ACPA Implodes !

[CanadaEH]

Why is so much wrath and wasted energy directed at each other and not where it should be: namely, at the employer? The employer is doing its job at the negotiating table: competition is brutal, costs are too high, employees have to work harder for less, “the cupboard is bare”, etc. etc. etc. Their job at the table is to attack labor and they are very effective at it.

It goes both ways. On one side you say "..wrath and wasted energy directed at each other and not where it should be: namely, at the employer?" and on the other you say "Their job at the table is to attack labor and they are very effective at it."

As an outside observer, it's the "us" vs. "them" mentality that's killing Air Canada. On both sides.

[onspeed]

Q400 at mainline? A joke.

Kinda curious why you think mainline could not fly a q400? your wages are certainly low enough, they start lower than porter or jazz for the embrear... Some mainline ALPA airlines in the US have been saying they would like to take back their farmed out flying because of mainline wage decreases.

[Rockie]

Through personal experience. Trying to explain to people what can be expected around the corner, what is as plainly obvious as 1 plus 1, can and will elicit a completely ignorant response.They don't want to hear it. I think they sleep better.

How's that working out for you and ACPA on the age 60 issue Brick Head?

[the original tony]

It probably works as well for him as it does for you knowing that you, as junior as you are, will surely be on layoff when your senior buddies are raking it in.
I think he sleeps very well.
How are your nights? Finally give in and start searching for alternate employment while all the poor souls try to reach their 35 yr service mark?
I'm glad it doesn't bother you. Everyone is so pissed our union is setting us up while the guys on our list don't give a rats ass if the bottom suffers for them to stay.
I guess the union is taking the "real" aircanada mentality. Do it for yourself.

Bonne soire

[Doug Moore]

Why is so much wrath and wasted energy directed at each other and not where it should be: namely, at the employer? The employer is doing its job at the negotiating table: competition is brutal, costs are too high, employees have to work harder for less, “the cupboard is bare”, etc. etc. etc. Their job at the table is to attack labor and they are very effective at it.

It goes both ways. On one side you say "..wrath and wasted energy directed at each other and not where it should be: namely, at the employer?" and on the other you say "Their job at the table is to attack labor and they are very effective at it."

As an outside observer, it's the "us" vs. "them" mentality that's killing Air Canada. On both sides.

Hi CanadaEH,

I’m not sure if I understand your point. I attempted to say that the pilots were wasting their energy fighting/arguing amongst themselves over this TA and that all their energy should be focused on the employer, whose job at the negotiating table is to attack labor, which they have accomplished quite successfully with the TA.

“Us” vs “them” is the nature of the beast when it comes to negotiations. Employers will never say “we’ll give you whatever you want” and labor will never say, “we’ll accept whatever you offer us.” They have to find a common ground that works for both sides.

Both sides have an inherent interest in the company being profitable, but for different reasons. Employees want to work for a profitable company so they can earn a good living. Management wants a profitable company so they can earn a good return for the shareholders. And usually, the better the return for the shareholders, the better the compensation arrangements for management. So is management going to “look after” labor at the expense of the shareholders and themselves? I suggest: only as much as they have to.

Thus did I offer the example of a DB pension plan that the company says is too expensive for the employees, but then sustains an even more exorbitant DB plan for its executives. Thus did I contrast paltry wage increases for the employees against multi-million dollar bonuses for executives. Trust is always a huge issue. Employees generally aren’t stupid, and when times are tough, working people believe and want to see that the pain is shared. When the employees see what the likes of the former CEO walked away with, when they see current executives hauling in multi-million dollar bonuses, that trust evaporates very rapidly.

Employees know that the aviation business has changed and that it is a very competitive industry. Unionized employees will change when they have to – as they have in the past. They’d simply like to see the same thing happen all the way up the food chain, but those “up there” don’t see themselves as part of the problem. I simply believe that the time has arrived for the union to impress upon those "up there" that they are a big part of the problem.

