Seems AC's PR department will have a busy week following one where they must have thought it couldn't have gotten much worse (i.e. Milton's appearance before hostile MPs).

As a follow-up to Milton's appearance, AC/CP are now running quarter-page ads in all the country's dailies reminding passengers to check which of the two airlines they are actually flying (i.e. metal), and clarifying how ops at YYZ are being handled between the two terminals. There is also a "drop-in" (sorry, don't know correct technical term for these things) when you go to the home pages for both AC and CP with a similar reminder.

(I wonder how AC arrived at the number "100" as the number of passengers at YYZ who were inconvenienced each day out of the 27,000 daily travelers using the two carriers at Pearson?)

The NATIONAL POST reports on its front page that the PM will ensure AC legislation will protect travelers, and the Competitions Bureau is investigating "unfair pricing" in AC's matching of West Jet's new Hamilton/Toronto-Moncton fares.

And both papers feature a prominent story about a "stolling minstrel" who blames AC for his cancellation of a tour of Ontario schools because the carrier lost his luggage and instruments between Victoria and Toronto over the weekend.

Oh well, at least the stock is up a bit today! (And I confirmed my upgrade on both flights to YHZ on Thursday's flights...)

I think those things are called pop-up windows (most of the time I find them very annoying, even the supposedly helpful ones in Microsoft Word). When I want help, I will ask for it.

I presume you are flying on AC planes since this is an AC post but maybe not. What is your experience as a CP elite getting upgrades on AC flights at time of booking? Do you book through AC or through CP? I posted elsewhere that I can never get confirmed CP upgrades at time of reservation when booking through AC although that can change by flight time (ie upgraded at gate).

Actually I fly CP metal and flight numbers as much as possible to avoid the problems you appear to be having. (With no status on AC, I can barely get through on the telephone to get my Aeroplan balance and update on "land transaction" postings. Their web version is quite useless in this regard, and it is hoped AC will adopt CP's almost real-time FF account retrieval system.)

My flights to YHZ are all CP numbers and metal, and booked originally in the slightly costlier ($175 return) M-class so I could use my "new" stickers. I haven't had any experience trying to book upgrades on AC metal, though I know when we were looking for award seats a few weeks ago, the CP agent had problems "communicating" with AC's computer and accessing that inventory for CP seats.

I know many of us are posting inappropriately or indiscriminately from AC to CP about the other carrier. I just assume those of us interested in these carriers will be reading both sets of forums (fora?).

And, yes, like you I also detest those "pop up windows". They are as bad as the cards which fall out of our magazines by the millions: I dub them "magazine dandruff".

As for the boards, we should probably get ahead of the wave and just combine them, anyway, into one CP/AC board. We all want to know what's going on at both places, anyway.

While I generally agree with the idea of merging the boards, let's wait until Cdn+ disappears and we all have our Aeroplan cards. (I know, a most frightening thought for some of us to ponder let alone live with!)

Technically, these boards are for posting and discussion of FF programs themselves, though of course we have certainly gone further into the business affairs of the two carriers of late.

I agree with Shareholder. Until Cdn + is folded into Aeroplan. let's keep the postings separate. Let's not empty the closet of the dearly departed too quickly!

If the PM feels obliged to comment on this matter (particularly when he's out of the country) then Milton has already sustained major self-inflicted, ego-driven damage. That same ego will most likely prevent him from seeing this until he's well past the point of no return.

I'm also fairly convinced that the 100 out of 27,000 number is bogus. It seems unlikely that they would put forth such an effort to deal with only .37% of their passengers. Isn't the rate of mis-directed baggage higher?

Let's remember Milton is an American.

'Nuff said. (IMO--but with apologies to those Americans who deviate from the norm)

Wasn't that the irony in AC's attacks on Carty and AA last summer? We didn't want them **** Yankees running our Mapleflot! But let's not go there...

From an OD perspective, the challenges of merging AC and CAI are tremendous: tough human resources issues with complex labour relations; blending two airlines into a smooth daily operation; creating a new brand; and marketing the new entity; and finally communicating with all constituents. An OD consultant's nightmare is a CEO who projects a mixed image. Mr Milton is an astute executive. He however comes across as arrogant and insensitive to some market realities. He is not the ideal spokesperson for the airline and he has managed to alienate some politicians and a part of the travelling public. I don't think that he understands that airlines are perceived to be public transportation first and foremost and then an industry. He seens to have misread the national psyche and the conmplex emotional ties of Canadians to two airlines. This is a national trait not found in the multi carrier USA market. I would suggest a frank boardroom discussion on some strategic issues with tactical implications. Many mergers have failed from lack of attention to the "people question." This is a good case study in OD !

