COVID MOA 2

[altiplano]

3. WJ contract so damn awful? They extracted large gains in their 1st contract. 1st contract.

Ummm, I've been at WJ since 2003. Do tell about this extraction of large gains. Specifics please. I'm prepared to be as unbiased as possible, but other than YOS, I fail to see how this contract was in any way a win for the pilots. There are many, many negatives that outweigh the gains, in my opinion.

The decision making and power structure of ALPA surprised many once certification happened. We are probably better off as a result of certifying, given the Onex sale, but I'm not prepared to admit that we are better off with ALPA than with any other certification option.

John

Specifics:

• Narrowbody career compensation comparison (old work rules vs new Collective Agreement):

Previous agreement under the WJPA:
25-year career = $4,768,565
30-year career = $5,998,321

ALPA Awarded Collective Agreement:
25-year career = $5,345,170
30-year career = $6,628,530

*Difference
25-year career = +$576,605
30-year career = +$630,206

*Comparison above of expected career earnings, based on:
Pay rates and rues as of 5/1/18; 960 hours per year; 20% ESPP; stock options per current book ($10,298/year for CA and $7,312/year for FO (except for Year 1)); upgrade to CA at Year 8; CA rates based on time-in-seat ALPA awarded Collective Agreement Award Pay rates as of 1/1/19; 984 credit hours per year; 20% ESPP; stock options per current book ($10,298/year for CA and $7,312/year for FO (except for Year 1)); upgrade to CA at Year 8; CA rate based on years-of-service

• ALPA Economic and financial analysis costing over $1.5 billion over life of the agreement
• Increase of $180 million over the life of the collective agreement in WestJet pilots’ pocketsfrom previous working agreement under the WestJet Pilots Association (WJPA) (13.5% average increase year over year through the 4-year term)
• ALPA spent over $2,000,000, not including ALPA specific resources (Legal, E&FA etc.), on their negotiations.
• Scope provisions around codeshare, joint venture
• Scope around 76 seat jet flying
• Scope around 78 seat turboprop flying (more restrictive than AC, which has turboprop scope of 80 seats)
• No codeshare with any companies above 76 seats within Canada (more restrictive than AC, since AC allows arctic codeshare)
• 30 narrowbody airframe maximums at Swoop, with no widebodies permitted
• Canadian industry-leading reserve system with long-call reserve provisions (not found in other reserve systems in Canada, only in U.S. CBA’s)
• Proactive pick up for reserve pilots, and max 16-days work for mixed line reserve holders
• Achieved Air Canada comparable trip and duty rigs (a considerable achievement since there were no rigs previously in place)
• Achieved years of service pay, thereby reducing career pay progression from 22 years to 12.
• Codified 20% Employee stock purchase plan, profit share plan, stock option plan (which has subsequently been leveraged into an annual bonus program with sale to Onex), Owners performance award.

////

I don't work there though, but this is my understanding of it. Are those numbers are wrong?

$20K+ per year vs. your WJPA agreement. That's a big gain.

$180 million over 4 years? That's a big gain.

Scope, where none existed previously? That's a big gain.

Capped ULCC? Big gain.

Duty rigs where none existed? Big gain.

Industry leading reserve? Big gain.

YOS on upgrades? Huge gain.

Industry leading representation into the Onex sale? And now with Covid? Priceless.

Again, just me looking in though... what are the specifics of what you lost.

[ALPApolicy]

Boy are you smoking the ALPA kool-aid. I'm on my phone right now so I won't answer, as it's too frustrating to type that much.

When I get a chance I will properly respond.

[ALPApolicy]

First of all, let's ditch the 25/30 year gain $ numbers because:

"Comparison above of expected career earnings, based on:
Pay rates and rues as of 5/1/18; 960 hours per year; 20% ESPP; stock options per current book ($10,298/year for CA and $7,312/year for FO (except for Year 1)); upgrade to CA at Year 8."

