Pilots vote "NO" to 787s and 777s
Jun 19, 2005, 4:12 am
#31
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: PSP
Programs: AC*SE
Posts: 1,878
Negotiator says....
When a former thread was discussing this matter I said right from the beginning that RM was not going to cave-in on the issue and now that the members of the ACPA have rejected the deal, he has, in fact, cancelled the order.
This time it's not about 'union-thugs' as Parnel would suggest! And by the way Parnel your idea about setting up a different company would not work because of the successor rights entitlement that ACPA has under the Canada Labour Code!
The leadership of ACPA recommeded acceptance of the package and the membership, very marginally, said NO for whatever reason.
The deal is not dead however. If RM and Monty still want their birds, they have to work a bit harder for them. My advice is for them to get back to the table immediatly. The leadership of the ACPA has to be de-briefed by the membership as to what the actual problem was with the proposed settlement and bargain from there. Sometimes it's just a small move that will push through a deal - that's what I suspect here.
I notice the non-threatening, concillatory words used by Monty in his press realese from Montreal about the ACPA leadership...this is the kind of leadership AC needs in resolving their labour relations problems...no more RM tantrums or threats! I suspect that RM's arrogrance is half the problem with the rejection outcome.
They are close to a deal and they have to keep voting untill is comes out right.
These aircraft are needed in the fleet! The future of AC may depend on it!
This time it's not about 'union-thugs' as Parnel would suggest! And by the way Parnel your idea about setting up a different company would not work because of the successor rights entitlement that ACPA has under the Canada Labour Code!
The leadership of ACPA recommeded acceptance of the package and the membership, very marginally, said NO for whatever reason.
The deal is not dead however. If RM and Monty still want their birds, they have to work a bit harder for them. My advice is for them to get back to the table immediatly. The leadership of the ACPA has to be de-briefed by the membership as to what the actual problem was with the proposed settlement and bargain from there. Sometimes it's just a small move that will push through a deal - that's what I suspect here.
I notice the non-threatening, concillatory words used by Monty in his press realese from Montreal about the ACPA leadership...this is the kind of leadership AC needs in resolving their labour relations problems...no more RM tantrums or threats! I suspect that RM's arrogrance is half the problem with the rejection outcome.
They are close to a deal and they have to keep voting untill is comes out right.
These aircraft are needed in the fleet! The future of AC may depend on it!
Cheers
Last edited by negotiator; Jun 19, 2005 at 4:19 am
Jun 19, 2005, 4:15 am
#32
At Large
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: oakville Ontario canada;AC*SE
Posts: 16,985
Originally Posted by Overwing
Or maybe this isnt so much about sticking it to a colleague, as it is about shedding light on a very serious problem that is definately still there and not going away anytime soon ??
Remember we are your clients, and we are pissed at your attitude,and your actions.
I would love to be able to ask the government to put your "mob" into trustee ship with the idea of completely reorganizing the thing.
Jun 19, 2005, 4:25 am
#33
At Large
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: oakville Ontario canada;AC*SE
Posts: 16,985
[QUOTE=negotiator][LEFT]
It is still a problem of union thugs.......personalities are definitely at play here and there is power struggle within the union membership as I have been getting some reports of commentary from the pilots web site. This is clearly a case where the thugs can't even manage themselves, and they have the audacity to say the company has been arrogant... 
.
If I was AC I would sit back and let the Boeing order die and let the union thrash about in their own mess. They made their deal and they should stick to it with no more negotiating.
But he did say the order is cancelled and he should leve it that way until thye vote to accept the deal as is.Don't forgetMontie works for RM and the BOD.
My thoughts are still that AC should sell their international routes to a "newco"based offshore but under ACE control and offer jobs to any pilots that want them. And get Ministry aproval to do this even if it means changing existing laws.
The leadership of ACPA recommeded acceptance of the package and the membership, very marginally, said NO.
The deal is not dead however. If RM and Monty still want their birds, they have to work a bit harder for them. My advise is for them to get back to the table immediatly after the leadership of the ACPA is de-briefed by the membership as to what the actual problem with the proposed settlement was and bargain from there. Sometimes it's just a small move that will oush through a deal and that's what I suspect here
If I was AC I would sit back and let the Boeing order die and let the union thrash about in their own mess. They made their deal and they should stick to it with no more negotiating.
