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

[PostmasterGeneral]

It’s not defeatist to throw in the towel at this point. There’s no point in wasting all of that time and money. It’s a bit of a moot point, as ALPA National won’t pursue it anyway, but you’d have better luck if you regroup, and go after a grievance against the company for the guys who got screwed on flow.

[truedude]

It’s not defeatist to throw in the towel at this point. There’s no point in wasting all of that time and money. It’s a bit of a moot point, as ALPA National won’t pursue it anyway, but you’d have better luck if you regroup, and go after a grievance against the company for the guys who got screwed on flow.

The guys who were screwed the most, aren't on property anymore. Jazz ALPA represents current employees. And even if we win the fact that that section of the contract is breached, Jazz will simply shrug and say they had no control over it, which is true. There is no mechanism that will allow an arbitrator to extract anything from AC, the ones that really violated the agreement. And there is nothing saying ALPA national won't pursue it. You are talking about something else, about general merger rules won't apply if AC buys a regional. But we have full ability to file a s.35.

[Bede]

Your analysis should also be the analysis of any competent and credible legal resource retained to advise on the matter.

That legal analysis might not be that there is a ‘zero’ chance of a sustained petition, but it should be the reasonable assessment of the odds of achieving the relief requested. 1 in 2? 1 in 5? 1 in 10? 1 in 100? Thus far, it appears that any response above zero is a low enough threshold for the JAZ MEC to file.

I'm just looking at case law and providing my lay opinion based on my experience. It's free advice so take it for what you paid for it. The probability of success is not 0, but it's much, much lower than the adjectives used by some posters. ("Clearly", "obviously", "guaranteed").

The Jazz pilots got screwed. That is a matter of fact. But being right doesn’t guarantee success in any form of litigation. Thus far, the CIRB has rejected all remedy requested in the ULP filing. The JAZ MEC might prevail in a grievance to arbitration but receive less than they hope for in the form of remedy. And just because the CIRB has suggested that some of the issues raised in the ULP filing might be more properly considered in the context of an s35 petition does not guarantee that such filing will result in a positive decision.

Absolutely 100%.

History is the teacher. The history of the Jazz/ACR pilots in litigation is not a single victory. Success has only come when the Jazz pilots were smart enough to recognize and exploit an opportunity. Sometimes those opportunities present themselves, and sometimes they have to be created. Unfortunately, in the recent timeframe that ship may have already sailed.

I see the same issue as I saw 20 years ago when I was there. Jazz pilots get screwed. Maximalist litigation ensues. An echo chamber develops where pilots think success is "guaranteed" and make career decisions based on what they hear in the echo chamber. Litigation fails and pilots are disappointed. Cycle repeats.

Like I keep saying, there won't be a s. 35 application, let alone a successful one. And there won't be a class action lawsuit against ALPA.

[PostmasterGeneral]

True dude, Bede is giving you sound advice. It may not be what you want to hear, but facts are facts. Nobody is denying that Jazz pilots got screwed. The unfortunate truth, however, is that in this instance, there really is no viable remedy. Sometimes life isn’t fair, sometimes the big corporations get away with it, and sometimes the “little guy” gets screwed. That’s the way it is.

[truedude]

Name one thing that anyone here has posted that is even remotely possible if the other party won't engage. You can't negotiate with a company that refuses to want to negotiate. You can't bargain with another pilot group that really has nothing to lose or win by doing anything. The only thing here has been empty rhetoric, with no plan on how to achieve any of it, except rainbows and happy thoughts. You can't bargain with an employer that does not want to bargain. I don't understand what it is about that you can't wrap your head around?

So name one thing that anyone has listed, that is in any way possible if the main company that determines what we get paid, wants to do nothing, and ignores any and all agreements it signs anyways the moment it becomes to burdensome to follow.

I've mentioned a couple times that you should file a grievance for the pilots screwed by the flow.