Cheers,

Doug

[rudder]

It goes both ways. On one side you say "..wrath and wasted energy directed at each other and not where it should be: namely, at the employer?" and on the other you say "Their job at the table is to attack labor and they are very effective at it."

As an outside observer, it's the "us" vs. "them" mentality that's killing Air Canada. On both sides.

Pilots believe that because they can manage an airliner, they can also manage an airline. So when they get an invite from senior management to sit at the big boys table, they make the mistake in assuming they will be sitting there permanently and begin to act as if they are no longer labour, including passing judgement on other labour groups.

But when the dust settles, and it always does, the pilots find themselves sitting once again at the kid's table with the rest of organised labour.

That is how it is. Management will always view pilots as expensive labour. Get over it, then get on with it. Management represent themselves then the shareholders, in that order. They do not represent you. You are a line on the expense side of the income statement. You are what is standing between them and their own personal success.

They will always try to take more than they need and give less than they should. And that is why pilots join unions.

[Rockie]

Here's what it is Tony. You pick your fights and you fight them intelligently. In the case of age 60 the union (and hence the members since they seem happy to trust the union on this case) are fighting to prevent something that cannot be prevented. What they should be doing instead is planning for the day after to minimize the consequences. Why aren't they doing that? Your guess is as good as mine, but I think it's because the guys driving this program want to delay it as long as possible because it benefits them personally and screw the rest.

If that sounds familiar it's because those are the very same guys who brought us this TA, and who are ignoring the membership's wishes by keeping up the effort to con us into it before they are kicked out of office.

The thing I find astounding is people's continued trust in these guys motives and judgement in the age 60 issue, and their persistent belief in the nonexistent information they con you with.

I don't get why realism and intelligent strategizing is so far beyond our grasp.

[Understated]

Trying to save this group from themselves is a daunting task.

That hasn't stopped you from trying though, has it, Brick Head, using your paternalistic "I know better than you" mentalilty to do what you believe is best for "this group"?

Like setting up a secret "Project Ultra Committee" to get the "inside scoop" from management on how the pilots must compromise their careers to save their jobs. Staffing that "committee" with the same members of the union who deny the reality of the end of mandatory retirement, then carving out a deal that bears little or no resemblance to the WAWCON survey. Following that up by getting management to authorize the use of its own doom and gloom slide-show scenario presentation to persuade the union members that the responsibility falls upon them to save this airline from the havok that they are wreaking upon it with their modest demands, in the face of multi-million dollar pay increases for senior management.

A daunting task, indeed.

The reason that the union constitution has a recall provision is to save its members from the havok wreaked by omniscient, holier-than-thou representatives like yourself who completely lose sight of the fundamental role that a union must play in fairly representing the interests of all its members, both in relation to its own members themselves and in relation to the employer whose interests differ markedly, on the whole, from our own.

[vic777]

How are your nights? Finally give in and start searching for alternate employment while all the poor souls try to reach their 35 yr service mark?

Did I read where the average Tim Horton's owner makes more than a B777 Captain?

[chatman]

How are your nights? Finally give in and start searching for alternate employment while all the poor souls try to reach their 35 yr service mark?

Did I read where the average Tim Horton's owner makes more than a B777 Captain?

And what is wrong with that...There are many small biz owners that make way more than a B777 Captain and also work less hours.

[vic777]

And what is wrong with that...There are many small biz owners that make way more than a B777 Captain and also work less hours.

Geez, who said there was anything wrong with it? Or are you asking? I guess the point is, if you want to get rich, flying for Air Canada is not the most efficient route.

[Fanblade]

Q400 at mainline? A joke.

Kinda curious why you think mainline could not fly a q400? your wages are certainly low enough, they start lower than porter or jazz for the embrear... Some mainline ALPA airlines in the US have been saying they would like to take back their farmed out flying because of mainline wage decreases.

