jazz pilots pay the mortgage off fast

[simplyput]

The E175 can be thought of as a DC-9? Give me a break. How many seats does it have? Doesn't the RJ705 have 2 more seats?

The E175 is a REGIONAL JET.

Most REGIONAL AIRLINES in N. America have them.

[Indanao]

Job security is the knowledge that you are underpaid at your current job.

Unless you are a public "servant".

Or, a Pilot.

[Sage]

The E175 can be thought of as a DC-9? Give me a break. How many seats does it have? Doesn't the RJ705 have 2 more seats?

The E175 is a REGIONAL JET.

Most REGIONAL AIRLINES in N. America have them.

Hmm..I think you need to read again or learn your numbers again dude. No where in my post did I mention the 175. I said 1 - 90!!! Even in one class configuration the 175 falls a mere 2 seats shy of the dc9-10 and -20 (according to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DC9.

Edited to include wikipedia.

[teacher]

If we're quoting wikipedia than:

Although commonly referred to with simply an "E" prefix, the jets are technically still Embraer Regional Jets ("ERJ"s).[7] Embraer dropped the ERJ prefix in its advertising early in production.

Regardless, you're right. Companies are replacing there CRJs with Q400s and maybe Q500s if they ever build it BUT I'm talking EMB vs CRJ. Seat for seat in the plane the CRJ is cheaper to operate. Regardless you and I both know that the top brass at both airlines would farm out ALL flying to the lowest bidder if they could and become a holding company collecting cheques.

[yycflyguy]

DC-9 range ~1200nm
EMJ-190 ~1800nm

DC-9 weight - 108,000lbs
EMJ 190 weight - 105,000 lbs-114 000 lbs

DC-9 pax 90-132
EMJ 190 pax 93

1990 DC-9 12 year blended day/night $160/hour
2011 EMJ 190 12 year rate $134

Anyone else see a problem here?

[simplyput]

I think its funny when AC guys talk about the EMB they only mention the 190, Sage do you guys just conveniently forget about the 73 seat EMB 175? Is the 175 a regional jet and the 190 not? They're both REGIONAL JETS. 40% of AC's fleet is REGIONAL JETS.

[yycflyguy]

I think its funny when AC guys talk about the EMB they only mention the 190, Sage do you guys just conveniently forget about the 73 seat EMB 175? Is the 175 a regional jet and the 190 not? They're both REGIONAL JETS. 40% of AC's fleet is REGIONAL JETS.

Wow did you miss the point. It was a pay comparison thing.

If you want to get into a pissing match. Here are some more numbers.

AC fleet size 202 aircraft of which 45 are 190s and 15 are 175. Yes only 15, which were rumoured to be sent back and replaced by more 190s. THAT is why we normally refer to 190s. It does the lion's share of the work between the two as there are 4 times more 190s than 175s. In case you don't have a calculator handy or are unable to do the math. All Embraer's represent 29.7% of the fleet, not 40% like you indicate.

A regional jet that flies 1800 nm and weighs over 100,000 lbs? Where does your definition of a regional jet end?

[Black Cat]

If I get laid off in 9 years because AC gave the Jazz CPA to another carrier, I will just go on EI.

I would get a paycheque to do nothing, abeit not as much as what I would be making at Jazz but probably more than the pilots that would eventually be doing my old job

Then I would go back to school, which would be paid for because I am on EI. Get a better job after I graduate.

There you go, I would get a free/or subsidized education and get paid while I am doing it. Courtesy of you clowns who are predicting the downfall of Jazz in 2020.

LMAO. +1498

[rudder]

DC-9 range ~1200nm
EMJ-190 ~1800nm

DC-9 weight - 108,000lbs
EMJ 190 weight - 105,000 lbs-114 000 lbs

DC-9 pax 90-132
EMJ 190 pax 93

1990 DC-9 12 year blended day/night $160/hour
2011 EMJ 190 12 year rate $134

Anyone else see a problem here?

The 1990's are not coming back for AC nor any other airline. Pining about the past is a waste of time and effort. The industry has been reset and so has the profession. Call it a DC9, call it an Embraer. Either way, there is a new rate in the industry for 93 seat jets.

[yycflyguy]

DC-9 range ~1200nm
EMJ-190 ~1800nm

DC-9 weight - 108,000lbs
EMJ 190 weight - 105,000 lbs-114 000 lbs

DC-9 pax 90-132
EMJ 190 pax 93

1990 DC-9 12 year blended day/night $160/hour
2011 EMJ 190 12 year rate $134

Anyone else see a problem here?

