BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Discuss topics related to Air Transat.

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

twa22
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 461
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2018 4:27 pm

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by twa22 »

I'll start by saying that I don't work for Transat, but since before I started flight training, Transat always gave me the impression they are a good company to work for, and over the years, I have yet to meet one pilot from there that has had massive complaints or has said run, go work elsewhere... If i've learned anything on avcanada, or forums in general, there are just some people who will come and shit on literally everything in their way. You will never be able to please some, never, no matter how much you give them. These are the type of frustrated individuals who will find something wrong with every single company in THE WORLD, never mind in Canada.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Apestogetherstrong
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:36 pm

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by Apestogetherstrong »

FL320 wrote: Sat Sep 09, 2023 2:11 pm I am not pro bond at all and I agree that it should be removed.
However most pilots who resigned in the last few months (about 50) went to AC and were almost all still doing their initial training: they don’t have to pay the bond in this case. Most are less than 30 yo; they haven’t had the chance to taste the Air Transat’s lifestyle: they just moved to AC because it looks more appealing in terms of job security and pay in the long term (and not for the lifestyle). Transat could increase the salary up to 100k/y 1st year FO and people would still leave to AC anyway.
You can think whatever you want: Air Transat is a great employer; we are extremely well treated in many aspects. Talked to a friend who left to Air Canada after 7 years at Transat: the only thing he has to say after a year is that he regrets big time, he has zero fun at Air Canada. The grass is not always greener; and it’s nice to hear from those who can really compare.
I dare Transat to increase the salary up to 100k/y 1 st year. I guarantee no one will leave for AC then.
---------- ADS -----------
 
digits_
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 6781
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:26 am

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by digits_ »

FL320 wrote: Sat Sep 09, 2023 2:11 pm However most pilots who resigned in the last few months (about 50) went to AC and were almost all still doing their initial training: they don’t have to pay the bond in this case. Most are less than 30 yo; they haven’t had the chance to taste the Air Transat’s lifestyle: they just moved to AC because it looks more appealing in terms of job security and pay in the long term (and not for the lifestyle).
So you're saying when pilots have a chance to pick an employer with similar pay but without a bond, they pick the one without a bond? :o

I'm fairly certain a significant part of those 50 would have stayed for at least a year if they could 'try' the AT lifestyle and be able to leave whenever they want. Your bond is working against you in this case. It's a great example why you *shouldn't* have a bond. And if the AT lifestyle is great (which I'm not disputing by the way), they would be convinced to stay much longer than a year. The best way to judge a lifestyle is to experience it.
---------- ADS -----------
 
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
Cavalier44
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 6:32 am

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by Cavalier44 »

Apestogetherstrong wrote: Sat Sep 09, 2023 3:30 pm I dare Transat to increase the salary up to 100k/y 1 st year. I guarantee no one will leave for AC then.
I'm not sure if you're being facetious, but pilots from many companies from Canada and all over the world are still leaving six-figure jobs to come to AC. I did it, most of my colleagues in my PIT course did it, and despite the lower experience levels of some of the new-hires that we've been seeing recently, I'm sure it will continue.

Air Canada has its flaws, but it is still at the top in this country for job stability, long-term compensation, and pension plan (again - the CWIPP plan is not perfect, but it's still far superior to a traditional RRSP match). These are the reasons that experienced pilots, including those from Air Transat, continue to make the switch to AC.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DanWEC
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2551
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:05 pm
Location: 404

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by DanWEC »

Yep, I disagree with the bond too, but with so many people wanting to go to AC in the first year or two before really experiencing the lifestyle at TS, (Though not for everyone, no judgement here.) I don't know the solution. I'd love to hear some actual suggestions.

A 100k 1st year would change absolutely nothing. The driving factors are understandably long term job security and pension at AC along with fleet and pay ceiling. All this would do is waste money on people doing training or line indoc who might leave.
Airlines traditionally have a very low 1st year to offset training cost.

After several years, people generally don't leave, whether that's because of being handcuffed by seniority in this messed up industry or because they like their lives.
The goal is to save money by preventing people from jumping ship who never intended to stay past a call from AC anyways.

