Equipment bid
Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, I WAS Birddog
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 150
- Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 6:07 am
-
- Rank 2
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2017 7:39 pm
Re: Equipment bid
I would certainly hope so!
Hard to say to 675 pilots that it’s too expensive to keep them on CEWS and then keep paying captains their regular wage to sit in the right seat.
Hard to say to 675 pilots that it’s too expensive to keep them on CEWS and then keep paying captains their regular wage to sit in the right seat.
Re: Equipment bid
I doubt we will see one until September, when there might be some longer term certainty of our flying. It costs a lot to run a bid, and if you run a bid just to have to undo it the moment everyone is trained to go the other direction, you don't save much, if anything.
Second, if my interpretation of 10 - 4 .04 of our agreement is correct, it means a fair number of our pilots who may get downgraded, their pay will not be impacted by being put into the right seat, again, minimizing any cost benefit of a bid.
Second, if my interpretation of 10 - 4 .04 of our agreement is correct, it means a fair number of our pilots who may get downgraded, their pay will not be impacted by being put into the right seat, again, minimizing any cost benefit of a bid.
- KenoraPilot
- Rank 8
- Posts: 904
- Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 2:34 pm
- Location: 'berta
Re: Equipment bid
I wouldn't expect to see an equipment bid until Sept 2020. ALPA is working hard to keep everyone on CEWS, will have to wait and see I guess.Admiral Benson wrote: ↑Thu Jun 11, 2020 9:05 pm I would certainly hope so!
Hard to say to 675 pilots that it’s too expensive to keep them on CEWS and then keep paying captains their regular wage to sit in the right seat.
Re: Equipment bid
So, your logic is, if I am suffering so should the ones who are left behind! Downgrading to balance the roster won’t save jobs, we are already at a surplus even with half the active pilots on CEWS, the pilots remaining are paying your benefits while you receive CEWS, maybe a down bid should coincide with cancellation of the CEWS.Admiral Benson wrote: ↑Thu Jun 11, 2020 9:05 pm I would certainly hope so!
Hard to say to 675 pilots that it’s too expensive to keep them on CEWS and then keep paying captains their regular wage to sit in the right seat.
As said above, the union is working on a LOU to keep CEWS going, which will have some concessions by those who remain on payroll.
But thanks for your support!
"Stand-by, I'm inverted"
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 150
- Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 6:07 am
Re: Equipment bid
So got the answer today. No equipment bid till September. CEWS till August. No benefits starting July 1st. Only extended ones.... whatever that means?
Re: Equipment bid
EHC = medical and medical equipment/practitioners/ prescription drugsCPT.HarshColdReality wrote: ↑Fri Jun 12, 2020 1:46 pm So got the answer today. No equipment bid till September. CEWS till August. No benefits starting July 1st. Only extended ones.... whatever that means?
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 150
- Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 6:07 am
Re: Equipment bid
Awsome! Thanks for the info. Positive news from the ALPA email today............back to regular bidding and hints that recalls might start soon!!!
Re: Equipment bid
What indication is there that recalls may begin soon? ( I certainly hope you are correct)
My understanding is that more layoffs could be occurring after Aug 30.. and at this point there would have been more layoffs had alpa not tried to mitigate them.
My understanding is that more layoffs could be occurring after Aug 30.. and at this point there would have been more layoffs had alpa not tried to mitigate them.
- KenoraPilot
- Rank 8
- Posts: 904
- Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 2:34 pm
- Location: 'berta
Re: Equipment bid
Oops! My bad. You’re correct...
What Indications are there of recalls in the future?
Re: Equipment bid
I don't think there are any indications of any pilot recalls in the short term. When you consider the vast majority of those 50% remaining are not being utilized that is an indication that if things don't change there will be more to come.
The JAZ MEC priority has been to keep the CEWS program in place and minimize any further loss of employment for those who remain along with status pay and base protections. However this cannot continue long term. The only indication of anything positive is when you see in an uptake in flying by the travelling public. At this time, there are still too many barriers to free travel within our own country. This needs to be addressed. Increase in transborder flying and expansion of international will follow however we need to have a standard protocol that is followed by all participants.
The JAZ MEC priority has been to keep the CEWS program in place and minimize any further loss of employment for those who remain along with status pay and base protections. However this cannot continue long term. The only indication of anything positive is when you see in an uptake in flying by the travelling public. At this time, there are still too many barriers to free travel within our own country. This needs to be addressed. Increase in transborder flying and expansion of international will follow however we need to have a standard protocol that is followed by all participants.
