The AustralianAugust 29, 2008 12:47am AEST Rex pilot shortage under control:
Steve Creedy, Aviation writer | August 29, 2008
REGIONAL Express is optimistic it is well on the way to solving a crippling pilot shortage that forced it suspend several routes last financial year.

The airline feels it can handle fuel prices at today's levels but needs its pilot attrition rate to stay at 25 per cent or below if it is to earn a net profit this financial year like 2007-08's $24.3million result.

After losing half its pilots last financial year, the airline is hoping it will have enough to allow it re-open some suspended routes in the second half.

But managing director Jim Davis said the airline wanted to be absolutely confident it had enough pilots to weather future recruitment drives by major airlines.

Mr Davis said the last thing Rex wanted to do was restore a service and cut it again two months later. "So we want to build up. And we feel by early next year, by about February, it might be less of an issue."

Rex executive chairman Lim Kim Hai said pilot attrition remained the big problem.

Rex is not hedged and offsets fuel increases or falls by raising or dropping surcharges.

"We are not so concerned about the fuel prices at this level," Mr Lim said.

"If it goes to $US140 (a barrel), $US160 then we have to review it, but we could deal with it at $US140, even up to $US160.

"We have a lot of resilience as far as the fuel prices are concerned."

To address the pilot shortage, the regional carrier has established its own aviation college in Victoria and established a cadet scholarship scheme that requires graduates to stay with the airline.

It has also ramped up recruitment, including a drive to lure South African pilots.

Mr Lim said the airline would be better able to deal with its attrition rate when 40 students graduated from its new academy in October.

Union officials and pilots have been urging Rex to address is pilot shortage by improving wages and conditions.

They have also expressed concern about the effect of the pilot exodus on the level of experience in Rex cockpits. But Mr Lim said Rex could not compete with its bigger competitors. "You have to be realistic," he said. "If we had to pay 10 per cent more to avoid the problem, or we had to pay 20 per cent more to avoid the problem, it could still be something we stretch for," he said.

"But the pilots who leave are not looking at 10 or 20 per cent in their new jobs with Qantas and their new jobs with Virgin. They are really talking about 80 to 100 per cent increase and on top of that a career as a jet pilot.

"More than the immediate money, (it's) the future career. So why do you even bother to fight that, because you can't win the battle?"

Mr Lim said the airline was offsetting the pilot losses with its cadet school, whose graduates are locked in for six years.

"In a couple of years we'll find we'll have a huge crew of pilots that are no longer going to leave us," he says.

"And because there are new pilots coming on every year, we have the ability to control the supply.

"So in a way, we've turned a very bad situation to something where we've become more confident."

Mr Lim said Rex would be hit if the drop in the Australian dollar outpaced falling fuel prices but, he doubted this would happen. There had been about a 10 per cent fall in the currency compared to a drop of about 15 per cent in fuel prices.

"I don't think the outlook is going to be tremendously worse than it is today," he said. "Of course, this time last year we wouldn't even think of a $100 fuel price."

The airline's $24.3 million net profit was about 3 per cent above last year and better than revised guidance. Officials were encouraged by a strong fourth quarter in which after-tax profits rose 31.7 per cent to $8.3 million.

Group revenue grew by 15.7 per cent to $260.5 million, partly due to the consolidation of results from Pel-Air for the full financial year.

Passenger numbers for the year rose by 5.6 per cent to almost 1.5 million while load factors decreased marginally to 68.1 per cent.

Passenger numbers remained relatively strong despite moves by the airline to increase its average fare to $152.80 in the fourth quarter of 2007-2008, compared with an average for the year of $141.30.
lian, 29 Aug 08..


So now management have given up on trying to compete with wages, putting ALL their faith in cadets and south african pilots, and hope that the fuel price and au/us dollar remains within limits?
sounds like a really really really good strategy. well done you muppets.

this is not even being REACTIVE... this is just tossing the cards in the air and hoping they land with a royal flush. Admitting that there IS a problem, but not doing anything about it!

And Steve Creedy.... for shame! do you REALLY think that rex has their pilot shortage under control ?

Boy this one will get some :mad: flack from pruners and rightly so. My mate is a truck driver and makes $50,000 for 38hrs no overtime as do bus drivers.
This end of piloting sucks re wages, while the other end is over the top.

Steve, I beg of you, don't give a token one line "union and pilots want more money".... why don't you put the effort in and write a balanced article which, rather than copy and pastes 95% company propoganda, maybe shows 50% of the company's opinion and 50% of the union's position. If you can waste your time interviewing LKH, why don't you interview Lawrie Cox from the AFAP?

The real facts are:
1. The majority of drivers who have left in the last two years didn't have any huge aspirations to fly a jet and didn't want unrealistic pay rises - but left BECAUSE FINANCIALLY THEY WERE FORCED TO SO THAT THEY COULD SUPPORT THEIR FAMILY
2. By propogating these myths (unrealistic 100% pay increases, or were going to leave to fly a jet anyway) it has allowed Rex management to greatly reduce wages. They must have realised a 2nd year captain costs less to pay than a 10 year captain, so have accepted the higher training costs and pushed the more senior, higher paid captains out.
3. They have then used the high attrition rate to try and gain mileage in eba negotiations - when in fact they have driven it to reduce costs.
4. If you read their press releases and media articles, they have blamed - fuel prices, other airlines deliberately poaching their pilots, pilots not being loyal, pilots calling in sick ... in fact just about every excuse other than themselves - wage tightening to boost profits at the expense of experience and safety.

I have no doubt in my own mind that Rex management, and Rex management alone, have driven the exodus of senior pilots to reduce wage costs.

Rumour has it that instead of a medical certificate when they take sick leave, Rex pilot's will now need to provide a note from their mother...;)

On a serious note, I would say they haven't solved their 'pilot shortage' until all the dropped routes have been reinstated, so far I haven't seen any!:hmm:

They are making bigger profits, which is what they are there for, and what they are required to do for their shareholders.

Locked the cadets in for 6 years hey??? it'l take em that long to get a command...

LKH is a greedy egotistical prick who who no respect for what happens in the pointy end..if this is not enough motivation to leave this second rate outfit, nothing is...

Funny a EBA neg is about to commence, good luck.....looks like it's 3% at best..

I can see mass resignations coming....

"In a couple of years we'll find we'll have a huge crew of pilots that are no longer going to leave us," he says.


