Strike vote

[Daniel Cooper]

Apparently we're going to have to play this little public performance every time where the Minister pretends they can order binding arbitration.

[bcflyer]

Apparently we're going to have to play this little public performance every time where the Minister pretends they can order binding arbitration.

Exactly. Binding arbitration can not be FORCED on anyone that isn’t an essential service.

[Reinhard]

kek

[cjp]

Just in Canada's Minister of Labour, Steven MacKinnon has directed the CIRB to order CN and CPKC resumption or work activities, binding Arbitration and extending the collective agreement. We do not live in a democratic country. Sadly I am convinced the same will happen with AC Pilots.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0Z_xoW2D2o

Ya I knew some form of government intervention was coming. They say they won’t, but then they realize shit hittin the fan. And then they shit on everyone who just wants a livable wage.

I shall be sending a strongly worded email to my MP. For the little good that it will do.

The media justification.

"The two companies moved an average of $1 billion in trade per day across Canada and into the United States. Business groups warned of severe financial hardships if the strike had continued, with grain farmers saying the strike would cost farmers $43 million per day.

The strike risked drinking water supplies for cities because chlorine moves by rail and it risked leading to back-ups at major ports. There were calls from the U.S. and Canadian chambers of commerce for an end to the strike and pressure from premiers across the country."

Not right at all. Tough to figure out if this is the slippery slope leading to Air Canada, or that the Liberals just burned their non existent remaining social credit.

Apparently Singh called them out, you'd know what would be even better, a non-confidence vote - instead of the Liberals operating as if they have a majority.

[cjp]

kek

What media platform did he post that on? The username seems to find me at a dead end.

[Reinhard]

What media platform did he post that on? The username seems to find me at a dead end.

Youtube comments

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvhtVA_Ln-8

[pelmet]

Is there something wrong with binding arbitration? Seems like a judge-like person looks at both sides and makes a decision that is reasonable.

I was a member of a union that had a no strike clause and binding arbitration as policy. It worked out quite well for us at that time and I remember the company being very pissed off after one of them as the pilots pretty much got all they were asking for, and they got it all with no strike. No passengers and businesses screwed over by a small group of people, no loss of pay for the pilots, and no strike loss for the company.

[ysogk1]

Any result of vote yet?

[Daigo]

Is there something wrong with binding arbitration? Seems like a judge-like person looks at both sides and makes a decision that is reasonable.

I was a member of a union that had a no strike clause and binding arbitration as policy. It worked out quite well for us at that time and I remember the company being very pissed off after one of them as the pilots pretty much got all they were asking for, and they got it all with no strike. No passengers and businesses screwed over by a small group of people, no loss of pay for the pilots, and no strike loss for the company.

There's lots wrong with arbitration. It's how we got this abysmal contract shoved down our throats

[rudder]

Is there something wrong with binding arbitration? Seems like a judge-like person looks at both sides and makes a decision that is reasonable.

I was a member of a union that had a no strike clause and binding arbitration as policy. It worked out quite well for us at that time and I remember the company being very pissed off after one of them as the pilots pretty much got all they were asking for, and they got it all with no strike. No passengers and businesses screwed over by a small group of people, no loss of pay for the pilots, and no strike loss for the company.

Do you think an arbitrator is going to give the AC pilots back all that they have given up (or had taken away) over two decades? Do you think an arbitrator is going to upgrade work rules that are arguably the worst in the industry to a level that is comparable to US legacy carriers? Don't you think that an arbitrator is going to be unsympathetic to the impact on profits that would result from the aforementioned changes?

Right-to-strike is the right to fight for those enhancements, understanding the consequence.

Question is whether or not in Canada there is in fact a right-to-strike.

[Canpilot7]

Is there something wrong with binding arbitration? Seems like a judge-like person looks at both sides and makes a decision that is reasonable.

I was a member of a union that had a no strike clause and binding arbitration as policy. It worked out quite well for us at that time and I remember the company being very pissed off after one of them as the pilots pretty much got all they were asking for, and they got it all with no strike. No passengers and businesses screwed over by a small group of people, no loss of pay for the pilots, and no strike loss for the company.

