willnotworkforfree
Advanced
- Aug 29, 2002
- 196
- 0
and to the point....Thank You. 
h34r: 
h34r: Why Is The Iam Violating Our Contract By Refusing
- Thread starter strike facts
- Start date
PITbull
Veteran
- Dec 29, 2002
- 7,784
- 456
Strike Facts,
The point is just that, are you an IAM member or not? Because if that question is answered, then all falls into place with your constant inquiry on the "forced Majeure". issue.
If this mangement proceeds to enact a "force majeure" situation, then they will be setting their own fate in stone. Bringing down the flights and airplanes and walking away from cities, and giving the competition everything they ever dreamed of an "East Coast franchise") will seal the company's demise. We all expect the doors to shut if management outsources the Airbus work, so what is your point with the "force Majeure" issue anyway?
The point is just that, are you an IAM member or not? Because if that question is answered, then all falls into place with your constant inquiry on the "forced Majeure". issue.
If this mangement proceeds to enact a "force majeure" situation, then they will be setting their own fate in stone. Bringing down the flights and airplanes and walking away from cities, and giving the competition everything they ever dreamed of an "East Coast franchise") will seal the company's demise. We all expect the doors to shut if management outsources the Airbus work, so what is your point with the "force Majeure" issue anyway?
ONTHESTREET
Advanced
- Aug 20, 2002
- 198
- 0
One question for all who read this board, employees, managment, and passengers.
There has already been a big smoking hole next to the Charlotte maint. hanger, made by an airplane wearing our paintjob, that was directly attributed to piss-poor contract maintainance. (Final ruling not yet out, but it is clear what happened.)
To our customers who pay for a safe flight, if it is painted blue and says USAirways it is USAirways, regardless of who actually operates the plane.
So my question is this.
Some of our passengers have already died because of this issue, why in the world would managment want to INCREASE the outsourcing, thus increasing the risk to our passengers?
Aviation is only as safe as the people operating and maintaining the airplanes make it. Aviation is and always has been very unforgiving of mistakes and carelessness. Piloting an aircraft is an excercise in risk managment, on any given day there are many many things that will kill you if you choose wrong. I suspect that working on planes is very similar.
I currently fly and manage a corporate aircraft. I save money where possible, fuel (Slow down, make fuel stops at lower priced airports) wash the plane myself to avoid $400 professional fees, Compare all FBO's at an airport and use the best value one etc. The one thing that I NEVER EVER scrimp on is the maint.!!!!!! The two things that can kill me the quickest is, ME screwing up and my mechanic screwing up!! I take no chances with either of the two!
When aircraft operators start making safety decisions based on cost, they usually end up losing some of their aircraft.
Just a pilots point of view.
There has already been a big smoking hole next to the Charlotte maint. hanger, made by an airplane wearing our paintjob, that was directly attributed to piss-poor contract maintainance. (Final ruling not yet out, but it is clear what happened.)
To our customers who pay for a safe flight, if it is painted blue and says USAirways it is USAirways, regardless of who actually operates the plane.
So my question is this.
Some of our passengers have already died because of this issue, why in the world would managment want to INCREASE the outsourcing, thus increasing the risk to our passengers?
Aviation is only as safe as the people operating and maintaining the airplanes make it. Aviation is and always has been very unforgiving of mistakes and carelessness. Piloting an aircraft is an excercise in risk managment, on any given day there are many many things that will kill you if you choose wrong. I suspect that working on planes is very similar.
I currently fly and manage a corporate aircraft. I save money where possible, fuel (Slow down, make fuel stops at lower priced airports) wash the plane myself to avoid $400 professional fees, Compare all FBO's at an airport and use the best value one etc. The one thing that I NEVER EVER scrimp on is the maint.!!!!!! The two things that can kill me the quickest is, ME screwing up and my mechanic screwing up!! I take no chances with either of the two!
When aircraft operators start making safety decisions based on cost, they usually end up losing some of their aircraft.
Just a pilots point of view.
