Mitch Cronin Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 Apparently all they wanted to do was count the number of emails they got. What garbage. Don was right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 You're right it was mostly fluff but one part was interesting, the few questions with Carty. For those who didn't see it: he was commenting on AC and Milton and he said that it's crucial that the CEO have the respect of the employees otherwise he better just step aside. This is from someone who should know. seeker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Max Continuous Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 It also didn't sound like much negotiating being considered by Victor Li, according to Gordon on the AC pension issue ... tick tick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jump seat Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 Would Don Carty make a good choice for President? WRT pension - sure doesn't look like Trinty is giving much room to talk . . .nobody else has a pension - therefore AC shouldn't have a pension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 So disappointed in your comments ...you mean you sat through that 8 minutes and 30 seconds of heart stopping news and learned absolutely nothing....................I mean really...didn't you notice that Pam now has a shorter hair-do...golly Mitch you are certainly not very observant.. :> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super 80 Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 I am puzzled by the cargojet story, the guy was bashing the pax market, while he himself is in the process of setting up his own pax charter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMC Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 His charter operation is solely directed at sports teams and high end corporate. Each aircraft has 60 seats... Although arguable as to the profitability, it is certainly different than 2 for 1's from YUL to YYZ. That being said, he did come off a bit "anti-passenger". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AME Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 He also made it clear that bonuses were necessary to retain upper management, and that his mistake was not being open about his. I also found it interesting that the last quoted email was positive (although they did end by saying only 2 out of 100 were positive) I thought the piece was positive for AC but made Ms Sachs look bad, and the bit by Gordon pretty much laid it on the line, I did think the bit about the other carriers not having a pension wasn't necessary because if they're around 65 years from now I'd be willing to bet they will have one. I wonder how the consolidation alluded to be the owner of Cargojet will shake down? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CDB Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 Mitch, I totally agree. It seemed like they patched the piece together with no purpose other than to stir up controversy within the airline and the flying public. The show accomplished nothing except to make everyone involved (Milton waving from the cockpit, Sachs and her 'we want his head', Li, and even Carty) look really stupid. The show bordered on misinformation too - flashing $20,000,000 in rainbow colours on the screen only to proclaim quietly that, 'oh yeah, Milton only gets it if he's there for 4 years and if the airline succeeds,' but the viewers don't really need to know that... And the 2 out of 100 e-mails nonsense, what garbage! If you put out a call for comments, who do you think is going to respond?? That's really representative... And I didn't quite understand the cheap shots towards Air Canada. They switch stories to talk about a succesful Cargo operation, only to throw out a stupid one-liner, 'I wonder if Milton stops in to eat pizza with his employees?' What trash, and I'm thinking of letting the CBC know about it... Cory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted February 16, 2004 Author Share Posted February 16, 2004 After seeing some of what others had contributed, I actually drafted up a rather positive contribution to counter some of the negative... then remembered my "I'll shut up" comment and thought I'd better do just that. Now I wish I'd sent it, just so they could count that as number 3. But someone here had speculated they already knew what kind of commentary they were going to do, even before asking for email... and I reckon that's true. It probably wouldn't have mattered if all the response they got was positive... they might have just avoided mentioning the count. Yes, working for Air Canada at the moment has it's sore points... some of them loom rather large in our minds at times... for some it even feels like hell... But negative publicity isn't going to improve that, and as long as we're here for the duration, improvement is what we ought to be shooting for. I think if I was a clueless viewer, I might have got the impression that AC's employees are a sorry bunch. Pam... shut up. (can I say that?) Carty was dumped because his rewards were kept hidden... and then found. The CBC seems to be looking for a story of that kind of excitement, but Milton's deal is different and above board... the 2 most important differences: it hinges on success, and is Victor Li's money, not ours. As I said earlier, I hope he gets filthy rich. (Calin, on the other hand... should be sent packing for his part in selling the same thing to two different parties... which may yet kill this deal!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 Mitch; Such a good post, right until the last line. Remember the sequence to these events. seeker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest M. McRae Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 It is interesting that only 100 sent emails and of course we are not told how many were from the same person. When you consider how may thousand AC employees have access to computers............ Seems that it turned into a show for Pam and not at all what it was touted to be, typical CBC of late though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st27 Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 I think the Venture piece was really just a bunch of fluff from MotherCorp [oops, the other one]and although it said that the AC employees are furious, it didn't really say why...yeah yeah Milton and the Snake's $20 mill bonus are right up front but what about the huge concessions from the employees, the apparent lack of sacrifice from management, and the lack of apparent change in operations to get us all out of this mess!!! Absolutely nothing about the lie of leaving our pensions alone if we swallowed the concessions and absolutely zilch on trading off mainline a/c for regional jets and letting 2 union groups who work for this company fight it out over jobs...I won't even go near the M word.All in all smoke but no spark...then again its the CBC ..I should have known better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted February 16, 2004 Author Share Posted February 16, 2004 Seeker... Forgive me... I didn't mean to imply that I think the little birds should all go to ACPA. Frankly, like so many others, I don't have the foggiest notion of how to come to the best resolution to that problem, but ignoring the many complications for the moment, it does seem reasonable to me that "regional" aircraft be in the hands of the "regional" arm of the company... However, Mr. Rovinescu had no business ignoring all those many complications... it seems to me. ...and it is my understanding that he did just that when he made agreements that clearly violated others already in place. I think I'd quickly be in court facing some kind of ugly charges if I'd done something like that... ? "Group A... you get exclusive rights to do x,y and z. Signed, me" "Group B... you get exclusive rights to do v, w, and x. Signed, me" ... "Hang on Mr. me, you've already signed away exclusive rights to x, what's up with that?" ... "Well, ya, but they made me do it and I didn't want to." Good enough excuse? ... I dunno what funny law books might make that ok, but in my books that makes the man's signature worth absolute zero and he ought to be tossed out on his ear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st27 Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 RE; regional aircraft should be in the regional arm of the company. These aircraft aren't regional anymore.I remember looking at a map of Comairs route structure in the US about 2-3 years ago with the RJ.I don't think there was one area of the country that was not covered..from Fla all the way out to West Coast.So now you have Mr.Milton who one minute says he couldn't care less about the domestic market and in the next breath goes out and orders 100 small regional aircraft.Who trusts him and who's to say that the whole of A/C's domestic/transborder structure won't be deemed regional?As far as wide bodies goes, no good news there.. with the exception of DEL and SCL.. mostly shrinkage.No resumption of service to Rome,Copenhagen,Madrid,Manchester,no direct YYZ-HNL, a fraction of the transborder/Caribbean flying that was done a year ago and this is just on the 67.In addition,the 47's seem to be history.It's all about scope which is part of a contract between a union and a company and bargaining in good faith [which seems to be an oxymoron these days] Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest M. McRae Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 Seems that the industry is also confused re the precise definition of "Regional Air Carrier" . Here is what Air Transport World has to say on the subject: REGIONAL AIRLINE OF THE YEAR AWARD This is our top award for the regional segment of the airline industry. It has the same basic criteria as our Airline of the Year award. The winner should have displayed consistent superior service to the public, and in some cases to its parent airline. We, like everyone else, are still wrestling with a precise definition for a regional airline. For now we are confining it to airlines which have essentially short-haul operations using predominantly less-than-100-seat transports. http://www.atwonline.com/events_awards_describe.cfm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest M. McRae Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 Seems that the industry is also confused re the precise definition of "Regional Air Carrier" . Here is what Air Transport World has to say on the subject: REGIONAL AIRLINE OF THE YEAR AWARD This is our top award for the regional segment of the airline industry. It has the same basic criteria as our Airline of the Year award. The winner should have displayed consistent superior service to the public, and in some cases to its parent airline. We, like everyone else, are still wrestling with a precise definition for a regional airline. For now we are confining it to airlines which have essentially short-haul** operations using predominantly less-than-100-seat transports. http://www.atwonline.com/events_awards_describe.cfm ** short-haul flying, defined as trips under 800 kilometres. http://www.canada.com/national/features/september11/story.html?id=6ED54C37-BAD8-422B-B076-3BAB2B5CAC33 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest M. McRae Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 So, based on what appears to be an industry standard, a "regional route" is operated using an aircraft with under 100seats going a distance of less than 800 kilometers. YVR-YYC, YYC-YQR, YQR-YWG, YVR-YEG, YHZ-YUL, YSJ-YOW(ALL OK AS REGIONAL ROUTES based on mileage), YWG-YYZ & YVR-YXY would not fit the profile and neither would YHZ-YOW or YHZ-YYZ. Seems that the definition of "Regional Carrier" needs some work based on Canadian Routes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dockjock Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 So should AC go the profit-sharing/stock options route then? Please save the snide comments about not being profitable...but if they're playing have/have not then that should be on the table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Oneworld Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 "STARJET" as its being called is going to be flying passengers down south..... This is the first that I have heard that the operation will be "solely directed at sports teams and high end corporate". I have friends at tour operators that have been contacted about picking up seats on the aircraft to certain southern destinations. Regardless of his comments, Starjet is a passenger operation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMC Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 Perhaps all you say is possible, however all the destinations in the new Runway Analysis Charts that showed up are only those of major league baseball teams. Coincidence? Who knows. I can certainly say that if indeed flying for the tour companies is in the cards then the 60 seat interiors in the airplanes will have to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.