Guest neo Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 Dear Colleagues, If you're an original AC pilot, then my understanding of the situation may be of interest to you. (Please remember that this is just my interpretation and that you should call your union representative for confirmation, such as they are able to give.) Your MEC has already signed off on the T.A., and now by law they MUST recommend the membership accept it. They have no legal alternative. The same applies to any ACPA official. Since the MEC signed off on the T.A., the ACPA Merger Committee was given the preliminary Keller decision (seniority details but no supporting reasons); but they're under a gag order and cannot tell you what it is. Now the Keller award has been delayed, and I'll bet you dollars to donuts that the intent is to delay it's release until after the T.A. ratification vote. If you're an original ACPA pilot and willing to say YES to the T.A. regardless of how your seniority is affected, then carry on. However the information I've received, and which I believe to be credible, suggests that the effects to the seniority of the AC pilots will be nothing short of devastating. So if that result makes a difference to you, then the information contained in the Keller report is crucial to your expectations of the future. So there it is. Your MEC has to recommend ratification because they are legally required to do so. Your Merger Committee(s) are under gag orders and not permitted to let you know the details of the Keller award. Now do you understand why you're reading it here and in the newspapers? Your union's hands are tied and its mouth gagged, but they have information that is of the utmost importance to you. In fact, if you're an original AC pilot, I would venture to say that the information is of far greater impact than the contractual consequences in the T.A. As I said, all of the foregoing is just my own interpretation, gleaned from reading entrails, anonymous phone messages, you know the drill. But the information is such, and of such importance, that it would be a travesty to keep it from you. If it turns out to be a false alarm, then the jokes on me and I'll eat crow on AEF. But I don't think it's a false alarm. Take that for what it's worth. Richard Roskell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp fa Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 With all due respect Richard, if it turns out to be a false alarm, and guys are voting down the TA based on this, the consequences are a little more serious than just you having to eat crow on AEF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peanuts Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 Hey Richard, I hope you will be able to tell us what eating crow on AEF tastes like !! lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 "If it turns out to be a false alarm, then the jokes on me" If it turns out to be incorrect you may be responsible for bringing the company down - that's no joke, is it? "the effects to the seniority of the AC pilots will be nothing short of devastating" More devastating then having no job at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inchman Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 neo: You have often been a voice of reason and truth, generally not succumbing to innuendo and unfounded "facts". Nothing that anyone does before the truth is revealed will have any effect on the ultimate outcome. As I understand it, no list has been produced, no formula has been released and nobody has seen anything of substance. Only generalized concepts about direction but not distance have been alluded to. Why not just wait to see what the truth is before you whip everyone into a frenzy and put your reputation on the line? Maybe somebody's setting you up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest V1 Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 Richard, When are you going to shut up! Your "right" to post is very tiresome and destructive. You are a good example of the limitations of democracy. A few weeks ago you were advocating WJets contract for us now you are agitating about something you know nothing about. Would you please cool it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JakeYYZ Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 RR has employed more than enough caveats. The likelihood of this TA not passing, IMHO, is about 0. Lots of hotheaded empty threats from a lot of hot empty heads. IMHO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GDR Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 Hi Richard I would imagine that most of what you are posting is correct. It looks like we will get hosed on this ruling by Keller. It is possible however that the delay is because the award isn't final yet. Can I suggest we look at the big picture though. Is it really worthwhile to shatter the career of 30,000 AC employees who depend on an AC pay cheque to put food on the table because we wound up with the short straw on a senioity dispute. (For that matter, the CDN guys appealed Mitchnik, maybe we can appeal Keller. We are already appealing the process to the Supreme Court.) There is no doubt that the Keller award, if it is implemented, will have a much more devastating affect on you than it will on me, but the principle remains the same. It is a shame that we haven't been able to bring an end to this pilot tribalism a long time ago. Why couldn't we have set down and negotiated our seniority issues long ago, whether it be the ex-CDN guys or JAZZ. Greg Robinson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rance Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 "Why couldn't we have set down and negotiated our seniority issues long ago, whether it be the ex-CDN guys or JAZZ". Greg the reason acpa has never done what you ask is because they have never treated any group with descency and respect.The issues