JETSTAR PILOTS [Archive]

Datum

24th Feb 2006, 22:11

All pilots around the world need to stand up to management who are continually attempting to erode professional aviators pay and conditions!!!

Every pilot works extremely hard to get their first position within an airline and then even harder on the long road to a Jet Command. Unfortunately, many management types have very very little idea of the sacrafices made and the work done in order for pilots to achieve this goal. :*

The current deal put to JETSTAR may look relatively good to some..... However, if you talk to any of your friends (external to the aviation industry) in the bigger cities in Australia (ie: Logistics, IT, Finance) you will quickly realise that many are paid what is on offer to a JETSTAR A330 Captain, only 3-5 years after graduating from university!!!

Do you really think that a Widebody International Aircraft Captain is worth what a recent graduate is worth in other professions???.. I hope not.:sad:

For a very lucky few JETSTAR INTERNATIONAL may provide a slightly shorter road to command and a better salary than what they may be currently paid. However, for the majority (and future pilots) this deal will make the road to command all the more difficult financially. It will effectively change the financial rewards associated with the GOAL forever!!

Ask yourself - Do you think anyone else in another professional industry would accept such and erosion in their conditions (QF v JETSTAR)??? I am pretty sure management would not accept any erosion in their conditions!

Professional pilots need to compare their industry/personal terms and conditions against other professions and stop just looking at the aviation industry. Remember - it is those people in other industries that you will be competing with when you buy your first home, book a holiday or just attempt to keep living the lifestyle you have always aimed for.... VOTE NO TO THIS EBA:yuk:

El Oso

24th Feb 2006, 23:53

Wanna vote based on promised upgrades? You might first ask your cousins up the road at Jetstar Asia who got promised upgrades for A320 F/O's to sign up in late 2004. No upgrades for these boys and some of them are pretty pi**ed off now.

You mention how hard they've worked but then maybe these days thats not the problem. The traditional self funded type is getting less common. More often Mummy paid for it and kept them comfortable whilst they waited. IME these types often don't give a rats about anyone else, or know the true value of a job as they have rarely lived off their own earnings. They mostly care about the wa*k value of a position such as "A330 CPT". They are so desparate for get that job (or verbal "promise" thereof) they'll accept almost anything.

Promises are worthless in this game - get globally marketable renumeration packages and upgrade promises in writing (IRON CLAD, with timelines and no ifs, buts, or maybe clauses) or else forget it. These guys could sell their mothers and still sleep at night - believe them at your peril. You guys (and the F/A's etc) will earn the money, all they do is spin their way from one board meeting to the next, busy copying other LCC's methods, hoping their end of contract bonus comes before the chickens come home to roost.

Wake up guys - the world is getting short of A320/330/340 drivers, have a look at the deals on offer elsewhere - more $$ and much less tax, plus they will treat you as an asset. You are an increasingly valuable commodity. If QF want to pay for foreign contractors, let them try - it will cost them more, be of varying quality and be unreliable for expansion plans in the medium term - and they know it. They are banking on your emotions still being in the game of 5 years ago. The shortages have started, so if you sell out now you've got nothing to look forward to. Mr D and his pet AJ know full well people buy Ozzie brands for their image of safety and will NOT give your jobs to dodgy foreign crews, it would trash their brand value and they know it. Idle threats and bargaining tactics. These guys love using the excuse of "market forces" to screw staff for their own higher profit bonuses - its time they learnt to face the market themselves...

Have some balls and wait it out - thats what mummy would want! :E

Chris Higgins

25th Feb 2006, 02:02

That last post wins a prize! If your coming over our way in Winter I'll take you skiing at any of three resorts near my house. Summer you can take your pick of a Harley or any of the dirtbikes.:ok:

El Oso

25th Feb 2006, 02:26

Aim to please...!

:}

Ski-ing in Pittsburgh - what y'all sellin next, jetskis in Vegas?

But hey if you've got a nice KTM in the shed who knows...

Hugh Jarse

25th Feb 2006, 04:39

Summer you can take your pick of a Harley or any of the dirtbikes

Nice one Chris. I'll take the dirt bike thanks :ok: However, back home Harleys are known for the ****boxes they really are :} We call them "Cattle Dogs"......Because they love to go out for a run in the morning....But always come home in the back of the ute!:8 :} :} :yuk:

Sorry mate, but I couldn't resist:E And I've been riding bikes for 30 years ;)

I'll take the KTM also ;)

Chimbu chuckles

25th Feb 2006, 05:03

Datum,

Do you really think you'll get much sympathy from those who go to an office for 40++ hrs a week?

How do you think they will react when you tell em you actually work about 10-12 days a mth and the rest of the time you are either off at home or off downroute at various holiday destinations?

Yes overnights do get old...yes you spend a significant proportion of your time there asleep.

Do you really think they will have THAT much sympathy?

Yes we miss lots of family things...mind you I am a long haul pilot and I had leave last xmass for 3 weeks and I was home for my daughters birthday yesterday...she went KL to see her boyfriend who moved there recently for college.

Every job that pays the money we get requires that you miss family stuff from time to time.

25 yrs ago when I was driving taxis (BTW about 70 hrs a week for about 5% of what I net now) while learning to fly. I would OFTEN pick up Lawyers and take them home after work..at 10pm...and they left for work at 6am...and they take work home on weekends.

Ask a hospital doctor what hrs he is required to work.

Both those jobs require huge commitment, long study and sacrifice...and the AVERAGE Doctor or Lawyer probably doesn't make more than the AVERAGE airline pilot.

My sister in law is a high powered Barrister in Sydney...probably the legal profession equivalent of a mainline captain....she works HUGE hrs....and gets paid less than a 744 Captain.

I am not trying to drag down my profession...but reality has to intervene somewhere.

The plane fact is for the amount of actual work we do we are paid well.....you'll get no sympathy from most non aviation professionals.

LookinDown

25th Feb 2006, 07:07

Chimbu,
Not so sure about the comparability of flight crew to other professionals…at least in terms of security of tenure.

The doctor, the lawyer, the dentist, the teacher and even the candlestick maker can reasonably expect to continue in their business or job for a number of years despite not being a high flyer (no pun intended) unless they stuff up in a major way. Most others have much lower levels of job scrutiny applied unlike airline pilots where underperformance can easily and quite quickly = no job + little likelihood of soon obtaining another with similar conditions.

Few other professionals would have to face the prospect of the equivalent of maybe not passing that next six monthly sim ride. Or of say the discovery of a medical condition which would still allow them to continue driving but not retain their job. Eg a heart murmur (I used this example cause people around here lately have been suggesting that pilots don’t have hearts).