As for the Air Canada "interference", that's annoying but there is no legal remedy. As multiple cases before the CIRB has indicated (Atomic Energy, Bell ExpressVu, etc.) a customer (AC) telling their supplier (Jazz) that they won't pay for the salaries in a costs plus business arrangement is not a cause for the Board to exercise it's discretionary powers despite that it may meet the five elements found in Murray Hill Limousine.

Bede,

Your analysis should also be the analysis of any competent and credible legal resource retained to advise on the matter.

That legal analysis might not be that there is a ‘zero’ chance of a sustained petition, but it should be the reasonable assessment of the odds of achieving the relief requested. 1 in 2? 1 in 5? 1 in 10? 1 in 100? Thus far, it appears that any response above zero is a low enough threshold for the JAZ MEC to file.

The sentiment “we need to do something” has translated in to “we will do anything”.

I hope that you are correct that the ultimate consent for an s35 filing will rest with ALPA National and not an MEC.

Maximum leverage (if any) was during the mediation phase involving the CIRB. Now, the residual rhetoric appears more like an angry man shaking his fist at the sky.

The Jazz pilots got screwed. That is a matter of fact. But being right doesn’t guarantee success in any form of litigation. Thus far, the CIRB has rejected all remedy requested in the ULP filing. The JAZ MEC might prevail in a grievance to arbitration but receive less than they hope for in the form of remedy. And just because the CIRB has suggested that some of the issues raised in the ULP filing might be more properly considered in the context of an s35 petition does not guarantee that such filing will result in a positive decision.

This is sad to watch and most certainly frustrating for the Jazz pilots who are seeking compliance with the terms of their CBA which provide for some degree of job security and the negotiated career progression opportunity with AC. But that frustration cannot translate in to an ‘us against the world’ mentality. Without allies, it will not end well. Who are the allies? Please do not say it is just the lawyers being paid by the JAZ MEC. And it is most certainly not the CIRB. It is also painfully evident that the ‘us’ at Jazz is a divided group both at the elected level as well as within the membership. 50%+1 is not good enough when you presume to fight a war.

The reality for the Jazz pilots is that the true employer is a CPA carrier. It is unlikely that will change anytime soon so base expectations on that paradigm. And suggestions of civil litigation (which per ALPA Policy would have to be member funded) speak to desperation borne from failure in every other forum.

History is the teacher. The history of the Jazz/ACR pilots in litigation is not a single victory. Success has only come when the Jazz pilots were smart enough to recognize and exploit an opportunity. Sometimes those opportunities present themselves, and sometimes they have to be created. Unfortunately, in the recent timeframe that ship may have already sailed.

It isn't just about odds of success, it is about lack of other options. We can't will another option into existences. You have to play the cards you have, not wish you have better cards, or hope better ones show up tomorrow. These are the cards we have. Literally the only cards.

So we either play them, or we fold. And then we have nothing.

[truedude]

True dude, Bede is giving you sound advice. It may not be what you want to hear, but facts are facts. Nobody is denying that Jazz pilots got screwed. The unfortunate truth, however, is that in this instance, there really is no viable remedy. Sometimes life isn’t fair, sometimes the big corporations get away with it, and sometimes the “little guy” gets screwed. That’s the way it is.

I know how the Westjet pilots played the merger, and they definitely did some strange things. I don't trust their advice, because it is bad advice. And as long as we can still file a s.35, it isnt over. But it is over of we decide to not even play.

[truedude]

Your analysis should also be the analysis of any competent and credible legal resource retained to advise on the matter.

That legal analysis might not be that there is a ‘zero’ chance of a sustained petition, but it should be the reasonable assessment of the odds of achieving the relief requested. 1 in 2? 1 in 5? 1 in 10? 1 in 100? Thus far, it appears that any response above zero is a low enough threshold for the JAZ MEC to file.

I'm just looking at case law and providing my lay opinion based on my experience. It's free advice so take it for what you paid for it. The probability of success is not 0, but it's much, much lower than the adjectives used by some posters. ("Clearly", "obviously", "guaranteed").

