Sky Regional to YTZ for AC

[MD2]

Sure, enough has been said for some quiet reflection, all the best.

[MD2]

Nice try. You know that was a loan and that it was paid back less than a year later. So....no burden on the taxpayers. In any case why shouldn't the government provide the odd loan guarantee since it's airport rents have been bleeding the industry for years. As for employees expecting a bailout, so what. This expectation has nothing to do with your claim that AC has been a burden on the taxpayer - please try to stay with your own argument for a few posts at least.

And for the record, it's not as though this was nothing. Even if the money has been paid back fully, which is debatable, it was a large sum of money given from the tax payers' pocket with high risk. And let's also not forget that much smaller amount of 75 millions also in loan guarantees was not given to Canada 3000 resulting in liquidation of that company. Now, how would you feel if you were a former Canada 3000 employee when the government aided Air Canada as a matter of fact, while signing the bankruptcy of your former company for lot less money? Government has no business in funding private sector companies. If Air Canada fails again, much like Canadian it must deal with it itself. It appears you have not been heeding your CEO's call to erase the "sense of entitlement" from your psyche!

[spreadsheet]

Didn't Porter get loans from Export Development Canada as well?

[Seeker]

And for the record, it's not as though this was nothing. Even if the money has been paid back fully, which is debatable, it was a large sum of money given from the tax payers' pocket with high risk. And let's also not forget that much smaller amount of 75 millions also in loan guarantees was not given to Canada 3000 resulting in liquidation of that company. Now, how would you feel if you were a former Canada 3000 employee when the government aided Air Canada as a matter of fact, while signing the bankruptcy of your former company for lot less money? Government has no business in funding private sector companies. If Air Canada fails again, much like Canadian it must deal with it itself. It appears you have not been heeding your CEO's call to erase the "sense of entitlement" from your psyche!

Well, actually I don't feel entitled but when faced with critics like you who want to turn everything AC does into something negative it tends to get my back up. As I recall the Canada 3000 situation happened very, very, quickly. Too quickly for anyone to respond but my opinion, if you care, is that the government should have given them the loan guarantee too. Truthfully though I don't think you can compare the two situations. C3 was a much smaller company and when it stopped operation the remaining companies were able to absorb the traffic. The C3 employees had, and have my sympathy though.

As a rule, I agree that the government shouldn't fund business however there are always exceptions and I could name numerous steel companies, auto manufacturers, airlines, tech companies etc etc that have needed a hand.

[MD2]

Didn't Porter get loans from Export Development Canada as well?

You should also ask: is Porter in bankruptcy protection or buying brand new Canadian-built airplanes, remember the time that Air Canada bought brand new Air Buses ... actually never mind we're all trying to forget that one! And secondly Export Development was only a portion of the loan to Air Canada, the rest came from the Government's account itself. By not having the same benefit were other airlines like Westjet somehow being penalized for their fiscal responsibility and financial performance?

[MD2]

Well, actually I don't feel entitled but when faced with critics like you who want to turn everything AC does into something negative it tends to get my back up. As I recall the Canada 3000 situation happened very, very, quickly. Too quickly for anyone to respond but my opinion, if you care, is that the government should have given them the loan guarantee too. Truthfully though I don't think you can compare the two situations. C3 was a much smaller company and when it stopped operation the remaining companies were able to absorb the traffic. The C3 employees had, and have my sympathy though.

As a rule, I agree that the government shouldn't fund business however there are always exceptions and I could name numerous steel companies, auto manufacturers, airlines, tech companies etc etc that have needed a hand.

It's a nice gesture, but sympathy is of little comfort to those who lost their jobs and then saw their tax dollars go to the company that bankrupted them!

[Thebean]

You should also ask: is Porter in bankruptcy protection or buying brand new Canadian-built airplanes, remember the time that Air Canada bought brand new Air Buses ... actually never mind we're all trying to forget that one! And secondly Export Development was only a portion of the loan to Air Canada, the rest came from the Government's account itself. By not having the same benefit were other airlines like Westjet somehow being penalized for their fiscal responsibility and financial performance?

Golly. MD2 seems to be getting pretty amped up about the prospects of, horrors, head to head competition from YTZ. If the product is that good, the costs are that low and their customers are so gosh darn loyal, they haven't got a thing to worry about. What's the fuss?

