New Contract thread

Discuss topics relating to Air Canada.

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

Post Reply
jdm
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:01 pm

Re: New Contract thread

Post by jdm »

TheStig wrote: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.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Disco Stu
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 677
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 12:26 am
Location: Springfield, USA
Contact:

Re: New Contract thread

Post by 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.
---------- ADS -----------
 
CanadianEh
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 2:00 pm
Location: YYZ

Re: New Contract thread

Post by CanadianEh »

Disco Stu wrote: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.
---------- ADS -----------
 
jdm
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:01 pm

Re: New Contract thread

Post by jdm »

Disco Stu wrote: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.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Disco Stu
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 677
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 12:26 am
Location: Springfield, USA
Contact:

Re: New Contract thread

Post by 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?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by Disco Stu on Sat Aug 11, 2012 9:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
jdm
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:01 pm

Re: New Contract thread

Post by jdm »

Yeah, I know that. I didn't say "run for an elected position again" because I was trying to be diplomatic and not out you any further.
---------- ADS -----------
 
jdm
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:01 pm

Re: New Contract thread

Post by jdm »

Ah, I see you changed your post while I was typing mine.

FYI, I would have no problem with the TA being voted down if it was done honestly, but it wasn't. I got a lot of anonymous emails full of half truths and outright lies about that TA that were leaked from someone on the inside that wanted it to fail. If it was that bad, why not let it fail on its own merits?

And here's why I think I'm right: I voted for TA1. We ended up with something worse. So yeah, majority rules, but when you get a majority by whipping up a mob mentality with false info, the minority want to know who's responsible for that.
---------- ADS -----------
 
jdm
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:01 pm

Re: New Contract thread

Post by jdm »

Disco Stu wrote:
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?
Kind of hard to answer when you keep changing your post.

FYI, I am doing something about it. I'm trying to figure out who to vote for in the next elections.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Disco Stu
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 677
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 12:26 am
Location: Springfield, USA
Contact:

Re: New Contract thread

Post by Disco Stu »

jdm wrote:Ah, I see you changed your post while I was typing mine.

FYI, I would have no problem with the TA being voted down if it was done honestly, but it wasn't. I got a lot of anonymous emails full of half truths and outright lies about that TA that were leaked from someone on the inside that wanted it to fail. If it was that bad, why not let it fail on its own merits?

And here's why I think I'm right: I voted for TA1. We ended up with something worse. So yeah, majority rules, but when you get a majority by whipping up a mob mentality with false info, the minority want to know who's responsible for that.
There was a radical element, sure. There is a radical element any time anything controversial is being discussed. There are radical elements in all aspects of politics.

TA1 was a piece of junk and deserved to fail. New hire poverty, SL5 pension, terrible scheduling rule changes, CARs limits and B scale wages at LCC. I could go on and on and on. IMO, and that of the majority, the bad vastly outweighed the good.

If people based their votes on some anonymous emails they received, and didn't take the time to read the TA and decide on their own, then they are stupider than I give them credit for.

When TA1 was voted down, no one foresaw the fact the the corp and gov't would collude so deeply. Interest based arbitration would have been one thing, and there are some opinions that if ACPA had voluntarily gone into arbitration there was the possibility of getting something better than TA1 had the replication theory been applied. FOS was designed for sports arbitration when ONE issue - MONEY, is the cause of the impasse. It was never thought up for complex issues such as a pilot agreement. Bill C-33 is an outrageous piece of legislation that unfairly favoured Air Canada and destroyed any hope of ACPA getting a fair settlement. There are many legal opinions out there that claim the Harper Government has violated international labour law with their draconian back to work bills.

I assume you have read both the corp's reply submission, our reply submission, and Stanley's report?

Like I said, mistakes were made in the months following the failed ratification. If we could go back and do things differently, hindsight being 20/20, sure, there are things that could have been done differently. Voting down TA1 and recalling those responsible for it would not be among them.
---------- ADS -----------
 
av8ts
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 839
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 8:31 am

Re: New Contract thread

Post by av8ts »

Sooo......how long have you two been married? :smt014
---------- ADS -----------
 
Mig29
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1213
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 7:47 pm

Re: New Contract thread

Post by Mig29 »

Not trying to stir the pot, but I'm a bit tired of hearing this MAJORITY is right and minority can go home....

Just because majority votes FOR something doesn't mean they are always right... It's how the information is presented to the public and how it gets twisted and corrupted by the time it gets to each voter that decides the majority most of the time in life.

See last century, MAJORITY of Germans thought they were right while minority was against World War I and II. Who would you side with?

Remember that when you talk about this majority/minority issue. I've personally witnessed few contract votes where majority won and then it turned out to be a compete disaster. Air Canada pilots are no different than other people....
---------- ADS -----------
 
jdm
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:01 pm

Re: New Contract thread

Post by jdm »

Disco Stu wrote:
jdm wrote:Ah, I see you changed your post while I was typing mine.

FYI, I would have no problem with the TA being voted down if it was done honestly, but it wasn't. I got a lot of anonymous emails full of half truths and outright lies about that TA that were leaked from someone on the inside that wanted it to fail. If it was that bad, why not let it fail on its own merits?

And here's why I think I'm right: I voted for TA1. We ended up with something worse. So yeah, majority rules, but when you get a majority by whipping up a mob mentality with false info, the minority want to know who's responsible for that.
There was a radical element, sure. There is a radical element any time anything controversial is being discussed. There are radical elements in all aspects of politics.

TA1 was a piece of junk and deserved to fail. New hire poverty, SL5 pension, terrible scheduling rule changes, CARs limits and B scale wages at LCC. I could go on and on and on. IMO, and that of the majority, the bad vastly outweighed the good.

If people based their votes on some anonymous emails they received, and didn't take the time to read the TA and decide on their own, then they are stupider than I give them credit for.

When TA1 was voted down, no one foresaw the fact the the corp and gov't would collude so deeply. Interest based arbitration would have been one thing, and there are some opinions that if ACPA had voluntarily gone into arbitration there was the possibility of getting something better than TA1 had the replication theory been applied. FOS was designed for sports arbitration when ONE issue - MONEY, is the cause of the impasse. It was never thought up for complex issues such as a pilot agreement. Bill C-33 is an outrageous piece of legislation that unfairly favoured Air Canada and destroyed any hope of ACPA getting a fair settlement. There are many legal opinions out there that claim the Harper Government has violated international labour law with their draconian back to work bills.

I assume you have read both the corp's reply submission, our reply submission, and Stanley's report?

Like I said, mistakes were made in the months following the failed ratification. If we could go back and do things differently, hindsight being 20/20, sure, there are things that could have been done differently. Voting down TA1 and recalling those responsible for it would not be among them.
Yes, radical elements exist, but I don't want them representing me, especially during negots. The foxes that took over the henhouse by leaking that misleading info are still there. I'd prefer a little more trustworthy group.

I strongly disagree that "no one foresaw...". Everyone with any expertise or experience, inside the union and externally foresaw that going up against the government was a bad idea, and the reason you were outmaneuvered is you allowed yourselves to be painted into a corner you couldn't escape from. The current MEC chair should have known from previous experience that strong arm tactics fueled by unrealistic expectations don't lead anywhere good.

You may not regret it, but getting rid of everyone in the union with experience in the middle of negots was a huge mistake that prevented us from getting an improved version of that TA instead of what we got.

You've answered my question, no further response required.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Jimmy_Hoffa
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 94
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 2:46 pm

Re: New Contract thread

Post by Jimmy_Hoffa »

Guaranteed this would be a different conversation had the outcome been TA1+ ...... Too many arm chair quarterbacks coming out of the wood work now that its all over with.

JDM Do you agree that the B scale wages, 4yr Flat Pay, SL5 Pension, and voluntarily sending WAWCON DECADES in the past at LCC was beneficial to the pilots as a whole? Or were you just happy because it "WORKS FOR ME?"

Just trying to figure out why all the TA1 supporters claim it to be so awesome. Anyone who has tried to explain it to me ends up with the same statemet, "It worked for ME."

Please feel free to correct the half truths and misconceptions so that we might see the error of our ways.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Disco Stu
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 677
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 12:26 am
Location: Springfield, USA
Contact:

Re: New Contract thread

Post by Disco Stu »

Your last post is full of inaccuracies jdm.