Really ??? :rolleyes:

LKH just does'nt get it !!! :ugh:

The majority of drivers who have left in the last two years didn't have any huge aspirations to fly a jet and didn't want unrealistic pay rises - but left BECAUSE FINANCIALLY THEY WERE FORCED TO SO THAT THEY COULD SUPPORT THEIR FAMILY



Actually I think that the majority of drivers left because conditions are now untenable. LONG LONG hours, with no thanks. Calls on your days off to see if you will work the next day. NO sick pay without paperwork being in on time, weekly sickleave records published to all and sundry as an act of shaming those who dare be sick. Allowances not paid in accordance with the EBA... because management "didn't intend for the clause to be used in that way".No real uniforms or wet weather gear (although I believe that they now DO have raincoats). Every time there is an incident, the pilots are harangued until they admit that they did not say a phrase exactly as per the FCOM, even though they safely managed and handled the situation 99% as per the FCOM.Unrealistic schedules, with the pilots constantly being at fault for late departures. NO support whatsoever for the crew once already mid ToD.Even though it is illegal, LKH threatens that you will LOSE your annual leave entitlements if you do not clean out your leave balance.... and then when ON leave, you are rung every day, as they could not roster a monkey to eat a banana properly! every single time a contract or equipment is up for renewal, they take the cheap option... leaving the guys at the coalface with no equipment to do their job properly. IT department now full of singaporeans who do NOT know what they are doing. All new jobs being filled by singaporeans.... half of whom can speak goodly engrish.

and of course, better money elsewhere.

AND... when you leave, no one cares! no one asks WHY you are leaving, or why you do not want to stay. there was even the alleged incident where the CP of REX rang the CP of QF to badmouth a pilot AFTER he had left... even though the pilot had a very good record whilst at REX.

basically... there is NO confidence in management by the workers.

Is there a compulsory 10% pay cut at age 60 as happens in Singapore?

chr!st gypsy!

Don't give them more ideas.

apache:

To the point and accurate as usual. If ever there was a case of not having a clue to the reality of the situation it lies squarely with REX management. So in the absence of dealing with the problem, we now see the blatent untruths emerge.

Lie No 1:

"After losing half its pilots last financial year, the airline is hoping it will have enough to allow it re-open some suspended routes in the second half."

Not likely. Captains (who would prefer to stay) are continueing to leave in unsustainable numbers. Next year this will increase significantly. The pool of suitably qualified candidates for upgrade is now all but empty. Rather than see a reversal of lost opportunities, we will see further reductions in services.

Lie No 2:

"But the pilots who leave are not looking at 10 or 20 per cent in their new jobs with Qantas and their new jobs with Virgin. They are really talking about 80 to 100 per cent increase and on top of that a career as a jet pilot."

I have yet to see a Captain with a regional going to a domestic and starting on $160K P/A!

Lie No 3:

"In a couple of years we'll find we'll have a huge crew of pilots that are no longer going to leave us," he says.

No you won't. Most of them will be made redundant because there will not be enough Captains to make up the other half of the crew!

Lie No 4:

"So in a way, we've turned a very bad situation to something where we've become more confident."

See Lie No 1!

Finally:

Steve Creedy. You really should be able to do better mate! I don't know if you read these forums, but feel free to PM me if you want. You just might learn something!

He reads these forums. He told me himself. No; I'm not him.

hey now you've got it in writing!

Hey Krusty,

I'm fascinated with Rex management Lie number 3 :}

Exactly where do these management clowns think they're going to get "a huge crew of pilots that are no longer going to leave us" ???

Oh that's right, the cadet program will solve everything ! :rolleyes:
By the time they have enough candidates with the required experience for upgrade there will be no airline left !

As you say, the exodus WILL continue and the bleeding won't stop until LKH and his henchmen start to pay up ! :ugh:

Let's hope for the sake of the travelling public in regional areas, that it's sooner rather than later.

Well if he reads these forums and knows how much the workers are getting screwed over, but still wrote that article, he's a f***** moron.

Journalism in Australia is very quickly becoming dressed up advertising.

Refer to the thread "He's at it again" in this forum regarding Steve Creedy. This is far from the first time his journalistic integrity has been brought into question.

Gday everyone! I have an interview next month with REX (direct enrty FO) and I am losing motivation to prepare for it after reading your posts.

I am especially concerned about redundancies taking place in 1-2 years from now. And I am guessing it would primarily affect the least senior pilots like myself, if I were to join.

"Most of them will be made redundant because there will not be enough Captains to make up the other half of the crew!"

What are the chances are this happenning?

Mike...NO chance of redundancies. They need all the pilots that they can get. And if you have enough experience, then a quick command is very likely.
Good luck with the interview. Never give up... once some of these problems are solved, it will be a great place to work again.

Apache,

Is English your second language- by chance?

"redundanceies"

Ladies and Gentlemen; there are members of the general public that frequent these forums.

Is it too much to ask that we observe at least a high school graduate's passing grade in spelling, in order that we might be taken seriously by media sources in the first place?

What's this guy smoking ????

The South Africans will take the job just to get an Aussie passport. Once they've got that they'll move on to something better.

The cadets will take anything just to get airborne, once they are marketable they can either buy their way out or do a runner. Cathay here we come.

Forty cadets fresh from school with the ink still wet on their licences are right seat material only for the immediate future. How many qualified captains, or those they can upgrade in six months are joining ?

How does he expect his pilots to stick around when he refuses to pay them properly ? Money isn't everything, but try buying a house and raising a couple of children on REX wages. These days new CPLs are turning their noses up at $50 000/year C206 jobs.

25% attrition is approaching the rates seen in taxi driving and real estate. It's not acceptable in an airline which needs stability to maintain safety.

"They would have left anyway, so why pay them more ?" Same catagory as:

"You're getting hours" When instructing
"You're getting twin hours" Charter job
"You're getting turbine time" First kero burner
"You're getting jet time" Low cost carrier
"You're new so you start on the 'B' scale" Airline job
"You're lucky to have a flying job" Any employer in times of pilot surplus
"Which would you rather be doing ?" Employers response when comparing your wages to truck driver/baggage loader/refueler etc.

Prehaps he'll learn when he's paying contract companies $130 000/year per Captain as he won't have any of his own.

Yes......... good post.

