What is going on with AA MD-80 Fuel Tank Covers?

[Bill]

No, its now quite obvious, you don't know what you're talking about.
Wrong. The last pre-bankruptcy vote was never taken. The vote was canceled following the ATSB loan rejection, and UAL filed bankruptcy immediately afterwards.
Again Wrong. In the first round of concessions under the iam, UAL obtained the right to outsource 100% of heavy overhaul. The only concession AMFA gave concerning overhaul was to allow B747/B777 overhauls to be done overseas, which had previously been restricted to domestic outsourcing. As this was work the iam had already given up, which(at least during bankruptcy) was not coming back, AMFA actually saved members from taking more severe cuts in pay by allowing these 2 lines to sent overseas vs continuing restricting them to domestic OSVs.




Well this is interesting, while I'll grant you NWA, I'm quite curious about ASA and Mesabas overhaul, which you say..."all of that loss occured on amfa's watch"

So they were doing overhauls eh? All lost on AMFAs watch eh?

And you can prove this of course?
I have defended it. The Overhauls at UAL were lost under the iam, period.

You don't know what you're talking about.

In the fall of 2002 the IAM membership rejected a proposal for concessions which did not include outsourcing of heavy overhaul. The membership was revoting the proposal when the vote was stopped because the ATSB rejected the UAL loan application. After it declared bankruptcy the Company, like every other bankrupt carrier, secured the right to unrestricted outsourcing of heavy maintenance. That is what happens in bankruptcy. But, if you read the entire 2003 agreement you will see that certain overhaul work was preserved by the IAM along with all the restrictions on foreign outsourcing. The Company demanded that this restriction be eased in the second round of concessions that amfa agreed to because there was not sufficient capacity in the US to take advantage of its outsourcing rights. That is why they were given economic credit for the concession in terms of meeting the Company's demands.

As for ASA, the Company outsourced its heavy maintenance and closed its hanger in Oakland in 2004. It also outsourced all of its facilities maintenance and cleaning. This was several years after amfa ratified its first agreement with ASA. I am not sure when Mesaba outsourced its heavy work, but it was well after amfa signed its agreement with Mesaba in 1999.

<_< ---- That's my point Bill! "System wide", those numbers would be damn close! Close enough that you or any of your TWU lackeys should hang your heads in shame! Close enough that you have no business pointing fingers at anyone!!!! ---- But than again! We don't count, do we?

System wide???? Outside M & R????

I was talking M & R. amfa's loss out-numbers the TWU's by thousands! Can't even compare.

How many just at NWA alone???? Add in UAL and the others....astronomical!!

 

[Bob Owens]

In the fall of 2002 the IAM membership rejected a proposal for concessions which did not include outsourcing of heavy overhaul. The membership was revoting the proposal when the vote was stopped because the ATSB rejected the UAL loan application. After it declared bankruptcy the Company, like every other bankrupt carrier, secured the right to unrestricted outsourcing of heavy maintenance. That is what happens in bankruptcy. But, if you read the entire 2003 agreement you will see that certain overhaul work was preserved by the IAM along with all the restrictions on foreign outsourcing. The Company demanded that this restriction be eased in the second round of concessions that amfa agreed to because there was not sufficient capacity in the US to take advantage of its outsourcing rights. That is why they were given economic credit for the concession in terms of meeting the Company's demands.

As for ASA, the Company outsourced its heavy maintenance and closed its hanger in Oakland in 2004. It also outsourced all of its facilities maintenance and cleaning. This was several years after amfa ratified its first agreement with ASA. I am not sure when Mesaba outsourced its heavy work, but it was well after amfa signed its agreement with Mesaba in 1999.

And what forced all those other airlines to outsource their OH? Easy, the biggest carrier of them all, AA, had AMTs that started as low $8.89/hr in 2003 thanks to the TWUs OSM program. There was no way these other carriers who were already at a disadvantage could expect or get their $35/hr mechanics to accept the TWUs Industry leading(in the downward direction) low wage of $8.89/hr.

You sit there and try to spin the blame onto AMFA for the loss of overhaul but the fact is those carriers could not match AAs low costs and AA is the biggest competitor of any other airline out there.

The Company demanded that this restriction be eased in the second round of concessions that amfa agreed to because there was not sufficient capacity in the US to take advantage of its outsourcing rights.

Oh really? So if AA, the largest carrier out there had tried to outsource their OH where would they have sent it to?

 

[TWU informer]

<_< ---- That's my point Bill! "System wide", those numbers would be damn close! Close enough that you or any of your TWU lackeys should hang your heads in shame! Close enough that you have no business pointing fingers at anyone!!!! ---- But than again! We don't count, do we?

MCI, you sure counted when the TWU needed the NMB to prevent a vote of the membership in AMFA vs TWU ballot.

Bill seems confident in his belief or um worship of the TWU, but that confidence wasn't strong enough to allow the membership to have a National Mediation Board ballot.

