P4C members terminated

[Fanblade]

understand why so many Jr pilots feel like the Sr pilots didn't do much to protect this job.

You wonder why senior pilots don't think much of junior pilots....statements like that show so much ignorance and naiveté.

1995-1998 huge hiring boom...ends with strike of 1998.
199?-1998 Air Canada regional airline pilots take ACPA pilots to CLRB/CIRB to try and force a seniority merger
1999 Federal govt conspires with AA and Gerry Schwartz to takeover Air Canada
1999 Air Canada forced to buy CAI
2000 tech sector meltdown - huge downturn of business traffic
2000 merger of AC and CAI...CRA pilots merged with fake dates of hire, CAI pilots get free upgrade (non-negotiated) to ACPA wage and working conditions
2001 - 9-11 almost zero support from Canadian federal government
2001 Mitchnick award in merger of ACPA and ALPA-C
2003 - Air Canada CCAA pilots chose to take pay cuts to protect junior pilot jobs...other AC unions sell out their junior members
Keller award award in merger of ACPA and ALPA-C
2004 Air Canada emerges from CCAA
2006 arbitrator removes pension indexing from ACPA
2008/09 Financial meltdown...Air Canada barely avoids CCAA a second time that decade - CA frozen
2012 Federal gov't under Harper takes a tough stance against Labour....screws Canada Post...prevents pilots from striking under the Protection of Air Services Act
FOS is forced on ACPA by Harper govt.

But you're right...senior pilots no nothing about tough times and protecting junior pilots

And the last 15 years?

I get we, the average Joe pilot voted against TA1. That still doesn’t excuse what happened. ACPA negotiated it. It never would have been rammed down our throat had ACPA not negotiated it.

ACPA owns.

The loss of DB Pension. Doubling flat pay to four years. FO and RP pay cuts. Rouge.

All of this was freely negotiated by ACPA. Give a thought to how these changes alone are currently impacting the next generation.

[Fanblade]

"Everyone just shut up and be happy you work at AC"...

Sounds familiar.

And Sr pilots wonder why there's a whole separate forum just for CWIPP pilots.

Go look at 2003 wages, compared to 2022 wages. Factor some inflation, housing prices since then, overall cost of living... and maybe you (sportingrifle) will understand why so many Jr pilots feel like the Sr pilots didn't do much to protect this job. And don't say "well go somewhere else"... there isn't anywhere else. AC is still the top in Canada, but that doesn't mean those of us who went there have to be happy with the status quo.

disclaimer; I know it's not everyone, I know a ton of awesome Sr guys.

Just a random question.
What’s the time to left seat in a 320 now vs. back in 2003?

The question is a red herring. In 2003 we were dealing with over staffing due to a merger. In the late 90’s people were upgrading to the 320 in about 3-5 years. Not that different than today. The quality of life issues on the narrow body fleet weren’t as sever then either. Today some people avoid narrow body upgrading because of the poor pairing credit alone. Top of the list is working 16 days often. It’s going more junior partly because the quality of the job has dropped.

We certainly helped AC to expand by creating cheap new hire pay. Yes some got quick upgrades out of the expansion. Between the expansion, and doubling flat pay, our pilot population on flat pay more than tripled.

Think about it.

[altiplano]

I love how the company and union establishment shills all come out and argue against the idea that improvements are needed for Air Canada plots.

Meanwhile -
We make 30% less than we did 20 years ago.
Our annual wage gains are 1/4 current inflation levels.
FOs and RPs make less.
We work more.
Our pension is shittier wether you are DB or CWIPP.
We pay more for that pension.
We have less vacation.
We have B scale and C scale.
We have 4 years of low pay to start off.
We have lost scope, EMJs, 80 seat aircraft, ASM percentage.
We haven't made a gain in our contract for 20 years.

Keep on cheering though boys. You are king of the shit pile.

[Ki-ll]

"Everyone just shut up and be happy you work at AC"...

Sounds familiar.

And Sr pilots wonder why there's a whole separate forum just for CWIPP pilots.