I wish I had a dollar for every time I heard some of those words.:=

nice post Kangaroo Court .... I do apologise, it was a typo. Please accept my most humble and sincere thanks for pointing out this error to me... TOSSER!
I will correct it now.

Quote:

"You're lucky to have a flying job" Any employer in times of pilot surplus
"Which would you rather be doing ?" Employers response when comparing your wages to truck driver/baggage loader/refueler etc.

Good post Metro man. I've quoted your last 2 remarks because I have personally heard the cheif pilot of REX say exactly that!

Sort of says it all doesn't it.

apache:

Naughty boy....proof read, proof read, prooof read!!!

So reading the above and all other posts about REX, I take it that it's a blessing in disguise that I didn't accept a recent invitation for an interview with them??

It all depends Centurion'

If it was for the Cadetship, I'd say yes. If it was for direct entry, and you do not have, or are not close to the min Multi for command, then I would say yes.

If you do have, or are very close to the min requirements for command, then I would say give it your best shot. REX are going to need more upgradeble F/O's in the near future. A lot more. Promotion is running at approx 7 months, where at one stage not too long ago it was around 6-7 years!

If you read these threads carefully you will see a common theme. Flying for REX is in itself a rewarding and often challenging job. And therein lies the problem. For REX to be free of it's serious crewing issues the job needs to become a career in it's own right. LKH and his cronies say they cannot compete with the major airlines on the open pilot labour market. Bullsh!t! They choose not to compete because they are under the deluded opinion that this shortage of pilots will somehow turn around as quickly as it started. Well here's the news. This "shortage" has been coming for 10 years, and unless the airline operators (DJ, VA, and Jetstar included) start paying pilots what they are really worth, then this whole phenomenon will be with us untill they do!

Yep,

with a long overdue EBA; no obvious sign of common sense in upper management, no regard to cost of living expenses and common sense to see that most pilots at Rex would stay for a very long time if the base salaries were $15 - 20k higher given the restrictive lifestyles we lead and our responsibilities, fair go.........only one piece of advice.......

IF AN EMPLOYER AINT WILLING TO PAY YOU WHAT YOUR WORTH THEN THEY DON'T RESPECT YOU AND THE DECISION IS EASY....... THEY ARE QUITE HAPPY TO HAVE REX A STEPPING STONE..... SO HEY MAKE LKH AND UPPER MANAGEMENT THINK THERE RIGHT......GIVE THEM ENOUGH ROPE TO HANG THEMSELVES AND LEAVE ONCE YOU HAVE THE EXPERIENCE OR A BETTER OFFER................. how can you have a family and a mortgage on a Rex wage in Sydney....... bah humbug, maybe the spirit of Christmas will bring LKH to his knees in a dream??? :ugh:

More than a year ago the REXPC did some number crunching on the movement of pilots, and the numbers didn't add up. They approached the Chief pilot with what they believed would be a loss of at least half the pilot group over the next 12 months. The Chief pilot was quite dismissive and whilst acknowledgeing the problem (off the record at that stage) believed the loss closer to 20%. So much for the Chief pilot's grasp of the situation.

During subsequent meetings the REXPC proposed to stem the expected flow by what in reality was the only solution. 40% payrise! This would have bestowed a rise for Captains of approx $30K P/A and for F/O's $18K P/A. The costings were passed on to management and were acknowledged as being correct for the amount of money required. Based upon 1.2 million pax per annum at the time, the cost came in at $6.25 per ticket!

Some excuses for not proceeding were,

We'll lose market share. Yeah right! REX has competitors on only 5 of it's 48 routes. Keep the ticket price the same on those and make the levy $7.00 on the rest. Not exactly rocket science.
Pilots will leave regardless. Some will, many wont. Even at this early stage the REXPC could see that the loss of experienced Captains and upgradeble F/O's would be the problem. One senior REX manager famously remarked "Experience is overrated". We can only pray that little statement doesn't come back to haunt. It was therefore suggested that rather than diluteing the rise by an increase in fortnightly salary, that it be made as an ongoing yearly retention bonus. Stay the full year, you get the lot. Leave after 364 days, you get nothing. If pilots do leave, then the company keeps the money! Win, Win. Sh!t! this thing sells itself!
Passengers will not tolerate an increase in fares. They will drive or take the bus! Yes and my Mum still believes in the Tooth Fairy! Rex hedge virtually all the cost of fuel by way of a ticket levy (around $44) and that's per sector! This levy was introduced without fanfare and without hesitation. Guess what, more people are flying with REX than ever before. approx 1.5 Million last year.The fact that REX are making record profits, and are carrying record numbers appear on the surface to dispell the naysayers. In the latest advice to investors (see apache's first post) they acknowledge that this performance will be in jeapody if pilot attrition does not fall to 20%. Jesus! You think so! What we all know is that the barrel is now empty. If REX are to prevent the inevitable bloodletting next year then they must act now. So what sort of pax levy would do it. I'm afraid the previously suggested 40% may be less effective given that REX Pilot's wages are now an industry joke.

How's this for an idea.

$10 per sector per pax.
Bonus to be paid proportionally to REX pilots on the completion of each full years service
How much will this bestow? Approx $50K for Captains, $30K for F/O's
Crewing problems solved for life!Damn! I was having such a nice dream.

JQ to recruit 140 next year.....that'll sting a bit

And thats just the beginning of round 2 Muff'.

The circumstances leading to last year's attrition were seen coming by all except REX management. As I have said before it could have been reduced significantly. Now we are seeing the light on the front of the train again. What will they do this time? Well, if they follow the REX game plan, they will simply place their heads back up their collective a#ses and blame everyone except themselves!

The problem is, this time it will have a significant impact on the bottom line. The major airlines once again will be hungry for suitable candidates, only now they just aint' out there. Round 1 saw to that.

Get ready for serious pain REX. It's not like we didn't warn you!

Didn't REX make a $10 million profit last year? You can't make that sort of money without pilots, well not in an airline anyway.

Apache, loved your response re-spelling, piss funny.

metroman, next time in sydney ask the refueller how much he grossed last year. truck drivers in the mines aren't going broke either

Lil' Blueberry,

You are spot on.
Quite a few of us were 'happy' to stay for a while longer (only a short while longer) to see if management will agree on an equitable EBA, recognising the professionalism expected from us.....BUT, after what LKH said last week, the morale has dropped through the floor and many, I mean MANY, are now actively looking to move ASAP and using the meagre REX salary to fund our job search.

