Why American Airlines doesn't tout its maintenance work

[MERV]

With all its red ink and union problems, American Airlines doesn't have a lot to brag about. But in one category, it's far and away the industry leader: doing its own maintenance on airplanes.

Read more: http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/04/12/2995825/why-american-airlines-doesnt-tout.html#ixzz1JRcZKHRq

http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/04/12/2995825/why-american-airlines-doesnt-tout.html

 

[Deleted member 14439]

Little off on his AMT numbers. Closer to 9500 on the title1 list. Which includes a/c cleaners, parts washers and OSMs.

 

[FWAAA]

According to the WN 10-K, at 12/31/10, WN employed 2,464 maintenance personnel, and had 548 737s on the property. That's 4.5 employees in maintenance per aircraft, not the three per airplane as alleged in the article.

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9ODExNTl8Q2hpbGRJRD0tMXxUeXBlPTM=&t=1

His point, however, is sound. Airline execs would look really stupid to get into a pissing match over their maintenance outsourcing/safety. WN has had some hiccups, but it has yet to suffer the kind of hull losses (and massive loss of life) that AA has suffered, some of which may have maintenance as root causes.

 

[AV1]

According to the WN 10-K, at 12/31/10, WN employed 2,464 maintenance personnel, and had 548 737s on the property. That's 4.5 employees in maintenance per aircraft, not the three per airplane as alleged in the article.

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9ODExNTl8Q2hpbGRJRD0tMXxUeXBlPTM=&t=1

His point, however, is sound. Airline execs would look really stupid to get into a pissing match over their maintenance outsourcing/safety. WN has had some hiccups, but it has yet to suffer the kind of hull losses (and massive loss of life) that AA has suffered, some of which may have maintenance as root causes.

Please list some incidents where maintenance has been the cause. Flying around with unapproved parts, having two incidents of cabin depressurization in the last two years with a sky view, and many other infractions with the FAA has been some of WN's highlights recently. Personally, I would pay the extra 5 bucks and fly aircraft maintained in the U.S. and by A & P mechanics. I am not an airline executive but I would advertise the heck out of this, just saying.

 

[sixty/4]

According to the WN 10-K, at 12/31/10, WN employed 2,464 maintenance personnel, and had 548 737s on the property. That's 4.5 employees in maintenance per aircraft, not the three per airplane as alleged in the article.

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9ODExNTl8Q2hpbGRJRD0tMXxUeXBlPTM=&t=1

His point, however, is sound. Airline execs would look really stupid to get into a pissing match over their maintenance outsourcing/safety. WN has had some hiccups, but it has yet to suffer the kind of hull losses (and massive loss of life) that AA has suffered, some of which may have maintenance as root causes.

 

[sixty/4]

None of AA acidents have been caused by maintence except the one in Chicago in 69.

 

[Hopeful]

None of AA acidents have been caused by maintence except the one in Chicago in 69.

1979......fLT 191

 

[lineguy43]

None of AA acidents have been caused by maintence except the one in Chicago in 69.

Sorry didn't see the post above

 

[Hopeful]

According to the WN 10-K, at 12/31/10, WN employed 2,464 maintenance personnel, and had 548 737s on the property. That's 4.5 employees in maintenance per aircraft, not the three per airplane as alleged in the article.

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9ODExNTl8Q2hpbGRJRD0tMXxUeXBlPTM=&t=1

His point, however, is sound. Airline execs would look really stupid to get into a pissing match over their maintenance outsourcing/safety. WN has had some hiccups, but it has yet to suffer the kind of hull losses (and massive loss of life) that AA has suffered, some of which may have maintenance as root causes.

I recall when AA first began getting the A300's, the first 25 were outsourced. Through an agreement, once the 26th was delivered AA did all the maintenance on them.
I can tell you from personal experience that that there were many an instance where we had to undo a mistake made by the contractor. Aircaft groundings, flight cancellations because of an outsourced mistake. And, yes, it was a domestic contractor! JFK was the A300 base and many an aircraft was flown to JFK and that ferry flight was also the test hop. Pilots could have used a stenographer with page after page of discrpancies RIGHT out of maintenance.