MarkMyWords
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,900
- 1
Dell -
Thank you for your response. I honestly don't think my thought pattern is coming through as clearly as I would like it to. Sometimes emotional responses get things all jumbled up. I appreciate you trying to answer the questions that I had, but in reality those questions were directed toward the company, and are probably the same questions you are asking yourself. I want to know what the company thinks it will save by contracting out the work. There are up front costs, associated costs and long term costs. While the up front costs may be lower, the associated costs (ferrying airplanes, fuel, deadheading crews to test hop, hotel expenses, parts movement, etc) will sky rocket. All I am saying is that I would like to see what the companies rational is and see a response from the IAM. Either way you cut it, my support is still behind the IAM. I dont' care if it saves us 10 million dollars a year to contract the work out. It is work that is in your contract and should be performed in house. End of story. My comments about a more compelling arguement just mean that you may win more support with arguements such as, "The company states that the work will save XX million dollars, by our figures we show no/little cost savings due to .......blah blah blah" versus 'It has been our work since 1949." That is all I am saying. I don't contest that in any way, I am just looking at what is a more compelling arguement.
Also, your point about checks going beyond schedule time is a very valid point. You never know what you will run into when you take an airplane apart. If you are a contract company that has a deadline imposed with financial penalties for failing to meet that deadline, there is a motivation to cut corners. That is a very valid arguement. What I don't necessarily agree with is that contract vendors are less safe then in house vendors. Using the tragedy in CLT to prove your point is fine, but let me play devils advocate here and ask this. Your leafletting to the public is to muster support for keeping the work in house due to safety reasons. What would your stance be on people flying with our alliance partners like UA? do you now consider them to be unsafe because their heavy mtc is contracted out? What about other STAR members? What about our express affiliates? How about even going one step further, since we are one of the few airlines that (up til now) have done all our heavy work in house, are we the only safe airline? I realize that safety is our number one priority, but are you exploiting a tragedy for personal gain? Again, just playing devils advocate here.
PitBull -
My thoughts are all over the page on this issue. It has a huge impact on each and every one of us. Bottom line, I do support the Mechanics and their fight to uphold the language in their contract. My reponses regarding people talking about shutting the place down and so on, were to counter the belief that by doing so people would be teaching Dave and Dave a lesson. We will all learn that lesson and I think Dave and Dave will fair much better then most. If the place shuts down, it is because the union(s) took a stance that enough is enough and you willing to make a huge sacrifice to protect what is yours, not to feel you have in some way won out over Dave and Dave. In a strike that results in a Chapter 7 filing, there are no winners, just a moral victory on the part of labor.
If I may, let me ask just a couple more questions....
If the first airbus goes to Alabama and results in a job action and the IAM wins, how long would it take to gear up to perform the work? Again, we have not recalled 1 person to perform the checks, we have not trained anyone to do the work yet, we have not prepared the facilities, we don't have all the tooling. how long would it take to get this track up and running?
Second question, Say the first airbus goes to Alabama and results in a job action. The judge decides that the company is right and can contract out the work. What happens then? Stirkes over or do the mechanics continue to walk?
Thanks for your time.
Thank you for your response. I honestly don't think my thought pattern is coming through as clearly as I would like it to. Sometimes emotional responses get things all jumbled up. I appreciate you trying to answer the questions that I had, but in reality those questions were directed toward the company, and are probably the same questions you are asking yourself. I want to know what the company thinks it will save by contracting out the work. There are up front costs, associated costs and long term costs. While the up front costs may be lower, the associated costs (ferrying airplanes, fuel, deadheading crews to test hop, hotel expenses, parts movement, etc) will sky rocket. All I am saying is that I would like to see what the companies rational is and see a response from the IAM. Either way you cut it, my support is still behind the IAM. I dont' care if it saves us 10 million dollars a year to contract the work out. It is work that is in your contract and should be performed in house. End of story. My comments about a more compelling arguement just mean that you may win more support with arguements such as, "The company states that the work will save XX million dollars, by our figures we show no/little cost savings due to .......blah blah blah" versus 'It has been our work since 1949." That is all I am saying. I don't contest that in any way, I am just looking at what is a more compelling arguement.