The spike in oil actually gave REX some reprieve to get their act together, instead, nothing has been done to keep experience over the last few months and now, VB,Jet* and the likes will have a larger pool of experienced pilots in line.

The flying is pure enjoyment and the people at the coalface are fantastic to work with.......but it is sad to see what it has come to, and how much more worse it is going to be.

I suppose the worst thing is that management DO read these forums. I guess they just dismiss them as pilot bitching, at their peril.
The point that IS being made over and over, is that the job has changed. There is now NO lifestyle which is attached to very poor money, comparatively. Respect to the pilot group is out the window, and the AFAP is sitting on their fat a$ses collecting union fees from seriously underpaid members.
When a 10+ yr captain can LEAVE REX, and take up a Direct Entry Captaincy on a DHC-8 across the road, on the SAME(or better) money, yet expect incremental and inflationary pay rises for the next ten years, with better staff travel allowances and ground support,to do essentially the same job.... who is going to stay ?When a junior pilot can leave to a LCC jet job, fork out $40K and STILL be better off financially after year one... who is going to stay?

unfortunately, when one "peaks" at REX, there is a LONG way to go to the glass ceiling... even in regional airlines!

****this post has been checked for spelling mistakes, typos, grammatical boo-boos, and content ****

Apache, you need to go back to school! How can anyone take a pilot seriously who puts the space in the wrong place after "SAME(.." and then does the same after "stay" and missed a space between "support, to". Just not good enough for the high Proon standards. Go to the back of the line until you get it write!

sheesh...maybe I should just become management. At least there I KNOW that everyone will hate me for a reason.

KRUSTY 34 wrote:
if pilot attrition does not fall to 20%. Jesus! You think so! What we all know is that the barrel is now empty.

My bold.

The barrel itself isn't completely empty of talent Krusty - there are plenty of high time twin piston and multi crew turboprop drivers in their thirties and early forties that would jump at an opportunity like Rex - if only Rex would reach deeper into their pockets for improved T&C's while they are new to the company as an F/O and offer a decent path over the next 20+ years to retirement. That is about all it would take and I would personally call Sandy and fire that application up again after declining two offers of interviews).

They might also be a little more attractive to many if they had a few more east coast options for basing and home most nights..... should you catch my drift - many of us would rather leave the industry or stay in our present position than work in Sydney, s#!tloads of overnights (unless we were chasing allowances) etc..... ;)

Those of us in that position know that from what we read and hear that something like that will never happen, so around the wheel goes for Rex again.

Apache.... everyone "luvs yer mate".... especially that "chick" from your waaaaay distant past in Boulia that night you mentioned while sitting in the General R W Bourke that evening almost 10 years ago.... :oh::oh::oh:

Regards,

OpsN.;)

don't you know better than to listen to drunks? especially DRUNK drunks?

btw... are you sure that was me?

I have to admit, I was in a similar state of "tune" that evening.... :}

Spending the odd evening in Boulia up until a couple of years ago there was rumour of a certain pilot who had gone before and left his mark on one of the locals who was quite smitten.... :oh:

Must have been the same "chick" at the general when I was last there 23 years ago. Poor thing still hasn't gotten over me!!!:cool:

Boy what a mess.

Its all about money now, acording to LKH. If we pay the pilots more, we go broke. And all the pilots want is more money.

How simplistic can you get? I would have stayed if the conditions were better. But by the time I left it was almost like a war. They were trying to get the most flying hours out of me by what ever means and I was trying to get out of it.

And is it true that managment are now just striking off one full weeks annual leave because of the pilot shortage? Doesn't that need consultation???

OpsNormal.

Hear ya loud and clear mate. However we are both right. The barrel is empty, but with respect to upgradeble candidates willing to work their arses off for the crap money. The youngun's well short of the required hours will still put their hands up (although even they are becoming difficult to find), but they won't save REX, as we all know.

To attract, and hold onto, the sort of people that REX need will require decisive action along the lines of my post #26. Anything less and they are simply hoping for a miracle.

Mind you it would take a miracle in itself for REX management to see the reality of the situation. My fear all along is they will only act after it is too late.

Do ther Rex drivers know that the Rex Grade 1 instructors at Mangalore are being paid more than a year 3 Rex Saab Fo? yep 50 K got a Grade1.

I'm actually surprised a grade 1 would only earn $50K!:eek:

Then again I have never been an instructor or trained to be one.

Regards,

OpsN.

Out of interest for someone not in a flying job, what do REX drivers actually get paid?

Nothing sinister, just curiousity.

Enough to make an FO of six to nine months seriously think about saving the required amount to pay his bond out at the 1 year (50% of) mark and then move on! Mainly because he is seriously sick of not being able to get ahead. Also sick of the company playing silly buggers with the PC and the new EBA. ($42k base + some allowances)

Radar.

Mate, you guys must really love flying. I don't mean to sound like a prick but after all that effort, money and time learning to fly, you're better off driving a truck. I got a couple of mates laying ashphalt for RWY and road contracts making 80K + allowances.

I take my hat off to you for sticking around.

Is it worth staying to make Captain?

Short answer is NO! Especially not when the bloke down the road is paying $60k+allowances to fly similar sized turboprop aircraft (as an FO) and with a similar time to command. The flying is good but Its just as good next door.

Radar.

Ok simple question here, what's the attraction to REX?
Can't be money, can't be 'cause it's a happy place, can't be 'cause you want to make a difference so what's left? Stepping stone to the majors prolly, although you go there pre bitter & twisted man/girl by the sounds of things.

I know of several guys who flew for Kendall's many years ago & loved it. Sounds like Rex is but just a shell of its former past.


CW

high time twin piston and multi crew turboprop drivers in their thirties and early forties that would jump at an opportunity like Rex -

Where?? The only guys around are in Perth and they're getting decent money already for driving Brasillas.

Kendall and Hazo's were great places to work. Were they better than REX? Personally I don't think so!

What has changed is the world has moved on. There are now opportunities out there in numbers that simply didn't exist just a few years ago. The size of the operation has grown and as such has lost much of it's "family" atmosphere. That's the price of success. A mate of mine who went to DJ years ago said after 12 months, he would come back if he could earn the same money and if they would have him! Again the price of success. And REX has been quite sucessful.

