Yup that sounds about right. Want to see more outsourcing at AA? Vote for the Teamsters if we get an election.
SWA under AMFA brought back two heavy lines that the Teamsters could not do or gave away.
AMFA on the WRITE IN if we get a vote.
Outsourcing at AA
- Thread starter Duke787
- Start date
Yup that sounds about right. Want to see more outsourcing at AA? Vote for the Teamsters if we get an election.
SWA under AMFA brought back two heavy lines that the Teamsters could not do or gave away.
AMFA on the WRITE IN if we get a vote.
UAL farms out practically every heavy check (widebodies to overseas MROs in Hong Kong and mainland China plus narrowbody overhaul to domestic MROs).
The TWU is beyond worthless, but there's no need to understate the level of heavy airframe overhaul that UAL outsources to make that point. Neither the TWU nor the Teamsters nor IAM nor AMFA will save the day when it comes to outsourcing heavy airframe overhaul. That outsourcing will happen whether anyone likes it or not because
1. labor is cheaper in El Salvador and HKG and SIN and mainland China; and
2. there aren't enough aircraft mechanics in the USA willing to work for low wages for all of the heavy airframe overhaul to happen domestically.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #18
Probably the most accurate statement yet, the unions don't control anything. It's all about the bottom dollar.
Don't forget that AA doesn't have to pay for healthcare for the Chinese or el salvadorian mechs. That's probably worth a tank a gas to get the planes overseas.
I wonder why in the TWU handout it didn't mention the Airbus, 777, 787, 767, and 757 outsourcing.
Maybe the TWU should say what they did for the mechs at AA during bankruptcy and the 10 years prior, rather then focus on heavy maint, the line mechs pay union dues too, and we have a vote.
iluvaa
Veteran
- Mar 22, 2007
- 1,228
- 811
your forgetting the 2 or 3 heavy lines of the 737 and the many mod lines outsourced
They don't pay much as far as Health Care for us either. With the average cost to the company to provide Health care at around $10,000/year per covered employee you would pay around $7000 of that $10,000 should you actually use that much. When you factor in what you pay AA for the coverage, copays, deductibles etc the company doesn't really pay that much even though they claim the whole figure.
I like many others have opted for no coverage from AA because we can get better plans through our spouse.
So figure it costs AA around $3000 a year per covered employee, the holidays we don't get and the week of Vacation we don't get more than cover that. Add in all the Holidays and vacation that workers who opt out of AAs overpriced plans and it costs them very little.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #22
Lets add up the #'s,
AA with TWU representation, outsource's or will outsource, the 787's (42 a/c) 777's, (67 a/c) 757's (102 a/c) 767's (6 a/c), and will not do the OH on the Airbus's (259 a/c). Which are replacing the 190 S80's, and 12 767-200's. If this info is inaccurate please correct, because these numbers look pretty bad. That's directed at You Bob, it would be nice to hear the real numbers from a union leader who has access to that info. That will hold more weight then info from me or overspeed. I got my a/c numbers from wikipedia.
I don't believe any union can control what a company decides to outsource, and they certainly don't have the power to decide which base stays open or closes. If the TWU claims they saved TULE, then they have to say they closed MCI, AFW, MSP, DTW, SNA, and CLE.
If you have the real numbers please post with a link if possible.
AA with TWU representation, outsource's or will outsource, the 787's (42 a/c) 777's, (67 a/c) 757's (102 a/c) 767's (6 a/c), and will not do the OH on the Airbus's (259 a/c). Which are replacing the 190 S80's, and 12 767-200's. If this info is inaccurate please correct, because these numbers look pretty bad. That's directed at You Bob, it would be nice to hear the real numbers from a union leader who has access to that info. That will hold more weight then info from me or overspeed. I got my a/c numbers from wikipedia.
I don't believe any union can control what a company decides to outsource, and they certainly don't have the power to decide which base stays open or closes. If the TWU claims they saved TULE, then they have to say they closed MCI, AFW, MSP, DTW, SNA, and CLE.
If you have the real numbers please post with a link if possible.
