Going back to M. Teplinsky?

Discuss topics relating to Air Canada.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

Gurundu the Rat
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 355
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 5:59 am

Going back to M. Teplinsky?

Post by Gurundu the Rat »

I heard the Jazz equipment bid is again delayed. Something to do with going back to Martin Teplinsky. Anyone know what's up? Is ACPA involved or is this just a Jazz thing?
---------- ADS -----------
 
thrust set
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 181
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 8:26 pm

Post by thrust set »

I heard that it has to do with Jazz acquiring 8 or so aircraft from Independence Air and that be them CRJ-200's it still falls under the "small jet allocation" that was agreed upon by M.Teplinsky. If either side wants to get more aircraft (CRJ or EMB) they will have to make their case with the company before Teplitsky.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Gurundu the Rat
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 355
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 5:59 am

Post by Gurundu the Rat »

Does anyone have a problem with Jazz getting 8 more CRJ-200s? I am guessing if it's a problem they will just get Q400s which is probably a better aircraft as fuel prices keep rising. Doesn't make much sense to fly RJs between YVR and YYJ.
---------- ADS -----------
 
thrust set
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 181
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 8:26 pm

Post by thrust set »

"Does anyone have a problem with Jazz getting 8 more CRJ-200s?"

It's not so much of a problem as it is with following what was laid out in the agreement. Jazz just can't go out and operate whatever aircraft they feel entitled to without passing it by the company, ACPA and more so Teplinsky. Remember they are just suppose to operate 25 CRJ 200's/25 CRJ 100's and 15 CRJ 705's. Maybe ACPA will want to see where the company will operate those extra 8 aircraft? They might be nipping into the EMB block hours and therefore ACPA might put up a fight to have them not enter the fleet.

Have to say it's a lot more complicated than saying OK we don't get 8 more CRJ's we'll just go pick up some Dash 8 400's then....wish it was that easy.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
pilotbzh
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 611
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 7:33 am
Location: yyz

Post by pilotbzh »

http://www.flightinternational.com/Arti ... props.html


looks like it's a matter of time for the Q400
---------- ADS -----------
 
Gurundu the Rat
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 355
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 5:59 am

Post by Gurundu the Rat »

The master plan seems to change daily at Jazz. Just got back from a little training, and the word now is they would like to exchange the 25 CRJ100s from AC for 25 705s (40 total). They also want 40 Dash-8-300s and 40 Q400s plus 40 CRJ200s and keep a few Dash-8 100s for cargo. Fleet total would be 160ish. I'll believe it when I see it.
Jazz just can't go out and operate whatever aircraft they feel entitled to without passing it by the company, ACPA and more so Teplinsky.
I'm sure the company and Teplinsky have no problem with it. They just want the right aircraft on the right route. The CRJ100/200s are bursting at the seams with passengers being left behind. Using 705's on those routes just makes sense. As for ACPA, I can't seriously see them having a problem with this after refusing 777s for themselves. This is just another example of how this whole whipsaw is hurting everyone. What is ACPA going to give up so that Jazz doesn't get more jets? Why didn't we just merge it last year and get on with it already???
It's not so much of a problem as it is with following what was laid out in the agreement.
From ACPA? lolll
---------- ADS -----------
 
Captn Flex
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 5:23 pm

Post by Captn Flex »

What is ACPA going to give up so that Jazz doesn't get more jets
LOU 18 so all Jazz pilots are treated like any other pilots joinning AC...