Where REX falls down big time however is their lack of success in motivating people to look at the company as a viable alternative to other higher paying operators. Does REX care about that? Definitely not, and has stated publicly as much.

So given the almost complete lack of effort by REX management in this regard, people throw their hands up and actively look elsewhere. The frustration of seeing nothing encourageing from the top, and the need to uproot what you may be comfortable with just to provide a future for your family, will inevitably lead to the sort of reactions we have seen on these forums. The big problem for REX, is that for these people, there are plenty of places to look!

neville. I can assure you they are most certainly not all in Perth. I personally know over half a dozen drivers on the east coast alone with over 4KTT/2K multi/heaps of multi turbine time etc who could never afford to go and work for the conditions Rex pay now for F/O's.

Rex offer that sort of rubbish $$ to those people when they can easily go and fly Rex's old A model Saabs for Pelair as a DEC for over twice that?

Hear Hear Krusty... Your words are spot on. From where I sit it seems that management can't look past their own hip pockets to see how stressful it is for the troops doing the work (or care). Try living in Sydney on and FO's wage. Try that for on stress. To know that the company is making real profits yet they are still trying to get away with not paying anymore doesn't do much for morale or retention. To continually hold off the negotiations on the EBA is purely stupid. I'm happy to fly a turboprop but why do it when it creates such stress outside of work!?

Radar.

I think that you may have hit the nail on the head there, KRUSTY. There IS no encouragement from the top... quite the opposite in fact. There is no respect FROM the top down... again, quite the opposite.
When the people in Lord St throw their hands in the air and say "oh well. Pilots will ALWAYS move to a jet job, and there is nothing we can do to stop it", is like a pilot with an engine failure throwing HIS/HER hands in the air and saying "oh well. I guess that I am going to crash now. there is nothing I can do about it".
The defeatisit attitude of the YES-MEN close to LKH is so sickening that it infects all areas of the business, in a flow down manner. What is even MORE sickening, is the AFAP's roll over and die attitude. WHY has there been no action from them? WHY are they not forging ahead with a new EBA? why aren't they being pro-active in all this mess? have they got the same attitude as REX management?

Gidday apache:

Quote:

"The defeatisit attitude of the YES-MEN close to LKH is so sickening that it infects all areas of the business, in a flow down manner."

Ironic isn't it!

Well I feel for you guys caught up in that level of anger within REX.
Aviation is a very unstable industry anyway, it's effected by the worlds econmy at the drop of a hat.
Remember in aviation the sh*it sticks big time people have looooooong memories when it comes to aviation so still best keep the head down & do the task 'till you move on.:) I think by now management have heard it all before so keep yr personal affairs in order, you never know what could be around the next corner with the boffins at the top!:)


CW

Sage advice Cpt Wally.:ok:
Very sad and it's prevalent in dozens of airlines around here (aviation attracts them?) but sage.:D

its a stepping stone chaps, don't get emotionally involved - get what you need and go. Plenty of jobs out there will pay and treat you better:ok:

But you gotta survive while you're "stepping", the wages for a F/O in a capital city are a disgrace ! :yuk:
Rex will continue to miss out on applications from experienced drivers while they keep offering such crap pay & conditions. :ugh:

Heard that there hasn't been a resignation for a while as the big boys have slowed down their recruiting. Also heard that they have dropped the exam? This true? People are getting calls to say that they're in that afternoon of their interview! :eek: What about those reference checks?

Krusty

How can you motivate and keep pilots when the pay is what 80 grand as a Cap when you can go to Jetstar or Virgin and earn 100 grand as an FO to 200 grand as a Cap. Nothing can be done to stem the flow of Rex pilots to the Major Airlines. So why the hell would Rex pay more.

C-Change I would rather take the low money and have a career than driving some busted ass truck full of crap with no future. You may have heard short term loss for long term gain. Same goes for the mines you can go earn 100G in some hole but what is the long term future. Aint gonna be Crappsville in the middle of nowhere.:ugh:

Sydney is "crapsville"

Quote

"Nothing can be done to stem the flow of Rex pilots to the Major Airlines. So why the hell would Rex pay more.

C-Change I would rather take the low money and have a career than driving some busted ass truck full of crap with no future."

captaintunedog777, You're not related to the REX Chief pilot are you?

Unberf#ckin'lievable!

Not related.

But you tell me. Why would Rex want to pay more? Believe me I'm all for it. I was once in a regional and couldn't wait to get the bloody hell out.:8 Doing your own boarding, fueling, briefing and leading the bloody pax to the a/c. Bugger that. Rex is just another rung up the ladder. No offence .

The problem for REX is that it now cannot afford to be "just another rung up the ladder". Come next year, REX will litterally be fighting for it's survival. The fact that REX management haven't understood the nature of the pilot shortage will go down as a complete corporate failure. The cause of which was there for all to see, but the obvious solutions were nonetheless ignored.

Don't get me wrong, your points about the role(s) of the regional pilot are noted. However to simply let irreplaceble pilots walk out the door without so much as trying to hang on to them is IMHO nothing short of gross negligence.

If I'm wrong and REX can continue to recruit sufficient numbers of pilots with the required experience, then I will happily admit to such. If I'm right, and the supply cupboard is truely bare, then REX is screwed!

I thought the high oil price put a massive dent in pilot demand???

Considering it is now around $50 per barrel cheaper than 2 months ago!

The price of oil was just an excuse for poor planning, equipment delays, and training backlogs.

Let the games begin.

Krusty,

I have a question which up until a few months ago I might have been able to answer myself. How is REX currently surviving?
From what I read here and have been following for almost a year now, given the conditions, pay, hours etc all the stuff we aleady know about, there STILL seems to be ready supply of young, eager newbies who are willing to accept it.
They may see this a rung to the next thing, but the company now has them locked for X years and STILL there is a steady supply of resource.
Surley while this river runs, mgt have no reason to alter conditions, pay etc as they simply keep getting the applications in the door. So I guess my question also is, given the way they operate and what they offer, why are they still in business and why do they have no shortage applicants for the cadet scheme? Surley if no-one applied and the existing guys got out, there would simply be no REX?
I was one of those applicants, up until a few months ago. I couldnt justify it financially.

BP.

I was really really keen too... but with 2 kiddies on the ground I couldn't do it.

I would need to be a Captain in Rex for 10 years to come close to what I am making in GA now - and based on Krusty's narrative of the Hazo/Rex wage freezes, in 10 years that's still about all I would be making.

