Vote results.

Discuss topics relating to Westjet.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, North Shore

Message
Author
Maurice
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 22
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 7:11 pm

Re: Vote results.

#51 Post by Maurice » Sun May 13, 2018 12:44 pm

Flyingsquirrelsuck wrote:
Sat May 12, 2018 9:47 am
tbaylx wrote:
Sat May 12, 2018 2:33 am
BE02 Driver wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 8:06 pm
Legitimate question...

Quote as posted on wjpilotfacts.com:

"Over a five-year term, the increase in costs to the Company of the MEC’s current proposal represents approximately 85 per cent of WestJet’s total net earnings over the last five years. It would largely wipe all profits going forward and make WestJet unable to continue operations."

So unless I'm not understanding something here, WJ is claiming that if they were reduced to 15% of current profits over the next 5 years they would have to cease operations?

Why would a profitable company have to cease operations?
You can't see why wiping out 85% of a company's profits to placate one single employee group is a problem?
Dividend cuts, stock price drop, inability to raise financing for future growth and expansion are a few that jump out immediately.

If 85% is accurate someone should have asked ALPA to do a cost analysis before coming up with a proposal and setting up unrealistic expectations within the pilot group. There's the MEC's next challenge, selling the eventual contract to a group that they've riled up.
Your buying into the lies. If you really researched the numbers there is no way the pilots would cost an increase of 85%! What do we cost the company now? It’s between 2-3% of yearly costs.

In saying that, the math doesn’t add up. I get it, your not an ALPA supporter, but it’s your responsibility to find out the truth. Call CAM, ask him about his math. It’s lies to divide the group. Simple
Speaking of math not adding up, where did you get the 2-3% of costs from?
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
aerobod
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 157
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2014 3:35 pm

Re: Vote results.

#52 Post by aerobod » Sun May 13, 2018 12:53 pm

Maurice wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 12:44 pm
Flyingsquirrelsuck wrote:
Sat May 12, 2018 9:47 am
tbaylx wrote:
Sat May 12, 2018 2:33 am


You can't see why wiping out 85% of a company's profits to placate one single employee group is a problem?
Dividend cuts, stock price drop, inability to raise financing for future growth and expansion are a few that jump out immediately.

If 85% is accurate someone should have asked ALPA to do a cost analysis before coming up with a proposal and setting up unrealistic expectations within the pilot group. There's the MEC's next challenge, selling the eventual contract to a group that they've riled up.
Your buying into the lies. If you really researched the numbers there is no way the pilots would cost an increase of 85%! What do we cost the company now? It’s between 2-3% of yearly costs.

In saying that, the math doesn’t add up. I get it, your not an ALPA supporter, but it’s your responsibility to find out the truth. Call CAM, ask him about his math. It’s lies to divide the group. Simple
Speaking of math not adding up, where did you get the 2-3% of costs from?
For WestJet, that number is about 6% of costs for pilot compensation. Total corporate employee compensation bill is about 25% of total costs (varies mainly with fuel expanding or contracting it's portion).
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
schnitzel2k3
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 588
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 11:17 pm

Re: Vote results.

#53 Post by schnitzel2k3 » Sun May 13, 2018 4:12 pm

Maurice wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 12:44 pm
Flyingsquirrelsuck wrote:
Sat May 12, 2018 9:47 am
tbaylx wrote:
Sat May 12, 2018 2:33 am


You can't see why wiping out 85% of a company's profits to placate one single employee group is a problem?
Dividend cuts, stock price drop, inability to raise financing for future growth and expansion are a few that jump out immediately.

If 85% is accurate someone should have asked ALPA to do a cost analysis before coming up with a proposal and setting up unrealistic expectations within the pilot group. There's the MEC's next challenge, selling the eventual contract to a group that they've riled up.
Your buying into the lies. If you really researched the numbers there is no way the pilots would cost an increase of 85%! What do we cost the company now? It’s between 2-3% of yearly costs.

In saying that, the math doesn’t add up. I get it, your not an ALPA supporter, but it’s your responsibility to find out the truth. Call CAM, ask him about his math. It’s lies to divide the group. Simple
Speaking of math not adding up, where did you get the 2-3% of costs from?
60% of the time people bull$hiting works everytime. That especially includes WS management.

I think someone threw that out a few months ago in an angry WS thread to justify their position in an argument.

Now it's 'fact'.

Good luck guys with arranging the agreement you deserve. No sarcasm.

S.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Zaibatsu
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 340
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2016 8:37 am

Re: Vote results.

#54 Post by Zaibatsu » Mon May 14, 2018 2:29 pm

Aviation is strewn with the corpses of airlines that unions bankrupted.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Boreas
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 3:06 pm
Location: The haunted corners of familiar rooms

Re: Vote results.

#55 Post by Boreas » Mon May 14, 2018 2:46 pm

Zaibatsu wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 2:29 pm
Aviation is strewn with the corpses of airlines that unions bankrupted.
Yeah... You WestJet guys better reconsider. :roll:
---------- ADS -----------
  

FL410AV8R
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 65
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 8:56 pm

Re: Vote results.

#56 Post by FL410AV8R » Mon May 14, 2018 3:25 pm

Zaibatsu wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 2:29 pm
Aviation is strewn with the corpses of airlines that unions bankrupted.
Try again. Aviation is strewn with the corpses of airlines that executives and CEOs have bankrupted. Unions don't make financial or network decisions and most certainly don't control all the expenditures. Supposedly smart people with fancy titles do that.

Just one example would be Delta through the 90s and 2000s, the book Airline Without a Pilot by Harry L. Nolan is a concise and interesting read.
https://www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/ho ... =&sortKey=
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
complexintentions
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1928
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 3:49 pm
Location: of my pants is unknown.

Re: Vote results.

#57 Post by complexintentions » Mon May 14, 2018 6:24 pm

So unions are a symptom of corporate dysfunction, not the cause.

Hmm. Not exactly a huge improvement over Zaibatsu's comment, if you're hoping for a positive outcome to this whole mess and think unionization will be your salvation.
---------- ADS -----------
  
I’m still waiting for my white male privilege membership card. Must have gotten lost in the mail.

LegalWeedKiller
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 12:16 am

Re: Vote results.

#58 Post by LegalWeedKiller » Tue May 15, 2018 12:17 am

complexintentions wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 6:24 pm
So unions are a symptom of corporate dysfunction, not the cause.

Hmm. Not exactly a huge improvement over Zaibatsu's comment, if you're hoping for a positive outcome to this whole mess and think unionization will be your salvation.
Unionization was a precursor for unity within the WestJet Pilot group. If you don’t see that then you have not spoken to a WestJet pilot recently.

Cheers
---------- ADS -----------
  

LegalWeedKiller
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 12:16 am

Re: Vote results.

#59 Post by LegalWeedKiller » Tue May 15, 2018 12:26 am

This article seems to fairly reflect how a lot of WestJet pilots are feeling.


https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.thestar ... -ride.html


AltaCorp Capital’s Chris Murray — who recently downgraded his rating of the company to underperform — said WestJet management’s plan to use an outside provider to staff its new, ultra-low-fare carrier Swoop is an “egregious shot across the bow” of its nascent pilots’ union that thumbs its nose at labour law and is almost certain to fail.

When the pilots were represented by an employee association, WestJet had agreed they would fly all of the company’s flights, Murray said in an interview with the Star.

“But now that they want to unionize, they’ve said, ‘No that’s not the case and we’re going to hire third-party pilots at a different set of wage rates,’” he said.

“A lot of the pilots are saying, ‘Hang on! You’re actually displacing WestJet routes and using WestJet planes, so tell me how you’re not outsourcing my job.’”


When I say ‘fairly reflect’, the comments from most WestJet pilots are a lot stronger than ‘hang on’.

WestJet Flying WestJet Pilots

The airplanes literally still belong to WestJet an Alberta Partnership yet they are outsourcing the pilots.

Que the shame bell from game of thrones!
---------- ADS -----------
  

Eric Janson
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 649
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:44 am

Re: Vote results.

#60 Post by Eric Janson » Tue May 15, 2018 1:23 am

Zaibatsu isn't wrong - one example is Sabena.

They were on the verge of bankruptcy and there was a rescue plan in place - but it meant a 30% wage cut across the board.

The Pilot's Union publicly stated that they'd rather see the doors close than accept a single penny in cuts (I saw it happen live on TV) - then they went on strike.

The doors closed and everyone lost their job.

Interesting sidenote:- All the leaders in the Pilots Union have been blacklisted in Belgium - no company will hire them. My Belgian colleagues have confirmed this is true.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Always fly a stable approach - it's the only stability you'll find in this business

User avatar
Boreas
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 3:06 pm
Location: The haunted corners of familiar rooms

Re: Vote results.

#61 Post by Boreas » Tue May 15, 2018 1:29 am

The Europeans know how to get it done!

It seems like the Lufty guys go on strike every other year.
Now who wouldn't want to see some WestJet executive get torn apart as they're climbing over a fence? :mrgreen:
Not very Canadian... but still.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Flyingsquirrelsuck
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 3:14 pm

Re: Vote results.

#62 Post by Flyingsquirrelsuck » Tue May 15, 2018 5:20 am

Zaibatsu wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 2:29 pm
Aviation is strewn with the corpses of airlines that unions bankrupted.
Can you revise any examples?
---------- ADS -----------
  

Flyingsquirrelsuck
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 3:14 pm

Re: Vote results.

#63 Post by Flyingsquirrelsuck » Tue May 15, 2018 5:22 am

Eric Janson wrote:
Tue May 15, 2018 1:23 am
Zaibatsu isn't wrong - one example is Sabena.

They were on the verge of bankruptcy and there was a rescue plan in place - but it meant a 30% wage cut across the board.

The Pilot's Union publicly stated that they'd rather see the doors close than accept a single penny in cuts (I saw it happen live on TV) - then they went on strike.

The doors closed and everyone lost their job.

Interesting sidenote:- All the leaders in the Pilots Union have been blacklisted in Belgium - no company will hire them. My Belgian colleagues have confirmed this is true.
Your comparing apples to oranges. Let’s see an example of a company with the financial health of Westjet, when the union took down the ship
---------- ADS -----------
  

altiplano
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2932
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: Vote results.

#64 Post by altiplano » Tue May 15, 2018 6:39 am

SABENA? Taken down by the Pilots' union?
The reasons for SABENA's bankruptcy are numerous. One of the direct causes was Swissair not living up to its contractual obligations and failing to inject necessary funds into the company. This was because at the time Swissair was having its own financial problems. During the so-called "Hotel agreement", signed on July 17, 2001, Belgian prime minister Guy Verhofstadt met with Swissair boss Mario Corti, who agreed to inject €258 million into Sabena. Mr Corti had made a terrible mistake as the sum was never paid, due to Swissair's own financial problems. The purchase of 34 new Airbus A320 family aircraft, imposed under Swissair's management, was a burden Sabena could not cope with.

After the bankruptcy, a parliamentary commission in Belgium was established to investigate the demise of the airline. The Belgian politicians got a part of the blame; Rik Daems, who, at the time, was Minister of Public Enterprises and Participations, Telecommunication and Middle Classes, received most criticism due to his lack of effort. Swissair itself went bankrupt in October of that year.
Looks like it's mismanagement, poor decisions, and bad deals done between CEOs and politicians that brought it to the precipice...

Not to mention the Bankruptcy was in NOVEMBER 2001. Wasn't there something else that came just before that, that decimated our industry?
---------- ADS -----------
  

Eric Janson
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 649
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:44 am

Re: Vote results.

#65 Post by Eric Janson » Wed May 16, 2018 12:32 am

altiplano wrote:
Tue May 15, 2018 6:39 am
SABENA? Taken down by the Pilots' union?
The reasons for SABENA's bankruptcy are numerous. One of the direct causes was Swissair not living up to its contractual obligations and failing to inject necessary funds into the company. This was because at the time Swissair was having its own financial problems. During the so-called "Hotel agreement", signed on July 17, 2001, Belgian prime minister Guy Verhofstadt met with Swissair boss Mario Corti, who agreed to inject €258 million into Sabena. Mr Corti had made a terrible mistake as the sum was never paid, due to Swissair's own financial problems. The purchase of 34 new Airbus A320 family aircraft, imposed under Swissair's management, was a burden Sabena could not cope with.

After the bankruptcy, a parliamentary commission in Belgium was established to investigate the demise of the airline. The Belgian politicians got a part of the blame; Rik Daems, who, at the time, was Minister of Public Enterprises and Participations, Telecommunication and Middle Classes, received most criticism due to his lack of effort. Swissair itself went bankrupt in October of that year.
Looks like it's mismanagement, poor decisions, and bad deals done between CEOs and politicians that brought it to the precipice...

Not to mention the Bankruptcy was in NOVEMBER 2001. Wasn't there something else that came just before that, that decimated our industry?
I'm not denying that the Airline was close to bankruptcy.

There was a rescue plan on the table - the Pilots did go on strike. This was the final straw.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/1528973.stm

The Pilots Union guys are blacklisted in Belgium for a reason.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Always fly a stable approach - it's the only stability you'll find in this business

altiplano
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2932
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: Vote results.

#66 Post by altiplano » Wed May 16, 2018 6:01 am

From your link:
The pilots have offered to reduce their working hours to help cut costs and avoid forced redundancies.

"They are losing money because there is very bad management" said Leo D'Hondt, Director of the Belgian Cockpit Association.

"We are flying today with aircraft, long-haul at least, which are almost 100% filled with passengers and even then they struggle to survive so there is something basically wrong," he said.
24 hour walkout..

Seeking an alternative to avoid layoffs by reducing individual block hours...

Sounds like exactly the kind of guys I would want to be working with... looking out for one another vs. every man for himself...

Here's an article about the bankruptcy... seems nobody is blaming the pilot union..
Sabena blamed its demise partly on the collapse of co-owner Swissair, which failed to come through with a promised injection of $123m (£84m) in fresh capital.

Swissair has had its fair share of financial problems and had to be bailed out by the Swiss government.

The Belgian government stepped in to provide emergency finance for Sabena last month but aid was curtailed by European Commission rules on state aid.

Sabena was already in distress before September 11, burdened by high labour costs, escalating debts and a chronic inability to make a profit.
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.theguar ... mandtravel
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
confusedalot
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 760
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 9:08 pm
Location: location, location, is what matters

Re: Vote results.

#67 Post by confusedalot » Wed May 16, 2018 8:13 pm

Small potatoes compared to the likes of Swissair and Sabena, but still.....

Yes, 9/11 had a whole lot to do with airline troubles, even the Americans bailed out their operators.

The Canadian aviation picture could have been slightly different if things went a different way.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canada-30 ... y-1.263968
---------- ADS -----------
  
Attempting to understand the world. I have not succeeded.

veni, vidi,...... vici non fecit.

:?

Fanblade
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 708
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Vote results.

#68 Post by Fanblade » Thu May 17, 2018 9:20 am

YYZSaabGuy wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 9:11 am
Fanblade wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 12:46 am

When peddling BS you never make it that obvious. When someone digs into the claim, at a minimum, a plausibly contorted rationalized explanation is required. It’s almost an art at AC.

The WJ Claim looks like amature hour.
Agreed, the number on its face looks one-sided. Then again, WestJet management will be aware that they are subject to strict regulatory requirements regarding timely disclosure (for example, on a company-owned but publicly accessible website) of material information, which the above arguably is. I'm very confident that somebody, likely in WestJet's corporate finance group, will have developed a model analyzing the cost of the ALPA proposals and supporting a build-up to the $1.274Bn 5-year impact quoted above.

Whether the assumptions underlying that analysis are appropriate is of course debatable, but there will at a minimum be something resembling a defensible rationale in place.
The strict regulatory requirements do not apply to internal communications. It is limited to “investor relations” initiatives. I can’t count the times in the past that AC told its employees one thing ( yes it was open to public consumption) and then told investors exactly the opposite.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Eric Janson
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 649
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:44 am

Re: Vote results.

#69 Post by Eric Janson » Thu May 17, 2018 1:36 pm

altiplano wrote:
Wed May 16, 2018 6:01 am
From your link:
The pilots have offered to reduce their working hours to help cut costs and avoid forced redundancies.

"They are losing money because there is very bad management" said Leo D'Hondt, Director of the Belgian Cockpit Association.

"We are flying today with aircraft, long-haul at least, which are almost 100% filled with passengers and even then they struggle to survive so there is something basically wrong," he said.
24 hour walkout..

Seeking an alternative to avoid layoffs by reducing individual block hours...

Sounds like exactly the kind of guys I would want to be working with... looking out for one another vs. every man for himself...

Here's an article about the bankruptcy... seems nobody is blaming the pilot union..
Sabena blamed its demise partly on the collapse of co-owner Swissair, which failed to come through with a promised injection of $123m (£84m) in fresh capital.

Swissair has had its fair share of financial problems and had to be bailed out by the Swiss government.

The Belgian government stepped in to provide emergency finance for Sabena last month but aid was curtailed by European Commission rules on state aid.

Sabena was already in distress before September 11, burdened by high labour costs, escalating debts and a chronic inability to make a profit.
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.theguar ... mandtravel
I've flown/fly with a lot of ex Sabena Pilots - I have yet to hear a single good word about the actions of their Pilot's Union representatives.

I'll bet with hindsight things would have played out very differently.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Always fly a stable approach - it's the only stability you'll find in this business

GRK2
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 80
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2015 5:04 am

Re: Vote results.

#70 Post by GRK2 » Thu May 17, 2018 2:42 pm

Hi Eric,

Some of us would maybe like to hear what those pilots had to say. I also fly with a number of those ex Sabena pilots and although they are still a little bitter at the Belgian government of that time, they still have pretty strong feelings that the union did what it could and they VOTED for the action to proceed...

On the ALPA and WS pilots subject, the fall from grace of the now ex CEO was easy to watch (and forecast) from outside of the company. My WS pilot friends and relatives were starting to feel the heat some time ago. I have been through the airline failure mill in Canada before, and while a few fellow pilots from that time STILL blame ALPA, (they never thought the company would ever fail...they had 100% faith in the bosses BS) No pilot's union ever bankrupted any Canadian airline.

The need to keep a level playing field between management and pilots is what should be driving these negotiations. I hope that the results of the CBA for WS stabilises the industry for a while as it seems that it's needed. Time to stop the race to the bottom at the expense of all pilots.

GRK
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
YYZSaabGuy
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 719
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 7:32 am
Location: On glideslope.

Re: Vote results.

#71 Post by YYZSaabGuy » Fri May 18, 2018 6:28 am

Fanblade wrote:
Thu May 17, 2018 9:20 am
YYZSaabGuy wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 9:11 am
Fanblade wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 12:46 am

When peddling BS you never make it that obvious. When someone digs into the claim, at a minimum, a plausibly contorted rationalized explanation is required. It’s almost an art at AC.

The WJ Claim looks like amature hour.
Agreed, the number on its face looks one-sided. Then again, WestJet management will be aware that they are subject to strict regulatory requirements regarding timely disclosure (for example, on a company-owned but publicly accessible website) of material information, which the above arguably is. I'm very confident that somebody, likely in WestJet's corporate finance group, will have developed a model analyzing the cost of the ALPA proposals and supporting a build-up to the $1.274Bn 5-year impact quoted above.

Whether the assumptions underlying that analysis are appropriate is of course debatable, but there will at a minimum be something resembling a defensible rationale in place.
The strict regulatory requirements do not apply to internal communications. It is limited to “investor relations” initiatives. I can’t count the times in the past that AC told its employees one thing ( yes it was open to public consumption) and then told investors exactly the opposite.
Fine, but that's not what we're discussing here. In this case, WestJet disclosed what is arguably material information on a publicly-accessible website, disseminating it broadly and making it widely available to everybody at the same time. That is the point of the regulatory regime: no one gains a benefit by receiving a "tip" of inside information. My point above was that the WestJet disclosure would undoubtedly have some analysis behind it and would be defensible.

