How will you spend your ratification pay?

[PA-18]

I have not noticed a lack of professionalism from the MEC in any public space. Nor have they betrayed anyone. It’s up to the voters to decide which way it goes. It’s as simple as that. If it takes another several months so be it. I see many anonymous people bashing other colleagues who are getting the EXACT same deal. (Just further along in their career) These people for all we know don’t even work for AC and just trying to cause a divide. There is no B scale. Everyone is getting the same deal. Get informed and vote. If a junior pilot wants to vote with their feet so be it… but coming on a public forum with a lack of etiquette and professionalism does a disservice to all of us in this career and does nothing to improve the wawcon.

[PA-18]

And a MEC attempting to muddy the waters with the drama of her resignation. Truly a horrific turn in leadership.

Makes sense, and it’s not uncommon to resign after a failed TA. It’s the lessor of 2 evils where some would call upon her resignation if not voluntary. It’s a bottom up organization. Write your reps if the TA fails. Pass the torch if required. She’s done an outstanding job up until this point.

[thepoors]

And a MEC attempting to muddy the waters with the drama of her resignation. Truly a horrific turn in leadership.

Makes sense, and it’s not uncommon to resign after a failed TA. It’s the lessor of 2 evils where some would call upon her resignation if not voluntary. It’s a bottom up organization. Write your reps if the TA fails. Pass the torch if required. She’s done an outstanding job up until this point.

Her responsibility as chair is to lead the membership through negotiations. Negotiations aren't over until an agreement is ratified. She is throwing a hissy fit, directly influencing the vote, and abandoning her position at the most critical time. It's disgusting behavior.

[rudder]

And a MEC attempting to muddy the waters with the drama of her resignation. Truly a horrific turn in leadership.

Makes sense, and it’s not uncommon to resign after a failed TA. It’s the lessor of 2 evils where some would call upon her resignation if not voluntary. It’s a bottom up organization. Write your reps if the TA fails. Pass the torch if required. She’s done an outstanding job up until this point.

Her responsibility as chair is to lead the membership through negotiations. Negotiations aren't over until an agreement is ratified. She is throwing a hissy fit, directly influencing the vote, and abandoning her position at the most critical time. It's disgusting behavior.

Just curious - how did the real elected reps vote in the motion to accept the AIP?

[thepoors]

Makes sense, and it’s not uncommon to resign after a failed TA. It’s the lessor of 2 evils where some would call upon her resignation if not voluntary. It’s a bottom up organization. Write your reps if the TA fails. Pass the torch if required. She’s done an outstanding job up until this point.

Her responsibility as chair is to lead the membership through negotiations. Negotiations aren't over until an agreement is ratified. She is throwing a hissy fit, directly influencing the vote, and abandoning her position at the most critical time. It's disgusting behavior.

Just curious - how did the real elected reps vote in the motion to accept the AIP?

YUL - 2 yes
YYZ - 3 no
YWG - 3 yes
YVR - 1 yes 1 no

[rudder]

Her responsibility as chair is to lead the membership through negotiations. Negotiations aren't over until an agreement is ratified. She is throwing a hissy fit, directly influencing the vote, and abandoning her position at the most critical time. It's disgusting behavior.

Just curious - how did the real elected reps vote in the motion to accept the AIP?

YUL - 2 yes
YYZ - 3 no
YWG - 3 yes
YVR - 1 yes 1 no

How did YWG (50 pilots?) end up with 3 votes? Seems a little insulting to the other large bases who represent hundreds (thousands?) of pilots.

[RippleRock]

And a MEC attempting to muddy the waters with the drama of her resignation. Truly a horrific turn in leadership.

Makes sense, and it’s not uncommon to resign after a failed TA. It’s the lessor of 2 evils where some would call upon her resignation if not voluntary. It’s a bottom up organization. Write your reps if the TA fails. Pass the torch if required. She’s done an outstanding job up until this point.

That's the point.

She had done an outstanding job "until" this point. The time to get $hit done was on to 14-18th. GONE. That was when "her outstanding job" culminated into action. Inaction was chosen instead. If there was ever a WTF moment, that was it 100%. We had a ton of momentum, unity, drive and a 98% mandate to WALK.

No trigger was pulled, and here we are. Now what? We easily lost 30% of our initiative and support going forward. The ball was DROPPED hard.

What message will a 55% "no" send? Who will hear it???

