Negotiations

[cdnavater]

Is that why there are no more initials on the E175?

Not sure where you heard this, there are many new hires currently undergoing an initial E175 course

[Little Star]

Not sure where you heard this, there are many new hires currently undergoing an initial E175 course

Alright!

[Dronepiper]

I had the option along with another colleague / peer in Q2 / Q3 2022 to go to Flair or Jazz both of us ATPL less than 2000 TT - both successfully interviewed and both received offers. He chose Flair, I chose Jazz.

He flew Flair for 6 months before AC picked him up - FO 330 YVR. 3 other Flair pilots from the same GS left at the same time to AC, 737 and 320 FO. I flew Jazz 3 for months and quit in December, 3 months I will never get back and of course needless to say missed the fast track opportunity to AC. A massive miscalculation on my part, in part due to misinformation and endless delusional optimum within these forums.

This small anecdotal story speaks massive volumes, I have followed AV Canada Jazz forums for years - everyone here is either in denial, delusional or they are company management spinning PR spam to help manage absolute circus that exists within.

I am back to 703/704 flying - 3 days on, 5 days off. $150k per year. Home every single night, no crash pad. 4 weeks (8 weeks) vacation per year. It takes basic math, basic Excel spreadsheet skills and knowledge on TFSA, RRSP contributions to realize how financially destructive even 2 or 3 years (5??) at Jazz can be on ones long term financial outcome.

If you don’t mind me asking, who do you work for? That sounds amazing

[Inverted2]

Not sure where you heard this, there are many new hires currently undergoing an initial E175 course

Alright!

All in Paris for now. The AC sim is an E190 and Transport said no more initials on it. Recurrents still allowed for now.

[genetic jack hammer]

If Claude f@%KS this up I vote for his immediate retirment and to be replaced with Rudder

Rudder for president!
“Make jazz great again!” Lol

Did you mean to say MAGA...Make ALPA Great Again!

[BingBong]

Items within Jazz control:

FO

1. 67
2. 77
3. 80
4. 83
5. 87
6. 90
7. 93
8. 97
9. 100
10. 103


CA

1. 110
2. 115
3. 120
4. 125
5. 130
6. 135
7. 140
8. 145
9. 150
10. 155
11. 160
12. 165

Training dept override 15%. LTC/LCP override $36/hr.

Straight time to 85. Time and a half 85-95. Double time over 95. All WDO double time.

Max 16 work days per bid month, including RSV. Exception for initial type course.

Min daily credit 5. No 2 day pairing less than 10. No 3 day less than 15. No 4 day less than 20.

Pilot pays STD premium only (to preserve tax free status). STD duration day 31-180. LTD day 181+. No LTD benefit payable beyond 6 years. Employer pays all other benefit premiums.

DC matching starts at 6%. Increases 1% every 2 years of service until employee contributions reaches 8%. Thereafter employer match increases 1% every year until a maximum of 10% is reached. Therefore 8/10 match reached at year 7.


Items outside Jazz control (requiring AC and/or ACPA concurrence):

CPA min fleet 80 fins effective 2025 (1 year early).

Minimum block hours reflecting full utilization of fleet.

50% AC flow with reserved seniority numbers coinciding with eligible PIT course if Jazz requires hold back for operational integrity. No Jazz Pilot can flow with less than 24 months of service. Maximum holdback duration is the aforementioned 24 month service time at Jazz or 12 months from eligible PIT course.


The competition facing Jazz for pilot labour is WestJet, Transat, Porter, Sunwing, Flair, Morningstar, CargoJet, Lynx, and others. An airline cannot be staffed exclusively with ab initio new-hire candidates. Experience has value. Recognize that and acknowledge it in your WAWCON.

Working together, AC and Jazz and ALPA/ACPA are capable of offering a career package that cannot be met by any other carrier. They just have to choose to do so.

Can someone please forward this to the union.

I would like for this to become reality.