While I'm against it, during negotiations if the company analyzed the the anticipated increased cost of training for employee acquisition by eliminating the bond, or offered to increase the salary pool by the same amount, I know which option I'd pick. And before someone who doesn't work here jumps on me for this post, yes, obviously the first 2 years salary have to change, they're despicable. But really, you're over 100k at year 3, and really climbs after year 4 however. Still sucks that they bond you during the junior, low salary regime.

So, given the outline of the problem with absolutely inevitable, early-year-only movement to AC, presumably regardless of any changes to TS's entry level salary, what would you guys suggest?
---------- ADS -----------
 
SPR
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 120
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 3:32 pm

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by SPR »

DanWEC wrote: Sun Sep 10, 2023 8:07 am A 100k 1st year would change absolutely nothing. The driving factors are understandably long term job security and pension at AC along with fleet and pay ceiling. All this would do is waste money on people doing training or line indoc who might leave.
Airlines traditionally have a very low 1st year to offset training cost.

After several years, people generally don't leave, whether that's because of being handcuffed by seniority in this messed up industry or because they like their lives.
The goal is to save money by preventing people from jumping ship who never intended to stay past a call from AC anyways.
Then why pay anything at all for the first three years then? Anything they pay would "waste money", so why not refrain from paying them until they've stuck around long enough to demonstrate their dedication and their unwillingness to go to AC? AT could save a lot of money by forcing new hires to sign three-year bonds and then not paying them a cent until they prove their loyalty.
---------- ADS -----------
 
digits_
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 6781
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:26 am

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by digits_ »

DanWEC wrote: Sun Sep 10, 2023 8:07 am

A 100k 1st year would change absolutely nothing. The driving factors are understandably long term job security and pension at AC along with fleet and pay ceiling. All this would do is waste money on people doing training or line indoc who might leave.
Airlines traditionally have a very low 1st year to offset training cost.
Of course it would.

Pay someone a million dollars a year and nobody would ever go to AC.

Pay them 60k and they do leave.

Somewhere in there will be a middle ground that would keep new pilots at AT happy to accept the extra 'risk' without them leaving, and would make economical sense. Would it be 100k? 200k? Only one way to find out!
---------- ADS -----------
 
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
Brakefans
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2023 6:48 pm

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by Brakefans »

Transat almost has to pay more than the average since they score the lowest in terms of job security. Lifestyle is great at Transat? Imagine how great your schedules would be if YYZ-LGW/FCO wasn't flown by wet-leased A330s. What about the wetleased 737s, do they contribute to your great lifestyle as well?

Seriously, where is your union?
---------- ADS -----------
 
TFTMB heavy
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 656
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 9:58 am

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by TFTMB heavy »

SPR wrote: Sun Sep 10, 2023 9:23 am
DanWEC wrote: Sun Sep 10, 2023 8:07 am A 100k 1st year would change absolutely nothing. The driving factors are understandably long term job security and pension at AC along with fleet and pay ceiling. All this would do is waste money on people doing training or line indoc who might leave.
Airlines traditionally have a very low 1st year to offset training cost.

After several years, people generally don't leave, whether that's because of being handcuffed by seniority in this messed up industry or because they like their lives.
The goal is to save money by preventing people from jumping ship who never intended to stay past a call from AC anyways.
Then why pay anything at all for the first three years then? Anything they pay would "waste money", so why not refrain from paying them until they've stuck around long enough to demonstrate their dedication and their unwillingness to go to AC? AT could save a lot of money by forcing new hires to sign three-year bonds and then not paying them a cent until they prove their loyalty.
How are we supposed to keep an interesting discussion going with this kind of reply? Seriously? This brings 0 to the discussion.
---------- ADS -----------
 
TFTMB heavy
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 656
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 9:58 am

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by TFTMB heavy »

Brakefans wrote: Sun Sep 10, 2023 10:36 am Transat almost has to pay more than the average since they score the lowest in terms of job security. Lifestyle is great at Transat? Imagine how great your schedules would be if YYZ-LGW/FCO wasn't flown by wet-leased A330s. What about the wetleased 737s, do they contribute to your great lifestyle as well?

Seriously, where is your union?
Air Transat will have to be at or very near the top in all aspects of compensation to be able to attract and retain pilots. For the first time since 1987 Transat wants Air Transat at the forefront and a real airline, not the transportation department for a tour operator. Many steps have been taken in that direction with more to come.