I don't have the numbers. I can say that in negotiations the company was asked directly about overhaul on the Airbus and the only answer they would give is that AA mechanics would work all aircraft types flown by AA, but that does not mean that we will do all the work. So if Line Maint is doing the overnighters and turnarounds, and they outsource all the checks from B on up, like they did with the TWA 747SP they have a pretty solid argument that should we arbitrate it we would lose. I know that Overspin claims that once the company goes over the 35% spend that our contract will force the company to bring that work back but we are looking at something that isn't likely to happen for at least ten years, by then those who lost their jobs in OH will be long gone, well into their 60s, past the ten year recall and well into another six year concessionary deal where they will likely eliminate that language and go back to offering system protection. Don and Bobby will make sure of that, we will get system protection when its not needed. You have to remember that the company came up with the 35% number, it was never discussed by the negotiating committee, so you can be sure that they picked a number that suited their needs and didn't provide us any protection because there is no real threat that they could cost effectively exceed the 35%. So come 2023, if that language survives at least one more negotiations, when the new Airbus and 737 and 787s start coming due for their heavy checks and the company needs to go over the 35%, or closer 50% if RR backs out of TEASL do you think that the majority of guys who remain, who will still likely be at the bottom of the industry in paid Time Off will not accept an offer by the company to continue to outsource OH in exchange for bringing them closer to industry standard? The 35% cap that he is banking on most likely wont be an issue during the life of this agreement because there really aren't cost effective alternatives at the moment to send the MD-80s to. As the MD-80s go away so will the jobs. We are already below 8000.
Will Tulsa go away as some have claimed? Who knows? If they have outlived their purpose then the answer is yes. By using Tulsa's majority status, low cost of living and the threat of closing the base they have leveraged us to the bottom of the industry. To the point where we are below non-union and below other industries that seek the same skillsets. But, in doing so they have made the whole industry unattractive to young people. That's why half the schools that trained A&Ps have closed and many of those that still offer Aircraft Maintenance have focused on other curriculum.
The average age of mechanics at AA is well into the 50s. Even though we cant afford to retire eventually we will have to go and there isn't really a sufficient supply to backfill us when we leave. Wages will be forced to go up, not because of the unions, but because of the market. In NY they were hiring at step 3 and pretty much only got people from Eagle, who get to keep their company seniority, to apply. Airlines with their poor reputation as employers have to compete with Utilities, Mass Transit and other industries which offer better compensation, more stability and better benefits for the 3000 or so A&Ps that are issued each year. Keep in mind that 3000 isn't just people looking to get into the Airlines, that includes General Aviation, Corporate, Manufacturing and the weekend pilot who wants to work on his own plane. Flight benefits really aren't much of an enticement when flying has become so cheap and the miserable hours that Airlines offer is enough to wipe out any illusions most young people have of working in the Airlines. AA is the worst of them all, not only is the pay and benefits the worst but they only offer 52 cents an hour premium for working Nights,weekends and Holidays. At top rate the night shift premium comes out to only 1.5%,lowest of any major industry and lowest in the airlines. (My wife gets 10% for working nights). On top of that they only get one week of vacation per year for the first five years. So imaging telling some young kid that he will only have one Friday and one Saturday night off to go hang with his friends for at least the first five years. Most of the kids I know would say "No thanks" and walk out the door or take the job and simply call in sick when they want to go out. Its not like there is a promising future in this industry.
MCI was told that their YES vote would save them too.
Overspeed
Veteran
- Jun 27, 2011
- 3,245
- 1,065
Let me set you straight. AA outsources all the 46 777-200 and 15 future 777-300s and all 757 heavies. All other 400 plus airframes are done in-house with all but the GE90 (777-300) done in house. That is far less than almost all UA/CO airframes done outside (737, A320, 757, 767, 747, and 777) outside plus all CO CFM56, RB211, CF6-80, and GE90s overhauled by OSV's.
The A320 and 787 fleet are new and even if the scope clause stated that work would have to be done 100% in-house the planes are new and they would not require overhaul for 6-7 years for the A320 and new 737s and the 787s will not require overhaul for 12 years according to Boeing. That said the HC required would drop no matter what. The difference is that when those aircraft do become due for overhaul, 65% of the spend will be in-house. That is ay different than the IBT scope at UA/CO that protects no future work beyond six lines of overhaul regardless of fleet size. Use your head, that means the TWU scope clause protects way more work than any IBT contract.
Yes the TWU saved the day.
