AC arbitrated agreement

Discuss topics relating to Jazz Aviation LP.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, Sulako, North Shore

Message
Author
Fanblade
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 618
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: AC arbitrated agreement

#26 Post by Fanblade » Tue Aug 07, 2012 10:22 am

hithere wrote:The CPA is signed until 2020 however i think the rate markup that Jazz charges AC is up for review again in 2016.
What was said in the webcast about the Jazz CPA?
"Air Canada needs reasonable CPA rates" was stated multiple times by the head table when talking about why they wanted multiple CPA players.

The confusing part is that based on the 29:100 domestic ASM ratio AC has very little room to expand CPA ASM'S.

So my take is that AC isn't finished yet and another shoe has to drop. Either ACPA is the target and AC will just plow thoughts the 29:100 domestic ASM ratio or the Jazz CPA is the target.

Something will have to give for AC to implement their stated objective as near as I can tell. Either that or the objective is not fulfilled.
---------- ADS -----------

rudder
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1503
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: AC arbitrated agreement

#27 Post by rudder » Tue Aug 07, 2012 11:34 am

Fanblade wrote: Forgive my ignorance but what is the reference to Jan 2016 about? I thought the Jazz CPA was until 2020?????
Any reference to Jan 2016 was not from me.
---------- ADS -----------

Fanblade
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 618
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: AC arbitrated agreement

#28 Post by Fanblade » Tue Aug 07, 2012 4:42 pm

rudder wrote:
Fanblade wrote: Forgive my ignorance but what is the reference to Jan 2016 about? I thought the Jazz CPA was until 2020?????
Any reference to Jan 2016 was not from me.
Sorry Rudder,

I didn't intend to attach the remark to you.

It was mentioned as if it had meaning and went over my head. I probably misunderstood.
---------- ADS -----------

hithere
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 181
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 8:05 am

Re: AC arbitrated agreement

#29 Post by hithere » Tue Aug 07, 2012 8:51 pm

Fanblade,
Before the arbitrator's decision, you were fairly confident that the Company's final offer would not differ significantly from TA1 (due to receeding horizons?)
While the size of aircraft(76 and below) that can be subcontracted didn't change, the number of these airframes and ratio certainly did from TA1 to the FOS. Were you surprised?
---------- ADS -----------

Brick Head
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 882
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 4:37 pm

Re: AC arbitrated agreement

#30 Post by Brick Head » Tue Aug 07, 2012 9:14 pm

hithere wrote:Fanblade,
Before the arbitrator's decision, you were fairly confident that the Company's final offer would not differ significantly from TA1 (due to receeding horizons?)
While the size of aircraft(76 and below) that can be subcontracted didn't change, the number of these airframes and ratio certainly did from TA1 to the FOS. Were you surprised?
The issues of receding horizons and replication were my comments with the twist of final offer selection. The closest to TA1 would win. The closest did win.

The thing is nothing really changed. 29:100 domestic ASM's is the same as TA1. Those 60 705's can not be placed without removal of fins at CPA's or increasing ASM's at mainline.

The arbitrator likely felt the removed language was redundant. In many ways repeating the same restriction from a different angle. Yet decreasing the companies flexibility. Why say it three different ways? Of course we all no why. However to the arbitrator he likely felt the mix of bill c33 and his requirements under jurisprudence were balanced.

So no this outcome doesn't surprise me. It is almost entirely TA1.
---------- ADS -----------

Fanblade
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 618
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: AC arbitrated agreement

#31 Post by Fanblade » Fri Aug 10, 2012 12:16 pm

hithere wrote:Fanblade,
Before the arbitrator's decision, you were fairly confident that the Company's final offer would not differ significantly from TA1 (due to receeding horizons?)
While the size of aircraft(76 and below) that can be subcontracted didn't change, the number of these airframes and ratio certainly did from TA1 to the FOS. Were you surprised?
Your right I also made similar comments. As for receding horizons I was referencing the companies Feb 2012 last, best, most fantastic, final offer. That offer had 90 seats in it as the scope line in the sand. The corporation could not recede from that position. And they didn't. In fact they moved a long way toward TA1 in FOS.

