Global Helicopter Pilots Association

[myassisgrass]

The Canadian Industrial Relations Board will be hearing CHC's arguments supporting their 2nd objection to the GHPA's application for certification (unionization). The hearings are scheduled for 24-27 November in Vancouver. They will be arguing that they (CHC) are not the 'True Employer'.
It has been nearly 2 years since the initial application in December 2006. The CIRB ruled 100% in favour of the GHPA on the 1st objection. CHC appealed this decision and once again, the CIRB ruled 100% in favour of the GHPA. Unsatisfied with these decisions, CHC launched a separate case with the Canadian Federal Court of Appeals. CHC hopes the Court of Appeals will overturn the CIRB rulings. This case will be heard in early November.
CHC is claiming that any pilots hired by CHC are actually employees of whatever subsidiary company they are sent to work for. For example, if a pilot is sent to Thailand, he effectively becomes an employee of Thai Aviation Services (TAS) and is not an employee of CHC.
This is a 'long-shot' and desperate attempt to do anything to stymie the legitimate attempt by a majority of the pilots to organize. CHC is doing everything within its power to try to bleed the GHPA of resources (financial). The OPEIU is backing the GHPA and CHC is losing the legal battle.
If the GHPA wins, this will be a landmark case. No longer will international helicopter companies be able to hide behind a legal facade that keeps pilots from organizing.
Stay tuned for more.................

[Plakstift]

Thank you for the update.

November will be over before we know it and hopefully we will know where we stand.

It's too bad that the company turned this into something bitter.

The jurisdiction matter was a ligitimate point of contention for the company and it did need a ruling. But from the moment that the CIRB ruled that they had indeed jurisdiction, CHC should have accepted it and moved on.

This new objection of not being the true employer is frankly ridiculous and everybody knows that it will be rejected, CHC included.

What a waste of time...

[Outwest]

What a waste of time...

Exactly the point......CHC intend to drag this out for as long as possible with the hope that we give up.

[myassisgrass]

Here is the text of the message from Christine Baird, the President of CHC Global Operations, sent to all employees after the GHPA application for certification was submitted;

"Dear Colleagues,
As you may be aware, our helicopter pilots have recently formed an association - the Global Helicopter Pilots Association (the GHPA) - and applied to the Canadian Industrial Relations Board (the CIRB or the "Board") to be certified as a union. As you may also be aware, the company has resisted that application and recently appeared before the CIRB to have it dismissed.
In light of the company's resistance to the GHPA's application for certification, we understand that there might be some misunderstandings or mispreceptions regarding the company's willingness to address issues raised by employees from time to time. In light og that, I am sending this memorandum to all employees to explain the company's position before the CIRB and to reaffirm Global Operation's commitment to insuring that it is, and will remain, an open, cooperative and consultive organization.
First, our position before the CIRB during the hearing last week was that the Canadian Labour Code does not apply to our pilots working in foreign jurisdictions. As these pilots do not work on or in connection with a 'federal work, undertaking or business' - as that phrase is defined in the Code - they do not, in our view, meet the test for certification.by the CIRB.
The Board will consider the arguments made by the parties and will make a determination in due course. I'm told that it may be several months before we see a decision.
Blah, blah, blah.............."

The CIRB ruled not once, but twice in favour of the GHPA, that it does have jurisdiction over the pilots application for certification. They simply cannot accept this simple fact. Now, they have tabled an appeal before the 2nd highest court in the land, the Canadian Federal Court of Appeals, in an attempt to have the 2 decisions overturned. Presummably, if this attempt fails they will apply to the Supreme Court of Canada!

And now, the GHPA will have to disprove the rediculous claim that CHC is not the 'True Employer'.

It begs the question - Is CHC truly an open, cooperative and consultive company as they claim to be?

[Swamp76]

The ruling I read indicated that some CHC Global pilots definitely (100%) are under CIRB jurisdiction while others very likely are not.

Not quite the complete support of GHPA's position as stated here. I haven't seen a subsequent ruling clarifying this stance. Is it available online?

At least everyone is finally admitting that it is, in fact, a union.

[myassisgrass]

The CIRB ruled 100% in our favour and included 100% of all the pilots employed in our application in spite of attempts by CHC to have non-Canadians, Canadian non-residents, etc., etc., disqualified.
The complete ruling, including the ruling on the appeal, are offered as public information on the CIRB website.
And finally, regarding whether or not it's called a union or association, the GHPA offered CHC the option of retracting our application, provided that they would sit down and talk to us. We were laughed out of the office. The only other option available to force CHC to sit and talk with us was certification and that means we have the right to be considered a union (with all other associated rights and protections).
I appreciate your concerns about embracing a union. When you are dealing with a management team that sees communication as a one-way street however, you have to use whatever legal resources at your disposal.
All the best.

[unstable load]

myassisgrass,

Without being labelled as a nutter/a-hole/whatever I would like to ask a question....

Your time at work and most of your professional lives are tightly regulated in the various countries you operate in and by the company, so, how exactly will a union/association benefit you guys?
Your hours are regulated, duty times ditto, most of you are on equal time rotations and supply and demand governs salaries, you have pension and medical - what more do you want?

I am not trying to be inflammatory here, so bear with me please. I do not see the point of unions, so please enlighten me.

If my compatriots decided they wanted to form a union they would need to convince me of the benefits of union versus non-union, so that is what I am asking of you........

What is the point of a union/association?

[Shawn Coyle]

I have no dog in this action, so to speak, so I'd like to add my two bits.
Unions have a place when management is not always sweetness and light. If management were perfect, there would be no need for unions. Mind you, in a perfect world, we wouldn't need management or regulatory authorities either. There is at least one company in the Gulf of Mexico that treats their people really well, and has been able to keep the union out.

The issue for a union is to find a balance in representing their member's interests. It's a little known fact that the main airline union, ALPA, spends most of their money in making sure they have representation on all the technical committees that impact airline operations. This is a huge expense, but it's the only way they can make sure that their main interest - safety - gets heard. They have been instrumental in many of these committees in preventing bad ideas from organizations like the FAA and management from becoming rules.

The other main reason is to make sure wages are reasonable. ALPA will send their accountants in to look at the books when an airline cries 'no money', and has accepted the truth when they find it.
If you want a really interesting story get 'Flying the Line' from ALPA, and you'll recognize a lot of parallels to the current helicopter industry.

