Jazz Recalls?

Discuss topics relating to Jazz Aviation LP.

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

McKinley
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2016 11:19 pm

Jazz Recalls?

Post by McKinley »

Hey,

I heard a rumor that Jazz has recalled a significant number of employees recently ( mainly pilots) . Is there any truth to this?

If it is true, congrats to all of those taking to the skies! I shall live vicariously through you. For those who have not been recalled, I’m sorry. I hope this mess ends soon...
---------- ADS -----------
 
RegionalPilot
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:28 pm

Re: Jazz Recalls?

Post by RegionalPilot »

Still hoping they will call me within the next 3 years...
---------- ADS -----------
 
flyingcanuck
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 183
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:55 am

Re: Jazz Recalls?

Post by flyingcanuck »

Nope, 77 pilots but some 300 other staff if I remember right. They re opened their maintenance operation at Chorus
---------- ADS -----------
 
Yycjetdriver
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 262
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 11:00 pm

Re: Jazz Recalls?

Post by Yycjetdriver »

Just read on a CBC(I know I know) article 2 days ago they let 100 maintenance staff go in an effort to cut 65% of their staff. Conflicting information.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Inverted2
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2367
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 7:46 am
Location: Ontario

Re: Jazz Recalls?

Post by Inverted2 »

Yycjetdriver wrote: Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:39 pm Just read on a CBC(I know I know) article 2 days ago they let 100 maintenance staff go in an effort to cut 65% of their staff. Conflicting information.
Probably the CERB ran out. A lot of employees who were essentially laid off were still on the books until recently thanks to the C.
---------- ADS -----------
 
skybluetrek
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 76
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 1:53 am

Re: Jazz Recalls?

Post by skybluetrek »

How many pilots were working for Jazz before Covid?
---------- ADS -----------
 
crj_705
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 5:25 am

Re: Jazz Recalls?

Post by crj_705 »

skybluetrek wrote: Wed Sep 02, 2020 7:35 pm How many pilots were working for Jazz before Covid?

31Dec19
JZA Pilot Positions - 1536 pilots listed
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Inverted2
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2367
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 7:46 am
Location: Ontario

Re: Jazz Recalls?

Post by Inverted2 »

The actual number of pilots is around 1250 before all of this happened. There are approx 200 pilots on med leave plus management etc.
---------- ADS -----------
 
planebored
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 153
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2020 10:24 am

Re: Jazz Recalls?

Post by planebored »

McKinley wrote: Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:21 pm Hey,

I heard a rumor that Jazz has recalled a significant number of employees recently ( mainly pilots) . Is there any truth to this?

If it is true, congrats to all of those taking to the skies! I shall live vicariously through you. For those who have not been recalled, I’m sorry. I hope this mess ends soon...
Once ACPA wins the scope grievance Jazz will prob end up having to lay off again.

No 76+ seat jets should be operating at Jazz right now.
---------- ADS -----------
 
flyingcanuck
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 183
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:55 am

Re: Jazz Recalls?

Post by flyingcanuck »

planebored wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 7:25 am
McKinley wrote: Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:21 pm Hey,

I heard a rumor that Jazz has recalled a significant number of employees recently ( mainly pilots) . Is there any truth to this?

If it is true, congrats to all of those taking to the skies! I shall live vicariously through you. For those who have not been recalled, I’m sorry. I hope this mess ends soon...
Once ACPA wins the scope grievance Jazz will prob end up having to lay off again.

No 76+ seat jets should be operating at Jazz right now.
Is there any public info on this? I was talking to an AC buddy a few days ago about this and I agree, once it goes through itll hurt
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Inverted2
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2367
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 7:46 am
Location: Ontario

Re: Jazz Recalls?

Post by Inverted2 »

Jazz doesn’t have any jets with more than 76 seats in them.

What about Skyregional? ACPA allowed that to happen.
---------- ADS -----------
 
47north
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 147
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 4:44 am

Re: Jazz Recalls?

