Cargo TA

Discuss topics relating to Air Canada.

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

Post Reply
tony ledsham
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2020 6:02 pm

Re: Cargo TA

Post by tony ledsham »

TS pilots: what's "plan B" if AC doesn't buy your Company? Apply to AC and accept new hire BOTL, once the furloughed pilots are back? Better than EI? Give your heads a shake. There is only one group of pilots who have the ability to create a toxic work environment in the merged entity (and it ain't the AC pilots...) Reality is cruel sometimes.
---------- ADS -----------
 
rudder
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3848
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: Cargo TA

Post by rudder »

Fanblade wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2020 4:50 pm
rudder wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2020 1:29 pm

FWIW - an arbitration panel is going to decide the seniority integration solution.
I’m picking up on the word panel. I was asking about this to someone else. Do you know if it is now standard in Canada to have an arbitration panel of three or more?
I presume the parties will seek to agree to a seniority integration dispute resolution structure as well as terms of reference. This is not about result but rather the rules of the process and limitations of the role and scope of the arbitrator(s) within the arbitration process. If there is no agreement between the parties I presume the CIRB would then intervene.

Experience of the pilot seniority integration process for the last couple of decades has been to use a panel rather than an individual. Eliminates the possibility of just one arbitrator going off the rails in an award.
---------- ADS -----------
 
chaster
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 9:50 am

Re: Cargo TA

Post by chaster »

tony ledsham wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2020 6:53 pm TS pilots: what's "plan B" if AC doesn't buy your Company? Apply to AC and accept new hire BOTL, once the furloughed pilots are back? Better than EI? Give your heads a shake. There is only one group of pilots who have the ability to create a toxic work environment in the merged entity (and it ain't the AC pilots...) Reality is cruel sometimes.
Hello Tony Who Knows what the Plan B is should the sale not pass! But For what its worth Ive been here for 23 years and I can tell you the people I know are a pretty Reasonable bunch of guys n gals !Hell id be willing to bet ya 100 slips they would treat you a lot better than the ones I seen in that Video you posted! That was TOXIC! The Industry is in FLUX my friend and If it goes on much longer Any company can find itself on the ropes!Good luck to All!
---------- ADS -----------
 
FL320
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 459
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Cargo TA

Post by FL320 »

nowind wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:58 pm I red the whole thread and the other one talking about merger and I think we all know what the ac guys think about it. I think we all get it. But it seems like the transat guys are more quiet about how they think it should be done. Just curious if anyone from the ts team would lile to share on what they expect from this merger when It comes to seniority. Lets say we compare pre pandemic level. Where should the most junior 330 captain sit on the ac list, what about a 10 years captain. Not here to argue, we all have differents view and its ok. Again im just curious what the ts guys think would be fair with regard to seniority integration.
As far as I am concerned; I just want at least the same paycheck (Captain). Put me right seat on the smallest aircraft at any base; it does not matter.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Cappo1
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2020 1:41 pm

Re: Cargo TA

Post by Cappo1 »

FL320 wrote: Fri Dec 04, 2020 12:59 pm
Cappo1 wrote: Wed Dec 02, 2020 2:29 pm Europe is crumbling and no one wants to venture there. Canadian industries are being hit harder and households cannot afford the visit the folks in the old country.
You may be living in a bunker at the moment, but for info all TS flights to Paris are full in december, people are travelling to Europe (VFR).
Also today travel agencies in Quebec reported a surge in bookings to sun destinations. But I agree people will look for the cheapest flight and best services; so we can understand why AC is so interested in Transat: focusing on the cargo and the leisure market is a great decision :)
Ok bud . Your imagination is bigger than your salary. TS flights to Paris are not full so dump your crapper. Its backing up.

TS Leisure is a brand. The aircraft are leased. We bought the brand to expand our leisure market and at the time it was a good option to compete with Onyx.

Leisure barely exists now but we have our own vacation airline pilots to worry about . Rouge is part of ACPA and we will facilitate our Rouge pilots first.