I'm not going to say that unions are perfect. There have been lots of abuses of power by unions, and times when personality gets in the way of logic and reason. But a union staffed by good people, who are backed by reasonable people in the ranks can be a very positive thing.
If you don't get involved one way or another, you deserve whatever happens to you!

[myassisgrass]

I agree 100% with the previous post. As a pilot in the field, the question to ask is, "What can a union bring to an equation?".....In one word.....Representation. An individual has but one voice. Often, that voice, as reasonable and as logical as it might be, is only one voice and as such, has no strength. A union of pilots allows one strong voice that can and must be heard by management. Management is often directed by economics and the loudest voice heard is an accountant's voice. Management is often not intimately involved with the issues that must be faced by the workers in the field....namely, the pilots. Without a union, decisions are made, policies are set and people's careers and lives are in the hands of their supervisors. Try having one bad day and see how difficult life gets without a professional body behind you providing support and representation.
The airlines and the professional pilots therein have recognized and have had representation before management by unions for decades. Somehow, we (helicopter pilots) have seldom organized and consequently we have never had the same advantages. Consequently, we have had our fates determined by management alone and when we have a problem, we stand alone.
And then there is the question of salary. Without an effective bargaining unit, what incentive is there for management to give fair and equitable pay increases when times are good? Their first responsibility is to their shareholders, not their employees. When senior management is rewarded by bonuses dependent on profitability, lower salaries generally equals more profitability and this generally equates to higher bonuses for management. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Who represents the pilots?
I don't have much experience with unions but over the years, I really cannot say that we, as pilots, have lived up to our potential. Perhaps a good union will help us along the way. It can't hurt to have professional representation. Right now, we have none.

[unstable load]

Thanks, guys. It is already starting to clear up for me.

Cheers,

UL

[malabo]

myassisgrass is absolutely right, the management is (necessarily) first responsible to shareholders. If the company is not profitable it will eventually become insolvent. This is of little consequence to the pilots if there is a shortage - they simply walk across the road to a solvent employer needing pilots. Labor employed in a company is a cost. Management tries to minimize all costs. They will pay the minimum required to retain pilots, which is why you see pilot salaries creeping up during shortages, especially if competing companies whipsaw salaries to poach pilots from other operators.

There are still advantages to employers to deal with unions, especially if the same union represents a spectrum of pilots working for the same competing companies - less chance of poaching and whipsawing because salaries are fixed for the term of the contract. Less backroom deals, better morale, etc.

On the downside, the select pilots (the "blessed" ones) can no longer expect that "special" deal not offered to other pilots. The union now becomes obliged by law to represent the pilot's interests. Layoffs and terminations also become more set in stone, with the company responding by setting better standards and evaluation systems to keep the deadwood out.

In a case of dispute between the pilot and the company, the union is legally accountable for the representation of the pilot. Depending on how CHC fragments in the coming years it will become a demanding task for GHPA to argue before whatever board of jurisdiction recognizes them for a remedy. Got a problem? Call your union rep, only they can take a grievance up with management. In the case of a labor dispute not being resolved between CHC and GHPA it then goes to arbitration before a labor board. So if you are a Sri Lanka pilot that got his butt kicked by a Malaysian manager because you were working for one of the CHC "shell" companies, your case will come before the ........Labour Relations Board of British Columbia??? Where is that, some small country in South America?

Interesting concept to have a union organized under the jurisdiction of the country where a company keeps its head office - even though that company has no flight operations in that same country and most employees don't work or are resident of that country. So if the CHC head office really does move to Amsterdam the GHPA will re-register there?

[chcoffshore]

So if the CHC head office really does move to Amsterdam the GHPA will re-register there?


Really! Is this on the cards.............. There's no info for us mushrooms!

[unstable load]

The union now becomes obliged by law to represent the pilot's interests.


Will membership therefore be automatic by default if a pilot is an employee?

[myassisgrass]

Membership in the union will follow Canadian, and for the most part, international rules. Membership is optional. Everyone pays dues however, because everyone benefits from the efforts of the union (benefit improvements, salary increases etc.)

[N Arslow]

"The hearings are scheduled for 24-27 November in Vancouver."

Any news?

[myassisgrass]

4 days of hearings concluded......likely one more to go (Dec 4th). Expect a summary report to be posted once the incredible claims by CHC are heard in their entirety (lawyers summations are all that remains on 4th)

[garsr1]

Do you think the union will do anything or just take our money and laugh like hell doing it? Just like all the bail out money in the US.

[Shawn Coyle]

gasr
A lot of the effectiveness of any union depends on the people who are taking part in the process. If you don't get involved, you deserve whatever happens to you. If you let hotheads get elected, prepare for the worst.

[Plakstift]

Shawn.

Thank you for showing how one can be diplomatic and civilized when you replied to "garsr1".

Well said.

[garsr1]

I would hope that they would work for our interest, but it seems that people are out for their own. In current times it is hard to believe the reps. I am not union, but see both sides. I would like a little more security in this business but who wouldn't want that.

[Deiced]

So, what happened, today was the 4th? I thought it was the day for the hearing ruling.? :ugh:

[Shawn Coyle]

gasr:
If you want a bit more security, and you don't think your reps are working to get that for you, then volunteer to work on that aspect of things. The union is really nothing more than the wishes of it's members - unfortunately sometime bad eggs make their wishes more important than the real wishes.

[BOOMER1]

The second set of hearings just concluded in the beginning of December. The Canadian Industrial Relations Board has heard CHC’s second major objection to the GHPA’s application for certification. CHC claims it is not the true employer of its pilots working around the world, yet they are being paid and administratively handled through their office in Richmond, Canada! There are a myriad of other arguments with respect to CHC’s stance and all were argued at the hearings accordingly. The hearings lasted for a total of six days and the results of the hearings are expected to be passed down by the end of February. CHC has vowed to oppose any hearing in favor of the GHPA, as one might expect, and the struggle will continue to the next level in two months time. I hope that this helps.