The 1990's are not coming back for AC nor any other airline. Pining about the past is a waste of time and effort. The industry has been reset and so has the profession. Call it a DC9, call it an Embraer. Either way, there is a new rate in the industry for 93 seat jets.

Disagree. If pilots could only show some sort of unity and integrity the wages and work conditions would not have deteriorated to the point they are at now and only heading in one direction. By perpetuating the myth that the "golden days" of pay are gone and there is nothing that can be done to get back to it is a defeatist attitude.

[rudder]

Disagree. If pilots could only show some sort of unity and integrity the wages and work conditions would not have deteriorated to the point they are at now and only heading in one direction. By perpetuating the myth that the "golden days" of pay are gone and there is nothing that can be done to get back to it is a defeatist attitude.

There was a way to try to achieve this objective, it was called 'a pilot union'. That no longer exists in Canada as the profession is comprised of pilot union(s) and non-union carriers. Same in the US. To remain competitive and survive, costs have to reflect the revenue environment. Consolidation in the US market may add some revenue stability, but as we have seen in Canada, there is always somebody waiting in the wings ready to open a new shop and charge fares based on Year 1 pay levels. And pilots are lined up to accept those jobs. That is reality.

[yycflyguy]

Disagree. If pilots could only show some sort of unity and integrity the wages and work conditions would not have deteriorated to the point they are at now and only heading in one direction. By perpetuating the myth that the "golden days" of pay are gone and there is nothing that can be done to get back to it is a defeatist attitude.

There was a way to try to achieve this objective, it was called 'a pilot union'. That no longer exists in Canada as the profession is comprised of pilot union(s) and non-union carriers. Same in the US. To remain competitive and survive, costs have to reflect the revenue environment. Consolidation in the US market may add some revenue stability, but as we have seen in Canada, there is always somebody waiting in the wings ready to open a new shop and charge fares based on Year 1 pay levels. And pilots are lined up to accept those jobs. That is reality.

Now THAT I can agree with. Just like AA 12 steps to recovery, the first step is recognition of a problem. Houston, we have a problem. A good friend of mine always preached to leave a company/job better than you found it. Some of us are working on it. Big ship, little rudder (pun intended). Hopeful for positive change for all.

[rudder]

Now THAT I can agree with. Just like AA 12 steps to recovery, the first step is recognition of a problem. Houston, we have a problem. A good friend of mine always preached to leave a company/job better than you found it. Some of us are working on it. Big ship, little rudder (pun intended). Hopeful for positive change for all.

Well, if it is true that ACPA has agreed to a widebody version of ZIP (Maple Leaf?) then it will be very difficult to make the case for wage rate inflation when there are competing in-house pay scales.

[yycflyguy]

Now THAT I can agree with. Just like AA 12 steps to recovery, the first step is recognition of a problem. Houston, we have a problem. A good friend of mine always preached to leave a company/job better than you found it. Some of us are working on it. Big ship, little rudder (pun intended). Hopeful for positive change for all.

Well, if it is true that ACPA has agreed to a widebody version of ZIP (Maple Leaf?) then it will be very difficult to make the case for wage rate inflation when there are competing in-house pay scales.

Let me nip that in the bud.

At this point, the negotiations committee has a proposal to present to the MEC. They are presently gathering all the details and preparing a presentation package to the MEC who will then debate the various pros and cons of the proposal. The MEC has yet to see the proposal, have not debated it and have not approved it. It is technically not a TA. IF, and it is a very big IF the MEC passes the proposal they do the roadshow thing to present it to the membership where it is subjected to the ratification process. DO NOT EXPECT THIS PROPOSAL TO PASS IN ITS PRESENT (RUMOURED) FORM.

At this point, there has only been rumour and speculation as to what it contains. A discount division of mainline is an easy "no" to anyone who I have spoken to. The rumour mill on the Air Canada Pilots Private forum is at full steam and guys are pissed.

Like I said, some of us are working on better conditions for all.

The next generation of new-hires should be happy to know that our priority to a new CBA is increased new hire pay and true formula on the Embraer. In its present form, it is totally, 100% unacceptable.

[rudder]

The Negots Committee had to get their direction from somewhere. If this 767-lite idea came out of the blue and they went with it AND this is the first that the MEC has heard about it, then you have a rogue committee. Not likely. And hopefully the MEC is not so disconnected from the membership that they have given tacit approval to the concept without understanding that it may be a non-starter. It is entirely likely that there is a quid pro quo where gains have been made elsewhere (perhaps in the areas that you have articulated) in exchange for the B767 LOU. I do know that it is being sold as 'growth' and hiring (i.e. no current 767 pilot negatively affected). Still, everyone knows what the fate of ZIP was. It is the exact same concept with widebodies.