Obviously, with all of the layoffs and downgrades, these numbers are no longer relevant.Ergo, anything that references a 25/30 year career is out.

Also, those career progression numbers didn't take into account the effect of the Pilot Transfer Agreement with Encore, which had a terrible effect on the career progression of OTS pilots hired since 2014.

[altiplano]

First of all, let's ditch the 25/30 year gain $ numbers because:

"Comparison above of expected career earnings, based on:
Pay rates and rues as of 5/1/18; 960 hours per year; 20% ESPP; stock options per current book ($10,298/year for CA and $7,312/year for FO (except for Year 1)); upgrade to CA at Year 8."

Obviously, with all of the layoffs and downgrades, these numbers are no longer relevant.Ergo, anything that references a 25/30 year career is out.

Also, those career progression numbers didn't take into account the effect of the Pilot Transfer Agreement with Encore, which had a terrible effect on the career progression of OTS pilots hired since 2014.

Covid threw a lot of numbers out of whack no doubt. But this will pass, you made improvements on a lot of areas, and the costing and gains will carry past this crisis.

PTA? That doesn't have anything to do with ALPA, does it? I'm not sure it's relevant. I realize nobody thought there would be any industry retraction, but here we are...

[altiplano]

I struggle to understand how you can;
1.) Acknowledge that CALPA partner airlines leveraged tremendous resources almost entirely paid for by Air Canada pilots to pursue and subsequently win an adjudicated settlement that would see Air Canada pilots lose their jobs and permanently have their seniority degraded.

CALPA doesn't exist anymore.

2.) Acknowledge that pilots supported by ALPA-C launched lawsuit after lawsuit against ACPA pilots and their widows for decades in effort to enforce a seniority integration that would have devasting effects on pilots who were not even on AC property during the days of CALPA.

They lost. CALPA doesn't exist anymore.

3.) Acknowledge that pilots who vocally support these efforts are still apart of ALPA-C and in large part still swing the levers of power in that organization.

I think the landscape at ALPA is different. Do you think ALPA Group C members swing the levers of power in ALPA? ALPA Group A members hold a majority of power in the executive with 5 EVPs. Plus with roll call voting do you really believe United or Delta would allow their seniority to be ran over by Group B/C Airlines?

And still dismiss any concerns over whether history can repeat itself in an industry known for its cyclicity as "baseless bullshit".

Sure it's a good concern to want to protect your seniority, but your worries are unfounded. The sky isn't falling.

The deal on the table is effectively dead. As I am sure you are aware we now and for the foreseeable future will fall well below both the pilot and dues requirements to be a member of the Group A carriers.

I don't think so. Our dues should be enough to take us over the top even if we're short the 4000. Alaska is short 4000. Jetblue may be too agree the dust on this settles. Also, this is the long game, we aren't talking about tomorrow either... we are looking at a couple year timeline here - post TRZ merger, recalls, be F&DT regs, we will grow again.

We are about to merge with a nearly fully laid off ALPA carrier, would ALPA allow us to crack them as hard as we are going to attempt to if we were the same shop? We are going want a result close to the TWA (ALPA) -American (APA) merger, fenced but nearly BOTL for the TWA guys.

Fear of the unknown... We are doing to have to see what this merger will look like. I'm not worried about ALPA letting us do anything though. I am worried about ACPA getting smoked by them though.

The way I see it is we are asking our narrow body captains to pay an extra $1250 a year for some cool blue lanyard, vague promises of a brighter future and to crack the door open to more seniority drama down the line.

$1250/year? That's an exaggeration. On $250K the difference in net (takehome) is about $500 or $600.

So $50/month? That's good value for me just to get access to their LRD and legal resources. I wonder how much ACPA sacrifices on not doing complete contract analysis before connective bargaining, or skips hiring the best advisors, so we can keep dues low? How much do we lose not having that access? Also ACPA can increase dues.. how much are they losing right now? They might have to.

