Ac union head says she will resign if pilots vote no

[rigpiggy]

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/ai ... eject-deal



And……go popcorn emoji

[JustaCanadian]

Union leaders will likely resign regardless of how the vote goes.

[RippleRock]

I have been one of the biggest advocates of Unity and change on this forum. BUT.


When your Leader, who almost created a "religious following", and was standing on the front lines staring the enemy in the face not 72 hours before the battle cry was to sound, then turns tail and runs over the hill yelling up to the clouds, "You are on your own ...... vote yes BTW or I QUIT!!!".

Like who could even make this shit up?!?! Seriously!! Who thought this scenario even possible, with all we have done, all the rallys, special speakers, emotions, unity events, pub nights, family barbecues?!? This will go down as the most epic surrender and capitulation in the entire history of Canadian aviation. Now we have a fractured Membership, useless ACPA era legal team, split MEC, and a Union leader who just threw her arms in the air with a huge "Fukit".

In this state, if we vote no, we will get absolutely RAILED by an arbitrator. RAILED. Watch, though apparently I can't predict $hit.


Anyways, it's ONLY two years to the start of the next negotiating cycle. Take the offered retro money and run. Remember they called it "retro pay" for a reason...it was OPTIONAL. Tell them to F-Off with a no vote, and it will likely drop to 2%, like they expected to give you for the last year of the 10 year deal. Arbitration garantees NOTHING, and the fat retro cheque will vanish like a fart in the wind. Watch.


Take your raise and retro and put it towards your pension, or buy your family something nice for putting up with you for the past year. Count yourself ahead of the game, because we are LOSING with this "leadership/negotiations" implosion.......cut your losses.




IN TWO YEARS.......DO BETTER.


1) GET PROFESSIONAL NEGOTIATORS, not pilots who have been negotiating for the loser union ACPA for the last decade or so.(tell Ralph and Evans to do something productive other than negotiate, cuz they ain't that good at it, and NEVER were)

2) FIRE THE LEGAL TEAM, Ridge et al are also ACPA losers, and likely worked behind the scenes against you.

3) FIND THE RATS, there are 4 or 5 MEC reps that voted this through to a vote, besides your Chair.

4) FIGURE OUT HOW TO CONTROL THE VO HOGS DURING NEGOTIATIONS, speaks for itself. You were done a disservice.


KOB better get a huge fat bonus for this, he deserves it . We were played 1000%, he won. Good for him.


I'm retiring early. Good luck. What a waste of time.

[thepoors]

This will go down as the most epic surrender and capitulation in the entire history of Canadian aviation. Now we have a fractured Membership, useless ACPA era legal team, split MEC, and a Union leader who just threw her arms in the air with a huge "Fukit".

No kidding. Of all the possible scenarios, I don't think anyone saw this outcome being a possibility.

I really want to know what happened on that night of the 14th. Because whatever it was caused a complete 180 and absolutely demolished everything leading up to it. It's frankly bizarre and brings into a lot into question - how did this "fearless leader" all of a sudden become a coward and a deserter?

[RippleRock]

It certainly put us in a nasty position.

Say we vote NO, which is entirely possible. The Company then heads to the government claiming the "Union is broken" (which it is) and the TA was approved by the MEC. So our "go forward" plan is to try to get better with Evans and Ralph (negots), and Brad Ridge (legal) and a fractured MEC who have no clue what they want, PLUS no leader.

AND were SUPPOSE to do BETTER?????

What does anyone think the government will do? Does anyone think our "Strike threat" will be taken seriously??? Immediate arbitration we will go. AC pulls the retro pay out of the deal, (because they can) then replaces it with the 2% we were suppose to get in 2023 as promised for the last year of the "10 year deal", then they adjust the pay scales to bring up the year 1-3 pay by taking it away from the higher rated scales. Then they offer it up as a "solution".


We ARE F#@*ED.


Anyway....I'm kinda done. Good luck.

[altiplano]

No kidding... what a joke.

[crystalpizza]

This will go down as the most epic surrender and capitulation in the entire history of Canadian aviation. Now we have a fractured Membership, useless ACPA era legal team, split MEC, and a Union leader who just threw her arms in the air with a huge "Fukit".

