TA

[DanWEC]

A lot of pitchforks here....

You can vote this down and probably will. The way I see it that the union was successful in extracting a substantial increase, $1.9B, and did so avoiding a strike. Now that's the working figure on the table and having that is incredibly important.
Now, between the MEC and the pilot group, it can be fine-tuned and reallocated for another vote. I think the key was just getting them to pony up in broad strokes first as the clock was running out.

But hey, this is just my outside opinion.

[rudder]

I remember once going on strike over FO pay. That’s right - we all walked (CA and FO) over FO pay. It was the right thing to do for the FO’s and the right thing to do for the profession.

I also remember walking out of the Minister of Labour’s office after being shown pending legislation removing the right to strike/lockout and settling all unresolved CBA items between the parties as written by the Director of the FMCS. I recall the employer being told imposing the legislated CBA on the pilots would create a nightmare going forward …. for the company.

Thankfully, the employer agreed and the parties ultimately wrote an agreement that was fair to all and removed the government interference factor. At the time it was the leading edge CBA for the sector in North America.

A pilot CBA is a de facto marriage contract. The employer and its pilots are stuck together, forever. If you alienate through selective rewards a large component of your pilot workforce - or your pilot membership - you do so at your peril.

A pot of money hit the table. Figure out where to best spend it. Explain to the employer the price of disenfranchisement, which is at the core of this TA.

There is no way the allocations in this TA (both compensation and QOL) are reflective of the AC pilot surveys conducted over the last 2 years.

The ACA MEC and NC can feel free to characterize the TA as where they chose to allocate the money, if that is in fact the case. And the membership will pass judgement. If there is more to the story, then tell the whole story.

[Texarcana]

The YUL LEC has come out publicly and told us that there was no secret ploy by the MEC. Labour Minister interference is more likely.

Your statement(s) are very serious. They are, obviously, consequential.

Publicly? Who said this? When, where?

How exactly?

Is there a document?

[boeingboy]

One should be mindful of a "no" vote. While we all know the truth around the pilots situation in Canada - and AC pilots with the cuts you've been taking in the last decade or so.....Public perception can and will be a powerful thing.

This is already being drummed up as pilots getting "unheard of" gains and raises, and while your worth every cent and more - from the perspective of everyone outside of the pilot profession - 42% pay raises are certainly unheard of. Almost $2 billion worth of added income for you guys will be a hard thing to explain if it's voted down. Just look at the latest media....

https://www.ctvnews.ca/business/politic ... -1.7039931
https://www.thestar.com/business/air-ca ... f8137.html

Perhaps a better alternative would be to accept it with a change to the dispersion of money....say 15% off the top end and giving it to the bottom guys.

[tango308]

The YUL LEC has come out publicly and told us that there was no secret ploy by the MEC. Labour Minister interference is more likely.

Your statement(s) are very serious. They are, obviously, consequential.

Publicly? Who said this? When, where?

How exactly?

Is there a document?

Chill. Just relaying info here. A rep posted on the base FB pages yesterday "There has never been a message to read between the lines and there won't be one either"

[Texarcana]

The YUL LEC has come out publicly and told us that there was no secret ploy by the MEC. Labour Minister interference is more likely.

Your statement(s) are very serious. They are, obviously, consequential.

Publicly? Who said this? When, where?

How exactly?

Is there a document?

Just relaying what I saw. YUL rep posted on the base FB pages yesterday "There has never been a message to read between the lines and there won't be one either"

I believe you, but I dont have FB (too old).

Can you post a screenshot or shoot me one in private?

If the UL LEC is posting that in public, they are deliberately undermining the MEC, and the process as well.

Send me a copy please.

In solidarity, top 100 seniority.

[thepoors]

A pot of money hit the table. Figure out where to best spend it. Explain to the employer the price of disenfranchisement, which is at the core of this TA.

There is no way the allocations in this TA (both compensation and QOL) are reflective of the AC pilot surveys conducted over the last 2 years.

The ACA MEC and NC can feel free to characterize the TA as where they chose to allocate the money, if that is in fact the case. And the membership will pass judgement. If there is more to the story, then tell the whole story.

Well said

[Texarcana]

A lot of pitchforks here....

