Guest Skirt Posted April 25, 2003 Share Posted April 25, 2003 A few good reasons why AC won’t liquidate: 1.) Now that CAIL is gone, there is no other carrier to pick up the slack. Unlike all the airlines people on this forum seem to compare us to, Pan Am, Eastern etc… There is no one to move the 50-80k people, let alone the cargo, that AC does per day all over the world. The effects off that alone on our economy would be devastating. I know there will be other who would eventually fill the void, but this process would take months, if not years to get to the required size. 2.) Jean Chrétien. What kind of a legacy (since that seems to be all he cares about these days) would that leave him? If it comes down to it, the gov. will step in and make sure that AC is still operating. (Even if it takes a few days to do it) in whatever form is required. 3.) To many people (powerful business leaders and others in high offices) would benefit from the survival of AC, and conversely there is to much for those same people to loose is AC goes the way off the Dodo. These are my opinions only of course, and only time will tell if it will happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest G3 Posted April 25, 2003 Share Posted April 25, 2003 Denial is a powerful emotion! G3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Skirt Posted April 25, 2003 Share Posted April 25, 2003 It's not just a river in Egypt either. While I'm not in denial, (I am fairly sure I'll be in the EI line come the fall) I was just presenting my point. Now instead of participating in an open discussion G3, (you didn't even provide one point (constructive or otherwise) opposite to my views) you simply try and slander or belittle someone you have never met and who has never shown any ill will toward you. Why is that? I won't venture to guess. I'm just perplexed. Let’s try and have an open and honest discussion and keep the unwanted slags out. (Goes for both sides) If you can’t be mature enough to do that than I’m at a loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted April 25, 2003 Share Posted April 25, 2003 Who else would hire all the Francophones and transplant them all across this country? It took one week after the merger to have the ex-Canadi>n, Vancouver Operations center, inundated with Francophones. Calgary based, Zip F/A's, large percentage of Quebecers. Air Canada will never go out of business because: IT IS BASED IN QUEBEC!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest b52er Posted April 25, 2003 Share Posted April 25, 2003 Cause this is the AEF!! Get a grip......that's what makes this forum a great place to visit. Geeez!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mars Posted April 25, 2003 Share Posted April 25, 2003 I'll play devil's advocate here. If Air Canada can't pull together a restructuring plan and liquidation is the result the government may not step in to prevent it. The downturn in the industry means that now may be the best time for others to step in and fill the void before demand rises. Yes it would take a while and cost the economy, but the impact would be less now than in normal times. Air Canada must change from the status quo with or without government intervention. Don't blindly put your trust in Ottawa to make things better. Hopefully all involved can hammer together a plan that will avoid a liquidation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Airmail Posted April 26, 2003 Share Posted April 26, 2003 All interesting reasons but very out of date. The politicians are not our friends and they can't be seen as somehow waiting on the sidelines to fly in and rescue us. They could set up a brand new airline without the baggage AC carries for half what it would cost them to prevent a liquidation of AC so why would they do that? There are other ways to ensure a national air transportation system besides keeping AC on life support. It would be best if the government stayed the heck out of AC and just let the private sector and market forces decide what will happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CarryOn Posted April 26, 2003 Share Posted April 26, 2003 For Immediate Publication: At the court hearing today April 25/03, the Hon. Justice Farley ruled that the 200 lay-offs scheduled for the May block month should not be implemented. The Union is meeting with Air Canada on Tuesday April 29/03 to negotiate the return to work of those 200 members and how to mitigate the additional 400 lay-offs that took place on April 04/03. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milehighclub Posted April 26, 2003 Share Posted April 26, 2003 It is my guess that you need vacation my friend... When someone is about to blame the color of the carpet for his/her inherent stress ; maybe it's time to turn the bleeds on. MHC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted April 26, 2003 Share Posted April 26, 2003 The Air Canada name will never disappear but the company as we know it sure could. I fly into Saint John, NB and often see a Jetstream 31 with the Pan Am name and logo on the side. When Pan Am went out of business one of their creditors got the legal rights to the name instead of the money owned. I think you and I would agree that this company isn't "Pan Am" even though it says so on the side of the airplane. There is alot of value to the Air Canada brand. If the company was liquidated and CIBC, for example, took ownership of the name and then some Deluce/Friesen/Campling consortium stuck a new airline underneath it I don't think anyone in the industry would think of it as still being Air Canada. You can bet, however, that the politicos would just say