TWU negotiations.........what?

[Bob Owens]

I have friends at Allegiant HDQ... What I've been told is they no longer saw the same level of quality present as when they first started using AA, and that there was also concern about AA being able to absorb their future growth. Call it "constructive eviction" if it makes you feel better, but it sure sounded like it was their choice, and they weren't "thrown out" as you put it. Or maybe they're just spinning their side of the story?...

That said, I agree that AA probably isn't as interested in the 3P work. And those white spaces in the dock plan are just getting bigger and bigger, since it looks like the MD80's aren't being replaced on a 1:1 basis.

My bet is that the "White spaces" on the roster are coming in a lot faster than the "white spaces" in the dock plan. By the way, during the companys report in June of 2009 there where white spaces projected by 2012, thats as far as they went, pretty much full up until then, by July of 2010 not only were all the white spaces gone through 2012 but now they were booked up with AA work to around 2015.

I'd heard from the company side that AA was going to dump North American so they could have 10 less heads at JFK, heard that it doesnt generate that many heads from an AA source and told from a North Americam source they have a five year contract with AA. North American was later seen doing training recently over at LGA for AA mechs (thrust reverser change or something).

The numbers I heard was around $100 per hour for line maint. If there are plenty of A&Ps out there why would North American be paying that much? Of the recalls who did come back to AA, some were from North American.

 

[FWAAA]

The numbers I heard was around $100 per hour for line maint. If there are plenty of A&Ps out there why would North American be paying that much? Of the recalls who did come back to AA, some were from North American.

Probably for the same reason that I pay about $90/hr in labor for repairs at my local GM dealer yet the tech makes maybe half that much. Like the way brand new lawyers, right out of school, bill out their time at $150/hr but are paid only about half that much. As I have posted before, the costs of repairing something include the pay the technician earns plus the benefits plus the overhead costs, including the expenses of managing the workforce. When AA bills out your labor to third parties, it includes your meager pay, your somewhat costly benefits and the bloated expenses of managing the AA maintenance staff (thanks to AA's bloated, expensive management). No doubt North American views the $100/hr (or whatever the actual figures are) as fair considering all of the expenses it avoids by not hiring several more line mechanics of its own.

Of course, I guess it's possible that someone at North American is so stupid as to think that they are being ripped off because you are paid less than $34/hr of that $100, but I doubt it. Most business managers realize that W-2 pay is merely the beginning - scratching the surface - of labor costs.

 

[Bob Owens]

Probably for the same reason that I pay about $90/hr in labor for repairs at my local GM dealer yet the tech makes maybe half that much. Like the way brand new lawyers, right out of school, bill out their time at $150/hr but are paid only about half that much. As I have posted before, the costs of repairing something include the pay the technician earns plus the benefits plus the overhead costs, including the expenses of managing the workforce. When AA bills out your labor to third parties, it includes your meager pay, your somewhat costly benefits and the bloated expenses of managing the AA maintenance staff (thanks to AA's bloated, expensive management). No doubt North American views the $100/hr (or whatever the actual figures are) as fair considering all of the expenses it avoids by not hiring several more line mechanics of its own.

Of course, I guess it's possible that someone at North American is so stupid as to think that they are being ripped off because you are paid less than $34/hr of that $100, but I doubt it. Most business managers realize that W-2 pay is merely the beginning - scratching the surface - of labor costs.

Well they have a rep, so their management costs are there anyway, but I agree that they are probably getting a good deal, and so is AA because they dont add any extra heads or management, or overhead or benifit costs etc doing that work, maybe a few hours OT here and there, maybe,but all the other costs are already there whether North American came over or not.

At one time the rule of thumb was 'double the wage", however its much less than that. Some tell us that we have better benifits than most, more than North American would be paying, then again maybe not because I doubt that North American is large enough to be self insured, so while AA collects three thousand dollars per worker for coverage and puts into their self insured medical fund, North American would probably fork over even more to an Insurance company so the Insurance Company could make a profit off them. While AA can keep the balance from those who make no claims and use it to pay those who use more than what they pay in, North American doesnt have that luxury. They just pay through the nose for everyone and the Insurance company makes a profit.

My guess is that if AA were to pay an insurance company to provide coverage for its 80,000 employees they would be paying around $10,000 per worker, they claim that they pay out around $8000 in claims and overhead to run the plan per worker, so right there they save $2000 per worker, now subtract the $3000 they are charging us and they pay around $5000 per worker, at the most.

While the wage may not reflect all the costs, its a lot more than a scratch on the surface. I gross $68000 before AA takes back $3000 for medical, I have a healthy family and have no where near $8000 per year in claims(last year AA made money off me, only $1700 in claims paid, around half what I paid to AA for the coverage), $1100 for the pension and $5000 for SSI. So my wage was $68000 and all my other stuff, including the pension came out to $6100, so a little less than 10%. When you subtract the balance of my medical it comes out to around $4800 or around 7%.