LOL (me 2)
---------- ADS -----------
 
yxu737
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 7:20 pm

Post by yxu737 »

if it helps there was a Q400 in london but i dont know if it was for fuel or not and then took off for downsview about 30-45 minutes later
---------- ADS -----------
 
balls
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 249
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 3:28 pm

Post by balls »

Gurundu the Rat wrote:The master plan seems to change daily at Jazz. Just got back from a little training, and the word now is they would like to exchange the 25 CRJ100s from AC for 25 705s (40 total). They also want 40 Dash-8-300s and 40 Q400s plus 40 CRJ200s and keep a few Dash-8 100s for cargo. Fleet total would be 160ish. I'll believe it when I see it.
Jazz just can't go out and operate whatever aircraft they feel entitled to without passing it by the company, ACPA and more so Teplinsky.
I'm sure the company and Teplinsky have no problem with it. They just want the right aircraft on the right route. The CRJ100/200s are bursting at the seams with passengers being left behind. Using 705's on those routes just makes sense. As for ACPA, I can't seriously see them having a problem with this after refusing 777s for themselves. This is just another example of how this whole whipsaw is hurting everyone. What is ACPA going to give up so that Jazz doesn't get more jets? Why didn't we just merge it last year and get on with it already???
It's not so much of a problem as it is with following what was laid out in the agreement.
From ACPA? lolll
:x and your view of the world is totally one-sided of course. You can not see the problem that ACPA might have with this because you are viewing from one of a vested interest. You have a bias. The Rovinescu manoever trashed the longstanding scope clause. You likely can not appreciate the reasons for that between ACPA and Jazz, yet you can probably see the reason for one between CMA and Jazz. The issue is one of perspective here.

There was an agreement in place regarding the distribution of aircraft that was not palatable to ACPA, but one ACPA had to swallow anyway. Done. Fine. We know the corners of that box. Don't change the size of the box unless there is some ammendment to the agreement, especially as there are attacks from all sides on all sorts of issues. ACPA has been isolated, and has had very special negative treatment from AC, so when you talk about turning down the 777, that is extremely inaccurate. We did not turn down anything other than a demand for more concessions of which the 777 happened to be part of.

There is not a pilot at AC that would turn down the 777/787, I can pretty much guarantee. We do not want to work more hours for less money though. The Jazz pilots have negotiated an overtime clause that does not even touch our considerations. You have the WDO double then triple time. We have a 25% premium - not even close to a 100%, or 200% premium. The TA was turned down, not the type. You are intentionally propagandizing and derogatory.

Back off that sort of crap commentary.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Jaques Strappe
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1847
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 6:34 pm
Location: YYZ

Post by Jaques Strappe »

Jazz is a "connector" airline. If the RJ's are busting at the seams then maybe that route should go back to the mainline where was originally. I am not trying to be sarcastic or take sides to an issue but if the company and Teplinsky want the right airplane on the right route then so be it. The solution is to move larger capacity routes back to the mainline rather than buy bigger aircraft for the "connector".

Putting bigger aircraft at the connector only proves one thing and that is that Jazz is willing to lead the race to the bottom.

As Balls said and I have said before on earlier threads, I voted no on the 777/787 deal too because it represented more concessions while every other employee group are getting clawbacks. For once, pilots stood up and said no way.( whether it was for the concessions or the seniority issue, ) Something we should see more of in this industry.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rebel
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1552
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:43 pm

Post by Rebel »

Jaques & Balls

Come on guys the ACPA membership shot themselves in the foot over the 777/8 issue. The slots that we had are long gone, so much for the pilots knowing better then everyone else...

When will we learn..
---------- ADS -----------
 
balls
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 249
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 3:28 pm

Post by balls »

Rebel wrote:Jaques & Balls

Come on guys the ACPA membership shot themselves in the foot over the 777/8 issue. The slots that we had are long gone, so much for the pilots knowing better then everyone else...

When will we learn..
Bullshit, we did the company a favour again. AC management now has the time to put their testosterone laden machinations aside for a quckie nap, and have time for a sober second thought about there super-airline macho expansion "plan". Bob Milton has become the airline re-birthing guru if you follow any of the current blurbs about airline re-org. He is totally full of shit about his pov on paycuts when he talks about 3% cuts to 'non-pilot' employees, and how paycuts are a destroyer of morale. Nice. If you can find a pilot that has had less than a real hours v hours paycut of less than 25%, give me a shout. Most other employee groups have suffered a permanant re-org to less employees, but now they are recalling or hiring too, but little change to the actual wages or working conditions in a real time comparison to the pilot group.