The above paragraph has ramifications for anyone considering a pay offer. What you deem acceptable now isn’t much use if you are no longer earning it 3 or 5 years down the track.

Chimbu chuckles

25th Feb 2006, 07:44

180k is roughly 4-5 times the national average wage...how much more of a premium do you think is appropriate for 1 weeks recurrent study, 8 hrs in the sim and a quick medical every 6 or 12 mths?

The 'risks' associated with our recurrent training and medical requirements are vastly overstated.

Don't get me wrong if current trends in the aviation world lead to higher wages...which they already are in many cases...I will be a very happy camper...but you'll NEVER convince beancounters to pay 20% more than they abolutely have to based on any of the arguments postulated here...it will NEVER happen.

In the expat world though things are slowly swinging back our way...pay is going up...if you don't like what is on offer in Oz vote with your feet...it is the ONLY option open to any pilot anywhere in the end....who knows...if enough leave and not enough expats come home pay in Oz may well rise....more likely they will just lower the requirements for new FOs and Oz will be like the rest of the world...relatively experienced pilot in the LHS and 500 hr wonder in the right...where I work we have very competent 30 yr old captains who changed seats with 5000 TT and 12-1500 jet, and that's longhaul widebody...what's the average in Oz?

Still think they won't fill the seats at Jetstar?

Chris Higgins

25th Feb 2006, 12:25

Chimbu,

What we are talking about is attracting the skillset to the flightdeck that could have been a doctor, a barrister or a succesful company CEO. What other company lets you run around with all that potential liability at one time without paying you properly?

The yanks tried dumbing down training years back and the insurance companies have put higher and higher experience requirements on their policies. To get back to the basics of the argument, consider Allegheny County Airport in Pittsburgh where they had four Beech Duchess crash in four years, two resulting in fatalities. They now require 2000 tt and 500 hours in type just to rent one! USAir had five crashes in five years, two off the end of the same runway in La Guardia. Is this really the direction you want your "qualified" professionals going in Australia?

In the Jetstar example you have an appeal being made by almost everyone to save the future of collective bargaining in the Australian airline industry. What will you make of the kind of personality and with what personal standards will those people conduct themselves in this profession by going against the wishes of the many? A whole airline full of back-stabbers? That should be a great place to work!

If you don't pay people properly you will attract those with lower abilities, problems in their personal and training backgrounds, lower total time and lower intellect. I've seen the damage this has done.

You pay peanuts, you get monkeys on the job!

El Oso,

www.7springs.com

www.hiddenvalleyresort.com

We live 65 miles East of PIT

Chimbu chuckles

25th Feb 2006, 13:27

Agree with everything in your post Chris....now tell us how to convince the QF beancounters that they should pay 220K for a Jetstar A330/787 captain....nothing airy fairy...cold hard indisputable fact that even a beany would agree with.

Chuck.

LookinDown

25th Feb 2006, 21:47

Human error always was and always will be the primary contributor to the majority of accidents in any industry. The quality of work performance underpinned by morale, commitment, aptitude and check and training by each individual in each industry determines the safety record irrespective of the risks specific to each setting.

Safety is the crux and QF's primary claim to fame. Its not exactly head and shoulders over the others in terms of service or value for your $.

I would pose the beencounters at QF one question.....
Based on QF's unique market niche through its claim to fame, can the company afford just one major accident and have any hope of retaining market share?

Even a beancounter knows what the term 'Captain' implies and so the absolute need to attract and retain the very best people. This is still an economic arguement but one from the standpoint of medium to long term success as opposed to short term.

Chris Higgins

26th Feb 2006, 00:21

Lookin Down and Chimbu

What you don't want to do is harp back to old rhetoric of 1989 and Bob Hawke. The way you win an argument is with a fresh view on an old problem that answers the other parties concerns about the way they sell the argument back to the board and to the shareholders.

We at Netjets just ended employment contracts, obtained 30-40 percent raises and ordered 119 new jets. We are hiring 475 pilots in 2006. We now have more former Air Force One pilots working for us than any other operator in the world. Not to make anyone mad, but I'll make more this year flying a Cessna product than your Jetstar agreement is proposing to its wide-body captains. Our top out on the BBJ, a 737 variant is higher than QF pays its most senior mainline to fly 744s.

There's a saying in gambling, that "no good gambler ever gambles more than they can afford to lose". Sadly, we are constantly shown that accident rates are higher for carriers that introduce lower payscales. It happened at Continental with Lorenzo, it happened at Pinnacle with the Regional Jet that flamed out both in a stall over the midwest, it happened at Mesa in Charlotte when a captain with only 2500tt took off with an aft CG on an aircraft that was improperly rigged and crashed out of control, rather than reduce power and land on the remaining 8,000 feet of runway.

If you think paying to prevent having an accident is expensive; try having one.

There is much at stake in Australia right now with this decision. Tourism is a major export earner. Many people who cannot afford a coach fare on Qantas mainline won't be spending much once they get there anyway. Is this the road you really want the tourism industry to go?

I just received an e-mail from Qantas Travel about a quick special out of LAX for $699 round trip to Sydney. The ticket to LAX from PIT would cost more and we all know that at $699 round trip, QF is not even covering the cost to start all four engines, let alone making me contribute my fair share to get to Sydney.

Netjets has sold itself on being the safest operation of its kind. It was the one thing that stopped me in my tracks and made me think before considering a management positon at Alaska Airlines or to go back for the second interview at Southwest. We have Flight Safety do the training, they are audited as a fellow Berkshire Hathaway company. It sometimes seems like our new-hires and upgrades are put before the firing squad over there; not everyone makes it out the other side. Really though, there's no other way. Safety has a price to pay in washout rates to obtain high standards. The training events are very expensive which when combined with the lack of availability of simulators, the company can get short on crews.

This is the price that Netjets has decided to pay to fly almost 600 aircraft on non-scheduled operations each day in worldwide operation. There are 5,000 airports alone in the US that we go to. The point I'm making is this: how long would we stay in business if we conducted ourselves in any other way?

Qantas has a business to support, but it has a responsibility to the passengers and the innocent populations who know nothing about flying to protect them from a B-787 going through their living room window. There are no guarantees, given the complex variables of this industry to ensure that this will never happen, but it is less likely to happen with the best crew that money can buy.

The saddest thing about airlines that go through this pendulum shift is that the damage they are doing is not known sometimes for many years. When this happens, the CEOs and other management who should bare responsibility are long gone.