Post by 47north »

Pretty sure AC could hang their hat on this and a judge or arbitrator would likely agree to temporary scope changes:

Force Majeure means, by way of example only and without limitation, events of the nature and scale which have a significant deleterious impact on the operation or finances of the Company or the market demand for its services, including: an Act of God, a strike or other labour disruption, legal or illegal, by employees employed by Air Canada or a CPA Carrier, a national emergency, the involuntary revocation of the Company’s operating certificates, a grounding of a number of the Company’s aircraft, a reduction in the Company’s operations resulting from a decrease in available fuel supply caused by either governmental action or by commercial suppliers being unable to meet the Company’s demands, the unavailability of aircraft scheduled for delivery, a severe downturn in the economy, which would include two consecutive quarters of decline in Canada’s GDP, the outbreak of war, a pandemic, a terrorist attack, or dramatic increases in the price of jet fuel, which would include an unexpected 30% year over year increase in the price.
---------- ADS -----------
 
iflyroads
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 322
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:50 am

Re: Jazz Recalls?

Post by iflyroads »

planebored wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 7:25 am
McKinley wrote: Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:21 pm Hey,

I heard a rumor that Jazz has recalled a significant number of employees recently ( mainly pilots) . Is there any truth to this?

If it is true, congrats to all of those taking to the skies! I shall live vicariously through you. For those who have not been recalled, I’m sorry. I hope this mess ends soon...
Once ACPA wins the scope grievance Jazz will prob end up having to lay off again.

No 76+ seat jets should be operating at Jazz right now.

It will be atleast a year if not longer before this is resolved. Jazz is not going to be laying off anytime soon because of the scope grievance.
---------- ADS -----------
 
hithere
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 8:05 am

Re: Jazz Recalls?

Post by hithere »

Planebored what the hell are you talking about? Jazz and/or Sky Regional are allowed under the ACPA scope to operate jets up to a maximum of 76 seats per frame. The CRJ900 and EMB175 operates at 76 seats so what the hell grievance are you talking about?
---------- ADS -----------
 
mbav8r
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2201
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 8:11 am
Location: Manitoba

Re: Jazz Recalls?

Post by mbav8r »

hithere wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 1:22 pm Planebored what the hell are you talking about? Jazz and/or Sky Regional are allowed under the ACPA scope to operate jets up to a maximum of 76 seats per frame. The CRJ900 and EMB175 operates at 76 seats so what the hell grievance are you talking about?
I haven’t heard anything but I’m guessing it has to do with the ratio of CPA flying to the AC fleet, given a big portion is parked
---------- ADS -----------
 
"Stand-by, I'm inverted"
hithere
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 8:05 am

Re: Jazz Recalls?

Post by hithere »

I know Jazz was no where near the max ratio before COVID and I know we have deferred delivery of some 900s until next year so I don’t think a grievance would have any merit
---------- ADS -----------
 
Sharklasers
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 5:24 pm

Re: Jazz Recalls?

Post by Sharklasers »

hithere wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 1:59 pm I know Jazz was no where near the max ratio before COVID and I know we have deferred delivery of some 900s until next year so I don’t think a grievance would have any merit
Not quite chief.

“1.10.02.01.02 On an exceptional basis, and notwithstanding the Small Jets Settlement
Agreement of Mr. Martin Teplitsky of July 12, 2004, and A1.10.02.01.01,
CPA carriers may operate MJA configured at a maximum of 76 seats and/or
MPA configured at a maximum of 80 seats inclusive of all classes (and no
other MJA or larger jet equipment), at any one time for the purpose of
performing flight operations for or on behalf of Air Canada or its Affiliates
pursuant to a CPA or a codeshare, provided that:
1. AC agrees to continue to operate at mainline and ACrouge combined a
minimum of 86 – and, as of July 1, 2016, 90 – Airbus 319/320/321 aircraft
or B737 Max aircraft or combination thereof, or equivalent NJA aircraft,
including at least 61 NJA at mainline.
2. Regional Replacement Aircraft flown on Regional Routes as defined in
L74.01 are not counted as aircraft in the 90 NJA guarantee in
A1.10.02.01.02.01.”

