QC off the b checks

[MetalMover]

Ironically everything Utility and the work being given to fleet is what the mechanics have voted over the years to give away.

My point exactly. no one cared then, no one will care now.

 

[Overspeed]

Metal mover
 
I was around when all moves were done by MX, maybe not here at AA. Even power backs.  But just over the yrs FSC got the pushbacks. And for a while they did accomplish MX moves. We have them now and should fight if the company tries to give them to FSC.
 
whether it be with the goldhoffers or with tractors and towbars all MX moves should be done by us.

 
So that is a strike issue for you?

 

[Overspeed]

I agree with the SHOULD part....But SHOULD seldom means MUST!
Remember deicing? Remember so many shops once manned by mechanics? The list is pretty long. Whether lost to outsourcing or other AA groups, mechanics have lost the most.
The thing to keep in mind now is that this is the New American...Not the Old American.

 
Agree that AMTs have given up the most but why is that? Because the FAR's allow maintenance work to be de-skilled in such a way that non-licensed AMTs can do the work. So when airline A decides to press the issue and send work overseas, the others either follow or die. That is why the industry is the way it is today. Remember what is won in the contract can be lost at the ballot box.

 

[AMFAinMIAMI]

 
So that is a strike issue for you?

O/S
 
Come on even You can't be that stupid?  We work at AA, No way in Holy hell would the NMB allow a release of any of the big carriers since we effect so much of the US economy.
 
Strikes are a thing of the past, NWA was the last large carrier. I think that when you don't have enough domestic routes to effect a change by the company and most of the flights are over seas as was the case with NWA. You loose!!!! 
 
Self help is over, and the no lock out clauses and no strike are just fluff the unions agree to thinking they will protect jobs. Rhetoric sold to the membership. When the airlines decide to cut back or rethink the operation the employees suffer. 
 
The more the group of employees is diverse like ramp/stores/a/c maintenance/simm techs/automotive/facilities the more the company can enforce a lower benefit package.
 
Electricians/Plumbers/Masons/carpenters, all have their own union. They have thrived so what makes us any different. I think we deserve a chance at a vote and a union for the mechanics auto/fac/aircraft/utility.  
 
Example: If I was a trucker I would want the IBT, but now they are into everything and just look at what has happened to them. It has all become about the dues and the upper echelon of the union getting richer. 
 
AA doing away with insp on the "B" checks is a way the company can save $$$. That is what they are all about. It's not about us specially here at AA.
If the AMT's who work the "B" check don't keep up the quality of insp that QC performed then it is on us the AMT's. But if we do the job and it is not a detriment to the company and the overall product we produce is high then how do we combat that? I don't have an answer.
 
Qc/QA has other functions within the airlines so maybe expanding on those will make the QC/QA dept better. Here in Miami from what I have heard no one will loose their job and will remain here in Miami.
 
I was in QA when I came here to MIA, now on floor, days off, shift, and ability to cs was my reason for getting out. 
 
We will just have to see what other changes come down the pike and pick and choose which is things we can fight for and win. But not just roll over as the TWU has throughout my time here at AA.

 

[exs]

Btw, how are those Bck's going without QA? Anyone have any Info? I'm not at a class 1 station.

 

[Thomas Paine]

 
Agree that AMTs have given up the most but why is that? Because the FAR's allow maintenance work to be de-skilled in such a way that non-licensed AMTs can do the work. So when airline A decides to press the issue and send work overseas, the others either follow or die. That is why the industry is the way it is today. Remember what is won in the contract can be lost at the ballot box.

So I guess it has nothing to do with the fact that we never wrote into our contract what is our work?
 
For decades we relied on language that said that before they change the QAM they have to meet with the Union, so we were told that specific language was not needed, now the language is gone, the FARs have not changed but all of a sudden its the FARs fault? 

 

[Thomas Paine]

Ironically everything Utility and the work being given to fleet is what the mechanics have voted over the years to give away.

Yes because they were foolish enough to listen to Union leaders (and people like Overspeed) who told them to.

 

[Overspeed]

So I guess it has nothing to do with the fact that we never wrote into our contract what is our work?
 
For decades we relied on language that said that before they change the QAM they have to meet with the Union, so we were told that specific language was not needed, now the language is gone, the FARs have not changed but all of a sudden its the FARs fault? 

 
It could have been changed before. Where did the langauge ever say that WB's had to have QA doing initials on the cabin, cargo, etc...? It didn't. But if it makes you feel better to blame the TWU Bob then fine.