In my opinion, the entire ACPA agreement needs an overhaul. There is a requirement to dramatically increase efficiency (or conversely, reduce inefficiency). There are clearly areas where a significant portion of the membership are no longer supportive of status quo (i.e. the pay gaps between fleet types). Productivity enhancements could be used to offset improvements in pay and benefits where necessary.

A discount widebody LOU is a smokescreen and if that is the best corporate plan available, then there is much to worry about. There is a crazy aunt living in the basement and it is time to acknowledge it and implement meaningful and practical change. Everybody's goal should be that AC plan to be around for the long term and to stop lurching from crisis to crisis. It is time for the pilots to take a leadership role. Problem is that for this pilot group many of the barriers to change are self inflicted. Witness the handling of the entire age 60 issue.

[teacher]

If this is true and that's a big IF please re-read a previous post for which I was chastised. ACE/AC would farm out what ever they could to lower the bar and make their money. Make no mistake, it isn't and never will be about pilots other than "how can we get these guys to work more for less".

[yycflyguy]

The Negots Committee had to get their direction from somewhere. If this 767-lite idea came out of the blue and they went with it AND this is the first that the MEC has heard about it, then you have a rogue committee.

Not true. The negotiating committee had an outline of goals given to them via a WACON survey the membership completed last year to give focus as to what was wanted by the membership. From the rumours I have heard, don't forget this all speculation at this point, the Low Cost overseas idea came from the Company side and it is the first anyone had heard about this idea. Not a rogue committee. They were left to do their job and now they are presenting the facts to the MEC. The MEC will then determine if it continues with the ratification process (I think it will die at this point).

It is entirely likely that there is a quid pro quo where gains have been made elsewhere (perhaps in the areas that you have articulated) in exchange for the B767 LOU.

Agreed. Another reason to vote no. This is coming across as a cost neutral agreement. Totally unacceptable for me and for most.

In my opinion, the entire ACPA agreement needs an overhaul.

Stop calling it an ACPA agreement! At this point, it is only an offer that the negots committee is presenting to the MEC. ACPA - the membership still have not seen anything!

There is a requirement to dramatically increase efficiency (or conversely, reduce inefficiency).

I would to hear where you think there are inefficiencies within our system that are directly impacted by the pilots.

There are clearly areas where a significant portion of the membership are no longer supportive of status quo (i.e. the pay gaps between fleet types).

Agreed. Every time their is another new hire course the "green" pilots number increase. The day is coming when it will be a majority.

Productivity enhancements could be used to offset improvements in pay and benefits where necessary.

Disagree. Piss poor management, poor hedging, shareholder disbursements, pension underfunding, executive compensation and foreign exchanges are not controllable by pilots. We do our job safely, efficiently and have only had concessionary contracts for 12 years. Meanwhile executive compensation has risen by 200% in some cases and bonuses in the millions distributed.

A return to pre-CCAA salaries for the pilots would require a ticket increase of around $3. Pass it on to the passengers and tell em it is for the pilots pay raise.

It is time for the pilots to take a leadership role. Problem is that for this pilot group many of the barriers to change are self inflicted. Witness the handling of the entire age 60 issue.

Agreed 100%

I am only 1 vote of a membership of 3000... but there are more like me everyday.

[yycflyguy]

If this is true and that's a big IF please re-read a previous post for which I was chastised. ACE/AC would farm out what ever they could to lower the bar and make their money. Make no mistake, it isn't and never will be about pilots other than "how can we get these guys to work more for less".

Agreed. See the arrangement with SkyRegional. ACPA still holds the keys to that. If this agreement allows for a totally separate Tier II on separate pay scale and a separate union it is another "no". I see the future whipsaw potential between 3 groups now driving pilot wages and conditions down further. Totally unacceptable to me.

[teacher]

To add to my post "yycflyguy" I and most of the pilots at Jazz (vacation flying aside) are happy to do what we do best and that's provide lift for Air Canada. Nobody wants to steal flying from ACPA nor do we want to undercut to increase our flying. Having said that, if we end up having to compete with others for that flying that we already do than we will have no choice but play the game to save our jobs. It's not a threat it's reality. If ALPA pilots at Jazz are to face layoffs in the future to possible lower cost CPA providers than what are we to do? What angers many I'm sure is that all these decisions are completely out of our hands.

