A computer system breakdown Tuesday in the baggage check system at Trudeau caused a massive slowdown, on top of all the other delays that have plagued air travel in recent weeks.
If I were a more fanciful woman I’d say it was karma for mowing that wild area near the airport.
After Aéroports de Montréal shaved clean a piece of wild land near the airport, removing an entire ecosystem that supports butterflies, bees and birds, some politicians are urging Ottawa to step in and protect the area.
“removing an entire ecosystem that supports butterflies, bees and birds”…and hence Homo Sapiens
Interesting that just when a labour shortage crisis was blossoming at the airport, ADM opted to landscape 200 hectares of an ecologically sensitive area. Uh, priorities?
Yeah, it’s almost as if they probably contracted the work out to a landscaping company instead of doing it themselves.
Contracting out work for unnecessary landscaping costs money. Money that could be otherwise spent hiring more resources (or paying existing resources better) for their core operations AS AN AIRPORT. Meezly’s comment about priorities is totally on point.
I don’t think you understand how the airport and most airports around the world function. Practically every operation is subcontracted out or a federal agency, Who should they have hired that’s usually under their employment?
Luggage check in and customer service agents? Those are airline employees.
Security? That’s CATSA.
Border Agents? CBSA
Luggage Handlers? that’s Swissport.
They have contracts with suppliers, and those suppliers in turn have employment deals negotiated with unions.
According to wikipedia, the ADM’s missions are “to provide quality airport service for the Montréal region, help the economic development of the Montréal region, and develop a harmonious coexistence with the surrounding environment.”
As someone who uses the airport at least once a year and has concerns for local ecosystems, surely I should be able to question ADM’s priorities about whether they’re meeting their primary missions?
Of course you do but do so with a substantive point not some knee jerk argument not based on the actual functioning of things.
I really don’t appreciate your policing tone and know it all attitude, Spi.
One of the reasons management outsources is so they can have a scapegoat, exactly the craven argument that you are using Spi. So what if they have external contractors? It’s still management’s responsibility to ensure that deliverables are met and if they are too weak (or corrupt) to pressure their vendors to live up to their contractors, then they need to find the budget elsewhere to support their customers. The problem here is that management’s goals are not to support the customers of the airport, but to maximize profits.
Just such a weak argument to say because they subcontract they should be excused from shitting the bed and destroying an ecosystem wastefully and unnecessarily.
Churches and other religious sites are exempt from property tax according to provincial law. The city is pressing Quebec into compensating for the taxes that would be paid by its 900 places of worship if the city had the choice. The total comes in around $30 million for this year.
I think that $30 million is a lowball. Those church properties are worth MUCH more than they are assessed. have a look for you yourself on the property assessment roll https://servicesenligne2.ville.montreal.qc.ca/sel/evalweb/index
The Radio-Can article got it wrong. The $30M is what the city lost due to a change in the formula of what the gouvernement pays the city (instead of taxes) for its own buildings (think hospitals, schools, etc).
The loss due to the places of worship exemption is another thing. The amount was not too estimated specifically for the city of Montreal but is $180M for the entire province.
Maybe the city should set up a permit for churches for non-church functions, so those can be taxes, like wedding receptions, Bingo and Auru shows that allow a church to compete with for profit enterprises. So pray for free… dance for a fee.
Have you seen the prices they are charging for Notre Dame? They should be ASHAMED of themselves. $14 plus a SERVICE FEE of $1. Aura is $34 plus a SERVICE FEE of $2. And they don’t pay property tax, income tax or anything else.
I’ve mentioned these things before, but church halls are used for a lot of benevolent community activities which would cease to exist if the groups involved had to pay market rates for taxes and rent. I’m a stone cold atheist but I would allow churches to go on having a break for these things, because I don’t trust the government to replace the services and social benefits, even if they say they will.
So, at what point is it okay for them to compete with for profit corporations that need to pay all taxes and make a profit? There is a difference between a wedding (a religious ceremony) and a wedding reception. And what about Aura… is that benevolent? So benevolent that the public still pays for maintenance of Notre-Dame and they charge $15 to get in. And $36 for cheap lightshow.
I don’t have a problem with them helping benevolent groups. That’s why they have registration as non-profit. But selling tickets to a show… that’s for profit… what’s benevolent about Aura?
Ephraim, Notre-Dame isn’t a parish church, and Aura is a tourist attraction. No other Catholic church in town is doing anything comparable. I’m not saying what N‑D does is admirable, but they do have to pay for a lot of upkeep.
People have to pay for marriage ceremonies in Catholic churches (as they do for funerals). But I would not call this competition with for‑profit businesses, as religious Catholics feel obliged to hold these rituals in a church, not in a reception hall or other place.
>but church halls are used for a lot of benevolent community activities
Does that include Scientology? 🙂 They would argue yes of course.
What fraction of a church’s time/money/property do you figure is used for said benevolent community activities? A compromise could be to get a tax break for that fraction only.
Kate – As I said, marriage is a religious ceremony, so it would be covered by the function of the church. But the reception hall… that’s not a religious ceremony…. that’s competitive business.
And you and I both know that Notre-Dame keeps it’s hands open and outstretched for government money at all time. We are paying for it’s upkeep. As long as we are paying, visits should be FREE. If they want to charge to get in, then stop hitting up the public purse.
Chris: food kitchens, clothing exchanges, services for the deaf in the church closest to where I live, all kinds of low-level benevolent activity run by volunteers, stuff you do not see, stuff I wouldn’t even know about if I weren’t inclined to read signs on buildings as I walk by.
Not Scientology.
Ephraim, to my knowledge, people don’t usually hold wedding receptions in church halls. Anyone prepared to shell out for a church wedding will probably also shell out for a reception hall somewhere, there are lots of them around, and some restaurants also have sections they rent out for these purposes – as you probably know. That’s why there are always rows of cars outside church weddings, ready to whisk people to the site of the reception once the ceremony ends.
Daniel D 22:00 on 2022-07-20 Permalink
I have the dubious honour of saying I flew from airport airport during the pandemonium on that day. The staff working there demonstrated infinite patience having to deal with the disaster. The queue just for bag drop was about two hours and passengers were being told their luggage may not arrive at their destination with them, causing people to desperately go through their suitcases to grab some clothes to transfer to their carry-ons. Suitcases were piled up in the corner of the checking area, presumably to be moved to aircraft by hand. Add to that multiple delays and cancellations. Truly the worst airport experience I’ve ever had travelling, but I didn’t see one passenger lose their temper and the overwhelmed airport staff went out of their way to try and make things work.