Go look at 2003 wages, compared to 2022 wages. Factor some inflation, housing prices since then, overall cost of living... and maybe you (sportingrifle) will understand why so many Jr pilots feel like the Sr pilots didn't do much to protect this job. And don't say "well go somewhere else"... there isn't anywhere else. AC is still the top in Canada, but that doesn't mean those of us who went there have to be happy with the status quo.

disclaimer; I know it's not everyone, I know a ton of awesome Sr guys.

Just a random question.
What’s the time to left seat in a 320 now vs. back in 2003?

Not everyone wants to go be a Jr captain just to get off flat pay.

Year 3 320FOs made 120-130k in 2002-2003 money. Go find an inflation calculator and compare that to the 75k they make now.

Have a look at what houses cost in Richmond, Surrey, Burlington, Oakville etc in 2003 as well.

Maybe then some Sr fellas will understand why so many Jr pilots are angry.

Fair points, some people would rather have seniority than pay.
Where on a list of 320 FOs would this hypothetical 3rd year 320 pilot sit in 2003 vs. now?
Just curious, how did you get 120-130k number? Using the collective agreement from 2000-2004, blended rates and 78 hour guarantee I get $96,822 in 2003 dollars.

[Ki-ll]

"Everyone just shut up and be happy you work at AC"...

Sounds familiar.

And Sr pilots wonder why there's a whole separate forum just for CWIPP pilots.

Go look at 2003 wages, compared to 2022 wages. Factor some inflation, housing prices since then, overall cost of living... and maybe you (sportingrifle) will understand why so many Jr pilots feel like the Sr pilots didn't do much to protect this job. And don't say "well go somewhere else"... there isn't anywhere else. AC is still the top in Canada, but that doesn't mean those of us who went there have to be happy with the status quo.

disclaimer; I know it's not everyone, I know a ton of awesome Sr guys.

Just a random question.
What’s the time to left seat in a 320 now vs. back in 2003?

The question is a red herring. In 2003 we were dealing with over staffing due to a merger. In the late 90’s people were upgrading to the 320 in about 3-5 years. Not that different than today. The quality of life issues on the narrow body fleet weren’t as sever then either. Today some people avoid narrow body upgrading because of the poor pairing credit alone. Top of the list is working 16 days often. It’s going more junior partly because the quality of the job has dropped.

We certainly helped AC to expand by creating cheap new hire pay. Yes some got quick upgrades out of the expansion. Between the expansion, and doubling flat pay, our pilot population on flat pay more than tripled.

Think about it.

What were pilot's options in 2003 in terms of whether upgrade or not upgrade to left seat of a NB? Could the have good seniority on the FO list? WB FO? Were they off reserve?

[altiplano]

Fair points, some people would rather have seniority than pay.
Where on a list of 320 FOs would this hypothetical 3rd year 320 pilot sit in 2003 vs. now?
Just curious, how did you get 120-130k number? Using the collective agreement from 2000-2004, blended rates and 78 hour guarantee I get $96,822 in 2003 dollars.

2003 319/320 3rd year FO rates were $97.49/109.41.

The rate would be a little higher if you accounted for 321 weight pay which we fly today.

More vacation, 25% lower employee pension contribution, pension indexing, fewer days worked all would bring a significantly better package.

What does a 3rd year FO (777 even) make today? $79/hr.- 20 years later.

What were pilot's options in 2003 in terms of whether upgrade or not upgrade to left seat of a NB? Could the have good seniority on the FO list? WB FO? Were they off reserve?

That's irrelevant. Those are market/industry cycle, corporate choices, and growth based on broader things than pilot concessions. Our duty and our union's duty is not to justify deteriorating work conditions and pay because we are in a period of growth and retirement and a member can take an upgrade sooner than 10 years.

[Fanblade]

Just a random question.
What’s the time to left seat in a 320 now vs. back in 2003?

The question is a red herring. In 2003 we were dealing with over staffing due to a merger. In the late 90’s people were upgrading to the 320 in about 3-5 years. Not that different than today. The quality of life issues on the narrow body fleet weren’t as sever then either. Today some people avoid narrow body upgrading because of the poor pairing credit alone. Top of the list is working 16 days often. It’s going more junior partly because the quality of the job has dropped.

