67% yes

[pitottubey]

Let me help you BradleyScott

The pension calculator assumes:

- 85 hrs a month (many DBMs this month are 70)

- 2% pay raises until retirement (if you think you're going the next 25 years without a crisis...not to mention the reduced pilot in the cockpit threat that will lead to serious concessions or reduction bids...)

- and the most critical assumption is that tax laws won't change. If you think you are going to be able contribute 18% like you can today without limits, then I think you're up for some serious disappointment. The amounts you quoted above have never been tested. This is the reason WestJet did NOT go with CWIPP. Their experts predict tax laws will change when the government sees these large pension contributions.

- the plan assumes more people will continue to be entering the plan. What happens in 2040 when single pilot airline ops kicks off? Air Canada pilots are the largest part of the plan...what happens when that plummets?

And remember...those figures are in TODAY money. So better factor in some inflation...

2040 when single pilot airline ops kick off? Do you know something no one else does? Aviation moves at a snails pace and this concept has so many issues and hurdles.

[bradleyscotts]

Let me help you BradleyScott

The pension calculator assumes:

- 85 hrs a month (many DBMs this month are 70)

- 2% pay raises until retirement (if you think you're going the next 25 years without a crisis...not to mention the reduced pilot in the cockpit threat that will lead to serious concessions or reduction bids...)

- and the most critical assumption is that tax laws won't change. If you think you are going to be able contribute 18% like you can today without limits, then I think you're up for some serious disappointment. The amounts you quoted above have never been tested. This is the reason WestJet did NOT go with CWIPP. Their experts predict tax laws will change when the government sees these large pension contributions.

- the plan assumes more people will continue to be entering the plan. What happens in 2040 when single pilot airline ops kicks off? Air Canada pilots are the largest part of the plan...what happens when that plummets?

And remember...those figures are in TODAY money. So better factor in some inflation...

jesus christ, i dont know why I bother....

Did you see the slider for hrs? you can select from 70 to 100hrs. I selected 80hrs. I never pick up VO but we have training outside of the block. if you have been here even for a year you will know that we all get paid more than the 900hrs min guarantee.

2% pay increases is super conservative.

Single pilot ops? did you read the new CA? in there you will find how moronic your comment is

Even if you assume that that money will buy half of what it buys now, that's still a higher pay out than the DB pension

[bradleyscotts]

The hilarious thing about this meme is the complete lack of awareness of what proper legacy airlines have in quality of life, bonus plans, retirement contributions, scheduling rules, 100% Deadhead, training pay, sim pay, commuting but most importantly respect.

Just hilariously ignorant. But yes as Stu says, we got early upgrades, so it's all good.

Air Canada pilots...relying on commercial plans instead of their contract since 2003...

Are you one of those that woke up one day after being a couch potato for 20 years and decided you want to be a world champion?

that's pretty much what has happened at AC. for 20 years it's been nothing but concessions. We bring ALPA and expect to be compensated and treated as a united/delta/American pilot in 1 4-year contract. You and the other 33% are simply delusional.

On the topic of pension do you think the following is not adequate? For reference, I was hired at 31 years old

ALPA took concessions in this round of negotiating... pay raises while taking a permanent concession of losing your bonus plan...yikes

Only carrier now without one...well done!

we do have an incentive plan, aka bonus plan. The only thing that changed was the threshold that needs to be met for it to payout. We didnt give anything, we took. We took a maybe money for a guarantee increase in pay. That increase in pay rate will affect everything we do. From DHD, to VO to pension. Good luck getting a mortgage broker to count your maybe bonus pay towards the purchase of a home.

[pitottubey]

Let me help you BradleyScott

The pension calculator assumes:

- 85 hrs a month (many DBMs this month are 70)

- 2% pay raises until retirement (if you think you're going the next 25 years without a crisis...not to mention the reduced pilot in the cockpit threat that will lead to serious concessions or reduction bids...)

- and the most critical assumption is that tax laws won't change. If you think you are going to be able contribute 18% like you can today without limits, then I think you're up for some serious disappointment. The amounts you quoted above have never been tested. This is the reason WestJet did NOT go with CWIPP. Their experts predict tax laws will change when the government sees these large pension contributions.

