Air Canada baggage handlers wildcat strike

[AssClown]

[QUOTE=FunSave22;14470096]Courts and police officers generally won't do anything until after an injunction is issued. Once the injunction was issued, the workers went back to work, so court action is highly unlikely. [/QUOTE]
Just because their actions came before an injunction doesn't make it any legal. The Ministry of Labour issued back to work legislation for the IAMAW thereby preventing them from striking (whether you agree if this should be done is not the point).

again from the globe "The back-to-work manoeuvre was seen as a precautionary measure because Ms. Raitt already took steps to avert a widespread work stoppage by referring the IAMAW labour dispute and another one involving pilots to the Canada Industrial Relations Board, effectively making any walkouts illegal."
the injunction merely served as a written notice that what they did was in fact illegal and should be stopped.

[QUOTE=FunSave22;14470096]I would like this see a source for your claim that this costed the company millions. [/QUOTE]

as mention by a previous poster, it shouldn't be hard to deduce the amount of money lost. 91 cancelled flights, many of which required the passengers to be given hotels to stay for the night, surely a fair number of them would be looking for a different carrier or some other way to travel. The pilots and flight attendants are still on the clock so that's money there. You create a backlog in work flow which will require more man hours, thus wages to clear up. Whatever hanger, walkout and runway fee will have to be paid presumably. Whatever cargo was to be shipped on the flights now can't be shipped.

Being a private entity i'm not sure Air Canada would want to disclose how much money they would be losing so finding a source would be difficult.

[QUOTE=FunSave22;14470096]Air Canada certainly could have fired them or taken disciplinary action. They choose not to. They likely did this because they don't want to further poison the labour relations. Management had choices from which to choose their actions. Just because they didn't choose the option you wanted, doesn't change the fact Management had choices. [/QUOTE]

If you read what I quoted or better yet read the article for yourself, [url]http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/air-canada-gets-injunction-wildcat-strike-ends/article2378787/[/url] it said 37 employees were terminated. However, the union reached a settlement through an arbitrator to have it so that none of the employees would be discipline. So Air Canada did choose, and attempted to discipline these employees. however those choices were rendered mute by the union.


[QUOTE=FunSave22;14470096]Hands were not tied. Management had a number of choices, and likely made the intelligent one. Further angering the labour force would be stupid.[/QUOTE]
I beg to differ (and by Air Canada's decision to try and fire the 37 employee i think they would agree). The IAMAW decided to strike during March Break, the pilots had their own form of job action by "being sick". If management continues to not take action then they are essentially sending the message that their opinions don't matter and the employees can do as they please to hold the passengers hostage and to cause as much disruption to the company and passengers as they want.

[slowtyper]

Picked up my family last night, they were stuck on the tarmac for 2 extra hours. They did say that this was by far the fastest they have ever unloaded baggage from the plane to the carousel. I wonder if its because the managers took over once they went on strike

[FunSave22]

[QUOTE=AssClown;14470464]Just because their actions came before an injunction doesn't make it any legal. The Ministry of Labour issued back to work legislation for the IAMAW thereby preventing them from striking (whether you agree if this should be done is not the point).[/QUOTE]
Driving 1 km/h over the speed limit is also illegal. So?

Are you suggesting that every single illegal act should be punished?



[QUOTE]If you read what I quoted or better yet read the article for yourself, [url]http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/air-canada-gets-injunction-wildcat-strike-ends/article2378787/[/url] it said 37 employees were terminated. However, the union reached a settlement through an arbitrator to have it so that none of the employees would be discipline. So Air Canada did choose, and attempted to discipline these employees. however those choices were rendered mute by the union. [/QUOTE]

From CBC: [url]http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/03/23/air-canada-wildcat.html[/url]

[QUOTE]Air Canada spokesman Peter Fitzpatrick said later Friday that "there is an independent arbitrator [B]agreed to by both parties[/B] and he issued a cease and desist order that carries the full weight of the law."

Union officials said the [B]two sides agreed[/B] that if everyone went back to work, no one would lose their jobs, including the workers who reportedly harassed the labour minister. [/QUOTE]
Air Canada [B]chose[/B] to go to an arbitrator. Air Canada [B]chose[/B] that no one would lose their job.

They didn't haven't to make these choices. They could have fired the employees. They didn't. They made other choices.

[MrKap]

If Air Canada was smart they would stop packing planes with leaflets on how to survive a one in a million plane crash incident, and start packing leaflets on how to travel light to enjoy your stay at a holiday or business trip with less strings, less hassle, and less baggage.

I don't have to wait for the scientific study. 98% of all items packed into travelers bags never gets used while traveling.

[Beradon]

Wow, imagine if the NDP would have been in power? They would cater to EVERY union demand.

I'm so glad the Tories are in place to reign in these cancerous unions.

[FunSave22]

[QUOTE=Beradon;14470935]Wow, imagine if the NDP would have been in power? They would cater to EVERY union demand.[/QUOTE]
If the NDP were in power, they likely wouldn't have gotten involved in the Air Canada labour disputes.