We certainly helped AC to expand by creating cheap new hire pay. Yes some got quick upgrades out of the expansion. Between the expansion, and doubling flat pay, our pilot population on flat pay more than tripled.

Think about it.

What were pilot's options in 2003 in terms of whether upgrade or not upgrade to left seat of a NB? Could the have good seniority on the FO list? WB FO? Were they off reserve?

I already answered you. See the bold above.

To expand on it you have picked the worse time in AC history for upgrades and career progression. A merger in 2000 which left us overstaffed. Then 911. Then CCAA. There were about 1600 pilot positions west of YYZ. By 2005 there were less than 1000. Yes it was absolutely brutal. Many people were forced off the YVR base. Left seats lost. Furloughs.

But it wasn’t the norm. It was bankruptcy. Like I said in the late 1990’s upgrades were almost as quick. In 2007 just as quick as today. Much of how fast one can upgrade is timing in a hiring cycle. You and I know it can stop just as fast as it starts.

Today people are upgrading quickly again, just like in previous hiring cycles, but the compensation is about 30% less than it was 20 years ago and the pension greatly degraded. And like always it could stop tomorrow.

Question for you to consider. We took 15% pay cuts in CCAA.

Why are we 30% (some instances 40%) behind pre bankruptcy pay levels today? An in-depth look at this question reveals a lot of continued concessionary bargaining even post CCAA. The most recent Cargo.

The truth of the matter is that in 2003 our wages were relatively close to US carriers. Then while US carriers fought to regain their bankruptcy losses post Chapter 11. ACPA continued to give concessions. Today we are embarrassingly far behind.

What does all this say about our performance over the last 15 years?

Now place yourself in the shoes of Joe junior pilot. Would you want this to continue?

If you want it stopped. How would you go about it?

As you went about trying to stop the concessionary bargaining how would it come across to you if senior pilots started saying to you. Greedy. Lazy. Trouble makers. Quite if you don’t like it.

Then you get to watch the agents for change you have elected get fired. The union response. Zero. Some of the senior response. Good riddance.

Think about it.

[sportingrifle]

Fan blade…I want to let you have the last word on this but I also want to clarify a point that you are confusing-in fact the whole thread has confused. There are two separate issues being discussed that in reality have nothing to do with each other but that have been joined together. A thread drift that would be better served by two separate threads.

The first issue is the termination of an employee who ( I believe) disregarded the companies policies on publicly commenting on company affairs. A policy that he signed and acknowledged upon being hired. A policy that is no different from what almost all companies have, and that most companies also terminate their employees for violating. Including airlines represented by ALPA. I commented that a significant number of newer employees also displayed a lack of appreciation for the job and the profession, and that I would be happy if they moved on elsewhere. At no time did I insinuate that it was an entire generation, or even the majority of new hires. You did. It is perhaps 10 or 20 percent, but still a great increase from the perhaps 2 percent of previous generations. Bad apples were culled pretty quickly 25 years ago. You broad brushed the idea that I was attacking an entire generation of pilots into my post when in fact I was not. I was complaining about the few that myself and my colleagues have had issues with that display strong indicators that they shouldn’t be here to begin with. And I stand by my position (“doubling down” in your words) that the airline and our cockpits are better off without these individuals.

But because the terminated individual was a union guy, his termination for (alleged) bad behaviour has been twisted into an attack on our union, and by extension, ourselves and our contract. No, he was simply one of significant number of hiring mistakes we have made that got corrected. And probably not the last. Your explanation of the tremendous erosion of our wages and working conditions is accurate and something that we need to begin to correct in the upcoming negotiations. But that is a completely separate issue from culling bad apples.

[negative_g]

The first issue is the termination of an employee who ( I believe) disregarded the companies policies on publicly commenting on company affairs.

Sounds like a lot of speculation (I believe).

[Bingo Fuel]

[A] significant number of newer employees also displayed a lack of appreciation for the job and the profession, and that I would be happy if they moved on elsewhere.

At no time did I insinuate that it was an entire generation, or even the majority of new hires. You did. It is perhaps 10 or 20 percent, but still a great increase from the perhaps 2 percent of previous generations.

