A "NEW" One List?

Discuss topics relating to Westjet.

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

Post Reply
DropTanks
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 215
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 7:56 am

Re: A "NEW" One List?

Post by DropTanks »

.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by DropTanks on Wed Feb 05, 2020 11:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
skyhighh
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 9:55 pm

Re: A "NEW" One List?

Post by skyhighh »

I love how in order for the One list to come back again there is this lay off protection that is so important for the WestJet pilots. So if something happens at mainline, they can go back to Encore. I agree 100%. But in that case, let's make it work both ways. If something happens to Encore the Encore pilots should be able to take WestJet's spots. A true one list.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
George Taylor
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 123
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 9:21 am

Re: A "NEW" One List?

Post by George Taylor »

Absolutely, one list flows both ways! Including Encore bumping up when seniority dictates.
---------- ADS -----------
 
tps8903
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 184
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 8:40 pm

Re: A "NEW" One List?

Post by tps8903 »

George Taylor wrote: Mon May 27, 2019 4:58 pm Absolutely, one list flows both ways! Including Encore bumping up when seniority dictates.
How would that work in practice? All the OTS guys since Encore started would be forced back to encore while 150-200 guys move to mainline to replace them?

Then all hiring would have to be done through Encore regardless?

Might be crazy, but I don't think the company would go for this.

Or are you suggesting true seniority moving forward with status quo unless there is a layoff event?

Honest questions.
---------- ADS -----------
 
laserstrike
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri May 24, 2019 2:59 pm

Re: A "NEW" One List?

Post by laserstrike »

tps8903 wrote: Mon May 27, 2019 5:21 pm
George Taylor wrote: Mon May 27, 2019 4:58 pm Absolutely, one list flows both ways! Including Encore bumping up when seniority dictates.
How would that work in practice? All the OTS guys since Encore started would be forced back to encore while 150-200 guys move to mainline to replace them?

Then all hiring would have to be done through Encore regardless?

Might be crazy, but I don't think the company would go for this.

Or are you suggesting true seniority moving forward with status quo unless there is a layoff event?

Honest questions.
Usually in situations like this, they would be protected in their current position and base but wouldn't be able to bid anything new until their seniority could hold it on the one list. Pretty simple really.
---------- ADS -----------
 
ALPApolicy
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2020 4:34 am

Re: A "NEW" One List?

Post by ALPApolicy »

JBI wrote: Sun May 26, 2019 4:34 pm
DropTanks wrote: Sun May 26, 2019 5:50 am
JBI wrote: Sat May 25, 2019 4:40 pm

Sort of. The ability to bump was in the non-unionized WJPA mainline and Encore contracts from 2015. However, not included in those contracts was the very strong scope clause that now exists in the mainline ALPA contract. The contractual clauses issue that I have referred to (which AGAIN, provides really strong lay off protection for the mainline pilots... this is a good thing!) were not there in the WJPA contracts - there was no real scope and there wasn't lay-off protections. Now there is. The lay-off protections in the current ALPA contract is significantly stronger than in the WJPA contracts.
But here’s the thing. What was or wasn’t in the previous WJPA contract is irrelevant. We’re not here to vote on the WJPA contract.
While I actually agree with you that what was in the previous contract is irrelevant, my comment was a direct response to "George Taylor" who suggested, I think, that because the wording was in the previous WJPA contract it should/could be in a new LOA. I was suggesting why it was different.

We're not here to vote on the WJPA contract nor the previous LOA. The topic of this discussion was to try and figure out what exactly mainline pilots who voted no want to see in an LOA that will make them vote yes. Some want bumping - that's fair. I've outlined why I don't think that that may be an unobtainable negotiating position. But, if there are other alternatives I'm interested to hear.
DropTanks wrote: Sun May 26, 2019 5:50 am We were to vote on the tri-party One List LOA. Nobody’s saying we don’t have some protections from lay-off built into the new contract, minimal as they may be. Yes I said minimal because I’ve seen much better lay-off protections in CA’s. It’s never been about the lay-off protections, it was about what we could do AFTER all those protections had been utilized and our position at mainline no longer existed. Bumping down in order of seniority on the exact list you wish to live on.
Aw, Twenty Dollars?! I wanted a peanut!