 

[700UW]

Yes because they were foolish enough to listen to Union leaders (and people like Overspeed) who told them to.

So you are saying they were smart enough to fix planes, but stupid enough not to use their brain and think before they voted?

 

[AMFAinMIAMI]

So you are saying they were smart enough to fix planes, but stupid enough not to use their brain and think before they voted?

 
700UW
 
As it seems you read everything on this forum, With all the comments about how you stick your two cents every where, about everything, you being a KNOW it ALL.
 
You come back and post on an AA forum related to mechanics, and you have the nerve to call us stupid?  You can't even take a hint. Go away...plain and simple.
 
You are NOT a A&P
You are NOT TWU
You are NOT AA employee
 
 
YOU are NOT Wanted.......

 

[iluvaa]

X10

 

[700UW]

 
700UW
 
As it seems you read everything on this forum, With all the comments about how you stick your two cents every where, about everything, you being a KNOW it ALL.
 
You come back and post on an AA forum related to mechanics, and you have the nerve to call us stupid?  You can't even take a hint. Go away...plain and simple.
 
You are NOT a A&P
You are NOT TWU
You are NOT AA employee
 
 
YOU are NOT Wanted.......

When you buy the message board, then you can tell people what to post.

 

[Thomas Paine]

So you are saying they were smart enough to fix planes, but stupid enough not to use their brain and think before they voted?

Stupid enough to trust people who had no dog in the fight and accept it, yes.
 
So whats your point? You made the statement that they voted to give away all that work, are you saying they were right to do so?  

 

[Thomas Paine]

 
It could have been changed before. Where did the langauge ever say that WB's had to have QA doing initials on the cabin, cargo, etc...? It didn't. But if it makes you feel better to blame the TWU Bob then fine.

Spin away, your response was to a post from MetalMover, who responded to a Post from AmfainMiami who expanded on the general lack of language and how mechanics lost work such as pushbacks , metal mover cited Deicing as another function we lost out of our workgroup, then you jumped in and said its all the fault of the FARS that allow "non-licensed AMTs" to do the work. Those were your words. Clearly you were not responding to the QC issue because all involved in that issue are licensed AMTs.  When I responded as to the fact that we don't have language protecting our work you grab a straw man and switch back to the QC issue, which I did not comment on. 
 
So, as usual you are responding to something that wasn't said, something that you are trying to claim was said so you can spin the subject away from a topic in which you have no defense. You claimed that its the FARS fault that we lost work that we never defined as our work in the contract, which is usually standard language in most Union contracts. We lost pushbacks in 1983, Deicing in the 90s, some of our peers kept both till after 9-11 and bankruptcy, most kept it many years past when we lost it, we all work under the same FARs. So if its the fault of the FARS explain that. Most union workers have language which defines their work and do not rely on FARs or labor laws to do what their Contract should do, that's why people join Unions, to get protections the government wont provide. . 

 

[Overspeed]

Spin away, your response was to a post from MetalMover, who responded to a Post from AmfainMiami who expanded on the general lack of language and how mechanics lost work such as pushbacks , metal mover cited Deicing as another function we lost out of our workgroup, then you jumped in and said its all the fault of the FARS that allow "non-licensed AMTs" to do the work. Those were your words. Clearly you were not responding to the QC issue because all involved in that issue are licensed AMTs.  When I responded as to the fact that we don't have language protecting our work you grab a straw man and switch back to the QC issue, which I did not comment on. 
 
So, as usual you are responding to something that wasn't said, something that you are trying to claim was said so you can spin the subject away from a topic in which you have no defense. You claimed that its the FARS fault that we lost work that we never defined as our work in the contract, which is usually standard language in most Union contracts. We lost pushbacks in 1983, Deicing in the 90s, some of our peers kept both till after 9-11 and bankruptcy, most kept it many years past when we lost it, we all work under the same FARs. So if its the fault of the FARS explain that. Most union workers have language which defines their work and do not rely on FARs or labor laws to do what their Contract should do, that's why people join Unions, to get protections the government wont provide. . 

 
Bob,
the issue of FARs is one that if the regulation allows it, you can do it under Part 121. Sure a CBA can lock in work based on scope langauge, job description, or QAM. You are a smart guy, argue the case as a past practice issue. If you can argue that the intent of the new CBA was not to remove work from a job classification then do it? How many grievances have been filed in JFK? Are you all on top of that issue? What about Gukelberger? In MIA are Knapp and Rojas taking up the fight? You guys are all on FT UB status...handle it!