Court decision gives AC gates at YYZ TNew
#16
Guest
Posts: n/a
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by YEG Guy:
The judges handwritten comments can be viewed here:
http://www.stikeman.com/ac/uploads/reasonsgtaa.pdf
....</font>
The judges handwritten comments can be viewed here:
http://www.stikeman.com/ac/uploads/reasonsgtaa.pdf
....</font>
#17
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Richmond, BC, Canada
Posts: 1,511
There has already been an appeal or two of some of Justice Farley's decisions. They didn't get very far. It seems the superior courts are very hesitant to get involved in CCAA proceedings in less than exceptional circumstances.
Besides, my brief reading of the TFAP gives me reason to agree with the judges decision. I'm no AC booster, and I like Westjet's business model but agreements and policies must be administered within their terms even if AC happens to be in CCAA.
Besides, my brief reading of the TFAP gives me reason to agree with the judges decision. I'm no AC booster, and I like Westjet's business model but agreements and policies must be administered within their terms even if AC happens to be in CCAA.
#18
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,129
I agree that AC should be in T1-NEW. Everyone knew that was the plan for years. T1-NEW has been designed for AC's operations. It would have been a major inconvenience for most AC passengers if they had to split their domestic operations between two terminals.
But look at this from WS's point of view. They need guarenteed access to perferential gates in YYZ to run an efficient hub operation at that airport, and WS is really big on efficiency. Anyone who made a connection on Tango in T3 and had to hike from A2 to C23 knows that you cannot run an efficient operation that way. Since WS was promised preferential gates in T1-NEW, they made plans to move their hub to YYZ. They can't really undo those plans now because they have already released the new schedule, accepted thousands of bookings for the new flights, and spent quite a bit preparing for the move. WS has every right to sue the GTAA over this.
What I suspect will happen is that the GTAA will offer WS preferential gates in T3 (the old shuttle gates, plus some of the others nearby) to avoid a lawsuit, and SG will get stuck with some "A" gates in the satellite terminal, plus maybe a few "C" gates to make connections interesting. Who knows how the GTAA will squeeze in all the transborder operations if they have to use the "A" gates for domestic flights, or where they will find enough gates for SG's expansion plans.
This whole mess proves that the idiots running the GTAA should not be allowed to manage the most important hub airport in the country without some measure of accountability.
But look at this from WS's point of view. They need guarenteed access to perferential gates in YYZ to run an efficient hub operation at that airport, and WS is really big on efficiency. Anyone who made a connection on Tango in T3 and had to hike from A2 to C23 knows that you cannot run an efficient operation that way. Since WS was promised preferential gates in T1-NEW, they made plans to move their hub to YYZ. They can't really undo those plans now because they have already released the new schedule, accepted thousands of bookings for the new flights, and spent quite a bit preparing for the move. WS has every right to sue the GTAA over this.
What I suspect will happen is that the GTAA will offer WS preferential gates in T3 (the old shuttle gates, plus some of the others nearby) to avoid a lawsuit, and SG will get stuck with some "A" gates in the satellite terminal, plus maybe a few "C" gates to make connections interesting. Who knows how the GTAA will squeeze in all the transborder operations if they have to use the "A" gates for domestic flights, or where they will find enough gates for SG's expansion plans.
This whole mess proves that the idiots running the GTAA should not be allowed to manage the most important hub airport in the country without some measure of accountability.
#19
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Programs: OWEmerald; STARGold; BonvoyPlat; IHGPlat/Amb; HiltonGold; A|ClubPat; AirMilesPlat
Posts: 38,186
So when was the last time a decision of a bankruptcy judge/court was appealed and made it all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada? Does our highest court deal with contract disputes and corporate law cases on a regular basis?
#20
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 1,656
Let's be clear: The GTAA is completely at fault here, not Air Canada. The GTAA seeminly committed the same thing to two seperate companies. WestJet has spent large sums already preparing for this hub-move, as Stu has said, and is going to have to be compensated in some fasion. WS can't just move back to YHM, because another airline has already taken up much of the newly avail capacity there.
Here is the problem with Terminal 3 from a WestJet ops standpoint... most gates at T3 are not usable for the B737-700s with winglets... and guess how many of the -700s will soon have winglets? ALL!
This is one MAJOR MAJOR mess!
Here is the problem with Terminal 3 from a WestJet ops standpoint... most gates at T3 are not usable for the B737-700s with winglets... and guess how many of the -700s will soon have winglets? ALL!
