Us Airways Says Repair Jobs Can Be Saved

[usairways_vote_NO]

STORY

Airline chief meets with congressmen

One group that has resisted talk of new concessions is the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers -- the group that repairs US Airways' planes. Lakefield's comments yesterday prompted speculation that the company may be using the talk of a new maintenance center and Pittsburgh-area jobs as a way of enticing the IAM to the bargaining table.

But IAM spokesman Joe Tiberi rejected that thought yesterday, saying that his union has already suggested the company create a third-party jet repair operation. "Nothing [Lakefield] said to a politician or anyone else will persuade us to open up our contract," Tiberi said.

 

[sentrido]

From the article:

"Maintenance work provides the largest chunk of US Airways' Pittsburgh-area workforce. (The next largest group is the 1,200-area flight attendants.) US Airways said it employs 1,752 unionized mechanics and 607 unionized ramp workers, along with 760 non-union managers. Lakefield's remarks yesterday referred only to the 1,752 people who repair planes. It is unknown what would happen to the rest of the local IAM workers."

Lets see,

1,752 unionized mechanics + 607 unionized ramp workers
_______________________________________________

760 non-union managers

= 1 manager per 3 employees?
WTF?
That doesnt even account for the fact that there are leads doing the real supervision.
And they want the IAM to give back? Give back some of those "non-union manager" jobs to the mechanics and rampers who deserve them.

 

[mweiss]

US is among the most top-heavy airlines in the country.

 

[diogenes]

And when you factor in staffing for the wholly-owned's and affiliates, the body count and costs are astronomical.

For instance, I am aware of a flight schedule where a 50 seat Dash operates at 1000, and then a 50 seat Mesa RJ operates ON THE SAME ROUTE at 1040. These flights are routinely full. Why on earth wouldn't you put ONE 737 on that route? Even at current labor costs, it'd be cheaper.

As it currently stands mainline employees handle the Piedmont Dash and Mesa lawn dart, so the costs for handling those flights accrue to mainline. Keep in mind, Mesa and Piedmont do not supply any ground equipment, so mainline absorbs the full costs for tugs, carts, beltloaders, deicing, etc. Additionally, the costs for Piedmont and Mesa dispatchers, crew and maintainance schedulers must be allocated.

So what it boils down to is, in the current flight schedule, three entities (mainline, Piedmont, and Mesa)must be supported, rather than one, if a 737 were put on.

No wonder U is losing money.

And, opinions on this board to the contrary, management is not stupid. The ONLY reason you'd configure a business operation this way is to whipsaw labor, with the intent of reducing labor costs significantly.

 

[usair_begins_with_u]

Lakefield's comments yesterday prompted speculation that the company may be using the talk of a new maintenance center and Pittsburgh-area jobs as a way of enticing the IAM to the bargaining table.

Does that come with a free bottle of snake oil?

 

[Winglet]

Classic disinformation campaign. Chapter 14 of the senior executive playbook . . . "make non-specific inuendos that can always be denied when you get called out on it, but nevertheless have an soothing affect."

I can't believe that some people can't (or won't) see through this B.S.

 

[insp89]

Seems that Mr. Lakefield has forgotten that management has the IAM in litigation over the outsourcing [stealing] of the Airbus work...And he expects good faith bargaining ???

 

[700UW]

He was involved, the BOD has to vote and approve the contract with ST MAE@BFM.

And the IAM board member went to Dr Bronner and Lakefield when the outsourcing was announced and told them it was wrong, against the contract and would create lots of labor unrest.

 

[delldude]

He was involved, the BOD has to vote and approve the contract with ST MAE@BFM.

And the IAM board member went to Dr Bronner and Lakefield when the outsourcing was announced and told them it was wrong, against the contract and would create lots of labor unrest.

And the IAM board member went to Dr Bronner and Lakefield when the outsourcing was announced and told them it was wrong, against the contract and would create lots of labor unrest.

so did charlie nardello... ,and what did that get him?
did better

 

[AP Tech]

The company also recently announced that they planned to contract out de-ice functions in Pit for the 2005 season. That is also mentioned specifically in the now famous contract book which the company ignores............More good faith towards the workers????

 

[sentrido]

Lets do some more math.

Lets see,

Where I work, we have about 1 manager per 10 employees.

1,752 unionized mechanics + 607 unionized ramp workers =

2359
------
10
= 236 managers

760 current managers
- 236
= 524
524 * 50K (Arbitrary average cost per year per manager) = 26 million a year in savings in pit alone.

If I were a consultant, wonder what i could charge them for that little bit of insight.

Does anybody know what southwests manager to employee ratio is? or were to look?

 

[PITMTC]

sentrido, I am not diputing your manager-per-employee headcount balance by any means. I think, however that people are confuded between the difference between "managers" and "non union". In some recently posted numbers I have read, there were examples of how PIT had x amount of union employees and the rest were managers. Just because someone is not union does not mean the rest are in management.
There are a lot of employees who do not belong to a union and are not supervising anyone.

How about excluding those people from your examples?

 

[sentrido]

I'm only going by the numbers in the article that started the thread that site "USAirways" as the source: "760 non-union managers". If the article is wrong, somebody who knows should post the correct numbers.

 

[JonC]

I'm only going by the numbers in the article that started the thread that site "USAirways" as the source: "760 non-union managers". If the article is wrong, somebody who knows should post the correct numbers.

I think the confusion might be over the management salary plan. Many "non-union" professional jobs at US Airways would be paid under the management salary plan, but wouldn't actually be supervisory managers. For example, your engineering and purchasing staff.

jc

 

[E-TRONS]

so did charlie nardello... ,and what did that get him?
did better

As far as Nardello getting all the rave reviews at his new company....we know better. What a farce <_< !!!

Charlie NEVER did a darn thing for CLT Base Mtc other than HINDER it's efforts to succeed. He never should have been removed from his STORES responsibilities in the first place where he also sucked as a vp!!! Good riddance!!

I look at it this way......He's Hawaiian Airlines problem now. Too bad for them.

LOSER :down: