CEWS

Discuss topics relating to airlines.

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

alkaseltzer
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2018 6:16 pm

CEWS

Post by alkaseltzer »

So let me get this straight - AC is the only airline NOT using the CEWS for their pilots, past June 30th? But Sunwing, Transat, Westjet are?
---------- ADS -----------
 
200Above
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 10:26 pm

Re: CEWS

Post by 200Above »

As far as I know-Yes. I’m on the Surplus list. I mean CEWS would be nice and all, but I understand AC’s point of view. I thought Management was just playing hard ball with the Government.

Only a couple days left before they have to give us our notice... I wish they would hurry up and do it already.
---------- ADS -----------
 
alkaseltzer
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2018 6:16 pm

Re: CEWS

Post by alkaseltzer »

CEWS nice and all? Not sure if you've lived through a downturn before, but every penny counts.

$2000 per month on CERB
$2500 ballpark on CEWS...hmmm

For some, that will be the difference between putting groceries on the table for our families and going to the food bank. I'm sure the vast majority of WB skippers are doing well though, collecting $210k+...sitting at home?

Or enlighten us...how are the other unions able to negotiate CEWS at null cost to their airlines?

Fly the flag....really?
---------- ADS -----------
 
fish4life
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1841
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 6:32 am

Re: CEWS

Post by fish4life »

alkaseltzer wrote: Wed May 27, 2020 9:02 pm CEWS nice and all? Not sure if you've lived through a downturn before, but every penny counts.

$2000 per month on CERB
$2500 ballpark on CEWS...hmmm

For some, that will be the difference between putting groceries on the table for our families and going to the food bank. I'm sure the vast majority of WB skippers are doing well though, collecting $210k+...sitting at home?

Or enlighten us...how are the other unions able to negotiate CEWS at null cost to their airlines?

Fly the flag....really?
CEWS is $3388
CERB is $2000

That’s a big difference
---------- ADS -----------
 
dash8driver
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2018 11:25 pm

Re: CEWS

Post by dash8driver »

Sky Regional, as per an email from Russ Payson, will terminate CEWS on July 4th due to a requirement for ‘additional changes in legislation’. I’m curious if Jazz will be terminating as well at the start of July?
---------- ADS -----------
 
rudder
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2254
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: CEWS

Post by rudder »

For many AC and Express employees, CEWS will be a bridge to a layoff not a bridge to return to active status.

Perhaps this is the issue or perhaps it is the large employer layoff provisions of the Federal Labour Code that are in conflict with the CEWS legislation.
---------- ADS -----------
 
200Above
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 10:26 pm

Re: CEWS

Post by 200Above »

That's well put Rudder- can't really add anything more to that statement. A CEWS extension offers a couple huge advantages over going to EI or CERB. We continue to receive benefits, pension, and most importantly (in my opinion), YOS. Coming back after 2 years on layoff to year one flat pay is the biggest kick in the nuts. It's a piss poor situation to be in, and unfortunately a lot of us are in it.

That being said. I'm not waiting for someone to tell me CEWS is being extended. Tough decisions will have to be made soon. I'm extremely grateful that my family has 6+ months of living expenses stashed away. It'll lessen the short term blow, but it'll still cause a ripple effect for my personal finances down the road.

As for other airlines offering the subsidy... I hear WJ has been misapplying CEWS. Not sure about the details or anything, but maybe there was some confusion as to how its been applied in the past, and how it's supposed to be applied in the future. This may warrant a second look at the pros/cons of the program moving forward.

I hope we can ALL stay on it.
---------- ADS -----------
 
kiaszceski
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 76
Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2019 10:29 am

Re: CEWS

Post by kiaszceski »

200Above wrote: Wed May 27, 2020 8:32 pm As far as I know-Yes. I’m on the Surplus list. I mean CEWS would be nice and all, but I understand AC’s point of view. I thought Management was just playing hard ball with the Government.

Only a couple days left before they have to give us our notice... I wish they would hurry up and do it already.
So how many are laid off ?
---------- ADS -----------
 
200Above
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 10:26 pm

Re: CEWS

Post by 200Above »

162 Furlough
632 Surplus
--------------------
794 no longer needed by my count.
---------- ADS -----------
 
kiaszceski
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 76
Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2019 10:29 am

Re: CEWS

Post by kiaszceski »

So surplus is just being paid 100% at home, right ?
---------- ADS -----------
 
200Above
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 10:26 pm

Re: CEWS

Post by 200Above »

Not necessarily. I'm Surplus. I have a full (55 hr) block of flying in June.
---------- ADS -----------
 
kiaszceski
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 76
Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2019 10:29 am

Re: CEWS

Post by kiaszceski »

So you are saying the ACPA couldn’t negotiate a tiny 5% pay cut to avoid sacrificing 162 families ?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Sharklasers
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 274
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 5:24 pm

Re: CEWS

Post by Sharklasers »

We all got into this knowing the score.
We cannot allow the WAGCON to permanently erode to temporarily save junior jobs. We already have a 30% pay cut due to our hours cut saving hundreds of jobs. Eventually we have to worry about the quality of the remaining jobs.
---------- ADS -----------
 
200Above
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 10:26 pm

Re: CEWS

Post by 200Above »

I'm not sure I follow. The 162 are on CEWS and being paid, just like me. Everyone took at 27% reduction in hours (75, now 55 hrs) in order to prevent further layoffs.
---------- ADS -----------
 
200Above
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 10:26 pm

Re: CEWS

Post by 200Above »

Beat me to it Sharklasers.