The bottom line FWAAA, it takes alot to bring an aircraft down, even due to shoddy maintenance. Aircraft design in redundancy is the main reason for that.
That's why we are able to defer certain systems and components and still operate a safe, normal flight.
Outsourcing has far more consequences other than turning wrenches.
Many an employee in these facilities do not read, write, or speak English....Yet the manuals are in English..
Safety? hah, good one!
Oversight? Sending ONE company rep to oversee the check? what a laugh. All that person does is make sure every card is accomplished. Do you really think he or she personally oversees the work of 20-30 individuals 24/7?

Airlines that outsource do it for more than $$$...they do it to skirt regulations.
Do you feel comfortable knowing US mechanics are subject to random alcohol and drug testing?

the DOT demands we be subject to it..but not third party foreign contractors...

Seem fair and safe?

 

[eolesen]

Many an employee in these facilities do not read, write, or speak English....Yet the manuals are in English..

Point of order.... HSBC has been running an ad for the last year which you might want to consider...

I travel a lot, and with rare exception, most of the people I come in contact with overseas are able to read English. All of my work colleagues were learning English no later than middle school, and most seem to start in elementary school. The US is one of the few countries left where being monolingual is the norm instead of the exception.

I'm quite sure there are examples where someone found a tech who couldn't speak English, but reading English and speaking it are mutually exclusive. I've got co-workers who can read and write English as though they were straight out of Oxford or Cambridge. But I cringe whenever I have to have a verbal conversation with them because it's impossible to hear thru the accent or because they're very self-conscious about speaking or listening in English, whereas reading or writing it is no problem because they get unlimited do-overs...

I also think it's safe to say that not everyone who has the urge to seek out a job repairing complex machinery is a middle school or high school dropout, because that would also have to extend to those born here who had the same urge.

None of that is intended to minimize the legitimate safety and oversight issues with offshoring, but I think the whole "they can't understand the manuals" argument is really overstated and nowhere near the problem some make it out to be. It probably also detracts a bit from the bigger issues which are oversight and licensing.

 

[Hopeful]

Point of order.... HSBC has been running an ad for the last year which you might want to consider...

I travel a lot, and with rare exception, most of the people I come in contact with overseas are able to read English. All of my work colleagues were learning English no later than middle school, and most seem to start in elementary school. The US is one of the few countries left where being monolingual is the norm instead of the exception.

I'm quite sure there are examples where someone found a tech who couldn't speak English, but reading English and speaking it are mutually exclusive. I've got co-workers who can read and write English as though they were straight out of Oxford or Cambridge. But I cringe whenever I have to have a verbal conversation with them because it's impossible to hear thru the accent or because they're very self-conscious about speaking or listening in English, whereas reading or writing it is no problem because they get unlimited do-overs...

I also think it's safe to say that not everyone who has the urge to seek out a job repairing complex machinery is a middle school or high school dropout, because that would also have to extend to those born here who had the same urge.

None of that is intended to minimize the legitimate safety and oversight issues with offshoring, but I think the whole "they can't understand the manuals" argument is really overstated and nowhere near the problem some make it out to be. It probably also detracts a bit from the bigger issues which are oversight and licensing.

Having been in this business for about 4 decades, i know an FAA inspector or two who tell me otherwise..
Why do you just cite China as an example? they are a global economic power,,,they have to speak English as it is the more used language..English is the International Aviation language as well.

Of couse it is a HSBC ad.....HONG KONG SHANGAI BANK CORPORATION!

Can you find some of those ads for Salvador? Mexico?

How do you feel about the non drug/alcohol testing they enjoy but the mandate that we are subject to here?

 

[WorldTraveler]

