Cargo TA

[rudder]

1.11 Specialty Companies

1.11.01 A Specialty Company is any Affiliate of the Company dedicated to air carrier operations within a narrower segment of the travel market than that in which Air Canada operates, such as air cargo, leisure market, low cost carrier or charter operations.

1.11.02 The Company or its Affiliates will not create or otherwise form any Specialty Company without the express written consent of ACPA.

Definition:

1.03.03 Affiliate means any entity incorporated in Canada or operating aircraft in Canada that controls the Company or that the Company controls and any Specialty Company.


Just curious - assuming the MOA ratifies, what if 6 months from now AC announces that the 6 777-200’s are not coming out of the desert again for mainline passenger ops, but then the next day offers to bring them out with a cargo conversion and 90% pay?

Previous AC CEO’s have said that there is no money in dedicated cargo ops. The current CEO fleeted the airline to derive cargo revenue from available below deck cargo capacity. All dedicated cargo carriers saw their stock sell-off yesterday on the news of a COVID vaccine which portends an eventual recovery to normal.

I guess it is a slippery slope. And it is not up to the pilots to set the business plan. But would the answer from the AC pilots be any different if there were not pilots on layoff?

[bcflyer]

Its 90% of mainline 767 wages. Big raise from the rouge flying.
With mainline working conditions to boot. It could bring hundreds of pilots back from the street and save some sense of career progression. Anyone off of flat pay will be the highest paid cargo pilots in Canada.

No where in the agreement does it say anything about bringing guys back. All that will happen is a transition of current WB positions to this new cargo entity at a reduced rate. We are still heavy on pilots. There is no way this will bring anyone back from layoff.
As for pay, have a look at the comparisons above. Certainly won’t be the hugest paid and is actually a pay cut from Rouge. In addition are the dispatchers, AME’s and rampies taking a pay cut to work the cargo? Why would we vote to fly the same planes, to the same destinations for less money just because there are no seats in the back? They have been running 777 and 330 in freight configuration for months at Ml pay and conditions. In fact they crowed about freight being the highlight of the last quarter. Why all of a sudden is it not possible to operate without a pay cut etc?
The company has already announced they are starting a cargo operation. If a 10% pay cut is the margin required to make it fly then they shouldn’t be doing it.
We have a 10yr contact that the company wanted. It was forced upon us. It lays out the rates and conditions to fly the 767. Time to hold them to it.

[PostmasterGeneral]

I see this being a good thing IF it's at MAINLINE pay rates and work rules. 12 days off is bullshit, and how long until you have a 3 day layover somewhere and "those are your days off?"

I doubt it will bring anyone back from furlough (like me) either. Also, will you be able to bid into and out of the cargo airline at will? Or are you stuck there for a couple years, etc like Rouge?

[fish4life]

Cargo operators in the states have traditionally paid the highest because it’s the hardest flying on the body predominantly being back side of the clock. It should be 10% above mainline 767 rates not 10% below.

[nottellin]

When comparing to Cargojet, dont forget to include the 1200 shares @$78 all CJT pilots got who were hired before April 2020 got, unless they took the 100k cash. It was a contract extension of 3 years vested %50 at 4 and 7 years. But its worth aprox 250k now. Retirement benefits are %2 ( terrible), medical fully paid and decent. 15 days a month, averaging 30- 60 hours depending on seniority and bidding. ( no min block) Dont settle for a shit sandwich guys.

[sanjet]

I voted for the last MOA but this is a easy no for me.

-No SnapBack to normal pay if cargo revenue increases passed a threshold.
-with the loss of 737/220 orders, no job protection.

We are able to buy another airline but can’t pay our pilots normal rate?!

[bobcaygeon]

Does the cargo 767 come with a retro paint scheme?

165092.jpg (754.12 KiB) Viewed 3710 times

[Fanblade]

1.11 Specialty Companies

1.11.01 A Specialty Company is any Affiliate of the Company dedicated to air carrier operations within a narrower segment of the travel market than that in which Air Canada operates, such as air cargo, leisure market, low cost carrier or charter operations.

1.11.02 The Company or its Affiliates will not create or otherwise form any Specialty Company without the express written consent of ACPA.

Definition:

1.03.03 Affiliate means any entity incorporated in Canada or operating aircraft in Canada that controls the Company or that the Company controls and any Specialty Company.


Just curious - assuming the MOA ratifies, what if 6 months from now AC announces that the 6 777-200’s are not coming out of the desert again for mainline passenger ops, but then the next day offers to bring them out with a cargo conversion and 90% pay?

Previous AC CEO’s have said that there is no money in dedicated cargo ops. The current CEO fleeted the airline to derive cargo revenue from available below deck cargo capacity. All dedicated cargo carriers saw their stock sell-off yesterday on the news of a COVID vaccine which portends an eventual recovery to normal.

I guess it is a slippery slope. And it is not up to the pilots to set the business plan. But would the answer from the AC pilots be any different if there were not pilots on layoff?

