Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Discuss topics relating to Air Canada.

Moderators: North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, I WAS Birddog

Post Reply
altiplano
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5683
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by altiplano »

Just as TAs need to be voted by the membership, TAs need to be approved by the BOD. It's bullshit that whoever negotiated for Jazz obviously didn't have a mandate though.

Common employer has been tried before when Jazz was owned by AC and it failed. There are established delineations in the airline industry between mainline and regional carriers, including ones with common ownership, fill your boots, but it's a waste of time, effort, and money.
---------- ADS -----------
 
PostmasterGeneral
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 937
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:50 pm

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by PostmasterGeneral »

altiplano wrote: Wed Apr 02, 2025 7:56 am Just as TAs need to be voted by the membership, TAs need to be approved by the BOD. It's bullshit that whoever negotiated for Jazz obviously didn't have a mandate though.

Common employer has been tried before when Jazz was owned by AC and it failed. There are established delineations in the airline industry between mainline and regional carriers, including ones with common ownership, fill your boots, but it's a waste of time, effort, and money.
You hit the nail on the head. What exactly are the wronged Jazz pilots seeking? There seems to be no clearly defined objective here. Hope for a one time cash settlement is probably the most likely outcome, so why not focus their energy on that? What is the JAZ MEC trying to achieve? Do they have a clear mandate from their membership?
---------- ADS -----------
 
skkfdk
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2015 1:39 am

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by skkfdk »

most of the membership have no idea what is going on and what the MEC is actually seeking.
---------- ADS -----------
 
truedude
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 889
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 3:30 pm

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by truedude »

altiplano wrote: Wed Apr 02, 2025 7:56 am Just as TAs need to be voted by the membership, TAs need to be approved by the BOD. It's bullshit that whoever negotiated for Jazz obviously didn't have a mandate though.

Common employer has been tried before when Jazz was owned by AC and it failed. There are established delineations in the airline industry between mainline and regional carriers, including ones with common ownership, fill your boots, but it's a waste of time, effort, and money.
Except our pay-table came directly from Air Canada. Which again begs the question, who employs us? Ownership is not required for a successful common employer application. And AC does own some of Jazz, with a board seat.

And it was tried 30 years ago, when the law and interpretation of that law was different. The world changes, as does the legal landscape, along with far less tolerance for corporations to play this bizarre shell game with the goal of keeping wages suppressed.
---------- ADS -----------
 
cdnavater
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2572
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2021 11:25 am

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by cdnavater »

altiplano wrote: Wed Apr 02, 2025 7:56 am Just as TAs need to be voted by the membership, TAs need to be approved by the BOD. It's bullshit that whoever negotiated for Jazz obviously didn't have a mandate though.

Common employer has been tried before when Jazz was owned by AC and it failed. There are established delineations in the airline industry between mainline and regional carriers, including ones with common ownership, fill your boots, but it's a waste of time, effort, and money.
Suffice to say, if common employer is on the table lessons from the past would surely have been looked at, I would think anyhow.
The bottom line is ACs interference with our collective bargaining they became our de-facto employer, if Jazz negotiated in good faith with our group without AC stepping in, probably not but they did! They ordered a new pay table and who knows what else was changed at their demand.
In addition, there are several moving pieces that have AC involvement including them signing our training agreement with CAE, not sure about the ostrich approach you guys seem to be taking but don’t say we didn’t tell you
---------- ADS -----------
 
Chateau
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2022 10:04 pm

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by Chateau »

This is just sad.

Almost as sad as signing a 17 yrs deal and then expecting serious gains after the fact.
---------- ADS -----------
 
cdnavater
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2572
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2021 11:25 am

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by cdnavater »

Chateau wrote: Wed Apr 02, 2025 12:13 pm This is just sad.

Almost as sad as signing a 17 yrs deal and then expecting serious gains after the fact.
So, to you, the genius that you, are a 42% increase to top Captain wages and company paid benefits is not serious gains.
That said is apparently what was rejected by AC, what I ended up with was a 31% increase in net pay, this is part of the CIRB complaint.
The 20 year deal to be clear was designed to get rid of the crap competition that had dragged us down after AC pilots removed the scope protection in their contract that only allowed Jazz as tier 2. That was the catalyst for driving down regional pay because before that, Jazz pilots were the highest paid regional in the entire segment.
So, of course I like to poke the astronauts and get them going, you want to get an AC pilot riled up, talk about Jazz pilots getting a number on their list or paint Express on the side of a 37!
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
daedalusx
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 810
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 7:51 am

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by daedalusx »

>Signs a 17 year deal that supposed to give them back exclusivity.
>AC renegs on it not even halfway through the deal and start using PAL
>Cucked union just sits there and take it.

