Guest George Posted May 22, 2003 Share Posted May 22, 2003 Gentlemen (and ladies) of AC Unions You will have to tell your respective unions whether to accept or not the company's offer. You can vote two ways. Yes or No. You would probably vote no because you think that the offer is rude, insulting, too long, too little money, too disprespectful, whatever....That is your choice and your right. You would vote yes for one obvious reason and one not so obvious reason. The obvious one is because there are no other jobs in aviation, you need the money, you want to work, you're willing to be part of the new company etc.... The less obvious reason is this. Vote yes, even if you think that you should vote no for the reasons listed in the No vote above. Why? Well, if you vote yes, then you and your collegues can continue to work. They can stay and be happy because they are working and you can leave at the time of your own chosing. That way you won't be competing with 35,000 other people for the same type of jobs, you can find another job and leave. To vote no out of spite for the company seems like a very selfish thing to do. Vote yes and then leave on your own terms. Part of this was suggested was fourth hand, I take no credit or blame ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Starman Posted May 22, 2003 Share Posted May 22, 2003 Any new contract requiring a greater percentage reduction in pilot's compensation than other employee groups is doomed to fail. There should be an across the board reduction at the same percentage with the first $25,000 exempted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted May 22, 2003 Share Posted May 22, 2003 Too logical so it probably won't convince many........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DashTrash Posted May 22, 2003 Share Posted May 22, 2003 Actually wage reductions should work like income tax in reverse. The more you make the more you give back. The net effect is much more equitable. Ciao...dt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DashTrash Posted May 22, 2003 Share Posted May 22, 2003 Actually wage reductions should work like income tax in reverse. The more you make the more you give back. The net effect is much more equitable. Ciao ...dt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest M. McRae Posted May 22, 2003 Share Posted May 22, 2003 I guess the convincer may be this: Take your gross salary now, deduct 15% and then compare that agains UI or what you might get flying for another company. If the second number is less than the first, I guess then you might be smart to vote yes. ...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp fa Posted May 22, 2003 Share Posted May 22, 2003 I thought the way our last pay cut at Canadian was a fair method of distribution, and I'm surprised no one has mentioned it yet. It was done "income tax style", for lack of a better description, where the percentage of your pay cut was based on how much you make, ie. the more you make, the greater your percentage, regardless of which union group you belong to. If the rumour mills are correct, and the pilots are being asked for 15%, while other groups are being asked for 10%, this means that the pilots at the lower end of the pay scale will be taking a greater hit than employees of other groups making similar income. But what do I know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JakeYYZ Posted May 22, 2003 Share Posted May 22, 2003 For a synopsis of what the new business plan will be, go to the attached link: http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/article_abstract.asp?ar=1190&L2=23&L3=79 Article at a glance: “The signs presaging a long and painful slump for the airline industry were already clear well before September 11: passenger traffic was trending downward, price wars were accelerating, and new competitors were taking business from the big hub-and-spoke players. The terrorist assault on the United States only exacerbated these problems. What will the airline industry look like when it emerges from the downturn? One thing seems certain: the major carriers that have dominated commercial air travel for two decades will lose share to smaller and more nimble competitors. The take-away Can today's major carriers fly their way clear of the airline industry's problems? Only if they make concerted long-term efforts to improve their profitability by changing their fleet structures, their labor agreements, and their basic operating assumptions. “ I guess this is not a particularly popular publication, otherwise Milton would have been called on his ‘not particularly original’ vision! I’ve resigned myself to the reality that I will have to buy my job back through concessions. What I can’t accept is, the same management: Milton, Brotto, Giguerre…. The lot of them have to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BAE 146 Posted May 22, 2003 Share Posted May 22, 2003 If I were to take a 15 percent pay cut I would make about 10% less than an AME working for westjet. Would you consider that fair? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dick Dastardly Posted May 22, 2003 Share Posted May 22, 2003 Or...take your present salary, subtract 15%, draw a chart and project it out 10 years, working for an airline with a poor reputation and deteriorating market share and voila. When one door closes, another one opens. Based on what I have heard today, it might be time to close the door and let other opportunities surface. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Simcoe Posted May 22, 2003 Share Posted May 22, 2003 Before agreeing to any pay cut proposal, someone better explain to me what use it is to take paycuts when they won't be nearly enough to reach the stated goal of matching Westjet's costs. If we can't match the costs, we can't match the fares and make any money, let alone expect any "profit sharing" in the future. In 2002, Air Canada produced 60.637 billion ASM's at a cost, including interest, of $10.31 billion with an average flight length of 1,225 miles. That is a cost per available seat mile of 17 cents a mile. http://www.newswire.ca/releases/February2003/06/c7398.html WestJet produced 4.651 billion ASM's in 2002 at a cost, including interest, of $600.4 million with an average flight length of 625 miles. That is a cost per available seat mile of 12.91 cents a mile. http://www2.cdn-news.com/scripts/ccn-release.pl?/2003/02/13/0213021n.html?cp=wja In the first quarter of 2003 WestJet produced 1.485 billion ASM's in 2002 at a cost, including interest, of $171.62 million with an average flight length of about 625 miles. That is a cost per available seat mile of 11.56 cents a mile. http://www2.cdn-news.com/scripts/ccn-release.pl?/2003/04/30/0430039n.html?cp=wja In order to match WestJet's cost structure, Air Canada needs to shave between 4.1 cents a mile and 5.4 cents a mile off each and every one of the 60.637 billion miles produced in a year. That works out to cost cuts of between $2.49 billion and $3.58 billion a year. When you consider what it costs Air Canada to operate a flight over WestJet's average flight length, you can easily add 30% to those numbers. You can quibble with the numbers but the bottomline is the bottomline. I don't see any chance of overall costs being cut between 25 and 35%, (and more likely 45%). US Air didn't come close to this under Chapter 11. I don't see revenue improving with the introduction of even lower fares the other day and the obvious reduction of flying that is going to have to occur. Sure, taking a 15% cut will help, but at the end of the day, it's not going to be enough to save the ship, I'm sorry to say. The cuts are going to have to be much, much deeper, almost to unthinkable levels. JMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B75/76 Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 It seems to me that one cannot directly compare operating costs between AC and WJ. AC will most certainly always have a higher company cost structure because of the international operations. If WJ were to take on wide-body a/c to go flying overseas, its’ costs would not remain the same. Are AC’s costs too high? It definitely seems so. Can they be lowered to WJ’s levels? Not unless it becomes a North America only, single fleet type operation. Can the costs be lowered enough for profitability? That is the Billion $ question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Starman Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Hey Jennifer, Back at Canadian, the pilots provided half of the total concessionary value with only 8% of the employees! That's why if you want to use the income tax act as a model, I'd prefer you use the flat tax method. The income tax act is progressive in percentage in order to promote a politically motivated social agenda for equitable distribution of wealth. That may be fine for a country, but it has no place in the restructuring of an airline. The pilots of AC are the second most productive major airline pilots in North America, behind Continental, BEFORE the cuts. Our pay and benefits compare to the low end of the average of our counterparts within the Star Alliance. If we take a bigger hit in order to reduce the impact on other employee groups, we may be subsidizing other components which are on the high end of the Star Alliance average. I'm all in favour of making this new business plan work and in increasing productivity to do it, but I don't want to see it used as an excuse to compress the gap between licenced and unlicenced labour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B75/76 Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 “Or...take your present salary, subtract 15%, draw a chart and project it out 10 years, working for an airline with a poor reputation and deteriorating market share and voila. When one door closes, another one opens. Based on what I have heard today, it might be time to close the door and let other opportunities surface.