DOH merge.

[altiplano]

I'm not reading your report, I don't care.

You are missing my basic statement. There are a lot of what ifs on how AC integrates the companies.

[FL320]

I'm not reading your report, I don't care.

I hope you don’t have the same attitude in the flight deck (especially if you’re in the left seat)
I just want to share some infos since you seem to be concerned with the transaction...now if the only person you want to hear is yourself then there’s nothing we can do; or ask Colin: he has your answers.

[altiplano]

What's your problem?

You are questioning my work and the professionalism I take on the job.

You seem to not grasp what I said and your report is irrelevant to my statement. I'm not wasting any more time trying to explain that to you.

Go float a boat.

[yycflyguy]

Have a look at the Labour code and acquisition laws and you will see that there are not so many ways as you might think. They are buying Transat and all what comes with it. Rules are pretty strict to the buyer.

Labour code doesn't dictate what AC does with Transat.

https://www.dentons.com/~/media/FMC%20I ... yment.ashx

I didn't read the entire link either but I do want to point out that it was a published opinion by a law firm. One thing I have learned about lawyers; they are right about 50% of the time! Like Fanblade says: if it can't be negotiated, it'll be decided by an arbitrator that has a 50% probability of "getting it right".

[mmm..bacon]

^ Newton's 4th (and lesser known) Law: For every opinion, there's an equal and opposite opinion

[Gilles Hudicourt]

There is so much garbage and venom on this thread, I have no desire to read it.
We are just pawns in a game played by others. I am not going to argue with other pawns who like me, have no control over what is happening, it's useless.
I am just going to continue to do my job, with a positive attitude, courtesy, respect and professionalism, regardless of what happens.

In the meantime, we should all make sure that the people we selected at our Unions to defend our interests are trusted and respected by our respective groups, to that we support them the day that they ask to sign on the dotted line.

Hey Gilles , you speak of venom . Remember the garbage and venom you gave Canjet pilots?

We remember you as an instigator to bring the 737 flying inhouse to TS and I do not recall you wanting to welcome us over to TS to fly our birds. You and your cronies wanted it. That went well didn't it?

I should thank you for not working with our unions to bring us over , even if it may have been BOTL .

I am at AC now and I am the guy who will stand strong with ACPA to see you at the BOTL because our contract is firm on it . This isn't a merger. We bought TS because they were losing money daily and would have been the next charter go out of business. Funny how things turn around buddy . Your turn now. AT operting on behalf of Air Canada might save your DOH. Say bonjour to your shareholders for me .

Dont blame me for your memory lapses. It's all documented, right here on AvCanada. But I'm not going to waste my time on you.

What joy you must be to work with.

[Duke Point]

There are a few here who think BOTL is a possibility. It isn't. ACPA won't even propose it as an opening move as they know it will damage our position in front of an Arbitrator down the road.

There will be ONE seniority list. There will not be a separate list for pilots who do Transat flying, or Rouge flying, or Tango flying, or Zip flying. All flights flown on behalf of AC will be done by pilots on a "single" ACPA seniority list. Period.

Most of us here are fully aware that the details seniority integration are going to be decided by our Union reps using rational formulas, and will very likely include the input of an Arbitrator.

There will be those who decide to make it personal, but they will be relatively few, as most pilots here are intelligent. Most are also rational, and good to work with. Those, including myself will welcome any Transat pilot.

DP.

[Jean-Pierre]

It is a bit naive to say it is not even a possibility considering that is what the contract currently stipulates and the company has explicitly said it will honor that contract.

[Duke Point]

Naïve???

When was the last time you saw BOTL when two carriers flying similar equipment merge?

Remember we're living in Canada. We operate under an entirely unique "fairness" paradigm that clearly favors the poor/underdog/disadvantaged.

No one will "win".

DP.

[fish4life]

It is a bit naive to say it is not even a possibility considering that is what the contract currently stipulates and the company has explicitly said it will honor that contract.

the CLC trumps a contract provision

[altiplano]

BOTL will never happen. I think everyone knows that. If you're hoping for it, your setting yourself up to be disappointed. Just like the junior TS 330CA thinking he's going to join as a 777CA... you're going to be disappointed.

