Just curious...

[yulpurser]

Air Canada is looking to cut labor costs by $650M. That is huge. Concessions will have to be made one way or another; there is absolutely NO doubt in my mind about that, unless we agree to layoffs, which of course we all want to avoid. What would you be willing to give up, personally, to help achieve that objective and ensure the survival of the airline? Do you have concrete examples in your daily work routine, bidding habits, expectations of the airline? Are you willing to accept free training days? Lower expenses? Less days off? Pay cuts?
I am asking myself this question, because when push comes to shove, the people we are about to elect will have to come to the membership for answers before they sit down and concede anything to the airline. Any ideas?

[out.of.the.blue]

I know this will be hard for you to believe but...


I'm willing to give up Pam! :grin:


On a more serious side (not that I'm not serious about giving her up) I think that there are many ways we can become more efficient.

As I've posted before, Mr. Milton has stated that Tango is profitable. This is probably due in part to the very short turn on many flights and the high use of the flight crew.

I think a great first step would be to get the crew planners to utilise the fa's to their max. What is this about 4 hour waits in airports? How efficient can this be?

I know of many fa's that miss the work share program we use to enjoy.

I'd be willing to sign up for an "on-line" 1-2-3. Can you imagine the amount of money spent each and every month on those updates x 8300 of us? At 5$/package times 8300 fa you're looking at 498 000/year in savings...not the 650 000 000 yet but it is a step in the right direction! How many more examples of "red tape" bureaucracy exist amongst us?

What about accepting to slide our days of vacation as not to famously "drop" your block and be a bit more efficient, thus not costing the company extra moolah?

These are just a couple of ideas we could start with; and this is just within the in-flight group. Remember, we are about 20% of the 40 000 employees. Costs efficencies can be found in other departments.

I'm sure there are many more suggestions out there and much finer ones.

Let's hear them!

[DRAGOON_MYTH_SLAYER]

A book, no a tome could be written on ways and means of cost cutting at this 'we've always done it this way' Company. Introducing an Ideas Plus type program where employess were rewarded for cost cutting ideas would be a good start.

-Uniform distribution streamlining

-Error riddled approach plate manuals could be replaced by Jeppessons and placed on aircraft instead of requiring all pilots to carry them and input the bi-weekly revisions. Atremendous waste, indeed.

-Utilization of crews needs improving

-Less red tape and bureaucracy in effecting changes

-I could go on all day.

-The time has come for a major shift and a new way of managing this company and its people, or our survival will continue to be in doubt.

[Flying_jojo]

In answer to "Out of the Blue" , I do agree to a lot in your comment but most of all, the brillant idea about having a "online 123" is just grrrreat! The company would save so much money; isnt that what they want to achieve? Lets hope someone from the "Ivory Tower" reads that !
Oh...I was just thinking..what am I gonna use to start my fireplace if they take away my 123 !!!

Flying_jojo!

[holy father]

It boggles my mind why Air canada management is not interested in the SOLO bidding system. By implementing SOLO it would save millions of dollars. It is the most efficient of the 6 blocking systems I have worked under.

[DRAGOON_MYTH_SLAYER]

Amen Holy Father...it's an abomination!

[out.of.the.blue]

Who in fact is not interested in Solo? Was it AC management or was it not high enough on Pammy's wish list ( after the bonus and FSD payout?)

Let's be realistic, when negotiating there's just so much you can get. After the bonus and payout what else could you get?

I've heard that solo would have cost about 40 000 000 dollars. It would have benefited the whole group. When you calculate the bonus (27 000 000) out of that .... it isn't that far off to compensate investing in.

But not important to that great negociator Pam! What a coup she gave us!

I just read the CUPE site where the company is asking for a 23% reduction in payroll. What exactly is this great CA all about? Milton says no lay off clauses are a thing of the past! He wants the money you tought you just got! And need I repeat that you have that wonderful duty day that they wanted all along... all for nothing.

This is not hindsight! We've been trying for months to tell people that working conditions were more important than any sum of money. Had the bonus not been in the contract...would you have signed it? Wouldn't you have wanted some form of better working condition for reserves? crew rest? duty day-four? Shouldn't an experienced negociator know that working conditions cannot be bought?

Nope blinded by Pam and her promise of delivering a bonus that now you may never see.