AC had this issue last decade before the triples showed up. They couldn’t bid certain contracts because they couldn’t guarantee the belly space due to weight restrictions. On perishables the penalties are high. At that time Europe was the problem and it was addressed by a temporary wet lease. The more recent Cargo Jet wet lease was to accommodate freight in and out of South America that the high density Rouge 767’s had trouble carrying plus a little Frankfurt.

Now we have a situation where the Rouge 767 is parked. That is a problem for South America Cargo.

If the Triples get parked Europe might be an issue. I’m not familiar enough with the 787’s capabilities vs the triple.

Just curious - assuming the MOA ratifies, what if 6 months from now AC announces that the 6 777-200’s are not coming out of the desert again for mainline passenger ops, but then the next day offers to bring them out with a cargo conversion and 90% pay?

Exactly why you don’t go down that path. Yet time and again we take the bait. Then during the next negotiations we will have to spend bargaining capital trying to fix it while putting other areas on the back burner.

Then we wonder why we are so far behind our peers....... We even recently voted to reinforce this as the kind of representation we want.

Hook, line, sinker.

AC clearly sees a need for dedicated cargo post pandemic. The business plan is probably targeting South America and possibly Frankfurt again. We know AC has been struggling with a strategy to deal with South America for a few years. Now the parking of the Rouge 767 has created a crisis point. It’s not like they would walk away from the revenue. If that were the case they already would have. That business plan can’t hinge on 10% of a pilots wage. To believe that is simply irrational.

This is nothing more than the company taking the opportunity to hack a piece of the contract. It has been so successful for them they would be crazy to pass on any opportunity. We have spent the last decade fixing the problems introduced during FOS. Now just as we are coming to the end of that process, we are willingly introducing another problem we will have to fix.

Are we really this blind? Rovinescu is probably walking Rousseau through the process.

https://media.giphy.com/media/YP1Jb0JNc ... /giphy.gif

https://media.giphy.com/media/3o7btNa0R ... /giphy.gif


I give up.

[alkaseltzer]

1.11 Specialty Companies

1.11.01 A Specialty Company is any Affiliate of the Company dedicated to air carrier operations within a narrower segment of the travel market than that in which Air Canada operates, such as air cargo, leisure market, low cost carrier or charter operations.

1.11.02 The Company or its Affiliates will not create or otherwise form any Specialty Company without the express written consent of ACPA.

Definition:

1.03.03 Affiliate means any entity incorporated in Canada or operating aircraft in Canada that controls the Company or that the Company controls and any Specialty Company.


Just curious - assuming the MOA ratifies, what if 6 months from now AC announces that the 6 777-200’s are not coming out of the desert again for mainline passenger ops, but then the next day offers to bring them out with a cargo conversion and 90% pay?

Previous AC CEO’s have said that there is no money in dedicated cargo ops. The current CEO fleeted the airline to derive cargo revenue from available below deck cargo capacity. All dedicated cargo carriers saw their stock sell-off yesterday on the news of a COVID vaccine which portends an eventual recovery to normal.

I guess it is a slippery slope. And it is not up to the pilots to set the business plan. But would the answer from the AC pilots be any different if there were not pilots on layoff?

AC had this issue last decade before the triples showed up. They couldn’t bid certain contracts because they couldn’t guarantee the belly space due to weight restrictions. On perishables the penalties are high. At that time Europe was the problem and it was addressed by a temporary wet lease. The more recent Cargo Jet wet lease was to accommodate freight in and out of South America that the high density Rouge 767’s had trouble carrying plus a little Frankfurt.

Now we have a situation where the Rouge 767 is parked. That is a problem for South America Cargo.

If the Triples get parked Europe might be an issue. I’m not familiar enough with the 787’s capabilities vs the triple.

Just curious - assuming the MOA ratifies, what if 6 months from now AC announces that the 6 777-200’s are not coming out of the desert again for mainline passenger ops, but then the next day offers to bring them out with a cargo conversion and 90% pay?

Exactly why you don’t go down that path. Yet time and again we take the bait. Then during the next negotiations we will have to spend bargaining capital trying to fix it while putting other areas on the back burner.

Then we wonder why we are so far behind our peers....... We even recently voted to reinforce this as the kind of representation we want.

Hook, line, sinker.

AC clearly sees a need for dedicated cargo post pandemic. The business plan is probably targeting South America and possibly Frankfurt again. We know AC has been struggling with a strategy to deal with South America for a few years. Now the parking of the Rouge 767 has created a crisis point. It’s not like they would walk away from the revenue. If that were the case they already would have. That business plan can’t hinge on 10% of a pilots wage. To believe that is simply irrational.

This is nothing more than the company taking the opportunity to hack a piece of the contract. It has been so successful for them they would be crazy to pass on any opportunity. We have spent the last decade fixing the problems introduced during FOS. Now just as we are coming to the end of that process, we are willingly introducing another problem we will have to fix.

Are we really this blind? Rovinescu is probably walking Rousseau through the process.

https://media.giphy.com/media/YP1Jb0JNc ... /giphy.gif

https://media.giphy.com/media/3o7btNa0R ... /giphy.gif


I give up.