I notice the non-threatening, concillatory words used by Monty in his press realese from Montreal about the ACPA leadership...this is the kind of leadership AC needs in resolving the problem...no more RM tantrums or threats!
These aircraft are needed in the fleet! The future of AC may depend on it
Jun 19, 2005, 4:39 am
#34
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: PSP
Programs: AC*SE
Posts: 1,878
Maybe so Parnel but remember... the existing leadership of ACPA unamiously recommended the deal and the vote was electronic meaning that no one in the leadership stood up at a meeting and said...Ya, I recommeded it but it's a piece of s*it. The members rejected it, plain and simple!
That's the difference between a succesful and un-successful negotiator. I've never heard AC say that the setllement was their 'final' offer nor have I heard that AC said they would not negotiate beyond this point. There's a deal here but it's going to take some patience and non-threating language to get it. For the sake of all concerned, everyone must be willing to go the distance and exhaust all means to come up with a package that will ratify.
It seems to me that on this issue MB is showing the most leadership on the issue and that's whats needed to consumate a deal.
It can't happen...the existing legislation would not permit it and you just can't change the Canada Labour Code as you suggest. The act is frought with political compromise and would never be amended in time and especially in a minority government situation.
Cheers
That's the difference between a succesful and un-successful negotiator. I've never heard AC say that the setllement was their 'final' offer nor have I heard that AC said they would not negotiate beyond this point. There's a deal here but it's going to take some patience and non-threating language to get it. For the sake of all concerned, everyone must be willing to go the distance and exhaust all means to come up with a package that will ratify.
It seems to me that on this issue MB is showing the most leadership on the issue and that's whats needed to consumate a deal.
It can't happen...the existing legislation would not permit it and you just can't change the Canada Labour Code as you suggest. The act is frought with political compromise and would never be amended in time and especially in a minority government situation.
Cheers
Last edited by negotiator; Jun 19, 2005 at 4:43 am
Jun 19, 2005, 4:59 am
#35
At Large
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: oakville Ontario canada;AC*SE
Posts: 16,985
[QUOTE=negotiator] The members rejected it, plain and simple!
And the airline cancelled an airplane order that means much to the pilots so let it sit. Pilots don't want it so we(AC) won't buy because the economics are no longer any good. That's the way it should stand; no more negotiations.
Union and management agreed on a deal so lets live with the results.....no more blackmail from that union
.
I hope RM backs him away from any more negotiating and I hope Boeing sells those plane manufacturing slots tomorrow.
.
Agree, except for one point.....I believe the government could make an order in council type of decision to suspend the union and allow the company flight rights with a "newco". This government just does not have the cojones to do it. The decision could be based on national interest,etc.
And the airline cancelled an airplane order that means much to the pilots so let it sit. Pilots don't want it so we(AC) won't buy because the economics are no longer any good. That's the way it should stand; no more negotiations.
That's the difference between a succesful and un-successful negotiator. I've never heard AC say that the setllement was their 'final' offer nor have I heard that AC said they would not negotiate beyond this point. There's a deal here but it's going to take some patience and non-threating language to get it. For the sake of all concerned, everyone must be willing to go the distance and exhaust all means to come up with a package that will ratify.
It seems to me that on this issue MB is showing the most leadership on the issue and that's whats needed to consumate a deal
I hope RM backs him away from any more negotiating and I hope Boeing sells those plane manufacturing slots tomorrow.
It can't happen...the existing legislation would not permit it and you just can't change the Canada Labour Code as you suggest. The act is frought with political compromise and would never be amended in time and especially in a minority government situation
Agree, except for one point.....I believe the government could make an order in council type of decision to suspend the union and allow the company flight rights with a "newco". This government just does not have the cojones to do it. The decision could be based on national interest,etc.
Jun 19, 2005, 5:06 am
#36
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 20,550
Boeing statement on order cancellation
SEATTLE, June 18, 2005 -- We share Air Canada 's disappointment at today's developments because we are looking forward to being a part of Air Canada 's vision for leadership. We are seeing very strong demand for the 777 and the 787, and we believe we will have many opportunities to place these aircraft elsewhere.
Jun 19, 2005, 5:13 am
#37
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: PSP
Programs: AC*SE
Posts: 1,878
Originally Posted by airbus320
SEATTLE, June 18, 2005 -- We share Air Canada 's disappointment at today's developments because we are looking forward to being a part of Air Canada 's vision for leadership. We are seeing very strong demand for the 777 and the 787, and we believe we will have many opportunities to place these aircraft elsewhere.