Is this now truly the person that should lead you?

I think not!

[Snackpack]

ootb,

If we hadn't signed when we did (which many of us are quite satisfied with, thanks), what kind of offer do you think the Company would be making us now in light of impending war and following UAL's bankruptcy filing? (rhetorical) Milton knows very well he won't get 23%. I'm sure we'll have to do some sacrificing and hope we'll all be able to live with the compromises. I, unlike you and some others on this board, don't blame P&R for everything.

[DRAGOON_MYTH_SLAYER]

Hi Snacky snack,

I just think P & R could have gotten a much better deal and especially based on the priorities from the bargaining survey. I don't recall a fat bonus for FSD's getting anywhere close to the top 10 wish list.

Even after two rum and cokes I still can't see the attraction for them. What do they say? "Drink 'til I'm pretty to you". Maybe I should switch to Kool-aid. LOL

Thanks for the welcome back Snacks. Did you really miss me or were you just saying that? :grin: :tongue_2:

I decided to leave just before things got really ugly. What crazy times we are living in! :frown_2:

[BTG1]

I would be willing to change the 14 hour rule for downtown layovers. After a long duty day to have a downtown layover of 14 hours when it takes you 45 minutes to get to the hotel is crazy. Most of the time the trip is just not worth it. We should look at maybe downtown layover for 16 hours or more. This would save the Company money in transportation costs. :windsock:

[out.of.the.blue]

I totally agree with you on that one BTG

[Snackpack]

I know you feel that way Puff Dragon. A lot of OAC's resent the FSD bonus too. I, on the other hand, honestly don't care about that issue and never have. I won't repeat to you why. There's really no point.

I really did miss you even though we don't always agree! It was so quiet and boring on this forum in January, the worst month for me because I don't go outside as much because of the cold. I spend most of my time on this computer in the winter. I guess I'm just a summery outdoorsy type. Although I skate, I'll never get used to this Montreal winter.

Two rum and cokes and Koolaid coming? Watch out ootb! Keep that umbrella handy! :cool_2:

[Puffy_G]

All the FSD pay-off represents is the first year's savings for the company by not having to crew the '47s with both an FSD and a Purser. This was an issue that favoured the company much more than the membership. Can we stop whining about that and move on to something else ??

[yulpurser]

Excellent suggestion there BTG, regarding downtown layovers. ...
OOTB you have good ideas, but your relentless tirades against other people are getting tiresome. No matter what is the subject, you always transform the discussion into your personnal resentment and vendetta. Please, stop the smearing: try to elevate the discussion! I would so much appreciate a more constructive approach!!! :smirk:
We can all see many ways that the Airline could save money. But this time we are asked to make hard, real choices ( we may not even get that luxury- it may be made for us). It is not really a matter of what THEY should do, should have done etc. It is about what WE feel we are willing to let go, how we are willing to transform our working habits etc...I think we (thru our union) ought to present as many alternatives as we possibly can think of, and these have to go beyond what has been proposed before. If we do not come up with realistic, creative, MEASURABLE($$$)suggestions to dicuss with Air Canada, they will dismiss us and arbitrarily cut wages. This is why I am urging everyone to consider what EACH ONE OF US is willing to give up . These will be the only bargaining chips that we will have to prevent loosing wages, or worst, jobs. I have been around a while, and seen many difficult years. But this time I am more worried than ever, for several reasons. Get real people...It doesn't matter how we got here and who is to blame. The hard truth is that if we do not cooperate, we will be crushed. Look at United. Look at TWA. Look at Swissair, Sabena...Remember, Robert Milton is American. And he takes no prisoners...

[yulpurser]

By the way OOTB- I also think that sliding vacation is a rather painless but potentially valuable saving for the airline. And the 123... on line would be tremendous.

[Was_Moeman]

Here's a few.

1) No pay for meetings and training for a year or two.
2) No fuel allowance for driving to the airport.(who else get's paid to drive to work?)
3) Lower Dry Cleaning expenses(do any of us actually spend that much each month?)
4) No "shoe allowance"(who else has their shoes paid for?)
5) Lower meal expenses by 25%.(don't most of us count it as salary? It's supposed to cover our costs.)
6) Salary reduction of 10% in return for profit sharing if we ever make a profit(like WJ does with their employees).
7) Block to 78 hours
8) SOLO
9) Pursers make a certain salary regardless of aircraft type.
10) No more night flying, language, or other premiums.
11) No more draft premium, but you can refuse a draft without question. If over-projected, you get to drop, but otherwise it's just like accepting make-up or 85 hours. At least it's voluntary.
12) More comfortable, less expensive uniforms like ZIP have.


