YTZ Flying

[truedude]

No, that is not what ACPA said; please re-read the newsletter issued by the Scope Committee less than 3 hours ago. They clearly state that they want this flying to be given to a 3rd-party carrier that is not crewed by either Air Canada or Jazz pilots.

Nevertheless, the Air Canada pilots from the Toronto base are dead set against this. Today, at the Toronto General Council Meeting, the pilots overwhelmingly endorsed a motion that directs the Union not make any changes to Article 1 of the Collective Agreement (Scope), regardless of the results of the present poll. However, there is nothing in the Constitution to prevent the MEC from ignoring the wishes of the YYZ pilots and doing as they please

This is the first thing I have read on here in a long time that gives me any hope. I am glad to see that the loud minority does not seem to be controlling policy. Though it would be interesting to see what would happen if the MEC ignored the wishes of their membership.

In any case, my fingers are crossed that this can be perhaps the beginning of a fresh working relationship between the two groups.

[teacher]

Thanks for the history lesson and detail given. I had only been expained it once a long while ago and like I had mentioned before I was still in highschool when this shit it the fan.

Back to the present, the risk for us at Jazz is lack of expansion and at worste case is contraction of the company as work goes elsewhere.

For mainline the risk is more downward pressure on wages as the "other's will do it for less" arguement gets louder. Scope can only protect you for so long. If the company really wants it they'll get it.

[Brick Head]

Back to the present, the risk for us at Jazz is lack of expansion and at worste case is contraction of the company as work goes elsewhere.

For mainline the risk is more downward pressure on wages as the "other's will do it for less" arguement gets louder. Scope can only protect you for so long. If the company really wants it they'll get it.

Both comments are very accurate. History tells us scope does not stop the problem. It just slows it.

Everyone on one list is the only answer.

But so I am not misleading anyone here. I'm not going to pass on BS. You wouldn't want to hear that anyway. The "no" to a change in scope from the YYZ and YUL members, was not because they wanted to preserve Jazz's exclusivity. The no was fractured for many reasons. Some want the Q's in house. Some want only ACPA pilots flying them no matter what company AC uses to do the CPA. (This idea I think has merit. It is a hybrid of recapturing the flying and allowing AC lower cost providers.) But the ideas go on and on, and on, and on, and on. No one was defending Jazz's exclusivity. It was all about what is the best way to terminate it.

[Understated]

...for us at Jazz is lack of expansion and at worste case is contraction of the company as work goes elsewhere.... Scope can only protect you for so long. If the company really wants it they'll get it.

Those are now and always have been concerns for the mainline, as well. That was one of the biggest issues in the early '80s when the employer's purchase of Air Ontario put it front and center for us. We engaged in a whole series of discussions and arguments about how to go about protecting our own flying. There were lots of different viewpoints on it, and eventually, the MEC Chair of the day prevailed with his view that the critical parameter was seating capacity of the allowed aircraft.

The issue of scope was front and center in every negotiation after that, as well as between contracts, as well. In 2001, the ink was just dry on the contract that resulted from one of the most difficult negotiations ever, when the employer, without even consulting us, entered into a contract with Skyservice to do a lot of our flying.

Lesson: it never goes away, but you don't necessarily have to lose the fight just because the employer won't give up trying to undermine your ability to stop you from losing your flying.

One of the most interesting and ironic twists, of course, is to see Jazz pilots be attacked on scope, after their own victories at gaining our flying. It was especially interesting watching the issue as it related to the third-tier carriers.

Lesson: Be careful what you wish for.

[rudder]

This all goes hand in hand with the ACPA grievance challenging the Jazz/AC Q400 fleet substitution agreement which will be heard next week by Burkett. If successful, there will be no Q400's in AC paint, no YTZ, and the continued operation of an extra 15 gas guzzling CRJ50's by Jazz. And who knows, maybe Marty will make a guest appearance

[Lost in Saigon]

This all goes hand in hand with the ACPA grievance challenging the Jazz/AC Q400 fleet substitution agreement which will be heard next week by Burkett. If successful, there will be no Q400's in AC paint, no YTZ, and the continued operation of an extra 15 gas guzzling CRJ50's by Jazz. And who knows, maybe Marty will make a guest appearance

What is the wording of the grievance?

