AVCANADA

It is currently Wed Oct 18, 2017 1:05 pm

All times are UTC-07:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 224 posts ]  Go to page Previous 14 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Jun 01, 2014 3:33 pm 
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 9:18 pm
Posts: 1210
Location: CYYZ
Lol .. Are you insinuating that companies are ethical and always operate within the law?


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jun 02, 2014 1:41 pm 
Offline
Rank 0
Rank 0

Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2013 7:45 am
Posts: 8
ah ah ah ...

Can't believe it !!! You guys actually love your situation : you complain all the time but never do anything about it,

Stop being so complacent for christ sake !

It's crazy that you guys actually believe in what you write !

Years ago, some people started revolutions because they were tired of seeing their children dying in the mines ...
But they probably were absolutely CrAzY, because what they did was illegal ...

I Wonder what you guys would have done back in those years ... May be the same since they didn't have a nice house, suv
and a boat awaiting for the we ?



Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jun 02, 2014 3:23 pm 
Offline
Rank 0
Rank 0

Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 6:24 am
Posts: 10
gearDown2green wrote:
ah ah ah ...

Can't believe it !!! You guys actually love your situation : you complain all the time but never do anything about it,

Stop being so complacent for christ sake !

It's crazy that you guys actually believe in what you write !

Years ago, some people started revolutions because they were tired of seeing their children dying in the mines ...
But they probably were absolutely CrAzY, because what they did was illegal ...

I Wonder what you guys would have done back in those years ... May be the same since they didn't have a nice house, suv
and a boat awaiting for the we ?



Image



Last edited by streets ahead on Mon Jun 02, 2014 5:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jun 02, 2014 5:04 pm 
Offline
Rank 4
Rank 4

Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 7:31 am
Posts: 250
Location: YYZ
:lol:


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2014 2:08 pm 
Offline
Rank 10
Rank 10

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 3:25 pm
Posts: 2358
DH772 wrote:
So teacher, you will walk off job if you're forced into concessions next contract


Of course not that's silly. I will however fight for better wages and working conditions until I either get them or forced to accept what comes down the pipe. Unfortunately, a "B" scale (Rouge and Georgian), lower wages for regional lift (Encore, Sky Regional and Georgian), DC pensions and final offer arbitration are all now a precedent. It will be an up hill battle but I will continue to fight it as long as I can.

I won't scuttle the ship but I won't sail merely down the river on it either.


_________________
http://www.collegeofpilots.ca/


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2014 2:17 pm 
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm
Posts: 1489
If 1000 Jazz pilots all resigned the same day, how do you think that Jazz/AC would deal with it? Both AC and Jazz had better be careful about reducing the value of a CPA pilot job so low that one is better off to walk away than stay.

There is leverage. You just need to know when and how to use it.



Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2014 2:52 pm 
Offline
Rank 2
Rank 2

Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 8:28 am
Posts: 61
A bit off topic, but I've heard that Jazz is shutting down the YVR and YHZ bases.

Is this true?



Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2014 3:35 pm 
Offline
Rank 5
Rank 5

Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 11:11 pm
Posts: 389
YHZ was shut down a couple months back


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2014 7:32 pm 
Offline
Rank 7
Rank 7

Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm
Posts: 607
rudder wrote:
If 1000 Jazz pilots all resigned the same day, how do you think that Jazz/AC would deal with it? Both AC and Jazz had better be careful about reducing the value of a CPA pilot job so low that one is better off to walk away than stay.

There is leverage. You just need to know when and how to use it.


I agree with you, but even your strategy sounds a little over the top to me. That many people quitting without a job in hand first? Don't buy it.

All I am saying is stop and think right now. What is the goal? What can be realistically achieved? Can status Coe be retained? What is the best outcome for the most amount of people?

Then make your move now while you have something tradable that CR wants. Wait too long and he will simply take it.



Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2014 8:02 pm 
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm
Posts: 1489
Fanblade wrote:
rudder wrote:

All I am saying is stop and think right now. What is the goal? What can be realistically achieved? Can status Coe be retained? What is the best outcome for the most amount of people?

Then make your move now while you have something tradable that CR wants. Wait too long and he will simply take it.


