Hungry Beast
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: down south
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand that FWA will be handing down the decision shortly.
My insider tells me it will be that the wearing of hats is required, but Jetconnect's hat badges must be 40% smaller.
My insider tells me it will be that the wearing of hats is required, but Jetconnect's hat badges must be 40% smaller.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: oz
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flare Armed,
Listen
It is ILLEGAL for AIPA to offer coverage to Jetconnect pilots. AIPA only has the right to cover pilots based in AUSTRALIA and operating international and domestic Australian routes.
Paradoxically Voz and Cathay (oz based) could be covered and Jetconnect not.
If the Jetconnect pilots had ever asked (I'm not suggesting they didn't), that's the reply they would have received.
Listen
It is ILLEGAL for AIPA to offer coverage to Jetconnect pilots. AIPA only has the right to cover pilots based in AUSTRALIA and operating international and domestic Australian routes.
Paradoxically Voz and Cathay (oz based) could be covered and Jetconnect not.
If the Jetconnect pilots had ever asked (I'm not suggesting they didn't), that's the reply they would have received.
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given the shellacking the JC crew are receiving here (mostly anti Kiwi) it would be interesting to know what the pilot demographic is and how it's changed since JC started ...... from someone in the know?
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: NZ
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't give you numbers, but there are quite a few ex-Ansett NZ guys there who, incidently, have been wearing a Qantas uniform since Tasman Pacific began operating as Qantas NZ back in the BAe146 days (domestic only of course) There are others from Ansett NZ Regional, as well as some Australians (some fair, some foul), many of whom are probably ex Ansett guys who also found themselves without a job.
From the point of an interested observer, I'd say many posters here are playing the man rather than the ball. Jetconnect pilots were offered jobs and accepted them in good faith. The fact that Qantas management seem to be using them as a leverage tool against QF pilots isn't their fault....if the QF pilot's representatives had built themselves a contract with a proper "scope" clause (similar to the Air NZ contract, which prevented Freedom being expanded) in the first place, they wouldn't be having this problem. First Jetconnect, then Jetstar, both management tools to reduce costs, both sneered at by Qantas pilots, but who are the ones feeling the pain now?
Too little and way too late. Qantas pilots need to look at themselves and ask why it took 10 years for the outsourcing of jobs to be recognised as a problem (or if recognised, why nothing was done)
Certainly there were a lot of observers all over the world wondering why QF pilots sat back and did nothing whilst Jetstar was set up and expanded. Jetconnect is small-fry in comparison.
From the point of an interested observer, I'd say many posters here are playing the man rather than the ball. Jetconnect pilots were offered jobs and accepted them in good faith. The fact that Qantas management seem to be using them as a leverage tool against QF pilots isn't their fault....if the QF pilot's representatives had built themselves a contract with a proper "scope" clause (similar to the Air NZ contract, which prevented Freedom being expanded) in the first place, they wouldn't be having this problem. First Jetconnect, then Jetstar, both management tools to reduce costs, both sneered at by Qantas pilots, but who are the ones feeling the pain now?
Too little and way too late. Qantas pilots need to look at themselves and ask why it took 10 years for the outsourcing of jobs to be recognised as a problem (or if recognised, why nothing was done)
Certainly there were a lot of observers all over the world wondering why QF pilots sat back and did nothing whilst Jetstar was set up and expanded. Jetconnect is small-fry in comparison.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NZ
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's probably fair to say the vast majority of drivers that have joined Jetconnect in the last 3 years (replacing those that went to PB or returned home to Aus) have come straight out of the Air NZ Link operators. Mostly F/O's from Air Nelson (the odd CPT has joined) or CPT's from Eagle Air.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: at home
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Little bit of history looking further back into the birth of JetConnect. Ansett NZ (after a disastrous industrial battle) was sold to a group of NZ private investors and was rebranded as Qantas NZ; a franchise of the Qantas brand. Due to poor management and ongoing poor morale Qantas NZ went into receivership early 2001 with the loss of hundreds of jobs (about 130 NZ pilots).