The Jazz pilots got screwed. That is a matter of fact. But being right doesn’t guarantee success in any form of litigation. Thus far, the CIRB has rejected all remedy requested in the ULP filing. The JAZ MEC might prevail in a grievance to arbitration but receive less than they hope for in the form of remedy. And just because the CIRB has suggested that some of the issues raised in the ULP filing might be more properly considered in the context of an s35 petition does not guarantee that such filing will result in a positive decision.

Absolutely 100%.

History is the teacher. The history of the Jazz/ACR pilots in litigation is not a single victory. Success has only come when the Jazz pilots were smart enough to recognize and exploit an opportunity. Sometimes those opportunities present themselves, and sometimes they have to be created. Unfortunately, in the recent timeframe that ship may have already sailed.

I see the same issue as I saw 20 years ago when I was there. Jazz pilots get screwed. Maximalist litigation ensues. An echo chamber develops where pilots think success is "guaranteed" and make career decisions based on what they hear in the echo chamber. Litigation fails and pilots are disappointed. Cycle repeats.

Like I keep saying, there won't be a s. 35 application, let alone a successful one. And there won't be a class action lawsuit against ALPA.

ALPA international has said and done nothing that limits our ability to file a s.35. And if our lawyers say there is a case and they interfere in us filing it, then thay absolutely represents a DFR. As a member of westjet ALPA, you should be very familiar those by now.

And a civil suit would be agaisnt AC as we have a signed agreement from them to us. But not sure the viability of that.

[rudder]

It isn't just about odds of success, it is about lack of other options. We can't will another option into existences. You have to play the cards you have, not wish you have better cards, or hope better ones show up tomorrow. These are the cards we have. Literally the only cards.

So we either play them, or we fold. And then we have nothing.

Can we at least agree on what is NOT going to happen?

There is no outcome via litigation that will see the Jazz pilots revert to the pay scales contained in TA1. There is no outcome via litigation that will see the Jazz pilots receive damages for the failure to implement TA1. There is no outcome via litigation that will see the AC SSL reordered to reflect historical or future non-compliance by Jazz or AC with the terms of the flow mechanism contained in the Jazz CBA.

So what is left? An arbitration over the alleged (but seemingly evident) flow breach by Jazz. Realistically the only available remedy is an order of compliance (against Jazz who can in turn deal with AC ensuring compliance or perhaps temporarily increasing flow rate to make up for any historical shortfall) and some subjective calculation of financial damage for the affected flow pilots WHO ARE STILL AT JAZZ. That is a grievance worth pursuing, but expectations of outcome and who might be eligible for financial compensation (if any) are limited.

I understand from postings on this web board that there is an alleged ‘letter from AC to the JAZ MEC’ somewhere. I have no idea what is contained in that letter. I have no idea if it an enforceable document or if it would have any meaningful evidentiary value in any other legal proceeding. But I would hope that is not solely what anybody is hanging their hat on in a broader argument of civil damage liability or declaration of a single employer.

Regarding a potential DFR - don’t forget that ALPA holds the bargaining rights for both Jazz and AC. ALPA must act in the best interest of BOTH parties. There is no slam dunk case to be made there either considering the rights of the AC pilots and it would be a return to the thus far unfriendly CIRB.

I hope for the best for the Jazz pilots. But now is the time to take a deep breath and recalibrate. It is also time for the leadership to go to the Jazz pilot group at large and share the diverse opinions that may exist at the decision making table. The elected reps work on behalf of the membership. Less talking and more listening might be a beneficial next step.

[hithere]

So it’s a waste of time/member dues to file a section 35 but a good use of time/member dues to file a grievance for the violation of flow to provide compensation to people who don’t even work for Jazz anymore? How the hell does that make any sense?
As for grieving the exclusivity clause violation and bargaining interference, the only entity capable of providing compensation for that(because Jazz CPA margins are thin) is AC. So how does one get anything from grievances with Jazz?


I’m saddened that no one has replied to my post

[Bede]

ALPA international has said and done nothing that limits our ability to file a s.35.

