August 21, 2025
Participants for AMFA
Ian Evershed – Region IV Director
Collin Ayotte – Airline Representative
Lucas Middlebrook – Legal Counsel
Participants for Calm Air
Randi McCallum – Vice President of HR & Payroll
Tim Kroeker – Vice President of Maintenance / PRM
Darcy Mawby – Director of Maintenance
Britney Bella – HRIS/Payroll Manager
The AMFA-Calm Air Negotiating Committee (“Committee”) is providing this update to the membership at Calm Air International LP (“Calm Air” or the “Company”). This is the only official source of negotiating communications by the Committee.
Session Summary
The Parties met in Winnipeg for a four-day collective bargaining session on August 11-14, 2025. The Parties reached TA on four articles and updated a fifth TA during this session:
- Article 12 – Uniforms
- Article 13 – Training (contingent on open economic item(s) remaining)
- Article 17 – Health and Safety
- New Article – Discipline and Discharge Procedure (combined with Art. 26 Personnel Files)
- Updated Article 7 TA – Grievance and Arbitration Procedure
This brings the total number of TA’d articles from the first three sessions to sixteen. In addition, your AMFA Committee worked late on Day 4 to return counterproposals on three articles and a first proposal on another. The Company, therefore, owes responses on all pending proposals/counterproposals moving into the next session. In addition, AMFA will have its economist present at the next session as we move into more economic-related issues.
The next bargaining session is scheduled for September 8-11 in Winnipeg. We would like to thank all the observers who attended this session. Your support is greatly appreciated. If any member wishes to attend the September session as an observer, please contact your Airline Representative (ALR), Collin Ayotte.
Please continue reading for a day-by-day breakdown of last week’s negotiation session.
Day One
The first day began as AMFA expressed serious objection to the manner with which the Company handled a recent accommodation issue experienced by one of our members while traveling to YSK for work. This issue was even more concerning given that the Parties had reached a TA on Article 21 – Accommodation Standards during the last session, and a large focus of that Article was raising standards and protections. AMFA pressed the Company to resolve the issue, but by the end of this session, the Company had failed to respond in a substantive fashion, and a grievance was filed by your ALR. We will continue to demand accountability from the Company.
AMFA then presented Article 32 – Discipline and Discharge Procedure, which is a new article not currently contained in the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). AMFA proposed this article to develop process and structure when the Company seeks to investigate and administer discipline. These types of articles are standard within AMFA Agreements. AMFA also presented a counterproposal on Article 12 – Uniforms, which found some alignment with the Company’s prior position, but continued to push for, among other issues, the availability of certain items to be purchased with your allotment and language regarding replacement of uniform items when damaged during work.
The Company presented a counterproposal to Article 13 – Training. The Company’s counterproposal found some alignment with AMFA’s last proposal. However, issues remained related to per diem and applicable rate of pay when attending training in certain circumstances. The Company then presented its counterproposal on Article 17 – Health and Safety, which brought the Parties close to tentative agreement (TA) on this article. However, AMFA advised the Company that it would respond with another counter that proposed specific language that Employees would suffer no adverse consequences for reporting safety and health concerns. AMFA felt this language was necessary to ensure you are not hesitant to file health/safety complaints when necessary. The Parties then caucused to review the respective proposals and counterproposals.
The Company, in the afternoon, presented a counterproposal on Article 12 – Uniforms. The Company’s counterproposal contained certain allotment amounts but presented different language as it related to the items that would be made available to you. AMFA presented a counterproposal on Article 17 – Health and Safety, which included the language mentioned above regarding reporting safety and health concerns without fear of adverse consequences. AMFA also presented a counterproposal on Article 13 – Training, which sought to address the remaining open items and move the Parties closer to TA on this article.
Day Two
The Company, in the morning of Day 2, advised AMFA it would agree to its new language in Article 17 – Health and Safety regarding no adverse consequences for safety/health reporting. The Company had questions regarding AMFA’s proposal on Article 32 – Discipline and Discharge Procedure and following discussion presented its counterproposal on this Article. The Company also presented counterproposals to Article 13 – Training, which maintained the Company’s prior position on issues related to what rate would be paid in certain training scenarios. AMFA presented a counterproposal on Article 12 – Uniforms that aligned with the Company on certain issues but, among other provisions, proposed specific language (again) detailing what uniform items must be made available to be ordered with your allotment amount.