[They] shouldn’t be here to begin with. I stand by my position ... that the airline and our cockpits are better off without these individuals.

No, he was simply one of significant number of hiring mistakes we have made that got corrected. And probably not the last.

So, let me make sure I'm understanding you correctly. In your estimate, the younger generation is 5-10x more likely to be a "bad apple" that never should have been hired?

If this is accurate, how would you suggest fixing it?

[negative_g]

I know a ton of pilots hired at AC in the last few years who are mid 30s/40s and some even pushing 50. All of which feel the same way as thid so called entitled "young generation". Not everyone is 23 years old you know.

I wonder should they go find new careers as well sportingrifle?

Are they also all hiring mistakes?

Seriously what the @#$! is this thread.

[sportingrifle]

Bingo fuel…
Hiring is above my pay grade but two thoughts in reply to your question. The first is I would try to hire people who have done hard or unpleasant jobs, either in aviation or to pay for aviation. They appreciate a job where you can sit in a really well maintained heated/air conditioned airplane and sip coffee while the freight loads. The second thing is I would be ruthless getting rid of people with even a hint of a bad attitude while on probation. If they have a bad attitude six months in, it ain’t gonna get better 6 years in.

Unfortunately I can’t tell stories out of school, but some of the stuff I have seen and have heard from my colleagues simply is beyond belief.

[Fanblade]

But because the terminated individual was a union guy, his termination for (alleged) bad behaviour has been twisted into an attack on our union, and by extension, ourselves and our contract. No, he was simply one of significant number of hiring mistakes we have made that got corrected. And probably not the last. Your explanation of the tremendous erosion of our wages and working conditions is accurate and something that we need to begin to correct in the upcoming negotiations. But that is a completely separate issue from culling bad apples.

I personally know the individual you are talking about that you refer to as a hiring mistake. My opinion of him is in stark contrast to yours. He was a true unionist. Selfless. An advocate for change. That is what his “bad behaviour” was about and why he was targeted. He will be back. No you can’t fire a union leader for saying something negative about a company. There would be no unions if that were so. This firing is way over the top. Way over. If it had happened with the IAM they would have downed tool. Yes this was a targeted attack on all of us. What you are applauding is the company stepping in and stomping on a union drive/change/ change of direction. Probably because you simply don’t want change.

We have a bunch of elections coming up. More of the same will be placed into leadership roles much to your dismay. Will you applaud if they fire them too?

You speak of correcting our abysmal performance yet you condone, no actually you fully support, the termination of unionists? Unionists are hiring mistakes. How on earth do you expect to correct the performance without unionists?

At no time did I insinuate that it was an entire generation, or even the majority of new hires. You did. It is perhaps 10 or 20 percent, but still a great increase from the perhaps 2 percent of previous generations.

Lol,

You actually think that is less offensive? Like I said, the YVR chair keeps doing the same demographic slagging without the self awareness to understand what he is doing.

Let’s put it this way. The new talent I work with on the line, in the real world, is superb. I have always been impressed with the quality AC hires. I have noticed nothing as far as degradation of attitude and professionalism with one exception. They are not happy with our contract and ACPA’s performance.

What’s going on is that as they try to take action to correct ACPA’s poor performance the company isn’t impressed.

[negative_g]

Bingo fuel…
Hiring is above my pay grade but two thoughts in reply to your question. The first is I would try to hire people who have done hard or unpleasant jobs, either in aviation or to pay for aviation. They appreciate a job where you can sit in a really well maintained heated/air conditioned airplane and sip coffee while the freight loads. The second thing is I would be ruthless getting rid of people with even a hint of a bad attitude while on probation. If they have a bad attitude six months in, it ain’t gonna get better 6 years in.

Unfortunately I can’t tell stories out of school, but some if the stuff I have seen and have heard from my colleagues simply is beyond belief.

Yeesh.

[Fanblade]

.

[skyhighh]

Bingo fuel…
Hiring is above my pay grade but two thoughts in reply to your question. The first is I would try to hire people who have done hard or unpleasant jobs, either in aviation or to pay for aviation. They appreciate a job where you can sit in a really well maintained heated/air conditioned airplane and sip coffee while the freight loads. The second thing is I would be ruthless getting rid of people with even a hint of a bad attitude while on probation. If they have a bad attitude six months in, it ain’t gonna get better 6 years in.