Given that AC no longer meets the contractual narrow body baseline the CPAs are no longer allowed to operate Q400s or RJ900 at all. 0 MPA/MJA until the baseline is met.
The language is very clear, now it’s just a matter of how an arbitrator rules. So given our illustrious track record in that regard I fully expect to see the 787 in Jazz colours this time next year.
---------- ADS -----------
 
mbav8r
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2201
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 8:11 am
Location: Manitoba

Re: Jazz Recalls?

Post by mbav8r »

Sharklasers wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 2:42 pm
hithere wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 1:59 pm I know Jazz was no where near the max ratio before COVID and I know we have deferred delivery of some 900s until next year so I don’t think a grievance would have any merit
Not quite chief.

“1.10.02.01.02 On an exceptional basis, and notwithstanding the Small Jets Settlement
Agreement of Mr. Martin Teplitsky of July 12, 2004, and A1.10.02.01.01,
CPA carriers may operate MJA configured at a maximum of 76 seats and/or
MPA configured at a maximum of 80 seats inclusive of all classes (and no
other MJA or larger jet equipment), at any one time for the purpose of
performing flight operations for or on behalf of Air Canada or its Affiliates
pursuant to a CPA or a codeshare, provided that:
1. AC agrees to continue to operate at mainline and ACrouge combined a
minimum of 86 – and, as of July 1, 2016, 90 – Airbus 319/320/321 aircraft
or B737 Max aircraft or combination thereof, or equivalent NJA aircraft,
including at least 61 NJA at mainline.
2. Regional Replacement Aircraft flown on Regional Routes as defined in
L74.01 are not counted as aircraft in the 90 NJA guarantee in
A1.10.02.01.02.01.”

Given that AC no longer meets the contractual narrow body baseline the CPAs are no longer allowed to operate Q400s or RJ900 at all. 0 MPA/MJA until the baseline is met.
The language is very clear, now it’s just a matter of how an arbitrator rules. So given our illustrious track record in that regard I fully expect to see the 787 in Jazz colours this time next year.
I’m not a lawyer but I could drive a truck through that language, AC will argue they are on the operating certificate so they are being operated. I don’t see any minimum hours per fin etc..
There is also language about 1 MJA per wide body. I guess we’ll see but you know thanks for your support, you have 20% of your pilots on furlough and Jazz has 50% and you want more blood, I guess we’re going back to screwing each other during bad times
---------- ADS -----------
 
Sharklasers
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 5:24 pm

Re: Jazz Recalls?

Post by Sharklasers »

mbav8r wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 4:24 pm
Sharklasers wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 2:42 pm
hithere wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 1:59 pm I know Jazz was no where near the max ratio before COVID and I know we have deferred delivery of some 900s until next year so I don’t think a grievance would have any merit
Not quite chief.

“1.10.02.01.02 On an exceptional basis, and notwithstanding the Small Jets Settlement
Agreement of Mr. Martin Teplitsky of July 12, 2004, and A1.10.02.01.01,
CPA carriers may operate MJA configured at a maximum of 76 seats and/or
MPA configured at a maximum of 80 seats inclusive of all classes (and no
other MJA or larger jet equipment), at any one time for the purpose of
performing flight operations for or on behalf of Air Canada or its Affiliates
pursuant to a CPA or a codeshare, provided that:
1. AC agrees to continue to operate at mainline and ACrouge combined a
minimum of 86 – and, as of July 1, 2016, 90 – Airbus 319/320/321 aircraft
or B737 Max aircraft or combination thereof, or equivalent NJA aircraft,
including at least 61 NJA at mainline.
2. Regional Replacement Aircraft flown on Regional Routes as defined in
L74.01 are not counted as aircraft in the 90 NJA guarantee in
A1.10.02.01.02.01.”