Are you ok ALPA?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Complex systems won’t survive the competence crisis
PostmasterGeneral
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 937
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:50 pm

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by PostmasterGeneral »

truedude wrote: Wed Apr 02, 2025 10:54 am
altiplano wrote: Wed Apr 02, 2025 7:56 am Just as TAs need to be voted by the membership, TAs need to be approved by the BOD. It's bullshit that whoever negotiated for Jazz obviously didn't have a mandate though.

Common employer has been tried before when Jazz was owned by AC and it failed. There are established delineations in the airline industry between mainline and regional carriers, including ones with common ownership, fill your boots, but it's a waste of time, effort, and money.
Except our pay-table came directly from Air Canada. Which again begs the question, who employs us? Ownership is not required for a successful common employer application. And AC does own some of Jazz, with a board seat.

And it was tried 30 years ago, when the law and interpretation of that law was different. The world changes, as does the legal landscape, along with far less tolerance for corporations to play this bizarre shell game with the goal of keeping wages suppressed.
The jazz pay table did not come from air Canada. Did the union tell you it did?

Jazz needed more money from AC to fulfill the contract as proposed to the pilots. AC simply said no, “we’re paying you this much to do our CPA flying, and not a penny more.” It was up to Jazz to decide how that money was spent, if it went to pay raises, aircraft, maintenance, etc. The fact that you believe AC directly meddled with the pilot pay scale, would explain why you think this common employer nonsense holds any water. Jazz wrote a check they couldn’t cash, AC wouldn’t pony up, and they were left holding the bag. The flow issue is another story, but to think AC directly set the pay scale is ludicrous.
---------- ADS -----------
 
truedude
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 889
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 3:30 pm

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by truedude »

PostmasterGeneral wrote: Wed Apr 02, 2025 6:04 pm
truedude wrote: Wed Apr 02, 2025 10:54 am
altiplano wrote: Wed Apr 02, 2025 7:56 am Just as TAs need to be voted by the membership, TAs need to be approved by the BOD. It's bullshit that whoever negotiated for Jazz obviously didn't have a mandate though.

Common employer has been tried before when Jazz was owned by AC and it failed. There are established delineations in the airline industry between mainline and regional carriers, including ones with common ownership, fill your boots, but it's a waste of time, effort, and money.
Except our pay-table came directly from Air Canada. Which again begs the question, who employs us? Ownership is not required for a successful common employer application. And AC does own some of Jazz, with a board seat.

And it was tried 30 years ago, when the law and interpretation of that law was different. The world changes, as does the legal landscape, along with far less tolerance for corporations to play this bizarre shell game with the goal of keeping wages suppressed.
The jazz pay table did not come from air Canada. Did the union tell you it did?

Jazz needed more money from AC to fulfill the contract as proposed to the pilots. AC simply said no, “we’re paying you this much to do our CPA flying, and not a penny more.” It was up to Jazz to decide how that money was spent, if it went to pay raises, aircraft, maintenance, etc. The fact that you believe AC directly meddled with the pilot pay scale, would explain why you think this common employer nonsense holds any water. Jazz wrote a check they couldn’t cash, AC wouldn’t pony up, and they were left holding the bag. The flow issue is another story, but to think AC directly set the pay scale is ludicrous.
No, it isn't. And the fact that you don't know that shows you are very misinformed. The pay table came from Air Canada. Seems like you don't have all the facts... or really any clue to what happened.
---------- ADS -----------
 
cdnavater
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2572
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2021 11:25 am

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by cdnavater »

PostmasterGeneral wrote: Wed Apr 02, 2025 6:04 pm
truedude wrote: Wed Apr 02, 2025 10:54 am
altiplano wrote: Wed Apr 02, 2025 7:56 am Just as TAs need to be voted by the membership, TAs need to be approved by the BOD. It's bullshit that whoever negotiated for Jazz obviously didn't have a mandate though.

Common employer has been tried before when Jazz was owned by AC and it failed. There are established delineations in the airline industry between mainline and regional carriers, including ones with common ownership, fill your boots, but it's a waste of time, effort, and money.
Except our pay-table came directly from Air Canada. Which again begs the question, who employs us? Ownership is not required for a successful common employer application. And AC does own some of Jazz, with a board seat.

