Smaller Westjet vs Pay Pilots

[mijbil]

What Daedelusx said.

Where I am, we were encouraged to "enjoy our days off" last spring and not answer the phone on GDOs or other non flying days. Cost the company millions bringing in wet leases from as far away as Malta and that was in our slow season. The union figured that if they had paid every pilot another $50K per year across the board for the rest of the contract (Dec 2024) it would have been less than the cost of the wet leases. They dug in heels. Then they were denied TFW's in the late fall/ early winter. Shortly thereafter, a significant number of people contracted "one day stomach flu". The wheels were already in motion for our LOU mid contract which gave us WS scale +2.5 this year and 2.5% next. Unheard of at this outfit. Then the December snow in YVR just accelerated the result of not paying people enough. The increase doesn't match what we lost in Nov 2020 but it's a start

We the pilots are just the most public face of what needs to happen industry wide and that is to pay people enough. We are all cheering you on WS mainline. Raise the bar.
ps
I think that in a previous life Alexis VH must have been a successful baseball pitching coach. His words will result in the word STRIKE.

[Oleo 4]

Would the union pay the pilots some kind of wage during the strike? If so, how much?

Section 65 - Strike Policy of the Alpa Administrative Manual. $1,400 per month prorated if strike ends earlier.


edited to add proration under a month.

That manual was written by ALPA in the USA so is that $1400 USD or CAD?
Also has anyone ever seen a deal struck during the conciliation or the cooling off period ? I haven't.
I feel like the announcement of a stike or lockout is inevitable, the only question is if the government with pre-emptively at the 11th hour legislate them back to work or do it ASAP after 00:01 the day they walk

It is CAD for Canadian pilots and USD for the states.

[bcflyer]

To legislate them back to work and refer the matter to an arbitrator

This has already proven to be illegal in a court of law. The right to strike is enshrined in the constitution and has been upheld by a Supreme Court.

[hithere]

Until the gov invokes the notwithstanding clause like the Ontario PCs did against the teachers aides a couple of months ago. Look, I hope you are right and I hope the Westjet pilots achieve the gains they deserve but go into this with eyes wide open

[averageatbest]

Until the gov invokes the notwithstanding clause like the Ontario PCs did against the teachers aides a couple of months ago. Look, I hope you are right and I hope the Westjet pilots achieve the gains they deserve but go into this with eyes wide open

I'll quote myself from the previous page of this topic...

To what end? What would that action accomplish politically? Why would the government have any incentive to step in and do something that has already proved wildly unpopular with the public in Ontario?

[Fanblade]

Until the gov invokes the notwithstanding clause like the Ontario PCs did against the teachers aides a couple of months ago. Look, I hope you are right and I hope the Westjet pilots achieve the gains they deserve but go into this with eyes wide open

Preemptive intervention by the government is not legal. It’s why Ford tried the notwithstanding clause root. That was complete over reach and he was forced to retreat.

Intervention after the strike has been in progress for a bit is still possible though. The latest rail strike went two weeks. The parties, likely under pressure from the Feds, agreed to arbitration. But no legislation.

The Westjet pilots, by stating they will not agree to arbitration, are signaling from the outset that they are in this for the long haul.

[JBI]

Until the gov invokes the notwithstanding clause like the Ontario PCs did against the teachers aides a couple of months ago. Look, I hope you are right and I hope the Westjet pilots achieve the gains they deserve but go into this with eyes wide open

For what it’s worth, the Canadian Federal Government has NEVER invoked the notwithstanding clause. So if you think they’ll use it for the first time in history on a privately owned, Western based airline, I’d love to hear your reasoning.

[Dronepiper]

[quote=hithere post_id=<a href="tel:1243746">1243746</a> time=<a href="tel:1678328955">1678328955</a> user_id=7661]
Until the gov invokes the notwithstanding clause like the Ontario PCs did against the teachers aides a couple of months ago. Look, I hope you are right and I hope the Westjet pilots achieve the gains they deserve but go into this with eyes wide open

For what it’s worth, the Canadian Federal Government has NEVER invoked the notwithstanding clause. So if you think they’ll use it for the first time in history on a privately owned, Western based airline, I’d love to hear your reasoning.
[/quote]

Huh?? Then how did air canada pilots get forced back to work 10 years ago?

[truedude]

[quote=hithere post_id=<a href="tel:1243746">1243746</a> time=<a href="tel:1678328955">1678328955</a> user_id=7661]
Until the gov invokes the notwithstanding clause like the Ontario PCs did against the teachers aides a couple of months ago. Look, I hope you are right and I hope the Westjet pilots achieve the gains they deserve but go into this with eyes wide open

For what it’s worth, the Canadian Federal Government has NEVER invoked the notwithstanding clause. So if you think they’ll use it for the first time in history on a privately owned, Western based airline, I’d love to hear your reasoning.

Huh?? Then how did air canada pilots get forced back to work 10 years ago?
[/quote]

They were legislated back to work, or preemptively told they could not strike. The supreme court has since ruled that is not allowed by the Federal Government. It won't happen this time.