[alouette3]

Why is Union a five letter word in North America? I have been in a non union and a union company, and ,I can tell you ,that my life certainly is better in the union company. However, even when the union is on the property, the company behaves like a sore loser.Constant union busting, propoganda and efforts to undermine the contract which they signed with the union.After months of bitter negotiations, I might add.:ugh:
Like everything in this world the truth is somewhere down the middle. Do unions abuse and misuse their power? Absolutely. But can they be a force for good too --definitely.
In the US,everything bad is blamed on the union. Poor management decisions lead airlines and auto companies into bankruptcy. But the situations are, nevertheless, blamed on the unions.And, as Shawn said, like ALPA, helicopter unions need to come of age to participate willingly in safety initiatives with the cordial acceptance of the company. But as long as the helicopter workforce is bitterly divided on this---that will never happen.:{
Rant over. Thanks for listening.
Alt3.

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

It is somewhat naive of an employer that they fear the collective and controlled bargaining that a unionised workforce enjoys.

Unionisation prevents unfair practices from taking plcae ON BOTH SIDES of the divide. Employees cannot just decide to up sticks and start a bun fight without some agreements in place from the greater union body. This affords the employer a good deal of protection and also the customer, at the end of the line.

Procedures have to be followed and employemnts laws followed by both sides.

Having said all of this, I suspect that CHC position with Globally employed pilots is they can align them to individual contracts in each are of operations that allows CHC to bid for work at local prices. Thus a UK North Sea Pilot probably earns substantially more than his collegues say in Thailand.

On one hand, it is easy to see CHCs point of view, but on the other, the implications for all Heavy helicopter pilots is that if left unchallenged we will at worst case see redeployment of global assests to locations where the profit is greatest, and thus the lot of the local pilots cannot improve.

I have always proferred the argument that the Pilots salary and remuneration package should not be involved in the contract bid calculations, just as the DOC on the machine is fixed, so should pilot overheads be also. (I also include engineers in this concept).

The issue here is whether Global pilots have the stomach for a real fight, because it is clear that if they all take a stance, currently unrestrained by the shackles of a union agreement, CHC would really feel how unpleasant things can get with no union agreement in place.

It comes down in the end to each and every mans price. If you are prepared to carry on working for current packages, no prgress will evr be made.

[Outwest]

Having said all of this, I suspect that CHC position with Globally employed pilots is they can align them to individual contracts in each are of operations that allows CHC to bid for work at local prices.

With the exception of IP (incentive pay) and per diem, all Global pilots are paid the same, regardless of the location.

Thus a UK North Sea Pilot probably earns substantially more than his collegues say in Thailand.

That is true, but North Sea pilots are not part of Global Operations, which is the group seeking representation.

[SARBlade]

:confused: Anyone have any news about the judge's ruling regarding the associations bid to become unionized? Had heard that if judge ruled in favour of the GHPA, then there was a proposal being tabled to unionize.

[myassisgrass]

The GHPA is still awaiting the CIRB ruling regarding the claim by CHC that they are NOT the true employer. We had hoped that the CIRB would have had their ruling released by the end of February (as the CIRB vice-chair had suggested) but obviously this has not been the case. So all we can do is wait and see.

[BOOMER1]

The GHPA has received certification from the Canadian Industrial Realations Board! We are now an official union........groundbreaking news!:ok:

[ppheli]

Really? - the news page on their website (http://ghpa.ca/index_files/breaking-news.htm) ran out of stories 15 months ago!

[Outwest]

That is the pace of the Canadian Government, there was no news to report........until now that is!!!
:ok::ok:

[myassisgrass]

With the recent decision by the CIRB to 'certify' the GHPA and to allow them to bargain collectively for the CHC Global Operations pilots, 'the time has come to speak of many things'.
Instead of being laughed out of the office, management at CHC will have to realize that we are a professional body and that we need our own representation. There are a lot of unresolved issues that absolutely need to be addressed. I sincerely hope that we get the participation we need and that the contract, already overdue, is not too long in coming.

[WBlume]

Sounds like really good news.
The Union was organised at my company over ten years ago and it has been very positive for us in every aspect. Lots of hard work but now you can have a future.
Best wishes.

[Hoverboy]

The CIRB has released Order # 9674-U dated June 30th 2009, but I can't find it on their site yet, it should be posted shortly perhaps?

The heart of the matter:

NOW, THEREFORE, it is ordered by the Canadian Industrial Relations Board that the Global Helicopter Pilots Association be, and is hereby certified to be the bargaining agent for a unit comprising:
"all pilots employed by CHC Global Operations (2008) Inc. excluding full time managers, pilots whose primary duty is non-flying base manager and foreign national pilots employed by CHC partner companies."

Reference file No. 26066-C

[BOOMER1]

It amazes me when I read the posts on Vertical Magazine regarding the GHPA being certified versus the posts on this site. It seems that there are fewer people excited about the prospect of the GHPA being certified and working together with CHC on the Vertical Magazine forum.

In fact, there are even a few predicting the demise of CHC as a result of this decision. Do these individuals know something the rest of us don’t?:suspect:

Chc Global Helicopter Pilots Unionize - Vertical Online Forums (http://www.verticalmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=14148)

[northseaspray]

Congratulations to the Global Pilots!! This is a big step forward for all helicopter pilots, not only those working for Global. Keep up the good work! :ok:

[Plakstift]

Thanks "Northseaspray".

I agree with your statement. All helicopter pilots will benefit from this, regardless of where they are.

The helo community is a very small one, especially offshore, therefore better working conditions for a large group of pilots like CHC GO will only improve the overall conditions for all of us.

[twisted wrench]

Now that CHC Global pilots have a association, what is there to stop CHC Global from letting all the CHC Global employed pilots go and hire them contract from a offshore hiring agency??

Much the same way Schriener hired there crews ( expat pilot/engineers) that worked in Nigeria?

[Outwest]

what is there to stop CHC Global from letting all the CHC Global employed pilots go

The law for one. It would be against the law to fire all pilots now that they are certified. Actually against the law without a union, the employer needs "just cause" to fire someone.
Second, we are now a union, so the union would tell all the members not to join the offshore hiring agency. Where would that leave CHC?

No, CHC GO will just have to deal with the union in good faith as CHC Australia, Scotia and Norway does.

This is not a war, we all recognize that CHC GO must be profitable to be viable and it must be viable to provide our jobs. Above all we are looking for fair and equitable treatment.

