QC off the b checks

[Flying low]

Arn't you forgeting Union Politics? MCI was "suposed to be" the Home of the 737 "C" checks! But the boys At the TWU, in TUL, couldn't have that! And pressured to have it moved! And this had nothing to do with performance! And it was moved without explanation, just told "That's just how it is! And we don't want to hear another word about it!"

TUL started out as "home of the 737". Then they were moved to MCI, even dismantled the giant tail dock. I forget how long they were up there, but the tail dock was once again dismantled and brought back to TUL along with the jets. I can only imagine, that when AA started thinking about closing MCI. Do you remember how long after the 737's left MCI, the base was closed?

 

[Bob Owens]

 
And LAX and DFW used to have about 5 BC lines each. They can be easily moved and under the US program they do phase checks which can be done just about anywhere. I hear that the TWU reps in MIA have been pushing hard to get the 777 BC moved there.

With each post you are showing your true anti-union colors. First you say its OK that QC is being pulled from the WB Bcks, saying that you didn't understand why they ever had QC since they didnt have QC on the narrowbody, a true Union man would have said they opposite and said they should have had QC on the narrow body as well, but not you, anything that goes with lowering costs for the company you are in favor of. every concessionary deal that has been put out there you supported. You go on and on about saving Tulsa, as long as that ties into us all giving concessions to do so. so it not really about saving Tulsa is it? Its about using Tulsa as a way of supporting concessions because here is a concession that has nothing at all to do with saving jobs in Tulsa or anywhere else and you are clearly in support of it.  Now you are coming here trying to cause division between MIA and DFW claiming that MIA is trying to take the 777 Bck. 
 
I've been here nearly 30 years and they never permanently moved a Bck because one station got it out faster than another, its a fallacy that management uses on the guys to try and increase productivity. If that was the case then LGA would have 10 Bcks and new hangars and MCI and AFW would still be open and TUL would be closed. 

 

[skinvalve]

Moving a check station, or removing inspection, is a common industry practice. It is usually the result of a phenomenon know as "digging too deep". A seasoned crew will generate many "items" resulting in a big hole. A new crew generates less "items" therefore a smaller hole.

 

[Overspeed]

With each post you are showing your true anti-union colors. First you say its OK that QC is being pulled from the WB Bcks, saying that you didn't understand why they ever had QC since they didnt have QC on the narrowbody, a true Union man would have said they opposite and said they should have had QC on the narrow body as well, but not you, anything that goes with lowering costs for the company you are in favor of. every concessionary deal that has been put out there you supported. You go on and on about saving Tulsa, as long as that ties into us all giving concessions to do so. so it not really about saving Tulsa is it? Its about using Tulsa as a way of supporting concessions because here is a concession that has nothing at all to do with saving jobs in Tulsa or anywhere else and you are clearly in support of it.  Now you are coming here trying to cause division between MIA and DFW claiming that MIA is trying to take the 777 Bck. 
 
I've been here nearly 30 years and they never permanently moved a Bck because one station got it out faster than another, its a fallacy that management uses on the guys to try and increase productivity. If that was the case then LGA would have 10 Bcks and new hangars and MCI and AFW would still be open and TUL would be closed. 

 
Are you kidding? Never moved a BC for performance permanently? How are those MD80 BCs doing in STL? They were moved from LAX almost 10 years ago for poor BC performance. How about the 757 BC you do in JFK? That was moved because here in DFW it was sitting for two days. How about the 737 BC line in SFO? They took that from DFW because it also was sitting for two days.

 

[AMFAinMIAMI]

 
Are you kidding? Never moved a BC for performance permanently? How are those MD80 BCs doing in STL? They were moved from LAX almost 10 years ago for poor BC performance. How about the 757 BC you do in JFK? That was moved because here in DFW it was sitting for two days. How about the 737 BC line in SFO? They took that from DFW because it also was sitting for two days.

 
O/S
 
The MD-80's  were moved from LAX to St Louis due to performance, NOT, when the "B" checks were sent to St. Louis the staffing there was higher and they had guys do the open up 
before the "B" check guys even showed up.  If you track the used parts at the time a/c were in LAX compared to LGA or St. Louis, LAX did more. They did not like the O/T.
Most of the time the Aircraft made the scheduled trips. If I remember Serg.B was the station Mgr and Moe S as the level 5. Ant.D was in charge of the "B" checks.

 

[Rogallo]

 
Are you kidding? Never moved a BC for performance permanently? How are those MD80 BCs doing in STL? They were moved from LAX almost 10 years ago for poor BC performance. How about the 757 BC you do in JFK? That was moved because here in DFW it was sitting for two days. How about the 737 BC line in SFO? They took that from DFW because it also was sitting for two days.

Yeah, we all know what reputation DFW has!
 
Let's drift.  How's the new management at DFW treating y'all?

 

[AMFAinMIAMI]

 
And now its in MIA and JFK. Your point? My was that routing gives and airline many options of where to place aircraft.
 
BC is a premium job? I prefer terminal myself on days. Got to love those ER checks.