But to address your comment: regulatory standards around continuous disclosure obligations of listed companies do not differentiate between "internal" and "external" communications; they govern the disclosure of material non-public information, period. Including to employees. I would be very surprised to see a publicly-listed company, including Air Canada, disclosing material information internally which was at variance to what it disclosed publicly. http://www.osc.gov.on.ca/en/SecuritiesL ... 51-201.jsp. I'm not saying it's never happened, but it certainly would not be the norm, and if the regulators caught wind of it, you can bet AC's General Counsel would very quickly be invited to discuss the matter.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Fanblade
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 708
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Vote results.

#72 Post by Fanblade » Fri May 18, 2018 7:40 pm

YYZSaabGuy wrote:
Fri May 18, 2018 6:28 am
Fanblade wrote:
Thu May 17, 2018 9:20 am
YYZSaabGuy wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 9:11 am

Agreed, the number on its face looks one-sided. Then again, WestJet management will be aware that they are subject to strict regulatory requirements regarding timely disclosure (for example, on a company-owned but publicly accessible website) of material information, which the above arguably is. I'm very confident that somebody, likely in WestJet's corporate finance group, will have developed a model analyzing the cost of the ALPA proposals and supporting a build-up to the $1.274Bn 5-year impact quoted above.

Whether the assumptions underlying that analysis are appropriate is of course debatable, but there will at a minimum be something resembling a defensible rationale in place.
The strict regulatory requirements do not apply to internal communications. It is limited to “investor relations” initiatives. I can’t count the times in the past that AC told its employees one thing ( yes it was open to public consumption) and then told investors exactly the opposite.
Fine, but that's not what we're discussing here. In this case, WestJet disclosed what is arguably material information on a publicly-accessible website, disseminating it broadly and making it widely available to everybody at the same time. That is the point of the regulatory regime: no one gains a benefit by receiving a "tip" of inside information. My point above was that the WestJet disclosure would undoubtedly have some analysis behind it and would be defensible.

But to address your comment: regulatory standards around continuous disclosure obligations of listed companies do not differentiate between "internal" and "external" communications; they govern the disclosure of material non-public information, period. Including to employees. I would be very surprised to see a publicly-listed company, including Air Canada, disclosing material information internally which was at variance to what it disclosed publicly. http://www.osc.gov.on.ca/en/SecuritiesL ... 51-201.jsp. I'm not saying it's never happened, but it certainly would not be the norm, and if the regulators caught wind of it, you can bet AC's General Counsel would very quickly be invited to discuss the matter.
Look I am no lawyer. But I have been through many many contract negotiations. There must be a grey area because with the stuff I have have heard from employers over the years, when negotiations start......my ear plugs go in because BS becomes the norm.

Perhaps it’s well crafted BS as to not cross a legal line. I don’t know.

What Westjet produced was a forward outlook. All forward outlooks come with legal caveats. Aforward outlook is no more than a guess made on assumptions. What assumptions were used? An assumption of $300 oil for instance could make the outlook look bleak. It would be complete truth based on that assumption. Yet the assumption is not realistic.

I will stick with my initial comment. The WJ claim looks over the top. To be believable it needs to be close ( sort of close) to be accepted as possible reality. The claim is too far and as a result looks amateurish.
---------- ADS -----------
  

atphat
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 426
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 8:01 pm

Re: Vote results.

#73 Post by atphat » Fri May 18, 2018 7:51 pm

Please stop making sense. It does not fit WJ’s management or the 9%’s narrative.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
YYZSaabGuy
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 719
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 7:32 am
Location: On glideslope.

Re: Vote results.

#74 Post by YYZSaabGuy » Sat May 19, 2018 8:59 am

Fanblade wrote:
Fri May 18, 2018 7:40 pm

What Westjet produced was a forward outlook. All forward outlooks come with legal caveats. Aforward outlook is no more than a guess made on assumptions. What assumptions were used? An assumption of $300 oil for instance could make the outlook look bleak. It would be complete truth based on that assumption. Yet the assumption is not realistic.
I can't disagree with that.
---------- ADS -----------
  

DynaRider
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:53 pm

Re: Vote results.

#75 Post by DynaRider » Wed May 23, 2018 8:02 pm

---------- ADS -----------
  

Post Reply

Return to “WestJet”