The FOS outcome IMO is obvious. A game of horse shoes. The closest to the pin would win. I agree with Brickhead. The closest did win. The further any one group moved from TA1 it permitted the other to move in the opposite direction and still have a shot. ACPA didn't make a real effort to hit the pin IMO which left the corporation latitude to win with a 97% of TA1 submission.

I would have preferred ACPA put TA1 on the table as was with one exception. Redistribute the pay scales with the over all cost at neutral. unfortunately now we don't have the ability to correct some of the more egregious pay issues that were born in TA1 and were in large part why it failed.
---------- ADS -----------

bearinmind
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 69
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2011 2:51 pm

Re: AC arbitrated agreement

#32 Post by bearinmind » Sun Aug 12, 2012 7:36 am

not realy my forum, pardon the intrusion,

Im confused by all the negativity here, there are 700 jobs that just got moved from Teir 1 to teir 2 and 3 in some form or another. Do you realy think that none of them will land at jazz? With Jazz (1500 pilots) Sky regional (50 pilots) and ggn (dont realy know), and US carriers that can only do us trans border, who will get the 700 new jet jobs? I was wrong once before, but i dont think sky or ggn could ramp up to those levels and have massive changes to their operation in the time line that ac will want. only time will tell but i think jazz will make at least some of those jobs, at least a couple hundred pilot positions.
---------- ADS -----------

rudder
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1503
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: AC arbitrated agreement

#33 Post by rudder » Sun Aug 12, 2012 8:50 am

bearinmind wrote:not realy my forum, pardon the intrusion,

Im confused by all the negativity here, there are 700 jobs that just got moved from Teir 1 to teir 2 and 3 in some form or another. Do you realy think that none of them will land at jazz? With Jazz (1500 pilots) Sky regional (50 pilots) and ggn (dont realy know), and US carriers that can only do us trans border, who will get the 700 new jet jobs? I was wrong once before, but i dont think sky or ggn could ramp up to those levels and have massive changes to their operation in the time line that ac will want. only time will tell but i think jazz will make at least some of those jobs, at least a couple hundred pilot positions.
Could you please explain where the 700 jobs are coming from? Clearly, it is not from the EMB fleet at AC. Air Canada has stated unambiguously that the Embraers were not being transferred anywhere within the AC regional system. AC has deemed the 15 E175's inefficient and is investigating putting them up for sale or lease. They will not find a home in Canada - likely a current US EMB operator. That does create an opportunity for the E175 lift at AC to be partially replaced by CRJ705/900 lift. AC will likely tender that lift which is equivalent to 150 pilot jobs, not 700. The 45 E190's are going to remain in the mainline fleet indefinitely while AC conducts an aircraft replacement review for its narrow body fleet (E190/A319/320/321). Therefore, most of the E190 lift will be replaced by a mainline narrow body lift in the 5-7 year time frame. Last but not least - the regional carriers are limited by a capacity ratio of 29/100 mainline domestic ASM's. Any reduction in the AC EMB fleet without replacement at the mainline has the effect of lowering the available capacity that can be provided by tier 2 and tier 3 carriers, which include any codeshare flights operated by US regionals. So, there are not 700 jobs up for grabs. I do not believe that there are even 150 incremental pilot jobs that will be created at Jazz or anywhere else for that matter as a result of the Stanley decision. But that does not mean that you will not see more CRJ705/900's in AC Express paint jobs. But there will be less CRJ 50 seaters in the AC Express fleet - it is also an aircraft that AC has deemed inefficient. It could end up close to a zero sum game when it comes to tier 2 airframes which means status quo for pilot jobs unless daily utilisation rates are increased using the new larger regional airframes.
---------- ADS -----------