In regards to the wet leases, unfortunately they are legal in Canada and it is addressed in the CA. It's not ideal and is impacting lifestyle for YYZ pilots. It is a temporary necessary evil to remedy the few damaged tails and delayed deliveries.

We are very well represented with the current elected members, not much they can do about the wet leases. For anyone that has never served at your union I highly recommend it, it will open your eyes and give you a new appreciation on how airlines operate.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DanWEC
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2551
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:05 pm
Location: 404

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by DanWEC »

TFTMB heavy wrote: Sun Sep 10, 2023 11:56 am
How are we supposed to keep an interesting discussion going with this kind of reply? Seriously? This brings 0 to the discussion.
Thought I'd throw a bone and attempt to start a meaningful discussion on the issue since there are so many vocal members here who are seasoned execs in aviation management and could provide tangible input. Shocking, I might have been wrong? ;)

TS occupies a unique position. Since they're a career airline with zero senior attrition besides retirements, they can't offer the carrot of quick jet upgrades for low timers like the low-cost startups and a few cargo ops since they aren't structured to have constant training and attrition while keeping costs down with low salaries.
It's a lifetime career job but the compensation isn't quite as good as AC who happens to be hiring like mad, so it's a conundrum.

One thing is certain, if AC ends up gaining substantially, especially on the low end end, bringing flat pay back down to one year, and rig rules changes/commuting policy, TS would be critically gutted almost overnight with an exodus of almost everyone under 10 years. There is no chance they can sit and wait till 2025 to react to the cost of doing business.
---------- ADS -----------
 
crashpadcommute
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2022 7:30 am

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by crashpadcommute »

330heavy wrote: Sat Sep 09, 2023 1:14 pm
It astounds me the lack of understanding and education that is displayed here. No concept of how a union works. No concept of the aviation industry. No concept of how to fix the Canadian pilot industry is, but they’re keen to play armchair warrior, without attempt in real life.

As far as I can tell, Air Transat continues to hire qualified and outstanding pilots. All I’ve meet help make working here enjoyable, and I hope that continues, bond or not.


Oh, and want to call me a management shill, go for it. I think our management is top notch, doing a great job. Are things perfect? No, but we’re on the right track, and good things are coming.
Someone who claims to know how a union works and then starts knob gobbling management in the next paragraph clearly doesn't understand how a union works

Having bonds, subpar pay, wet leases are a product of not behaving like a union
---------- ADS -----------
 
Romain
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2023 5:41 pm

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by Romain »

Cavalier44 wrote: Sun Sep 10, 2023 7:24 am
Apestogetherstrong wrote: Sat Sep 09, 2023 3:30 pm I dare Transat to increase the salary up to 100k/y 1 st year. I guarantee no one will leave for AC then.
I'm not sure if you're being facetious, but pilots from many companies from Canada and all over the world are still leaving six-figure jobs to come to AC. I did it, most of my colleagues in my PIT course did it, and despite the lower experience levels of some of the new-hires that we've been seeing recently, I'm sure it will continue.

Air Canada has its flaws, but it is still at the top in this country for job stability, long-term compensation, and pension plan (again - the CWIPP plan is not perfect, but it's still far superior to a traditional RRSP match). These are the reasons that experienced pilots, including those from Air Transat, continue to make the switch to AC.

Do the new hires still have access to the CWIPP plan? I thought it was only RRSP now with 7.5% Employee contribution and 10.5% company.
---------- ADS -----------
 
TFTMB heavy
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 656
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 9:58 am

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by TFTMB heavy »

crashpadcommute wrote: Sun Sep 10, 2023 6:52 pm
330heavy wrote: Sat Sep 09, 2023 1:14 pm
It astounds me the lack of understanding and education that is displayed here. No concept of how a union works. No concept of the aviation industry. No concept of how to fix the Canadian pilot industry is, but they’re keen to play armchair warrior, without attempt in real life.

As far as I can tell, Air Transat continues to hire qualified and outstanding pilots. All I’ve meet help make working here enjoyable, and I hope that continues, bond or not.