The price of fuel is up. Airines will be dropping like dead flies. Boeing and Airbus will be looking for customers. AC has $3B in the bank. There is a process in place via the current ACPA contract to do the deal, this minute, if AC choses. If the price of a pilot to fly the new machines makes the deal or breaks the deal, then AC absolutely should not take the chance because AC can not afford it. Don't buy that fancy car if you can't afford to insure and maintian it.

Take your hatred for ACPA and AC pilots and shuvit. I am tired of the worms that come out of the woodwork with a pov like yours. We turned down a demand for more concessions, not a chance to fly new aircraft, read that??? that is a demand for concessions that was turned down, after having taken up the dirt shute twice - that is two very nasty rounds - that is more times than any other employee group - that means NO. IF flight attendants or mechanics want new airplanes to fly on, or work on, then THEY can take the paycut for the new gear. We have had it. WE have done more than our share.

Take your point of view and kiss my asterisk. Kiss my rusty sherrif's badge because you appear to have no comprehension of actual issues on the 777 TA.

I can, and would fly the 777 on the current contract. I will fly the 777 under the concessions that we took under CCAA. I will NOT fly that 777 for less, or for more hours. NOR should most of the airline work more days, and more hours to introduce equipment. HIRE the appropriate number of pilots!!! This was about getting more hours and not having to hire to the appropriate level - which is already a very concessionary level under CCAA anyway, without any more concessions on top of that.

If AC wants to open our current contract, it will not be for more concessions, but it will be to slap the pre-CCAA contract on the table and say "Here, this is where we start!" If that is not acceptable, let's take a strike vote RIGHT NOW, and start the clock. Enough is enough, and I am far past the point of having any sense of humour about this issue, so F-OFF.

Cheers
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
RussD
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 3:20 pm

Post by RussD »

Jaques Strappe wrote:Jazz is a "connector" airline. If the RJ's are busting at the seams then maybe that route should go back to the mainline where was originally. I am not trying to be sarcastic or take sides to an issue but if the company and Teplinsky want the right airplane on the right route then so be it. The solution is to move larger capacity routes back to the mainline rather than buy bigger aircraft for the "connector".

Putting bigger aircraft at the connector only proves one thing and that is that Jazz is willing to lead the race to the bottom.

.
C'mon Ricky

You can't jump into the story half way thru. The term Connector was coined first by the AC pilots in an agreement with their own management. It applied to the newly purchased, deregualted (read free and unfettered ) stable of small airlines AC purchase post deregulation. It's a fabricated term to fit an agenda de jour. The reality is, Jazz, as was with all of it's constituent Co's, has always carried exponentially more O&D traffic (75/25%) than connections (who's connecting to who by the way?)

Today after way to much drama, trama and betrayal the reality is that the methodology of determiny who does what, and with what, is up to Teplitsky. And who who knows what the hell he'll do. All I do know for sure is that if there is a race to the bottom, that race, the starting
line. rules and insistense of it 's continuance lies with the ACPA. Not only have they refused to smoke the peace pipe, they have barred access to it with their latest macinations. All of these events will form a part of the argument in the next trip to Marty's begging bowl I'm sure.

Keep smokin the good stuff tho me son.. Say hi to Julian and Bubbles for me.

Russ the D
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rebel
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1552
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:43 pm

Post by Rebel »

Balls

Since I’ve way more AC pole time then you, might I suggest that your attitude is part of the problem..

Sounds to me that you are one of these know it all pilots who have wrapped themselves in the union flag for protection, who still believes in the tooth fairy but in reality knows nothing.

Why don’t you move on?
---------- ADS -----------
 
balls
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 249
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 3:28 pm

Post by balls »

Rebel wrote:Balls

Since I’ve way more AC pole time then you, might I suggest that your attitude is part of the problem..

Why don’t you move on?
Rebel ------ I'm not sure what you are saying, but it sounds like you think I'm a junior pilot. NOT. Move on? Not sure what you are thinking there.

