but we paid for it with other concessions. When we went from 18000 to 12000 we made that possible by agreing to roll system protection back, outside of bankruptcy, then we agreed to eliminate it entirely so they could go back to less than 7500 mechanics with a lot more airplanes than they had when you hired on. Back when you hired on we made more than SWA. Funny how now you cite the impact of several fleet types (because you believe it helps your argument) but ignore that when you cite SWA mechanic to aircraft ratio. SWA had a single narrowbody fleet type yet you claimed that if we had their contract we would have the same ratio despite our mixed fleet type which includes widebodies and ETOPS operations. I agree that a mixed fleet drives a higher headcount and higher maintenance costs Yes look at the whole picture and the relevant facts such as we work under the worst conditions in the industry, yes there are still more of us here, but given the option even you would rather be at SWA.

 

[Thomas Paine]

Accept less pay? No I am not an advocate of that.

Of course you are. You are willing to have all of us accept much lower wages than our peers doing the same work so people in AO can enjoy wages that are higher than their peers doing the same work.

 

[Thomas Paine]

And thanks for showing your true colors, you are willing to sacrifice other people's jobs (TUL) for your fatter paycheck.

Explain how you come to that conclusion? You once again claim that labor has no power, that if a company demands concessions that labor must give in, and give in completely, that the only option they have is either compensation or headcount. Well other than eliminating your job what other threat does a company really have if you say NO? What else would you expect them to threaten us with? We have the option to fight, and with 90% of the work in house and a maxed out MRO narrowbody capacity that was the time to challenge them. We know what your color is.

 

[Thomas Paine]

CO started the outsourcing under Lorenzo in the mid-80's. Come on man, tell the truth. OSM's came after NWA and DL started outsourcing. SWA was always used to beat us up don't you remember Crandall saying that over and over that they outsource and have way more flexible work rules? You are really making crap up now as you go along.

CAL really wasn't much of a Legacy carrier throughout the eighties and nineties, they went BK several times. Historically, every carrier outsourced some work, and the CR Smith letter is proof that AA was one of the leaders in outsourcing over 50 years ago. OSMs gave AA a cost advantage in OH that their competitors were unable to match, so when the Towers came down they threw in the towel and outsourced the work that we had gained a huge cost advantage on, AO. I also remember Crandall saying that we would not do 3P work for other carriers. Yep Crandall used to cite their flexible work rules, that now look stringient compared to ours but then again he was management, do you trust and accept as Gospell everything management tells you? Silly me, of course you do, then you come here and repeat it.

 

[Thomas Paine]

"We" is correct. I am TWU.

Wrong, you said "the membership asked us to draw the line." clearly "US" and "the membership" refer to two different entities.

 

[Vortilon]

Don't you just love the way overspeed attempts to lay a guilt trip on you for wanting better pay and benefits? In other words, it's up to us - to save the "at risk of RIF" people by giving away our pay and benefits contract after contract. Well, now we are bare bones overspeed - worst pay in the industry, and worst benefits in the industry. The TWU strategy has run its course - enough! It's AMFA time!

 

[Thomas Paine]

The CR Smith letter has to do with maintain stable employment and keeping maintenance as per the normal practice. That usually kept work at 15% of total spend on outsourcing.

It permitted outsourcing on a scale that was greater than other legacy carriers, that's why it was an issue. wasn't it always the position of Unions to go by manhours, not "spend"? I never heard of spend being used until last year, prior to that everybody went by manhours.

 

[Thomas Paine]

Don't you just love the way overspeed attempts to lay a guilt trip on you for wanting better pay and benefits? In other words, it's up to us - to save the "at risk of RIF" people by giving away our pay and benefits contract after contract. Well, now we are bare bones overspeed - worst pay in the industry, and worst benefits in the industry. The TWU strategy has run its course - enough! It's AMFA time!

He is really saying that we should accept lower wages so kids in school will have jobs waiting for them at AA, problem is there aren't many in those schools, so really the only one benefitting from all this is AA. He blasts SWA for not increasing its headcount proportionately with fleet growth, for opting instead for higher wages and no layoffs while at the same time AA was laying off workers, reducing headcount faster than fleet reduction, slashing wages and benefits and gutting contract language. he claims that AA would give us SWA contract and based on their mechanic to aircraft ratio that we would all be gone, then later cites how the mixed fleet at AA after the TWA merger drove headcount to 18000. So he admits in one post that a mixed fleet drives up headcount but in another claims that contract language, not the needs of the operation, dictates headcount. He is spinning so fast he made himself so dizzy and disorientated that he cant keep his lies straight.