Porter Pilots Unionize

[FISH-FLY]

Looks like it's real...

Regional carrier Porter Airlines acknowledged Friday that its approximately 250 pilots are trying to form a union.

Porter president and chief executive Robert Deluce said the airline values everyone's views and input as an integral part of the airline.

"Porter respects our team members' rights to make decisions about their future," Deluce said in a statement.

"Our team and culture are key factors differentiating us from other airlines."

Porter flies regional aircraft, mainly from its base at Toronto City Centre airport.

Last year, Porter ground staff at the Ottawa airport became the airline's first employees to form a union, voting to join the Canadian Union of Public Employees.

The roughly 50 workers included ramp attendants and customer service and operations staff.

[invertedattitude]

Thank you Porter pilots, for being one of the few pilots groups left with a backbone.

While you catch heat on these forums from the right wingers, and the "been there done that's" you are at least making an effort to protect and build your profession, which is far more than most pilot groups in this country, relying on the good graces of profit driven corporations to look after their livelihood.

Thank you.

[Realitychex]

Thank you Porter pilots, for being one of the few pilots groups left with a backbone.

While you catch heat on these forums from the right wingers, and the "been there done that's" you are at least making an effort to protect and build your profession, which is far more than most pilot groups in this country, relying on the good graces of profit driven corporations to look after their livelihood.

Thank you.

What other motive does a corporation have other than to generate a profit for shareholders? Who do you think provided the capital to pay for the shiny airplanes in the first place? How would you like to pour $10m into a business and have it return absolutely nothing over 7 years? Even at 3% a year, an investor could have done nothing and pocketed a gain of almost $2.3m.

If the business was consistently raking in the cash and salaries remained below industry average I can see why such an action might be contemplated. That is far from the case, even though the Porter self-promotion machine loves to make profitability claims that have historically been, err.... wildly exaggerated. Don't confuse the public claims of profitability, all of which are necessary to keep consumers confident that the airline will be around in the future so that future bookings don't collapse and the cash dries up, with the harsh reality of the situation

I could care less what Porter's pilots end up doing, however, my simple advice would be to take a look at the audited statements provided by management and ask yourself a couple of questions:

If the core business has never been consistently profitable, how will the outlook improve if costs rise and productivity is reduced?

Name a business who's output was about 1/20th of its next largest competitor, and 1/60th of the largest competitor, that has consistently been unprofitable in its first 5+ years of existence, that apparently has no reasonable prognosis of ever being profitable going forward, that survived a further 5 years in the marketplace.

If it can't be profitable on its own, the ultimate solution is either a buyout by a competitor or a shut down. No sane investor or entrepreneur is going to bankroll a losing venture in perpetuity. Who would buy an unprofitable, unionized airline in Canada at anything but a firesale price, and where would Porter's pilots end up in the food chain under this scenario?

At this stage of Porter's evolution, you have to be very careful of what you wish for.

[invertedattitude]

Of course a business is out to be profitable.

My point is, is that most businesses will drive towards maximum profits, even at the expense of the employees.

Cat being the best/worst example of such.

Relying on a corporation alone to protect you, and provide a solid future for you and your family, is absolutely foolish IMO.

Too many pilots in Canada were in one bad union or another, and now seem to think all unions are bad, not only that many especially on this forum will try to convince others of their own beliefs based on their own history. Not only that, most their "history" is based on perception not all of it is reality.

Im not saying there are no bad unions, but there are far more bad companies.

[Realitychex]

Of course a business is out to be profitable.

My point is, is that most businesses will drive towards maximum profits, even at the expense of the employees.

Cat being the best/worst example of such.

Relying on a corporation alone to protect you, and provide a solid future for you and your family, is absolutely foolish IMO.

Too many pilots in Canada were in one bad union or another, and now seem to think all unions are bad, not only that many especially on this forum will try to convince others of their own beliefs based on their own history. Not only that, most their "history" is based on perception not all of it is reality.

Im not saying there are no bad unions, but there are far more bad companies.

How did the union protect C3000 employees at the bitter end?

[Biff]

Of course a business is out to be profitable.

My point is, is that most businesses will drive towards maximum profits, even at the expense of the employees.

Cat being the best/worst example of such.

Relying on a corporation alone to protect you, and provide a solid future for you and your family, is absolutely foolish IMO.

Too many pilots in Canada were in one bad union or another, and now seem to think all unions are bad, not only that many especially on this forum will try to convince others of their own beliefs based on their own history. Not only that, most their "history" is based on perception not all of it is reality.

Im not saying there are no bad unions, but there are far more bad companies.

How did the union protect C3000 employees at the bitter end?

LOL, so you think they(C3) would still be around if it wasn't unionized? I don't think that the union was the issue!!