To fill the void in the market, Qantas mainline operated domestic services to avoid an embarrassing disappearance of the brand in NZ.
When Qantas decided to set up an operation in NZ they originally did this through AWOPS the Ansett Aus leasing company, this became Jetconnect with the issue of the NZ AOC.
Jetconnect operated ex-Ansett Aus B737's and then started getting Qantas mainline B737's, all of which were re-registered ZK.
An interesting fact at this time; AWOPS/AWAS and then JetConnect were originally not able to employ NZ pilots even though; the aircraft were ZK registered and operated on a NZ AOC, the routes were totally NZ domestic, 130 pilots had recently been laid off from Qantas NZ. Late 2002, NZ pilots were able to join JetConnect.
And yes it is true that AIPA would not allow JetConnect pilots to join their union at the time for reasons unknown.
Therefore, I believe that NZ pilots have a historical right to fly JetConnect aircraft, the best way to have a positive outcome for all parties is for trans-tasman union co-operation.
To fill the void in the market, Qantas mainline operated domestic services to avoid an embarrassing disappearance of the brand in NZ.
When Qantas decided to set up an operation in NZ they originally did this through AWOPS the Ansett Aus leasing company, this became Jetconnect with the issue of the NZ AOC.
Jetconnect operated ex-Ansett Aus B737's and then started getting Qantas mainline B737's, all of which were re-registered ZK.
An interesting fact at this time; AWOPS/AWAS and then JetConnect were originally not able to employ NZ pilots even though; the aircraft were ZK registered and operated on a NZ AOC, the routes were totally NZ domestic, 130 pilots had recently been laid off from Qantas NZ. Late 2002, NZ pilots were able to join JetConnect.
And yes it is true that AIPA would not allow JetConnect pilots to join their union at the time for reasons unknown.
Therefore, I believe that NZ pilots have a historical right to fly JetConnect aircraft, the best way to have a positive outcome for all parties is for trans-tasman union co-operation.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
5 Posts
If QF wants to start up outfits like JC or Jetstar, AIPA cannot stop them.
What AIPA can do however is ask that, if they are going to be operated as Qantas flights, that they be remunerated in the same way as Qantas pilots. This has the effect of removing some of the incentive to start up these flag of convenience operations.
QF has been trying to sideline AIPA for about 10 years now. The reason why there is no separate company called Jetstar International is purely because, as a company operating international flights in and out of Australia, and based in Australia, AIPA would have had the legal right to coverage.
As others have stated, JC pilots are based in NZ, so AIPA cannot legally cover them.
QF started JQ with promises to QF pilots that it would never grow beyond certain limits, never compete directly with QF services etc etc, and then waited till relevant QF EBA's were signed off before reneging on those promises. Outside of a bargaining period, AIPA was powerless to do anything about it.
The QF Chief pilot has written to his pilots stating that AIPA's claim threatens the jobs of the Jetconnect pilots and may mean that QF does not operate on the Tasman.
I find that claim somewhat ludicrous. Maybe it can be put in the same basket as the claims they made about the scope of Jetstar. Who knows. The main problem that QF pilots have with their management is that they don't believe a word they utter.
What AIPA can do however is ask that, if they are going to be operated as Qantas flights, that they be remunerated in the same way as Qantas pilots. This has the effect of removing some of the incentive to start up these flag of convenience operations.
QF has been trying to sideline AIPA for about 10 years now. The reason why there is no separate company called Jetstar International is purely because, as a company operating international flights in and out of Australia, and based in Australia, AIPA would have had the legal right to coverage.
As others have stated, JC pilots are based in NZ, so AIPA cannot legally cover them.
QF started JQ with promises to QF pilots that it would never grow beyond certain limits, never compete directly with QF services etc etc, and then waited till relevant QF EBA's were signed off before reneging on those promises. Outside of a bargaining period, AIPA was powerless to do anything about it.
