adams supplement pickle

[Guest ken hickerson]

I just spoke with the bargaining committee member for 2324, and he said 'the union has to get a second opinion' as to appeal the award or not. Interesting. As it stands now we have one seniority list for lay-off purposes and one list for everything else. The most senior AE1 will have to wait for me (the most junior by co. sen.) to pick my vacation/bid my shift; This is someone who is twenty years my senior and he won't get xmas or the summer. He will also work steady mids while I am on full rotation, (or steady days depending upon shifts). Can someone remind me what seniority counts for again? I can see my benefit, I can't see the justice.

[Guest Mitch]

Thank you for that refreshing bit of honesty!

That's a hell of a good question too... what does seniority count for??? I thought (naively I suppose?) that a good portion of unionism was all about protecting seniority rights of employees, not chopping and splicing and some for you, but none for you etc...

Maybe.... One day.... Maybe we'll manage to get ourselves into a legitimate association of some kind that will recognize and protect our seniority, regardless of our employer... As Bill was mentioning earlier.

On another note...:

Merry Christmas everyone!

Cheers,

Mitch

[Guest ame767]

ken

company has already started canvassing for vac. based on DOH haven't they? so now we have a merged work force with DOH for vacation and layoff and the only difference is that the former ae1's that either never got the ae2 or icc bid, or voluntarily demoted, will be at the bottom of the bid process and ineligible for the LLat...same boat as all our qualified mech's that have waited years for an opening to CAT... probably not fair either but have any of these gentlemen passed the above basic interview? have any of them been forced to wait years for the chance to bid on a licensed position and been refused based on whether a forman likes you or not?

i know it was different in yyz but the lack of any training for ywg is a sad story, guys go many years without any, where i understand cail did a very good job of training and mandated a license within 2 years? what are the facts?

the corporate cultures are vastly different and it'll take some time for us to all get our head around the troubles we've ALL been through. i think the only thing that will make a difference now is for all of us to have a common cause like the union change, or maybe a really good pre-issue offer on the IPO when tech ops goes public, because the company will keep playing one work force against the other and it is very apparent they care not about ANY of their people.

the suplementary award has grave ramifications for our present collective and we'll have to wait and see how bad they are.

on another note, should M lisenced people be paid the same as avionics and sheetmetal when we release the whole aircraft and any system within, while those trades are much more limited? lisense/endorsement premium anyone?

[Guest Mitch]

A licence premium, some extra coin for runup and taxi, and some other stuff can (I hope) be addressed in June, if not sooner. But I want to answer this: 'have any of these gentlemen passed the above basic interview? have any of them been forced to wait years for the chance to bid on a licensed position and been refused based on whether a forman likes you or not?'

When CDN merged with Wardair and the ICC position was created, the company made ICC's out of the most senior people. Since that time (what was that, about 11 years ago? 12 maybe?), in YYZ there have been about 3 or 4 that retired, and 2 at the very end that took a team leader position. All of the AE1's that would bid on those vacancies were subject to the rules that the company would have to choose from the 8 (I think, it may have been 7?) most senior applicants... the others wouldn't even get an interview.

The result being for those of us that finally got an interview, we were competing with some very qualified, senior people. We weren't stuck in the 'basic' positions because of any lack of ambition or qualifications and experience, it was simply because the 'above basic' positions (as defined by Air Canada) were few and far between! And remember as well, in our system an AE1 held ACA and did all the work that a current LAT does... just as your CAT's did. So where would you draw the 'basic' / 'above basic' line in there?

Anyway, I'm not whining, just trying to make sure you understand... we didn't stagnate as AE1's because we were unqualified or uninterested.