Also, your point about checks going beyond schedule time is a very valid point. You never know what you will run into when you take an airplane apart. If you are a contract company that has a deadline imposed with financial penalties for failing to meet that deadline, there is a motivation to cut corners. That is a very valid arguement. What I don't necessarily agree with is that contract vendors are less safe then in house vendors. Using the tragedy in CLT to prove your point is fine, but let me play devils advocate here and ask this. Your leafletting to the public is to muster support for keeping the work in house due to safety reasons. What would your stance be on people flying with our alliance partners like UA? do you now consider them to be unsafe because their heavy mtc is contracted out? What about other STAR members? What about our express affiliates? How about even going one step further, since we are one of the few airlines that (up til now) have done all our heavy work in house, are we the only safe airline? I realize that safety is our number one priority, but are you exploiting a tragedy for personal gain? Again, just playing devils advocate here.
PitBull -
My thoughts are all over the page on this issue. It has a huge impact on each and every one of us. Bottom line, I do support the Mechanics and their fight to uphold the language in their contract. My reponses regarding people talking about shutting the place down and so on, were to counter the belief that by doing so people would be teaching Dave and Dave a lesson. We will all learn that lesson and I think Dave and Dave will fair much better then most. If the place shuts down, it is because the union(s) took a stance that enough is enough and you willing to make a huge sacrifice to protect what is yours, not to feel you have in some way won out over Dave and Dave. In a strike that results in a Chapter 7 filing, there are no winners, just a moral victory on the part of labor.
If I may, let me ask just a couple more questions....
If the first airbus goes to Alabama and results in a job action and the IAM wins, how long would it take to gear up to perform the work? Again, we have not recalled 1 person to perform the checks, we have not trained anyone to do the work yet, we have not prepared the facilities, we don't have all the tooling. how long would it take to get this track up and running?
Second question, Say the first airbus goes to Alabama and results in a job action. The judge decides that the company is right and can contract out the work. What happens then? Stirkes over or do the mechanics continue to walk?
Thanks for your time.
PITbull
Veteran
- Dec 29, 2002
- 7,784
- 456
MMW,
Glad to hear you still support the IAM and believe the work belongs to them. I always respect your opinions, even though you ask a million questions, and I end up throwing my hands up.
I have an answer to your questions, but I think that an IAM member can better answer on their issue.
Glad to hear you still support the IAM and believe the work belongs to them. I always respect your opinions, even though you ask a million questions, and I end up throwing my hands up.
I have an answer to your questions, but I think that an IAM member can better answer on their issue.
Hawk
Member
- Sep 28, 2003
- 87
- 0
The readers of this board should not believe the pessimistic messages that are being directed at the company. Management has never tried to “divide and conquer†the employees. The company suffers when the IAM promotes a negative message to the passengers. This has the potential to drive away future revenue bookings.
The public should understand that the company would have to buy specialized equipment to execute the Airbus work. The work requires separate facilities and equipment. These are arduous times in the industry and contracting out maintenance work is a logical avenue to save money. The company is only adhering to the contract terms that were approved by the employees.
There are many IAM members that sustain the company on this position. They comprehend that the airbus work does not signify a furlough. This does not affect any of the jobs of the existing mechanics.
The majority has no desire to honor the picket lines. The minority on this board would try and have you believe different on this issue. This does not improve the morale within your union. The solidarity is lacking within the IAM and this is evident with the increased “chest pounding†by its officials. You should not believe the union propaganda.
The IAM continues to exploit the scope language since 1949 argument. This is union propaganda at its finest. Why do you want to put the company out of business? Do not buy into the “shut it down†propaganda.
The public should understand that the company would have to buy specialized equipment to execute the Airbus work. The work requires separate facilities and equipment. These are arduous times in the industry and contracting out maintenance work is a logical avenue to save money. The company is only adhering to the contract terms that were approved by the employees.
There are many IAM members that sustain the company on this position. They comprehend that the airbus work does not signify a furlough. This does not affect any of the jobs of the existing mechanics.
The majority has no desire to honor the picket lines. The minority on this board would try and have you believe different on this issue. This does not improve the morale within your union. The solidarity is lacking within the IAM and this is evident with the increased “chest pounding†by its officials. You should not believe the union propaganda.
The IAM continues to exploit the scope language since 1949 argument. This is union propaganda at its finest. Why do you want to put the company out of business? Do not buy into the “shut it down†propaganda.
MarkMyWords
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,900
- 1
If I don't ask the questions, how do I get educated?PITbull said:
Hawk -
You better have a fire retardant suit and tie on, because you are about to get flamed!
