Air Canada pilot strike vote open.

[dagger]

18 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

As Air Canada pilots strike looms, NDP says it will ‘never’ support back-to-work bill: Singh (msn.com)

Well that's a shocker...

 

[Malcolm]

4 minutes ago, dagger said:

Well that's a shocker...

 

Not sure that there would be a vote, doesn't  the government have the power to force back to work without any vote or am I wrong?

[dagger]

20 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

Not sure that there would be a vote, doesn't  the government have the power to force back to work without any vote or am I wrong?

Indeed, but I doubt they will be in a rush to use it. The opposition parties will begin by supporting the pilots. There will be an initial period of anti-AC nastiness as people are stranded, but after a few days, the pendulum will swing to neutral because it's hard to sympathize with workers offered a 30% wage increase (or more by the time the strike/lockout begins) and finding it far from acceptable because US pilots make X more.  If hardship cases mount, and the other carriers make their usual mistakes bumping people - see Porter and just one denied boarding for a 14-year-old travelling unaccompanied - then the debate will gradually take on a different character. In a sense, the government is better off not having an opposition party onside for arbitration, because as the situation deteriorates, the other parties will bear some of the blame.

I don't have a sense about how much more AC will offer, or should offer, or could offer and still be competitive, I am not getting into the fairness issue, but there will be a point where a majority of the public resigns itself to the idea that some intervention is desirable.

[FA@AC]

24 minutes ago, dagger said:

The opposition parties will begin by supporting the pilots.

The hypocrisy on the part of the Conservatives who twice shut down job action at AC before it could start is breathtaking.

[FA@AC]

Nothing much new in this article aside from quotes from Mike Rousseau.  If he's that concerned about the disruption a shutdown would cause, is he prepared to commit to not imposing a lockout?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/air-canada-labour-dispute-1.7321527

Edited September 12 by FA@AC

[Turbofan]

1 hour ago, dagger said:

Indeed, but I doubt they will be in a rush to use it. The opposition parties will begin by supporting the pilots. There will be an initial period of anti-AC nastiness as people are stranded, but after a few days, the pendulum will swing to neutral because it's hard to sympathize with workers offered a 30% wage increase (or more by the time the strike/lockout begins) and finding it far from acceptable because US pilots make X more.  If hardship cases mount, and the other carriers make their usual mistakes bumping people - see Porter and just one denied boarding for a 14-year-old travelling unaccompanied - then the debate will gradually take on a different character. In a sense, the government is better off not having an opposition party onside for arbitration, because as the situation deteriorates, the other parties will bear some of the blame.

I don't have a sense about how much more AC will offer, or should offer, or could offer and still be competitive, I am not getting into the fairness issue, but there will be a point where a majority of the public resigns itself to the idea that some intervention is desirable.

So let’s say “after awhile" the public and politicians get fed up and force us back to work.

Normally the parties negotiate a back to work protocol to restart.  This is what happened in 1998. It basically nullifies the CBA for a fixed amount of time to get the place moving.

Remember this isn’t like 2012 unless the government intervenes in advance of a wind down.

So how easy will it be to wind back up with pilots saying.  I have a schedule.  I will be there for my next scheduled pairing?

What do you think the reaction will be if the government sends us to arbitration and also temporarily nullifies our contract?

This is why AC is so concerned about Sunday.  Wind down day.  They know beyond that date they will become dependent on a cooperative pilot group.

That is why they are so focused on intervention before wind down.  Intervention after will be painful.

[Kip Powick]

Another POV

 

 

[UpperDeck]

5 hours ago, Turbofan said:

So let’s say “after awhile" the public and politicians get fed up and force us back to work.

Normally the parties negotiate a back to work protocol to restart.  This is what happened in 1998. It basically nullifies the CBA for a fixed amount of time to get the place moving.

Remember this isn’t like 2012 unless the government intervenes in advance of a wind down.