This is one MAJOR MAJOR mess!
#23
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 1,656
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by exAC:
Minor point:
Westjet at 20 some flights a day does not constiute a 'Hub Operation'. To call it such is laughable.
Air Canada's traffic only just became a true hub after the merge with CAIL. </font>
Minor point:
Westjet at 20 some flights a day does not constiute a 'Hub Operation'. To call it such is laughable.
Air Canada's traffic only just became a true hub after the merge with CAIL. </font>
#24
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: YVR
Posts: 9,999
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">All of us benefit when AC brings in Tourists, god give AC a break.</font>
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">T3 is too beautiful for LCC's</font>
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Forcing AC to split their domestic ops would be the worst thing for YYZ, AC, and the GTAA.</font>
{AC has 25 some odd domestic gates in T2 now, as well as all the trans-border gates. How are 14 new gates (or just the 6-8 additional gates that are in dispute) going to accomodate all the traffic currently in T2?}
#25
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Programs: OWEmerald; STARGold; BonvoyPlat; IHGPlat/Amb; HiltonGold; A|ClubPat; AirMilesPlat
Posts: 38,186
T1New will handle all Domestic and International check-ins. International passengers will then be bussed to the mid-field terminal to board their flights while JAZZ will fly out of the lower level of T1New. The old T1 will be torn down and the second of three piers will be built to accommodate AC's international flights.
Passengers for US destinations will still check-in and board from the south end of T2. Then north end will be torn down and the final pier for T1New built. At that point AC will transfer its transborder flights to T1New, and the balance of space will be used by other carriers. The rest of T2 will then be torn down.
As for competency or incompentency that leads to companies entering into CCAA, or Chapter II in the US, while we can split hairs about which airlines are better run than others, just about every major US full service carrier has been in Chapter 11 or close to it. The industry is going through a massive restructuring and paradigm change. With its high fixed costs there is no way AC or any other such airline could offer the type of service still being demanded and not be in this situation given the various exigencies that had to be dealt with in the past five years. And newstarts all have great advantages coming into the market at this point in time: cheap jets or extremely fuel efficient new generation jets, online res, non-union low wage employees, no overhanging commitments of interlining or serving marginal market... [Even Punisheds' new favourite carrier CO is the result of a Chapter 11 reorg.]
And isn't it the Federal Court of Canada which deals with the final appeal on commercial cases, which this most certainly is? Not the Supreme Court of Canada.
[This message has been edited by Shareholder (edited Feb 23, 2004).]
Passengers for US destinations will still check-in and board from the south end of T2. Then north end will be torn down and the final pier for T1New built. At that point AC will transfer its transborder flights to T1New, and the balance of space will be used by other carriers. The rest of T2 will then be torn down.
As for competency or incompentency that leads to companies entering into CCAA, or Chapter II in the US, while we can split hairs about which airlines are better run than others, just about every major US full service carrier has been in Chapter 11 or close to it. The industry is going through a massive restructuring and paradigm change. With its high fixed costs there is no way AC or any other such airline could offer the type of service still being demanded and not be in this situation given the various exigencies that had to be dealt with in the past five years. And newstarts all have great advantages coming into the market at this point in time: cheap jets or extremely fuel efficient new generation jets, online res, non-union low wage employees, no overhanging commitments of interlining or serving marginal market... [Even Punisheds' new favourite carrier CO is the result of a Chapter 11 reorg.]
And isn't it the Federal Court of Canada which deals with the final appeal on commercial cases, which this most certainly is? Not the Supreme Court of Canada.
[This message has been edited by Shareholder (edited Feb 23, 2004).]
#26
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: YVR
Posts: 9,999
Holy Crappaloni! That does indeed sound like a disaster in waiting.
Think about every transborder connection. Arrive in T-new, transfer to T-2, clear USINS, bus to the satellite terminal, arrrrgghhhh! Doesn't matter if your arriving from overseas or Vancouver, you're in for a pretty exciting airport experience.
I wonder if they wouldn't be better off just swapping T-New for all of T-3 (or in the words of Aladdin {as played by Robin Williams} one from column A and all of column B.
Think about every transborder connection. Arrive in T-new, transfer to T-2, clear USINS, bus to the satellite terminal, arrrrgghhhh! Doesn't matter if your arriving from overseas or Vancouver, you're in for a pretty exciting airport experience.