mexico bound
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 10:19 am

Re: AC arbitrated agreement

#34 Post by mexico bound » Mon Aug 13, 2012 9:15 am

Just a question about the ASM's. Before the TA1, the ratio was 12/100 tier 2 domestic, 2/100 Tier 3 domestic and 2/100 code sharing. Now it is 29/100 domestic and code sharing combined. Isn't this a double of avaiable ASM's. Jazz currently uses about 9/100 ASM's of the 12/100 ASM's. They were extremley restricted from increasing that amount because of restriction of the scope when it had to do with available jets. They did not want anymore CRJ 100/200's and could not increase the amount of 705's . Now there is the option for 44 more 705's and AC wanting to replace all the CRJ 100/200's. The current CPA has a minium of 122 covered aircrafts so if you get rid of 35 CRJ 100/200, it seems that the AC/JAZZ would replace these with 705's and Q400's.
---------- ADS -----------

rudder
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1503
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: AC arbitrated agreement

#35 Post by rudder » Mon Aug 13, 2012 11:15 am

mexico bound wrote:Just a question about the ASM's. Before the TA1, the ratio was 12/100 tier 2 domestic, 2/100 Tier 3 domestic and 2/100 code sharing. Now it is 29/100 domestic and code sharing combined. Isn't this a double of avaiable ASM's. Jazz currently uses about 9/100 ASM's of the 12/100 ASM's. They were extremley restricted from increasing that amount because of restriction of the scope when it had to do with available jets. They did not want anymore CRJ 100/200's and could not increase the amount of 705's . Now there is the option for 44 more 705's and AC wanting to replace all the CRJ 100/200's. The current CPA has a minium of 122 covered aircrafts so if you get rid of 35 CRJ 100/200, it seems that the AC/JAZZ would replace these with 705's and Q400's.
The new capacity restriction is 29/100 where the '100' excludes all widebody international ASM's operated by AC (that is a lot of ASM's). It is difficult (impossible?) to calculate the current tier 2/3/regional codeshare ratio of ASM's to AC domestic ASM's as the public numbers are all consolidated. The rumour is that there is not much unused capacity room for the regionals under that formula given the current flying schedules. It will not get better if the E175's are removed from service.

There will be 26 50 seat CRJ's remaining in the Jazz fleet in May 2013. It is assured that AC will continue to seek reduction in that fleet type. The only mechanism for that is a consensual agreement with Jazz for fleet substitution/reduction. Likely more CRJ705/900 airframes and more Q400 airframes operated by Jazz. But also likely that total Jazz fleet will shrink below 122.
---------- ADS -----------

Treetopflyer
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 7:46 pm

Re: AC arbitrated agreement

#36 Post by Treetopflyer » Mon Aug 13, 2012 3:33 pm

Given the latest message from Joe, it seems the sky is falling here at jazz. I personally won't be so quick to assume any and certainly not all new 705/900's entering the system will end up at jazz. They will likely go up in a bid to the lowest bidder. Let the games begin....
(que the sound of a flushing toilet)
---------- ADS -----------

rudder
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1503
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: AC arbitrated agreement

#37 Post by rudder » Mon Aug 13, 2012 3:50 pm

Treetopflyer wrote:Given the latest message from Joe, it seems the sky is falling here at jazz. I personally won't be so quick to assume any and certainly not all new 705/900's entering the system will end up at jazz. They will likely go up in a bid to the lowest bidder. Let the games begin....
(que the sound of a flushing toilet)
Either some of the 705/900's end up at Jazz or Jazz operates 26 (inefficient) 50 seat jets for AC until 2020.
---------- ADS -----------

tailgunner
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 401
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 4:03 pm

Re: AC arbitrated agreement

#38 Post by tailgunner » Mon Aug 13, 2012 5:13 pm

It is possible that The Jazz pilot numbers may in fact stagnate for a time.
If Jazz replaces some of the short Dashes with the Q's, and some of the 50 seat RJ's with 705/Q 400's the Jazz's ASM just went up significantly per fin. This is tempered by the29/100 ratio that all feeders must now operate under...thus bigger AC mean fewer AC.
It will be interesting to watch.
---------- ADS -----------

Post Reply

Return to “Jazz Aviation LP - Air Canada Express”