So how easy will it be to wind back up with pilots saying.  I have a schedule.  I will be there for my next scheduled pairing?

What do you think the reaction will be if the government sends us to arbitration and also temporarily nullifies our contract?

This is why AC is so concerned about Sunday.  Wind down day.  They know beyond that date they will become dependent on a cooperative pilot group.

That is why they are so focused on intervention before wind down.  Intervention after will be painful.

Damn!! I don't understand this process.

Two parties are negotiating and are at an impasse. Why doesn't matter. It is well understood that if the union is withdrawing services then the company MUST take steps to mitigate and must do so at least 3 days prior to the "strike". AC MUST anticipate a strike.

Why not in good faith continue negotiations if possible and when it is clear an agreement will not be reached then agree upon a date to withdraw services? That allows AC to mitigate and preserves ( to a degree) public goodwill.

Arbitrarily withdrawing services after a date specific compels the company to proactively shut down. How can that possibly be good PR for the union? You're holding the public hostage!!

[Turbofan]

Upperdeck,

Unfortunately in Canada, because of all the past government interference in the transportation sector, employers will not put their last best offer on the table until they are absolutely certain they have to.  They will wait hoping to be rescued by the government.  For that last best offer to happen 72 hours and wind down has to be imminent.

If it was never imminent?  The last best would never happen.

Have you not noticed all the pleading from Air Canada?  Please save us from negotiating.

It's unfortunate.  But that is just the way this gets played.  It's why government interference is so problematic.  Even the government realizes they have been part of the problem.

We didn't pick an arbitrary date.  This date has been known for nearly 3 months and was determined by the process set out by the labor board.  In fact we were conscious about staying out of peak travel.  We mindfully cut a deal that would see AC avoid this happening in summer.

Truth be told if we don't serve 72 hours notice to strike, AC would simply serve 72 hours notice to lock us out.  Just like CN.

Air Canada has always acted first to lock out the pilots.  1998 and 2011

For AC this uncertainty has to come to an end.  It's costing forward bookings by the day.  The last thing they want is for it to drag on. They will be looking to get this over and done with as a result. One way or another they need an end.

If we don't pull the trigger Sunday?  They will.  They will take one last look to see if the minister is riding in on his cape.  If he is?  We are screwed.  If he isn't we will get the last best offer.

We don’t make the rules.  We play within them.

The company has known for 15 months now what we were looking for and has dragged their feet the whole way.

We want a bankruptcy recover contract. Just table it and it’s over.  It could have been over months ago.
 

 

[dagger]

Just to round out the comparatives, what is Delta (or United) covering in health care for pilots and dependents in their new contracts. And for pensions, have they reverted to a DB plan (though I know not all AC pilots are on full DB).

[boestar]

Dagger makes a good point.  

Salary is only one aspect of total compensation.  How about a full comparison of compensation including Pension and benefits.

 

[dagger]

40 minutes ago, boestar said:

Dagger makes a good point.  

Salary is only one aspect of total compensation.  How about a full comparison of compensation including Pension and benefits.

 

Yes, and I ask because I tried to read the Delta contract section on heath coverage, and it's Byzantine. Different plans, co-pays, deductibles. And they have been paying premiums, presumably, through the past decade before their big increases last year. I know this line of questioning will irritate some folks, but the union has to be ready to deal with them in the days ahead. Sooner or later, even the dumbest reporter begins asking more pointed questions of both sides

[Vsplat]

Hopefully there is a complete, transparent comparison, including items that don't appear in US contracts because they don't have to.  While it is convenient to lock onto a final year income number, the personal and family costs behind that income are very different north and south of the border.

Personally, I would start with work and scheduling rules.  Canadian regulations simply allow exhausting and disruptive schedules that are not permitted in the US, for any carrier.  The assumption that somehow Air Canada's contract is cushy compared to the regs or other countries was never true in my experience, but the myth persists to this day.