A320,

That seems to me to be a very astute assessment of the situation.

In looking for a solution. We should also consider the corporate governance problem:

In theory, shareholders elect directors, who in turn appoint officers. Meaning that officers report upwards to both levels. In reality, though, the presence of large institutional shareholders, and the officers' control of proxies, mean that in reality, the officers are in control of most of the shares--so that they dictate who the directors are, and to a certain extent control them.

Since Milton has been successful at generating shareholder value, it may be extremely difficult to get either the directors, or less directly the large institutional shareholders to rein him in.
There needs to be a realization among those people that his approach may be damaging to the airline in the long term.

Robert Milton has done a good job planning the Open Skies bridgehead into the USA market. He is astute and nimble in response to market opportunities. I admire this in a CEO. He is not totally la Bete Noire that some media portray. He however needs to be tempered and guided by the Board. Maximizing shareholder value while eroding public good will is a short term solution that has the potential to be counter-productive in the long term. As an AC shareholder, I applaud the potential synergies that can be obtained by carefully blending two great brands; however, I disapprove of the seemingly cavalier manner that some constituents have been treated: legislators; travelling public. I fear that politicians will over-react and introduce into the proposed legislation some elements that are narrow minded and short sighted. As for the customers, Canadian traditional tolerance is being eroded and there well may be a backlash. It takes a $10 investment to gain a customer while only $1 to maintain this same customer.. The CEO is not helping the public image and he is becoming a lightning rod for resistance to the merger. From a shareholder point of view, at what point does such a situation become a liability ?

Agree with your comments (both airbus320 and AC*SE) and particularly about the lock management has on directors and how little power shareholders actually have. This has been my primary concern with AC since it went private and one of the reasons I preferred the Onex solution, seeing more accountability in a company sensitive to such things. (It is a falicy, of course, in most corporate governance to think shareholders do have a real say in appointing directors. In AC's case, it is the Caisse de Depot in Quebec that is likely the largest and most influential shareholder and does have a say on who sits on its board.)

And the lack of understanding by Milton about how Canadians see their institutions like AC and CP as more than just competing companies and businesses is an important blind spot that may well be at play here. Very astute.

Been enjoying three days of isolation on Cape Breton Island, but had a fine flight on CP through YYZ (T3 domestic lounge is showing strain under its lack of a second floor, and lots of AC elites in addition to us CP elites: also no decent beer, the Upper Canada has vanished!) to YHZ on Thursday. Am at a conference now and too many delegates had complaints about problems at YYZ T2, even with the fixes AC introduced the other day. (Didn't help that their computers went down Friday afternoon at a peak check-in period!) But it was interesting how many people I talked to tonight noted the poor attitude of AC staff. And this was from people who generally fly and prefer AC.

(Those flying CP -- and I myself -- found no such evidence in the air or on the ground with CP staff.)

Shareholder,
While it is easy to generalize, I usually resist the temptation. As an employee of Air Canada, I have witnessed many of my colleagues going above and beyond the call of duty during the last few weeks, under very difficult conditions. While there have been teething problems at this early stage of the merger, the politicians and the media in particular, have been quite biased. Many of the examples of merger related poor service put forward by the politicians and the newspapers, have little to do with the merger. Let the liberal politicians not forget the reasons behind the merger in the first place or the reason why Toronto aiport does not have a completed large modern air terminal.

This media scrutiny has given a segment of the flying public license to abuse Air Canada public contact staff. I have witnessed several episodes of passengers using supposed merger related frustrations as an excuse to let loose on customer service agents. Apparently, the merger is now responsible for mechanical problems and weather related delays. In fact, an agent in T2 was punched in the face by an irate customer, who was not happy that weather had closed down the airports on the U.S. eastern seabord.

I just got back from a trip which started with a Telaviv flight delayed 4 hours by YYZ thunderstorms(last Friday night). Even though my crew had the right to not work the delayed flight because of a 17 hour duty day, which started at midnight, they all elected to work the flight. And they did so with a smile, despite the many barbed comments from some of the passengers. Some of these people truly expected Air Canada to control the thunderstorms!
Most of my colleagues have aquitted themselves admirably under difficult circumstances during the past several week. Is the only news that is newsworthy, bad news? We could use a break for a little while until this merger is a little further down the road.

WDK: Hang in there. You didn't create the chaos but you and all line staff are forced to endure it. There are really frequent flyers who are on your side! We know that you are frustrated and stressed because you are professionals who care about delivering excellent service. You bear the brunt of the angst created by the merger. Things should improve as both operations slowly merge and customers will see the result: a fine airline
resulting from the blending of two great brands.