Recommended Posts

Lets be clear, this still is the Keller award. The only change is to remove the Mitchnick penalty adjustment. An adjustment Keller had no right to impose in the first place. But since Keller felt that the OAC had an advantage for just under 2 years by using the Mitchnick list he imposed it anyway, not for 2 years but for life. Teplitsky has verified, and the facts support, that the adjustment has done what Keller intended and then some. It has now swung too far the other way towards a Keller effect that the OAC should be compensated for but he won't go there. Net effect is the list we should have gotten from Keller 2 years ago. It still has me 8% from my pre-merge relative seniority and doesn't comply with D183 but Teplitsky won't overturn it.

Edited by Homerun
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest directlaw
Doesn't sound too much like you and Jaydee are holding your noses. I drop 15% on system seniority, and I'm just over 50 numbers ahead of where Mitchnick stuck me (a list that even most of you held up as being overly punishing). From where I sit, this is Mitchnick with a cat toy to distract me.

I hope the CIRB puts this piece of crap where it belongs: in the dumper.

mad.gif

So Buzz let me get this straight.

You say that the Mitchnick award and the Keller award ( uncorrected) are only 50 numbers apart in your situation. (or about 1.6%)

Sounds like Keller and Mitchnick both agreed where you belong on the seniority list. Or at least agree with in 1.6%. Pretty close considering they were two separate opinions.

So how come you deserved that 15% seniority gain, for life, when Keller only said you were penalized 50 numbers for 2 years?

And your mad. Perhaps you should have sat in our shoes during CCAA while you enjoyed that 15% gift.

Link to post
Share on other sites
>>Air Canada acquired cash-strapped CAI in 2000<<

Kinda says it all doesn't it..

Actually, since CAI had important pacific routes and Narita slots, plus some LHR slots, a large frequent flyer program and a major maintenance base - all of which AC is using to its advantage today - one could says...

Air Canada acquired asset-rich CAI in 2000

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reuters..." His tenure at the helm of Air Canada since 1999 has included the disastrous merger with insolvent Canadian airlines "

One would think the OCP would be thankful they had been given a job, let alone biotch about the one they got....especially since it was delivered on a gold trimmed, gift wrapped, silver platter with ALL the trimmings.

Edited by Jaydee
Link to post
Share on other sites

One would think the OCP would................

Kinda says it all.....................

Unfortunately, no matter what the real/positive/final/finito outcome is, there will still be a few of those that harbour the attitudes displayed in these posts. One would think that after 5+ years and millions of your dollars being spent on this futile exercise, individuals would all refrain from comments that do nothing but raise the ire of so many...red and blue alike

So sad, as I once I thought the entire peer group I once belonged to were more professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

dagger, I think you're stirring the pot needlessly here. My response may well do the same, though it is not my intent.

Asset-rich implies ownership of the assets. CAIL did not own the slots, nor did they have the cash remaining to remain in possession of the other 'assets'. Long lost in the shell game that Jenkins and Benson had run.

So found Mr. Von Fink when he ultimately dropped his objection to the takeover. There was not enough left of the airline to avoid liquidation and there were no suitors. The fact was, regardless of how you categorize the holdings of CAIL in 1999, they would not have seen the new year without the cash infusion Air Canada brought.

Here's a link of interest.

http://competitionbureau.gc.ca/internet/in...itemID=619&lg=e

I for one do not subscribe to either polar view of the takeover. Simply put, at the working level, both groups of employees were working their tails off at the time of the merger. They were not in control of this situation, so the level of blame or entitlement is completely nonesense.

No one group deserves the belief that it should come out far ahead of where it was pre-merger. Where Mitchnick had fences, Keller had the 'Mitchnick effect". Neither were appropriate. Both are gone. Teplitski's track record shows him not to be a fan of ACPA, so to suggest that this is some kind of biased, "paid for" solution is offensive to the point of defamatory. Odd that those spouting this tripe are calling for fairness while not being fair to others....

Human nature is all about dominating. This issue long ago ceased to be about fairness and more about baser instincts. Time to start walking upright again.

At least in my opinion.

Vs

Link to post
Share on other sites

So sad, as I once I thought the entire peer group I once belonged to were more professional.

UM......yeah.....sure Kip...what ever you say

And.......from YOUR professional side of the equation...right from the devils mouth.....I present

Taaaaa Daaaaaaaaaaaa !!! ( insert drum roll thingy here )

CAPTAIN ROB " MAC THE KNIFE IN ALL OUR SIDES" INNES

Captain Rob McInnis, a spokesman for the ex-CAI pilots, said his group will seek to stop the new rankings from being implemented, including asking the Canada Industrial Relations Board to rule that the mediation process isn't valid.

"There's no way that we're going to take this loss lying down. We want to make sure that this Teplitsky award goes where it belongs, and that's in the trash bin," Capt. McInnis said.

Edited by Jaydee
Link to post
Share on other sites
One would think the OCP would be thankful they had been given a job, let alone biotch about the one they got....especially since it was delivered on a gold trimmed, gift wrapped, silver platter with ALL the trimmings. icon_head222[1].gif

Wow! blink.gif This is unreal... an almost exact replay of the trash being thrown around 5 years ago....

.....grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr..... angry[1].gif .... do we really need to go through this again?....

Listen up bub.... yer own beloved jobs were hangin' on a wire themselves, and without the merger, and subsequent loss of any competition to speak of, your silver platter was not so damned assured.

It's interesting how some of you like to look at the CAIL picture as a dynamic, as in - where it was headed, but you prefer the snap shot variety of looking at AC.

