https://www.theglobeandmail.com/busines ... e-mandate/

May 19th is apparently the day to circle on the calendar.

And there you have it, Westjet has grown to be a full airline folks ... it now has to deal with big boy issues.

I was surprised to hear that they were looking to hire WS pilots to fly for SWOOP, by offering them leaves of absence. Shoddy practices that would not make their existing employees happy.

And today there was that article about snooping and recording employees/the service that came out.

WS is no longer that cute little airline.

Are Encore pilots separate from the mainline group?

yhu wrote:

Are Encore pilots separate from the mainline group?

That's a good question.

From the article:

The airline will try to operate if there is a full strike, he said.

Assuming Encore pilots are separate from mainline, other than wet leasing every available spare 737 out there from the likes of Air North, Canadian North, First Air, etc., how?

It's ironic how the current banner on AC's homepage says 'Book with confidence'. https://www.aircanada.com/ca/en/aco/home.html

yhu wrote:

Are Encore pilots separate from the mainline group?

Yes Encore pilots are separate from the mainline pilots under this strike vote.

While May 19th is the date pilots can officially strike, with 72 hrs notice, ALPA has agreed there will be no action taken over the May long weekend.

I think the actions of the company at the negotiations table will now dictate whether a strike proceeds or not. It's to bad it has had to go to this to get them there.

Dominion301 wrote:

yhu wrote:

Are Encore pilots separate from the mainline group?

That's a good question.

From the article:

The airline will try to operate if there is a full strike, he said.

Assuming Encore pilots are separate from mainline, other than wet leasing every available spare 737 out there from the likes of Air North, Canadian North, First Air, etc., how?

It's ironic how the current banner on AC's homepage says 'Book with confidence'. https://www.aircanada.com/ca/en/aco/home.html

In a press release, Montreal-based Air Canada said "it is ready to adjust its schedules and capacity to limit disruptions for the traveling public and to ensure that customers get to their destinations in the event of a labour disruption," at its Calgary-based rival.

It's a repeat of the stunt that WestJet pulled on Air Canada back in 2011, when Air Canada was facing a looming strike of its own.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/air-can ... -1.4637093

AC hasn't been shy about preparing for this.

Dominion301 wrote:

Assuming Encore pilots are separate from mainline, other than wet leasing every available spare 737 out there from the likes of Air North, Canadian North, First Air, etc., how?

I doubt wet leasing will be much of an option. Air Transat, Canadian North, and First Air are all fellow ALPA groups. It’s extremely unlikely that they would take on struck work, especially from another pilot group in the same union.

Encore is also ALPA, but a separate group from WestJet. They would fly their normally scheduled flights, but will doubtlessly be in close coordination with WestJet union leadership to ensure that no extra sections are operated that are covering for struck work.

Given the increasingly close relationship between WestJet and Delta, I’m sure DAL ALPA is monitoring the situation too to make sure no extra trans-border flights are operated to cover for WestJet.

berari wrote:

And there you have it, Westjet has grown to be a full airline folks ... it now has to deal with big boy issues.

I was surprised to hear that they were looking to hire WS pilots to fly for SWOOP, by offering them leaves of absence. Shoddy practices that would not make their existing employees happy.

And today there was that article about snooping and recording employees/the service that came out.

WS is no longer that cute little airline.

They never were cute. Resorting to tactics like going through your competitors garbage & having the CEO overtly state the need to throw out employees that don’t fit their “yes men model”, is hardly cute.

The perception of being cute by offering free yoga classes, but at the expense of benefits shows what it is truly like to work at Westjet.

If WestJet pilots do strike and if WestJet makes the choice to have say encore or other possible contract pilots to fly struck work, they would be considered scabs FOREVER even when someone dies their names never get erased from the scab list. Now in the digital age, it’s very hard to hide if someone decides to cross a picket line. The inter webs got the full resume/background and address of the FO who decided to cross the picket line during the spirit strike, and posted it even before they landed.

Hope WestJet pilots get the contract they deserve. Culture doesn’t pay the bills.

Alias1024 wrote:

Dominion301 wrote:

Assuming Encore pilots are separate from mainline, other than wet leasing every available spare 737 out there from the likes of Air North, Canadian North, First Air, etc., how?

I doubt wet leasing will be much of an option. Air Transat, Canadian North, and First Air are all fellow ALPA groups. It’s extremely unlikely that they would take on struck work, especially from another pilot group in the same union.

Encore is also ALPA, but a separate group from WestJet. They would fly their normally scheduled flights, but will doubtlessly be in close coordination with WestJet union leadership to ensure that no extra sections are operated that are covering for struck work.

Given the increasingly close relationship between WestJet and Delta, I’m sure DAL ALPA is monitoring the situation too to make sure no extra trans-border flights are operated to cover for WestJet.

