Thoughts on the RJ

[Guest GDR]

I know that I have posted this suggestion before but maybe this is an appropriate time to try it again.

It would appear that there is a struggle between ALPA and ACPA for the rights to the RJ cockpits.

There is tremendous pressure on both groups to resolve the issue with the hope that most will still have a job at the end of the day and there will still be an Air Canada and a JAZZ in the air.

To resolve the impasse I suggest merging the lists in the following manner.

There would be two lists. A main line list and a regional list. All main

line pilots would be put on the bottom of the regional list, and all

regional pilots would be put on the bottom of the main line list.

This would mean that a some of the laid off main line pilots would be able

to fly for JAZZ during the lay off but they wouldn't have an affect on the

seniority of the JAZZ pilots as they would be junior to all of them on the

regional list. When a recall occurs they would then come back to the main

line ahead of the current regional pilots because of their position on the

main line list.

Just my humble suggestion so fire away.

Greg Robinson

[John S.]

Greg,

Timing is so very important.

There was a group at Jazz that wanted to talk to your leaders some months ago. Really truly tried.

Too bad you were not in to office to pick up the phone at the time.

No doubt there will still be some interest in your suggestion but don't be surprized if the 'let's talk to ACPA' group decides to wait a few weeks to see how your group handles the company's proposals.

[Guest JW]

...and there you have the crux of the problem. As the apparent power shifts back and forth, the timing for one group will not be right for the other, as the saw whips back and forth through the log, pulled then pushed.

JW

[Guest Dick Dastardly]

I would prefer the following:

Create a list that encompasses all the contentious airplanes, RJ's 50 seat 70 seat and perhaps up to 90 seats. Recognize years of service with the airlines. Once the lists are formed, overall seniority is accumulated so that when and if a Jazz employee wants to bid to mainline, they can do so based on their years of service from the time the list was created. This may make it more palatable to the fellows that have stayed behind.

There would of course be certain restrictions in terms of bidding to make it a no cost proposal.

Incidentally, under the terms of the CRA/CAIL LOU, we have flowback rights for 5 years. Positions must be available though as it is a "no bump" provision.

[Guest Airway]

From what I understand, you no longer have flowback rights, as that was a CRA/CAIL LOU, and those companies no longer exist.

[Guest Dick Dastardly]

Well, I guess we'll see about that.

[Par88]

Why does everybody insist on bottom of the list?

Therein lies the problem. What you suggest is not unreasonable but jumping back and forth sounds like a lot of training and therefore, cost. Furthermore, it suggests that time spent at either property is not a contribution to the AC family as a whole.

Somehow, most pilots see WJ as a great career choice but the idea of working for Jazz is more like a sentence and early parole is your only chance.

The industry has changed dramatically and it is not a conspiracy by Jazz employees or the executive team at mainline. The customers are the ones making the changes and unfortunatly the glory years are behind us. Give everybody their due in the new environment and welcome new members to the team when they come. Rather than trying to steal careers from each other, think of it as trying to sustain one.

Respectfully;

PH

[Guest GDR]

What I was attempting to do is propose something that doesn't involve winners or losers. Both sides gain something.

What we are talking about is survival. If this airline liquidates we are all out of a job.

We need something quick, easy and painless. As I said, both sides gain something and if the RJs were allowed to be a deal breaker then everybody loses.

[Guest Dick Dastardly]

Perhaps I'm having difficulty seeing who the winners are in my proposal. What I see is a proposal that treats people equally whether they work for Jazz or AC. Please identify for me. Who are the winners and who are the losers?

[Guest GDR]

First off then could you answer a couple of questions. I am having trouble seeing how your proposal works. Who would go on this new list and just how would it fit in with the current list.

Do you mean that it would be a third list and that pilots from either the mainline or JAZZ could bid onto it?

How do pilots flow from their current lists to this regional jet list and then how do they flow back?