Boeing is raising the stakes!
"stong demand" for 777 and 787's. I agree. AC shouldn't miss the opportunity to work with it's ACAP partner to get a deal that will ratify.
Having gone this far, everyone has to exhaust the process completly to make the new purchase happen. The balls in AC's court now!
Cheers
Jun 19, 2005, 5:25 am
#38
At Large
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: oakville Ontario canada;AC*SE
Posts: 16,985
[QUOTE=negotiator]
No just telling it like it is.
The ball is with the thugs who are trying to squeeze AC's balls and Ac should say they will olny renegoiate with Boeing if the union ratifies the agreement as is within 5 days.
Boeing is raising the stakes!
"stong demand" for 777 and 787's. I agree. AC shouldn't miss the opportunity to work with it's ACAP partner to get a deal that will ratify.
Having gone this far, everyone has to exhaust the process completly to make the new purchase happen. The balls in AC's court now!
Having gone this far, everyone has to exhaust the process completly to make the new purchase happen. The balls in AC's court now!
The ball is with the thugs who are trying to squeeze AC's balls and Ac should say they will olny renegoiate with Boeing if the union ratifies the agreement as is within 5 days.
Jun 19, 2005, 5:28 am
#40
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 20,550
Negotiator:
If you were handling this situation, how would you proceed to move the issues forward?
PS: This is not a smarta$$ question. I am interested in the art of give and take
Edited to add PS
If you were handling this situation, how would you proceed to move the issues forward?
PS: This is not a smarta$$ question. I am interested in the art of give and take
Edited to add PS
Last edited by airbus320; Jun 19, 2005 at 5:31 am
Jun 19, 2005, 5:33 am
#41
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Programs: OWEmerald; STARGold; BonvoyPlat; IHGPlat/Amb; HiltonGold; A|ClubPat; AirMilesPlat
Posts: 38,186
Wow, go out for a Saturday night on the town, and all hell breaks loose! Isn't democracy messy?
I agree this also is a knock at the seniority issue by the young turks among AC's pilots who never did accept the status given to CP pilots. And thus put many more of the latter in the position to be flying these widebodies ahead of newbie AC pilots.
Obviously this is not the end, but it does appear there is a major schism among the ranks that the union and pilots themselves will have to work out. The impact on ACE's business plan is major, though not critical. Just means more 763s being leased, and higher costs to ACE to refurbish them with new interiors, a program that may be delayed a couple of months too. [Will Boeing allow ACE to use the 787 interior kits for these 763s if AC isn't a firm customer?]
While setting up a scab subsidiary looks good in the wee hours of the morning, Parnel, it couldn't happen for the reasons both QShoeGuy and Negotiator have mentioned: the routes AC flies are bilateral and only a Canadian owned and staffed airline could fly them for Canada. And federal labour laws do not permit the repudiation of labour agreements, which any court is likely to rule if that scenario were followed. [This isn't like ONEX buying Boeing's assembly plants and letting everyone go after the union/workers rejected requests/demands for a wage rollback, then offering to rehire all but the troublemakers..]
ACE faces a real problem now that it is on the verge of being a profitable airlines with a high stock price and lots of cash on hand: as its union agreements come up for renewal, the employees will want in on the gravy train. And go after the goose that's laying the golden eggs. Higher labour costs will erode the profitability and business plan, and we will begin the downward spiral. [Yes, I know Parnel will say the unions had a chance at profit sharing and sold off their shares on the arbitrage market, quite likely to Parnel himself...and me and 100,000mile flyer and others here who bought ACE in the weeks after it was released.] Share price on Monday could drop back under $40 if the union's statement is not more positive or forthcoming about returning to the table.
Like others, I don't think it is all over. There will be another vote after some further negotiations. But ACE will never be able to address the core issue, if indeed it is the CP/AC seniority thing.
And I would certainly like to know why mtacchi feels this is a good thing.
I agree this also is a knock at the seniority issue by the young turks among AC's pilots who never did accept the status given to CP pilots. And thus put many more of the latter in the position to be flying these widebodies ahead of newbie AC pilots.
Obviously this is not the end, but it does appear there is a major schism among the ranks that the union and pilots themselves will have to work out. The impact on ACE's business plan is major, though not critical. Just means more 763s being leased, and higher costs to ACE to refurbish them with new interiors, a program that may be delayed a couple of months too. [Will Boeing allow ACE to use the 787 interior kits for these 763s if AC isn't a firm customer?]