It is all about unit cost. The fixed costs that make AC run are spread across each unit (CASM) with wages. Rent, Loyalty lounges, the secretary at HQ, Flt planning coordinator, HR, ect. In the case of AC, employees amount to less than 20% of the unit cost. Pilots are around 4%. Meaning 80% of the unit cost has nothing to do with employees at all. This is unique to aviation by the way. In most other industries employee costs represent over 50% of the unit cost. In this industry fuel is the most expensive. Adding together the volatility of the highest input cost, with an industry that operates on razor thin margins, makes for a very challenging environment.

As you spread the overall cost structure over a smaller and slower aircraft, the break even unit cost becomes higher and higher and uncompetitive. It is why AC farms out to Jazz, smaller slower aircraft. Why Jazz no longer does Tier 3 flying.

I would hazard a guess that pilots could work for free at AC, and a Q400 would still not be profitable because of the cost structure spread across fewer seats, slower moving seats, and shorter stage lengths.

The Continental/United pilots are trying to regain some of the flying lost to the feeders. And they should be aggressive since the regional amalgamation, as long as they are prudent. What they are trying to avoid is permanently loosing flying to tier 2, that could now, post merger, be profitably done at mainline. Two crj700's amalgamated may now make one 737 profitable. They want it back.

As for the low pay for pilots starting out at AC? That would be ME! I wrote this earlier.

If you owned an apple company and your budget for payroll was $1000.00. Within your employee group you have, pickers, sorters and drivers. If one group commands a wage above that of the competition what happens? The other wages must drop in comparison to stay competitive. There is a reason LCC companies pay their pilots better than the legacy carriers. It is because they can. AC cannot. Not until AC is competitive on the cost front in all areas.

Message to everyone who didn't get the message. The other labor groups have more to do with the ability of a smaller type aircraft operating profitably at AC, than you do. The overall cost structure is another hindrance to smaller aircraft operating profitably at mainline.

Securing the flying under a lower cost structure is a good idea with one caveat. All other employee groups get left behind. I am taking CR's offer to other employee groups as optics only. If he actually brings them in? RUN. It is just a scam.

Ground up only.

[SII]

are we comparing apples and oranges here

[Fanblade]

Lets say you are negotiating egg production with a golden goose. You have done the back ground work and know one egg a day is sustainable. Beyond that is risky. The Vet tells you more than one egg a day will eventually lead to problems. Big vet bills. Reduced egg production. Possibly even infertility.

What are you going to strive to negotiate with the golden goose? One egg? Or more?

Now lets say two of you are negotiating with the same golden goose on an equal footing. The other negotiator won't settle for anything less than 2/3 of one egg. You explain the consequences of taking more than an egg a day, but he doesn't care. As far as he is concerned it is the gooses problem.

Now what do you do? Negotiate 1/3 of the egg? Or take your fair share. 2/3 of the egg?

Guess who will do most of the winning and pointing of fingers, when the golden goose stops producing eggs?

Just look at how the CAW milked the auto sector.

[rudder]

Whatever ACPA gives up above the line should be returned to the pilots proportionally below the line. That is also the WJ model.

Think that AC will go for that? No way - they want it all and they want it on their terms.

[Rockie]

Air Canada has to eventually start making money to be a viable business and that is not in dispute. But is ignoring safety the way to do it? No meals, exemptions to Canada's already archaic F&DT regulations and onerous reserve rules. Is taking away our meals and ability to get one on a nine hour layover saving the company or does it merely pay part of Calin's 77% pay increase?

How about we look at some other ideas?

Actually have management ensure a ground crew is waiting for the airplane when it comes around the corner so we don't sit there burning gas (biggest expense) as they stroll out like they have nowhere to be.

Do we really need a manager of non-revenue flying?

Do we need to be doing circling approaches because none of the other seagulls in the office thought RNAV approach capability was necessary?

What do the people in that big white building in Winnipeg do? I know it's not calculating expenses.

How much money is Air Canada spending to kill Porter?

Why not make the "just do it" slogan actually have some meaning? We could get rid of probably hundreds of management positions if decision making authority was given to the people at the coal face like they said they were going to do.

