The ACWA (Air Canada Workers Association)

[admin]

THE ACWA (AIR CANADA WORKERS ASSOCIATION) covers all workers within AIR CANADA. UNION DUES are the lowest in North America as it is run by the employees for the employees. Everyone gets a vote on any issue governing their employment or benefits. Rumour has it ACPA may join as well causing one cohesive bargaining unit.The management at AC are extremely delighted and the employees are united in one common front called their survival! EVERONE GETS A VOTE!!! If only this were true but it could be done, you know?

Would this idea (taken from a post on the ACFamily Network) be feasible? Could it be the future of organizing a union or association within Air Canada?

You're free to comment below...

[admin]

From a post on the ACFN by "kittycat"...

The new Air Canada

Mainline:
Selected domestic, Trans-border & International. Business & Economy. Business should be maximum of eight seats on 319/320/321 unless paying traffic warrants more. Selected routes would be between YVR, YYC,YWG,YYZ,YOW,YUL,YHZ & possibly YYT if oil traffic warrants. Economy should be sold on a similar basis as now with Tango/Zip type fares as well as route sensitive fares as AC now offers. Ist come gets best fare but greatest restrictions on changes etc.

Business Class on Trans-border should be matched to loads of fare paying passengers. Again zip/Tango and other fare pricing models.

International should be the same.

Zip as we now know it would be gone!!!!. The 737s should be used for charters to Vegas, Mexico etc.

Fleet utilization should be maximized. If AC Vacations cannot develope and implement sufficient business then contracts with other tour companies should be sought to utilize the down time overnights of the fleet. Present ZIP pilots and F/As would be used to lower costs to those of other LCCs.

A proper business plan should be developed and signed off by the board with possible inputs from Flight ops and Inflight prior to implementation.

Routes that have been sucessful in the past for other airlines i.e Royal Canada3 should be examined for implementation. ie YWG to UK once or twice a week in the summer. Route was sold out for Royal in the past. An overnight flight would again increase fleet utilization. Calgary To Hawaii in the winter another example.

Redeye flight both east and west. It costs more for the hotel rooms than airplane tickets so who would prefer to go home or arrive early in TO for a meeting. (Business class & high flyers may be offered shower facilities at YYZ to freshen up for that meeting.)

Jazz will fly shorter less travelled routes One hour etc. feeding into mainline transborder and international routes.


The service levels will be rationalized. A hot meal and two bar services on the Eastern triangle flights are rediculous. The competitors are offering nothing so Hot hor dourves and a bar service would probably serfice. Either stop selling Cara junk on the flights or have passengers pre pay and pre order. Too many times passengers have been either livid that they should be charged or unaware of costs and need for correct change.

All employees would be treated equally. Date of hire for boarding regardless of whether management, pilot, CSA, F/A, AME or the guy(s) that hook up the waste truck.

Maintenance would be done on a priority basis. If not fixed at 1st stop then next stop for sure. Quit deferals before an accident happens that affects all of us.

Several layers of management would either be let go or be forced to actually do something constructive. No more edicts from Mr GQ (Brad Moore) on how staff should smile all the time. Forced smiles are worse than no smiles. A HAPPY EMPLOYEE WILL SMILE WITHOUT BEING TOLD!

Tolerance will be part of the mission statement. Whether it be tolerance of the passengers, the race or background of your co-worker, or the video screen not working. Relax and have fun will be a possitive.


Oops! sorry thats part of my wish list for a new airline! I must be dreaming of the Easter bunny that will be visiting next week>

[admin]

and one from "Dickone" on the ACFN...

The New Air Canada will be comprised of a work force motivated to work. They will illustrate this by action and not words. There will be little time to disertate in lunch rooms about poor working conditions and colleagues who "make it work". Fellow employees will offer assistance to their co-workers rather than advice. Management will empower their workers to make decisions that are supportive to our customers and defend their staff for doing so. Management will make themselves visible and available to their employees. The CEO will lead by example. Visits to stations by the CEO will be unannounced and he will arrive by car. The current sense of entitlement will give way to enlightenment.

[RogerD@YYZ]

OK, enough observation and trepidity. Time to wade in, so let's go!!! I will tackle this from a "union" perspective.

The concept of one Air Canada Trade Union (ACTU), uniting all workers for common goals sounds wonderful in theory, but so does Heaven and Utopia. In practice, the reality is very difficult to achieve, especially to rally ALL under one banner. I am not dismissing the idea but let's look at it under a microscope.

What is the reason one would champion this cause? To build a better mousetrap or break up and discard the old? For what reason, genuine dissatisfaction with the status quo or to advance another agenda? Simply wanting to blame the Union for all the Company's woes is ignorant and regressive.

I have the advantage of a perspective of working for an organization that is not unionized. Reason why? It does not need one because they treat workers with respect and dignity. Their guiding philosophy is a simple formula created and maintained by the founder, Fred Smith. "When people are placed first they will provide the highest possible service, and profits will follow". The FedEx corporate philosophy is the result from this belief: People-Service-Profit. These three corporate goals form the basis for all business decisions. It works when the Company consistently turns a profit and is ranked in the Fortune 500/Global 1000 with ISO 9001 standing. Year-after-year, they are ranked in the Top100 Best Companies to work for.

