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
cosinus6
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:38 pm

Re: New Contract thread

Post by cosinus6 »

Is it realistic to say the Embraer fleet, or a part of it, could be operated by Skyregional?

If yes, who would fly them? And when would they begin doing it?

Correct me if I am wrong but from what I undersatnd, all the EMJ pilot jobs are protected. So Sky would have to train some of their Q400 pilots on the EMJ, while a lot guys from AC are already type rated on the aircraft... Sounds like an expensive plan!

Could AC pilots end up working at Sky one day? Would they loose their seniority doing this kind of move?
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
pilotbzh
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 600
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 7:33 am
Location: yyz

Re: New Contract thread

Post by pilotbzh »

EMJs are not going anywhere but the dump, once AC renews the narobody fleet the EMJ won't be part of it, either C series, boeing or Airbus neo....no changes for the short term..... Sky will probably compete against Jazz for the q400 work, no longuer stuck to the island....
---------- ADS -----------
 
yycflyguy
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2738
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 9:18 am

Re: New Contract thread

Post by yycflyguy »

I wouldn't be surprised to see the E175s at SkyRegional/GGN or a newly created regional within a year.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
flytdeck
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 7:01 pm
Location: In over my head

Re: New Contract thread

Post by flytdeck »

REF: TA1

Voting "NO" to TA1 was simply the right thing to do, ethically, and realistically. The contract had a major impact on the progressive careers of ALL pilots who had not yet reached the left seat. There were a substantial number of items that were not even close to complete. From experience, we all know that this gives our ever devious executive management ample room to rewrite the entire section of the agreement to THEIR benefit.

We essential are not working to an agreement in any logical or moral sense of the word. We are working under IMPOSED working conditions. A paper we ripped up and discarded has been resurrected from the ashes to be rewritten by the COMPANY and IMPOSED by the GOVERNMENT. You are no longer contract workers. You are INDENTURED workers with no rights to do anything other than complain, though even those may be limited at some level.

The more important question is; "Will this contract save Air Canada?". The core of the airline is deteriorating to such an extent that it now appears to have a limited lifespan. As the parts are calved into subsidiaries, the pension becomes more of an issue as there are less well paid employees to support it. At some point, these same employees will realize that they will be unlikely to see the DB benefits that they are religiously paying toward. With a nine years pension holiday, there is no incentive to balance the books rather, the executive will be highly motivated to roll it up and start fresh. DB loses, DC wins. After our experience with these negotiations, is there any doubt about how our senior management perceives the pilots?

This once was an airline to be proud of. Now, we are just grains of sand in the bottom of the sink, and someone has already pulled the plug. That sucking noise is our future and even though I am no longer employed by this once incredible airline, my future is still inevitably and firmly tied to it. Though hoping for the best, it is only prudent to plan for the worst.
---------- ADS -----------
 
ratherbee
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 121
Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 10:12 am

Re: New Contract thread

Post by ratherbee »

flytdeck:
"There were a substantial number of items that were not even close to complete. From experience, we all know that this gives our ever devious executive management ample room to rewrite the entire section of the agreement to THEIR benefit."
Kind of a broad statement ending with a wild accusation, don't you think? Can you give us all an example of what items were concerning you, because I didn't see any that really worried me. New PBS software? Pairing exchange program? Can you give us an example of when our ever devious execs were able to rewrite entire sections of our agreement?

Sounds like you're trying hard to justify your no vote. Why not just admit that you thought a better deal was possible? In fact, maybe it was but it just didn't happen. Maybe, one day, we can learn from all this. Too soon?
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
flytdeck
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 7:01 pm
Location: In over my head

Re: New Contract thread

Post by flytdeck »

Hi ratherbee:

No need to justify my no vote. If faced with the same circumstances, I would make the same vote. Hopefully I made it clear that it was the ethical thing to do.

Though I no longer have access to the AC pilots forum, you may have already seen the list of items that were left "open" to be "negotiated further" with "details forthcoming" in TA1. Lets start with just a few:
  • Augmentation
  • Long range duty periods
  • Rest periods
  • Career transition path
  • New aircraft pay grouping
  • LCC details (many)
  • Deadheading (long standing)
The list on the AC forum is much more extensive. We learned these hard lessons from previous contracts that if you do NOT nail it down to start with, it will allow them to beat you up with the parts that are not attached. Remember that airline contracts are a one way street. Once signed our only recourse is arbitration, a lengthy process that favours the company over an extended period. If you do not agree with the contract interpretation, then your only recourse is to quit (or be fired) if you do not comply. How long has the cargo issue been outstanding?