That’s so very true. I forgot about that. I guess “try to operate “ = fly Encore routes only.

How does a YYT-YHZ-YOW-YYZ-YQT-YWG-YXE-YEG-YLW-YVR-YYJ Q400 transcon sound? An avgeek’s dream?

FlyinRabbit88 wrote:

If WestJet pilots do strike and if WestJet makes the choice to have say encore or other possible contract pilots to fly struck work, they would be considered scabs FOREVER even when someone dies their names never get erased from the scab list. Now in the digital age, it’s very hard to hide if someone decides to cross a picket line. The inter webs got the full resume/background and address of the FO who decided to cross the picket line during the spirit strike, and posted it even before they landed.

Hope WestJet pilots get the contract they deserve. Culture doesn’t pay the bills.

“Culture doesn’t pay the bills”.

As always, the passengers are the ones who get the punishment during fights between the employees, unions, and corporate. That is why when I hear of passengers yelling/swearing/treating front-line employees badly, I yawn. We pay for a service, we should get it.

1900Driver wrote:

berari wrote:

And there you have it, Westjet has grown to be a full airline folks ... it now has to deal with big boy issues.

I was surprised to hear that they were looking to hire WS pilots to fly for SWOOP, by offering them leaves of absence. Shoddy practices that would not make their existing employees happy.

And today there was that article about snooping and recording employees/the service that came out.

WS is no longer that cute little airline.

They never were cute. Resorting to tactics like going through your competitors garbage & having the CEO overtly state the need to throw out employees that don’t fit their “yes men model”, is hardly cute.

The perception of being cute by offering free yoga classes, but at the expense of benefits shows what it is truly like to work at Westjet.

From the average customers standpoint, they are cute. Ask anyone in AB that sees them as a homegrown airline.

Of course you and I know about their espionage, the corporate culture that went down the shits when it became more about the shareholder and less about the company/people/culture.

When it comes to strikes, disruption and privacy issues that they are experiencing now, it's a different story.

Super80Fan wrote:

As always, the passengers are the ones who get the punishment during fights between the employees, unions, and corporate. That is why when I hear of passengers yelling/swearing/treating front-line employees badly, I yawn. We pay for a service, we should get it.

I yawn every time a self entitled passenger gets put in their place by a front line employee. Just because you pay for a service doesn't mean you get to act like a donkey

Dominion301 wrote:

yhu wrote:

Are Encore pilots separate from the mainline group?

That's a good question.

From the article:

The airline will try to operate if there is a full strike, he said.

Assuming Encore pilots are separate from mainline, other than wet leasing every available spare 737 out there from the likes of Air North, Canadian North, First Air, etc., how?

It's ironic how the current banner on AC's homepage says 'Book with confidence'. https://www.aircanada.com/ca/en/aco/home.html

Westjet were the first to do it years ago, when AC pilots were negotiating.

This is a great thread. Literally a textbook example of how to turn someone from being union- neutral to mildly union-curious into a strong anti-union in 3 minutes.

Super80Fan wrote:

As always, the passengers are the ones who get the punishment during fights between the employees, unions, and corporate. That is why when I hear of passengers yelling/swearing/treating front-line employees badly, I yawn. We pay for a service, we should get it.

Nobody strikes to hurt the passengers. They strike because they have exhausted all other options.

Dominion301 wrote:

Alias1024 wrote:

Dominion301 wrote:

Assuming Encore pilots are separate from mainline, other than wet leasing every available spare 737 out there from the likes of Air North, Canadian North, First Air, etc., how?

I doubt wet leasing will be much of an option. Air Transat, Canadian North, and First Air are all fellow ALPA groups. It’s extremely unlikely that they would take on struck work, especially from another pilot group in the same union.

Encore is also ALPA, but a separate group from WestJet. They would fly their normally scheduled flights, but will doubtlessly be in close coordination with WestJet union leadership to ensure that no extra sections are operated that are covering for struck work.

Given the increasingly close relationship between WestJet and Delta, I’m sure DAL ALPA is monitoring the situation too to make sure no extra trans-border flights are operated to cover for WestJet.

That’s so very true. I forgot about that. I guess “try to operate “ = fly Encore routes only.

How does a YYT-YHZ-YOW-YYZ-YQT-YWG-YXE-YEG-YLW-YVR-YYJ Q400 transcon sound? An avgeek’s dream?

I can tell you:

I frequently "cross" half of Canada by Dash 8, doing my pairings:

I could be doing YYC-YXE-YWG-YQT on one day, then YQT-YYZ-YOW-YQB, then YQB-YUL-YSJ-YUL. It's a little slower than a 737

kalvado wrote:

This is a great thread. Literally a textbook example of how to turn someone from being union- neutral to mildly union-curious into a strong anti-union in 3 minutes.

