Counterpoint wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 3:10 am
If ALPA AT won’t allow their pilots to do OT until they are all back flying so be it. Their members suffered far more harm than we have.
Uh what?
If we compare bottom of the list AC to bottom of the list AT, their pilots received an extra year and a bit (or $30k) worth of CEWS. They will likely be back to flying a year earlier too. And to top it all off, their first four years of pay is significantly higher than AC's flat pay. When you count three years of furlough and four years of flat pay, I would bet AC pilots are well over $100,000 behind their AT counterparts.
Please explain to me how furloughed AC pilots have suffered less?
Counterpoint wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 3:10 am
If ALPA AT won’t allow their pilots to do OT until they are all back flying so be it. Their members suffered far more harm than we have.
Uh what?
If we compare bottom of the list AC to bottom of the list AT, their pilots received an extra year and a bit (or $30k) worth of CEWS. They will likely be back to flying a year earlier too. And to top it all off, their first four years of pay is significantly higher than AC's flat pay. When you count three years of furlough and four years of flat pay, I would bet AC pilots are well over $100,000 behind their AT counterparts.
Please explain to me how furloughed AC pilots have suffered less?
I second that! How out to lunch is this fucking clown?
Objectively, we have suffered the most out of any furloughed pilot group in the country:
- Only group to not be afforded CEWS
- First to be laid off, last to be recalled
- 4 years of flat-pay to look forward to (7 years total when this is all done)
- ACPA leadership picking up VO
- Vacation buy-backs
- Least likely to be hired by other operators
Counterpoint wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 3:10 am
If ALPA AT won’t allow their pilots to do OT until they are all back flying so be it. Their members suffered far more harm than we have.
LOL, wow you really see the world through different eyes than most.
Counterpoint wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 3:10 am
If ALPA AT won’t allow their pilots to do OT until they are all back flying so be it. Their members suffered far more harm than we have.
Uh what?
If we compare bottom of the list AC to bottom of the list AT, their pilots received an extra year and a bit (or $30k) worth of CEWS. They will likely be back to flying a year earlier too. And to top it all off, their first four years of pay is significantly higher than AC's flat pay. When you count three years of furlough and four years of flat pay, I would bet AC pilots are well over $100,000 behind their AT counterparts.
Please explain to me how furloughed AC pilots have suffered less?
Agreed 100%!
AC furloughs have suffered the most of any airline in Canada.
Counterpoint wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 3:10 am
If ALPA AT won’t allow their pilots to do OT until they are all back flying so be it. Their members suffered far more harm than we have.
Uh what?
If we compare bottom of the list AC to bottom of the list AT, their pilots received an extra year and a bit (or $30k) worth of CEWS. They will likely be back to flying a year earlier too. And to top it all off, their first four years of pay is significantly higher than AC's flat pay. When you count three years of furlough and four years of flat pay, I would bet AC pilots are well over $100,000 behind their AT counterparts.
Please explain to me how furloughed AC pilots have suffered less?
Members far more harmed….not furloughed pilots far more harmed. AC let go 15%, AT let go almost 90% of all their pilots (at one point).
Counterpoint wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 3:10 am
If ALPA AT won’t allow their pilots to do OT until they are all back flying so be it. Their members suffered far more harm than we have.
Uh what?
If we compare bottom of the list AC to bottom of the list AT, their pilots received an extra year and a bit (or $30k) worth of CEWS. They will likely be back to flying a year earlier too. And to top it all off, their first four years of pay is significantly higher than AC's flat pay. When you count three years of furlough and four years of flat pay, I would bet AC pilots are well over $100,000 behind their AT counterparts.
Please explain to me how furloughed AC pilots have suffered less?
Members far more harmed….not furloughed pilots far more harmed. AC let go 15%, AT let go almost 90% of all their pilots (at one point).
I'd love to know what galaxy you live in. Must be pretty far off, maybe Andromeda?
Counterpoint wrote: ↑Sun Oct 31, 2021 12:38 pm
Members far more harmed….not furloughed pilots far more harmed. AC let go 15%, AT let go almost 90% of all their pilots (at one point).
Counterpoint,
My apologies for taking your post out of context - I hope you can forgive me for my frustration.
You're correct on the ratio of pilots laid off. Where I would push back is with the amount ACPA had a role to play in this. By nature of our multiple types, the company was well aware a large scale pilot layoff would require years and years of training to get back up to speed. Even MS was heavily against further layoffs for this reason. Seeing what ACPA has done during my tenure here, I highly double they played much of a supporting role in this decision. The company has very clearly illustrated they'll do whatever is best for them, and the number of furloughed directly reflect this.
Counterpoint wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 3:10 am
If ALPA AT won’t allow their pilots to do OT until they are all back flying so be it. Their members suffered far more harm than we have.
I WISH our union stopped ppl from doing overtime.
Maybe then the scope chair wouldn't do month after month of 100 hours a month.
Counterpoint wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 3:10 am
If ALPA AT won’t allow their pilots to do OT until they are all back flying so be it. Their members suffered far more harm than we have.