So is that all ACPA has, it's our own mess, and dues are low?

Do you remember when we made more than, or even as much as US majors? Do you know how far back we are now from them?

[Sharklasers]

CALPA doesn't exist anymore.

A rose by any other name.....


They lost. CALPA doesn't exist anymore.

See above


I think the landscape at ALPA is different. Do you think ALPA Group C members swing the levers of power in ALPA? ALPA Group A members hold a majority of power in the executive with 5 EVPs. Plus with roll call voting do you really believe United or Delta would allow their seniority to be ran over by Group B/C Airlines?

For one Group C had the pull to shut down the merger talk according to our MEC and we had to go to Berlin hat in hand to try and mend that fence.


Sure it's a good concern to want to protect your seniority, but your worries are unfounded. The sky isn't falling.



I don't think so. Our dues should be enough to take us over the top even if we're short the 4000. Alaska is short 4000. Jetblue may be too agree the dust on this settles. Also, this is the long game, we aren't talking about tomorrow either... we are looking at a couple year timeline here - post TRZ merger, recalls, be F&DT regs, we will grow again.


I wouldnt be so convinced that we wont end up as part of group C for previously mentioned reasons. We barely made the Group A dues requirement before and that was only when they considered the Canadian dollar at par. I would not count on that kind of generosity again



Fear of the unknown... We are doing to have to see what this merger will look like. I'm not worried about ALPA letting us do anything though. I am worried about ACPA getting smoked by them though.


Fear mongering.
I want our union to be able to go for the throat on this one. We have a once in a generation opportunity to make this potentially as painless as possible for our pilots. Why would we invite in an organization that would surely throw up impediments to that.
I invite you to look at the history of the TWA/ American merger where ALPA got thoroughly trounced by the APA. So much so that the TWA pilots were able to sue ALPA and win a settlement for their piss poor representation ($53 million!).



$1250/year? That's an exaggeration. On $250K the difference in net (takehome) is about $500 or $600.

So $50/month? That's good value for me just to get access to their LRD and legal resources. I wonder how much ACPA sacrifices on not doing complete contract analysis before connective bargaining, or skips hiring the best advisors, so we can keep dues low? How much do we lose not having that access? Also ACPA can increase dues.. how much are they losing right now? They might have to.

So is that all ACPA has, it's our own mess, and dues are low?

Do you remember when we made more than, or even as much as US majors? Do you know how far back we are now from them?

.53% increase against 250k is $1325. Justify it any way you want but it seems like alot to pay for a lanyard to me. I just do not personally see the value in spending that kind of dough on an organization with the demonstrated track record in Canada that ALPA does. But one man one vote I suppose. So far the ALPA or Die crowd doesn't seem to be swaying the general membership.

[spinaxis]

CALPA doesn't exist anymore.

A rose by any other name.....


They lost. CALPA doesn't exist anymore.

See above

But see... it's not though. You sound like the YVR LEC incumbent. CALPA was a Canadian Union through and through. It had it's issues, we can all agree and at the time it was the right move for AC to leave.

ALPA is not CALPA. ALPA-C isn't a Union. It's a section of ALPA-I.

If Air Canada joins we would not only have an indirect voice on the Canada Board, but ALSO our own EVP at the "big table." The fear mongering really needs to end.

.53% increase against 250k is $1325. Justify it any way you want but it seems like alot to pay for a lanyard to me. I just do not personally see the value in spending that kind of dough on an organization with the demonstrated track record in Canada that ALPA does. But one man one vote I suppose. So far the ALPA or Die crowd doesn't seem to be swaying the general membership.

You ever stop to think that maybe those at the top enjoying all the spoils maybe don't want a dues increase because life is good, but the bulk of the pilots who make between $55k-$160k see the benefit in ALPA resources? We spend 25+ years of our careers in the "middle" and if a .5% increase in dues ends up improving my earnings by more, I am willing to pay. What has ACPA done in the last 25 years to improve pay for the middle earners? I'll wait.

