New Contract thread

[rudder]

Mainline/LCC is guaranteed 77.5% of non international ASM's.

That is true. The old calculation left mainline with a guarantee of 89.3% of the combined ASM's. Now it is 77.5% of the flying that is defined as "the combined ASM's less widebody international ASM's". There are also provisions for the percentage of LCC flying that is to be included in this calculation.

Not quite sure where this snapshot leaves AC today and what it will take in incremental mainline/LCC flying to even allow for the reduction/transfer of the 75 seat flying capacity to the CPA carriers to commence as the traffic numbers that are published are consolidated.

[whiteguy]

And For LCC

Air Canada flight attendant

5.04 PURSER DC9, B727, A320, A319
B747, B747CFY
EFFECTIVE
JUNE 1, 2003
I (1st year)
II (2nd year)
III (3rd year)
51.72
55.82
58.82

Pretty sad that the Fas will make more for the first few years

Just so we're clear, your comparing FO/RP pay from Aug 1, 2012 to In Charge pay from 2003?

Nice spin!

[Fanblade]

Mainline/LCC is guaranteed 77.5% of non international ASM's.

Not quite sure where this snapshot leaves AC today and what it will take in incremental mainline/LCC flying to even allow for the reduction/transfer of the 75 seat flying capacity to the CPA carriers to commence as the traffic numbers that are published are consolidated.

There is a little room but not very much. A Canadian North code share will tighten it further. Dropping the 175's puts them very close to violation territory. 60 instantaneous 705's at tier 2 would require a 15% increase in Mainline/LCC non international ASM's.

There isn't a plan to increase Mainline/LCC domestic ASM'S. The plan is to up gauge, a few less NB, with relatively static ASM'S.

I wonder if they even know what they have planned?

[rudder]

I wonder if they even know what they have planned?

That is the million dollar question They have been given the keys to the car but do they know where they are going?

[loopa]

Doesn't make sense to me why they would be hiring a bunch to simply lay them off ? Huh?

[Fanblade]

Doesn't make sense to me why they would be hiring a bunch to simply lay them off ? Huh?

There will not be any lay offs as a result of scope. Hiring continues. The amount of hiring will be impacted by the end of mandatory retirement in December.

[slickmag]

They know EXACTLY where they are going... They did it with ZIP, they did it with TANGO. Ask yourselves why.... ??? Is it a way to keep $$ off of the books? What ever it is, it worked for them twice and they are going to do it again and again. Now with the fed's on board making laws so they MUST choose the company decisions and doing it in plane sight show's you how corrupt this country really is. It's another slap in the face.

[hapyav8r]

Just wondering...

Jazz has been operating 65 RJs since the earlier part of the last decade. Now we are at 52 and shrinking as the Q400s replace them one for one.

I've heard rumors from pilots at mainline that scope is "basically" gone and that the regionals are now allowed to operate up to 120 seats unrestricted. Apparently from what I've been reading here this is not true. Unless someone could elaborate a bit more on the details of the new scoping rules.

The only thing I'm seeing that has any scope implications is "60 MJA up to 76 seats at the regionals".

My question is: Are the 60-76 seaters in addition to what Jazz already operates or is this a new restriction to lower the total number of jets permitted at the regionals to 60 with the allowance to operate them as 76 seats?

Thanks

[one8tee]

Hey...here is the deal from what I can figure out. CPA providers (Jazz, Sky regional or anyone else that pops up) can operate up to 60 medium jet aircraft up to 76 seats. Jazz currently has 16 of those 60.

For every increase of a MJA above the current 16 at a CPA provider, mainline must also increase by 1. So jazz could get 44 705's if AC got 44 more 320's. There is also a let that 1 wide body can be substituted at a 2 to 1 ratio..ie. 22 767's or some combination thereof.

There is an available seat mile (ASM) ratio of 29:100 that must be protected in the domestic system. I think the idea is to get rid of the embraers in favor of 737 or 320 equivalent and CRJ 100/200 in favor of the larger 700/900 or equivalent.

I'd guess this is all to facilitate a transition to a common narrow body type.


Hope this is correct and makes sense!

180

[Disco Stu]

For every increase of a MJA above the current 16 at a CPA provider, mainline must also increase by 1. So jazz could get 44 705's if AC got 44 more 320's. There is also a let that 1 wide body can be substituted at a 2 to 1 ratio..ie. 22 767's or some combination thereof.

Not quite correct. CPAs can now operate up to 60 76 seat MJA (Jazz currently operates 16 of the 60 currently) without the mainline adding anything. However if the CPA flying increases, mainline flying will have to increase to maintain the 29/100 ASM ratio.