 
O/S
 
LAX had a -200 "B" check SFO had the -300, the "B" check here in Miami is a -300.
 
SFO lost flight/flights and Miami gained a South American trip, that is why Miami got SFO's "B" check.
The "B" check in SFO was out and on time from what I can remember on a consistant basis.
So it was not a performance thing.
 
If any b checks were moved due to performance that would of been during the G.H. term, but he is no longer here
at AA. After that he was also let go by UAL. Poor decisions by mgmt causes upper mgmt to rethink many things.

 

[Bob Owens]

 
Are you kidding? Never moved a BC for performance permanently? How are those MD80 BCs doing in STL? They were moved from LAX almost 10 years ago for poor BC performance. How about the 757 BC you do in JFK? That was moved because here in DFW it was sitting for two days. How about the 737 BC line in SFO? They took that from DFW because it also was sitting for two days.

 
How many MD-80s still end up in LAX? MD-80s are being delegated to the sub-prime markets that STL serves, the coastal stations are rapidly going all 737 and Airbus.
 
757 bk was moved to JFK because with the A-300 going away they had the hangar, the manpower and it didn't make sense to fly 757's with cabins configured for over water trips to DFW for a Bck. They were losing money, they didn't have enough cabins configured to route them to DFW, their claim, they never said anything to us that it was driven by performance. By doing the 757 Bck at JFK they could maximize the productivity of those with cabins configured for Europe and plug in domestic configured cabin ac for the other days. It had ZERO to do with how DFW did the B-check. 
 
STL, glad you brought that up, they had the best performance in the system yet their workload and headcount were still gutted. Same with MCI and AFW. 
 
If DFW is doing so poorly and all this work is going away then why is DFW headcount as high as it is? DFW grew when other stations were shrinking. Why did the 737 end up in SFO? Because they lost the 767 Bck and when you have 600 airplanes and only 8 locations with hangars and constantly changing equipment around to try and match the seats to the demand you jockey stuff around, and plug the B checks in where you have the ability to do them. 
 
 When they moved the 767 Bck out of JFK to LAX, which already had one, JFK had the best performance in the system and LAX had the worst. 
 
Go ahead Overspin  keep showing your true management colors. As distressing as you may find it JLT and PLI are dead, nobody is buying into that BS anymore and we will no longer have stations hoodwinked into believing they are in competition with each other for work. 

 

[Overspeed]

 
How many MD-80s still end up in LAX? MD-80s are being delegated to the sub-prime markets that STL serves, the coastal stations are rapidly going all 737 and Airbus.
 
757 bk was moved to JFK because with the A-300 going away they had the hangar, the manpower and it didn't make sense to fly 757's with cabins configured for over water trips to DFW for a Bck. They were losing money, they didn't have enough cabins configured to route them to DFW, their claim, they never said anything to us that it was driven by performance. By doing the 757 Bck at JFK they could maximize the productivity of those with cabins configured for Europe and plug in domestic configured cabin ac for the other days. It had ZERO to do with how DFW did the B-check. 
 
STL, glad you brought that up, they had the best performance in the system yet their workload and headcount were still gutted. Same with MCI and AFW. 
 
If DFW is doing so poorly and all this work is going away then why is DFW headcount as high as it is? DFW grew when other stations were shrinking. Why did the 737 end up in SFO? Because they lost the 767 Bck and when you have 600 airplanes and only 8 locations with hangars and constantly changing equipment around to try and match the seats to the demand you jockey stuff around, and plug the B checks in where you have the ability to do them. 
 
 When they moved the 767 Bck out of JFK to LAX, which already had one, JFK had the best performance in the system and LAX had the worst. 
 
Go ahead Overspin  keep showing your true management colors. As distressing as you may find it JLT and PLI are dead, nobody is buying into that BS anymore and we will no longer have stations hoodwinked into believing they are in competition with each other for work. 

 
The MD80 BC was moved out of LAX when it was big MD80 market. It was moved because LAX performance was awful. I spoke with some people that worked there and they said the mgmt and the union were fighting and the local was trying to pound the BC up their a**. The joke they said was that they called it the shark tank because managers would get chewed up there.
 
Both the 757 and the 737 were pulled out of DFW because we were writting some many items on the aircraft. Some guys in DFW faxed the E58 sheets to SFO so they would tank the plane there. Guess what? The SFO members threw that stuff in the trash and didn't back us up. And you guys with the 757...well 562 members and leadership gladly took our work. The 757L was not big until after the BC was pulled and the routing still supported a BC in DFW. Durst saw a way to show us who runs the airline and sent the BC to JFK because as you say, the A300 was going away. They should have laid off JFK workers and kept the BC in DFW but he knew 562 was worried about layoffs and the members would jump all over it to save their jobs.
 
I told those working together hacks it wouldn't work. I did QWL and it doesn't work. Managers screw all the ideas we give them up.

 

[Rogallo]

We are our own worst enemy. The Dysfunctional TWU at AA!

 

[Bob Owens]

The MD80 BC was moved out of LAX when it was big MD80 market. It was moved because LAX performance was awful. I spoke with some people that worked there and they said the mgmt and the union were fighting and the local was trying to pound the BC up their a**. The joke they said was that they called it the shark tank because managers would get chewed up there.
 
Both the 757 and the 737 were pulled out of DFW because we were writting some many items on the aircraft. Some guys in DFW faxed the E58 sheets to SFO so they would tank the plane there. Guess what? The SFO members threw that stuff in the trash and didn't back us up. And you guys with the 757...well 562 members and leadership gladly took our work. The 757L was not big until after the BC was pulled and the routing still supported a BC in DFW. Durst saw a way to show us who runs the airline and sent the BC to JFK because as you say, the A300 was going away. They should have laid off JFK workers and kept the BC in DFW but he knew 562 was worried about layoffs and the members would jump all over it to save their jobs.
 
I told those working together hacks it wouldn't work. I did QWL and it doesn't work. Managers screw all the ideas we give them up.

BS, they do not move B-checks because one station gets it out faster than the other. The company tries to match where they have the facilities and manpower with routing, as routing changes so does the location of B-Checks. Are you saying that DFW doesn't have any B-checks? They didn't add work to JFK, they replaced one B-check with another, was one a reward and the other punishment? No, that's what the company felt best served the operation. We were doing two 757 B checks a night when I transferred into JFK 20 years ago. They move Bchecks all the time and whether you bang them out or not there is no guarantee they will keep them there. When JFK lost the 767 B-Check they had near perfect performance at the time, LAX had the worst, but they still got it anyway. Sure there may have been occasions where the performance was not what the company wanted prior to the move and it gave management and their sucks like you the opportunity to blame the poor performance for the move but it would have happened either way, just ask the guys in STL, MCI and AFW who all delivered exceptional performance but saw the work leave anyway and in most cases it went to places where the performance was no better. So according to you the only time they move a plane and its not due to routing is because the performance was bad, but when the performance is excellent and they move it it's because of Routing, did you ever think that maybe when the performance is bad that they lie to you and tell you its because of performance and not routing? So when performance is bad they have the option to move it wherever but when the performance is good and they move it then its because they have no choice. How convenient! and why would you believe that? Because management told you so.

 

[Overspeed]

BS, they do not move B-checks because one station gets it out faster than the other. The company tries to match where they have the facilities and manpower with routing, as routing changes so does the location of B-Checks. Are you saying that DFW doesn't have any B-checks? They didn't add work to JFK, they replaced one B-check with another, was one a reward and the other punishment? No, that's what the company felt best served the operation. We were doing two 757 B checks a night when I transferred into JFK 20 years ago. They move Bchecks all the time and whether you bang them out or not there is no guarantee they will keep them there. When JFK lost the 767 B-Check they had near perfect performance at the time, LAX had the worst, but they still got it anyway. Sure there may have been occasions where the performance was not what the company wanted prior to the move and it gave management and their sucks like you the opportunity to blame the poor performance for the move but it would have happened either way, just ask the guys in STL, MCI and AFW who all delivered exceptional performance but saw the work leave anyway and in most cases it went to places where the performance was no better. So according to you the only time they move a plane and its not due to routing is because the performance was bad, but when the performance is excellent and they move it it's because of Routing, did you ever think that maybe when the performance is bad that they lie to you and tell you its because of performance and not routing? So when performance is bad they have the option to move it wherever but when the performance is good and they move it then its because they have no choice. How convenient! and why would you believe that? Because management told you so.

 
Okay is this really you Bob? The way you explain it is that AA management knows what they are doing and that they make sound business decisions. What?

 

[bigjets]

You are all wrong, the only reason a station has a b check, or a b ck is moved is because that station is where a plane can be grounded for an extended amount of time. It's all generated by the flt schedule.

 

[AANYER]

With each post you are showing your true anti-union colors. First you say its OK that QC is being pulled from the WB Bcks, saying that you didn't understand why they ever had QC since they didnt have QC on the narrowbody, a true Union man would have said they opposite and said they should have had QC on the narrow body as well, but not you, anything that goes with lowering costs for the company you are in favor of. every concessionary deal that has been put out there you supported. You go on and on about saving Tulsa, as long as that ties into us all giving concessions to do so. so it not really about saving Tulsa is it? Its about using Tulsa as a way of supporting concessions because here is a concession that has nothing at all to do with saving jobs in Tulsa or anywhere else and you are clearly in support of it.  Now you are coming here trying to cause division between MIA and DFW claiming that MIA is trying to take the 777 Bck. 
 
I've been here nearly 30 years and they never permanently moved a Bck because one station got it out faster than another, its a fallacy that management uses on the guys to try and increase productivity. If that was the case then LGA would have 10 Bcks and new hangars and MCI and AFW would still be open and TUL would be closed. 

 
Bob,
 
You nailed it. No other comment needed.

 

[Bob Owens]

Okay is this really you Bob? The way you explain it is that AA management knows what they are doing and that they make sound business decisions. What?

No I'll leave the butt kissing to you. I believe I clearly said they move work based on where they "felt" it was the best location, did not take a position as to whether it was the right location.