Here's a thought I've offered before.... if CDN's assets and routes had been distributed among other competitors, like C3, SSV, WJ, AT (or whoever), AC was gonna be in heap big doodoo... and I'd guess there's a strong likelihood that anyone without at least 10 years would have been headed for the unemployment lines.... Son of a gun if those aren't among the loudest of those singing that bloody "you should be thankful" song!

...here's a new verse: If that's the case then you too should be thankful!

Now... shall we address that "gold trimmed, gift wrapped, silver platter with ALL the trimmings" nonsense? ... or just let it slide?.... unsure.gif Who the heck was it that went bankrupt a short while ago?.... hmmmm....?

It's like we're in a time warp here.... I almost expect to see Captain Kirk in a space suit floating outside my window....

Henceforth, anyone who uses that "you OCP oughta be thankful you have a job" line should consider themselves penalized by being 5 years closer to death, with nothing learned in that time... the rest of us have had 5 more years of growth to enjoy. martini.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
Simply put, at the working level, both groups of employees were working their tails off at the time of the merger. They were not in control of this situation, so the level of blame or entitlement is completely nonesense.

Thank you! There's a breath of fresh air.... obviously you're a man who's done some things in the past 5 years... good on ya mate! thumbs_up.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kip,

If I read you correctly, entire means all of us regardless of "color" and you are right. Things are at an all time low and will head south if the polarized forces about were to get their wish.

Time for "entire fairness" for all concerned. Not just for the few "colorful" noisy, destructive partisans.

To move on we need a "colorblind solution"; while imperfect, Teplitsky got closer to the truth with his solution then some (of all colors) can handle.

Bunkerman ph34r.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for you Kip......... cool26.gif

I stand corrected on the word "entire " as you meant it

although.......

en·tire

Function: adjective

---not capable of being divided into independent parts---

hmmmmmmm..seems RM has now also managed to change the English language as well cause we sure are divided.

*****************************************************************

The rest of my reply re :

CAPTAIN ROB " MAC TURN THE KNIFE IN ALL OUR SIDES" INNES

stands as posted

Edited by Jaydee
Link to post
Share on other sites

JAYDEE...we're almost on the same page. Read VSPLAT'S post,,,again.... he has his $h!t together...let's leave the topic alone. ...screaming out opinions, posting what someone said...all that does is bring attention to the malcontents and as we both know...there are many on both sides.

Eventually, I hope this mess will be settled and you can bet your house not everyone will be happy...but for the sake of your well being, and the well being of others, including your loved ones...move on.....

I know "venting" is good for the soul but this topic has now become "over -vented"... wink.gif

I made that word up tongue.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not knowing as much about any of the decisions put forth so far as you peelots on here, is either group severely disadvantaged by Teplitsky's ruling based upon where they were pre-merger? If not, are they fairly equally disadvantaged? If so, how so?

Is Teplitsky better than Keller for one group and better than Mitchnick for the other, but somewhere in between for both? If the answer is Yes, and you can disregard both Mitchnick and Keller for the moment, is that not the best possible solution for the entire group and one that should have been rendered in the first place?

In other words, had this been the decision put forth by Mitchnick originally, would either side have been up in arms or would we have had peace in the flight deck?

Edited by moeman
Link to post
Share on other sites
In other words, had this been the decision put forth by Mitchnick originally, would either side have been up in arms or would we have had peace in the flight deck?

Hi Moeman,

Firstly there is and always has been "peace in the flightdeck" as far as I'm concerned.

Secondly I think its fair to say that both sides would have been annoyed if Mr. Teplitsky's report was the first one imposed on us. Expectations being quite high on both sides. Since Mr. T is essentially the 3rd review he has the benefit of all the hindsight on what should or should not have been done. He seems to have made a valiant effort to get it right.

(speaking as an OAC) I know I can live with it and could have, if it was the only review.

Chico

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Chico. By Peace in the FD I meant amongst your group as a whole, not necessarily onboard. I've never witnessed anything but professionalism onboard no matter the mix. A few RP's can be a real pain in the neck, but as far as onboard behaviour it's been fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've found that if there is going to be a crew conflict between the front and back end, the RP is usually the cause. Some, not all, seem to feel entitled to everything onboard (like food, newspapers, etc.) ahead of J-class and any other crew member. Of the 3 drivers, the RP seems more likely to treat us, and the customers, with disdain. If someone has a problem putting up and/or taking down the crew rest curtain on the 767, it's generally the RP. Little things, but if you ask most galley people they would probably have a few RP stories to tell. Not sure if it's their relative lack of experience or what, but the attitude and lack of respect can be quite difficult to deal with sometimes. Much more so than the vast majority of Captains and FO's who treat us with respect, IMO.

Not seniority related, but an observation I've made of late.

Link to post
Share on other sites

TWO OBSERVATIONS:

1) How does one get around the fact that "the parties" agreed to "binding arbitration" (the Keller arbitration) and it is not open (should not be open) for one party to unilaterally reject that award and seek a more palatable resolution? The Tepitsky "solution" may be acceptable but where is the legal and moral authority for implementation?

2) Noticed lately how a Jazz Dash seems less prevalent than a Jazz jet? Evolution is funny. If the difference between mainline and regional was jet/prop, where is the difference now? Point....pilots....all just (repeat..."JUST") pilots. The course of the future is apparently, domestic-----"small body"; international..."wide body" and the point of demarcation for purposes of ego will be....?

It is so unfortunate that such a large percentage of pilots believe in this hierchical structure and will shortly "swear" that the Embraer pilot is somehow inferior to his/her 330 or "Dreamliner" compatriot.

Ah, well! Feed the dogs.

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.