After looking through the contract, the scope clause isn't as alarming as I had initially been lead to believe.

The scheduling rule changes however are terrible. As are the LCC rules and pay. And new hire year 3 and 4 wages, and course rights, and the reduction of pay rates that need grandfathering to make them look like actual raises. And on and on and on.

[jdm]

[quote="Disco Stu"]


After looking through the contract, the scope clause isn't as alarming as I had initially been lead to believe.

[\quote]

Does that mean you're going to post a retraction on twitter?

[Disco Stu]

There are still plenty of jobs at risk. You could drive a truck through the hole in the no furlough language.

What I mean is that the rumours were far worse (<120 seats, no ASM ratio, no LCC).

Instead of trying to troll me JDM why don't you grow a set and tell me who you are since you seem to know me?

[jdm]

There are still plenty of jobs at risk. You could drive a truck through the hole in the no furlough language.

What I mean is that the rumours were far worse (<120 seats, no ASM ratio, no LCC).

Instead of trying to troll me JDM why don't you grow a set and tell me who you are since you seem to know me?

I know who you are.

By the way, how is your wife doing those days ? And my kids ?

I thought everyone knew who he was. He's the guy who sent out all the petitions, right?

And how is asking a guy a question on a forum "trolling""???

[ilovelamp]

I know who you are.

By the way, how is your wife doing those days ? And my kids ?

Thats an odd question! is disco stu with your ex wife and now raising your kids? thats what I gathered.

[ilovelamp]

You're one fast bullet sunny, you'll go far in life

BTW, it's a joke. Were i come from, it's something you ask a guy when it has been a while you did not see him

aaaahhhh ok. and thanks, I was always told by my teachers growing up, that I was special.

[jdm]

There are still plenty of jobs at risk. You could drive a truck through the hole in the no furlough language.

What I mean is that the rumours were far worse (<120 seats, no ASM ratio, no LCC).

Instead of trying to troll me JDM why don't you grow a set and tell me who you are since you seem to know me?

I know who you are.

By the way, how is your wife doing those days ? And my kids ?

I thought everyone knew who he was. He's the guy who sent out all the petitions, right?

And how is asking a guy a question on a forum "trolling""???

Just curious, now that it's all over, any regrets about sending out the petitions?

[Disco Stu]

jdm,

You know who I am, so you know how to reach me. Feel free to email me if you want to discuss anything that has occurred in the last 15 months.

[jdm]

What's the problem with answering here?

I don't understand why you still work at AC. From what I've seen you post here, on twitter, etc, you have nothing good to say about the company, and you're saying that newhires should go to Westjet. You haven't been at AC that long, so I assume you're not too old to start over, and you obviously hate working for AC, so I'm curious as to why you wouldn't just find another job instead of staying at a company you hate?

[TheStig]

jdm,

There is a difference between working for a company you hate, and working at a job you hate.

[pilotbzh]

Air Canada 's problem has always be management, not employees

[jdm]

jdm,

There is a difference between working for a company you hate, and working at a job you hate.

Sure but I keep hearing about better paying jobs at companies that actually respect their pilots, but nobody ever seems to leave. Those of us who like working here are getting a little weary of listening to the guy in the other seat bitch about how terrible it is here, why not just go work for a company you don't hate?


So, Disco Stu, I guess you're not going to man up and answer questions about the petitions in public. You've already posted on this forum that you sent them out, your real name was listed as the author of them when they first came out, and lots of people saw it besides me, so it's not exactly a state secret. I guess you're either trying to cover your tracks or weasel out of taking responsibility for your part in this fiasco. Pathetic.

[Disco Stu]

jdm

I stand by the petitions and would do them again. I'd vote no to TA1 again. I don't support the new contract at all.

I have no interest in getting into a mud slinging debate with you or any other anonymous person on here. You want to have a debate about the petitions, the failure of TA1, or anything else feel free to email or call me and come out from your shadow of anonymity. It's really easy to talk tough when nobody knows who you are.

I love Air Canada. What I'm sick of is the executives who come in to rob this place and then run off with the loot, while the employees like me who have our careers invested in this place are left holding the bag.

This was a great airline once, and it pains me to see it slowly descending into oblivion.

It would probably be easier to cut and run, but I'd rather volunteer my time and efforts into turning this place into an airline the employees can be proud of. This company's viability and success is very important to me. You may only care about the issues that affect you but I'm interested in leaving this place better than how I found it. This new contract is a big step in the wrong direction. It takes out all the good, and keeps all the bad. And the bad far outweighed the good in the first version.

