Simon

What exactly does this have to do with the fact that "original" Air Canada pilots are still bitter about "original" CP pilots and where they ended up in the seniority scheme? Like I said before, time rolls on. If they don't like it, they should go find another job.

negotiator

It's not about the art of 'give and take' it's about 'knowing what 'the intrests of both sides are to arrive at a mutual win'!

It seems to me that AC want's the 777 and 787's because the purchase of the Boeings fits within their long term strategic plans to expand into markets that they can compete in the best. This includes the economics associated with the proposed settlement that's now been declined by ACPA.

From what I've heard, the more junior pilots are concerned about the seniorty issue of the dovetailed Canadian pilot's who, in their opinion, jumped the que. If that's the case, then the issue is squarely the problem of ACPA and they have to straighten it out before the company can respond. That said, it is the AC's turn to attempt at a resoultion but only after the pilot's get their 'collective' act together once they reign in their members and read them the 'riot act'. If ACPA leadership does not get a firm idea where the bottom line interests of their members are they'll lose along with the Company.

There's one other thing but it is politically damaging to the leaders of the ACPA.

Under existing jurisprudence, it is possible, and legally permissible, for the ACPA to agree to the proposal without a vote of it's members. In other words, the union, as the holder of the bargaining rights for the group, can legally ratify the 'amendement' to the existing collective agreement without a vote. Because this is not a renewal of an existing collective agreement but rather an amendment to it through the resolution of a question that has yet to be bargaining such an approach is permissible. Unfortunatly, this would likely mean that the existing executive of ACPA would be booted from office next term but it's an option if the member's don't come together on the issue.

I would not abandon talks yet. There's plenty of room to carve out a deal yet and given what's at stake on both sides (as usual) then the parties must come to a resolution no matter what the consequences.

Cheers

Stranger

How nice. You think that sort of an attitude will help solve the problem?

Or let's rephrase this: Seems Milton did not see this coming. What does that tell you about his judgment, what does this tell you about his competence? Do you seriously believe Milton was unaware of the pilots problems?

Anyway, at the end of the day, the pilot problem is self-inflicted on AC's part. It was AC that engineered a plan to kill CP and ended up swallowing the pieces. Which led to the pilot issues.

One can b*i*t*c*h* at the pilots ad infinitum, one can be jaleous of their pay scales, whatever. None of that will result in a solution though.

At the end of the day, even if the core of the problem is with some union or group of employee, sorry but as a customer, that's not really my concern. I deal with the company, so the right target to blame is management. The onus is on management to handle these details. Which are of no real concewrn with me. I don't buy tickets from the unions. And if I were a shareholder, ditto.

Stranger

I don't deal with strident pilots. I merely expect them to fly the plane.

As a customer, I expect Milton to deal with strident pilots. And to get results. And to buy new planes.

In other words, I don't care about philosophy, ideological agendas, etc. I care for results and new planes. I submit that's Milton's job and this was a major failure on his part.

DanJ

If the pre-merger AC pilots are upset that CP pilots got seniority dovetailed, they should realize this is the way many (if not most) organizations handle things when they acquire another company and merge operations. Our company wasn't even unionized when we acquired another, and their seniority was dovetailed.

Simon

It's no kind of attitude, it's reality. The ACPA pilots are still whining and moaning about something that was decided by a third party that was empowered to do so, not AC. They lost, and here we are years later and we all still suffer for it.

And let me assure you, I have zero jealousy of pilot pay scales.

RM just tried to buy new planes. Short of firing all the ex-CAIL pilots, the seniority issue is not something he has much capability to do anything about.

parnel

Milton got an agreement with the union executive and they could not sell it to their members...so how is that Milton's fault........you have your head up your ... on this as usual.

Shareholder

And he could not "fire" all the pilots or any other CP staff under Canadian labour rleations laws, and were he to do that, it would actually be AC's unions who'd be in an awkward situation, remaing on the job while their brothers and sisters in labour are tossed into the street. So Stranger's arguments really cannot be supported in the real world.

Yes, AC could have bought the airplanes and dealt with this when the started arriving, but part of the economics of cost-effectiveness relates to crewing.

