Powermatic Posted July 5, 2003 Share Posted July 5, 2003 Just caught the Bloomberg News update on the radio. They are reporting that Air Canada will be concentrating on long haul flying and Jazz will be doing the majority of the domestic flying in Canada. No Tango product. No Zip product. Didn't offer any source for this information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jeanmermoz Posted July 5, 2003 Share Posted July 5, 2003 Intox from Jazz-Alpa. I will not be surprised that the info to Blomberg is coming from Jazz Alpa Mec. But you never know, AC is well known for not respecting a contract or anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jzdude Posted July 5, 2003 Share Posted July 5, 2003 It actually makes sense $$, if in fact it turns out to be true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Qtip Posted July 6, 2003 Share Posted July 6, 2003 Sounds like a great solution to a problem that's been around for a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted July 6, 2003 Share Posted July 6, 2003 I've heard that Zip will merge with Jazz and Jazz will be the LCC for Air Canada. Makes sense to me because Jazz is already set up route wise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Qtip Posted July 6, 2003 Share Posted July 6, 2003 This would work as long as the JAZZ contract was used otherwise we're back in CCAA in less than two years. Then there's the seniority question that could take 2 years to settle so maybe it's not such a good solution. Or is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rj200 Posted July 6, 2003 Share Posted July 6, 2003 With the above news do you guys think that the impending layoffs at mainline would equal the numbers of flight crew that currently operate Zip? It would be an easy way for the company to integrate the 317 layoffs into the Jazz component, either layoff or Jazz? Any thoughts??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Terminated Posted July 6, 2003 Share Posted July 6, 2003 I think you all may be reading way too much into this. First, it wouldn't totally surprise me if they are mistaking the 'proposed' Jazz plan for the 'actual' company plan. And even if the company has actually seen the light, and that is the plan, remember this is the media--they screw things up. If not the big things, then most certainly the details. The talk of 'merging' Zip and Jazz is probably their description for winding Zip down, and having Jazz do the cost effective domestic flying. I doubt their talking about a full blown merger, including pilot seniority lists, and all the tremendous greif that goes along with it. Now the disclaimer: this is aviation, so ANYTHING is possible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bat Posted July 6, 2003 Share Posted July 6, 2003 Gurk: It looks like Cinderalla was planning a 12:00 raid of ACPAs scope clause. (April 2, 2004) with the contract extended to 2009 "she" might have to stay up very late. In other words, the ACPA contract covering scope was, and still is in force. To sign a TA with Jazz (and vice versa) that contravenes it seems at tad questionable. Maybe CR will share some of his "lovely parting gifts". Ciao Bat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Marion Vanderlubbe Posted July 6, 2003 Share Posted July 6, 2003 Q for you. Tango doesn't interline, doesn't tranfer baggage or anything like that, does it? I'm not sure about Zip, I think they do. But, if there's no connections, a la Tango, then can't they use that model, operate without the Air Canada code (they have their own, don't they?) and disregard the scope clause? Isn't the clause based entirely upon carrying the AC code? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jeanmermoz Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 I think that we will see Tango disappear and Zip expanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Marion Vanderlubbe Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 If you're from Air Canada, and i think you are from what you're said before, can you tell me if I'm right regarding your scope clause and AC code? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bat Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Well, you are close, sort of. ZIP does not interline, Tango does. If you had a copy of the scope clause (in your collective agreement) you would know the specific wording. I am not about to post clips from it here. Suffice it to say that the definition of AC/Company is more clearly defined than before. (re. fewer if any loopholes) Ciao for now. Bat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Philip Aubin Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 OK, I happen to be both &%$@! off and drunk, so, as opposed to normally ignoring these threads, I will answer your question. ACPA's scope clause is based on both code share which also includes any revenue sharing arrangement. This includes a jet ratio (in effect since 2000) which currently limits JAZZ to about 20 jets total which in itself was a relaxation of a prior jet limit clause that limited JAZZ to a max of 10 BAE 146's. ACPA also has an ASM ratio (props and jets) with JAZZ of 12/100. As one of the authors of this language I am confident of its strength. Futhermore, I am confident in the determination of the mainline pilots to ensure that OUR flying is not further eroded. There have been many opportunities to bury this particular hatchet, unfortunately for this to succeed a core group of senior connector pilots have always required some mainline pilots to suffer in order to secure windfall gains for themselves. Perhaps in the future the bulk of the connector pilots can regain control of their union and come to a MUTUALLY beneficial solution with the mainline pilots. Philip Aubin AC Pilot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kal Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Close,, Your only 100% wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kal Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Phil: Perhaps when you sober up you'll realise that that was all the stuff you used to have. The puck hasn't even dropped to start the second period of this game. AS far as your take on the state of affairs between AC two group of pilot's, well it takes two to Tango,,No?? Perhaps if you retired all the lunatics running your show, put a permanent ban on the 243 union busters involvement and woke up and realised the present paradigm of division and exclusion is largely responsible for the labour debacle we all face then maybe a parlay would bring fruit. By the way Jazz had 41 jet a/c at it's birth. The fact that we have only twenty now is a large part of your 15% plus plus plus plus plus plus give back. Now take a couple of ASA and go to bed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Philip Aubin Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 You had 39 jets operating + two hanger queens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Philip Aubin Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Ah the joys of anonimity, but this forum is not really anonomous no matter what you may think. What you just offered was a death threat my friend, punishable with time in jail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Philip Aubin Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 And, given the expected quality of the responses, I will return myself to only the occasional lurking view of this sad forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragon Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 You have sunk to a new low jazzplayer, you really have. Any and all peripheral issues aside, You should be ashamed of yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HPT-TOUR Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Phil, make no mistake, your group the 243 have been the biggest problem in Canadian aviation for "lowering the bar" to stand on your soap box and claim to be proud of your scope language (wich you copied from United)is nothing short of hilarious. Your group has lost millions of dollars in income for scope. You sir signed a union card when you joined CALPA to uphold its constitution. The gentlemen in CALPA that came before you and I seemed to have a pertty good handle on todays situation with whipsawing the way the constitution was written you must agree. As senior pilots like Don Hudson, GDR etc. retire they must be shaking their heads about the money they lost for your prized scope and the possibility of future losses in retirement. Time to get off your soap box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Phil, While I understand the sentiment, I don't think it's fair to say this is a "sad forum". It's often a great forum that occasionally finds a lot of people posting in anger. You yourself admitted to being &%$@! off when you posted and it's that kind of thing that almost invites similarly emotional responses. At least, it's often difficult, when responding, to rise above the emotion expressed in a post, when that particular subject is one that elicits so much emotion in oneself... Anyway, I hope you'll see what I'm trying to say... Obviously some people go over the top, but it's unreasonable, I think, to presume you could post in anger and not get angry responses... The "Admin" team is evidently doing what they can to tame things. Hopefully their efforts will help convince people to behave. Cheers, Mitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Qtip Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Very well said and everyone in the company knows this accept the ones that created the problem in the first place. What goes around comes around!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Philip Aubin Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Aside from the other mis-conceptions in your post, please don't pretend to speak for the likes of Don Hudson. I see him regularly, and he is more than capable of speaking for himself. By the way, to my knowledge he has never expressed the sentiments you have put in his mouth. (GDR I don't know very well, but I am also sure that he is not too shy to speak for himself either). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HPT-TOUR Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Misconceptions....... right I don`t see you providing examples, as for speaking for DH or GDR they are examples of those heading into retirement that are facing litigation. As for your quote on this being a sad forum at what point do you feel better than anyone else here? Enjoy your day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.