Does anyone know what the MEC is actually trying to get out of the ULP?

[Nick678]

Look like dumb Jazz lawyer did not file at the right place

many more year of delay to come, thanks for the legal team.

Yup the Jazz MEC whole strategy just got flushed, you can rip up that CPA it’s not worth the paper it’s written on.

[flyingcanuck]

Look like dumb Jazz lawyer did not file at the right place

many more year of delay to come, thanks for the legal team.

Yup the Jazz MEC whole strategy just got flushed, you can rip up that CPA it’s not worth the paper it’s written on.

What happened?

[Bede]

Look like dumb Jazz lawyer did not file at the right place

many more year of delay to come, thanks for the legal team.

Yup the Jazz MEC whole strategy just got flushed, you can rip up that CPA it’s not worth the paper it’s written on.

I think it's premature to say that. The CIRB ruled that Air Canada is not the de facto employer of Jazz pilots and removed Air Canada as a respondent to the complaint. This is strictly between Jazz and ALPA, not Jazz/Air Canada and ALPA

The CIRB will decide, "in the coming weeks", the following questions:

1. Has Jazz breached its duty to bargain in good faith, or interfered in the union’s ability to represent its members by its inability to implement article 3.14 of the collective agreement in force between Jazz and ALPA?
2. Is this issue more appropriately dealt with through the grievance arbitration process?

[Nick678]

Look like dumb Jazz lawyer did not file at the right place

many more year of delay to come, thanks for the legal team.

Yup the Jazz MEC whole strategy just got flushed, you can rip up that CPA it’s not worth the paper it’s written on.

I think it's premature to say that. The CIRB ruled that Air Canada is not the de facto employer of Jazz pilots and removed Air Canada as a respondent to the complaint. This is strictly between Jazz and ALPA, not Jazz/Air Canada and ALPA

The CIRB will decide, "in the coming weeks", the following questions:

1. Has Jazz breached its duty to bargain in good faith, or interfered in the union’s ability to represent its members by its inability to implement article 3.14 of the collective agreement in force between Jazz and ALPA?
2. Is this issue more appropriately dealt with through the grievance arbitration process?

The whole point of filing the ULP was to include Air Canada. They might as well have just filled grievances and not wasted 2-3 years.

[rudder]

Yup the Jazz MEC whole strategy just got flushed, you can rip up that CPA it’s not worth the paper it’s written on.

I think it's premature to say that. The CIRB ruled that Air Canada is not the de facto employer of Jazz pilots and removed Air Canada as a respondent to the complaint. This is strictly between Jazz and ALPA, not Jazz/Air Canada and ALPA

The CIRB will decide, "in the coming weeks", the following questions:

1. Has Jazz breached its duty to bargain in good faith, or interfered in the union’s ability to represent its members by its inability to implement article 3.14 of the collective agreement in force between Jazz and ALPA?
2. Is this issue more appropriately dealt with through the grievance arbitration process?

The whole point of filing the ULP was to include Air Canada. They might as well have just filled grievances and not wasted 2-3 years.

Wow. 27 months later and basically all that might be available is a limited scope grievance (section 3.14 Pilot Movement to Air Canada)?

After all the chest pounding and guarantees of victory - looks like there will be no new pay scale, no new cars in the driveway, and no new boats at the lake. And certainly no new numbers on the AC pilot seniority list.

The lesson to be learned here is to reign in expectations. But just watch, some will come out of the woodwork chanting “the fight shall continue”. Good luck with that.

Whatever negotiating leverage that may have existed was squandered. Litigation opportunities and outcomes now dramatically reduced. And the third party that was going to hammer AC and AC ALPA with an iron fist has released both parties from liability or consequence.

Not sure what comes next but this should be a big reality check for those that work at Jazz and for those aspiring to work at Jazz. You don't see this type of drama (or disappointment) anywhere else.

[hithere]

The leverage was not squandered, it was used as the only means possible to get AC management to the table for mediation. And it got the raises and reduced health care premiums just before the ULP was launched. AC was trying to convince the board that they didn’t belong in the talks since the beginning of the ULP. And the board held them there for 27 months and then let them go last week. Not sure what else the JAZ MEC could have done.

[truedude]

I think it's premature to say that. The CIRB ruled that Air Canada is not the de facto employer of Jazz pilots and removed Air Canada as a respondent to the complaint. This is strictly between Jazz and ALPA, not Jazz/Air Canada and ALPA

The CIRB will decide, "in the coming weeks", the following questions:

The whole point of filing the ULP was to include Air Canada. They might as well have just filled grievances and not wasted 2-3 years.

Wow. 27 months later and basically all that might be available is a limited scope grievance (section 3.14 Pilot Movement to Air Canada)?

After all the chest pounding and guarantees of victory - looks like there will be no new pay scale, no new cars in the driveway, and no new boats at the lake. And certainly no new numbers on the AC pilot seniority list.

The lesson to be learned here is to reign in expectations. But just watch, some will come out of the woodwork chanting “the fight shall continue”. Good luck with that.

Whatever negotiating leverage that may have existed was squandered. Litigation opportunities and outcomes now dramatically reduced. And the third party that was going to hammer AC and AC ALPA with an iron fist has released both parties from liability or consequence.

Not sure what comes next but this should be a big reality check for those that work at Jazz and for those aspiring to work at Jazz. You don't see this type of drama (or disappointment) anywhere else.

The board also included this in their decision...


“To the extent that ALPA is alleging that it is the joint conduct of Air Canada and Jazz, through their commercial agreements, that has the effect of interfering in ALPA’s representation rights, those allegations and arguments raise issues of common control and direction that are more appropriately raised and addressed through a single employer application. They fall outside the applicable considerations of the present unfair labour practice complaint.”

That is not a nothing statement.

[Tbayer2021]

The whole point of filing the ULP was to include Air Canada. They might as well have just filled grievances and not wasted 2-3 years.

Wow. 27 months later and basically all that might be available is a limited scope grievance (section 3.14 Pilot Movement to Air Canada)?

After all the chest pounding and guarantees of victory - looks like there will be no new pay scale, no new cars in the driveway, and no new boats at the lake. And certainly no new numbers on the AC pilot seniority list.

The lesson to be learned here is to reign in expectations. But just watch, some will come out of the woodwork chanting “the fight shall continue”. Good luck with that.

Whatever negotiating leverage that may have existed was squandered. Litigation opportunities and outcomes now dramatically reduced. And the third party that was going to hammer AC and AC ALPA with an iron fist has released both parties from liability or consequence.

Not sure what comes next but this should be a big reality check for those that work at Jazz and for those aspiring to work at Jazz. You don't see this type of drama (or disappointment) anywhere else.

The board also included this in their decision...


“To the extent that ALPA is alleging that it is the joint conduct of Air Canada and Jazz, through their commercial agreements, that has the effect of interfering in ALPA’s representation rights, those allegations and arguments raise issues of common control and direction that are more appropriately raised and addressed through a single employer application. They fall outside the applicable considerations of the present unfair labour practice complaint.”

That is not a nothing statement.

There you go. First guy out of the woodwork.

[Dime]

A lot of misinformation on here as usual.

Section 35 cannot be exercised until all other options have been explored first, such as mediation, ULP, mutual talks and negotiations.

The objective of the ULP, was to get Jazz in front of AC and ACA and Jazz to talk about the issues. Jazz has never had an audience with AC or ACA before.

Not saying something will eventually come of the talks but seems like they had to go down this route.

ACs reach and pockets are far and deep so knows …

[truedude]

Wow. 27 months later and basically all that might be available is a limited scope grievance (section 3.14 Pilot Movement to Air Canada)?

After all the chest pounding and guarantees of victory - looks like there will be no new pay scale, no new cars in the driveway, and no new boats at the lake. And certainly no new numbers on the AC pilot seniority list.

The lesson to be learned here is to reign in expectations. But just watch, some will come out of the woodwork chanting “the fight shall continue”. Good luck with that.

Whatever negotiating leverage that may have existed was squandered. Litigation opportunities and outcomes now dramatically reduced. And the third party that was going to hammer AC and AC ALPA with an iron fist has released both parties from liability or consequence.

Not sure what comes next but this should be a big reality check for those that work at Jazz and for those aspiring to work at Jazz. You don't see this type of drama (or disappointment) anywhere else.

The board also included this in their decision...


“To the extent that ALPA is alleging that it is the joint conduct of Air Canada and Jazz, through their commercial agreements, that has the effect of interfering in ALPA’s representation rights, those allegations and arguments raise issues of common control and direction that are more appropriately raised and addressed through a single employer application. They fall outside the applicable considerations of the present unfair labour practice complaint.”

That is not a nothing statement.

There you go. First guy out of the woodwork.

And you mean what by that?

[Bede]

The board also included this in their decision...

“To the extent that ALPA is alleging that it is the joint conduct of Air Canada and Jazz, through their commercial agreements, that has the effect of interfering in ALPA’s representation rights, those allegations and arguments raise issues of common control and direction that are more appropriately raised and addressed through a single employer application. They fall outside the applicable considerations of the present unfair labour practice complaint.”

That is not a nothing statement.

Might I remind you of one of your recent posts:

You simply don't have all the facts, and really have shown a poor understanding in general of what is happening.

Maybe it's you that has a poor understanding of what is happening. You've been spouting off how the CIRB will order a single employer, with such certainty,and now it appears that such an application hasn't even been filed.

[truedude]

The board also included this in their decision...

“To the extent that ALPA is alleging that it is the joint conduct of Air Canada and Jazz, through their commercial agreements, that has the effect of interfering in ALPA’s representation rights, those allegations and arguments raise issues of common control and direction that are more appropriately raised and addressed through a single employer application. They fall outside the applicable considerations of the present unfair labour practice complaint.”

That is not a nothing statement.

Might I remind you of one of your recent posts:

You simply don't have all the facts, and really have shown a poor understanding in general of what is happening.

Maybe it's you that has a poor understanding of what is happening. You've been spouting off how the CIRB will order a single employer, with such certainty,and now it appears that such an application hasn't even been filed.

Never claimed that it had been. Seems like we have been given an invitation to file one.

[PostmasterGeneral]

Just came here to see if truedude was still trying to convince himself that there was some windfall gains to be made. Was not disappointed.

[Bede]

Never claimed that it had been. Seems like we have been given an invitation to file one.

Your MEC is not going to file a s. 35 application.

[truedude]

Just came here to see if truedude was still trying to convince himself that there was some windfall gains to be made. Was not disappointed.

When the board specifically mentions that a common employer is the better avenue to deal with these issues, people should pay attention. But fine, dismiss it as if it were nothing. I guarantee you ACA lawyers know exactly what and why that statement was specifically included.

[truedude]

Never claimed that it had been. Seems like we have been given an invitation to file one.

Your MEC is not going to file a s. 35 application.

Yes, they are. I know that one for a fact.

[Bede]

Never claimed that it had been. Seems like we have been given an invitation to file one.

Your MEC is not going to file a s. 35 application.

Yes, they are. I know that one for a fact.

They can't. A s.35 application has to come from the bargaining agent, ie ALPA national, not the MEC.

[truedude]

Your MEC is not going to file a s. 35 application.

Yes, they are. I know that one for a fact.

They can't. A s.35 application has to come from the bargaining agent, ie ALPA national, not the MEC. ALPA won't file it because they agreed not to in the merger agreement with ACPA.

Just watch! And refusal to do so would mean Jazz pilots could file a failure to represent suit against ALPA.

Air Canada signed a lot of things too... turns out signing things doesn't mean much.

[Tbayer2021]

Yes, they are. I know that one for a fact.

They can't. A s.35 application has to come from the bargaining agent, ie ALPA national, not the MEC. ALPA won't file it because they agreed not to in the merger agreement with ACPA.

