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

[Buck]

1700 mechanics or OSM's?

. Is Title I getting ready to have Title II mechanics added to it or will they all be "red circled"?

What about AFW? Are these members going to be given their contractual rights when a RIF happens?

 

[Bob Owens]

1700 mechanics or OSM's?

. Is Title I getting ready to have Title II mechanics added to it or will they all be "red circled"?

What about AFW? Are these members going to be given their contractual rights when a RIF happens?

We have around 1700 mechanics without system protection.
I don't believe in Red Circles, seniority must prevail.

For me the issue is this, we gave up stuff that nobody else gave up so others could keep stuff that everybody else gave up, we can't give anymore. If they want to keep those things without a fight they can not expect us to give up more to make it happen.

Basically we have our line guys working at best for Tulsa OSM living standards so others can live very well doing work that anywhere else pays much less. I have no problem fighting to keep that work in house but we need financial relief and cost of living must be recognized.

 

[AA89]

Are you aware that Fed Ex and UPS always sent that work out, even when we made more than them?

Are you aware tht AA dumped most of their cargo because they did not feel it was profitable enough?

Are you aware of all the concessions that were tied to the TA including having to turn over our Prefunding for sick time credits that could only be used to buy retiree medical at inflated rates that could be raised even higher after three years?

As far as your claim that outsourcing pays for the holidays please present your proof, if outsoucing pays for he holidays does it also pay the $17 more per hour they get at UPS? If that's the case then why is AA looking to only pay us a max of $32.77/hr with 50% outsourcing? If outsoucing is such a great deal then why isn't AA offering at least industry average in exchange for increased outsourcing? How come in four years of negotiations AA never even proposed matching compensation and outsourcing?

Are you aware that our management still has 10 holidays? Wouldn't the ranks of management also be reduced by outsourcing?

Seems that you are the one cherry picking. You never fail to leave out the fact that none of our competitors who outsourced oh had Osms and that osms lowered AAs average costs below what competitors could achieve even with the concessions they got in BK.Show me proof hat AA will outsource all that work, the fact is that AA has around 1700 mechanics without system protection, in other words they could lay hem off under the agreement as is but instead of laying off they have been hiring for the last two years.

Bob, I'm not trying to pile on you as I believe that we all have a common goal. Just different points of view. But..........
I still haven't seen any numbers as to how our overall maintenance costs compare to the other AIRLINES. We do the same job as the freight haulers but surely you understand the difference in economics of the two businesses.
If you have numbers that show that our OSMs with full retirement and healthcare benefits as well as overhaul AMTs with the same can produce at the same costs that the other majors are getting either in the U.S. or overseas then please share with us. And I hope Jim Little gets a chance to share with the arbitrators too.
I agree with you that insourcing and keeping overhaul in-house has value that company refuses to aknowledge. It just amazes me that union has been unable to put a value on it. Until then we are at a negotiating disadvantage.

 

[Buck]

Now that the company with the unions blessing will have 40% OSM's., possibly some on the aircraft as well the support shops, the average compensation for the company drops.

And Bob, how can the pension multiplier ( 1.6777x ) be used to the unions advantages now that the pension is no longer a factor?

 

[Birdman]

Now that the company with the unions blessing will have 40% OSM's., possibly some on the aircraft as well the support shops, the average compensation for the company drops.

By my calculation there is just shy of a $20,000,000 savings per year by attaining the 40% OSM target at current TULE employment levels. We currently have a 15% ratio now. That's only about 1/10 of the cost savings they're look for from M&R. The 40% ratio with 2000 less title I in TULE would be even less. Forget it!

 

[Overspeed]

We have around 1700 mechanics without system protection.
I don't believe in Red Circles, seniority must prevail.

For me the issue is this, we gave up stuff that nobody else gave up so others could keep stuff that everybody else gave up, we can't give anymore. If they want to keep those things without a fight they can not expect us to give up more to make it happen.