I'm not interested in pursuing this with you anymore.
---------- ADS -----------
 
thrust set
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 161
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 8:26 pm

Re: New Contract thread

Post by thrust set »

Disco I appreciate how honast you are about what events took place over the last 18 months. I like you voted down TA 1 and recently have been having a little " buyers remorse" with our new contract.

Thanks for reminding me that voting down the last contract was and still is the only solution that made sense at the time. I don't want to get into a pissing match either. We made our beds lets move on.

Disco hope you continue to serve our union but please could you tell CG to zip his " pie hole "!
---------- ADS -----------
 
CanadianEh
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 2:00 pm
Location: YYZ

Re: New Contract thread

Post by CanadianEh »

Mig29 wrote:Not trying to stir the pot, but I'm a bit tired of hearing this MAJORITY is right and minority can go home....

Just because majority votes FOR something doesn't mean they are always right... It's how the information is presented to the public and how it gets twisted and corrupted by the time it gets to each voter that decides the majority most of the time in life.

See last century, MAJORITY of Germans thought they were right while minority was against World War I and II. Who would you side with?

Remember that when you talk about this majority/minority issue. I've personally witnessed few contract votes where majority won and then it turned out to be a compete disaster. Air Canada pilots are no different than other people....
Isn't that the truth... just look at the Government that the majority of Canadians elected. What a mistake.
thrust set wrote:Disco I appreciate how honast you are about what events took place over the last 18 months. I like you voted down TA 1 and recently have been having a little " buyers remorse" with our new contract.
Don't forget that ACPA is taking the company and the Government to court on the grounds that all of this infringes on certain rights in the Charter. We'll see where that goes, I really hope it ends up working out even though it will take a long time to fight.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Disco Stu
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 677
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 12:26 am
Location: Springfield, USA
Contact:

Re: New Contract thread

Post by Disco Stu »

CanadianEH

The Conservatives only received 39% of the popular vote in 2011.

The MAJORITY of Canadians voted against them. :wink:
---------- ADS -----------
 
slob driver
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 6:01 pm

Re: New Contract thread

Post by slob driver »

Just wondering, how does one come up with the blended mainline rates as per Airlinepilotcentral. Is it a 2/3 day 1/3 night rate? As well, when do the night rates come into effect, 6pm to 6am? How does the international and nav-aid pay work as well?
---------- ADS -----------
 
CanadianEh
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 2:00 pm
Location: YYZ

Re: New Contract thread

Post by CanadianEh »

Disco Stu wrote:CanadianEH

The Conservatives only received 39% of the popular vote in 2011.

The MAJORITY of Canadians voted against them. :wink:
I stand corrected!
---------- ADS -----------
 
jdm
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:01 pm

Re: New Contract thread

Post by jdm »

Jimmy_Hoffa wrote:Guaranteed this would be a different conversation had the outcome been TA1+ ...... Too many arm chair quarterbacks coming out of the wood work now that its all over with.

JDM Do you agree that the B scale wages, 4yr Flat Pay, SL5 Pension, and voluntarily sending WAWCON DECADES in the past at LCC was beneficial to the pilots as a whole? Or were you just happy because it "WORKS FOR ME?"

Just trying to figure out why all the TA1 supporters claim it to be so awesome. Anyone who has tried to explain it to me ends up with the same statemet, "It worked for ME."

Please feel free to correct the half truths and misconceptions so that we might see the error of our ways.
There were things I liked and didn't like about it as well, but I didn't vote on what I liked, I voted on what I thought could be achieved, and in the end the deciding factor was the economy. I didn't like what I was reading in the financial papers, and I was surprised that TA1 wasn't worse than it was. I thought that voting it down was risky, and the balance of bad to good in it wasn't enough to gamble on turning it down.

I also think a lot of guys voted based on an emotional response to CR's obscene bonus, but you can't compare our wages to executive compensation. It's a mug's game and a distraction, no different than if the flight attendants demanded more money because wide body captains make more than them.

You have to look at what other people are making who are doing the same job, and take into account whether your company is making any money, and what direction the economy is heading. It wasn't my dream contract either, but under the circumstances, I didn't think we would do better by turning it down.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Air Canada”