That opportunity has presented itself at least twice in the last 10 years. Unfortunately, the parties that could have generated the most beneficial and sustainable plan could not get to the same place at the same time. And hence we find ourselves where we are today.

My belief is that there is in fact one more (and final) opportunity for the proactive and pragmatic advocates to sit and work to an outcome that exceeds what is available to CR even using his considerable resources and influence.

However, that window of opportunity will not last long and the time to start that discussion was yesterday.



Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Jun 06, 2014 5:23 pm 
Offline
Rank 7
Rank 7

Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm
Posts: 607
rudder wrote:
Fanblade wrote:
rudder wrote:

All I am saying is stop and think right now. What is the goal? What can be realistically achieved? Can status Coe be retained? What is the best outcome for the most amount of people?

Then make your move now while you have something tradable that CR wants. Wait too long and he will simply take it.


That opportunity has presented itself at least twice in the last 10 years. Unfortunately, the parties that could have generated the most beneficial and sustainable plan could not get to the same place at the same time. And hence we find ourselves where we are today.

My belief is that there is in fact one more (and final) opportunity for the proactive and pragmatic advocates to sit and work to an outcome that exceeds what is available to CR even using his considerable resources and influence.

However, that window of opportunity will not last long and the time to start that discussion was yesterday.


So long as it does not include ACPA pilots making further sacrifices, or accelerating the race to the bottom.

A 190 to express would do both would it not? Further erosion of ACPA work and further erosion of 100 seat pay.

Neither is acceptable nor should it be to anyone including those at express. Every job that leaves mainline represents someone not hired at AC. Every job that leaves mainline represents a job that will go to the lowest bidder. All we would accomplish is more pilots in substandard wages. Correct?

If you think CR will give up the ability to contract out, think again.

If, a big if, I have read you and Loc wrong. That you have a concept that does not include a 190 transfer. Does not include less ACPA jobs. Does not include less pay for a 100 seat aircraft. Then i think everyone would be interested.

So I'll ask point blank.

Does your pragmatic outcome include a 190 transfer to express?

A yes or no answer will suffice.



Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Jun 06, 2014 8:37 pm 
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm
Posts: 1489
Fanblade wrote:

So I'll ask point blank.

Does your pragmatic outcome include a 190 transfer to express?

A yes or no answer will suffice.


As I said in another posting - the 190's will be gone sooner rather than later. So anybody that tries to build a future based on those 25 aircraft is building a house of cards.

Read in to that what you will. A proper solution will go far beyond squabbling over the remaining 190 fleet.



Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Jun 06, 2014 9:21 pm 
Offline
Rank 3
Rank 3

Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 8:40 am
Posts: 165
Rudder, the Embryo's cannot be looked at in isolation. They are not "just Embraers". That aircraft is certified for over 100 seats, so don't forget to include in the "sale" every aircraft ever manufactured, or ever will be manufactured with a similar seating capacity. Once that size catagory is gone, it will always be gone, and the next size aircraft will be the new target.

I don't know who you are, but if ACPA pilots want a "pandora's box" of epic proportions cracked open, selling that sized scope to Tier II is exactly the way to do it. It'll make the Sky 175 fiasco and FOS combined, look like a birthday party for toddlers.

DP



Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Jun 06, 2014 10:49 pm 
Offline
Rank 7
Rank 7

Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm
Posts: 607
rudder wrote:
Fanblade wrote:

So I'll ask point blank.

Does your pragmatic outcome include a 190 transfer to express?

A yes or no answer will suffice.


As I said in another posting - the 190's will be gone sooner rather than later. So anybody that tries to build a future based on those 25 aircraft is building a house of cards.

Read in to that what you will. A proper solution will go far beyond squabbling over the remaining 190 fleet.


It wasn't quite yes or no. But direct enough.

Not a chance for the reasons stated above. This will go no where. Anyone trying to bring this concept forward would get hung by their toes by the membership.

Start getting realistic.......as you put it.......should have happened yesterday.

To be honest I don't understand why you would think this idea has any chance at all with the ACPA membership. The disconnect puzzles me.

Why would ACPA “sell" their jobs away? Other than greed for a few, the logic defies me.

You are clearly a smart guy. What am I missing?



Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Jun 07, 2014 1:34 pm 
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm
Posts: 1489
Fanblade wrote:


To be honest I don't understand why you would think this idea has any chance at all with the ACPA membership. The disconnect puzzles me.

Why would ACPA “sell" their jobs away? Other than greed for a few, the logic defies me.

.... What am I missing?


The FOS CA allows all of the E190's to be removed from service without replacement. AC has already announced that 20 are leaving the fleet.

Likely outcome is replacement on a less that 1:1 basis.

Eventually, the entire 190 fleet will be replaced by a combination of 737's at mainline and 75 seat jets operated by one or a combination of the CPA carriers (the FOS CA allows for another 29 75 seat jets to be operate by CPA carriers).

This will be the outcome absent a better proposition. If this is the outcome that parties desire, then simply do nothing. That also means that Rouge compensation rules will remain the new Achille's Heel for the AC pilots. Lots of Rouge pilots saying that they got a raise.......based on overtime.

For the corporation, the current path is an imperfect solution. A more perfect solution might be more attractive. That report that was just issued suggested that ACPA become more introspective. Perhaps now is that opportunity.



Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 5:39 am 
Offline
Rank 7
Rank 7

Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:34 pm
Posts: 517
rudder wrote:
Fanblade wrote:


To be honest I don't understand why you would think this idea has any chance at all with the ACPA membership. The disconnect puzzles me.

Why would ACPA “sell" their jobs away? Other than greed for a few, the logic defies me.

.... What am I missing?


The FOS CA allows all of the E190's to be removed from service without replacement. AC has already announced that 20 are leaving the fleet.

Likely outcome is replacement on a less that 1:1 basis.

Eventually, the entire 190 fleet will be replaced by a combination of 737's at mainline and 75 seat jets operated by one or a combination of the CPA carriers (the FOS CA allows for another 29 75 seat jets to be operate by CPA carriers.

For the corporation, the current path is an imperfect solution. A more perfect solution might be more attractive. That report that was just issued suggested that ACPA become more introspective. Perhaps now is that opportunity.


I'm not sure what you're getting at either Rudder? What is the more perfect solution you're referring to?

No doubt, at some point the EMJ will leave to fleet, their ASM cost isn't competitive. However, as the contract stands any aircraft with more than 76 seats will be flown by ACPA pilots, if they choose to replace the remaining 25 E190's with larger narrow bodies, just like they plan on replacing the 20 Boeing is purchasing, with 10 larger narrow bodies, that's their decision. If the airline wants to pursue cost reductions instead of departure frequency that's a business decision ACPA can't stand in the way of, but if they wish to fly an aircraft with more than 76 seats, it will be done by ACPA pilots. The E190's will not be transferred to Jazz.

The ASM ratio of 100:29 has also been right at the limit since the E175's were transferred to SR, so if Jazz were to start flying more (up to the 60 MJA limit) CRJ705's or replace classic Dash's with more Q400's it would have to come at the expense of existing Tier 2 flying.

ACPA being introspective doesn't seem like a good thing for other pilot groups, I interpret it to mean that they are willing to throw everyone else under the bus if there is a perceived benefit to its members.



Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 5:16 pm 
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)

Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 8:11 am
Posts: 1547
Location: Manitoba
Stig, just a slight correction, the Teplinski arbitration recently allowed SR to keep the 175s but the ASMs flown are to be considered mainline flying, otherwise they would have had to go back to mainline as the transfer was in violation of the four party small jet agreement.
Shockingly or not so shocking, ACPA sided with AC during this arbitration, they wanted the SJA to be ended in favour of bottom feeder wages. The very definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face!



Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Jun 08, 2014 6:46 pm 
Offline
Rank 7
Rank 7

Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:34 pm
Posts: 517
Wow! I had no idea, pathetic, but not surprising. I'd heard that the E175 transfer had brought the ratio over 29:1000. Rereading my last post, I'd just wanted to make sure that it's clear, I'm am not against Jazz pilots. I've been doing my best to participate in this thread in hopes of continuing the discussion in the open to better understand the realities of the upcoming hurdles we're going to face as separate groups and collectively.


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 12:30 pm 
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 9:18 pm
Posts: 1210
Location: CYYZ
Further to Teplinski .. my understanding from someone who should be in the "know" says AC wanted to transfer the remaining 190s to Sky but that plan had the brakes put on my Mr. Teplinski .. hence the reason those a/c are staying at mainline.