Oh, and want to call me a management shill, go for it. I think our management is top notch, doing a great job. Are things perfect? No, but we’re on the right track, and good things are coming.
Someone who claims to know how a union works and then starts knob gobbling management in the next paragraph clearly doesn't understand how a union works

Having bonds, subpar pay, wet leases are a product of not behaving like a union
Imagine this eloquent individual negotiating your next CA and showing management how it’s done.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Blueontop
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 509
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2014 8:01 pm

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by Blueontop »

TFTMB heavy wrote: Mon Sep 11, 2023 1:52 am
crashpadcommute wrote: Sun Sep 10, 2023 6:52 pm
330heavy wrote: Sat Sep 09, 2023 1:14 pm
It astounds me the lack of understanding and education that is displayed here. No concept of how a union works. No concept of the aviation industry. No concept of how to fix the Canadian pilot industry is, but they’re keen to play armchair warrior, without attempt in real life.

As far as I can tell, Air Transat continues to hire qualified and outstanding pilots. All I’ve meet help make working here enjoyable, and I hope that continues, bond or not.


Oh, and want to call me a management shill, go for it. I think our management is top notch, doing a great job. Are things perfect? No, but we’re on the right track, and good things are coming.
Someone who claims to know how a union works and then starts knob gobbling management in the next paragraph clearly doesn't understand how a union works

Having bonds, subpar pay, wet leases are a product of not behaving like a union
Imagine this eloquent individual negotiating your next CA and showing management how it’s done.
Between him and you? I know who’d I’d have more confidence in.

Plus don’t worry about me applying at TS as long as there is a $30k 3 YEAR BOND :lol:. That’s insane. Even airsprint which has terrible WAWCONS has only a 2 year bond. 1 YEAR MAX for a bond, especially for a place like TS which I can admit does have some good points but don’t try and put lipstick on a pig
---------- ADS -----------
 
TFTMB heavy
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 656
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 9:58 am

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by TFTMB heavy »

Blueontop wrote: Mon Sep 11, 2023 6:23 am
TFTMB heavy wrote: Mon Sep 11, 2023 1:52 am
crashpadcommute wrote: Sun Sep 10, 2023 6:52 pm

Someone who claims to know how a union works and then starts knob gobbling management in the next paragraph clearly doesn't understand how a union works

Having bonds, subpar pay, wet leases are a product of not behaving like a union
Imagine this eloquent individual negotiating your next CA and showing management how it’s done.
Between him and you? I know who’d I’d have more confidence in.

Plus don’t worry about me applying at TS as long as there is a $30k 3 YEAR BOND :lol:. That’s insane. Even airsprint which has terrible WAWCONS has only a 2 year bond. 1 YEAR MAX for a bond, especially for a place like TS which I can admit does have some good points but don’t try and put lipstick on a pig
Do you really think I care what you think about me or the place where I work? Apply or don’t, another thing I don’t care about.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Cavalier44
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 6:32 am

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by Cavalier44 »

Romain wrote: Mon Sep 11, 2023 12:05 am
Cavalier44 wrote: Sun Sep 10, 2023 7:24 am
Apestogetherstrong wrote: Sat Sep 09, 2023 3:30 pm I dare Transat to increase the salary up to 100k/y 1 st year. I guarantee no one will leave for AC then.
I'm not sure if you're being facetious, but pilots from many companies from Canada and all over the world are still leaving six-figure jobs to come to AC. I did it, most of my colleagues in my PIT course did it, and despite the lower experience levels of some of the new-hires that we've been seeing recently, I'm sure it will continue.

Air Canada has its flaws, but it is still at the top in this country for job stability, long-term compensation, and pension plan (again - the CWIPP plan is not perfect, but it's still far superior to a traditional RRSP match). These are the reasons that experienced pilots, including those from Air Transat, continue to make the switch to AC.

Do the new hires still have access to the CWIPP plan? I thought it was only RRSP now with 7.5% Employee contribution and 10.5% company.
You have been informed incorrectly. New hires are a part of the CWIPP plan. There is no RRSP-matching retirement plan in effect for Air Canada pilots, you’re either DB or CWIPP.
---------- ADS -----------
 
727driver
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 93
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by 727driver »

