Another slap in the face

[Counterpoint]

Pension plans are improving, but that only makes for a better deficit. AC's problem is that without reform the payments required would lead to bankruptcy, as in 2003 and 2009, that is why the moratorium. In the case of the teachers and omers, if payments are required and they can't be met because the governments aren't going to make up the difference, there will have to be something done.

Increasing member contributions won't work, that's why it hasn't been done.

$9.9B at omers, and $12B at teachers.

[disco]

Counterpoint, you remain very confused by specific details from the FTA and I am now clear that you were not directly connected to bargaining as some here have suggested. Your complete confusion in several areas is proof enough....I'm guessing you are a recent hire - as in within the last 2 years. You speak from that level of comprehension of this entire experience had by (the) ACPA (lol). The ACPA...who says that? But sorry, I digress...

Pay grouping did not provide a pay uplift for ACPA pilots as a group. It inequitably improved EMJ and 767 pay at the expense of their colleagues who would always make less money forever more as they move into A320 and B777, A330 jobs and any RP position....hence grandfathering. Just so you can understand - grandfathering ALWAYS means you have agreed to concessions....concessions that those already in these positions will not suffer but make no mistake - every new bidder would be paid less for ever more....so that 2 positions would pay more. This was not a financial coup for the pilots. The entire FTA was a zero sum swap game (save the 2.5% across the board increase) and was couched as gains by an NC desperate to sell their work to the group. 2.5% ....that is it. The sum total in monetary gain in pilot wages in the FTA....at great expense to decades of bargaining effort.

Your comments about RP pay show further ignorance on your part about the industry....AC are one of the outliers in N.America in creating a concessionary position and title in order to pay an augment pilot less money. Most of N.America, and indeed the world, pay an additional F/O or Captain to augment flights.

So far, every contributor on this thread has misunderstood the inequitable (disparate) pension adjustments in the FTA....there was an unbalanced retroactive increase of MPUs for ex-Canadian pilots only. This was seen as a fair distribution of bargaining capital by NC1 (for good reason...let's leave it there). They felt about 400 pilots should receive this money in their pensions for a period of time they were not even on the AC property. Yes, bargaining capital assigned to a period that pilots were not yet on the property. Sound familiar? Do you believe that is fair? If so, perhaps NC1 should have dug deeper and found any portions of the contracts of that day that AC pilots should receive retro adjustments...per diems perhaps? Would that be a reasonable approach. Retro per diem adjustments for original AC pilots only. This devious measure was argued on false merits when they cited an arbitration decision that suggested (but did not legally award) a convergence of the 2 groups pension plans....

You attempt to speak from a position of knowledge on these matters but are revealing yourself to many of us as confused and biased. Don't get me wrong - its good that you have taken the time to learn more than most but you now attempt to argue as an authority on a matter you are very much confused and misinformed about.

[Counterpoint]

If you don't believe that AC needs an LCC, then you haven't been paying attention to market share and margin loss from the competition.

When Zip was introduced and subsequently ignored, WJ had 20 something planes, they now are closing in on 120 something planes. Sunwing didn't exist, they will have 40 planes this season. They both operate a holiday package business that generates profits. AC has to react.

What was offered to the acpa for an increase in rouge capacity? If it was nothing then it would be a let, if there was money offered then it wouldn't be a let. I wonder what it was? Don't you? If there was something offered in return for the increase in capacity, wouldn't that just prove that the acpa negotiators kept something from AC that they wanted, and now there would be a chance at improvement?

By how much are middle managers at AC bloated? How many of them are there? Will erasing those positions bring AC an instant appreciable margin increase?

[yycflyguy]

The FAA doesn't allow RP's only IRO's (specially qualified FO's).

TC does allow RP's. until you change how TC doles out licensing you got nothing.

You missed the point. It doesn't matter if TC recognizes RPs or not. Eliminate RPs from the pay structure. Only CAs and FOs. That way there is a logical career progression for the pilots and the argument that some RPs made six figures is moot. FOs only.

Doesn't the public deserve to have 3 qualified, rested pilots on all overseas flights, especially through the circadian lows of night crossings? One of "the" ACPA's greatest committees are the Flight Safety people. They work hard to mitigate augment and fatigue issues.... something the architects of TA1 failed to do. They were not even consulted on the radical proposal to shift to CARs max for the LCC.

[Counterpoint]

yyc,

Isn't that what an RP is fully qualified to provide, enroute relief? In the event of an emergency and both pilots are incapacitated, isn't the RP qualified to divert and land the aircraft?