that Air Canada was 'restructured'. Even if this restructuring meant an entirely new fleet and all new employees! Even the public would go along with this agreeing that Air Canada sure has changed but not really acknowledging that it's a completely different company with the same name. I'm not suggesting that J31's are AC's future only that the continued existence of an airline called Air Canada does not necessarily mean good things for the current employees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted April 26, 2003 Share Posted April 26, 2003 The Air Canada name will never disappear but the company as we know it sure could. I fly into Saint John, NB and often see a Jetstream 31 with the Pan Am name and logo on the side. When Pan Am went out of business one of their creditors got the legal rights to the name instead of the money owned. I think you and I would agree that this company isn't "Pan Am" even though it says so on the side of the airplane. There is alot of value to the Air Canada brand. If the company was liquidated and CIBC, for example, took ownership of the name and then some Deluce/Friesen/Campling consortium stuck a new airline underneath it I don't think anyone in the industry would think of it as still being Air Canada. You can bet, however, that the politicos would just say that Air Canada was 'restructured'. Even if this restructuring meant an entirely new fleet and all new employees! Even the public would go along with this agreeing that Air Canada sure has changed but not really acknowledging that it's a completely different company with the same name. I'm not suggesting that J31's are AC's future only that the continued existence of an airline called Air Canada does not necessarily mean good things for the current employees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tsgas Posted April 26, 2003 Share Posted April 26, 2003 Seeker you bring up some valid,thought provoking points. Good for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagger Posted April 26, 2003 Share Posted April 26, 2003 Yes, he's bang on. That's the most likely scenario absent a negotiated restructuring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arctic Ace Posted April 26, 2003 Share Posted April 26, 2003 The travelling public has survived many strikes in Air Canada's history. Unions didn't think Air Canada was an essential service then, why should they now. The reasons you suggest why Air Canada won't liquidate are exactly the reasons why no-one could stomach the thought of an Air Canada monopoly. Too large a disruption when a union decides to have a strike. If Air Canada cannot come up with a viable survival plan and the government feels a need to step in there are several scenarios that could emerge. Here are a couple of suggestions. 1. Cabotage on a limited basis until other airlines in Canada expand and fill in the void. or 2.A temporary government lifeline with the intent that Air Canada cannot compete with other self supporting airlines. Air Canada could only provide service on routes where no-one else offers the service. As soon as another carrier is ready, willing, and able to provide the service, than Air Canada must drop the route. Air Canada would slowly shrink into oblivion over time as other airlines fill in the void. Much the same as Ontario's NorOntair purpose in life used to be. Air Canada employees could find employment with the other expanding carriers as they would need experienced people. No huge unemployment claims. This scenario would enable other airlines in Canada to expand in a nice controlled and orderly fashion and the problems of one large monopoly holding the country at ransom should never occur again. That would be about the only way the public could stomach any sort of government airline bailout. One last and final time. Methinks the "Flag Carrier" concept has run its course and is a thing of the past. Airlines are a business now and should be treated as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arctic Ace Posted April 26, 2003 Share Posted April 26, 2003 Many of the unions representing Air Canada's labour groups have shown in the past that the airline could be shut down and the world goes on. They didn't feel then that Air Canada was an essential service, why should they now? If Air Canada can't get its financial act together there are several options available to pick up the slack. Here are a couple of suggestions. 1. Cabotage on a limited and controlled basis to be phase out as other Canadian owned carriers expand and "pick up the slack". or 2. A lifeline to Air Canada with Air Canada's role being only to service routes that no other Canadian airline was ready, willing, and able to serve. As soon as another Canadian carrier was ready, willing, and able to service a route, Air Canada would have to pull off and could not compete with private enterprise. This would include international of course. Air Canada would eventually over time shrink into oblivion as it should if the taxpayer has to fund them. Much the same as the Ontario government NorOntair's purpose in life was. Scenario #2 would allow a nice controlled expansion and development of existing and new entrants and provide airline employment opportunities to those laid off from Air Canada as it shrinks. No large unemployment claims. That is about the only way the Canadian taxpayer could stomach another airline bailout. One last time that gets them out from under a monopoly that has the attitude of "there is no other carrier to pick up the slack". No more being held at ransom when a union decides to hold a strike. Methinks the concept of the "flag carrier" is a thing of the past. Airlines are a business now and should be treated as such. Dont't let your union mislead you into believing you can't be replaced. Your posting shows a strong union mentality of self importance and is exactly why Air Canada shouldn't be a monopoly. Gone to get fire retardant gear!