Chris Higgins

26th Feb 2006, 02:42

For any of the Jetstar Pilots who are considering voting this in: this one's for you!

http://media.putfile.com/Mr-Discount-Airline-Pilot-Guy

:p

Mr.Buzzy

26th Feb 2006, 03:54

Not to make anyone mad, but I'll make more this year flying a Cessna product than your Jetstar agreement is proposing to its wide-body captains. Our top out on the BBJ, a 737 variant is higher than QF pays its most senior mainline to fly 744s

Man. Chris, that is by far the biggest load of BOLLOCKS I have ever heard and trust me I have read a lot of your posts!

Your disclaimer about not wanting to make "anyone mad" clearly shows you are wanting to validate your miserable job even by comparing your G.A wages to those of a QF skipper.

So, If your job and life are so amazing, quit telling us about it and bugger off to enjoy it! Of course assuming you have friends that aren't tired of your boasting to enjoy life with!!! Leave us miserable Aussies to our own ruin!

bbbbbbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzzbbbbbbbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz z

Chris Higgins

26th Feb 2006, 04:39

No, actually its a statement of fact Buzzy. We have Captains here that will make over 250K...and that's US dollars. Line check airmen and extended international tours even more. Wouldn't surprise me if some will go over US300k with the new contract we just signed!

Did the beer commercial link piss you off that badly mate?!

BWAHAHAHAHA!:}

Sorry man, I didn't mean to upset your sunny Sunday!

Chimbu chuckles

26th Feb 2006, 04:40

Well Chris I don't necesarily dissagree with SOME of what you have to say above but I do dissagree with your characterisation of LCC pilots as lesser mortals because they work for LCC...and as for the audio file:yuk: LCC pilots are not responsible for routing etc either...they take the aeroplane where they are told...just like you do.

Perhaps comparing a premium corporate service aimed at MULTI MILLIONAIRES and BILLIONAIRES to Jetstar is apples and oranges....but I do remember you guys picketing your boss.

BTW I know they are different franchises but are we expected to believe that Warren Buffett was happy to pay 3 times what the Netjets ME pilots are payed for doing the same job in the same aircraft, flying the same passengers? But of course without the threat in the US, unlike Saudi, of being kidnapped and beheaded on the internet.

As it stands the experience base across Jet* is quite high in general hrs terms...if not always in Jet hrs...the C&Ting system is VERY experienced on jets.....in fact the ex Ansett coup is complete at Jetstar.

If they vote down the EBA I guess there are only two possible outcomes.

1/. QF caves and pays more...QF have told them that will not happen.

2/. QF goes greenfields initially using it's own A330 pilots seconded to the op rather like Australian Airlines...and probably keeps Australian alive a little longer to help out too(could if NEEDED use the Australian AOC I suppose)...while it recruits pilots for J* International.

It advertises widely and gets inundated with applications from A330/A340 longhaul pilots from EK..many, many captains and lots of SFO's with previous jet command on narrow body who are presently being done over by EKs policy of DECs....and a bunch more FOs with no previous jet command but with 3000+ A330 FO time on longhaul ops....guys who could be captains, all things being equal, VERY QUICKLY....other guys would come from GF and you WILL get applications from guys from all manner of other airlines including where I work...very experienced A320 pilots, both captains and SFO.

They identify 30 captains and 30 SFOs who average 12000 hrs and 8000 hrs respectively as an initial TYPE RATED and VERY EXPERIENCED on TYPE intake....and another 20 of each in the same categories for employment over the next 12 mths....and 10 more of each for the 12 mths after that.

These pilots will require about 4 weeks induction training, standardisation sims and maybe 8 sectors to check to line....they have flown into all the countries planned on the route network many, many times....slowly they check to line releasing the QF A330 pilots and Australian Airlines 767 pilots to return to QF mainline in an orderly fashion rather than one big rush.

After 2 or 3 years Jetstar International is staffed with very experienced pilots...in fact in terms of relevant experience they are more experienced than 90% of current Jetstar pilots...including quite a few who had previous 777 commands before their A330 commands or flew as SFO on the Boeing before the Airbus...the 787 will be no mystery...and recruiting returns to a normal pace...no more DECs...recruitment open to all who have the cash for the type rating...promotion times stretch out to 10yrs because the average age of captains is so low...like VB....QF are happy...not much upgrade training required, stable pilot population...at least for about 10 more years when there will be a huge rush of retirements...but that will be someone else's problem in the usual beancounter way.

It would not be unprecedented for the QF beanies to offer such DECs a LITTLE bit more than was on offer to the Jet* pilots to absolutely ensure they get the numbers and 'quality'....but it would be too late for the Jet* incumbants.

QF WILL GET those applications believe me...there are expat Ozzies scattered all over the globe, mostly on min rest layovers with EK, who are praying for the Jetstar people to vote down this EBA....guys who have had a gutfull of expat life in the sandpit and who are willing to take a pay cut for a perceived lifestyle improvement...who's kids are approaching high school age and they don't want to put them in boarding schools...or just would like them to enjoy the freedoms they enjoyed growing up as teenagers rather than the skewed expat teenage life....who's wives are threatening to take the kids home and who face the commuting nightmare...or divorce and seperation from their children...even one guy I know who is still basically happy in the ME is tempted....although he will most likely stay and benefit from the resignations around him....if he had a house paid off in OZ it would probably be a different story.

The above scenarios are the almost daily concerns of very many expats with families.

Then you have the single guys who have been stacking away the cash for 6 or 8 years, are captains in their early 30s, and would love the opportunity to go home and live in one of their houses and have all their days off in Oz doing Oz things..drinking beer on their boat or at their local while their negatively geared investment properties reduce their tax bill and they continue to almost net what they were overseas anyway...I know guys like this.

Alternatively the J* pilots can vote yes and at least maintain some control over their lives....one guy I know joined Impulse on a punt as a DEC on the 717 when they first got them...on 90 odd K...last year he grossed double that as a senior checky and is a very happy fella....he was a returning expat who took a gamble and it has been a huge win.

It will be interesting to watch....best of luck all involved...it's your decision in the end....I offer only a perspective.

Chris Higgins

26th Feb 2006, 04:44

Guys the audio link was supposed to be a joke, but I guess it struck a chord..or hit a nerve somewhere!

Oh yeah, we had a long and hard fought battle for our new contract. We should be proud of that and our boss respects the fact that we didn't roll over and play dead.

Chimbu, I can't really comment on other operators, but I know there are many airlines having a tough go of it. It's not a happy industry to be in with the challenges of fuel and security alone.

It's not a question of looking down at LCCs. Southwest is an LCC that pays higher than almost anyone, yet they haven't lost money since 1971. Their growth has been controlled, they have crossed over into the business market quite well and they are a highly, highly respected company.

Chimbu chuckles

26th Feb 2006, 04:58

And their wages grew as the company grew...they were not industry leading from day 1.