The 10% pay cut came just in time. Rumour in the parking lot says TS might be doing a lot of cargo flying on the 330s until the pandemic is under control. Don't sell your van yet.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Cappo1
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2020 1:41 pm

Re: Cargo TA

Post by Cappo1 »

tony ledsham wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2020 6:53 pm TS pilots: what's "plan B" if AC doesn't buy your Company? Apply to AC and accept new hire BOTL, once the furloughed pilots are back? Better than EI? Give your heads a shake. There is only one group of pilots who have the ability to create a toxic work environment in the merged entity (and it ain't the AC pilots...) Reality is cruel sometimes.
Imagine if TS was acquiring AC? There would be no DOH. Bottom of the list is what they would demand .
---------- ADS -----------
 
330heavy
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2020 12:56 pm

Re: Cargo TA

Post by 330heavy »

Cappo1 wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 2:46 pm
tony ledsham wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2020 6:53 pm TS pilots: what's "plan B" if AC doesn't buy your Company? Apply to AC and accept new hire BOTL, once the furloughed pilots are back? Better than EI? Give your heads a shake. There is only one group of pilots who have the ability to create a toxic work environment in the merged entity (and it ain't the AC pilots...) Reality is cruel sometimes.
Imagine if TS was acquiring AC? There would be no DOH. Bottom of the list is what they would demand .
Is that what your Tarot card reader told you?
---------- ADS -----------
 
GATRKGA
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 1:24 pm

Re: Cargo TA

Post by GATRKGA »

Cappo1 wrote: Tue Dec 08, 2020 1:44 pm
FL320 wrote: Fri Dec 04, 2020 12:59 pm
Cappo1 wrote: Wed Dec 02, 2020 2:29 pm Europe is crumbling and no one wants to venture there. Canadian industries are being hit harder and households cannot afford the visit the folks in the old country.
You may be living in a bunker at the moment, but for info all TS flights to Paris are full in december, people are travelling to Europe (VFR).
Also today travel agencies in Quebec reported a surge in bookings to sun destinations. But I agree people will look for the cheapest flight and best services; so we can understand why AC is so interested in Transat: focusing on the cargo and the leisure market is a great decision :)
Ok bud . Your imagination is bigger than your salary. TS flights to Paris are not full so dump your crapper. Its backing up.

TS Leisure is a brand. The aircraft are leased. We bought the brand to expand our leisure market and at the time it was a good option to compete with Onyx.

Leisure barely exists now but we have our own vacation airline pilots to worry about . Rouge is part of ACPA and we will facilitate our Rouge pilots first.

The 10% pay cut came just in time. Rumour in the parking lot says TS might be doing a lot of cargo flying on the 330s until the pandemic is under control. Don't sell your van yet.
:lol:
---------- ADS -----------
 
FL-280
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 305
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:45 pm

Re: Cargo TA

Post by FL-280 »

TS Shareholder vote is next tuesday, I think it will pass. Fact I didn't know is the vote needs 2/3 to pass, still I don't see how it won't go through.

I look at the economy right now and multiple sectors, consolidation is everywhere. Bigger is better. As the dust settles and emotions settle, I view this merger in a positive way if it's done correctly.

Here is what I am expecting. A percentage merge where an AC pilots percentage on the total list is the main guideline. Example: An AC pilot sits at 80% of his total list before the merger he shall at least maintain that 80% and even increase slightly by approx. 2%. The approx 2% should be a sufficient amount to compensate the fact other pilots are coming on the legacy list, upgrade times will be longer with the consolidation of routes and positions.

Economic indicators and looking into the matter has made me completely change my view on this issue. I strongly believe this will be positive for Transat pilots, job stability wise. I also have changed my mind, it is positive for AC pilots if their total seniority percentage was to increase slightly by 2%. If this was to happen, I will STFU.
But, the line in the sand for all AC pilots is AT LEAST, maintain their total percentage of seniority (pre merger) on the merged list.
---------- ADS -----------
 
columbia
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2020 7:25 pm

Re: Cargo TA

Post by columbia »

FL-280 wrote: Fri Dec 11, 2020 7:58 am TS Shareholder vote is next tuesday, I think it will pass. Fact I didn't know is the vote needs 2/3 to pass, still I don't see how it won't go through.

I look at the economy right now and multiple sectors, consolidation is everywhere. Bigger is better. As the dust settles and emotions settle, I view this merger in a positive way if it's done correctly.