You seem to imply that the ACPA grievance was to stop JAZZ from operating Q400's.

I thought the grievance was to put the Q400's at AC mainline with AC pilots flying them.

[Martin Tamme]

This is the first thing I have read on here in a long time that gives me any hope. I am glad to see that the loud minority does not seem to be controlling policy. Though it would be interesting to see what would happen if the MEC ignored the wishes of their membership.

The problem is that the 7 MEC members' (we refer to them here as the Super 7) hatred for Jazz is so great that they will cut off their noses despite their face. Nevertheless, these are the same guys who are championing the philosophy behind the College of Pilots.

The Toronto General Council has spoken loud & clearly. Three of the Super 7 are Toronto-based LEC members. If they go against the wishes of their General Council, they are going to find themselves in very hot water. That is going to be a promise from me to you. I've already spoken with several former MEC members, and we are ready to take action against these three should they decide to ignore the ACPA Constitution.

[accumulous]

Nevertheless, these are the same guys who are championing the philosophy behind the College of Pilots.

What does the College of Pilots have. Seems like ALPA already has everything and much, much more. Seems like the C of A would be a non-starter.

[mbav8r]

Brickhead wrote:
What if Picher had just end tailed the regional pilots?

We wouldn't be where we are today.

The answer to that question is the answer to the law suit. What if Picher had endtailed the regional pilots?
There would have been 900 regional pilots furloughed while the 900 mainline pilots came back.

[Brick Head]

This all goes hand in hand with the ACPA grievance challenging the Jazz/AC Q400 fleet substitution agreement which will be heard next week by Burkett. If successful, there will be no Q400's in AC paint, no YTZ, and the continued operation of an extra 15 gas guzzling CRJ50's by Jazz. And who knows, maybe Marty will make a guest appearance

Until quid pro quo flows from it. AKA leverage.

The grievance is about extracting bargaining capital that has already been expended by ACPA.

Your not really paying attention to what is going on this side of the fence. We are attempting (some people think it will back fire) to work with the company towards viability. Realizing that without viability none of us have anything.

If you think our intent is to damage AC, your getting the wrong picture.

Someone will fly the Q400's. The question is who.

My bets are on the going to 15 to Jazz. Maybe more later. AC needs the CASM drop. We know it.

What happens to the other Q's and how this develops will depend on leverage.

[Brick Head]

Brickhead wrote:
What if Picher had just end tailed the regional pilots?

We wouldn't be where we are today.

The answer to that question is the answer to the law suit. What if Picher had endtailed the regional pilots?
There would have been 900 regional pilots furloughed while the 900 mainline pilots came back.

This is why I didn't want to touch the subject. Who in the hell told you that. Way to much absolute BS history revisionist crap going on. All the time on this subject.

AC had 243 on furlough. They were all recalled/in the process by the time the award came out. As a result of no merged list AC hired nearly 600 pilots over the next 5 years.

By 2000 number 600 on the regional list would have been at the bottom of the AC list.

Enough said.

[mbav8r]

The Picher award placed furloughed AC pilots, DOH with the regional pilots on the bottom of the list, behind the last AC pilot not furloughed. To give you an idea. AC's list at the time was about 1500 pilots. The regionals about 900. Some furloughed AC pilots who were 1500 on the AC list now became 2300 on the proposed list.

My mistake, I misread this portion of your history lesson, it was explained to me that there would have been some regional layoffs as a result of endtailing.
So, there will always be 3 sides to every story. Yours, theirs and somewhere in the middle what really happened.
For the record I'm all for endtailing and thought the regional guys should be too, afterall, if you were number 1 on the Jazz list you would still have 1500 below you at the end of the day.