And it was tried 30 years ago, when the law and interpretation of that law was different. The world changes, as does the legal landscape, along with far less tolerance for corporations to play this bizarre shell game with the goal of keeping wages suppressed.
The jazz pay table did not come from air Canada. Did the union tell you it did?

Jazz needed more money from AC to fulfill the contract as proposed to the pilots. AC simply said no, “we’re paying you this much to do our CPA flying, and not a penny more.” It was up to Jazz to decide how that money was spent, if it went to pay raises, aircraft, maintenance, etc. The fact that you believe AC directly meddled with the pilot pay scale, would explain why you think this common employer nonsense holds any water. Jazz wrote a check they couldn’t cash, AC wouldn’t pony up, and they were left holding the bag. The flow issue is another story, but to think AC directly set the pay scale is ludicrous.
The wording used was, AC slid a piece of paper across the table and said this is what we are willing to pay so we walked away, that’s what was communicated. A short time after that, not sure how much time passed, a new deal was reached and the union felt it was irresponsible to not let us vote on it.
I guess all will eventually be revealed, I promise not to rub it in your face, well maybe not.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
KenoraPilot
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 904
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 2:34 pm
Location: 'berta

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by KenoraPilot »

PostmasterGeneral wrote: Wed Apr 02, 2025 6:04 pm
truedude wrote: Wed Apr 02, 2025 10:54 am
altiplano wrote: Wed Apr 02, 2025 7:56 am Just as TAs need to be voted by the membership, TAs need to be approved by the BOD. It's bullshit that whoever negotiated for Jazz obviously didn't have a mandate though.

Common employer has been tried before when Jazz was owned by AC and it failed. There are established delineations in the airline industry between mainline and regional carriers, including ones with common ownership, fill your boots, but it's a waste of time, effort, and money.
Except our pay-table came directly from Air Canada. Which again begs the question, who employs us? Ownership is not required for a successful common employer application. And AC does own some of Jazz, with a board seat.

And it was tried 30 years ago, when the law and interpretation of that law was different. The world changes, as does the legal landscape, along with far less tolerance for corporations to play this bizarre shell game with the goal of keeping wages suppressed.
The jazz pay table did not come from air Canada. Did the union tell you it did?

Jazz needed more money from AC to fulfill the contract as proposed to the pilots. AC simply said no, “we’re paying you this much to do our CPA flying, and not a penny more.” It was up to Jazz to decide how that money was spent, if it went to pay raises, aircraft, maintenance, etc. The fact that you believe AC directly meddled with the pilot pay scale, would explain why you think this common employer nonsense holds any water. Jazz wrote a check they couldn’t cash, AC wouldn’t pony up, and they were left holding the bag. The flow issue is another story, but to think AC directly set the pay scale is ludicrous.
Completely incorrect
---------- ADS -----------
 
CaliforniaDreamin
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2023 6:57 am

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by CaliforniaDreamin »

cdnavater wrote: Wed Apr 02, 2025 1:42 pm
Chateau wrote: Wed Apr 02, 2025 12:13 pm This is just sad.

Almost as sad as signing a 17 yrs deal and then expecting serious gains after the fact.
So, to you, the genius that you, are a 42% increase to top Captain wages and company paid benefits is not serious gains.
That said is apparently what was rejected by AC, what I ended up with was a 31% increase in net pay, this is part of the CIRB complaint.
The 20 year deal to be clear was designed to get rid of the crap competition that had dragged us down after AC pilots removed the scope protection in their contract that only allowed Jazz as tier 2. That was the catalyst for driving down regional pay because before that, Jazz pilots were the highest paid regional in the entire segment.
So, of course I like to poke the astronauts and get them going, you want to get an AC pilot riled up, talk about Jazz pilots getting a number on their list or paint Express on the side of a 37!
It is true you were the highest paid regional.

What's wild is now you are the lowest and locked into a 20 yrs deal. Then you're hoping for more gains with no real leverage besides a botched flow agreement.

It's sad
---------- ADS -----------
 
truedude
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 889
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 3:30 pm

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by truedude »

CaliforniaDreamin wrote: Thu Apr 03, 2025 5:32 pm
cdnavater wrote: Wed Apr 02, 2025 1:42 pm
Chateau wrote: Wed Apr 02, 2025 12:13 pm This is just sad.