If the preceding fifteen replies to a post on the airliners.net Civil Aviation forum were all it took to change your mind on a topic, I'm thinking you didn't really have much of an opinion of your own to begin with.

N353SK wrote:

Nobody strikes to hurt the passengers. They strike because they have exhausted all other options.

That's how I see this chain of events.

The Westjet pilots don't want to strike. They don't want anything outlandish, they just want the opportunity to negotiate. It appears that option has been continually denied them! Hopefully, this turn of events will bring the parties together at the negotiating table.

longhauler wrote:

N353SK wrote:

Nobody strikes to hurt the passengers. They strike because they have exhausted all other options.

That's how I see this chain of events.

The Westjet pilots don't want to strike. They don't want anything outlandish, they just want the opportunity to negotiate. It appears that option has been continually denied them! Hopefully, this turn of events will bring the parties together at the negotiating table.

Indeed. Hopefully at the end of the day a settlement is reached without a strike. The pilots lost a good 10 months of negotiating time with the Saretsky authoritarian regime in place that didn't even want to acknowledge the existence of there now being a union presence within WestJet.

FlyinRabbit88 wrote:

If WestJet pilots do strike and if WestJet makes the choice to have say encore or other possible contract pilots to fly struck work, they would be considered scabs FOREVER even when someone dies their names never get erased from the scab list. Now in the digital age, it’s very hard to hide if someone decides to cross a picket line. The inter webs got the full resume/background and address of the FO who decided to cross the picket line during the spirit strike, and posted it even before they landed.

Hope WestJet pilots get the contract they deserve. Culture doesn’t pay the bills.

Threatening someone just because they want to go to work... Ain't unions grand?

kalvado wrote:

This is a great thread. Literally a textbook example of how to turn someone from being union- neutral to mildly union-curious into a strong anti-union in 3 minutes.

AMEN.

roadpilot wrote:

Super80Fan wrote:

As always, the passengers are the ones who get the punishment during fights between the employees, unions, and corporate. That is why when I hear of passengers yelling/swearing/treating front-line employees badly, I yawn. We pay for a service, we should get it.

I yawn every time a self entitled passenger gets put in their place by a front line employee. Just because you pay for a service doesn't mean you get to act like a donkey

/thread

[quote="1900Driver"][quote="berari"]And there you have it, Westjet has grown to be a full airline folks ... it now has to deal with big boy issues.

I was surprised to hear that they were looking to hire WS pilots to fly for SWOOP, by offering them leaves of absence. Shoddy practices that would not make their existing

They never were cute. Resorting to tactics like going through your competitors garbage.....

Get your story straight.

It wasn’t WestJet who were digging through garbage at 574 Island Road in Victoria in Feb and March 2003 and were caught twice, with photographic evidence of the team in the rented white pick up truck from Richmond BC doing so, with evidence later obtained indicating such practices may have been, um, a little more common and geographically diverse than people might want to believe.

longhauler wrote:

N353SK wrote:

Nobody strikes to hurt the passengers. They strike because they have exhausted all other options.

That's how I see this chain of events.

The Westjet pilots don't want to strike. They don't want anything outlandish, they just want the opportunity to negotiate. It appears that option has been continually denied them! Hopefully, this turn of events will bring the parties together at the negotiating table.

Agreed. They're well aware that striking hurts the passengers. That's why they specifically came out and said they would avoid striking over the long weekend. This all stems from WS management's refusal to negotiate in good faith with them. Then trying to outsource their work to Swoop, by offering leaves of absence from mainline, and now even looking for foreign workers.

All they want is to negotiate an industry standard contract. And WS management till recently essentially ignored the union. That's not negotiating in good faith. A strike is the last thing these guys and gals want. You think they'd prefer to be standing outside holding a picket sign? Absolutely not. But it's the only leverage they have to show management they're serious. And you know what? It's working. Even the threat of a strike is hurting bookings. Hopefully management cleans their act up and negotiates in good faith to get these folks a contract.

They're not asking for a ton of money. They're asking to be paid similarly to what other people flying similar metal are.

I work for an ALPA carrier (Though I'm not flight crew) and ALPA and management here have extremely good relations. We haven't had a strike, negotiations have never drawn out, and the crews haven't asked for the world. The pilots get the work rules they negotiated in a contract, the company can plan around the costs/work rules for the duration of the contract, and everyone's happy, and planes come and go like they're supposed to. It takes two to tango after all

longhauler wrote:

N353SK wrote:

Nobody strikes to hurt the passengers. They strike because they have exhausted all other options.

That's how I see this chain of events.