[.70 mach]

"Incidentally, under the terms of the CRA/CAIL LOU, we have flowback rights for 5 years. Positions must be available though as it is a "no bump" provision."

You had flowback rights as long as LOU 54 was still valid as per the agreement with CRA/CAIL. But you have to understand as we went forward with our merger of the four regional airlines to complete our first contract we never carried any LOU's with us. So your flowback provision ended when the contract had been ratified.

I agree with Greg's post above that something could be worked out and as Jim mentions the power shifts from one hand to the next. In the crew room the banter is something like , "if we do indeed hire : lets interview them, lets sim them , cog test them, write a written test and finally medical them ..... and if they pass we will put them in a pool and hire them along with pilots off the street.".

I for one welcome any solution that keeps a AC/ Jazz member employed in the corporation before we look outside.

IMHO

[.70 mach]

"Incidentally, under the terms of the CRA/CAIL LOU, we have flowback rights for 5 years. Positions must be available though as it is a "no bump" provision."

You had flowback rights as long as LOU 54 was still valid as per the agreement with CRA/CAIL. But you have to understand as we went forward with our merger of the four regional airlines to complete our first contract we never carried any LOU's with us. So your flowback provision ended when the contract had been ratified.

I agree with Greg's post above that something could be worked out and as Jim mentions the power shifts from one hand to the next. In the crew room the banter is something like , "if we do indeed hire : lets interview them, lets sim them , cog test them, write a written test and finally medical them ..... and if they pass we will put them in a pool and hire them along with pilots off the street.".

I for one welcome any solution that keeps a AC/ Jazz member employed in the corporation before we look outside.

IMHO

[Guest GDR]

I would think that this proposal does just that. Right now it would help the AC group in that it would mean that laid off mainline pilots would transition over to JAZZ behind all the current JAZZ pilots. Right now the current ACPA scope clause prevents the RJs from going to JAZZ and this proposal should make it easier to accept.

Scope is a big issue for many. It could be a deal breaker and we might all be out of work.

Over the long term when laid off main line pilots return to the main line it will mean that JAZZ pilots could then transition to the main line if and when they want to, and ahead of anybody who was hired after these two lists were formed. In other words there would be a third list made up of pilots hired after all laid off pilots are back, and that third list would be tacked on to the bottom of both the regional and the main line lists.

Clear as mud?

[Par88]

I think, Dick, that your proposal and GDR's are one in the same. Effectivly, your merged list still puts ACPA or ALPA pilots at the bottom of each others list as of today.

Mergers hurt but only as long as you think you have somehow been wronged.

We are all cut from the same cloth and once shared common values and respect. If a new kid shows up with a smaller truck at the park, do you tell them all to play nicely, or is the one with the smallest truck only allowed to use his own toy when the others aren't interested.

Don't change your values or rules taught by your parents just because you're an adult now. They still apply.

[Guest GDR]

I don't understand why anybody would feel wronged. It would be a net benefit to everyone currently on either list and would treat everybody equally.

Greg

[Guest Dick Dastardly]

Firstly, this proposal would only effect the last several hundred pilots at AC since the remaining ones will not be effected by the RJ transfer to Jazz.

Recognize years of service whether with AC, Jazz or a combination thereof.

RJ's, 50 seat, 70 seat 90 seat 110 seat are operated by Jazz but can be bid on based on the YOS list that was created. From the time the list is formed, pilots on the Jazz list accumulate YOS and can move to mainline when positions are available based on their seniority. In other words, the Keller (or whatever) list would remain but if a Jazz employee were to move to mainline, they could do so based on their seniority relative to the other Jazz pilots. All future hiring at AC would come from Jazz unless no Jazz pilots wanted the position where the company would hire off the street. All Jazz pilots would remain senior to this off the street hire for future bidding. Although this proposal is essentially a bottom of the list scenario, it provides opportunities to everyone for the contentious airplanes and provides future opportunities at AC to Jazz pilots that may wish to move up when they can hold a reasonable position rather that being a junior right seat guy.

