Jump to content

Holy sh!t!!!


Maverick

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 98
  • Created
  • Last Reply
40 minutes ago, conehead said:

No, $14 in Ontario.  Wynne was going to raise it, but I’m sure our new Premier will not.

Looking at Alberts but of course the IAM agreement would rule.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alberta has the highest minimum wage but it is still at $13.60

It has been promised by the Dippers to go to $15 in October this year.

The unintended consequence of raising the min/wage is unemployment.  The small coffee shop that I frequent has reduced hours and on Statutory Holidays the owner and his wife work a 12 hour day to try and make ends meet.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The minimum wage in Ontario was raised to $14.  There was many cries of doom and gloom, people claiming it would cause unemployment.  In fact, the opposite has happened, and employment is up.  Prices did not skyrocket to cover the raise in pay.  The sky did not fall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, conehead said:

The minimum wage in Ontario was raised to $14.  There was many cries of doom and gloom, people claiming it would cause unemployment.  In fact, the opposite has happened, and employment is up.  Prices did not skyrocket to cover the raise in pay.  The sky did not fall.

Not sure where you are getting your info.  Every business I am familiar with has scaled back staff hours to keep costs in line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct me if I'm wrong, when Ontario went to $14, AC raised it's starting wage for ramp to match.  Right across the country I believe.  The union will never fight a raise in wages. The contract only guarantees the minimum to be paid.  Just as with bonuses, the better the company does, the better the employee does, so the better the company does.

If Alberta goes to $15, then it will push up all other stations as well.

As was shown in the U.S., and has been confirmed with the results in Ontario as Conehead said, raising the wage actually has improved employment.  The truth that certain political groups didn't want anyone to hear.  Everyone working has more money to spend, which is the true driver of the economy.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, deicer said:

I think this answers the question, from your article

Quote

Although most of the employment gains this year have been in the public sector and the latest spurt of new jobs were part-time, analysts suggested Ontario’s economy withstood the sharp wage increase. Ontario’s paid employment has increased at the fastest pace since 2010, according to National Bank Financial

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, deicer said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, when Ontario went to $14, AC raised it's starting wage for ramp to match.  Right across the country I believe.  The union will never fight a raise in wages. The contract only guarantees the minimum to be paid.  Just as with bonuses, the better the company does, the better the employee does, so the better the company does.

If Alberta goes to $15, then it will push up all other stations as well.

As was shown in the U.S., and has been confirmed with the results in Ontario as Conehead said, raising the wage actually has improved employment.  The truth that certain political groups didn't want anyone to hear.  Everyone working has more money to spend, which is the true driver of the economy.

 

I would love to see the articles that support what you are saying, in my experience the collective agreement rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Collective bargaining cannot supplant the minimum wage.  The minimum wage is the minimum that MUST be paid to every worker regardless of collective bargaining being in place.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone thought that the article was just a chance for the author to vent his grievances about the airline in question?

 It appears the author is using the incident as the breaking point for the fellow who died but I don't see any documented evidence that his job led to his  desire to do what he did.........Did he leave a note that states it was his "jobs fault" that he did what he did?  

How was his home life?

Did he discover he just found out that he had  a terminal illness and he couldn't handle what was to be the final outcome ?

What the author wrote is his opinion about working conditions at the airline but as far as I know there is no proof that those conditions led to the fellows reason to become a lawn dart.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Kip Powick said:

Has anyone thought that the article was just a chance for the author to vent his grievances about the airline in question?

 It appears the author is using the incident as the breaking point for the fellow who died but I don't see any documented evidence that his job led to his  desire to do what he did.........Did he leave a note that states it was his "jobs fault" that he did what he did?  

How was his home life?

Did he discover he just found out that he had  a terminal illness and he couldn't handle what was to be the final outcome ?

What the author wrote is his opinion about working conditions at the airline but as far as I know there is no proof that those conditions led to the fellows reason to become a lawn dart.

 

Welcome back Kip. We all know it’s going to take time to feel better about almost everything but distractions like this forum may be a good place to visit.

I agree 100% with your first comment and I had posted earlier: 

”Definitely interesting and certainly his point of view.”

Having worked the ramp with Delta as a summer student I can relate to his comments but it read more like an opportunity to blog/vent for his 15 mins of fame. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, boestar said:

Collective bargaining cannot supplant the minimum wage.  The minimum wage is the minimum that MUST be paid to every worker regardless of collective bargaining being in place.