In my opinion, as a May 4, 2015 hire you have some incredible lay-off protection outlined in the current mainline scope clause (not in the lay-off section). You have this whether an LOA gets passed or not. The company cannot lay you off without renegotiating the CBA. I've outlined my reasons why ad nauseam. If I were in your position I'd honestly rather have that protection than the ability to bump. Arguably, if the company gets to the point where you're facing a lay-off there won't be anyone's position to bump into.
DropTanks wrote: Sun May 26, 2019 5:50 am Because guess what...doing so would inherently become a lay-off prevention tool due to training costs for WestJet. See how that works? Secondly if the content of the LOA was in fact so good then I dare say we wouldn’t be having this conversation. It’s as simple as that. People don’t need lawyerly dissection of a document that makes them simply feel cheated. If it feels wrong then it feels wrong and they voted as such. Now the powers that be have very quickly felt the wrath of the group for their inadequate LOA and are working on new solutions. That’s how the system works. Vote for what’s in front of you.

You can feel however you want to feel. My "lawyerly dissection" will tell you what the contract (a document written by union and company lawyers) actually says.

I mean if your feeling is even though the company has to literally ask to renegotiate the CBA in order to lay you off and you still feel cheated, there's not much I can say to that. Also, if your feeling is that the only way you'll vote for a new LOA is that if, in addition to the contractual scope clause prohibiting layoffs for those hired May 2015 and earlier AND also prohibiting lay-offs of those after that date if as a result of business with Encore or any other commercial relationship you need the company to agree to something more, that's fine. If all the no voters feel that way too, that's fine. But it does give me a good sense of the actual chance of success of any future LOAs.

The old LOA is dead. Long live the LOA!

So is bumping the threshold? (As I've said, I'm not arguing against bumping. In fact my feelings towards bumping are very positive). But I've outlined my concerns with having that as a negotiating position. Is there any other positions that would make you (presumably a no voter), decide to vote yes if included in a new LOA?
mbav8r wrote: Sun May 26, 2019 8:40 am This is exactly why I questioned the timing of the Encore vote and One List vote, if it were me at Encore, I would’ve voted no the the contract until the results of the one list vote or as an MEC member I would’ve delayed the vote for the same reason. I believe had the one list results been known prior to the contract vote, it would have turned out different.
Please excuse the indifference, Encore pilots have no one to blame but themselves for how it turns out, they had some leverage if they voted no until the seniority was resolved, now it’s completely up to the mainline pilots how this goes.
I’m also surprised they didn’t have a 17 year deal shoved it front of them, given according to yycjetdriver, us bad Jazz pilots set a huge precedent and everyone will have to sign extremely long term deals(paraphrasing, of course) guess he was wrong, shocker!
mbav8r,

If only it were that easy. Due to a number of reasons I've outlined previously, simply voting No on a TA while waiting for the One List LOA to be signed wasn't an option. For a number of reasons, it did need to be the second step in the process.

I don't condone non-Jazz pilots from playing armchair quarterback on the Jazz TA. Respectfully, if you don't completely understand the situation suggesting that "Encore pilots have no one to blame but themselves" is a misguided statement.
It’s really interesting for me to examine the arguments FOR the PTA/ONE LIST in light of the traumatic situation we find ourselves in.

According to our own legal beagle JBI, we mainline pilots of pre-2015 DOH were actually were better protected in the current situation if we had not signed the PTA and just kept the ALPA CBA as it was. As he stated:

You can feel however you want to feel. My "lawyerly dissection" will tell you what the contract (a document written by union and company lawyers) actually says.

I mean if your feeling is even though the company has to literally ask to renegotiate the CBA in order to lay you off and you still feel cheated, there's not much I can say to that. Also, if your feeling is that the only way you'll vote for a new LOA is that if, in addition to the contractual scope clause prohibiting layoffs for those hired May 2015 and earlier AND also prohibiting lay-offs of those after that date if as a result of business with Encore...”


In hindsight, maybe he’s right. Don’t know myself as I see legalese and my eyes glaze over.
---------- ADS -----------
 
JBI
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 900
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 11:21 am
Location: YYZ / LGA

Re: A "NEW" One List?

Post by JBI »

So to be clear, on a week when 1600 or so of our fellow pilots and literally almost 10,000 of our colleagues are getting lay-off and furlough notices because of an international pandemic that is decimating the aviation industry, you are digging up old posts of mine with an anonymous internet account to try and refute an argument that ended up being moot as a one way bumping clause was added to the October PTA?