Maybe you aren't junior either, and like me, very close to retirement, about 20,000 with this company alone, or 33 years at AC, is more "pole time". Talking about "pole time" as somehow being an argument to discount my point of view, makes me think that likely you do not have as much time around as I do anyway. I will be "moving on" in the not distant future. Sure, I come off grumpy, because I'm tired of hearing the same old crap over and over again. I am tired of the demands on pilots, when we have given so much, but the finger keeps pointing at us as being the necessary source of concessions to keep the airline growing or running. How about some management lets?? Give up their free passes, stock options and pay rises that they have sucked from the people that actually generate the cash flow when the machines move in the skies.

Aside from moving on soon, I will be around for a bid or two yet, and like many of my cohorts of our era, I am still very concerned about the situation in the company, and degradation of the job, terrible management to pilot relationship, the safety issues of a crew sked that totally at odds with the pilots, compounded by a lack of resources for them to do a scheduling job anyway. We have serious safety concerns about long haul duty days, and many other areas where AC is cutting and cutting, making the job of pilot harder, with longer days, more frustration, and unnecessary battles that are distracting and fatiguing in there own way.

I am totally fed up with non-AC pilot types that figure that they can comment on whether ACPA members should or should not have accepted the 777 TA. Even with the ACPA ranks, there were, and still are many members that are unwilling to educate themselves about such things as this TA and the ramiifications of what a demand for a 90 hour work month might mean beyond their own little egocentric world. There is a large chunk of people that blindly accept the direction of others on voting issues. More importantly, and more to the point of my irritation within our group, is the apathy group of non-voters that are not willing to take a stand one way or another, then bitch about the outcome piss me off the most.

The contract took decades to build, and we have had that destroyed in a few short years. There was room for change, no doubt. That was given away though, and not bartered away. We have given up major concessions for new hirees, to a point where we virtually have two wage scales in the company.

There is a constant fight for long haul on crewing issues, and domestically it looks like many of the 320 type drivers are working a large number of days with the high DMM we now have. All of this is the erosion of our contract to a point where the job of even 10 years ago is now not recognizable, let alone 30 or 35 year ago for me.

Yet we have other employee groups that figure the ACPA pilots should give up more. We have ALPA pilots wanting more from the mainline pilots work while themselves probably working under a better contract that ACPA enjoys, but having the gall to suggest that ACPA turned down the 777. I will say again, and again after that if necessary, that ACPA members turned down the demand for concessions.

If Bob Milton wants new airplanes, bring 'em on. That would be great, but Bob, if you need concessions, look somewhere else.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rebel
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1552
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:43 pm

Post by Rebel »

balls wrote:
Rebel wrote:Balls

If Bob Milton wants new airplanes, bring 'em on. That would be great, but Bob, if you need concessions, look somewhere else.
That attitude is exactly what's helping sink us; sadly our aviation world has changed for the worst never to return in our career time. The Boeing's are gone, probably for good which is certainly not going to guarantee your top hat pension or mine. Great bluff RM made..

Personally I don't find the bunks all that bad and they sure are an improvement over flying 13:55 overseas multi-leg duty days with just the two of us. Perhaps it would help if our folks didn't abuse their rest periods by watching movies etc stretched out in J-class and started to respect their personal CARS. And then some wonder why the company treats us with disrespect.. You have to earn respect. You’re a fellow albeit junior to me Captain, start behaving like one and put peer pressure on those folks doing the abusing and causing embarrassment to the rest of us. You may end up not being the most popular Captain out there, but in this day and age being popular is not the name of the game, survival of AC is.

The majority of the complainers only offer criticism and no solutions. I wonder how well they would survive in RM's place with their limited knowledge of how big business actually operates. My guess is not long..