BTW, when are we going to see the 2Q numbers? How about 3Q?

Where's the beef?

[MD2]

Mr. Bean, do you see Sky Regional as good honourable business plan, or you like it because you perceive it as a fight of (your) rivals? Would you endorse similar plans for Westjet?

[Guest floatrrr]

Hold on a minute. ACPA feels that it is entitled to do all Air Canada flying and has a contract with the company to do it too. Now if the company decides they'd rather get someone else to do a specific part of that for them they need to negotiate that with the pilot group. What if the company decided they wanted to farm out "Service Checks" or "charter group check-in" - do you suppose that the AMEs or CSRs would just allow that to happen?

Ummm , OK . Describe what Air Canada flying is then , and what Air Canada flying will be done with the turboprops? I guess traditionally (tongue in cheek) every route in the country is Air Canada's. Is this still so?

[conehead]

What if the company decided they wanted to farm out "Service Checks" or "charter group check-in" - do you suppose that the AMEs or CSRs would just allow that to happen?

I have news for you. The company farms out "Service Checks" every day on the Embraer fleet, to little aviation service outfits all over the U.S.A. and we AME's just keep eating it. There's not much we can do about it. But if I were flying that plane, I'd be doing a REAL good walkaround...

[inchman]

Let's assume that Air Canada operates 35 Rapidair flights a day carrying about 3000 pax, and these flights are shared among the B767, A320, and EMB. This would mean an average cost of, let's say X dollars in labour cost, particularly pilot cost. Now, Air Canada sees an opportunity to ship some of this flying to a 3rd or 4th tier flying while pretending to be saving the day by fending off the pesky little raccoon. This way about a 1000 of those pax are transported using the airline that submitted the lowest bid to get the flying...

I'm surprised at you, MD2... or maybe I shouldn't be.

The flaw in this argument is that:

1. This provides better customer service to customers who like to fly on Air Canada but would also like to fly out of the island airport and currently only have one choice of airline. (This is completely different from the current EK argument where passengers currently have a choice of many airlines out of YYC and YVR (and of course, YYZ) to get to virtually any destination around the world). It seems that the raccoon prides itself on customer service, so I don't see why this would be so much of a stretch.

2. A good portion of the 1000 passengers will be, instead of AC's YYZ passengers, current users of YTZ, thus increasing AC income and profit. In fact, having the ability to carry passengers from YTZ brings with it the potential that these passengers will want to connect to our overseas destinations from YUL and YOW on Air Canada, rather than another overseas carrier, again increasing overall income.

Bottom line... this is not siphoning off YYZ traffic... it creates a significant amount of new opportunity for AC. Ultimately, it's a win-win for AC passengers and the company and falls well within the agreement between the union and the company for 2nd and 3rd tier flying.

[Thebean]

Mr. Bean, do you see Sky Regional as good honourable business plan, or you like it because you perceive it as a fight of (your) rivals? Would you endorse similar plans for Westjet?

Yes.

[MD2]

Perhaps you'd be good enough to post full details of the pay scale, benefits, pension plan, and the general terms and conditions under which the FAs at Porter work in order that I can offer an opinion on whether they too should seek improvements.

I wonder if the union crowd at AC has had the opportunity to drop in on the brothers and sisters at Sky regional. Apparently, they have quite the contract! If they can pass condescending innuendo about the competitors, surely they'd be up in arms about the proletariat at their sister company. After all, this is their company's flying, albeit done by the lowest bidder, which is more likely to affect their working conditions. Air Canada corporate is probably rubbing its hands together wondering how it can expand these contracts to more divisions or siphon more flying to the lowest bidder!

[MD2]

Yes.

So, money above all? Disappointing, but frankly, not surprising!

[Seeker]

I wonder if the union crowd at AC has had the opportunity to drop in on the brothers and sisters at Sky regional. Apparently, they have quite the contract! If they can pass condescending innuendo about the competitors, surely they'd be up in arms about the proletariat at their sister company. After all, this is their company's flying, albeit done by the lowest bidder, which is more likely to affect their working conditions. Air Canada corporate is probably rubbing its hands together wondering how it can expand these contracts to more divisions or siphon more flying to the lowest bidder!