As I've said, if you want to e-mail me with your real identity and arrange to chat I'm happy to discuss. Until then, I hope you and your family stay well.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Gear Jerker
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 12:48 am

Re: A "NEW" One List?

Post by Gear Jerker »

I say this with an open mind.

I really don't understand why prioritizing layoff mitigation, and doing as all the others have done and negotiating temporary (attached to an MOA with an expiry) pay concessions in order to save some jobs is not in the interest of WestJet pilots. I'd be happy to discuss via PM or phone if someone is not comfortable posting certain information.

In my view, we're in the midst of a once in a lifetime (hopefully) disruption which has had, and will continue to have devastating effects on the global economy, and is absolutely decimating airlines. My understanding is that 5-10% of normal revenue is more or less an industry standard right now. To me, a majority of the group eating sh*t temporarily is more fair, appropriate and humane during these times than having a proportionally very small group continue to work under the normal CA while the vast majority will soon make $2000 per month until they are recalled.

Help me understand, guys.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Look, it's f***in Patrick Swayze and Reveen!
sstaurus
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 619
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 4:32 pm

Re: A "NEW" One List?

Post by sstaurus »

JBI wrote: Thu Apr 23, 2020 7:06 pm So to be clear, on a week when 1600 or so of our fellow pilots and literally almost 10,000 of our colleagues are getting lay-off and furlough notices because of an international pandemic that is decimating the aviation industry, you are digging up old posts of mine with an anonymous internet account to try and refute an argument that ended up being moot as a one way bumping clause was added to the October PTA?

As I've said, if you want to e-mail me with your real identity and arrange to chat I'm happy to discuss. Until then, I hope you and your family stay well.
Don’t take it personally...capt Wingsuit is bored and obviously back with his alter-egos :rolleyes:
---------- ADS -----------
 
Maxpwr
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 7:12 pm

Re: A "NEW" One List?

Post by Maxpwr »

.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by Maxpwr on Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
sstaurus
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 619
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 4:32 pm

Re: A "NEW" One List?

Post by sstaurus »

Well those who were upset about Encore making concessions, must be right happy now that the mainline MEC wasn't able to save a single job. Those top ~500 guys can now continue making 150-200K +ESP while the rest get laid off.
---------- ADS -----------
 
cloak
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 348
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2018 12:08 pm

Re: A "NEW" One List?

Post by cloak »

sstaurus wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 6:57 am Well those who were upset about Encore making concessions, must be right happy now that the mainline MEC wasn't able to save a single job. Those top ~500 guys can now continue making 150-200K +ESP while the rest get laid off.
Your disappointment is understandable. This is an unprecedented challenge which requires unprecedented new approaches. It also presents an opportunity to rebuild trust and improve relationships through cooperation and transparency. Most carriers around the globe have either stopped flying altogether or reduced hours substantially for a number of months.

The company must have offered something, either similar to April or similar to Encore, lower, higher...whatever it was, it is best to put that information to the membership and let them decide by ratifying it. I believe ALPA represented U.S carriers did just that fairly quickly online.

The company should also offer more appealing early retirement packages. This is to their advantage too as it reduces payroll at the top. It also creates new opportunities and allows these folks to take their well deserved retirements, so it's a win-win.
---------- ADS -----------
 
mbav8r
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2182
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 8:11 am
Location: Manitoba

Re: A "NEW" One List?

Post by mbav8r »

cloak wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 8:33 am
sstaurus wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 6:57 am Well those who were upset about Encore making concessions, must be right happy now that the mainline MEC wasn't able to save a single job. Those top ~500 guys can now continue making 150-200K +ESP while the rest get laid off.
Your disappointment is understandable. This is an unprecedented challenge which requires unprecedented new approaches. It also presents an opportunity to rebuild trust and improve relationships through cooperation and transparency. Most carriers around the globe have either stopped flying altogether or reduced hours substantially for a number of months.

The company must have offered something, either similar to April or similar to Encore, lower, higher...whatever it was, it is best to put that information to the membership and let them decide by ratifying it. I believe ALPA represented U.S carriers did just that fairly quickly online.

The company should also offer more appealing early retirement packages. This is to their advantage too as it reduces payroll at the top. It also creates new opportunities and allows these folks to take their well deserved retirements, so it's a win-win.
Cloak, you were a very vocal opponent to the one list, my question, did you take a lay-off or avail yourself to a spot at Encore?
---------- ADS -----------
 
"Stand-by, I'm inverted"
cloak
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 348
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2018 12:08 pm

Re: A "NEW" One List?