Unfortunately I can’t tell stories out of school, but some of the stuff I have seen and have heard from my colleagues simply is beyond belief.

That shows your total lack and awareness of the pilots AC is hiring. Most of the new hires have been in this industry for decades, which means they most likely worked the ramp, flew planes older than their parents (grand parents?) up north in bad weather while freezing their ass off for a 703-704 who didn’t care about them and most likely forced them to do unsafe things in fear of not having a “recommendation”.

Maybe the reason why the new hires are not as happy to have a job at AC is because they have been selected for being the best, have extensive experience, good attitude, etc… all that while realizing upon arrival that the union doesn’t care about them and the working conditions are some of the lowest of the industry.

You mentioned that the company has been hiring more and more bad apples… Maybe the problem isn’t the apple.

I personally know a bunch of fantastic pilots at Air Canada and one of them just got fired… he isn’t a bad apple but someone motivated to make sure the industry becomes a better place and attract professional pilots. Did you notice there was a “pilot shortage”? Oh wait… no, it isn’t a pilot shortage but a shortage of pilots willing to go through all the s**t and see their pay diminish for every move they make. How many paycut did we take in our career in order to get to the airlines? We keep hearing the old guys saying “They have to pay their dues”… well, guess what, except for a handful… they did! And people like the ones who got fired know that and they are fighting to make sure to attract more and more pilots so we can keep those airplane flying.

Ask around you how many would leave Canada to fly for the US carriers in a heartbeat if the green card was easier to get? Meanwhile the union is like “Yeah… they are bad apples…” while they make 300K a year flying just enough to remain current on the aircraft.

Anyway… Thanks god I can’t get fired from Air Canada

[Ki-ll]

The question is a red herring. In 2003 we were dealing with over staffing due to a merger. In the late 90’s people were upgrading to the 320 in about 3-5 years. Not that different than today. The quality of life issues on the narrow body fleet weren’t as sever then either. Today some people avoid narrow body upgrading because of the poor pairing credit alone. Top of the list is working 16 days often. It’s going more junior partly because the quality of the job has dropped.

We certainly helped AC to expand by creating cheap new hire pay. Yes some got quick upgrades out of the expansion. Between the expansion, and doubling flat pay, our pilot population on flat pay more than tripled.

Think about it.

What were pilot's options in 2003 in terms of whether upgrade or not upgrade to left seat of a NB? Could the have good seniority on the FO list? WB FO? Were they off reserve?

I already answered you. See the bold above.

To expand on it you have picked the worse time in AC history for upgrades and career progression. A merger in 2000 which left us overstaffed. Then 911. Then CCAA. There were about 1600 pilot positions west of YYZ. By 2005 there were less than 1000. Yes it was absolutely brutal. Many people were forced off the YVR base. Left seats lost. Furloughs.

But it wasn’t the norm. It was bankruptcy. Like I said in the late 1990’s upgrades were almost as quick. In 2007 just as quick as today. Much of how fast one can upgrade is timing in a hiring cycle. You and I know it can stop just as fast as it starts.

Today people are upgrading quickly again, just like in previous hiring cycles, but the compensation is about 30% less than it was 20 years ago and the pension greatly degraded. And like always it could stop tomorrow.

Question for you to consider. We took 15% pay cuts in CCAA.

Why are we 30% (some instances 40%) behind pre bankruptcy pay levels today? An in-depth look at this question reveals a lot of continued concessionary bargaining even post CCAA. The most recent Cargo.

The truth of the matter is that in 2003 our wages were relatively close to US carriers. Then while US carriers fought to regain their bankruptcy losses post Chapter 11. ACPA continued to give concessions. Today we are embarrassingly far behind.

What does all this say about our performance over the last 15 years?

Now place yourself in the shoes of Joe junior pilot. Would you want this to continue?

If you want it stopped. How would you go about it?

As you went about trying to stop the concessionary bargaining how would it come across to you if senior pilots started saying to you. Greedy. Lazy. Trouble makers. Quite if you don’t like it.

