TA Vote by FA's

[dagger]

Actually, she might be making very good friends of the bigwigs at HQ. There's a story on our discussion group about Raitt having been given an upgrade recently on the instructions of one of our executives. It's unsubstantiated and could well be BS, but if there's any truth to it she's popular in the executive offices.

I dare say ministers of any federal government get treated rather well by the higher ups, and if Westjet had a business class, they'd be upgrading ministers, too.

I've been at the gate when Stephen Harper, while he was opposition leader, got an upgrade. Whether he was entitled to it by virtue of his frequent flyer status, or just receiving a courtesy, bigwigs get upgraded, as do lots of frequent flyers on a daily basis.

Every minister except the defence minister, I suppose.

I'd argue that Air Canada probably screwed David Collenette along the way to be treated as disreputably by him. With federal ministers, the upgrade is likely the path of least resistence.

By the way, unless we were talking about an upgrade on a trans-oceanic flight, it's not such an earthshaking gesture, heck, she's not doing any better than an Air Canada pilot, is she?

[FA@AC]

By the way, unless we were talking about an upgrade on a trans-oceanic flight, it's not such an earthshaking gesture, heck, she's not doing any better than an Air Canada pilot, is she?

Maybe not, but she's doing better than those customers who pay for their own seats and travel in the class they pay for. I wonder if Raitt was travelling on the taxpayer's dime in this instance.

Anyway, Dagger, what do you make of this being headed to the CIRB. Are they likely to consider this seriously, or toss it? Thanks.

[dagger]

Maybe not, but she's doing better than those customers who pay for their own seats and travel in the class they pay for.

.

Come on, you know the upgrade game. Who buys a Latitude fare and doesn't go for the upgrade. Heck, frequent flyers buy specific sub-classes of fares to get upgrades. No one travels full fare economy without the intention of scoring a free upgrade. It's the very nature of the system. And most of these people are travelling on their employer's dime.

As for the CIRB process, well, both sides will likely have to appear in person later this week, and the CIRB will act after that.

If I was betting, I'd say they will issue a decision no earlier than Friday, but it could be a lot longer.

This procedural move essentially prevents any strike or lockout pending a board decision on the question around the maintenance of activities and what essential services are affected.

“Referrals they are not an everyday occurrence. They do occur,” said Ginette Brazeau, executive director and senior registrar of the Canada Industrial Relations Board, adding it can require written submissions from the parties or an actual hearing.

This question, permitted under Canada Labour Code, focuses on what services, if any, are “necessary to prevent an immediate and serious danger to the safety or the health of the public,” Brazeau said.

The last time it was used was last November in the West Coast port dispute, and a decision was issued in January. It has also been used in the case of ferry service and CN Rail.

Then there is the question of whether the 72-hour clock will have to be reset.

[greenmachine]

Come on, you know the upgrade game. Who buys a Latitude fare and doesn't go for the upgrade. Heck, frequent flyers buy specific sub-classes of fares to get upgrades. No one travels full fare economy without the intention of scoring a free upgrade. It's the very nature of the system. And most of these people are travelling on their employer's dime.

How many of these people are getting their upgrade directly from Duncan Dee?

[dagger]

How many of these people are getting their upgrade directly from Duncan Dee?

They don't even have to bother him. The fare qualifies them... LOL. By the way, a lot of frequent flyers call Calin Rovinescu's office if they have a need/beef/suggestion. Some of them might even get an upgrade.

[FA@AC]

Come on, you know the upgrade game. Who buys a Latitude fare and doesn't go for the upgrade. Heck, frequent flyers buy specific sub-classes of fares to get upgrades.

Yes, but there's a pecking order for upgrades for those travelling on eligible fares. That's different from being given an upgrade that might otherwise have gone to an eligible customer because somebody high up in AC gave the instruction. I'm not saying that's what happened here as I don't know, but if it is what happened it would appear that AC's brass is rather pleased with Minister Raitt or with The Dear Leader or whomever tells her what to do.

[dagger]

Yes, but there's a pecking order for upgrades for those travelling on eligible fares. That's different from being given an upgrade that might otherwise have gone to an eligible customer because somebody high up in AC gave the instruction. I'm not saying that's what happened here as I don't know, but if it is what happened it would appear that AC's brass is rather pleased with Minister Raitt or with The Dear Leader or whomever tells her what to do.

You don't think federal ministers travel on change-able, upgradable fares? Senior federal officials don't travel on Tango fares.

What I read is that she had an upgrade in the system based on her fare, an upgrade to which she was entitled, and changed flights.

"When the Minister's flight was changed to a later time, she was under the impression that the personal upgrade she had already used would be applied to the flight change," she said.