[myassisgrass]

What sort of company is CHC? Are they 'union friendly' as their lawyer suggested in his closing statement during the last hearings (to determine if CHC is the True Employer)?
We now have less than 2 weeks before the deadline for an appeal with the CIRB. Then there is a separate appeal process through the Canadian Federal Court of Appeals. Will they file both appeals? Will they forget about appealing to the CIRB and appeal directly to the Federal Courts? Do not be surprised that CHC will appeal this for as long as they possibly can. Do not be surprised when CHC asks for a 'stay' in proceedings while the appeals are being processed. We already know (from unofficial sources) that the fight is not over yet. The GHPA has won 3 important battles (all of them so far) and we believe we are right. The CIRB believes we are right and went so far as to declare the GHPA as the collective bargaining agent for the helicopter pilots employed by CHC Global Operations.
Let's see where 'union friendly' CHC GO goes with this. I do not foresee any surprises on this and I fully expect we will be returning to the courts to substantiate our case. When the time comes to sit down and bargain, let's see what goodwill remains. It is time for CHC to rethink their stance on this. The pilots only want representation and a voice when addressing management. Nothing more. We are a viable group of professionals with concerns similar to other professional groups such as airline pilots, doctors, lawyers etc.. We are doing the same work as our brothers in Europe and Australia and yet, we are denied (by CHC) the same rights of organisation.

[Hoverboy]

Everything that CHC management has done so far shows they are not going to go down without a fight. Reading the CIRB ruling shows they are happy to misrepresent themselves as they attempt to introduce outdated and invalid documentation to try to bolster their weak arguments.
They keep losing and they keep fighting because they are not union friendly and they fear losing total control over their domain. They are setting the tone, rather than trying to work it out, they just want to fight, so they will get the union they deserve.
They could make a strong show of good faith by accepting the CIRB decision since this is not the first round they have lost, but somehow I don't think they are going to start to be "union friendly" any time soon.

Don't expect them to start being nice simply because they lost the latest round, if they sense any chance to delay or deny the inevitable, they will continue to do battle. But how many times do they have to be told that they are wrong?
I imagine there will be a departure or two once the final, final court decision is reached and legal action is threatened for non-compliance. Once they have no legal recourse and the corporate level people realize that any sense of cooperation or goodwill has long disappeared a few people will get a golden parachute and sent on their way.
Speculation? Of course! This is a rumour network!

Union friend? Yeah, right. They will not go down gracefully, that is already clear after reading the 40 some pages of the CIRB ruling and certification documents.

[myassisgrass]

As of 16th July 2009, CHC Global Operations officially filed for a hearing with the Canadian Federal Court of Appeals. Their wish is that the court will overturn the CIRB rulings and that our application for collective bargaining be thrown out.

On the other hand, the GHPA has officially filed notification that we wish to meet with CHC GO management for the purpose of collective bargaining. We are awaiting their response. We will attempt to establish mutually agreed upon dates where we (GHPA) and CHC can meet to discuss the components of a CLA. The question is, with the case before the Canadian Federal Court of Appeal, can we expect CHC GO to move forward and bargain in good faith?

Frankly, to date CHC has not surprised me at all. I would expect that there would be NO good faith and that they will only come to the table kicking and screaming.

As with all legal proceedings on this level, I would expect that the final decision from the Federal Court of Appeal will take at least another year. Let's hope that they, like the CIRB, will find our attempts to organise legitimate and that CHC will finally talk to us (the pilots).

[taxying]

During this interim period AND given that the GHPA is the official (and legally) annointed representative body of the pilots.....I wonder if the GHPA is now in a position to legally call for STRIKE action if CHC GO remains recalcitrant ?????

:ugh:

[Outwest]

I am not surprised by this latest development, and rather than seeing this as a bad thing, I think it will further strengthen our resolve to see this thru, just as it did when they rejected our first attempt to negotiate.

Keep fighting us YVR and see how that works out for you in the end. You may just get the union YOU deserve ;)

myassisgrass,

have the lawyers told you how many avenues of appeal that CHC have open to them? If they lose this one, what will be their next play?

[myassisgrass]

CHC has a 'right of appeal' with the Canadian Federal Court of Appeal. This is the avenue they are presently pursuing. If they fail in this attempt, they can appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada where they do not have 'right of appeal'. The Supreme Court must determine if the case is worth hearing and ruling on. They may very well decide not to hear the case. To the best of my knowledge, that is the end of the appeal process.

A previous post suggested striking as a possible work action should CHC continue to drag their heels. I would not like to consider that option until absolutely no other avenue is left open to us. We are a union, we have union rights. CHC has their right of appeal and it would appear they will use it.

[myassisgrass]

Here's an interesting extract from the GHPA website. I like the concept of = pay for = work.

How Do We Compare? (using top payrate)

Introduction
This should clearly be the question everyone asks when we wonder whether what we are getting paid is comparable to that our colleagues in other parts of the world receive.
It is no simple matter to deduce whether the salary paid to a pilot working in the North Sea is comparable to the salary paid to an equally experienced and qualified pilot working in say Azerbaijan. How best to make that comparison?
Regardless of how the numbers are compared there will be those who believe that the numbers are skewed or incorrect parameters and data have been used etc. Such disbelievers usually have an agenda of their own and would wish the outcome to be more in line with what they want to believe is reality rather than the truth of reality itself.
This document is a fairly amateur attempt to bring some light into the discussion about salary and become a starting point for future discussion and evaluation.
Where do we start? Well, the obvious should be the salaries paid for equivalent experience, qualifications and seniority in other areas of CHC’s operations. To find this information, as it is not forthcoming from the current management team, it is necessary to look to what the associations in other locations tell us.
Salaries
Principally we are concerned with the salaries paid to our colleagues in the area of Northern Europe and encompassing both Off-shore and Search and Rescue operations in the following locations:
A)The United Kingdom including England, Wales and Scotland.
B)Ireland
C)Norway
D)Denmark
E)The Netherlands
The CHC operations in these locations provide a number of different services although Off-shore services predominate and the crews are qualified and tasked similarly to CHC Global flight crews.
Information regarding salaries paid to pilots was obtained from the various Associations representing crews in Europe. However, it should be remembered that there is a vast difference in not only salaries but also in the various allowances that differing Associations have obtained for their respective employees.
Therefore, this exercise becomes a little like comparing apples to oranges rather than apples or oranges. To try to form a comparison that can make sense a number of assumptions have been made and some other issues ignored for the time being.
The salary that is used in all cases here is that paid to all Off-shore captains at the top rate of pay on their respective payrolls.
The value of salary paid to CHC global employees was calculated at CAD4,000 per month and a daily rate of CAD225 x 182 days worked (=CAD88,950).
Actual benefits and allowances vary very widely throughout the different companies and although these make a very significant difference in the take-home pay of some crews for the sake of simplicity these have, for now, been mostly ignored.
Finally, the issue of currency needs to be addressed as not all employees are paid in the same currency. Those is the UK are normally paid in British Pounds (GBP), those countries of Europe in the Euro Zone (Netherlands and Ireland) are paid in Euros (EUR), while Norwegian crews are paid in Norwegian Kroner (NOK) and Danes are paid in Danish Krone (DKK) and, of course, those hired out of Vancouver are paid in Canadian dollars (CAD).
In an effort to make this comparison more understandable all salaries have been converted to US dollars.
Therefore, the table of salary paid senior Off-shore captain in the various geographic locations is as follows:
Location
Scotia
CHC HS
Denmark*
Ireland
Netherlands
Canada
Salary in local currency
GBP93471
NOK1,137,426
EUR139,798
EUR130,053
EUR123,900
CAD88,950
Salary in USD
$184,138
$209,047
$206,062
$191,698
$182,629
$89,039