You can vote this down and probably will. The way I see it that the union was successful in extracting a substantial increase, $1.9B, and did so avoiding a strike. Now that's the working figure on the table and having that is incredibly important.
Now, between the MEC and the pilot group, it can be fine-tuned and reallocated for another vote. I think the key was just getting them to pony up in broad strokes first as the clock was running out.

But hey, this is just my outside opinion.

Id prefer we ditch the forks as well, re-focus on the prize. Nothing to be gained through divisions.

Im not convinced $1.9 is a limit. A strike, with consequent financial pain would test that.

Regardless, a bit of speculation by both of us.

The MEC will speak to us all, in time. It will all become more clear, soon.

[Texarcana]

Chill. Just relaying info here. A rep posted on the base FB pages yesterday "There has never been a message to read between the lines and there won't be one either"

Im chill. There are not many, more chill than me.

Can you, or anyone else that has the FB screenshot please send it to me.

[daedalusx]

A lot of pitchforks here....

You can vote this down and probably will. The way I see it that the union was successful in extracting a substantial increase, $1.9B, and did so avoiding a strike. Now that's the working figure on the table and having that is incredibly important.
Now, between the MEC and the pilot group, it can be fine-tuned and reallocated for another vote. I think the key was just getting them to pony up in broad strokes first as the clock was running out.

But hey, this is just my outside opinion.

Id prefer we ditch the forks as well, re-focus on the prize. Nothing to be gained through divisions.

Im not convinced $1.9 is a limit. A strike, with consequent financial pain would test that.

Regardless, a bit of speculation by both of us.

The MEC will speak to us all, in time. It will all become more clear, soon.

Division is inevitable when you have such a disparity between the top and bottom end, when you have 40% of the members on flat pay, 2 year of surveys and promises of a WCC and then you deliver this Minuit’s bargain …

[thepoors]

A strike, with consequent financial pain would test that.

That's where we were, and what should have happened, 3 days ago...before they threw everyone under the bus.

[Texarcana]

Im waiting for the details. I feel there is more to come, Im staying focused exactly because of both your concerns, and much more.

[goingnowherefast]

Lots of airlines have voted down the first TA and gotten a better deal the second time. Same NC, same MEC the second time too.

Encore voted down their first TA with weak a weak no vote, and still got a bit more

United voted down their first TA with a strong no vote and got a lot more.
https://www.reuters.com/business/aerosp ... 022-11-01/
https://onemileatatime.com/news/united- ... -contract/

[Hangry]

I will admit I definitely lost my cool and my faith when I was shattered by the news of the subpar TA.

Obviously something not so kosher occurred.

Prepared for the subsequent rounds.

[mervinmerv]

The company truly believes this TA is enough. They can maintain and argue this defence with anyone they speak to or negotiate with until proven otherwise. They could have easily used this defence had it gone to arbitration instead of a vote. Nowhere does it state that the company must take into account what the union representatives say the pilots want. The union can know this isn’t it but they cannot argue with certainty that it will not pass in a vote. Only the vote results can say that. The higher percentage of votes against, the greater the leverage the pilots will achieve. Arm the NC and MEC with a big fat we told you so and have them deliver it. Remove AC’s defence at the table and let the true negotiating begin. It may take a few rounds but with the strength and unity of the membership more gains will be made.

[flyingcanuck]

It's simply, does the TA meet what you answered on the survey? No? Then you know what to vote.

[Jfthepilot]

Just based on the unchanged reserve rules, this is a no.

[flying4dollars]

The company truly believes this TA is enough. They can maintain and argue this defence with anyone they speak to or negotiate with until proven otherwise. They could have easily used this defence had it gone to arbitration instead of a vote. Nowhere does it state that the company must take into account what the union representatives say the pilots want. The union can know this isn’t it but they cannot argue with certainty that it will not pass in a vote. Only the vote results can say that. The higher percentage of votes against, the greater the leverage the pilots will achieve. Arm the NC and MEC with a big fat we told you so and have them deliver it. Remove AC’s defence at the table and let the true negotiating begin. It may take a few rounds but with the strength and unity of the membership more gains will be made.

It's simply, does the TA meet what you answered on the survey? No? Then you know what to vote.

Bingo!

Well said fellas

[bcflyer]

Something tells me that this may have been accepted by the MEC very well knowing the majority will vote a big NO to this. Risky, yes. Maybe they wanted to give the power to the members one more time to show management that the power lies with the pilots. You have huge leverage right now. No clobberhead in the MEC would actually think this is a good deal…I think there’s more to it. They want you to vote a big NO.

