RippleRock wrote: ↑Mon Jan 16, 2023 8:14 am
Some of us are very eager to see the yellow, colluding, capitulating mess that is ACPA thrown hard into a dumpster and set alight.
Can't happen quickly enough in my world. Any "initiative" otherwise seems a waste of resources and time.
Some of us are worried that you're also willing to "set alight" our $50M, handing it over to ALPA Washington without due diligence, as long as we throw ACPA in the dumpster as soon as possible.
There's a process that needs to be followed here. It's not a waste of resources and time.
First and foremost, this is a negotiation with ALPA, about what we pay, what representation we get, what resources we get, and what happens to a very big sum of funds that have been accumulated over decades. Think 'prenup' when one party is entering into a marriage with a lot of assets.
You're breaking rule number 1 of negotiations. Announcing that you're willing to sign a merger deal no matter what.
RippleRock wrote: ↑Mon Jan 16, 2023 8:14 am
Some of us are very eager to see the yellow, colluding, capitulating mess that is ACPA thrown hard into a dumpster and set alight.
Can't happen quickly enough in my world. Any "initiative" otherwise seems a waste of resources and time.
Some of us are worried that you're also willing to "set alight" our $50M, handing it over to ALPA Washington without due diligence, as long as we throw ACPA in the dumpster as soon as possible.
There's a process that needs to be followed here. It's not a waste of resources and time.
First and foremost, this is a negotiation with ALPA, about what we pay, what representation we get, what resources we get, and what happens to a very big sum of funds that have been accumulated over decades. Think 'prenup' when one party is entering into a marriage with a lot of assets.
You're breaking rule number 1 of negotiations. Announcing that you're willing to sign a merger deal no matter what.
You'll be getting a lot more from ALPA than you give to ALPA considering the overall wages in the US and the number of pilots making a boat load more cash than Canadians under ALPA in the US.
RippleRock wrote: ↑Mon Jan 16, 2023 8:14 am
Some of us are very eager to see the yellow, colluding, capitulating mess that is ACPA thrown hard into a dumpster and set alight.
Can't happen quickly enough in my world. Any "initiative" otherwise seems a waste of resources and time.
Some of us are worried that you're also willing to "set alight" our $50M, handing it over to ALPA Washington without due diligence, as long as we throw ACPA in the dumpster as soon as possible.
There's a process that needs to be followed here. It's not a waste of resources and time.
First and foremost, this is a negotiation with ALPA, about what we pay, what representation we get, what resources we get, and what happens to a very big sum of funds that have been accumulated over decades. Think 'prenup' when one party is entering into a marriage with a lot of assets.
You're breaking rule number 1 of negotiations. Announcing that you're willing to sign a merger deal no matter what.
IACP did it. FPA did it. Still waiting to see if APA is going to do it.
It isn’t rocket science and the template is not hard to find.
The problem with being told that you are ‘special’ all of the time is that you actually start to believe that you are special.
RippleRock wrote: ↑Mon Jan 16, 2023 8:14 am
Some of us are very eager to see the yellow, colluding, capitulating mess that is ACPA thrown hard into a dumpster and set alight.
Can't happen quickly enough in my world. Any "initiative" otherwise seems a waste of resources and time.
Some of us are worried that you're also willing to "set alight" our $50M, handing it over to ALPA Washington without due diligence, as long as we throw ACPA in the dumpster as soon as possible.
There's a process that needs to be followed here. It's not a waste of resources and time.
First and foremost, this is a negotiation with ALPA, about what we pay, what representation we get, what resources we get, and what happens to a very big sum of funds that have been accumulated over decades. Think 'prenup' when one party is entering into a marriage with a lot of assets.
You're breaking rule number 1 of negotiations. Announcing that you're willing to sign a merger deal no matter what.
IACP did it. FPA did it. Still waiting to see if APA is going to do it.
It isn’t rocket science and the template is not hard to find.
The problem with being told that you are ‘special’ all of the time is that you actually start to believe that you are special.
I’m not sure why you are so offended that some people want to understand the full scope of a potential merger deal including what will happen to ACPAs healthy cash reserves before jumping into the idea head first. Why are the pilots I encounter who are most vocal and excited about the idea of a merger are regional pilots on the outside looking in. Things like that make the sceptical amount us nervous.
