ACPA votes again....

[Ratherbe]

ACPA is again conducting elections for an MEC member. Besides recommending adult supervision, ACPA's external auditors recommended staggered terms and significant structural change to the MEC.
However, due largely to apathy, candidates are getting elected with either very few or questionable qualifications.
For example, our new MEC Chair was on the negots committee that failed to produce a TA and instead led us into a failed arbitration that cost the pilots over $250,000,000.
Now a National MEC candidate is trying to join the MEC who served on the same failed negots team.
These individuals are spreading rhetoric, rewriting history, blaming others for their failures, bullying any opposition and promising to start a fight with AC. Like Trump, they have very little strategy just tactics, something that Strom and Rovinescu will easily see through.
The external advisors noted back in 2012:

During the last few rounds of negotiations, it is apparent that aggressive negotiations expectations fueled by a vocal minority of more militant voices with an anti-Company attitude has resulted in government imposed arbitrations and settlements that have worked against the pilot group and appears to have cost the Members a significant amount of credibility and compensation. Hopefully future leaders will learn from this experience and ensure that future labour negotiations and ratifications are freed from short term, negative emotional reactions and are conducted in a positive and professional manner.
...........
Hopefully, apathy will make way for meaningful and informed membership involvement that has learned from our past mistakes. Please vote!

[pilotbzh]

Are you one of the 27 "Concerned pilots" that secretly negotiate TA1 and torpedoed the following negotiations that lead to FOS and the 10 years concessions ?

The new hire can thank you for the 4 years flat pay, the crappy pension and the restricted course right.....

Vote for change, vote for Tony.

[Ratherbe]

Tony and the rest of the NC2 are responsible for the FOS, the loss of 250 EMJ jobs, $250,000,000 of concessions, and the restrictive course rights. No wonder the pilots voted for a 10 year deal - battle fatigue!

Now they want back in?! To fight again? No thanks!

All NC2 had to do was tweak the TA and we would have had a good agreement. Instead they sewered us, as predicted, with their losing strategy and the result was FOS. The Company saw right through their amateur tactics and played them as fools.

To try and save face they blamed the Company, the Government, the Concerned Pilots, and all the pilots that wouldn’t join them in their ludicrous, and unsuccessful sick-out. Standby for more of the same dysfunctional behaviour from them if elected.

[Ratherbe]

Oh and here is another gem from the audit that Tony and Mike won’t like:

It is difficult to quantify the total economic difference between TA1 and the FOS settlement. One estimate by the NC1 which has not been publicly revealed or evaluated indicated that the difference between TA1 and the FOS contract may be as high as a few hundreds of millions of dollars worth over the duration of the contract. When the interviewer attempted to ask Company representatives what the value lost by ACPA members was, they quite properly declined to confirm the NC1 number, but several of them clearly indicated that it was a very big amount that ACPA Members lost. During interviews with the Company, their greatest concern during FOS was that ACPA would submit the TA1 or a very similar version to it which they felt would have easily been the Arbitrator’s selection.

[Ratherbe]

Oh and this too Tony would not be happy to read:

During the course of NC2's negotiations, several highly reputable experts who acted as ACPA's internal and external advisors and renowned union leader Buzz Hargrove all informed the MEC that the best alternative to proceed would be to negotiate from the TA1 and NOT to start fresh. Their collective opinion seemed to be that it was highly likely that the arbitrator would rule in favour of a proposed agreement that most closely resembled an agreement that had been negotiated by both parties. Once again, hindsight can be 20:20, but it seems that there was more than enough input from various trusted and experienced advisors that should have led the MEC of the day or NC2 to reconsider its strategy. During interviews with the Company members, they confirmed that their greatest concern at FOS would be if ACPA had simply re-issued the TA1 for its FOS contract proposal.

[Ratherbe]

But really the last word goes to the MEC Chair of the day who sums up the clever strategy that Mike, Tony and others followed with such gullible loyalty: In spite of fear mongering and innuendos, we prefer to rely on our belief that quiet determination, combined with the deep conviction that our cause is true and fair, will strengthen our resolve and guide us to victory.

Oh make me gag

[Duke Point]

I'm very glad to see that there is legitimate fear of a real paradigm shift at ACPA.

The "colluding" soft approach hasn't worked. The days of backroom deals with zero net gain, or "temporary gain" to the pilot group are ending. Zero sum bargaining shouldn't EVER have existed.