The Westjet pilots don't want to strike. They don't want anything outlandish, they just want the opportunity to negotiate. It appears that option has been continually denied them! Hopefully, this turn of events will bring the parties together at the negotiating table.

goboeing wrote:

kalvado wrote:

This is a great thread. Literally a textbook example of how to turn someone from being union- neutral to mildly union-curious into a strong anti-union in 3 minutes.

If the preceding fifteen replies to a post on the airliners.net Civil Aviation forum were all it took to change your mind on a topic, I'm thinking you didn't really have much of an opinion of your own to begin with.

ANd the way me as a passenger sees this is that pilots not only going to strike - which is sort of OK for me, maybe, as part of labor dispute - but also explicitly want to block any attempts to accomodate affected passengers, which is not too unlike taking hostages.
And while we're at this - do you guys know any company which works on single pilot technology? May be a good investment for my money..

kalvado wrote:

longhauler wrote:

N353SK wrote:

Nobody strikes to hurt the passengers. They strike because they have exhausted all other options.

That's how I see this chain of events.

The Westjet pilots don't want to strike. They don't want anything outlandish, they just want the opportunity to negotiate. It appears that option has been continually denied them! Hopefully, this turn of events will bring the parties together at the negotiating table.

goboeing wrote:

kalvado wrote:

This is a great thread. Literally a textbook example of how to turn someone from being union- neutral to mildly union-curious into a strong anti-union in 3 minutes.

If the preceding fifteen replies to a post on the airliners.net Civil Aviation forum were all it took to change your mind on a topic, I'm thinking you didn't really have much of an opinion of your own to begin with.

ANd the way me as a passenger sees this is that pilots not only going to strike - which is sort of OK for me, maybe, as part of labor dispute - but also explicitly want to block any attempts to accomodate affected passengers, which is not too unlike taking hostages.
And while we're at this - do you guys know any company which works on single pilot technology? May be a good investment for my money..

Not the case at all. The other ALPA carriers would be showing solidarity with the WS ALPA members. Why would you undermine other dues paying members? No one is being held hostage. If you're concerned that labour action might disrupt your plans, book a different carrier. Seems simple enough.

Of course it's the passengers that lose. Which is why WS pilots have said specifically as a show of good faith they won't strike over the long weekend.

Again, they aren't asking for the world, they just want to be compensated for the job they're doing similarly to other pilot groups. And before you say they could leave and go somewhere else, it's really easy to say when you're not the one who would lose years of seniority and have to go to the bottom of the payscale and seniority list somewhere else, holding a reserve block.

roadpilot wrote:

Super80Fan wrote:

As always, the passengers are the ones who get the punishment during fights between the employees, unions, and corporate. That is why when I hear of passengers yelling/swearing/treating front-line employees badly, I yawn. We pay for a service, we should get it.

I yawn every time a self entitled passenger gets put in their place by a front line employee. Just because you pay for a service doesn't mean you get to act like a donkey

Maybe do your job and it wouldn't happen as much? I treat frontline employees the way I want to be treated, not bothering them unless I need something, saying please and thank you, making small talk etc. The nice thing about going to an aviation school is that I have contacts at almost every major airline. In the rare occasion one of you start acting up, I call one of my friends in corporate and that usually resolves the issue.

Fly the dang plane, you're still getting paid to do so and many others are relying on you to keep that schedule going.

diverted wrote:

Not the case at all. The other ALPA carriers would be showing solidarity with the WS ALPA members. Why would you undermine other dues paying members? No one is being held hostage. If you're concerned that labour action might disrupt your plans, book a different carrier. Seems simple enough.

Of course it's the passengers that lose. Which is why WS pilots have said specifically as a show of good faith they won't strike over the long weekend.

Again, they aren't asking for the world, they just want to be compensated for the job they're doing similarly to other pilot groups. And before you say they could leave and go somewhere else, it's really easy to say when you're not the one who would lose years of seniority and have to go to the bottom of the payscale and seniority list somewhere else, holding a reserve block.

So you strike against passengers, not only against company. Case closed.
And seniority is something fully supported by the union, as far as I understand. Was there any attempt to make total hours count towards position at a different carrier, for example? I don't think so. Because that will, ugh, undermine standing of other dues paying members...

Super80Fan wrote:

roadpilot wrote:

Super80Fan wrote:

As always, the passengers are the ones who get the punishment during fights between the employees, unions, and corporate. That is why when I hear of passengers yelling/swearing/treating front-line employees badly, I yawn. We pay for a service, we should get it.

I yawn every time a self entitled passenger gets put in their place by a front line employee. Just because you pay for a service doesn't mean you get to act like a donkey

Maybe do your job and it wouldn't happen as much? I treat frontline employees the way I want to be treated, not bothering them unless I need something, saying please and thank you, making small talk etc. The nice thing about going to an aviation school is that I have contacts at almost every major airline. In the rare occasion one of you start acting up, I call one of my friends in corporate and that usually resolves the issue.