That being said, I do not subscribe to the benevolence of my boss-master, nor blind faith loyalty of any kind. Anything I have gained as a worker has been earned at the negotiations table. Before I even entertain ever giving up on the CAW Canada, you have to come good. Warts and all, they have served me well thus far, so show me the beef. They have tremendous resources and clout.


Before I am asked to jump ship, I want to know if there are any sharks in the waters. We seem to always see grass greener on the other side of the fence, but once some reach beyond, they want to go back. We are a fickle bunch and leopards don't really change their spots, right?

This has been talked about before in other forums, albeit not to any great depth. It's usually prompted by members fed up by some latest move on the union's part. I hope that we can dissect under better examination this time.

There is a definite chasm that disconnects the leadership from the membership and each side of the divide, bears some responsibility.

The Pension Issue has unified the various unions like never before I can remember and the coalition has stood it's ground well, so far, despite some cracks in the armour.

There are some definite things I would like to see evolve with my Trade Union Movement. Principally, to start, a democratic evolution from Maximum Leadership to Maximum Participaction. Sounds good, but what it means in effect is responsive representation.

That would mean effective and informed consultation with the entire rank-and-file membership prior to negotes, to best arm the bargaining committee with member's priorities. Not during negotes. If and when a tentative agreement is reached, then ratification would follow per the Canada Labour Code in force, guided by the CIRB.

There are distinct advantages to forming one union as there are some distinct disadvantages. Let's examine.

One Union means power at the negotiation table, but it could mean some individual member's voice getting lost in a large mob and loud crowd.

Leaving recognized so-called "International" unions could mean the same difference. Replace it with National, then Regional, then Local.

We in the CAW did that when we left the UAW. Now we are the largest private sector trade union in Canada and Local 2002 (the airline division) is now the third largest and the AC Bargaining Unit is the largest within.

To counter that would require a well-structured organization that responds to collective needs but respects individual rights.

What we could envision is a National Union with a global master agreement or Collective Convention regarding and defining "common" issues, like pensions, benefits, including industry travel, etc.

Then, one could see sub-grouping into Local divisions centered on the valued scope work of a defined work-group. CS&S, SA's, FA's, Pilots, Tech-Mech's etc.

Each would have Local Agreements to add and address "local" needs. Wages, Scheduling, Vacations, etc.

Published "Location" Agreements could also exist per the need and "District/Location" level which adds, not subtracts from the Main or Local agreements to fulfil nuanced requirements.

There is also the factor that as a commune the needs of the collective have to be balanced with the needs of the individuals when the art of negotiation comes into play. Items that are more easily achieved from a "national" perespective than a "local" one when presented from a united larger front. However the test of fungibility should always be for the priority of the "whole collective" to maintain unified solidarity, unless "civil/human" rights are trampelled upon.

Before we beam that far into the future, maybe a thrust could be a more formal amalgamation of our current unified focus.

An AC Union Coalition (ACUC), comprising: ACPA <> CALDA <> CAW <> CUPE <> IAMAW

Modelled on the ITF's Star Union Coalition's (formerly known as the Star Solidarity Alliance).

http://www.itf.org.uk/itfweb/civil_a...ance/index.htm

If "we" take care of our People, everything else will fall in place.

[Scott Morrison]

I am in favour of the AC Union Coalition, as I see something like that is taking place right now. I am NOT in favour of one big happy union for all employees. I am now a member of the I.A.M.A.W. and as a Maintenance employee, I do not believe I am being fairly represented. As a Maintenance employee, I wish to be represented by other Maintenance employees. This is why I support CAMA.

I do not believe "one big union" can ever work in this environment.

[campo]

Posted by RogerD@YYZ


"I have the advantage of a perspective of working for an organization that is not unionized. Reason why? It does not need one because they treat workers with respect and dignity."

Wouldn't that be nice to have here at Air canada? what a new and innovative idea!!

[skudkid]

I have thought for a long time that there should only be one union at Air Canada. That it should be an "association" of Air Canada employees only. Each group would negotiate their own wants and needs. The employees don't need to pay union dues to some large impersonal group from another country.

Idealistic? Yes maybe, but this was in the days before the likes of West Jet, Jetsgo........Back then all airlines paid about the same for each group of workers. The discount carriers changed the rules, along with it my feelings for one association, it wouldn't work now.

There is not much one person can do to change things, the maintenance guys are trying now to have their own representation, everyone else does. (except the ramp, who are "saddled" with maintenance) Will it work? I hope so. You can like it, lump it, or leave.

[Tromboner]

SKUD,

"Like it, lump it, or leave" reminds me of a basic tenent for leadership. Lead, follow, or get out of the way. CAMA is leading, I will follow, and the IAM holdouts had better GET OUT OF THE WAY.

[RogerD@YYZ]

It will be interesting if the Pilots choose independent and national ACPA or international ALPA or maybe (C)ALPA.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040416.wairca17/BNStory/Business/]Globe

[our_kid2000]

Seems to me that the Jazz pilots got the better of the last deal on the agreement for the smaller jets.


Could it be that the ACPA is tryin to horn in because they think they can get a better deal if they merged? I dunno, it would be interesting to see how the Jazz pilots feel about this merger.