More Air Canada cuts.

[McKinley]

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/globalnews. ... anada/amp/

Is this just posturing by Air Canada or are things that dire?
( they could also be both)

After reading the comments section, it also appears that there’s little sympathy from the general public for the status of airline sector.

One person went so far as saying that Air Canada can no longer be called a “ national airline” because Air Canada no longer serves the nation as a whole. ( due to service cuts). I don’t know exactly what the solution would be to this?

[Heliian]

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/globalnews. ... anada/amp/

Is this just posturing by Air Canada or are things that dire?
( they could also be both)

After reading the comments section, it also appears that there’s little sympathy from the general public for the status of airline sector.

One person went so far as saying that Air Canada can no longer be called a “ national airline” because Air Canada no longer serves the nation as a whole. ( due to service cuts). I don’t know exactly what the solution would be to this?

It's supply and demand. Demand has dried up, now the supply goes. Once demand goes back up then I'm sure they'll be back to those routes.

I have sympathy for the front line workers and other trickle down businesses who are losing their jobs, no sympathy for the corporate machine. That's why the aid packages are going to the people after the fact and not straight to the shareholders.

[teacher]

No surprise.

This isn’t posturing. The planes are empty and the company is bleeding money. There’s no real support from the government as they shovel money to those unsympathetic to corporations who actually pay the bills and those that provide the services only to bitch about said services once they are lost and happily vote Liberal or NDP because “they support the people” only to have the people suffer as the infrastructure that supports said people crumbles around them.

[Old fella]

Here in the Atlantic people are not flying, period and full stop. Reason being is that they are quite concerned with their health and safety and don't want to be caught up in isolation for 14 days. Can't blame them nor the airlines for the reduction in their services. I have no doubt some services will be restored once things settle a bit and folks here are comfortable.

[McKinley]

No surprise.

This isn’t posturing. The planes are empty and the company is bleeding money. There’s no real support from the government as they shovel money to those unsympathetic to corporations who actually pay the bills and those that provide the services only to bitch about said services once they are lost and happily vote Liberal or NDP because “they support the people” only to have the people suffer as the infrastructure that supports said people crumbles around them.

Hahahahhahahahahahahhahaha! Yup! Sounds about right. I get the sentiment behind anti-corporate corruption. With this being said, workers need a place to work.. if the enterprise goes down .. where do those workers go?

[Heliian]

No surprise.

This isn’t posturing. The planes are empty and the company is bleeding money. There’s no real support from the government as they shovel money to those unsympathetic to corporations who actually pay the bills and those that provide the services only to bitch about said services once they are lost and happily vote Liberal or NDP because “they support the people” only to have the people suffer as the infrastructure that supports said people crumbles around them.

Hahahahhahahahahahahhahaha! Yup! Sounds about right. I get the sentiment behind anti-corporate corruption. With this being said, workers need a place to work.. if the enterprise goes down .. where do those workers go?

They go to the next business that hires them. If there are no other businesses then that sector is not sustainable and there is no point in dumping millions of dollars into it. The "bailout" money is best spent on retraining the individuals.

[McKinley]

No surprise.

This isn’t posturing. The planes are empty and the company is bleeding money. There’s no real support from the government as they shovel money to those unsympathetic to corporations who actually pay the bills and those that provide the services only to bitch about said services once they are lost and happily vote Liberal or NDP because “they support the people” only to have the people suffer as the infrastructure that supports said people crumbles around them.

Hahahahhahahahahahahhahaha! Yup! Sounds about right. I get the sentiment behind anti-corporate corruption. With this being said, workers need a place to work.. if the enterprise goes down .. where do those workers go?

They go to the next business that hires them. If there are no other businesses then that sector is not sustainable and there is no point in dumping millions of dollars into it. The "bailout" money is best spent on retraining the individuals.

I respectfully disagree, in a free market economy yes.. but this is far from that. It’s an international emergency. The aviation sector is being called an essential service and being told to operate at a loss under blanket restrictions.

Retraining to work at Tim Hortons? The economy is on its knees.. along with many businesses.( whom had great balance sheets prior to this mess)

To replace the purchasing power, retirement savings snd benefits for these individuals is not possible.

How is Canada the only G7 country that has not given sector specific support to the aviation industry that this country was built on?

Let’s remember there’s lives on both sides of the coin here..

[lownslow]

Air service to the east coast is rapidly dropping, planes are cheap, there is plenty of qualified laid off staff out there. Why not take advantage of the situation and start your own airline to monopolize this perceived demand?

[digits_]

The aviation sector is being called an essential service and being told to operate at a loss under blanket restrictions.

Who's telling them to do anything?

[teacher]

Air service to the east coast is rapidly dropping, planes are cheap, there is plenty of qualified laid off staff out there. Why not take advantage of the situation and start your own airline to monopolize this perceived demand?

No money, no passengers, no revenue means no business. I really hope you were being sarcastic.

Your opinion is an echo of the naive opinion of the general public and how common sense has eluded the general population the last few decades. People say “let it fail” than cry when they can’t get what the failed company was providing. How about we let people fail? Couldn’t get your financial house in order to survive this crisis well too bad for you and your family (healthy dose of sarcasm there).

[iflyforpie]

If any of those airlines fail you can bet that there will be expansions or startups to fill the void.. buying up existing aircraft and crews to do it.