It's more than a lanyard, and you know that.

[spinaxis]

Rudder is correct, there is no canned deal waiting for us. Aside from the Transat acquisition the ALPA deal was partly derailed by ALPA-c's protest. Any future deal will have to be renegotiated and our position would be weakened by appointing an MEC who's entire platform rests on "ALPA by hell or high water".

Rudder is wrong, and so are you. ALPA is waiting for us to get our shit together and ready for us to join. Tomorrow if we want but let's be real it's going to take another decade until all the old pilots are gone and we can finally move forward and join a real union.

[altiplano]

CALPA doesn't exist anymore.

A rose by any other name.....

Except it's not some backwater Canadian 1 mec 1 vote Union. It's the largest international pilot Union in the world.


They lost. CALPA doesn't exist anymore.

See above

They lost.

I think the landscape at ALPA is different. Do you think ALPA Group C members swing the levers of power in ALPA? ALPA Group A members hold a majority of power in the executive with 5 EVPs. Plus with roll call voting do you really believe United or Delta would allow their seniority to be ran over by Group B/C Airlines?

For one Group C had the pull to shut down the merger talk according to our MEC and we had to go to Berlin hat in hand to try and mend that fence.

I heard some mixed things there, but I also heard that situation has changed and the big Airlines very much want us there.

Sure it's a good concern to want to protect your seniority, but your worries are unfounded. The sky isn't falling.



I don't think so. Our dues should be enough to take us over the top even if we're short the 4000. Alaska is short 4000. Jetblue may be too agree the dust on this settles. Also, this is the long game, we aren't talking about tomorrow either... we are looking at a couple year timeline here - post TRZ merger, recalls, be F&DT regs, we will grow again.


I wouldnt be so convinced that we wont end up as part of group C for previously mentioned reasons. We barely made the Group A dues requirement before and that was only when they considered the Canadian dollar at par. I would not count on that kind of generosity again

4000 or... $10 million. We will make it.

Quick math says 3600 pilots at an average pay of $150K makes Group A level dues. I think our average will be down this year, but I heard once that our average is actually higher than that... and 3600 pilots seems like a cushion, we'll eventually increase our numbers again on both.

Fear of the unknown... We are doing to have to see what this merger will look like. I'm not worried about ALPA letting us do anything though. I am worried about ACPA getting smoked by them though.


Fear mongering.
I want our union to be able to go for the throat on this one. We have a once in a generation opportunity to make this potentially as painless as possible for our pilots. Why would we invite in an organization that would surely throw up impediments to that.
I invite you to look at the history of the TWA/ American merger where ALPA got thoroughly trounced by the APA. So much so that the TWA pilots were able to sue ALPA and win a settlement for their piss poor representation ($53 million!).

Me too. I want what's best for AC Pilots. I don't think ACPA/ALPA defines what we achieve.

$1250/year? That's an exaggeration. On $250K the difference in net (takehome) is about $500 or $600.

So $50/month? That's good value for me just to get access to their LRD and legal resources. I wonder how much ACPA sacrifices on not doing complete contract analysis before connective bargaining, or skips hiring the best advisors, so we can keep dues low? How much do we lose not having that access? Also ACPA can increase dues.. how much are they losing right now? They might have to.

So is that all ACPA has, it's our own mess, and dues are low?

Do you remember when we made more than, or even as much as US majors? Do you know how far back we are now from them?

Do you??!!

.53% increase against 250k is $1325. Justify it any way you want but it seems like alot to pay for a lanyard to me. I just do not personally see the value in spending that kind of dough on an organization with the demonstrated track record in Canada that ALPA does. But one man one vote I suppose. So far the ALPA or Die crowd doesn't seem to be swaying the general membership.