Basically we have our line guys working at best for Tulsa OSM living standards so others can live very well doing work that anywhere else pays much less. I have no problem fighting to keep that work in house but we need financial relief and cost of living must be recognized.

So the options were clear back in 2003, take the cuts we did (or a combination of others) or give up jobs so you could have the standard of living you feel the line deserves according to you. So you think we should have given up jobs in 2003 instead of wages? Whose job? Do you or someone else get to pick?

 

[AA89]

So the options were clear back in 2003, take the cuts we did (or a combination of others) or give up jobs so you could have the standard of living you feel the line deserves according to you. So you think we should have given up jobs in 2003 instead of wages? Whose job? Do you or someone else get to pick?

A lot of people think we should have given up jobs insread of pay/benefits that will take years to recover, if ever. Even some that would have been laid off then with the hope of getting recalled have told me this. Based on what we went through after 2003 with the animosity and pissing and moaning, I have to agree. But most guys don't want to fall on the sword for somebody else.

 

[Overspeed]

Are you aware that Fed Ex and UPS always sent that work out, even when we made more than them?

Are you aware tht AA dumped most of their cargo because they did not feel it was profitable enough?

Are you aware of all the concessions that were tied to the TA including having to turn over our Prefunding for sick time credits that could only be used to buy retiree medical at inflated rates that could be raised even higher after three years?

As far as your claim that outsourcing pays for the holidays please present your proof, if outsoucing pays for he holidays does it also pay the $17 more per hour they get at UPS? If that's the case then why is AA looking to only pay us a max of $32.77/hr with 50% outsourcing? If outsoucing is such a great deal then why isn't AA offering at least industry average in exchange for increased outsourcing? How come in four years of negotiations AA never even proposed matching compensation and outsourcing?

Are you aware that our management still has 10 holidays? Wouldn't the ranks of management also be reduced by outsourcing?

Seems that you are the one cherry picking. You never fail to leave out the fact that none of our competitors who outsourced oh had Osms and that osms lowered AAs average costs below what competitors could achieve even with the concessions they got in BK.Show me proof hat AA will outsource all that work, the fact is that AA has around 1700 mechanics without system protection, in other words they could lay hem off under the agreement as is but instead of laying off they have been hiring for the last two years.

I am aware of that FEDEX and UPS always outsourced that work. Are you aware that in the BK process the judge and the creditors don't give a damn about pay comparisons or how much you feel you should have made in the past? BK restructuring is for the purpose of enabling the company to pay back the secured creditors first, not "get even" for how badly the company was managed or how you didn't get paid what you think you should have. You don't even understand the process you wished for apparently.

AA did not dump cargo, revenues have dropped probably due to less belly capacity (parked DC10s, A300s, and MD11s) not because it is unprofitable as you claim. AA hasn't run a cargo only plane for sometime but sells available cargo capacity at rates where they can make money. With the lower operating costs they seek AA may be able to do more business with more competitive cargo rates.

I am aware of what was in the TA and retiree medical. The point is, now we will most likely have no retiree medical prefunding and at best pay active rates when we retiree. The MCTs already have that and they got a pay raise that they are not having to give up in BK. We got no pay raise because the TA was voted down and will get the same thing as the MCTs.

The holiday issue is simple, it's all about cost. If you outsource a block of work at a lower cost than it does to do with inhouse staff, you can afford to have additional wages and benefits (e.g. more holidays) for the smaller inhouse group. It's actually really simple to figure it out. You have professional economists at your disposal, maybe you should spend some time with them so they can explain it to you.

AA does not have to offer us higher wages or benefits due to outsourcing. AA is in Chap 11 which means they are restructuring the business to become profitable and viable. If they can show they need outsource and not pay higher wages and benefits to the judge and we have no effective argument other than you think you should get more, AA gets what they want. You standing there saying, "I should get more because the other guys do," is not an effective argument. But then again, you are a smart and compelling guy, I am sure the judge will hear you.