All I can say is "FINALLY"!!!

GO TONY.

To pin FOS on good intentioned individuals that worked on TA2, and ignore the real cause...….. the 27 colluding sabatours, the Company and the Harper Government is what is really laughable.

DP.

[altiplano]

TA1 sold ACPA members out, present and future. Some of them are managers today.

The NC & MEC had no authority or mandate from the membership to bring something like TA1 forward. It should have never seen the light of day.

TA2 was working from a severe position of disadvantage.

Go Tony.

[Victory]

When is the vote to replace ACPA with ALPA?

[pigboat]

Ratherbe.............You and those that thought up TA1 are about to be finally gone. I hope permanently. The first glimmer of hope for a PILOTS UNION in many years is about to happen. Rage all you want. Your time is up.

The days of giving it all away for free is about to end. Good luck with your efforts trying to slag one of our pilots that actually will stand up for US.

Regards

[Stan Darsh]

Hey Ratherbe,

Feel free to air these grievances on the private AC pilot forum - you'll get more constructive debate there.

[yycflyguy]

TA1 sold ACPA members out, present and future. Some of them are managers today.

The NC & MEC had no authority or mandate from the membership to bring something like TA1 forward. It should have never seen the light of day.

TA2 was working from a severe position of disadvantage.

Go Tony.

Thanks for saving me the typing.

Talk about selective memory regarding the FAILED TA and the corner it backed all of us into.

Time to start saying No. Time to get back some of what has been lost over the past 15 years. Time to unify.

Vote for Tony.

[Ratherbe]

You’re missing the point.

Tony, Mike and the rest of their negotiating committee ignored the advice of Buzz Hargrove! They also ignored the advice of lots of other experts including the Pension Committee. That’s why we ended up with FOS and a contract that was the original TA but one year longer and with concessions of over $250,000,000 (Permanent concessions to the DB plan, B-scale wages at rouge, restrictive course rights, etc).

None of the negotiators from back in 2011 are running for election nor are any of the Concerned Pilots. This is about the three candidates running today.

I don’t want elected officers of ACPA to ignore experts. I want them to make informed, rational decisions based on fact and reason. Tony and Mike have shown that they are not willing to do that and that has cost all of us dearly.

[cloak]

... the rest of their negotiating committee ignored the advice of Buzz Hargrove!
....I don’t want elected officers of ACPA to ignore experts. I want them to make informed, rational decisions based on fact and reason...

Honest question: what actually is the contribution of Buzz Hargrove to Canadian aviation and what makes him an "expert"?

[altiplano]

Permanent concessions to the DB plan,

Negotiated away in TA1

B-scale wages at rouge,

Negotiated away in TA1


restrictive course rights,

Negotiated away in TA1


All that is TA1 stuff!

Yeah we got stuck with it in TA2 also... but that isn't their fault. Buzz Hargrove? Get real... that was completely irrelevant to the submission or outcome.

PASA disabled us. That was group of 27 sewed dissent and division that contributed to that and gave Rovinescu the ammo to go to Raitt and Harper.

No coincidence that the old guard is supporting the status quo. I like MH, but he has shown that he's not going to achieve anything for us, and I watched him, in his new suit, vote against transparency on MEC voting records at the YYZ LCM. What's he hiding?

I watched him support the accountant and his big salary, paid apartment, paid commute, to do what? build us a website and shut down the directory?

This is just like the reopener... the machine gets spinning to rewrite history and lie to the membership... I get a kick out of the former YUL chair coming out of the woodwork with a condescending secret letter too... then coming on the forum with nothing but shallow insults and telling people who disagree to "suck a dick", that's a class act right there.

You guys can spin your chairs right of the deck. I don't think many are buying it anymore.

[Ratherbe]

The DB proposal in the TA had a sunshine clause that if the Pension was fully funded at a certain date then the concessions would be restored. That would have happened.

The TA had rouge included into the pay groups. Instead we got $117/hr for L767 captains in FOS.

The course rights were from Tony and Mike’s negotiations attempt but without pay groups.

Also, remember that the TA secured the EMJ175 at mainline. Tony was the scope guy but the arbitrator found his arguments “provided no persuasive explanation for why the TA was not acceptable“. We lost those 250 jobs thanks to Tony and Mike’s inability to argue effectively on our behalf.

The one common trait among this group is they talk tough but history shows they fail to deliver the results they promise.