"At no point did the Minister knowingly accept a complimentary upgrade from Air Canada or any of its staff, nor did she request one."

[FA@AC]

What I heard is that she had an upgrade in the system based on her fare, an upgrade to which she was entitled, and changed flights.

Could well be, but then what was Duncan's involvement--if he was involved--all about? If she wasn't going to be upgraded outside the pecking order, I can't see why things couldn't have been handled by an agent (or a kiosk) rather than by a V.P.

[boestar]

Back before privatization Ministers didnt pay for tickets AT ALL.

[AIP]

Could well be, but then what was Duncan's involvement--if he was involved--all about? If she wasn't going to be upgraded outside the pecking order, I can't see why things couldn't have been handled by an agent (or a kiosk) rather than by a V.P.

Gimme a break already, you yourself said it was unsubstantiated and might very well be BS.

These upgrades happen EVERYDAY, to all kinds of people. Who Cares ??

Don't you have bigger things to be worried about ??

[FA@AC]

These upgrades happen EVERYDAY, to all kinds of people. Who Cares ??

Don't you have bigger things to be worried about ??

Worried about? I'm not worried about this, actually, but I'd be mildly ticked off if it turned our that a minister of the government (a government, I'm sure, you support, but we'll see if that changes when your union gets its act together and heads back to negotiations) that intends to undermine our legal right to strike was upgraded by one of our VPs as a thank you for her actions. And no, I'm not saying that's what happened. I was just making mention of what some are saying on another board.

If it's all insignificant to you, feel free to ignore posts on the subject.

[dagger]

Could well be, but then what was Duncan's involvement--if he was involved--all about? If she wasn't going to be upgraded outside the pecking order, I can't see why things couldn't have been handled by an agent (or a kiosk) rather than by a V.P.

Because big wigs of all kinds call the CEO first? Because she knows Dee well? Because the CAW Lounge Dragon was rude?

Like I said, you'd be surprised how many customers try to speak to Calin each and every day.

[FA@AC]

Because big wigs of all kinds call the CEO first? Because she knows Dee well? Because the CAW Lounge Dragon was rude?

Yes it could have been for any of those reasons, and maybe it was. Nevertheless, to obtain an upgrade other than through normal channels leaves a bad impression in the current circumstances. Not that big a deal, but dumb in my opinion. To do something that might leave the appearance that Raitt had been given special treatment by an AC VP--even if she wasn`t--will not help cool heads to prevail here. You wouldn`t believe how angry some FAs are about Raitt`s latest move.

Just as a matter of interest and given the esteem in which you hold CUPE, you might be amused to learn that we have heard nothing, absolutely zilch, from them on the CIRB business so far.

[livin']

Unless someone is fabricating copies of RES printouts showing an upgrade for Lisa Raitt, authorized by Duncan Dee, then it is not BS.

It did happen.

I'm sure these type of upgrades happen all of the time. It just seems more than a little offside that an upgrade is being authorized by a VP for an elected official who has made it clear she is helping the company in their labour dispute.

[inchman]

Worried about? I'm not worried about this, actually, but I'd be mildly ticked off if it turned our that a minister of the government (a government, I'm sure, you support, but we'll see if that changes when your union gets its act together and heads back to negotiations) that intends to undermine our legal right to strike was upgraded by one of our VPs as a thank you for her actions. And no, I'm not saying that's what happened. I was just making mention of what some are saying on another board.

If it's all insignificant to you, feel free to ignore posts on the subject.

You are clearly dwelling and restating your implication that that's what happened. With or without the upgrade, Raitt and the Conservatives were quite clear long before this that they were not going to allow AC to be shut down by a strike. An upgrade had nothing to do with it.

[Jaydee]

With or without the upgrade, Raitt and the Conservatives were quite clear long before this that they were not going to allow AC to be shut down by a strike. An upgrade had nothing to do with it.

It probably didn't Inchman but it sure would make for some good Press for a few days. If it was really true, CUPE would be all over it if for no other reason than to watch Raitt squirm.

[UpperDeck]

It probably didn't Inchman but it sure would make for some good Press for a few days. If it was really true, CUPE would be all over it if for no other reason than to watch Raitt squirm.

It is true---As FA@AC noted, the RES bulletin was on another forum. I agree---someone should have been all over this because apologists notwithstanding, one must be seen to be above the fray. Accepting "handouts" from a party to a dispute that will be resolved within your portfolio is unacceptable conduct.

And so---why hasn't there been a "hue and cry"? I agree with earlier posters; CUPE is flailing away without any apparent cohesive strategy. The Component Executive/Bargaining Committee are twisting in the wind. For reasons unknown, these "types" become wedded to the notion that they know best and resolve to weather the storm regardless of the will of the membership. They expend all of their energy and resources "hunkering down" and the membership is torn apart in the process. As matters stand---no communication from CUPE; no communication from the Exec. And rumours and innuendos (and Petitions) run rampant.