The following exchange rate assumptions are used:
GBP to USD 1.970 NOK to USD 5.441 EUR to USD 0.678 CAD to USD 0.998
These exchange rates were current as of 21th February 2008 and taken from the following website Currency Converter for 164 Currencies (http://www.oanda.com/convert/classic)
*Denmark salaries could only be found posted in Euros (from the CHC Benchmark document, CHC Pilot Association)
Since this study is interested in the salary paid to CHC Global employees as it compares to other CHC companies then we can make the following comparison:
CHC Salary Comparison (Level 15 equivalent, not including benefits or allowances):
Company Location
UKScotia
CHC HS
Denmark
Ireland
Netherlands
CHC Global
Company Salary (USD)
$184,138
$209,047
$206,062
$191,698
$182,629
$89,039
CHC Global as %
48.4%
42.6%
43.2%
46.4%
48.8%
100%
Others as % of CHC Global
206.8%
234.8%
231.4%
215.3%
205.1%
100%

From this we can see that CHC global employees are paid at a rate ranging between 47.5% and 54.3% of their fellow employees in other CHC companies. Or, put differently, CHC European companies are earning anywhere from 84% to 110% more than CHC Global employees.
While this appears very significant there are other factors that come into play not the least of which are the cost of living and the cost of housing in any given geographic location.
So how do CHC Global employees compare in regard to our European colleagues?
Housing Prices
Housing numbers are definitely not as definitive as rates of pay. It has been far more difficult to find average housing prices across the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) of which all the above countries are members.
To come up with numbers certain assumptions have been made as although the numbers given for the price of the average home is based on the nationwide average. It was felt that this number was not fair in the case of Canada as the variation between geographic locations was very large, probably due to the size of the country. For example in 2007 house prices in Vancouver averaged about CAD581,000 while in Winnipeg the average price was only CAD175,000. The same wide spread in prices was not found in European locations likely due to the smaller size of the countries in question and the relatively large population base. Therefore, for the purpose of this study the average house price was used for all countries but along with the Canadian average we have also given the average price for the Greater Vancouver area. This was done because Vancouver is the location of CHC Global’s head office, and because many CHC Global crews are still hired from, and live, there.
Again, it was felt necessary, to convert the average price into US dollars to be able to make fair comparison. Exchange rate used was similar to the above example for wages and information on the average house price is from the Economist magazine survey.
So, with how do house prices stack up in the various locations?
Location
United Kingdom
Norway
Denmark
Ireland
Netherlands
Canada
Canada
Vancouver
Average House price
USD444,179
USD450,850

USD350,299

USD449,665

USD396,320

USD335,180
USD564,702
Canada as %
75.4%
74.3%
95.7%
74.5%
84.5%
100%
59.3%
Others as % of Canada
132.5%
134.5%
104.5%
134.1%
118.3%
100%
176.1%
Vancouver as %
128.1%
129%
132.3%
132%
164.3%
176.1%
100%

Figures are the most current that could be found.
Canada house prices from: http://www.nationwide.co.uk/hpi/historical/Q1_2008.pdf
UK House prices from: BBC NEWS | In Depth | UK House Prices | Overview (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/in_depth/uk_house_prices/html/houses.stm)
Irish house prices from: Ireland/Irish House Prices, Housing Market, Prices, NCB Stockbrokers, Index, 2009, Europe, Australia, US : Finfacts Ireland (http://www.finfacts.ie/biz10/irelandhouseprices.htm)
Denmark, Norway and Netherlands house prices from: House Prices Worldwide - N (http://www.globalpropertyguide.com/real-estate-house-prices/N)
Immediately, it can be seen that although Canada as a whole has the cheapest house prices among those studied Vancouver has by far the highest house prices of any of the locations of the various CHC Companies.
How then do the salaries paid by the various companies compare to the price of housing. The following table gives an idea:
Location
United kingdom
Norway
Denmark
Ireland
Netherlands
Canada
Vancouver
Average House Price
USD444,179
USD450,850
USD350,299
USD449,665
USD396,320
USD335,180
USD564,702
Salary
$184,138
$209,047
$206,062
$191,698
$182,629
$89,039
USD89,039
Salaries as % of Housing Price
41.4%
46.3%
58.8%
42.6%
46.1%
26.5%
15.7%
House Price as multiple of Salary
2.41
2.15
1.69
2.34
2.17
3.76
6.34

Cost of Living
So, if Vancouver has the highest house prices but Canada overall the lowest house prices then how does Canada compare with the other OECD countries and CHC company locations with regard to the Cost of Living?
Here again, the best information available was to be found from the Economist magazine which publishes Cost of Living rankings for major cities around the globe twice annually. Information regarding Cost of Living was not found on a country by country basis but rather as a city comparison.
For example, in the latest Cost of Living comparison issued by the Economist in December of 2007 the most expensive city in the world was Oslo in Norway with other European cities being in the top 10. The benchmark city used in the economist survey is New York in the United States which is given the value of 100. The following table gives an idea of the cost of living.
Cost of Living
United Kingdom
Norway
Denmark
Ireland
Holland
Canada
City
London
Oslo
Copenhagen
Dublin
Amsterdam
Toronto
Ranking
3
1
2
4
16
19
Index (New York = 100)
125.9
144.2
129.8
122.7
103.6
99.7
Canada as %
79.2%
69.1%
76.8%
81.2%
96.2%
100%
Others as % of Canada
126.2%
144.63%
130.2%
123.0%
103.9%
100%