Just watch! And refusal to do so would mean Jazz pilots could file a failure to represent suit against ALPA.

Air Canada signed a lot of things too... turns out signing things doesn't mean much.

truedude is going to retire years from now and still be claiming common employer is right around the corner. If you want that so bad, why don't you just apply to AC? At this point you have a better chance of ending up at AC by going to Transat and hoping AC wants to buy them again than waiting for a common employer judgment.

[PostmasterGeneral]

I'm just glad this whole fiasco is finally over with and the issue can be put to rest, once and for all. Time to focus on the next round of negotiations, and improving the profession as a whole for all pilots in Canada no matter which carrier they work for.

[truedude]

I'm just glad this whole fiasco is finally over with and the issue can be put to rest, once and for all. Time to focus on the next round of negotiations, and improving the profession as a whole for all pilots in Canada no matter which carrier they work for.

This isn't even remotely over. Our executive has already clearly indicated their intent to pursue common employer if this was the result. Which means they planned for it. And given the CIRB giving us a pretty clear message that is the avenue to be taken, we will absolutely take it.

[truedude]

They can't. A s.35 application has to come from the bargaining agent, ie ALPA national, not the MEC. ALPA won't file it because they agreed not to in the merger agreement with ACPA.

Just watch! And refusal to do so would mean Jazz pilots could file a failure to represent suit against ALPA.

Air Canada signed a lot of things too... turns out signing things doesn't mean much.

truedude is going to retire years from now and still be claiming common employer is right around the corner. If you want that so bad, why don't you just apply to AC? At this point you have a better chance of ending up at AC by going to Transat and hoping AC wants to buy them again than waiting for a common employer judgment.

What I wanted was AC to follow the agreement they made. What I wanted was them to stay out of our contract negotiations.

They didn't, and the damage is nearly beyond repair to Jazz at this point. So if the only avenue to hold AC to account is a common employer, then absolutely we take it.

But don't mistake my wanting to see AC held to account with any desire to work there.

[Bede]

Just watch! And refusal to do so would mean Jazz pilots could file a failure to represent suit against ALPA.

Don't worry, I'm watching:) There won't be a single employer application filed.

I think you're referring to a Duty of Fair Representation complaint with the CIRB, not a suit. I also think that you don't understand how DFR works. If you're legitimately interested in learning more about DFR, here's a link: https://decisia.lexum.com/cirb-ccri/cir ... ocument.do

I'll reiterate my point that I made earlier. Yes, the Jazz pilots got screwed. Yes, they deserved to be made whole. But, once again, they're misplaying their hand- just like they have for the last 30 years. Nothing changes.

[truedude]

Just watch! And refusal to do so would mean Jazz pilots could file a failure to represent suit against ALPA.

Don't worry, I'm watching:) There won't be a single employer application filed.

I think you're referring to a Duty of Fair Representation complaint with the CIRB, not a suit. I also think that you don't understand how DFR works. If you're legitimately interested in learning more about DFR, here's a link: https://decisia.lexum.com/cirb-ccri/cir ... ocument.do

I'll reiterate my point that I made earlier. Yes, the Jazz pilots got screwed. Yes, they deserved to be made whole. But, once again, they're misplaying their hand- just like they have for the last 30 years. Nothing changes.

Jazz will 100% be filing one. And I would be more worried about a DFR coming to WJA for your that secret agreement the WJA made with Westjet and you both refuse to turn over. Wonder what is in that?

Im any case, I am more familiar with what is happening at the Jazz level, and it is 100% coming unless the issues are resolved before it is drafted and filed.

No union can legally sign away protected rights of workers it represents, nor can they refuse to file claims for those workers based on signed agreements. To believe that, you are really out of touch with reality, and the Canadian legal system.

And a class action suit can be filed against ALPA for DFR behavior. The board has made it pretty clear here, that that is the avenue we should be pursuing. And we will.

[Bede]

A class action DFR lawsuit. That's totally how the legal system works.