Hi Dagger, did you miss my message down below

[Guest Rob Assaf]

Dagger,

I just started holidays, my last block consisted of a rather "nice" shift, day 2 of my pairing saw me fly one leg for the day from Winsdor to Toronto, just over an hour flying time. For this I was paid a minimum credit day of 4.5 hours.

I got done one better though, while recounting this in the crew room on the same day, another capt informed me that he was deadheading to Kingston for a standup overnight to operate back the next day, again, one leg of actual operation just over an hour of flying time, for which he was paid just over 6 hours.

I consistantly wait for marshalling at YYZ, my "best time" last shift was 40 minutes, even if we are getting the marshalling for FREE, 40 minutes of fuel burn at 450 lbs per hour make this a most UN-economic practice, yet it continues.

Next time you power lunch or run into them at the water cooler or where ever it is that you seem to know these high end people from, ask them why in the face of continuing losses these poor practices continue.

I've asked and get no response, I await your talents at getting to the bottom of this. I would offer the observation that much more economically feasible operations are possible WELL WITHIN THE CURRENT JAZZ COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT, YET IT DOES'T SEEM TO BE HAPPENING!

Sincerely, Rob Assaf

[dagger]

I didn't read your message below. Don't feel offended. I'm not able to read all messages, and I don't often scroll all the way down. As for your observation, I am not qualified to say what portion of your experiences are the result of inefficiencies which management "allows" and what portion reflect archaic work rules that make it hard to schedule or get optimum benefit from employees. Jazz, as you know full well, is scoped. And that includes a mainline to regional ratio, if I am not mistaken.

But if you are going to talk about a Jazz contract being lower cost than an ACPA contract, I could also say that a third tier contract is more efficient and less costly than yours. So why not just skip Jazz and training up third tier pilots to do all Air Canada flying?

Impractical? Sure. Stupid? Almost certainly.

But so is this talk about "our" contract being better than "theirs". Their contract exists. It's a fact, and it's got to be renegotiated or torn up before Jazz can enjoy a different mission within AC.

For that to happen, people have got to look beyond their usual positions, their usual "rants" and get down to the proverbial "brass tacks" about what Air Canada is going to look like a year from now.

[Guest Rob Assaf]

Didn't say that Jazz contract was cheaper than ACPA. What I did say was that there is room within our current collective agreement to operate JAZZ more effectively. In light of the fact that there needs to be changes to ALL aspects of the operation, I'm curious as to why this is not being done.

You'd have to agree, given that we get paid a minimum of 4.5 credits per day, the examples I gave are pretty poor examples of effeciancy. The managment is crying poor to the unions yet they continue to schedule this way. Our contract allows up to 10 legs of flying per day and 14 hours scheduled duty, yet it doesn't even remotely resemble this. It doesn't lend much credibility to their version of how things are when the avenues to fix at least some of it are currently contractualy availble.

Cheers, Rob

[LongTimer V]

Hi Rob just to let you know,hundreds of ramp rats have been laid off in the last 6 months,I guess thats the way the company saves money.No wounder there's nobody there to park you.Poor manpower planning is really the problem,but hey what do i know i've never run a airline before like some people on this forum.LOL

[dagger]

I can't agree or disagree with your examples because I don't know - and am not capable of analyzing - the terms of your collective agreement and other factors that produce such scheduling. I would also have to know whether tag ends or other anomalies occur at other carriers. No scheduling regime is perfect. Even when you are dealing with hourly paid employees working shifts, there is always going to be situations where some people are under-employed or poorly utilized.

[dagger]

Maybe poor collective agreements with archaic work rules shape that scheduling. I am sure the airline could hire another 5,000 "ramp rats" and things would improve operationally. The point is to make sure the "ramp rats" work productively and efficiently.

I think you would be in a small minority here if you argue that that is the case.

[Guest Terminated]

Geez, Dagger becomes somebody else when Jazz is mentioned.

I often read Dagger's posts, often informative, and reasonably balanced. But I've noticed how much the attitude changes if Jazz is any part of the discussion. You (Rob) pointed out some of the inefficiencies we suffer through every day, and how such a large part of the problems in our company (Jazz/AC)are the result of structural issues, that no amount of pay cuts/productivity gains can change. You merely addressed that issue, which is overwhelmingly valid to anyone who sees it. It appeared that Dagger must've mis-read it.

