Guest 100 Above Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 It seems that alot of the contributors on this forum are beginning to attack the employees at Air Canada, instead of its management. Well lets look at why WE employees feel the way we do about this whole situation, from my point of view anyways. A mere month or two ago, our management team declared that they were in need of some immediate cash to weather the storm. At that time, the price of oil/fuel was astronomical, the war in Iraq was about to start, the dollar was near 61 cents and SARS was just starting to show its ugly head. However, after careful examination, management said that they required a round number of 650 million to stave off any further problems with liquidity. They understood that asking for 1.3 billion was too much to ask to bring us down to WJ levels. After getting a phone call at around the midnight hour with an ultimatum on the other end of the line, to match and basically mirror what was demanded by American to its employee group, was too much to accept in a one minute phone call. Then, apparently, there was no alternative but to declare CCAA. NOW, the gouging begins. NOW, the dollar is approaching 71 cents, the highest in five years, oil/fuel are back to there pre millenium values, SARS is on the decline, and the war is but a mere snapshot in time, 650 million has now quickly turned into 700 million plus an extra 400 million in contractual dollars. Management has locked up 1.05 billion from GE, soothing any cash shortage problems in the interim, and they also have two banks willing to go bottomless to secure the frequent flyer program.. To top it all off, they require an IMMEDIATE 10 % roll back in wages to get enough cash flow to carry on, temporarily of course. As far as the pilots are concerned, we agreed to a paycut in the form of flex hours. This on the surface wasn't apparent to many, but when we are paid by the hour/minute, 5 to 8 hours adds up to a lot of coinage in one month, roughly 7 to 9 % !! Also, after waiting for a contract to be ironed out, the FAs finally did just that, raising there pay levels and job security to boot, what a mere 3 weeks prior to this fiasco. What, the company didn't forsee these problems prior to letting their ink dry. Then they asked the CAW for layoffs and wage concessions to prevent any CCAA filing. Well, Buzz and his team did just that, and soon as that ink was dry, they filed anyways. This is a farce !!! This is a plane and simple tactic used to rip as much out of the employee group as possible. OHHH, I'm seeing Boss Hogg in the back of the boar's nest laughing and counting his money, sorry our money, as we the employee group get our hands slapped like Rosco used to as he tried to touch it. It stinks !!! Sure I got paid on the 1 st as did my retired Dad who had nearly 40 years with AC.. All you people who keep asking.." Well you got paid, didn't you ?? ", that is not the point !!! We have fought long and hard over the years, both from AC and CAIL to establish work rules and pay levels that are industry level substandard to standard at best. But for those on the outside who keep attacking our employee group should really understand and accept where the problem lies. We have a management team displaying a management style that cannot be trusted nor bargained with. Major changes have to be made before any major wages and rules are attacked. We have all been lied to repeatedly from FA's to Pilots, to Rampies to you name it. If we had a management team that was honest and worked with there employees, we would do anything for our employer, but this head butting, tug of war attitude that AC has with its employees is not conducive to any future success or company viability/survival. Please don't misunderstand me..If they need our help, legitimately, we must and will do whatever we can to do just that. We ALL have to give, and hence learn to adjust our lifestyles accordingly. The employees keep getting attacked by the media, public and other airline groups, that we are not willing to give an inch, well that too is a farce. We have asked repeatedly for the documents from the due diligence process to see what kind of help is required and what financial problems AC really is faced with. Nothing has come forward to date that can accurately assess either and I doubt that any will. But in the meantime, we are faced with monetary demands and these are requested to be fulfilled without any future restructuring plan or vision of the future. Are we just to throw money at our management in this realm. Would anybody in any industry, do that. I think not !!! I too want to have a 40 year career at this wonderful airline, but I think we all now what has to be done, and where it has to start from !!! 100 Above Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neo Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 I wouldn't worry about it too much, 100 Above. There's a few voices calling for the employees to face up to what they're responsible for, but I'd still say that the majority of voices are like your own: blaming someone else. I don't have time to correct the inaccuracies and mistakes in your posted points, but I'd like to correct a misimpression that you're providing about people like myself. There are employees who recognize this crisis for what it is, and we are not interested in wasting time blaming ANYONE. We recognize that the most direct way forward is to shoulder the responsibility for THOSE THINGS OVER WHICH WE ARE ACCOUNTABLE, and we expect everyone else in this crisis to do the same. That's a very reasonable expectation, because a court is overseeing the process: they will ensure that everyone shoulders their share of the burden. The ship is a lubberline from going down, 100 Above. Are you going to blame, or are you going to bail? neo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 100 Above Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Neo, I would love it if you took the time to enlighten myself and the other followers of this thread, as to these mistakes and innaccuracies I have made. As far as I see it, I clearly stated that I am willing to bail to keep the ship alive , but as I throw one bucket of water overboard, I don't expect one to be thrown on my head from my own management team. If you are willing to throw endless amounts of money, benefits etc.. away without concrete facts, you definitely should not get a future job as a loan's manager at a major bank, because you would be out of that job as quick as you may be out of this one, judging from where you are bailing from !!! I'll try not to hit your head on the way down Neo..Best of luck to you !!! 