With all due respect to the Transat pilots here defending the use of bonds it has to be said that this is a massive strategic victory for management. I have said and always will that the existence of bonds are indicative of an underlying systemic problem in an organization, whether it be wawcon, labour relations, lifestyle, etc. If the claims of lifestyle being so great that this should out-weight all other negative aspects of working there then as such this would negate the requirement for bonded service? The attrition rates mentioned indicate that this is not the case. Unions are finally seeing the leverage they need to negotiate real gains on this new landscape yet the AT MEC surrendered its leverage to management this by allowing a bonded labour initiative to stems the attrition instead. Also very smart of management to make the bond three years in that it is long enough to let the value of seniority set in and place you on the cusp of pay bump with a significant enough penalty that will deter people from exercising self determination. Zero cost to the company zero benefit to pilots. Checkmate. Where as it is being demonstrated now these past strategic initiatives are failing as bonds, reserved seniority, flow agreements are disappearing or diminishing in influence and are being replaced by REAL gains in the form of signing or retention bonuses, better duty rigs, tighter CB language and substantial mid or new contract wage gains. The question has to be asked, how much bargaining capital will it take to get rid of the bonds and what will the bargaining landscape look like in 2025?

Having worked at AT in the past I had a peak up the skirt that revealed, although the touted cool lifestyle is always the first and best answer for the benefit of working there it pales against the backdrop of lagging compensation (pre AC acquisition attempt contract, lowest paid 330 pilots in the world), loose CB language, costly benefits, inferior retirement plan, constant career and financial uncertainty. What I saw then is what I hear now, pilots with some accrued seniority and deep enough into their career wanting to make sure this horse stays in the race until their career gets across the finish line and could care less about the right seat meat that they need there in order to get to Paris or Athens. “Bond? What's the big deal your at a career airline and should be happy your going to Lisbon in a 330 instead of Wabush in a King Air for the same money.” A career airline with a bond? WTF? These pilots are and will always be the defenders of le bleu. Can I blame them no, their concerns are real. I just don’t want to see their rhetoric undermine what the rest of the profession is trying to accomplish. If you’re not going to paddle in the the same direction as the rest then just put your ore back in the boat and enjoy the ride. Please do not attempt to justify bonds as a viable alternative to better compensation to solve an attrition problem especially for the jr ranks as it is insulting them as professional pilots and gives management the appearance of small minded thinking and ease of manipulation. Unless you are management then your argument makes total sense.
---------- ADS -----------
 
TFTMB heavy
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 656
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 9:58 am

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by TFTMB heavy »

727driver wrote: Mon Sep 11, 2023 10:51 am With all due respect to the Transat pilots here defending the use of bonds it has to be said that this is a massive strategic victory for management. I have said and always will that the existence of bonds are indicative of an underlying systemic problem in an organization, whether it be wawcon, labour relations, lifestyle, etc. If the claims of lifestyle being so great that this should out-weight all other negative aspects of working there then as such this would negate the requirement for bonded service? The attrition rates mentioned indicate that this is not the case. Unions are finally seeing the leverage they need to negotiate real gains on this new landscape yet the AT MEC surrendered its leverage to management this by allowing a bonded labour initiative to stems the attrition instead. Also very smart of management to make the bond three years in that it is long enough to let the value of seniority set in and place you on the cusp of pay bump with a significant enough penalty that will deter people from exercising self determination. Zero cost to the company zero benefit to pilots. Checkmate. Where as it is being demonstrated now these past strategic initiatives are failing as bonds, reserved seniority, flow agreements are disappearing or diminishing in influence and are being replaced by REAL gains in the form of signing or retention bonuses, better duty rigs, tighter CB language and substantial mid or new contract wage gains. The question has to be asked, how much bargaining capital will it take to get rid of the bonds and what will the bargaining landscape look like in 2025?

Having worked at AT in the past I had a peak up the skirt that revealed, although the touted cool lifestyle is always the first and best answer for the benefit of working there it pales against the backdrop of lagging compensation (pre AC acquisition attempt contract, lowest paid 330 pilots in the world), loose CB language, costly benefits, inferior retirement plan, constant career and financial uncertainty. What I saw then is what I hear now, pilots with some accrued seniority and deep enough into their career wanting to make sure this horse stays in the race until their career gets across the finish line and could care less about the right seat meat that they need there in order to get to Paris or Athens. “Bond? What's the big deal your at a career airline and should be happy your going to Lisbon in a 330 instead of Wabush in a King Air for the same money.” A career airline with a bond? WTF? These pilots are and will always be the defenders of le bleu. Can I blame them no, their concerns are real. I just don’t want to see their rhetoric undermine what the rest of the profession is trying to accomplish. If you’re not going to paddle in the the same direction as the rest then just put your ore back in the boat and enjoy the ride. Please do not attempt to justify bonds as a viable alternative to better compensation to solve an attrition problem especially for the jr ranks as it is insulting them as professional pilots and gives management the appearance of small minded thinking and ease of manipulation. Unless you are management then your argument makes total sense.
First of all the bond has been around for about 11 years or so, it’s not a new thing. Management knows it’s hurting recruitment at this point but I explained why it’s a mistake to remove it now unfortunately.