I think the other posters assertion that we will definitely get a return on our considerable investment because of the US pay rates willfully ignores the steamy turds that ALPA Flair and Westjet dropped recently and losers ALPA Jaz have been dropping since 2011.
I and most others are very open to hearing a fleshed out proposal for pilot unity but I am also reasonably sceptical about the claims foisted around that the only thing lacking that keeps Air Canada pilots from obtaining US style compensation is Tim Perry and his band of mostly regional pilots/metro drivers, and because the ask is so little/reward so high it’s offensive for us to ask for a peak behind the curtain. And purely as an ALPA-C outsider watching you guys drop stinker after stinker while maintaining a holier than thou attitude is entertaining to say the least. Shouldn’t ALPA have flown up from Herndon and stopped Flair from rolling out that contract? What about 2015 when the Jazz pilots completely demolished the best regional contract in North America in exchange for flow and buyouts, why didn’t ALPA intervene? According to the AlPA fanatics that is how it works.
Fully negotiate a deal, educate the membership, put it to a vote. That’s all the reluctant are asking for.
RippleRock wrote: ↑Mon Jan 16, 2023 8:14 am
Some of us are very eager to see the yellow, colluding, capitulating mess that is ACPA thrown hard into a dumpster and set alight.
Can't happen quickly enough in my world. Any "initiative" otherwise seems a waste of resources and time.
Some of us are worried that you're also willing to "set alight" our $50M, handing it over to ALPA Washington without due diligence, as long as we throw ACPA in the dumpster as soon as possible.
There's a process that needs to be followed here. It's not a waste of resources and time.
First and foremost, this is a negotiation with ALPA, about what we pay, what representation we get, what resources we get, and what happens to a very big sum of funds that have been accumulated over decades. Think 'prenup' when one party is entering into a marriage with a lot of assets.
You're breaking rule number 1 of negotiations. Announcing that you're willing to sign a merger deal no matter what.
IACP did it. FPA did it. Still waiting to see if APA is going to do it.
It isn’t rocket science and the template is not hard to find.
The problem with being told that you are ‘special’ all of the time is that you actually start to believe that you are special.
Rudder,
I hear you. But this isn't about being special.
The group in charge currently isn't the same group as before.
It's about simply doing it right.
We have about 20% of this group firmly opposed to ALPA. See above.
Some of us are worried that you're also willing to "set alight" our $50M, handing it over to ALPA Washington without due diligence, as long as we throw ACPA in the dumpster as soon as possible.
There's a process that needs to be followed here. It's not a waste of resources and time.
First and foremost, this is a negotiation with ALPA, about what we pay, what representation we get, what resources we get, and what happens to a very big sum of funds that have been accumulated over decades. Think 'prenup' when one party is entering into a marriage with a lot of assets.
You're breaking rule number 1 of negotiations. Announcing that you're willing to sign a merger deal no matter what.
IACP did it. FPA did it. Still waiting to see if APA is going to do it.
It isn’t rocket science and the template is not hard to find.
The problem with being told that you are ‘special’ all of the time is that you actually start to believe that you are special.
Rudder,
I hear you. But this isn't about being special.
The group in charge currently isn't the same group as before.
It's about simply doing it right.
We have about 20% of this group firmly opposed to ALPA. See above.
Unity survey was 52% turn out.
74% for hearing ALPAs proposal in a non binding way.
20% against.
So it’s more like 10% firmly opposed and 48% too apathetic to vote in the unity survey.
To say the support is slam dunk overwhelmingly pro-ALPA is disingenuous, it might get there but we need to follow the process and engage the membership.
Fan blade wrote:
We have about 20% of this group firmly opposed to ALPA. See above.
Unity survey was 52% turn out.
74% for hearing ALPAs proposal in a non binding way.
20% against.
So it’s more like 10% firmly opposed and 48% too apathetic to vote in the unity survey.
To say the support is slam dunk overwhelmingly pro-ALPA is disingenuous, it might get there but we need to follow the process and engage the membership.
Sharklasers,
Where did I state that overwhelming support for ALPA is a slam dunk?
How about we just let the merger negotiations happen. The road shows happen. Then vote.
You know democracy. It is all anyone has really wanted. An opportunity to choose. Something that has been denied for far too long.