Stop giving away billions of dollars in cash.

These are admittedly simple ideas from somebody who only sees a small slice of the overall picture. But I'm a little testy about seeing my working conditions continually eroded when I see no evidence of a commitment to fix the real problem. All I see is a CEO and senior executive taking the money they've scared out of the employees with the help of my union and then leaving to watch the ensuing wreckage from their estate.

[yycflyguy]

Now what do you do? Negotiate 1/3 of the egg? Or take your fair share. 2/3 of the egg?

EGG MANAGEMENT FEE

[Bored]

Chorus Aviation Inc Market Cap (Millions) 650.283

Groupe Aeroplan Inc Market Cap (Millions) 2,415.613


Air Canada (AC/A:CN) Market Cap (Millions) 659.240

Air Canada (AC/B:CN) Market Cap (Millions) 661.579

This a quick list of the Market Cap of Air Canada and just 2 of the companies that absolutely depend on the solvency of Air Canada. Billions of dollars and you think it all comes crashing down because of a few dollars for pilots. Even the pilot pension deficit is a rather small decimal to these people. CR can not dissolve Air Canada as it would hurt all his friends that are invested in and controlling the companies stolen from Air Canada in CCAA.
The whole scam is that Air Canada was forced to sign ridiculous contracts in CCAA that siphon any money Air Canada makes to Chorus, Aeroplan, the maintenance company and probably others I forget.
Just look at Chorus. They own nothing but some worthless Dash 8s and an operating certificate. Is that really worth hundreds of millions? Air Canada has to stay in existence to keep paying the CPA fees.
Don't believe management's BS.

[aroundthewing]

Respectfully Fanblade ..

You're thinking from the wrong side of the table. AC management will take care of the airline .. isn't that why their bonus are through the roof? Pilots need to look out for pilots and move our interest along with the industry forward.

You seem to be a fish biting CR's hook.

Gentlemen, I will try to say this as subtly as possible since it is an open forum. You screwed up in CCAA. Well maybe not so subtle. You took pay cuts to protect something that no one else was trying to protect, so it got you nothing but a pay cut. Then nothing but the same old crisis to crisis. At the same time other employee groups managed to stay well above industry standard costs. Not just wages, but kept very expensive benefits, skilled workers we compete with don't even have, such as a pension. Essentially the cost disparity issue was never addressed and so sustainability never really had a chance.

We are not the problem wrt to cost. We are the problem however if we stand in the way of managements attempt to get all costs in line with industry standard. I know that statement is going to piss of Jazz employees. It is going to piss off FA's. It will piss off gate agents. It will piss off baggage handlers. It will even piss off pilots who don't want to give an inch.

So Fanblade....who should be thrown off the Gravy Train first to allow AC to become a sustainable profitable company? That is what all your posts are about. Correct?

[vortac]

Chorus Aviation Inc Market Cap (Millions) 650.283

Groupe Aeroplan Inc Market Cap (Millions) 2,415.613


Air Canada (AC/A:CN) Market Cap (Millions) 659.240

Air Canada (AC/B:CN) Market Cap (Millions) 661.579

This a quick list of the Market Cap of Air Canada and just 2 of the companies that absolutely depend on the solvency of Air Canada. Billions of dollars and you think it all comes crashing down because of a few dollars for pilots. Even the pilot pension deficit is a rather small decimal to these people. CR can not dissolve Air Canada as it would hurt all his friends that are invested in and controlling the companies stolen from Air Canada in CCAA.
The whole scam is that Air Canada was forced to sign ridiculous contracts in CCAA that siphon any money Air Canada makes to Chorus, Aeroplan, the maintenance company and probably others I forget.
Just look at Chorus. They own nothing but some worthless Dash 8s and an operating certificate. Is that really worth hundreds of millions? Air Canada has to stay in existence to keep paying the CPA fees.
Don't believe management's BS.