All of these are things that, to me, could be sacrificed without much harm to each of us individually, but would save the company millions annually. Obviously, we'd have to ask for certain things in return like the profit sharing, but I think we have wiggle room. Let's hope we can work this out.

[Was_Moeman]

By the way ootb, get off the 19 hour duty day thing. If it's such a terrible thing, it will go so junior that you won't have to worry about it. But we all know that that flying will be the cream of the crop, so stop your belly-aching. You're probably going to bid it yourself. Personally, I wouldn't tarnish my ten-foot pole by touching that type of flying, but it will definitely be popular. Why can't you accept that the company needs the freedom to reach around the world? We've given them that with this agreement.

[BTG1]

A situation of this magnitude finally brought out the best in people without the sarcastic side and vicious unfounded comments.
I am not a lawyer and do not pretend to be one, if someone out there has a legal background or knows someone who is a lawyer please give this thought.

Is there a way, under the labour or civil law, to hold Mr. Milton, President and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. C. Rovinescu, Executive Vice President Corporate Development & Strategy along with Rob Peterson, Executive Vice President &Chief Financial Officer and the Board Of Directors of Air Canada personally responsible for the cost of the recently signed Collective Agreement?

As far back as the first day of negotiations, the Company detoured for what was the normal process. This was to buy time to see where the Union would go on the issues of contention. Air Canada had on the table issues that were so outrageous; no one took them seriously. These issues wasted much time and expense.

On December 30th 2002, we ratified, with the approval of the above mentioned Officers of the Company a Collective Agreement. These Officers and the positions that they hold gave them access to all affairs of the Company up to and including the financial position and the ability to honour the Agreement.

It is my opinion that they used the document to further the share price of the Corporation by demonstrating to the public that labour peace had been achieved. I also now believe that they had no intention of honouring the agreement. This Collective Agreement that we signed in good faith was nothing more that a public relation ploy.

This is only an opinion I can not prove my theory but my resolve to have them held accountable is set in concrete.

:mad_2:

[out.of.the.blue]

In reply to:<hr />
If it's such a terrible thing, it will go so junior that you won't have to worry about it

Nice to see how you value your junior colleagues! I guess that's why nothing was done for the reserve either; there junior who cares?

BTW it's 19:30 hours!

[yulpurser]

Right on again BTG!
I am convinced in hindsight that although we negociated and signed the agreeement in good faith, the same was never true of the company- and it does not matter one bit who negociated for us. We would have been promised anything to ensure that we ratified , giving AC the final go ahead to integrate the crews, and the long awaited opening to get rid of FSDs. (How ironic that this part of the settletment was litterally handed out and paid immediately, without even being on our negociating agenda! I wonder what they will say about the bonus now.)

It was AC's goal to deceive us all along, as it is impossible that they did not know 2 months ago that they were not in a financial position to honor the agreement. Why , they kept leaking out that we were doing better than most airlines! It is a low , sickening tactic, but not out of line with the behavior we have seen since the arrival of Mr Milton and his friends . Still, leaves me feeling so incredulously disgusted...I am afraid to consider in what other ways we are and will be manipulated .
And BTG... I am also certain that this can never be proven.

[Fly_Boy_YUL]

BTG1,

I am insulted at how Air Canada dealt with us during the last contract talks. They had to be fully aware that they would be asking for all and more if it back... or they are just plain stupid (maybe some from collumn A and some from collumn B).

From what I know of liability, the board of directors are responsible for unpaid salaries - including vacation. They have seen the writing on the wall for some time. Why do you think we were "given" our vacation for next year this year? (Vacations used to be "earned" in the first year and paid ot the second, now you are given vacation inthe year that you are working.)

The board of directors (and thereby the company) had to have seen that we were close to a state of bankruptcy, and wanted to shed itself of any personal liabilities, ie vacation.

Looks like they are planning for an efficient shut-down. They have their plans in place to protect themselves from any personal losses... For us... "Let them eat cake."