There will be some give and take. Everyone needs to get that in their heads on both sides.

I think TS will slot in on a formula based off a hybrid of DOH/ratio/status and with pay and career expectation adjustment, ACPA pilots will get some adjusted credit for the high seniority level of the group and advancement expectations, but TS guys will do slightly better on average in ratio/status, certainly on pay, they'll all get raises... there will probably fences to prevent TS bidding the 787/777 CA for X number of years. We may see that the full integration takes a period of time, even a couple years, depending on where AC puts fins and merges the flying and the agreement they come to with ACPA. Plus potential training requirements.

But in the end the most senior TS guys will be able to hold 330 YUL and get $100/hour raises or so, even Gilles here with 20.5 years seniority at 16%...will slot in with guys with closer to 30 years seniority on the 330 at AC that are around 20%. More junior TS captain's will still be able to hold 320 in a base of their choosing, and will take a slight raise. Most of the FOs will hold pretty much any FO seat or even a junior narrow body Captain seat... and everyone from TS will get better benefits, and a pension...

And in the end we will get along and better get our shit together to get a new contract sorted out and get everyone a big raise together - blue and red - before the economy tanks.

[Babar350]

Or maybe AC won't touch anything and let Air Transat like it is and reduce Rouge fleet and give the flight to AT.
When people are getting retired from AT they won't replace them and increase Rouge fleet.
If there is too much pilots in AT they will ask for volunteer to flow to AC

So everyone would be happy and there is no question about BOTL or merge...

[tailgunner]

Babar350,
That can’t happen due to the first article of the contact with ACPA. Simply put, ALL flying that AC controls above scope limits( seats/fin count) has to be crewed by ACPA pilots. They cannot run Transat as is, outside of ACPA.
Cheers

[Duke Point]

Babar350,
That can’t happen due to the first article of the contact with ACPA. Simply put, ALL flying that AC controls above scope limits( seats/fin count) has to be crewed by ACPA pilots. They cannot run Transat as is, outside of ACPA.
Cheers

Correct, however this concept seems lost on some. It's been pointed out and repeated many times.

It seems we're wasting our time pointing out that there will be ONE list.

With regard to pilot seniority, there will be no sub-contracting, no merging with only Rouge pilots, no running Transat as a separate entity.

It couldn't be clearer.


Those in doubt should refer to Altiplano's post above.....seems it was covered best there.

DP.

[Victory]

Or maybe AC won't touch anything and let Air Transat like it is and reduce Rouge fleet and give the flight to AT.
When people are getting retired from AT they won't replace them and increase Rouge fleet.
If there is too much pilots in AT they will ask for volunteer to flow to AC

So everyone would be happy and there is no question about BOTL or merge...

I'm going back this prediction as well. This is what Calin likely wants and there is a lot of ways he can get it. Trading some trivial gains to the AC pilot's contract, or instilling fear of what will happen with a merged list, all the way up to lockout threats, government intervention, etc.
Most likely a combination of all of the above.

[altiplano]

There's no way AC Pilots give on scope for a seperate C scale. All the most productive flying would just go there, that's what happened when we got a B scale.

There is no way AC Pilots will allow any LCC expansion beyond the contract either. Like putting the 330s at rouge.

I could see a deal bringing the LCC767s back to mainline and running a 330/320 mixed LCC fleet within the existing ratios. I could even see them negotiating to do that as 1 LCC pilot group flying both types and ACPA getting some gains to allow it.

I'd want LOU74 eliminated, plus 5 hour/calendar day DBM, to give 320/330 dual checked pilots for the LCC flying at a blended rate... That would be a huge savings for the corp even at mainline wawcon. Not to mention the flexibility they would gain. Meanwhile pilots would get rid of B-scale and most would get a better schedule.

Leverage will exist in this deal somewhere, hopefully we don't piss it away.

[Victory]

You're already justifying it in your head.