Fly the dang plane, you're still getting paid to do so and many others are relying on you to keep that schedule going.

Well, sounds like you're not one of the people getting put in their place by a front line employee. Kudos. But treating aviation employees as second class citizens is still a d*ck move. "In the rare occasion one of you start acting up." Get off your high horse

kalvado wrote:

diverted wrote:

Not the case at all. The other ALPA carriers would be showing solidarity with the WS ALPA members. Why would you undermine other dues paying members? No one is being held hostage. If you're concerned that labour action might disrupt your plans, book a different carrier. Seems simple enough.

Of course it's the passengers that lose. Which is why WS pilots have said specifically as a show of good faith they won't strike over the long weekend.

Again, they aren't asking for the world, they just want to be compensated for the job they're doing similarly to other pilot groups. And before you say they could leave and go somewhere else, it's really easy to say when you're not the one who would lose years of seniority and have to go to the bottom of the payscale and seniority list somewhere else, holding a reserve block.

So you strike against passengers, not only against company. Case closed.
And seniority is something fully supported by the union, as far as I understand. Was there any attempt to make total hours count towards position at a different carrier, for example? I don't think so. Because that will, ugh, undermine standing of other dues paying members...

Company seniority. Yes. Look at how merging seniority lists go during a merger. Total hours has nothing to do with the position. It's date of hire. There's FO's at my employer flying today with double the time of the guy sitting in the left seat.

Now, explain to me how pilots are supposed to strike against the company and not affect passengers? The only thing I can think of is a bus strike where the bus drivers kept driving, but refused to accept payment for fares. Unfortunately pilots can't do that, or I'm sure they would. I'd still rather an organized strike where you have advanced notice and can change your travel plans, as opposed to a wildcat strike, or pilots grounding aircraft for every little snag.

Again, it's not like the pilots are asking for the world. They just want an industry standard contract. Considering WS has made a profit every quarter for what, 13 consecutive years now, I think that's entirely fair.

jimbo737 wrote:

1900Driver wrote:

berari wrote:

And there you have it, Westjet has grown to be a full airline folks ... it now has to deal with big boy issues.

I was surprised to hear that they were looking to hire WS pilots to fly for SWOOP, by offering them leaves of absence. Shoddy practices that would not make their existing

They never were cute. Resorting to tactics like going through your competitors garbage.....

Get your story straight.

It wasn’t WestJet who were digging through garbage at 574 Island Road in Victoria in Feb and March 2003 and were caught twice, with photographic evidence of the team in the rented white pick up truck from Richmond BC doing so, with evidence later obtained indicating such practices may have been, um, a little more common and geographically diverse than people might want to believe.

While I'm going to refrain from any personal comment or opinion on the situation itself, let's not forget why private investigators were going through Mr. Hill's garbage in the first place (allegedly ).

jimbo737 wrote:

1900Driver wrote:

berari wrote:

And there you have it, Westjet has grown to be a full airline folks ... it now has to deal with big boy issues.

I was surprised to hear that they were looking to hire WS pilots to fly for SWOOP, by offering them leaves of absence. Shoddy practices that would not make their existing

They never were cute. Resorting to tactics like going through your competitors garbage.....

Get your story straight.

It wasn’t WestJet who were digging through garbage at 574 Island Road in Victoria in Feb and March 2003 and were caught twice, with photographic evidence of the team in the rented white pick up truck from Richmond BC doing so, with evidence later obtained indicating such practices may have been, um, a little more common and geographically diverse than people might want to believe.

This is the story!
It was Air Canada that went through Mark Hill's garbages for retrieving hard copies of AC corporate data. He was a Westjet executive that was passed along a password from a former Canadian Airlines employee who had still access to the AC website, that was at one point accessed more than 4,500 times or so. Westjet matched every major route scheduled to Air Canada plus they had all data on passengers loads. A private investigator hired by AC, followed Hill on an Air Canada flight to Miami with his girlfriend and it is that event that prompted the lawsuit. They sat next to each other as Hill was working along on his computer, apparently being cocky and all. Westjet fired Hill and settled the case for money given to charity.

diverted wrote:

Now, explain to me how pilots are supposed to strike against the company and not affect passengers? The only thing I can think of is a bus strike where the bus drivers kept driving, but refused to accept payment for fares. Unfortunately pilots can't do that, or I'm sure they would. I'd still rather an organized strike where you have advanced notice and can change your travel plans, as opposed to a wildcat strike, or pilots grounding aircraft for every little snag.

Again, it's not like the pilots are asking for the world. They just want an industry standard contract. Considering WS has made a profit every quarter for what, 13 consecutive years now, I think that's entirely fair.

