Jetgo Blacklist

[why panic]

Jetgo Blacklist

I applied to Jetgo a few days ago. With 10,000 plus hours of large Jet time, training captain, etc, and having agreed to their requirement to fund my own type rating, I was naively expecting my application to get some sort of serious consideration. Instead I got an email back saying that at 61 I was too old for them, as I couldn't fly internationally at 65. I replied that this sounded like age discrimination to me, and I was going to make a report to the Age Discrimination Commissioner. This prompted a further email that I can only describe as an angry rant. It accessed me of threatening to sue them and that they would Blacklist me. This is a cut and paste from this email:

"The fact that a professional pilot has threatened to sue us instead of taking a graceful retirement from a flying role is noted and will be passed on at CEO level to all HR heads at major Australian operators therefore black banning you from Australian Aviation. Your Call
Have a great Day"

This seems all wrong to me. I could only call it bulling and intimidation. I also suspect this has opened the door to the legal issues of Defamation and Damages. I would be very interest to hear the opinions of anybody with legal training.

If anybody thinks this post is just sour grapes, then I can assure them that, yes my grapes are definitively sour after this email, which prompted me to go ahead and file a formal Age Discrimination complaint. Will update this post with developments there.

I get no pleasure from slagging-off an operator that is providing valuable jobs to Australian pilots, but it seems to me, their HR department is clearly out of control.

[Snakecharma]

If this is real then it is a gutsy call by the person that sent the email!

Not sure why you couldn't get a return on your training investment in four years, given that the type rating is funded by the applicant, and that assumes that the person turns into a pumpkin at 65 which shouldn't be the case.

[NoN1]

Jetgo fly internationally? They must have grand plans.

[Mach E Avelli]

Why Panic, check your PM.

If someone at Jetgo did send you such an email, you probably could go them
not only on age discrimination but for threats - even if they have no hope of carrying them out with any effect. You obviously need to take legal advice on the latter, but the former would appear clear cut enough.

I recall back at the time of the great pilot dispute of 89 a couple of hotheads touring flying schools making threats to the young hopefuls that if they took airline jobs from the old mates, these kids would be blacklisted forever. It was a pathetic and empty threat by a few very immature individuals.

[Stationair8]

One would have thought that a new company rapidly expanding would be looking for your experience-after all at 61, you could still be flying for a few more years yet!

[d_concord]

Nothing lost I would think.

While I admire them for having a go and hope for everyones sake they succeed. But to be honest Jetgo makes no more sense than SkyAirWorld did.

[hiwaytohell]

Jetgo fly internationally? They must have grand plans.

Last year they were doing Bill Peach runs to London and plus charters to PNG.

[mppgf]

"The fact that a professional pilot has threatened to sue us instead of taking a graceful retirement from a flying role is noted and will be passed on at CEO level to all HR heads at major Australian operators therefore black banning you from Australian Aviation. Your Call
Have a great Day"

Ring Ring !!!!
G'day Alan/Jane/John/etc,
Yeah mate I got this old pilot who is a dic*%ead so you cant employ him okay !
No worries mate !

Gotta love the delusional "you'll never work in this industry again types"

Two points however

1) You probably wouldn't want to work for an operator like that
2) If that email is legit you definately have a case for age discrimination and should pursue it vigorously just to put clowns like that in their place.

Graceful Retirement My Arse ! :yuk:

[max AB]

Thats the mother load right there, follow that up and you won't need to work again...

[international hog driver]

I rarely say anything here but after a conversation with one of my good mates in the last couple days I cant keep quiet now.

With all respect, I can appreciate that you have been in the industry and seen there and done that, now how about thinking about letting someone else have a go.

This week a mate of mine who has been at QF for nearly 15 years was displaced by about 300 people in front of where he was a mere month ago. He now reckons that his time to command has now blown out by another decade.

So let me guess you have now been passed over for an interview and you did not get the answer you expected. As Jetgo said in the other thread they have had over 500 applicants for a few jobs.

To be brutally honest, the way you have aired your dirt laundry here really smacks of nothing but sour grapes and an attitude and it is not any wonder that Jetgo have passed you by on this alone.

To the best of my knowledge jetgo have been more than prepared to give young and older people a go playing with their toys but I reckon it has to do with their attitude. There was even an article in AA about one of their captains retiring with after flying for 50+ years or something stupid, so to stomp your foot here saying i'm going to blacklist them and they are discriminating really has no leg to stand on

On Wednesday met a guy who has just started with them, lost his job with Brindy and now just landed his first jet job. He was stoked and bloody good luck to him.

Dude 10000 hours large jet time means that you have gotten out there and lived the lived the life its also a hell of a lot different to 1 hours sectors, half OCTA and humping bags like I have seen the the Jetgo guys do in Townsville.

Maybe they did not think you fit the mold of what they want, it is their train set after all not yours and having seen in the other thread that they are getting more jets and getting bigger, it really comes across as if you feel you deserved it not earnt it.

[vee1-rotate]

I rarely say anything here but after a conversation with one of my good mates....

the whole purpose of the OP's thread has, it seems, gone straight over the top of your head and into the abyss.

The fact also that you have absolutely no idea of the personal circumstances surrounding his decision to continue to pursue a flying position but suggest he "let someone else have a go", just proves how ignorant you really are.

[hiwaytohell]

WP
Your posts seem more like you are overreacting to an honest reply from Jetgo telling you why you were not accepted. Then you threaten to sue them! Nice!!!

Maybe you should have checked your facts before "slagging off"... Google is your friend!

The fact is that an airline can "discriminate" based on age:

Qantas v. Christie is the lead case which is a High Court decision.

Here is the ALRC ruling:
The inherent requirements exception

31.2 Under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) (DDA) it is lawful for an employer to discriminate against a person on the ground of the person’s disability if the person is unable to carry out the ‘inherent requirements’ of the particular job or would, in order to do so, require services or facilities that would impose an ‘unjustifiable hardship’ on the employer. This defence is available to an employer only in relation to ‘hire and fire’ decisions, namely, determining who should be offered employment or dismissed as an employee.[1]
31.3 The Inquiry has considered two aspects of the inherent requirements exception as it relates to genetic information: how to define the inherent requirements of a particular job; and whether an employer should be able to discriminate against a job applicant or employee on the basis that, while he or she is currently able to perform the inherent requirements, this may not be the case in the future.
Current law

31.4 The term ‘inherent requirements’ is used in the DDA, the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1984 (Cth) (HREOC Act) and the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) (WRA). The term is also used in New South Wales, Tasmanian and Northern Territory anti-discrimination legislation, while other jurisdictions use terms such as ‘work genuinely and reasonably required’.[2] The term ‘inherent requirements’ is not defined in the DDA, the HREOC Act or the WRA.
31.5 In HREOC’s view, inherent requirements must be determined in the circumstances of each job and may include:


the ability to perform the functions that are a necessary part of the job;
productivity and quality requirements;
the ability to work effectively in the team or other type of work organisation concerned; and
the ability to work safely.[3]

31.6 There has been some judicial consideration of the term ‘inherent requirements’ as it appears in the WRA and other industrial relations legislation. In Cramer v Smithkline Beecham,[4] two employees of a pharmaceutical plant were dismissed because of their sensitivity to penicillin, to which they were exposed at work. The Federal Court decided that penicillin tolerance was an inherent requirement of working in the pharmaceutical plant and therefore the dismissals were lawful.
31.7 In Qantas Airways Ltd v Christie,[5] Qantas had dismissed a 60-year-old international airline pilot on the basis of his age. In deciding whether the pilot could fulfil the inherent requirements of his position, the High Court considered it relevant to look at the surrounding context of his employment, as well as his physical ability to perform the task. As most countries prohibit pilots over 60 years of age from flying in their airspace, the Court decided that the surrounding context meant that he was not able to fulfil the inherent requirements of the job even though he might be physically capable of flying.