Management and the unions would have be forced to sit down and do real bargaining. Instead of having management not do real bargaining because they know the Feds won't allow a strike to happen. (and I mean a real strike, not a couple of hours of striking about which so many people are severely overreacting).


The real negotiations may have led to a strike or lockout. But they also would have forced each side to finally compromise and reach an agreement that both sides can tolerate. And a step would be taken in repairing labour-management relations.


By refusing to allow real negotiations to take place, Harper is just ensuring that the poisonous labour environment will continue.

[Mark77]

[QUOTE=FunSave22;14470999]If the NDP were in power, they likely wouldn't have gotten involved in the Air Canada labour disputes. [/QUOTE]

Actually Roy Romanow, the famous NDP leader in Saskatchewan, legislated workers back to work on a number of occasions, including electrical workers, nurses, and other public servants. Romanow even locked out government workers and the government was found guilty of bad faith bargaining on a number of occasions.

The NDP really isn't a friend of labour either, so I hope you aren't under the delusion that the NDP would have left this issue alone.

[Hitman21]

[QUOTE=Beradon;14470935]Wow, imagine if the NDP would have been in power? They would cater to EVERY union demand.

I'm so glad the Tories are in place to reign in these cancerous unions.[/QUOTE]

:facepalm: No government should even be interfering with this strike. Its private business and the government has no right to get involved especially Conservatives

[at1212b]

[QUOTE=Hitman21;14471206]:facepalm: No government should even be interfering with this strike. Its private business and the government has no right to get involved especially Conservatives[/QUOTE]

:facepalm::facepalm: That is the equivalent of "Get your Government Hands off my Government funded Medicare".

The Government (and whichever Government may be in power at the time) essentially Charters their existence, such as protecting AC by legislation to be the only operator on certain routes, lower fees, protected from competition on the basis of it being an “instrument of government policy”.

So you get protected by the Government, but guess what, you can also get "Disciplined" by it.

[Conquistador]

[QUOTE=MrKap;14470918]
I don't have to wait for the scientific study. 98% of all items packed into travelers bags never gets used while traveling.[/QUOTE]

Stop with the hyperbole. This is a ridiculous comment.

[D-Roc]

[QUOTE=at1212b;14471280]:facepalm::facepalm: That is the equivalent of "Get your Government Hands off my Government funded Medicare".

The Government (and whichever Government may be in power at the time) essentially Charters their existence, such as protecting AC by legislation to be the only operator on certain routes, lower fees, protected from competition on the basis of it being an “instrument of government policy”.

So you get protected by the Government, but guess what, you can also get "Disciplined" by it.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. The AC employees sure were not complaining about Government involvement when they helped them avoid bankruptcy. Can not have it both ways. You do not want the Government involved in AC business, then prepare for AC to go under and you loose your job.

[FunSave22]

[QUOTE=D-Roc;14471773]Exactly. The AC employees sure were not complaining about Government involvement when they helped them avoid bankruptcy. Can not have it both ways. You do not want the Government involved in AC business, then prepare for AC to go under and you loose your job.[/QUOTE]
The Air Canada employees and management were complaining when the feds basically forced them to merge with Canadian. Both the employees and management would have preferred if Canadian were allowed to go bankrupt.

And the merger played a part in Air Canada going bankrupt. I'm not saying the AC bankruptcy wouldn't have happened if they didn't merge. But it might not have happened.

[MrKap]

[QUOTE=Conquistador;14471395]Stop with the hyperbole. This is a ridiculous comment.[/QUOTE]

Okay fine... Carry an extra bag full of crap you'll never use, just to support your local baggage carriers union.

Honestly, they should just allow one piece of carry on. If someone wants to bring thier whole life with them somewhere, have them show up to the airport 2 hours early and pack it in boxes themselves. Then ship it Fed Ex.

Problem solved.

Why should I have to pay for everybody else who has hoarding tendencies?

[manmanny]

Mr. Kp slow down.

From G&M

"About 15 ramp employees blocked the main exit out of the carousel section, slowly clapping in mock applause and taunting her with “nice job.” The protest forced the concierge to escort Ms. Raitt through another door, but the workers kept pace. They followed as she rode up an escalator at Pearson and she waited outside for her ride home."

"If an illegal strike is staged in future, employees will each face fines of up to $1,000 a day and the union will face fines of up to $100,000 a day."

All I can say is "Goons". Only Unions can pull this off. No use of imposing fines. The arbitrator will side with unions.

[Hitman21]

[QUOTE=at1212b;14471280]:facepalm::facepalm: That is the equivalent of "Get your Government Hands off my Government funded Medicare".

The Government (and whichever Government may be in power at the time) essentially Charters their existence, such as protecting AC by legislation to be the only operator on certain routes, lower fees, protected from competition on the basis of it being an “instrument of government policy”.

So you get protected by the Government, but guess what, you can also get "Disciplined" by it.[/QUOTE]

The government shouldnt be protecting them though. No government involvement in the private sector