No kidding. Of all the possible scenarios, I don't think anyone saw this outcome being a possibility.

I really want to know what happened on that night of the 14th. Because whatever it was caused a complete 180 and absolutely demolished everything leading up to it. It's frankly bizarre and brings into a lot into question - how did this "fearless leader" all of a sudden become a coward and a deserter?

If I had to take a wild guess, Charlene and/or the NC got berated into submission by an angry CEO (or someone else) and threatened with an ultimatum. Didn't Rovinescu do exactly that as well when Jazz threatened to strike before he went on to start up SR?

[digits_]

Called it. Perfect ending to a ridiculous result.

You've got to love ALPA democracy. WestJet did it, now AC does it. "You can vote as you please of course. But vote NO and we'll scorch earth this mo***fu***"

Absolutely disgusting. Unworthy of a union leader. Future management material perhaps?

[sportingrifle]

There is an angle here that everyone is missing . ALPA.
ACPA was a dysfunctional, dis-connected, and even corrupt organisation, but it was one we controlled. In the headlong rush to join ALPA - the white hatted cavalry that would ride in guns blazing to save us - most pilots never considered the bigger, longer term implications of what we were joining. I did because many decades ago I was represented by ALPA (and its predecessor CALPA) and I had seen how they operate. Which is why I expressed my preference on this forum for fixing a union we controlled instead of joining one we didn’t. Doesn’t matter, water under the bridge.

Remember Charlene’s email about authorizing a strike vote? It said the MEC had sought ALPA’s permission to get that mandate. Wasn’t our call to make on our own. ALPA is a VERY strike averse organization. Do you know why their strike fund is so big? Because they never use it! The last time ( to my knowledge) an ALPA airline actually went on strike was Spirit in 2010. ALPA twisted the WJ MEC’s arms hard at the 11th hour to accept a meh TA. I strongly suspect the same happened here.

Add government arm twisting, a perceived (rightly or wrongly) peak leverage position, and a peak in public support that would soon plummet, our negotiating teams actions make perfect sense. Not traitorous or cowardly, simply proceeding to an alternate before running out of fuel. And our “fuel” is controlled in a large part by ALPA (Intnl.)

[Aerkavo]

There is an angle here that everyone is missing . ALPA.
ACPA was a dysfunctional, dis-connected, and even corrupt organisation, but it was one we controlled. In the headlong rush to join ALPA - the white hatted calvary that would ride in guns blazing to save us - most pilots never considered the bigger, longer term implications of what we were joining. I did because many decades ago I was represented by ALPA (and its predecessor CALPA) and I had seen how they operate. Which is why I expressed my preference on this forum for fixing a union we controlled instead of joining one we didn’t. Doesn’t matter, water under the bridge.

Remember Charlene’s email about authorizing a strike vote? It said the MEC had sought ALPA’s permission to get that mandate. Wasn’t our call to make on our own. ALPA is a VERY strike averse organization. Do you know why their strike fund is so big? Because they never use it! The last time ( to my knowledge) an ALPA airline actually went on strike was Spirit in 2010. ALPA twisted the WJ MEC’s arms hard at the 11th hour to accept a meh TA. I strongly suspect the same happened here.

Add government arm twisting, a perceived (rightly or wrongly) peak leverage position, and a peak in public support that would soon plummet, our negotiating teams actions make perfect sense. Not traitorous or cowardly, simply proceeding to an alternate before running out of fuel. And our “fuel” is controlled in a large part by ALPA (Intnl.)

That's a good analysis. Excellent observations. A few factors are missing however. We have a government that is spring loaded to intervene and the CIRB as the enforcer. I think Charlene's description of "peak leverage" was strongly influenced by the knowledge that the gov would likely intervene quickly and with a big hammer.

[JHR]

From "Hold the line" to "we will get them in four years!"

Pathetic....