Here is what I am expecting. A percentage merge where an AC pilots percentage on the total list is the main guideline. Example: An AC pilot sits at 80% of his total list before the merger he shall at least maintain that 80% and even increase slightly by approx. 2%. The approx 2% should be a sufficient amount to compensate the fact other pilots are coming on the legacy list, upgrade times will be longer with the consolidation of routes and positions.

Economic indicators and looking into the matter has made me completely change my view on this issue. I strongly believe this will be positive for Transat pilots, job stability wise. I also have changed my mind, it is positive for AC pilots if their total seniority percentage was to increase slightly by 2%. If this was to happen, I will STFU.
But, the line in the sand for all AC pilots is AT LEAST, maintain their total percentage of seniority (pre merger) on the merged list.

That’s the end goal. Everybody sitting approx where they were before the merger, without fuckin anybody up
---------- ADS -----------
 
FL-280
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 305
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:45 pm

Re: Cargo TA

Post by FL-280 »

Everybody on the AC list yes... I don't think a TS pilot can say, I am at 75% at TS I should be 75% on the merged AC/TS list, that would be a windfall gain.

If you look at it from the AC pilots side it makes more sense, just because there is a lot more AC pilots and at the end of the day, AC is the buyer.
---------- ADS -----------
 
altiplano
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5377
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: Cargo TA

Post by altiplano »

I predict it will be ratio integration based on the rank of AC LCC positions on the larger list. So count how many positions are above LCC CA at AC that's you're start point, not actual seniority, but numbers down as if they most senior person was in each slot starting from 777CA down.

1% TS CA does not equal 1% AC CA.

1% TS CA does equal 1% AC LCC CA.

Same for FOs.

Then ratio integration of furloughs/inactive pilots to ensure equal recall and to any position based on seniority.

No bump and flush, ratio of 330/320 CA pisition issued fir APOS based on active TS fins at time of merger (no dual types at AC). Standard course right issuance based on APOS ie. 330 CA 1 UR, 320 CA 1 UR, 1 WBCA

No loss to TS pilots because they will earn same or more.
---------- ADS -----------
 
rudder
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3848
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: Cargo TA

Post by rudder »

FL-280 wrote: Fri Dec 11, 2020 8:13 am .... and at the end of the day, AC is the buyer.
That will be a non issue for the arbitrator(s).
---------- ADS -----------
 
rudder
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3848
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: Cargo TA

Post by rudder »

altiplano wrote: Fri Dec 11, 2020 8:26 am I predict it will be ratio integration based on the rank of AC LCC positions on the larger list. So count how many positions are above LCC CA at AC that's you're start point, not actual seniority, but numbers down as if they most senior person was in each slot starting from 777CA down.

1% TS CA does not equal 1% AC CA.

1% TS CA does equal 1% AC LCC CA.

Same for FOs.

Then ratio integration of furloughs/inactive pilots to ensure equal recall and to any position based on seniority.

No bump and flush, ratio of 330/320 CA pisition issued fir APOS based on active TS fins at time of merger (no dual types at AC). Standard course right issuance based on APOS ie. 330 CA 1 UR, 320 CA 1 UR, 1 WBCA

No loss to TS pilots because they will earn same or more.
I see the embargoed integrated seniority number equivalent to AC WB CA positions available. So the 674th active AC seniority number. I don’t think the pay disparity between AC NB CA and TS CA will trigger a lower permanent seniority embargo but could also result in a fence from mainline WB CA.

Unlikely arbitrator(s) would permanently penalize TS pilots for AC pilots that could hold WB CA but bid lower categories.

Ratio or ratios - TBD. Depends on relevant fleets/positions.

As for handling of ‘inactive’ at the snapshot date, that will be a challenging topic. Result may depend greatly on number of operating certificates that flow from the transaction.
---------- ADS -----------
 
altiplano
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5377
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: Cargo TA

Post by altiplano »

rudder wrote: Fri Dec 11, 2020 9:29 am
altiplano wrote: Fri Dec 11, 2020 8:26 am I predict it will be ratio integration based on the rank of AC LCC positions on the larger list. So count how many positions are above LCC CA at AC that's you're start point, not actual seniority, but numbers down as if they most senior person was in each slot starting from 777CA down.