[Brick Head]

My mistake, I misread this portion of your history lesson, it was explained to me that there would have been some regional layoffs as a result of endtailing.
So, there will always be 3 sides to every story. Yours, theirs and somewhere in the middle what really happened.

mbav8r,

Your talking with someone right now who was on the regional side when this happened. No regional pilots were in threat of furlough.

My wondering about what would have happened if the regionals had just been entailed, that would have included me at the time, probably should have been explained.

The Air Canada regionals at the time were offered BOTL. The regional MEC's figured, (yes I heard it with my own ears at a meeting,) if that is the worse we will get, then why settle for it? Lets try for more. And we did. In fact we did really well. We won something unacceptable to the AC pilots and the rest is history.

The lesson? Going for more, just because you can, could leave you with less.

How does it affect what is going on today? creating another group, outside of ACPA, just recreates the same problem some time down the road. The whip saw starts. We talk merge. Offer BOTL. They say...no thanks we can do better in arbitration than that. If that doesn't work they undercut our flying.

Lesson? Make them AC pilots from the start.

Now i'll go back to dreaming what if? What if the regionals just accepted BOTL in 1995?

Better yet. What if AC pilots had insisted in the 80's that everyone flying AC code had to be on the AC seniority list?

[Localizer]

What if AC pilots had insisted in the 80's that everyone flying AC code had to be on the AC seniority list?

Interesting theory? .. Correct me if i'm wrong .. in the 80's the regionals were separate companies .. (AO, AirBC, AirNova) .. not owned by AC at that time. How would that have worked? .. Is that still possible today? ..

[Lost in Saigon]

What if AC pilots had insisted in the 80's that everyone flying AC code had to be on the AC seniority list?

Interesting theory? .. Correct me if i'm wrong .. in the 80's the regionals were separate companies .. (AO, AirBC, AirNova) .. not owned by AC at that time. How would that have worked? .. Is that still possible today? ..

Back in the 1980's they were not owned by Air Canada. At least not 100%. That came later. I think Air BC even switched from CPAir to Air Canada back then.

[square]

Just get get Porter to do the YTZ flying! Jeeez. They've got a big base there and I think they already have Q400's don't they?

[Max111]

I think one of the sad things about this possible agreement is that it very confrontational to our fellow pilots at Jazz ....not withstanding that some of them are trying to sue us. It would appear that the MEC believes it knows what's best for us.

Why can't we build bridges. Collectively, the professionalism and caring of the Air Canada's pilot group is there. I've seen this, so many times in so many ways. This is not us.

Max111

[Localizer]

not withstanding that some of them are trying to sue us.

I just wanna make sure people realize that its approx. 160 ex-AO pilots out of 1500 Jazz pilots involved in the law-suit. I think it needs to be clarified because that is a very small percentage (10% approx.).



I think its time for both groups to work together .. both groups are under attack with this whole proposition. I hope the heads of both unions arrange a meeting very soon to discuss this issue and see if common sense can't play some factor in assuring both sides prosperity.

[Johnny767]

To characterize the "MEC Super 7" as Jazz haters is ridiculous, at least speaking for the YVR guys.

The 7 MEC members (which includes the MEC Chairman) that certain guys love to slag are the ones that have moved past the merger. They are trying to repair decades of distrust between Pilots and Management.

The remaining YYZ and YUL reps are only dedicated to one issue and haven't seen the ball since kick off.

Unfortunately this Scope issue has turned into Base and Color Politics. As all the same old players expose their hate-on for the YVR LEC.

It would be great to bring the Q-400 to the Mainline, it will never happen. Even if we (Pilots) could negotiate workable Wages and Working conditions, Mainline is uncompetitive with the outrageous wages for F/A's and Ramp Service.

[rudder]

Not too complicated.