The QF Chief pilot has written to his pilots stating that AIPA's claim threatens the jobs of the Jetconnect pilots and may mean that QF does not operate on the Tasman.
I find that claim somewhat ludicrous. Maybe it can be put in the same basket as the claims they made about the scope of Jetstar. Who knows. The main problem that QF pilots have with their management is that they don't believe a word they utter.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sunny side up
Posts: 1,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QF started JQ with promises to QF pilots that it would never grow beyond certain limits, never compete directly with QF services etc etc, and then waited till relevant QF EBA's were signed off before reneging on those promises.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
5 Posts
They were delivered by various means, pilot meetings and such. But never in legally enforceable form.
It was the start of the total destruction of trust in management that characterises the relationship today.
It was the start of the total destruction of trust in management that characterises the relationship today.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Airborne
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hence the current PIA to make it enforceable. Some might say too little too late, but it isn't too late and they won't accept anything less than enforceable agreements so it isn't too little. Finally.
And on the other subject the FWA JC case may take another 6 months to deliver a decision - which could be that JC crew get a 40% pay rise. I woud be lying low too if I was a JC pilot. And yes, under current regimes AIPA and NZALPA do finally have a good cooperative working relationship. What's more, I believe they even have it in a written and signed document.
And on the other subject the FWA JC case may take another 6 months to deliver a decision - which could be that JC crew get a 40% pay rise. I woud be lying low too if I was a JC pilot. And yes, under current regimes AIPA and NZALPA do finally have a good cooperative working relationship. What's more, I believe they even have it in a written and signed document.
Last edited by HF3000; 9th Jun 2011 at 09:27.
Jetconnect was always interesting in the fact that it has grown like a bit of an un-noticed cancer.
One interesting question to ask QF management is why that when JC started that the a/c were clearly missing the 'spirit of australia' titles on the aircraft - fair enough one might question when the a/c were only operating domestically in NZ. Then they started occasional Trans-Tasman services - missing the titles. Then over time the a/c started turning up in exactly the same colour scheme as the VH registered a/c including the 'spirit of australia' titles including the ZK rego.
Throwing even more insults, both to the New Zealand people and Australian, is that they put a special colour scheme advertising the wallabies, on a NZ registered a/c, flying to Australia, crewed by Kiwis ! Spirit of where ?
I mean where does it end - Shelf companies in UK, Singapore,Bangkok, Los Angeles employing locals on local terms flying with QF colours ?
Rather than worrying about screwing their employees, why doesn't Qantas actually concentrating on it's product and doing things to make customers chose them over others, compete on product, timetable and service. Remember the times as a kid and feeling pride at seeing the Qantas red tail lined up at an international airport on the other side of the world, now go to the airport and all you see is a faded red tail that looks like it belongs to some third world carrier.
Remember all the things that were going wrong at Ansett towards the end...
One interesting question to ask QF management is why that when JC started that the a/c were clearly missing the 'spirit of australia' titles on the aircraft - fair enough one might question when the a/c were only operating domestically in NZ. Then they started occasional Trans-Tasman services - missing the titles. Then over time the a/c started turning up in exactly the same colour scheme as the VH registered a/c including the 'spirit of australia' titles including the ZK rego.
Throwing even more insults, both to the New Zealand people and Australian, is that they put a special colour scheme advertising the wallabies, on a NZ registered a/c, flying to Australia, crewed by Kiwis ! Spirit of where ?
I mean where does it end - Shelf companies in UK, Singapore,Bangkok, Los Angeles employing locals on local terms flying with QF colours ?
Rather than worrying about screwing their employees, why doesn't Qantas actually concentrating on it's product and doing things to make customers chose them over others, compete on product, timetable and service. Remember the times as a kid and feeling pride at seeing the Qantas red tail lined up at an international airport on the other side of the world, now go to the airport and all you see is a faded red tail that looks like it belongs to some third world carrier.