100 Above P.s. Still waiting for your rendition of my innaccuracies and mistakes !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimer V Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 That should satisfy the radical union leaders who kept saying you first,Or will it?We shall see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest George Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 I would love it if you took the time to enlighten myself and the other followers of this thread, as to these mistakes and innaccuracies I have made. Be enlightened. The company didn't blindly sign a contract that they knew they were going to have to renege on 3 weeks later. The company and CUPE agreed to a mediator to settle their dispute. The mediator said that the FAs would get a no-furlough clause, a bonus for the AC component etc. The company was in a take-it-or leave it spot as well. You don't go back to the mediator and say, we'll sign the deal but get rid of those two items. The company needed to intergrate the FA group badly and the only way was to sign the contract. The other issue is one of level playing field. CUPE, CAW and ACPA all have no furlough clauses...so they will all lose the same part of their CA. If CUPE had to start giving from a lower level than the other unions, imagine the squawking from them. So you can continue with you shallow analysis of the problems, but I would suggest that you start to use some critical thinking skills that the good Lord gave you and remember that these issues are a lot more complex than people think they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Shibui Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 For whatever reason (those of you in need of a doctoral dissertation theme, take heed) organized labour in Canada looks to be the last to realize that in the brave new world of mobile capital the "rights" of workers have come down to two rights and one responsibility: -the right to receive one day's pay in exchange for one day's work -the right (whilst at work)to display whatever degree of motivation you choose and- -the responsibility to accept the consequences No matter how many Escalade payments are missed in consequence this is a healty thing and somewhere Hayek, Thatcher, and other manifestly correct people are smiling. Me, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 "The company was in a take-it-or leave it spot as well. You don't go back to the mediator and say, we'll sign the deal but get rid of those two items." Yes you do. That's what mediation is all about and when it's over you don't have to accept the mediators terms. If AC wanted to play hardball they could have. Only because the top end apparently doesn't understand the concept of running a business are we here today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragon Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Just a small correction. Before ACPA's 'no layoff' clause would kick in [pilots on the list as of Jan 2000], a lot of ACPA pilots could be laid off. As for your CUPE comments, I will leave that to others, more in the know, to discuss. cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest George Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Actually I believe it was an arbitration...totally different, and it was a take-it-or-leave-it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest George Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Yes ACPA has protection for all pilots on the list prior to Sept 2000. there are approx 210 pilots not covered by the no furlough protection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Well, perhaps someone can clarify the point however, I've always seen those meetings described as a mediation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragon Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Thanks George, Another thing while I have you on the phone. There is no Force Mageure in the ACPA contract. There is 'fleet guaranty' a clause embedded to confuse even the smartest pilots at AC. This would take a lot of time, and a lot of lawyers to figure that one out. cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Airmail Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 It doesn't matter if it was arbitration or mediation. The notion that this agreement was negotiated some 3 months ago is wrong -- the negotiations started more like 18 months ago and the company's objective was intermingling of the CP and AC flight attendants which was costing piles of money and setting a level playing field of the AC flight attendants who were being paid on a different scale than the CP ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 "It doesn't matter if it was arbitration or mediation" But it does and is relative to our debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Airmail Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Actually it doesn't because in either case, the company could not have turned down either an arbitrator's or a mediator's report without such a decision resulting in the continued inefficiencies and high cost of maintaining two separate flight attendant groups so regardless of which procedure was used, the bottom line is that the company -- after 18 months of negotiations -- was in no position to: a) take a strike or lockout; or continue paying for the inefficiencies of two flight attendant groups caused by the lack of a merged collective agreement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SLEUTH Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Ahhhhh! I can't take it... The reason they had to suck a$$ to get a deal is because AC management made a deal with CP's f/a's behind the AC f/a's backs. If the deal was done in good faith 2 years ago for both groups they wouldn't have been in the position they were. It comes back to POOR management, confrontational and condescending, PERIOD. I agree we all must take a share of the blame but let's see some leadership. Roskell, I thank GOD daily that you are in no way involved in