ACPA agrees not to give AC relief to add additional regional commercial partners in Canada.

ALPA agrees not to facilitate any further transfer of flying from mainline to Jazz without expressed consent of ACPA.

Should have happened 20 years ago.

[Glen Quagmire]

Johnny767 you are right on the money. All I see in this latest scope blowup is a power struggle within ACPA between the merger and seniority clowns vs. the guys who have moved on. This all happened last year, although much more quietly, over the "yes" vote to the new CA.

Anyone of sound mind knows those airplanes are never going to be flown by the mainline. What our union should be doing is ensuring that if the flying does go to someone other than Jazz, the pay and working conditions for the front end are to be equal to or better than the JAZZ pay scales and contract. Of course solidifying the scope language should be a priority as well, like not letting airline manufacturers re-certify airplanes via pen and ink to less seats just to circumvent scope clauses (RJ440 and CRJ705)

[picwally]

Mr. Rovinescu and the BOD will decide as to where the Air Canada owned Q400's will go, not the pilots. This debate is pointless.
The only two concerns of ACPA are for the legitimacy of the scope clause for any other operator (including Jazz) to fly Q400's under CPA, and to negotiate a possible pay scale to operate these airplanes themselves.
Mr. Rovinescu showed his position on the Q400's operating at YTC by Jazz and the definite bottom line is... HE DECIDES!

[yycflyguy]

Mr. Rovinescu and the BOD will decide as to where the Air Canada owned Q400's will go, not the pilots. This debate is pointless.
The only two concerns of ACPA are for the legitimacy of the scope clause for any other operator (including Jazz) to fly Q400's under CPA, and to negotiate a possible pay scale to operate these airplanes themselves.
Mr. Rovinescu showed his position on the Q400's operating at YTC by Jazz and the definite bottom line is... HE DECIDES!

The YTZ flying is very much open to debate. There is an outstanding grievance regarding Jazz operating the Q400s and the delegation of the upcoming 5 Q400 planes is protected in a CA between ACPA and AC.... having said that, CR will probably just send them where he wants and wait for one group or the other to grieve it.

Involving a third pilot group wanting to operate these planes is a dangerous road. It only allows the company to pit another group versus another and propagate the deterioration of the entire industry.

It is only 5 Q400s but what will it be tomorrow?

One pilot list. College of Professional Pilots is needed sooner rather later.

[flyguycanuk]

The remaining YYZ and YUL reps are only dedicated to one issue and haven't seen the ball since kick off.

.

Really? And what is that one issue? Seniority?

One of these MEC members is of the new hire generation and could give a care less about seniority. In talking with these MEC reps they are flabergasted at all the silo barganing and the williningness to be giving lets to the company with getting nothing in return... as am I. That's why we have the hate on for the Super 7. They are not listening to the membership. Why can't they even let the poll be conducted without tainting it as the Scope commitee chair has done with his recommendation to vote "YES"! What a crock! That should never have happened. We are smart enough to make up our own minds without YVR MEC chair abusing his position as Scope chair telling us how to vote just to push his own agenda. Why do we even allow MEC members to chair commitees anyways? Seems like our system needs some fixing there.

[Brick Head]

Trying to attach this to seniority is a bait and switch. We don't give a rats ass red, blue, or pink with turquoise highlight. They are being held accountable for their actions.

Besides we have something much more interesting here. The timing couldn't be better. First contact with someone affiliated with the new pilot group perhaps?

Read it carefully. Do we really want to go down this road again?

Mr. Rovinescu and the BOD will decide as to where the Air Canada owned Q400's will go, not the pilots. This debate is pointless.
The only two concerns of ACPA are for the legitimacy of the scope clause for any other operator (including Jazz) to fly Q400's under CPA, and to negotiate a possible pay scale to operate these airplanes themselves.
Mr. Rovinescu showed his position on the Q400's operating at YTC by Jazz and the definite bottom line is... HE DECIDES!