Chris Higgins

26th Feb 2006, 12:25

Good luck with your decision on this new EBA. Possibly it will go through, and with that possibility goes the future fortunes of many, both at QF mainline and those wishing to pay competitive wages on the same routes.

One thing the Budweiser ad' shows us is that the general public can see through most of it for what it really is, pretty quickly. At the end of the day it's not about how others see us, but how we view ourselves.

To not get more money in this new EBA is not unforgivable, but not attempting to do so, is.

Many employers here tried Pay-For-Training and employment contracts in the form of promissory notes. Almost nobody does it now because most crews wont agree to it and most employers realise that an environment of trust and mutual respect is required to operate a jet safely.

Before any final hope of a world standard of remuneration is flushed down the dunny, hopefully you will see that too!

Cheers!

cortex

26th Feb 2006, 22:00

Reproduced for consideration without comment:

Dear Jetstar Colleague,
Re: Jetstar Vote
As you will be aware, a variation to the existing Jetstar Certified Agreement has been put to all Jetstar pilots. This variation, if accepted, will enable Jetstar pilots to crew international A330 operations. You may not be aware, however, that the Australian and International Pilots Association (AIPA) wrote to our Jetstar pilot members, advising in essence that:

The agreement with Jetstar does not give you the pay and conditions that you deserve. Don’t vote for an agreement that undervalues your ability, and your profession. AIPA urges you to reject this agreement.

Subsequent to this letter to our members, AIPA has had discussions with some members of the Jetstar Pilots Council and has put the following position forward:

.AIPA seeks acceptable standards of remuneration and conditions of work for all pilots in the Qantas Group.
.In achieving this goal, AIPA does not distinguish between pilots who are Qantas long haul, Qantas short haul, Qantas Jetstar or Qantas Regional.
.AIPA supports fair conditions for all pilots in the Qantas Group, including Jetstar pilots.
.The terms dictated by Qantas for acceptance by Jetstar pilots were allegedly made to the Jetstar Pilots Council under the threat of using imported contract labour from the US. This is unacceptable, unworkable and unlawful. Despite newspaper comments to the contrary, these allegations have been reconfirmed.
.Notwithstanding the MOU agreement covering Jetstar flying by mainline pilots, AIPA has been excluded from any participation in the negotiation of the proposed variation.
.The Qantas variation document itself is deceptive and seeks to downplay its intended application to long haul flying under references to wide-bodied aircraft.

AIPA has now sought advice on the remedies available to Qantas and Jetstar pilots in this situation and, amongst other things, has decided to invite all Jetstar pilots seeking industrial representation to contact AIPA on a confidential basis to discuss the way forward. AIPA will stand behind Jetstar pilots, whether AIPA members or not, who vote to reject the proposal.

Please contact EDITto register your interest.
AIPA is confident that a positive outcome to genuine negotiations is achievable.

With regards,

Captain Ian Woods
AIPA President

Edited to remove contact details. Please exercise more caution when cut-and-pasting. ;)

Woomera (Eastern States)

cortex

26th Feb 2006, 22:07

Reproduced for consideration without comment:

THE AUSTRALIAN
Friday 24 February 2006

Jetstar pilots' deal

JETSTAR chief executive Alan Joyce last night rejected claims by the Australian and International Pilots Association that the company had threatened to contract its flying to a North American labour hire company if pilots did not agree to a proposed deal for Jetstar International. He said the tough negotiations had reached an agreement the Jetstar pilots council was happy with. ``We very much have a co-operative arrangement with them and there's absolutely no truth to the claim that North American labour hire companies are being considered in any way,'' Mr Joyce said. The AIPA claims were in a letter urging Jetstar pilots to reject the Jetstar International deal, which will see long-haul pilots paid about $100,000 a year less than their Qantas counterparts.

Qantas talks off

A SUDDEN decision by Qantas to cancel meetings with union representatives fuelled speculation yesterday that the Flying Kangaroo has been spooked by comments by federal government ministers about keeping at least 2500 maintenance jobs in Australia. Qantas put off until March 6 enterprise bargaining talks due yesterday with two maintenance unions and cancelled a briefing for senior union officials on its wide-body heavy maintenance business. However, Qantas human relations boss Kevin Brown said the maintenance briefing was cancelled because a decision on the maintenance jobs had not yet been made. He said changes to enterprise bargaining schedules were not unusual and nothing should be read into the postponement.

Edited to remove image link which requires user ID and login.

Woomera (Eastern States)

Thanks for the help Woomera :) .

Cortex

Chris Higgins

26th Feb 2006, 22:38

If I were a gambling man right now, I'd say Mr Dixon is about to get pushed out of office. It's not about xenophobia, its about the very ideals of being an Australian that you don't screw ya' mates!

Running maintenance up to China and threatening to import American labour will do nothing to support the proud traditions of the Australian icon, QANTAS.

I would not be too worried about getting replaced if I were a Jetstar Pilot; I'd be more worried about getting replaced if I were Mr Dixon.

This is no way to carry on an 85 year tradition of excellence, nor is it the definition of what it means to be an Australian.

Keg

27th Feb 2006, 01:46

aircraft

27th Feb 2006, 11:10

Chris Higgins,

Allow me to politely inform you that you haven't got a clue about how companies work - whether they be Australian or not!

You certainly are not a gambling man. Some advice: Don't make that bet that GD is about to be pushed out of office!

Also, your quaint notion that the "very ideals of being an Australian that you don't screw ya' mates!" is in need of some revision. Australians screw their mates just as much as other nationalities!

Chris Higgins

27th Feb 2006, 13:42

Aircraft,

I'm sorry but my Bachelor of Science Degree in Business Administration, says that I do have a clue how businesses work. This is exactly the reason that my wife and I own one of the largest online retailing specialty businesses of its type in the world. Its also the reason I have investments in Australia and North America.

Back on track with regards to aviation matters...

The very reason that Australians travel on Qantas is that they associate the Qantas brand as uniquely Australian and of superior safety than other nations flag carriers. To export the brand name and have somebody licence it off as a cheap copy will not "fly" in the Australian culture.

Whether you have political views in favour of the Chinese or not, it doesn't really matter. If you exported the maintenance to India or Canada, it would have the same result as trying to recruit from abroad to fill your Olympic Team. The product is no longer considered genuine in the court of public opinion.

People are already saying, "Why should I fly Qantas, if its not going to be Australian anymore?"

As somebody who has worked in aircraft maintenance, there has been a universally unsolved problem with maintenance oversight on the part of certifying authorities. I saw the same problems with CASA in Port Macquarie as I did with the FAA in John F Kennedy International, where I was the union safety chairman.