While setting up a scab subsidiary looks good in the wee hours of the morning, Parnel, it couldn't happen for the reasons both QShoeGuy and Negotiator have mentioned: the routes AC flies are bilateral and only a Canadian owned and staffed airline could fly them for Canada. And federal labour laws do not permit the repudiation of labour agreements, which any court is likely to rule if that scenario were followed. [This isn't like ONEX buying Boeing's assembly plants and letting everyone go after the union/workers rejected requests/demands for a wage rollback, then offering to rehire all but the troublemakers..]
ACE faces a real problem now that it is on the verge of being a profitable airlines with a high stock price and lots of cash on hand: as its union agreements come up for renewal, the employees will want in on the gravy train. And go after the goose that's laying the golden eggs. Higher labour costs will erode the profitability and business plan, and we will begin the downward spiral. [Yes, I know Parnel will say the unions had a chance at profit sharing and sold off their shares on the arbitrage market, quite likely to Parnel himself...and me and 100,000mile flyer and others here who bought ACE in the weeks after it was released.] Share price on Monday could drop back under $40 if the union's statement is not more positive or forthcoming about returning to the table.
Like others, I don't think it is all over. There will be another vote after some further negotiations. But ACE will never be able to address the core issue, if indeed it is the CP/AC seniority thing.
And I would certainly like to know why mtacchi feels this is a good thing.
Jun 19, 2005, 5:38 am
#42
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Programs: OWEmerald; STARGold; BonvoyPlat; IHGPlat/Amb; HiltonGold; A|ClubPat; AirMilesPlat
Posts: 38,186
Originally Posted by airbus320
Negotiator:
If you were handling this situation, how would you proceed to move the issues forward?
PS: This is not a smarta$$ question. I am interested in the art of give and take
Edited to add PS
If you were handling this situation, how would you proceed to move the issues forward?
PS: This is not a smarta$$ question. I am interested in the art of give and take
Edited to add PS
But I also think this puts the union exec/negotiating team in a worse position than ACE right now because of the schism(s) it reveals between the ranks and "management" of the union, and between work groups within the union [ex-AC/CP, widebody versus narrowbody, older/younger]. This is much like the rebels at the Mechanics union in Montreal who broke away from their leadership in the final days of negotiations while oldAC was still in CCAA. Or the YYZ groundhandlers who did the wildcat walk a few months ago. Not sure I'd want to be hanging around the pre-flight ops rooms today or tomorrow...
Jun 19, 2005, 6:05 am
#43
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 20,550
I have backed away from my initial anger at the pilots. Time for some quiet reflection...
AC and its pilots have a serious problem. This negative vote is a symptom of a profound malaise within the pilot ranks. Diagnosing it only as "thugery" is an oversimplification IMHO. The issues are much more complex and long standing.
It is time to do something about this issue or it will continue to fester and occasionally bite the airline in the a$$. I hope that AC and the pilots will return to the table and that common sense will prevail.
It is not in the long term best interests of the airline to see this new fleet disappear...and it is not in the pilot's long term best interest to jeopardize the airline's recovery.
AC and its pilots have a serious problem. This negative vote is a symptom of a profound malaise within the pilot ranks. Diagnosing it only as "thugery" is an oversimplification IMHO. The issues are much more complex and long standing.
It is time to do something about this issue or it will continue to fester and occasionally bite the airline in the a$$. I hope that AC and the pilots will return to the table and that common sense will prevail.
It is not in the long term best interests of the airline to see this new fleet disappear...and it is not in the pilot's long term best interest to jeopardize the airline's recovery.
Jun 19, 2005, 6:39 am
#44
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: YHZ
Programs: Sans souci
Posts: 2,190
Just in case anyone wants to follow the discussion on PPRuNe, here's the link: http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...hreadid=179110
The post by Tony Clifton is illuminating.
The post by Tony Clifton is illuminating.
Jun 19, 2005, 7:33 am
#45
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: YYZ
Programs: BA Gold/Marriott Gold/HH Diamond/IC Plat Amba
Posts: 5,992
Originally Posted by drwoodsy
My sentiments exactly. How long are people prepared to fly on worn out planes that look like .... inside, no lie flat seats poor IFE etc etc......