Throughout a CBA, the company holds almost all of the leverage in all situations. They're in their right to start layoffs, shrink their operation, change the direction of the company etc. All can be a negative for the employee. The only time the employees hold the leverage is when they're willing to strike. Removing that with binding arbitration means businesses never face real pressure, only employees.

[Ash Ketchum]

I think it is in AC managements best interest not to go into binding arbitration. If they truly want a world class airline with motivated, top tier pilots they need to treat us with respect and pay us what we deserve. The airline executives in the US seem to get it. I know for myself personally, if we go into binding arbitration and the contract doesn't improve significantly I am out. Either going to fly internationally as an expat or go back to school for a masters/professional degree and change careers entirely. I am sure I am not the only one thinking this way.

[Canpilot7]

I think it is in AC managements best interest not to go into binding arbitration. If they truly want a world class airline with motivated, top tier pilots they need to treat us with respect and pay us what we deserve. The airline executives in the US seem to get it. I know for myself personally, if we go into binding arbitration and the contract doesn't improve significantly I am out. Either going to fly internationally as an expat or go back to school for a masters/professional degree and change careers entirely. I am sure I am not the only one thinking this way.

AC's CEO might cry tears of joy if they get the binding arbitration they will want. They were comfortable with the status quo in the CBA before the union ended it, so I don't think they're too worried about people leaving.

[RippleRock]

Binding arbitration CAN NOT be forced by the call of a Minister alone. It's against the law. It is ultimately decided by the CIRB, not the Government.

The only things that can force it are a "not withstanding clause", or a legislation in Parliament. Neither has been done yet. However, both can be argued against as case law has upheld the "right to bargain" as a Charter Right.

This is NOT over for the rail workers. Forced arbitration is not likely the path AC pilots are on. ALPA legal is all over this.



FWIW, remember the AME's were not ultimately charged for striking at WJ, nor held responsible for the tens of millions in revenue losses. The CIRB held the day, not the Minister.

[cdnavater]

Binding arbitration CAN NOT be forced by the call of a Minister alone. It's against the law. It is ultimately decided by the CIRB, not the Government.

The only things that can force it are a "not withstanding clause", or a legislation in Parliament. Neither has been done yet. However, both can be argued against as case law has upheld the "right to bargain" as a Charter Right.

This is NOT over for the rail workers. Forced arbitration is not likely the path AC pilots are on. ALPA legal is all over this.



FWIW, remember the AME's were not ultimately charged for striking at WJ, nor held responsible for the tens of millions in revenue losses. The CIRB held the day, not the Minister.

It’s a strange situation, seems exactly the same as the WJ AMEs with a different minister, what could possibly make this new guy think it will have a different result.
I just read the CN workers will begin returning to work today but CP will continue their strike until after they hear from the CIRB. The only difference I can see is CN workers didn’t issue a strike notice and were locked out, while the CP workers issued a strike notice.
This could work out, CP strikes, CN moves freight and when binding arbitration finally takes place the CN workers will have the CP contract as a reference.

[cjp]

Binding arbitration CAN NOT be forced by the call of a Minister alone. It's against the law. It is ultimately decided by the CIRB, not the Government.

The only things that can force it are a "not withstanding clause", or a legislation in Parliament. Neither has been done yet. However, both can be argued against as case law has upheld the "right to bargain" as a Charter Right.

This is NOT over for the rail workers. Forced arbitration is not likely the path AC pilots are on. ALPA legal is all over this.



FWIW, remember the AME's were not ultimately charged for striking at WJ, nor held responsible for the tens of millions in revenue losses. The CIRB held the day, not the Minister.

It’s a strange situation, seems exactly the same as the WJ AMEs with a different minister, what could possibly make this new guy think it will have a different result.
I just read the CN workers will begin returning to work today but CP will continue their strike until after they hear from the CIRB. The only difference I can see is CN workers didn’t issue a strike notice and were locked out, while the CP workers issued a strike notice.
This could work out, CP strikes, CN moves freight and when binding arbitration finally takes place the CN workers will have the CP contract as a reference.