 

 

Re Minimum wage ,,,, there are always exceptions and they vary by province.

Exempt occupations (Alberta)

The following employees are exempt from minimum wage standards:

  • real estate brokers
  • securities salespersons
  • insurance salespersons paid entirely by commission
  • students in a work experience program approved by the Alberta government
  • students in an off-campus education program provided under the School Act
  • extras in a film or video production
  • counsellors or instructors at a non-profit educational or recreational camp for children, handicapped individuals, or religious groups
  • municipal police service members
  • post-secondary academic staff

BC Exemptions are lengthy : http://www.bclaws.ca/Recon/document/ID/freeside/396_95#section32

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course there are exceptions.  Its common sense that a commission sales person like first 3 on the list would be exempt because they do not make a "wage"  Students on work experience programs dont even have to be paid.  The last few are a bit baffling but it is what it is.  I suppose extras in film get a flat rate and wont be paid for all the sitting around so that makes sense.

But if you work a job that pulls a regular salary or hourly wage then you should be covered by the standard.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, boestar said:

Of course there are exceptions.  Its common sense that a commission sales person like first 3 on the list would be exempt because they do not make a "wage"  Students on work experience programs dont even have to be paid.  The last few are a bit baffling but it is what it is.  I suppose extras in film get a flat rate and wont be paid for all the sitting around so that makes sense.

But if you work a job that pulls a regular salary or hourly wage then you should be covered by the standard.

 

I agree but when you consider a group that is working under a blanket national agreement you have to wonder what if:

eg. 15.00 in Alberta, 13.00 in another province.  Does the highest one rule for all not matter their work place or ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That depends on the wording of the collective agreement as well as the nature of the company.

With a company like AC that is a federally regulated company I believe they have an obligation to make the pay rates equal across the country.  So the highest minimum wage wins.

If you were to work for a company based in alberta that is not federally regulated then in alberta you would get the Alberta rate and if you moved to Nova Scotia to, say, open a new office, you would be governed by the Nova Scotia rate.  This is generally in a Non Union workplace though.  Many pay based on the cost of living for the location.  at least that used to be the practice, I am not sure if it still is.

Most collective bargaining agreements specify pay by Work category or job description and not location.  So if you are a Station attendant 1 in YYZ you get the same pay as station attendant 1 in YVR.

I see no reference in my VERY OLD copy of the IAMAW agreement with AC to location. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, boestar said:

That depends on the wording of the collective agreement as well as the nature of the company.

With a company like AC that is a federally regulated company I believe they have an obligation to make the pay rates equal across the country.  So the highest minimum wage wins.

If you were to work for a company based in alberta that is not federally regulated then in alberta you would get the Alberta rate and if you moved to Nova Scotia to, say, open a new office, you would be governed by the Nova Scotia rate.  This is generally in a Non Union workplace though.  Many pay based on the cost of living for the location.  at least that used to be the practice, I am not sure if it still is.

Most collective bargaining agreements specify pay by Work category or job description and not location.  So if you are a Station attendant 1 in YYZ you get the same pay as station attendant 1 in YVR.

I see no reference in my VERY OLD copy of the IAMAW agreement with AC to location. 

Back in the day at CPAir and I believe TCA there were provisions for a "Northern Allowance" 60s and into the 70s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still remember the on street interview with the lady in Seattle when they raised the minimum wage to $15 there.

"I love the pay raise but I had to cut back on my hours or I would lose my housing subsidy"

 

That's what your paying for folks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

ATWOnline

Analysis: Horizon Air incident puts spotlight on employee screenings

Aug 24, 2018 Ben Goldstein | ATWOnline
 

The crash of a stolen Horizon Air Bombardier Q400 turboprop Aug. 10 at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (Sea-Tac) in Washington state is drawing scrutiny from US lawmakers about aviation security and airport employee screening.

In an Aug. 13 letter to the leadership of the US Senate Commerce Committee, Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Washington) called on chairman John Thune (R-South Dakota) and ranking member Bill Nelson (D-Florida) to convene a hearing on the incident, writing that it “exposed an issue with our nation’s airport security protocols.”

Cantwell also remarked that the fact the incident occurred at Sea-Tac, which is notable for being one of the few large US airports to require full screening for all employees who work in the sterile area, demonstrated the need “to continually adapt security measures to meet new threats.”

