Jump to content

An interesting financial tidbit


DEFCON

Recommended Posts

"Mr. Jones said the union has offered to transfer all aircraft with up to 55 seats to the mainline. But ACPA is insisting on keeping larger planes for its own members.

He said each aircraft that is transferred to Jazz means the loss of about 14 ACPA jobs."

Jazz only requires 10 pilots per bird. This would represent the rational for the transfer and negate all the arguements of who gets paid what.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BillyBigToe

Keep in mind that we MAY be comparing "old" work rules to "new" work rules. There is so much partial information flying around and everyone hooks onto what suits them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Mr. Jones said the union has offered to transfer all aircraft with up to 55 seats to the mainline."

Interesting indeed. Wonder what ACPA's proposed Dash 8 rate was below that of ALPA's?

I know, it's just a typo. Really. It is. Isn't it? Would have to be. That couldn't really happen. Could it? I mean, what precedent would there be for it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please keep in mind that Jazz is currently operating and has previously operated "Jet" powered aircraft of up to 85 seats. This size of aircraft has been operated by both Air BC and Air Nova beginning from as far back as 1987! Canadian Regional was also operating F-28s, a fleet of aproximately 39 aircraft? This size of aircraft fit quite nicely into the "regional" market just as they do in other regional airlines throughout the world.

GTFA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tri-spool

DEFCON,

My suggestion to you is stop reading the headlines and taking every number seriously. Today I read in the G&M that the average salary of an AC pilot is $180K and that they only work 45 hours/month. The last time I checked my pay I don't make anywhere near that and I work 70-75 hours/month. The media hates AC, but worse yet they hate the pilots at AC even more to publish crap like that!

ACPA is doing what its members want which is to defend scope! If they caved to the demands of the company I can guarantee you that it would not pass by the members when it went for a ratification vote.

Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


"My suggestion to you is stop reading the headlines and taking every number seriously."

The quote I posted was from the ACPA lawyer. I do understand the media ability to screw up a quote however,...

"If they caved to the demands of the company I can guarantee you that it would not pass by the members when it went for a ratification vote."

I don't think you'll get the chance to vote. I think the hour is late and any "deal" reached will be accepted on your behalf by the MEC. Just a guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Kilo Mike

Evening Defcon.

While you and I have traded internet pokes in the eye, I do actually respect some of the things you have posted. Having said that though, I have to say that you are mistaken on this on regarding no vote by the membership. Any deal must be voted on by the membership. It's part of the constitution.

What a busness...

KM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate the olive branch. It's too bad it couldn't become a tree.

Re the constitution:

Most, I thought all, CA's had a clause in them that allowed a groups union executive to accept new CA's, LOU's, and the like on behalf of its memebers? As a matter of practice and policy these clauses aren't used excepting extraordinary circumstances?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Kilo Mike

Hey there again Def.

Guess you can't sleep either eh? ;)

How's this for a tree attempt. You and I speak exactly the same language regarding the Iraq war and politics. Your discourses on the forum were interesting reading. While you and I probably won't see eye to eye on the labour thing, I will offer that we could share a beer without hitting one another over the head with it. Promise. Just don't mention Picher, and I promise not to mention Adams ;)

The ACPA constitution has some basic tenants regarding the membership having to vote on just about everything. Prevents the MEC / leadership going off and doing something that the troupies don't want them to. Not trying to poke a sore spot, but this came about as a result of the picher merger fiasco. While I agree that there are emergency measures available, anything to do with money and working conditions has to be voted on by the membership.

Hope we can sleep after all this....
KM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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



×
×
  • Create New...