Overwing

I do not think that is a simple yes or no answer there. The two most important things are experience and training. The more of each of those yes the better the pilot one becomes.

Not sure where you are going with that one, but hiring at airlines is incredibly cyclical as well. Some guys I work with on the B767 were hired at 20 years of age with minimal time. Years as Second Officer and then moving up the ranks.

Nowadays, the entry time for a job at Air Canada would be about 4000 to 5000 hours because of this phenomenon.

AC A320 skipper to a WJ B737 skipper, on straight salary alone, WJ would be at least 40% less. Do not even get me started on that one, there is not enough bandwidth.

stinger

I guess I was just more curious if there was any way to determine the skill level of a pilot and not have everything based on seniority? I realize in the perfect world all pilots should be trained the same but we all konw that is not the case.

I will purposely stay clear of the AC/WJ camparison

blue2002

So much anger and bitterness... Was it something in your childhood?

SEA_Tigger

Closed at $63.670, down $0.950 (1.470%).

parnel

[QUOTE=Overwing][QUOTE=stinger]

Please describe hard in the context of 80 hours a month.



Waht's abad deal. One that costs the company more than making a decent return on their investment or one that pays pilots and profits be damned. Lots of companies do not supply water or coffee to their staff;and getting water and food on a long haul flt is pretty easy even for crew...been there saw that




So you don't want to even work 80 hours a month going forward!!!
Again lots of other airlines are hiring and if their conditions are better go for it.There are plenty of people around who are qualified and can take your job. Just remember all airline pilots were able to effectively blackmail the Companies for several years until the deals became far too rich and the LCC's came into being. You are rushing your own demise here


I don't think that was addressed solely to the company, particularly after the stunts yours and other unions tried to pull off to have the company pay you and not any secured creditors.


Which was appealed to death and and you lost..the same labour that covers your ... is the same one that ruled on the seniority issue....but its not in your favour so you whine and blame the company...........that sucks big time for me and smells of serious hypocrisy.

blue2002

Thank you! You have just explained why in this day and age trade unions are evil.

Overwing

Growth Flex provisions are still apart of the contract, not touched one iota through CCAA, that is why this deal for more hours was so perplexing. There is no need for this, other than greed. The mechanism was all in place, all was need was a growth bid to be issued and this would have taken care of itself. A growth bid was a certainty with the B772 coming along as well as the EMB machines.

The seniority issue need a little clarification as well. The CIRB has changed the goalposts so many times here it is pathetic. The second award was to based upon principles in D183, and it fails miserably. The problem added to it is the fact that the CIRB refuses to look at this award as it applies to D183 (which they said was a condition of D183). Again tehy are changing the rules.

Justice Dawsons recent decision (although it was a very long shot apparantly) was surprising as well. It seems more concerned with the time this process has taken rather than justice itself. Now I have a real problem with that, and everybody in this country affected or not should as well.

I am not blaming the company for this mess, although if they wished to get involved as is their right why did they feel the need to tie more concessions to it ?? That is not cricket.

dbyyz

It has nothing to do with it at all. But it appears that perhaps some members who are angry or frustraazted over this or some other issue, voted no in protest. If this is the case, some minor tweeking of the deal and then putting it to another vote and encouraging a larger turnout will probably get it passed.

Overwing

I will glady work 80 hours a month, every month (that is what I signed on for). I will gladly work 85 hours a month for a period of time to help my company grow (as we have done in the past under the Growth Flex provisions). What I am not interested in doing is working 85 - 90 hours a month every month forever, because my company has not staffed the airline properly.

I have a small family, and they are more important.

parnel

[QUOTE=Overwing][COLOR=Navy]What you and other union types call greed is nothing more than an attempt to take more of the companies profits and put them in your pockets.they spend a lot of time putting business plans together that will give them the returns shareholders need to keep investing in the Company. They have a competitive environment to deal with as well.and what pisses me off about unions is that they just look out for themselves because the employer is forced to deal with them even in a situation that is patently unfair to the company. Union issues both monetary and productivity wise have killed off just about all the legacy carriers and you continue to hammer away at wages that are not economical in this market place. That is why I applaud guys like Milton and his board for drawing a line in the sand.



And the company has to pay the price for this so called inequity?


Again why is the company paying for your disapointment with the system.

But you clearly are by voting against their well thought out expansion plans



Concessions are the only way they can operate these craft profitably and I have not seen a union response that supports the company's need to make a profit. All I see and hear from you is that concessions have gone too far with out any reasoning or thoughts about the industry and its economic status.
Again , if you don't like the way the company or the system operates why not leave and go where you're wanted.

dbyyz

Although frustrating and incomprehensible to some (and even outrageous or stupid to others), this is really not that complicated.

So far, no one has said the deal was a bad deal, and it appears that the problem is that both the union leadership and the management did not forsee a protest vote.

If they want the deal to fly, which I am sure both sides want, they have to find a solution. So, what does this entail?

First, they cannot walk away and point fingers at each other. They are best to leave that to Flyertalkers. So, far neither side has done that. Although AC has cancelled their deal with Boeing, they have used very careful language in their public communications.

Second, they have to get a second vote. Realistically, they cannot put the same deal out to another vote if they want it to pass, so they have to tweak it somehow and perhaps they need a little time and a little drama.

Third, the union leadership has to get out the vote and sell the agreement. Generally, getting out the vote the second time around is easier, but the union leadership cannot underestimate the enormity of their task in selling the agreement and the importance to the future of AC.

Although I am very sympathetic to the AC employees and their unions, they really do have to move on. For most, this is exaclty what they are doing. Indeed, this is a major part of the reason that AC has turned the corner and service is improving across the airline. Voting no on a deal like this out of frustration over some past issue(s) while understandable, simply does not make sense. It's time for the union leadership (and the management) to roll up their sleeves and get to work and solve this problem.

Overwing

Now you are changing your tune Parnel.

I said that the Growth Flex were provisions in the agreement already to handle this and handle it very well as it did thoughout the exponential growth of the 90's. Why the need to change this other than greed ? ?

You are back to your anti-union rant, and I thought we both agreed there would be no rant here ??

The problem with the comapny and the seniority thing is that they said they would get involved but it would be for a price. Again that is not cricket. That was a sleazy attempt to play one group against they other.

dbyyz

Better than J in a 767-200!

dbyyz

I agree. Although I have sometimes critical of AC and RM's labour relations practices, they are in no-win situation on this one.

malgudi

Most folks work atleast 40hrs/week and you are complaining about 85hours/month? Am I missing something?