Cheers,

Mitch

[Guest ame767]

thanks mitch that does clarify things somewhat. i suspect both companies did what they could to mitigate the number of 'high priced help'.

at cail was the ae1 (licensed) position not encouraged though, where at AC the licensed position could be quite difficult to achieve and that is part of the complaint AC guys have with this list. the company used CATs as crew chiefs in heavy mtc with very few licensed mechs. that and the fact cail guys are carrying seniority from any of 5 or 6 different companies all combined where AC folks may have just as much experience but with companies that didn't combine and therefore are now at a disadvantage.

do you know what the median age of the tech-ops work force is on your side?

[Guest ken hickerson]

Mitch

I would like to clarify one point as I have seen it throughout the forum, and there hasn't been a sufficient answer or response.

'And remember as well, in our system an AE1 held ACA and did all the work that a current LAT does... just as your CAT's did.'

The CAT did all of the licensed work that the AE1 did; however he also was self directed, and commonly had a workforce to direct. This roll on the line was similar to that of the ICC.

In Calgary, howver, the ICC rarely left the office ( I realize that yc was unique in the CAIL world with base closure, and the amalgamation of so many senior work forces)in fact now that they are having to perform the work that a CAT traditionally did some are lost (one cannot even perform a simple walk on a widebody). The AE1s (in yc) who traditionally waited for the work to be doled out are cast adrift. Not one has stepped up to take a leadership roll,(they are self directed as LATs and as hard if not harder {some}workers than I have had the pleasure of working with).

The differences are there, and since the bargaining committee autonomously agreed to this LAT and LLAT crap most of the CATs (and me included) feel insulted: going from self direction to having someone giving direction. This point is crucial: the insult came from the IAM not my (new)co-workers. We all have adjustments to make, some will be harder than others. AMEs, generally speaking, like to be autonomous and when direction is offered they are more likely to take insult rather than the proffered hand.

With the new system CAT's seniority rights in an 'above basic' have been removed, not unlike a demotion, and the LLAT is the new 'above basic'.

I am sure that through the many mergers you have endured, at one time you have felt the same way I do, and I hope this gives some insight to the bitterness that is evident with ex-CATs.

[Guest Mitch]

I hear you Ken.

As I've chosen to remain in the hangar as much as was possible, I can't speak with certainty as to whether our ICC's on the ramp got out of the office much, but what I've heard is that they acted in a very similar role as your team leaders... As a side note, one of our best ICC's in the hangar decided to take a job as team leader simply because he felt that was the closest thing to the job he had. The AE1's on the ramp acted very similarly to your ramp CAT's.

In the hangar, AE1's were 'directed' by ICC's, but often that direction was limited to being assigned an aircraft to look after. In some cases, there were some who needed to be directed and would be lost on their own, but in many cases, the AE1's knowledge far exceeded that of the ICC who only got the job because of his seniority upon the creation of the position. Sadly, some of them are still around.

To address your point about 'the many mergers', and to ame767 as well, ... to my knowledge, none of us are carrying seniority from any more than our original airline, plus CDN.... Yes, CDN was comprised of, and went through many mergers, but each of us individually stayed put, just as in this merge.... We started at CP, or EPA, or PWA, or Nordair, or Wardair... and then were swallowed into CDN. So we only carry seniority from CDN plus our original, not '5 or 6 different airlines'.

There are some folks among us who quit one to go to another at various times, but of course, that seniority is lost. No one carries any seniority after quitting.

I think I do understand the bitterness, and I'm happy to see a little understanding as well. None of us asked for this. It was thrust on us all and it's not easy to deal with, but we'll do ok.

In any case where rules need to cater to the majority, some will get screwed. In this case, we've got people on both sides getting screwed and likewise some on both sides getting quite a bonus. Those of us that are getting the shaft will just have to do our best to swallow it and carry on. All in all, I think we've got a hell of a good team of talented people and we'll just have to do our best to be sure we find ways to see that rewarded.

Bring on the separate bargaining unit!!!!!!

[Guest Mitch]

Please see my response to Ken, above.

I'd have to guess at the median age... In YYZ, it's probably about 39. (I'm 42) We hired very few since about 1990. But that's just a guess...

[Guest Mitch]

Now that's a great idea!