And I can get my chlorine for my drinking water.

[Mac08]

I think it is in AC managements best interest not to go into binding arbitration. If they truly want a world class airline with motivated, top tier pilots they need to treat us with respect and pay us what we deserve. The airline executives in the US seem to get it. I know for myself personally, if we go into binding arbitration and the contract doesn't improve significantly I am out. Either going to fly internationally as an expat or go back to school for a masters/professional degree and change careers entirely. I am sure I am not the only one thinking this way.

You've been threatening to leave for about 90% of your posts so I'd say they're shaking in their boots

[digits_]

It’s a strange situation, seems exactly the same as the WJ AMEs with a different minister, what could possibly make this new guy think it will have a different result.
I just read the CN workers will begin returning to work today but CP will continue their strike until after they hear from the CIRB. The only difference I can see is CN workers didn’t issue a strike notice and were locked out, while the CP workers issued a strike notice.
This could work out, CP strikes, CN moves freight and when binding arbitration finally takes place the CN workers will have the CP contract as a reference.

So wait. CN locked out their workers, which weren't on strike, then went to cry to the government that their workers weren't working, only for the government to tell CN to stop the lockdown, so the workers which weren't striking can go back to work?

[cdnavater]

It’s a strange situation, seems exactly the same as the WJ AMEs with a different minister, what could possibly make this new guy think it will have a different result.
I just read the CN workers will begin returning to work today but CP will continue their strike until after they hear from the CIRB. The only difference I can see is CN workers didn’t issue a strike notice and were locked out, while the CP workers issued a strike notice.
This could work out, CP strikes, CN moves freight and when binding arbitration finally takes place the CN workers will have the CP contract as a reference.

So wait. CN locked out their workers, which weren't on strike, then went to cry to the government that their workers weren't working, only for the government to tell CN to stop the lockdown, so the workers which weren't striking can go back to work?

Yes, further proof there was collusion between both companies, they had to time it for maximum effect, with both companies shutdown at the same time, the expectation was Trudeau would step in, clearly they were right!

[TCAS II]

The Teamsters union has served Canadian National Railway (CN) with a 72-hour strike notice, hours after saying it was taking down picket lines and its workers were returning to the job.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cn-rai ... -1.7302978

[rookiepilot]

The Teamsters union has served Canadian National Railway (CN) with a 72-hour strike notice, hours after saying it was taking down picket lines and its workers were returning to the job.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cn-rai ... -1.7302978

When does JT freeze their bank accounts and trample them with horses?

Truckers.

Railway workers.

All the same to the Elite.

[cdnavater]

The Teamsters union has served Canadian National Railway (CN) with a 72-hour strike notice, hours after saying it was taking down picket lines and its workers were returning to the job.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cn-rai ... -1.7302978

They had no choice, when CP union issued a strike notice, CN(Company) issued a simultaneous lockout but the CN union had not issued a strike notice. The company issuing a lockout triggered the simultaneous shutdown of rail to have the maximum effect to get government intervention, however because of this the CN workers have no choice but to return as it is required to issue 72 hour notice of striking, not sure if it was intentional to stagger the timing of a misstep but now they have 72 hours to try and negotiate. The CN workers have a window into what the CIRB decides on notwithstanding or not intervening at all, this will no doubt have an effect on if CN comes to the table and whether or not the CP strike puts enough pressure. Lots of moving parts here and a very interesting situation; I also feel the situation at AC will be different, as there are other options and no real reason for government to intervene.
The outcome here will definitely shape the AC negotiations to an extent, by that I mean if AC wants to avoid a stoppage they will come to the table with a real offer!

[pelmet]

Is there something wrong with binding arbitration? Seems like a judge-like person looks at both sides and makes a decision that is reasonable.