Vs

[neverminds]

3 hours ago, dagger said:

Just to round out the comparatives, what is Delta (or United) covering in health care for pilots and dependents in their new contracts. And for pensions, have they reverted to a DB plan (though I know not all AC pilots are on full DB).

I was not aware of this. So you are saying that all those that had been put on a DC plan over the past number of years have been transferred to a DB plan, and all new hires will go DB as well? If so that  is almost more significant than the substantial wages that Delta and United got, since its an Albratross/huge liability to the employer that I thought they would never entertain again

[dagger]

13 minutes ago, neverminds said:

I was not aware of this. So you are saying that all those that had been put on a DC plan over the past number of years have been transferred to a DB plan, and all new hires will go DB as well? If so that  is almost more significant than the substantial wages that Delta and United got, since its an Albratross/huge liability to the employer that I thought they would never entertain again

I don't know where the DL and AC pension issue is, I should have worded that better. I don;t know what pension or retirement contribution DL even had during those lean years since the US carriers basically walked away from their plans and replaced them with 401k plans  if I understand the situation correctly.

Edited Friday at 03:42 PM by dagger

[Turbofan]

4 hours ago, dagger said:

Just to round out the comparatives, what is Delta (or United) covering in health care for pilots and dependents in their new contracts. And for pensions, have they reverted to a DB plan (though I know not all AC pilots are on full DB).

Yes total compensation, or total cost per pilot in the US, is even greater than the hourly wage disparity indicates.

Sorry I know very little about the cost of medical in the states. So take this with a grain of salt. They are company/employee paid.  And yes there is some copayment.  Some deductibles.  My understanding is that the pilot cost is in the ball park of $400/month.  The company portion I have no idea.  ALPA E&FA has a comparison if this at some point is required to be dealt with in public.

Pensions

No US carriers have DB pension any longer.

1/3 of Air Canada pilots have a DB.  The other 2/3 are DC

Air Canada DB -overfunded due to people staying past 60.  Pension holiday. Pilots still paying extra into the overfunded pension as per the protocol agreement in 2009 when it was underfunded.

Air Canada DC - company contribution 6% rising to 10.5% after 5 years.

Delta - company contribution 17% rising to 18% in 2026

United - company contrIbution 16% (this # is out dated. Previous contract.  May have changed)

[Turbofan]

We could then move on to profit sharing.  The US carriers dwarf us there too.

I believe ALPA E& FA put out a pilot cost comparison chart.  I will look.

[Malcolm]

Interesting ALPA report... latest one I could find.

The State of the North American Passenger Airline Industry—And What's on the Horizon (alpa.org)

Note where Canadian Carriers place.

[Turbofan]

5 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

Interesting ALPA report

The State of the North American Passenger Airline Industry—And What's on the Horizon (alpa.org)

Note where Canadian Carriers place.

From 2015/16?  Page four of this thread has an AC DL operating margins comparison that is recent.

[Malcolm]

8 minutes ago, Turbofan said:

From 2015/16?  Page four of this thread has an AC DL operating margins comparison 

Did you find the report you were looking for?

this one from 2023 may also be of interest

https://www.alpa.org/news-and-events/air-line-pilot-magazine/state-of-the-industry-2024

[UpperDeck]

Dagger is getting credit for reading earlier posts!! Lol

Turbo posted a G&M article authored by "Ashley" whose opinions are not shared by Turbo et al;

"But wages represent more than the value of labour alone. Your salary also reflects (among other things) the cost of living when you are not at work, the perks your organization offers and the benefits the government offers.

On each of these points, Americans fare worse. The cost of living in the United States is generally higher than it is in Canada, organizational perks – think job security and severance pay, to name a few – pale in comparison with what Canadians are used to and American health care is – to put it mildly – a mess. Without anything akin to Canada’s universal health care system, nearly 80 million Americans have medical bills they can’t afford and one in 12 Americans report losing their homes in part because of these debts. Put simply, Americans, be they bartenders, burger flippers or pilots, need to earn more because the expenses they incur are far heftier.