Overspeed
Veteran
- Jun 27, 2011
- 3,245
- 1,065
You are not reading the scope clause. Number of airframes are not a factor. The money spent on labor and material is. Only 35% of the total labor, material, and OSS spend can be expended on outsourcing. That being said with a stated spend of near $2.5B AA can only outsource $875M before backing out overhead. That leaves $1.625B in-house which means out of 600 aircraft, a lot of work will be done in-house. UA/CO outsources 50% plus of its spend and has on six lines of overhaul and all of CO's engines outsourced. So that means we can reasonable expect more work to be done in-house and more jobs at AA than UA/CO in the future.
With the 787 overhaul question is 12 years away and the A320/737s that are just starting to be delivered is 6-7 years away. There are no "real" numbers since the current TWU/AA agreement and US/IAM agreement will be renegotiated by then. Even with the current TWU and IAM scope language more work is protected than any IBT agreement in force today.
- Banned
- #26
You dont know what the JCBA language will be for the merger, at US only 50% of billable hours of heavy maintenance can be outsourced. Line cant be outsourced, nor line checks, A, B, Weekly, and Daily.
The AA/TWU outsourcing language is much worse, 35% of total maintenance budget.
I certainly hope the IAM's language is kept, more jobs and more job security.
Wrong, the A320 family under go a series of c-checks . its C-1 through C-12,which the the last one is a week, the S-check which is the heavy check is done after 6 years.
The AA/TWU outsourcing language is much worse, 35% of total maintenance budget.
I certainly hope the IAM's language is kept, more jobs and more job security.
Wrong, the A320 family under go a series of c-checks . its C-1 through C-12,which the the last one is a week, the S-check which is the heavy check is done after 6 years.
Are you claiming that 787s won't get a heavy check for 11 years after delivery? AA gets its first 787 in late 2014, so I would expect a heavy check within about six years of that, or by late 2020.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #28
The way I'm understanding all these great posts is, our union leaders don't know what is farmed out and overspeed the TWU guy say it doesn't matter because there won't be checks on the a319 and 737s for 6-7 years and 12 years for the 787. The question is,
What fleets do we farm out?
The TWU has no problems saying what fleets are farmed out at UAL, I'm thinking UAL might have a complicated outsourcing language in their contract also.
What fleets do we farm out?
The TWU has no problems saying what fleets are farmed out at UAL, I'm thinking UAL might have a complicated outsourcing language in their contract also.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #29
I would like to read info that is more fact driven from the TWU, and less info that is misleading about the facts. Say what good the TWU has done for it's membership over the last ten years, and let their record stand. We need more facts and less Rush Lindbaugh / Ed Shultz propoganda. Sense the TWU uses our dues for this advertising blitz, we want FACTS!!!
United Airlines has 699 aircraft, the TWU says they farm out 76 heavy checks. That's all the info the TWU gives
AA has 631 aircraft. We farm out 154 heavy checks, but the TWU doesn't mention that.
We need all the FACTS, not misleading partial info, paid for with my union dues.
United Airlines has 699 aircraft, the TWU says they farm out 76 heavy checks. That's all the info the TWU gives
AA has 631 aircraft. We farm out 154 heavy checks, but the TWU doesn't mention that.
We need all the FACTS, not misleading partial info, paid for with my union dues.
Saved the day for whom?
By your own admission the language does not protect current workers and allows the company the ability to reduce headcount through layoffs. By your own admission the language as it is today would only come into affect many years down the road, what makes you think that language will still be there when you claim it would bring work back in?
As 700 said 35% of spend is crappy language, because 35% of spend could total a lot more than 50% of hours. It encourages the company to bring it all overseas in search of the cheapest labor rates. If they can get labor in El Salvador for $20 and hour then for every one hour in Tulsa they could farm out four hours in El Salvador up to the cap. Roughly twice as many hours can be outsourced as worked in house and still stay below the 35% cap. If AA provides the parts and materials the materials increase the amount of hours they can outsource, and lets not forget the 35% is contingent upon RR keeping TEASL, should RR decide they want out the formula gets adjusted up to nearly 50% of spend. This would allow them the ability to outsource all OH once the MD-80s and older Boeings are gone.
So what you are saying is that its OK that we gave away system protection, which will allow the company to contract out as much as they want even if it means current workers lose their jobs, after all they came up with 35% not us, and those who get laid off should be happy because in 10 years, after their recall has expired AA will have to hire people if that language stays in place? People who will start off with crappy wages and never know that this was once a good job?
Sounds like a management schpeel to me, "Concessions are good", "Get job Security by working for less than everyone else", "Right to Work", etc etc.
