New TA?

Discuss topics relating to Air Canada.

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

Message
Author
User avatar
Mr. North
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 716
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 11:27 am

New TA?

#1 Post by Mr. North » Tue Sep 12, 2017 3:21 pm

Anyone wanna provide some new details on the new TA that was voted in today?
---------- ADS -----------

Fanblade
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: New TA?

#2 Post by Fanblade » Tue Sep 12, 2017 7:22 pm

Excellent DC pension traded for Rouge growth.
---------- ADS -----------

aV1aTOr
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 133
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:15 pm

Re: New TA?

#3 Post by aV1aTOr » Wed Sep 13, 2017 11:05 am

Fanblade wrote:Excellent DC pension traded for Rouge growth.
Spoken like a true DBer.
---------- ADS -----------

livin'
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2012 12:20 pm

Re: New TA?

#4 Post by livin' » Wed Sep 13, 2017 11:17 am

Short term gains. long term pain
---------- ADS -----------

rudder
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1497
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: New TA?

#5 Post by rudder » Wed Sep 13, 2017 11:27 am

FWIW - pension had to be fixed. Within the term of this TA (3 years) there will be 1500+ DC pilots. My guess is almost 100% of the current DC pilots voted 'yes'.

The question is whether ACPA extracted enough value for that improvement. Apparently 40% of the AC pilots think not, or did not care about that particular issue. Either way, it highlights a demographic divide within the group.

There is no doubt that bargaining under the terms of the current collective agreement with limited issue arbitration at the end is not ideal. Far from it. But the bottom line is that AC was not going to get Rouge fleet size relief without ACPA consent. And they got it.

Would be curious to see what the annualized value is projected to be for the company DC contributions. Most of the big numbers will not kick in for several years. Would also like to see estimates of AC pilot cost savings of Rouge incremental NB fleet deployment vs mainline fleet deployment.

When it comes to DC enhancements vs Rouge fleet growth it most certainly should not be a zero sum game.
---------- ADS -----------

Dry Guy
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 2:44 pm

Re: New TA?

#6 Post by Dry Guy » Wed Sep 13, 2017 11:44 am

Any improvements in new hire pay or anything else that would benefit them?
---------- ADS -----------

atphat
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 286
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 8:01 pm

Re: New TA?

#7 Post by atphat » Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:15 pm

Dry Guy wrote:Any improvements in new hire pay or anything else that would benefit them?
They can get slightly more expensive glasses.
---------- ADS -----------

rudder
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1497
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: New TA?

#8 Post by rudder » Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:42 pm

I am guessing that there is a lot of unannounced growth coming. AC operating 737's across the Atlantic means that some of the 319/320's may stay in service longer. Also more 787's may be added for international expansion and to permit Rouge NB fleet growth under the revised ratio.

AC knows exactly what is planned for the next 5 years...... or longer. And the TA is part of that. There is a Plan A. Plan B. Plan C. The ratification is probably going to allow AC to pursue Plan A.
---------- ADS -----------

groundpilot
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 198
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2004 10:10 am
Location: A Smokn' Hole

Re: New TA?

#9 Post by groundpilot » Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:43 pm

atphat wrote:
Dry Guy wrote:Any improvements in new hire pay or anything else that would benefit them?
They can get slightly more expensive glasses.
Don't forget about the massages

But in all seriousness, Rudder's sums it up nice
---------- ADS -----------

User avatar
sanjet
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 761
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 8:54 am

Re: New TA?

#10 Post by sanjet » Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:13 pm

Dry Guy wrote:Any improvements in new hire pay or anything else that would benefit them?

Apart from the DC plan, nothing material whatsoever.....
---------- ADS -----------

littlebird
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2016 4:31 pm

Re: New TA?

#11 Post by littlebird » Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:06 pm

I'll probably just take my type rating and go overseas then. A lot of my friends are planning to do the same thing. I wonder if Air Canada will have to implement a bond if too many new hires start doing that. Wouldn't that be something.
---------- ADS -----------

Jimmy_Hoffa
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 2:46 pm

Re: New TA?

#12 Post by Jimmy_Hoffa » Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:21 pm

sanjet wrote:
Dry Guy wrote:Any improvements in new hire pay or anything else that would benefit them?

Apart from the DC plan, nothing material whatsoever.....
Even then ACPA pulled a slight of hand and misrepresented the difference. In the end most of the increase will just be paid by thebmembwrship in increases to their contribution rates.

The remainder of the contract is cost neutral, and borderline concessionary depending on how you view rouge expansion.