You're not really going to start all this again are you? These questions have been answered here already.

[MD2]

I'm surprised at you, MD2... or maybe I shouldn't be.

The flaw in this argument is that:

1. This provides better customer service to customers who like to fly on Air Canada but would also like to fly out of the island airport and currently only have one choice of airline. (This is completely different from the current EK argument where passengers currently have a choice of many airlines out of YYC and YVR (and of course, YYZ) to get to virtually any destination around the world). It seems that the raccoon prides itself on customer service, so I don't see why this would be so much of a stretch.

2. A good portion of the 1000 passengers will be, instead of AC's YYZ passengers, current users of YTZ, thus increasing AC income and profit. In fact, having the ability to carry passengers from YTZ brings with it the potential that these passengers will want to connect to our overseas destinations from YUL and YOW on Air Canada, rather than another overseas carrier, again increasing overall income.

Bottom line... this is not siphoning off YYZ traffic... it creates a significant amount of new opportunity for AC. Ultimately, it's a win-win for AC passengers and the company and falls well within the agreement between the union and the company for 2nd and 3rd tier flying.

inchman, surprised or not, the fact is that there is a finite number of passengers between Toronto and Montreal. By doing 15 flights from YTZ Air Canada will essentially be competing against its flights from YYZ. Don't kid yourself, it WILL reduce capacity from YYZ, a capacity which is on the mainline at a higher cost is shifted to the lowest bidder, seemingly to the benefit of the corporation. Except that we all know that the intention of Air Canada is not to make a profit out of YTZ, rather to be an obstacle for Porter. As such it will cut prices, give triple points and whatever else it takes to lure passengers and in the process lose millions more. Air Canada will not make a dime out of the YYZ, of that there could be no doubt. The end result as far as the employees are concerned are more flights given away to seemingly cheaper third party, expect that they will be sold even cheaper accruing millions more in losses. And in time corporate will be asking for more concessions, CCAA, or both. This cycle will continue as long as the game plan is the same at AC.

[Seeker]

inchman, surprised or not, the fact is that there is a finite number of passengers between Toronto and Montreal. By doing 15 flights from YTZ Air Canada will essentially be competing against its flights from YYZ. Don't kid yourself, it WILL reduce capacity from YYZ, a capacity which is on the mainline at a higher cost is shifted to the lowest bidder, seemingly to the benefit of the corporation. Except that we all know that the intention of Air Canada is not to make a profit out of YTZ, rather to be an obstacle for Porter. As such it will cut prices, give triple points and whatever else it takes to lure passengers and in the process lose millions more. Air Canada will not make a dime out of the YYZ, of that there could be no doubt. The end result as far as the employees are concerned are more flights given away to seemingly cheaper third party, expect that they will be sold even cheaper accruing millions more in losses. And in time corporate will be asking for more concessions, CCAA, or both. This cycle will continue as long as the game plan is the same at AC.

Yep, sucks. Although it's still better than the alternative of rolling over and letting Porter eat their fill.

[MD2]

You're not really going to start all this again are you? These questions have been answered here already.

I must have missed them I guess. Care to elaborate what they were?

[Seeker]

I must have missed them I guess. Care to elaborate what they were?

Nope, sorry, too busy. Go back and read from the beginning.

[MD2]

Nope, sorry, too busy. Go back and read from the beginning.

Ah, evidently not "too busy" to reply to every post! If you meant "answers" under this thread, I have read them and they sound like "do as I say, not as I do!"

[FA@AC]

I wonder if the union crowd at AC has had the opportunity to drop in on the brothers and sisters at Sky regional. Apparently, they have quite the contract! If they can pass condescending innuendo about the competitors, surely they'd be up in arms about the proletariat at their sister company. After all, this is their company's flying, albeit done by the lowest bidder, which is more likely to affect their working conditions.

What condescending innuendo? You weighed in with your two cents about how Air Canada employees ought to be seeking improvements to their collective agreements. I replied by inviting you to post details of Porter's salaries and pension plans etc for the sake of comparison. Feel free to post details of what Sky Regional offers its employees, too. Dropping remarks about having heard that they have quite the contract but not providing details doesn't cut it. You'll have to do better than that if you want to stir the pot. Now if Sky Regional has discovered some magic formula for providing richer contractual provisions to its employees than other companies do and achieving lower unit costs while doing it, more power to them. It sounds like win-win to me. No doubt AC and its unions will rush to similar agreements during negotiations that are soon to begin. If only we had had the Sky Regional example to follow ealier.