[cjp]

There is an angle here that everyone is missing . ALPA.
ACPA was a dysfunctional, dis-connected, and even corrupt organisation, but it was one we controlled. In the headlong rush to join ALPA - the white hatted calvary that would ride in guns blazing to save us - most pilots never considered the bigger, longer term implications of what we were joining. I did because many decades ago I was represented by ALPA (and its predecessor CALPA) and I had seen how they operate. Which is why I expressed my preference on this forum for fixing a union we controlled instead of joining one we didn’t. Doesn’t matter, water under the bridge.

Remember Charlene’s email about authorizing a strike vote? It said the MEC had sought ALPA’s permission to get that mandate. Wasn’t our call to make on our own. ALPA is a VERY strike averse organization. Do you know why their strike fund is so big? Because they never use it! The last time ( to my knowledge) an ALPA airline actually went on strike was Spirit in 2010. ALPA twisted the WJ MEC’s arms hard at the 11th hour to accept a meh TA. I strongly suspect the same happened here.

Add government arm twisting, a perceived (rightly or wrongly) peak leverage position, and a peak in public support that would soon plummet, our negotiating teams actions make perfect sense. Not traitorous or cowardly, simply proceeding to an alternate before running out of fuel. And our “fuel” is controlled in a large part by ALPA (Intnl.)

That's a good analysis. Excellent observations. A few factors are missing however. We have a government that is spring loaded to intervene and the CIRB as the enforcer. I think Charlene's description of "peak leverage" was strongly influenced by the knowledge that the gov would likely intervene quickly and with a big hammer.

They used their leverage with CN / KNCP.

That said Singh tore up then taped up the agreement, so he could get re-elected in his by-election. Unlikely they would intervene but unpredictable if it really caused economic issues.

[RippleRock]

There is an angle here that everyone is missing . ALPA.
ACPA was a dysfunctional, dis-connected, and even corrupt organisation, but it was one we controlled. In the headlong rush to join ALPA - the white hatted calvary that would ride in guns blazing to save us - most pilots never considered the bigger, longer term implications of what we were joining. I did because many decades ago I was represented by ALPA (and its predecessor CALPA) and I had seen how they operate. Which is why I expressed my preference on this forum for fixing a union we controlled instead of joining one we didn’t. Doesn’t matter, water under the bridge.

Remember Charlene’s email about authorizing a strike vote? It said the MEC had sought ALPA’s permission to get that mandate. Wasn’t our call to make on our own. ALPA is a VERY strike averse organization. Do you know why their strike fund is so big? Because they never use it! The last time ( to my knowledge) an ALPA airline actually went on strike was Spirit in 2010. ALPA twisted the WJ MEC’s arms hard at the 11th hour to accept a meh TA. I strongly suspect the same happened here.

Add government arm twisting, a perceived (rightly or wrongly) peak leverage position, and a peak in public support that would soon plummet, our negotiating teams actions make perfect sense. Not traitorous or cowardly, simply proceeding to an alternate before running out of fuel. And our “fuel” is controlled in a large part by ALPA (Intnl.)

Like watching a freaking train wreck, I gotta comment....


I disagree 1000%. Anyone with a brain would, sorry.

ALPA is NOT the problem. ACPA would have done a lousy job and MAYBE got us 8-10%. They were colluding with Management, and were corrupt to the core. Sorry, hanging out in box seats at the arena with Management is NOT acceptable. Inviting Management onstage (Ben Smith) to sell a contract is NOT OK. FAIL

ALPA should have done a better job of "cleaning house". The BR legal team, who's advice we followed again and again, led to meager gains and us walking away from a proper FOS challenge. They were responsible for over a decade of lousy advice, on both contract and grievance challenges. Likely the same lousy advice for this round. FAIL.

Ralph and Evans were a "known entity" in the bargaining room. It was a game of poker, and the AC negotiations team knew their "tells". The MEC relied on the advice of guys who had been used to bargaining "zero sums" for a full decade and handing over concessions left and right. The thinking behind sending this "dynamic duo" back to the table for ALPA was the stupidest thing I could imagine. I expected less than what was tabled from these guys. FAIL.

There is ZERO evidence that ACPA would have secured a better deal. Half maybe. ALPA shook up the establishment. ACPA never did. We were ALWAYS the low hanging fruit, always the first into the "burning building" to save the company from it's own poor choices. That's over.

