Massive cuts needed at AC

[Guest Labtec]

It is clear that massive cuts are needed at Air Canada they were needed 3 years ago when we merged with CAIL. It is also clear that massive improvements are required in productivity.

The ramp in YYZ is poorly managed. As a pilot I see first hand aircraft often waiting 15-20 minutes for a lead to arrive and wave us in. Think of the fuel costs we expend to wait for staff to wave a couple of wands so that we may proceed. The costs rippled throughout the system are astronomical. The work rules on the ramp need to be restructured and the "LEAD" position done away with. Everyone who works on the ramp ought to be able to do everyone else's job. It makes no sense to have this artificial division of labour. If these inefficiencies aren't dealt with my guess is that if Milton is able to sell off this part of the operation the rampies will be earning hudson general wages. Welcome to McDonalds.

The pilot work rules need to be altered. This business of being paid by the minute creates ridiculous inefficiencies. Checkers and instructors ought not to be able to displace operating pilots for competency they should bid a block and fly that block. It makes no sense to have 3 guys paid for a flight when only two are required.

The shift selling on the ramp and in sales needs to be halted. If you're senior and you keep selling your shifts to the junior people what do we need you for? There are people that haven't set foot on the property, other than to bid, in five years that are paid at the highest rate. These people acrue pension benefits, have medical coverage, and passes and they never work here. Let's get rid of them and get some people that want to work here in their place. The newer people will start at a lower pay rate effecting immediate savings.

Milton wants to shave $650 million off the labour budget of 3 billion. Assuming 38000 employees that's about $17000 per employee. I say to Mr. Milton take the necessary measures immediately and without predjudice. Make the cuts and make them sensibly. Let's not follow the lead of our Canadian colleagues and limp along for 10 years on the brink never solving the problem. Mr. Milton you must shrink this airline and put costs in line with revenues.

As an immediate cost cutting measure let's do away with some redundant and over priced clerical help in flight operations. There is no need to have a guy earning 200K plus to be a flight manager on each equipment type. These are clerical jobs and ought to be done by clerks for a commensurate salary.

The aviation industry is currently in a race to the bottom with WJ, Canjet, jetsgo, et al leading the charge. Let's do what we must to ensure that this does not happen to Air Canada. If we don't take these neccessary steps immediately we will all be working for WJ, Canjet or Jetsgo wages. I would rather be laid off for a few years than participate in an industry that is the laughing stock of all others. WJ F/O's earn what I earned 15 years ago flying a PA31-350. Their Captains are paid what I was paid to fly a King Air 10 years ago. If this trend continues we are all in very deep trouble. Aviation will become an industry like the fast food business or the retail sales business. They generate lots of cash for the executives while the front line workers earn enough to live in squalor.

The alternative is I suppose, from the pilots persepctive, that Canada becomes an efficient training ground for expat pilots who live and work in the Mid-east or Asia where the salary and benefits are commensurate with the time, money and knowledge required to do the job.

LABTEC

[Vsplat]

Actually, the F/O cannot legally do the Captain's job. That's not AC, that's ICAO and every national regulatory system.

The pilot-in-command also carries the company liability and decision making role, not to mention is the first respondent in any OSH issue aboard. These are just a few of the more visibile differences. And no, they are not sky gods. The hands and feet part is only a percentage of the work.

Oh, and by the way, I'm not currently in a command position at AC, so this isn't me polishing my own brass....

Vs

[Gumbi]

How about not going to the cdf when it's not needed?

How often do I d/h on AC and we end up in the cdf with LESS than nothing on the surfaces (not even the slightest hint of frost)...

Surely all of this amounts to tremendous sums of money, in overtime, glycol, fuel, manpower... That would be another great place to start giving it some thought. (although, I'm sure not everyone plays that game but for those who do...)

[Gumbi]

How about not going to the cdf when it's not needed?

How often do I d/h on AC and we end up in the cdf with LESS than nothing on the surfaces (not even the slightest hint of frost)...

Surely all of this amounts to tremendous sums of money, in overtime, glycol, fuel, manpower... That would be another great place to start giving it some thought. (although, I'm sure not everyone plays that game but for those who do...)