1% TS CA does not equal 1% AC CA.

1% TS CA does equal 1% AC LCC CA.

Same for FOs.

Then ratio integration of furloughs/inactive pilots to ensure equal recall and to any position based on seniority.

No bump and flush, ratio of 330/320 CA pisition issued fir APOS based on active TS fins at time of merger (no dual types at AC). Standard course right issuance based on APOS ie. 330 CA 1 UR, 320 CA 1 UR, 1 WBCA

No loss to TS pilots because they will earn same or more.
I see the embargoed integrated seniority number equivalent to AC WB CA positions available. So the 674th active AC seniority number. I don’t think the pay disparity between AC NB CA and TS CA will trigger a lower permanent seniority embargo but could also result in a fence from mainline WB CA.

Unlikely arbitrator(s) would permanently penalize TS pilots for AC pilots that could hold WB CA but bid lower categories.

That's what I'm saying. Not actual seniority number in the seat, but rank counting down positions from the top. No bump and flush means the most senior TS go 330 pilots, they aren't penalized at all and take significant raises, they walk into AC WB seats at a pretty reasonable seniority number. TS 320 pilots stay a comparable wage and overall more valuable package.

Ratio or ratios - TBD. Depends on relevant fleets/positions.

Right. LCC CA, LCC FO, & furlough/inactive.

TS = LCC that's your ratio start/end right there. Left and right seat based on rank as if every AC guy was in the most senior position he could hold.

A federally appointed arbitrator has already ruled that TS was equivalent with the creation of LOU74 under FOS. They copied the wage. TS & the LCC were direct competitors. There is certainly precedent.


As for handling of ‘inactive’ at the snapshot date, that will be a challenging topic. Result may depend greatly on number of operating certificates that flow from the transaction.

I doubt it. AOCs aren't the pilots' problem and can be manipulated. Merge the seniority on an even ratio and then recall in order to any seat available when it's available to whoever is up next. That's equally fair both sides.
---------- ADS -----------
 
GATRKGA
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 1:24 pm

Re: Cargo TA

Post by GATRKGA »

altiplano wrote: Fri Dec 11, 2020 8:26 am I predict it will be ratio integration based on the rank of AC LCC positions on the larger list. So count how many positions are above LCC CA at AC that's you're start point, not actual seniority, but numbers down as if they most senior person was in each slot starting from 777CA down.

1% TS CA does not equal 1% AC CA.

1% TS CA does equal 1% AC LCC CA.

Same for FOs.

Then ratio integration of furloughs/inactive pilots to ensure equal recall and to any position based on seniority.

No bump and flush, ratio of 330/320 CA pisition issued fir APOS based on active TS fins at time of merger (no dual types at AC). Standard course right issuance based on APOS ie. 330 CA 1 UR, 320 CA 1 UR, 1 WBCA

No loss to TS pilots because they will earn same or more.
If it goes this way, that means the most senior ts pilot ends up somewhere around 1200 and the most junior around 4300.

The guys in year 2-3 fo ts pay find themselves 3300-3500, and year 3-4 around 3000 and year 5-30 sporadically through 1200 to 3000. If using pay parity as determination where you sit.

For example a year 2 fo makes 70k. Year 3 around 80k year 4 around 90 and year 5 around 104k.

Which seniority number is making that if they didn’t upgrade at ac? Roughly those numbers.

Because only about 600 are coming in, the effect on anyone’s 2% thesis will be negligible. Glad to see fl280 sees the light.
---------- ADS -----------
 
RVR6000
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 485
Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2006 7:25 pm

Re: Cargo TA

Post by RVR6000 »

The most senior Rouge 767 captain was in the 700 seniority range. This is before the fleet was grounded.

Remember rogue wide-body pay rates where taken directly from Transat rates at inception.

Makes sense to start integration at Rouge levels.
---------- ADS -----------
 
altiplano
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5377
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: Cargo TA

Post by altiplano »

GATRKGA wrote: Fri Dec 11, 2020 5:23 pm
altiplano wrote: Fri Dec 11, 2020 8:26 am I predict it will be ratio integration based on the rank of AC LCC positions on the larger list. So count how many positions are above LCC CA at AC that's you're start point, not actual seniority, but numbers down as if they most senior person was in each slot starting from 777CA down.