- the plan assumes more people will continue to be entering the plan. What happens in 2040 when single pilot airline ops kicks off? Air Canada pilots are the largest part of the plan...what happens when that plummets?

And remember...those figures are in TODAY money. So better factor in some inflation...

jesus christ, i dont know why I bother....

Did you see the slider for hrs? you can select from 70 to 100hrs. I selected 80hrs. I never pick up VO but we have training outside of the block. if you have been here even for a year you will know that we all get paid more than the 900hrs min guarantee.

2% pay increases is super conservative.

Single pilot ops? did you read the new CA? in there you will find how moronic your comment is

Even if you assume that that money will buy half of what it buys now, that's still a higher pay out than the DB pension

Oh yes silly me, I forgot all of international aviation revolves around Air Canada and it's up to them and their CA when and how its happens and if it's safe enough.

[Freshredmeat]

They deleted Profit Sharing Plan (Company-wide profit sharing) and changed
the EBITDAR target changes from 15% to 20%

So they essentially removed the bonus plan.

Crazy to see Air Canada pilots defending the loss of this like it is no big deal. This will save the Executives hundreds of millions and improve their bonuses

[ClearedDirect]

Lol...the irony

Pilots at Air Canada think their calculator will yield them $600k per year one day yet the industry won't move to reduce these costs.

And somehow some line in their contract will save them from the inevitable reduction of pilots in airliners.

Vehicles already drive themselves and artifical intelligence is legit. Driverless vehicles will normalize the stigma that planes need pilots.

Militaries have already established the capability:

https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-s ... s-8d43dde3

Don't shoot the messenger. It's just reality

[FelixGustof]

Isn't the pension a "target"?

So like it could say anything really?

And what kind of retirement planner would take a "target" pension over a "defined" pension?

Seems bonkers to me.

[Tbayer2021]

Lol...the irony

Pilots at Air Canada think their calculator will yield them $600k per year one day yet the industry won't move to reduce these costs.

And somehow some line in their contract will save them from the inevitable reduction of pilots in airliners.

Vehicles already drive themselves and artifical intelligence is legit. Driverless vehicles will normalize the stigma that planes need pilots.

Militaries have already established the capability:

https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-s ... s-8d43dde3

Don't shoot the messenger. It's just reality

I do agree with your point about our inevitable replacement. I also don't get why so many think that clause about 2 pilots in the cockpit was such a huge win. We saw first hand during the pandemic that companies will simply wipe their a$$ with collective agreements when they see fit. Plus, I see a potential single pilot operation working its way through the back door, sort of speak.

Airlines from countries with little to no labour protections will jump at the first opportunity to get their hands on these single pilot aircraft. We already know Cathay is working very closely with Airbus on this. It won't take long for European and North American carriers to start complaining that they're not competitive against these foreign carriers that aren't saddled with restrictive mandatory 2+ crew operations. Sooner or later the rules will be changed in NA and Europe to allow such operations and that line in the contract won't have meant anything. No union was able to save the navigator, radio operator and lastly the flight engineer. The march of progress is relentless. So pay off that house ASAP.

[stall]

I think at some point reality needs to set in that Air Canada pilots will never get the opportunity they just had.

To have that level of unity, a government that vocally supports labour(even the Conservatives), a profitable company and staggering comparables to pilots that do the same job (that gets ignored or rationalized anyways)

You can already see the weak vocally supporting this and zero chance they will be militant the next round. The rats have scurried and got their perceived cheese. These career shills will essentially be useless besides throwing more junior pilots under the bus.

The cats out of the bag. The corp won here.

Take what you can, while you can...

[aeronauticaldisaster]

Have you seen the MQ-28?

Truly impressive AI technology developed by Boeing

It's already flying...

https://www.boeing.com/defense/mq28#overview

[Optimus Primer]

I think at some point reality needs to set in that Air Canada pilots will never get the opportunity they just had.