The question is, what kind of "gatekeeper" will ALPA be? Answer, BETTER THAN ACPA. No doubt. ACPA went "off contract" constantly, and had an arrogant, know-it-all leadership style that did no one any favors but themselves.

Hopefully ALPA can salvage some of the unity they have generated. We are better off as a cohesive unit, rather than fractured "silos" under the "dictatorship" of the M. McKay ACPA.


FWIW,

Hoping the unity builds approaching 2027, and they have learned a thing or two about using former ACPA "known failures" in the bargaining room.

KOB and MS still deserves a huge raise, but not as big if they had figured out how to keep ACPA around. The "over-reach" that was the last MOA cost them a bundle.

[rudder]

Anyways, it's ONLY two years to the start of the next negotiating cycle.

Actually, unless this clause has been modified - notice of intent to bargain would be May 29, 2027. Likely to achieve a new CBA sometime early in 2028. 39-42 more months under (mostly) existing work rules.

3.03 Following the termination of the Memorandum of Agreement, this Agreement will renew itself without change each succeeding year, unless written notice of intended change is served by either party within 4 months prior to the expiry date. In the event that notice is given of intended change, the Agreement will remain in full force and effect while negotiations are being carried on for the arrangement of a further Agreement.

[RippleRock]

Anyways, it's ONLY two years to the start of the next negotiating cycle.

Actually, unless this clause has been modified - notice of intent to bargain would be May 29, 2027. Likely to achieve a new CBA sometime early in 2028. 39-42 more months under (mostly) existing work rules.

3.03 Following the termination of the Memorandum of Agreement, this Agreement will renew itself without change each succeeding year, unless written notice of intended change is served by either party within 4 months prior to the expiry date. In the event that notice is given of intended change, the Agreement will remain in full force and effect while negotiations are being carried on for the arrangement of a further Agreement.

I did say 2 years to the start. 24 months plus a standard years bargaining is 36 months. Not that far off, all things considered. If this TA passes, we will be closer to our goal than ACPA ever could have gotten us in anyone's wildest dream.

40ish percent is likely far better than anything hoped for under MM. He should be thanking us as he's in the "benchmark category".....but he won't.

[rudder]

Anyways, it's ONLY two years to the start of the next negotiating cycle.

Actually, unless this clause has been modified - notice of intent to bargain would be May 29, 2027. Likely to achieve a new CBA sometime early in 2028. 39-42 more months under (mostly) existing work rules.

3.03 Following the termination of the Memorandum of Agreement, this Agreement will renew itself without change each succeeding year, unless written notice of intended change is served by either party within 4 months prior to the expiry date. In the event that notice is given of intended change, the Agreement will remain in full force and effect while negotiations are being carried on for the arrangement of a further Agreement.

I did say 2 years to the start. 24 months plus a standard years bargaining is 36 months. Not that far off, all things considered. If this TA passes, we will be closer to our goal than ACPA ever could have gotten us in anyone's wildest dream.

40ish percent is likely far better than anything hoped for under MM. He should be thanking us as he's in the "benchmark category".....but he won't.

No problem.

But to be clear - this TA CBA would expire on Sept 29, 2027.

Notice of intent to bargain can be sent earliest May 29, 2027. Using your prediction of 1 year of bargaining means TA working conditions until mid-2028.

Not saying whether that is good or bad (it is up to you guys to decide). Just looking at the practical reality.

Good luck.

[JHR]

WCC=WORLD CLASS CUCKS

[RippleRock]

Actually, unless this clause has been modified - notice of intent to bargain would be May 29, 2027. Likely to achieve a new CBA sometime early in 2028. 39-42 more months under (mostly) existing work rules.

3.03 Following the termination of the Memorandum of Agreement, this Agreement will renew itself without change each succeeding year, unless written notice of intended change is served by either party within 4 months prior to the expiry date. In the event that notice is given of intended change, the Agreement will remain in full force and effect while negotiations are being carried on for the arrangement of a further Agreement.

I did say 2 years to the start. 24 months plus a standard years bargaining is 36 months. Not that far off, all things considered. If this TA passes, we will be closer to our goal than ACPA ever could have gotten us in anyone's wildest dream.