1% TS CA does not equal 1% AC CA.

1% TS CA does equal 1% AC LCC CA.

Same for FOs.

Then ratio integration of furloughs/inactive pilots to ensure equal recall and to any position based on seniority.

No bump and flush, ratio of 330/320 CA pisition issued fir APOS based on active TS fins at time of merger (no dual types at AC). Standard course right issuance based on APOS ie. 330 CA 1 UR, 320 CA 1 UR, 1 WBCA

No loss to TS pilots because they will earn same or more.
If it goes this way, that means the most senior ts pilot ends up somewhere around 1200 and the most junior around 4300.

The guys in year 2-3 fo ts pay find themselves 3300-3500, and year 3-4 around 3000 and year 5-30 sporadically through 1200 to 3000. If using pay parity as determination where you sit.

For example a year 2 fo makes 70k. Year 3 around 80k year 4 around 90 and year 5 around 104k.

Which seniority number is making that if they didn’t upgrade at ac? Roughly those numbers.

Because only about 600 are coming in, the effect on anyone’s 2% thesis will be negligible. Glad to see fl280 sees the light.

Yes - based on number of active Captain position at times of merger - starting point would be ratioed from about 1200 through the number of total LCC Captains at time of merger on the most recent AC requirement bid. Longevity may have some affect, but the base for the formula will be ratio.

Number of active FOs would be ratioed starting from further down, I don't know the start point numberoff the top of my head, but there will be a gap between the bottom TS "Captain" seniority allotment and the top TS "FO" seniority allotment as a lot of AC position will rank lower than TS CA, but higher than TS FO.

Most junior active TS pilot would be ahead of all most junior AC position (220 FO). All inactive/furloughed pilots are ratioed below the most junior AC active number, and yes the most junior pilot will be the bottom TS pilot on that list, is it 4300? I don't know.

It's important to remember that it isn't the actual seniority number of the person in the seat that the ratio will be based on. It's the rank of the position red, red, blue, etc...

I don't know if you guys have CAs junior to FOs but that won't matter red, red, blue is how the ratio will go... who's actually in the seat, the seniority number actually in the seat won't matter. But we'll all get no bump, no flush, and be able to hold our positions anyway.
RVR6000 wrote: Fri Dec 11, 2020 7:29 pm The most senior Rouge 767 captain was in the 700 seniority range. This is before the fleet was grounded.

Remember rogue wide-body pay rates were taken directly from Transat rates at inception.

Makes sense to start integration at Rouge levels.
Again the actual person in the seat won't matter, the rank of the position is what will play... red, red, blue starting from #xxxx to #xxxx and then #xxxx to #xxxx... inactive/furloughs ratioed at the bottom.

I think that's where we're headed... flame away.
---------- ADS -----------
 
330heavy
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2020 12:56 pm

Re: Cargo TA

Post by 330heavy »

Over 1.5 yrs since the announcement, no one can be sure how it'll play out. Certainly not now in the current industry conditions. We all know this will head to arbitration. While it's fun to play armchair QB, we simply don't "exactly" know how this will play out based on past mergers and current conditions.
Then there's those of the lower intellectual variety, who take things on here as gospel, and/or incite some trolling to create division, ignore them and don't feed them, for we all just don't know exactly how this will play out, so why waste time? What we do know is, is that we all want this to be done fairly and peacefully. We are all now brothers & sisters from different parents. My message is let's work together in a post merger fashion now to get ahead of the company. To get ahead in a contract. To get ahead in work conditions. There is so much to do in little time than to piss over a few seniority spots that is largely out of our hands. Save that for the current MECs to work on with arbritation, let the rest us work on the future.
---------- ADS -----------
 
FL-280
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 305
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:45 pm

Re: Cargo TA

Post by FL-280 »

Going through Q4 statements and Transat seems to have 24 airplanes at their disposal. A certain amount won't be flown until return to lessors. Both companies are smaller than pre-pandemic, but there is no doubt about a simple fact. Transat pilots are showing up (possibly) at AC with more pilots than work.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Air Canada”