Future YYC pilot base?

Discuss topics relating to Air Canada.

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

Blue42
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 133
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 11:33 am

Re: Future YYC pilot base?

Post by Blue42 »

'97 Tercel wrote:
they're planning the YYC base
Haha good luck. They can plan on getting whatever base their seniority number allows them.
That's exactly what I said.......blows me away how naive some of our group are!
---------- ADS -----------
 
Blue42
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 133
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 11:33 am

Re: Future YYC pilot base?

Post by Blue42 »

aV1aTOr wrote:There seems to be alot of talk over at WJ lately about what AC plans to do. From opening new pilot bases under the ALPA banner to accepting 737 qualified pilots to the left seat out of seniority. It's all a little concerning.

Firstly since it shows an overwhelmingly naive understanding of how unions and seniority function, never mind the lack of control ACPA or ALPA or any employee group has over things like the opening and closing of pilot bases. ACPA currently has some major challenges ahead for each contract reopener and pilot bases isn't even remotely on the table for discussion. And the only way any pilot is jumping the seniority queue is if AC buys and merges WJ. Spoiler alert, AC doesn't have $3B lying around.

Secondly, this kind of energy should be funneled towards bargaining a fair contract between WJ pilots and WJ management, and better the WAWCONs where WJ pilots currently work, not seeking to somehow leapfrog other pilots across the fence to where the grass seems greener (at the moment).

WJ already has a YYC base, are growing both domestically and internationally, they are profitable, and the future looks bright. If that's not enough, there are AC new hire courses planned almost every month going forward.

How does that song go? You don't know what you've got til it's gone.....
+1!!!!
---------- ADS -----------
 
altiplano
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5377
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: Future YYC pilot base?

Post by altiplano »

xlwing wrote:I don't get it either. Assuming:

Rent 1700
Car 450
Gas 100
Food 450
Misc 500
=3200/month in living expenses

At first year pay, minus tax that's what? 3200 take home?
You net 0 after expenses. Change rent to a mortgage for a decent home? Now you're bleeding money every month. Granted there's many variables such as student loans, family dependants, circumstances, but AC is not an entry level job, so most people aren't going in there fresh outta high school with no obligations. Most people have families and established lives by the point they hit AC.
Live within your means...

$450 car payment?
What a wealth killer.

I have a 10 year old import.
It runs...

I used to pay $1700 rent.
I moved.

My mortgage is now about $1000.
I live 40 min away from YYZ by car, an hour on transit...

Don't get me wrong the flat salary at AC sucks balls. You can thank our sh!t bait and switch complicit union for that and all the @ssholes that can't see the direction we are headed... they think they "have it" and have tuned out of reality.

Anyway... live in your means, find an affordable city/neighbourhood and don't finance a new car.
And while you can, I wouldn't commute. esp. for the first while, and then maybe only if it was out of the Bahamas or similar... tax free and about the same distance as YYC to YYZ...
---------- ADS -----------
 
rudder
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3848
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: Future YYC pilot base?

Post by rudder »

Bottom line - AC year 1/2/3/4 year FO/RP pay is a fraction of that paid by all other North American legacy carriers. This is not a COLA issue, it is a straight cost saving centre for AC. One year? Fine. Two yeas? Really? Three years? Four years? By the end of 2018 there will be over 1000 AC pilots on this pay scale. That is over 1/4 of the seniority list.

This issue was not even touched in the TA.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
infiniteregulus
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 231
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2015 3:46 am

Re: Future YYC pilot base?

Post by infiniteregulus »

Might as well just buy a tent and start living in the campgrounds off Capilano :lol:
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
infiniteregulus
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 231
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2015 3:46 am

Re: Future YYC pilot base?

Post by infiniteregulus »

Maybe it's a sustainability thing? Instead of having big booms and busts with the cyclical nature of the economy, they want to subdue and dampen the volatility with a sustainable model. I don't think they have any problem of attracting pilots, as I'm sure there's thousands lined up out the door. It is THE carrot for the regionals after all. The bean counters probably came to such a pay-figure to where they can have the cost savings without jeopardizing attraction.
---------- ADS -----------
 
groundpilot
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 295
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2004 10:10 am
Location: A Smokn' Hole

Re: Future YYC pilot base?

Post by groundpilot »

rudder wrote:Bottom line - AC year 1/2/3/4 year FO/RP pay is a fraction of that paid by all other North American legacy carriers. This is not a COLA issue, it is a straight cost saving centre for AC. One year? Fine. Two yeas? Really? Three years? Four years? By the end of 2018 there will be over 1000 AC pilots on this pay scale. That is over 1/4 of the seniority list.

This issue was not even touched in the TA.
Bang on

Four years flat pay was an insane win for the company. We have some of the lowest paid wide body FO's in the business.

The problem is compounded with the DC pension and flat pay. It was a huge sell out to all new hires.
---------- ADS -----------
 
FADEC
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 7:31 pm

Re: Future YYC pilot base?

Post by FADEC »

YYC Pilot base was a rumour my entire career at AC; don't hold your breath.