facing acpa today are a result of past dealings. All alpa members and ex-cdn guys wanted is to have been treated fairly,but unfortunately acpa can only see the short term ramifications of their descions and its all coming full circle. I take zero pleasure in watching any of it,but its not surprising. Just MHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sustainable Posted June 11, 2003 Share Posted June 11, 2003 You nailed that one. One of the benefits of having gone through numerous mergers is that it gives you the ability to look ahead and think of the ramificaitons of your present actions. In hindsight, DoH was the best solution to the problems that arose from EPA-CP and then the CP-ND-PWA. By the time Ward came around it was a no-brainer but it prooved impossible to re-visit the previous mergers to set them straight. There will come a day when the feds open up the ownership rules to foreign investors and there will come a day when mega carriers like StarLines or OneLine exist. You can bet that the OAC types would be singing a different tune if they were to be ratioed in the same manner that they attempted to do to the Cdn group. Look ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GDR Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 Hi Rance Actually, I don't agree. It takes both sides to negotiate an agreement. All we have ever known is an adversarial style of negotiating, whether we be from the AC tribe, the CDN tribe or the regional tribe. ACPA is no more guilty than anyone else for this situation. ACPA is the largest and most affluent group and as a result we are the easiest target. (The one exception is the two regional groups and I have to congratulate them for that.) Unfortunately this confrontational style has carried over into our negotiations with the company, and frankly I largely hold them responsible for that. Our negotiations have always been about appointing teams to represent each party and to get the best deal possible for the sides that they represent. Nobody, whether it be ACPA or anybody else will give an inch until forced to in these negotiations. What is fair depends on awful lot on which tribe you belong to. It would probably be a good idea if we all set back and remembered when we were all part of the same tribe, whether that was in flying school, a bush outfit or a squadron. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John S. Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 Greg, you say "What is fair depends on awful lot on which tribe you belong to." No, that's not quite true. It may seem that 'fair' means 'beneficial to me at the time' - hence AC thought MM was fair. It may seem that 'fair' means 'bigger, stronger ought to be right' - hence one of reasons for the ACPA/Jazz history. But when we are both 25 years older I'll bet that 'fair' means something completely different. I'll be willing to bet that most will look on the period from 1995 to 2005 as the lunatic years and that in the end a simple Date of Hire will be deemed to be 'fair' bye the pilots of 2023. Mind if I point out (just one more time) that the four Jazz pilot groups managed to learn from the mistakes and errors of merging seniority lists by anything but DoH? In that small way we are years ahead of you guys. Years ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Starman Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 Excellent post, sustainable. I've been suggesting the same thing for a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GDR Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 Let's just agree to disagree. I do not think that DOH is always the best solution. Sometimes, in my opinion, DOH is the best solution, but in the majority of cases I don't believe it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Starman Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 A couple of posters have informed me that there have been 364 pilots hired since the merger. As I understand it, the company wishes to lay off 350 - 400 pilots. I think we can safely assume that there will be about 150 early retirements (from the 747 and from people just fed up with working in a stress factory...) Therefore, the Keller award, no matter what formula it may use for seniority, will not result in one original AC pilot being laid off, contrary to the "sky is falling" postings of Neo... Take a look at the sky, Neo. It may have a few storm clouds around, but it is not about to fall on your head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluemic Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 Mind if I point out (just one more time) that the four Jazz pilot groups managed to learn from the mistakes and errors of merging seniority lists by anything but DoH? In that small way we are years ahead of you guys. Years ahead. AMEN! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rance Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 Hi Greg: "ACPA is the largest and most affluent group and as a result we are the easiest target". Your post in a way makes it seem like acpa are victims.You are the biggest group and because you know that your "negotiating" style is that of a schoolyard bully. "ACPA is no more guilty than anyone else for this situation". actually you are. the difference between acpa and everyone else is if you don't get your own way you stomp out of the sandbox. Most groups if they couldn't agree would settle with binding arbitration,but you didn't get exactly what you wanted (no compromise) and as a result we have the whipsawing today.Some of your collegues were calling jazz pilots "prostitutes", but the division was caused by acpas past descions. cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John S. Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 OK. I guess it will never end as long as you are involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jazzplayer Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 For GDR, How can a merge be anything but date of hire. Anything else will produce a windfall gain for one group of equally qualified people, and a loss for the other group. As for a companys health being a precursor to a ratio for merge, that would be fine as long as the pilots were all responsible for managing there respective companies which they are not! Therefore; DOH is fair, simple and unambiguous. It is only when you mix in arrogance, hubris and selfishness that things can get complicated ie. present state of affairs. So GDR defend your position of no DOH, enlighten me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GDR Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 Mergers are hopefully to come out with a solution that doesn't damage one's career potential or give someone a windfall gain. If JAZZ were to merge DOH with AC some pilots at JAZZ would have sufficient seniority to be A340 capt's. Now you tell me. Would that constitute a windfall gain? Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GDR Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 ACPA has been involved in 2 merger negotiations. In the first case the AC pilot group felt the award was unfair and was able to back out of the agreement. In the second case the CDN group thought the award was unfair and it looks like they have successfully gotten the agreement over turned. In both cases it is ACPA members who are the bad guys. It does seem that everyone expects ACPA to roll over and play dead. ACPA negotiators are there to represent the best interests of their membership in exactly the same way that the negotiators on the other side of the table are there to represent the best interests of the folks that they represent. I think that it's a rotten system, but right now it seems to be all we know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jazzplayer Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 For GDR, If the guy could hold the left seat of an A340 through his senority then he rightfully deserves that and has been in the industry as long as or longer than his new peers. If he has been around that long and qualifies for his seat then so be it. And conversly maybe you will get a left seat on a dash 8 if the reverse scenario were to occur. If you qualify that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neo Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 Amen to your last statement, Greg. And may I tell you as well how much I appreciate your calm and reasoned post? Well, I do. By way of an answer to your most important question, let me pose one to you: at what point does one say, "enough is enough"? Had the outcome of all the new union contracts seen the F/A's taking a 50% pay cut while everyone else walked away happy, would they agree? If the maintenance division T.A. saw every x-CAIL employee being laid off, while the AC crew was retained, would it pass? These are clearly hypothetical scenarios, but they illustrate the issue: at what point does one say, "The damage is too great, I don't care what the alternative is, I won't accept this." Well, just as clearly, that point will come at a different point for each individual. If I'm not mistaken, you live out here on the West Coast too. Do you remember that not long ago our province's doctors and nurses were closing emergency wards, refusing all but the most life-threatening surgery, and generally doing everything they could to bring about the outcome they wanted? It wasn't about flying someone to Vegas for the weekend, the consequences were that peoples' health was negatively affected. Yet the doctors and nurses took that action because they had been pushed to their limit. Are doctors and nurses less professional, less worthy of respect because of it? Did they do the "Right Thing"? If you haven't got your line in the sand, if you don't know where your limit for punishment is, you will keep receiving it forever. I don't force my views on anyone else, they're free to choose as they wish, but my limit's been reached. So, where is yours? Best wishes, Richard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neo Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 Perhaps everyone should consider in what order the cards are being placed on the table. At the moment, the ACPA ratification vote has not even been scheduled. In fact, if I were to hazard a guess based on the most recent time line issued by our union, the beginning of a ratification vote is perhaps two weeks away. Do you see any ethical reason why the Keller award wouldn't be released before then? Neither do I, in which case all Air Canada pilots will be able to vote based on the actual details contained in Mr. Keller's award. But I hasten to add, if the Keller award is delayed so that I have to vote on the T.A. before its release, I will vote NO. And let's put the shoe on the other foot for a moment. Let's say it was the Canadian F/A's in a similar position. The very credible rumor going around is that an impending seniority arbitration will absolutely devastate their seniority expectations. Yet the T.A. they have to vote on governs layoffs, wage reductions, fleet guarantees, the Whole Nine Yards. Would you advocate that they simply vote without having all the facts at their disposal? I ask again, Jennifer: would you advocate that your colleagues simply vote blindly, believing in your heart that they are not fully aware of how serious a blow they are about to receive? I don't believe you're that kind of person. Neither am I. Richard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GDR Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 OK. Now how about you try putting yourself in an AC pilot's shoes under those circumstances. I don't think it would be fair and I don't think you would either. You didn't answer my question. Would that be a windfall gain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.