Air Canada Flight Attendants Overwhelmingly Say "No!" to Concessions

New Horizons Editorial

On August 27 the Air Canada Component of the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) released the results of the ratification vote on the Tentative Agreement that the Bargaining Committee had signed with the Company and unanimously recommended. With 78.6% of the membership casting ballots, this vote represented the highest ever level of participation. A whopping 87.8% of those voting took the courageous stand to reject the tentative agreement despite the campaign of fear-mongering. And everyone recognizes that even most of those who voted for acceptance did so reluctantly, strongly influenced by the propaganda that, not only could we get nothing better but that we risk being put in a position of faring even worse.

This decision by cabin personnel to refuse to bow to the kind of pressure under which they were placed by "the current political context" and the campaign of fear has brought about an unseen unity between juniors, mid-seniority and senior flight attendants as well as between the groups that now make up the Air Canada Component.

New Horizons salutes the cabin personnel for taking this courageous decision and we look forward to continue participating in the discussions on the way forward.

Haut de page


The New Situation Requires New Solutions

What has become very clear over the past few rounds of negotiations, whether with In-Flight Service or with other departments in the Company as well as throughout the economy in Canada, is that the situation has inexorably changed since the social contract was established after WWII to guarantee labour peace. For many years now, we no longer have a process where the two parties -- management and the workers represented by their unions -- sit down to negotiate mutually satisfactory working conditions and compensation.

We now have the Company engaging in something that appears to be very similar to extortion. This is enforced with the threat of disaster or state intervention -- or both. Yet they tell us that we must continue to "negotiate" in the old way. This is an untenable situation that has led us to where we find ourselves now.

The Company has long accused us of threatening its well-being and the interests of its shareholders by demanding the continuity of the pensions it agreed to when it hired us along with wages and working conditions at a Canadian standard and commensurate with the important role we play as safety and service professionals. Now the government is saying that this defence of our interests threatens the Canadian economy and must be crushed.

Whose economy is this the Harper government is defending? It is our economy and we must decide its direction. The government must fulfill its role to the working people of this country and not to the handful of mega-rich who are out to put every cent of added value that we produce into their pockets.

Closer to home, we must look at how negotiations are being conducted under the new conditions and how we can turn that around to serve our interests. We must tell the Company that we, too, recognize that the situation has changed and we intend to be part of the process from now on.

These questions need discussion. The kind of open meetings that were held to discuss the "tentative agreement" must be held to discuss the way forward. They should be organized at every base and in every city where there are large numbers of commuters. A "new business" or "for the good of the union" item tagged on at the end of a lengthy, bureaucratic agenda will not allow, let alone foster, the kind of discussion that is necessary to come up with answers.

Together we can and must end our marginalization. We have begun by standing together and declaring we will not accept the unacceptable. Let us participate massively in discussing how to bring this process to fruition.

Haut de page


What Do We Do Next?
The Need to Establish New Mechanisms

Cabin personnel at Air Canada have taken a decisive step in ending our marginalization by voting overwhelmingly to reject the Tentative Agreement (TA) that the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) Bargaining Committee had signed with the Company and unanimously recommended. Refusing to submit to the threats and pressure we turned their words into deeds by affirming our dignity and insisting that the important work we do in attending to the safety and well-being of our passengers entitles us to a say in determining decent working conditions and an appropriate wage as well as a guarantee of security throughout our working lives and in retirement.

Many question how and why we got into this situation but the most important question that is on everyone's mind and that remains to be answered at this time is, "What do we do next?" Many readers have proposed a number of suggestions. We should have the opportunity to discuss all of them in order to come to satisfactory conclusions that will allow us to set our own agenda and consolidate our new-found strength.

Because the conciliation process was precipitated at a time when we were being told that everything was going well, the Bargaining Committee has now called for a strike vote beginning this week. It seems that the strength of the rejection of the tentative agreement is a clear indication to the Company that we expect something better. What we really need now is time to work out a new direction for the negotiation process.

One of the most important aspects of the discussions over the past couple of weeks has been the expression of the necessity and our desire to end our isolation from the negotiation process. The rejection of the tentative agreement is an illustration of the need for us to be at the centre of this process. We do not need experts or advisors or highly paid lawyers or other intermediators to "represent" us. Nobody can represent us better than we, ourselves. Now is the time to begin the discussion on how we can place ourselves at the centre of the process and to put in place the mechanisms for bringing this about.

As the editorial in this bulletin pointed out, the situation has changed from what it was a few years ago. The Company has changed its strategy but we continue to act in the old way. The only way we can guarantee any progress is to take stock of the new conditions and new context we are facing and work collectively to ensure our voice continues to be heard.

Is simply sending the same people back to the bargaining table to tell the Company that we feel their "best offer" stinks going to make us stronger and help us win a better contract? If the Company feels it no longer has to bargain, will a change in the bargaining committee make us stronger? If we are told we won't be able to go on strike, what is the purpose of a strike vote? We should add, nevertheless, that because we are faced with a strike vote, we call for 100% participation and for everybody, including those who reluctantly voted to accept the TA, to express their determination to continue to stand up for our rights, our interests and our dignity and to vote "yes" and send the message to the Company and to the Harper government that we are not pushovers.

Although it seems that the whole "conciliation" process was precipitated in order to line us up for a "favourable" strike date, that, too, has changed. The important thing is that we must tell the Company that we, too, now recognize that the overall situation is not what it was 10 years ago and we now intend to be part of the process. We expect them to bargain seriously and respectfully and we demand that the negotiations no longer be held behind closed doors.

Ending secret negotiations doesn't mean that we expect them to be held in an arena with everybody being allowed to have their say whenever and however they want. It means that we demand our right to know what is going on through whatever technological means are available, secure and practical. It also means that we want our bargaining committee to involve us at every step of the process, soliciting and accepting our feedback. As one reader expressed it, "we want to take back the control of the steering wheel of OUR vehicle."

If we work together as a collective with the same determination we illustrated during the campaign to reject the collective agreement, we can create the new mechanisms we need to turn the situation around in our interests. We have no other choice.

Haut de page


September 3, 2011 Bulletin • Return to Index • Write to: editor@cpcml.ca