If you had offered to swap higher pay for more outsourcing during negotiations I am positive AA would have said ok. The problem is I doubt AFW, TULE, and MCIE would have agreed with that and roll called you.

Yes, management does still have ten holidays. And your point is that we should get it too because it's not fair? That's a great argument!

I did not leave it out. OSM/SRPs were a response to how other airlines were getting lower costs through outsourcing in the early 90s. So are you saying we should have outsourced those jobs instead of having SRPs?

Could it be that AA hired because the scope clause required them to keep work inhouse? After all the clause does describe that AA will be able to outsource according to existing practice. That would mean they can't outsource more than they have in the past therefore they needed to hire mechanics. Laying people off or not hiring would require modifications to the work rules or some type of continuous improvement to increase productivity. Kind of like what AA is doing by trying to wipeout all the special LOAs and restrictive language.

 

[Bob Owens]

Bob, I'm not trying to pile on you as I believe that we all have a common goal. Just different points of view. But..........
I still haven't seen any numbers as to how our overall maintenance costs compare to the other AIRLINES. We do the same job as the freight haulers but surely you understand the difference in economics of the two businesses.
If you have numbers that show that our OSMs with full retirement and healthcare benefits as well as overhaul AMTs with the same can produce at the same costs that the other majors are getting either in the U.S. or overseas then please share with us. And I hope Jim Little gets a chance to share with the arbitrators too.
I agree with you that insourcing and keeping overhaul in-house has value that company refuses to aknowledge. It just amazes me that union has been unable to put a value on it. Until then we are at a negotiating disadvantage.

I understand the differences of the economics of the two businesses, but these arent new develpoments, whats changed is that their wages kept pace with inflation while ours were cut and we are going into bankruptcy at the bottom of the industry, nobody else did that, everyone else went in fat and came out skinny, we are already skinny.

There is no real apples to apples way to compare the costs because there are so many variables. AA currently has an older fleet which requires more maintenance and vendors are not willing to disclose what they would charge to do the work, which would be an estimate anyway. Comparing what AAR or TIMCO or Pemco pays their mechanics to what our guys get paid is a useless comparasion for us, the only purpose that serves is who would you rather work for not whether or not its cheaper for AA to do it in house or outsource. What those outfuts pay their guys is only an incomplete snapshot of a component of the equation. Until AA recieves and elects to share such info, which is usually conviently subject to a confidentiality clause between the vendor and the carrier there can be no comparasion. AAs actions however over the last seven years however are more telling, they have brought work in house that they did not need to.

Since we do not have access to all the info, and even if we did there is no way to verify that its accurate or pertinant, we have two choices call them or fold. Does AA really plan on sending out nearly half the work? I dont think so, all through negotiations we heard of impending layoffs that did not materialize. I think they will send out the 757 and 767 and headcount will shrink, attrition takes out around 500 a year anyway, but I dont think AA wants to lose control. Things like the hailstorm in Dallas was just one example of the benefit of having OH in house.

The question is, we are already at the bottom, how much lower should we go? Sure in Tulsa its still a good living but out here on the coasts we are hurting, we need relief.

 

[AA89]

I understand the differences of the economics of the two businesses, but these arent new develpoments, whats changed is that their wages kept pace with inflation while ours were cut and we are going into bankruptcy at the bottom of the industry, nobody else did that, everyone else went in fat and came out skinny, we are already skinny.

There is no real apples to apples way to compare the costs because there are so many variables. AA currently has an older fleet which requires more maintenance and vendors are not willing to disclose what they would charge to do the work, which would be an estimate anyway. Comparing what AAR or TIMCO or Pemco pays their mechanics to what our guys get paid is a useless comparasion for us, the only purpose that serves is who would you rather work for not whether or not its cheaper for AA to do it in house or outsource. What those outfuts pay their guys is only an incomplete snapshot of a component of the equation. Until AA recieves and elects to share such info, which is usually conviently subject to a confidentiality clause between the vendor and the carrier there can be no comparasion. AAs actions however over the last seven years however are more telling, they have brought work in house that they did not need to.