I've stayed away from this forum for a while. Thanks for reminding me why. I'm done on this thread. You want to talk, you know how to reach me. When I know who you are, we can continue this, until then, I'm done fighting with shadows.

[CanadianEh]

jdm

I stand by the petitions and would do them again. I'd vote no to TA1 again. I don't support the new contract at all.

I have no interest in getting into a mud slinging debate with you or any other anonymous person on here. You want to have a debate about the petitions, the failure of TA1, or anything else feel free to email or call me and come out from your shadow of anonymity. It's really easy to talk tough when nobody knows who you are.

I love Air Canada. What I'm sick of is the executives who come in to rob this place and then run off with the loot, while the employees like me who have our careers invested in this place are left holding the bag.

This was a great airline once, and it pains me to see it slowly descending into oblivion.

It would probably be easier to cut and run, but I'd rather volunteer my time and efforts into turning this place into an airline the employees can be proud of. This company's viability and success is very important to me. You may only care about the issues that affect you but I'm interested in leaving this place better than how I found it. This new contract is a big step in the wrong direction. It takes out all the good, and keeps all the bad. And the bad far outweighed the good in the first version.

I've stayed away from this forum for a while. Thanks for reminding me why. I'm done on this thread. You want to talk, you know how to reach me. When I know who you are, we can continue this, until then, I'm done fighting with shadows.

+1. The think that is absolutely sickening is that the shareholders have gone along with all this, including approving all those bonuses for executives while they have watched their capital whither away and be diluted. What ACPA should have done when they received a 10% share stake in AC is sell it all and then open a margin account to short the stock. Then with the money, they could have bribed our Totalitarian gov't to keep their nose out of a private company's negotiations or used the money for good lawyers. Good on you for trying to rebuild, but real change needs to start from the top. Just look at Westjet.

[jdm]

jdm

I stand by the petitions and would do them again. I'd vote no to TA1 again. I don't support the new contract at all.

I have no interest in getting into a mud slinging debate with you or any other anonymous person on here. You want to have a debate about the petitions, the failure of TA1, or anything else feel free to email or call me and come out from your shadow of anonymity. It's really easy to talk tough when nobody knows who you are.

I love Air Canada. What I'm sick of is the executives who come in to rob this place and then run off with the loot, while the employees like me who have our careers invested in this place are left holding the bag.

This was a great airline once, and it pains me to see it slowly descending into oblivion.

It would probably be easier to cut and run, but I'd rather volunteer my time and efforts into turning this place into an airline the employees can be proud of. This company's viability and success is very important to me. You may only care about the issues that affect you but I'm interested in leaving this place better than how I found it. This new contract is a big step in the wrong direction. It takes out all the good, and keeps all the bad. And the bad far outweighed the good in the first version.

I've stayed away from this forum for a while. Thanks for reminding me why. I'm done on this thread. You want to talk, you know how to reach me. When I know who you are, we can continue this, until then, I'm done fighting with shadows.

Fighting with shadows? I haven't outed you here any more than you have outed yourself, but for a guy who posts anonymously on other forums, you sure are indignant about other people's anonymity.

If you love Air Canada, you would never know it from your constant public bad mouthing of it on the internet. And if you're really trying to leave it better than you found it, please stop. You couldn't even leave TA1 better than you found it.

What you and your buddies don't seem to realize is that outside of the bubble of the AC pilots forum and whoever you hang out with, there are a lot of people who are already proud to work here. What they're not proud of is being associated with the angry, unprofessional thug like behaviour that has gone on since the process was hijacked.

Thank you for finally answering my question. You obviously have no regrets, good to know if you ever decide to run for an elected union position.

[Disco Stu]

I guess the hundreds of people who signed the petitions and the majority of pilots who cast their votes to recall the people responsible were wrong? So were the the 2/3rds of the pilot group that voted down the piece of shit TA1?

I guess in your world, minority rules? Interesting perspective you have. You are right, and the majority were wrong.

My opinion is and was shared by a MAJORITY of the pilots at Air Canada. What part of that is so difficult for you to understand? Why is it that you are right and the 2000 people who said no to TA1 were wrong?

Mistakes were made in the last 15 months. Recalling the rogue MEC and saying NO to TA1 were not amongst those errors.

And FYI, I was elected to a union position in January. I put my money where my mouth is and am volunteering my time to improve this airline.

It's easy to sit around and bitch and complain on an anonymous forum. If you don't like what transpired, why don't you do something other than spout off about it?