WestJet Agreement 2.0

Discuss topics relating to Westjet.

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

rudder
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3848
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: WestJet Agreement 2.0

Post by rudder »

jonny dangerous wrote:Now if we did unionize and consequently ended up with seniority driven schedule bidding (a given), how long would it be before Frog Legs could hold weekends off? Christmas?

What about the inevitable reserve coverage system? How high up the list would an F/O have to be before he/she could avoid reserve days. Very sucky for the YHZ commuters.

And then how long before the FAs follow suit and join CUPE and mtce joins IAMAW?

The drama would be awesome though. Think of all the fun things we could talk about in the cockpit, you know, how management is screwing us all the time.

And grievances. Man those are great.

Where do I sign?
What a load of C.R.A.P.

You could certify the WJPA with status quo (Agreement 2.0) as your collective agreement, including the present system for pilot scheduling and vacation bidding.

A campaign of misinformation is not a valid strategy to avoid a real debate on the merits of certification, but is the most common tactic used.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Four1oh
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2448
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 9:24 pm

Re: WestJet Agreement 2.0

Post by Four1oh »

I'm pretty sure in a lot of cases, it's a campaign of misinformation that GETS companies certified. Been there, done that 4 times, no thanks, still not interested.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Drinking outside the box.
Rotten Apple #1
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 915
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 5:34 am

Re: WestJet Agreement 2.0

Post by Rotten Apple #1 »

RUDDER, I am an employee, not management. I am not launching a 'campaign' as there is no 'debate' ongoing about unionizing at WestJet.

I must question your understanding of the process of obtaining a colective agreement however. That is probably understandable if I assume that you have never participated in the certification process.

To whit, there is no assuming the current agreement as the new collective agreement. As soon a group of employees obtains certification, then the process begins on obtaining a collective agreement, which is in essence a contract between the union, as certified bargaining agent, and the company.

As exists right now, WestJet management could, with some measure of protest, unilaterally change the terms of employment for all WestJet pilots. Unlikely as that is, that is the law.

Should the pilots or other employees at WestJet choose to unionize, WestJet management would still have the prerogative to unilaterally alter the terms of employment for those employees.

For example, profit share, stock options, you name it, off the table. And that would be fair, and expected, if an employee group, chose to put their faith in a union as opposed to their management.

Rudder, if you like, we could set up another thread in which we could enlighten each other and anyone else in the reality, pros and cons, of unionizing. Whatever, a pilot union is not likely at WestJet. But spend time fretting about it if you like.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: WestJet Agreement 2.0

Post by Rockie »

jonny dangerous wrote:Now if we did unionize and consequently ended up with seniority driven schedule bidding (a given), how long would it be before Frog Legs could hold weekends off? Christmas?

What about the inevitable reserve coverage system? How high up the list would an F/O have to be before he/she could avoid reserve days. Very sucky for the YHZ commuters.

And then how long before the FAs follow suit and join CUPE and mtce joins IAMAW?

The drama would be awesome though. Think of all the fun things we could talk about in the cockpit, you know, how management is screwing us all the time.

And grievances. Man those are great.

Where do I sign?


Pardon me for interjecting in a family squabble but I know a thing or two about unions as well, and unlike some here I have no bias about them one way or the other. So I can offer up a fairly unslanted opinion of what a union would mean.

There is no shortage of misinformation and manipulation of the facts from either management or unions who are in a sense running their own business. Fortunately as a group employees can usually see through the BS and will collectively make the right decision whether a union is needed or not. In one of my old companies an initial union drive from an established union was rejected by the pilots, but subsequent to that some things happened that made the pilots realize the need for protection and so an in-house legal union was accepted in another vote. So far WJ has treated you guys with enough respect and honesty that a legal union is not deemed necessary by the group, and I congratulate you and your company for that. It may not always be that way though, and if your group one day reaches the point where you feel a real union is required for protection then that will be a valid and correct choice. Maybe not for some individuals, but as a group it will be the right decision. In other words, a company becomes unionized because the employees as a group feels it is necessary however much they dislike going that route. If an employee group reaches that point then a union is necessary and the company gets what it deserves.

If you do one day get a union though, it is supposed to work for you, you don't work for it. YOU are the union. Your working conditions upon certification must by law remain frozen until a new contract is negotiated, and your new contract will be what YOU negotiate. The scenarios cited in the quote above will only be pursued by the union if you as a group want them to. It is not the union that dictates, it is you as members.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rotten Apple #1
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 915
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 5:34 am

Re: WestJet Agreement 2.0

Post by Rotten Apple #1 »

No arguments with your post Rockie.

I remember the schedule I had as a junior guy at Canada 3000. It sucked. 18 days of work a month. All weekends. No holidays off.

The senior fuckers were doing 2 YYZ-LAX-YYZ trips a week, four weeks a month. Life was good working 8-10 days a month.

I can't wait for that schedule. Probably would have that schedule for the last 10 years of my employment at WJ if the pilots unionized.

At least that's what I would want out of a union.