This is a major problem for the future of Qantas if they try to export an issue of safety in maintenance to a culture that struggles to take care of their own oversight, and hide behind "saving face". I for one will not fly on Qantas, nor will my family, if this program of exporting to China, such a vital link in the safety chain goes through.

Mr Dixon has done very little for your share price. The behemoth from France may or may not work out. The workers of the Qantas groups and the shareholders will pay dearly for this ego trip if it doesn't meet performance and reliability goals in much the same way that American Airlines did with the MD-11.

Aircraft, you have inferred that any business that doesn't treat its shareholders, employees and customers with integrity is a dinosaur now. I see you are only 21 and from Perth. I sure as hell hope you never get into in airline management, because Sir, you certainly have no clue!

If there is any hope of getting Qantas back on track..and on top; there are changes that must be made at the top and almost immediately.

Taildragger67

27th Feb 2006, 13:52

Interesting that AIPA engages the J* crew directly and QF responds by going via the media. It wasn't that long ago that AIPA copped a bit of a hammering from QF management for allegedly going to the media to do business. Yet again it highlights that what is good for the goose, ain't necessarily so for the gander! :*

Interesting, but possibly not so mysterious; it might help that a) you're a big advertising-space buyer and b) you've got one of the country's major media people as a board-mate. The fact that JCP ain't the first might be seen to indicate something of an ongoing strategy in this respect.

This may explain why non-management representative groups (did anyone say 'unions'?!) might struggle to get airtime to put grievances forward. Journos might be impartial but they know who pays their kids' school fees.

Chris Higgins

28th Feb 2006, 00:48

Taildragger-

This is a terrible mistake on the part of QF management. Journos will likely turn on their own when they feel they are being taken for fools. GD may have been a journo' too, but it's only a matter of time before he is seen as a turncoat on his profession and just another politician looking for a free ride on his own agenda.

oicur12

28th Feb 2006, 02:33

Chris Higgins,

I have followed some of your posts recently and have refrained from joining the “Jetstar pilots hold the future of airline flying to ransome” debate nonsense but your recent comment has moved me to reply.

“Sadly, we are constantly shown that accident rates are higher for carriers that introduce lower pay scales.”

What utter garbage. To use the North American airline industry as an example, as you have done, reminds us that Delta was in serious trouble after a string of accidents back in the mid eighties to the point of almost being shutdown by the FAA. Another example would be when Pan Am was crashing 707’s like they were being given away for free. Both of these carriers paid premium salaries and indeed Delta was one of the highest paying airlines in the US. Fedex is another example of an airline where clearly salary levels work inversely proportional to MD11’s going bump in the night. You mention USair as an example of an airline that suffered from a spate of accidents some years ago and yet over at HP during the same period, there were no hull losses at an airline where flight crew were being paid considerably less. Interestingly, American has one of the poorest safety records in the US and yet some of the highest aircrew salaries.

Chris, the entire thrust of your contribution on pprune wrt Jetstar is a suggestion that Jetstar pilots are of inferior quality or experience, simply as a result of receiving a lower income than their mainline equivalent. Do you know what experience levels the crew actually have at Jetstar? Are you in a position to judge how many hours in a logbook makes a quality pilot? What do you think is a minimum number of hours logged in order to move to the lhs of an automated aircraft and how do you quantify such a number?

Lookin Down - “Few other professionals would have to face the prospect of the equivalent of maybe not passing that next six monthly sim ride”.

After being in 3 airlines over the last 12 years, I have only ever seen a couple of pilots sacked as a result of poor job performance. Do you really head off to do your recurrent sim check thinking “gee, I could get sacked if I make a mistake”. I don’t think you do.

Howard Hughes

28th Feb 2006, 02:51

I gotta say, I have been biting my tongue for the last few days with some of the things Chris has espoused.

Thanks for speaking up Oicur12.:ok:

I will continue to bite my tongue.....;)

ROKAPE

28th Feb 2006, 06:08

Colleagues,

With regard to Chimbu chuckles writings on bean counters and others perception of our profession and our level of remuneration.....
The next time a ground crew member, FA, accountant, bloke at a bbq etc says to you "Yea but it's all automatic isn't it? You guys don't work, you don't even do the landing". Instead of smiling or mumbling a half hearted response, let them know the facts of our profession.

The vast majority of T/O and Landings are manual.
We land a 65t, 85t, 100t etc machine at 200kmph on a piece of tarmac, in all sorts of weather conditions, the machine is worth US$65, A$85, A$100 million with 100, 200,400 POB.
We work 8-11 hour shifts nearly every time we sign on.
Our work space is in a small locked room at 8000' with large amounts of radiation.
The aircraft is travelling 800kmph+ at 40,000’ with a -65 degree temperature. It is a harsh environment if something goes wrong.
We can’t leave our ‘office’ for lunch or a coffee/smoke break, we don’t do corporate lunch’s.
We too take our work home, we spend significant amounts of time updating Jepps/company manuals and brushing up on CASA/company regulations and aircraft systems. Or writing the odd incident report.
Yes we have overnights in exotic places like Perth, but we don't go home every night to catch up on house jobs, kids and the washing.
No we don’t work as many hours as doctors, however a doctor works on one patient at a time with four, five, six or more other doctors available for a second opinion. Not to mention nurses that will also monitor and assist with a patient.
Yes we fly the majority of our time in controlled airspace with ATCO’s to assist us. However they are not in the cockpit and the final responsibility is with the Captain. We are responsible for hundreds of people at a time.
We are tested at aircraft simulator sessions bi or quad annually.
We must renew our command instrument rating every 12 months.
We are line checked every 12 months.
We must qualify in EP's, DG's, CRM and must keep these current.
Yes in the cruise we do sit there and manage (radio, navigation, aircraft systems, crew, passengers, aircraft cabin environment) the safe conduct of the flight. And yes on occasion someone may read a paper. I don’t know of an accountant who will crunch numbers for an entire eight hour shift with out sneaking on the internet or reading the paper or making a non business related phone call.
We have done a long poorly paid apprenticeship to gain the experience to qualify for a jet job. PPL,CPL,IREX,ATPL,ME-CIR, numerous aircraft endorsements ratings and approvals.
We must have a valid medical to fly, which lasts 12 months. As you get older the medicals get more rigorous.
We have a large influence on the operating costs of our company with regard to, on time performance, fuel carried, fuel used, brake usage, training.
‘180k may be 4-5 time the national average’ remuneration that's what experience is worth. I don’t mind a medical specialist making A$350,000, he deserves it, I am paying for his experience.
I also don’t begrudge a Caterpillar D12 bulldozer driver making A$110,000+. He is operating expensive equipment and can push dirt on a 35 degree bank angle and move ? tonnes of tailings per hour.
If an accountant makes a mistake a company only loses A$100 million on fuel hedging or a stapler gets jammed and gets paid accordingly. If pilots make a mistake the company will probably not survive and people may be hurt or worse.
When people mention "yea but most crashes are pilot error", mention the incidents in which the pilots have saved the aircraft and occupants. These incidents happen every day.
We need to resist the temptation to talk down our profession/remuneration, I don't hear doctors, accountants, CEO's or magistrates doing it.
Most people know what doctors(insert profession) do and how they got there. We need to educate people on what we as pilots do and how we got there.