Uh what?
If we compare bottom of the list AC to bottom of the list AT, their pilots received an extra year and a bit (or $30k) worth of CEWS. They will likely be back to flying a year earlier too. And to top it all off, their first four years of pay is significantly higher than AC's flat pay. When you count three years of furlough and four years of flat pay, I would bet AC pilots are well over $100,000 behind their AT counterparts.
Please explain to me how furloughed AC pilots have suffered less?
Members far more harmed….not furloughed pilots far more harmed. AC let go 15%, AT let go almost 90% of all their pilots (at one point).
This is literally the last line of messaging defense for ACPA...but...but..."we negotiated ONLY 15% layoffs..."
We were down to 55 hrs...55 hrs!! I mean flat pay pilot at 55 hrs...what does that even equate to? Starbucks barista starting wage??
Counterpoint,
What did the ACPA Staff do during our "darkest hour"? Did they take an equivalent pay cut? Were they "flying the line" around the globe during a pandemic or cuddling up under a blanket at their cottage?
What about the 15% who mostly STILL aren't back? Do you at least sign them up for the "Jelly Bean of the month" club?
Counterpoint wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 3:10 am
If ALPA AT won’t allow their pilots to do OT until they are all back flying so be it. Their members suffered far more harm than we have.
Uh what?
If we compare bottom of the list AC to bottom of the list AT, their pilots received an extra year and a bit (or $30k) worth of CEWS. They will likely be back to flying a year earlier too. And to top it all off, their first four years of pay is significantly higher than AC's flat pay. When you count three years of furlough and four years of flat pay, I would bet AC pilots are well over $100,000 behind their AT counterparts.
Please explain to me how furloughed AC pilots have suffered less?
Members far more harmed….not furloughed pilots far more harmed. AC let go 15%, AT let go almost 90% of all their pilots (at one point).
That's your problem...
You're using a vacation tour operator with a completely different business model and financial position as a comparator.
They aren't our comparator.
And even so, we are the only Canadian airline that didn't keep our "layoffs" on CEWS. Do you really think AC would have said no to our hundreds of millions of dollars in concessions and ask the added flexibility and blank cheques we wrote them if we made it a condition that the 600 had to keep getting a government paycheque? Just like the layoffs did at almost every other airline in this country.
Of course they wouldn't have. But people like you are short sighted and not capable of thinking on a level beyond what you're told or shown. Bunch of fucking chicken littles in this joint.
altiplano wrote: ↑Sun Oct 31, 2021 4:52 pm
That's your problem...
You're using a vacation tour operator with a completely different business model and financial position as a comparator.
They aren't our comparator.
And even so, we are the only Canadian airline that didn't keep our "layoffs" on CEWS. Do you really think AC would have said no to our hundreds of millions of dollars in concessions and ask the added flexibility and blank cheques we wrote them if we made it a condition that the 600 had to keep getting a government paycheque? Just like the layoffs did at almost every other airline in this country.
Of course they wouldn't have. But people like you are short sighted and not capable of thinking on a level beyond what you're told or shown. Bunch of fucking chicken littles in this joint.
Not short sighted, they just didn't give a shit about the 600 furloughs.
altiplano wrote: ↑Sun Oct 31, 2021 4:52 pm
And even so, we are the only Canadian airline that didn't keep our "layoffs" on CEWS. Do you really think AC would have said no to our hundreds of millions of dollars in concessions and ask the added flexibility and blank cheques we wrote them if we made it a condition that the 600 had to keep getting a government paycheque? Just like the layoffs did at almost every other airline in this country.
Very well said. Some semblance of an attempt to help the furloughed on the part of the union or company would have gone a long way. Instead, we were clearly forgotten by both, and AC will now have 600 fairly demoralized pilots returning over the next couple of years.
If we compare bottom of the list AC to bottom of the list AT, their pilots received an extra year and a bit (or $30k) worth of CEWS. They will likely be back to flying a year earlier too. And to top it all off, their first four years of pay is significantly higher than AC's flat pay. When you count three years of furlough and four years of flat pay, I would bet AC pilots are well over $100,000 behind their AT counterparts.
Please explain to me how furloughed AC pilots have suffered less?
Members far more harmed….not furloughed pilots far more harmed. AC let go 15%, AT let go almost 90% of all their pilots (at one point).
I'd love to know what galaxy you live in. Must be pretty far off, maybe Andromeda?
Andromeda is the closest galaxy to ours.... but I get your point
The best way to predict how many pilots AC is going to require is by looking at how many airplanes it plans to fly. The airline has just released its Q3 results and in the MD&A there is a fleet plan included. AC plans on operating 228 aircraft as of December 31, 2022. 83 wide bodies, 106 ML narrow bodies, and 39 airbuses at rouge. Interestingly there is 1 additional 787-9 being added.