Fan blade wrote:
We have about 20% of this group firmly opposed to ALPA. See above.
Unity survey was 52% turn out.
74% for hearing ALPAs proposal in a non binding way.
20% against.
So it’s more like 10% firmly opposed and 48% too apathetic to vote in the unity survey.
To say the support is slam dunk overwhelmingly pro-ALPA is disingenuous, it might get there but we need to follow the process and engage the membership.
Sharklasers,
Where did I state that overwhelming support for ALPA is a slam dunk?
How about we just let the merger negotiations happen. The road shows happen. Then vote.
You know democracy. It is all anyone has really wanted. An opportunity to choose. Something that has been denied for far too long.
I’m not sure why you are so offended that some people want to understand the full scope of a potential merger deal including what will happen to ACPAs healthy cash reserves before jumping into the idea head first.
I think the other posters assertion that we will definitely get a return on our considerable investment because of the US pay rates willfully ignores the steamy turds that ALPA Flair and Westjet dropped recently and losers ALPA Jaz have been dropping since 2011.
This obsession with the “healthy cash reserves” is a combination of funny and revolting considering the healthy cash reserves have resulted in a conga line of concessionary contracts over 2 decades.
Secondly, a pilot group gets the contract that they approve, not just negotiate and are willing to strike and shut down the company for. At any point these pilot groups and others could have said NO!!! ALPA came to as good an agreement as they thought they could get without striking or threatening other labour actions from management and presented it.
It pains me to see how scared pilots are. For a group of professionals that face the threats that flying through the air presents we sure have a pathetic lack of courage when it comes to demanding our own worth as an employee group. Say “NO”, work to rule, say “NO” again, threaten to strike, say “NO” again, get legislated back, say “NO” again and make your demands focused and clear. “We want better, we will not accept any less any more and we want it yesterday.”
IACP did it. FPA did it. Still waiting to see if APA is going to do it.
It isn’t rocket science and the template is not hard to find.
The problem with being told that you are ‘special’ all of the time is that you actually start to believe that you are special.
Rudder,
I hear you. But this isn't about being special.
The group in charge currently isn't the same group as before.
It's about simply doing it right.
We have about 20% of this group firmly opposed to ALPA. See above.
Unity survey was 52% turn out.
74% for hearing ALPAs proposal in a non binding way.
20% against.
So it’s more like 10% firmly opposed and 48% too apathetic to vote in the unity survey.
To say the support is slam dunk overwhelmingly pro-ALPA is disingenuous, it might get there but we need to follow the process and engage the membership.
I sometimes wonder if the 48% that did not vote will actually say no, add to that the 20% that actually said no, and we might find out than it is a much closer fight than one might think. Add a merger rumour or anything in the likes and this will turn into a no. I don't think it will be easy "yes".
The merger rumour is a red herring being thrown around to spook people into staying with ACPA.
Any merger REGARDLESS of union similarities or differences will be negotiated, mediated and/or arbitrated. Anything else is just right ignorance of labour law.
I’m not sure why you are so offended that some people want to understand the full scope of a potential merger deal including what will happen to ACPAs healthy cash reserves before jumping into the idea head first.
I think the other posters assertion that we will definitely get a return on our considerable investment because of the US pay rates willfully ignores the steamy turds that ALPA Flair and Westjet dropped recently and losers ALPA Jaz have been dropping since 2011.
This obsession with the “healthy cash reserves” is a combination of funny and revolting considering the healthy cash reserves have resulted in a conga line of concessionary contracts over 2 decades.
Secondly, a pilot group gets the contract that they approve, not just negotiate and are willing to strike and shut down the company for. At any point these pilot groups and others could have said NO!!! ALPA came to as good an agreement as they thought they could get without striking or threatening other labour actions from management and presented it.
It pains me to see how scared pilots are. For a group of professionals that face the threats that flying through the air presents we sure have a pathetic lack of courage when it comes to demanding our own worth as an employee group. Say “NO”, work to rule, say “NO” again, threaten to strike, say “NO” again, get legislated back, say “NO” again and make your demands focused and clear. “We want better, we will not accept any less any more and we want it yesterday.”
The lack of courage likely comes from the beatings we take on our first jobs, you know the CP or owner who tells you if you don’t break the rules they could find ten pilot tomorrow who will.