Remember all the things that were going wrong at Ansett towards the end...
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Airborne
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You see parallels between the current downfall of Qantas and the downfall of Ansett?
Do you see parallels between the people in charge of Qantas and the people in charge of Ansett approaching it's downfall?
Shareholders take note.
Do you see parallels between the people in charge of Qantas and the people in charge of Ansett approaching it's downfall?
Shareholders take note.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone on here knows what the QANTAS brand is/was based on.
The muppets who have run the company for the last 10 years have abused the trust of the paying passenger in that people have paid for Qantas and sometimes been copping something else. These muppets have the attitude that the traveller should just suck it up as the management are trying to satisfy the shareholders.
Brand is everything. You devalue your brand and you devalue your business. You can't serve up a Cheeseburger and tell people it's a BigMac. People are smarter than that.
You can't charge for Qantas and deliver Jetstar.
The muppets who have run the company for the last 10 years have abused the trust of the paying passenger in that people have paid for Qantas and sometimes been copping something else. These muppets have the attitude that the traveller should just suck it up as the management are trying to satisfy the shareholders.
Brand is everything. You devalue your brand and you devalue your business. You can't serve up a Cheeseburger and tell people it's a BigMac. People are smarter than that.
You can't charge for Qantas and deliver Jetstar.
Does cx pay in Au$ for Au bases and NZ $ for NZ?
If so then this supports JC as Qf have a NZ base and pay the going rate for NZ pilots. Has to be NZ based flying due to am departures from NZ. So would e bes thing not to make JC part of Qf and if you want your flying back go live in NZ and earn the nzd?
If cx pay hkg then Qf win the debate. Aud should be paid.
If so then this supports JC as Qf have a NZ base and pay the going rate for NZ pilots. Has to be NZ based flying due to am departures from NZ. So would e bes thing not to make JC part of Qf and if you want your flying back go live in NZ and earn the nzd?
If cx pay hkg then Qf win the debate. Aud should be paid.
Does cx pay in Au$ for Au bases and NZ $ for NZ?
If so then this supports JC as Qf have a NZ base and pay the going rate for NZ pilots. Has to be NZ based flying due to am departures from NZ. So would e bes thing not to make JC part of Qf and if you want your flying back go live in NZ and earn the nzd?
If cx pay hkg then Qf win the debate. Aud should be paid.
If so then this supports JC as Qf have a NZ base and pay the going rate for NZ pilots. Has to be NZ based flying due to am departures from NZ. So would e bes thing not to make JC part of Qf and if you want your flying back go live in NZ and earn the nzd?
If cx pay hkg then Qf win the debate. Aud should be paid.
This is why the Aussie bases are hurting right now with the increase in the Aussie dollar (or more realistically the decrease of the US dollar).
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Airborne
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On Guard,
QF is not allowed to franchise the brand to overseas companies... The Qantas Sale Act dictates.
They have done just that with Jetconnect.
Court ruling awaits.
It doesn't have anything to do with what Cathay does or does not. Cathay is Cathay. Qantas is Qantas.
QF is not allowed to franchise the brand to overseas companies... The Qantas Sale Act dictates.
They have done just that with Jetconnect.
Court ruling awaits.
It doesn't have anything to do with what Cathay does or does not. Cathay is Cathay. Qantas is Qantas.
The Green Goblin
Incorrect. CX pays what they believe is market rates in all their bases. It isn’t linked to the US$ in any way. It is infact the HK base that is hurting the most compared to Aus in salary scales because the HK$ is pegged to the US$ and my pay in AU$ is now less than my Aussie based colleagues even after tax.
Cathay pay everyone the same rate in US dollars I believe.
This is why the Aussie bases are hurting right now with the increase in the Aussie dollar (or more realistically the decrease of the US dollar).
This is why the Aussie bases are hurting right now with the increase in the Aussie dollar (or more realistically the decrease of the US dollar).