Isn't that same qualification allowed by TC, but not by the FAA? In AC's case isn't the licensing for RP's been there for awhile? Wasn't there an era when Airbus 320 pilots were used as Airbus 340 RP's?

Here is my point, why would AC pay a higher rate for a license they don't require? I'm presuming the RP is qualified in the event of emergency to provide diversion and landing in the event both the captain and FO are incapacitated.

Until you get TC to abolish the Relief qualification and align it with the IRO qualitficatiin, you still got nothing AC wants to pay for.

[Counterpoint]

Disco,

Did I sound very confused when;

-FanB said the acpa negotiators got sucked in to no growth language in the TA, (-15 EMJ, -10 net of fleet to rouge before transfers, and 30 or 29 airbus transfers to rouge when the limit is 20, some without the 767's being at rouge), or when he says that only ML ASMS count for just the rouge 767 flights to Mexico, (it's all rouge ASMS both fleets at 85% on all rouge flying)?

-Dukepoint criticized the acpa negotiator for taking a EMJ Captain position when he was forced reduced off the 767 FO position and essentially had no other option?

-yycflyguy when he too disputed the growth language, carrier wage increases in groupings, the CARAC repor about how most of the flying at rouge can be done under ML rules but not under their proposed regulations, the CARAC repor about how most of the flying at rouge can be done under ML rules but not under their proposed regulations, how WJ rest periods copied for rouge were/are considerably better, how EMJs couldn't go to any CPA carrier (SkyRegional or otherwise), how having a presence that doesn't cost as much as Jazz is a way to protect the RapidAir product, how having an LCC is a must in the presence of two competitors rapidly expanding straining margins and market share, how the pension contribution holiday is a factor of pension legislation?

-pilotbzh's fleet projection showing the fallout and blaming the TA?

-seabat expected to recoup 10-years of losses and why that seemed unrealistic?

-when rudder sees the debate as useless, when finding out what went wrong means uncovering the misinformation?

-Rockie on the options available to the acpa negotiators to relieve AC of the pension risk in order to get reform enough to protect the moratorium requirements and keep AC solvent enough to keep operating, à la 2003 and 2009, how member contributions aren't able to hamper pension payments due without a moratorium?

-spiraldive on the myth that ex-Canadian pilots weren't able to use previous merged airline time to count for their DB pension accruals before the TA, getting $25,000 added to benefits because they werent already eligible to the SERP before the TA, no EMJ protective languages, the acpa negotiators getting a half a million dollar a year executive jobs, the length of the TA?

I'm not so sure I'm ignorant about AC being the outliers in the RP field. As I said earlier, if the license is issued and it's valid, why would AC pay for something it doesn't need?

As for the ex-cdn MPU increase, the MPU increase above and beyond what the AC plan members got, was only for the period 1990-2000, they were balanced because they compensated for a period that the Adams decision said would fulfill the intent of his ruling. One pension for all. When you say the acpa negotiators did it for good reason, what would that be? 80% of that team were original AC pilots, the lone ex-Canadian negotiator was a pension chair for many years, are you insinuating he did it without the knowledge of the other negotiators? Or are you insinuating he did it to pay ex-cdn pilots more than what was given up when they lost their DCA? If that's the case he failed miserably, it was for the middle MPU's only and it doesn't come close to what they gave up in DCA potential benefits (I say potential because it was never realized from the merger on, for those pilots).

Grouping pay provided an uplift for every position that was on the property, lost when you moved positions. The increases to FO's ranged from 6% to 17% before the across the board increases of 5%-3%-2%-2%. The first four years rate was an increase on all but one position, one that for some reason had vacancies.

Can you explain why you think the only across the board increases were 2.5%?

As for per diems, well look what happened? The cash supplement for the meals was an incredible uplift, and it was net dollars.

You are right, I am biased, I think the acpa made a fundamental mistake in turning down a load of money ($38.5M a year for 4-years), an opportunity to modernize a pay and scheduling system so archaic that no other professional organization I know of uses (think hospitals, and police forces etc.), hardly any of the veterans at AC understood, on acpa terms, based on misinformation from pilots that couldn't be bothered to read the NL's, let alone comprehend increases from a nearly dead company was possible.

[Dockjock]

I really hope we're still debating this crap in 2016.

[Counterpoint]

What debate?

Let's hope the acpa has learnt a lesson from risking a viable aircraft growth, job increasing, pay increasing and pension sustainable tentative agreement to a forced arbitration, resulting in a fleet reduction, deflationary DB pension, job reducing arbitration final offer selection.

The damage from paranoid emotional mis-information, is staggering......

[ClevelandSteamer]

Is any of this information readily available to the public?