Even Bill knows that had there been a ballot from the NMB, the TWU would no longer represent the Mechanic and Related at AA.

TWA mechanics were used by the TWU to prevent the vote, you guys are nothing more than dues payer to the TWU now. Welcome to the superior world of industrial union representation, where cheating, threatening, drinking, kissing company ass, and lies are an everyday part of life. They stapled your asses to the bottom of the seniority list, used you like step-children to save themselves from a membership uprising, and now pretend to be your union leaders while kissing more company ass than most workers in non-union shops.

Maybe Bill has answers regarding Bankrupt Carriers and AMFA misfortunes, but the real question is does he have an answer for the 1995 six year contract with 6.5% in raises throughout the duration? Does Bill have an answer for the TWU negotiated loss of company paid LTD insurance, Retirement Medical without pre-funding, Flex Benefits out of your pocket, the 1983 twelve year progression B-Scale, the unilateral loss of Lump Sum Options on our Pension, the 70 1/2 age pension payment loss, the fact that floor space inside the turbine building that was once used for member productivity is now held by outside vendors taking our work? Hell no Bill has not one answer for these issues, but he damn sure knows alot about AMFA.

The AMFA movement started long before 9/11 and the current industry downturn. Like a good lackey, he jumps on the bandwagon to defend his TWU during turbulent times, but not once has he ever addressed the FACT that the TWU has lead the industry in concessions bargaining for over 20 years. The TWU is nothing more than a worthless bunch of company suck asses that are opportunist that have no success record at all for over 20 years, but instead uses the demise of others as reason and logic for their own survival.

 

[Bob Owens]

Welcome to the superior world of industrial union representation, where cheating, threatening, drinking, kissing company ass, and lies are an everyday part of life.

Please dont confuse Business or Company Unionism with Industrial Unionism.Just because Jim Little calls the TWU an Industrial Union that does not make it so. In fact Bobby Gless, a TWU International Rep did not even know what an industrial union was when he was deposed in July of 2004, a year and a half into the job.

 

[High Speed Steel]

Hey Third Seat, I have a question about the settlement agreement over at NW with the amfa.

It was reported that when the amfa called its strike over at NW that they were striking for "jobs". It as well was reported that there were 4000 of their members on strike over this issue of jobs. They were the Mechanics & Related and the Cleaners & Custodians.

Now there were 2461 eligable voters for this settlement agreement. What happened to the other 1539 amfa members who struck over jobs?

 

[Bob Owens]

I was talking M & R. amfa's loss out-numbers the TWU's by thousands! Can't even compare.

How many just at NWA alone???? Add in UAL and the others....astronomical!!

Well if you look at Labor History and see how many union workers lost their jobs when faced with pay and benifit cuts compared to non-union the union losses far exceed non-union, because non-union simply gave the company everything they wanted, like the TWU does.

The fact is there is a price to pay for standing up for what is right but over the long haul labor does better when they fight.

 

[TWU informer]

The fact is there is a price to pay for standing up for what is right but over the long haul labor does better when they fight.

There is NO shame in fighting and losing, only shame in ACCEPTING the unacceptable without a fight.

 

[Bob Owens]

There is NO shame in fighting and losing, only shame in ACCEPTING the unacceptable without a fight.

Exactly, thats what FM couldnt seem to grasp over on the NWA thread.

Now there were 2461 eligable voters for this settlement agreement. What happened to the other 1539 amfa members who struck over jobs?

Good question. Maybe they found other employment in the industry which may have made them ineligible like laid off workers who have recall but found employment with another carrier in a representation election vote.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

In the fall of 2002 the IAM membership rejected a proposal for concessions which did not include outsourcing of heavy overhaul. The membership was revoting the proposal when the vote was stopped because the ATSB rejected the UAL loan application. After it declared bankruptcy the Company, like every other bankrupt carrier, secured the right to unrestricted outsourcing of heavy maintenance. That is what happens in bankruptcy. But, if you read the entire 2003 agreement you will see that certain overhaul work was preserved by the IAM along with all the restrictions on foreign outsourcing. The Company demanded that this restriction be eased in the second round of concessions that amfa agreed to because there was not sufficient capacity in the US to take advantage of its outsourcing rights. That is why they were given economic credit for the concession in terms of meeting the Company's demands.

You haven't the first damn clue!

100% of heavy overhaul was surrendered under the iam, period. NO HEAVY OVERHAUL CHECKS WERE PRESERVED! When AMFA was certified in 2003 the highest check still accomplished by UAL was C-Checks.

Here is the contract 2003-2009 IAM Agreement-Art:II Scope of Agreement Para: D.

The Company may contract out the work of heavy maintenance visits (as defined
by current Company practices consistent with AOP and MOP guidelines) without
restriction. Additionally, the Company may contract out up to 20% of all remaining
maintenance work annually as measured by the sum of the Maintenance Operations
Division's gross annual budget, excluding the cost of heavy maintenance visits, plus
those portions of stations' total gross annual budgets attributable to building maintenance
and ground equipment maintenance, provided however this percentage
may be exceeded in the event the Company has fully utilized its existing equipment
or facilities.


