Totally Amazing

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

I dont need an assistant I need better pay and benefits
:angry:

 

[MERV]

Those assistants will make less and you'll became like a supervisor over looking their work and signing the log books for minor repairs. I hope that they're not going to be use for any major repairs/overhauls. I know that DL has them. I know that couple of airlines uses them because its cheaper to use them because carriers don't want to pay top dollar.

 

[Boomer]

AMTs dont sign for an inspection that the rampers do. Once made aware of a issue AMTs check out the problem and if it isnt in the logbook we put a maintenance entry in the logbook and work the item from there.

No one touches a log book except for maintenance after a pilot makes a pirep.

I agree with most of the above, but:

Frequently aircraft arrive during icing conditons that require the pilots to leave flight surfaces extended until an inspection states that the critical areas are clear of contamination and clear for retraction.

Since aircraft maintenance is no longer involved in deicing, that inspection is now with the ramp.

Frequently, aircrews create a pirep stating that the flight controls were left in the extended position stating that it an inspection is required due to runway contamination.

This is not unlike a pirep stating that a particular area of the cabin has a carpet, seatback pocket, oven etc...that requires some level of maintenance: frequently, AMTs' sign off the item as, "Notifed Cabin Services," and "Notified by Ramp Deicing that flight controls are clear for retraction." That is not a valid signoff.

Unless the mechanic witnesses the maintenance action and the suitability for service of that action: they cannot sign that item off as a KF without some form of official written notification that is documented in the GPM as being valid. Remember the E-165 and the deicing report?

As for no one touching the logbook except aircraft maintenance: what are the signoffs from RCI and contractors? Further, in many stations without aircraft maintenance, the ramp CC enters the inbound pireps and the action taken into the FMR prior to notifying Tech Svcs and the local contract maintenance: at least that is what was required of me when I was a ramp CC before becoming an AMT.

 

[Hopeful]

from RCI and contractors? Further, in many stations without aircraft maintenance, the ramp CC enters the inbound pireps and the action taken into the FMR prior to notifying Tech Svcs and the local contract maintenance: at least that is what was required of me when I was a ramp CC before becoming an AMT.

RCI and Panasonic technicians are licesed A&P mechanics. Years ago they were not.

At JFK, a Class 1 station.....no one except a mechanic touches the log book.

We have done contract work over the years on foreign carriers and only a certified mechanics can sign the log book.

 

[Ken MacTiernan]

RCI and Panasonic technicians are licesed A&P mechanics. Years ago they were not.

At JFK, a Class 1 station.....no one except a mechanic touches the log book.

We have done contract work over the years on foreign carriers and only a certified mechanics can sign the log book.

As it should be.

 

[proAMT]

I couldn't agree more the ASM proposal should be removed from the table. I always believed the maintenance we do should be world class-second to none. Unfortunately the company acts as if it would be happy with Tramco, Dee Howard, or Dalfort maintenance. Many of these types of repair stations don't last long. Sabre Tech comes to mind, Elsinor, Chrysler Aerospace, Pemco, Dynair I'm sure the list goes on and on.

Hey Ken,

I fixed the comments feature at the website

514defenders.org

 

[Hopeful]

The company thinks we are a bunch of morons..First they say the ASM would have limited functions,,But eventually, when the A&P pool is vitually gone, they will be the first to petition the government and the FAA to eliminate the need us altogether so they can pay someone $15.00 an hour to maintain aircraft.

But then, of course, when an ASM screws up, he or she will not be held liable because of the "no license" required policy and AA will see lawsuits increase tenfold.

 

[Bob Owens]

To me the Line ASMs issue can be summed up in one word NO.

Look at all the fines the company is facing with having people with the training and background required, do you really think that they can afford to give this work to people with no training? Another factor is if they are looking for people with mechanical skills who dont have A&Ps where are they going to find them? $15/hr? They could make more than that working on lawnmowers, what makes you think they would be willing to work nights weekends and holidays for what AA is offering?

Ironically the only mechanics they could get to work for the wages they are offering would be A&Ps because these people already sunk $20 to $30K into getting their licenses and hope theres a future to make their investment pay off. As fewer and fewer people enter A&P school because of the abysmal wage structure even that supply will dry up.