You still don't get it. It's not your MEC that files it- it's ALPA National. If it was MEC's that files s. 35 applications, the Encore MEC would have filed an application a long time ago. They have a far greater claim to single employer that Jazz does. It literally is the same people in the room and the same people who agree to the TA's. No one disputes that.

... DFR. As a member of westjet ALPA, you should be very familiar those by now.

Meh. Frivolous DFR's make me laugh. Pilots know about DFR's about as much as they know about s. 35. Here's some reading. https://decisia.lexum.com/cirb-ccri/cir ... ocument.do

[truedude]

ALPA international has said and done nothing that limits our ability to file a s.35.

You still don't get it. It's not your MEC that files it- it's ALPA National. If it was MEC's that files s. 35 applications, the Encore MEC would have filed an application a long time ago. They have a far greater claim to single employer that Jazz does. It literally is the same people in the room and the same people who agree to the TA's. No one disputes that.

... DFR. As a member of westjet ALPA, you should be very familiar those by now.

Meh. Frivolous DFR's make me laugh. Pilots know about DFR's about as much as they know about s. 35. Here's some reading. https://decisia.lexum.com/cirb-ccri/cir ... ocument.do

Encore does not have a stronger case than Jazz pilots. And again, there is nothing preventing Jazz from filing it. It is already drafted and ready to go. You have zero idea what you are talking about in this case.

And again, I know how westjet ALPA operated during the merger, and you guys had all the lawyers scratching their heads with the crap you were arguing, including your own.

[Mr. North]

Encore does not have a stronger case than Jazz pilots.

How can you honestly say that with a straight face? WestJet ownership of Encore is the starting point, not the obstacle. The employer relationship already exists. Jazz would be asking the CIRB to impose one after the fact, without ownership, by recharacterizing a commercial CPA. That is a much higher bar.

The uncomfortable truth is aviation is full of bad actors and incompetence, and careers are often shaped more by timing and luck than by fairness. Not every wrong gets corrected, and litigation is not going to deliver the outcomes some are expecting here. The real question is whether escalating now actually improves your future position or just trades leverage and opportunity for process and disappointment.

If I were a Jazz pilot I would reflect on some of the great posts by Rudder and Bede (among others).

[Bede]

It is already drafted and ready to go. You have zero idea what you are talking about in this case.

So why hasn't it been filed?

And again, I know how westjet ALPA operated during the merger, and you guys had all the lawyers scratching their heads with the crap you were arguing, including your own.

Where do you come up with this crap?

[hithere]

So it’s a waste of time/member dues to file a section 35 but a good use of time/member dues to file a grievance for the violation of flow to provide compensation to people who don’t even work for Jazz anymore? How the hell does that make any sense?
As for grieving the exclusivity clause violation and bargaining interference, the only entity capable of providing compensation for that(because Jazz CPA margins are thin) is AC. So how does one get anything from grievances with Jazz management?

I posted this earlier but no one addressed my concerns.i expected so much more from this well of knowledge that is avcanada, so here it is again.

[truedude]

Encore does not have a stronger case than Jazz pilots.

How can you honestly say that with a straight face? WestJet ownership of Encore is the starting point, not the obstacle. The employer relationship already exists. Jazz would be asking the CIRB to impose one after the fact, without ownership, by recharacterizing a commercial CPA. That is a much higher bar.

The uncomfortable truth is aviation is full of bad actors and incompetence, and careers are often shaped more by timing and luck than by fairness. Not every wrong gets corrected, and litigation is not going to deliver the outcomes some are expecting here. The real question is whether escalating now actually improves your future position or just trades leverage and opportunity for process and disappointment.

If I were a Jazz pilot I would reflect on some of the great posts by Rudder and Bede (among others).

Ownership doesn’t really matter, as it is how the lines between the companies are maintained. In our case, they didnt just set targets, they dismissed our negotiated agreement and imposed their own pay table. That is direct interference, among other things. Look up the law, and previous cases.