Best Regards

Datum

28th Feb 2006, 07:27

ROKAPE,

I agree 100% - Professional Aviators must stop talking down their operational role and very important job. It is half our battle.... The exact picture you have painted happens all the time...that is - the same old poorly educated question regarding the AUTOPILOT!...rapidly followed by a lazy and equally poor response...

The truth is most people have very little understanding of what we do....nor should they be expected to. However, if they genuinely ask the question; It is our responsibility, on behalf of all professional pilots to give a well thought out answer. If we, as a professional group continually talk down our area of expertise, then we face a tough time convincing many of the need for descent pay and conditions.

PERCEPTION IS REALITY

You have given great examples of what others can say in response to any question regarding the day to day role of an Airline Pilot....:ok:

LookinDown

28th Feb 2006, 08:10

Oicur...

If people are sacked when they "make a mistake" its usually for a biggy. The issue is that far more likely is the prospect of your position being placed under review for making a number of lesser mistakes....mistakes which you had damn well better unmistake.

The half of my point that you responded to is about the fact that the threat is there. The threat is always there. The threat will always be there irrepective of hrs, age or rank until you no longer are employed. Few other professionals have to face this possibility. For highly self assured people this is a lesser issue but for those of us who become increasingly aware of our own fallability as we get older (we could also throw in issues of increasing family and financial responsibilities) or who cant step readily into another airline every few years, its more of an issue believe me.

This leads us to the other half of my point. Medicals aren't about skills, currency, study or aptitude. Just when you least expect it something crops up, and sometimes these matters arent rectifiable with pills or laser surgery or at least rectifable enough. The bones just dont mend so well anymore either when you fall off your bike and break one or two. Having trouble recalling too many other professions that hang on such standards.

Nicely scribed Rok.

Chocks Away

28th Feb 2006, 08:18

Good point Keg, on your previous. ;)

A top sumation also Rokape, which should be plastered all over this D&G section.

Happy landings:ok:

B A Lert

28th Feb 2006, 09:32

Having read Rokape's piece, I am surprised that anyone is prepared to take on the job as its all soooooooooooo onerous and demanding not to mention responsible. If its as difficult as he suggests, then why do it at any price?

Chris Higgins

28th Feb 2006, 11:23

Oicur 12,

You've flown for three airlines in ten years?! (It must be nearly time to dust off that resume again!)

Alright, I'll grant you some of the arguments that you've outlined regarding pay versus accident statisitics, but much has changed in training, weather forecasting, crew pairing and cockpit technologies over the timespan you referred to. One of my last airline roles was as a B-757/767 systems instructor where I taught procedural training and did company oral evaluations. Much changed in the training department alone with the advances made by NASA/AMES/Safety Foundation work and lets not forget the NTSB and ALPA. What we are talking about here was not about dumbing anything down, which was so popular in the '80s rote learning, but concentrating on correlative learning. The course had to be totally revamped but the results were measurably better.

Given that training and cockpit technologies are all better the only other variable is the quality of "the nut behind the wheel". To say that all pilots are created equal in this part is to say that Australian school teachers should only be allowed to hand out only As. The better quality candidates will shine in the pre-evaluation checkrides in the simulator, in their written and verbal skill-based testing and even with their interaction with your human resources staff. They are your A's. Having identified your higher level candidates, what does an employer do to entice the subject from going elsewhere...yep! Pay 'em more.

Anyway, you've got the right to demonstrate higher than average skill levels for below industry standard wages, but I don't see any reason why you should.

aircraft

28th Feb 2006, 13:14

Rokape,

I don't see the relevance of your post. In fact, I think you have an insecurity complex.

What you think you are worth matters not one iota in the context of an operating business - it is the market conditions that determine how much you are worth.

Chris Higgins

28th Feb 2006, 13:26

Aircraft-
There is obviously merit to the traditional supply-demand argument that you just learned in school, but in reality, the ability to sell one's craft at the highest possible price has little to do with supply-demand, but the ability to sell.
I see that you are also a psychologist!:yuk:
I see nothing in anyones posts here to be indicative of any kind of insecurities nor psychosis. Some lack a certain degree of maturity, but in most of those cases, its all in jest.:p

oicur12

1st Mar 2006, 01:37

ROKAPE,

Such a comprehensive list of duties required by an airline pilot. Maybe that explains why airline pilots are in a much higher income bracket than the majority of other employees in Australia while working fewer hours. And still you complain.

Chris,

“what does an employer do to entice the subject from going elsewhere...yep! Pay 'em more.”

This is incorrect. There is ample evidence that staff turnover is related to many things, but salary is not the most critical of these. WN is just one example of an airline that enjoyed the lowest staff turnover of any airline in the US industry back when their salaries/profit sharing were not competitive at all (and their safety record was and is the best). Companies commonly make the mistake of believing that raising staff salaries will solve problems arising from an unmotivated, unhappy disengaged workforce. It does not necessarily work. You pay ransom, you get bandits.

‘Having identified your higher level candidates . . “

What exactly is a higher level candidate in piloting terms? Surely if your cockpit crew meets minimum standards of safety and efficiency then there would be no need to offer a premium to attract the “higher level candidate” you refer to. Surely a safe pilot is just as good as a really really safe pilot that costs more.

Finally, having been so critical of Jetstar pilots in many posts here on pprune, I thought I would again offer you the chance to prove how in depth your knowledge of Jetstar is.

I ask again,

Do you know what experience levels the crew actually have at Jetstar?

Chris Higgins

1st Mar 2006, 01:57

Oicur 12,

I started as a baggage handler at the old Oxley Airlines at the age of 16, turned wrenches on their Navajos and flew scenics in their only single, long before it became Impulse or Jetstar. Yes, the pilots have experience and I don't know where this feeling of inferiority comes from that you have to defend your colleagues in this way.

Your data on Southwest is incorrect. It paid well from the first day of operation, not only in immediate terms of employment but in "sweat equity" stock disbursements. Many flight attendants that started in the beginning became millionaires just off the stock alone. I did not see anything close to this in your Jet "star" offering.

Oicur, its not a comparison of penis size we're talking about here. It's a question of not destroying the profession by selling yourself "short" on what the expectations you defined for yourself when you became a pilot in the first place.