Almost as sad as signing a 17 yrs deal and then expecting serious gains after the fact.
So, to you, the genius that you, are a 42% increase to top Captain wages and company paid benefits is not serious gains.
That said is apparently what was rejected by AC, what I ended up with was a 31% increase in net pay, this is part of the CIRB complaint.
The 20 year deal to be clear was designed to get rid of the crap competition that had dragged us down after AC pilots removed the scope protection in their contract that only allowed Jazz as tier 2. That was the catalyst for driving down regional pay because before that, Jazz pilots were the highest paid regional in the entire segment.
So, of course I like to poke the astronauts and get them going, you want to get an AC pilot riled up, talk about Jazz pilots getting a number on their list or paint Express on the side of a 37!
It is true you were the highest paid regional.

What's wild is now you are the lowest and locked into a 20 yrs deal. Then you're hoping for more gains with no real leverage besides a botched flow agreement.

It's sad
What's sad is that this is a direct result of ACPA giving up the exclusive tier 2 flying to Jazz they had in the their contract, for absolutely nothing in return. They dragged the entire industry down with that one stupid move.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Man_in_the_sky
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 275
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2023 10:52 am

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by Man_in_the_sky »

At the end of the day, even if AC dictated the offer to the penny of every year/position. You guys voted for it and now you complain? And in the same tread, you’re trying to sell us that a 17 years contract was a good idea?

Come on.
---------- ADS -----------
 
fixnfly
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 164
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2012 4:21 am

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by fixnfly »

Man_in_the_sky wrote: Thu Apr 03, 2025 6:03 pm At the end of the day, even if AC dictated the offer to the penny of every year/position. You guys voted for it and now you complain? And in the same tread, you’re trying to sell us that a 17 years contract was a good idea?

Come on.
No a 17 year agreement was not a good idea. But to the senior pilots, it provided stability by guaranteeing that Jazz would be the exclusive regional carrier, and for the younger group, AC guaranteed that 60% of it's new hires would come from Jazz ensuring a proper flow to mainline so you can see why it passed the vote. Both of these promises were almost immediately ignored by the AC executive suite once that 17 year contract was signed. Air Canada really should face consequences for those blatant violations.
---------- ADS -----------
 
truedude
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 889
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 3:30 pm

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by truedude »

Man_in_the_sky wrote: Thu Apr 03, 2025 6:03 pm At the end of the day, even if AC dictated the offer to the penny of every year/position. You guys voted for it and now you complain? And in the same tread, you’re trying to sell us that a 17 years contract was a good idea?

Come on.
Of course we complain. Nothing wrong with taking what they offered, and also holding their feet to the fire for all the breaches of contract and interference in our contract talks. And if that rises to the bar of common employer, then it is what it is. Doesn't hurt to try and see what shakes out.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Man_in_the_sky
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 275
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2023 10:52 am

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by Man_in_the_sky »

fixnfly wrote: Thu Apr 03, 2025 6:28 pm
Man_in_the_sky wrote: Thu Apr 03, 2025 6:03 pm At the end of the day, even if AC dictated the offer to the penny of every year/position. You guys voted for it and now you complain? And in the same tread, you’re trying to sell us that a 17 years contract was a good idea?

Come on.
No a 17 year agreement was not a good idea. But to the senior pilots, it provided stability by guaranteeing that Jazz would be the exclusive regional carrier, and for the younger group, AC guaranteed that 60% of it's new hires would come from Jazz ensuring a proper flow to mainline so you can see why it passed the vote. Both of these promises were almost immediately ignored by the AC executive suite once that 17 year contract was signed. Air Canada really should face consequences for those blatant violations.
Provided stability at the expenses of the next B scale, no upgrades and more concessions, but that's another story.

This tread is about how the 285 concerned pilots were affected and will be compensated, noone else.
---------- ADS -----------
 
truedude
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 889
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 3:30 pm

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by truedude »

Man_in_the_sky wrote: Thu Apr 03, 2025 6:39 pm
fixnfly wrote: Thu Apr 03, 2025 6:28 pm
Man_in_the_sky wrote: Thu Apr 03, 2025 6:03 pm At the end of the day, even if AC dictated the offer to the penny of every year/position. You guys voted for it and now you complain? And in the same tread, you’re trying to sell us that a 17 years contract was a good idea?