[Mach E Avelli]

The OP is 61 not 65 so he has some four years before any limitation on international flying in the immediate region would kick in. He makes the point that he would have been required to self fund the type rating, so the employer can't really claim any commercial penalty in employing him.
In any case, I thought that the jobs advertised were for domestic flying out of Sydney. If so, age would not be limiting.
Seems more like these guys don't want people with too much of a proper airline background. In which case, why not say something to the effect that preferred applicants should have recent time in GA because they want them to hump the bags, refuel and clean the cabin? There is no law against setting any practical requirements that the job may demand.
So blatantly playing the age card and compounding it with threats to blacklist with other operators demonstrates a very poor grip on how the game is played in these politically correct times.
As for the statement that he (or anyone) should retire gracefully, try telling that to the medical experts and governments who encourage us now to remain actively employed as long as possible. I know several pilots over 60 and two in their 70s who are sharper than some under 40 and who have more stamina when it comes to long duty days.

[Snakecharma]

Ah no.

If the applicant was over 65 then I would agree IF the operator was an international operator or predominantly an international operator.

For a domestic operator to try and rely upon that as a precedent would be an interesting move I would think, but then again I am not a lawyer.

The fact that they just had a bloke as another poster mentioned retire after a kazzilion years means that the the age 65 thing wasn't too big an issue for them.

As for giving the young uns a go, well I am not close to 60 yet, but I know that when I am I will still need to work well into my 60's to put my kids through school and uni (and no they are not a second family and no I don't have multiple ex wives to support). To have to pull the pin at 60-61 would be financially devastating for myself and my family. If I found myself looking for jobs at that age and got that sort of response I would be well bent out of shape as well. It is no different to saying we won't hire you because you are fat, ugly, Jewish, Christian, thetan or a girl.

Fair enough if there are better candidates, but to write someone off because you can only get 4 years out of them (which is debatable anyway) is well out of line in my opinion.

That all said it is a report on an internet site and may not be true!

[why panic]

I too have friends as QF FO's. I am very sympathetic to their plight. It must be frustrating for them with such a long time to command. On the plus side, they do enjoy terms and conditions that most of us only dream about.

Regarding the old blokes should get out to make way for the young ones argument - I always wonder how many of the people that say this will give up their careers when they're +55 to altruistically donate their job to some worthy up and comer - Put my family into poverty - No Problem.

Regarding Jetgo, it's not that I didn't get the answer I expected, I didn't get the reason I expected, and I certainly didn't expect to get threatened with an industry wide Blackban. My "atitude" as you call it was a result of their email after their denying my application. Do you think I applied saying "Give me a job or I'll sue you".

One hour sectors half OCTA - You should try 20 minute sectors doing domestic flying in an A320, training a new cadet, through a Polish winter where the vis hardly gets above 800m. Just business as usual.

Finally, sour grapes, yes as I said in my initial post, and the dirty laundry, who does that belong to?

[why panic]

You wrote:
Your posts seem more like you are overreacting to an honest reply from Jetgo telling you why you were not accepted. Then you threaten to sue them! Nice!!!

Just to make this perfectly clear, I did not threaten to sue Jetgo. As I said in my initial post, they accused me of threatening to sue them.

My understanding is that in past court cases employers within Australia can no longer discriminate against pilots due to age who are medical fit. Internationally I have heard of people still flying after 65. Anyway the matter has no been handed over to the ADC who will decide. As I said, I will post any new developments.

[VH-XXX]

I would say that they will be in serious strife should you go public.

With Tony Abbotts pension age hitting 70 we need to work until we are older (if we need to rely on it due to our personal circumstances) so how can we get a decent job with tossers like this out there in the industry?

Hit em hard and good luck!

[Ascend Charlie]

You perhaps do not have information on their specific insurance policies, which are confidential. There may be a clause specifying that a pilot of a certain age cannot be covered by insurance, so it would be criminally liable of the company to put him in an aircraft cockpit.

Just a thought...

[ButFli]

You can't discriminate because of what insurance you've chosen to pay for. It's up to you as an employer to pay for insurance that covers your needs. You can't pick and choose employees to suit your insurance.

[bogdantheturnipboy]

Arrogant, cockheads. Who'd want to work for them anyway?

@hiwaytohell - thanks for sharing those cases.:ok:

[Square Bear]

Why Panic gets told that he is considered too old for the position, although he is four years short of the max age for international flying, let alone there being no such age barrier to flying domestically in Aus.

Qantas v. Christie is different. In that matter the pilot was too old at that time to fulfil his role as an international pilot. It was not that he would be too old in 4 years time.

The Australian Human Rights Commission website states: "Age discrimination is when a person is treated less favourably than another person in a similar situation, because of their age". Certainly seems to be the case here.

In regards to:
"The fact that a professional pilot has threatened to sue us instead of taking a graceful retirement from a flying role is noted and will be passed on at CEO level to all HR heads at major Australian operators therefore black banning you from Australian Aviation. Your Call
Have a great Day"
,

Absolutely disgraceful. A guy applies for a job, gets a knock back based on purely discriminatory grounds (geez, they didn't even have to give a reason however they did and it was an illegal one!!) and then not only does he receive a patronising suggestion that he retire gracefully, he get threatened with "blacklisting" after he mentions his legal rights.

I cannot for the life of me understand how some here are justifying the position of Jetgo.

[Wally Mk2]

"WP" I feel for you & fortunately most here are sympathetic to yr plight, shame about the few who think somewhat oddly but I guess we are all entitled to an opinion right or wrong.

I hope you can get some legal advice to yr benefit & turn the big stick around & whack them over the head!

In a strange sort of way JetGo have done you a favour by saying such school yard bully crap as it shows their mentality already to treating pilots & you don't even work for them!

I note "PB" is listed as the MD, interesting, haven't heard that name in many years.

GoGetEm:ok:

Wmk2

[VH-XXX]

Ascend Charlie. The company would not be criminally liable for anything should their insurance not allow a 60+ yr old pilot at the controls !

Criminal = persons who commit indictable offences.


I would suggest that the OP start calling news papers, TV and radio stations and expose this mob !

[Chocks Away]

Amen, Square Bear.
Really showing their colours now aren't they!?
Arrogant biz-jet jockeys full of their own self importance... how sad.

Happy Landings :ok:

[kaz3g]

Thats the mother load right there, follow that up and you won't need to work again...


Sadly, discrimination complaints seldom find even the bastard son, let alone the mother, but I strongly encourage you to pursue your rights vigorously.

The threats would possibly open a victimisation/harassment claim as well as one of age discrimination...it's certainly an aggravation.

Talk to your legal team about which legislation they will be lodging the complaints under. Ask them who they will be briefing, especially if going to the Federal Court. I have briefed Fiona McLeod SC who practises out of Melbourne. Strongly suggest you seek an opinion from her if she is available.

Kaz

[Snakecharma]

My prediction....

The response to the ADC would look something like...

"This email response was written by a staff member who was not authorised to do so and does not reflect the view of the company.

The staff member concerned has been counselled and no longer has any association with pilot recruitment

The management regrets any offence caused and apologises to mr XX. We would be happy to review mr xx's resume should he wish to apply again."

He would then be interviewed and oddly be unsuccessful.

But again that is only a prediction.

