Jump to content

A resounding NO!


Kasey

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I'm not mistaken, and am intimately familiar with the rouge contract. Hourly rate on 767 and 319 are within 5% of each other. When AC proposes increasing rouge fleet to 75 fins, it is my expectation that ACPA will attempt to widen that gap significantly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Zan Vetter said:

I'm not mistaken, and am intimately familiar with the rouge contract. Hourly rate on 767 and 319 are within 5% of each other. When AC proposes increasing rouge fleet to 75 fins, it is my expectation that ACPA will attempt to widen that gap significantly.

Do I have it correctly, the rouge contract is two pay scales 767 and 319, where do the 321s fit in?

Purely reading the tea leaves, ouijia board, and tarrot cards; it have heard that the 321s will be transitioned to Rouge from mainline once the max9 arrives. If this proves to be true the rouge fleet could be 10-20 319s, 20 321s, and 35-45 763s for a 75 aircraft operation. 

For argument sake, lets say that there are 20 A321s in the rouge fleet, could AC go towards capping the upper end of the 319 pay scale and raising the lower end of the 763 schedule. Further AC would introduce a pay level between 319 and 763 for the 321.Finally the upper end of the 763 pay scale could be increased give these pilots a bit better separation between 319 and 763. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Boney said:

The 737 Max will increase the stage length of the NG from both YYC westbound, and YYZ eastbound. The gap would be YYC to Europe if WB is not in play. Hopfully, this is just a blip and will get back on track shortly.

The problem with YYZ eastbound argument is that there is insufficient gate space at T3 to operate additional flights. GTAA cannot grow terminal and gate space if they are only getting more narrowbody aircraft. The efficient growth needs to come from more wide body flights or at a minimum the addtional services need to be a balance between regional, narrowbody, and widebody growth.

Through rouge, larger regional aircraft, and mainline seat densification, AC has been able to significantly grow T1 passenger count without requiring additional gates. I doubt WS could do the same without additional wide body aircraft on both international and domestic sectors. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Super 80 said:

What would prevent the expansion of the Terminal 3 satellite after Hangar A is felled? I would swear the GTAA mentioned the possibility of doing that.

Removal of Hangar A would only yield 2 additional 737 sized gates. So far the GTAA has not presented publicly the net steps for air terminal development. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are the impediments to opening up the infield terminal other than the bus ops?? Not ideal but at least it beats off gate parking....it might cost the GTAA money, but that doesn't seem to be an issue after wasting almost $1mil on a viewing stand and elaborate sign board!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it wasn't for having to put up with the hours & hours of boredom on long haul flights, fighting to stay awake when your body says it should be asleep, and all sorts of other insults to one's health, flying a WB is no different than a NB.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, st27 said:

What are the impediments to opening up the infield terminal other than the bus ops?? Not ideal but at least it beats off gate parking....it might cost the GTAA money, but that doesn't seem to be an issue after wasting almost $1mil on a viewing stand and elaborate sign board!

I have heard there are significant renovations required to bring the infield terminal up to effective operational condition (both from a lack of mtce in the preceding 10 years since it was closed and because of the Syrian refugee operation resulted in some modifications). 

Further, CBSA facilities at T1 and T3 are at capacity during peak times, with aircraft densification and increased gate utilization; both terminals are now over their originally intended passenger capacity. Could either terminal handle an additional 10 gates of international flights?

Also specific to T3, preboard security is at or near capacity, could preboard security handle the additional flights for a 10 gate operation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I guess the big question is....who is accountable for the lack of planning to accommodate the growth in airline traffic, and why should the tenants incur operational losses and passenger dissatisfaction from their mismanagement? All the while operating from the second most expensive airport in the WORLD!!

We know the answer but will anything change?

Hardly world class (which you don't hear bragged about much anymore).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On November 20, 2016 at 11:38 AM, better4me said:

There is greater responsibility with the 763 than with 73G. The pilots are responsible for more passengers. The 763 is a larger operation than the 73g. It could also be argued the 763 is more complex WRT EToPS and foreign airports. 

There is a lot of comparability in other jobs to support that the same job but with greater responsibility warrants better pay. 

The Mayor of Calgary makes more money than the mayor of Airdrie. The CFO of Westjet makes more money than the CFO of a venture listed startup. The list goes on and on. 

Greater responsibility? Not really. The same level of care should be taken regardless of whether it is 30 pax or 300.

Equipment based pay got its genesis in the ability for evolving aircraft to generate greater revenue. If gross revenue per block hour is the relevant metric then bigger, faster airplanes generally paid higher rates to pilots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On November 20, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Zan Vetter said:

I'm not mistaken, and am intimately familiar with the rouge contract. Hourly rate on 767 and 319 are within 5% of each other. When AC proposes increasing rouge fleet to 75 fins, it is my expectation that ACPA will attempt to widen that gap significantly.