Bede is a tool. They were a disaster during the merger, made arguments nobody could understand, and generally lost. Now they are facing a DFR, along with a ULP for an agreement they signed in secret with Westjet that neither party wants to reveal. Their chair and vice chair resigned shortly after the DFR was filed. He is the worst person to listen too.

And Rudder is retired, yet still can't get off avcanada.

The people to listen to, are our lawyers.

[truedude]

It is already drafted and ready to go. You have zero idea what you are talking about in this case.

So why hasn't it been filed?

And again, I know how westjet ALPA operated during the merger, and you guys had all the lawyers scratching their heads with the crap you were arguing, including your own.

Where do you come up with this crap?

The LEC has yet to give direction, as they have yet to be briefed by legal. There is no rush to file it. As pointed out, it is a multi year process, so a few months waiting to file is irrelevant.

And as far as where I got my information, I'll leave that to your imagination. But you guys made fools of yourselves, and if you think otherwise, then you lack any sense of self awareness.

[hithere]

So it’s a waste of time/member dues to file a section 35 but a good use of time/member dues to file a grievance for the violation of flow to provide compensation to people who don’t even work for Jazz anymore? How the hell does that make any sense?
As for grieving the exclusivity clause violation and bargaining interference, the only entity capable of providing compensation for that(because Jazz CPA margins are thin) is AC. So how does one get anything from grievances with Jazz management?

I posted this earlier but no one addressed my concerns.i expected so much more from this well of knowledge that is avcanada, so here it is again

Surely Rudder, with your wealth of ALPA experience, can explain why currrent Jazz pilots should use dues money to litigate grievances to compensate pilots that are are now at Air Canada?

[truedude]

So it’s a waste of time/member dues to file a section 35 but a good use of time/member dues to file a grievance for the violation of flow to provide compensation to people who don’t even work for Jazz anymore? How the hell does that make any sense?
As for grieving the exclusivity clause violation and bargaining interference, the only entity capable of providing compensation for that(because Jazz CPA margins are thin) is AC. So how does one get anything from grievances with Jazz management?

I posted this earlier but no one addressed my concerns.i expected so much more from this well of knowledge that is avcanada, so here it is again

Surely Rudder, with your wealth of ALPA experience, can explain why currrent Jazz pilots should use dues money to litigate grievances to compensate pilots that are are now at Air Canada?

Rudder has offered lots of "advice" and all of it with an odd sense of self assured arrogance.

And of course they can't explain. I find it so odd how many people who don't work at Jazz, seem to be so adamant that we don't file a common employer. Their advice is apparently for us to just admit that the world is unfair and do nothing. That isn't what a union is for.

This is exactly the type of fight a union is designed to fight. The CIRB exists to hear these arguments for exactly this reason, even if they prefer to do nothing in the end. Common employer legislation exists for exactly this scenario, even if the threshold is high, and odds of success are low. But apparently we are to ignore all these things and do nothing because... I really don't understand.

We have nothing now. Jazz doesn't want to sit down and discuss solutions that actually cost anything. AC doesn't want to discuss solutions that cost anything. ACA has no reason to discuss anything. So what is it we lose by filing a s.35? That at the end of it we have nothing.... exactly what we have now?

We can argue all day if our long contract is good or bad, but in the end it is the reality we need to deal with. We don't have a wage opener until 2030, and then no requirement for them to actually offer anything then. So do we just do nothing until 2035, ignore ACs infractions and interference?

I really don't understand what these people expect us to do, along with all our own pilots advocating for change, with no real solid plan on how to achieve it.

[hithere]

The wage reopener is 2029 and the reason people weigh in on Jazz problems here is because they can, anonymously, because social media abounds, and the world sucks because of it

[PostmasterGeneral]

Bede has given some solid advice here, and some examples to back up what he’s saying, but truedude you continue to live in a fantasy world where you believe this S.35 nonsense has a chance.

Actually, scratch that. You acknowledge that it has little chance of success (congratulations to you for attempting to ground yourself in reality.) but you want the union to go ahead with the application anyway. Why? Because it’s the only useless tool you have left? Because you believe the CIRB was trying to get you to “read between the lines” for some top secret coded message in their judgement that suggested a S.35?