Given that AC no longer meets the contractual narrow body baseline the CPAs are no longer allowed to operate Q400s or RJ900 at all. 0 MPA/MJA until the baseline is met.
The language is very clear, now it’s just a matter of how an arbitrator rules. So given our illustrious track record in that regard I fully expect to see the 787 in Jazz colours this time next year.
I’m not a lawyer but I could drive a truck through that language, AC will argue they are on the operating certificate so they are being operated. I don’t see any minimum hours per fin etc..
There is also language about 1 MJA per wide body. I guess we’ll see but you know thanks for your support, you have 20% of your pilots on furlough and Jazz has 50% and you want more blood, I guess we’re going back to screwing each other during bad times
I hope you drive that truck better than you lawyer. I never said I am out for blood, I was merely explaining the basis for the grievance. But our scope language must be aggressively defended and the ACPA pilots must be made whole, whether that’s through parking CPA fins, financial means or otherwise.

First off your confused about 1 MJA to CPA ect, that does not apply in this circumstance (AC does not meet the baseline) it applies to growth of the CPA fleet beyond the minimum. The language is clear, do not meet the baseline, do not pass go, Jazz does not operate MJA or MPA. The history behind the NJA language is rooted in the 2008-2012 threat that AC would become a WJA only operation with the CPAs providing all domestic and regional lift. The baseline is there to protect mainline jobs.

Secondly active aircraft is CLEARLY defined. Air Canada has explicitly said which fins are inactive. The history behind this language was that ACPA was concerned that AC would buy a fleet of clapped out fins in the desert to try exactly what you are suggesting. This language has precedent and is well established.

1.04.04.1
“Active Mainline NJA” excludes (i) the three Jetz-configured aircraft; (ii) any
inactive aircraft, e.g., spare aircraft, aircraft in heavy maintenance, or aircraft
grounded by unforeseen circumstances; and (iii) any new aircraft type in its first
year of service at mainline or any aircraft type in its last year of service.
---------- ADS -----------
 
mbav8r
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2201
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 8:11 am
Location: Manitoba

Re: Jazz Recalls?

Post by mbav8r »

Ok, fair enough however, careful what you wish for. This is from the small jet agreement and the first paragraph of your scope notwithstanding, meaning Jazz can operate 50 RJs and 15 705s(74 seats max) which doesn’t factor in. Currently only have 10 RJs, I believe they are parked, more than half the fleet is going to long term storage, so I’m not sure you’ll get much out of this.
1, Jazz Air Inc. (“Jazz”) may maintain a fleet of 50 CRJ 1 OO’s/2OO’s made up as follows: 0 Its present fleet of 10 CRJ-~OO’S, 15 CRJ-200’s which Air Canada has ordered and 25 CRJ-100s in the mainline fleet which shall be transferred to Jazz, subject to the conditions set forth in the Letter of Commitment no. 47 and in the ACPA collective agreement. 2. If either Air Canada or Jazz seek to increase the fleet beyond 50 CRJ 100’s/200‘s, they shall first notify ACPA and ALPA in writing of the proposed increase and then meet with ACPA and ALPA to discuss and, if possible, agree on the increase and any terms in connection therewith; 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. If the parties are unable to agree, the issue in paragraph 2 shall be referred to Martin Teplitsky, Q.C. as mediator/arbitrator. In reaching a decision on whether to permit the increase and on what terms, Martin Teplitsky, Q.C. shall consider the business case for the increase, and the impact on ACPA and ALPA; The 15 Bombardier CRJ-705’s are to form part of the Jazz fleet and flown by Jazz pilots configured at a maximum of 74 seats inclusive of all classes. Jazz may not operate the CRJ- 705’s if configured in excess of 74 seats inclusive of all classes
---------- ADS -----------
 
"Stand-by, I'm inverted"
Post Reply

Return to “Jazz Aviation LP - Air Canada Express”