[kaz3g]

Your posts seem more like you are overreacting to an honest reply from Jetgo telling you why you were not accepted. Then you threaten to sue them! Nice!!!

Maybe you should have checked your facts before "slagging off"... Google is your friend!

It seems Google didn't do much for HWTH...Christie was a High Court case published in the Australian Law Reports (ALR) amongst others. The decision most definitely did not involve the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC).

Discrimination is proscribed by the Age Discrimination Act 2004, not the Disability Discrimination Act 1992

Do you honestly believe, HWTH, that today in Australia a 61 year old pilot who meets the health and competency standards imposed on his colleagues of whatever age should be denied work on the ground he doesn't comply with the inherent requirements of the job simply because of his age?

Give me a break!

Kaz

Edit: the employer is vicariously liable under the Act.


Edit: couple of trolls here, perhaps?

[TWOTBAGS]

So before everyone and their bar room lawyers get a bit too overheated maybe we should take a look at the requirements of Part IVA of the Civil Aviation (Carriers’ Liability) Act 1959 (Act).

It is fact that it has been tested by pilots and companies with FWA & the AFAP in relation to so called age discrimination, and to be honest it never ends up good for the pilots. The provisions of the act override the Human Rights Commission laws.

It's up to you as an employer to pay for insurance that covers your needs. You can't pick and choose employees to suit your insurance. Sorry champ but that too does not stand up in court, there is no law as to insurance coverage other than the value and the fact it needs to be carried.

It has nothing to do with the organization, and everything to do with the level of risk the underwriter and insurer are prepared to carry.

The level of risk they carry, then dictates the minimums, time on type, etc that the company has to stick by even before someone comes up with a premium. I have seen it in several companies and I agree it is the **** end of the stick where a very capable pilot gets passed over because he does not meet the requirements of an invisible line in the sand for another seat warmer of much lesser capability.

I have been and still am an AFAP member my whole career and prior to that I was even a TWU member (remember the days of no ticket, no start at the airport) each and every time the union has become involved in this kind of action it ends in tears, and the pilot walks away bitching and moaning and the AFAP spend more of our member fees on no win situations.

I dont mean to single out the AFAP, it also applies to AIPA, VIPA and the previously unmentionable PA.

[Nulli Secundus]

Why would any company choose to market itself in such a haphazard, problematic way? Who in their right, business mind would ever think it ok to sign off a corporate communications with............ " Your Call. Have a great day"? BIZZARE!

Based on the information you have provided Why Panic, good on you for firstly challenging the Jetgo response & secondly for publishing the situation here.

In fact, I believe you done the right thing. Rather than have them recieve a call from The Anti Discrimination Commissioner, you professionally informed them of the action you intended to take. They had your details & thus you afforded them the opportunity to nip this in the bud, pick up the phone and talk it over with you.

But worst for them, the word is out that their puerile, playground-like handling of your concern is quite possibly what's in store for future staff. For mine, this may well be either ops normal for Jetgo or company management/ founders aren't implementing a systemised, training process to cover 'how we market ourselves'.

I wouldn't expect this venture to be a high flyer if this sitaution was to be repeated. Tread carefully if you are planning to invest in a 145 rating.

As for the bozo who suggested you step aside and give someone else a turn, we're not down at the park palying on the swings. You have as much right to be on the team as anyone.

Good luck with the outcome & please keep us posted.

[Jenna Talia]

Instead I got an email back saying that at 61 I was too old for them, as I couldn't fly internationally at 65.

What a dumb and naive reply.

How about a reply such as, "Your application has been unsuccessful. Thank you for your interest."

Sounds as though they have young, inexperienced and immature HR staff.

[Mach E Avelli]

If that puerile response to the applicant is for real - as it seems to be - it did not come from a trained HR person. Even your average 18 year old student HR wannabe would have been trained enough to know the perils of threatening and belittling adult professionals.
That email has pilot-manager ego written all over it. And not very bright pilot-manager at that, but at least the ego part has evolved to a high level.

[j3pipercub]

Jetgo Management is very quiet? They're normally on here debunking any untruths...

I can just imagine Mr Borghetti getting the blackban call.

'Jet who? Oh Jetgo, yes of course. I've heard of you' (covers mouthpiece and mouths to secretary 'who the fark are Jetgo?'

[Chocks Away]

Mach E, yep:ok: but here is the real reason (http://moralmatters.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/OldManInterview.jpg) older people don't get hired by HR.

[lilflyboy262...2]

There was an interesting thing that happened in Canada a while back.

All of the young pilots got together and forced changes that made mandatory retirement at age 65 be put in place.
15-20yrs later down the track, these guys are up for retirement and are now fighting tooth and nail to have that age limit removed so they can stay in their positions for a few years longer.

Its always interesting when the shoe ends up on the other foot.

[smiling monkey]

Has anyone over 50 ever got an interview with any of the major airlines, eg Qantas, Virgin, Jetstar? I doubt it very much. How does this case differ then?

[Square Bear]

How does this case differ then?

Only in that I very much doubt QANTAS, Virgin, Jetstar would forward a rejection to an applicant that read....

"The fact that a professional pilot has threatened to sue us instead of taking a graceful retirement from a flying role is noted and will be passed on at CEO level to all HR heads at major Australian operators therefore black banning you from Australian Aviation. Your Call
Have a great Day"

A "professional" (using their words) Airline Company would send a less condescending and threatening NO THANKS reply. So it is not about why panic not getting hired, it is about the reply that was sent.

Anyway, good for you and those that support this kind of behaviour, just that I, and a I would suggest a good percentage of decent people don't.

[Spotlight]

Has anyone over 50 ever got an interview with any of the major airlines?

Quite obviously. Yes!

How does this case differ then?

[Ascend Charlie]

There are a lot of high horses being ridden here.....

[Mach E Avelli]

Chocks Away, love ya work!

Reminds me of when I applied to Virgin a few years after they started up. I was already well over 50. Some chick from HR was tasked with doing preliminary telephone interviews. She had a list of stock questions such as "what are your strengths and weaknesses?" When she got to "where do you see yourself in 10 years?" I replied "retired and sailing the Pacific - by the way do you get seasick and can you cook in a confined space." Dunno why I never got the job.

[Anthill]

There are quite a few over 50 CzFOs and FOs at Virgin.

The argument that the employee "was not authorised to send the email" won't hold water. The company holds responsibility to ensure that all staff comply with legislation, including the Anti-Discrimination Act. There is NO wriggle room for them on this one.

I had a brief moment where I considered applying for a job with them as a DEC. This confirms my correct choice in not doings so. They'll be out of business in 2 years anyway.

As for the silly comment regarding retiring to give some " younger guy a go", over 60's pilots have every legal and moral right to work as long as their Class 1 medical remains valid. :cool:

[Wally Mk2]

'Chocks' that was definitely funny & rather poignant here:-)
Perhaps some youth today simply don't have that trait within them as it's a dog eat dog world today where it's all about me:-)

'MEA' That too is a funny story, nice to see humor is still alive & well in this at times sh1tty business of aviation:ok: By the way did she get seasick or did you simply throw her overboard?:-)

Once upon a time over 50 meant you where as good as dead as far as aviation jobs go & marriages actually:-) :-)

Fortunately the couple of posters who really are out of touch here have not returned, the rest of us can only support you not 'label' you

I truly hope the original poster can take solace in the fact that there are some out there who really haven't got a clue about personal feelings!

CW

[Anthill]

I would also like to point out that the person who calls HR at other companies to perpetuate a Blacklisting will certainly be limiting their own future career options with those companies.