There are better ways than fixed bases anyway; they inflate costs artificially in many cases.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Dockjock
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1045
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 1:46 pm
Location: south saturn delta

Re: Future YYC pilot base?

Post by Dockjock »

groundpilot wrote:
rudder wrote:Bottom line - AC year 1/2/3/4 year FO/RP pay is a fraction of that paid by all other North American legacy carriers. This is not a COLA issue, it is a straight cost saving centre for AC. One year? Fine. Two yeas? Really? Three years? Four years? By the end of 2018 there will be over 1000 AC pilots on this pay scale. That is over 1/4 of the seniority list.

This issue was not even touched in the TA.
Bang on

Four years flat pay was an insane win for the company. We have some of the lowest paid wide body FO's in the business.

The problem is compounded with the DC pension and flat pay. It was a huge sell out to all new hires.
It bears mentioning that none of that was proposed by ACPA, it was gained in arbitration by the company. ACPA stepped on their dicks, multiple times, in that whole process, but I don't believe it is fair to categorize it as a sell-out as the fact remains that no pilot voted for it. We didn't gain anything from new hires' loss is what I'm trying to say, which would be my categorization of a sell-out.
---------- ADS -----------
 
groundpilot
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 295
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2004 10:10 am
Location: A Smokn' Hole

Re: Future YYC pilot base?

Post by groundpilot »

Dockjock wrote:
groundpilot wrote:
rudder wrote:Bottom line - AC year 1/2/3/4 year FO/RP pay is a fraction of that paid by all other North American legacy carriers. This is not a COLA issue, it is a straight cost saving centre for AC. One year? Fine. Two yeas? Really? Three years? Four years? By the end of 2018 there will be over 1000 AC pilots on this pay scale. That is over 1/4 of the seniority list.

This issue was not even touched in the TA.
Bang on

Four years flat pay was an insane win for the company. We have some of the lowest paid wide body FO's in the business.

The problem is compounded with the DC pension and flat pay. It was a huge sell out to all new hires.


It bears mentioning that none of that was proposed by ACPA, it was gained in arbitration by the company. ACPA stepped on their dicks, multiple times, in that whole process, but I don't believe it is fair to categorize it as a sell-out as the fact remains that no pilot voted for it. We didn't gain anything from new hires' loss is what I'm trying to say, which would be my categorization of a sell-out.
Fair enough!
---------- ADS -----------
 
'97 Tercel
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 775
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 5:19 pm

Re: Future YYC pilot base?

Post by '97 Tercel »

..
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by '97 Tercel on Thu Feb 08, 2018 11:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
thenoflyzone
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 148
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 2:19 pm

Re: Future YYC pilot base?

Post by thenoflyzone »

LuckyPilot wrote: Thu Aug 31, 2017 8:09 am Not ever going to happen, if it weren't for the ACPPA, YUL/YWG would not exist as bases.
I doubt AC would get rid of its pilot base at YUL, even without ACPPA.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Fanblade
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1693
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Future YYC pilot base?

Post by Fanblade »

Dockjock wrote: Sat Sep 09, 2017 8:30 am
groundpilot wrote:
rudder wrote:Bottom line - AC year 1/2/3/4 year FO/RP pay is a fraction of that paid by all other North American legacy carriers. This is not a COLA issue, it is a straight cost saving centre for AC. One year? Fine. Two yeas? Really? Three years? Four years? By the end of 2018 there will be over 1000 AC pilots on this pay scale. That is over 1/4 of the seniority list.

This issue was not even touched in the TA.
Bang on

Four years flat pay was an insane win for the company. We have some of the lowest paid wide body FO's in the business.

The problem is compounded with the DC pension and flat pay. It was a huge sell out to all new hires.
It bears mentioning that none of that was proposed by ACPA, it was gained in arbitration by the company. ACPA stepped on their dicks, multiple times, in that whole process, but I don't believe it is fair to categorize it as a sell-out as the fact remains that no pilot voted for it. We didn't gain anything from new hires' loss is what I'm trying to say, which would be my categorization of a sell-out.
The statement in bold is false. Arbitration imposed, with some adjustments, what the TA1 negotiations team negotiated.

It is true the pilot group voted no to the negotiated deal by a very large amount. However it is not true to claim ACPA didn’t negotiate it.


At the road show for TA1, the negotiations team justified the new hire pay with:

“we don’t negotiate for people not on the property”

“Market forces will drive up new hire pay if there are no applicants”

“Pilots are still applying, they don’t think it’s too low”

It is my view that as we look at our future (possibly ALPA) we must remember our past accurately.

ACPA negotiated the four year flat pay during TA1. The pilot group voted no. The negotiated flat salary was then imposed in arbitration. ACPA has had two negations since and has failed to address the problem.

They have tried to address Pension and Rouge pay steps but nothing on new hire pay.

TB Pension is based on the time value of money. People on this plan need to make more money early in their career. So the pension issue is really only partly addressed.

Rouge step on was for people who are not new hires.

We need ALPA in my view to make certain something like the TA1 fiasco never happens again. We will be giving in negotiations for well over a decade before we correct all the damage done by that TA.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Air Canada”