[RippleRock]

Her responsibility as chair is to lead the membership through negotiations. Negotiations aren't over until an agreement is ratified. She is throwing a hissy fit, directly influencing the vote, and abandoning her position at the most critical time. It's disgusting behavior.

Just curious - how did the real elected reps vote in the motion to accept the AIP?

YUL - 2 yes
YYZ - 3 no
YWG - 3 yes
YVR - 1 yes 1 no

Montreal I get, cuz they are just "Montreal"....they are in a world alone.

Winnipeg is a former "Rob Weiser stronghold". Makes perfect sense. But, why is there even Union representation there (50 pilots to YYZ's 2300)....another epic FAIL. It's like the Block Queb. (a Federal party no one can vote on outside Quebec) dictating national policy, they shouldn't exist, and it shouldn't be possible.

But Charlene??? Do the math on that for me, please.



The F Ups are lining up like dominos. F this S.

[thepoors]

Just curious - how did the real elected reps vote in the motion to accept the AIP?

YUL - 2 yes
YYZ - 3 no
YWG - 3 yes
YVR - 1 yes 1 no

How did YWG (50 pilots?) end up with 3 votes? Seems a little insulting to the other large bases who represent hundreds (thousands?) of pilots.

One of the YWG was a proxy vote given to them by a YYZ rep. I'm not sure the reason for the proxy.

And yes, I agree it's ridiculous that they had 3 votes. They should get 1 at most. YVR is the second largest base and should be given another vote. YUL will always be "special."

This whole thing stinks of corruption.

[altiplano]

I was told that a YYZ status rep was on the Negots Comm and recused himself from the vote so the YWG LEC secretary got it.

Can you give a proxy if you recuse from a vote? Or only if you are absent? I'm not sure what the ALPA constitution says on this.

Either way it doesn't seem above board to me that 3 votes would go to YWG on what is the most important vote in a generation for professional pilots in this country.

[thepoors]

I was told that a YYZ status rep was on the Negots Comm and recused himself from the vote so the YWG LEC secretary got it.

Can you give a proxy if you recuse from a vote? Or only if you are absent? I'm not sure what the ALPA constitution says on this.

Either way it doesn't seem above board to me that 3 votes would go to YWG on what is the most important vote in a generation for professional pilots in this country.

The rep can give the proxy vote to whomever they want.

The ALPA line on this so far is that it "wouldn't have changed the outcome."

[RippleRock]

I was told that a YYZ status rep was on the Negots Comm and recused himself from the vote so the YWG LEC secretary got it.

Can you give a proxy if you recuse from a vote? Or only if you are absent? I'm not sure what the ALPA constitution says on this.

Either way it doesn't seem above board to me that 3 votes would go to YWG on what is the most important vote in a generation for professional pilots in this country.

....PLUS....


It was a unanimous vote at the Winnipeg base, YES - three, NO - zero....... not one outlier.

There was clearly a form of "groupthink" or collusion going on. But I'll try and steer clear of any theories as to why.

However the result is that the Winnipeg base Reps, all by themselves, torpedoed what could have been a "huge" turning point for this profession in Canada.



Another WTF moment......keep 'em comin'.

[rudder]

I was told that a YYZ status rep was on the Negots Comm and recused himself from the vote so the YWG LEC secretary got it.

Can you give a proxy if you recuse from a vote? Or only if you are absent? I'm not sure what the ALPA constitution says on this.

Either way it doesn't seem above board to me that 3 votes would go to YWG on what is the most important vote in a generation for professional pilots in this country.

How is it in a bargaining unit of 5200 members that one of 10 elected status reps needs to be on the bargaining committee…… everybody knows that creates a conflict of interest. Hard to be objective on an AIP that you had an hand in reaching. And that would have precipitated a proxy.

Just wondering - was it a directed proxy?

Regardless, it looks more like Bearskin Airlines MEC rather than the largest pilot group in Canada.

For a group that was so transparent, cohesive, and effective in the lead up to the TA this just seems like a confusing, divisive, and sloppy outcome.

[flyingcanuck]

For a group that was so transparent, cohesive, and effective in the lead up to the TA this just seems like a confusing, divisive, and sloppy outcome.

good summary right there

[Cessna 180]

Just curious - how did the real elected reps vote in the motion to accept the AIP?

YUL - 2 yes
YYZ - 3 no
YWG - 3 yes
YVR - 1 yes 1 no

How did YWG (50 pilots?) end up with 3 votes? Seems a little insulting to the other large bases who represent hundreds (thousands?) of pilots.