Voting no was the right thing to do or do you really think that TA1 was a tightly bundled, ribbon wrapped positive proposal from our poor and starving, empathetic executive management?
---------- ADS -----------
 
ratherbee
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 121
Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 10:12 am

Re: New Contract thread

Post by ratherbee »

flytdeck,

I respect your early departure due to ethical concerns. I truly hope you have found greener pastures.

However, for those of us left behind to pick up the pieces following this monumental failure we need to figure out what happened. The first thing we need are the facts but they are hard to find.

The AC Pilots forum which bans retirees and anyone with a dissenting opinion is simply a cesspool of misinformation. So lets bare it all here on this public forum.

Not everyone felt as strongly about the TA as you did. Some saw the need for some change, many were misinformed, and many didn't read it. Any labour lawyer or person with the slightest amount of background in negotiations would let you know that you can't simply rip up an tentative agreement and start over again without great risk. However, that's not what we were told by those responsible for this mess. Ethics?

The end result is tragically ironic. The arbitrated agreement puts AC Captains at the highest pay levels in North America - with DB pensions too. Without the pay grouping system, the First Officers looking to progress have rates much lower than was available in the TA. Their jobs no longer have the same protection because of changes to the scope provisions from those negotiated in the TA. With the removal of mandatory retirement, the stagnation will be now be magnified instead of nullified.

We have been told by ACPA that the bidding rights we now have are an "improvement" Why, well because it was their idea that's why. Lets see how this current equipment bid works out first.

All of this could have been avoided had it not been for a severe lack of ethics. I can't think of another event in Canadian labour history where a union has let so much money slip through their fingers. They claim its over $140M.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
flytdeck
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 7:01 pm
Location: In over my head

Re: New Contract thread

Post by flytdeck »

ratherbee wrote: The AC Pilots forum which bans retirees and anyone with a dissenting opinion is simply a cesspool of misinformation. So lets bare it all here on this public forum.

.........[part deleted by author of this message]

All of this could have been avoided had it not been for a severe lack of ethics. I can't think of another event in Canadian labour history where a union has let so much money slip through their fingers. They claim its over $140M.
Do not believe for one moment that the money "slipped" though the fingers on the union. It was systematically and politically hacked out of the body of the membership. We are yet to find out if this was legal.

Sure there were many members who did not read the initial TA. Those are the ones who voted yes or no. Most of my contemporaries who spent the time to read and discuss the contents (and LACK of content) of the initial TA were the ones who voted no. At least, those on the west coast though the fellows I encountered and talked to on the line from other bases seemed to share the same opinion. Though many had different reasons to vote no, mine was the overwhelming distrust for the potential left in the unfinished portions of the agreement, and the extensive changes that did not explore the consequences for the future. We had been waiting for over a decade to resolve some critical issues that were NOT resolved. The TA was a non-starter and the results do not really have to be justified. The membership made a decision and for us, at that time, it was the right one.

That was the last decision we have made. Ergo, we are no longer a union, just indentured workers having little recourse other than to quit. Active dissension is now illegal. Discussing terms of the contract are irrelevant as we do not have a contract, rather a "document of mandatory working conditions". Grievances may be filed, however, the mechanism for their resolution tends to drag many of them out until the contract expires where they often "disappear".

We all knew age 65 was a given at some point. Many of us had been urging ACPA to address this issue well over a decade ago. If we had started at that time, likely middle to junior pilots would not be facing such a massive impact on their careers as there were many avenues available AT THAT TIME to mitigate the impact. Age 60 in the early stages had the potential to be a non-contract item. Negotiating with no tools with one's back against the wall is a no-win situation. We brought this on ourselves collectively so not a lot of sympathy no matter who we point to and try to blame. All we need to do to find someone to blame is look in a mirror. It is ironic that now the senior pilots (note, my age and seniority number are less than 60 and match this year) have no incentive to retire at 60 rather, with the state of our pension, they almost HAVE to continue for as long as possible. The other irony is that by staying, they are leaving all their eggs in the same, unraveling basket.

The fields here are not greener. The working conditions in comparison are harder and there is no protection for those who make major errors or breach of conduct. The pay is good and the co-workers very professional. Living conditions, depending on one's priorities, are great or harsh. There is no "us vs them" conflict as there is no "us". It is interesting, honest work in an environment that the North American carriers must envy. This is no picnic, but guarantees diversification of active and retirement income. Call it insurance along with a little adventure and a method to put in place an alternative long term income to replace the ever more tenuous SERP.