[altiplano]

How so?

LOU 74 eliminated.

One wawcon.

No B or C scale.

[Fanblade]

There's no way AC Pilots give on scope for a seperate C scale. All the most productive flying would just go there, that's what happened when we got a B scale.

There is no way AC Pilots will allow any LCC expansion beyond the contract either. Like putting the 330s at rouge.

I could see a deal bringing the LCC767s back to mainline and running a 330/320 mixed LCC fleet within the existing ratios. I could even see them negotiating to do that as 1 LCC pilot group flying both types and ACPA getting some gains to allow it.

I'd want LOU74 eliminated, plus 5 hour/calendar day DBM, to give 320/330 dual checked pilots for the LCC flying at a blended rate... That would be a huge savings for the corp even at mainline wawcon. Not to mention the flexibility they would gain. Meanwhile pilots would get rid of B-scale and most would get a better schedule.

Leverage will exist in this deal somewhere, hopefully we don't piss it away.

If they moved the 767's back to mainline the corp wouldn't need to cut a deal to have Transat's 330's at the LCC. It could be done under the existing agreement.

Therefore no bargaining leverage exists under your proposal. Not saying your wrong in that you might have nailed the outcome. Just saying negotiation is not needed.

[320YYZ]

I hope u guys are not negotiating for Ac because we are going to be screwed big time !!!!

Transat guys should lose at least a couple of years like the Canadian pilots lost. (2 years)

[altiplano]

There's no way AC Pilots give on scope for a seperate C scale. All the most productive flying would just go there, that's what happened when we got a B scale.

There is no way AC Pilots will allow any LCC expansion beyond the contract either. Like putting the 330s at rouge.

I could see a deal bringing the LCC767s back to mainline and running a 330/320 mixed LCC fleet within the existing ratios. I could even see them negotiating to do that as 1 LCC pilot group flying both types and ACPA getting some gains to allow it.

I'd want LOU74 eliminated, plus 5 hour/calendar day DBM, to give 320/330 dual checked pilots for the LCC flying at a blended rate... That would be a huge savings for the corp even at mainline wawcon. Not to mention the flexibility they would gain. Meanwhile pilots would get rid of B-scale and most would get a better schedule.

Leverage will exist in this deal somewhere, hopefully we don't piss it away.

If they moved the 767's back to mainline the corp wouldn't need to cut a deal to have Transat's 330's at the LCC. It could be done under the existing agreement.

Therefore no bargaining leverage exists under your proposal. Not saying your wrong in that you might have nailed the outcome. Just saying negotiation is not needed.

Not true. Perhaps you don't follow me. Notice it was an idea, and then an expansion on the idea...

I agree, if they want to move the 767s back and run 330s at the LCC, they can do that following provisions in our contract. But to really make it efficient with a 320/330 dual qualified pilot group, it would require an amendment to our contract.

In our contract, only under 11.05.01, NRFOPs may be simultaneously qualified on 320/330. Line pilots may not.

There is always something they will want. ALWAYS. There is always leverage. Just like there was leverage in the 737 grounding, but we gave it away to get a below minimum pay rate? Time we walk in slowly, be less than accommodating, and hold our cards until the other side shows there's... there will be leverage in this, let's not lose our heads.

[Fanblade]

Agreed.

Just wanted to acknowledge that AC has all the tools they need to do the basics without talking to us at all.

[Just another canuck]

…

[JAHinYYC]

There will be some give and take. Everyone needs to get that in their heads on both sides.

100% agree. No truer words have been spoken.

I spent twenty years in another business negotiating large dollar value contracts before coming to aviation full time. If I have learned one thing, and as simplistic as it sounds, the best deal is the one where each side walks away a little unhappy with the outcome.

Remember if there is a clear cut “winner” it will come to the detriment of the other side ( the de facto losers) which will give rise to lingering hard feelings going forward.

When it is all said and done we will have to live with one another and share the same flight decks going forward.

[Dry Guy]

DQ, CCQ nor MFF

What does any of this mean?