Lisa Raymond, Author at AC Component

Flow Through

Lisa Raymond on December 17, 2019

Thinking of Flowing Through to Mainline or Rouge?

Here are some comparisons we feel you should consider. Please note that this a simplistic comparison and we encourage you to reach out to your Local Union office if you have any further questions.

What will my pay rate be?
*** Though the Union receives the most concerns regarding this issue for members flowing over, this is not something we can address until the expiration of the current collective agreement in 2025 as it was agreed to by the Company and the Union during the 2015 Collective Agreement. Your leadership at all levels are equally concerned about this, and the larger scale effect it is having on the membership as more members flow from Rouge to Mainline. ***

If you are transferring from Mainline to Rouge, your pay rate on the Rouge pay scale will be based on your years of service at Mainline.

If you are transferring from Rouge to Mainline, your pay rate will be placed on the Mainline pay scale at the closest dollar rate without earning less. You will be then be frozen at that wage step until you accrue the equivalent years of service at mainline. In essence, for pay purposes you start at Mainline with NO service and won’t move up the wage scale until you’ve accrued the required Mainline service. However, you still receive 2% wage increases each April 1st. Click HERE to access a handy document that explains the wage rate in more detail.

How does parking work?
At Mainline the Company pays for your parking. Note that if there is a monetary cost to your parking spot, it is considered a taxable benefit.

At Rouge, parking can cost up to $130 per month and is not covered.

What are my minimum days off?
At Mainline, as a regular block holder you are entitled to 12 days off per block month. As a reserve block holder, you are entitled to 13 days off per block month.

At Rouge, you are entitled to 10 days off per block month.

What the scheduled flight time limitation?
At Mainline, the scheduled flight time limitation is 80 hours per month. The Company may designate four months per year as 85-hour block months. You may volunteer up to 100 hours.

At Rouge, the scheduled flight time limitation is 95 hours per month. You may volunteer to increase your hours with no upper limit.

Are there duty overtime premiums?
At Mainline, if you choose to stay on duty beyond your maximum duty day, you are entitled to a 50% premium on all flight credits involved in that duty period.

At Rouge, there is no premium and you are required to stay on duty for up to 17 hours.

How does Reassignment work?
At Mainline, if you are subject to Reassignment, you will receive credit for the greater of your scheduled flight sequence or the actual credits to which you are reassigned.

At Rouge, if you are subject to Reassignment, you will be given another assignment or placed on 24-hour ready reserve with no pay protection for your original pairing.

What about draft?
At Mainline, if you are drafted, you will receive a 50% premium for the drafted flights. In addition, you will be pay protected for the any flights missed as a result of the draft.

At Rouge, you will receive a 50% premium for the drafted flights on scheduled days off only.

If I have to stay on duty after my duty period was to end, can I claim for post duty credit?
At Mainline, the Service Director can submit a pay claim for the crew to ensure they are compensated for remaining on duty.

At Rouge, there is no process for claiming post-duty credit. You are simply not compensated.

If I choose to attend voluntary training or a voluntary focus group will I be compensated?
At Mainline, you would receive ground credits for the time.

At Rouge, you will not be compensated.

Overall, the differences in working conditions are quite stark. The Air Canada Component of CUPE will continue to fight to improve the conditions our Rouge members face. Many of the bargaining proposals for Rouge address these issues.

In solidarity,

Sign the petition: Safety and air quality on airlines must be improved

Lisa Raymond on December 16, 2019

Passenger safety and air quality on airlines are critical issues for all

The previous federal government’s decision to allow Canadian airline carriers to fly with fewer flight attendants is a threat to passenger safety. On most aircraft, passengers and crew can be exposed to toxic fumes in the cabin. These health and safety risks must be eliminated. Sign the petition to put pressure on the Liberal government to act now.

On August 1^st 2015, Transport Canada allowed Canadian carriers to operate with a ratio of one flight attendant to 50 passenger seats (1:50 ratio), instead of the safety-proven 1:40 ratio. This has resulted in reduced crew on many flights, despite Transport Canada officials admitting that the new ratio does not provide an equivalent level of safety. In fact, all the available evidence shows that the 1:50 ratio lowers passenger safety.

Transport Canada’s decision to allow the 1:50 is based on a 2003 risk assessment that was biased, incomplete, and veiled in secrecy. Because of this, CUPE calls on the government to restore the 1:40 ratio, at least until Transport Canada conducts a new risk assessment of the 1:50 ratio in a fully transparent way. Key stakeholders must be involved in the process, and the risk assessment must be made available to the public. The Standing Committee on Transportation, Infrastructure and Communities (TRAN) should oversee any review of the ratio, including a new risk assessment.

During the last federal election campaign, the Liberals seemed to agree. CUPE’s Airline Division asked the Liberal Party of Canada if they supported scrapping the new 1:50 regulation and returning to the safety-proven 1:40 ratio. The Liberals committed to consult “stakeholders and experts” on the issue, “all the while keeping the safety of all Canadians as a top priority.”

Toxic fumes on aircraft

Airline passengers and crew can be exposed to toxic fumes when engine lubricants and other chemicals enter the cabin through the air pressurization process.