She also commented that she was interested in exploring how technology could help secure aircraft that are not in service from airport workers who may have access to them as part of their duties. Previous efforts from Congress, including the House-passed Aviation Employee Screening and Security Enhancement Act, would instruct FAA to study the cost and feasibility of implementing biometric identification and other security technologies.

The US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is leading an investigation into the incident in cooperation with the National Transportation Safety Board and several other federal and local agencies.

Lawmakers have been concerned with insider threats to aviation for years, following a series of incidents in which former or current airport employees were identified as members of terrorist groups. 

But some US airport executives worry that lawmakers could be spurred to hastily pass a fix that could lead to unintended consequences or burdensome costs. The reality is that there is no magic bullet solution to this problem, but there is one obvious path Congress could take.

The Senate could take up the Aviation Employee Screening and Security Enhancement Act, legislation sponsored by Rep. John Katko (R-New York) that passed the House in April 2017 on a 409-0 vote. It has since remained dormant in the upper chamber, which has failed to bring up the measure for a vote.

The bill aims to boost employee vetting requirements, enhance procedures governing airport issuance of security credentials and reform the Transportation Security Administration’s employee screening to be more targeted and efficient. It would also provide lawmakers with much-needed data related to the cost, feasibility and logistics of implementing full employee screening at US commercial airports.

Approximately 900,000 people work at federally supervised airports across the US, and most are able to bypass the screening checkpoints that passengers pass through. The latest incident at Sea-Tac, along with other recent examples of employees posing threats to aircraft, including Germanwings flight 9525, in which a co-pilot with a history of mental illness deliberately crashed an aircraft into a French Alps mountainside, killing all 150 onboard—illustrate the importance of mitigating insider threats to aviation.

In the case of Germanwings flight 9525, the co-pilot had been treated previously for suicidal tendencies, and had even been declared unfit to work by a doctor—critical information that was not made available to his employer because of stringent European privacy laws. 

The case of Horizon Air employee Richard Russell, who has been identified by authorities as the perpetrator of the stolen Q400 incident, is different; he had no criminal record or history of mental health issues that could have served as potential red flags. 

Sea-Tac is notable for being one of the few large US airports to require full screening for all employees who work in the airport’s sterile, airside area. Ground workers at Sea-Tac must go through criminal background checks, have their bags screened, pass through metal detectors and have their fingerprints scanned to verify their identities. 

Even if Katko’s bill had been passed by the full Congress, it is doubtful that it would have prevented this tragedy. 

Aviation security expert Jeff Price, a professor at the Metropolitan State University of Denver’s Department of Aviation and Aerospace Science, wrote that the episode was “not a failure of the airport security system,” since responsibility for accessing aircraft falls squarely on airlines. He also expressed skepticism about whether beefed-up physical intervention or anti-hijacking procedures would have made a difference, since “there was no indication anything was going on until it was too late.”

If lawmakers want to do something, however, one obvious first step is to strengthen airport employee screening and security. Katko’s bipartisan bill, which already has the backing of the House, is sitting there for the Senate to act on.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh come on.  This guy, for all the comments from friends, family and co-workers was perfectly stable.  No screening 3 years ago would have caught that.

People are not born that way as to catch it on a screening.  this guy was "normal" until one day something triggered a mental episode and this was his way to go.

How many of us have heard of or know a co-worker that was fine for years then one day...Bam.  suicide, mental breakdown or whatever, out of the blue.

We have seen many of these over the years.  some take people with them and some go solo and some seek help.

Best action is to TALK to your friends, family and co-workers.  you just may catch a signal that will allow you to help them.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have to agree. I don’t think any amount of pre-employment testing would have discovered anything out of the ordinary. However  I’m sure the FAA will advise all ramp agents must now have 1500 hrs of previous hotel concierge experience.

In 40 years of flying I’ve had only one psych exam as part of the interview process. And they still hired me. It was the standard one about liking guns or flowers. The key was to be consistent as they repeated similar questions but I know others who didn’t pass because of not playing the game correctly. 

What I find interesting about this sad story is how to work for Delta on the ramp in the summer of 1978 I had to complete three interviews. One in YUL, a second in ATL and a third back in YUL. The most amount of interviewing I’ve ever had in aviation. And they still hired me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...