I was a member of a union that had a no strike clause and binding arbitration as policy. It worked out quite well for us at that time and I remember the company being very pissed off after one of them as the pilots pretty much got all they were asking for, and they got it all with no strike. No passengers and businesses screwed over by a small group of people, no loss of pay for the pilots, and no strike loss for the company.

Do you think an arbitrator is going to give the AC pilots back all that they have given up (or had taken away) over two decades? Do you think an arbitrator is going to upgrade work rules that are arguably the worst in the industry to a level that is comparable to US legacy carriers? Don't you think that an arbitrator is going to be unsympathetic to the impact on profits that would result from the aforementioned changes?

Right-to-strike is the right to fight for those enhancements, understanding the consequence.

Question is whether or not in Canada there is in fact a right-to-strike.

Should the arbitrator consider how many billions Air Canada lost during Covid?

Whose rights are more important in this rail strike - 40 million Canadians negatively affected(some very seriously) or 4000 strikers? How does that apply to Air Canada. I say: Binding Arbitration.

I'm happy for AC pilots to get a decent raise but I think you will have as much sympathy from the public as the public servants have.

[Canpilot7]

Is there something wrong with binding arbitration? Seems like a judge-like person looks at both sides and makes a decision that is reasonable.

I was a member of a union that had a no strike clause and binding arbitration as policy. It worked out quite well for us at that time and I remember the company being very pissed off after one of them as the pilots pretty much got all they were asking for, and they got it all with no strike. No passengers and businesses screwed over by a small group of people, no loss of pay for the pilots, and no strike loss for the company.

Do you think an arbitrator is going to give the AC pilots back all that they have given up (or had taken away) over two decades? Do you think an arbitrator is going to upgrade work rules that are arguably the worst in the industry to a level that is comparable to US legacy carriers? Don't you think that an arbitrator is going to be unsympathetic to the impact on profits that would result from the aforementioned changes?

Right-to-strike is the right to fight for those enhancements, understanding the consequence.

Question is whether or not in Canada there is in fact a right-to-strike.

Should the arbitrator consider how many billions Air Canada lost during Covid?

Whose rights are more important in this rail strike - 40 million Canadians negatively affected(some very seriously) or 4000 strikers? How does that apply to Air Canada. I say: Binding Arbitration.

I'm happy for AC pilots to get a decent raise but I think you will have as much sympathy from the public as the public servants have.

So every working group should take turns making concessions for the greater good. Forever! Because obviously the individual working groups will never outnumber the overall population.

Rights of individuals are the same rights that the rest of the population has. A central tenant of the idea of "rights" being that you get them, even when you're not in the majority by excersising your rights. That's literally the point of that concept.

[cdnavater]

Is there something wrong with binding arbitration? Seems like a judge-like person looks at both sides and makes a decision that is reasonable.

I was a member of a union that had a no strike clause and binding arbitration as policy. It worked out quite well for us at that time and I remember the company being very pissed off after one of them as the pilots pretty much got all they were asking for, and they got it all with no strike. No passengers and businesses screwed over by a small group of people, no loss of pay for the pilots, and no strike loss for the company.

Do you think an arbitrator is going to give the AC pilots back all that they have given up (or had taken away) over two decades? Do you think an arbitrator is going to upgrade work rules that are arguably the worst in the industry to a level that is comparable to US legacy carriers? Don't you think that an arbitrator is going to be unsympathetic to the impact on profits that would result from the aforementioned changes?

Right-to-strike is the right to fight for those enhancements, understanding the consequence.

Question is whether or not in Canada there is in fact a right-to-strike.

Should the arbitrator consider how many billions Air Canada lost during Covid?

Whose rights are more important in this rail strike - 40 million Canadians negatively affected(some very seriously) or 4000 strikers? How does that apply to Air Canada. I say: Binding Arbitration.

I'm happy for AC pilots to get a decent raise but I think you will have as much sympathy from the public as the public servants have.

When the public “servants”, I use that term loosely, walked out, I fully supported them and in fact didn’t even notice they were gone. They could have went on strike for months and I would’ve supported them the whole time, I didn’t feel bad for them, I cheered them on, who needs public sympathy anyway!