Of course you can find examples of people in foreign repairs stations who can't speak or perhaps even read English.... but is it possible that they, in assembly line fashion, are given jobs that do not require them to read the manuals?
.
And more significantly, you might want to note that the US has some of the lowest scores in all areas among developed nations when it comes to how well its population reads and writes... and don't try to blame it all on immigrants because there are people who were born on American soil by the boatloads that can't read or write at levels remotely close enough to understand a newspaper, let alone a Boeing technical manual.
.
HSBC runs the same ad around the world and you can walk through the streets of any developing country and find dozens of English schools and all kinds of ads for learning English including by immersion in other countries.
.
The whole idea that maintenance outsourcing doesn't work because people "there" can't speak English is a red herring - and it also belies the fact that there are plenty of maintenance outsourcing operations in the US.
.
Further, the idea that companies send their planes to an overseas MRO shop w/o oversight is often not accurate.... I know that there are employees of US airlines who live and work at overseas MROs to oversee the work done on their own planes.... and there is nothing that says they can't.
.
FWAAA is correct that airlines don't compete on safety and the whole reason might be that AA has had more accidents and incidents regardless of the reason than any other large airline - and AA is facing the largest fine in FAA history for maintenance.
.
It would be fine to tout doing it all in-house but you gotta make sure your own nose is really clean first - and that includes AA's flight ops procedures which have been faulted for several recent accidents. You can bet there are execs of other airlines that are whispering to lawmakers that they should look at the boogers hanging of AA's nose before they talk about legislating outsourced maintenance.
.
Finally, Wall Street really doesn't care if AA does its work in-house or in the outhouse if it can do it at competitive costs to the industry and keep the operation running well - which leads to making money. Getting fined or having to ground planes is a costly distraction from making money.
Other airlines who do outsource have had fewer operational distractions related to maintenance as well as better P&Ls.
And in DL's case, they not only outsource the work they say doesn't make sense but they insource what does and are a larger MRO than AA is... and DL's maintenance costs are far lower than AA's.
.
When AA can do its own work in-house at competitive rates to the industry and run an operation that is as good as if not better than its peers, then people will sit up and notice.... until then all the cries that everyone else is wrong and we are right fall on deaf ears.

 

[Hopeful]

When AA can do its own work in-house at competitive rates to the industry and run an operation that is as good as if not better than its peers, then people will sit up and notice.... until then all the cries that everyone else is wrong and we are right fall on deaf ears.

WT, THERE IS NO COMPETING WITH COUNTRIES THAT PAY 2-3 DOLLARS AND HOUR AND HAVE LITTLE OR NO REGULATIONS.



That is what outsourcing is about......poverty wages AND little or no regulations!

Competive rates???????????????????????????????? Exactly.......When AA says they want mechanics to make MRO wages OR ELSE, then we will sit up and take notice.

It is amazing how all the critics and pundits here say AA needs labor costs to be competive but are so hypocritcal when they don't criticize airlines who send work oversees for poverty wages and little or no workplace/safety regulations. Why don't the UA/CAL, SWA, JetBLue, USair, Deltas of the world simply have most of their work done here with cheap US MRO wages?

Why? Because here they still have workplace/safety rules and drug and alcohol testing.

And WT, do you know when the flying public will really give a damn?

When a loved on is killed in a crash due to human error and a lawyer will bring all these things to light.

Then that passenger will give a damn!

Outsourcing is more about skirting government regulations!

 

[1AA]

WT, THERE IS NO COMPETING WITH COUNTRIES THAT PAY 2-3 DOLLARS AND HOUR AND HAVE LITTLE OR NO REGULATIONS.



That is what outsourcing is about......poverty wages AND little or no regulations!

Competive rates???????????????????????????????? Exactly.......When AA says they want mechanics to make MRO wages OR ELSE, then we will sit up and take notice.

It is amazing how all the critics and pundits here say AA needs labor costs to be competive but are so hypocritcal when they don't criticize airlines who send work oversees for poverty wages and little or no workplace/safety regulations. Why don't the UA/CAL, SWA, JetBLue, USair, Deltas of the world simply have most of their work done here with cheap US MRO wages?

Why? Because here they still have workplace/safety rules and drug and alcohol testing.

And WT, do you know when the flying public will really give a damn?

When a loved on is killed in a crash due to human error and a lawyer will bring all these things to light.

Then that passenger will give a damn!

Outsourcing is more about skirting government regulations!

One thing comes to mind after reading this post.

"Fly Cheap, Die Cheap"

 

[Frank Szabo]

WT, THERE IS NO COMPETING WITH COUNTRIES THAT PAY 2-3 DOLLARS AND HOUR AND HAVE LITTLE OR NO REGULATIONS.

That is what outsourcing is about......poverty wages AND little or no regulations!

... snip

He/she knows that already and probably thinks it's a good thing (business-wise) to aid in the destruction of the American Middle Class.