- Aug 20, 2002
- 7,319
- 1,555
So if I understand you, the facilities are not counted toward mechanic per aircraft?
Are the Stores personal counted toward the mechanic per aircraft?
And where is the break between supervisors and mechanics at UAL?
TWU negotiations.........what?
- Thread starter Chuck Schalk
- Start date
Are the Stores personal counted toward the mechanic per aircraft?
And where is the break between supervisors and mechanics at UAL?
I included them under the assumption they were included in the figure in the article. But generally I would say they are not included as mechanics per aircraft in most calculations.
Stores and management No, union mechanics under the contract,maybe I should not have referred to them as M&R.
- Aug 20, 2002
- 7,319
- 1,555
I sent Fwaaa the link for the 5500 UAL mechanics he ask about....
Yes, I'm confident that the 4,728 (UAL's number, not mine) includes aircraft mechanics plus facilities maintenance. Under the '34 Act, UAL must disclose and discuss union-represented employee groups, and UAL says that 4,728 "Mechanics and Related" represented by the IBT were employed as of 12/31/10. Just like there were 5,551 represented by AMFA at the end of 2007 (2007 10-K). In the latest 10-K, UAL says that CO employed 3,637 mechanics, which matches the news articles that say CO has about 3,600 mechanics, like this Chicago Tribune article:
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-11-11/business/chi-united-teamsters-reach-deal-on-labor-contract-20111111_1_teamsters-tentative-deal-union-ratification-vote
The media either looked up some bad numbers on their own or were given bad info by someone. At 12/31/10, UAL had 5,600 pilots - perhaps the media saw that number and mistakenly reported it as the number of mechanics and related - it's just above the UA M&R total of 4,728.
UA says that there are 4,728 "Mechanics and Related" represented by the Teamsters and doesn't mention any other IBT-represented employees and that term is a term of art (from the NMB, right).
If the choice is between a number that UA execs filed under penalty of possible securities fraud laws and a number printed by the news media without any source listed, I'll take the number filed by the company with the SEC. And that number is indeed 4,728. Three years earlier, it was 5,551, when UAL had 100 more mainline planes. Looks like the media found some old numbers.
Thanks, Buck, but that's the same .pdf you posted above in post #4296, right? I've read it a few times and I don't see any mention of 5,500 UAL M&R. Is it in there and I'm just not seeing it?
There are news articles like the Chi Trib article I linked above where the number 5,500 is thrown around right next to the 3,600 CO mechanics. The 5,500 appears to be inflated.
I found another source for the "approximately 5,500" number: the UA press release from yesterday:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/United-Airlines-International-prnews-3783300886.html?x=0&l=1
Looks like an error, but it is a number published by UAL. Wouldn't be the first time that press release writers goofed. Anybody friendly with any UAL M&R and can get some actual numbers (like the numbers on the seniorty list)?
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/United-Airlines-International-prnews-3783300886.html?x=0&l=1
Looks like an error, but it is a number published by UAL. Wouldn't be the first time that press release writers goofed. Anybody friendly with any UAL M&R and can get some actual numbers (like the numbers on the seniorty list)?
- Aug 20, 2002
- 7,319
- 1,555
I read so many sources last night attempting to find some compensation and benefit numbers I must have seen it somewhere. Anyway, about 5,500.
Even if it's 4728 its still a high number if they contract out most of their oh. AA has around 4000 line mechanics for 615 aircraft.
Overspeed
Veteran
- Jun 27, 2011
- 3,245
- 1,065
MIT site that uses DOT F41 information. The M&R per aircraft includes all in-house people (mgmt, engr, admin, facilities, QA, CC, AMTs, AC, and janitors) that are used to maintain the aircraft. Like you said earlier the indirect people (the people that don't turn wrenches) will be outsourced along with the AMTs and that is part of the cost savings when you outsource.
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2010%2012%20Month%20Documents/Employees%20and%20Productivity/MX/Average%20In%20House%20Maintenance%20Employees%20per%20Aircraft.htm
- Aug 20, 2002
- 7,319
- 1,555
Well its a good thing the last T/A got rid of the janitors.....
Thats one step closer
Overspeed
Veteran
- Jun 27, 2011
- 3,245
- 1,065
Was that sarcasm?
Overspeed
Veteran
- Jun 27, 2011
- 3,245
- 1,065
Looks like DL is adding people but not AMTs.
CEO ANDERSON, RICHARD CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER (404) 715-6201
Liaison PISZ, KAREN L. REPAIR STATION QUALITY COORDINATOR - ATG (404) 714-5837
Personnel
Certificated Mechanics: 4085
Repairmen: 103
Non-Certificated Mechanics: 1721
Total Employees: 8134
FAA Information
CHDO: SO27 DELTA CMO SO27
Address:
DELTA CERT MANAGEMENT OFFICE
1701 COLUMBIA AVE
COLLEGE PARK , GA 30337
Phone: (404) 474-5300
- Aug 20, 2002
- 7,319
- 1,555
Sarcasm yes, however it was also a reference to the FSC T/A. The difference between the loss of positions versus the loss of members.