ACPA affairs as I would probably be working for $7.00 an hour flying 135 hours a month. I just hope they process your WJ application soon so you'll be too busy telling cockpit jokes to belittle your former union. Have a great day Benedict. Sleuth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Airmail Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Actually, management tried to negotiate a merged agreement with CUPE as it did with every other union successfully but Sachs and crew turned them down. It's great to be able to re-write history and simply blame management at every turn but the fact of the matter is that management tried to negotiate a deal and was told to come back in 2 years. But all this is history and irrelevant today. Under CCAA haircuts will be required all around an whether you like it or not, Westjet is the market leader in setting wage rates, employee profit sharing and working conditions because their model is the only one that is yielding adequate and acceptable returns for investors and employees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 100 Above Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Finally received the response I was looking for after starting this thread !! Thanks for the back up... Like I said, good luck Neo !!! 100 Above Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 100 Above Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 I guess these radical union leaders are waiting to see some pay cuts from those managers that will remain. We keep seeing newspaper article after newspaper article pinpointing the percentage the employees MUST give. Not one article, correct me if I'm wrong, gives any direction showing any managers taking a percentage cut also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 100 Above Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 George, Fine and dandy, you made a lot of valid points, but, can't you see what I am saying, a little, anyways ?? This filing for CCAA was concocted about 2 years ago. Why do you think the company has been so lax with the pension fund, for example. Why do you think the company signs agreements/contracts, then busts them before the ink even dries. Sure, they'll be called in for grievance arbitrations at a later date, but do you think they care about oodles of grievances against them ??? This management team hates unions and will do whatever it takes to bust them. Whether it is RM and his gun slinging American way or Calin and his one sided bargaining tactics. Why do you think he of all people will be in charge of restructuring and labour talks, because he is a great person to deal with ?? Wake Up !! It is simple. With this management team and their antics, it will be very hard to look at each other across the bargaining table.. A little bit of trust would do wonders for all parties concerned... 100 Above Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragon Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Whos fault was that Am, and why, IYO? dragon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Airmail Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Actually, everything the company has said is that managers would be part of the $770 million labor cost reduction and the 800 that are going represent part of management's contribution to the $770 million (800 = 20% of management/administrative ranks at AC). No one has said that management is immune and, if anything, management has been there ahead of unionized employees with a pay cut last year and a pay freeze for three years in a row (while unionized employees continued to get pay raises and salary progression). Also, last year, 12% of managers lost their jobs which is a far cry from the number of unionized employees laid off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inchman Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Many people here, seem to think that all managers sit in their cubicles and rub their hands trying to figure out ways to mess up other employees lives. Managers include people like sim planners (probably a bad example ), simulator technicians, human resources people and many others that do not immediately come to mind when one thinks of a bunch of "management" sitting around the cigar club. Many of these "management" people make less than even a new hire pilot, have not had a pay raise for 3 years, and took a pay cut last year. Not to mention the lowly clerical staff... Don Johnston's spoken fear was that if pilots took a pay cut, then CCAA occurred, the pilots would take a double hit. As wrong as this position was under the reality of what would happen under CCAA, isn't the insistance that all "management" (which, by default, includes clerical staff) take the full hit a bit of a double standard when they have already "given" 12% more than any unionized employee. They have already made a partial sacrifice to the bottom line where other employees have not. It is my opinion that they should only have to make up the difference. Even if they only did this, they have already lost the 12% of their past earnings so, no matter what happens in the future, they will always be behind in total dollars compared to a unionized employee making the same money as them 3 years ago. This, of course, does not apply in the same vein to pilot managers who are simply paid as a factor of what the line pilot makes (but did take the pay cut, BTW). Whatever the line pilots end up with would obviously have a direct effect on what pilot managers end up with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 You started out with a good thought, but then.... you lost me. I reckon people all ought to be paid what they're worth, or I suppose that should be what their job is worth, as they do it. All of this stuff about equalizing who gives up how much is nonsense, imo... Those that are overpaid should have that adjusted. Once that's done then try knocking off some for a temporary while-we're-hurting wage. Other than that, if we still can't make money then it's time to look elsewhere for the causes, and the fixes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimer V Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 "Those who are over paid should have that adjusted." And who do you feel are over paid.The pilots? Let me guess the rampies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.