As far as the Jazz contract vs the mainline contract, you didn't get into that, but Dagger did, which raises my own questions. We (all) talk about doing what is necessary to make us competitive, and to right the ship. Dagger has made numerous comments and suggestions, directed towards mainline pilots, which are often creative and valid. Ways to increase productivity, and make a viable competitor to the low cost operators. Changing the contract in out-of-the-box sort of ways, in an attempt to address the challenges. Yet when it comes to Jazz, or scope, it seems to be 'to bad, that's the way it is, you have to live with scope, why not just give all the flying to 3rd Tier'.

It seems that everything is on the table unless it affects how many jobs are at ACPA. Totally understandable from ACPA, but from the perspective of someone who wants AC to survive, and prosper, and have shareholders profit, it would require some greater big picture thinking.

But regardless of any of this, it would certainly be uplifting to see the organization become well run, and utilize the opportunities for increased productivity in the collective aggreements.

[DEFCON]

Dagger

I believe Rob is trying to point out the fact that Jazz is losing money and a large portion of that loss can be attributed to AC ramp.

This is not something new and from a personal perspective it's a situation that's gone on unabated for twenty five years. Airlines such as BA & US Air have endured and done everything possible to avoid AC handling for the the same reasons. A past AO president was fired for refusing payment to AC for non performance of a contracted service.

Jazz is supposed to be an independant corp. If so, let Jazz choose a handler that will actually serve their needs or in the alternative, Jazz should be able to charge AC for the delays on a by the minute basis.

[DEFCON]

Right on the mark!

[LongTimer V]

Nobody wants to do that job for $8/hour.Air Canada tried that and the turn over was so great that at the end it wasn't cost affective.Who in there right mind would want to work in noisy,dirty wet,cold dangerous conditions for that kinda money.You can get that money anywhere and without the crap.Remember its the ramp rat that has the final say if that flight goes out on time,so don't piss em off or you'll see.Everybody else can do their job,but at the end of it its the rampie who gets the crap.

[Guest kevbert]

Wage rate is not Dagger's point - his is in how the work is done: how shifts are bid, how many hours per shift, how many hands per aicraft, average expected turnaround time. You can still pay people pretty well, you just expect different work behaviours from them.

[DEFCON]

"Remember its the ramp rat that has the final say if that flight goes out on time,so don't piss em off or you'll see"

So who &%$@! them off twenty five years ago and when will production return? to an acceptable level?

[nozel]

ramp rat or longshore man whats the difference?
They are a cost of doing business, you can't live with them, you can't live without them!
Its time we respected them and in turn maybe they'd become productive...

[dagger]

The problem is that you can't deal with Jazz in isolation. ACPA is the larger group and has the overriding scope clause. This is fact, not fiction. I didn't invent it. You may despise me for saying this, but one cannot just say give Jazz half of ACPA's flying and we'll do it more efficiently. In a theoretical world, it's probably true. But in the real world, the ACPA obstacles are real. So until there are solutions at the ACPA level - for example, moving RJs to the regional or relaxing ratios of mainline to regional flying - I see no point in harping on it.

If I were given a free hand, free of legal and labor constraints, I might give Jazz a whole lot more to do. I might also hire foreign flight attendants and base them abroad and have them take over some of CUPE's work for lower pay and benefits. But that doesn't make this solution legal and/or practical at this time.

[Guest Rob Assaf]

actually, under current scope can operate up to 39 small jets, we operate 10 RJ's plus 10 146's. We haven't hit the scope limit yet.

[Guest Terminated]

This is kind of a chicken and egg arguement. Should the ramp guys work hard so they get respect, or get respect so they work hard?

Firstly, I must say, that there are many, in all parts of the company, including ramp and agents, that do an exceptionally good job. And most of them recognize the same problems I do. However.....

I think most of us could accept the disproportionate pay scales of ramp and agents in particular, if they were providing exceptional service and doing their jobs to an extremely high level. But the fact is, and is apparent to most, that there are WAAAAY to many that feel that they deserve to make these inflated salaries, and do the bare minimum. Agents that don't think that being friendly and helpful to passengers is the absolute bottome line requirement of their job, or rampies that figure that there is never a need to rush to the just arrived aircraft. If we had the best rampies and agents, then I could accept that they are paid the best. But we have substandard peformance for top of the line wages. If we have to tolerate substandard peformance, they may as well be paid to reflect that.