In reality the YWG rep doesn't have 2 or 3 votes. Each rep (FO and Captain) has the votes of the number of pilots they represent. That goes for every other local council too.

now in practice, calling a roll call vote doesn't happen often, but any of the status reps voting have the right to call a roll call.

I don't work at AC so I have no idea the number of pilots each rep represents, but it looks to me like it may have failed if the status reps called a roll call vote.

[lownslow]

For a group that was so transparent, cohesive, and effective in the lead up to the TA this just seems like a confusing, divisive, and sloppy outcome.

I feel like there’s some detail a NDA prevents them from telling us.

[AirCandida]

For a group that was so transparent, cohesive, and effective in the lead up to the TA this just seems like a confusing, divisive, and sloppy outcome.

I feel like there’s some detail a NDA prevents them from telling us.

Like future management jobs and Leafs tickets?

[lownslow]

For a group that was so transparent, cohesive, and effective in the lead up to the TA this just seems like a confusing, divisive, and sloppy outcome.

I feel like there’s some detail a NDA prevents them from telling us.

Like future management jobs and Leafs tickets?

I hope not but I don’t personally know the people involved so to think I can accurately call their motivations would be arrogant at best.

[ItsGoodEnough]

I said it from the very beginning that no one should be fooled by all the pretty lanyards. We never were and never will be one cohesive group as some might naively believe. The AC pilot group is a very diverse fraternity made-up of different generations, seniority levels and values. We don’t all think the same … and that’s ok.

The 98% strike vote was great as a pressure tactic during negotiations but to believe it meant 98% of pilots would be rowing in the same direction when push comes to shove was mistaken.

[bcflyer]

$285/hr... bit of training... a bit of premium/override... max esop match... that's easy $300K.

ESOP match is not pay. That’s an investment. Working overtime doesn’t count. Anyone can work overtime and earn more. The fact that people will bitch about working too many days then count on doing overtime to achieve some magical number defeats the whole point of trying to achieve QOL gains.

Seems like you’re just digging in now, how is ESOP match not income, I can tell you the CRA counts it as income.
When the company matches, I sell it all unless the stock is down a bit but it’s certainly not a long term investment, it’s just a savings that the company has to pony up.
Also, on the most junior equipment, 8 days of OT for an entire year, seriously, don’t you guys train every four months, that’ll either be at double time or in the block, either way it’s a win.
Just admit you were wrong, you just sound silly now

I sound silly? I said ESOP was an investment not income. They give you stocks not money. You said it yourself you need to sell them to see any gains (the way the stock is going now I doubt you would sell) and backed up my claim by saying they aren’t a long term investment. Let me guess. You’re one of those guys who considers per diems to be income as well?
The 3rd year 220 captain rate is roughly $280. Multiply that by 960 = $ 268,800 at the most. Now take into account they will be on reserve so quite likely will never see 960 hrs. They are guaranteed 900 so $280 x 900 = $252,000. Nowhere near the magical $300,000 without doing almost $50,000 worth of OT.

[Lt. Daniel Kaffee]

They give you stocks not money.

Better go back and read that ESOP documentation....it's paid out and taxed on your April pay typically.

[altiplano]

I can't believe that I'm agreeing with Lt. Dan...

It's treated as taxable income, but but pensionable - the company does have the option to match cash or shares as part also. Just like profit share they also had option for cash or shares...

bcflyer - your really digging in on splitting hairs and semantics here. The point is that just about any NB CA at AC will be damn close to 300K if they're not over. This junior guy I flew with was pretty happy about it anyway. He was a solid yes - this isn't a junior vs senior vote.

I wish the FO formula started year 2 at a better %. I wish everyone went up more. There's more work to do. But the gains are pretty reasonable in the relevance department for FOs.

4 of 7 fleets FO will pay significantly more than a NB CA is paid today. The other 3 fleets. slightly less but close to a NB CA today.

Anyway, I don't support the TA, but I don't like this being framed to divide us. Junior/senior. WB/NB. CA/FO. DB/CWIPP. YYZ vs. World. Whatever...

[Ash Ketchum]

Best use of ratification pay at this point is to pay for lawyer fees to get the right to work in the US.

[Straight2Secondary]

For those that do leave, our flight decks are better off. Good riddance.

[8895]

For those that do leave, our flight decks are better off. Good riddance.

^ this unfounded arrogance is why the AC pilot group is becoming the laughing stock of the industry. Enjoy flying the flag after getting unstacked again.