I live in downtown T.O., and as much as I'd love to be able to work some of my trips out of YTZ, nobody at mainline AC expected that mainline AC employees would operate the YTZ services. I'm not aware of any airline where mainline crews operate flying done by regional/commuter arms.

[MD2]

... Now if Sky Regional has discovered some magic formula for providing richer contractual provisions to its employees than other companies do and achieving lower unit costs while doing it, more power to them. It sounds like win-win to me. No doubt AC and its unions will rush to similar agreements during negotiations that are soon to begin. If only we had had the Sky Regional example to follow ealier.

And certainly nothing would please Air Canada corporate more than that!! Surely you mean well dear, that's sweet, but respectfully you have no idea what's going on! Suffice it to say that Sky regional contracts are not going to be emulated any time soon. You are also using some very "loaded" and contested words. For instance, before delving into the "mainline" and its "arms" and "commuters", can you define "regional" flying and whether or not it includes Montreal? You have to the end of the year to get back to me with a consensus! All the same, enjoy your "mainline" flying, and hopefully your union will soon stop the seasonal lay-offs for the new-comers if it hasn't already.

[FA@AC]

And certainly nothing would please Air Canada corporate more than that!! Surely you mean well dear, that's sweet, but respectfully you have no idea what's going on!

Then fill me in. For a guy who accuses others of dropping innuendo, you do a lot of it yourself.

I refer to regional flying as the flying done on aircraft like the CRJ, the Embraer 145, prop aircraft--any of that sort of thing. Of course it can include YUL or any other destination, and I'm not sure why you ask. A lot of AC's flying of that type is operated by Jazz. I know of no airline where mainline crew have captured that type of work. It's always farmed out to American Eagle, Continental Express, etc etc etc.

Our union has no layoffs to stop. On the contrary, AC is hiring FAs. You have no idea what's going on, and I mean that most respectfully, of course.

[inchman]

And certainly nothing would please Air Canada corporate more than that!! Surely you mean well dear, that's sweet, but respectfully you have no idea what's going on! Suffice it to say that Sky regional contracts are not going to be emulated any time soon. You are also using some very "loaded" and contested words. For instance, before delving into the "mainline" and its "arms" and "commuters", can you define "regional" flying and whether or not it includes Montreal? You have to the end of the year to get back to me with a consensus! All the same, enjoy your "mainline" flying, and hopefully your union will soon stop the seasonal lay-offs for the new-comers if it hasn't already.

The majority of your most recent posts appear to be attempts to appeal to the unions at Air Canada to rise up against AC providing competition to Porter by building in fear that AC will somehow farm out all of our flying to regional carriers. Obviously another hay bale off the back of the pickup truck to see if you can derail competition in your one pony market.

ACPA has protected itself against having regional airlines do excessive flying, and by inclusion, has protected the flight attendants from the same.

You'll have to be more imaginative than that.

[MD2]

The majority of your most recent posts appear to be attempts to appeal to the unions at Air Canada to rise up against AC providing competition to Porter by building in fear that AC will somehow farm out all of our flying to regional carriers. Obviously another hay bale off the back of the pickup truck to see if you can derail competition in your one pony market.

On the contrary, believe me when I say, I couldn't care less about an insurrection since unions simply don't seem to matter any more. If you're happy giving away your flying to third party in the hopes that it provides competition to Porter, well good luck with that. That is such a naive notion that I doubt very many even at Air Canada believe that. At some point you have to wonder if you keep getting back to square one, maybe the plan is flawed. Providing competition is of little use if it continues to lose you money which will in turn be used to lower your wages and liquidate your pension and round and round we go! In 2001 when pay cuts were mentioned to be coming, you all laughed and brushed it off as what did you call it, "another hay bale off the back of the pick up truck". Let me ask now, how did that work out for you? Rest assured that nothing would please corporate more to farm-out as much flying as they can to the lowest bidder. If you're happy with the way things are at Air Canada, I'm happy to leave you to it.