Company takes another stab at Cupe

[Guest CarryOn]

Yesterday, all the F/A's in YEG received a call stating that a FED EX package was on the way. They are laying the whole base off even though we have no base closure protection in our current collective agreement.

What's next?

[dragon]

A lot more employee layoffs, across all departments [fat departments should expect deep cuts], all bases and management ranks. The remaining employees should then expect a substantial pay cut and increases to the their productivity.

That’s for starters.

[Guest Airmail]

"we have no base closure protection in our current collective agreement" -- what part of bankruptcy protection is so tough to understand?

For examples on what it means and what to expect, look at UA and USAirways employees.

[Guest johnboy]

With all due respect Airmail, one aspect of CCAA that you should be aware of is
that during CCAA union agreements remain in “force”. Justice Farley has taken
the unprecedented step of ignoring this aspect of the law and this will be aggressively
challenged by the unions on April 22.

With regards to the YEG F/A base AC management has singled out aprox 50 very
senior F/A’s and without any notice told them they are laid off and can report for
work in YYZ without relocation assistance or take 2 days severance pay for each
year of dedicated service. What could stop AC from telling every 747 captain
and F/O in the system them same thing Monday morning?

In no way am I understating the seriousness of the situation at AC but this move
smacks of retribution and callousness. This company does not even have a business
plan yet.

[Guest George]

Well CUPE was the only union that told AC to go pound sand on 31 March prior to the CCAA filing. All the other unions at least engaged in some dialogue and got somewhere in the negots. Too bad CUPE has such stupid leadership cause neanderthal union thinking ain't going to help much. Its too bad, cause its the membership who's going to reap the rewards of CUPE's "leadership".

[Guest ecamaction]

Johnboy

I am confused by your statement that the F/A's are laid off, but must report for work in YYZ. You really can't be both, in my books.

Does your collective agreement have a paid move provision in the event of a base closure?

[Guest Airmail]

I am not saying that the CCAA process in and of itself has the ability to abrogate collective agreements, I know that much about the process. But the process we are now faced with involves creditors, lessors, bondholders and others who will say that they will vote against any plan of arrangements (and hence in favor of liquidation) if AC employees (including myself) don't take massive pay cuts and accept HUGE increases in productivity. Law or no law, the choice is accept huge pay reductions/huge productivity increases or face obliteration. Remember, the plan of arrangement will be voted on by individuals who have absolutely no emotional attachment to AC or its employees.

So try to protect collective agreements all you want -- all I am saying is that in this environment, they are worth as much as the contract signed by a lessor, the share purchased by a shareholder or the bonds held by a debtholder -- in other words, almost nothing!

[Guest Airmail]

Exactly George! CUPE had better wake up!

[Guest Airmail]

With all due respect, Johnboy, I am not saying that the CCAA process in and of itself has the ability to abrogate collective agreements, I do know that much about the process. But the process we are now faced with involves creditors, lessors, bondholders and others who will vote against any plan of arrangement (and hence in favor of liquidation) if AC employees (including myself) don't take massive pay cuts and accept HUGE increases in productivity. Law or no law, the choice is to accept huge pay reductions/huge productivity increases OR face obliteration. Remember, the plan of arrangement will be voted on by individuals who have absolutely no emotional attachment to AC or its employees and they will demand that employees make huge sacrifices a la UA/USAir/American or else they will simply liquidate the company and take what they can.

So try to protect collective agreements all you want -- all I am saying is that in this environment, they are worth just as much as the lease signed by a lessor, the share purchased by a shareholder or the bonds held by a debtholder -- in other words, almost nothing. Sad but true.

[UpperDeck]

The point is somehow obscured. You will receive as compensation what the market will permit. Unions identify that appropriate market level and ensure your services are not underpriced or they fail to adequately define the parameters and "all is lost". Or is it? What is the "value" of a pilot's service; or that of an mechanic? If you have ANY ability as a marine electrician, you can travel ANYWHERE and get $25 - $30 /hr on your terms CASH!!! In other words...the market rules according to market rules. A lot more qualified pilots than planes? Then guess what happens to wages. How many here questioned (nay; sneered at) the $30,000 pilot payment? The road is clear...the market will dictate both demand and compensation.

[UpperDeck]

The point is somehow obscured. You will receive as compensation what the market will permit. Unions identify that appropriate market level and ensure your services are not underpriced or they fail to adequately define the parameters and "all is lost". Or is it? What is the "value" of a pilot's service; or that of an mechanic? If you have ANY ability as a marine electrician, you can travel ANYWHERE and get $25 - $30 /hr on your terms CASH!!! In other words...the market rules according to market rules. A lot more qualified pilots than planes? Then guess what happens to wages. How many here questioned (nay; sneered at) the $30,000 pilot payment? The road is clear...the market will dictate both demand and compensation.