Stop it. You’ve embarrassed yourself. It’s over, let it go.

[Bede]

Bede is a tool. They were a disaster during the merger, made arguments nobody could understand, and generally lost. Now they are facing a DFR, along with a ULP for an agreement they signed in secret with Westjet that neither party wants to reveal. Their chair and vice chair resigned shortly after the DFR was filed. He is the worst person to listen too.

And Rudder is retired, yet still can't get off avcanada.

The people to listen to, are our lawyers.

You're angry because nothing that you've predicted so far has come true (CIRB ULP that was a "sure thing", "Drafted" s. 35 application still not filed). I am not here to try to convince you- you're beyond that. I'm here because first, I was once a Jazz pilot, and second, because I have probably more experience dealing with this stuff than most on this forum. I'm here to share my insights for the benefit of others.

There are many young Jazz pilots, like I was 20 years ago, who need to make career decisions. When I was at Jazz, senior pilots, who I respected, kept telling me that there would be some quick path to Air Canada. Global Solutions, merged lists, etc. I believed it and make career decisions based on that information. None of it came to fruition, just like none of it will now. I spent years of sunk seniority at Jazz before I came to that realization and moved on. Had I moved on as quick as I could, my career would have benefitted. Jazz is a CPA carrier and, like all CPA carriers in North America, they're a red headed step child. That's the reality and no legal proceedings are going to change that.

Jazz pilots need to make their decisions based on the information now, not wishful thinking of some merged lists that you're proposing.

As for the WJ merger, yes, you keep bringing it up in an attempt to discredit, but you have no idea what you're talking about. I doubt that you've read the award because it reads significantly different than how you're painting it. There will always be disappointment in a merger, especially amongst the acquiring group. But let me ask you, if you were a WJ pilot, is there any arbitrated merger award in the last 35 years that is more favourable? (hint: there's not) Mergers come between kick in the nuts and career altering (Air Canada-CAIL). This one was a kick in the nuts.

As for the DFR, that will get dismissed without a hearing. It's a response by a few individuals who belatedly realized that the merger wasn't quite so in their favour as they once thought.

The ULP - ALPA has nothing to do with it. It's WJ's problem and ALPA has nothing to do with it. I heard about it but am not getting any of the submissions.

Anyways, I think I've said my piece. Your colleagues can decide whether to listen to my (and many others) advice or yours in making their career decisions. I'm checking out for a while. I'll be back to apologize once the s. 35, DFR or some class action lawsuit has been filed. Otherwise...

[truedude]

Bede is a tool. They were a disaster during the merger, made arguments nobody could understand, and generally lost. Now they are facing a DFR, along with a ULP for an agreement they signed in secret with Westjet that neither party wants to reveal. Their chair and vice chair resigned shortly after the DFR was filed. He is the worst person to listen too.

And Rudder is retired, yet still can't get off avcanada.

The people to listen to, are our lawyers.

You're angry because nothing that you've predicted so far has come true (CIRB ULP that was a "sure thing", "Drafted" DFR still not filed). I am not here to try to convince you- you're beyond that. I'm here because first, I was once a Jazz pilot, and second, because I have probably more experience dealing with this stuff than most on this forum. I'm here to share my insights for the benefit of others.

There are many young Jazz pilots, like I was 20 years ago, who need to make career decisions. When I was at Jazz, senior pilots, who I respected, kept telling me that there would be some quick path to Air Canada. Global Solutions, merged lists, etc. I believed it and make career decisions based on that information. None of it came to fruition, just like none of it will now. I spent years of sunk seniority at Jazz before I came to that realization and moved on. Had I moved on as quick as I could, my career would have benefitted. Jazz is a CPA carrier and, like all CPA carriers in North America, they're a red headed step child. That's the reality and no legal proceedings are going to change that.