Cost of Living index from: Dublin fourth most expensive city of 71 global cites - Kuala Lumpur cheapest according to UBS report (http://www.finfacts.com/irishfinancenews/article_1012932.shtml) and then click on the following link: Prices and Earnings, 2008 update (http://www.ubs.com/1/ShowMedia/ubs_ch/wealth_mgmt_ch/research?contentId=74352&name=PL_U08_e.pdf)
Looking at the above table it is apparent that Toronto is less expensive than all the other cities in which we are interested, being more than 31% less expensive than Oslo in Norway but only marginally (4%) less expensive than Amsterdam.
Conclusions:
What deductions can be made then from the above data? Or more importantly, does it appear, from the numbers given that CHC Global employees are under paid in comparison to their compatriots in Europe? In a word, yes. There is enough information found to show that there is a large discrepancy between the various locations.
CHC Global employees are paid, on an average about 45.9% of their compatriots in Europe. Yet the cost of living in Canada, on average, is 82.4% of what it is in the European countries in our study and the cost of housing in Canada is, on average, 77.8% of what it is in European compatriots’ countries.
In other words the cost of housing and living in Canada is only about 20% less expensive on average than Europe, provided we exclude the exorbitant cost of housing in Vancouver. If Vancouver house prices were to be included then the discrepancy would be rather shocking with the CHC Global salary equal to no more than 15% of the cost of the average Vancouver home as opposed to some of those in Europe where the average salary paid is equal to 41% to 58% of the cost of a house. Even taking only Canada into account for the CHC Global employee the cost of a house is about 4 times the employee’s salary.
While it is cheaper to live in Vancouver than any of the other cities, and cheaper also to buy a house in Canada than elsewhere, these two facts do not assuage the lesser monies paid to CHC Global employees. Clearly it would not be a wise decision for a CHC Global employee to live in Vancouver where the cost of housing far outstrips the salary paid.
How much then are CHC Global employees underpaid given that their salaries are less than one half that of those in Europe yet the Cost of Living and the cost of housing (ignoring Vancouver) is only 20% less than Europe? Taking these items into account it would appear that the average CHC Global employee is grossly underpaid in relation to fellow CHC employees in Europe.
Taking the above study into account it would appear that the CHC Global salaries should be only about 20% less than those of the CHC European employees. In dollar terms the average salary paid in European CHC companies to an off-shore Captain at the top of the payscale is USD194,714, yet CHC Global equivalent captain only receives USD89,039 or 47.7% of the European equivalent even though, as we have seen above, the cost of living and house prices are about 80% of what they are in Europe. Using the above numbers, and if we wanted to see the equivalent pay for a CHC Global captain then the apparent salary for the CHC Global employee should then be USD155,768, or approximately 80% of the average European salary of USD194,714.
This puts a CHC Global employee at a minimum of USD66,736 disadvantage to an equivalent European employee and a dramatic salary restructuring would be needed to bring parity to the salary equation.
The above numbers clearly show that in every aspect of this comparison the average CHC Global employee is in a far worse financial position than his/her equivalent European counterpart.

[Plakstift]

The above figures can't be denied and paint a good likeliness of reality.

I live in Australia (but I'm a G.O.) and I make a good chunk less than my CHC Oz mates. Plus the buggars get a full month vacation/year.

However I would argue that the comparison based on living and buying houses in Canada is flawed. Many, if not half, of the G.O. pilots do not live in Canada. Many actually live in Europe. I have colleagues who are resident of Holland, U.K and France and all are G.O. pilots. Those guys would be short changed if the Canadian table of comparison is used.

I know I'm dreaming but why can't it just be "same work = same pay".

[froggy_pilot]

Myassisgrass

Where do you put on your scale a CHC pilot on 6/6 based in Nigeria :\, going to work with an armed escort :eek: , and locked down in a camp with virtually no facilities :sad:

:E

[N Arslow]

froggy pilot - where do you put him? On incentive pay surely?

I have a couple of questions to throw at this...

Canadian residents have quite a hefty advantage through the OETC - should this be factored in?

How with a globally dispersed workforce, not only in terms of work location but also in residence do we carry out the comparison to other non-Global CHC employees? There is, for many of us, advantages in being 6/6 rather than following northern European schedules as we can be more flexible about where we choose to live. There is a price we are willing to pay for that.

So, while these comparisons are interesting I cannot help but think the picture is skewed quite drastically UNLESS the benefits received by area are also considered - and that makes for some horrible number crunching I am sure.

As I understand it each pilot group around CHC have negotiated separately, and the particular interests of each will have been represented. Comparisons on basic salary are limited in scope when taken isolated and also need not be limited to CHC companies alone. It will be up to the GHPA to determine the interests of its' own members to determine what needs proposing for a collective agreement. The global dispersal will, I have no doubt, bring a greater array of issues of concern, and greater emphasis will be placed on these rather than simply pay alone.

Interesting times ahead, hopefully to the benefit of all.

[froggy_pilot]

N Arslow
On incentive pay of course. ;)


Myassisgrass
What's the point of publishing canadian and european salaries if you don't publish GO salaries (with incentive pay by location) and cost of living (food allowance or company food) ...


How to compare ? :confused:
That's the question.
In GO you have 182 working days plus travel plus simulator. That's how many nights a year away from home ? When a european or canadian just drive home after work.
What about the flying environement, like 45°C without airconditioning :{,
What about flight hours and duty hours, it's different from a location to another one
Really difficult to compare :confused:

[Plakstift]

NA and FG.

Indeed it is very difficult to compare, if not impossible however MAiG provided a starting point to elaborate from. Much more than you guys did.

[N Arslow]

Um - I did not realise I had to offer a starting point so I think your rather supercilious sounding comment was unnecessary. However, as you wish, I will offer a starting point - the terms and conditions we are currently working to!!