Dumb.:rolleyes:

[Arctaurus]

If an employee sent the email, then the company is indeed liable, and will be deemed to have committed an act of discrimination. They may offer the defence as described above, but technically, that should not be considered as a mitigation strategy.



Shaky ground and a brave move to send such an email. :=

[Jetgo Management]

Ladies and Gentleman,

Before we are labelled "Ogre's" and worse according to the experts on this forum. JETGO would like to say that the UNSIGNED email sent to "Why Panic" WAS sent by an unauthorized person from an open computer within the organisation. Obviously the company and its management are appalled and embarrassed at the content of the email and are not the views shared by its management. We advise we since have contacted the original applicant and asked him to send his application to management directly. JETGO are investigating as to how this email eventuated.

[GAFA]

Jetgo's reply above opens up further questions, such as how did the person who replied gain access twice to this 'open' computer ie their first reply re being to old and the subsequent reply?
How many other applications did this person access?
What other files did this person access?
How did this person gain access to this computer and the office it's located in?

[Arnold E]

This email response was written by a staff member who was not authorised to do so and does not reflect the view of the company.

The staff member concerned has been counselled and no longer has any association with pilot recruitment

The management regrets any offence caused and apologises to mr XX. We would be happy to review mr xx's resume should he wish to apply again."

He would then be interviewed and oddly be unsuccessful.
n.

Hmmm, looks like you might be right Snakecharma.:rolleyes:

[hiwaytohell]

Kaz
You are right about the trolls. But not about the law. Christie vs Qantas set the bar.

The unions continue to support members dismissed due age but to my knowledge every case in the last few years has been thrown out.

Is it fair? Probably not! But it is not Jetgo that set the age limit.

[why panic]

I've received a very apologetic email from senior management at Jetgo. They have assured me that the matter has been taken most seriously and that the content of the emails I received was never official company policy. I was offered a chance to re-apply, and assured of a "fair hearing" but I have declined.

I want to say thank-you for all the fantastic support I've received here on Pprune.

The issue of ageing and finding yourself slowly entering a world of diminishing opportunities is a very sensitive one. But I guess that's life and we all have to face it, but it can be very frustrating when you feel you are doing the job as well as ever. I hope employers can appreciate that the older ones still have a lot to contribute, experience to pass on, and we aren't just hours building and ready to run off to the majors at the first opportunity. - Enough said, am putting away the soap box.

[Mach E Avelli]

The 'unauthorised person' story is a bit hard to believe. But, if true, surely that person will get his/her sorry arse fired. Most companies have very strict protocols surrounding mis-use of communication networks, so this one would be easy to sack without any fallout from the unions or unfair dismissal tribunals.
More likely it's damage control with a certain pilot-manager sporting a freshly torn new rectum, courtesy the guy who is funding this show and who would have faced considerable inconvenience had it gone further.

[Nulli Secundus]

What's an open computer?

[Arnold E]

What's an open computer?

Good point Nulli:confused:

[Nulli Secundus]

..........JETGO are investigating as to how this email eventuated.

Forget the email!

Start with how do you recruit someone/ people capable of this level of unprofessional conduct.

As a management team, ask yourselves how did you manage to let this happen?

AND, most of all, DO NOT attempt to water down this person's complaint with the email was UNSIGNED & sent by an unauthorised person. Its a company communication, it is unprofessional and its from Jetgo! Own it!

[Pinky the pilot]

JETGO would like to say that the UNSIGNED email sent to "Why Panic" WAS sent by an unauthorized person from an open computer within the organisation. Obviously the company and its management are appalled and embarrassed at the content of the email and are not the views shared by its management.

Very good, Jetgo Management;:rolleyes: But what are you going to do with the 'unauthorised sender?' And please do not say 'counsel him/her.'

Nulli Secundus; Precisely!:ok:

[50 50]

An open computer is one where a user has forgotten to sign off properly, thus allowing unauthorised use of that persons login.

Also one that has been smashed to the floor in a tantrum. :ugh:

[kaz3g]

Christie went to the IRC in 1994. It was heard in the HCA in 1998. The Court held that the requirements of the particular position relied upon had to be inherent, ie involving permanent features of the position and not features that vary in time and place.

It found that “the age of sixty” could not be described as "permanent". The evidence showed that the retirement age for Qantas pilots had varied over time, including by the increase from fifty- five to sixty years during Captain Christie's service.

Christie lost because the High Court upheld the second leg of the Qantas argument which was the fact that 60 years of age was the age mandated in some other Convention countries.

As best as I can ascertain, Jetgo limits it's operations to Australia and there is no basis for an argument about what goes on in other Convention countries.

Post Christie, of course, the Age Discrimination Act was gazetted and age discrimination became unlawful removing the emotive arguments relating to a "disability".

If the argument is about insurers then they must be able to produce actuarial data to support the decision to refuse/load insurance at age 60.

Free hills have kindly published a digest on age discrimination at
australia (http://www.agediscrimination.info/international/Pages/australia.aspx)

Kaz

[Skystar320]

What I find alarming is that the 'sensitive' information i.e Pilot Recruitment is left open for anyone to gain access?

[Wally Mk2]

'Why panic" most of us stand before you proud of yr actions here, well done & it has shown up what JetGo are really like despite their trying to back pedal now. It (email) might very well have been unsigned & sent from an unauthorized person but it had the desired effect & hit it's target with what would have been a devastating effect at first.

As I mentioned previously they have in a strange sort of way done you a favour here & maybe even some others who might be thinking of applying but will now think twice:-)

For all it's faults PPrune is a very powerful tool as is all social media in spreading the word, right or wrong!

We salute those that have morals:ok:


Wmk2

[Seaeagle109]

Kaz3g,

For someone who appears to do their research on legal matters, you haven't been following the tread as well as you might. Try post #7 where International Ops are mentioned.

JetGo has previously operated to Europe via SE Asia and the ME for Bill Peach Tours(BPT). They were scheduled to go this year as well, but there was a problem with Ukraine, Egypt/ME and a few other things, the tours were cancelled out a month or two ago, mainly due to security concerns was the story. Pissed some family friends off no end, as they were scheduled to do some of the European tours with BPT and JetGo.

Strangely, since the other day, they're not that fussed any more about heading over that way at present. Good call by BPT and JetGo to make the call early to cancel out of the area I reckon.

I'm not sure if any of the countries that they were scheduled to fly through have the age restrictions(as the tour details have been removed from the BPT website) but it's a distinct possibility.


50 50,

I'm far from a computer expert but as JetGo has stated on another thread that they'll soon be opening a new website, which was apparently visible for a few hours, a day or so ago, according to a poster here on PpRune. Could the open computer be linked to that? I.E. A hack.


Nulli and Pinky,

To continue my question directed to 50 50, if they've been hacked, they'd hardly want to admit it, and if so, your questions, and those of other posters, about their staff and recruitment, could be seen to be a bit harsh, could they not?

[doubledub]

I have nothing but praise and admiration for your response to this situation why panic. Your courage and integrity is to be commended, and I hope you're flying again soon

[Square Bear]

Before we are labelled "Ogre's" and worse according to the experts on this forum

So now you try to deflect what came from your company and your employee by patronising those on this forum, who called your companies actions to task, by calling them "experts" in what can only be taken in a derogatory manner.

Gotta ask, do you guys have a professional PR Advisor or are you doing all this on the fly? Geez!!!

[donpizmeov]

What I find appalling is that they expect you to fund your type rating and no-one here questions it. Do they ask the bean counters to fund there own desks, pencils and "open" computers?
Oz Aviation is dead.


The Don

[Nulli Secundus]

Seaeagle 109,

No I don't think the comments are harsh.