On another topic - I was in Orange today and had a cup of coffee with my cousin, a public service management type.

She told me that Rex has a really bad reputation in ORG now due to a long series of last-minute cancellations and the local business people need to charter an aircraft to be certain of getting to SYD for their commitments.

Sad that they're treating their clients with the same contempt as their staff :sad:

Your absolutely correct boardpig. There appears to be a ready supply of young and inexperienced people willing to apply to either the cadetship, or as general entry, even though the conditions are what many believe substandard for this day and age.

I may cop some flack here, (nothing new I suppose) but the attraction for these people is they don't have to serve the apprentiship that most of us old hands had to. I wonder just how many would still pursue the profession if this type of scheme was not available. Money certainly isn't the problem (unless of course Mum and Dad have been niave enough to mortgage the house for them). $42K per year probably seems reasonable when living at home and after working at Macdonalds. The problem for them, and REX for that matter is that this lack of real world experience comes at a price. REX will have us believe that "experience is overated", that cadetships are the way of the future. Time will tell on that front. But even though there is a seemingly inexhaustable supply of these young wannabes lining up, the essential problem is that none of them will be either qualified and/or ready for command for years to come!

Commands at REX are still running at approx 7 months. The Check and Training system is under enormous pressure just to keep Line pilots current. Upgrade times are falling behind, the available candidates with the min experience for command are now becoming critical, and endorsement training becoming more protracted, and on it goes

If the company could, I'm sure they would be happy to have their aircraft fully crewed by 200 hour First Officers. As this is not possible, then the real crunch will probably come during the middle of next year when a large number of experienced captains finally give up and move on. Not being able to replace these people will sadly see a dramatic increase in the reduction of services.

Watch this space.

Krusty,

What is the failure rate of the guys on the intitial type course. I heared its been around 50%, and thats with 3k hr ex charter guys.

I have way over the min hr for direct enty(almost 3k) but am seriously put off in even applying.

After reading all the past posts in this thread I’m starting to wonder if accepting an interview next month was a good idea.... Even still "nothing ventured nothing gained".

If anyone is able to PM me some details of the interview or other useful information I would be most appreciative.

I don't think the failure rate of the initial type course is as high as 50% but its not an easy course. If you are prepared to put the work in then you'll get through. Regardless of how many hours you have, if you have a bad day in the sim or on a check flight then you're not likely to get through it. But few and far between I'd say. There are the one or two per course that struggle and get left behind but its not 50%. Its not a case of fail and your out on your ear either (if you show that you are prepared to work hard).

Radar.

captaintunedog777


I would rather take the low money and have a career than driving some busted ass truck full of crap with no future.


The busted ass truck that you refer to, is that the same one that brings your Jet A1, your food, new car from the dock etc, etc, etc ?

Make sure you include EGO on your checklist.;)

Pilot shortage over, yeah right 6 sectors at least last long weekend cancelled in Adelaide. Crews all over the network getting called in on Rdo's all the time, annual leave interrupted all the time, people being shipped to SYD from MELB & AD daily to cover flights that aren't crewed. Statements from management like this are sickening. Wake up people in the BULLS:mad:T CASTLE, before you ruin a good thing beyond repair. May already be to late tho!:ugh:

With the dire crew situation in Sydney are any new hires being offered bases in other cities?

Heard on the grape vine the other day that crews are starting to say no to working on their RDO's and annual leave days more and more regularly.

Why..?

I guess because they're just getting tired of it all..


yaddayadda

Mr Lim Mr Lim I lost all my pilots!!

What kind werday?

Regional Express!!!

No problem we have an office right here in Singapore!!

Oh Mr Lim........you are a loser!

Yes some people are saying no to working on RDO's, extending duites, etc... but there are still FAR TOO MANY pilots saying YES! And there lies the problem..

Wake up fellow pilots!!! They are taking us for a ride. STOP WORKING ON RDO's and EXTENDING DUTY, atleast untill they start showing us some respect, perhaps by reasonable working T&C's! What the hell is the REXPC doing about it??and the AFAP?

check in staff, lounge staff, baggage handlers, receptionists,crewing, rostering,operations staff even FLIGHT ATTENDANTS get renumerated for extending.... about the ONLy group that doesn't is the PILOT GROUP!!!!

Wake up guys and girls....anyone extending for free is just harming your cause.

Well they've dug their own grave. I applied, talked to HR and got a very icy response to my enquiry. The jist of the convo was they were focused on Cadets.

I know that the ground staff are rostered on for overtime, as they'd prefer to pay them more than train someone else up. Seems to be the main problem, lack of staff here, there and everywhere..

After telling my oldies that I had my first job in grade 10, and that I'd be having a trail week before I started to get paid. My old man said something along the lines of, 'never work for free son, get something out of them'. So I for one, and am pretty confident many others dont accept extensions for moral reasons.


yaddayadda

No-one should be doing RDOs or extensions. Simple as that.

Maybe those who are shouldn't be entitled to the pay increase the others are desperately fighting for. THE PILOT GROUP SHOULD BE IN THIS TOGETHER.

Apparently the EBA committee was not getting anywhere on the base salary, so a one-on-one meeting has been organised to try and bully the RexPC. I've heard several ramblings that anything less than 20% will get voted down.

unfortunately, it is a bit of a catch-22 scenario.... the pilots NEED to work the RDO's to make a living, but by doing so, they stuff up any chance of a decent pay rise.

on the OTHER hand, management WILL pay a bucketload of $$$$ to keep services operating... just not as a %age increase top base salary.

and now with fuel prices going down, their argument doesn't hold up as well about how things are tight!

stand firm chaps!!!

Agreed on all counts 4x. I get the feeling that many are just waiting to see how it all turns out before making the final decision to stay or go. Anything less that 20% is an insult. What happened to our fine Australian company(s)!?! This is not what we all thought would happen following the merger.

Radar.

Why is a rise of 20% so hard to get as a minimum when LKH has saidor we had to pay 20 per cent more to avoid the problem, it could still be something we stretch for
why is it so hard, this should have already been put to the pilot group, union with the EBA done & dusted months ago, before the old EBA expired. May be they are waiting to see how the cadets, 457 visa people, economic conditions, fuel prices, community backlash go, to water down the pay claim. Surely if this is not resolved soon the right to industrial action is warranted.