Westjet pilots need to be prepared to shutdown the airline, and to do so for weeks. Air Canada pilots did it in 1998.

[kiaszceski]

For months, have 6 months of savings, and the company will come back to the pilots.
Be ready!

[TheLastonetoknow]

For months, have 6 months of savings, and the company will come back to the pilots.
Be ready!

And this time frame is based on? I raise a spockian eyebrow on most guesstimates about strike length...

[pilot4life]

https://simpleflying.com/canada-expecte ... ng-merger/

[kiaszceski]

For months, have 6 months of savings, and the company will come back to the pilots.
Be ready!

And this time frame is based on? I raise a spockian eyebrow on most guesstimates about strike length...

You'll be the last one to know

[rigpiggy]

This was from 2011, not pilots, but the Fed's still did their thing

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/air-cana ... n%20loomed.

[JBI]

Huh?? Then how did air canada pilots get forced back to work 10 years ago?

This was from 2011, not pilots, but the Fed's still did their thing

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/air-cana ... n%20loomed.

In 2015, the Supreme Court ruled that the right to strike in Canada is a constitutional right in the decision Saskatchewan Federation of Labour v. Saskatchewan, 2015 SCC 4 (CanLII), [2015] 1 SCR 245, https://canlii.ca/t/gg40r

What that means is that now if a Government is going to impose back to work legislation that will basically deprive unionized employees with their constitutional right to strike, they need to invoke the "Notwithstanding Clause" in the Charter. This means that the Government KNOWS its passing legislation that violates the charter, but in spite of it being unconstitutional (definition of notwithstanding), they're doing it anyways.

Back in 2011, the right to strike hadn't been considered a constitutional right. Although Governments were generally very hesitant to get involved labour disputes, they were not required to enact the Notwithstanding Clause of the Charter in order to pass back to work legislation.

So it may seem like a trivial difference, but it's really not. Using the Notwithstanding Clause is a big deal and, as Doug Ford and friends found out, it can backfire. As mentioned in my previous post, the Federal Government (whether Liberal, Conservative, majority or minority) has never used the Notwithstanding Clause. It's not impossible, but I'd be absolutely shocked if a minority Liberal Government supported by the NDP decided to invoke the Notwithstanding Clause for the first time in history by the Federal Government for return to work legislation for WestJet Pilots.

It doesn't mean they can't get involved some other way, be it delays or additional steps prior to striking, but a full "return to work" too bad, so sad would be tough to do.

[TFTMB heavy]

They might be forced into arbitration, the government could get involved that way. I too would be surprised if they took away their right to strike.

[flyingcanuck]

Huh?? Then how did air canada pilots get forced back to work 10 years ago?

This was from 2011, not pilots, but the Fed's still did their thing

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/air-cana ... n%20loomed.

In 2015, the Supreme Court ruled that the right to strike in Canada is a constitutional right in the decision Saskatchewan Federation of Labour v. Saskatchewan, 2015 SCC 4 (CanLII), [2015] 1 SCR 245, https://canlii.ca/t/gg40r

What that means is that now if a Government is going to impose back to work legislation that will basically deprive unionized employees with their constitutional right to strike, they need to invoke the "Notwithstanding Clause" in the Charter. This means that the Government KNOWS its passing legislation that violates the charter, but in spite of it being unconstitutional (definition of notwithstanding), they're doing it anyways.

Back in 2011, the right to strike hadn't been considered a constitutional right. Although Governments were generally very hesitant to get involved labour disputes, they were not required to enact the Notwithstanding Clause of the Charter in order to pass back to work legislation.

So it may seem like a trivial difference, but it's really not. Using the Notwithstanding Clause is a big deal and, as Doug Ford and friends found out, it can backfire. As mentioned in my previous post, the Federal Government (whether Liberal, Conservative, majority or minority) has never used the Notwithstanding Clause. It's not impossible, but I'd be absolutely shocked if a minority Liberal Government supported by the NDP decided to invoke the Notwithstanding Clause for the first time in history by the Federal Government for return to work legislation for WestJet Pilots.

It doesn't mean they can't get involved some other way, be it delays or additional steps prior to striking, but a full "return to work" too bad, so sad would be tough to do.

If they did this I hope it would have the same effec as it did for the health care works, that we all ralley behind them. Every Union and pilot group. It's the only way to stop them from doing this.

[elite]

To state the obvious, in case of a strike by WestJet pilots, Sunwing, not to mention Encore will continue flying in accordance with their contracts and carry the load, which would be quite ironic given the bargaining capital WestJet MEC has put in negotiating for Encore!!

[Maskless1]

I am at encore and WILL NOT be crossing the picket line. One airline, one group of pilots. Same uniform, same guests, same colour paint. We all need a good deal.

[ant_321]

To state the obvious, in case of a strike by WestJet pilots, Sunwing, not to mention Encore will continue flying in accordance with their contracts and carry the load, which would be quite ironic given the bargaining capital WestJet MEC has put in negotiating for Encore!!

Even if that were the case SWG will only have about 10 airplanes in Canada this summer. It won’t even make a dent in the Westjet flying.