 

[TWU informer]

Bob,

If the Company position was "If you ask X amount on the contract, then we are done with the North American Contract."

Do you save your ten heads, or take your money?

 

[Bob Owens]

Bob,

If the Company position was "If you ask X amount on the contract, then we are done with the North American Contract."

Do you save your ten heads, or take your money?

Take the money, because the ten heads never existed, it was a ruse by the company, they do not, have not, and will not staff for 3p work. At JFK they claim they wont even budget in OT for the work.

 

[Interested]

I have friends at Allegiant HDQ... What I've been told is they no longer saw the same level of quality present as when they first started using AA, and that there was also concern about AA being able to absorb their future growth. Call it "constructive eviction" if it makes you feel better, but it sure sounded like it was their choice, and they weren't "thrown out" as you put it. Or maybe they're just spinning their side of the story?...

That said, I agree that AA probably isn't as interested in the 3P work. And those white spaces in the dock plan are just getting bigger and bigger, since it looks like the MD80's aren't being replaced on a 1:1 basis.

So I guess by us being told that we "didn't have room" because of AA's work load was only a 1/2 truth.

 

[eolesen]

So I guess by us being told that we "didn't have room" because of AA's work load was only a 1/2 truth.

I'm sure there are elements of spin on all sides... Somewhere in the middle is usually the truth.

 

[Birdman]

I have friends at Allegiant HDQ... What I've been told is they no longer saw the same level of quality present as when they first started using AA, and that there was also concern about AA being able to absorb their future growth.

My comments on this subject are well documented in past threads. I repeat,AA could no longer afford to subsidize Allegiants maintenance program. Simple as that. As far as quality issues, I wish Allegiant luck finding better maintenance than we provided.

 

[odie01]

Bob Owens,

Add this video to your presentation Dec 14

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5OtB298fHY&feature=youtube_gdata_player

 

[Tex-Mech]

Bob Owens,

Add this video to your presentation Dec 14

But yet I am surrounded by union members who would never vote for Bernie and have no issue about the rich getting more and more wealthier.

 

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

But yet I am surrounded by union members who would never vote for Bernie and have no issue about the rich getting more and more wealthier.

its obvious our members have no issue about the rich getting richer that is why we are still led by the twu and the crooks at the international level. i would sign an AMP card just to get rid of them !

 

[Bob Owens]

Bob Owens,

Add this video to your presentation Dec 14

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5OtB298fHY&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Loved it!!!! Amazing to see such truth come out in the Senate, its more common at the House of Reps. For a minute there he sounded like Lewis Black but I love him too.

"Whose greed has no end"

That without a doubt describes AA management. Despite the suffering of the last 8 years they are still demanding more. Despite soaring revenue and plummeting headcount, they want more.

They obviously have no problem keeping things as they are where they extract further concessions through inflation and profiteering off their self funded medical (last year I paid AA $3000 for coverage and they paid $1700 in claims. They made $1300 off me. Look at your Total Value Statement to see how you made out)

They have dragged this out for three years and so far have pretty much made it clear that they are willing to drag it on indefinately, and why wouldnt they when we give them what they want everyday on the gates and in the hangars? I think I've said all I can say, and the membership voted NO reinforcing what I've said, but apparently they still dont hear it, or more likely refuse to listen because they dont care, they are getting what they want. The only time management asks us what we want is when a plane that should be up in the air making money is sitting on the ground costing money waiting to be fixed. Then and only then, they are all ears.

Maybe I'm wrong, by next Friday I'll know, and so will you.

 

[eolesen]

That without a doubt describes AA management. Despite the suffering of the last 8 years they are still demanding more. Despite soaring revenue and plummeting headcount, they want more.

I thought it was a zero cost contract proposal, no?

That would imply they don't want more. They're just not offering more.

 

[Bob Owens]

I thought it was a zero cost contract proposal, no?

That would imply they don't want more. They're just not offering more.

"Zero costs" is a concession. Inflation automatically takes on behalf of the company.
AA revenues have increased dramatically, so have our costs, the company also extracted concession through their self insured medical plan, in my case I'm paying the equivelent of $1.20 an hour more to AA for less coverage and higher deductibles than I was going into 2003.

We need to bring balance between the company and the union, last time they took and only took, this time they have to give and only give. Then we can work together and make the company what it needs to be.

 

[eolesen]

We need to bring balance between the company and the union, last time they took and only took, this time they have to give and only give. Then we can work together and make the company what it needs to be.

One could also say that the company was simply returning the favor from giving you guys a good contract in 2001.

Seriously, what did you "give up" in 2001 or the previous contract?

I remember people claiming 2001 was a great contract, thanks to the "threat" of AMFA.

The 1997 contract (?) would have been when AMR was making record profits. What did you "give up" then, other than allowing the SRP/OSM classifications?

We've all heard about how far you fell in 2003, but I don't recall a whole lot of discussion on how far the 2003 cuts compared to where you were in 2000 or 1996.