I find the older I get my willingness to shut down the company has diminished, I was willing and voted accordingly in the past, now I just want to coast to my retirement.
I honestly don’t think we will need to threaten strike, they will have no choice but to pony up, once they pull their heads out of their asses and actually see what’s going on
cdnavater wrote: ↑Tue Jan 17, 2023 1:41 pm
I find the older I get my willingness to shut down the company has diminished, I was willing and voted accordingly in the past, now I just want to coast to my retirement.
I respect the sentiment of the ~20% that want to coast. But the rest of us have decades of career left, and also want to leave things better for the next generation than what we started with.
cdnavater wrote: ↑Tue Jan 17, 2023 1:41 pm
I find the older I get my willingness to shut down the company has diminished, I was willing and voted accordingly in the past, now I just want to coast to my retirement.
I respect the sentiment of the ~20% that want to coast. But the rest of us have decades of career left, and also want to leave things better for the next generation than what we started with.
cdnavater wrote: ↑Tue Jan 17, 2023 1:41 pm
I find the older I get my willingness to shut down the company has diminished, I was willing and voted accordingly in the past, now I just want to coast to my retirement.
Funny I’m the exact opposite. Over time I have come to realize there is only one way to get the company to open their wallet.
cdnavater wrote: ↑Tue Jan 17, 2023 1:41 pm
I honestly don’t think we will need to threaten strike, they will have no choice but to pony up, once they pull their heads out of their asses and actually see what’s going on
The company, left to its own devises, will pony up what they think is the bare minimum and only in the limited directions they think are required. For example they probably believe they need to fix new hire pay to attract more qualified applicants. But they probably don’t think wide body pay needs fixing.
In their mind no wide body Captain is going to leave. Why increase their pay then? Now consider where they threw the money in the last MOA. They will do whatever it takes to avoid paying anything beyond the bare minimum. We need the same resolve.
It took Delta, United, American and Alaska pilots multiple years of negotiations after an expired contract to get a deal. Years of information pickets.
There are no free handouts. If we are not willing to demand it and mean it, we will fail.
---------- ADS -----------
Last edited by Fanblade on Wed Jan 18, 2023 11:22 am, edited 2 times in total.
The group in charge currently isn't the same group as before.
It's about simply doing it right.
We have about 20% of this group firmly opposed to ALPA. See above.
Unity survey was 52% turn out.
74% for hearing ALPAs proposal in a non binding way.
20% against.
So it’s more like 10% firmly opposed and 48% too apathetic to vote in the unity survey.
To say the support is slam dunk overwhelmingly pro-ALPA is disingenuous, it might get there but we need to follow the process and engage the membership.
I sometimes wonder if the 48% that did not vote will actually say no, add to that the 20% that actually said no, and we might find out than it is a much closer fight than one might think. Add a merger rumour or anything in the likes and this will turn into a no. I don't think it will be easy "yes".
The 3rd party that does the surveys work in their expertise - statistics
And statistically to a few percentage points - three quarters of AC pilots want ALPA without ALPA even doing a singular presentation
Once the roadshows start, it will be a slam dunk.
Anyone who knows anything about ACPA, knows how bad the organization is and continuing with it is literally the definition of insanity
Sharklasers wrote: ↑Mon Jan 16, 2023 3:11 pm
Unity survey was 52% turn out.
74% for hearing ALPAs proposal in a non binding way.
20% against.
So it’s more like 10% firmly opposed and 48% too apathetic to vote in the unity survey.
To say the support is slam dunk overwhelmingly pro-ALPA is disingenuous, it might get there but we need to follow the process and engage the membership.
I sometimes wonder if the 48% that did not vote will actually say no, add to that the 20% that actually said no, and we might find out than it is a much closer fight than one might think. Add a merger rumour or anything in the likes and this will turn into a no. I don't think it will be easy "yes".
The 3rd party that does the surveys work in their expertise - statistics
And statistically to a few percentage points - three quarters of AC pilots want ALPA without ALPA even doing a singular presentation
Agreed,
Statistics are rarely out more than the margin of error. In this case the sampling size was large enough for a narrow margin of error.
What made up merger BS are people pumping out this time around?
I mean surely people are getting wise to this manipulative tactic by now.