Since we do not have access to all the info, and even if we did there is no way to verify that its accurate or pertinant, we have two choices call them or fold. Does AA really plan on sending out nearly half the work? I dont think so, all through negotiations we heard of impending layoffs that did not materialize. I think they will send out the 757 and 767 and headcount will shrink, attrition takes out around 500 a year anyway, but I dont think AA wants to lose control. Things like the hailstorm in Dallas was just one example of the benefit of having OH in house.

The question is, we are already at the bottom, how much lower should we go? Sure in Tulsa its still a good living but out here on the coasts we are hurting, we need relief.

Relief is coming for the line guys at the expense of OH through layoffs and OSM pay. Of course if we get locked into a 6 year deal there won't be time for most of us to negotiate that relief back. So on the bottom we will stay for awhile.

 

[strikeforce]

I understand the differences of the economics of the two businesses, but these arent new develpoments, whats changed is that their wages kept pace with inflation while ours were cut and we are going into bankruptcy at the bottom of the industry, nobody else did that, everyone else went in fat and came out skinny, we are already skinny.

There is no real apples to apples way to compare the costs because there are so many variables. AA currently has an older fleet which requires more maintenance and vendors are not willing to disclose what they would charge to do the work, which would be an estimate anyway. Comparing what AAR or TIMCO or Pemco pays their mechanics to what our guys get paid is a useless comparasion for us, the only purpose that serves is who would you rather work for not whether or not its cheaper for AA to do it in house or outsource. What those outfuts pay their guys is only an incomplete snapshot of a component of the equation. Until AA recieves and elects to share such info, which is usually conviently subject to a confidentiality clause between the vendor and the carrier there can be no comparasion. AAs actions however over the last seven years however are more telling, they have brought work in house that they did not need to.

Since we do not have access to all the info, and even if we did there is no way to verify that its accurate or pertinant, we have two choices call them or fold. Does AA really plan on sending out nearly half the work? I dont think so, all through negotiations we heard of impending layoffs that did not materialize. I think they will send out the 757 and 767 and headcount will shrink, attrition takes out around 500 a year anyway, but I dont think AA wants to lose control. Things like the hailstorm in Dallas was just one example of the benefit of having OH in house.

The question is, we are already at the bottom, how much lower should we go? Sure in Tulsa its still a good living but out here on the coasts we are hurting, we need relief.

AA knows the unions will cave and accept even further wage and benefit reductions in order to keep in-house maintenance. So, the company wins on both ends.....they keep control of maintenance and they get lower wages. The job of any craft union is to keep the HIGHEST PAY, even if it costs jobs. Bob, WE don't belong to a craft union, so it's really a waste of time explaining what a craft union would do. The TWU is all about jobs.....and NOT about keeping up with industry standard wages. Because if they were, TUL, AFW and DWH would be outsourced and the Line mechanics would be making WN wages. AMFA and IBT are looking out for the highest industry wages, first, and jobs second. You can talk, explain and demand all you want, but at the end of the day WE all belong to a union that can care less about keeping the highest wages.....do you hear Jim Little talking about keeping the highest wages???? Nope, it's all about jobs, right! Why don't you ask him why he doesn't exchange jobs for the highest pay, I did on his townhall teleconference. You're wasting your time brother.

 

[Bob Owens]

So the options were clear back in 2003, take the cuts we did (or a combination of others) or give up jobs so you could have the standard of living you feel the line deserves according to you. So you think we should have given up jobs in 2003 instead of wages? Whose job? Do you or someone else get to pick?

No the option to retain the money but lose jobs was removed from the table. When the committee came back and said take the jobs and leave the money the company said they could not run their operation that way. eventually they could, and they took the jobs anyway, after they took the money. They will do the same thing again if we let them.