I agree. I don't expect my fellow pilot group to continue taking concessions, nor do I want them to. I made my own decisions and I have to make the best of it.
---------- ADS -----------
 
TheStig
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 717
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:34 pm

Re: CEWS

Post by TheStig »

In March ACPA and AC negotiated a 6 month (April - September) MOA that reduced all pilots to 55 hours in exchange limited furloughs to no more than 600 prior to the end of September.

The 162 Pilots hired in 2020 were furloughed along with 16,500 AC employees. At the same time the Government announced the CEWS and AC 're-hired' its furloughed employees and placed them on the wage subsidy.

With the release of its Q1 reports AC announced that it is retiring 79 aircraft and is planning to emerge from this crisis 30% smaller and it doesn't forecast 2019 levels of traffic for at least 3 years. At the end of that week AC announced that it's intention to furlough 50-60% of its staff.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by TheStig on Thu May 28, 2020 10:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
L39Guy
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 228
Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2019 10:04 pm
Location: Canada

Re: CEWS

Post by L39Guy »

Perhaps it's easy being on the sidelines now as a retiree but I think ACPA and AC pilots should endure some pain for its junior members facing furlough.

Unlike a normal, economic recession which is just part of the cycle of this industry, COVID-19 is an entirely different event. Everyone going into this game should know that there is a risk of a furlough with the economic cycles, but COVID is not an economic cycle - it is a pandemic that has triggered an economic cycle. In past economic downturns AC pilots have taken a reduction in hours to keep their colleagues on the property (2008 comes to mind).

I find it tough to stomach the notion that non-furloughed AC pilots, after the 55 hour reduction ending in September, will be back to ops normal and normal pay while 700+ junior members bear the brunt of COVID. Virtually no sector of society is untouched by this event and the notion that senior pilots will carry on their merry way while junior ones take it on the chin is not right or fair. Everyone should feel some of the economic pain of this pandemic.

Even if all 700+ furloughs cannot be avoided, even a 10% cut in hours (~8 hours per month) would at least keep 300+ employed and make it just that much closer for the remaining 400 or so to come back.
---------- ADS -----------
 
rudder
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2254
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: CEWS

Post by rudder »

L39Guy wrote: Thu May 28, 2020 8:34 am Perhaps it's easy being on the sidelines now as a retiree but I think ACPA and AC pilots should endure some pain for its junior members facing furlough.

Unlike a normal, economic recession which is just part of the cycle of this industry, COVID-19 is an entirely different event. Everyone going into this game should know that there is a risk of a furlough with the economic cycles, but COVID is not an economic cycle - it is a pandemic that has triggered an economic cycle. In past economic downturns AC pilots have taken a reduction in hours to keep their colleagues on the property (2008 comes to mind).

I find it tough to stomach the notion that non-furloughed AC pilots, after the 55 hour reduction ending in September, will be back to ops normal and normal pay while 700+ junior members bear the brunt of COVID. Virtually no sector of society is untouched by this event and the notion that senior pilots will carry on their merry way while junior ones take it on the chin is not right or fair. Everyone should feel some of the economic pain of this pandemic.

Even if all 700+ furloughs cannot be avoided, even a 10% cut in hours (~8 hours per month) would at least keep 300+ employed and make it just that much closer for the remaining 400 or so to come back.
There is a significant employer expense associated with job sharing vs layoff savings. Pension. Benefits. Vacation accrual. Pay progression. Payroll taxes. Etc.

For a projected surplus lasting less than 12-18 months job sharing might make economic sense. In this case, it is entirely possible that recalls will not commence prior to 2022.
---------- ADS -----------
 
L39Guy
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 228
Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2019 10:04 pm
Location: Canada

Re: CEWS

Post by L39Guy »

Similarly, there is significant expenses with furloughing too. Severance, training being a particularly large expense but there are also non-financial costs too such as morale, loyalty, etc. In other words, this is more than a financial issue but a human issue too.
---------- ADS -----------
 
rudder
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2254
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: CEWS

Post by rudder »

L39Guy wrote: Thu May 28, 2020 9:04 am Similarly, there is significant expenses with furloughing too. Severance, training being a particularly large expense but there are also non-financial costs too such as morale, loyalty, etc. In other words, this is more than a financial issue but a human issue too.
True. But for anybody who has been in the industry through multiple economic cycles - they have seen this movie before. Some have even had the displeasure of going through the exercise with the complication of CCAA. The wheel will not be reinvented.

Long downturn = layoffs.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “General Airline Industry Comments”