Air Canada union slams Ottawa's intervention

[Mazmaz]

Another day, another union crushed.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/stor...ada-union.html

Back-to-work legislation headed for late-night debate and vote

Air Canada's largest employee union says the federal government's introduction of back-to-work legislation in advance of any work stoppage is an attack on workers' rights.

"The rights and wages of our members at Air Canada are being attacked by the federal government," Dave Ritchie, head of the Canadian branch of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, said.

The proposed legislation, if passed, would force an end to any labour disruption at Canada's largest airline. The 8,600-member machinists union has had a mandate to strike since Monday, and last week, the airline said it would lock out its 3,000 pilots at the same deadline.

But both job actions have been delayed indefinitely as Ottawa moved quickly to block any potential work disruption during the busy March break travel season. Citing undue harm that a shutdown would have on the economy, Labour Minister Lisa Raitt announced the proposed legislation on Monday.

"We will take swift actions to ensure that Canada's economic recovery is not negatively affected and that Canadians across the country who rely on air services are not unduly impacted," Raitt said.

The language of the bill calls for an arbitrator to implement what's known as a final offer selection — an option in negotiations that have typically reached an impasse. Instead of negotiating a halfway point, a final offer selection involves both sides pitching their cases, and the arbitrator picks one over the other, as a basis for a new agreement.

Raitt defended that option on Friday, noting the two sides have been at the bargaining table for the past 18 months without a solution.

"They've been around these issues," she told reporters in Ottawa. "It is appropriate for a final offer arbitration in this case."

"We're not saying the employer is correct and we're not saying the union is correct," Raitt added. "What we're saying is the Canadian public is caught in this and we're going to act because of them."

"It is time to get certainty back so they can move forward."

Closure motion

The government invoked closure Tuesday afternoon on a motion to speed up debate of the back-to-work legislation, Bill C-33, bringing the motion to a vote in the House of Commons by 8 p.m. ET. The closure motion's passage is all but assured by the Conservatives' majority, setting up four hours of non-stop debate on the back-to-work bill toward a final vote at about 2:30 a.m. ET Wednesday.

The bill would then go to the Senate, where the Conservatives would use their majority for similar swift passage, and the legislation could receive royal asset into law before the end of the week.

The machinists union said Tuesday the bill "goes beyond what was needed."

"It’s a sad day for any federally regulated worker in Canada because this legislation says you do not have the right to strike, period," Ritchie said. "This will undermine free collective bargaining and poison labour relations across Canada."

The airline says it is trying to strike a new deal with its business models to implement a sustainable model. For its part, the union wants to get back some concessions given up when the company restructured in 2004.

[Salodin]

Let's be fair though...something needs to be done about 18 months of negotiations. It's not right to take away their right to strike, but the union needs to realize they can't hold the industry hostage to their demands either.

[Siniroth]

They really should be allowed to stri- wait 18 months? Fuck that noise, that's ridiculous

[Mazmaz]

It's funny how every time with every union people come up with an excuse.
Canada Post? Those guys are public sector, they shouldn't get to strike!
Air Canada flight attendants? Fuck those guys, they shouldn't be getting more money.
Air Canada mechanics and pilots? lol 18 months GTFO

[Acturus]

Speaking as someone who's been in a fair amount of large corporate negotiations, 18 months of discussion is no big deal when you're dealing with a large group. The key statement is that they've been "at the table" for 18 months. Well, that statement means fuck-all in the grand scheme of things.

Being "at the table" just means that neither group is exercising any forms of binding arbitration or dispute resolution to achieve compromise.

They're not holding anyone hostage by negotiating for 18 months, unless it can be shown that the negotiations were not in good faith (which the article does not state). I'm in the middle of a negotiation that's been three years in development. We've been "at the table" with a business partner for THREE YEARS. We just haven't had the time to make a formal termination of the contract a priority.

Personally, I say both sides were equally generous in this situation by being willing to negotiate outside of a formal strike for that long.

I don't really care about Canada law or the rights of these workers or the issue specifically, but those of you reading, I wouldn't get so caught up in OMG 18 months! Both parties deserve the credit and the blame for that time table, since a union strike and/or a class action lawsuit are generally the next logical steps for unions to take.

[Mazmaz]

Let's not forget the call for the strike of the mechanics came at the same time as the call for the airline to lock out the pilots.

[Kaylia]

Mazmaz, since you have a strong opinion on this topic, I'm going to assume its well documented. Could you give me a link to a study that compare the working condition at Air canada to other airlines? Is it really bad?


Also, considering our goverment bailed them out a few months ago, and they would be taking canadian's economy in hostage with this strike, don't you think the goverment has its word to say?

