negots?

[Lost in Saigon]

As for the F/A source, while we were in negotiations, there were F/As with inside information. They got it from an F/A that was married to a pilot. So, I wouldn't discount the info solely on the fact it came from a flight attendant.

I would discount EVERTHING she said because even the negotiators don't know that much information. They have not reached the monetary stage of negotiations.

[Rockie]

Disregard anything anybody says until a TA is put on the table.

[mbav8r]

Even if that's the case, you have to consider that everything in the contract has a monetary value attached to it, if not then the company would agree to all the lifstyle perks you ask for. For example; my understanding is you have a minimum of 12 days off per month, only 4 are GDO, what would it cost for the company to agree that all 12 are guaranteed once the final schedule is published. I'm certain they have a figure already attached, so if you wanted that, they would ask for something else in return, a net of zero.

[HavaJava]

You have to understand that we have a combination of optimistic and pessimistic pilots at AC. The spouse of the F/A seems to be a pessimist.

The optimists maintain that we will get Pre-CCAA wages back (+20% or so) + cost of living gains for the past decade (another 20% or so) and then a raise on top. At that point the net-zero negotiating might begin.

The pessimists are the ones that are saying we will get a 2%-a-year raise at best and that it will probably come at a cost of something else in the contract.

Neither of the groups are right (although I feel better when I talk to the optimists!) and I am positive that our contract will fall somewhere in the middle of the two (hopefully closer to the optimists).

[habs]

"They have not reached the monetary stage of negotiations."

Then they have not begun negotiations.

[teacher]

"They have not reached the monetary stage of negotiations."

Then they have not begun negotiations.

SO TRUE!!! When ALPA was negotiating with Jazz all was good until those "negotiations" started.

The optimists maintain that we will get Pre-CCAA wages back (+20% or so) + cost of living gains for the past decade (another 20% or so) and then a raise on top. At that point the net-zero negotiating might begin.

The pessimists are the ones that are saying we will get a 2%-a-year raise at best and that it will probably come at a cost of something else in the contract.

We had both types here too. I think what we came up with at Jazz in the end was something in the middle for the whole group. We had to give on a few things and Captains got less than they wanted to help out the FOs. We tried to play hardball until Calin and the Govornment stepped in at which time even without cause we were backed into a corner. I still don't understand how a nonessential service can be forced back to work and have binding arbitration imposed on negotiations.

[bcflyer]

The government has continually said it would legislate Jazz and Air Canada back to work, but so far nobody has called their bluff. The public doesn't seem to care to much about Air Canada being around (see all the pro Emirates bs in the news for example) so I can't see much public support for declaring them an essential service. (that would be the ultimate in hypocrisy.) In the Jazz case they were not actually declared an essential service, there was just the threat of it happening. Again nobody called their bluff. The legislature was on summer vacation and the labour minister was speaking WAY out of her place. It would have been pretty interesting to see just how they would have pushed the back to work legislation through parliment, especially with a minority government.....

[Mig29]

since this thread is slowly losing its focus, I have one thing to ask Norwegianwood:

My smiley guy is looking to join a band....you guys interested? He plays acoustic only but is really good

[prop2jet]

The government has continually said it would legislate Jazz and Air Canada back to work, but so far nobody has called their bluff. The public doesn't seem to care to much about Air Canada being around (see all the pro Emirates bs in the news for example) so I can't see much public support for declaring them an essential service. (that would be the ultimate in hypocrisy.) In the Jazz case they were not actually declared an essential service, there was just the threat of it happening. Again nobody called their bluff. The legislature was on summer vacation and the labour minister was speaking WAY out of her place. It would have been pretty interesting to see just how they would have pushed the back to work legislation through parliment, especially with a minority government.....

The public at large won't care until it affects them. The Fed's will encact BTWL should there be a strike at AC. You don't have to be an essential service for this to happen. The premise for BTWL will be that a strike is going to cause economic hardship. That there is a minority government has no bearing. The majority of Liberals will support the government should this happen. Don't think so? Then I suggest you read up on what the Liberals were doing back in 2000 when they were at the helm and there was the possibility of a pilot strike at AC.

[Bede]

I think some of you are confused about "essential services" and back to work legislation. An essential service (firefighters, police, etc) can be sent back to work by the Minister of Labour's order and then sent to arbitration. AC and Jazz are not an essential service. They would have to be legislated back to work through an act of Parliament. (This is what happened to teachers in Ontario back in the Harris days).

