The Canadians "get it"

Re: The Canadians \"get it\"

Actually I orginally had thought that but wasn't totally sure sure didn't include it in my post. I'll just say thats insane.

-Matthew
 
Re: The Canadians \"get it\"

[ QUOTE ]
This shows a complete and fundamental lack of knowledge of how the pay scales work at most airlines. Fly bigger airplanes, get more money. Fly a 747, you get more than if you're flying a 737.

Comprende, senor?

So then. Flying a larger plane for the same wages as a smaller plane IS a pay cut.

Sounds like you've fallen for the management BS hook, line, and sinker. Thank God the guys at Air Canada didn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you and I reading the same thread??? Yes, I KNOW that the larger the plane you fly the more money you think you should get. You've missed my point entirely. I suggest you re-read my posts.

My definition of a pay cut is when your weekly paycheck is less than what you used to take home. I said that I don't see the harm in AC ASKING their pilots to fly the 777 for A343 rate, if it means that AC can order the 777 in order to provide a more stable and secure future for AC. The word "asking" in that last sentence means I know that the pilots expect to make more $$$ flying the 777 over the A343.

On the flip side of your assertion that I've fallen for the management BS, it could be stated that you've fallen for the union BS hook, line, and sinker just like the guys at Eastern did.

My spidey senses sense quite a bit of anger towards me in your posts. I hope that's not the case. I'm just having a good discussion with you here.
 
Re: The Canadians \"get it\"

[ QUOTE ]
I said that I don't see the harm in AC ASKING their pilots to fly the 777 for A343 rate, if it means that AC can order the 777 in order to provide a more stable and secure future for AC.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the business case for the 777 depends on lower wages for the pilots flying them, I guess they really don't create that more stable and secure future, do they?

I do see the harm in even ENTERTAINING the notion that a pilot should fly a larger airplane for lower wages unless there's something that management gives to those pilots, besides shiny new airplanes.

It's too bad you don't.

And it's a damn good thing the pilots at Air Canada did.

What you're seeing is nothing more than another ploy of management to get its employees to do more work for the same pay. Screw that.
 
Re: The Canadians \"get it\"

[ QUOTE ]
L1011 Fan
You seem to have a problem with the AC pilots rejecting the contract. In the past couple years the AC pilots have taken huge wage cuts and made a lot of concessions. The way it works at AC is that the bigger the plane, the more money you make. That's just the way it is. So now these pilots have made all these concessions and have a contract that says how much they should be paid and AC says well if we want these jets we're not gonna pay you according to the contract. I think I would be a little angry as well. The union does not have to much power, the company is making deals that are dependent on changing around the contract of the pilot's. That is not smart in my opinion. The pilots have simply taken a stand. They have made a lot of concessions and are tired of it. There are other issues with seniority that the pilots were angry about but still. You can't just make a deal with the union, then say we want bigger planes and are changing the deal for it. That is not the union having to much power that is the company being stupid. I think it's great that the pilots have said enough is enough.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, it is what I have always said, when things are good, the Union fights for pay raises and better work rules, so, when things are good, why should the company not fight for pay cuts & and more efficient use of scheduling the pilots for flights?
 
Re: The Canadians \"get it\"

I have always thought that it would be better for the pilot & the company to be paid based on number of years with the company rather than what equipment you fly. This way, in the event upgrading is not possible your pay would still increase.

The situation with Air Canada & the Union, is an internal problem, I have noticed people picking one side or the other, both sides are wrong & both are correct.
 
Re: The Canadians \"get it\"

[ QUOTE ]
If the business case for the 777 depends on lower wages for the pilots flying them, I guess they really don't create that more stable and secure future, do they?

[/ QUOTE ]

This goes back to whole point of my post. AC wanted the 777/787 combo in order to lower costs to help the airline SURVIVE. If AC can't find a way to fly more efficient airplanes in the wake of $60, $70, and possibly $80/barrel oil then AC won't be around much longer. Don't you understand what I'm trying to say? IF AC doesn't lower their costs, the pilots won't be around to fly any of their planes. Buying these planes was part of strategy to survive. AC surviving means paying jobs for the pilots, thereby providing a more stable and secure future. The airline doesn't survive then there are no paying jobs for their pilots. It's really quite simple.

[ QUOTE ]
I do see the harm in even ENTERTAINING the notion that a pilot should fly a larger airplane for lower wages unless there's something that management gives to those pilots, besides shiny new airplanes.

It's too bad you don't.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the long term survival of the company means doing so then I suggest you are incorrect here, not me.

[ QUOTE ]
And it's a damn good thing the pilots at Air Canada did.

[/ QUOTE ]

If AC folds in a few years b/c they were unable to remain competitive, will you still feel this way when the pilots start to lose their jobs? Again, I maintain that AC's union voting down this purchase was a near-term "me me me" vote that didn't consider the long term ramifications.

[ QUOTE ]
What you're seeing is nothing more than another ploy of management to get its employees to do more work for the same pay. Screw that.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know what...maybe, just maybe, you are correct here. Neither I nor you know what's really going on inside the boardroom and union meeting rooms. You could very well be right here but this still doesn't negate the fact that all airlines, including AC (and even WN) need to be relentless in their pursuit of cost cutting/controlling costs in order to survive. Aside from the oil crunch of the 1970's, the downturn the airline industry has experienced in the last few years is unprecendented. Like I said before, the old way of doing things isn't going to work anymore.

