- Reaction score
- 43,930
- Points
- 1,210
How is an Air Canada decision to extort money from their passengers a LPC news item?
Liberal (Minority/Majority) Government 2025 - ???
- Thread starter Altair
- Start date
How is an Air Canada decision to extort money from their passengers a LPC news item?
- Reaction score
- 13,640
- Points
- 1,160
It's an LPC news item because Ottawa owns about 6% of Air Canada from the pandemic bailout, LPC have uploaded a lot of tax dollars to them in the last 10 years, and Carney is privatizing air travel in Canada.
Government of Canada sold their stake in Air Canada in Dec 2024.
Edited for spelling
trying to get rid of more people and go to on-line booking. Also gets people going to agents so they can further cut staff. Don't care as long as Porter doesn't follow suit and there are lots of international carriers who will accept my phone call
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 20,994
- Points
- 1,260
The Commissionaires need to adapt or they will find themselves less and less relevant in the Security world.
- Reaction score
- 9,032
- Points
- 1,260
Considering that AC is now selling at just over 21$/share. Good thing they got out at 25$/share back then.
It appears that they were trying. They certainly presented a competitive bid.
- Reaction score
- 19,342
- Points
- 1,160
So screw over employees ever chance they get and hire people with no english or french (Despite requirements of provincial security regs) and questionable backgrounds? Because that is most other security companies.
- Reaction score
- 8,267
- Points
- 1,260
Ummmm.....
The Government of Canada spent over $440 million on Microsoft software licenses between March 2025 and March 2026.
99 % usage rate across an enterprise as large as the GoC is cause for celebration. It is not at all a gotcha moment.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 20,994
- Points
- 1,260
The current commissionaires model will not meet the upcoming requirements for the RCN; and I suspect at least the RCAF security.
Old, unfit, unarmed men/women at gates is soon to be simply no longer acceptable if we wish to use the systems and equipment that is coming our way.
- Reaction score
- 9,032
- Points
- 1,260
And I assume that the pay/training for young, fit and armed men/women at the gates would be the next step.
Presumably the first line of security will still have a role to play in things like ID checks, pass control, etc? Clearly we’re going to have to have some robust force protection in place once you hit a given perimeter, but it seems like that we’ll have differing security zones (I mean, we already do now) where some of the outermost control points will probably still have use for a retired guy who can look at a provincial DL and put it in a slow in exchange for a visitor pass? I struggle to think CAF will have enough force protection bodies to take over all of the low intensity security manning?
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 20,994
- Points
- 1,260
We dont have a choice if we want the things we are building and buying.
There are hard and fast requirements. We either meet them, or they aren't allowed to be "energized" for lack of a better term.
How that will all shake out we will have to wait and see.
PrairieFella
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,914
- Points
- 1,110
Highlight is Turkey may purchase CANDU rights.
This thing is so dumb. I would love to see what corporate entity actually has a 99% utilization rate for their licenses. That's actually an incredible number.
Security Force trade is planning to eventually cover every RCAF Wing by 2040. I really don't see at this point, why this wouldn't be made a purplish trade with a Navy sub-occ. Or even just assign some blue SF to navy bases. A lot of the work will be similar. Just a slightly different context.
You can see how it's done on American bases. Same idea. Pass control can be a civilian/contracted employee. Everything else at the perimeter, including ID checks has to be more robust. And really, that's the model we are moving too. That said, for most government buildings, especially outside DND, it's just pass control.
I don't think the commissionaire who sits outside a SCIF, for example, needs to be replaced by SF. But I do think a lot of the security verification and inspection functions need to move to SF. Some of that is also done by MPs today.
so they go out and hire more junior vets or police officers looking for something less dangerous than their present job. If you write it into the request for bids and the commissionaires can't meet those requirements that is all well and good. I seem to recall an old retired (30 years of service) cop who didn't do so badly in 2015 and I will be willing to wager that there have been other old men who have responded when needed. So please, don't write them off just because they have Ret'd behind their name. As Dame Judy Dench recently said: Retired should be removed from the English dictionary.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 20,994
- Points
- 1,260
I’m not the one writing anyone off. The Commissionaires are doing that themselves.
It’s up to them to adapt to the evolving security environment and changing requirements. If they fail to do so, they risk being left behind. It is not the Government of Canada’s responsibility to make those adaptations on their behalf.
- Reaction score
- 2,645
- Points
- 1,260
Similar threads