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 5:41 pm 
Offline
Rank 3
Rank 3

Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:29 pm
Posts: 120
Localizer wrote:
Further to Teplinski .. my understanding from someone who should be in the "know" says AC wanted to transfer the remaining 190s to Sky but that plan had the brakes put on my Mr. Teplinski .. hence the reason those a/c are staying at mainline.


Well it's obvious that AC would want to farm the 190s (and every other airframe we operate) out to a cheaper operator, but I don't see how they could have pulled it off under the current contract in any way.



Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 6:43 pm 
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 9:18 pm
Posts: 1210
Location: CYYZ
DBC .. As I understand it, ACPA is currently in discussions with AC regarding Rouge expansion .. I'm sure any further transfers of a/c above 90 seats would be incorporated in those talks. I can't really see those discussions being very "win win" .. Rouge expansion? and lose scope on 90 seats? The scope issue doesn't matter if the SJA still holds water, AC doesn't want the planes at Jazz, and Mr. Teplinski won't let them go anywhere else .. interesting.


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 6:52 pm 
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm
Posts: 1489
Localizer wrote:
DBC .. As I understand it, ACPA is currently in discussions with AC regarding Rouge expansion .. I'm sure any further transfers of a/c above 90 seats would be incorporated in those talks. I can't really see those discussions being very "win win" .. Rouge expansion? and lose scope on 90 seats? The scope issue doesn't matter if the SJA still holds water, AC doesn't want the planes at Jazz, and Mr. Teplinski won't let them go anywhere else .. interesting.


His name is "Teplitsky".

There is no harm to ACPA if the Rouge brand is expanded provided the wages and work rules for the ACPA pilots on those aircraft are equal to those at the mainline.



Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 10:26 pm 
Offline
Rank 7
Rank 7

Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm
Posts: 607
Localizer wrote:
DBC .. As I understand it, ACPA is currently in discussions with AC regarding Rouge expansion .. I'm sure any further transfers of a/c above 90 seats would be incorporated in those talks. I can't really see those discussions being very "win win" .. Rouge expansion? and lose scope on 90 seats? The scope issue doesn't matter if the SJA still holds water, AC doesn't want the planes at Jazz, and Mr. Teplinski won't let them go anywhere else .. interesting.


The current discussions do not include the remaining 190's. Again all ya gotta do is ask someone. I didn't get too many details. Sounds like the company wants 320/321's at Rouge. Yeah I know everyone and their dog has known that since last summer. Sounds like they are also tight on the 29:100 ratio and are looking for more room. We are proposing something that would return “normal seniority progression". I'm guessing (stress guessing) that means better WAWCON at Rouge.

That jives with the joint NL a few weeks back.



Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:58 pm 
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 9:18 pm
Posts: 1210
Location: CYYZ
Sorry rudder, I copied the name from someone else's post, as for your comment about Rouge, i believe fanblade used the expression "the horses have left the barn"?

Fanblade, I wasn't suggesting the 190's were part of the discussion, merely pointing out that this would be the time to discuss it.



Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Jun 10, 2014 10:18 pm 
Offline
Rank 7
Rank 7

Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm
Posts: 607
Thanks loc. Got it.

Localizer wrote:
scope issue doesn't matter if the SJA still holds water, AC doesn't want the planes at Jazz, and Mr. Teplinski won't let them go anywhere else .. interesting.


Can you explain this SJA to me? I know the history but obviously missing the fine points. It looks like your saying Teplitsky has control over allocation of all 75 seat jets AC adds to their fleet. Does this expire at some point?

Could he allocate 75 seat jets to GGN for example? I'm guessing no as it is a four party agreement as I understand it.

Would it be reasonable to think that if AC squired some 175's Teplitsky would likely allot them to AC who then could do as they please with them. If AC acquired 705's Teplitsky would likely allot them to Jazz. So if AC wants to operate 705's at GGN they probably won't be able to do so.



Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 224 posts ]  Go to page Previous 14 5 6 7 8 9 Next

All times are UTC-07:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 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 Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]

For questions/comments please send them to
avcanada@gmail.com


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 avcanada@gmail.com .  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.