Well,

diverted wrote:

Not the case at all. The other ALPA carriers would be showing solidarity with the WS ALPA members. Why would you undermine other dues paying members? No one is being held hostage. If you're concerned that labour action might disrupt your plans, book a different carrier. Seems simple enough.

So damage to the carrier is not the only point - it is about ensuring that passengers are stranded. If pax re-accomodated on other carriers - possibly with extra flights - original carrier is still in a loosing position, and money go to those with proper contract. But no, solidarity...
Really, guys, you are carefully destroying any sympathy. Well, at least it is not xmas season, I am willing to give a credit for that.

Labour law in Canada allows for a negotiating process. While the pilots have tried over the past year, the previous CEO refused to even acknowledge the requests. Some may come hard against unions, but it is just these bullying tactics that justify the very union's existance.

So ... after a year of trying, with no progess, how would the anti-union, anti-strike, a-netters on here resolve this issue? Remember, this strike process is entirely legal within the labour code of Canada and after a long involved process, it is the last resort.

kalvado wrote:

And while we're at this - do you guys know any company which works on single pilot technology? May be a good investment for my money..

Actually kalvado, WestJet could be an operator of single pilot aircraft (i.e. CapeAir C402s right now, or single-pilot 737s a hundred years from now), but this issue would still be the same in that case.

The single-pilot aircraft pilots of that hypothetical WestJet would still be using the system to advance towards the option of a strike in this time of stalled negotiations.

So, your point is moot.

YULACYYZ wrote:

jimbo737 wrote:

1900Driver wrote:

This is the story!
It was Air Canada that went through Mark Hill's garbages for retrieving hard copies of AC corporate data. He was a Westjet executive that was passed along a password from a former Canadian Airlines employee who had still access to the AC website, that was at one point accessed more than 4,500 times or so. Westjet matched every major route scheduled to Air Canada plus they had all data on passengers loads. A private investigator hired by AC, followed Hill on an Air Canada flight to Miami with his girlfriend and it is that event that prompted the lawsuit. They sat next to each other as Hill was working along on his computer, apparently being cocky and all. Westjet fired Hill and settled the case for money given to charity.

Thanks for the story. To whoever is keeping a grudge about this, that was many moons ago with different leaders involved and settled.

To the basic Canadian, Westjet was the cute alternative to the behemoths that we had in AC and CP, where air travel costs where high, and a new entrant that drummed up low cost service was welcomed. In AB, WS is still held near and dear, likely because it's a homegrown airline that also employs many in the province. It's a different airline now. Its current laundry is aired in media, its "owner" employees that "care" are disgruntled, and it's less about the customer and more about the shareholder now.

kalvado wrote:

I am considering single pilot operation as a step to fully automatic one AND as a way to create surplus of pilots. Which should help a bit..

Well, if you have one pilot, you'd better have a system in place to have the thing finish the whole flight itself in the event that the single pilot conks out.

And if you've worked with the FAA and seen how they operate, because that's who it would have to initially go through, then you may have worked with a different FAA than I have.

And in that case, it should be a wise investment!

Just a couple more days and they'll have the infrastructure all setup.

Right after they're finished with NextGen, which was supposed to be done......oh, ten years ago. And a few billion dollars over budget.

goboeing wrote:

kalvado wrote:

And while we're at this - do you guys know any company which works on single pilot technology? May be a good investment for my money..

Actually kalvado, WestJet could be an operator of single pilot aircraft (i.e. CapeAir C402s right now, or single-pilot 737s a hundred years from now), but this issue would still be the same in that case.

The single-pilot aircraft pilots of that hypothetical WestJet would still be using the system to advance towards the option of a strike in this time of stalled negotiations.

So, your point is moot.

I am considering single pilot operation as a step to fully automatic one AND as a way to create surplus of pilots. Which should help a bit..

berari wrote:

Of course you and I know about their espionage, the corporate culture that went down the shits when it became more about the shareholder and less about the company/people/culture.

This could explain in a nutshell why there are so many WN loyalists out there...while there have been a lot of corporate moves in the past decade that have been geared towards the shareholder, they still have some semblance of staying true to their culture in that airline (e.g. "bags fly free"), and not completely foresaking it just to completely nickel and dime the customer while simultaneously driving company morale into the ground.

longhauler wrote:

Labour law in Canada allows for a negotiating process. While the pilots have tried over the past year, the previous CEO refused to even acknowledge the requests. Some may come hard against unions, but it is just these bullying tactics that justify the very union's existance.

So ... after a year of trying, with no progess, how would the anti-union, anti-strike, a-netters on here resolve this issue? Remember, this strike process is entirely legal within the labour code of Canada and after a long involved process, it is the last resort.

I have a megaton of respect for you, longhauler, so please don't interpret this as being snarky...