Where we move on to from there will, I am sure, be through dialogue first with members of the GHPA and then with the company. As I suggested before, I believe for many of us salary will not be as high on the list as ensuring benefits reflect our location and occupation; I am not providing an exhaustive list and I have not polled my colleagues but off the top of my head areas to be considered/improved might be:
Loss of licence benefits
Paid travel days
Bidding for bases/type ratings
Incentive pay
Blended pay
Pension contributions
...and of course our pay but I have to say I do not consider this to be accurate:

This puts a CHC Global employee at a minimum of USD66,736 disadvantage to an equivalent European employee and a dramatic salary restructuring would be needed to bring parity to the salary equation.

Do not forget a national working from home pays his own tax.

[Plakstift]

Sorry if I’ve hurt anybody’s feeling.

I agree with most of the above. The points are in line with most of the guys I work with the exception that salary seems to be #1.

The tax thing... Well I believe it should left out.

Most of the Euro boys do pay full tax but on the flip side they are home and that's worth something. I would also say that most of GO pilots also pay taxes. For example, here in Australia, since July 1st 2009 there is no more tax credit\exemption on foreign income. Yes full tax for us. Ditto for any GO Yanks. Canadian have a tax break of some sort but my Canucks co-worker keep hearing rumors of it being shelved in the near future. Anyway since non Canadians are now a majority at GO it is fair to assume that most GO pilots pay full tax.

I think that MAiG comparo, even if not perfect, is very realistic.

[N Arslow]

I am not sure about the tax thing being easy to drop. I wait to be corrected on this but since we work six months in foreign countries, I thought we were liable for taxes there and that was picked up by the company. If that is the case you would be in for a healthy tax credit at home surely. But I may be wrong...
And I am not sure how that ties in with the OETC for Canadians either.
That clarification would certainly determine whether the pay comparisons MAIG copied here are truly relevant or not.

What interests me is the appeal process and the knock on effects to settlements that are finally reached in collective agreement. From what I have read the CIRB were confident we had legitimate cause and agreed the formation of a union. With CHC appealing and when:ooh: they are found to lose that appeal, is it fair to say that any agreements should be back dated to the commencement of the union; otherwise the company can gain huge offsets against its' lawyer bills just by delaying new terms with the pilots through the appeal process.

[the delaminator]

1. Taxes and tax credits are between the taxpayer and the Government. For years CHC has unfairly used this credit as an excuse to hold wages down.

2. Citizens of other countries have their own tax advantages. Americans can write off their mortgages. Australians can claim non resident status much easier than Canadians.

3. Most employees of CHC GO are not Canadians now.

4. The OETC only covers the first 80'000 of income. After that we are taxed at the top rate.

[myassisgrass]

We have heard many issues from our members that will need to be addressed in upcoming negotiations other than those mentioned by the above posts (all good issues, by the way!). These include but are not limited to the following:

Business travel vs Economy (certainly on flights of over 8 hours duration)
Incentive pay at least on par with Canadian government employees (see below for website)
Protection of employees from unfair dismissal or unfair labour practices
A method of resolving disputes or grievances with management (none exists right now)
Representation at committees where legislation or safety issues are of concern (ie. HAC, ICAO, IFALPA etc.)Gov't of Canada per diem payments
Travel Directive, Appendix D - Allowances - Module 4 - Effective July 1, 2009 - Part 9 of 10 (http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pubs_pol/hrpubs/tbm_113/d08-eng.asp)

These are but a few of the outstanding issues that have never been addressed by CHC GO. They are not all remuneration issues. As professionals, these and many other issues need to be addressed.

[myassisgrass]

Over 90% of all pilots are at the top level (14). Nearly no one is below Level 9. The pay structure needs to be overhauled to better reflect the current hiring trends and to better acknowledge seniority
A clearer definition of what protections exist for those pilots (essentially all of us) flying in foreign countries with a foreign validation. If something bad should happen (God forbid), we need to know what resources CHC will commit to get us out of trouble. Many of us know that we will be held personally liable for any accident(s) that might occur while flying abroad

[Plakstift]

NA...
You are right in saying GO pays taxes incurred while working in another country however you are responsible to pay all taxes in your country of residence. The amount paid by GO will not affect, or little, taxes actually paid in most country of residence.

To top it off, taxes paid by GO on your behalf shows up on your income as a taxable benefit.

Delam..
Oz lost their non resident status option as of last month (July 1st). You'll see many Aussies looking for a job at home as the take home pay will now be the same or better here.
Yanks with deductible mortgages only benefit them if they actually have a mortgage. The downside is that the capital gain achieve with the sale of a house is taxable as oppose to Canada which is not.

As we can see taxes are so convoluted from country to country that we will never be able to bring it down to a common denominator.

As Delam said " Taxes and tax credits (if any) are between the taxpayer and the Government"

Therefore (personal opinion of course) tax should be left out of the debate all together.

[tistisnot]

Plakstift,

Exactly - tax should not be included in the equation - neither by the employer stating that you are paid less in comparison 'because you are tax-free'!

[N Arslow]

Interesting - clearly I should talk to an account to fully understand the tax situation. Afterall, if CHC pay our taxes in country and bi-lateral tax agreements exist between home and that country, tax should not be taken twice. I suspect the situation is highly dependant on both where you work and where you live and will prove a minefield at negotiation time.

Business class travel - very nice. Just travelling on a ticket that the company does not find on the floor of a bird cage would be nice so I could use some of those upgrade vouchers once in a while...

[Heli-Jet]

Has income protection been considered ... take one currency and base your salary and per diems add ons etc and protect your income on your local currency worldwide, then it doesn't matter what your home country is. Everybody gets paid based on one currency and the the income protection insurance keeps it on a level playing field

[Plakstift]

Mmm. Interesting.

I don't think it has been considered and may be it should. As it is now all GO pilots are paid CDN dollar and we all know that it can be quite a moody currency.

[Heli-Jet]

works really well

[Plakstift]

Heli-Jet

It sounds you are talking from experience. Can you tell us how you make it work for you.

[Heli-Jet]

Well the company I work for pays all it's expats in US dollars. There are about 15 different nationalities, so you can imaging the fluctuations in all the foreign currencies. Company gave us all a base line for our local currency against the US and when the currency fluctuates we get paid more. Eg the Canadian or the Aussie dollar is strengthening against the USD so we get paid more last month I pulled an extra $2500 on my Salary. belive me all the crews are happy about our currency protection. Should the Aussie or Canadian dollar drop against the USD well then we still win as we get more money due to the exchange rate. so you see it is a win win situation.