Although I did hear that the MEC chair had made reference that he would be retiring before any of the "fallout" from this amazing (cough) deal.
---------- ADS -----------

Fanblade
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: New TA?

#13 Post by Fanblade » Thu Sep 14, 2017 4:32 pm

aV1aTOr wrote:
Fanblade wrote:Excellent DC pension traded for Rouge growth.
Spoken like a true DBer.
?

My comment wasn't meant to be sarcastic or negative. So why the shot?

Yes I am a DBer. I voted yes to this agreement because as Rudder put it, it needed to get fixed.

Your welcome.

FWIW I get the response considering the vocal "what's in it for me crowd".

So cheers!
---------- ADS -----------

Fanblade
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: New TA?

#14 Post by Fanblade » Thu Sep 14, 2017 4:47 pm

Jimmy_Hoffa wrote:
Even then ACPA pulled a slight of hand and misrepresented the difference. In the end most of the increase will just be paid by thebmembwrship in increases to their contribution rates.
The company contributes a higher percentage than the employee.

It really is a very very good DC pension.
---------- ADS -----------

Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7325
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: New TA?

#15 Post by Rockie » Thu Sep 14, 2017 5:44 pm

Who cares if anything else was gained? The correction to the DC pension while not nearly making up for losing the DB for post 2012 pilots was absolutely necessary, and worth it even if some of those pilots don't themselves realize it yet.

For the rest of us, by comparison we have nothing to complain about.
---------- ADS -----------

Jimmy_Hoffa
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 2:46 pm

Re: New TA?

#16 Post by Jimmy_Hoffa » Thu Sep 14, 2017 6:16 pm

Rockie wrote:Who cares if anything else was gained? The correction to the DC pension while not nearly making up for losing the DB for post 2012 pilots was absolutely necessary, and worth it even if some of those pilots don't themselves realize it yet.

For the rest of us, by comparison we have nothing to complain about.
I didn't say it wasn't an improvement that wasn't needed. All I said is that the union misrepresented the numbers and the difference to the new MEPP is not going to be as great as what people are expecting or was shown on the slides. When juxtaposed against the real DC numbers (ie. 8% industry standard growth vs 5.5% ACPA growth, including overtime in rouge calculations if you want those numbers, no NAVAID/Overseas pay for widebody positions to short the ML side of the equation) plus guaranteed improvements to it through arbitration the difference is even smaller. If you really want to get financially savvy take the extra 1.5% you are now going to have to contribute and add that to your RRSP instead and we close the gap a little more. The value individuals place on portability and estate planing are varried, but it was pure magic how the NC managed to pull out a 5 year survivor benefit mid way through the road show. Ask your pension rep if any further increases can be negotiated with the MEPP... they can't. Your per year credit of 1.9% is it and the company is officially clear of any liabilities or responsibilities save making on time payments.

Part of the justification for this MEPP was because new hires were not taking the 10 mins to log into a website and show some interest in their pension. Where was the union on this front to help guide the new hires? Information is power and our representatives didn't exactly empower the membership to make an truly informed decision and was asked to sacrifice a lot in turn. The value just wasn't there nor did they have a mandate to take the direction they did. They forced the membership between a rock (AIP) and a hard place (Arbitration). The result was an embarrassing 53% membership support.

The rest of us do indeed have lots to complain about. If you are on any of the narrow bodies, which I know you are not, then go take a look at what was silo bargained as cost neutral scheduling changes to reassignment and pairing integrity. Good luck flying a published pairing. There is more but as our own MEC chair is quoted as saying, you and I are probably "Insulated from the fallout." All that is left to do is move on and start educating the membership for the rouge wide body expansion request that is sure to show up in 3 years and the whipsaw attempt between rouge at 80+ fins and the rest of the mainline.

-JH

P.S. If you truly don't care if anything else was gained, then imagine what we could have done if we all worked to CARS. Bet we could have gotten the new hires onto the over funded DB pension then ... Dare to dream. Maybe in 3 years...
---------- ADS -----------

livinlife
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2016 8:17 pm

Re: New TA?

#17 Post by livinlife » Thu Sep 14, 2017 6:34 pm

Yeah a great deal.... :roll:

You don't put a bunch of management wannabes on the ACPA negotiating team and expect to get a good deal.......AC is making the most money it has ever made, Pilot shortage is an actual thing, and we are still taking concessions for a shitty gain.....the new DC pension ain't worth shit. This place is gonna make West Jet's working conditions look awesome within 2 years.
---------- ADS -----------

Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7325
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: New TA?