(Full disclaimer: I am just about as anti-union as they come)

I would attempt to resolve the issue between me and my employer the same way the millions of non-unionized employees* in Canada already do. If you are no longer comfortable with the pay/benefits you currently receive, you talk to your employer about it. If your employer is unwilling to budge on any mark, then you have two choices. You accept what you are currently paid, or you seek employment elsewhere (be it a different job within the company or with a different employer altogether).

*As per StatsCan data from 2015, 31.8% of Canadians were dues-paying union members.

I'm not going to discuss anything related to this specific potential strike because, while I personally disagree with it, I understand and respect that it will be completely legal under the Labour Code.

AWACSooner wrote:

berari wrote:

Of course you and I know about their espionage, the corporate culture that went down the shits when it became more about the shareholder and less about the company/people/culture.

This could explain in a nutshell why there are so many WN loyalists out there...while there have been a lot of corporate moves in the past decade that have been geared towards the shareholder, they still have some semblance of staying true to their culture in that airline (e.g. "bags fly free"), and not completely foresaking it just to completely nickel and dime the customer while simultaneously driving company morale into the ground.

Also, WN's pilots have been unionized for eons. While they've had a few hiccups along the way with management, they have yet to ever go on strike. That speaks volumes about union-management relations at that airline.

IF WS pilots go on strike, WS senior management have no one to blame but themselves.

RJLover wrote:

I would attempt to resolve the issue between me and my employer the same way the millions of non-unionized employees* in Canada already do. If you are no longer comfortable with the pay/benefits you currently receive, you talk to your employer about it. If your employer is unwilling to budge on any mark, then you have two choices. You accept what you are currently paid, or you seek employment elsewhere (be it a different job within the company or with a different employer altogether).

And it is mentioned in any of these discussions:
in many industries you can leave one company and likely get an equal or better position at another company. Seniority system at airlines - and the fact that there are only 2 types of pilot positions at the airline, captain and FO; and few, if any, performance metrics for a pilot - creates unique environment where career (or lack thereof in many aspects) is locked to a certain carrier. Which is another big problem here, empowering both airline and union - but not rank-and-file flight crew members... So your advice is only that good for airlines.

kalvado wrote:

RJLover wrote:

I would attempt to resolve the issue between me and my employer the same way the millions of non-unionized employees* in Canada already do. If you are no longer comfortable with the pay/benefits you currently receive, you talk to your employer about it. If your employer is unwilling to budge on any mark, then you have two choices. You accept what you are currently paid, or you seek employment elsewhere (be it a different job within the company or with a different employer altogether).

And it is mentioned in any of these discussions:
in many industries you can leave one company and likely get an equal or better position at another company. Seniority system at airlines - and the fact that there are only 2 types of pilot positions at the airline, captain and FO; and few, if any, performance metrics for a pilot - creates unique environment where career (or lack thereof in many aspects) is locked to a certain carrier. Which is another big problem here, empowering both airline and union - but not rank-and-file flight crew members... So your advice is only that good for airlines.

The limit of a seniority-based system is a consequence of choosing to be employed by a major North American airline as a commercial pilot. It is personal decision as to whether someone is willing to accept the current, lower, or not-as-high-as-they-really-want pay OR leave the comfort of the seniority-based system and do something else (go to another airline, start a dog grooming company, whatever). Every person in the free world makes different decisions for their own reasons.

I support the pilots going on strike. It's their right and WestJet management has forced their hand.

RJLover wrote:

If you are no longer comfortable with the pay/benefits you currently receive, you talk to your employer about it. If your employer is unwilling to budge on any mark, then you have two choices. You accept what you are currently paid, or you seek employment elsewhere (be it a different job within the company or with a different employer altogether).

I agree with you 100%.

In fact, I am guessing a thousand Westjet pilots would also agree. Because, what you just described is what has been denied the Westjet pilots. It's called "negotiation". The only difference is that 1000 pilots can not have that encounter, one on one, it is virtually impossible, so they elect an association to represent their best interests.

That interaction ... meet with a manager, understand their best offer, decide if they can live with it, or leave ... is exactly how the process works. Whether it is one on one with your immediate superior, or by necessity you have your representative meet with the company's representative ... it's the same.

The strike is legal. Yes, I said that before, so have many. One may take that to mean that I am justifying it. Actually, quite the opposite. For an employee group be in a "legal strike position", it would mean that they have already gone through many, many, many levels of meetings, mediations, interactions ... ending in the position in which they find themselves ... no other options.

It is the way the Canadian Labour Code works. And, it works for one employee meeting with one manager, or one group of employees trying to meet with the employer's representative.

Quite well explained longhauler.

My only beef would be that the "rapport de force" is somewhat unfair in a capital intensive business like the airlines.