It seems Negotiator agrees with me. This is not so much RM's and ACE's problem, but the pilot's union's problem. Surely the executive was not so ingenuous as to know that tempers still were there among the lower seniority AC pilots and these men were going to use this vote to express it? Or maybe they were, and this got the off the hook. There was no need for a vote of the full membership, just the union executive, to amend the existing agreement. But to do so would lead to a rebellion in the ranks and a nasty inside battle. This way, the executive gets away without being tagged as selling out to ACE.

parnel

The union leadership probably hasn't got the balls to ratify it w/o the membership on side but maybe AC should go to court and try to get union management forced into signing the deal since as you say its not a contract renewal and the elected union management has agreed to it. That would cause some wildcat strikes no doubt but AC would have the legal side covered.

Stranger

I don't care. I don't deal with pilots or unions. I trust Milton to do that. As a customer, the only entity I am to blame is the one I am dealing with. Milton's. The rest is supposed to be his own cooking. I am not asking you if you beat your wife, it's not my problem either, OK?



So he got an agreement. Which apparently wasn't worth the paper it's written on. Big deal. I think he needs an agreement that will fly, don't you think? We want the planes, we expect him to get this through. How is for him to figure out. Presumably that's why he gets a fat paycheck. So perhaps he ought to deliver?

OTOH, whether he caters or not to your emotional agency is of no interest to me whatsoever. Especially if your emotional agenda stands in the way from getting results. Which appears to be the case.

Seems like when you attack unions, your real target in not really unions but employees. Perhaps you should label your "tugs" properly? Sounds like you look at the pilots as being the real thugs here?

parnel

[QUOTE=Stranger]I
He got an agreement that does not need to be voted on by the membership and that should stand up. He also has a responsibility to the shareholders to deliver profits and he is of the opinion he needs that deal done right before he can buy the planes. If the union has become a rogue one he needs to deal with that as well which may well have been his strategy going into this. He had to know it was a toss up or he would not have made the piurchase conditional on the pilots deal. They, the pilots, are playing power politics and losing badly and forcing us all to suffer. So, Milton needs to deal with that issue and getthe union to be more compliant.



Got nothing to do with "emotional agency" whatever that means exactly. Its business plain and simple.

I hate unions in Canada because they have been given too much power and even most employees felt letdown by their unions during CCAA negotiations. They are not there for the employees but only to preserve their powers.


In this case yes. They have been able to blackmail the company for years and are no longer getting that attention. The union leadership agreed to the deal.

Simon

Um, no. He gets a fat paycheck to deliver returns to investors. If new planes cannot be brought into a cost structure that makes sense, then they should be cut loose (as they have been). We may not like that as customers, but I'd sure prefer that to seeing AC go out of business and be stuck flying non-J-ever-available WS and its ilk for the rest of time.

Was the wife beating comment meant to be funny?

Stranger

And in the process it's his job to secure whatever agreements he needs from whoever he needs them. *And that is *his* respnsibility. The cooking details are only of anecdotal interest to us, either as customers or shareholders.

Right now, looks like he played quite badly and he lost though. But whether the pilots are thugs or not is of little interest to anyone but AC management.

No. Trying to make my point. Milton's domestic agenda is his, not ours (either as customers or shareholders).

YOWkid

Nope.

I don't agree.

The ball is in the pilot's court. It's up to them to make the next move. The pilots voted it down, so they better have a Plan B or a Plan C.

SEA_Tigger

While the A330 is the better plane then the 767, I would not be surprised if Air India replaces their ex-UA 777-200ERs with 777-200LRs when they are delivered for YYZ-DEL. This will give AI the ability to fly a good deal more cargo as well as more passengers then AC's A340-300s. AI can also use their 787s to start service from India to YVR/YUL/YYZ (persuant to any relevant route authorities).

AF will be able to offer 777-300ER service YYZ-CDG now (better then AC's 767s and A330s) and they might be able to upgauge to A380s if YYZ can handle them. With some 3x the capacity as a 767/A330, that will give Air France solid pricing power. Not sure who else flies YYZ-HKG, but a 772LR carries 12 more people and 10 tonnes more cargo (11mt vs. 1mt) then AC's A345.

NH can use their 787s to launch new Japan-Canada service (again, depending on route authorities) which would put additional pressure on AC's international ops.

All in all, airlines operating 787s and 777s will have advantages in cargo, passenger, and range over AC's 767/A330/A340 fleet. The Boeing deal would have leveled the field (especially by allowing them to upgrade in flight service and cabins), but now, they will be at the same disadvantage many of their American domestic peers are.