In December 2019 the fleet was 252 aircraft, with 105 WB & 147 NB. In December 2018 there were 237, 99 WB & 138 NB. As of December 2017 the fleet was 224, 97 WB & 127 NB. So the airline is planning to have roughly the same size fleet at the end of 2022 as it had in 2017. Of course there are some differences, mainly, augmentation and duty limitations which would require more pilots. However, the fleet will have more narrow bodies and fewer wide bodies (which require more pilots for augmentation). This either indicates that the airline doesn't foresee as much demand in overseas markets or (hopefully) is going to be placing a wide body, or possibly an A321XLR order, to replace the 30+ retired 767's as air travel recovers.
To crew for the 224 aircraft fleet AC required just over 3700 pilots, roughly 16.5 pilots/aircraft. With a forecasted requirement of 4900 pilots for a projected fleet of over 260 aircraft, which would have equalled about 19 pilots/aircraft. Obviously a crude guesstimation, to operate a planned fleet of 228 aircraft gives a range between 3800-4200 pilots. Looking at other variables 4000 is probably an accurate total and based on that I would guess that all furloughs will have recall notices prior to the summer of 2022.
TheStig wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 6:50 am
The best way to predict how many pilots AC is going to require is by looking at how many airplanes it plans to fly. The airline has just released its Q3 results and in the MD&A there is a fleet plan included. AC plans on operating 228 aircraft as of December 31, 2022. 83 wide bodies, 106 ML narrow bodies, and 39 airbuses at rouge. Interestingly there is 1 additional 787-9 being added.
In December 2019 the fleet was 252 aircraft, with 105 WB & 147 NB. In December 2018 there were 237, 99 WB & 138 NB. As of December 2017 the fleet was 224, 97 WB & 127 NB. So the airline is planning to have roughly the same size fleet at the end of 2022 as it had in 2017. Of course there are some differences, mainly, augmentation and duty limitations which would require more pilots. However, the fleet will have more narrow bodies and fewer wide bodies (which require more pilots for augmentation). This either indicates that the airline doesn't foresee as much demand in overseas markets or (hopefully) is going to be placing a wide body, or possibly an A321XLR order, to replace the 30+ retired 767's as air travel recovers.
To crew for the 224 aircraft fleet AC required just over 3700 pilots, roughly 16.5 pilots/aircraft. With a forecasted requirement of 4900 pilots for a projected fleet of over 260 aircraft, which would have equalled about 19 pilots/aircraft. Obviously a crude guesstimation, to operate a planned fleet of 228 aircraft gives a range between 3800-4200 pilots. Looking at other variables 4000 is probably an accurate total and based on that I would guess that all furloughs will have recall notices prior to the summer of 2022.
Another factor is utilization rate.
Pre-COVID, the AC operating fleet was ‘fully’ utilized. It may be the case in 2022 that some fleets are fully utilized (i.e. A220/737MAX) while other fleets - particularly owned aircraft - are still below 100% utilization rate.
Regardless, if your staffing forecast is accurate AC may be looking at OTS/flow through hiring by Q4 2022/Q1 2023.
I think those are good estimates, my concern on the timeline is training capacity.
The big 20-01 reduction bid really set us backwards on this, they still haven't cleared that backlog out. So they'll be needing to add positions while they still haven't finished training the people they reduced, then the RIRs will get exercised, up-bid will happen, and we'll start all over again.
They should have held steady rather than layoff, negotiated short term paid LOAs in positions, paid CEWs, etc. to park people and wait for the recovery...
They should have made LCC767 the new Cargo 767, then it would just be recall, recurrent training, and go... there were guys forced off the L767 that did a new course, checked out, and never flew a full block month in their new seat before they were back on course for the C767... what a waste... 2 courses pissed into the wind, not to mention the person they displaced, and the person that person displaced, etc.. But they needed that 10% wage cut...
This management team triggered thousands of courses down, now thousands of courses are needed to go back up... They better get one big bid out next month and chart the right course if they have a hope of catching up and getting our guys back.
In addition to the 1 787 showing in the fleet plan, there is this note in the MD & A
Air Canada exercised options for the purchase of three Boeing 787-9 aircraft which are scheduled to be delivered in 2022 and in 2023. The table in section 7.8 “Contractual Obligations” contains the additional three Boeing 787-9 aircraft.
Up 3 787s down one 777 from pre covid. Obviously down a bunch of rouge 767s, but contractually those were considered narrow body.
Yeah it's actually three 787s. I heard they were white tails and we're getting them all in the Spring, not over 2022/2023. We are not crewed for 40 737s, or the amount of Rouge they plan to run this winter. This bid will be an expansion bid, I'm sure of it. Can't wait to see the clusterfuck that will be the training plan with all the reinstatement rights being exercised.
asleep_at_the_yoke wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 11:38 am
Yeah it's actually three 787s. I heard they were white tails and we're getting them all in the Spring, not over 2022/2023. We are not crewed for 40 737s, or the amount of Rouge they plan to run this winter. This bid will be an expansion bid, I'm sure of it. Can't wait to see the clusterfuck that will be the training plan with all the reinstatement rights being exercised.
Maybe, but my above is a direct quote out of the management discussion and analysis section of the quarterly results. Can be found at aircanada.com investor relations. Although traditionally it tends to be conservative.