[Mazmaz]

The workers bailed out Air Canada. The government can tell Air Canada to get its head out of its ass and pay its workers instead of raping the workers with its arbitrators' decisions.

http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/9368...t-intervention

The pilots have been trying to secure a new contract for more than a year. While negotiations continue, the pilots are flying under a 2009 agreement which expired almost one year ago. That agreement froze the pilots' pay for more than two years and provided Air Canada hundreds of millions of dollars in relief from its pension funding obligations

In contrast, Air Canada last year boosted compensation for its top five executives by 30 per cent. On March 31 of this year, Air Canada President and CEO Calin Rovinescu will collect a $5 million retention bonus for remaining in his position for three years.

In Air Canada's financial restructuring of 2003-2004, the pilots accepted pay cuts of 15 - 30 per cent and granted other concessions to keep the airline viable. Since that time, they have been unable to freely bargain a new contract and their pay rates are currently lower than they were a decade ago.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/...ttendants.html

The issues

Low-cost airline: Probably the biggest sticking point in the negotiations is Air Canada's plan to set up a low-cost carrier to service "leisure routes" to sun destinations like Mexico and the Caribbean in order to compete with the likes of Air Transat and West Jet.

Flight attendants fear such a move would poach routes away from the main carrier, threaten their job security and drive wages down.

According to the Canadian Union of Public Employees, the top wage at the low-cost airline would be only three-quarters of what veteran Air Canada flight attendants make (which is somewhere between $46,400 and $51,500 according to figures quoted by union and management representatives).

Air Canada reportedly plans to hire 1,400 flight attendants and 460 pilots for the discount carrier. In the second tentative agreement, the union withdrew clauses in which it had given its support in principle for the discount airline.

Wages: The second agreement includes wage hikes of 9.3 per cent over four years. The first agreement had proposed an increase of 12.6 per cent over five years. The starting salary for a flight attendant is $18,000 a year, which union members complain puts them below the poverty line.

Pensions: CUPE agreed to a blended pension model for new hires that will combine a defined benefit plan, which guarantees a set payout at retirement, and a defined contribution plan, in which the payout is variable and which is less costly for the employer.

Duty days: Management agreed to compensate flight attendants for a greater portion of overnight shifts on domestic flights that include airport layovers.

It agreed to the union's proposed "duty days minus four hours" model of compensation, meaning attendants would receive nine hours of wages for a 13-hour duty period as opposed to the current 6.5 hours of wages for such a shift. The changes wouldn't take effect until October 2012, which some union members feel is too long of an implementation period.

Banked time: Management reportedly withdrew an offer included in the first agreement to allow flight attendants to bank time for vacation days.

Per diems: Air Canada withdrew its offer to reduce the minimum length of a stopover required in order to have hotel room costs covered. It currently pays hotel costs only for stopovers of five hours or more, but in the first agreement it offered to reduce this to four hours.

Premiums: Management scrapped new rules that had been proposed in the first agreement that would have obliged it to pay premiums to junior flight attendants for some on-call shifts.

[Kaylia]

http://www.worldsalaries.org/flightattendant.shtml

So, about the same as USA, and more than everywhere else (talking about Europe). It's also a pretty decent pay considering the qualification it requires (or lack of).

[Mazmaz]

Cool. You responded to one part of the post and not the other parts. And your argument was "ALL FLIGHT ATTENDANTS SHOULD MAKE POVERTY WAGE BECAUSE ALL OTHER FLIGHT ATTENDANTS MAKE THAT".

[Kaylia]

What "other part" do you want me to address? That CEO are making lot of money because they can? Welcome to capitalism Mazmaz.

No one (but a few) like these injustices , but when you don't have a better solution to propose, bitching isn't going to solve the problems. Secondly, a wrong on one side doesn't make the other right. The bonus after a bailout (which I disagreed with btw) is wrong, but it doesn't make this strike right.

"ALL FLIGHT ATTENDANTS SHOULD MAKE POVERTY WAGE BECAUSE ALL OTHER FLIGHT ATTENDANTS MAKE THAT".

Because it's totally what I said.

[Mazmaz]

So basically, you don't think that

In Air Canada's financial restructuring of 2003-2004, the pilots accepted pay cuts of 15 - 30 per cent and granted other concessions to keep the airline viable. Since that time, they have been unable to freely bargain a new contract and their pay rates are currently lower than they were a decade ago.

is worth a strike. And you think it's ok for Air Canada (and probably other businesses after this) to not make an effort to negotiate because they know the government will force back to work legislation on unions if they threaten to strike.

Is that about all? Just want to sum up your argument against my points since I took the time to find them.

[Kaylia]

It could be a 90% pay cuts for all I care, if we don't know how much a pilot is worth, I can't fucking answer that question.

Are they worth pitying? Probably not considering they still have some of the best working conditions in the industry. Having the right to strike shouldn't be an obligation to strike every 4 years just because you can take the population in hostage as a bargaining card.