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Go Around Posted April 26, 2003 Share Posted April 26, 2003 Many of the unions representing Air Canada's labour groups have shown in the past that the airline could be shut down and the world goes on. They didn't feel then that Air Canada was an essential service, why should they now? If Air Canada can't get its financial act together there are several options available to pick up the slack. Here are a couple of suggestions. 1. Cabotage on a limited and controlled basis to be phase out as other Canadian owned carriers expand and "pick up the slack". or 2. A lifeline to Air Canada with Air Canada's role being only to service routes that no other Canadian airline was ready, willing, and able to serve. As soon as another Canadian carrier was ready, willing, and able to service a route, Air Canada would have to pull off and could not compete with private enterprise. This would include international of course. Air Canada would eventually over time shrink into oblivion as it should if the taxpayer has to fund them. Much the same as the Ontario government NorOntair's purpose in life was. Scenario #2 would allow a nice controlled expansion and development of existing and new entrants and provide airline employment opportunities to those laid off from Air Canada as it shrinks. No large unemployment claims. That is about the only way the Canadian taxpayer could stomach another airline bailout. One last time that gets them out from under a monopoly that has the attitude of "there is no other carrier to pick up the slack". No more being held at ransom when a union decides to hold a strike. Methinks the concept of the "flag carrier" is a thing of the past. Airlines are a business now and should be treated as such. Dont't let your union mislead you into believing you can't be replaced. Your posting shows a strong union mentality of self importance and is exactly why Air Canada shouldn't be a monopoly. Gone to get fire retardant gear!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arctic Ace Posted April 26, 2003 Share Posted April 26, 2003 Sorry Skirt I hadn't read your post above Re:Except "The unions who are battling with the "no layoff clauses" will hopefully be singing a different song come negatiation time, there simply is no choice IMO! One can only hope that everyone will realize how serious this all is (like ACPA has )and find a way to make it work. I've said it before and I'll say it again, only time will tell." So I retract " Your posting shows a strong union mentality of self importance and is exactly why Air Canada shouldn't be a monopoly." The Ace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Skirt Posted April 26, 2003 Share Posted April 26, 2003 Some interesting points Artic Ace. However, you stated that "Many of the unions representing Air Canada's labour groups have shown in the past that the airline could be shut down and the world goes on. They didn't feel then that Air Canada was an essential service, why should they now? " While this is true, it all happened when CAIL was still around to pick up the slack. My question is, how are you going to move all those people around should AC stop? Westjet, Jetsgo, Canjet ET all will do their share domestically but it still won't be enough. I won't even touch the international routes? Remember these are just my thoughts. No one is around anymore to pick up the trash. I would also suggest that my perceived mentality of self-importance is balanced quite nicely by your (and many others) deprecating view of AC. There has got to be a happy medium somewhere! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arctic Ace Posted April 26, 2003 Share Posted April 26, 2003 Sorry Skirt I hadn't read your post above Re:Except "The unions who are battling with the "no layoff clauses" will hopefully be singing a different song come negatiation time, there simply is no choice IMO! One can only hope that everyone will realize how serious this all is (like ACPA has )and find a way to make it work. I've said it before and I'll say it again, only time will tell." So I retract " Your posting shows a strong union mentality of self importance" The Ace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Skirt Posted April 26, 2003 Share Posted April 26, 2003 No prob Ace. I didn't take it to bad. Many have called me worse! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted April 27, 2003 Share Posted April 27, 2003 Just reading all this .... Has no one ever looked beyond AC....it's not just us. One by one the north American carriers are going chapter 11 .....let the conspiracy theory's start. By the way did anyone notice that it's not just our pension plan that's underfunded? GM's and Ford make AC's look like a drop in the bucket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Virtual Posted April 27, 2003 Share Posted April 27, 2003 I have heard that WestJet does not have a pension plan per se. Is that true ... and if so, is this another area where they have learned to control some of their costs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Virtual Posted April 27, 2003 Share Posted April 27, 2003 I have heard that WestJet does not have a pension plan per se. Is that true ... and if so, is this another area where they have learned to control some of their costs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.