If you want the respect of management, yourselves and the society in general you have to negotiate what is historically acceptable in the society you live in. Otherwise you'll probably end up the satire of a beer commercial too!

Chris Higgins

1st Mar 2006, 02:25

For any of the Jetstar Pilots who are considering voting this in: this one's for you!

http://media.putfile.com/Mr-Discount-Airline-Pilot-Guy

:p

Guys here's a four letter word for those of you who didn't get it the first time...j-o-k-e.

LookinDown

1st Mar 2006, 03:59

oicur you've got to be kidding mate.

You have poo pooed just about every suggestion that's been posted and I'm yet to see a constuctive alternatve from you....

You made some comment about pilot pay being in a higher income bracket for hours worked. Bit like many aussie workers especially in the resources sector. Your point would be?? Pilots are already appropriately paid for their duties?? Pilots dont have a right to seek fair remuneration for workload and increased workload??

Re offers of pay rises to retain staff about to jump ship. Are you really saying that the waving of a proposal/promise/review of company re-organisation of those factors that relate directly to job morale other than salary is going to deter someone from taking up another job offer short term? They twiddle their thumbs on the same pay scale for goodness knows how long while management get their act together, maybe?

No. The pay rise offer is just to keep them there long enough to see whether structural reforms are fair dinkum.

And the next one is a doozie! There are no differences between equally qualified pilots?????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??
My goodness QF you have been wasting everyone's time and money with your Cadet Program. In fact your direct entry process is a blantant waste of effort. Just take first in best dressed cause the candidates are all clones in actual fact with the same pieces of paper.

What's that old instructor addage? Dont let someone solo unless you would be happy to be left bound and gagged and sitting next to them (or behind them in the last row). Hmm. Don't know I'd feel too happy about doing that with every single person on the planet who happens to have the same piece of paper. :uhoh: :uhoh: :uhoh:

Throws gauntlet down

oicur12

1st Mar 2006, 11:54

Chris

“Yes, the pilots have experience and I don't know where this feeling of inferiority comes from that you have to defend your colleagues in this way.”

I am very good friends with many Jetstar pilots but none of them feel inferior at all. I asked you this question – “Do you know what experience levels the crew actually have at Jetstar?” as a result of some of the disparaging remarks you made such as:

“What will you make of the kind of personality and with what personal standards will those people conduct themselves in this profession by going against the wishes of the many? A whole airline full of back-stabbers? That should be a great place to work!”

And especially this:

”If you don't pay people properly you will attract those with lower abilities, problems in their personal and training backgrounds, lower total time and lower intellect. I've seen the damage this has done.”

I may have misunderstood the thrust of your argument – please let me know if this is the case.

“Your data on Southwest is incorrect. It paid well from the first day of operation, not only in immediate terms of employment but in "sweat equity" stock disbursements. Many flight attendants that started in the beginning became millionaires just off the stock alone”

According to the 2004 airline salary survey and career earnings comparison (and many other sources), Southwest airlines ranked tenth out of twelve airlines for 30 year career value and you guessed it, ranked the best for low pilot turnover. Delta ranked first for career value. I have no information regarding cabin crew salary.

Lookin Down,

I am having trouble deciphering your post as it is little more than rabble but I will attempt to respond where possible.

‘You have poo pooed just about every suggestion that's been posted and I'm yet to see a constuctive alternatve from you....”

An alternative to what exactly?

“You made some comment about pilot pay being in a higher income bracket for hours worked. Bit like many aussie workers especially in the resources sector. Your point would be??”

I am not really sure what you are asking with this question.

“And the next one is a doozie! There are no differences between equally qualified pilots?”

No, actually what I said was this “What exactly is a higher level candidate in piloting terms? Surely if your cockpit crew meets minimum standards of safety and efficiency then there would be no need to offer a premium to attract the “higher level candidate” you refer to. Surely a safe pilot is just as good as a really really safe pilot that costs more.”

Why exactly is such a comment a “doozie”.

Dynasty Trash Hauler

1st Mar 2006, 12:57

Chris Higgins

2nd Mar 2006, 00:56

Play the ball, not the man.
It aint the fault of the pilots. its the industry in general.
Virgin america look like paying a320 caps max 80000 usd all up. if you dont like it, dont apply. lots of others waiting.
the industry is changing.

Dynasty, Dynasty, Dynasty!

Virgin America has neither pilots, nor aircraft yet, they are not even an airline. I don't quite see where you see the "lots of others waiting"?

Jetblue has hired most of the USAir guys with A-320 time, the Independence guys are getting lots of offers from Netjets, Jetblue, Airtran and Southwest. Jetblue has stated publicly that they don't know where they'll find enough captain ready pilots to undertake the Embraer 190 program.

So you think that there are "lots of others waiting''?

Waiting for what?

Waiting for Godot?

Waiting for an airline that may or may not make it in a country that has had over 130 start-ups fail since deregulation?

The Nevada gaming comission would close any one of their casinos for such a poor return ratio!

Chris Higgins

2nd Mar 2006, 01:05

[QUOTE=oicur12]Chris
“Yes, the pilots have experience and I don't know where this feeling of inferiority comes from that you have to defend your colleagues in this way.”
I am very good friends with many Jetstar pilots but none of them feel inferior at all. I asked you this question – “Do you know what experience levels the crew actually have at Jetstar?” as a result of some of the disparaging remarks you made such as:
“What will you make of the kind of personality and with what personal standards will those people conduct themselves in this profession by going against the wishes of the many? A whole airline full of back-stabbers? That should be a great place to work!”
And especially this:
”If you don't pay people properly you will attract those with lower abilities, problems in their personal and training backgrounds, lower total time and lower intellect. I've seen the damage this has done.”

Yes Oicur,

My entire argument is based upon protecting the future of the industry not about the existing staff that have worked hard for less than they should. Why you would suggest that is a good idea to do that for a company that is highly profitable is beyond me.

You may have no shortage of Emirates, ex AN, or even Singapore or Cathay guys that are feeling homesick for the first short while of operation, but that supply will quickly dry up and then what? If the world market for airline labour picks up as predicted, you'll be left with the ones that come to an interview with all kinds of problems in their history-and like the mutual fund disclaimer, might be used to predict an outcome in the future.

Datum

2nd Mar 2006, 01:08

....

If I was a JETSTAR PILOT I would be looking at my situation in the broadest possible sense...

I would be attempting to remain cognisant and acutely aware of the possibility of hidden agendas. Therefore, I would source information from as many RELIABLE sources as I could. AIPA and QF Mainline Pilots could be a source of information....albeit to provide a different perspective to the JPC and other JETSTAR Pilots...I would then sit down with my closest mates / family (not just Aviation related either) over a few beers and talk it out. They may also provide a different perspective...