Milton, as you must know, has a multi-million dollar parachute if he were ever to lose his job. For starters, let him renounce that. Make his salary tie in with the profitability of our company. Others have done the same - the head of Chrystler and Continental are both exellent examples of LEADERS who led by example, and brought the hurt to their personal level.

Remember, this company is run by a group of people more interrested in how the shares are doing - than how their employees are doing.

Virgin Atlantic has a neat concept:

- Make our employees happy.
- Happy employees make for happy customers.
- Happy customers come back to us and make for happy shareholders.

This simple idea is hard for to put in place if the leadsership cannot grasp the fact that your PEOPLE are your greatest asset. A plane can break down from hard use and be fixed... once your people break down, the fix is never easy, and it will cost you more. Funny no one up there has thought about this.

I for one would love to see Milton gone (without his golden parachure... maybe a golden shower, but I digress). The question is who would replace him? Rovenescu (from what I have seen and heard) is a carbon copy of Milton, and I do not want to go through that again.

[Snackpack]

There are some great ideas here for concessions that I'm more than willing to entertain. I'm looking forward to the administrator being replaced by real component leadership so we can get on with it. I will forgo the opportunity of tooting the horn of any one candidate here so as to not distract from the present equally important discussion.

Let's remember that increased productivity also means using better what you already have. If want to save $$$ without sacrificing customer satisfaction, there are some pretty creative ways out there if we brainstorm. Some of them seem small or petty but multiply them by the number of flights we operate and the savings and corresponding customer satisfaction both add up fast.

My pet peeve is the useless WASTE. The next time you see a colleague tossing out perfectly clean, reusable items (ie, tumblers, dry goods, etc), call them on it! Make the effort to make sure the leftover newspapers from J are really offerred in econony and not just thrown away-they've already been paid for by AC. Would you throw away a perfectly new newspaper at home that no one has ever read? After the first bar service (or ANY service), why dump out all those half cans of soft drinks and juice? Put them in a unit on the side and instead of a first water service, pre-pour some already opened alternatives on a tray, start at the back, when you use up what would have been thrown away, continue with water. Really lazy or unaware f/a's will tell you carbonated drinks go flat in no time-not true. The customers appreciate choice. The half opened cans have already been paid for-why all the waste? The list could go on and on.

Granted, most of the above boils down to good attitude and common sense. Let's try to keep in mind that it costs nothing for those of us who have it to set the right example for those who don't. It's also in our interest now more than ever to hold both our leaders AND colleagues accountable. JMHO

[yuldude]

It's nice to see that many of us are willing to try and help out management with these cost reductions. I for one hope that whoever gets voted in is listening. We would rather compromise now than lose it all later. Here are a couple of my thoughts.

1. I guestimate that on average about 200 junior pursers fly as FA's on any given month and are paid assistant purser pay. Why not let excess pursers bid off at FA pay voluntarily. I for one would welcome a break from purser from time to time as would many of the pursers I've talked to over the years. It's a win win change.

2. 5-10% pay reduction in exchange for stock options. This would be a non cash item for the company which would greatly aid their liquidity problems. Not only would they save on pay but also on all the related payroll taxes. Further, if all AC employees had a financial stake in the company, there would be more of a team spirit in play as far as turning the co. around. Who knows, it might even make us rich.

3. One final thought. Before I would be comfortable making pay concessions or accepting layoffs, I want to see some of the fat in management trimmed. If managers and supervisors have time to come on board and check our grooming, make harassing calls to us at home when we're booked off sick and call about every 1 or 2 minute delay then in my opinion we have a huge oversupply of management at the base level. I shudder to think of the waste at HQ in terms of middle and upper management. As far as In-flight, why not entrust and empower us to groom ourselves, judge for ourselves when we're sick and order additional supplies when we're short without having to explain and justify it to 3 or 4 people while at the same time trying to board an aircraft. Management by exception, if we're doing a good job save yourselves the cost and us the hassle and let us keep doing it.

If management stops thinking of us as the enemy and the union can stop trying to squeeze every last penny out of the company maybe the two sides can roll up their sleeves sit down and find a reasonable solution.