Thanks for the UAL presentation. I looked at the pie chart and you're wrong, just like I pointed out in May when you first said that UAL had told its employees that outsourced maintenance consumed 13% of total costs in 2007.
The pie chart tracks the categories shown on the 2007 UAL 10-K but for some inexplicable reason in one instance it combines two categories, "Aircraft maintenance materials and outside repairs" plus "Purchased services" to form an inartfully described "Maintenance & related purchased services" and labels the expense as 13% of costs. That does not say that UAL spent 13% of its total costs on outsourced maintenance.
From the 10-K, it is clear that UAL spent $1.166 billion on "Aircraft maintenance materials and outside repairs" which equals 6.1% of total costs. That category includes outsourced maintenance plus parts and materials purchased for insourced maintenance. UAL still overhauls engines in SFO plus performs A, B and C checks, just not D checks (or as AA calls them, heavy C checks). To compare, AA spent just $826 million on the same category in 2007, or just 3.7 % of total costs (AA 10-K, not AMR 10-K, to get just mainline costs). That's logical since AA outsources some component work but still performed all heavy C checks in-house. So of course, UAL's spending on that item (which includes all outsourced maintenance) would be larger as a percentage than at AA.
And, of course, AA's labor expense is proportionately larger, in part because UAL reported just 5,551 unionized maintenance personnel in 2007 compared to, say, 12,000 or more at AA in 2007.
What about the other UAL category called "Purchased services?" UAL spent $1.346 billion on that one in 2007 but that category does not include any maintenance. That category covers all other outsourced labor and services, like outsourced ramp and outsourced IT and outsourced customer call centers (Manilla, India, etc). It covers all the people who do work on UAL's behalf but aren't UAL employees, like the employees of World or Globe or ICT or others who push wheelchairs or guard the elite security lines or work as skycaps. It covers outsourced ticket agents and gate agents in stations where UAL doesn't have its own employeees. It covers consultants (and those can be expensive). It doesn't include maintenance. Maintenance has its own category called "Aircraft maintenance materials and outside repairs."
What we don't know is what UAL spent on outsourced maintenance in 2007. We do know that it was no more than $1.166 billion - and of course, it was actually less than that, since that number includes parts and materials for insourced maintenance.
As I pointed out six months ago, your assertion made no sense on its face. UAL had just 460 mainline planes in 2007 and if it spent $2.5 billion on just outsourced maintenance, that would equal $5.43 million per plane in the entire fleet, or more than enough to completely overhaul every plane in UAL's fleet in 2007 (AA has previously estimated a heavy C check at $2 million to $4 million per plane).
Overall, I believe that you are a good person. You desparately want outsourced maintenance to be much more costly than insourced maintenance. Despite what Dave posts, you want overhaul to remain inhouse and you aren't trying to throw TULE and DWH under the bus to get what your membership deserves.
But I find it troubling that you would misinterpret a single crappy pie chart presented by UAL management to its employees as establishing as fact that UAL spent 13% of its total expenses in 2007 just on outsourced maintenance. To me, it demonstrates a failure to think critically. I realize that you often show a profound hatred toward me and everything I post here. I can only guess that it's because I frequently push you to think before you speak and when someone posts outlandish "facts," I challenge them to prove those "facts."
IMO, that's the only way your membership has any chance of achieving the market rate for A&P mechanics of at least $50/hr. Every day, however, I become more and more convinced that it will not happen until the TWU is replaced as the bargaining agent plus professional negotiators are hired. And you and every other current mechanic on the negotiating team are replaced. You previously posted that you aren't even asking for UPS-level wages.
And as I've pointed out before, you spend an inordinate amount of time arguing "sky is blue" facts with me and others here. I have no doubt that you're an excellent airplane mechanic. I have my doubts about your skills in certain other areas.
787nightmare
Veteran
- Aug 28, 2010
- 722
- 153
FWAAA, you seem like a fairly knowledgeable guy, but I disagree with a previous statement referencing the starting wage for mechs as (41k as "not terrible"...
I think it's an outrage that the Co wants experienced mechs and only pays 20/hr. A. a/p sch grad is worth more than that. I'm not going to beat it to death, but I do believe WN starts there mechs out at around 27/hr-which is more like it. And I would add a 36 mo step pay progression for top out. The mech brings exp-pay the man!
This is just one area I see the union has failed the aircraft tech miserably...
I think it's an outrage that the Co wants experienced mechs and only pays 20/hr. A. a/p sch grad is worth more than that. I'm not going to beat it to death, but I do believe WN starts there mechs out at around 27/hr-which is more like it. And I would add a 36 mo step pay progression for top out. The mech brings exp-pay the man!
This is just one area I see the union has failed the aircraft tech miserably...