Nobody has stated that the bond is a viable alternative to better compensation. Stop twisting other arguments to justify your point.

What’s the loose CA language?

We are lagging in many aspects of compensation and take home but there have been significant gains since 2015 in the pay scales. Lowest paid 330 pilots is misleading as all wide body pilots are on the same pay scale (321 replaced the 310).

Although you make some valid points most of your post is in accurate and misleading.

Best of luck in your new endeavour..
---------- ADS -----------
 
thepoors
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 408
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2022 8:27 am

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by thepoors »

TFTMB heavy wrote: Mon Sep 11, 2023 12:29 pm
727driver wrote: Mon Sep 11, 2023 10:51 am With all due respect to the Transat pilots here defending the use of bonds it has to be said that this is a massive strategic victory for management. I have said and always will that the existence of bonds are indicative of an underlying systemic problem in an organization, whether it be wawcon, labour relations, lifestyle, etc. If the claims of lifestyle being so great that this should out-weight all other negative aspects of working there then as such this would negate the requirement for bonded service? The attrition rates mentioned indicate that this is not the case. Unions are finally seeing the leverage they need to negotiate real gains on this new landscape yet the AT MEC surrendered its leverage to management this by allowing a bonded labour initiative to stems the attrition instead. Also very smart of management to make the bond three years in that it is long enough to let the value of seniority set in and place you on the cusp of pay bump with a significant enough penalty that will deter people from exercising self determination. Zero cost to the company zero benefit to pilots. Checkmate. Where as it is being demonstrated now these past strategic initiatives are failing as bonds, reserved seniority, flow agreements are disappearing or diminishing in influence and are being replaced by REAL gains in the form of signing or retention bonuses, better duty rigs, tighter CB language and substantial mid or new contract wage gains. The question has to be asked, how much bargaining capital will it take to get rid of the bonds and what will the bargaining landscape look like in 2025?

Having worked at AT in the past I had a peak up the skirt that revealed, although the touted cool lifestyle is always the first and best answer for the benefit of working there it pales against the backdrop of lagging compensation (pre AC acquisition attempt contract, lowest paid 330 pilots in the world), loose CB language, costly benefits, inferior retirement plan, constant career and financial uncertainty. What I saw then is what I hear now, pilots with some accrued seniority and deep enough into their career wanting to make sure this horse stays in the race until their career gets across the finish line and could care less about the right seat meat that they need there in order to get to Paris or Athens. “Bond? What's the big deal your at a career airline and should be happy your going to Lisbon in a 330 instead of Wabush in a King Air for the same money.” A career airline with a bond? WTF? These pilots are and will always be the defenders of le bleu. Can I blame them no, their concerns are real. I just don’t want to see their rhetoric undermine what the rest of the profession is trying to accomplish. If you’re not going to paddle in the the same direction as the rest then just put your ore back in the boat and enjoy the ride. Please do not attempt to justify bonds as a viable alternative to better compensation to solve an attrition problem especially for the jr ranks as it is insulting them as professional pilots and gives management the appearance of small minded thinking and ease of manipulation. Unless you are management then your argument makes total sense.
First of all the bond has been around for about 11 years or so, it’s not a new thing. Management knows it’s hurting recruitment at this point but I explained why it’s a mistake to remove it now unfortunately.

Nobody has stated that the bond is a viable alternative to better compensation. Stop twisting other arguments to justify your point.

What’s the loose CA language?

We are lagging in many aspects of compensation and take home but there have been significant gains since 2015 in the pay scales. Lowest paid 330 pilots is misleading as all wide body pilots are on the same pay scale (321 replaced the 310).

Although you make some valid points most of your post is in accurate and misleading.