If you wish to continue making a fool of yourself, by all means do, but when it comes to UAL, you don't know what you're talking about.

Hey Third Seat, I have a question about the settlement agreement over at NW with the amfa.

It was reported that when the amfa called its strike over at NW that they were striking for "jobs". It as well was reported that there were 4000 of their members on strike over this issue of jobs. They were the Mechanics & Related and the Cleaners & Custodians.

Now there were 2461 eligable voters for this settlement agreement. What happened to the other 1539 amfa members who struck over jobs?

Good question.

As I had nothing to do with settling the strike at NWA, I don't know.

I could offer an opinion but it would be just that, idle speculation.

Have you posed this question on the NWA board?

There are several AMTs there that voted on the settlement agreement, I'm sure they could provide some insight.

 

[Bob Owens]

You haven't the first damn clue!

100% of heavy overhaul was surrendered under the iam, period. NO HEAVY OVERHAUL CHECKS WERE PRESERVED! When AMFA was certified in 2003 the highest check still accomplished by UAL was C-Checks.

Here is the contract 2003-2009 IAM Agreement-Art:II Scope of Agreement Para: D.

The Company may contract out the work of heavy maintenance visits (as defined
by current Company practices consistent with AOP and MOP guidelines) without
restriction. Additionally, the Company may contract out up to 20% of all remaining
maintenance work annually as measured by the sum of the Maintenance Operations
Division's gross annual budget, excluding the cost of heavy maintenance visits, plus
those portions of stations' total gross annual budgets attributable to building maintenance
and ground equipment maintenance, provided however this percentage
may be exceeded in the event the Company has fully utilized its existing equipment
or facilities.
If you wish to continue making a fool of yourself, by all means do, but when it comes to UAL, you don't know what you're talking about.
Good question.

You have to understand that where Bill comes from facts dont matter.

 

[AMFAMAN]

Back to the topic at hand (Which is Bad Paint on Tank Cover Plates, not AMFA vs TWU)


Seems when he powered up the high pressure water, then the wand got away from him and the high pressure water cut into is leg bone deep like a hot knife through butter.

Ouch, that hurts big time. We had a mechanic pressure wash his foot years ago at the Rock while he was holding down the parts he was cleaning with his feet. Well he just about passed out from the pain of the open flesh. Hate to hear that again.

You are right about slowing down and getting this screw-up right before more people get hurt.

Now there were 2461 eligable voters for this settlement agreement. What happened to the other 1539 amfa members who struck over jobs?

I've been told of upwards of 1,000 retired shortly after the strike, and scabs don't vote. I don't have a breakdown of the numbers but considering the workforce was much older than AA, and reports of 600 or so AMFA mechanics crossing, 1539 sounds about right.

 

[High Speed Steel]

Good question.

As I had nothing to do with settling the strike at NWA, I don't know.

I could offer an opinion but it would be just that, idle speculation.

Have you posed this question on the NWA board?

There are several AMTs there that voted on the settlement agreement, I'm sure they could provide some insight.

Third Seat, I appreciate your reply and may direct my question to the NW board. I respect that you did not try to speculate as to what happend over there. I had posted this question before here because there were those here who pushed for the representation of the amfa at AA and to my own ignorance I thought they would be able to give a uniform description as to what happend. As you can see there have been two different speculations from "two of amfa's associates finest", and their opinions don't have any common relationship. Third Seat, they don't know the answer either. As I suspected.

Anyway, thanks for the reply

 

[mjk]

Can the union infighting go somewhere else?

Anyone have any further info regarding the fuel tanks?

I've heard all the remaining work is to be done at line stations.

 

[Bill]

You haven't the first damn clue!

100% of heavy overhaul was surrendered under the iam, period. NO HEAVY OVERHAUL CHECKS WERE PRESERVED! When AMFA was certified in 2003 the highest check still accomplished by UAL was C-Checks.

Here is the contract 2003-2009 IAM Agreement-Art:II Scope of Agreement Para: D.

The Company may contract out the work of heavy maintenance visits (as defined
by current Company practices consistent with AOP and MOP guidelines) without
restriction. Additionally, the Company may contract out up to 20% of all remaining
maintenance work annually as measured by the sum of the Maintenance Operations
Division's gross annual budget, excluding the cost of heavy maintenance visits, plus
those portions of stations' total gross annual budgets attributable to building maintenance
and ground equipment maintenance, provided however this percentage
may be exceeded in the event the Company has fully utilized its existing equipment
or facilities.
If you wish to continue making a fool of yourself, by all means do, but when it comes to UAL, you don't know what you're talking about.

Go read the AMFA contract Third Seat. It specifically requires that the Company maintain and continue to do the three C Checks still being done in house at the time of the agreement.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

Go read the AMFA contract Third Seat. It specifically requires that the Company maintain and continue to do the three C Checks still being done in house at the time of the agreement.

........and???