Post by cloak »

Apparently certain unions would not allow the pilots to make accommodations by accepting reduced hours (for a period), and hopefully this is not the case here where ALPA for instance would not allow the MEC to entertain certain proposals.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Bede
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3213
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 5:52 am

Re: A "NEW" One List?

Post by Bede »

sstaurus wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 6:57 am Well those who were upset about Encore making concessions, must be right happy now that the mainline MEC wasn't able to save a single job. Those top ~500 guys can now continue making 150-200K +ESP while the rest get laid off.
Actually, the MEC was capable of saving 1000 pilot jobs. However, the MEC is responsive to the membership and the membership clearly did not want to make concessions and therefore there was no deal. You can't "Hold the Line" while at the same time caving to the company's demands to save jobs.
---------- ADS -----------
 
cloak
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 348
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2018 12:08 pm

Re: A "NEW" One List?

Post by cloak »

Bede wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 9:52 am Actually, the MEC was capable of saving 1000 pilot jobs. However, the MEC is responsive to the membership and the membership clearly did not want to make concessions and therefore there was no deal. You can't "Hold the Line" while at the same time caving to the company's demands to save jobs.
Are pilots around the world "caving in" to agree to reduced blocks under the circumstances, including ALPA represented U.S carriers?
While a survey may indicate a preference, although not sure what the participation rate or results were, perhaps they should not be taken as "decisions" and with timely and transparent communications such important matters can be put to a vote? I believe ALPA did that in the states.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Maxpwr
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 7:12 pm

Re: A "NEW" One List?

Post by Maxpwr »

.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by Maxpwr on Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Blue42
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 99
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 11:33 am

Re: A "NEW" One List?

Post by Blue42 »

sstaurus wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 6:02 am
JBI wrote: Thu Apr 23, 2020 7:06 pm So to be clear, on a week when 1600 or so of our fellow pilots and literally almost 10,000 of our colleagues are getting lay-off and furlough notices because of an international pandemic that is decimating the aviation industry, you are digging up old posts of mine with an anonymous internet account to try and refute an argument that ended up being moot as a one way bumping clause was added to the October PTA?

As I've said, if you want to e-mail me with your real identity and arrange to chat I'm happy to discuss. Until then, I hope you and your family stay well.
Don’t take it personally...capt Wingsuit is bored and obviously back with his alter-egos :rolleyes:
The same guy that said he’ll have no problem working as much overtime as he can while 1700 coworkers are laid off...... :evil:
---------- ADS -----------
 
hurtin'albertan
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 87
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 5:40 pm

Re: A "NEW" One List?

Post by hurtin'albertan »

cloak wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 8:53 am Apparently certain unions would not allow the pilots to make accommodations by accepting reduced hours (for a period), and hopefully this is not the case here where ALPA for instance would not allow the MEC to entertain certain proposals.
How then could ALPA have "allowed" Encore to accept their deal? Same union... :roll:
Blue42 wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 11:04 am
The same guy that said he’ll have no problem working as much overtime as he can while 1700 coworkers are laid off...... :evil:
Yeah. Awesome. A few other guys saying this as well. Don't you (they) realize that this not only hurts the recall chances and timelines of those laid off, but it also sewers your chances at getting back to your old base, left seat, etc.
---------- ADS -----------
 
jjj
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 737
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 12:53 am

Re: A "NEW" One List?

Post by jjj »

sstaurus wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 6:57 am Well those who were upset about Encore making concessions, must be right happy now that the mainline MEC wasn't able to save a single job. Those top ~500 guys can now continue making 150-200K +ESP while the rest get laid off.
Correct that the WS MEC did not reduce the number of lay offs. What they did do was work full time on lay off mitigation until yesterday I believe. What we don't know is what they were up against. I can just imagine what the company wanted.

When this all turns around - pilots need good jobs to go back to. Laid off Encore pilots need the same light at the end of the tunnel that was there before.

I stand by my assertion that the Encore concessions were a blunder. Most of the pilots they were looking out for have been flushed. The bump down pilots are not happy with MOA 2.

The Pilot Transfer Agreement remains in jeopardy and I assure you it is not a retribution.

I stand by the WS MEC.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “WestJet”