[Par88]

For 15 or so years the debate has raged. We are eating each other up everytime there is a downturn, to the detriment of our contracts and the overall health of the corporation. Many a great and not so great mind have proposed solutions yet the debate rages because some win and some loose.

As of Saturdays anouncement we are all loosing something be it planes or working conditions AND we are still debating what our possition should be next week.

Maybe the solution is right in front of our face but we somehow think ourselves as failures by admitting we were wrong in the past.

[Guest GDR]

OK I think I understand now and that would work fine. I think my suggestion would be easier to implement but primarily I want to see something that is going to build bridges and something that will keep the Air Canada family in the air.

[Guest GDR]

Nobody has to admit they were wrong, and probably everybody thinks that they hold the moral high ground, but who cares. This isn't about right or wrong, or winners or losers. This is all about short term survival and long term viability for all of the AC family.

We ain't gonna change the past, so let's work on the future.

Greg Robinson

[Guest Dick Dastardly]

I figured as much. Like you, I think its time to work out our differences and come to an agreement that provides long term opportunities to both groups.

[Guest Terminated]

Greg, I've been an advocate of your proposal, and it would be nice to see it happen. Perhaps with the current situation beginning (and I stress just beginning) it may provide the impetus the ACPA executive needs for meaningful discussion with the Jazz group. Because no matter how well or poorly either group makes out in the current situation, we know it is likely to happen again in the future, whipsawing of work, and playing groups against each other. A long term solution is needed.

As for Dicks proposal, it is more complicated, and I don't think I like it. It appears to be the type of proposal that sounds great when your group is staring at possible layoffs and loss of flying. I may be not getting it completely, but it seems that the Jazz seniority at the mainline is accrued only from the date the new list is created. However ACPA pilots maintain their current seniority from mainline to bid on all the Jazz aircraft. Kind of a DOH for AC at Jazz, then a BOTL for Jazz if and when they went to AC.

Admittedly, we all have yet to see how this plays out, and I in no way intend this as early hatched chicken counting, but for now Jazz has the inside track on 70 seaters, 50 seaters, and maybe 50/50 on up to 110. It seems obvious that this is what has many mainline pilots suddenly more interested in access to work at Jazz, and some kind of list unification. So now to put forth a proposal that considers 50-110 seat aircraft 'in contention', and then say layed off mainline pilots get DOH on those aircraft, even if they are operated at Jazz, seems rather self serving. Perhaps if your proposal was DOH across the board, or far more likely the 3 list/mutual bottom scenario that Greg described, it would seem palatable.

Perhaps I have misunderstood the Dick proposition, please clarify as needed. I certainly hope that this current situation can be a catalyst in finding our 'roadmap to peace'.

[Guest rance]

Unfortunatly the best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour and if that's the case why would regional pilots trust acpa?? Who is to say that this senority issue won't go to binding arbitration and we all know what will happen if they don't get their own way.

[Guest GDR]

I believe that the two list proposal is something that works well for both groups. Personally I think that the only people who would be opposed are those who want to hold onto their grudges

[Guest pilotforhire]

What would happen if Jazz is subsequently sold?? I thought that this is still under consideration by Milton and doesn't Jazz look more attrative now if it has RJ's??

[Guest Dick Dastardly]

I understand what you are saying however, what I have proposed is essentially date of hire for everything up to 110 seats. As far as date of hire on the entire list goes, as nice as it would undoubtedly be, the CAIL boys that have lost 10 or 15 years under the current ratio would likely find it somewhat unpalatable.

Furthermore, all I have advocated is aircraft entitlement based on YOS. I Firmly believe that it is important to keep in mind that there are no guarantee's with regard to these aircraft. You have them today, AC may have them tommorrow, Jazz may be sold the day after that. This "homerun" mentality should take a back seat in my opinion.