Re: Equipment bid
Jazz is still sitting well below 25% of planned block hours for July. August likely will not exceed 25% either. Unlikely any Pilots will transition from inactive to active before Sept 01 with a greater likelihood that many will transition from inactive/CEWS to lay-off if the CEWS program is terminated by the Feds.
Once AC makes its decision about required Express fleet for 2021, then Jazz and SKY will have to respond accordingly. Right now it seems that AC only has clarity on the mainline fleet required for 2021 and is in the process of implementing that training plan.
Eventually it will be Express turn. If AC is getting smaller, then Express will be smaller although not necessarily proportionally.
Once AC makes its decision about required Express fleet for 2021, then Jazz and SKY will have to respond accordingly. Right now it seems that AC only has clarity on the mainline fleet required for 2021 and is in the process of implementing that training plan.
Eventually it will be Express turn. If AC is getting smaller, then Express will be smaller although not necessarily proportionally.
Re: Equipment bid
You guys are so negative. 25% is a significant increase from less than 10%. August will likely be a bit more, with a bit more in September. A steady uptrend is solid. I doubt we will see any further layoffs, and my guess is the first bunch of guys and gals will see some recalls before Christmas. The industry is putting a fair amount of pressure on the government, and I think you will start to see the needle move in a positive direction.
Re: Equipment bid
Thanks guys, that’s kinda what I figured.
We can have 25% of total flying but I think the million dollar question is “what is the demand for flying.”
Yes, Jazz et.al. Might be flying a 25% roster but if RSM Isn’t there to support the flying I think more layoffs could be on the table. I think CR could be testing the waters..
I’m hoping I’m completely wrong !
We can have 25% of total flying but I think the million dollar question is “what is the demand for flying.”
Yes, Jazz et.al. Might be flying a 25% roster but if RSM Isn’t there to support the flying I think more layoffs could be on the table. I think CR could be testing the waters..
I’m hoping I’m completely wrong !
Re: Equipment bid
You guys are all far, far to positive. No call backs until January 2022 at the earliest. If we’re lucky.
Re: Equipment bid
Disagree!!! Strongly disagree! I will wager 1/3rd of those on the inactive list will be back by the end of this year!!!
Re: Equipment bid
I am not. Just watching domestic numbers elsewhere in the world, along with actual COVID numbers from official sources instead of the news, to better grasp how many of the increased numbers are due to increased testing, age distribution, and hospital beds.
Re: Equipment bid
I certainly hope you’re correct, however I’m not so confident.
Half of all Canadians had less than $400 extra in the bank before this crisis, and if the feds axe the CEWB the banks will cool or outright freeze credit for millions of Canadians.
Canadians were some of the worlds most indebted people before this crisis. Our domestic travel won’t rebound like Chinas, or Europe’s domestic travel. We’re in for a long haul I fear because of economic reasons, not virus reasons.
Half of all Canadians had less than $400 extra in the bank before this crisis, and if the feds axe the CEWB the banks will cool or outright freeze credit for millions of Canadians.
Canadians were some of the worlds most indebted people before this crisis. Our domestic travel won’t rebound like Chinas, or Europe’s domestic travel. We’re in for a long haul I fear because of economic reasons, not virus reasons.
-
- Rank 5
- Posts: 344
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2015 7:04 pm
Re: Equipment bid
It seems that the very high transmission rate of this particular virus is going to be a limiting factor in what kind of restrictions we will see lifted, and subsequently what increases we can see in air travel. We also still have to recover from all the economic damage already done.
Re: Equipment bid
It has nothing to do with how transmissible it is, but rather how deadly it is to a very specific subset of our society. According to the CDC mortality of 0-49 is .05%. That is virtually nothing. Up to 30% of infected people never even have any symptoms.
The problem we have in Canada is that each province is doing their own thing, with no uniformity between them. New Brunswick is going full North Korea with their measures. And then we have a Federal government that seems incapable of leading. That will hamper us more than demand.
As far as money goes, I am not sure how that $400 was measured, but when you look at the general economic income in Canada, and how it is distributed, it very quickly paints a stark picture. The bottom 50% of households were not the ones traveling to begin with. And most young people, never have any money, but will very happily go travel the world.
U.S. Air Traffic Continues To Show Sequential Improvement: As of June 11, the seven-day rolling average of U.S. air travelers according to the TSA was 410,274 versus 323,753 a week ago (June 4), and is the highest level we have seen since March 25. As well, the TSA reported 502,209 passengers on June 11 which is the highest level we have seen since March 21 and ~5x higher than what we saw in mid-April when air passenger volumes bottomed. That said, U.S. air traffic is still down ~80% Y/Y but this compares to down over 95% in April.
