Jump to content
canflyer

Negotiator

Members
  • Content Count

    1,524
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Negotiator

  • Rank
    CanFlyer SuperElite
  1. They have to stop making those cookies in J class. They alway burn. http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/arti ... moke-scare
  2. Coming to Canada soon! Freedom of religion has gone to a new extreme, as Austrian authorities have decided wearing a pasta strainer on one’s head in a driver’s license photo is a state-protected form of religious expression, according to the BBC. Austrian Niko Alm told reporters that he recently won a three-year battle to wear a strainer-hat in his license photo as a type of religious headgear. A self-described “pastafarian” and member of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Alm decided a sieve would be the best sign of his religious devotion, and submitted a picture of him wearing the kitchen equipment along with his application for a license in 2008. Initially, the application only earned Alm a mandatory appointment with a doctor to confirm that he was mentally fit to drive. But after a three-year wait, authorities sent Alm his card in the mail. He now says the processed license signifies Austrian recognition of the colander’s religious importance. But Vienna police spokesman Mafred Reinthaler explained that the decision was less significant, according to the BBC. “The photo was not approved on religious grounds,” Reinthaler said. “The only criterion for photos in driving licence applications is that the whole face must be visible.” An atheist, Alm first thought of the stunt after hearing that Austrian officials were permitting confessional headgear in photos, according to the BBC. He is currently working on having “pastafarianism” officially recognized as a faith. Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/07/14/pasta ... z1SBVvkBCw http://dailycaller.com/2011/07/14/pasta ... -cookware/
  3. 5% ?????? Pathetic. If that rule was applied in Toronto then the services would need to be offered in: (1) Cantonese; (2) Hindi; and, (3) probably Jamaican 'man'.
  4. The OLA applies to AC because of section 10 of the Air Canada Public Participation Act: http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/A-10.1/FullText.html Antiquated and redundant legislation that should be scrapped. Oh, and if there is a public outcry because of Canadian bi-lingualism then make every other airline flying in and out of Quebec bi-lingual. Indeed, even the Quebec based Air Transat is not bi-lingual!
  5. http://www.torontosun.com/2011/07/14/ai ... -no-french This is not a crown corporation so why the english / french requirement? Makes no sense to me as the competition such as Westjet et al have no similar requirement.
  6. Link; http://chrt-tcdp.gc.ca/aspinc/search/vh ... isruling=0
  7. It's a Canadian Human Rights Code Decision. Wallace G. Craig (adjudicator) OTTAWA, Ontario July 8, 2011 CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL PARTIES OF RECORD TRIBUNAL FILES: T1176/5806, T1177/5906 & T1079/6005 STYLE OF CAUSE: Robert Neil Kelly v. Air Canada and Air Canada Pilots Association and Geroge Viven v. Air Canada DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED: July 8, 2011
  8. I'm interested in the link. I searched for stories on this and couldn't find anything.
  9. Someone has to pay for those fat pensions.
  10. Air Canada settles with CAW http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/s ... eturn.html Sorry, but putting the main issue in the dispute to binding arbitration is a really bad move. Unless they know the outcome (wink, wink) Air Canada is taking an awful gamble putting the future of their business in the hands of an single person (outsider). I would never had agreed to that and, indeed, that was an option recently in my own multi-million dollar bargaining and my answer was a resounding NO!
  11. True ... most DB plans fund at about 80% and that has been recognized as being acceptable by actuaries.
  12. Possibly. I rejected the same offer to put the pension 'issue' to an arbitrator here in So Cal. The problem with arbitration is that there is no real guarantee that s/he will make the 'right' decision. There is too much at stake for a single person to decide such a critical issue. In my case, $150 Million in potential savings. I would also say that the union's membership (the AC EEs) don't really care about this issue. It doesn't affect them! Like at Vale in YSB, the pension issue was driven by the 'institution' of the Steelworkers and not really the members although it was the members who suffered at the end by going out over a year due in large part to the policy of the Steelworkers (not smart).
  13. Cutting benefits would be a violation of law.
  14. Arbitration is but one option for the resolution of the contract. The other option is for the government to simply impose the company's last, best and final offer. Indeed, arbitration is too risky for this type of situation as you never know what kind of off the wall decision a 'single' person will finally render and, as important, you can't let the resolution fall to one person.
  15. as long as the harpercrite doesn't put on his red neck badge and come down so hard the unions start serious civil disobedience acts. The unions are too weak, top heavy with pork-choppers and strikes / lock-outs impair their economic stability. There will be no grass-root disobedience!
×
×
  • Create New...