Any near term increases in Rouge fleet size above 50 fins would less likely be 'growth' and more likely to be 'substitution' for existing mainline flying. 

What else would be on ACPA's shopping list to consider this request?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re WestJet, at one time they had their WB flying done by wetleases (Thomas Cook to Hawaii for instance), it will be interesting to see where this goes. Re the Cabin Crew, does their agreement include the B767 or does it need to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On November 20, 2016 at 6:57 PM, better4me said:

Do I have it correctly, the rouge contract is two pay scales 767 and 319, where do the 321s fit in?

Purely reading the tea leaves, ouijia board, and tarrot cards; it have heard that the 321s will be transitioned to Rouge from mainline once the max9 arrives. If this proves to be true the rouge fleet could be 10-20 319s, 20 321s, and 35-45 763s for a 75 aircraft operation. 

For argument sake, lets say that there are 20 A321s in the rouge fleet, could AC go towards capping the upper end of the 319 pay scale and raising the lower end of the 763 schedule. Further AC would introduce a pay level between 319 and 763 for the 321.Finally the upper end of the 763 pay scale could be increased give these pilots a bit better separation between 319 and 763. 

Easiest solution is to harmonize mainline and Rouge pay scales.

Problem is resulting inversion of seniority when AC pilots on the Rouge rosters get a significant pay bump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, boestar said:

HArmonizing the pay scales defeats the purpose of Rouge in the first place.  Unless you mean harmonize by putting EVERYONE on the Rouge pay scale.

 

No. By harmonize I meant by deleting the pilot pay scale exceptions included in the Rouge/LCC LOU. The impact would probably not even be noticed financially other than in the second decimal point in margin. The vast majority of the pilot cost savings at Rouge are based on work rule exceptions resulting in increased efficiency not marginally discounted hourly rates.

Based on information and statements that are already in the public domain, it would appear that AC would like to grow Rouge as a competitive response to new entrants in the LCC segment. The timeline for that initiative is not possible based on existing Rouge fleet/growth provisions of the ACPA collective Agreement. 

I do not believe that changes to Rouge fleet provisions can be achieved by AC via the dispute resolution mechanism (arbitration) in the ACPA/AC re-opener provision therefore consent will be required. That implies a quid pro quo.

Given the flexibilities that AC has achieved across all of the labour groups, it seems less relevant for Rouge to operate on a separate OC. Rouge could be a simply a brand and a paint job and therefore several layers of regulatory compliance redundancy and operational restrictions could be removed creating possible cost savings across several departments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First it was 50 fins, but before the paint has even had a chance to dry on the first iteration of Rouge, a perceived need to grow that number by a whopping 50% to 75 fins is being introduced. That trend is almost certain to continue as growing competitive pressure from WJ and other carriers compels management to badger labour into accepting an increase in the number of Rouge fins to somewhere near 125 before the decade is out.

As Rudder suggested, it's substitution, not growth. Under the skillful direction of CR, AC is whittling labour costs down one employee generation at a time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, rudder said:

The vast majority of the pilot cost savings at Rouge are based on work rule exceptions resulting in increased efficiency not marginally discounted hourly rates.

I'm not at all familiar with the ACPA contract, but some 767 pilots have told me that they'd be in for huge pay cuts were they to transfer to Rouge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, DEFCON said:

First it was 50 fins, but before the paint has even had a chance to dry on the first iteration of Rouge, a perceived need to grow that number by a whopping 50% to 75 fins is being introduced. That trend is almost certain to continue as growing competitive pressure from WJ and other carriers compels management to badger labour into accepting an increase in the number of Rouge fins to somewhere near 125 before the decade is out.

As Rudder suggested, it's substitution, not growth. Under the skillful direction of CR, AC is whittling labour costs down one employee generation at a time.

On the 319/321 flying, I agree its substitution. But I don't agree the vast majority of 763 flying was substitution. AC didnt fly to half the rouge European destinations and the other have of rouge flying was unprofitable with the last mainline flight going back to Claude Taylor & Pierre Jeanniot days.  

 

As for competitive pressure, I think the main cause of 763 expansion is to eat TS lunch before WS has a chance. On the LGW WS operation, I am reminded by a quote, "A goose with a lawn chair on its back could make money" to LON (LGW or LHR). There are not many other routes with this characteristics. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A clarification is in order; I was trying to say that I felt future' Rouge routes would be substitutions as the mainline becomes less competitive against other carriers including WJ, TS along with foreign ones as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, DEFCON said:

A clarification is in order; I was trying to say that I felt future' Rouge routes would be substitutions as the mainline becomes less competitive against other carriers including WJ, TS along with foreign ones as well.

Isn't the problem with Rouge that the "service" is not up to par with Star Alliance's requirements?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have never had bad service on a Rouge flight.  I have flown rouge several times and the service has been excellent.  While the overall experience is what one would expect from a lowe cost leisure carrier it is definitely near the top of its class.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...