Best of luck in your new endeavour..
AT pay is only a "WB scale" on the CA side. If you look at the FO side it is in line with WJ and AC NB scales. Calling your compensation WB pay is another management spin job only an idiot would fall for.
---------- ADS -----------
 
TFTMB heavy
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 656
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 9:58 am

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by TFTMB heavy »

thepoors wrote: Mon Sep 11, 2023 12:54 pm
TFTMB heavy wrote: Mon Sep 11, 2023 12:29 pm
727driver wrote: Mon Sep 11, 2023 10:51 am With all due respect to the Transat pilots here defending the use of bonds it has to be said that this is a massive strategic victory for management. I have said and always will that the existence of bonds are indicative of an underlying systemic problem in an organization, whether it be wawcon, labour relations, lifestyle, etc. If the claims of lifestyle being so great that this should out-weight all other negative aspects of working there then as such this would negate the requirement for bonded service? The attrition rates mentioned indicate that this is not the case. Unions are finally seeing the leverage they need to negotiate real gains on this new landscape yet the AT MEC surrendered its leverage to management this by allowing a bonded labour initiative to stems the attrition instead. Also very smart of management to make the bond three years in that it is long enough to let the value of seniority set in and place you on the cusp of pay bump with a significant enough penalty that will deter people from exercising self determination. Zero cost to the company zero benefit to pilots. Checkmate. Where as it is being demonstrated now these past strategic initiatives are failing as bonds, reserved seniority, flow agreements are disappearing or diminishing in influence and are being replaced by REAL gains in the form of signing or retention bonuses, better duty rigs, tighter CB language and substantial mid or new contract wage gains. The question has to be asked, how much bargaining capital will it take to get rid of the bonds and what will the bargaining landscape look like in 2025?

Having worked at AT in the past I had a peak up the skirt that revealed, although the touted cool lifestyle is always the first and best answer for the benefit of working there it pales against the backdrop of lagging compensation (pre AC acquisition attempt contract, lowest paid 330 pilots in the world), loose CB language, costly benefits, inferior retirement plan, constant career and financial uncertainty. What I saw then is what I hear now, pilots with some accrued seniority and deep enough into their career wanting to make sure this horse stays in the race until their career gets across the finish line and could care less about the right seat meat that they need there in order to get to Paris or Athens. “Bond? What's the big deal your at a career airline and should be happy your going to Lisbon in a 330 instead of Wabush in a King Air for the same money.” A career airline with a bond? WTF? These pilots are and will always be the defenders of le bleu. Can I blame them no, their concerns are real. I just don’t want to see their rhetoric undermine what the rest of the profession is trying to accomplish. If you’re not going to paddle in the the same direction as the rest then just put your ore back in the boat and enjoy the ride. Please do not attempt to justify bonds as a viable alternative to better compensation to solve an attrition problem especially for the jr ranks as it is insulting them as professional pilots and gives management the appearance of small minded thinking and ease of manipulation. Unless you are management then your argument makes total sense.
First of all the bond has been around for about 11 years or so, it’s not a new thing. Management knows it’s hurting recruitment at this point but I explained why it’s a mistake to remove it now unfortunately.

Nobody has stated that the bond is a viable alternative to better compensation. Stop twisting other arguments to justify your point.

What’s the loose CA language?

We are lagging in many aspects of compensation and take home but there have been significant gains since 2015 in the pay scales. Lowest paid 330 pilots is misleading as all wide body pilots are on the same pay scale (321 replaced the 310).

Although you make some valid points most of your post is in accurate and misleading.

Best of luck in your new endeavour..
AT pay is only a "WB scale" on the CA side. If you look at the FO side it is in line with WJ and AC NB scales. Calling your compensation WB pay is another management spin job only an idiot would fall for.
More name calling from the great minds of Avcanada.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DanWEC
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2551
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:05 pm
Location: 404

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by DanWEC »

737, thanks for your post that was actually cohesive in relation to these others.

How long ago did you work at TS? Things have changed by leaps and bounds even in the last year, and it's a constant, albeit glacial, move to improve conditions. Some of the issues are growing pains while the state of the company is in a major flux, reorienting it's identity to an airline.