Jazz pilots need to make their decisions based on the information now, not wishful thinking of some merged lists that you're proposing.

As for the WJ merger, yes, you keep bringing it up in an attempt to discredit, but you have no idea what you're talking about. I doubt that you've read the award because it reads significantly different than how you're painting it. There will always be disappointment in a merger, especially amongst the acquiring group. But let me ask you, if you were a WJ pilot, is there any arbitrated merger award in the last 35 years that is more favourable? (hint: there's not) Mergers come between kick in the nuts and career altering (Air Canada-CAIL). This one was a kick in the nuts.

As for the DFR, that will get dismissed without a hearing. It's a response by a few individuals who belatedly realized that the merger wasn't quite so in their favour as they once thought.

The ULP - ALPA has nothing to do with it. It's WJ's problem and ALPA has nothing to do with it. I heard about it but am not getting any of the submissions.

Anyways, I think I've said my piece. Your colleagues can decide whether to listen to my (and many others) advice or yours in making their career decisions. I'm checking out for a while. I'll be back to apologize once the s. 35, DFR or some class action lawsuit has been filed. Otherwise...

I never said a DFR was drafted. I said the s.35 was drafted.

And I wouldn't recommend anyone come to Jazz at the moment, until Jazz and AC take the issues seriously and fix them. And if they have a chance to go to AC, and are young, they absolutely should. No one should come to Jazz as a career option until Jazz and AC make it a career airline again. But that won't happen until the execs wrap their heads around the fact that this isn't 20 years ago when there was an a abundance of pilots. By beating down wages for so long, and now giving up regional market share to avoid paying wages, they are ensuring they will never staff a regional airline like they once did. And the market share they have abandoned in the prairies is just nuts. Even just Q4 flying before and after coivd is a absolutely shocking, while Porter continues to push into markets.

[QKZXKV]

Encore does not have a stronger case than Jazz pilots.

How can you honestly say that with a straight face? WestJet ownership of Encore is the starting point, not the obstacle. The employer relationship already exists. Jazz would be asking the CIRB to impose one after the fact, without ownership, by recharacterizing a commercial CPA. That is a much higher bar.

The uncomfortable truth is aviation is full of bad actors and incompetence, and careers are often shaped more by timing and luck than by fairness. Not every wrong gets corrected, and litigation is not going to deliver the outcomes some are expecting here. The real question is whether escalating now actually improves your future position or just trades leverage and opportunity for process and disappointment.

If I were a Jazz pilot I would reflect on some of the great posts by Rudder and Bede (among others).

Ownership doesn’t really matter, as it is how the lines between the companies are maintained. In our case, they didnt just set targets, they dismissed our negotiated agreement and imposed their own pay table. That is direct interference, among other things. Look up the law, and previous cases.

Bede is a tool. They were a disaster during the merger, made arguments nobody could understand, and generally lost. Now they are facing a DFR, along with a ULP for an agreement they signed in secret with Westjet that neither party wants to reveal. Their chair and vice chair resigned shortly after the DFR was filed. He is the worst person to listen too.

And Rudder is retired, yet still can't get off avcanada.

The people to listen to, are our lawyers.

Lol spoken like someone who knows they haven't got anyting productive to contribute. The personal insults start getting hurled.

A number of us know who's behind this account and know you've got your own character flaws

[QKZXKV]

So it’s a waste of time/member dues to file a section 35 but a good use of time/member dues to file a grievance for the violation of flow to provide compensation to people who don’t even work for Jazz anymore? How the hell does that make any sense?
As for grieving the exclusivity clause violation and bargaining interference, the only entity capable of providing compensation for that(because Jazz CPA margins are thin) is AC. So how does one get anything from grievances with Jazz management?

I posted this earlier but no one addressed my concerns.i expected so much more from this well of knowledge that is avcanada, so here it is again

Surely Rudder, with your wealth of ALPA experience, can explain why currrent Jazz pilots should use dues money to litigate grievances to compensate pilots that are are now at Air Canada?

Rudder has offered lots of "advice" and all of it with an odd sense of self assured arrogance.