Come on.
No a 17 year agreement was not a good idea. But to the senior pilots, it provided stability by guaranteeing that Jazz would be the exclusive regional carrier, and for the younger group, AC guaranteed that 60% of it's new hires would come from Jazz ensuring a proper flow to mainline so you can see why it passed the vote. Both of these promises were almost immediately ignored by the AC executive suite once that 17 year contract was signed. Air Canada really should face consequences for those blatant violations.
Provided stability at the expenses of the next B scale, no upgrades and more concessions, but that's another story.

This tread is about how the 285 concerned pilots were affected and will be compensated, noone else.
It's all part of the same application. You can't talk about one, without the other.
---------- ADS -----------
 
unionism101
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2021 11:25 am

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by unionism101 »

This is all so sad.

Jazz gave away their biggest hammer -> job action.

Job action is the core of union strength & leverage.

You sign a 20 yrs deal which is absolutely insane. You gave away your greatest tool, possibly forever.

Now you are relying on lawyers, who aren't even unionized themselves generally, as your only hope.

Lawyers will never you get a great deal. They will give you the scraps left over after they pay themselves handsomely.

And set themselves up for the next round, to then get paid more in the future.

In all honesty, this is a huge disaster in terms of union strategy.
---------- ADS -----------
 
truedude
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 889
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 3:30 pm

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by truedude »

unionism101 wrote: Fri Apr 04, 2025 6:57 am This is all so sad.

Jazz gave away their biggest hammer -> job action.

Job action is the core of union strength & leverage.

You sign a 20 yrs deal which is absolutely insane. You gave away your greatest tool, possibly forever.

Now you are relying on lawyers, who aren't even unionized themselves generally, as your only hope.

Lawyers will never you get a great deal. They will give you the scraps left over after they pay themselves handsomely.

And set themselves up for the next round, to then get paid more in the future.

In all honesty, this is a huge disaster in terms of union strategy.
There weren't a lot of good options after ACPA gave up the tier 2 exclusivity clause for nothing in return. Air Canada managment was quick to start parting us out to the lowest bidder, to witch there was at the time and endless supply of pilots prepared to do the flying for cheaper and cheaper, led by Encore.

And the lawyers arent doing this work for a % of the outcome. And the CIRB has a lot of power should they decide AC acted inappropriately. But the current state of Jazz can all be traced back to ACPA giving up the tier 2 exclusivity.
---------- ADS -----------
 
3rdWorldClassPilot
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 67
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2024 1:33 pm

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by 3rdWorldClassPilot »

truedude wrote: Fri Apr 04, 2025 7:53 am
unionism101 wrote: Fri Apr 04, 2025 6:57 am This is all so sad.

Jazz gave away their biggest hammer -> job action.

Job action is the core of union strength & leverage.

You sign a 20 yrs deal which is absolutely insane. You gave away your greatest tool, possibly forever.

Now you are relying on lawyers, who aren't even unionized themselves generally, as your only hope.

Lawyers will never you get a great deal. They will give you the scraps left over after they pay themselves handsomely.

And set themselves up for the next round, to then get paid more in the future.

In all honesty, this is a huge disaster in terms of union strategy.
There weren't a lot of good options after ACPA gave up the tier 2 exclusivity clause for nothing in return. Air Canada managment was quick to start parting us out to the lowest bidder, to witch there was at the time and endless supply of pilots prepared to do the flying for cheaper and cheaper, led by Encore.

And the lawyers arent doing this work for a % of the outcome. And the CIRB has a lot of power should they decide AC acted inappropriately. But the current state of Jazz can all be traced back to ACPA giving up the tier 2 exclusivity.
Not arguing to give up scope, ever. We had more scope concessions in our last contract even.

However, can you name one major airline in the entire world that does Tier 2 flying?
---------- ADS -----------
 
hithere
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 598
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 8:05 am

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by hithere »

Air Canada flew 50 seat CRJs in the 1990s and early 2000s and E175s in the mid 2000s to mid 2010s
You don’t have to look far, just in the mirror
---------- ADS -----------
 
3rdWorldClassPilot
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 67
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2024 1:33 pm

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by 3rdWorldClassPilot »

hithere wrote: Fri Apr 04, 2025 8:23 am Air Canada flew 50 seat CRJs in the 1990s and early 2000s and E175s in the mid 2000s to mid 2010s
You don’t have to look far, just in the mirror
Ok, name another major airline that flies regional jets...In the entire world.
---------- ADS -----------
 
hithere
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 598
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 8:05 am

Re: Grievance update for the 285ish former Jazz pilots affected by Flow

Post by hithere »

What difference does the rest of the world make? This is the Canadian reality
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Air Canada”