Be safe out there..
---------- ADS -----------
 
balls
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 249
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 3:28 pm

Post by balls »

Rebel wrote:
balls wrote:
Rebel wrote:Balls

If Bob Milton wants new airplanes, bring 'em on. That would be great, but Bob, if you need concessions, look somewhere else.
That attitude is exactly what's helping sink us; sadly our aviation world has changed for the worst never to return in our career time. The Boeing's are gone, probably for good which is certainly not going to guarantee your top hat pension or mine. Great bluff RM made..

Personally I don't find the bunks all that bad and they sure are an improvement over flying 13:55 overseas multi-leg duty days with just the two of us. Perhaps it would help if our folks didn't abuse their rest periods by watching movies etc stretched out in J-class and started to respect their personal CARS. And then some wonder why the company treats us with disrespect.. You have to earn respect. You’re a fellow albeit junior to me Captain, start behaving like one and put peer pressure on those folks doing the abusing and causing embarrassment to the rest of us. You may end up not being the most popular Captain out there, but in this day and age being popular is not the name of the game, survival of AC is.

The majority of the complainers only offer criticism and no solutions. I wonder how well they would survive in RM's place with their limited knowledge of how big business actually operates. My guess is not long..

Be safe out there..
SO you and I can have the rest of the airline vote in the 777 so we can live comfortably picking out own bunk time, but screw the rest of the guys?

The current situation is bad, but the 777 TA would keep the most junior people in the PG, make all the middle seniority people work 90 hours per month from now until, probably forever once it that TA is in place. The proposal was to go to 90 hours 'for training' immediately, but there were only supposed to be 2 777s next year in the initial idea. The delivery was stretched out over many years, so 90 hours, on virtually the whole airline 'for training' for a long period of time. That screws with so many areas of the contract from vacation credits being more or less useless, to the number days, quality of life on domestic equipment, or the lives of more junior pilots......NO, I can not be that greedy. People that say, look, we could have had this shiny new aircraft, or you screwed up my new airplane bid.......man, that is really egocentric. This is not just about the 777 as I have tried to hammer through to you and others.

If you truly believe that the 777 is a dead issue, I think you are really out of the loop. Even if it is, fine. Bob said we'd get some other equipment, and that will be brought in under the current contract - or not. The airline will continue, and made AC should be consolidating in the niche that we have found anyway. There WILL be another downturn, whether that is fuel related, avian flu, or another war or two. You and I will be gone anyway.

The wage cap on the 777 under the TA would not bring Top Hat into play anyway, and likely that is part of the issue. AC wants to divest of pension, and Top Hat is a consideration, I am sure. You and I have probably already seen our best 5 years earnings already. If you are that much more senior to me, as you suggest, then you likely don't have the minimum time required to bid a new type anyway.
---------- ADS -----------
 
flyer 1492
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 561
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 7:55 pm

Post by flyer 1492 »

As a Jazz pilot I watch these threads develop and shake my head. We do more damage to our profession and our company when we act like little kids fighting over the bigger ball on the playground. I saw it CDN/CRA and have continued to see it at AC/JAZZ. A house divided cannot stand. Why can we not see this? We have more power as a united pilot group. To the sheer joy of management, we allow them to wipsaw both groups, which affects our working conditions and pay. When are we going to stand together???
---------- ADS -----------
 
JayDee
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 135
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 10:49 am

Post by JayDee »

flyer 1492 wrote: When are we going to stand together???
2033
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Jaques Strappe
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1847
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 6:34 pm
Location: YYZ

Post by Jaques Strappe »

Hey Russ

When I worked at Air Nova, right on the side of the airplane, next to the entrance door, " Air Canada Connector" was painted there. I am not coming into the story half way through.

There is rumour now of Georgian getting Do 328's to start taking some of your flying. Enjoy the race to the bottom, I am going to roll another one and hang with Bubbles and Julian.

Rebel.

We have a formula pay system that states an aircraft that weighs this much and flies this fast, pays this much. A contract that Bob demanded. There is no need for futher concessions. With fuel they way it is, you will see a major in the U.S fall over the edge, dumping a surplus of 777's on the market. Bob comes off looking like a hero yet again.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Air Canada”