[Guest Lupin]

or contract out their work that way you can just switch contractor if the work isn't to your liking

:]

[Guest]

The mechanics used to do push back and receive, it is still practiced at a number of airlines, it may return to AC.

[Guest Rob Assaf]

My actual main point was the unproductive scheduling despite what could be done well within the contract. The fuel burns waiting for marshalling was a side bar.

However.....since you bring it up

Someone pointed out to me below that it is due to the laying off of 500 ramp personal in the last 8 months that I can't get timely marshalling. I would however offer the following observation, ONE of the days in which I waited 40 minutes for marshalling I happened to be parked outside of the entrance to terminal 1 baggage area. The F/O and I spent the time amusing ourselves by betting on how many crews would go past us into the terminal. Not crews with full baggage carts but crews with empty baggage carts, done loading some a/c and on the way in EMPTY. The final was 6 crews, this does not include crews outbound or crews inbound with full tubs.

Now I know that years ago the "system" in YVR used to be that crews were assigned certain flights and they didn't handle others. End of story. I personally watched on the ramp in YVR while the plane I waited to operate sat waiting for marshalling and other ground crews point blank ingnored it after checking the sheet to see if it was theirs. The plane they were waiting for was obviously not there yet but no move to at LEAST get the freaking a/c parked, engines shut down, and the skycheck off so the pax could head for the connecting flight or whatever.

Flip side, in YXE and YQR, while they were crewed for multiple a/c handling, instead of assigning 4 guys to the 146 and 5 guys to the 320 next door leaving later, EVERYBODY came out and handled the 146 and then later everbody went out and handled the 320. Using the many hands make light work theory, they could turn a 146 full pax in and out, lavs, water, baggage, strollers to the bridge, groom cabin in 20 minutes. I know because on more than one occasion we arrived late from YYC and those guys got us out on sched. The only guy sucking wind on that one was the fueler and he was restricted by how much pressure he could dial in.

I don't know if that practice got established by the nature of a prairie winter and the desire to spend a couple of shorter shifts rather than one longer one or what. But the fact is, it can be done. I don't know if there is an official "rule" within your collective agreement but I know that in ours the company has the flex to reassign us if our original flight is late or cancelled to cover irops.

So the question I would have for any ground handlers here is, is it the collective agreement that doesn't allow for flex or is it a operational practice on the companies part?

Anyone?

Cheers, Rob

[deicer]

Good Morning Lupin

This could be another "be careful what you wish for".

If you look back, in '87 when the IAM went on strike, the company tried to run the operation with clerical staff and fill ins from other departments. Transport Canada shut the operation down after three days after a Sales Supervisor drove a baggage tractor into a Convair prop on the second day, and then on the third day Air Jamaica was loaded nose heavy not according to the plan and couldn't rotate and aborted takeoff.

Net result,,,

Airline shut down.

When the pilots went on strike in the late '90's, within 24 hours the sub-charters from Laker, Royal, et al, started and even though they had to lay off some ramp and sales, the operation still limped along until the strike was settled.

Net result,,,

Airline still operated.

Overall result?

There are plenty of prostitutes waiting to take your work, and will willingly do it for half your rate.

That is where our society has gone. Nobody is sacred anymore, therefore it is time to be proactive.

Just my opinion...

Iceman

[Guest carbheat]

On the issue of waiting at the gate. I don't know what AC uses for planned turnaround times, but when I worked for one of the Charters they had a weekly ops meeting to discuss delays. The goal was 45 minutes for the A320. If it was +5 minutes late the reasons were discussed and actioned. All of the examples mentioned would have been on the table for discussion. They were then assigned to an operations person(ground/flight/etc) for investigation, then tabled again the following week.

This might be a simplistic scenario considering the number of flights at a Charter, but the concept seemed to work.

[Guest QFE]

"Remember its the ramp rat that has the final say if that flight goes out on time, so don't piss em off or you'll see."
This statment speaks volumes!
It shows the general attitude of an Air Canada rampie. Why would anyone have any reason to piss you off if you were doing your job in the fist place? I have thanked leads for quick turns although it rarely happens.
Where are the managers that are responsible for ramp? What actions are being taken to rectify these ongoing problems?
And finally Longtimer V, would you like to expand on the "or you'll see." part of the quote.