It’s always easy to reject a deal for some (perceived) lack, but one shouldn’t do that without knowing who’s gonna negotiate another and if you can expect them to get a better deal. I don’t know about the AC situation but if that different treatment of junior pilots doesn’t amount to a B-scale and is temporary only, those junior pilots should probably take a look at their long-term perspectives before deciding to reject.
She is not a leader. She should resign now. The deal does not address all of the moneys lost due to inflation over the past four years. The current deal on the table is barely a break even deal. It should be rejected.
Why even say that? Let pilots vote and then make up your mind to quit or not. You’re not buying YES votes with guilt.
A lot to process here -
In any event, this is an interesting case - with many nuances - we’ll soon know the outcome, but it won’t settle the question about whether the tactics were a smart strategy. I’m not there, so I don’t know all the reasoning behind her decision - but it is a head turning decision.
1 reply
It’s NOT about you.
If your reaction is to throw a tantrum, then you’re not mature enough to be a “boss”.
I recall seeing this from union negotiating heads several times over the years but have no sense of how it may have done statistically in terms of swaying membership vote. One could conclude, though, it does indicate the issuer doesn’t consider their union position the be-all and end-all of their career. This can be viewed as good or bad depending on your outlook, but I wouldn’t consider it a moral failure.
1 reply
When you make such threats to people who already feel unrepresented, I can see them saying “Buh-bye”.
This is not a B scale issue. This short fall dates back to bankruptcy in 2003 and the last ten year 2%/yr in 2014. The cumulative pay might have been acceptable if the company had made any effort to repair numerous quality of life issues, broadly scheduling, duty credit guarantees, and vacation. The company could have attracted junior pilots by limiting flat salary to one year versus four for new hires. Pilots are giving up a lot to come to AC and are required to live in Canada’s most expensive cities … difficult at 50k a year.
1 reply
It’s been my observation that, after flying for a U.S. Carrier for 32 years, that the younger generation of Pilots, generally speaking, are not at all interested in “paying their dues” they want everything that the Senior Pilots have earned through years of hard work, right now! Put your time in, like we have, and then when you get to where we are, you can reap the benefits. The sense of entitlement and instant gratification has not been a part of Airline flying for the past 50 plus years.
I concur - the “I’m worn out if this doesn’t work,” I understand - what I think is controversial is announcing it - both to the pilot group, and to management. Without knowing her motivations for doing that, I’m not judging - I would love to talk to her, and see what she was thinking - but in any event, it’s an interesting choice.
I have an idea, stop jumping from company to company, and you will earn your seniority pay in two years… so impatient.
Or just work a few years and make 200k… some people are just entitled.
Unfortunately there are only two major airlines in Canada and the nature of the industry (vis a vis seniority) means once you choose you’ve bought in and are “trapped”. Your comment reflects the typical man on the street view - do something else, go elsewhere, you knew when you applied.
To summarize, the money at AC isn’t bad until you compare it to anywhere else (EU, UK, US) and the working conditions (scheduling, training, vacation) are the worst in the wider industry.