[yycflyguy]

To add to my post "yycflyguy" I and most of the pilots at Jazz (vacation flying aside) are happy to do what we do best and that's provide lift for Air Canada. Nobody wants to steal flying from ACPA nor do we want to undercut to increase our flying. Having said that, if we end up having to compete with others for that flying that we already do than we will have no choice but play the game to save our jobs. It's not a threat it's reality. If ALPA pilots at Jazz are to face layoffs in the future to possible lower cost CPA providers than what are we to do? What angers many I'm sure is that all these decisions are completely out of our hands.

Couldn't agree more.

There have been no rumours of "stealing-back" Jazz flying in this agreement. There are far too many other issues that need to be addressed.

My hope is that the company goes about positive growth with fleet expansion (787s in late 2013) and route expansion (China, Japan and India). I am sick of cost reductions that pit pilot against pilot within ACPA or pilot versus pilot at Tier II's.

[rudder]

By 'ACPA agreement' I meant the entire collective agreement, not the rumoured TA.

As far as inefficiency is concerned, just look at the amount of stick time lost due to time spent in training (or waiting for training) after every equipment bid. I still have buddies that brag about having to displace to stay current on the 777. That is not a badge of honour, it should be a cause for concern. AC could easily morph to a modified status pay system using widebody and narrowbody categories and significantly reduce training expense and improve pilot efficiency.

The employees with the most to lose from financial instability at AC are the pilots. Instead of pouring over the failed ideas from management, sponsor ideas of your own. Take a look around the industry. I would rather be the advocate for change while there is time to investigate all options rather than staring down the barrel of a gun circa 2003/2004.

Cost neutrality is a laudable management objective but is unlikely to form the basis for a ratified agreement unless this really just about such mundane topics as pass travel priority. There are millions available to be saved in the pilot agreement which means that are also millions available to spend on the agreement as well.

767-lite? It is a distraction not a solution.

[mbav8r]

A couple ineffeciencies pointed out to me by an ACPA pilot was, sick if required and a career trainee.
Sick if required; if on reserve and you are called, you can say you're sick. If they keep going down the list and someone comes in for that shift, no deduction from your sick bank.
Career trainee; Bid new equipment, start your training, then on next bid, bid new equipement before getting out of line indoc from previous bid. Keep the cycle going and spend your career in training.

[yycflyguy]

As far as inefficiency is concerned, just look at the amount of stick time lost due to time spent in training (or waiting for training) after every equipment bid. I still have buddies that brag about having to displace to stay current on the 777. That is not a badge of honour, it should be a cause for concern. AC could easily morph to a modified status pay system using widebody and narrowbody categories and significantly reduce training expense and improve pilot efficiency.

A couple of points here. 777 guys only are in the plane for 4-8 take-off/landing cycles in a month. You throw in some vacation days and they can easily exceed the 3 bang and go's in 90 day currency. That won't change. The 777 only account for around 300 total pilots (CA & FO). That is only 10% of the pilot group.

The rumoured TA has aircraft "groupings" they are using this as a way to limit the amount of training that goes on. Some guys do the type acquisition program and have a list of types on their licence. Most are lazy and sit on their airplane for years. What you suggest may be coming sooner rather than later.

[yycflyguy]

A couple ineffeciencies pointed out to me by an ACPA pilot was, sick if required and a career trainee.
Sick if required; if on reserve and you are called, you can say you're sick. If they keep going down the list and someone comes in for that shift, no deduction from your sick bank.
Career trainee; Bid new equipment, start your training, then on next bid, bid new equipement before getting out of line indoc from previous bid. Keep the cycle going and spend your career in training.

Sick if required, or SIR is being monitored by the company for abuse. It is still a contractual right and guys use it because our reserve rules are so poor. No A/B reserve. It is actually a convenience thing for crew sked to use a sick day on someone than call that person up on reserve only to have them book off at that point.

Career trainee? Nop. Doesn't exist. There are freezes anytime someone exercises a bid. You have to be able to hold that position and that takes time. In over 5 years I have only been able to make 1 upgrade due to seniority restrictions. The company has gone to 4 bids in a year to utilize better training programs and sort through re-instatement rights faster. Even if you are awarded a new position it does not mean you will be trained on it. Subsequent bids may bump guys off back into their original seat negating wasteful/unnecessary training. Afraid that myth is busted.

[swordfish]

a/c capcity agreement end in 2020 a little birdie has indicated that is will go to the lowest bidder not a traditional carrier he metioned that is would be very wise for all jazz aviators to pay down as much of ur ppersonal debt asap /// for what it is worth // fly safe

That is a very well written piece. In fact after reading it only 3 or 4 times, I finally got the gist of it.