[teacher]

The fact that we are not an essential service and were threathened BEFORE even going on strike is what pissed off the masses. That amounted to interference in our negotiations and took our ACE card away.

[c170b53]

Good luck to all of the groups in the upcoming contract renewal. I think everyone should extract as much as possible whilst they can. Unfortunately for my co-workers, the dismantling of the maintenance infrastructure to shed pension liabilities has for all intents and purposes resulted in the elimination of our department. And what it means to those still on the front lines is even more of the nonsense everyone has witnessed over the last few years. Yes we tried to be team players, we allowed training to become a joke to reduce costs and we made do with equipment. Well you've all seen the stuff on the ramp if you doubt me (and its our finest). In the upcoming months will the will to "make it work" be there ?
Tell me your departments have operated differently?
Again go for the throat, its what they understand.

[bcflyer]

Once again I ask why didn't Jazz call their bluff? Parliment was out for summer vacation.. Try getting all the MP's to come back to work during holidays... Especially if Jazz wasn't flying.....

[teacher]

It would have led to binding arbitration and there's no way of knowing what that deal would have been.

[Localizer]

It would have led to binding arbitration and there's no way of knowing what that deal would have been.

Of course they know what it would have been ... Approx. half of whatever was on the table. Let's be honest .. you either take the best deal you can negotiate, or you call the bluff and face the consequences if you're wrong. The deal on the table is always going to be better then an arbitrated deal.

It may be a minority government, but I have no doubt that the government would have held an emergency session to pass the legislation, especially since MP's get extra pay for attending emergency sessions of parliament. A little extra cash for the boat payments.

[teacher]

True "LOC", very true. We played our hand but the dealer was cheating, than we had to do the best we could. The damage done to the pilot/management relationship will take a LONG time to repair if at all. What management doesn't get is that this relationship is worth more to them than a cheaper contract.

[Ifly]

BCFlyer

We were told after the fact that the MEC was made aware that the MPs didn't go home. A big part of the reason for the Minister of Labours statements in the house was to advise the MPs that they would be sticking around. The other gauling part, was that the Minister informed the MEC that if we were to strike, not only would she legislate us back to work, but our contract was only going to be worth X million dollars.

There was certainly no hiding the bias she held.

[teacher]

We have CR among others to thank for this, he flew to YOW the day before all this was announced.

[mbav8r]

The minister was told and believed that if Jazz were to strike, AC would be bankrupt in 3 days. Yes folks, that is how important Jazz is to mainline. This was the basis of CR's case to the minister of labour, so it was upto the minister to call his bluff. Was he bluffing or are we that important to Air Canada? I certainly don't feel like we are treated as such!
The bottom line, the Minister believed it, and felt the ramifications of AC going bankrupt during a volatile period in the economic recovery was too much of a risk, and threatened us with her own ramifications. Too big to fail, comes to mind..

[Brick Head]

Guys,

Same tune different year. 2000. Claudette Bradshaw minister of labor. ACPA.

Get used to it. It is part of everyone's negotiating reality. To date no one has called their bluff. We didn't. You didn't.

It is all about politics and voter inconvenience. Other industries inconvenience voters down the road if their is a stoppage. We do it immediately.

[countryhick]

I'm still waiting for a response from Ms. Raitt regarding her decision to NOT intervene in the lockout at the Port of Montreal. One of our Nations busiest ports, and considered a vital part of our countries supply chain.

I think she is ignoring me........

[Brick Head]

I'm still waiting for a response from Ms. Raitt regarding her decision to NOT intervene in the lockout at the Port of Montreal. One of our Nations busiest ports, and considered a vital part of our countries supply chain.

I think she is ignoring me........

Because the impact is not immediate. Yes she will ignore you.

[bcflyer]

Amazing how politicians seem to forget who is paying their salaries... They work for us and while I understand they are busy there is no excuse for not answering emails eventually....

[Localizer]

Amazing how politicians seem to forget who is paying their salaries... They work for us and while I understand they are busy there is no excuse for not answering emails eventually....

They use to work for us ... now they work for themselves.

[prop2jet]

Amazing how politicians seem to forget who is paying their salaries... They work for us and while I understand they are busy there is no excuse for not answering emails eventually....

What is amazing is WE are the ones that continually vote them in.