Any pilot strikes have catastrophic consequences to the airline. Better settle (even with outrageous demands) than face a strike. That explains why historically, airlines lost more money than it ever gained.

longhauler wrote:

RJLover wrote:

If you are no longer comfortable with the pay/benefits you currently receive, you talk to your employer about it. If your employer is unwilling to budge on any mark, then you have two choices. You accept what you are currently paid, or you seek employment elsewhere (be it a different job within the company or with a different employer altogether).

I agree with you 100%.

In fact, I am guessing a thousand Westjet pilots would also agree. Because, what you just described is what has been denied the Westjet pilots. It's called "negotiation". The only difference is that 1000 pilots can not have that encounter, one on one, it is virtually impossible, so they elect an association to represent their best interests.

I'd say while they would probably mostly agree, it wouldn't be quite 100%! If they did agree with 100% of my position they'd be walking out the door permanently.

Westjet was a successful non-unionized airline for more then 20 years, so there must have been avenues available to be able to meet with their direct supervisor(s). It wouldn't necessarily be easy or quick, but there has to be or else there would be no opportunity for any employee to talk to management about anything (safety concerns, suggestions for improvement, etc). That being said, It would be extremely unlikely that all 1,000 pilots would have had a discussion about pay; many people simply don't have the stomach for tough in-person negotiations. There is way less pressure to stand behind a professional representative and cast an anonymous ballot.

But they have definitely not ended up in a position with "no other options". Every single one of Westjet's pilots can call their Chief Pilot right now and give their two weeks notice. No one is forcing them to remain an employee of a company that apparently hasn't been interested in discussing improvements to their compensation.

jimbo737 wrote:

1900Driver wrote:

berari wrote:

And there you have it, Westjet has grown to be a full airline folks ... it now has to deal with big boy issues.

I was surprised to hear that they were looking to hire WS pilots to fly for SWOOP, by offering them leaves of absence. Shoddy practices that would not make their existing

They never were cute. Resorting to tactics like going through your competitors garbage.....

Get your story straight.

It wasn’t WestJet who were digging through garbage at 574 Island Road in Victoria in Feb and March 2003 and were caught twice, with photographic evidence of the team in the rented white pick up truck from Richmond BC doing so, with evidence later obtained indicating such practices may have been, um, a little more common and geographically diverse than people might want to believe.

You are a weapon. This storm on your veranda and you’re blaming AC.

Looks good on ya.

ExMilitaryEng wrote:

Quite well explained longhauler.

My only beef would be that the "rapport de force" is somewhat unfair in a capital intensive business like the airlines.

Any pilot strikes have catastrophic consequences to the airline. Better settle (even with outrageous demands) than face a strike. That explains why historically, airlines lost more money than it ever gained.

Airlines lose money because they have no competitive moat. Any airline with an airplane can fly nearly any route it chooses, erroding any possibility of competitive advantage. It's like selling oil without Opec to protect you. The pilots have nothing to do with that.

RJLover wrote:

longhauler wrote:

RJLover wrote:

If you are no longer comfortable with the pay/benefits you currently receive, you talk to your employer about it. If your employer is unwilling to budge on any mark, then you have two choices. You accept what you are currently paid, or you seek employment elsewhere (be it a different job within the company or with a different employer altogether).

I agree with you 100%.

In fact, I am guessing a thousand Westjet pilots would also agree. Because, what you just described is what has been denied the Westjet pilots. It's called "negotiation". The only difference is that 1000 pilots can not have that encounter, one on one, it is virtually impossible, so they elect an association to represent their best interests.

I'd say while they would probably mostly agree, it wouldn't be quite 100%! If they did agree with 100% of my position they'd be walking out the door permanently.

Westjet was a successful non-unionized airline for more then 20 years, so there must have been avenues available to be able to meet with their direct supervisor(s). It wouldn't necessarily be easy or quick, but there has to be or else there would be no opportunity for any employee to talk to management about anything (safety concerns, suggestions for improvement, etc). That being said, It would be extremely unlikely that all 1,000 pilots would have had a discussion about pay; many people simply don't have the stomach for tough in-person negotiations. There is way less pressure to stand behind a professional representative and cast an anonymous ballot.

But they have definitely not ended up in a position with "no other options". Every single one of Westjet's pilots can call their Chief Pilot right now and give their two weeks notice. No one is forcing them to remain an employee of a company that apparently hasn't been interested in discussing improvements to their compensation.

It sounds like you have no idea how airline employment works.
The employee does not dictate any terms at all, and has no choice to. They take what is given to them. If a pilot at a non-union airline shows up wishing to be paid more, the company simply says "that's not the pay scale" and continues to pay you what they pay everyone else. It's like socialism.

Even at non-union airlines like Skywest, the pay is negotiated as a group. The only difference is no union assistance or protections.