This kind of ignorance and reasoning boggles my mind. Your attempt to use market cap as reasoning is poor business analysis. You seem have a problem with the way the market has priced AC. Can I give you a hint of the AC's market cap if the other two companies didn't exist... economies of scale.

[Fanblade]

So Fanblade....who should be thrown off the Gravy Train first to allow AC to become a sustainable profitable company? That is what all your posts are about. Correct?

aroundthewing,

Nice choice of words, but no.

No one is throwing anyone off the Gravy Train. The case I am making is that ACPA should step off the Train of their own accord to avoid the eventual wreck. I could make the argument for everyone, but it is really none of my business.

Everyone has to be cost competitive in a low margin industry such as this to be profitable. If the company isn't profitable, in the end everyone gets hurt.

If you had a struggling business, and a partner who refused to get his cost competitiveness in line with the market segment you were competing in, would you stay in business with him? Or would you abandon ship before he took you down with him?

If you don't want to get off the gravy train? Stay on.

In fact an LCC may actually help preserve your job and compensation. AC can not harm you through job transfer. It would trigger common employer. The only thing they can do is new growth, and slow attrition.

[LeadingEdge]

How are your nights? Finally give in and start searching for alternate employment while all the poor souls try to reach their 35 yr service mark?

Did I read where the average Tim Horton's owner makes more than a B777 Captain?

And what is wrong with that...There are many small biz owners that make way more than a B777 Captain and also work less hours.

Actually there is a lot wrong with that. Does that Tim's location fly around at 600Kts? There are 350 customers in B777 at any one time. the B777 captain has 17 employees working for him. The B777 can crash, I'd like to see you try that with a Tim's location. The B777 Captain typically works 15+ hours every day that he is at work. Does Tim's have 115,000 KG of kerosene at its location? Does Tim's carry dangerous goods? Is a Tim's location worth $100+million? If the Tim's location manages to crash and burn, does it cost the parent corp $1Billion???

I'll give you one thing, the food is arguably better at Tims.

LE

[LeadingEdge]

Air Canada has to eventually start making money to be a viable business and that is not in dispute. But is ignoring safety the way to do it? No meals, exemptions to Canada's already archaic F&DT regulations and onerous reserve rules. Is taking away our meals and ability to get one on a nine hour layover saving the company or does it merely pay part of Calin's 77% pay increase?

How about we look at some other ideas?

Actually have management ensure a ground crew is waiting for the airplane when it comes around the corner so we don't sit there burning gas (biggest expense) as they stroll out like they have nowhere to be.

Do we really need a manager of non-revenue flying?

Do we need to be doing circling approaches because none of the other seagulls in the office thought RNAV approach capability was necessary?

What do the people in that big white building in Winnipeg do? I know it's not calculating expenses.

How much money is Air Canada spending to kill Porter?

Why not make the "just do it" slogan actually have some meaning? We could get rid of probably hundreds of management positions if decision making authority was given to the people at the coal face like they said they were going to do.

Stop giving away billions of dollars in cash.

These are admittedly simple ideas from somebody who only sees a small slice of the overall picture. But I'm a little testy about seeing my working conditions continually eroded when I see no evidence of a commitment to fix the real problem. All I see is a CEO and senior executive taking the money they've scared out of the employees with the help of my union and then leaving to watch the ensuing wreckage from their estate.

Could not have said it better myself.

ACPA already gave a third and what did management do with that?? They pi$$ed it away on fuel hedges, currency hedges, paint, uniforms, CAPITAL REPATRIATION. ACPA could work for free and the current group would still lose money... Making a service company work and be profitable for all participants is a foreign concept in AC's management.

How many times have we heard the same old crap from Dagger etc... Remember CCAA was the fix for everything, and nothing changed. Forcing ACPA wages up will force management to address the structural problems at AC once and for all. We all know what they are, and we all know what needs to be done to fix them.

I still don't understand how a CEO can have his salary doubled, when we are in such "dire straights"...