It is still depressing observing the devolution of Air Canada. It is sad as so many good friends work there. The distance makes it somewhat easier (proximity relates to relevance). Executive arrogance continues to escalate as they know there is nothing can hinder whatever decisions they make. Hope for the best but plan for the worst. Been there and done that. Here I am and honestly, I am hoping for the best for the employees of my former airline. In the meantime, I pretty much know that this company will be around until I retire, and ready and willing to pay me every month. Possibly, and when was the last time this happened to you, a BONUS now and then! Just a little on the downside. Don't get ill and never, ever, FTD (fornicate the dog :wink: ).
---------- ADS -----------
 
DHC-1 Jockey
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 578
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 6:41 pm

Re: New Contract thread

Post by DHC-1 Jockey »

Based on the pay rates quoted earlier in this thread, to determine approximate yearly pay, what are the minimum monthly hourly guarantees per month when on reserve or holding a block?
---------- ADS -----------
 
777LR
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 66
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 11:59 am

Re: New Contract thread

Post by 777LR »

The DBM will be limited as follows:
26.04.04.01 For all Positions the total hours for the 12-month period
must fall in the range of 900 to 996 hours.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DHC-1 Jockey
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 578
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 6:41 pm

Re: New Contract thread

Post by DHC-1 Jockey »

Thanks 777LR. For an approximate gauge of year 1 mainline pay then, I could assume anywhere from $45,243 to $50,068 (900 / 996 X $50.27) excluding per-diems and slightly less with the LCC?

Also, how many days off per month do the EMJ and 320 drivers see on average? I know circumstances change from person to person and month to month with scheduling requirements, but I'm just looking for a general number to compare to my current gig. Thanks again!
---------- ADS -----------
 
altiplano
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4423
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: New Contract thread

Post by altiplano »

Also remember DBM is Designated Block Maximum. And I think they shoot for -5/+1 for block holders, so you could maybe expect 50 - 60 hours less for the year than your numbers. Also if you are on reserve and if you are on the 320 you will be there for a while, Min Res Guarantee varies with DBM and is generally 7 - 9 hours less unless you fly out. There is also a clause for AVO now which lets you work more than DBM under certain restrictions.
---------- ADS -----------
 
777LR
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 66
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 11:59 am

Re: New Contract thread

Post by 777LR »

DHC-1 Jockey, that is correct. The LCC rates are a few dollars less per hour.

On reserve you are scheduled 12 days off per month. If it's a slow month and you are senior on reserve you can pass the flying and be pretty much semi retired :lol: .

As a block holder on the EMJ and A320 you can expect a minimum of 14 days off. If the DBM is low then even more time off.

Cheers!
---------- ADS -----------
 
DHC-1 Jockey
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 578
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 6:41 pm

Re: New Contract thread

Post by DHC-1 Jockey »

Thanks for the info! I got the PFO back in July and am thinking of reapplying. The future here at Jazz (or anywhere else for that matter) is never certain so I'm just trying to get as educated as I can before applying again, especially after all the new contract stuff that has been finalized since my interview earlier this year.

Any new hires care to weigh in on how it's going so far? We've all heard of the crusty old-timers who might have become a little jaded during their decades in the seat. How do those with a fresh set of eyes see the operation? Any regrets making the move to Big Red?
---------- ADS -----------
 
MRP
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 7:36 am

Re: New Contract thread

Post by MRP »

DHC-1 Jockey;
For what its worth I left Jazz for AC in Spring of this year. I have no regrets. There were several ex Jazz pilots in my PIT course and I'm pretty sure they don't regret the move either. My schedule on the EMJ is almost the same as I had at Jazz on the Dash. Destinations way better.

So far its been great, and I think I made the right move.

As for the LCC, I've flown with several captains who are intending to bid over to it, and several who are completely against it. Many pilots I speak with who would gain a pay increase by bidding LCC are simply waiting for it to get up and running to see what the working conditions are going to be like (destinations, pairings, scheduling etc) before making a decision to bid over.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DHC-1 Jockey
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 578
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 6:41 pm

Re: New Contract thread

Post by DHC-1 Jockey »

Thanks MRP! It's nice to hear for once someone who is happy over there. There's hope for all of us!
---------- ADS -----------
 
jazzbeat
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 3:31 pm

Re: New Contract thread

Post by jazzbeat »

DHC-1 Jockey

In my 25 years of aviation I have never seen anybody regretting leaving Jazz for Mainline....

Beat
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
lov2fly
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 5:13 pm
Location: Solar system

Re: New Contract thread

Post by lov2fly »

Does the DBM apply to the LCC or if there is no minimum guarantee?
---------- ADS -----------
 
DHC-1 Jockey
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 578
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 6:41 pm

Re: New Contract thread

Post by DHC-1 Jockey »

lov2fly wrote:Does the DBM apply to the LCC or if there is no minimum guarantee?
I was also wondering this. And, since there is no reserve at the LCC, do they just rely on people volunteering to work on their days off to cover book-off's?
---------- 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 »

LCC will be blocked between 77.5 and 85 hours per month, with anything over 82.5 being at 1.5x.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Air Canada”