Remember, this will have to be voted on by the members (pilots) before actually getting ratified. Don’t forget that United airlines pilots voted NO for their first TA and actually got something better the second time round. Never accept the first offer during negotiations and know your worth!

It's a terrible idea because then all the company has to do is turn over to the feds and cry for binding arbitration.
It kills all momentum and worse of all, it shows the company that you didn't have it in you.
They called your bluff, pulled down your pants and bent you over.

You realize that binding arbitration needs to be agree to by both parties right?
Lots of groups vote down the first offer. There was clearly backroom government influence involved here. Vote No and show the company that the union does indeed speak for you.

[rudder]

Year 3 NB FO pay vs year 3 NB CA $113.91/274.49 = 0.41
Year 4 NB FO pay vs year 4 NB CA $121.75/276.71 = 0.44
Year 5 NB FO pay vs year 5 NB CA $156.53/279.52 = 0.56
Year 12 NB FO pay vs year 12 NB CA $199.42/299.89 = 0.665

Year 3 WB FO pay vs year 3 WB CA $138.26/373.69 = 0.37
Year 4 WB FO pay vs year 12 WB CA $148.80/376.71 = 0.39
Year 5 WB FO pay vs year 12 WB CA $207.40/380.55 = 0.545
Year 12 WB FO pay vs year 12 WB CA $265.37/408.27 = 0.65

Any way you slice it, it appears both currently and (potentially) going forward there is a de facto FO reduced pay ratio until year 12. I am not sure that any other legacy carrier does that.

Is everybody aware that almost 50% of the voting AC pilots are not CA?

[hithere]

Rudder,
The MEC chair is an FO. Pretty sure she can read the room from where she sits in the right seat. It’s probably the first time in the history of AC that the MEC chair is an FO and is quite rare amoung MEC chairs in North America. She is also a commuter. Nothing in this TA is self serving for her. Pretty sure this is the best ACA could get until they return to the table in a mere 3 years from now

[rudder]

Rudder,
The MEC chair is an FO. Pretty sure she can read the room from where she sits in the right seat. It’s probably the first time in the history of AC that the MEC chair is an FO and is quite rare amoung MEC chairs in North America. She is also a commuter. Nothing in this TA is self serving for her. Pretty sure this is the best ACA could get until they return to the table in a mere 3 years from now

Those who ignore demographics do so at the own peril. Similarly, those who ignore surveys do so at their own peril.

It should be an interesting roadshow.

I agree that pass or fail will be close. Maybe not 1% close, but it won’t be 90/10 in either direction. Either way, the result creates division not unity. That is the furthest goal that any bargaining committee or elected oversight body should be seeking.

p.s.

“You won’t always be on flat pay”

“You won’t always be an FO”

“You won’t always be on reserve”

All lines from bargaining rounds in the past. Will they be spoken again this time?

[digits_]

Year 3 NB FO pay vs year 3 NB CA $113.91/274.49 = 0.41
Year 4 NB FO pay vs year 4 NB CA $121.75/276.71 = 0.44
Year 5 NB FO pay vs year 5 NB CA $156.53/279.52 = 0.56
Year 12 NB FO pay vs year 12 NB CA $199.42/299.89 = 0.665

Year 3 WB FO pay vs year 3 WB CA $138.26/373.69 = 0.37
Year 4 WB FO pay vs year 12 WB CA $148.80/376.71 = 0.39
Year 5 WB FO pay vs year 12 WB CA $207.40/380.55 = 0.545
Year 12 WB FO pay vs year 12 WB CA $265.37/408.27 = 0.65

Any way you slice it, it appears both currently and (potentially) going forward there is a de facto FO reduced pay ratio until year 12. I am not sure that any other legacy carrier does that.

Is everybody aware that almost 50% of the voting AC pilots are not CA?

When an FO upgrades, do they start at Captain pay year 1?

[hithere]

all RP and FO pay counts 100% to the Years of service step you enter when you go Captain at AC

[digits_]

all RP and FO pay counts 100% to the Years of service step you enter when you go Captain at AC

Which only makes the FO / CPT pay ratio more out of whack.

If the average FO has around 2 years of service, and the average CPT is likely on step 12, the average AC plane will have a captain making about 4 times as much as his colleague, or an FO making 25% of his colleague. Interesting situation for sure!