NEWS: Outsourcing-Demon or Savior?
Back in February I posted an opinion about my expectation that airlines will increase the amount of aircraft maintenance outsourcing. Now CNN has put up an article that illustrates nearly every boiler plate argument that has ever been offered up for and against outsourcing maintenance. On one side you have the airlines citing the need to control costs and pointing to improved overall safety records as proof that using outside maintenance is not a problem. On the other side are the unions claiming that the maintenance being done is substandard and waving around their list of things 3rd party maintenance facilities have done wrong. In the middle you have the Dept of Transportation questioning the FAA's ability to oversee these maintenance facilities. So who is right? Most likely the answer is simply...everyone...to some degree.
Have the airlines saved money with outsourced maintenance while showing improved safety trends? You bet. Are the two connected? Maybe.
Has some maintenance performed by 3rd party maintenance been wrong or substandard as pointed out by the unions? Simply put...yes. Have the union's subjected their own work to the same scrutiny? If they have then they are not going to share because it would show some of the same types of mistakes.
Is the FAA staffed to oversee new burgeoning 3rd party airline maintenance industry? Doubtful, they are chronically slow to move on industry trends. But it is mitigated by the fact that, no matter who performs the maintenance, the airline is ultimately held responsible for the maintenance performed.
The way I see it outsourced maintenance is here to stay. Not every airline can afford to keep their maintenance in house. But I put a challenge out to every major airline that has a large maintenance force and facilities. Why is it that your airline is looking to outsource? Why is it that a 3rd party maintenance facility can do things more efficiently and with less expense? Answer those questions and you keep your jobs. Continue to put all your efforts into spreading FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) and watch your work continue to get outsourced.
Have the airlines saved money with outsourced maintenance while showing improved safety trends? You bet. Are the two connected? Maybe.
Has some maintenance performed by 3rd party maintenance been wrong or substandard as pointed out by the unions? Simply put...yes. Have the union's subjected their own work to the same scrutiny? If they have then they are not going to share because it would show some of the same types of mistakes.
Is the FAA staffed to oversee new burgeoning 3rd party airline maintenance industry? Doubtful, they are chronically slow to move on industry trends. But it is mitigated by the fact that, no matter who performs the maintenance, the airline is ultimately held responsible for the maintenance performed.
The way I see it outsourced maintenance is here to stay. Not every airline can afford to keep their maintenance in house. But I put a challenge out to every major airline that has a large maintenance force and facilities. Why is it that your airline is looking to outsource? Why is it that a 3rd party maintenance facility can do things more efficiently and with less expense? Answer those questions and you keep your jobs. Continue to put all your efforts into spreading FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) and watch your work continue to get outsourced.
posted by The ACK at
22:01
