Jammed rudders on HMCS AC

[dragon]

Jammed Rudders,

Would a well placed torpedo, effectively sinking our ship, not certainly deliver the catalyst to cure, over night basically, a lot of what ails the present Air Canada?

The debt, the salaries, the structure and it’s trusted guardians, the relationships with government, media, investors and unions.. the entitlements, the attitudes, along with a lot of the people too lazy, too entrenched, too stupid or a bit of all three, to evolve..

From a personal, selfish point of view, I’d say that’s the best, perhaps only, real answer.. wonder if the Feds see it that way too.. personally and selfishly that is.

Just wondering out loud.

[Don Hudson]

Dragon;

Always enjoy engaging the dialogue...

Re "Would a well placed torpedo, effectively sinking our ship, not certainly deliver the catalyst to cure, over night basically, a lot of what ails the present Air Canada?"

A number of points and then some question arise.

What kind of "torpedo", what kind of "sinking", what kind of "catalyst" and what is meant by "over night, basically"?

I heard today that Air Canada's part in the Canadian economy's infrastructure was around 11%, a figure which I am almost certain to be corrected upon because the source would have to be termed 'hearsay' as opposed to researched. Maybe its 5%, maybe its less or more. Although not at all intended to fortify the notion of "bailout", (I am strongly against that as my recent letter indicated), nor should Transport, the Canadian government, the public and most of all Canadian business be sanguine in the face of an "overnight" cessation of transportation.

I have asked the question here and elsewhere of those who wish the demise of Air Canada-and-the-sooner-the-better:

Not that it's immanent (lest we worry people...) as an academic question to an academic hypothesis, do we know what Day One looks like for between 45,000 and 60,000 customers? Do we know what it looks like for the thousands of freight handlers, package deliverers, the Royal Mail and holiday makers?

This doesn't presuppose immunity or invincibility...not at all, and the closer May 21rst draws, the clearer that fact should become, one hopes.

At the same time, the romantic notion of "starting over right from the beginning" is, to me, rife with impracticalities, short-sightedness and misunderstandings of the consequences.

It is not as though there is a service equal to the task in the wings. Even though exploratory talks have taken place (for what real purpose?,... only those heavily enough into denial would not engage the potential of using other airlines), the practicalities are astoundingly beyond the immediate capabilities of anything in the Canadian industry today.

At the very least, the term, "migration" comes to mind in such a scenario and how that might be accomplished is so complex and fraught with peril that the solution might be worse than the "cure".

Its a Gordian Knot, Dragon. Everyone involved is damned-if-they-do, damned-if-they-don't in terms of acting.

The best outcome is a continued converation with labour signalling an open invitation to another investor, combined with in-depth talks with the Federal government on ways it can facilitate Air Canada's paradigm change, with all participants prepared to talk seriously and come to a conclusion.

Big order. Much bigger failure. No one who has thought this through could conclude otherwise.

Don

[Don Hudson]

Dragon;

Always enjoy engaging the dialogue...

Re "Would a well placed torpedo, effectively sinking our ship, not certainly deliver the catalyst to cure, over night basically, a lot of what ails the present Air Canada?"

A number of points and then some question arise.

What kind of "torpedo", what kind of "sinking", what kind of "catalyst" and what is meant by "over night, basically"?

I heard today that Air Canada's part in the Canadian economy's infrastructure was around 11%, a figure which I am almost certain to be corrected upon because the source would have to be termed 'hearsay' as opposed to researched. Maybe its 5%, maybe its less or more. Although not at all intended to fortify the notion of "bailout", (I am strongly against that as my recent letter indicated), nor should Transport, the Canadian government, the public and most of all Canadian business be sanguine in the face of an "overnight" cessation of transportation.

I have asked the question here and elsewhere of those, primarily in the media, who wish the demise of Air Canada-and-the-sooner-the-better:

Not that it's immanent (lest we worry people...) as an academic question to an academic hypothesis, do we know what Day One looks like for between 45,000 and 60,000 customers? Do we know what it looks like for the thousands of freight handlers, package deliverers, the Royal Mail and holiday makers?

This doesn't presuppose immunity or invincibility...not at all, and the closer May 21rst draws, the clearer that fact should become, one hopes.

At the same time, the romantic notion of "starting over right from the beginning" is, to me, rife with impracticalities, short-sightedness and misunderstandings of the consequences.

It is not as though there is a service equal to the task in the wings. Even though exploratory talks have taken place (for what real purpose?,... only those heavily enough into denial would not engage the potential of using other airlines), the practicalities are astoundingly beyond the immediate capabilities of anything in the Canadian industry today.