There's been no explanation of hacking, no explanation it is to become a matter for police investigation due to a cyber-security breach. Whilst the Jetgo management may not share the views contained in the email's content, its grossly inadequate to be simply appalled and embarrassed.

How does a person become unauthorized?: their initial authority is rescinded. An outsider therefore, whom never was a member of the organisation, & thus never held any authority, can't, by definition, be regarded as an unauthorised person.

In a nutshell, its not a hacking issue!

[Anthill]

Don: the self-funded rating issue - a very good point and was a significant reason why I didn't apply for a DEC at Jetgo.



There needs to be IT policies in any workplace that require each staff member to login to use the computer. It's not hard to do and it ensures the integrity of the company IT useage.

Anyone who is sending emails of this nature to applicants ( whether they are authorised or not) is a workplace pathogen and should be sacked.

[boguing]

Jetgo would have you believe that either a non-employee or an employed loose cannon happened across an 'open' computer. And that they then thought that the very best use of unfettered access was to write a rude email.

My experience of the ungruntled is that they want to know how much the boss earns, and were they to send messages, they'd be much more likely aimed, anonymously, internally.

[Kharon]

Not being privy to all the correspondence between WP (OP) and the company makes it difficult to arrive at a balanced conclusion, however. WP has provided an expression of interest – in confidence. IF we are to believe that 'someone' unauthorised breached that confidentiality and felt free to provide 'that' response, then this, standing alone, casts the company system and management in a very poor light.

Whatever form it took, (the signed or unsigned excuse is legal weasel speak and gutless) it stands as the company response and begs not only many questions but brings other unsavoury aspects to the table. I have lately been looking at opportunities and conditions offered by some of the offshore carriers; many are quite 'up front' about their age limitations and corporate preference. They may for example specify an aircraft type rating ;or, minimum time on type; or, pink socks must be worn. etc. That, discrimination issues aside is fine with me; maximum age at time of employment 55 – cool, not worth applying so save the stamp if you're 54.9. If there is a preferred age or any other 'company' policy openly stated, then it's furry muff. This crowd didn't do that and WP, believing (rightly IMO) that 10,000 hours of experience would be of value, duly applied.

There's a bit of 'tit for tat' in the next part – 'if' WP had known there was an age limitation; would the application have been made ? You see my point is that either by error or deliberate omission the company has opened a can of worms. If there is a clandestine policy of age barrier; then they should be smart enough to have had that covered. If they just hadn't thought it through, it risks the notion of immaturity and basic incompetence of management being mooted.

This is further compounded by the company response to the WP retort; "You're too old" says the doyen of Jetgoo – "No I'm not and that's discriminatory" says WP. Game on. Any Australian knows how quickly a campfire can become a bushfire. Once again, immature management fans the flames, not sensing the potential for trouble, wades in adding insult to injury, instead of taking the potential mess to a grown up.

No matter by whom, how or why: the email response was sent and the holes in the cheese lined up then. The 'type' of company that employs someone immature, ignorant and arrogant enough to stuff up a simple matter of pilot selection cannot be considered a serious player. The underlying elements and attitudes which allowed this type of error can and probably will promote other, perhaps more serious commercial errors to occur. It's not only money and bad business which drive fledgling companies into the dirt. Bad ethics, bad management, bad manners, bad people and blind arrogance are always willing assistants.

There is a reason proper airline management never openly respond on a forum like Pprune, particularly with regard to an issue like this one. It should never, not ever have been allowed to get to this stage. Bad form Jet Go, supported by a disappointing, patronising response.

AH "Anyone who is sending emails of this nature to applicants ( whether they are authorised or not) is a workplace pathogen and should be sacked."

Anthill, I would suggest that whoever hired and managed the fool that fumbled the ball be fired, it all smacks of insular, immature, arrogant behaviour from the top down.

Nothing can repair the breach of confidentiality, the risk of exposure to legal action, risk of public sanction or the insult to WP, who simply applied for job and had the temerity to ask "why not". Perhaps they don't want real, experienced command pilots, just cardboard cut-outs with nodding heads, deep pockets and no idea of how the real world wags.

The young blokes and blokettes who are serious about a flying career should be looking overseas not pissing about in Oz. There are some great opportunities to see the real world, live somewhere else for a while, fly some real aircraft, meet new folk and have enough adventures and laughs to last you until marriage, old age, booze and bad living carry you off to a happier place. There really is a world beyond flight school and Mum's apple pie.

Times up caller – to extend insert another two bob. Click.. Buuurrrrr.

[Sunfish]

There used to be a blacklist, in fact several I guess. Your name could get added to it over a liquid lunch at Mack's in the TAA / Ansett days...

[kaz3g]

I referenced the Jetgo website which I took to be more authoritative than a post to a discussion list.

I have an interest in matters legal. I'm now 70 years and still working so feel for someone who is allegedly the victim of age discrimination yet perfectly capable of continuing to be a productive and loyal employee.

Think about it....many of you who are younger will be expected to work to 70 before collecting your pensions in this brave new world. And a number of you, sadly, will find a lot of employers overtly discriminate against older applicants.

Kaz

[Hempy]

The 'type' of company that employs someone immature, ignorant and arrogant enough to stuff up a simple matter of pilot selection cannot be considered a serious player.

For mine, this sums up the entire sordid little affair. Seriously, you wouldn't get a response like that from a 22 year old McDonalds manager...it looks like the type of threat some 15 year old nerd would type on the internet.

And these people fly aeroplanes?

fwiw I think the 'unauthorised' story is a load of damage control horse****e, but if it's not they'd better hope said individual didn't have access to correspondence with CASA as well. The fact is that they (and the person who concluded that they were worth hiring, and the person who concluded that THAT person was worth hiring) work at Jetgo...

I didn't know anything about Jetgo. I do now :rolleyes:

[Horatio Leafblower]

There is a reason proper airline management never openly respond on a forum like PPRuNe, particularly with regard to an issue like this one. It should never, not ever have been allowed to get to this stage. Bad form Jet Go, supported by a disappointing, patronising response.

You guys need to get off your high horses. :=

I commend JetGo for getting on here and sticking their head above the parapet. They have stepped up and owned it - so what if they didn't air all the dirty laundry with you lot? You aren't a party to the correspondence.

PPRuNe is a viper pit full of malcontents and PPL know-it-alls.

You sit there and bag out the guys that are doing the right thing and do it well, while defending to the death those who cut every corner and take every liberty.

Some of you keyboard heroes have forgotten what it is like to work in a small, growing company and very few of those whinging here have ever put their coconuts on the block and built something like JetGo have.

I am sure JR and co would like this to never have happened but not everyone can have the structure, the personnel and the overheads of QANTAS group.

...and thank :mad: for that!

I feel terrible for the OP who has received an unprovoked and savage slap in the face and for the company who no doubt work very hard to avoid exactly this sort of waste of reputation, time & emotion. I am sure we ALL do.

Stop wringing your hands and pontificating and get on with your lives :ugh:

[Jetgo Management]

Thank you Horatio..

[morno]

I very much doubt Horatio has an interview with Jetgo FPV Dude.

morno

[VH-XXX]

Jetgo Management says:

Ladies and Gentleman,

Before we are labelled "Ogre's" and worse according to the experts on this forum. JETGO would like to say that the UNSIGNED email sent to "Why Panic" WAS sent by an unauthorized person from an open computer within the organisation. Obviously the company and its management are appalled and embarrassed at the content of the email and are not the views shared by its management. We advise we since have contacted the original applicant and asked him to send his application to management directly. JETGO are investigating as to how this email eventuated.