So my question is, why would ACPA put forth this to the members at 90% pay? Is there a disclosure for any kickback to the ones at the negotiating table? Has this ever been an issue with this MEC in the past?

The stock market has reflected these news in a positive way (32% increase by today).

10% less pay without burning a course right seems fair.

Especially since this pandemic will take at least 3 years to get to 2019 levels.

Also don't know what's all the bitching by MAX captains or other pilots that have barely flown OR worked, yet earnings throughout the year will top $180k. Acpa saved jobs, more than any other airline and if it's a 10% paycut for a different lifestyle, then sign me up. Some guys like flying freight.

Last call for boarding on the gravy ...

[discountpilot]

Just curious - assuming the MOA ratifies, what if 6 months from now AC announces that the 6 777-200’s are not coming out of the desert again for mainline passenger ops, but then the next day offers to bring them out with a cargo conversion and 90% pay?

This

[discountpilot]

ML rates - 10% rates at 18-19 days a month for 70-75 hours? This will pay less than Rouge did due to lack of 77.5, 2x draft and min day rate.

PASS.

If I wanted to fly 18-19 days a month I would have stayed at Jazz.

[PostmasterGeneral]

If it's the same flying, in the same airplanes, WHY is it being done at a cheaper rate? Who gives a shit if there's people or cargo in the back? And cargo flying often has WORSE scheduling and work conditions, if anything it should pay more.

Who in their right mind would bid to go over there? Am I missing something?

[discountpilot]

As pilots we never interact with passengers other than saying goodbye at the end of the flight. To us it doesn't matter what's the the back, we fly from A to B. If anything cargo flying should pay MORE due to it's unproductivity, back of the clock flying and airport appreciation time.

We had the chance to get rid of this MEC a month ago and didn't take it. This is what we get.

[Fanblade]

10% less pay without burning a course right seems fair.

......if it's a 10% paycut for a different lifestyle, then sign me up.

Last call for boarding on the gravy ...

Now I need alka seltzer.

10% less = a gravy train? That my friend is why we are in a union. If we negotiated on our own we would be working for next to nothing because of that attitude. So now that I know your willing to work for 10% less on a 767, what reduction are you willing to take for a triple? 15%? 20?

Yes there is always a few that see an opportunity to jump the Q if wages fall in a certain position. Do you know how many people I heard say they were concerned ACPA would fix the Rouge pay rates to a point where they could no longer hold their current position? Add it to the reasons to never go down that path. The devisiness becomes destructive.

How about we just do the flying for the negotiated rate?

Problem is it is too late for that. It is incredibly rare that we vote against an MEC recommendation. This 10% pay cut is now most likely locked in. It’s why these issues should never get past the MEC.

[Fanblade]

https://acpa.ca/members/about-us.aspx

ACPA - About us - Values - Professionalism and career development

Having chosen to pursue a career in such a highly specialized and technical arena, ACPA members constantly seek to improve our profession, working conditions, compensation and benefits — not just on behalf of our own member pilots, but also in support of our chosen profession.

No one laugh.

[discountpilot]

https://acpa.ca/members/about-us.aspx

ACPA - About us - Values - Professionalism and career development

Having chosen to pursue a career in such a highly specialized and technical arena, ACPA members constantly seek to improve our profession, working conditions, compensation and benefits — not just on behalf of our own member pilots, but also in support of our chosen profession.

No one laugh.

[thrust set]

Just found out that all three members of Pilots for Change that won successfully in the last election, supported this cargo LOU.
No transparency, no backbone, just follow in line.

Their new logo .......“Pilots looking for $ change”

You’re welcome.

TS

[skypirate88]

Just found out that all three members of Pilots for Change that won successfully in the last election, supported this cargo LOU.
No transparency, no backbone, just follow in line.

Their new logo .......“Pilots looking for $ change”

You’re welcome.

TS

What are you talking about? None of the members who won election were even remotely connected to Pilots for Change.

Even if they were, the term doesn't start until the new year so they wouldn't be in office.

Your entire post is completely incorrect. Perhaps you should get a better source, because the one you're using is completely full of shit.

I honestly can't tell if you believe this nonsense or if you're just on a fishing expedition.

[thrust set]

One LEC chair that won ( well nobody ran against him ) and 2 National MEC members in positions now, but lost in their local base elections. All three are P4C...... my point is they ran on a platform of change. 18 days a month, 10% less ,no bunks??
And it seems they never pushed back over this Cargo agreement....nope, not a peep.

That’s change, that’s pilots for change. ( sorry I can hardly keep a straight face !)

[discountpilot]

One LEC chair that won ( well nobody ran against him ) and 2 National MEC members in positions now, but lost in their local base elections. All three are P4C...... my point is they ran on a platform of change. 18 days a month, 10% less ,no bunks??
And it seems they never pushed back over this Cargo agreement....nope, not a peep.

That’s change, that’s pilots for change. ( sorry I can hardly keep a straight face !)

The issue with your claim is that there's no way to corroborate it. If only ACPA MEC had an available voting record for members to review.

There's so many issues.

It's all connected.