Outsourcing at AA
- Thread starter Duke787
- Start date
Overspeed
Veteran
- Jun 27, 2011
- 3,245
- 1,065
swamt said:
Calm down. You don't do any engine overhaul in-house, you have four lines of airframe overhaul in-house for 622 aircraft, and practically no component work in-house to speak of. Keep bragging about how much better the SWA/AMFA contract is on jobs because its not. You justify that by saying you never had it to begin with but we have since the beginning. The comparison is not valid unless you establish how you intend to get us to where you are at? Are we supposed to mimic your agreement and give up all engine overhaul, components, and all but four lines airframe overhaul? That means we need to close TAESL, TUL PALM, and all the docks in TUL. We get to keep DWH and get a contract that limits AA to outsourcing only four lines to a foreign country. Do you think the members who are working those jobs will be okay with voting yes to do away with their careers? Some more may lose their jobs under the CBA scope clause but nowhere near what would happen under the AMFA scope clause.
I admit I was wrong on the foreign MX cap. You win, AMFA wins on the battle for capping foreign MX at four lines. Bottom line is you are saying that outsourcing more than 50% of your MX spend okay because you only allow four lines to be done outside the country? We have been having the outsourcing argument for how long now? Too long. What is your fix? How do we stop it? The industry status quo is not keeping overhaul in-house and it did not get started at AA under TWU contracts. AA based their outsourcing level in the ask based on the industry average which was based on UA, US, DL, CO, and WN. The company wanted what everyone else has and the TWU had to find a way to hang on to as many jobs as possible without taking too many hits on wages and benefits.
MetalMover
Veteran
- Sep 16, 2013
- 3,543
- 2,410
I used OH as one example regarding the contract of UPS and SWA. UPS has a very few mechanics compared to AA. They do not do any OH. So I attribute their generous contract to that aspect. As for SWA, yes, they do some heavy work but nothing compared to what AA did up until the BK deals. This is just one piece of the huge puzzle.eolesen said:
Having said that, yes you correct in that bringing up the past will do us all no good. But look at the relationships at UPS and SWA.....Those have been developed in the past. They originated with that concept. It takes far greater effort to change a bad relationship than it is to improve a good one.
Now by no means am I advocating getting rid of OH...to a point and not totally....but that does seem to be the trend.
I am all for moving forward,,,,,but time will tell.
MetalMover
Veteran
- Sep 16, 2013
- 3,543
- 2,410
swamt.....by no means am i knocking SWA......Yes they do some OH..But did they have ever a TULSA? an AFW? numerous Class I line stations? With hangars performing a lot of work? Then MCI?swamt said:
That's my point...I did not mention SW because to throw a dig at AMFA.
I have always contended that UPS namely and even SWA have generous contracts because they do not perform as much in-house work as AA once did.
Geez, at one time we had around 12000 mechanics.
One would think that paying a couple of thousand would be better for a company than paying several times that in the same expense category.
But this (OH) just one aspect.....Management/labor relationships play a far greater role.
MetalMover
Veteran
- Sep 16, 2013
- 3,543
- 2,410
MetalMover said:
La Li Lu Le Lo
Veteran
- May 29, 2010
- 7,414
- 2,649
They already did it once. No job security remember?Overspeed said:
MetalMover
Veteran
- Sep 16, 2013
- 3,543
- 2,410
Oh? Did I miss something? I thought the TWU already saved jobs and got us good wages?Overspeed said:
