* AvCanada's Home Page * Photo Gallery * Directory * Topsites *Weather *Enter Chat * Media Kit
It is currently Sun May 19, 2013 10:01 am



All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is chatting

Who is chatting
Enter Chat




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 3:05 pm 
Offline
Rank 7
Rank 7
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 8:19 pm
Posts: 632
Found this on another website.
Quote:
Decision No. 194-A-2012
May 22, 2012

APPLICATION by Air Canada, on behalf of itself; Colgan Air, Inc. carrying on business as US Airways Express, United Express and Continental Connection (Colgan); and Champlain Enterprises, Inc. carrying on business as CommutAir and Continental Connection (CommutAir), pursuant to section 60 of the Canada Transportation Act, S.C., 1996, c. 10, as amended, and section 8.2 of the Air Transportation Regulations, SOR/88-58, as amended.

File No.:M4835-2-56

Air Canada, on behalf of itself, Colgan and CommutAir, has applied to the Canadian Transportation Agency (Agency) for an approval to permit Air Canada to provide its scheduled international services between Canada and the United States of America by selling transportation in its own name on flights operated by Colgan and CommutAir between Canada and the United States of America, including between points in the United States of America, for an indefinite period or such period as may be authorized by the Agency. As the application was filed less than 45 days before the first planned flight, as required by subsection 8.2(2) of the Air Transportation Regulations (ATR), an exemption from the application of this provision is necessary. The Agency finds that compliance with subsection 8.2(2) of the ATR is impractical in this case. Accordingly, the Agency, pursuant to paragraph 80(l)(c) of the Canada Transportation Act (CTA), exempts Air Canada from the application of subsection 8.2(2) of the ATR.

Air Canada is licensed to operate scheduled international services, medium and large aircraft, in accordance with the Air Transport Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America signed on March 12, 2007.

The Agency has considered the application and the material in support and is satisfied that it meets the remaining requirements of section 8.2 of the ATR.

Accordingly, the Agency, pursuant to paragraph 60(1)(b) of the CTAand section 8.2 of the ATR, approves the use by Air Canada of aircraft and flight crew provided by Colgan and CommutAir, and the provision by Colgan and CommutAir of such aircraft and flight crew to Air Canada, to permit Air Canada to provide its scheduled international services on licensed routes between Canada and the United States of America by selling transportation in its own name on flights operated by Colgan and CommutAir between Canada and the United States of America, including between points in the United States of America, for an indefinite period from the date of this Decision.

This approval is subject to the following conditions:

Air Canada shall continue to hold the valid licence authority.
Air Canada shall apply its published tariffs, in effect, to the carriage of its traffic. Nothing in any commercial agreement between the air carriers relating to limits of liability shall diminish the rights of passengers as stated in such tariffs.
The air service approved shall only be provided as long as a code-sharing agreement providing for such service remains in effect.
Air Canada, Colgan and CommutAir shall continue to comply with the insurance requirements set out in subsections 8.2(4), 8.2(5) and 8.2(6) of the ATR.
Air Canada shall continue to comply with the public disclosure requirements set out in section 8.5 of the ATR.
Air Canada, Colgan and CommutAir shall provide the Agency with a copy of any new agreement or amendments to the code-sharing agreement, including any new or amended annex, without delay.
This approval does not apply to the carriage of cargo.

Member(s)

Raymon J. Kaduck
J. Mark MacKeigan


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 3:17 pm 
Offline
Rank 2
Rank 2

Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 8:59 pm
Posts: 59
Well here is hoping that the scope clause will not allow this. This ladies and gentlemen is why limiting tier 2 flying to only Jazz is so important.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 3:23 pm 
Offline
Rank 2
Rank 2

Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 8:59 pm
Posts: 59
I took a look at Airline Pilot Central for pay.

DH8 FOs start at 22K a year and Captains at 41K a year at CommutAir.

FOs start at 24K a year and Captains at 42K a year for Colgan Air.

Absolute Disgrace.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 4:48 pm 
Offline
Rank 7
Rank 7
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 4:54 pm
Posts: 645
Location: Montréal! CYUL #1!!
This my friends is unprecedented. I have never seen it go to this level. Can Jazz fly for American carriers in the US to do transborder routes? I love this industry... CR is a genius if this all works out. SCOPE clause, protect it or we'll see 175's/190's flown by these guys!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 5:16 pm 
Offline
Rank 6
Rank 6

Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 9:11 pm
Posts: 480
Location: CYYJ
This is disgusting :shock:

It's hard to believe they actually approved this, which is simply aiding in the degration of this industry as well as the safety of the travelling public. What these executives are getting away with is truly ridiculous.


Last edited by BTyyj on Wed May 23, 2012 5:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 5:23 pm 
Offline
Rank 7
Rank 7
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 4:06 pm
Posts: 739
I'm more curious about this:
"As the application was filed less than 45 days before the first planned flight"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 5:51 pm 
Offline
Rank 4
Rank 4
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:59 pm
Posts: 229
I wonder how secure all the new hires are feeling right about now. What's the name of that truck driving school...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 6:07 pm 
Offline
Rank 7
Rank 7
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 4:54 pm
Posts: 645
Location: Montréal! CYUL #1!!
Can arbitration change the scope clause?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 6:22 pm 
Offline
Rank 3
Rank 3

Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 10:02 pm
Posts: 131
Growing up I always dreamed of flying for Canada's national airline. Well Canadian Airlines actually. Then by default Air Canada. Over the past 5 - 10 years it has been disheartning to see where the "top" airline is going. There have been several occasions over the years where I have contemplated throwing in an application but never did and now it all makes sense. I think both myself and a lot of other drivers who always aimed for the airlines will be looking to stay put and might just have a little bit more appreciation for the jobs we currently hold. Good luck to all those who just went to main line, Im sure there are a lot of people under you grateful for the vacancies you created at other various 703/704/705 operators who might just be looking to make a career out of it given the latest developments.

Just my 2 cents. Fire away if you must.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 7:08 pm 
Offline
Rank 2
Rank 2

Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 11:29 pm
Posts: 59
Not that I don't believe you, because I do. But could you provide a source for this?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 7:38 pm 
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 11:25 pm
Posts: 1871
I too had to look it up myself, there it is:

https://www.otc-cta.gc.ca/eng/ruling/194-a-2012


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 7:53 pm 
Offline
Rank 10
Rank 10
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 4:10 pm
Posts: 2625
Location: The Sandbox
How is this all that much different from code share? This is just another step beyond in the increasingly globalized airline business.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 8:16 pm 
Offline
Rank 0
Rank 0

Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 1:19 am
Posts: 8
Panama Jack wrote:
How is this all that much different from code share? This is just another step beyond in the increasingly globalized airline business.


It's not...

Look at this thread

http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=75105


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 10:00 pm 
Offline
Rank 10
Rank 10
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:59 am
Posts: 2589
Location: Grizzly Adam's neighbor.
I would worry to much about Colgan taking all your flying.

We are taking 28 of their q400's, and there parent company, Pinnacle has dropped United Express flying (which is the only flying Colgan did).

Delta on the other hand have ratified their pilot contracts, with a clause about crj700 pay rates and have struck a deal with Southwest to take their 717's.

No chicken littles, the sky isn't falling.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 10:02 pm 
Offline
Rank 2
Rank 2

Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 3:22 pm
Posts: 54
vref wrote:
Panama Jack wrote:
How is this all that much different from code share? This is just another step beyond in the increasingly globalized airline business.


It's not...



Does this not mean Colgan can bid for AC flying? In effect, taking it away from Jazz/Sky/Georgian?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 10:08 pm 
Offline
Rank 10
Rank 10
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:59 am
Posts: 2589
Location: Grizzly Adam's neighbor.
Or if you see the other side of the coin, Colgans only option now is now Air Canada flying.

Good luck.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 10:11 pm 
Offline
Rank 2
Rank 2

Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 3:22 pm
Posts: 54
Nark wrote:
I would worry to much about Colgan taking all your flying.
We are taking 28 of their q400's


Newbie here. Who's the 'we' that are taking their planes?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 10:20 pm 
Offline
Rank 8
Rank 8

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:10 pm
Posts: 815
Republic Airlines.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/republic- ... 00548.html

Colgan Air to be liquidated:

http://www.bizjournals.com/memphis/news ... h-450.html


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 10:48 pm 
Offline
Rank 2
Rank 2

Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 3:22 pm
Posts: 54
So the Q400s are leaving Colgan. What are the odds of Colgan operating AC's ERJs?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 11:49 pm 
Offline
Rank 10
Rank 10
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:59 am
Posts: 2589
Location: Grizzly Adam's neighbor.
Zero chance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 11:54 pm 
Offline
Rank 5
Rank 5
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:06 pm
Posts: 302
Location: the center of the Canadian Aviation Universe
I'd have to agree with Panama Jack on this one.
This looks like nothing more than legaleeze for "code share" with a Star Alliance 'Express' carrier.
Big deal?
Not really.

Out of curiosity, what agreement gave Jazz exclusivity or a monopoly on the 2nd tier flying in this country?

Gino :partyman:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2012 12:46 am 
Offline
Rank 8
Rank 8
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 3:40 pm
Posts: 939
Location: YXL
Pretty obvious to me and a lot of others unless I got a bad batch of the wild weed - seems like air canada is maneuvering to strengthen their options when the Jazz contract is up - They have eliminated Jazz as an entity to the public eye by "americanizing" and choosing to call it AC express and now the separate companies just parts of air canada express - there is still enough time left for companies interested in bidding this to position themselves and get infrastructures planned and set to go. As much as I support what people has worked so hard for to get their airline up to a standard where it is a good place to work I fear they have a real fight on their hands to maintain that and not be cut loose because some cut throat low wage airline low balls the bid.

Fee for departure airlines have very few places to cut expenses and unfortunately wages and working condition are on top of the list. Dark times for ahead I fear.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2012 3:33 am 
Offline
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 5:29 pm
Posts: 3598
Location: The Frozen North
While I suppose Moderators by definition are supposed to be moderate, I sent off a registered letter advising CR that I will no longer be using Air Canada for cross border travel.

I am not worth much more dead than I am alive, but the quality of training, compensation and oversight of Colgan leads me to suspect that traveling with them will put that a bit closer to the test.

That Dash Crash just "over the border" revealed a corporate culture that is toxic. No thanks!
J C


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2012 5:05 am 
Offline
Rank 11
Rank 11
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 7:58 pm
Posts: 3032
Something to stick in your pipe and smoke for awhile.....................


http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/03387.html

Quote:
Competition Bureau Seeks to Block Joint Venture between Air Canada and United Continental

Backgrounder

June 27, 2011

The Commissioner of Competition applied today to the Competition Tribunal to prohibit a proposed joint venture between Air Canada and United Continental Holdings Inc. If the joint venture is allowed, it will monopolize ten important Canada/United States routes, and substantially reduce competition on nine additional routes, leading to increased prices and reduced consumer choice on key, high demand transborder routes.

The Bureau became aware of the proposed joint venture after the parties issued a press release in October 2010.

Until they merged on October 1, 2010, United and Continental were separate airlines. United and Continental (along with their operating subsidiaries) continue to operate separately pending receipt of a single operating certificate from the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration. United Continental has publicly stated that it expects to receive the certificate by the end of 2011.

Canadian airlines are unable to formally merge with non-Canadian airlines owing to current foreign ownership restrictions governing regulation of the airline industry. Yet, this joint venture would achieve that very same result for Air Canada and United Continental.
The 19 routes affected by this merger are: Route Post-Merger Marketshare
Calgary/Chicago 87%
Calgary/Houston 100%
Calgary/San Francisco 87%
Montreal/Chicago 70%
Montreal/Houston 100%
Montreal/New York 65%
Montreal/Washington 100%
Ottawa/Washington 100%
Ottawa/New York 100%
Toronto/Chicago 68%
Toronto/Cleveland 100%
Toronto/Denver 100%
Toronto/Houston 100%
Toronto/New York 62%
Toronto/San Francisco 100%
Toronto/Washington 100%
Vancouver/New York 34%
Vancouver/Los Angeles 42%
Vancouver/San Francisco 99%

American studies regarding similar route concentration have demonstrated price increases to consumers of up to 15 per cent; the Bureau anticipates similar price hikes in this case if the Competition Tribunal allows the joint venture to proceed.

In addition to challenging the proposed joint venture under the merger provisions of the Competition Act, the Bureau is seeking to undo three existing "coordination agreements" between the airlines. This is the Bureau's first challenge under section 90.1 of the Act, a new civil provision that came into force on March 12, 2010, allowing the Commissioner to challenge anti-competitive agreements between competitors. Under section 90.1 of the Act, the Commissioner can apply to the Competition Tribunal for an order to alter or block an agreement, as we have done in this case with respect to the three outstanding coordination agreements.

The coordination agreements between the parties currently in force are:

Marketing Cooperation Agreement between Air Canada and United Air Lines, Inc.;
Alliance Expansion Agreement between Air Canada and United Air Lines, Inc.; and
Air Canada/Continental Alliance Agreement between Air Canada and Continental Airlines Inc.

The Competition Bureau, as an independent law enforcement agency, ensures that Canadian businesses and consumers prosper in a competitive and innovative marketplace.



Que Dubya Jay


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/westjet-seeks-to-intervene-in-air-canada-competition-hearing/article2140541/

Quote:
WestJet Airlines Ltd. (WJA-T) is asking for intervenor status in the Competition Bureau’s fight with Air Canada (AC.B-T), saying it is directly affected by its rival airline’s plan to join with a U.S. partner.

Montreal-based Air Canada wants to forge a close alliance with Chicago’s United Continental Holdings Inc. (UAL-N), the world’s largest airline, on 19 cross-border routes between Canada and the U.S. The carriers would share data about sales and fares and co-ordinate schedules with the aim of reducing costs.

Competition Commissioner Melanie Aitken filed charges at the Competition Tribunal in June, saying the partnership is tantamount to a merger because the airlines would dominate the international routes. She said it would reduce choice, deter rivals and jack up prices – something WestJet agreed with in its filing on Wednesday.

WestJet competes directly against Air Canada on three of the routes – Calgary to San Francisco, Vancouver to Los Angeles and Vancouver to San Francisco. It says Air Canada’s plan to share competitive information with a U.S. carrier makes it almost impossible for the smaller Canadian rival to compete.

It also provided a list of Canada-U.S. flights it is interested in pursuing, but has so far avoided because it couldn’t make a strong business case. It continues to be interested in the routes – such as Toronto to Washington and Vancouver to New York – but said the Air Canada partnership would make that all but impossible.

“If the proposed merger is implemented, WestJet’s ability to continue to provide effective competition for the provision of transborder air passenger services ... will be significantly and materially constrained and its ability to provide any competition at all on WestJet considered transborder overlap routes is likely to be virtually foreclosed,” wrote Hugh Dunleavy, the airline’s executive vice-president of strategy and planning.

By intervening, WestJet is requesting that it be allowed to speak at any hearings and explain how Air Canada’s deal is affecting its business. In its request, it positions itself as Air Canada’s only real competition in Canada, estimating its share of the national domestic air travel market at the end of last year at 29 per cent, in total seats per week. It also estimated its share of the market for Canadian travellers flying out of the country at around 10 per cent.

Air Canada has defended the partnership, arguing that the Competition Bureau’s criticisms are “wholly inconsistent” with the federal government’s policy to deregulate air travel. It also said it has tried to deal with the bureau’s concerns, but found Ms. Aitken preferred to pursue charges.