I wonder if they wouldn't be better off just swapping T-New for all of T-3 (or in the words of Aladdin {as played by Robin Williams} one from column A and all of column B.
#27
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Thanks for the Memories !!!
Posts: 10,658
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Ken hAAmer:
Holy Crappaloni! That does indeed sound like a disaster in waiting.
I wonder if they wouldn't be better off just swapping T-New for all of T-3 (or in the words of Aladdin {as played by Robin Williams} one from column A and all of column B.</font>
Holy Crappaloni! That does indeed sound like a disaster in waiting.
I wonder if they wouldn't be better off just swapping T-New for all of T-3 (or in the words of Aladdin {as played by Robin Williams} one from column A and all of column B.</font>
Agreed, AC should just take T3 and a portion of Tnew and then let all the LCC's and everybody else(BA AA etc.) enjoy the pleasure of T2. I think T3 would work out just fine for AC transboarder /international. Also AC would look magnanimous in offering this to the GTAA/WJA........an olive branch if it were !
#28
At Large
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: oakville Ontario canada;AC*SE
Posts: 16,985
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Fisch:
Let's be clear: The GTAA is completely at fault here, not Air Canada. The GTAA seeminly committed the same thing to two seperate companies. WestJet has spent large sums already preparing for this hub-move, as Stu has said, and is going to have to be compensated in some fasion. WS can't just move back to YHM, because another airline has already taken up much of the newly avail capacity there.
Here is the problem with Terminal 3 from a WestJet ops standpoint... most gates at T3 are not usable for the B737-700s with winglets... and guess how many of the -700s will soon have winglets? ALL!
This is one MAJOR MAJOR mess!</font>
Let's be clear: The GTAA is completely at fault here, not Air Canada. The GTAA seeminly committed the same thing to two seperate companies. WestJet has spent large sums already preparing for this hub-move, as Stu has said, and is going to have to be compensated in some fasion. WS can't just move back to YHM, because another airline has already taken up much of the newly avail capacity there.
Here is the problem with Terminal 3 from a WestJet ops standpoint... most gates at T3 are not usable for the B737-700s with winglets... and guess how many of the -700s will soon have winglets? ALL!
This is one MAJOR MAJOR mess!</font>
They should have thought all this through,in effect knowing there was some risk with T1 new, before giving up all the YHM gates to Canjet;finally makes WS have to compete as a real player in the LCC market instead of the phoney cinderella role they played making hay while AC was helpless in CCAA.
And Canjet was smart to move quickly in YHM.
Fisch, you are a FA and admittedly a devoted WS employee but the elbow pads are off and the business in Canada will now get very competitive on a more level playing field....AC is hiring, as you may know
We would welcome your good service habits on AC flts.
#29
At Large
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: oakville Ontario canada;AC*SE
Posts: 16,985
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PunishedEdmontonian:
Well, one thing's for sure: AC couldn't compete in the real marketplace and hence the CCAA proceedings!
Only poorly-managed businesses end up in CCAA or Chapter 11....the overwhelmingly vast majority of businesses - and individuals - don't resort to court protection.
[This message has been edited by PunishedEdmontonian (edited Feb 23, 2004).]</font>
Well, one thing's for sure: AC couldn't compete in the real marketplace and hence the CCAA proceedings!
Only poorly-managed businesses end up in CCAA or Chapter 11....the overwhelmingly vast majority of businesses - and individuals - don't resort to court protection.
[This message has been edited by PunishedEdmontonian (edited Feb 23, 2004).]</font>
I think the new Li management approach will make them very profitable and much more efficient...the civil service years are officially gone when they emerge from CCAA.
Even your favorite airline CO has been in ch.11 not once but twice and was partially bailed out by AC the 2nd time. So thank AC for your U/G success on CO.
#30
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto YYZ UA-1K 1MM,QFgold
Programs: Royal Ambassador/ SPG Platinum 75/Marriott gold
Posts: 14,283
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PunishedEdmontonian:
why fly I rarely visit here anymore because it's sad to see a business disaster get applauded the way AC does. I stand by what I said.</font>
why fly I rarely visit here anymore because it's sad to see a business disaster get applauded the way AC does. I stand by what I said.</font>
Some countries have built huge tourists hubs around great airports SIN/HKG are eg. IMHO.
I am not that sure that many international tourists arrive in YYC.