To have that level of unity, a government that vocally supports labour(even the Conservatives), a profitable company and staggering comparables to pilots that do the same job (that gets ignored or rationalized anyways)

You can already see the weak vocally supporting this and zero chance they will be militant the next round. The rats have scurried and got their perceived cheese. These career shills will essentially be useless besides throwing more junior pilots under the bus.

The cats out of the bag. The corp won here.

Take what you can, while you can...

+1

A once in a lifetime opportunity where all the stars were aligned so that AC pilots could finally have a win. Completely, and needlessly, squandered.

[cdnavater]

I think at some point reality needs to set in that Air Canada pilots will never get the opportunity they just had.

To have that level of unity, a government that vocally supports labour(even the Conservatives), a profitable company and staggering comparables to pilots that do the same job (that gets ignored or rationalized anyways)

You can already see the weak vocally supporting this and zero chance they will be militant the next round. The rats have scurried and got their perceived cheese. These career shills will essentially be useless besides throwing more junior pilots under the bus.

The cats out of the bag. The corp won here.

Take what you can, while you can...

+1

A once in a lifetime opportunity where all the stars were aligned so that AC pilots could finally have a win. Completely, and needlessly, squandered.

You must be under 30, the reason I say that is you don’t see the big picture, labour friendly government is a misnomer, even the NDP didn’t put up a fight for CN/CP, there is no doubt in my mind the liberal labour minister would have interfered. After that, you were in no man’s land, unable to say with any certainty what would have happened, just an educated guess and those who’ve been around this racket have seen it and been burned by it.
Anyhow, maybe time to move on, no point in continuing to spew the same shit, the majority voted, enough said!

[JHR]

You were defeated because you were afraid. All that tough talk was just talk.

[pitottubey]

Lol...the irony

Pilots at Air Canada think their calculator will yield them $600k per year one day yet the industry won't move to reduce these costs.

And somehow some line in their contract will save them from the inevitable reduction of pilots in airliners.

Vehicles already drive themselves and artifical intelligence is legit. Driverless vehicles will normalize the stigma that planes need pilots.

Militaries have already established the capability:

https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-s ... s-8d43dde3

Don't shoot the messenger. It's just reality

A military aircraft is completely different than having hundreds of civilians onboard. The stakes are completely different. Yes its a sign of what is possibly to come, but no guarantee in our lifetimes. Theres a difference between being safe 99 percent of the time and being safe 99.999 percent of the time. Will removing pilots be as safe or safer? We as pilots constantly have to deal with technology that is dealing with a hiccups or gremlins.

Theres also a difference between what is scientifically/technologically possible and what is financially and logistically practical. That big difference is a technology thats at its cutting edge vs when that technology becomes regulatory approved and become widespread among civilian use.

[pitottubey]

I think at some point reality needs to set in that Air Canada pilots will never get the opportunity they just had.

To have that level of unity, a government that vocally supports labour(even the Conservatives), a profitable company and staggering comparables to pilots that do the same job (that gets ignored or rationalized anyways)

You can already see the weak vocally supporting this and zero chance they will be militant the next round. The rats have scurried and got their perceived cheese. These career shills will essentially be useless besides throwing more junior pilots under the bus.

The cats out of the bag. The corp won here.

Take what you can, while you can...

I couldn't have said it better myself. I would add that of the 67 percent, its junior people that caved out of fear and greedy senior people that only wanted to buy their second sports car. Bargaining for upper end pay only undermines public sympathy for future pilot gains. "Pilots make 300k, and thats not enough???". Would have been far smarter to fight for lower end pay, and QOL. The young people in this country, especially the ones that are yet to buy a home, are the most starved for cash. What a shame. That's my 2 cents. Shame on that 67%.

[ClearedDirect]

Lol...the irony

Pilots at Air Canada think their calculator will yield them $600k per year one day yet the industry won't move to reduce these costs.

And somehow some line in their contract will save them from the inevitable reduction of pilots in airliners.

Vehicles already drive themselves and artifical intelligence is legit. Driverless vehicles will normalize the stigma that planes need pilots.