[Was_Moeman]

1) No pay for meetings and training for a year or two.
2) No fuel allowance for driving to the airport.(who else get's paid to drive to work?)
3) Lower Dry Cleaning expenses(do any of us actually spend that much each month?). We could submit a claim with receipt for what it actually costs us each month instead.
4) No "shoe allowance"(who else has their shoes paid for?)
5) Lower meal expenses by 25%.(don't most of us count it as salary? It's supposed to cover our costs.)
6) Salary reduction of 10%-15% in return for profit sharing if we ever make a profit(like WJ does with their employees).
7) Block to 78 hours
8) SOLO
9) Pursers make a certain salary regardless of aircraft type.
10) No more night flying, language, or other premiums.
11) No more draft premium, but you can refuse a draft without question. If over-projected, you get to drop, but otherwise it's just like accepting make-up or 85 hours. At least it's voluntary.
12) More comfortable, less expensive uniforms like ZIP have.
13) Give up "sched or better" in exchange for "pairing or better". For those of you who don't know what that means, we now get paid whatever the flight is scheduled at or however long it actually takes, whichever is the better of the two. So if you're 20 minutes under-sched going somewhere then 20 minutes over sched coming back, you get the sheduled time credits for the way out and 20 minutes extra for the way back, for a net gain of 20 minutes. What I propose is that you get the greater of what your pairing is worth or the actual flight time you've worked. You would never lose a minute from your pairing, but you wouldn't gain like the example I just gave. Seems fair to me. You get paid what you're promised, or more if you actually work more. This would save the company a ton.
14) Pay cuts. If it comes to that, and I hope it's a last resort, I would like the opportunity to work more if I so choose so that my take-home pay doesn't suffer. They could block to 75 or 78 hours, but we could do make-up to 85 hours if we so choose. Instead of having to wait for sched to call you for vol.85, you could just ask or bid for makeup. 10-15% pay cut, but we could make up the money if we want.

There are lots of things we can propose to save the company millions without really giving up that much. We take a lot for granted. Hopefully the other unions are having the same discussions.

[takeoff]

I think your ideas are great. We at ExCP were able to "open Fly" 15hrs per month over our block for a total of 45 in a quarter. You could fly 30 extra in one month or 10, it didn't matter as long as you didn't go over 45. Reserves could as well over and above their min gaurantee. Even though we made over $10.00/hr less than you before I bet most of us made more overall.
Ideas like these are just the beginning. Now that we are offically intermingled ( reserves as of yesterday) why don't we start trying to figure out a way to work harder and smarter, thus ensuring our pensions are there for us in (?) years.

[Was_Moeman]

In case anybody thinks AC is just kidding around, this is what's happening at American Airlines:

American asks for $1.8 billion in cost cuts from employees. According to Airwise News, in what it called “a last resort” appeal to its workforce, American Airlines has said it needs $1.8 billion US in annual labour cost savings to help it survive. The carrier said the cost cuts were in addition to the $2 billion it has already identified in its restructuring plans. In letters to union leaders and other employee groups, the company said that despite the action it has already taken on costs, it needed to do more immediately. American is calling for wage cuts and changes to benefits and work rules to achieve its target.

[Swizzles]

It's time to rally the troops, our profession is being restructured and the low cost carriers employees are the ones that need to step up to the plate. They need to mobilize now and realize that they could be making a lot more money. Their companies are sabotaging our profession for the benefit of the share holders. This is a essential industry to the country's economy and people will pay what it cost to do business. It's not up too us to roll back our wages but up to them to demand an increase. Let the companies fly in the black and that's it. Being a vital part of the fabric of a country's economy this should not become a cash machine for shareholders but an industry that breaks even and offers safety and comfort to it's customers.

I will not be taken away from my family three to four day's at the time working in a risky environment to be paid close to minimum wage. We should be paid Danger Pay for this type of work. Working out of DCA with fully harmed F16's flying at 30 000 feet acknowledging your intentions. Comanche Helicopters hovering over the airport just to make sure you don't divert. Us military armed with M4 machine gun's welcoming you in the terminal and two armed officers on board making sure nobody walks up to you with a knife cutter. All in a day's work, I don't think so, it's not a normal job and I want to be compensated for it... over reacting! maybe, maybe not.

I'll take a pay cut so that the company survives and gets it's act together. But at years end when the numbers come out and a profit is made, I want to be reimburse fully before the shareholders take a dime.

my two cent's