Send it to Claude to see what he says

He’d have to stop doing WDOs to actually read the email

[Inverted2]

His schedule on Flica doesn’t show any flying the past 3 months unless he’s not flying at all now or it’s hidden from view.

[genetic jack hammer]

His schedule on Flica doesn’t show any flying the past 3 months unless he’s not flying at all now or it’s hidden from view.

The block on schedule lookup has taken into effect. The company had put out a memo late last year.

[tango308]

Grievance process going forward for the lack of pilot movement to AC. The next 295 Jazz pilots going to AC will have the opportunity to grieve AC not respecting the 60% commitment.

To be followed.

[cdnavater]

Grievance process going forward for the lack of pilot movement to AC. The next 295 Jazz pilots going to AC will have the opportunity to grieve AC not respecting the 60% commitment.

To be followed.

Hmm, so you’re at AC and on probation, essentially suing your new employer, seems that’s not going to turn out well for some.
I think the union should just put all the pilots names on the grievance, since all were effected. The wages were kept low including the top based on this flow, the arbitrator can figure who was harmed more but I wouldn’t want to be singled out as a new hire at AC.
Better be on your absolute best behaviour during probation including all training, etc…

[PostmasterGeneral]

Grievance process going forward for the lack of pilot movement to AC. The next 295 Jazz pilots going to AC will have the opportunity to grieve AC not respecting the 60% commitment.

To be followed.

This doesn't make any sense. How can they "grieve" Air Canada, for something done while they were not under their employ?

Reeks of BS to me. Best provide some facts.

[truedude]

Grievance process going forward for the lack of pilot movement to AC. The next 295 Jazz pilots going to AC will have the opportunity to grieve AC not respecting the 60% commitment.

To be followed.

This doesn't make any sense. How can they "grieve" Air Canada, for something done while they were not under their employ?

Reeks of BS to me. Best provide some facts.

Our contract is with Jazz. So it is grieved with Jazz. Jazz can then decide to pursue it up the chain, as it is part of the CPA, which Air Canada is in violation of.

Or Jazz can decide to just swallow the cost of whatever is decided is owed.

[cdnavater]

Grievance process going forward for the lack of pilot movement to AC. The next 295 Jazz pilots going to AC will have the opportunity to grieve AC not respecting the 60% commitment.

To be followed.

This doesn't make any sense. How can they "grieve" Air Canada, for something done while they were not under their employ?

Reeks of BS to me. Best provide some facts.

Our contract is with Jazz. So it is grieved with Jazz. Jazz can then decide to pursue it up the chain, as it is part of the CPA, which Air Canada is in violation of.

Or Jazz can decide to just swallow the cost of whatever is decided is owed.

Not exactly, our contract is with Jazz but the flow was a three party agreement, I don’t believe ACPA was required for who AC chooses to hire. AC agreed to hire 60% of their new hires from Jazz, without that there was no agreement.

“Air Canada has consistently chosen to violate our agreement in favour of their own commercial interest. There is tangible harm stemming from Jazz and Air Canada’s non-compliance with Section 3-14.”

[truedude]

This doesn't make any sense. How can they "grieve" Air Canada, for something done while they were not under their employ?

Reeks of BS to me. Best provide some facts.

Our contract is with Jazz. So it is grieved with Jazz. Jazz can then decide to pursue it up the chain, as it is part of the CPA, which Air Canada is in violation of.

Or Jazz can decide to just swallow the cost of whatever is decided is owed.

Not exactly, our contract is with Jazz but the flow was a three party agreement, I don’t believe ACPA was required for who AC chooses to hire. AC agreed to hire 60% of their new hires from Jazz, without that there was no agreement.

“Air Canada has consistently chosen to violate our agreement in favour of their own commercial interest. There is tangible harm stemming from Jazz and Air Canada’s non-compliance with Section 3-14.”

But we are pursuing it as a violation of our Contract, which we hold with Jazz. The grievance process can only go to our employer, not an outside party.

