Air Canada is "investigating."
I'm very interested to know if that's a firing offence for a unionized employee.
Because if not...
"I'm very interested to know if that's a firing offence for a unionized employee."
==> I will make an odds on bet that it's not.. Usually with most CBA's in the transport universe, there's a progressive disciplinary process or tract that must be followed. Each offense is usually given a "point" value, and discipline is given based on the number of points on his/her record at the time of offense; and points do 'expire' after some point in time. It's a lot like your driver's license and tickets and points assessed against it.
That said, there are some offenses that, if proven, are what many carriers CBA's (Collective Bargaining Agreement) call "cardinal" offenses, or those that are eligible for immediate termination, and do not require the company to use the progressive disciplinary process.
Cardinal offenses are commonly things that would be, could be or even are, criminal offenses outside of the carriers universe; examples would be:
1) theft of property of the carrier, passengers, vendors, or others,
2) intentional falsification of company safety or security records,
3) intentional violation of any safety, customs, security or national law related to the carriers business,
4) any type of assault occurring on company property or against a company employee, passengers, contractors while on-duty,
5) intentional destruction, defacing, tampering or altering with aircraft or any parts of the aircraft that are regulated.
When I worked on "the ramp", those that got caught bag "tossing" were usually given the first level of discipline, unless; 1) they had a prior mark for that offense still in their record, then it went to a 2nd step - suspension without pay, or 2) it was proven that the intent of the throwing was not work product related, but was done with intent to damage the property in question, then it went right to a 2nd step, or 3rd (last chance notice) if already on a step 2.
I don't think it will be either. Canadian unions are well aware of the progressive discipline process and that's what will be followed here.
Thanks for that GOPBI. That's what I was afraid of.
No more gate check for me! (Well, not willingly...)
These boys have been suspended and AC say, through the news, that they will be fired once the investigation is complete. Backlash has been enormous. But I think if AC were serious about firing them, they would be fired now.Edited: 22 April 2014, 02:45
"These boys have been suspended and AC say, through the news, that they will be fired once the investigation is complete. Backlash has been enormous. But I think if AC were serious about firing them, they would be fired now."
==> Interesting.. I'd like to know what their CBA says in these kinds of cases.. To me, Air Canada is in kind of no-win spot, in that the PR they're taking is ugly and only a "we fired them" resolution will make this matter effectively go away, or placate the media.. but... they're also bound the CBA... and failing to follow that will most likely produce a grievance and all the internal costs to address it.. and I suspect there's no language in there that speaks to cases like this --- ones hat create a media/PR nightmare for them..
I wonder if their CBA has some kind of "egregious" conduct clause that lets them move directly to a termination, versus going thru the normal process (or if these folks were already on some kind of existing disciplinary mark)
I don't agree with bag tossing as it's just wrong - and in most cases there's no real "need" to do so... but.. I also don't agree with meting out discipline based, in whole or part, on public relations/media/social media drivers, as that can open the door to cases of unequal treatment, whereby employee X gets a termination letter for the offense, but employee Y, getting something less, only because his/her infraction wasn't captured on video or made the media rounds.
Not sure what the Agreement says, but the backlash is why I think AC is simply beating their chests at this point. They must be seen to be doing something, but when the dust settles, and meetings are held, another outcome will quietly be found. One AC spokesperson is quoted as saying:
>>the actions “clearly contravened” the airline’s baggage-handling rules.<<
Many are blaming the airline - for not enforcing their policies re: checked/carry on luggage. Remember these many bags were taken from pax trying to take them onto a plane whose overheads were full, and for working their employees so hard up and down those steps. And the other many are blaming the pax for not checking their luggage. Some of those bags being dropped were BIG.
I'll keep an eye on this.
-:- Message from TripAdvisor staff -:-
This topic has been closed to new posts due to inactivity. We hope you'll join the conversation by posting to an open topic or starting a new one.
To review the TripAdvisor Forums Posting Guidelines, please follow this link: http://www.tripadvisor.com/pages/forums_posting_guidelines.html
We remove posts that do not follow our posting guidelines, and we reserve the right to remove any post for any reason.