40ish percent is likely far better than anything hoped for under MM. He should be thanking us as he's in the "benchmark category".....but he won't.

No problem.

But to be clear - this TA CBA would expire on Sept 29, 2027.

Notice of intent to bargain can be sent earliest May 29, 2027. Using your prediction of 1 year of bargaining means TA working conditions until mid-2028.

Not saying whether that is good or bad (it is up to you guys to decide). Just looking at the practical reality.

Good luck.

Contrary to some, we did leapfrog Westjet by a significant margin on wages on the upper 2/3rds of the yearly pay scale.

Hopefully they leapfrog us, and vice versa come 2028 (as corrected).


The trick will be preserving what we got (or will get). No concessionary LET's or MOA's till then. Hoping ALPA is up to the task.

[sportingrifle]

Ripplerock…we have agreed on almost nothing over the last year or two but I can’t really argue with you here. Simply because you seem to have completely and utterly missed the point of my post.

From your long rant it appears that a) you got the union you wanted and b) the union didn’t deliver what you wanted and c) you blame the union negotiators for (b).

I would suggest that you put your superior knowledge and negotiating skills to use, join the negotiating team, and in either one month or three years, show us all how it’s done.

[thepoors]

Add government arm twisting, a perceived (rightly or wrongly) peak leverage position, and a peak in public support that would soon plummet, our negotiating teams actions make perfect sense. Not traitorous or cowardly, simply proceeding to an alternate before running out of fuel. And our “fuel” is controlled in a large part by ALPA (Intnl.)

I don't understand your logic here. First off, we don't know what the government's role was in the negotiating room. Even if the minister made threats, it's ultimately up to the CIRB. The company was always going to stonewall (and bluff) for as long as they could. The MEC folded while holding a great hand.

At the very least, they should have followed the mandate we gave them and issued the strike notice. To throw it all away that early was absolutely cowardly and embarrassing. Making excuses for that doesn't help us now and won't help us in future negotiations. They demonstrated to the company, once again, that we will back down at the crucial moment.

[sportingrifle]

FWIW, we have been explicitly told that the minister had been in the hotel for several days leading up to the acceptance of the offer. What role he played we may learn at the roadshows, but I think it is safe to assume he wasn’t watching Netfliks. My comment was concerning the role and input of Herndon Virginia. I do know they had a very large role in the acceptance of the WJ TA.

[Canadaflyer46]

How has this rumour not been put to bed yet? If the minister was exerting threats to the MEC you can bet your ass it would have been mentioned at the first roadshow.
The union didn’t dare to give strike notice and made a U-turn in the final minutes despite a mediocre TA and a 98% strike vote. Charlene has said she endorses this TA. Case closed.

[GeoffPilot]

I can't believe this...but SportingRifle is right...ALPA (the circus that travels from property to property) absolutely did not want a strike

No strikes since 2010 and how many collective agreements without any job action since then? 50?

They want to bargain. Their strategies are based on the National Railway Act where it is very hard to strike.

They definitely do not want to issue strike pay nor use their contingency fund they lure properties in with.

Would acpa have gotten better? Not a chance

But seeing this MEC Chair make this about her instead of the actual quality of the TA is brutal.

Read their "Flight Plan" document on what we were to expect, then move over to the Comparables document which is going to be comical in 2027, and then read the actual TA.

We clearly fell way short. I am basing my No vote purely on those documents and not some fear campaign by a burned out MEC Chair. It's not my job to strategize the what ifs with a no vote. That's their job and their job was to bring forward a deal that would easily ratify and unify the pilot group.

Her not having a plan B with what is clearly a very marginal deal is a failure on her.

[AirCandida]

I'm guessing Charlene was offered a future management position. ACPA 2.0. As mentioned , might as well vote this in, but also vote her out

[lownslow]

I'm guessing Charlene was offered a future management position.

My view on all this is she sees a ‘no’ vote as a vote of non-confidence in her leadership. Fair enough though maybe every leader falling on their sword for every miscalculation is a bit much. I bet the company wants to see a no just as badly as anyone.