Totally agree, there are some serious shortfalls when comparing to AC, the most glaring is pension. It's % matching into a managed fund, but the end result is probably about 60% of the retirement income you'd get at AC.
We are definitely the lowest paid 330 drivers in Canada (As we're the only ones outside of AC) and possibly North America, but definitely not the world. Hell, we're in Canada, all the fricken pilots are the lowest paid in North America, including most of AC's. It's not a trophy I'm proud to be sharing.

There are major issues at TS outside of salary, such as the wet lease, benefit cost, and reserve. The reserve rules are terrific for junior, as you're only allowed rsv every other month, and not in a month you have training, but it causes rsv to go WAY too high up the list. Like to #1. Big problem, but it's temporary because of the massive hiring and newbies being green but they're being actively worked on, we don't have an adversarial relationship with the company, but we need to push harder in some areas. Check my past posts, I'm very vocal regarding us being paid less than we're worth overall as pilots in Canada.

I think the reason you have guys here defending the company (Nobody is defending the bond, nobody) is because we actually like working here. That is a rare sentiment among airlines. The guys here who match with our lifestyle really, really enjoy our day-to-day, and for some reason that seems to piss a lot of other pilots off. The ones that want to make more money and work more go to AC, and that's perfectly fine. Different strokes. At the end of the day I want us all to get the 40% gain that we need, now. And I would love to see that bond disappear, with the salary bump that would have to come along with it. I know it's a detriment.
---------- ADS -----------
 
330heavy
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 128
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2020 12:56 pm

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by 330heavy »

727driver wrote: Mon Sep 11, 2023 10:51 am The question has to be asked, how much bargaining capital will it take to get rid of the bonds and what will the bargaining landscape look like in 2025?
I highly doubt there will be any bargining captial used to remove the bond. It'll be when the company decides and the time may be sooner than later. Other alternatives would be rentention bonuses. Again, that's up to the company.
---------- ADS -----------
 
thepoops
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2023 5:25 am

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by thepoops »

Morgssoars wrote: Sat Jan 15, 2022 3:29 pm Hello, I am 25, and I want to be a commercial pilot. I love flying so even if that’s not possible, I still want to fly recreationally. I have started flight training and got the news back my class one medical has been denied. They went on to say the medications coupled with my diagnosis makes me unfit for any area of aviation. So I can’t get any category. However, they did say if the diagnosis (bipolar II) is in question, which it is, I could send in paper work. When I did my medical, I mentioned I would be coming off the medication I was on, which I have.

Bit of context, my home life was complicated growing up, I didn’t know how to properly take care of myself or cope with adversity. From 15-20 I was given a number of different diagnosis from different doctors. I had 2 suicide attempts. They said depression, anxiety, add, and decided on bipolar II in the end. I think this was because at the time I was smoking pot and drinking constantly. After I was finally able to move away from my parents place, I got the help I needed, went to rehab and learned the skills I needed to be an adult. I learned how to eat right, excessive, manage emotions and kept only the positive people in my life. I have been sober, happy, stable and healthy for 5 years now. I have so many personal references for this, but the issue is I haven’t seen any doctors, expect for the one a year ago helping me come off my meds, who agreed my diagnosis might have been because of my circumstances at the time.

So I guess my question is, with all this in my past, if I show them I’m stable with no medication, is it possible I might be able to get a medical, even just a class 3/4? Has anyone else been through something like this? Also, open to the idea that perhaps this just isn’t possible for me.

It can't be any worse than being bonded at a major air carrier with shit pay
---------- ADS -----------
 
Latitude
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 105
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2020 8:50 am

Re: BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

Post by Latitude »

I flew for TS for 5 years and made the switch to AC.

I understand, from a business point of view, why they bond pilots. Is it wrong ? Yes. But I understand why the management does it. Either way there's a reason why pilots leave for AC; because of job stability, flexibility, money and prestige. No matter how bad AC flat pay is, the money isn't any better at TS when you start. Even if you make a few thousands dollars extra before taxes, the LTD kills your net pay and you end up making less than an AC pilot after all deductions. I'm not even gonna talk about the much better CWIPP (AC) vs the crappy RRSP match (TS).

And to that TS guy showing his earnings in the left seat doing overtime; that means 0. Any widebody left seat AC pilot will earn more than you do, and again that's excluding better retirement benefits, less deductions, etc.

Is it perfect at AC ? No. Some stuff definitely needs improvement (hopefully the current negos takes care of that) but overall, as a career, you're better off at AC.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Air Transat”