At the very least, the term, "migration" comes to mind in such a scenario and how that might be accomplished is so complex and fraught with peril that the solution might be worse than the "cure".

The best outcome is a continued conversation with labour signalling an open invitation to another investor, combined with in-depth talks with the Federal government on ways it can facilitate Air Canada's paradigm change, with all participants prepared to talk seriously and come to a conclusion.

Big order. Much bigger failure. No one who has thought this through could conclude otherwise.

Those who have been in this business long enough to remember the period after 1988 well, will recall that when things appear their bleakest, a solution which is totally out-of-the-box thinking resolves the worst of the matter.

I'm not relying on this as a magical solution, but there are very good reasons for this airline should survive. Notwithstanding the reliably hostile media, there are many, many things which Air Canada and its employees do very well.

Change it must, and its been slow to do that. But "torpedo" it to "start over"? No, I don't think so.

Don

[Guest Fax]

The Country will survive.

Travelers will survive.

Mail will move.

If there is any Government intervention, they should relax the 1 year time period for a new Air Canada to resurect itself...minus the union contracts.

[Don Hudson]

Fax;

"Wrong"? Just like that, out of hand?

Of course the country will survive, people will travel and mail will go through. I am not alarmist, nor is the sky falling.

Re-read my post please, and realize that this is one of the outcomes discussed under the term "migrate".

Should that be one outcome, how that process unfolds is unknown, and part of my point was that things happen which were heretofor unimagined.

Who knows how this will come out. But come out it must, in some fashion. I was merely observing that an overnight cessation is almost certainly unlikely.

regards,

Don

[Guest Fax]

Hi Don,

Not out of hand at all. Rather careful consideration to the situation at hand.

I would be damned happy if AC survives the current malaise it finds itself in...but I have my doubts, given the current labour climate.

If this forum is any indication, there's a ton of baggage that needs to be shed. And it's had years to do so.

Am I wrong, I hope so.

[Guest Fax]

Hi Don,

Not out of hand at all. Rather careful consideration to the situation at hand.

I would be damned happy if AC survives the current malaise it finds itself in...but I have my doubts, given the current labour climate.

If this forum is any indication, there's a ton of baggage that needs to be shed. And it's had years to do so.

Am I wrong, I hope so, but in the end I guess that my point is that the world will survive without Air Canada.

[Guest Raingear]

so now that you've finished with the airline career... its time time to rip up those nasty union contracts that gave you a decent living during your time here eh Fax?

Oh, and thanks for your comforting words about the country surviving...where did you get the idea from Don's post that it wouldn't?

[Guest Fax]

His whole post is "fraught with peril" if AC doesn't survive.

Canada will survive...so will the travelling public.

[Guest Fax]

And further to that.

I was just trying to book myself to KIX this summer. 4 Grand on Air Canada round trip...for one person.

Thanks, but no thanks.

[Guest Fax]

And further to that.

I was just trying to book myself to KIX this summer. 4 Grand on Air Canada round trip...for one person.

Thanks, but no thanks.

[Guest AME]

Don

I've been drinking so if this comes across wrong, I'm sorry..... but from your post I get the feeling that you don't for a minute believe that AC can fail, as I understand it there isn't another investor, and GECAS isn't willing to extend the DIP thingy so even though the protection has been extended to May 21st is there really any hope past next Friday?????

[Guest eights wild]

There's a Rabbit in this hat somewhere.....

[Don Hudson]

Hi Fax;

Oh yes, the world will survive without AC...no illusions there. Nothing's indispensible, nothing's forever etc etc.

But that's not the point. And focussing on the current labour climate is only a small part of the problem. Remember, labour did not create this problem and the blame it is receiving in the media is way out of proportion.

Southwest Airlines, the model for low-cost operations is, as you likely know, the heaviest of unionized airlines, paying their employees (certainly their pilots) among the highest wages in the industry. Those who attack labour as being the problem at AC have never explained that. We never hear of "pension" problems at Southwest. Why not?

Labour will certainly be part of the solution along with many others who have come to the table at Air Canada.

But to dismiss Air Canada's presence by saying, 'ach, the world'll get along', is to ignore the facts of any cessation of business. Of course it will "get along". But is that what we want? Do we know what is really wanted here, or are we just angry and want action?

Such a blunt statement as was first offered (torpedo AC) is no solution at all and just a rallying slogan for those who just want to bash the airline once more.

The road to solutions is paved with far more complex and sophisticated strategies than that, even if those strategies ultimately contemplate the "migration" earlier mentioned. Any careful consideration must appreciate this point.

[Don Hudson]

Hi Brett;

Hey, thanks for the admission! ( to you!