Stopping the deal “would significantly impede Air Canada’s ability to compete [and] would have significant adverse effects on Canadian consumers,” the airline said in its 55-page filing.

WestJet defended its own partnerships in its filing, as it, too, has links to U.S. carriers – American Airlines Inc. (AMR-N) and Delta Air Lines Inc. (DAL-N) But it said that its arrangements only ensure that its passengers can transfer to the U.S. carriers for a second leg of their journey without obtaining new boarding passes. It has also pursued code sharing agreements with the airlines. Its deal with American Airlines allows both airlines to book seats on the same flight. It is seeking a similar deal with Delta.

“This type of arrangement does not permit the airlines to share competitively sensitive information, co-ordinate flight offerings, co-ordinate on pricing, inventory and yield management, co-ordinate on route planning, sales, marketing or scheduling access across networks or to share net revenues or costs on the particular routes that are subject to these agreements,” Mr. Dunleavy said.

WestJet said that while its roots are in domestic leisure travel, it is increasingly trying to compete against Air Canada for business travellers, and for that to work it needs to be on a level playing field with its rival.

“The ability of Air Canada, United and Continental to leverage shared information and to co-ordinate on pricing and other activities to a significant extent ... will continue to serve to strengthen the structural barriers that enhance and entrench [their] market dominance with the effect that competitors and potential competitors such as WestJet will be unable to gain sufficient and timely access to the necessary airport infrastructure and services in order to provide effective competition,” Mr. Dunleavy said.

The case is likely to be heard next year, if a settlement isn’t reached sooner. The Competition Tribunal has the ability either to squash the deal, or allow it to proceed with conditions attached.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2012 5:49 am 
Offline
Rank 10
Rank 10
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 4:10 pm
Posts: 2625
Location: The Sandbox
vref wrote:
Panama Jack wrote:
How is this all that much different from code share? This is just another step beyond in the increasingly globalized airline business.


It's not...

Look at this thread

http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=75105



Sorry vref,

I clicked on the link and pawed through the two pages of threads, but I don't have the time or attention span this morning to try to research the point you are trying to make.

I appreciate why Jazz and AC employees are unhappy about this, however, I come back to my original point. "How is this all that different from Code Sharing?" If you want to fly non-stop from Vancouver to Frankfurt and book on Air Canada you will find yourself on Lufthansa metal (or carbon fibre).

Since Air Canada is trying to compete on the transborder market with lower-cost US carriers it only makes business sense that they are seeking the same economics as the competition.

As for the scare tactics, I am unconvinced that it will convince many travellers to switch airlines. Many travellers already chose to fly on US carriers because of schedule or price and they don't think twice about it. Following the recent regional airline accidents the regulators in the US is cleaning up the show; pulling out photos of the Colgan accident is a bit like pulling up photos of the Dryden F-28 accident. It is not like they are pacting with an air carrier from the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

I am not taking an advocate position on either side of this arguement, just trying to highlight the rational business logic which Air Canada is facing in an increasingly globalized and competitive industry. Speaking of which, do you only buy "Made in Canada" whenever that option is available, or do you ever buy foreign-made stuff because of it being cheaper or you perceive it to be of better quality? I know I do.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next


All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: slowstream and 35 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

 
For questions/comments please send them to
webmaster@avcanada.ca


AvCanada Topsites List
AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com Avitop.com

While the administrators and moderators of this  forum will attempt to remove or edit any generally objectionable material as  quickly as possible, it is impossible to review every message. If you feel a  topic or post is inappropriate email us at support@avcanada.ca .  By reading these forums you acknowledge that  all posts made to these forums express the views and opinions of the author and  not the administrators, moderators or webmaster (except for posts by these  people) and hence will not be held liable. This website is not responsible or liable in any way for any false or misleading messages or job ads placed at our site.   

Use AvCanada's information at your own risk!

We reserve the right to remove any messages that we deem unacceptable.
  When you post a message, your IP is logged and may be provided to concerned parties where unethical or illegal  behavior is apparent. All rights reserved.