Surely if this is not resolved soon the right to industrial action is warranted.
Most people think it was warranted 6-8 weeks ago. What exactly are the AFAP union fees paying for? An $800 diary?

I totally agree landof4x enough is enough. An airline that is being run like a two bit G.A company of years gone by. Shareholders & management beware as when the next big recruitment drive is on, planes will have to be parked & a situation may arrise that is not recoverable from.

Hang on, something just doesnt add up.

One post said command upgrade failures are going through the roof, one would assume that most of these guys/gals were 1500+ hr charter pilots befoe comming to Rex. One would say fairly experianced prior to Rex. I would be interested to find out why they are failing. Poor training? low morale/motivation. would these poor souls fail in any other organisation...QF link etc.

But........the cadets, comming out of flight school straight into the airline will have none of the solid grounding in charter the ones mentioned above had.

So how are they expected to do better???

Will the pass mark be lower for a cadet on a command upgrade?

Failure rates are up, and they are well above traditional levels. The check and training system has remained essentially unchanged so what's happened? The reasons are varied.

In years gone by the typical experience level of a new F/O was around 3 thousand hours + and at least a thousand hours Multi-IFR Command. As well as that, a candidate for command would probably spend between 3-4 years, and have at least 2,000 hours experience on type before coming up for command training! By that time the upgrading pilot had a broad range of experience both on the aircraft in normal, abnormal, and emergency procedures. Now we have people thrown into command training before they even have a chance to become settled into the operation! Even for those with reasonable experience, it's still a lot to take in.

Some of the lower time candidates have risen above that lack of experience and it's a credit to them. Many haven't been able to, and that's a shame. In years gone past these people simply would not have been recruited in the first place. I suppose they have paid the price for the state the industry is now in!

The theory about the Cadets is that because they are trained in REX procedures, CRM, etc from the word go, they should be well equipped to move easily into the REX First Officer Training program. That of course is the theory, which still remains to be tested.

As far as Cadets coming up for command is concerned, despite what B.S. may or may not have been fed to them, it will be at least 5 years, if not never untill they move over to the left seat. The provisions of the REX AOC are quite clear. ATPL, 2,000 hours total and 500 hours multi-Command under the IFR. Assuming after 4-5 years a Cadet has reached the 2,000 hours total, their Multi command time under the IFR will still amount to no more than what they accrued during their I.F. training. 50 hours maybe? Quite a shortfall!

As far as I am aware the pass standards for the Cadets will be the same as for everyone else.

Sure will be interesting!

Krusty what if the cadets are able to be put sidewys into pelair to get a command quicker, that is if the AOC requirements are different to that of rex.

Perhaps some analysis of the current training "budget" in relation to new intake pilots regarding the modification or fine tuning of the training programme to suit the current intake of candidates would be beneficial. The current training seems to be aimed at pilots with high time and current experience. Many coming into the company do not fit this profile and are struggling in some areas of the training. Training should, where possible, cater for individual differences.

It seems that the philosophy of one size fits all is incorporated in the design of the initial training and it is a real pressure cooker environment. This is fine for the Checking process but not for training. The experience level and backgrounds of the new intakes is widely varied probably more than ever before, hence the need for a little flexibility and tuning of initial training to suit the current environment.

I agree with Krusty that the cadets entering the REX training system as it is at present will be interesting. My comments are not meant as criticism but as constructive observation.

assasin.

Some mention of secondment to Pelair or Airlink was made in the early days of REX being forced to recruit pilots that didn't have the required multi command for upgrade. It's been fairly quiet on that front lately. I think talking about it, and implementing it may be two different things. About 18 months ago the Airline Transport Operations Group at CASA put out a proposal aimed at circumventing this problem. A more illconcieved, fundamentally flawed document you will never find. From what I'm aware it is currently the subject of legal arguement and more than likely will never see the light of day. If it does surface, I'm sure it will be the subject much debate with a thread in it's own right!

PT6.

As far as REX modifying it's check and training program to suit a less experienced candidate, I doubt very much we will see that happen. You see, someone has to take responsibility! CASA? I don't think so. The REX chief pilot and/or his staff? Not likely. Any changes to the current system would have serious consequences for whoever sign's off or embraces it if heaven forbid, there where to be an accident or serious incident as a result.

REX have always taken the path of least resistance when dealing with the pilot shortage. Recruitment over Retention. Lowering the entry requirements and simply extending training where necessary. Hopeing the situation will go away rather than recognising it for what it really is!

As this crisis deapens, and it will, REX will truely start to reap the fruits of inaction and their inept handling of this whole affair.

Krusty - the cadets can get the 500 hours over the 5 years with RHS ICUS or even LHS ICUS. Same as Qantas cadets. The biggest limitation is the command requirement for an ATPL, of which 100 hours command must be non ICUS. Most integrated CPL courses leave you 30 hours short of that, so the real limitation is the 30 hours.

Once they meet the requirements for an ATPL and have 500 hours ICUS they can be Captains at REX.

There are many LCRPT operators in Australia who do Command Practice to get the required 500 hours ME Comm for LCRPT ops.

Airlink and Pelair (both are LCRPT) have the same issues so secondment there won't help.

An interesting point JetA_OK. What's the definition of ICUS? Obviously there is only 250 hours required for HCAOC, whereas REX's operation requires 500. If candidates were able to simply log ICUS from the right seat during normal line ops (as hoped for by REX), why even have the requirement of the AOC in the first place? Within a little over 12 months everyone would have in excess of the min Multi requirement!

The problem for REX, and the Regulator, is there has to be some oversight (and accountability) to this sort of practice. If not, they would simply be doing it already. And I can tell you they are not. What requirements will define an ICUS flight as opposed to a non ICUS flight? What form will the supervision take? The proposal effectively attempts to circumvent the requirements of the AOC by proposing no requirements whatsoever! That's where the serious issue lies. I don't know how QANTAS do it JetA_OK, but In Command Under Supervision, means IN COMMAND UNDER SUPERVISION!

As far as the ATPL is concerned, you are right. Candidates do not even need Multi time for that, and the balance of the 100 hour requirement could probably be made up without too much trouble.

JetA_OK,

REX IS also an LCRPT operator...

PT6,

Whatever you are taking to enable such a surrealistic view of the REAL WORLD, I want some too.....

nomorecatering,

1500 hour 'fairly experienced pilots'....you are kidding yourself.....