It's probably been said earlier in the thread but seriously JetGo Management, do you actually expect ANYONE to believe that steaming pile of crap?

So let me get this straight, some "employee" happened to be walking past the PC that belongs to the HR/recruiting department and decided to look through all of their emails and then comes across this one and thinks "I might just quickly fire off an email to this old dude and tell him he's too old to fly for us" Does that not sound slightly over-the-top ? What a crock. I honestly hope Today Tonight or A Current Affair come knocking !

[Copythisnumberdown]

and with 4937 posts under your belt XXX, you need to get a life..Seriously 4937 posts... thats probably right up there with Rolf Harris's collection

[Mach E Avelli]

Leafie, maybe some of us should get off high horses, but you maybe need to remove those rose tinted glasses. Whoever said "you cain't polish a turd" could have been applying it to this mob.

[Pinky the pilot]

Well, it seems that there really is a first time for everything!

Horatio Leafblower; As far as I can remember, I have never previously disagreed with any of your posts, opinions etc.

Until now. :hmm:

[Nulli Secundus]

Horatio,

Not afraid of free speech?
No one is on a high horse, simply telling it as they see it.

As for getting on with lives, for most people here its a fair bet that aviation is a very significant part of their lives. I would argue they seem pretty much fed up with the gong show of mismanagement conducted by many Australian aviation executives.

Why anyone would discourage criticism of unsatisfactory executive performance is beyond me.

Why not speak out and send a message back up the line that if airline managers want people to join their team they had better run a good ship. Staff too take on personal risk and deserve far better than what's occurred here.

For mine, this dialogue is healthy. And for the record, to date, Jetgo have not owned it, they're simply embarrased and appalled. Bit like our modern day politcians who have conveniently learnt to distance themselves from their departments when someone commits a grave mistake.

And now the latest from Jetgo management is to thank a person attempting to shut down the conversation. I simply don't get it!

[VH-XXX]

Copythisnumberdown, with all of your 20 posts, you are by all definitions a tool. Go *uck yourself. As for your references to Rolf Harris, poor form and utterly disrespectful.

I find it interesting that 98% of your 20 posts are about JetGo... Hmmm, that is interesting.... Just joining the dots here.

[Horatio Leafblower]

Pinky - that's cool. :ok:

I just think some people are being a bit hysterical about this :=

Shut it down? No not really. Stop acting like 6 year old girls? Definitely.

[Mach E Avelli]

What I find interesting about this thread is that it has not gone off topic like so many seem to. It could have degenerated into the tired old argument about whether silly old buggers should get out of the industry so that gen x and gen y could race to the top - but it did not. If it had, it would certainly have deserved to be shut down - if only because that argument has been done to death elsewhere in these forums.
Instead, most were in agreement that Jetgo had acted inappropriately and have compounded their indiscretions with a very poor attempt at damage control.
What is so hysterical or childish about commentary surrounding this?

[Nulli Secundus]

Mach E,

Very good point.

I think we all just want the most professional standards possible, whether at the coal face or behind the scenes.

[josephfeatherweight]

I have worked with kids and have kids and feel I'm pretty good at spotting porky pies a mile off. Jetgo's damage control "story" is bigger bollocks than dangled from my great grandfather's prize-winning bull.
(They were pretty big...)

[Stink Finger]

JETGO would like to say that the UNSIGNED email sent to "Why Panic" WAS sent by an unauthorized person from an open computer within the organisation.

Is this the same unauthorised person sitting infront of an open computer within your organisation who is accidently also sitting infront of a whole pile of Resumes that were sent to your company, most of whom would/could be "in-confidence" ?.

Good on you for responding, I feel your response does not pass what I consider a reasonable logic test.

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck....................

What would pass is: Employee "A" acted like an immature jack ass and was sacked due to the potential damage he/she has done to the image of our company and the associated potential liability.

[wotajoke]

Neiili seconded you're a **** stirer of the highest order. Mr Leafeblower thanks for weaving some sense into it. The whole discussion is a massive wank. What a waste of time and effort. Really...get a life.

[Hempy]

wotajoke, you aren't the 'unauthorised person', are you? :rolleyes:

[Kharon]

There is an old, old, dusty story – from back in the day; an Australian crew was in the Heathrow 'facilities' taking their ease before getting on the bus. The BA crew followed them in and, the place being crowded, waited their turn. As the Oz crew left, in a teddibly pucker voice, the BA skipper exclaimed - "Oh, don't they teach you to wash your hands?' – "Nah" says the Oz FE: "we, were taught not to piss on 'em".

[50 50]

Stinkfinger puts forward a reasonable scenario. Some HR clown f$cked up and needs their botty spanked. End of story, and probably end of thread.

Unfortunately while the ones that deliver the actual service, ie. the crew, are accountable for every action, thought, breath, and potential implication, back office HR types seem to get away with murder. But of course, they are the ones that discipline others, why would they discipline themselves?

wotajoke, what, if anything, is bleaving? Also, there are myriad other websites that would cater to your taste for a massive wank, or the stirring of sh!t.

[Aussie Bob]

Some old geeza applies for a job, there are 100+ applicants for a handful of positions. He doesn't get the job. He asks why and is told he is too old. He threatens "discrimination legislation" and receives a politically incorrect letter.

5 pages of drivel follow.

[why panic]

Dear Aussie Bob,

Firstly, I don't appreciate being called "Some old geeza", pretty rude I thought. 61 hardly puts you in a retirement home. Maybe you'd like to meet up some time and see how old and feeble I am, please PM me if you're interested.

I didn't ask the reason why I didn't get the job, that was provided completely free of charge. Please read the threads a little more carefully before posting your valuable opinion.

Do you really think being threatened with Blacklisting (what this thread is about) is just politically incorrect ?

As for 5 pages of drivel, what is any on line forum for, but to share views on a particular topic. This thread has explored and highlighted some very important issues and alerted an employer to serious problems within his HR department.

If you are so bored with this thread as to call it 5 pages of drivel, please find another one where you can share your wisdom.

[Wally Mk2]

"WP" you can rest assure that most on here support yr thoughts on this matter & fortunately there are not too many narrow minded 'Aussie Bob's around.
The very fact that there is 5 pages is a sign that this behavior is not acceptable, well to most anyway.

Stick to yr guns 'WP' as you only need to be true to one person, YOU:ok:


Wmk2

[flydive1]

Maybe you'd like to meet up some time and see how old and feeble I am, please PM me if you're interested.

Sounds a bit like a threat, are you going to beat him up, old and violent too?;) :)


I didn't ask the reason why I didn't get the job, that was provided completely free of charge. Please read the threads a little more carefully before posting your valuable opinion.

Do you really think being threatened with Blacklisting (what this thread is about) is just politically incorrect ?

Yes, but we only got your side of the story.

We saw the bad reply from the company, but we did not see a copy of the mail you sent them, that might have prompted they reply.

I'm sure that your mails were all nice, but maybe someone might have some doubts.;)

[Cactusjack]

I give JetGo full marks. A mistake was made and they publicly apologised to 'old mate'. They didn't have to apologise. They could have tried to bury it further. And i have no doubt they could have also released some of 'old mates' email correspondence that he has perhaps not shared with us? Who knows. At the end of the day they have apologised, tried to right a wrong, not many people will do that these days.

[Anthill]

Fly dive, by meeting up with Why Panic you may, perhaps, see that he is fit and spritely. There is no suggestion that he he violent, only your interpretation - classic creation of a Straw Man argument on your part.

As for Jetgo :

- inappropriate to send email with age listed as rejection criteria.