And of course they can't explain. I find it so odd how many people who don't work at Jazz, seem to be so adamant that we don't file a common employer. Their advice is apparently for us to just admit that the world is unfair and do nothing. That isn't what a union is for.

This is exactly the type of fight a union is designed to fight. The CIRB exists to hear these arguments for exactly this reason, even if they prefer to do nothing in the end. Common employer legislation exists for exactly this scenario, even if the threshold is high, and odds of success are low. But apparently we are to ignore all these things and do nothing because... I really don't understand.

We have nothing now. Jazz doesn't want to sit down and discuss solutions that actually cost anything. AC doesn't want to discuss solutions that cost anything. ACA has no reason to discuss anything. So what is it we lose by filing a s.35? That at the end of it we have nothing.... exactly what we have now?

We can argue all day if our long contract is good or bad, but in the end it is the reality we need to deal with. We don't have a wage opener until 2030, and then no requirement for them to actually offer anything then. So do we just do nothing until 2035, ignore ACs infractions and interference?

I really don't understand what these people expect us to do, along with all our own pilots advocating for change, with no real solid plan on how to achieve it.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, weren't you the vocal one on the forums in 2019 who bullied a lot of the pilots into thinking we needed to sign the 17 yr CPA to not upset AC? The same 17 yr CPA that others warned about having no language to hold AC accountable in that stretch of time?

The "no" voters warned about this kind of thing and now people like you now complain about having hands tied until 2035...

That's the problem here...

[truedude]

So it’s a waste of time/member dues to file a section 35 but a good use of time/member dues to file a grievance for the violation of flow to provide compensation to people who don’t even work for Jazz anymore? How the hell does that make any sense?
As for grieving the exclusivity clause violation and bargaining interference, the only entity capable of providing compensation for that(because Jazz CPA margins are thin) is AC. So how does one get anything from grievances with Jazz management?

I posted this earlier but no one addressed my concerns.i expected so much more from this well of knowledge that is avcanada, so here it is again

Surely Rudder, with your wealth of ALPA experience, can explain why currrent Jazz pilots should use dues money to litigate grievances to compensate pilots that are are now at Air Canada?

Rudder has offered lots of "advice" and all of it with an odd sense of self assured arrogance.

And of course they can't explain. I find it so odd how many people who don't work at Jazz, seem to be so adamant that we don't file a common employer. Their advice is apparently for us to just admit that the world is unfair and do nothing. That isn't what a union is for.

This is exactly the type of fight a union is designed to fight. The CIRB exists to hear these arguments for exactly this reason, even if they prefer to do nothing in the end. Common employer legislation exists for exactly this scenario, even if the threshold is high, and odds of success are low. But apparently we are to ignore all these things and do nothing because... I really don't understand.

We have nothing now. Jazz doesn't want to sit down and discuss solutions that actually cost anything. AC doesn't want to discuss solutions that cost anything. ACA has no reason to discuss anything. So what is it we lose by filing a s.35? That at the end of it we have nothing.... exactly what we have now?

We can argue all day if our long contract is good or bad, but in the end it is the reality we need to deal with. We don't have a wage opener until 2030, and then no requirement for them to actually offer anything then. So do we just do nothing until 2035, ignore ACs infractions and interference?

I really don't understand what these people expect us to do, along with all our own pilots advocating for change, with no real solid plan on how to achieve it.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, weren't you the vocal one on the forums in 2019 who bullied a lot of the pilots into thinking we needed to sign the 17 yr CPA to not upset AC? The same 17 yr CPA that others warned about having no language to hold AC accountable in that stretch of time?

The "no" voters warned about this kind of thing and now people like you now complain about having hands tied until 2035...

That's the problem here...

In 2019 I was very much against that agreement, and very vocal agaisnt it. I did say we needed to take the last one in, because there was no guarantee if we turned it down, AC would come back with more money. And since it didnt solve anything, and they haven't offered a cent since, I think it is safe to say they wouldn't have offered more.