Corrections on that, it's a 0.48% difference between, 1.37% / 1.85%. You're also not calculating that the income paid towards dues is not taxed, if you took that income you would be taxed, so the $1200 less taxes on a $250K earner at the highest marginal tax rate in most provinces would get you under $600 difference.

I'll say again, all I want is the ALPA roadshow like we were promised, I want to hear what they have to say and what the vision would be, if we can't get the same deal as was made in 2018 or get our issues addressed, I guess ACPA it is. But the membership deserves to see this through one way or another...

[/quote]

[Sharklasers]

We will just have to agree to disagree on whether now of all times it is appropriate to try an enact a coup of the MEC and force a representation vote that has the ability to change the fundamental structure of our union. How will the company react if we go through a lengthy reorganization while the NC is working on COVID, a reopener, and the merger among other things? They didnt like us changing the face of the MEC in the middle of a deal in 2012 and we were greatly punished for it.

I think we can look at the AA/TWA merger as an example of how us and the company can work constructively together in the midst of a crisis and come out ahead. In exchange for labour peace AA and the APA pilots worked together and keelhauled the ALPA TWA pilots.

[spinaxis]

Who gives two flying fucks what the company thinks?

This wasn't a coup. Three current MEC members ran... In a democratic election. Two lost but are still in there. If that many people on the inside including IS all see problems maybe it's time to open our eyes. This MEC has been seemingly split down the middle now for a year... One has to wonder how these elections would have gone if 600 pilots had a vote.

Have a road show and membership vote. The AT red herring is just that. It will make zero difference come merger time. This would all take a long time anyways, wouldn't happen overnight. A year IMO at minimum...

The unity initiative was enough to show there's more support than you think to look down this path. Maybe it doesn't happen and the majority say no which is fine, but we're doing ourselves a disservice by not exploring the option. The longer ACPA keeps their head in the sand the longer it will take to eventually right the ship.

[Sharklasers]

Who gives two flying fucks what the company thinks?

The fact that you ask that says you either were not around during 2012 when the company hammered us into this bullshit contract that I am sure you love.

They did it in large part due to the memberships petty mickey mouse bullshit conduct at the time, including burning down the MEC and electing a band of hardliners mid negotiation who went out of their way to be obtuse and disregarded all sound advice.

They saw the same disharmony that is brewing here today as an opportunity and Calin laughed all the way to that bank.

https://acpa.ca/Media/ACPA/ACPAUpdates/ ... 136211.pdf


Do yourself a favor and educate yourself. Then ask again "who gives a @#$! what the company thinks".

[spinaxis]

No I wasn't around yet.

FOS was a travesty but there's no one but the MEC of the time to blame for it's existence. We shot ourselves in the foot after by ratifying a collective agreement under that framework instead of taking it's legality to the courts. All for what, a little signing bonus that was half a greivance award?

Then the best run in the industry happened shortly after and we were left with no ability to extract gains. ACPA is to blame for that and our substandard LRD.

I'm more than educated in on the failings of ACPA for the last 25 years. Name ONE THING they have done that has benefited the pilot group. And minor recovery of previous losses doesn't count.

I'll wait.

[altiplano]

We have 4 years ahead of us of "labour peace" no collective bargaining for 3 years, and even then it's restricted under the balance of the 10 year framework deal. No completely open unrestricted negots for 4 years. This is the perfect time to address this. This isn't mid negotiation and this is just following through on what the membership already said in a survey they wanted to explore.

Spinaxis is right, who cares what the company thinks... but I can guarantee that the company thinks they are better off without ALPA representing us. And this isn't a flip the switch thing... we should follow through with it, have a vote, and put it to bed either way.

[spinaxis]

We have 4 years ahead of us of "labour peace" no collective bargaining for 3 years, and even then it's restricted under the balance of the 10 year framework deal. No completely open unrestricted negots for 4 years. This is the perfect time to address this. This isn't mid negotiation and this is just following through on what the membership already said in a survey they wanted to explore.