In the afternoon, the Company presented a counterproposal on Article 13 – Training, which, except for minor movement, maintained its prior position. The Company also presented a counterproposal on Article 12 – Uniforms, which introduced the concept of the ALR and a Company representative engaging on uniform items and issues moving forward. In addition, the Company accepted AMFA’s language regarding the replacement of damaged uniform items.
AMFA presented a counterproposal to Article 32 – Discipline and Discharge Procedure, which agreed with certain minor Company language changes, but largely maintained AMFA’s first proposal designed to develop a structure and process for Company investigations and discipline, including the just cause standard and right to Union representation. AMFA also included language that provided Employees would not suffer adverse consequences for participating in the grievance process (including a grievance challenging discipline), but agreed to move that language to Article 7 – Grievance and Arbitration Procedure. The Article 7 TA was updated accordingly. Again, AMFA felt this non-retaliation language was important, so members feel confident to pursue a grievance without fear of reprisal. The Parties caucused and reconvened later in the afternoon.
AMFA, upon reconvening, presented a counterproposal to Article 13 – Training, which proposed to maintain existing Agreement language on certain training pay rate (and related) issues and agreed to defer per diem discussion until economics. AMFA also presented a counterproposal on Article 12 – Uniforms that maintained the Union’s position on uniform items to be made available for you to order with your allotment. AMFA’s Article 12 counterproposal entertained the Company’s concept of having the ALR involved with uniform item availability and other issues, but proposed moving that to a Side Letter, which was presented to the Company.
Day Three
The Company began Day 3 with a counterproposal on Article 12 – Uniforms. The Company agreed, following AMFA’s proposals, to a detailed list of items that would be available for you to purchase with your allotment. There was also discussion regarding a joint AMFA – Calm Air lanyard. AMFA advised it was not opposed to such an idea but reserved all legal rights for its members to wear union insignia or related items. AMFA then presented a revised Side Letter regarding ongoing ALR involvement in uniform item selection and related issues. The Parties caucused to work internally and returned in the afternoon.
AMFA returned from caucus and presented a counterproposal on Article 12 – Uniforms, which aligned with the Company on several items, including the joint lanyard as referenced above. The Company indicated it had no issues with AMFA’s revised Side Letter contingent on future negotiations related to certain Union representation and leave issues. AMFA then presented a counterproposal on Article 31 – Classifications. This counterproposal included new language regarding the specific grouping of classifications and presented, for the first time, language in response to the Company’s concern that it needed the ability in certain circumstances to cross-utilize Employees between classifications. AMFA proposed language intended to limit the Company’s cross-utilization to specific situations and within certain parameters, as well as to protect work schedules and compensation in those instances.
AMFA also presented its first proposal on Article 16 – Seniority, which sought to specify issues surrounding Union Seniority, its accrual and the Union Seniority list. AMFA also presented its first proposal on Article 6 – Layoff and Recall, which addressed an orderly layoff and recall process guided by Union Seniority. The Company asked questions related to these articles and the Parties caucused for the remainder of the day to work internally.
Day Four
The Parties spent the morning of Day 4 engaged in off-the-record conversation and working internally. In the afternoon, the Company presented a counterproposal to Article 31 – Classifications. While the Company’s counter agreed to AMFA’s Classification Group language, it disappointedly reverted to prior concepts within the classifications that AMFA felt had been previously resolved. In addition, the Company countered with cross-utilization language that was broader in scope than that proposed by AMFA. The Company then presented counterproposals on Article 6 – Layoff and Recall as well as Article 16 – Seniority. The Company’s Article 16 proposal aligned somewhat with AMFA’s initial proposal with a few areas remaining apart. However, the Company’s Layoff and Recall counterproposal did not make similar movement and, in AMFA’s opinion, failed to properly recognize the importance of respecting and following Union Seniority during a period of layoff.
AMFA worked diligently the remainder of the afternoon and remained late to present counterproposals to Article 31 – Classifications; Article 16 – Union Seniority and Article 6 – Layoff and Recall. In addition, AMFA presented its first proposal on Article 27 – Union Business (formerly “Union Leave”) that proposed more detailed language on how your AMFA representatives will perform their Union functions to enforce your Agreement and protect your rights. Your Committee was appreciative that certain Calm negotiators were willing to stay late to receive these proposals and engage in discussion on the final day of the session.
Remember - stay engaged, remain informed, and continue to support the Negotiating Committee. Our solidarity will produce a CBA that your hard work has earned.
Fraternally,
Your AMFA-Calm Negotiating Committee
