AIP Posted August 16, 2005 Share Posted August 16, 2005 Careful there, you don't want some OAC guy coming along and calling you a troll. He's not worth the trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
handyman Posted August 16, 2005 Share Posted August 16, 2005 AIP...ouch! Havin a rough day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AME Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 By the time this is all said and done it probably would have been cheaper and better for everyone to just give the original 243? guys a million dollars each and called it a day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John S. Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 Or several million to the handful of Jazz pilots who wound have been integrated into that 243 (I'm not included.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dork Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 Not a bad idea...too bad you would have to give 1200 OAC types $2,000,000 each to cover the latest fiasco. DOH never looked better. GS is DOA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCDU Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 I've formulated my opinion based on what I've seen happen not only between OAC and Jazz, but also between OAC and OCP You've formulated your opinion based on what you've read here. That's your first mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dropzone Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 "it's all about screwing the other guy" A small change to your above statement would be more accurate of the situation, and that is, "It's all about OAC pilots screwing the other guy." Sadly you and your friends have been consumed by your own hatred. At least some of us on the other side have tried in vain to find a solution for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cargo Agent Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 You've formulated your opinion based on what you've read here. That's your first mistake. Hardly, but the rhetoric spouted by some pilot's from all sides here sure hasn't painted a pretty picture. Are you trying to say that there is no animosity between the various pilot groups? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AME Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 Not a bad idea...too bad you would have to give 1200 OAC types $2,000,000 each to cover the latest fiasco. DOH never looked better. In hind sight had the OAC group accepted the original arbitration there would have been a precident for DOH and all of this would have been over in a matter of minutes. Of course this place would have been extremely boring Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest floatrrr Posted August 21, 2005 Share Posted August 21, 2005 "The reason they won't entertain anything else is that they have a responsibility to protect their most junior members to the same level as their most senior." Rich! So is that what they did with the introduction of the Pay Group? Give me a break. This AC pilot group is a funny bunch. Come all ye Jazz pilots for an interview. We will pick and choose which of you are good enough to fly an Air Canada Jet. For those of you who are not good enough... good luck with your career in aviation. By the way (sez the gate agent) there is an Air Canada Pilot looking for the jumpseat on your regional airplane so he can get home. Apparently you are good enough to fly him home ,but are not good enough to fly with him. What a twisted group. Oh well, the jumpseat is yours, weeeel git ya home Capn. Close yer ize tho, it may git a bit skeeery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kilo Mike Posted August 21, 2005 Share Posted August 21, 2005 'Apparently you are good enough to fly him home ,but are not good enough to fly with him.' - Floatrrr Don't confuse ability with a potential interpersonal flight safety hazzard. Hence the need for an interview at ACE, which scares the bejezzus outta the senior jazz folks. ps ... This doesn't mean I won't have one of your co-horts in my j/s. We all want to get home . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sambucca Posted August 21, 2005 Share Posted August 21, 2005 'Apparently you are good enough to fly him home ,but are not good enough to fly with him.' - Floatrrr Brings up another interesting situation. What happens if a Jazz pilot is refused employment with mainline and subsequently rolls an airplane up in a ball sometime thereafter. (God forbid) I'll bet there are a lot of lawyers that would love to get their teeth into that lawsuit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AME Posted August 21, 2005 Share Posted August 21, 2005 Does AC and Jazz actually codeshare? or is there just a commercial agreement in place??? With the changes to the ACE group of companies AC no longer owns Jazz so CARs 705.27 (3) (d) (ii) may no longer apply Admission to Flight Deck 705.27 (1) Where a Department of Transport air carrier inspector presents an official identity card to the pilot-in-command of an aircraft, the pilot-in-command shall give the inspector free and uninterrupted access to the flight deck of the aircraft. (2) An air operator and the pilot-in-command shall make available for the use of the air carrier inspector the observer seat most suitable to perform the inspector's duties, as determined by the inspector. (3) No person shall be admitted to the flight deck of an aeroplane other than (amended 2002/03/21; previous version) (a) a flight crew member; ( a crew member performing their duties; © an inspector referred to in subsection (1); (d) in accordance with the procedures specified in the company operations manual, (i) an employee of the air operator who is not a crew member performing their duties, and (ii) a pilot, flight engineer or flight attendant employed by a wholly owned subsidiary or a code share partner of the air operator; and (e) a person who has expertise related to the aeroplane, its equipment or its crew members and who is required to be in the flight deck to provide a service to the air operator. (4) The air operator shall verify (amended 2002/03/21; previous version) (a) in the case of a person referred to in paragraph (3)(d) or (e), the identity of the person by means of a personal photo identification issued by the air operator, its wholly owned subsidiary, its code share partner or a foreign government or a restricted area pass as defined in the Canadian Aviation Security Regulations, and ( in the case of a person referred to in paragraph (3)(d), the fact that (i) the person is currently employed by the air operator, or by a wholly owned subsidiary or code share partner of the air operator; and (ii) no seat is available for the person in the passenger compartment. (5) No person referred to in paragraph (3)(d), except an employee of the air operator who is undergoing the aircraft cockpit familiarization required for the performance of their duties, shall be admitted to the flight deck if a seat is available in the passenger compartment. (amended 2002/03/21; no previous version) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lakelad Posted August 21, 2005 Share Posted August 21, 2005 AME,Aug 21 2005, 02:04 PM] With the changes to the ACE group of companies AC no longer owns Jazz so CARs 705.27 (3) (d) (ii) may no longer apply Just curious, what are you basing this ownership change on? Their stated intention to this point is to retain majority control of Jazz. "August 05 - G&M While announcing strong second-quarter results, ACE said it will file a preliminary prospectus in the third quarter for an IPO containing a minority interest in Jazz while allowing ACE to retain majority control." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RussD Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 Just curious, what are you basing this ownership change on? Their stated intention to this point is to retain majority control of Jazz. The ownership structure did change. Where as before Jazz was a sub of mainline , now Jazz air LP is a subsidiary of ACE. Air Canada (mainline) is also a sub of ACE. The two divisions have more of a sibling type relationship vs the parent (mainline)/child (Jazz) relationship of pre CCAA days. I think the code share language of the CARS captures the ability to offer recip jumpseats tho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lakelad Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 .. now Jazz air LP is a subsidiary of ACE. Air Canada (mainline) is also a sub of ACE. I see, thx. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 KM says "Don't confuse ability with a potential interpersonal flight safety hazzard. Hence the need for an interview at ACE, which scares the bejezzus outta the senior jazz folks." What a pile of horse hockey! I applied to AC when I had 250 hrs total time and not since. My Dad was not an AC pilot and therefore I was required to actually go out and develop the skills etc which are necessary to the licence & job. This would be unlike all you wonder pilots that got CS to strongarm TC into an ATP let to the regs. That makes your ATP something akin to the kind that might come as a cereal box prize? Scared of an AC interview? What kind of arrogance does it take to dream up garbage like this KM? Perhaps most of the senior Jazz pilots recognize AC for the dinosaur it remains today and have little to no interest in sitting beside people such as yourself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bobw Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 Hey KM...maybe you just zip it for awhile!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.