Spinaxis is right, who cares what the company thinks... but I can guarantee that the company thinks they are better off without ALPA representing us. And this isn't a flip the switch thing... we should follow through with it, have a vote, and put it to bed either way.

The sooner we put this to bed the better. Let the members have their say, although I'm sure the negative spin on all the roadshows will be in FULL FORCE. Same goes with the legal issues with a certain NEM. The sooner that debacle is over, the better.

[alkaseltzer]

Who gives two flying fucks what the company thinks?

The fact that you ask that says you either were not around during 2012 when the company hammered us into this bullshit contract that I am sure you love.

They did it in large part due to the memberships petty mickey mouse bullshit conduct at the time, including burning down the MEC and electing a band of hardliners mid negotiation who went out of their way to be obtuse and disregarded all sound advice.

They saw the same disharmony that is brewing here today as an opportunity and Calin laughed all the way to that bank.

https://acpa.ca/Media/ACPA/ACPAUpdates/ ... 136211.pdf


Do yourself a favor and educate yourself. Then ask again "who gives a @#$! what the company thinks".

Very helpful link - thank you. If there's more, please let us know, or PM.

[altiplano]

Boy are you smoking the ALPA kool-aid. I'm on my phone right now so I won't answer, as it's too frustrating to type that much.

When I get a chance I will properly respond.

I just thought I'd follow up on what those specifics regarding your losses were.

Speaking about the contract itself? What concessions were made?

I'm genuinely interested.

Or was it just the PTA and covid losses that you were referring to?

[mbav8r]

I think most members voted based on their assessment of the candidates running for their LEC Chair position, not just whether these candidates openly support joining ALPA.

ALPA may very well be the right move under the right terms for us. But if I don’t think a candidate will make a good LEC Chair, then I won’t vote for them. It’s a three year term where you represent members directly with the Company, and represent your base at the MEC. It’s a big deal, and for me personally it’s more than about whether someone will say ‘Aye’ when they ask around the table whether we should join another Union.

I think you’re being a little too quick to pan the entire membership for not being single issue voters.

The recent election is not what my comment was related to.

I'm speaking to the comments I see and hear directly regarding the misunderstanding of ALPA structure and where we would fit in the event is a merger.

People dismiss looking closer at it with comments and ideas that aren't based on what's real.

The constant misunderstanding of what ALPA Canada, currently ALPA group C, is and where that will go after a merger. ie. ALPA C will no longer be ALPA Canada in the event of an ACPA merger, and we would not join in ALPA Group C, rather we would stand on our own as a Group A airline.

The misunderstanding of what ALPA Canada actually is and it's powers - ie. it's not its own Union, it's essentially a Canadian lobbyist division under the larger ALPA umbrella.

The fear and misinformation that we would somehow be outvoted to have our seniority taken by regionals at ALPA Canada.

The actual cost of dues.

The actual cost of the performance of our association...

I get, but don't necessarily agree with, why guys voted for incumbents in that election.

But we had the unity initiative 2 years ago and a promise that ALPA would hold a roadshow to present what a merger would look like. That all got stopped under MM and the Transat mess, but I'd like to see that roadshow and have the membership get the real picture on what this merger would look like and where we'd actually fit in at ALPA.

I think the membership deserves the real story, and the choice.

Let me preface this by saying I spent the better part of a decade at ALPA shops and you are kidding yourself if you deny that there are currently guys who touch themselves at night to the thought of CALPA 2.0 I’m thinking about touching myself again with the latest announcement, Canada's Chorus Aviation receives takeover proposalwhere the tail again gets to wag the dog. There is open discussion of a seniority reorganization by certain senior elected reps and committee chairs in the ALPA ranks. May I remind you that it has only been 4 years since Jazz pilots stopped sueing AC pilots for their seniority numbers, that is a fact. These issues have the potential to come to a real head again should AC decide to expand their equity interest in their regional partners again.