- inappropriate to make a threat of blacklisting.

-inappropriate to make a public apology on a public Internet forum which actually revealed a reluctance to fully own the problem. Instead, we were treated to a "it's not my fault, man" defence in which it was inferred that any criticism of Jetgo was unreasonable.

Cactus, for Jetgo to release some of "old mates" emails would also be inappropriate. That would not be the action of a worthy organisation. A sincere apology is a start, but words are cheap and fail to address a tangible wrong.

It's very difficult to see how Jetgo can reasonably make this up to Why Panic, who has been treated very badly.

Some suggestions as to how Jetgo could make amends are :

1) commit to tighten their IT use to include a mandatory employee sign-in on company computers.

2) removal of the author of the emails that were sent to Why Panic.

3) training to reinforce anti-discrimination legislation and its implications to their staff. Ensure that the cultural shift is real and enduring.

That would be a start. Other than a real offer of employment to Why Panic where Jetgo pay for his type-rating, I can't see how Jetgo could ever make reasonable amends for what has transpired.

[Gas Bags]

One would think the OP has had his first born kidnapped and held to ransom reading some of these replies. Get over it. He has declined an offer to revisit his application and the company has apologized. Move on! Oh the golden age of entitlement.....

[DeltaT]

As you get older and gain wisdom from life, you gain more respect for yourself and tolerate a little less idiots that you come across, and your spine becomes a bit more hardened for you to stand up for yourself against such types. 'Why Panic' is a good demonstration of this.

I do wonder, and so should others, if the HR person concerned is responsible for pilot applications being filed in the circular bin that might have otherwise been inline for a job? Certainly my own experience of calling up when I was in Brisbane asking to come and say hello in person and being told "don't call us we'll call you" makes me think so.

[Pinky the pilot]

As you get older and gain wisdom from life, you gain more respect for yourself and tolerate a little less idiots that you come across, and your spine becomes a bit more hardened for you to stand up for yourself against such types. 'Why Panic' is a good demonstration of this.


As someone who has, in the words of someone else I might add, and he borrowed them from elsewhere, suffered more than the usual share of the 'slings and arrows of outrageous fortune' ('That's Life, deal with it!' has been my attitude, generally) and is about to reach the big 60,* I second the above remarks.:ok:


* Yeah I know, Griffo and others; I'm still a young bugger!!!:eek:

[gerry111]

Goodness Pinky!

I first met you in 1969 when you were a teenager. But fortunately, I remain younger than you... :p

[Stanwell]

Gas Bags,
I think you missed the point.
Suggest you go through the thread again.


I like to think I'm anything but precious - however, there's a valid point being made here.

[Aussie Bob]

Firstly, I don't appreciate being called "Some old geeza", pretty rude I thought. 61 hardly puts you in a retirement home. Maybe you'd like to meet up some time and see how old and feeble I am, please PM me if you're interested.


If we ever meet, you can return the favour, I am about your age, not quite the hours though.

In this politically correct time, it is incredibly rare to get a reason for not getting a job and I suspect that Jetgo will never again tell someone they are too old even if it is the truth (in their minds). In the distant past I was told I was too heavy for a seaplane job flying a Maule, it can hurt.

On another thread somone was lambasting a skydive company for having the temerity to advertise for a pilot under 80kg. In my mind it was the mark of a good skydive operator. Calling a spade a spade is not wrong.

The sad part is that with your experience, finding a job is difficult. Makes me thing the industry is doomed. I wish you well in your endeavors.

[ANCPER]

Aussie Bob,

Somehow I don't think you understand the situation here. You're confusing operators imposing a weight limit for what sounds like very limited payload reasons with blatant discrimination based on age and say that's calling a spade a spade!!

[Hempy]

Put it this way, are you happier walking past the door and seeing a grey headed dude with 4 bars on his shoulders exuding 20000 hours sitting in the left seat doing a pre-flight, or some 27 year old with more product in his hair than the CC combined, wearing mirror raybans and chatting up the CM?

When I'm in the cabin give me hours over youth any time. I'd be happier to fly with Bob Hoover than most pilots I know, put it that way.

[Pinky the pilot]

Can't argue with that Hempy.:ok:

[004wercras]

When I'm in the cabin give me hours over youth any time. I'd be happier to fly with Bob Hoover than most pilots I know, put it that way.
Good ol Bob, some fond memories there, what a legend! And I agree, I would fly with Bob any day over some kid with a handful of hours and a 'sucked mango' hairstyle :ok:

[Square Bear]

And I agree, I would fly with Bob any day over some kid with a handful of hours and a 'sucked mango' hairstyle

.....just ROFLMAO....hahaha. :ok:

[Aussie Bob]

Somehow I don't think you understand the situation here.

I understand the situation perfectly. Here is a company who wants younger startups. The regulator is also discriminatory, they demand flight checks every 6 months for pilots over 60. Getting old sucks.

[Pinky the pilot]

Getting old sucks.

Agreed Aussie Bob, but it beats the alternative!

[sms777]

I also agree with Aussie Bob and Pinky and Hempy......but I do love my RayBans.....they make me feel young and topgum...topdumb...topbum...damn Alzheimers. :{

[Black belt]

Well, l do understand your plight and go for it 100%, as it's totally disgusting. If these Airlines were in the USA, they would be taken to the cleaners. Though all Airlines in Australia display age discrimination, especially if your a mature pilot with Airline experience outside of the small mindedness of Australian aviation. If your over 25 years old, your considered over the hill. 15 years ago if you had Papuan experience with 4,000 hours twin time, you were considered an experienced pilot to have survived the hard times and filthy living conditions. But now times have changed by the Powers to be and the big two airlines of Oz consider newby pilots with a can of hair gel in their hair with a bare CPL, 200 hours in a 40 yr old C172 can of bolts, more experienced. WORK THAT OUT.!!!!!
Or if the young 200 hr C172 top gun personally knows the CP, or is the son of a Captain, he gets a gold pass to the Brainless pit. It truly is a laughable joke, the state of affairs in Australian aviation. It's a kindergarten of immature school kids in the Brainless pit.

[Arnold E]

Well, l do understand your plight and go for it 100%, as it's totally disgusting. If these Airlines were in the USA, they would be taken to the cleaners. Though all Airlines in Australia display age discrimination, especially if your a mature pilot with Airline experience outside of the small mindedness of Australian aviation. If your over 25 years old, your considered over the hill. 15 years ago if you had Papuan experience with 4,000 hours twin time, you were considered an experienced pilot to have survived the hard times and filthy living conditions. But now times have changed by the Powers to be and the big two airlines of Oz consider newby pilots with a can of hair gel in their hair with a bare CPL, 200 hours in a 40 yr old C172 can of bolts, more experienced. WORK THAT OUT.!!!!!
Or if the young 200 hr C172 top gun personally knows the CP, or is the son of a Captain, he gets a gold pass to the Brainless pit. It truly is a laughable joke, the state of affairs in Australian aviation. It's a kindergarten of immature school kids in the Brainless pit.

Come on, don't hold back, tell us what you realy think.:E

[hiwaytohell]

If these Airlines were in the USA, they would be taken to the cleaners.

Ahhh I seriously doubt it! Tell me one American Part 121 carrier that would hire a 61 year old pilot?

After ICAO brought in the age 60 limitation in 2006 even the FAA followed suit until Congress passed a bill allowing American pilots to fly in international airspace until they are 65 provided they have a pilot aged under 60 in the operating crew endorsed for all phases of flight. However there is nothing in that bill that "requires" airlines to hire pilots over age 60.