Militaries have already established the capability:

https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-s ... s-8d43dde3

Don't shoot the messenger. It's just reality

A military aircraft is completely different than having hundreds of civilians onboard. The stakes are completely different. Yes its a sign of what is possibly to come, but no guarantee in our lifetimes. Theres a difference between being safe 99 percent of the time and being safe 99.999 percent of the time. Will removing pilots be as safe or safer? We as pilots constantly have to deal with technology that is dealing with a hiccups or gremlins.

Theres also a difference between what is scientifically/technologically possible and what is financially and logistically practical. That big difference is a technology thats at its cutting edge vs when that technology becomes regulatory approved and become widespread among civilian use.

Lol...the irony

Yes, military combat operations is somehow "lower stakes"

The defense of your nation, battling foes in tight rules of engagement where literally millions if not potentially billions of lives are at stake...is less than an airline with a couple hundred souls on board.

I think you're really missing reality. Driver less rides is not far off...you don't need up to say 4 pilots for overseas flights with the advancements that are coming in short order. Even the reduction of one pilot on overseas operations will have a dramatic impact on crewing of global carriers...

Don't shoot the messenger...

[pitottubey]

Lol...the irony

Pilots at Air Canada think their calculator will yield them $600k per year one day yet the industry won't move to reduce these costs.

And somehow some line in their contract will save them from the inevitable reduction of pilots in airliners.

Vehicles already drive themselves and artifical intelligence is legit. Driverless vehicles will normalize the stigma that planes need pilots.

Militaries have already established the capability:

https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-s ... s-8d43dde3

Don't shoot the messenger. It's just reality

A military aircraft is completely different than having hundreds of civilians onboard. The stakes are completely different. Yes its a sign of what is possibly to come, but no guarantee in our lifetimes. Theres a difference between being safe 99 percent of the time and being safe 99.999 percent of the time. Will removing pilots be as safe or safer? We as pilots constantly have to deal with technology that is dealing with a hiccups or gremlins.

Theres also a difference between what is scientifically/technologically possible and what is financially and logistically practical. That big difference is a technology thats at its cutting edge vs when that technology becomes regulatory approved and become widespread among civilian use.

Lol...the irony

Yes, military combat operations is somehow "lower stakes"

The defense of your nation, battling foes in tight rules of engagement where literally millions if not potentially billions of lives are at stake...is less than an airline with a couple hundred souls on board.

I think you're really missing reality. Driver less rides is not far off...you don't need up to say 4 pilots for overseas flights with the advancements that are coming in short order. Even the reduction of one pilot on overseas operations will have a dramatic impact on crewing of global carriers...

Don't shoot the messenger...

Nice strawman argument. I'm clearly not saying an entire war is less important than one airliner. I'm saying if an autonomous military aircraft crashes thats far less important than a Boeing nose diving into the ground. We're comparing and discussing operational reliability. THAT is apples to apples. Consider the cost of the 737 Max issues, caused by faulty automation design. 20 BILLION dollars and the incalculable 346 people dead. The cost of America's proposed autonomous F-16: 10-20 MILLION. That's 500 to 1000 times less expensive PER PLANE. If USA loses an autonomous drone or two they wouldn't bat an eye and it would barely make the news, and no one would die. Two 737's go down and aviation is turned upside-down, entire fleets and airlines are grounded, you make two mass graves ands it's all over the news, and in 2021 Boeing takes full responsibility after a massive investigation. So yes one to one it's absolutely lower stakes by an incalculable margin.

I don't think I'm missing reality, I think you just see vastly things differently so I agree to disagree, you're not "the messenger", you're not a chicken little on the internet with an opinion Anyways thread drift over, back to shitting on the new CA, I'm done.



https://www.henricodolfing.com/2024/08/ ... %20history.

https://thedefensepost.com/2024/04/11/u ... ghter-jet/

[Hangry]

*gasps* in reality

[Booming]

This stuff won't affect me as I'll be hand flying my Navion in retirement...but Project "DragonFly" at Airbus

“Inspired by biomimicry, the systems being tested have been designed to identify features in the landscape that enable an aircraft to “see” and safely manoeuver autonomously within its surroundings, in the same way that dragonflies are known to have the ability to recognise landmarks.”

https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/pres ... assistance

And US military already doing single pilot tanking flights on their KC-46:

https://www.twz.com/kc-46-pegasus-tanke ... e-controls

Good luck!