Rudder is correct, there is no canned deal waiting for us. Aside from the Transat acquisition the ALPA deal was partly derailed by ALPA-c's protest. Any future deal will have to be renegotiated and our position would be weakened by appointing an MEC who's entire platform rests on "ALPA by hell or high water".

Speaking strictly as a line pilot I dont see the urgency for the switch portrayed on this forum, and clearly neither does the membership judging from the election results. Further I find it partly disconcerting that a large part of the public criticism of ACPA and the shaming that we are not ALPA seem to be coming from pilots who do not work for Air Canada.

Ill finish by saying that ALPA isnt the panacea that it is being sold as. If it were why is Westjets contract so god damn awful? Why has the TRZ contract been suppressing our wagcon for decades? Southwest and American and Delta dont need big daddy ALPA to come run their show, maybe change should start at home?

Makes sense for Air Canada to reduce the CPA costs, it’s going to be real messy. The certification vote will also be quite interesting, timing wise it could be simultaneously with the transat pilots. Sharlaser, I’m coming for that number.
Anyhow, I digress, but I honestly can’t think of any other investor who would buy an airline that doesn’t “own” it’s flying with a contract that could be renegotiated in CCAA in the next year.

[altiplano]

you are kidding yourself if you deny that there are currently guys who touch themselves at night to the thought of CALPA 2.0 I’m thinking about touching myself again with the latest announcement, Canada's Chorus Aviation receives takeover proposal

Classy...

[mbav8r]

you are kidding yourself if you deny that there are currently guys who touch themselves at night to the thought of CALPA 2.0 I’m thinking about touching myself again with the latest announcement, Canada's Chorus Aviation receives takeover proposal

Classy...

True, there is history with sharklaser, it was tongue in cheek but maybe too soon?

[altiplano]

Whatever man...

[Sharklasers]

you are kidding yourself if you deny that there are currently guys who touch themselves at night to the thought of CALPA 2.0 I’m thinking about touching myself again with the latest announcement, Canada's Chorus Aviation receives takeover proposal

Classy...

I would just like to thank Mbav8r for helping prove my point here that we always need to be cognizant of who we attach ourselves to. Hundreds of regional pilots like Mbav8r are currently giddy like its christmas morning at the thought of sparking another seniority battle.

[spinaxis]

Do Jazz pilots really think they'd get anything other than BOTL? Jazz is a feeder for AC and always has been. An arbitrator will see that, pilots leave Jazz to go to AC. Has anyone ever in the history of aviation left AC for Jazz?... It's a regional carrier that doesn't even own their flying. Jazz pilots would be lucky to get fenced into their positions and should be happy with that if a merger ever happens.

[Sharklasers]

Do Jazz pilots really think they'd get anything other than BOTL? Jazz is a feeder for AC and always has been. An arbitrator will see that, pilots leave Jazz to go to AC. Has anyone ever in the history of aviation left AC for Jazz?... It's a regional carrier that doesn't even own their flying. Jazz pilots would be lucky to get fenced into their positions and should be happy with that if a merger ever happens.

You had better believe the leaders of ALPA at Jazz absolutely do believe they are entitled to DOH or better in a merged list.
Thats why they spent the last decade they were in control of ALPA-C establishing a precedent of DOH in acquisition situations. Think about it, why would they gift DOH to GGN, Bearskin and wasaya pilots to the great harm of their current members? There were some at the top were playing the long game to further their own careers.
If we join ALPA the arbitrator will absolutely look at the precedent they have spent years establishing.

1.) ALPA in canada establishes industry DOH seniority. Encore pilots taking DOH to mainline. GGN taking DOH to competitors when they go out of business ect.
2.) AC pilots choose ALPA representation after this seniority systems has been well established.
3.) AC buys chorus.
4.) Jazz pilots show arbitrator well defined history of seniority integrations and show that ACPA merged in well after said precedent established.

[Air.Field]

if the above is true regarding acquisition, can't help but think ACPA stoked the fire on that one.