What a shame.

What is clear, however, is that the "experts" both on this forum and elsewhere are mumbling but not enlightening because they depend on experience to predict the future and in this case, there is no well-defined path.

[Parakeet]

If CUPE wants to turn this situation right and let the collective bargaining process to proceed (strike lockout or continue to work under provisions of current contract).The FA's could take the very serious step of mass resignation if Raitt tries to pass back to work legislation. An example of this happened in Nova Scotia in July 2001. Nurses achieved over %75 resignation of its members after government started an essential service(no strike) legislation for nurses.The government backed down, and things were settled under the process of collective bargaining. That takes a lot of guts but it has worked for some.

[Specs]

Accepting "handouts" from a party to a dispute that will be resolved within your portfolio is unacceptable conduct.

Personally, I would expect the company to upgrade any cabinet minister or opposition leaders when it is at all possible.

And I might add that I couldn't begin to count the number of times I have seen union negotiators and reps flying in J Class. I don't expect the union is paying for those J tickets.

[DEFCON]

"It agreed to the union's proposed "duty days minus four hours" model of compensation, meaning attendants would receive nine hours of wages for a 13-hour duty period as opposed to the current 6.5 hours of wages for such a shift. The changes wouldn't take effect until October 2012, which some union members feel is too long of an implementation period."

When scheduling realities are considered, that's a pretty huge uplift, is it not? Regardless, I've always seen 'down the road' promises as items management can and with the present economy being what it is, likely will seek to claw back before implementation.

[rudder]

I hope that the result of the CIRB review is that the process as written is fine and works except when the Minister of Labour injects herself into the process and completely undermines the bargaining dynamic contemplated by the Code.

A 'self help' option is a fundamental part of the Code and is integral to causing the parties to bargain honestly, fairly, and meaningfully recognising the potential consequences of failing to do so.

As an aside, the 'essential services' piece should have been dealt with by the parties at the outset of bargaining. Is this CUPE's first time at the bargaining table?

[DEFCON]

Specs

"Personally, I would expect the company to upgrade any cabinet minister or opposition leaders when it is at all possible.

And I might add that I couldn't begin to count the number of times I have seen union negotiators and reps flying in J Class. I don't expect the union is paying for those J tickets."

If a government minister, let's say, the Minister of Labour, accepts a 'free' upgrade, isn't that a 'gift' to a political official and a bit of an ethics problem?

[FA@AC]

When scheduling realities are considered, that's a pretty huge uplift, is it not? Regardless, I've always seen 'down the road' promises as items management can and with the present economy being what it is, likely will seek to claw back before implementation.

Yes, it's a big improvement, but under TA2 it would have taken effect only 13 months after ratification. AC, unfortunately, is seen by our membership as having a history of reneging on its promises to implement down the road, so insufficient numbers were willing to trust them on this one.

[dagger]

If CUPE wants to turn this situation right and let the collective bargaining process to proceed (strike lockout or continue to work under provisions of current contract).The FA's could take the very serious step of mass resignation if Raitt tries to pass back to work legislation. An example of this happened in Nova Scotia in July 2001. Nurses achieved over %75 resignation of its members after government started an essential service(no strike) legislation for nurses.The government backed down, and things were settled under the process of collective bargaining. That takes a lot of guts but it has worked for some.

Mass resignation? Where does Air Canada sign to get that to happen?

We're not talking pilots here, for God's sake.

Air Canada would take the short term hit to go non-union faster than you can say "I screwed myself"

[UpperDeck]

Mass resignation? Where does Air Canada sign to get that to happen?

We're not talking pilots here, for God's sake.

Air Canada would take the short term hit to go non-union faster than you can say "I screwed myself"

Uh huh. And were that to happen, I wonder how long those employees hired to replace the CUPE members would themselves become unionized? Really---do you think AC could long remain a non-union shop?

That aside---mass resignations are highly unlikely but...I was wondering; on what basis can the Minister make a referral to the Board? See the following extract from the Code. Is she jumping the gun? Is everyone flying blind?

87.4 (1) During a strike or lockout not prohibited by this Part, the employer, the trade union and the employees in the bargaining unit must continue the supply of services, operation of facilities or production of goods to the extent necessary to prevent an immediate and serious danger to the safety or health of the public......

5) At any time after notice of dispute has been given, the Minister may refer to the Board any question with respect to the application of subsection (1) or any question with respect to whether an agreement entered into by the parties is sufficient to ensure that subsection (1) is complied with.