I think if we look at the ASM program thats in place at the OH we would find that a large number of the ASMS are also license holders. We had a guy who downgraded from a mechanic in JFK to an ASM in AFW because he couldnt afford to live in New York on a mechanics wage. Texas on an ASM wage was more affordable than New York on a mechanics wage. So while they can get ASMs in low cost areas, which are essentially""D scale" A&P mechanics its doubtful that an ASM program on the line would work out. To me Line ASMs is a "pie in the sky" issue, not open for discussion in negotiations.

 

[Deleted member 14439]

To me the Line ASMs issue can be summed up in one word NO.

Look at all the fines the company is facing with having people with the training and background required, do you really think that they can afford to give this work to people with no training? Another factor is if they are looking for people with mechanical skills who dont have A&Ps where are they going to find them? $15/hr? They could make more than that working on lawnmowers, what makes you think they would be willing to work nights weekends and holidays for what AA is offering?

Ironically the only mechanics they could get to work for the wages they are offering would be A&Ps because these people already sunk $20 to $30K into getting their licenses and hope theres a future to make their investment pay off. As fewer and fewer people enter A&P school because of the abysmal wage structure even that supply will dry up.

I think if we look at the ASM program thats in place at the OH we would find that a large number of the ASMS are also license holders. We had a guy who downgraded from a mechanic in JFK to an ASM in AFW because he couldnt afford to live in New York on a mechanics wage. Texas on an ASM wage was more affordable than New York on a mechanics wage. So while they can get ASMs in low cost areas, which are essentially""D scale" A&P mechanics its doubtful that an ASM program on the line would work out. To me Line ASMs is a "pie in the sky" issue, not open for discussion in negotiations.

Not only NO for line asm`s but for the bases as well. We gave them the in with the 1995 contract, we must stop the bleeding. I hope you people on the negotiating team are listening. NO ASM`s !!!

 

[Boomer]

I totally agree with the sentiment that no certificated A&P should be working AA metal unless they are employed by AA; but, the fact is that the TWU has already opened the barn door.

The question that I originally raised was how an AMT signs off a PIREP that is not an AMT function at AA unless they witnessed that the required action has, in fact, been performed.

Oil added by non-maintenance personnel is recorded on a legally binding document: the E-165. Aircraft Deicing is signed off by the ramp on another legally binding document stating the percentage of glycol used, the temperature of the deicing fluid, and the beginning of application(the start of the holdover time).

There is no legally binding document that is in effect that requires the person performing the action required by the PIREP to legally signoff the action reportedly performed for cabin items since many of those items are not aircraft maintenance issues: but, require a signoff by a certificated AA AMT or contractor of any item opened by an AA PIREP.

The burden of proof lies on the certificated individual that signs for the PIREP on two conditions: 1) they witnessed the action required to answer the pirep; or, 2) they relied on a signature from a legally binding document which states that the required actions were performed.

As of today: unless a certificated individual witnesses the required action, it cannot be signed off unless the crew is able to placard the item.

 

[Runwaysticker]

As it should be.

I totaly agree with AMTs signing all log sign offs <_< <_< , but with Rockwell covering maintenance on the video equipment I dont sign for thier work and never will, they must have A&Ps but not sure

 

[Large Grey]

The AMT' biggest enemy is lack of process measurement for the what ifs. IE, "what if"
- AA had to rely and wait on a lesser trained local FBO as contractor..

- AA planes lack the best AMTs because they choose to work in automotive or HVAC or some other field where they are home every night and holidays...

The AMT has no friends at TWU, or in Congress, or Senate or elsewhere.

I am feeling ill. What will I do with all that sick time when they close the station and transfer me?

hmmm

 

[Large Grey]

I totaly agree with AMTs signing all log sign offs <_< <_< , but with Rockwell covering maintenance on the video equipment I dont sign for their work and never will, they must have A&Ps but not sure

I think they do have A&Ps. As to whether they should be on our planes at all.... It depends how the Rockwell contract now over 12 - 15 years running - is structured. Is it their equipment riding on our equipment, or did we buy the equipment and share the revenues?