So Jazz can then take it up with Air Canada, but we are taking taking it to Jazz to deal with it. I suspect it is being used to light a fire under someone's ass to actually get it together and pay us more.

[cdnavater]

Our contract is with Jazz. So it is grieved with Jazz. Jazz can then decide to pursue it up the chain, as it is part of the CPA, which Air Canada is in violation of.

Or Jazz can decide to just swallow the cost of whatever is decided is owed.

Not exactly, our contract is with Jazz but the flow was a three party agreement, I don’t believe ACPA was required for who AC chooses to hire. AC agreed to hire 60% of their new hires from Jazz, without that there was no agreement.

“Air Canada has consistently chosen to violate our agreement in favour of their own commercial interest. There is tangible harm stemming from Jazz and Air Canada’s non-compliance with Section 3-14.”

But we are pursuing it as a violation of our Contract, which we hold with Jazz. The grievance process can only go to our employer, not an outside party.

So Jazz can then take it up with Air Canada, but we are taking taking it to Jazz to deal with it. I suspect it is being used to light a fire under someone's ass to actually get it together and pay us more.

We’re splitting hairs, AC is a party to that section and will be named in the grievance, they are signatories to that section but you are correct the grievance will be filed with Jazz. I don’t believe that the award, if any, will be directed at Jazz with them having to approach AC to pony up, as I said they are signatories in the part.

[truedude]

Not exactly, our contract is with Jazz but the flow was a three party agreement, I don’t believe ACPA was required for who AC chooses to hire. AC agreed to hire 60% of their new hires from Jazz, without that there was no agreement.

“Air Canada has consistently chosen to violate our agreement in favour of their own commercial interest. There is tangible harm stemming from Jazz and Air Canada’s non-compliance with Section 3-14.”

But we are pursuing it as a violation of our Contract, which we hold with Jazz. The grievance process can only go to our employer, not an outside party.

So Jazz can then take it up with Air Canada, but we are taking taking it to Jazz to deal with it. I suspect it is being used to light a fire under someone's ass to actually get it together and pay us more.

We’re splitting hairs, AC is a party to that section and will be named in the grievance, they are signatories to that section but you are correct the grievance will be filed with Jazz. I don’t believe that the award, if any, will be directed at Jazz with them having to approach AC to pony up, as I said they are signatories in the part.

AC won't be named directly. Our contract is with Jazz. Using the grievance process under our contract takes the issue to Jazz and Jazz alone. Jazz will then be on the hook for any payout, which in turn they can try and recoup from AC. But AC will not be a part of our grievance.

AC is not signatories to that part of the contract. They simply offered assurances that made it possible for Jazz to commit to that. Which they then failed to comply with.

[cdnavater]

But we are pursuing it as a violation of our Contract, which we hold with Jazz. The grievance process can only go to our employer, not an outside party.

So Jazz can then take it up with Air Canada, but we are taking taking it to Jazz to deal with it. I suspect it is being used to light a fire under someone's ass to actually get it together and pay us more.

We’re splitting hairs, AC is a party to that section and will be named in the grievance, they are signatories to that section but you are correct the grievance will be filed with Jazz. I don’t believe that the award, if any, will be directed at Jazz with them having to approach AC to pony up, as I said they are signatories in the part.

AC won't be named directly. Our contract is with Jazz. Using the grievance process under our contract takes the issue to Jazz and Jazz alone. Jazz will then be on the hook for any payout, which in turn they can try and recoup from AC. But AC will not be a part of our grievance.

AC is not signatories to that part of the contract. They simply offered assurances that made it possible for Jazz to commit to that. Which they then failed to comply with.

Ok, you seem quite certain about that, the information coming from the MEC specifically mentions that AC is violating the agreement, not Jazz.
What makes you so certain? Are you in the union and part of the committee preparing the grievance?

[SmokinJoe]

We’re splitting hairs, AC is a party to that section and will be named in the grievance, they are signatories to that section but you are correct the grievance will be filed with Jazz. I don’t believe that the award, if any, will be directed at Jazz with them having to approach AC to pony up, as I said they are signatories in the part.