[Guest Pull Up]

Unfortunately, there are too many people involved in the decision. Recently, the de-ice co-ordinator, and both flight crew members on a flight I operated agreed that de-icing wasn't required, and would actually cause problems because of the temperature, -20c and very light snow that was blowing off. The lead said, "No, I think you need to be de-iced". STOC was advised of all the dialogue, and we went and de-iced. The de-ice co-ordinator couldn't believe we were there, and to add insult to injury, now we needed type 4 over type 1 because now we were gving the snow something to stick to. More wasted money, and how often does this happen?

[groundeffect]

Right on 13820
As I stated on the acpa forum recently, twice last month I was doing a first-flt walkaround noticing no ice or frost...only to come up to the flt deck acars announcement of the need to spray...ok it's hard to tell if the UPPER tail surfaces are covered...so both times I had innovative captains willing to 'call' central d-ice ...after 'second' inspections, youi guesses it...no spray required...My cynical thought processes lead me to the question...was the a/c actually inspected before? Or was the 'enviroment' ripe for icing ...therefore..?How much is glycol agin?...

[dragon]

Was the impact not publicly disseminated, by AC, at 250M CDN?

Was that 250 profit or 250 revenue, and what was disposable from that revenue – how many days would that buy us today? What was Lamar's or Wayne's share v. ACPA's share or at least the share of responsibility? How did 250M compare to the overall cost of ACPA's thrust back in the fall of 1998?

I agree with you dagger, it is not irrelevant, only perhaps for slightly different reasons. WDR, this is, for all intent and purpose, not the fore concern today.

Most importantly, were lessons learned by Lamar’s replacement? Were lessons learned by ACPA? Would the lead of ACPA be followed by the CUPE, CAW, IAM etc or will AC pilots forever be viewed as greedy and self serving?

Important questions.

I need to do a little research on your other post [Management], please stand bye.

[dragon]

Was the impact not publicly disseminated, by AC, at 250M CDN?

Was that 250 profit or 250 revenue, and what was disposable from that revenue – how many days would that buy us today? What was Lamar's or Wayne's share v. ACPA's share or at least the share of responsibility? How did 250M compare to the overall cost of ACPA's thrust back in the fall of 1998?

I agree with you dagger, it is not irrelevant, only perhaps for slightly different reasons. For all intent and purpose, not the fore concern today.

Most importantly, were lessons learned by Lamar’s replacement? Were lessons learned by ACPA? Would the lead of ACPA be followed by the CUPE, CAW, IAM etc or will AC pilots forever be viewed as greedy and self serving?

Important questions.

I need to do a little research on your other post [Management], please stand bye.

[Don Hudson]

Dagger;

No strike is "successful". It is a sign of failure.

There are others far more capable than I who can (and if necessary, should) discuss this first ACA pilots' strike, but the failure must be shared, and not attributed to the pilots alone.

These things arise out of sincere intentions to avoid the final act, as well as mistaken signals which confuse and anger the already-primed parties.

I will not go into details as I simply don't have the time or interest on this issue anymore, but I will say that the labour relations climate all through 1998 (after Interest-Based Bargaining was tried that spring and failed), was poisonous to say the least and had been for some time.

The main issue which triggered the action was the augmentation issue and that began in Vancouver, but there were other issues which could hardly be called secondary, including the very difficult simulator environment created by many sectors in response to Airbus training and transition issues, many from 1995 on. Intimidation by failure was a strategy practised during this time and pilots felt justifiably threatened.

I am sure that seen from the other side, such "tactics" were merely a beefed-up training program which was responding to the enormous pressures created by the largest growth period and training program in Air Canada's history. In the end it doesn't matter, because the membership had felt, in their opinion, the last lash.

The augmentation issue, (with threats of dismissal) in August of 1998 rallied the membership and a fatal game of brinksmanship ensued.

But please...this was not a pilots' strike; this was a strike at Air Canada in which the pilots were parties. It was not executed in a vacuum.

Suffice it to say that from my perception, the present climate is vastly improved and although confrontational and still ready with the potential for mistaken signals (pretty normal), the difference is in the willingness to solve problems and come to conclusions rather than escalate the responses.

Don