The wording of the bill allows for continued employment of a pilot who reaches age 60 on or after 13 Dec 2007 but actually does not allow for the hiring of a new hire pilot who has attained the age of 60 on or after 13 Dec 2007

[Black belt]

Hiwaytohell, you have no idea of flying in the USA. That's obvious.!!!! :D

[KittyBlue]

On a corporate perspective costs of flying at 60+, the company has more down time with a 60+ pilot than someone below that due to checks both flying and medical. Other stipulations include having someone under 60 fly with you blah blah blah...

These are rules that have been set to this present day, want to make a change then fight for rule changes.

[Mach E Avelli]

Considering that most operators require pilots to renew medicals in their own time, and conduct at least two checks per year on all pilots, the extra time and cost to the company for us silly old buggers to maintain a licence is three eighths of five eighths.

The only real issue is that certain international flights can't be done by over 65s. Therefore it is quite reasonable for an operator with predominately international operations to reject applicants nearing that age cutoff. They can even say so without fearing any age discrimination proceedings.

What really bothers some managements is that most of us are a bit too independent and street-wise to tolerate bull****.

[Chocks Away]

What really bothers some managements is that most of us are a bit too independent and street-wise to tolerate bull****.
BINGO! :}

Oh yes, how true! (http://i.imgur.com/GaREJEG.jpg)

[Kharon]

What really bothers some managements is that most of us are a bit too independent and street-wise to tolerate bull****.

Give the man a key to the Tim tam cupboard.

http://thumb7.shutterstock.com/photos/thumb_large/498865/119471821.jpg

[DeltaT]

What really bothers some managements is that most of us are a bit too independent and street-wise to tolerate bull****.

:D:D:D
Fantastic!!
Yes that sums airlines up for sure when it comes to assessing people.
Are you really a sheep to Company BS.

[pineappledaz]

Mach..well said..a truly unique industry

Delta..you may want to add most of the flight schools , sorry aviation academies, to that airline list

[Pilot58]

They are running on the smell of a oily rag. Watch this space I am told

[Ned Stark]

Looks like the 'Jetgo blacklist' is coming back to haunt them.

"The AFAP is currently pursuing a general protections case against Jetgo in the Federal Circuit Court. The case involves whether the company breached the Fair Work Act when it decided to terminate the services of an older pilot because of higher insurance costs related to his age."

[kaz3g]

Looks like the 'Jetgo blacklist' is coming back to haunt them.

"The AFAP is currently pursuing a general protections case against Jetgo in the Federal Circuit Court. The case involves whether the company breached the Fair Work Act when it decided to terminate the services of an older pilot because of higher insurance costs related to his age."

do you have a link or a citation reference so I can follow it, please?

Kaz

[Seaeagle109]

Ned,

I think you might have the wrong end of the stick about this, the thread started about initial employment, age at employment and time of useful service to a company.

The issue you're referencing here is different from what I've heard. The current AFAP action is about termination due to age and insurance, or as I hear it, an inability to get anybody to insure a 75 year old pilot.

As you'd be aware it's a legal requirement for all AOC holders to have "Carriers Liability Insurance"http://www.casa.gov.au/operations/standard-page/carriers-liability-insurance.

From what I hear, nobody wants to, or will, insure a pilot of that age for an AOC operation. I also hear this is becoming a problem for other carriers as well due to pilots continuing to fly well past what's generally considered retirement age around the World.

Apparently, and I'm definitely not an expert on this, all the insurers here in Oz reinsure with overseas companies and it's there where the problem lies for insuring a pilot of that age on an AOC operation.

I'm guessing the actuaries from the insurance companies don't give a rat's ar*e about whether it's an Australian's right to work in whatever job they want until they drop off the perch but are more concerned about the probability of a big payout if an older pilot is involved in an operation that has an incident or accident.

So, the problem, disregard the CASA requirements regarding insurance(Commonwealth Civil Aviation (Carriers' Liability) Act 1959) and fly uninsured or terminate a pilot for whom you can't get insurance.

Both options, IMHO, are not something you'd want to do, unless you either want to be prosecuted, and probably lose your AOC, and therefore your method of keeping the wolf from the door and keeping your other people employed, and or, be bankrupted, if bad sh*t were to happen with a 75 year old involved, and you're not insured or you have to tell someone that their time is up and get taken to court by the aggrieved pilot.

Not a choice I'd want to make nor something that many of us would want to risk.

As an older pilot, though not quite at retirement age yet, this is probably something that will affect more of us, unless there's either a change in either the Commonwealth Civil Aviation(Carrier's Liabilty) Act insurance requirement, not likely IMHO, or the insurers change their way of doing business, even less likely than a change in the CCA(CL)A.

I guess some will say, "Bad luck, you've got to keep him/her on the payroll at whatever cost" and others will take the attitude of "Retire and let other people have a go at a career in flying". Neither really are real World solutions to the problem.


Seaeagle109

[50 50]

Continuing the great Australian stagnation, old men that refuse to let go and refuse to change. It's a problem in every industry I've ever worked in. The old ways were always the best and "no young $&@&)/ is going to tell me otherwise."

Unless there is a great cultural revelation it's unfortunate the country will have to wait for these type of people to die before any progress is made. Cue the old men giving me what for........

[By George]

Ah.....The spikey hair gel with tattoos generation has spoken. Took me 20 years from first job to a Command. Us old men have earned our spot in the sun, you could do the same. You lot can't spell either!

[red_dirt]

Ah.....The spikey hair gel with tattoos generation has spoken. Took me 20 years from first job to a Command. Us old men have earned our spot in the sun, you could do the same. You lot can't spell either!

Lol hear we go the old timers are saying the young whippets need to earn their spot so have some respect..... Welcome to 2015 times and life generally are changing.

[Checklist Charlie]

50 50 and Red dirt

When you can demonstrate your preparedness and suitability to take over from me, then and only then will I consider passing the mantle over to you.

In the mean time you would be well advised to learn more about command responsibility and that is much more than simply sitting in the LHS.

CC

[50 50]

The 25-30 year old nowadays will have on average 17 jobs and 5 different careers. The days of waiting patiently for the mantle to be passed no longer exist. So are the days of the captain having any authority outside his cockpit. You will not decide who takes over or when, your HR department and management team will. In fact the opportunities for advancement are far greater outside the cockpit.
Unless you plan on living forever you will give up the mantle eventually whether you like it or not. As people like me move on to more lucrative opportunities the ones that follow will only get younger and you will only get older and less willing to give in. But it is inevitable.

20 years from first job to command? You must be kidding, in that time my daughter will be finished with her first job and looking for an upgrade!

[IFEZ]

17 jobs and 5 different careers..?? So in a 40 year working life, they will spend on average, 8 years/career or 2 - 3 years/job. Based on that, they won't be any good at anything..! Far from job hopping to 'more lucrative opportunities', I fear the reality may be more like long stretches of unemployment between all these 'dream jobs' they'll be doing..! I know things are different now, and times they are a changing, but sometimes I think the gap between fantasy & reality is getting wider by the generation.

[50 50]

IFEZ that is not pie in the sky thinking, that is the reality of the workforce right now, and has been for some time. Now to qualifiy as a senior whatever...project manager, investigator, HR business partner, the requirement is appropriate qualifications and five years experience. Five. The average time spent in one job is 3 years. The longest I have ever been unemployed is 6 weeks.

Compare that to the difficulty of getting then retaining an entry level aviation job. If you have spent more than 5 years in a single job it is looked as a a lack of motivation to advance, not loyalty. Sorry for the thread drift but the realities of attitudes outside aviation are very different from those inside.