That and the sense of entitlement.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
KAG
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3619
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 11:24 pm

Re: WestJet Agreement 2.0

Post by KAG »

As it stands we don't need a union. The day MGMT stops communicating with us, and going back on agreed terms, I'm sure it would be discussed. I truly hope that day never comes.
The perks that come along with a union are out weighed (IMHO) by the lack of lifestyle as a junior FO/CPT. Plus I prefer the non union atmosphere in general– less politics and drama. To each there own.
---------- ADS -----------
 
The feet you step on today might be attached to the ass you're kissing tomorrow.
Chase lifestyle not metal.
whiteguy
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1059
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 1:33 pm
Location: YYC

Re: WestJet Agreement 2.0

Post by whiteguy »

KAG wrote:As it stands we don't need a union. The day MGMT stops communicating with us, and going back on agreed terms, I'm sure it would be discussed. I truly hope that day never comes.
The perks that come along with a union are out weighed (IMHO) by the lack of lifestyle as a junior FO/CPT. Plus I prefer the non union atmosphere in general– less politics and drama. To each there own.
Exactly, why bring in a union when its not needed. I've always felt that its the company that creates the union and have seen first hand why the union is needed. Look at Delta for example, no unions except pilots and the company has always treated their employees great!
---------- ADS -----------
 
Biff
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 9:36 pm

Re: WestJet Agreement 2.0

Post by Biff »

jonny dangerous wrote:
To whit, there is no assuming the current agreement as the new collective agreement. As soon a group of employees obtains certification, then the process begins on obtaining a collective agreement, which is in essence a contract between the union, as certified bargaining agent, and the company.

As exists right now, WestJet management could, with some measure of protest, unilaterally change the terms of employment for all WestJet pilots. Unlikely as that is, that is the law.

Should the pilots or other employees at WestJet choose to unionize, WestJet management would still have the prerogative to unilaterally alter the terms of employment for those employees.

JD

You sometimes sound like a fairly intelligent fellow but then some of your posts make me wonder....

Looking through Canadian Labour Code I found the following;

Duty to bargain and not to change terms and conditions

50. Where notice to bargain collectively has been given under this Part,

(a) the bargaining agent and the employer, without delay, but in any case within twenty days after the notice was given unless the parties otherwise agree, shall

(i) meet and commence, or cause authorized representatives on their behalf to meet and commence, to bargain collectively in good faith, and

(ii) make every reasonable effort to enter into a collective agreement; and


(b) the employer shall not alter the rates of pay or any other term or condition of employment or any right or privilege of the employees in the bargaining unit, or any right or privilege of the bargaining agent, until the requirements of paragraphs 89(1)(a) to (d) have been met, unless the bargaining agent consents to the alteration of such a term or condition, or such a right or privilege.


From the above, I would interpret that while attempting to negotitate the collective agreement, the previous agreement would stand(profit share, stock options, you name it).

How do you interpret it so differently that;
jonny dangerous wrote: For example, profit share, stock options, you name it, off the table. And that would be fair, and expected, if an employee group, chose to put their faith in a union as opposed to their management.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: WestJet Agreement 2.0

Post by Rockie »

KAG wrote:The perks that come along with a union are out weighed (IMHO) by the lack of lifestyle as a junior FO/CPT.
This is an example of misunderstanding what a union means. It does not mean your schedule is now determined by bidding for pairings in accordance with seniority. If your group is happy with the current way you are schedule to fly / get holidays / days off etc, then that remains the same after you became a union. Once again, you are the union and you determine as a group what sort of working conditions you are going to negotiate for.

Having a union does not automatically mean you are butting heads with the company either. An enlightened company management in my opinion would be more than happy to offload things like pilot welfare issues onto a union freeing themselves up to manage the business. An enlightened management would work in partnership with an enlightened unionized pilot group to share the responsiblility for taking care of the pilots. But that's just my opinion.
---------- ADS -----------
 
balfour
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 210
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 11:42 pm

Re: WestJet Agreement 2.0

Post by balfour »

Not going to happen. Please move on.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: WestJet Agreement 2.0

Post by Rockie »

Biff wrote:(b) the employer shall not alter the rates of pay or any other term or condition of employment or any right or privilege of the employees in the bargaining unit, or any right or privilege of the bargaining agent, until the requirements of paragraphs 89(1)(a) to (d) have been met, unless the bargaining agent consents to the alteration of such a term or condition, or such a right or privilege.

From the above, I would interpret that while attempting to negotitate the collective agreement, the previous agreement would stand(profit share, stock options, you name it).
You interpret correctly Biff. This has been tested by companies before (such as the company I used to work for) and they have lost in every case that I'm aware of. It's the law.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Jastapilot
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 832
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:42 pm

Re: WestJet Agreement 2.0

Post by Jastapilot »

Rockie wrote:Having a union does not automatically mean you are butting heads with the company either.
Ok then, How about giving us a list of enlightened unionized aviation companies? Hell, never mind the aviation companies, just any? More than 1 or 2?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Biff
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 9:36 pm

Re: WestJet Agreement 2.0

Post by Biff »

Jastapilot wrote: Ok then, How about giving us a list of enlightened unionized aviation companies? Hell, never mind the aviation companies, just any? More than 1 or 2?
Ok...Southwest.