#18 Post by Rockie » Thu Sep 14, 2017 6:37 pm

Dare to dream indeed. If anybody harbours any delusion that the growing number of DC pilots will ever get our DB plan they need to go hide somewhere and reassess reality. Their plan needed fixing and this was the time to do some of it. Also don't forget that this was a reopener, not a contract negotiation. At the best of times a strike is the only leverage ACPA has (insert big hearty laugh here), and we don't even have that for how many more years?

AC didn't have to give us the time of day.
---------- ADS -----------

Jimmy_Hoffa
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 2:46 pm

Re: New TA?

#19 Post by Jimmy_Hoffa » Thu Sep 14, 2017 6:51 pm

livinlife wrote:Yeah a great deal.... :roll:

You don't put a bunch of management wannabes on the ACPA negotiating team and expect to get a good deal.......AC is making the most money it has ever made, Pilot shortage is an actual thing, and we are still taking concessions for a shitty gain.....the new DC pension ain't worth shit. This place is gonna make West Jet's working conditions look awesome within 2 years.
You do realize the new pension isn't a DC pension right?
---------- ADS -----------

Skyhunter
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 240
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 8:15 am
Location: Near YOW

Re: New TA?

#20 Post by Skyhunter » Fri Sep 15, 2017 7:29 am

livinlife wrote:Yeah a great deal.... :roll:

You don't put a bunch of management wannabes on the ACPA negotiating team and expect to get a good deal.......AC is making the most money it has ever made, Pilot shortage is an actual thing, and we are still taking concessions for a shitty gain.....the new DC pension ain't worth shit. This place is gonna make West Jet's working conditions look awesome within 2 years.

Just so you know there are many of us that completely disagree with you!
---------- ADS -----------

ActionAxson
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2013 11:42 pm

Re: New TA?

#21 Post by ActionAxson » Fri Sep 15, 2017 7:40 am

Can anybody ELI5 (explain like I'm 5) the consequences of Rouge expansion? I heard someone mention it will mean more days worked per month to NB pilots. I guess I don't understand the differences between Mainline and Rouge very well.
---------- ADS -----------

rudder
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1497
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: New TA?

#22 Post by rudder » Fri Sep 15, 2017 7:59 am

ActionAxson wrote:Can anybody ELI5 (explain like I'm 5) the consequences of Rouge expansion? I heard someone mention it will mean more days worked per month to NB pilots. I guess I don't understand the differences between Mainline and Rouge very well.
Some Rouge flying is growth flying but thus far the majority is substitution for mainline flying.

Rouge is B scale pay. Rouge is B scale work rules.

It takes less pilots to do the Rouge schedule under LOU74 than it would under mainline rules so growth is partially offset by efficiency.

Separating Rouge flying from mainline shrinks the pool of flying on specific equipment that is available for monthly bidding.
---------- ADS -----------

Spruce Moose
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 70
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 11:48 am

Re: New TA?

#23 Post by Spruce Moose » Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:56 am

So essentially, this TA allows Rouge to grow at the expense of Mainline NB flying?

When you put it that way it doesn't sound good at all, but obviously there is more to it than that.
---------- ADS -----------

User avatar
Old fella
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1659
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am

Re: New TA?

#24 Post by Old fella » Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:56 am

rudder wrote:
ActionAxson wrote:Can anybody ELI5 (explain like I'm 5) the consequences of Rouge expansion? I heard someone mention it will mean more days worked per month to NB pilots. I guess I don't understand the differences between Mainline and Rouge very well.
Some Rouge flying is growth flying but thus far the majority is substitution for mainline flying.

Rouge is B scale pay. Rouge is B scale work rules.

It takes less pilots to do the Rouge schedule under LOU74 than it would under mainline rules so growth is partially offset by efficiency.

Separating Rouge flying from mainline shrinks the pool of flying on specific equipment that is available for monthly bidding.
Question (as a point of interest) and if you don't mind. I understand Rouge fleet is A319/20 and B767 so if you fly those types at mainline can you bid on Rouge per month or does he/she have to stay at Rouge for a period of time.
---------- ADS -----------

rudder
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1497
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: New TA?

#25 Post by rudder » Fri Sep 15, 2017 9:10 am

Spruce Moose wrote:So essentially, this TA allows Rouge to grow at the expense of Mainline NB flying?

When you put it that way it doesn't sound good at all, but obviously there is more to it than that.
CR and BS would probably like to see Rouge on any route that can support A319 or larger that does not require J-class inventory. That now includes RRA routes.

That is a lot of flying (think of every North American and sun destination leisure route and many overseas routes that are primarily tourism driven).

Rouge represents labour cost savings, pure and simple.
---------- ADS -----------

Post Reply

Return to “Air Canada”