Seniority picks who stays and who goes, if you were a union man you would know that.

When they shut down Bradley and some guys hit the streets and others had to bump the system I didnt see you saying that we should open up the contract and see if we could all give up some more pay and benefits to save those jobs, why is that? Isnt an injustice to one an injustice to all or only if it hits certain stations?


Like I said, it sucks to get laid off but I've been there but at least if they keep the wages and benefits where they should be those who are laid off will have something good to come back to. Everyone who was laid off in 2003 has been offered a job, many decided it was not worth it, and to me thats a bigger shame.

 

[Rogallo]

Isnt an injustice to one an injustice to all or only if it hits certain stations?

Bingo!! All about me!!

 

[Overspeed]

No the option to retain the money but lose jobs was removed from the table. When the committee came back and said take the jobs and leave the money the company said they could not run their operation that way. eventually they could, and they took the jobs anyway, after they took the money. They will do the same thing again if we let them.

Seniority picks who stays and who goes, if you were a union man you would know that.

When they shut down Bradley and some guys hit the streets and others had to bump the system I didnt see you saying that we should open up the contract and see if we could all give up some more pay and benefits to save those jobs, why is that? Isnt an injustice to one an injustice to all or only if it hits certain stations?


Like I said, it sucks to get laid off but I've been there but at least if they keep the wages and benefits where they should be those who are laid off will have something good to come back to. Everyone who was laid off in 2003 has been offered a job, many decided it was not worth it, and to me thats a bigger shame.

Uh not right. Remember, Greg Hall offered to keep the heads after 9/11 and not layoff as many if the TWU AMTs would work with less OT. Yes we could have run much leaner and by 2003 we were still fat. In fact, the scenario or running leaner was an option in 2003 but no president wanted to say they agreed to a deal that would result in layoffs.

Oh I am a union man and I have more seniority than you. I know my number.

Uh didn't the BDL guys bump the system and get absorbed if they want to? Then there was no overall reduction in HC.

Yes there has been a serious injustice, it's called going to BK court and listening to someone try not to accept accountability for what they said. "Vote no, there is more money on the table, BK is a threat, they can't outsource because there is a mechanic shortage," etc...

No we have those great deals in the term sheets. Now you say, we can go on strike if the judge imposes those terms. Yes we probably can, probably not legally, but what's the end game?

 

[strikeforce]

Uh not right. Remember, Greg Hall offered to keep the heads after 9/11 and not layoff as many if the TWU AMTs would work with less OT. Yes we could have run much leaner and by 2003 we were still fat. In fact, the scenario or running leaner was an option in 2003 but no president wanted to say they agreed to a deal that would result in layoffs.

Oh I am a union man and I have more seniority than you. I know my number.

Uh didn't the BDL guys bump the system and get absorbed if they want to? Then there was no overall reduction in HC.

Yes there has been a serious injustice, it's called going to BK court and listening to someone try not to accept accountability for what they said. "Vote no, there is more money on the table, BK is a threat, they can't outsource because there is a mechanic shortage," etc...

No we have those great deals in the term sheets. Now you say, we can go on strike if the judge imposes those terms. Yes we probably can, probably not legally, but what's the end game?

I think Bob Owens is wasting his time explaining to the TWU minions that it's the objective of any union, especially a union representing employees of a liars club employer, that preserving pay would be in ALL amt's best interest in lieu of saving lower paid jobs. Let the company fail in it's objective to outsource maintenance. This company has a bad habit of implementing creative maintenance ideas only to find out later that it wasn't cost effective, and then ultimately revert back to something that works or has been working. So, I say to AA, "go ahead and farm out as much as you want......TUL, AFW, DWH, but in exchange you need to pay my remaining AMT's $50/hr. Then, when their plan fails and they want to insource work the amt's will be making $50/hr. That would be my plan, and I think that's what Bob is trying to convey here.