If it was the companies intent to farm out the Airbus work then it should have been clearly stated in the contract and not hidden in some legal loophole (if one does exsist.) If you can prove, without doubt or difference in interpretation, that the contract signed agreed to the out sourcing of the work I will eat a copy of the IAM contract for lunch. It is my belief that the IAM would have never signed a contract that clearly state the work would be farmed out. As Dell said earlier, if that was their true intention, they had the perfect opportunity to put the language in the contract ot take it before the bankruptcy judge to get it. It is not there and the work belongs in house.
This issue more then anything has united the entire work force. If you honestly think that the views expressed on this board do not represent the majority voice of the employees, then you are sadly mistaken. We may not all agree on many things on here, but we do all agree that this work belongs in house ACCORDING TO THEIR CONTRACT.
repeet
Veteran
Hawk said in his second post:
"There are many IAM members that sustain the company on this position. They comprehend that the airbus work does not signify a furlough. This does not affect any of the jobs of the existing mechanics.
The majority has no desire to honor the picket lines. "
Interesting words. I suggest you check out the picture:
http://www.machinists1725.org/images/DSCN1027.JPG
And this article:
http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/new...ews/6880336.htm
"There are many IAM members that sustain the company on this position. They comprehend that the airbus work does not signify a furlough. This does not affect any of the jobs of the existing mechanics.
The majority has no desire to honor the picket lines. "
Interesting words. I suggest you check out the picture:
http://www.machinists1725.org/images/DSCN1027.JPG
And this article:
http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/new...ews/6880336.htm
PITbull
Veteran
- Dec 29, 2002
- 7,784
- 456
Markmywords,
Thanks for your words of support for honoring contract language. I knew you were good people.
For Hawk: Your toast!
FYI, Hawk poster again is mangement (as you just may have guessed) and has changed is handle name from flyonthewall to "hawk" I suspect. As the PM messages stated to me, "I will watch YOU like a hawk".
Management has arrived on the boards. Be prepared for many posing as "rank and file" posters to make their argument.
Thanks for your words of support for honoring contract language. I knew you were good people.
For Hawk: Your toast!
FYI, Hawk poster again is mangement (as you just may have guessed) and has changed is handle name from flyonthewall to "hawk" I suspect. As the PM messages stated to me, "I will watch YOU like a hawk".
Management has arrived on the boards. Be prepared for many posing as "rank and file" posters to make their argument.
MMW:we have an airbus 's' check program for maintenence and inspection now.originally it was going to be done in TPA...funny they should close that,'eh? we ahve all the tooling.....recently all the tooling has been tracked down and the list is in the hands of the IAM.MarkMyWords said:
i guarantee you there exists an alternate plan if they decide at the last minute to abide by the contract....there may be lumps in the batter,but it'll work.my best bet would be to watch tooling and parts shipping. if anyone can run a 'c' check program and run daily maintenance they can do an 's' check...dont' let anyone tell you differently.the union tried to show the company that if tthey jockeyed several checks to other bases,they can and would make room for the 's' check. they can make room at CLT or PIT or one track at each station.it can be done,so there is no merit in the "no facilities"argument.
if the company goes third party,one of the options to the IAM is to withdraw its services.also things could go legal too.i'd expect much stress from the dave duo of bronner and siegel running before a court to get a temporary restraining order to get us back to work...but,alas then the games would begin....
if they got a TRO,it would end up in court and as the HAWK has so eloquently misinformed there would be a 50/50 chance of a ruling in favor of either the IAMor the company.as for my using the eagle crash....i supposed it would bite me when i posted...but digest this:with the sudden surge in outsourcing a/c maintenance...don't you think these third party vendors are scrambling like hell to get people,facilities and TRAINING?to keep up with the work they are getting?what happens when you scramble like hell?mistakes are often made,shortcuts happen...i'm going to keep a watchful eye on this for some time to come.
STRIKE FACTS:whats this infatuation with the force majure?you dangle it out there like we're suppoed to cower in fear.take this to the bank bucko,if we withdraw our services and the airline would shutdown...force majure ain't going to make too much difference then would it?and hows come you know nothing of the education efforts going on at U...only labor group members would beaware of the information that is available. BUT I'M SURE YOU FORGOT TO MENTION TO ME THAT YOU SAW ALL THAT...HUH? :down:
hey,everyone have a safe and informed day!