[renelevesque]

Isn't the pension a "target"?

So like it could say anything really?

And what kind of retirement planner would take a "target" pension over a "defined" pension?

Seems bonkers to me.

Because the DB pension is a billion plus fund that will eventually be cashed out to the corp in profits once the last of the DB pensioners are gone. This is already calculated.

The folks left over on the DB plan need pension improvements every year so they need negotiating captial by pushing the agenda that somehow a target pension plan is better.

The principle redeeming attribute of the CWIPP pension is that contributions have no limits, so far. But remember, you're contributing a lot more than what a DB pension plan would pay as they limit out. For every $100 you make, $7 is going to your pension, always.

The high end pay outs you see are hard earned. You are paying for it. With the minimal quality of life improvements in this latest contract, you will be paying for any early upgrades or going to the bottom of a list...

[goingnowherefast]

This stuff won't affect me as I'll be hand flying my Navion in retirement...but Project "DragonFly" at Airbus

“Inspired by biomimicry, the systems being tested have been designed to identify features in the landscape that enable an aircraft to “see” and safely manoeuver autonomously within its surroundings, in the same way that dragonflies are known to have the ability to recognise landmarks.”

https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/pres ... assistance

And US military already doing single pilot tanking flights on their KC-46:

https://www.twz.com/kc-46-pegasus-tanke ... e-controls

Good luck!

Military knowingly and intentionally operates at a higher risk. The job is train how to and get shot at, hopefully shoot some bad guys and most of you survive. Completely different risk equation.

Send a KC-46 (767) into a war zone, do it with as few humans on board as reasonablely possible while still being mission effective. If they get shot down and the crew dies, the crew that weren't on board live to fly another day. Having another RP on board won't protect them from the risk of a missile.

Airliners aren't often shot down, so the mentality is utmost safety. We don't need to protect the crew from the risk of the mission. Having another RP on board protects from the risk of fatigue.

[Landingstrip]

Lol...the irony

Pilots at Air Canada think their calculator will yield them $600k per year one day yet the industry won't move to reduce these costs.

And somehow some line in their contract will save them from the inevitable reduction of pilots in airliners.

Vehicles already drive themselves and artifical intelligence is legit. Driverless vehicles will normalize the stigma that planes need pilots.

Militaries have already established the capability:

https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-s ... s-8d43dde3

Don't shoot the messenger. It's just reality

A military aircraft is completely different than having hundreds of civilians onboard. The stakes are completely different. Yes its a sign of what is possibly to come, but no guarantee in our lifetimes. Theres a difference between being safe 99 percent of the time and being safe 99.999 percent of the time. Will removing pilots be as safe or safer? We as pilots constantly have to deal with technology that is dealing with a hiccups or gremlins.

Theres also a difference between what is scientifically/technologically possible and what is financially and logistically practical. That big difference is a technology thats at its cutting edge vs when that technology becomes regulatory approved and become widespread among civilian use.

Lol...the irony

Yes, military combat operations is somehow "lower stakes"

The defense of your nation, battling foes in tight rules of engagement where literally millions if not potentially billions of lives are at stake...is less than an airline with a couple hundred souls on board.

I think you're really missing reality. Driver less rides is not far off...you don't need up to say 4 pilots for overseas flights with the advancements that are coming in short order. Even the reduction of one pilot on overseas operations will have a dramatic impact on crewing of global carriers...

Don't shoot the messenger...

Your lack of understanding of aviation safety/technology/regulations is astounding to me. I genuinely thought you must be a non-pilot, just an aviation enthusiast at first. Honestly are you? Do people genuinely not understand how vastly different military and civilian aviation risk analysis/regulations differ? The military having autonomous test aircraft is interesting and impressive but civilian aircraft is a completely different can of worms with many hurdles. It's like comparing testing a new medication on a lab rat vs releasing it to the public. Airbus and Boeing and regulators are only starting to explore the concepts of 1 or 0 crew aircraft. But you think AC's CA will predict the future? Now thats moronic.