Global Commercial Flight Activity Hits 2.5-month High: Looking at FlightRadar24 data which track the number of commercial flights, on a seven-day rolling average the number of flights hit 43,794 on June 13, the highest level we have seen since March 29. This compares to a week ago (June 6) which saw flights at 40,552.
For some reason we don't have numbers that are nearly as up to date. But travel is increasing and will continue to do so if the government will get out of the way. As far as I am aware, there was never a super spreader even linked to air travel (as in a single passenger or crew member who infected multiple people). Flying in an airplane is safe, and if social distancing measures are kept up, that should be more than enough to keep this think under control.
I do think governments are starting to see the damage they inflicted to the economy, and will be looking to undo it as quickly as possible. But there is a theater to it now, since they scared the crap out of everyone to begin with.
The problem we have in Canada is that each province is doing their own thing, with no uniformity between them. New Brunswick is going full North Korea with their measures. And then we have a Federal government that seems incapable of leading. That will hamper us more than demand.
As far as money goes, I am not sure how that $400 was measured, but when you look at the general economic income in Canada, and how it is distributed, it very quickly paints a stark picture. The bottom 50% of households were not the ones traveling to begin with. And most young people, never have any money, but will very happily go travel the world.
U.S. Air Traffic Continues To Show Sequential Improvement: As of June 11, the seven-day rolling average of U.S. air travelers according to the TSA was 410,274 versus 323,753 a week ago (June 4), and is the highest level we have seen since March 25. As well, the TSA reported 502,209 passengers on June 11 which is the highest level we have seen since March 21 and ~5x higher than what we saw in mid-April when air passenger volumes bottomed. That said, U.S. air traffic is still down ~80% Y/Y but this compares to down over 95% in April.
Global Commercial Flight Activity Hits 2.5-month High: Looking at FlightRadar24 data which track the number of commercial flights, on a seven-day rolling average the number of flights hit 43,794 on June 13, the highest level we have seen since March 29. This compares to a week ago (June 6) which saw flights at 40,552.
For some reason we don't have numbers that are nearly as up to date. But travel is increasing and will continue to do so if the government will get out of the way. As far as I am aware, there was never a super spreader even linked to air travel (as in a single passenger or crew member who infected multiple people). Flying in an airplane is safe, and if social distancing measures are kept up, that should be more than enough to keep this think under control.
I do think governments are starting to see the damage they inflicted to the economy, and will be looking to undo it as quickly as possible. But there is a theater to it now, since they scared the crap out of everyone to begin with.
-
- Rank 5
- Posts: 344
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2015 7:04 pm
Re: Equipment bid
"For COVID-19, [transmissibility] is at a two or three. That means one person can give the virus to two or three other people," explains Dr. Chen Liang, an associate professor with McGill University's department of medicine. "For SARS, I believe it is one-point-something. It's quite low. So, this really makes COVID-19 a lot worse than SARS."
Re: Equipment bid
It isn't if it transmits, it is if it kills. SARS had a very high mortality rate. Far higher than the current estimate of this. SARS mortality is estimated at 15% vs COVID-19 which is largely dependent on age groups, 0-49 it is, .05% and for 50 - 54 it is .2% (according to the CDC). That is a big difference.mixturerich wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:34 am "For COVID-19, [transmissibility] is at a two or three. That means one person can give the virus to two or three other people," explains Dr. Chen Liang, an associate professor with McGill University's department of medicine. "For SARS, I believe it is one-point-something. It's quite low. So, this really makes COVID-19 a lot worse than SARS."
Just to put that in perspective, the average 40yr old has a .05% of dying in any given year from simply living life.
-
- Rank 5
- Posts: 344
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2015 7:04 pm
Re: Equipment bid
You’re disputing what the doctor said, but we’re all entitled to our unqualified opinions.truedude wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 8:01 amIt isn't if it transmits, it is if it kills. SARS had a very high mortality rate. Far higher than the current estimate of this. SARS mortality is estimated at 15% vs COVID-19 which is largely dependent on age groups, 0-49 it is, .05% and for 50 - 54 it is .2% (according to the CDC). That is a big difference.mixturerich wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:34 am "For COVID-19, [transmissibility] is at a two or three. That means one person can give the virus to two or three other people," explains Dr. Chen Liang, an associate professor with McGill University's department of medicine. "For SARS, I believe it is one-point-something. It's quite low. So, this really makes COVID-19 a lot worse than SARS."
Just to put that in perspective, the average 40yr old has a .05% of dying in any given year from simply living life.