WHY - Because my single VOTE will effect my working conditions, lifestyle and general level of happiness as long as I remain a JETSTAR Pilot...:ooh: Further, this VOTE will effect the Terms and Conditions under which many other pilots will be employed in the future. They too, like me - will have worked very hard to initially get a job with JETSTAR...they will have paid for all their training prior to joining - to then be told they will need to fork out AGAIN - for another endorsement....to then realise their salary will not even allow them to do that adequately....:yuk:

I would consider very carefully whether the Terms and Conditions proposed in this 'Agreement' will attract the calibre of pilot I would wish to be my part of my crew when things are not going so well (ie: critical emergency over foreign country in poor weather).....Moreover, will JETSTAR be a happy, motivating and fun place to work given the conditions proposed...will my mates (especially the junior guys) have enough money to enjoy a slip now and then?

I just urge all JETSTAR Pilots - Please consider this issue very carefully. Be open minded enough to listen to what others have to say. Finally, unlike management - try to avoid making your final decision with only yourself and your back pocket in mind! :ok: Good Luck.

...............

aircraft

2nd Mar 2006, 02:06

Datum,

Will you please grow up and stop pasting posts that you have copied from some other thread?

Datum

2nd Mar 2006, 02:37

Pull your head in aircraft.......

Either add to the debate or don't bother. Your last couple of posts have wasted my time and others. If you cannot think of something constructive to say.....don't bother...

PPRUNE has a number of 'Moderators' and last time I checked you were NOT one of them!

If you have genuine gripe and still wish to winge PM the D+G Moderator - Woomera....

LookinDown

4th Mar 2006, 22:37

Hmm..perhaps my previous post was a little emotive. I’ll unpick some of the ‘rabble’.

I wouldn’t know Chris from a bar of soap and PIT isn’t in my list of top ten holiday destinations (sorry Chris). On rereading his posts, in this thread at least, I’ve found nothing whatseoever derogatory of J* pilots and one instance where a statement has been misinterpreted. Happy to stand corrected. In fact Chris’s posts, Rokape’s and others in this thread have been aimed at supporting the social and economic benefits of all pilots by reminding readers of the true and highly unusual nature of the role.

Oicur and one other in particular have posted nothing but statements devaluing the same, frequently made these via a tasteless personal attack, and been highly selective in responding. Comments decrying the incentive value of salary offers in retaining staff for example without any reference or explanation of alternatives are typical. This is what I meant by my reference to the lack of any positive alternatives.

The singular reference to safe pilots “Surely a safe pilot is just as good as a really really safe pilot that costs more.” ( A full glass and a fuller glass?) is a further example of selectivity and nothing but a distraction. The implication that this is or should be the sole criterion in crew selection as the only concern of the airline and the ignoring of the many human and performance factors that Chris has referred to is an example of the selectivity.

“What exactly is a higher level candidate in piloting terms?” and “Surely if your cockpit crew meets minimum standards of safety and efficiency then there would be no need to offer a premium to attract the “higher level candidate”

The vast majority of pilots worldwide are safe pilots and meet the minimum standards of their employer. The incident/accident balance would be tipped severely the other way if this were not the case. The argument seems to be against a merit selection process in the distinguishing of individual performance and aptitude. I just don’t accept this.

Thankyou Dynasty you are right about playing the ball. By responding in kind I took my eye off the game. I'd be very interested by the way in Oicur's and other's opinion on what is a fair offer by the way. What monetary value and conditions should the offer incorporate?

What exactly is ‘rabble’ as opposed to ‘a rabble’? :D

oicur12

6th Mar 2006, 05:07

“ Oicur and one other in particular have posted nothing but statements devaluing the same, frequently made these via a tasteless personal attack, and been highly selective in responding.”

Lookin down, I have responded to individual posts using the posters name, yourself and Chris being two examples. The comments I have made have not been personal attacks, I have not attempted to insult or denigrate the skills, abilities or professionalism of any player in this debate. Muddying the waters with such an accusation does little more than show a certain siege mentality so common amongst airline pilots.

I am unsure what exactly I have devalued by simply expressing an opinion however I suspect that market forces, changing customer expectations and deregulation of the industry have been more influential than my posting on pprune.

“Comments decrying the incentive value of salary offers in retaining staff for example without any reference or explanation of alternatives are typical. This is what I meant by my reference to the lack of any positive alternatives.”

You are quite correct, I have not offered any alternatives and I apologize sincerely. My comments were in response to Chris when on numerous occasions he suggested that an airline could solve staff turnover rates amongst pilots by simply raising salary levels. This may in some cases work however generally this is not an effective strategy. Some airlines in the ME and one in particular in Asia have raised salary levels numerous times only to find it has done nothing more than mask the real reasons why people are leaving. A big issue in my airline, and many others (especially booming startups) is rostering and roster changes and disruption. Many smarter airlines and fractionals in North America and Europe have successfully attracted sufficient crew numbers by providing benefits such as flexible rostering and lifestyle instead of simply out paying their competitors. I fully understand that in many cases, higher salaries are required in order to attract the necessary experience levels to regions such as Asia/ME but I would argue that this is not the case in Australia where there is a huge pool of qualified and well-trained pilots to choose from. Likewise North America and Canada where Frontier/Jetblue/Airtran/Westjet attract crew without the need to pay AA/NW/CO wages (and more importantly conditions).

My point – Jetstar does not need to pay QF wage levels (as suggested by some here on pprune) in order to safely crew their aircraft. It may be unfair to some, it my represent a double standard to others, but it is simply a reflection of a changing set of market conditions that is occurring in many places, not just Australia.

“The singular reference to safe pilots “Surely a safe pilot is just as good as a really really safe pilot that costs more.” ( A full glass and a fuller glass?) is a further example of selectivity and nothing but a distraction. The implication that this is or should be the sole criterion in crew selection as the only concern of the airline and the ignoring of the many human and performance factors that Chris has referred to is an example of the selectivity.”

I apologize if I gave the impression that I was suggesting that safety levels should be the sole determining factor in aircrew selection. I don’t believe this to be the case at all. Airlines should look at a wide range of key behaviors when selecting pilots, one of which should be technical competence.

“The argument seems to be against a merit selection process in the distinguishing of individual performance and aptitude. I just don’t accept this.”

This is not my argument at all. I strongly believe that airlines should select crew based upon individual technical merit as well as in competencies that go beyond simply flying an aircraft. I am suggesting, however, that many airlines chose candidates that meet the MINIMUM acceptable levels of technical ability. There is little to be gained by providing a financial incentive to attract pilots with higher levels of technical ability. What would this achieve?