I am sure your union rep can get CHC GO to arrange currency protection for all your foreign nationals. The Canadians might want to get a better basic by taking a look at the European wages and get CHC to match them. Price of oil is going to go up again and BC will want to get his calculator out again

[Plakstift]

Your company... do they bear the cost (or gain) of adjusting to currency fluctuations or is it covered by some kind of insurance they subscibe to?

[Heli-Jet]

The company bore the cost or gain ... however I am sure if you check online there are insurance companies that do currency protection together with Income protection (loss of license)

[Outwest]

Just like to let everyone know that the new website is up and running at GHPA - Global Helicopter Pilots Association > Home (http://www.ghpa.ca) and all CHC Global pilots are welcome to register.

After you register (with your real name) you will be vetted and if eligible, will be granted access to the members only portion of the website.

[myassisgrass]

The GHPA has a new website up and running. This is for CHC Global Operations pilots only. Existing GHPA members must obtain a new ID & password and CHC GO pilots wishing to join the Union are kindly requested to fill in an application form and submit to the GHPA address listed therein.
Collective Bargaining talks will begin on October 29th and we need to prepare a wishlist. Once online, you can participate in an internal Forum and express your opinions.
All the best,
Norm Robichaud

[coolhand110]

OPEIU Grants Charter to Global Helicopter Pilots Association

New York, NY – The Office and Professional Employees International Union (OPEIU), AFL-CIO, CLC, has granted a charter to the Global Helicopter Pilots Association (GHPA), effective October 27, 2009. The group will be known as GHPA, OPEIU
Local 103.

The pilots organized in 2006, but had to fight through a series of legal challenges mounted by the CHC, the pilots’ employer. GHPA voted to affiliate with OPEIU in March 2007, and affiliation was granted upon the recent issuance of a decision by the Canadian Industrial Relations Board (CIRB).

“This was a long time coming, but we’re glad we now represent the more than 275 GHPA pilots,” said OPEIU Director of Organization and Field Services Kevin Kistler. “Contract negotiations have begun, and we look forward to achieving an agreement that provides improved compensation, benefits, and working conditions.”

“I’m truly impressed with the skill and dedication that GHPA pilots have shown in their struggle to gain a voice in their profession,” said Butch Grafton, president of the Professional Helicopter Pilots Association (PHPA). “I also know that with the dedication and determination I’ve seen throughout their struggle to reach this point, they will certainly improve every aspect of their working life.”

ABOUT OPEIU
The Office and Professional Employees International Union represents more than 125,000 members in the United States, Puerto Rico and Canada. OPEIU represents employees and independent contractors in banking and credit unions, insurance, higher education, shipping, hospitals, medical clinics, utilities, transportation, hotels, administrative offices and more.

Professional organizations and Guilds affiliated with OPEIU are a diverse group that includes physicians, pharmacists, chiropractors, appraisers, podiatrists, dentists, clinical social workers, hypnotists, teachers and helicopter pilots.

[Outwest]

Federal Court of Appeal has denied CHC's latest attempt to have the CIRB ruling overturned.........

[Canadian Rotorhead]

And so the business unit sale begins...

:ok:

[Aquila13]

Do you really believe they will sell their assets because of a small fraction of their workforce is now organized?

[Joker's Wild]

One would have to be somewhat naive to think CHC and First Reserve are not, at the very least, considering it or some variant of divesting themselves of parts of the business.

I mean lets be serious here, we're talking about a bunch of people who have deluded themselves into believing the GHPA will/would never happen. There are bound to be quite a few necks on the chopping block right now and I'm fairly certain no idea will be too outrageous.

JW

[chc&proud]

Ladies and Gentlemen

It is good to see that Global Helicopter Pilots Association keeps getting confirmed as a union in accordance with rules and regulations in Canada. It is my hope that management will find the will and motivation to build a constructive and friendly relationship with GHPA in the time to come.

As far as unions for pilots within CHC, all pilot groups with exeption of GHPA have established collective labour agreements with their respective companies.

In the 5 countries/6 business units in Europe you will find pilot union membership varying between 90-99,5%.

The percentage is lower in GHPA. Some reasons may be that the union is newly founded and membership is scattered around the globe. Historically, management was perceived to be union hostile, leading to some pilots not daring to show an interest in union membership

CHC Australia has a separate CLA through the membership in Australian Federation of Air Pilots and Australian ALPA. Membership percentage equals Europe.

Other staff groups in the European companies are also unionized with high percentile membership.

If FRC follows what seems to be the typical timeline for its type of company, they will stick around for 5-7 years from taking over CHC in the summer of 2008. Whether FRC would sell CHC as a single entity or as separate companies is for them to know and for us to find out.

In my opinion, profit and cash are keywords for FRC. Unions, new and old would hardly be of major interest as long as business is taken care of in a professional manner.

Best regards,

Olav Bastiansen
Executive Chairman
CHC-PA

[Aquila13]

Well said Olav. I agree.

[Canadian Rotorhead]

Yes, well said.

The days of being a proud CHC employee are far behind me. They treated me very well for 16 years but it was time for a change and I am very happy that I finally made the leap.

RH

[BOOMER1]

Thank you for your comments/clarification on the subject Olav.

[wde]

... heard a rumor ...

... that by the end of 2010 CHC will not have a Cdn operating cert ... so what does that mean to the Cdn pilots ...


???

[Aquila13]

Some of CHC's executives (Canadian citizens working in Vancouver) will/have bought a majority of shares from FRC (US owner of CHC) for their Halifax operation. This new company (51% Canadian owned) will be able to retain the Canadian AOC. Paper shuffling really.

The Halifax pilots were asked if they want to join this new "company" or stay on CHC's roster.

[twisted wrench]

WDE :
What difference will it make, most of CHC Globals fleet is not canadian registered in the first place. Still crewed pilots and engineers by Canadians and a host of other nationalties.

[offshoreigor]

Hi Olav,

Thank you for your support. Although GHPA is the new kid on the block, we will honour all the ethics and codes of all our Brothers. Thank you for your support. We're almost there but still have a long road ahead.

Cheers,

OffshoreIgor
:eek:
I'm baack!