Does Teplisky know the 29th is a Sunday?


Recommended Posts

May not be a great question to ask on the EVE of what could be a very different airline and will effect a large number of pilots. To bad the two unions didn't get their ducks in a row years ago. I don't think we'd be breaking the camels back right now. Do you? But then again the " different airline" depending on the outcome, should have a chance with all the $$$$$$$$ that's being thrown at it. Good luck to all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The decision could come as early as a few days after Feb 29/04. My guess is that the decision will be out within the week. There's not much time left for AC to get all the ducks in a row and I'm pretty sure Teplisky along with most of the employees at this airline wanted this thing done long ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest directlaw

Teplitsky has 60 days to render his decision. He may come out with a quick decision but that will be up to him and of course the constraints, if any, put on him by the restructuring of Air Canada. He is a busy guy that is why we are doing this arbitration on a weekend.

I suggest everyone re read the protocol. This arbitration is only about deciding the party’s rights where a conflict exists. (I.e. the 705). It appears to me that a lot of people believe that the scope of this arbitration is much larger than it actually is.

Air Canada, Air Canada Jazz, ACPA and ALPA agree:

The parties rights regarding equipment acquisition and scope included in the

agreement between Air Canada Jazz and ALPA and the current Collective

Agreement between Air Canada and ACPA shall be subject to the following

dispute resolution mechanism, where a conflict exists:

(A) If Air Canada desires to purchase aircraft it shall advise ACPA and ALPA

prior to introducing the aircraft to its fleet or the Air Canada Jazz fleet and

provide each union with full particulars of the intended acquisition.

(B) A meeting shall be held within 15 days attended by both ACPA and ALPA

for the purpose of resolving the question of whether the aircraft shall be

added to the Air Canada or the Air Canada Jazz fleet.

© If no agreement is reached at this meeting, the dispute shall be submitted

to binding arbitration which shall be heard and determined on an

expedited basis.

(D) The arbitration shall be heard by Martin Teplitsky, Q.C., and the decision

shall be rendered within 60 days. If Mr. Teplitsky is unable to act, another

arbitrator shall be appointed by Justice Warren Winkler.

Signed this ___ day of June, 2003:

For Air Canada:

For ACPA:

For Air Canada Jazz: For ALPA

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest directlaw

Teplitsky can not go beyond the bounds of this protocol. It is what we all agreed to. I'm interested, you obviously believe there is more than just the 705 that is a conflict. Where is the conflict?

Link to post
Share on other sites

One would have to know what the Jazz/ALPA agreement states.

It was my understanding that they agreed to fly up to 110 seats and the ACPA scope limits the to 75? seats and this is where the conflict lies, and from what I understand this is what is being decided by Teplisky.

Of course I could be wrong again (it's been happening a lot lately)

Brett

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest directlaw

The only "right", as far as I know, in the Jazz contract is to fly a certain amount of 74 seat aircraft. They got a commitment from Air Canada to be able to put forward a proposal to fly larger aircraft, but that is far from a right to fly them. There is nothing in their contract that states they have a right to fly 110 seat aircraft. ACPA's contract says they have a right to fly everything above 55 seats. The conflict is those 74 seat aircraft.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest floatrr

You are not wrong. The agreement between the company and ALPA was that the flying up to 70 seats would be arbitrated, and that the 70 - 110 seat flying would go to the most successful bidder. All except ACPA were in agreement, obviously b/c it was a violation to their contract language. This arbitration is about who flies the small jets. Like it or not , thats what is happening here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Semantics I know, but does the ACPA contract (scope clause) actually state that they will fly everything over 55 seats, or does it state that JAZZ is limited to 55 seats??

Either way it's going to get real interesting here in the next little while :S

Brett

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the ACPA collective agreement not conflict with any of the below?? It seems to me it conflicts with all of it,,,No??

3. Section 3 of the collective agreement is amended so as to reflect the terms set out in this paragraph.

(a) Effective April 2, 2004, all flights using turbojet and turboprop aircraft operated, either directly or indirectly, by Air Canada Enterprises, its subsidiaries or related companies with a certified maximum seating capacity up to 75 seats will utilize pilots employed by Air Canada Jazz represented by ALPA.

(B) The allocation of aircraft with a certified maximum seating capacity between 76 and 110 seats shall be determined on the basis of a competitive bidding process between the pilots at Air Canada Jazz and the pilots at Air Canada. This process is to be administered by the Court-appointed Monitor.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest directlaw

Read the protocol. The parties "rights" regarding equipment acquisition and scope......where a conflict exists:

Explain Jazzes contractual "right" to fly anything above 55 seats. Other than of course the 74 seat aircraft that was put in your contract last spring.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest directlaw

I am sure his report will be clear on the matter. It will have to be because I guarantee ACPA will challenge him to a higher court if goes beyond the bounds of the protocol. Think about it, if that were to happen then the litigation will not end. I believe one of TTI's requirements was for a resolution to this matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted By: directlaw On Sun, 29 Feb 2004, at 1:21:11 PM

I am sure his report will be clear on the matter. It will have to be because I guarantee ACPA will challenge him to a higher court if goes beyond the bounds of the protocol. Think about it, if that were to happen then the litigation will not end. I believe one of TTI's requirements was for a resolution to this matter.

Interesting point. I'll take it one step further - If Mr. Teplisky does not side 100% with EVERYTHING ACPA proposes then it will probably mean that the decision is not within the bounds of the protocol.

ACPA files a challenge to a higher court.

The challenge is accepted - hearings to start in September.

Trinity Time sends over their plunge-protection team to see what the heck is going on.

Trinity time's advisors advise a timely withdrawal - using any of the several escape clauses available.

Air Canada Enterprises re-opens the bidding for investors.

Guess who calls? (besides OSFI)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.