No, you don't come across wrong, but I think you've misunderstood what I'm trying to say. That's my fault.

It would be folly, given the present circumstances, for anyone taking a look at the situation to "not believe for a minute that AC can fail".

But my point is, nor is AC's silencing, as many on this forum choose to see it, an inevitability.

I think in this kind of conversation, we have to be mindful of a few things...

-Be careful what is wished for;

-Guard against a set of events which might precipitate an accidental bankruptcy;

-Recognize and defend the airline's undeniable successes;

-Retain a positive stance because that helps everyone including the most important people, our customers; and finally,

-Keep optimistic about outcomes but practical about planning.

No one would expect us to take survival for granted. My views regarding the effects upon the economy are a recognition of almost certain economic fact, not a result of naive wishful thinking. We, all of us at AC, must focus on the job at hand and work as we can towards change which can return us to sustainable profitability. That's long on general talk and short on specifics, but that's where we should be marching towards.

Don

[Don Hudson]

Fax;

Re "4 Grand on Air Canada round trip. . . Thanks but no thanks."

Obvious straw man argument (with overtones of victimhood), Fax: Set up a situation unrelated to the argument then blame the target for the result, all without bringing in information which deals with the orginal statement.

What part of this fare is out of line with other carriers serving Canada to Japan?

[Guest Fax]

Very good points Don.

I guess what I was fumbling at, was that my opinion of AC's labour problems is not that it's overpaid, but rather one that seems to be stuck in the past & can't move on past prior differences.

I hope I'm wrong.

[rudder]

Don,

Enough with the SWA mantra.

Yes, the SWA pilots are well compensated relative to the declining market rates for B737 pilots. However, they are also the most productive pilots in North America. Therefore the pilot unit costs are amongst the lowest in the market.

As for the rest of the SWA employees, the pay is terrible. So much for your theory.

[dagger]

I agree. Southwest's labor agreements have little in common with AC's. Flexibility and an acceptance of the risk-reward concept is not something AC unions take kindly to unless there is an 80 mm cannon pointed at their heads.

The unions didn't create the situation by their lonesome - deregulation, privatization, etc can be blamed, but so what. The unions must be a big part of the solution to a degree they heretofore haven't accepted. Air Canada, the Crown corporation, is now far in the past. The political and regulatory conditions under which today's AC labor agreements were developed are long gone, and those agreements must adapt to AC's current reality - and competition - or AC will fail. Nor are the low cost carriers going away. They are the new fare and cost setters - the new industry standard.

In that sense, the obligation on the unions is crystal clear. If the unions refuse to adapt, when the aircraft lessors and bondholders and all others are adapting, then the unions are in fact the reason AC dies.

This is about evolution. Those who don't evolve, go extinct. Will AC's unions evolve, or become extinct. With all due respect to Don, it matters not how AC got to where it is and who is to blame - it's whether it gets to where it has to go, and who is to blame if it doesn't

If AC fails to exit this CCAA process, labor will indeed be to blame.

[Guest AME]

Don

I think I get it now, I truely want AC to survive, as they may be my employer again in the near future

[Mitch Cronin]

Dragon Meister,

The rudders aren't jammed... it's just the wheelhouse control that's suspect at the moment... seems there's been someobody fiddling with the telegraph, and communications from the engine room haven't all been heard.

We've got runners going back and forth.... there does seem to be someone at the helm... we've got a full tanks of fuel, there's a man in the crows nest calling down his sightings... if we can hang on to her long enough to get past these shoals, we just might manage to get her ship shape for the voyage ahead....

Hope to be seeing you at one of our ports of call in the not too distant future. We should have her all patched up and steaming well by then.

[Guest M. McRae]

Not sure when you are travelling but Travelocity shows AC at:

CAD 2325.72

Wed, Jul 14

8:00am Depart - Toronto, Canada (YYZ) Air Canada 1145 / 35

2:45pm Arrive - Osaka Kansai, Japan (KIX) 1 Stop - Change planes in Vancouver, BC, Canada (YVR)

Total travel time: 17hrs 45min - Next day arrival

Wed, Jul 21

4:15pm Depart - Osaka Kansai, Japan (KIX) Air Canada 36 / 130

6:24pm Arrive - Toronto, Canada (YYZ) 1 Stop - Change planes in Vancouver, BC, Canada (YVR)

UAL 1701 via ORD and AA 1953 vis LAX

[Guest WA777]

Fax only sees what he wants to see....and it has nothing to do with the facts or the truth.

[Guest WA777]

Fax only sees what he wants to see....and it has nothing to do with the facts or the truth.

[Don Hudson]

I hope so Brett!...Cheers,