If you're an AC pilot I can see why you guys voted in this trash CA...

[FelixGustof]

This stuff won't affect me as I'll be hand flying my Navion in retirement...but Project "DragonFly" at Airbus

“Inspired by biomimicry, the systems being tested have been designed to identify features in the landscape that enable an aircraft to “see” and safely manoeuver autonomously within its surroundings, in the same way that dragonflies are known to have the ability to recognise landmarks.”

https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/pres ... assistance

And US military already doing single pilot tanking flights on their KC-46:

https://www.twz.com/kc-46-pegasus-tanke ... e-controls

Good luck!

Military knowingly and intentionally operates at a higher risk. The job is train how to and get shot at, hopefully shoot some bad guys and most of you survive. Completely different risk equation.

Send a KC-46 (767) into a war zone, do it with as few humans on board as reasonablely possible while still being mission effective. If they get shot down and the crew dies, the crew that weren't on board live to fly another day. Having another RP on board won't protect them from the risk of a missile.

Airliners aren't often shot down, so the mentality is utmost safety. We don't need to protect the crew from the risk of the mission. Having another RP on board protects from the risk of fatigue.

Wouldn't having AI be the best way to avoid fatigue because a computer doesn't get tired?

[Optimus Primer]

I think at some point reality needs to set in that Air Canada pilots will never get the opportunity they just had.

To have that level of unity, a government that vocally supports labour(even the Conservatives), a profitable company and staggering comparables to pilots that do the same job (that gets ignored or rationalized anyways)

You can already see the weak vocally supporting this and zero chance they will be militant the next round. The rats have scurried and got their perceived cheese. These career shills will essentially be useless besides throwing more junior pilots under the bus.

The cats out of the bag. The corp won here.

Take what you can, while you can...

+1

A once in a lifetime opportunity where all the stars were aligned so that AC pilots could finally have a win. Completely, and needlessly, squandered.

You must be under 30, the reason I say that is you don’t see the big picture, labour friendly government is a misnomer, even the NDP didn’t put up a fight for CN/CP, there is no doubt in my mind the liberal labour minister would have interfered. After that, you were in no man’s land, unable to say with any certainty what would have happened, just an educated guess and those who’ve been around this racket have seen it and been burned by it.
Anyhow, maybe time to move on, no point in continuing to spew the same shit, the majority voted, enough said!

Ahh to be under 30 again.

After that, you were in no man’s land, unable to say with any certainty what would have happened

Welcome to life. If the only certainty you want is a subpar contract, then I'd say you're settling by saying yes every time.

those who’ve been around this racket have seen it and been burned by it.

I know. You, and a like-minded demographic at Jazz, have been spanked hard in the past. Therefore, we must all say yes anytime a company puts forward a TA that doesn't value us. We are Canadian pilots; who are we to think we deserve better?

Anyhow, maybe time to move on, no point in continuing to spew the same shit

Wouldn't that be nice? Then we wouldn't have to hear guys like you, saying the same thing when it comes time to vote on every TA. Save the fearmongering for your next one. At least Jazz pilots can say they don't own the flying.

[A310Heavy]

There are 2 terms all pilots should become familiar with:

Extended Minimum-Crew Operations (eMCOs) where single-pilot operations are allowed during the cruise phase of the flight, with a level of safety equivalent to today’s two-pilot operations

Single-Pilot Operations (SiPOs), where, at a later stage, end-to-end single-pilot operations might be allowed, offering at least a level of safety equivalent to today’s two-pilot operations provided that compensation means are in place

Jason Ambrosie had an interesting quote today:

“Some aircraft manufacturers are designing airliners to be flown with only one pilot on the flight deck during the cruise portion of the flight, and eventually with zero pilots. This profit-over-safety scheme is actually being supported by some aviation safety regulators and airlines, contrary to the highest standard of aviation safety. Global transportation workers are standing in solidarity against this effort to undermine workers’ rights and safe skies.”

So it's clear there is movement on this and ALPA is concerned