Even though many airlines continue to deny it, there is significant evidence showing exposure to toxic fumes is a hazard and can lead to the following symptoms while on board: irritation of eyes, nose and upper airways, cough, breathing difficulties, tightness in chest, blurred or tunnel vision, headache or light headedness, dizziness, difficulty concentrating, nausea, and vomiting. Longer term effects include damage to the respiratory and central nervous system, impaired memory and cognitive function, weakened immunity, cardiovascular disorders and possibly cancers.

The only way to totally ensure that flight attendants and passengers are not being exposed to toxic fumes is to fit aircraft with filtration systems that eliminate any potential air contamination, or to actually change the way pressurized air is brought into the cabin when aircraft are designed. Transport Canada regulations should be changed accordingly in order to protect the health of passengers and crew.

During the last federal election campaign, the Liberal Party of Canada committed “to ensuring that all Canadians have a safe and healthy working environment through evidence-based measures and proper consultation with stakeholders and experts.”

Therefore, the federal government must act immediately to bring together representatives from the airline industry, the medical and scientific communities, and airline unions, to identify and recommend all possible regulatory options to eliminate the harmful effects of toxic fumes.

But you can do your part too.

Sign the petition, by clicking the link below, to keep the Liberals accountable on these important health and safety issues.

https://cupe.ca/sign-petition-safety-and-air-quality-airlines-must-be-improved

For more information, consult CUPE’s 1:50 and air quality fact sheets.

Bargaining Update

Lisa Raymond on December 13, 2019

Your ACCEX has concluded the ninety (90) day period of direct bargaining with Air Canada. Unfortunately, an agreement could not be reached at this stage.

We now head into the mediation phase of the 2019 reopener to see if a mediator/arbitrator will be able to bridge the gap between the Company and Union. We are hopeful that with the assistance of a third party we will be able to achieve more for our members.

We thank you for your continued support.

In solidarity,

Union Response To The Company’s Air Quality Bulletin

Lisa Raymond on December 13, 2019

The Union recently issued a bulletin concerning cabin air quality (Click HERE to view), and since then two company documents have been referenced prominently in the Mid-November issue Move Me News (Employee Communication Regarding Cabin Air Quality – Update CSSI_12-06R2, and Frequently Asked Questions About Cabin Air Quality – Update CSSI_12-06R2_FAQ). It is the Union’s understanding that these documents have also been provided to its members following recent fume events.

To put it bluntly, the Union’s position is that the company’s cabin air quality literature cherry-picks the science and facts that suit it while discrediting research conducted by reputable scientists and world-renowned academic institutions that don’t. Furthermore, the company’s documents make factually incorrect and/or misleading statements regarding assurances from both health and safety officers as well as Occupational Health and Safety Tribunal Decisions concerning cabin air quality.

Cabin air quality is something the Union takes very seriously. It has over 15 years of experience in dealing with this issue on your behalf. Oil and hydraulic fluid fumes can contaminate the ventilation air onboard and are a concern. The fact that it has been normalized by industry is no excuse.

Some major airlines are now working with companies like Pall Aerospace and their unions to address this problem at its source through total filtration technologies. These are real solutions to a real problem and the Union encourages our company to do the same. Why is an airline with a proud history of firsts choosing address fume events as regular maintenance and nuisance events when air should simply be clean – period?

Ask yourself: Would your managers or company executives find it acceptable to have odourous mists containing oil or other mechanical fluids in their offices at any concentration at any time? We think not.

Attached in the link below, please find the Union’s response to the company’s bulletin, simply intended to set the record straight. We pose the same questions as the company, but – as you can read below – our answers are quite different. For the Union’s take on reporting these events, skip to point #12.

Union Response

DISCLAIMER: This bulletin contains important technical information. Translation can sometimes alter the meaning of such messages. In order to avoid any confusion, the original English version will be considered the official version.

In Solidarity,

Grievance Update – CHQ-18-11 – Narita (Layovers of 32 hours or more)

Lisa Raymond on December 11, 2019

The Union filed grievance, CHQ-18-11 (Click HERE to view) about Air Canada’s failure to provide a downtown Tokyo hotel on Narita Layovers of 32 hours or more.

This grievance has gone to Level 2, and mediation, and the parties have been trying to resolve the matter through the grievance process.

The Union is pleased to announce that effective December 1st, 2019 Air Canada has secured the InterContinental – ANA Tokyo hotel. Click HERE to view a bulletin from the Hotel Committee, published on November 27th, 2019, that outlines the details of this hotel.

The Union has forwarded this matter to arbitration to address outstanding remedies as a result of this violation and will update the membership once the matter has been resolved.

In Solidarity,

Wesley Lesosky
President, Air Canada Component of CUPE

Flow Through

Sign the petition: Safety and air quality on airlines must be improved

Bargaining Update

Union Response To The Company’s Air Quality Bulletin

Grievance Update – CHQ-18-11 – Narita (Layovers of 32 hours or more)

Site Map

Air Canada Component of CUPE

Follow us on Social Media