[Duke Point]

We're all forgetting that smart-a$$ "know-it-all pilots" negotiated against Calin and his team of professionals during the TA1 goat-rope. Our elected officials that negotiated it bought the mantra peddled by Calin hook, line and sinker. It was an "EPIC' failure on our part not to employ professional negotiators.

This was still going on with the Ben Smith "love-ins" that saw the cap removed from the Rouge narrow body fleet during the last re-opener. Smith was front-and-center on stage with our "deer-in-the- headlights" MEC. Ben was magical, our MEC comical....but the consequences of this collusional union with management was tragic.

We were outmaneuvered, and continue to be. Silo negotiating has decimated unity. Negotiate gains for the entire pilot body, or negotiate for none.

The old guard at ACPA was "just smart enough" to be really dangerous and allow a fracturing of unity that was unprecedented in our 80 year history. The result was hundreds of millions of dollars in "bargaining capital" flushed down the toilet.


DP.

[disco]

You’re missing the point.

Tony, Mike and the rest of their negotiating committee ignored the advice of Buzz Hargrove! They also ignored the advice of lots of other experts including the Pension Committee. That’s why we ended up with FOS and a contract that was the original TA but one year longer and with concessions of over $250,000,000 (Permanent concessions to the DB plan, B-scale wages at rouge, restrictive course rights, etc).

None of the negotiators from back in 2011 are running for election nor are any of the Concerned Pilots. This is about the three candidates running today.

I don’t want elected officers of ACPA to ignore experts. I want them to make informed, rational decisions based on fact and reason. Tony and Mike have shown that they are not willing to do that and that has cost all of us dearly.

This is a grossly misinformed individual spinning a campaign of misdirection, I don't know when I've seen a poster more ignorant of the facts and willing to spin. This individual is a troll with zero credibility with actual Air Canada pilots who are aware and plugged in to their history.

[Ratherbe]

Stu,
Not a troll at all. Those are the facts. Not the misbeliefs held by the vocal militant minority that the audit identified as largely responsible for allowing us to lose so much in FOS.
We've hired over 1,000 pilots since you left and they need leadership that delivers results not rhetoric.

[Fanblade]

Ratherbe has a point. The truth lies somewhere between the two viewpoints expressed here.

It is true ( really my opinion shared by most AC pilots) the TA1 negotiations were really a sell out of the pilot group. I’m not sure how to express it any other way.

It is true that the TA2 negotiators set out to correct the TA1 memorandum of agreement. And stop the sell out.

It is also true the TA2 negotiators refused to accept reality. That reality being that once an MOA is signed, jurisprudence indicates it will be imposed if you end up in arbitration. You can try to negotiate but if you end up in arbitration the MOA will be forced on you.

It is also true that the company lobbied the government to impose Final offer selection rather than interest based arbitration. If you are not familiar, FOS means the arbitrator has to pick one side or the other. No in between is permitted. This wrinkle now changed the jurisprudence from the MOA being imposed in arbitration to THE CLOSEST TO TA1 would be imposed.

It should have been plainly obvious at this point what the company wanted to do. Pull money out of TA1 during arbitration. Even the now “group of 27” saw it. To this day they are ridiculed for their open letter, yet in hind sight have been proven 100% correct. This tells me many people just don’t understand how off the cart path the TA2 negotiators went.

It is true the company then told the TA2 negotiators, TA1 was off the table. Wink wink nudge nudge. This was an effort by the company to keep ACPA no where near TA1 so that the company at the last minute could drop a (TA1 - a lot of $) submission in front of the arbitrator yet still be closer to TA1 than ACPA.

True to the plan AC negotiators made zero reference to TA1 during negotiations, mediation or MOST of arbitration. This kept ACPA miles away from TA1. Then at the very end of arbitration AC asked permission to submit an extra proposal. One based on the current negotiations and a second based on TA1.

The arbitrator saw through AC’s attempt at railroading TA2 negotiators. He decided to allow AC’s TA1 submission but went back to ACPA to allow them the same opportunity.

TA2 negotiators refused to submit a TA1 proposal, guaranteeing the companies submission would prevail. Had ACPA just placed TA1 as thier submission ACPA would have prevailed. With hindsight we know AC removed millions from TA1. ACPA if they were feeling ballsy could have submitted a proposal that was TA1 plus some gains and still been closer to TA1 than AC. This is what AC was concerned about. They were concerned that ACPA might simply be playing the same game they were.