Now what about a short list of enlightened non-union companies...
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Huge Hammer
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 148
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 1:59 pm

Re: WestJet Agreement 2.0

Post by Huge Hammer »

Biff wrote:
Jastapilot wrote: Ok then, How about giving us a list of enlightened unionized aviation companies? Hell, never mind the aviation companies, just any? More than 1 or 2?
Ok...Southwest.

Now what about a short list of enlightened non-union companies...
FedEx comes to mind.

I don't see what a union can give WS pilots that they have not been able to do for themselves. In a compnay that values culture the way they do why would they want to offload the relationship they have with the pilots to a 3rd party?

Union is a business just like any other where the revenue is driven by dues instead of sales.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Biff
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 9:36 pm

Re: WestJet Agreement 2.0

Post by Biff »

Huge Hammer wrote: FedEx comes to mind.

I don't see what a union can give WS pilots that they have not been able to do for themselves. In a compnay that values culture the way they do why would they want to offload the relationship they have with the pilots to a 3rd party?

Union is a business just like any other where the revenue is driven by dues instead of sales.
Nicely done, didn't think of them. Although they did flirt with ALPA for a few years, they have since reverted back to an association. One thing that should be noted is they are some of the highest paid pilots in the industry and, i believe i read somewhere, received a 9 percent increase while under the ALPA banner.
---------- ADS -----------
 
mattedfred
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1502
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:36 am

Re: WestJet Agreement 2.0

Post by mattedfred »

http://www.alpa.org/Home/WhoWeAre/Pilot ... fault.aspx

FedEx
Number of Crewmembers: 4,400
Joined ALPA: June 2002
Operations: The world’s largest express transportation company, serving more than 220 countries
Bases: Anchorage, Ala.; Los Angeles, Calif.; Memphis, Tenn.; Subic Bay, Philippines
Hub Cities: Anchorage, Ala.; Fort Worth, Texas; Indianapolis, Ind.; Memphis, Tenn.; Miami, Fla.; Newark, N.J. and Oakland, Calif.; Toronto, Ont., Canada; Paris, France; Subic Bay, Philippines
Corporate Headquarters: Memphis, Tenn.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: WestJet Agreement 2.0

Post by Rockie »

Huge Hammer wrote:
Biff wrote:
Jastapilot wrote: Ok then, How about giving us a list of enlightened unionized aviation companies? Hell, never mind the aviation companies, just any? More than 1 or 2?
Ok...Southwest.

Now what about a short list of enlightened non-union companies...
FedEx comes to mind.

I don't see what a union can give WS pilots that they have not been able to do for themselves. In a compnay that values culture the way they do why would they want to offload the relationship they have with the pilots to a 3rd party?

Union is a business just like any other where the revenue is driven by dues instead of sales.
You're confusing a 3rd party union (like ALPA) to an in-house association that is certified by the CIRB. If the WJPA certified themselves they become a union with all the legal rights and obligations as any other trade union. But as I said in a couple of previous posts, you are the union. Your agenda is what your group wants it to be, and WJ management would still be talking to WJ pilots. The advantage of an in-house union (association if you like) is that you are not beholden to the priorities of other member airlines like you would be with ALPA.

That's not to say membership in ALPA is bad, because belonging to them gives a pilot group access to resources and political influence they can't possibly get on their own. WJ pilots would still be the union executive, and you would still be responsible for setting your own priorities within your pilot group. But so far this discussion is moot anyway because your pilot group doesn't see the need for a union at this time. As far as I'm concerned that's far better than needing one.

I only inserted myself in this thread to try and clarify some misconceptions some people have on what having a union means.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Jastapilot
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 832
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:42 pm

Re: WestJet Agreement 2.0

Post by Jastapilot »

how about Toyota vs the North american manufacturers?
---------- ADS -----------
 
mattedfred
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1502
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:36 am

Re: WestJet Agreement 2.0

Post by mattedfred »

Jastapilot wrote:how about Toyota vs the North american manufacturers?
exactly

companies get the unions they deserve. obviously WJ hasn't earned one which means that both side of the table have been very smart about it. WJ mgmt recognize that appeasing the interests of non-unionized WJ pilots is better than the alternative while the WJ pilots continue to keep their interests in line with the industry. if this relationship ever falters then certification would be inevitable. although i would imagine that the canadian aviation industry would be better off if we were all a member of a single bargaining unit.
---------- ADS -----------
 
roger.roger
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2008 7:10 pm

Re: WestJet Agreement 2.0

Post by roger.roger »

The problem with unions is the inflexability that comes with it.

the reality is if you want a union that is flexable take a look a harley davidson. or see the topic Union for the coles notes.

for the non-university types coles notes means the short version
---------- ADS -----------
 
I think that if you stick to the dotted lines when making the folds your might have some aviation success.
Post Reply

Return to “WestJet”