Other carriers, or AA?
With regard to AA, they clearly have fewer mechanics per aircraft, even taking into consideration the fact that they are doing some of their heavy checks in-house.
Sure, there's a complexity factor from operating widebodies and having multiple types, but
AA has more than 3x mechanics per aircraft and 2.5 x mechanics as a percentage of the total workforce than WN.
Code:
Employees SWA AAL
Flight 11442 25792
Maintenance 1972 12464
Ground/Res 13414 33093
Management/Clerical 4183 9819
Employees per Aircraft
Flight 27 36
Maintenance 5 17
Ground/Res 32 46
Management/Clerical 10 14
WG % of Employees
Flight 37 32
Maintenance 6 15
Ground/Res 43 41
Management/Clerical 13 12
I've had to go with WN's breakout from their 2004 annual report, which conveniently for this argument had maintenance broken out as a single workgroup. AA's number is from 3Q05 data, so it's not exactly as close as I'd like it to be, but it isn't like AA has been on a hiring spree this year...
I don't have comparable numbers for other carriers yet, but I'd expect some of those gaps to close up for someone like UA or CO who has outsourced overhaul. NWA will be an even more interesting one to watch, since they're looking to outsource overhaul, line maintenance, and possibly ground operations.
OK, now take the WN AVERAGE pay per mechanic against AA's AVERAGE pay per mechanic, and you will surely find that AA is getting a damn good deal on that large number of mechanics. Problem is, all those large number of employees are disgruntled due to the massive pay and benefit cuts, so the sweet deal has gone sour.
Remember, the TWU agenda was to save jobs, and pay and benefits were drastically sacrificed and cut to keep that LARGE number of Maintenance employees per aircraft.
Cut that total number down, give back some pay and benefits, and you will gain the productivity rule changes to make things better. But to leave the union deal in place that cut pay and benefits to the bone, causing massive
Airline
Induced
Divorce
Sydrome, and then on top of that cut heads and gain work rules, is a recipe for further disaster.
Just get a damn business plan together, make the tough decisions, and take action. But to have the cake, ice cream, and the cherry is NOT the answer you are looking for.
Of course you will have to go directly to the membership and somehow by-pass the leadership agenda of jobs, jobs, jobs, what you really need is work, work, work, and that is obtainable with the right formula.
I remember hearing about the late 70's where head count was cut to below operational requirements, and those that were left worked overtime. This reduced the medical, dental, vision, and prescription liabilty and productivity reached all time highs. Something to think about!