Guest George Posted April 4, 2003 Share Posted April 4, 2003 Call me stupid, naive whatever (I've been called worse) but I would like to know what the members of AC unions think that they will be able to negotiate. From my limited understanding. The monitor with the consultants will draw up a business plan for AC. This will include a fleetplan, employee numbers etc. The monitor will then give all the unionized groups a budget target. e.g. ACPA $150 million, CUPE $120 million - whatever - they're examples. Then the monitor will lock the In Flt management and CUPE in a room and say "figure it out". How you get your budget is your business but the bottom line is not negotiable. So the haircut will be abundantly clear when the plan comes out. The only choices the unions have is to play ball or not and what style the haircut will be. Anyone with some facts or otherwise able to dispute this? There seems to be lots of bluster and frothing at the mouth, but it seems to this uneducated observer that the unions lost all their leverage on Tuesday morning at 4am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neo Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 I think you're a lot closer to it than most people, George. Air Canada's unions had more negotiating leverage prior to CCAA than they do now, in my opinion. Why they were all so reluctant to go to the table is a mystery to me, given the state the industry is in. I can only put it down to wishful thinking, or willful blindness. As for post-CCAA bargaining a lot will depend, I think, on the quality of the interest that is shown by those who would like to invest in a re-organized Air Canada. If there were no interest at all, then creditors would be in a position to place a take-it-or-leave-it package on the table. On the other hand, if there's some serious money around, especially if it's from a number of different investors all vying for the chance to run a New AC, then perhaps the employees will have some room to manoever. All just my uninformed opinion, mind you. neo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest George Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Do ya notice that when substantive issues are brought up raised, there is very little discussion? One response in 24 hours to my questions and yet a slagging match about scope based on opinions gets about 50 responses...Makes me wonder if anyone has their eye on the ball or are they a bunch of sheep being led to the slaughter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cargo Agent Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 George, I believe there are many that are considering your posts but they just won't respond because most posts quickly degenerate into slagging matches. The silent majority just don't want or need the abuse that comes with posting here. I myself have started to respond to countless posts recently and just hit the delete key instead of the send key. Us and against, is where it always seems to end up. Keep trying, just don't expect the vocal majority to take much notice, they have there own agenda's. IMHO CA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John S. Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 George, perhaps there has been little response to your questions because those with the best answers are too busy keeping their eye on the ball. Either that or they've been put off the by consistently arrogant view expressed by some of the sky-gods out here. I can tell you that AC is a most interesting company to watch. Just think, here you have: 1) half the pilots hate the other half 2) half the flight attendants hate the other half 3) half the mechanics hate the other half 4) half the rampies hate the other half 5) people in Toronto don't like the weather, and 6) everybody in Montreal is annoyed about something all the time Plus, as if it could not get more interesting, you have several thousand regional employees who, in spite of being called 'feeders' by some on the mainline holier-than-thou's still think this company could be a darn fine career. And are doing something about it. As I said on an earlier post, I just truly hope that the senior management, the creditors and all the others who have a decision in the future of AC have a chance to hear what ALPA is saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GDR Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Hi George It is a difficult post to respond to. Every union position is different and I don't think many of us feel comfortable negotiating on a public forum like this on in house matters. My overall suggestion would be to sort out the percentage of payroll that each union group will have to save. I guess a good place to start would be the 22% that Milton asked for before. Under CCAA that amount has likely gone up but just possibly with all the investor interest in the airline it might be enough. Each union group should then look at how they want to structure that 22%. Some of it will have to be a straight pay cut but much of it could be achieved with productivity improvements. Costing the increases in productivity improvements will no doubt be contentious. In addition productivity improvements will likely require more lay offs but hopefully some deal can be struck with gov't and the EI fund to mitigate some of those. Negotiating for pay increases was a lot more fun, but it's gonna be a long time before those days are back I'm afraid. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.