“ Having C3’s doors closed on me, I know all too well how dismal the job market in aviation is today. Unless the door one is hoping to see open is outside the aviation industry, consider carefully before allowing this one to close. Any way it is sliced, it is a tough predicament. :-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Aer Nfld Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 BAE 146 I think you are incorrect in your math, 15% of 100+ is still not the equivalent of what AME is getting at WJ. Now I am not advocating that what is happening is correct, however lets make real comparisons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Simcoe Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Have you ever seen the range of a 700-NG with winglets? Eastern Canada to the UK. Western Canada to Hawaii. With ease. How would costs increase other than proportionatley that would not be recovered in the fares? I guess I'm saying that the costs are proportional. HMY has the ability to fly international and you can be sure their costs are 30% lower than Air Canada's. The costs are going to have to be lowered system wide. If they are too high, it'll simply give others the opportunity to do internationally to AC what's already been done domestically. The cuts are going to have to be astronomical and what has been proposed is no where near enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pictues Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Still HMY Operates a single type of aircraft just like Westjet except HMY operates B757's instead of B737's. And last I looked the B757 isn;t a widebody aircraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragon Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Yes, thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Simcoe Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Canada 3000 operated A330's and their cost per mile was under 10 cents, far below AC's cost of 17 cents. Don't hang your hat on false hope and erroneous opinions of how the business works. Now is not the time. The 15% cuts being talked about are nowhere near enough to fix the airline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BAE 146 Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 I was talking about Aircraft Maintenance Engineers, (AME). And yes if I were to take a 15% pay cut it would mean that I would make 10%less than a Westjet AME. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B75/76 Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Agreed. The '57 and '37-700, however, are both limited as far as overseas ops go. You couldn't do Asia with either, for example. If WJ were to have the same route structure as AC their costs would surely increase. As I said, AC's costs are too high. Can they, and should they be lowered to WJ's? I don't think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
13820 Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Sir, what is it about your job that makes you automatically worth more than a "WestJet AME"? I will grant you that AMEs are all under paid, but there is nothing about your job that guarantees you more than I. If your company wants and expects you to take a pay cut to keep your job, so be it! Don't base your pay on what I make. This is an industry problem in my view, AMEs have always been underpaid compared to pilots. But justifying your outrage based on what I make is too much for me to take. If you can't get by on what a "WestJet AME" makes, imagine how I feel after 23 years on the other side of the fence. 13820 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lupin Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 AME top wages for a licenced aircraft technician level 4 is 33-34$/hour.There are 2080 hours in a work year(roughly) so that translates into 70000$/year as the top wage for an AME.If you make 100000$/year it is with tons of overtime!!The licence premiums are 14$/paycheck after the second endorsement so the premiums are hardly worth mentioning. From what the info I read on this web site ,WESTJET seems to top out mechanics at 29.75/hour(please correct me if i am wrong).A 10% pay cut would bring the AC AMEs to the westjet levels.You have to factor in that the AME at AC is responsible for alot more diferent aircraft types then his counterpart at WJ. I suggest getting a better source for your info Lupin AME yul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lupin Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 AME top wages for a licenced aircraft technician level 4 is 33-34$/hour.There are 2080 hours in a work year(roughly) so that translates into 70000$/year as the top wage for an AME.If you make 100000$/year it is with tons of overtime!!The licence premiums are 14$/paycheck after the second endorsement so the premiums are hardly worth mentioning. From what the info I read on this web site ,WESTJET seems to top out mechanics at 29.75/hour(please correct me if i am wrong).A 10% pay cut would bring the AC AMEs to the westjet levels.You have to factor in that the AME at AC is responsible for alot more diferent aircraft types then his counterpart at WJ. I suggest getting a better source for your info Lupin AME yul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CleardecksforACTION! Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Simcoe, you are all wet!, What you're missing in your analysis is the HUGE cost of running a 'fat' operation. AC has started a drastic reduction of capacity, without the attendant lay-offs to complement the reductions. The cost of carrying all these additional staff (with thumbs in bums) has the effect of 'fixed overhead' costs. LAY-OFFS will far out-weigh the percentage reductions being bandied about in reducing ASM costs! Cheerio! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.