[Rotten Apple #1]

Well, I was there. I was there for the union presentation on how just merely one, single, dollar, added per ticket price would get us 95% of Air Canada wages. How easy was that? I can still hear the clapping and 'hoorahs'. Well, that was about six months before the company was gone. So, to answer realitychex's question, 'not much'.

[Realitychex]

Well, I was there. I was there for the union presentation on how just merely one, single, dollar, added per ticket price would get us 95% of Air Canada wages. How easy was that? I can still hear the clapping and 'hoorahs'. Well, that was about six months before the company was gone. So, to answer realitychex's question, 'not much'.

Precisely. As I recall, the union at C3 also represented a much larger pool of employees at another airline.

Not only did the union throw the C3 employees under the bus, they backed up and ran over them again before it was all over.

A hard lesson learned for all those involved.

[ng78]

This union hate regarding C3 is missing the point entirely. C3 would have still shut down whether or not there was a union. However, perhaps employees were better off during the existence of C3 thanks to the union.

As for Porter, I don't think it's so much the pay that's the problem there, but maybe other underlying issues that need to be addressed.

[jjj]

If I recall the Pilots at C3 were willing to do anything to save the company. They were willing to chop their own heads off if it would buy the company a little time to resurrect. In the 11th hour it was not enough as the FA union reps (CUPE?) tried to play hard ball.

Anyone around here actually work there that can corroborate any details?


JJJ

[ng78]

If I recall the Pilots at C3 were willing to do anything to save the company. They were willing to chop their own heads off if it would buy the company a little time to resurrect. In the 11th hour it was not enough as the FA union reps (CUPE?) tried to play hard ball.

Anyone around here actually work there that can corroborate any details?


JJJ

No disrespect at all, but do you really believe that "FA union reps playing hard ball" is really why C3 shut down? No, it doesn't help the cause of course, but C3 was in a mess at the time, as were many others after the 9-11 attacks. It's too bad, because C3 was a great operation, but it had expanded far too much just before the bottom fell out from underneath them.

I'm not a staunch pro or anti union guy. There is a time and a place for them. But I hate the usual rhetoric that unions are to blame for all these airlines shutting down.

Also, let's not forget, that Westjet has their own pilot's association, much like what might be getting started at Porter. Westjet has found a way to work constructively with their pilot's association. Something other airlines could learn from.

[prop2jet]

Sorry to steer off topic but C3 did not tank because of a union. It tanked because it chose to enter and expand into a crowded marketplace. Not doing proper due diligence on one of it's main acquisitions and of course being extended to the max. The events of 911 probably only accelerated what would have inevitably occured.

As for the Porter pilots. Having formal recognition or certified status by the CIRB is not a bad thing. Having one voice to negotiate better WACON will ensure a fair process governed by what they as a group want and not by what some management appointed rep suggests they have.

Ultimately it is the membership that determines whether the union is good or bad as it is they who will be electing their reps.

[jjj]

If I recall the Pilots at C3 were willing to do anything to save the company. They were willing to chop their own heads off if it would buy the company a little time to resurrect. In the 11th hour it was not enough as the FA union reps (CUPE?) tried to play hard ball.

Anyone around here actually work there that can corroborate any details?


JJJ

No disrespect at all, but do you really believe that "FA union reps playing hard ball" is really why C3 shut down? No, it doesn't help the cause of course, but C3 was in a mess at the time, as were many others after the 9-11 attacks. It's too bad, because C3 was a great operation, but it had expanded far too much just before the bottom fell out from underneath them.

I'm not a staunch pro or anti union guy. There is a time and a place for them. But I hate the usual rhetoric that unions are to blame for all these airlines shutting down.

Also, let's not forget, that Westjet has their own pilot's association, much like what might be getting started at Porter. Westjet has found a way to work constructively with their pilot's association. Something other airlines could learn from.

ng78

Nope I'm not saying the FA union at C3 killed the company.

C3 tanked because it was running on razor thin margins - no cash - no assets. As another poster mentioned, they did a few brainiac moves in the aquisition area that we all scoffed at and Michael White profitted. I could go on. Post 911 the airlines have been through many tough times - C3 wouldn't have survived those either.

The FA union was one of the final nails in the coffin - that is all I'm saying. My post was in response to the question about what did the unions do for C3 in the end. The FA union in this case made no concessions and did nothing but bargain themselves out of a job rather than a stay of execution. Unions aren't always what their cracked up to be and sometimes just create more problems than solutions.

We could go on all day about the demise of C3 - but that would take a lot of bandwidth.

Good luck to all at Porter. They have a chance like you mentioned ng78 to still have a good working relationship with their management. Certifying doesn't have to end that.

Cheers.

JJJ

[ng78]

Agreed jjj.