Pressing for wage hikes is understandable. Why earn less when you can earn more. Arguing that wages haven’t kept up with inflation is also reasonable. Why? Because they clearly haven’t. Data from Statistics Canada show that many Canadians have seen their “real wages” – how much we earn after accounting for inflation – have dropped. Maybe Air Canada pilots should indeed be paid more than their paltry top end of $352,000.

But arguing that workers in one country should earn as much as workers performing the same work in another defies economic logic. While union execs argue that a pay hike is about fairness and equity, what they are really asking for is a better deal than their American counterparts. A deal that – given cost of living differences between the Canada and the U.S. – allows Canadian pilots to earn more than their southern neighbours, while spending less.

So much for equity."

[Turbofan]

I found it but I remembered it wrong.  It’s not total cost.  It’s a salary comparison as well.

[Turbofan]

8 minutes ago, UpperDeck said:

Dagger is getting credit for reading earlier posts!! Lol

Turbo posted a G&M article authored by "Ashley" whose opinions are not shared by Turbo et al;

"But wages represent more than the value of labour alone. Your salary also reflects (among other things) the cost of living when you are not at work, the perks your organization offers and the benefits the government offers.

On each of these points, Americans fare worse. The cost of living in the United States is generally higher than it is in Canada, organizational perks – think job security and severance pay, to name a few – pale in comparison with what Canadians are used to and American health care is – to put it mildly – a mess. Without anything akin to Canada’s universal health care system, nearly 80 million Americans have medical bills they can’t afford and one in 12 Americans report losing their homes in part because of these debts. Put simply, Americans, be they bartenders, burger flippers or pilots, need to earn more because the expenses they incur are far heftier.

Pressing for wage hikes is understandable. Why earn less when you can earn more. Arguing that wages haven’t kept up with inflation is also reasonable. Why? Because they clearly haven’t. Data from Statistics Canada show that many Canadians have seen their “real wages” – how much we earn after accounting for inflation – have dropped. Maybe Air Canada pilots should indeed be paid more than their paltry top end of $352,000.

But arguing that workers in one country should earn as much as workers performing the same work in another defies economic logic. While union execs argue that a pay hike is about fairness and equity, what they are really asking for is a better deal than their American counterparts. A deal that – given cost of living differences between the Canada and the U.S. – allows Canadian pilots to earn more than their southern neighbours, while spending less.

So much for equity."

So you now agree with me.  Read what I highlighted in bold.

That’s awesome.  Maybe Mikey will finally agree too.

Give us our pre bankruptcy contract back.

You keep dwelling on the US comparison.  They are only there to demonstrate that our wage demand of

”GIVE US OUR PRE BANKRUPTCY CONTRACT BACK” 

Is actually quite reasonable considering AC’s competition.

You are flipping the script on us, much like AC management has been doing.

[Turbofan]

OTTAWA, Sept 13 (Reuters) - The Canadian government will not intervene to end a dispute between Air Canada and its pilots and intends instead to pressure both sides to avert a strike, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said on Friday.

A stoppage could start as soon as Sept. 18. Air Canada and its low-cost subsidiary Air Canada Rouge together operate nearly 670 flights per day, and a shutdown could affect 110,000 passengers daily as well as freight carriage.

Airline and business groups want the Liberal government to force the two sides into binding arbitration before a strike starts, an idea that Trudeau dismissed.
"I'm not going to put my thumb on the scale on either side. It is up to Air Canada and the pilots' union to do the work to figure out how to make sure that they are not hurting millions of Canadians," he told reporters in Quebec.

"Every time there's a strike, people say 'Oh, you'll get the government to come in and fix it' - we're not going to do that. We believe in collective bargaining, and we're going to keep pushing people to do it."
Labour Minister Steven MacKinnon met both the company and the union on Thursday. Both sides are still far apart on the question of wages.

[Turbofan]

So no minister ridding in on a cape.

We now will see what last best looks like.