[andyt]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Mr_Canada Mr_Canada:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Yea! More greed! Who cares if the company lost 250 million last year.

I'm confused, I thought greed was good

Yep, you're confused.

Jeez Mr Canada, get with it. Greed is good only in the 1%, not the fucking peons. Stupid commie.

[CanadianJeff]

If anyone actually read the article you will notice they are asking for a return to 8 years ago when they made a ton of concessions to keep Air Canada above water.

If Air Canada's management can't keep the company out of bankruptcy they should be replaced. That is not the union's fault.

Hell at this point it may be wiser to scrap all of Air Canada and replace it all with a private company.

[OnTheIce]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

Oh really???? You didn't oppose Caterpillar's demand for 50% pay cuts during its period highest ever recorded profits. You tried to defend the company on that thread.

And where does it say they want more? These employees have earned less and less in real terms for 10 years, and now theyre being asked to take less again. All the while ACE CEO Robert Milton doubled his base pay to almost $15 Million a year.
From 2005 through 2009, his remuneration exceeded $82.7 Million at AC. But no, the greed is the skilled aviation mechanic who refuses take pay cuts year after year after year.

Sure I did.

My exact quote:

$1:

While I don't agree with their tactics, I would have done the proper thing and closed up shop and packaged people off.

If the plant was losing money, fine....package everyone off properly and move operations.

They article says they're trying to claw back concessions they made....hence, asking for more than what they have now.

Don't exaggerate....nobody is asking them to take a pay cut year after year, they're going on strike because they can't get more.

[OnTheIce]

Lemmy Lemmy:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

With the company losing that amount of money, I'd be happy to still have a job with AC let alone asking for more.

That's a common fallacy employed by anti-union folks. What a worker deserves is a product of the revenue they generate. The company's profitability isn't a variable. If the company is losing money, it should be shut down. Any worker who'd work for less than their marginal revenue product of labour is a fool. Any union that would give concessions to save employment is foolish. The best advice the union could give would be to quit and look for work at a profitable employer.

A worker deserves what s/he earns by his/her performance.

[DanSC]

Lemmy Lemmy:

The best advice the union could give would be to quit and look for work at a profitable employer.

But that doesn't involve fighting, so it will never happen.

[Lemmy]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

A worker deserves what s/he earns by his/her performance.

A worker deserves a wage equal to the marginal revenue product of his/her labour.

[andyt]

Either way you cut it, OTI's or Lemmy's, doesn't that mean that if a company is losing money, the guy running the show should get paid nothing and even have to pay back some of his previous earnings? After all, the people at the bottom are only following orders.

[Scape]

100 Million pay raise for the CEO?

[Lemmy]

andyt andyt:

Either way you cut it, OTI's or Lemmy's, doesn't that mean that if a company is losing money, the guy running the show should get paid nothing and even have to pay back some of his previous earnings? After all, the people at the bottom are only following orders.

Yup. Theoretically, employees should be paid on the basis of the revenue they generate. Management should be compensated on profitability. Air Canada generates lots of revenue and zero profit. Management, therefore, shouldn't get paid.

[Regina]

andyt andyt:

Either way you cut it, OTI's or Lemmy's, doesn't that mean that if a company is losing money, the guy running the show should get paid nothing and even have to pay back some of his previous earnings? After all, the people at the bottom are only following orders.

That sounds like the "Final Solution"

[OnTheIce]

andyt andyt:

Either way you cut it, OTI's or Lemmy's, doesn't that mean that if a company is losing money, the guy running the show should get paid nothing and even have to pay back some of his previous earnings? After all, the people at the bottom are only following orders.

They don't have nothing. They have a great job.

[BeaverFever]

And theyre a rare talent. Type-rated aircraft mechs dont grow on trees...lots of ex-air force guys whove been on the job since the ice age and a whole bunch more who came over in one massive flood when defence budgets were slashed in the 90s. If those guys all quit tomorow, AC would be in a whole world of hurt...might go under before thwy could recover.

[andyt]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

andyt andyt:

Either way you cut it, OTI's or Lemmy's, doesn't that mean that if a company is losing money, the guy running the show should get paid nothing and even have to pay back some of his previous earnings? After all, the people at the bottom are only following orders.

They don't have nothing. They have a great job.

Exactly - it is a great job for management - they get paid even tho they can't make the company turn a profit. What a deal. Fire the bunch of them and hire management that can perform.

[OnTheIce]

andyt andyt:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

andyt andyt:

Either way you cut it, OTI's or Lemmy's, doesn't that mean that if a company is losing money, the guy running the show should get paid nothing and even have to pay back some of his previous earnings? After all, the people at the bottom are only following orders.

They don't have nothing. They have a great job.

Exactly - it is a great job for management - they get paid even tho they can't make the company turn a profit. What a deal. Fire the bunch of them and hire management that can perform.

Look at what the job is, what they get paid and what they turned down.Stop looking up and what others doing different jobs get paid. There's no relevance.

They get paid well, more than their counterparts at Porter, Westjet, etc. They were offered an increase in pay and benefits, despite the company losing money.

[BeaverFever]

Well, Porter's not comparable, its a small single-fleet Turbo-prop operation. WestJet is also single-fleet and Air Canada is just a different animal altogether, with more service hubs, more complex schedules, etc. I think you need to look at other Majors for comparisson, but those are all US-based so it may not even be apples and oranges even then.