AC won't be named directly. Our contract is with Jazz. Using the grievance process under our contract takes the issue to Jazz and Jazz alone. Jazz will then be on the hook for any payout, which in turn they can try and recoup from AC. But AC will not be a part of our grievance.

AC is not signatories to that part of the contract. They simply offered assurances that made it possible for Jazz to commit to that. Which they then failed to comply with.

Ok, you seem quite certain about that, the information coming from the MEC specifically mentions that AC is violating the agreement, not Jazz.
What makes you so certain? Are you in the union and part of the committee preparing the grievance?

Look at the beginning of the collective agreement, page 4. You will not find a AC signature on it. Our CA is between us, and Jazz. The CPA on the other hand is an agreement between AC and Jazz. How can you grieve a contract violation against a party who is not a signatory of the contract. You can’t.

[Nick678]

AC won't be named directly. Our contract is with Jazz. Using the grievance process under our contract takes the issue to Jazz and Jazz alone. Jazz will then be on the hook for any payout, which in turn they can try and recoup from AC. But AC will not be a part of our grievance.

AC is not signatories to that part of the contract. They simply offered assurances that made it possible for Jazz to commit to that. Which they then failed to comply with.

Ok, you seem quite certain about that, the information coming from the MEC specifically mentions that AC is violating the agreement, not Jazz.
What makes you so certain? Are you in the union and part of the committee preparing the grievance?

Look at the beginning of the collective agreement, page 4. You will not find a AC signature on it. Our CA is between us, and Jazz. The CPA on the other hand is an agreement between AC and Jazz. How can you grieve a contract violation against a party who is not a signatory of the contract. You can’t.

You’re probably right. So the results from an arbitration will likely result in a financial payout. Jazz will definitely not want to pay and bitch to AC because they caused it. AC will try and find a solution to avoid paying it. Hopefully that solution is seniority based.

Really just buys AC time to get through the summer flying at the end of the day.

[SmokinJoe]

Well I am a firm believer that the PMA was the brainchild of AC. They could foresee the pilot shortage and tried to get ahead of it by this PMA. So there is value in it for AC. Now it’s just a matter of does Jazz want to try and leverage that value with AC in the CPA

[mmm...bacon]

Or Jazz can decide to just swallow the cost of whatever is decided is owed.

So is this a group grievance, or an individual one? Let's say I'm [*I* am not] a 30 year old Jazz captain, who was quite reasonably expecting to be part of the 60%; because of the hold/delay on that, I've now 'missed' a couple of hundred seniority numbers - the damage to my career is incalculable in terms of vacations, upgrades, pension etc...

[PostmasterGeneral]

How can anyone be sure that it was AC who didn’t honour the agreement? Jazz needed to stop attrition or they were about to park airplanes.

[CPT.HarshColdReality]

AC owns 9.99% of Chorus....

[truedude]

How can anyone be sure that it was AC who didn’t honour the agreement? Jazz needed to stop attrition or they were about to park airplanes.

In this case it doesn't matter who failed to honour the agreement. Our contract was clearly violated, and that is what the grievance will address. If we are successful, then Jazz and AC can figure out who is to blame, if Jazz wishes to pursue the matter with them. But when it comes to the grievance being filed, it really doesn't matter who failed to honour it, the only thing that matters is that the contract was violated.

[PostmasterGeneral]

How can anyone be sure that it was AC who didn’t honour the agreement? Jazz needed to stop attrition or they were about to park airplanes.

In this case it doesn't matter who failed to honour the agreement. Our contract was clearly violated, and that is what the grievance will address. If we are successful, then Jazz and AC can figure out who is to blame, if Jazz wishes to pursue the matter with them. But when it comes to the grievance being filed, it really doesn't matter who failed to honour it, the only thing that matters is that the contract was violated.

And what exactly are you hoping to achieve through this “grievance” process?