PITbull
Veteran
- Dec 29, 2002
- 7,784
- 456
Hey Hawk,
You should have prefaced your statement by saying: "Trust me, the outsourcing of the airbuses will not affect any of the jobs of the existing mechanics."
That would really rally the mechanics to stand tight together, especially the "trust me". Yup, that's the ticket.
You should have prefaced your statement by saying: "Trust me, the outsourcing of the airbuses will not affect any of the jobs of the existing mechanics."
That would really rally the mechanics to stand tight together, especially the "trust me". Yup, that's the ticket.
Remember ... This possible action of the employees aginst the company is not just about the Airbus outsourcing. Airbus outsourcing is just the match that starts the fire. And many fires are hard to put out, and can be very very expensive. It has much to do with with the frustration of the employees aginst the top managements deceitful and underhanded ways of dealings with its employees. When a management lies, finds any loopholes(even it they need to create them), and the such just what do they think the outcome will be!!! Moral will drop which leads to lower production, lower pride, just a feeling of "who cares".. Tell me its not there. Who is happy in their jobs, who is proud to say they work for usairways. THIS is the problem. NOT and let me stress NOT just the union action of Airbus work going away. I will not speak of my so called union I have been a member of the _ _ m for over 25 years and I am embarrassed to say I am a member. I was a shop steward for this union with another airline during which time we mechanics rolled our tool boxes out three times to go on strike. Once it was for the F/A's. When management saw how much solidarty the F/A's had , their contract was settled so quickly our rollaways were were called back before we could get them home. It was a sight when we could see our company CEO looking out his office window as we had a long line of trucks bumper to bumper, lined up to take our tool boxes out of there!! That is what this should be about, about the employees, ALL employees standing together. not bickering about what their union is or is not not telling them. This should be about the employees, ALL the employees, letting Mangement know their feelings of the current state of distrust!!!
Either we stand together or we will hang separtely :angry:
Either we stand together or we will hang separtely :angry:
Hawk,
First I would like to state that I am NOT a fan of the IAM. The big question I have is in the next ten years or so when the Boeing aircraft are retired and replaced with RJ's and Airbus's what does the company plan to do with the excess mechanics that are idle due to the fact the Boeing work is gone? And the statment that they will be absorbed into the system due to retirements does not work!
If you have clue about the maintenance of the Airbus you would know that the tooling for the Airbus "C" check is identical to that required for the "S" checks. Another question...If we cancel the lease contracts at the reservation centers, does the company now have the right to contract out reservations because we do not have the facilities?
Go back behind closed doors in your suite in Crystal City and re-think before you make any more statements!!!!! :angry:
First I would like to state that I am NOT a fan of the IAM. The big question I have is in the next ten years or so when the Boeing aircraft are retired and replaced with RJ's and Airbus's what does the company plan to do with the excess mechanics that are idle due to the fact the Boeing work is gone? And the statment that they will be absorbed into the system due to retirements does not work!
If you have clue about the maintenance of the Airbus you would know that the tooling for the Airbus "C" check is identical to that required for the "S" checks. Another question...If we cancel the lease contracts at the reservation centers, does the company now have the right to contract out reservations because we do not have the facilities?
Go back behind closed doors in your suite in Crystal City and re-think before you make any more statements!!!!! :angry:
pitguy
Veteran
- Aug 21, 2002
- 1,509
- 0
Hawk said:
The terms of the contract never have been changes in 50 plus years regarding this. You also need to learn the word "intent" and how it is used in reference to labor contract negotiations. The company had their opportunity to change the language.
Management (Director of Maintenance and others) even went around telling everyone to vote 'yes' on the second contract to protect the scope of the Airbus heavy maintenance work being done in-house.
To think this would not affect jobs as the company retires Boeing aircraft proves you are 'foolish'.
If you are of sound mind and honestly believe the crap you post then God should look out for you. To think someone would want to steal from honest families with children is despicable and I hope your soul is uneasy as you are taking part in it.
THE WORD I HEAR IS THE PICKET SIGNS ARE BEING PRINTED UP NOW!
