ALAEA Fed Sec
I always find your posts to be balanced and well presented and think it's a pity there's not more like you about the industry.
I'd like to comment on a couple of your points if I may.
Our LAMEs are airworthiness inspectors, much like a roadworthy inspector who issues you a green slip to sell your car. As the car owner, you want a hassle free inspector who will hand over the greenslip without telling you to replace the tyres and windscreen. That mentality has now embedded itself into Aviation management. They don’t want people there as airworthiness inspectors who can identify damaged or worn parts that need replacing.
I do wonder that QF engineers have become very "Gold Plated" in what they consider is worn and not worn? I don't have experience with heavy aircraft maintenance but over the years have had plenty of experience with light aircraft maintenance. There can be night and day difference between what some shops consider needs replacement or what work an aircraft needs to make it airworthy. Usually the reality is somewhere in between.
SDT run with 4 DMMs (Foreman who are LAMEs), and 12 Senior LAMEs. There are 54 LAMEs and 18 unlicenced Engineers or AMEs. The LAMEs all average about 30 years each in the industry, nearly all at Qantas. The AMEs average at least 10 years each. There are 70 LAMEs and 18 AMEs or a ratio of 3.9 LAMEs to each AME. The total experience of this workforce is about 2,280 years in aviation.
The ratio of LAMEs to AMEs seems out of whack to me. If the AME's are worth their salt they shouldn't need 3.9 LAMEs each to watch over them.
I don't agree with offshoring work like this, it's a pity you cannot get the bean counters to understand the folly of their ways.
I see this as the thin end of the wedge. You need to find a way to make it palatable for QF to do the work in OZ and at the same time maintain a good safety standard.