If there’s no money, no travel.. then all the more reason not to pump public dollars into private enterprise.

It should be the shareholders and creditors who take the hit on the risk that they assumed when they invested or lended, not the taxpayer. This privatizing gains while socializing losses are a big part of why the public wants to let corporations fail.

The other part is the age-old bait-and-switch of supply-side economics. It’s never worked. Every single supply-side economy racks up record debt and unsustainable economic growth that always crashes into recession and bailouts. The USA government owed a dollar for every dollar the country made, BEFORE COVID-19. Canada... less than .50c... and still far lower than the US in spite of rapidly increased spending.

You give corporations money... they take care of their shareholders and executives first. Then they decide if they are going to take care of their employees. Many of them now in developing countries. They get lazy and lack innovation.

You give people money, it doesn’t disappear. It goes right back into the economy, where corporations have to fight for those dollars and have to have the ingenuity and enthusiasm that is supposed to make capitalism great.

That’s why we have CEWS and CERB. None of this blank-cheque no strings attached bullshit. Your lobbyists are kiyiying about the loss of employment? Well, we just put OUR money where YOUR mouth is, problem solved.

And has Air Canada shut down? Is it going into receivership? No. So people have every right to complain about the loss of services. Nobody complained when any other airline stopped because there was no more service; there was nobody left to complain to.

[co-joe]

If it was market forces that caused airlines to lose money I wouldn't have much sympathy, but this shutdown is the government's doing, and therefore I think the government has to take responsibility for these losses.

[Dh8Classic]

If it was market forces that caused airlines to lose money I wouldn't have much sympathy, but this shutdown is the government's doing, and therefore I think the government has to take responsibility for these losses.

As a taxpayer, I am not interested in paying for AC's losses. Trudeau has already put us in a very precarious position with 240, I SAY AGAIN, 240 BILLION spent.

Time for the airlines to shrink and then return if the traffic ever returns. Some will, business stuff(which is where most of the profits are) maybe not so much.

The shutdown isn't a simple governments doing. It is a reaction. Should we support the oil companies if we go to green energy. Should we support the coal mining companies. Should we support Kodak.

I am willing to support a government intervention to keep air service to certain towns that would lose it otherwise. An amount to justify keeping a Metro flight a day is probably sufficient in many cases.

[Mach1]

The shutdown isn't a simple governments doing. Should we support the oil companies if we go to green energy. Should we support the coal mining companies. Should we support Kodak.

A lot to unpack there. I'll just pick out few quick things and move on...

If it's not the government who ordered the shuttering of the economy, who was it?

Everything you own that is synthetic has oil in it. All plastic, rubber, fleece, and even 'green' energy. So, oil is going to be around regardless, unless you want to go back to banging rocks together and hoping you'll survive just one more day.

Have you looked at Kodak's stock lately? Great returns... because they got a government contract to make chemicals for the manufacture of vaccines. So, in a way, they are already being supported by government.

[Dh8Classic]

Bottom line, no more money left.

Maybe someday AC stock will be like Kodak, higher due to a new type of business. They are getting into freight, so the transition has started. And they have many billions left to do so.

I would rather not subsidize them.

[Longtimer]

Re the industry this country was built on..... in actual fact it was the railways. Airlines are the Johnny come later

[ayseven]

Airlines are spouting the same nonsense the railway companies did: "no demand, so let's get rid of the service", forgetting that Air Canada would not have existed without a mandate to serve the country as a whole, much like the railways did. They get their pie, stuff their faces, then when things slow down, they weasel out of previous agreements. In the case of the railways, did you know huge swaths of land on Vancouver Island are still at the mercy of the CPR? It is clearly stated in the deed. That means they can expropriate any old time they want. They were given that land (for FREE) in order to provide a rail service, that they got rid of years ago, even though their agreement said 'in perpetuity'. Air Canada is the same.

[altiplano]

That's not a parallel comparison, Air Canada is not the same... there are no previous agreements, particularly after deregulation.

Bring back industry regulation and maybe a similar situation argument could be made.

AC only airline to serve money routes out of Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, then they have to serve North Bay, Sydney, Baie Comeau too.

[Dh8Classic]

That's not a parallel comparison, Air Canada is not the same... there are no previous agreements, particularly after deregulation.

Bring back industry regulation and maybe a similar situation argument could be made.

AC only airline to serve money routes out of Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, then they have to serve North Bay, Sydney, Baie Comeau too.

Just to confirm, AC is required by law to serve North Bay, Sydney, and Baie-Comeau. And if so, what level of service.

[Yycjetdriver]

There’s no point arguing whether Airlines deserve bailouts or not or whether joe public wants to see them get bailouts.
It’s clearly not going to happen if it hasn’t happened yet, the best they can hope for is aid or tax breaks during the recovery phase IF it becomes necessary.
Unlike previous Airline bailouts, there hasn’t been an instance like this where there’s so many different corporations in a vast range of industries. For example it’s predicted approximately 50% of restaurants will close in the next 24 month, would you like them all to receive bailouts. There’s many many industries that are in the same boat, likely making it impossible to start handing bailouts to everyone who asks. That’s why they gone the route of wage subsidies, rent relief, etc. This will give them the flexibility to pick and chose who fails and who they support when the time is right.