I wish AC best of luck...they're going to need it.
 
Re: The Canadians \"get it\"

[ QUOTE ]
This goes back to whole point of my post. AC wanted the 777/787 combo in order to lower costs to help the airline SURVIVE.

[/ QUOTE ]

So they say. I'm not buying. Nor is the pilot's union. And if they're so much more efficient, paying the pilots more to fly them ain't gonna be a problem, right?

[ QUOTE ]
Like I said before, the old way of doing things isn't going to work anymore.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Paradigm shift, new realities, leveraging our assets to create shareholder value, all that. You seem to buy it. I don't.

Know what the biggest lie on Wall Street is? This time, it's different.
 
Re: The Canadians \"get it\"

[ QUOTE ]
So they say. I'm not buying. Nor is the pilot's union. And if they're so much more efficient, paying the pilots more to fly them ain't gonna be a problem, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

I addressed this issue with a previous post to Max. The answer is no.

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Paradigm shift, new realities, leveraging our assets to create shareholder value, all that. You seem to buy it. I don't.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, then what would you do in the face of falling pax demand, unprecedented rising fuel costs, higher security costs, overcapacity, and vicious competition?

Are you telling me that oil prices rising, fierce competition, overcapacity, and falling ticket prices AREN'T a problem?

How exactly would you fix these problems and still give everything the pilots want? I'm anxious to hear your cure for this problem...
 
Re: The Canadians \"get it\"

[ QUOTE ]
OK, then what would you do in the face of falling pax demand, unprecedented rising fuel costs, higher security costs, overcapacity, and vicious competition?

[/ QUOTE ]

Falling pax demand? Well, that's just flat out wrong. Pax demand is going UP! We are at pre-September 11 traffic levels, and nobody predicts that the number of passengers is going to go down -- they are all saying it will go up. They are predicting gridlock.

You've got 70-80 percent loads. That's not declining passenger demand.

Now, crazy ole liberal me would say, hey, know what? We've got planes filled to capacity. Let's raise our fares. If the Air Greyhound types who want to pay $200 for a transcon go away, so be it. We'll have a few more empty seats, but we'll make up for it because now we're charging more, and we'll also reduce the congestion at airports.

What do you get when you do this? Shorter lines at security. Employees that can actually take care of the customer instead of just processing them. And passengers that you actually make money on.

So of course they won't do it.
 
Re: The Canadians \"get it\"

Maybe I should make this a little more clear.

CANADA IS FULL OF SOCIALIST COMMIES THAT WILL MAKE SURE THAT AIR CANADA STAYS AFLOAT. I DON'T THINK ANYONE HAS TO WORRY ABOUT AIR CANADA REALLY DISAPEARING.

Did I get your attention?
 
Re: The Canadians \"get it\"

Freakin commies........they're everywhere!
grin.gif
 
Re: The Canadians \"get it\"

John, I wasn't listening; did you say something?


grin.gif
grin.gif
grin.gif


Commies? I know our good friends to the north are a tad backwards but i don't think they're commies
smile.gif
 
Re: The Canadians \"get it\"

They're proud to be socialists, with pretty good job creation rates. Higher than ours.

Hmmmm.
 
Re: The Canadians \"get it\"

[ QUOTE ]
They're proud to be socialists, with pretty good job creation rates. Higher than ours.

Hmmmm.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps, but I can tell you as someone with firsthand knowledge (I'm french-Canadian with plenty of family up there) they certainly wish they didn't have such high taxes!
 
Re: The Canadians \"get it\"

[ QUOTE ]
they certainly wish they didn't have such high taxes!

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, cause everyone loves paying taxes.
cwm27.gif
 
Re: The Canadians \"get it\"

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
they certainly wish they didn't have such high taxes!

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, cause everyone loves paying taxes.
cwm27.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, I'll rephrase. They look at the taxes we pay (in NH for example) and wish they could pay that amount and not the higher amounts in Canada.

I also have friends in Sweden and they complain about taxes too. But then again, they don't have to pay much for college out there...


There are rumblings over on a.net and in the WSJ that the AC 777/787 deal may not be dead after all. I guess we'll see...
 
Re: The Canadians \"get it\"

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, I'll rephrase. They look at the taxes we pay (in NH for example) and wish they could pay that amount and not the higher amounts in Canada.

I also have friends in Sweden and they complain about taxes too. But then again, they don't have to pay much for college out there...

[/ QUOTE ]There's the rub. They want to pay our taxes, but I bet they wouldn't give up socialized medicine.
 
Re: The Canadians \"get it\"

[ QUOTE ]
They're proud to be socialists, with pretty good job creation rates. Higher than ours.

Hmmmm.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most of the Canadians that I know complain like hell about the high taxes, of course they love their country, but they hate the high taxes. Of course the minute I mention about their health care system & how would they pay for it, they get very quiet.
 
Re: The Canadians \"get it\"

[ QUOTE ]
Most of the Canadians that I know complain like hell about the high taxes, of course they love their country, but they hate the high taxes. Of course the minute I mention about their health care system & how would they pay for it, they get very quiet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, you get what you pay for. They pay higher taxes but they get cradle to grave health care, college is pretty much taken care of, and so on.

We pay lower taxes but we have to cough up the money to pay for those things.

We can debate the live long day which is better, but that's the bottom line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top