Confessions of a YYC Travel Junkie

[MissTeeks]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1806427996657696991

[Jimmy Stang]

^ Excuse my ignorance of the process, but what does this mean in the short term?

Can one or both parties refuse? Does this avoid the potential strike?

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

^ Excuse my ignorance of the process, but what does this mean in the short term?

Can one or both parties refuse? Does this avoid the potential strike?

The media has started reporting on it now, and they are suggesting that it is likely averted. That'll save me some time and hassle. I am cautiously relieved.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by MissTeeks

https://twitter.com/user/status/1806427996657696991

I'm surprised that the feds are stepping in so quickly to resolve this matter. So eager to squash the workers rights to fight for collective bargaining.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

^ Excuse my ignorance of the process, but what does this mean in the short term?

Can one or both parties refuse? Does this avoid the potential strike?

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

The media has started reporting on it now, and they are suggesting that it is likely averted. That'll save me some time and hassle. I am cautiously relieved.

Yeah, supposedly WJ just sent an email to employees saying this means no strike/lockout

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

^ Excuse my ignorance of the process, but what does this mean in the short term?

Can one or both parties refuse? Does this avoid the potential strike?

No strike or lockout, unless it’s an illegal one but the Union already said they’re advising all members to comply with the order and if I had to guess I’d say it’s extraordinarily unlikely that WestJet doesn’t comply for obvious reasons.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I'm surprised that the feds are stepping in so quickly to resolve this matter. So eager to squash the workers rights to fight for collective bargaining.

Now all of the sudden you care about workers rights eh?

[Lubicon]

Correct me if I'm mistaken but I believe the first ALPA (pilot) contracts were settled this way too.

[sa226]

It is kind of a concerning precedent, if you care about workers rights

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Now all of the sudden you care about workers rights eh?

I'm against the government impeding on the rights of Canadians.

This was the same labour Minister not even seven months ago::

The cabinet minister from St. John’s is clear that he’s not disposed to giving anyone the easy way out by intervening in work stoppages.

“Stop looking to me to do end runs on collective bargaining,” Mr. O’Regan said in an interview. “Sometimes people look to government to interfere, to make things happen more quickly, or in a way that would be more favourable to them. Invariably, my response is to sit at the table, do the work. Government shouldn’t be involved in this.”

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/busi...ening-in-work/

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

Correct me if I'm mistaken but I believe the first ALPA (pilot) contracts were settled this way too.

Yes and no. Not sure if it was for their first contract but back in I think it was 2012 Air Canada either gave or were threatening lockout notice and the general consensus was that they were colluding with the government(pretty sure Pierre was the minister of transportation at the time) with the intent of getting back to work legislation passed so that there couldn’t be a strike.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I'm against the government impeding on the rights of Canadians.

You’re gonna sit here and tell me you’ve never voted for the UCP or any other anti-labour party in your life?

This was the same labour Minister not even seven months ago::

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/busi...ening-in-work/

I’m well aware of his comments.

[btimbit]

Yeah, pretty big L for workers rights

Congrats on getting a slight raise I guess, I'm sure it'll cost them a big chunk of their savings plan in return

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Yes and no. Not sure if it was for their first contract but back in I think it was 2012 Air Canada either gave or were threatening lockout notice and the general consensus was that they were colluding with the government(pretty sure Pierre was the minister of transportation at the time) with the intent of getting back to work legislation passed so that there couldn’t be a strike.

I should have been more clear, I meant the WS pilots first contract.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

I should have been more clear, I meant the WS pilots first contract.

I think both parties agreed to arbitration in that one.

[Ryan Coke]

The union was pressured by the government to accept arbitration, and it is widely regretted.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Ryan Coke

The union was pressured by the government to accept arbitration, and it is widely regretted.

I’m not too familiar with what was going on in that round of bargaining but I wonder how much of it at the time had to do with getting the swoop pilots included in the bargaining unit. In any event the best deals are usually reached at the table rather than in an arbitrator’s ruling.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by MissTeeks

https://twitter.com/user/status/1806427996657696991

Right move.

In a country with a duopoly you can’t have something like air travel be shut down due to strikes.

[Jimmy Stang]

^ I'd rather the government address the duopoly itself. It is quite clear that they are avoiding competing with each other. For those of us in the west especially, AC isn't a realistic option on most domestic routes.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

^ I'd rather the government address the duopoly itself. It is quite clear that they are avoiding competing with each other. For those of us in the west especially, AC isn't a realistic option on most domestic routes.

Well, it’s a government made duopoly and I don’t see them opening up the industry.