Then you get to watch the agents for change you have elected get fired. The union response. Zero. Some of the senior response. Good riddance.

Think about it.

I don’t see you answering my questions with either of your posts.
I didn’t pick anything. The person I quoted picked 2003 wages so I did some digging and asked some question to get a perspective.

[BTD]

The first issue is the termination of an employee who ( I believe) disregarded the companies policies on publicly commenting on company affairs. A policy that he signed and acknowledged upon being hired. A policy that is no different from what almost all companies have, and that most companies also terminate their employees for violating. Including airlines represented by ALPA. I commented that a significant number of newer employees also displayed a lack of appreciation for the job and the profession, and that I would be happy if they moved on elsewhere. At no time did I insinuate that it was an entire generation, or even the majority of new hires. You did. It is perhaps 10 or 20 percent, but still a great increase from the perhaps 2 percent of previous generations.

There is no way you could know what percentage. Perhaps the avenues for dissenting opinions are not the same as they were for previous generations. IE social media.

The game would be totally different if social media was around long ago, or if it didn’t exist now. “If you build it he will come”. People are the way people are. Some are whiners and some aren’t. Some have integrity some don’t. Some are pleasant and some are crusty b*asterds, and they come in any combination.

[Fanblade]

What were pilot's options in 2003 in terms of whether upgrade or not upgrade to left seat of a NB? Could the have good seniority on the FO list? WB FO? Were they off reserve?

I already answered you. See the bold above.

To expand on it you have picked the worse time in AC history for upgrades and career progression. A merger in 2000 which left us overstaffed. Then 911. Then CCAA. There were about 1600 pilot positions west of YYZ. By 2005 there were less than 1000. Yes it was absolutely brutal. Many people were forced off the YVR base. Left seats lost. Furloughs.

But it wasn’t the norm. It was bankruptcy. Like I said in the late 1990’s upgrades were almost as quick. In 2007 just as quick as today. Much of how fast one can upgrade is timing in a hiring cycle. You and I know it can stop just as fast as it starts.

Today people are upgrading quickly again, just like in previous hiring cycles, but the compensation is about 30% less than it was 20 years ago and the pension greatly degraded. And like always it could stop tomorrow.

Question for you to consider. We took 15% pay cuts in CCAA.

Why are we 30% (some instances 40%) behind pre bankruptcy pay levels today? An in-depth look at this question reveals a lot of continued concessionary bargaining even post CCAA. The most recent Cargo.

The truth of the matter is that in 2003 our wages were relatively close to US carriers. Then while US carriers fought to regain their bankruptcy losses post Chapter 11. ACPA continued to give concessions. Today we are embarrassingly far behind.

What does all this say about our performance over the last 15 years?

Now place yourself in the shoes of Joe junior pilot. Would you want this to continue?

If you want it stopped. How would you go about it?

As you went about trying to stop the concessionary bargaining how would it come across to you if senior pilots started saying to you. Greedy. Lazy. Trouble makers. Quite if you don’t like it.

Then you get to watch the agents for change you have elected get fired. The union response. Zero. Some of the senior response. Good riddance.

Think about it.

I don’t see you answering my questions with either of your posts.
I didn’t pick anything. The person I quoted picked 2003 wages so I did some digging and asked some question to get a perspective.

Bullsh!t.

You know full well 2003 was an inflection point. Or a cliff. Best wages and worst progression all in one year.

You are being opportunistic jumping on someone who didn't live the history.

[Buckle_Up]

What these guys did is serious and they will be lucky if all they get is fired. I don't see this a a shot at P4C in the least. The one clown was on track to get fired before he got laid off. He had made a name for himself during his PIT Course and the unabashed arrogance grew from there.

No ones going to drop tools to support these guys and if you think they'll get their jobs back - you are delusional.

From what I have seen P4C has some great ideas, may want to work on your delivery. No doubt ACPA is useless but this wasn't their doing and remember the MEC Chairman is the Grand Poohbah of the P4C Movement.

Unfortunately these three made a seriously bad move but for the rest of us - time to move on - nothing to see here.