By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Air Canada flight attendants were forced back to work and into arbitration by the Canadian government Saturday after a strike stranded over 100,000 travelers during the peak summer travel season. Federal Jobs Minister Patty Hajdu intervened, citing economic risks and the need for resolution, ordering the Canada Industrial Relations Board to extend the existing collective agreement. The union representing the 10,000 flight attendants criticized the government’s action, claiming it violated their right to strike, while the Business Council of Canada and the Canadian Chamber of Commerce welcomed the move. Air Canada has said it could take up to a week to fully restart operations, impacting an estimated 130,000 people daily.
Read the original article here
Air Canada suspends operations as flight attendants go on strike, leaving many travelers stranded and scrambling for alternative solutions. Keelin Pringnitz’s family, returning from a European vacation, found themselves stuck in London’s Heathrow Airport, with canceled flights and limited options. The possibility of flying to the United States was offered, but travelers were warned that they would receive no further assistance once they landed, making this a less than ideal scenario. It’s a stark illustration of the chaos and frustration that ensues when a major airline’s operations are abruptly halted.
The underlying issues surrounding the strike seem to be a clash over fair compensation and working conditions. From an outsider’s perspective, the pay for flight attendants is considered low, especially when compared to the high costs of living in the cities where Air Canada crew bases are located. Some have suggested that management has lost sight of the importance of its workforce, leading to a breakdown in negotiations. The suggestion of re-nationalizing Air Canada surfaces, reflecting a sentiment of dissatisfaction with the current management structure.
The financial implications are significant. Air Canada, despite its profitability, is being challenged on its allocation of resources, particularly in light of recent stock buybacks. The core issue appears to be the perceived inadequacy of the airline’s offers to its flight attendants, especially when considering the rising cost of living in major Canadian cities. There’s a sentiment that the company should be able to offer better compensation, reflecting the value of the work performed by the cabin crew.
The government’s intervention by ordering the flight attendants back to work has further complicated the situation, as that only delays a solution to the underlying issues. The core of the disagreement appears to center on pay, with a union demanding a substantial increase and the airline offering a significantly lower percentage. The gap between the two positions highlights the fundamental disagreement regarding the value and compensation of the flight attendants.
Adding to the drama, some of the compensation models of other airlines also come into question, such as commission on snacks. A reduced rate for boarding and ground delays might be a good middle ground for both parties, but it’s a long shot when both sides are far apart in negotiating terms. The economic impacts of the strike are significant, particularly for Air Canada, which is losing millions of dollars in revenue daily. The speed at which the situation was resolved suggests that the airline would have needed to declare bankruptcy within a week.
Air Canada’s offers are far less than what it seems. The airline’s offer of 38% over four years falls short of what flight attendants agreed to in 2003 to avoid bankruptcy. The offer does not even keep up with inflation, from the 2015 CBA. Air Canada also continues to try and classify certain work as exempt from pay, as many duties for flight attendants are simply not paid. All this goes to show that the airline is not being straightforward with the flight attendants, nor is it fulfilling what it had previously promised.
Ultimately, the dispute highlights a fundamental conflict between labor and capital. The purpose of a union is to leverage its work to show Capital its value. Whether this means a 2000% increase in pay, or other benefits, is up to the flight attendants, and it’s up to Air Canada to figure out if they can or cannot do without them. The government’s actions, which have been criticised as subverting a union’s ability to negotiate, serve to emphasize the critical role of the government in such disputes.
The impact of the strike extends beyond the immediate inconvenience of canceled flights. For those who are stranded, the effects are significant. Some of the discussion involves border issues, such as crossing the United States border. Concerns were raised about potential negative experiences in the US, including potential arrest, or being sent to a third-world country. This points to the broader implications of labor disputes, particularly in the context of international travel and border restrictions.