[c170b53]

Everyone has to be cost competitive in a low margin industry such as this to be profitable. If the company isn't profitable, in the end everyone gets hurt

. No kidding that's why we're miffed, somehow the money still flows at the top.

If you had a struggling business, and a partner who refused to get his cost competitiveness in line with the market segment you were competing in, would you stay in business with him? Or would you abandon ship before he took you down with him?

Correct and many have retired to get away from the company's nonsense.

If you don't want to get off the gravy train? Stay on.

Exactly why CR came back

In fact an LCC may actually help preserve your job and compensation. AC can not harm you through job transfer. It would trigger common employer. The only thing they can do is new growth, and slow attrition.

You were doing so well but with this last one you've lost all credibility.

Just this last month the machinists lost this very argument and are now working for "somebody else" in the same uniforms, in the same buildings on the same planes for a company that is propped up by AC money. CLRB had three people on the board making that decision, one of them a former AC manager, one a former union affiliate and one from industry, Surprise, surprise, the vote was 2-1. Guess what's going to happen to their work and pension now? Also guess what happens to the quality of the work and how efficient our entire operation has become overnight.
Then the Double whammy, the company allegedly said they were not seeking a split if the union played ball. The union (Dues golden egg) agreed but (and this is funny) in exchange they requested that the company provide transparency. Then the split /sale happened and when the union went to court they lost the case because they played ball in the beginning. Company; winning, Union ;Losing
I like the egg slant so how about some more egg thoughts. I think scrambled eggs might be the outcome
What costs more, cook eggs at home or go out for dinner ? Have the resources or seek resources when you need them? Have just the correct aircraft flying for a route and you maximize yield but then your lose fleet lift, flexibility. Down size infrastructure to lower costs and you gain mobility at the cost of operational support and reaction infrastructure. The airline department stores and LCC speciality shops ability to sell the same goods are dictated by their size and their capacity to move volumes, which has both seeking to reinvent themselves after the other. Small wants to grow, big wants to shrink, both want to be in the bell curve customer sweet spot. And that's exactly where I want my conditions and remuneration to be as well. If you guys can do better, well good on ya.
Turn cargo and ground marshaling over to the airports (as in Schiphol) and the only difference will be more Beemers in the GTAA and YVRAA parking lots. Farm out maintenance... that's already happened south of the border and this summer, north of the border so stay tuned, it should be fun for all.
There's a choice management has to make here in search of efficiencies. Either let the workers work and make decisions in their workplace or as in the company's M.O. now under the threat of firings, tell the workers what to do, how and when, effectively paralyzing them. It won't be long before they'll be directing those left which shoelace to tie first.
Yes you can call me a loser, I've not follow sops (stupid ops) lately and saved several 767 plane loads, was dangerous out on the edge, felt wonderful.

[Morry Bund]

VOTE #08 - ACPA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE VII, REMOVAL FROM OFFICE - YYZ LEC VICE-CHAIR CAPTAIN B. (BRIAN) MURRAY

Final Result

May 12, 2011

***************

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The final result of the recent vote entitled, "Vote #08 - ACPA Constitution Article VII, Removal From Office - YYZ LEC Vice-Chair Captain B. (Brian) Murray", is as follows:

SPECIAL NOTE: THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY VOTE; A MINIMUM OF 50% PLUS 1 OF ALL ELIGIBLE VOTERS SUPPORTING THE QUESTION IS REQUIRED FOR RATIFICATION.


Number of Eligible Voting Members: 1843 *
Minimum number of YES votes to ratify with an absolute majority: 922
Number of votes cast: 1486
Number of recorded abstentions: 19
Total voter turnout: 1505 81.6%

Number of votes cast:

Do you support the removal from office of the YYZ LEC Vice-Chair Captain B. (Brian) Murray?

1. YES 1202 Votes 65.2%


Vote #08 - ACPA Constitution Article VII, Removal From Office - YYZ LEC Vice-Chair Captain B. (Brian) Murray has passed.