Oracle - I know that, that was the point I was making.

As a LCRPT operator the crew need to meet the requirements of CAO 82.3 App 4. This allows all of the 500 hours multi command to be ICUS. CAR 5.40 defines ICUS and its pretty loose.

Traditionally companies with CAR 217 systems have defined ICUS themseleves requiring Supervisory Capts etc. There is however nothing stopping someone from logging ICUS providing they meet the requirements of CAR 5.40.

This was written and distributed by CASA OLC approx 2 years ago to avoid the usual crap where 6 people in each regional office have their own intepretation governed by how big the chip is on their shoulder, or how many times a certain operator knocked them back from a job before they became aviation deities at CASA.

Unless I am mistaken Qantas use this methodology for their cadets and for low time crew in the regional ops.

Jet,

Although Krusty seems to be the authority and I will defer to his greater insight, here are a few thoughts.

I think with the recent and significant reduction in overall experience on type within the REX Captaincy ranks the issue of identifying 'supervisory' Captains acceptable to both the regulator and REX to enable the low time Cadets/F/O's to log ICUS at REX could require a serious risk assessment.

Furthermore, the whole notion could indeed be included by the REX negotiating team as forming part of their current EBA negotiations log of claims.

Food for thought...

Going back to REX's predecessor Kendell, they also had the problem of F/O's with not enough command time to be promoted to the LHS. This was related to the introduction of the Metro 23 which was above the 5700kg limit of the Metro II. The only solution for those pilots was to go back to flying piston twins to get the required hours. A lot of them got the experience through GAM. I can't see how that situation has changed.

The situation has changed because they'd getter better pay on the piston then they would in the right seat of a Rex.

The Oracle - CAR 5.40 doesn't specify that a Supervisory Captain is required to log ICUS. A Supervisory Captain may be required to conduct ICUS towards a particular level of accomplishment required under a TACO (ie Command Line Training), but this is a different scenario.

1 question that is a little off topic...

does casa still require you to have a command rating in order to log ICUS? and if so is there any way around that?

not off topic, fair question!

however, REX issue all pilots with COMMAND ratings on the SAAB anyway, so the point, whilst valid, is answered.

This may help;

(1) A person may fly an aircraft as pilot acting in command under
supervision only if:
(a) the person holds:
(i) a commercial pilot licence or an air transport pilot licence;
or
(i) a certificate of validation that has effect as if it were a
commercial pilot licence or an air transport pilot licence;
and
(b) the person holds an aircraft endorsement that authorises him or
her to fly the aircraft as pilot in command; and
(c) if the person proposes to carry out an activity for which a flight
crew rating is required—the person holds a flight crew rating, or
grade of flight crew rating, that permits him or her to carry out
that activity as pilot in command of the aircraft concerned; and
(d) the person is the co-pilot of the aircraft; and
(e) the operator of the aircraft permits the person to fly the aircraft as
pilot acting in command under supervision; and
(f) the pilot in command of the aircraft is appointed for the purpose
by the operator of the aircraft.
Penalty: 10 penalty units.

I think thats pretty clear.

Gidday 43"

I've read CAR 5.40 over quite a few times, and I think it's as clear as Mud! Your bolding highlights the type of aircraft endorsement required (REX do give "command" endorsements), but the definition of the catagory of licence I think is less clear.

CAR 5.40(2) (2 a i)

"The person holds:

A commercial pilots licence, or an Air Transport Pilots Licence that authorises him or her to fly the aircraft..."

So what does this mean?

What is the intent?

I believe, although poorly written, CASA know's exactly what it means and so do the operators! The licence required to Fly in command as well as ICUS on RPT aircraft with a MTOW > 5700kg is an ATPL. The reg also applies to ICUS on aircraft below 5700kg and that is where the minimum of a CPL applies.

If Cadets or Low time DE F/O's have insufficient command hours to qualify for an ATPL, then the logging of ICUS would only be permitted to satisfy that requirement. And may I say, only on an aircraft for which the candidate's current licence authorises him or her to fly in command!

The ATOG proposal attempts to circumvent this reg by envoking the ICAO annex 1, which permits the logging of ICUS to attain a higher Grade of licence! Unfortunately the logging of ICUS for the purpose of attaining a higher grade of licence (ATPL) has nothing to do with the 500 Multi-IFR requirement of the LCAOC!

The entire proposal is fundamentally flawed.

The lunatics have certainly taken over the assylum on this one!

apart from the legal issues, I cannot recall anywhere in the (now expired) REX EBA, which gives any scope for ICUS, un less it is done by C&T captains. Any line captain who agrees to supervise a lesser experienced pilot just to "build hours for an ATPL" needs his head read.
Not only are you helping the company out of a preventable predicament, you are placing your career and your licence in jeopardy should, heaven forbid, something go wrong.

Nothing against the cadets or not experienced enough drivers, but one must ALWAYS think about ones own self preservation at all times!

Probably better FO`s log icus and eventually get commands than the place goes nipples up! where will the skippers come from?

If a you feed a bird bread crumbs everyday I will come back and not go away and might even attack you if you don't feed it. If you keep on feeding Rex with Yes when they ask you to work a rosted day off they will come back and not go away and might even attack you!

If you don't want to have your eyes pecked out ... stop feeding!!!!

Gidday M.L.

The chances of REX going "nipples up" as you say is extremely remote. I say extremely remote because nothing in this world is certain, but as far as airlines go, REX are very stable financially. The Chairman has embarked upon a course of action that has seen good developement of the company halted and even reversed. The fundamentals however are sound. REX could shrink the business by a significant margin and not only survive, but still turn a profit, albeit a reduced one!

fritzandsauce,

good analogy mate, and you are absolutely correct. The time to stop accepting the crumbs has well and truely come. If all REX pilots refused to work on their days off it would have an imeadiate affect on the day to day operation of the business. Brutally the major initial impact would be on the hard working staff and long suffering public. But what else can you do in the face of such intransience. The EBA "negotiations are a joke, and the company continues to pour millions into bandaid solutions rather than be a part of the fix.

What's needed is a focus by the board on just how valuable and fragile the supply of professional aircrew have become. Maybe then they may start asking "what can we do to encourage you to stay", rather than, "have a nice life, don't slam the door on the way out!"

Worst thing is, one of the most vocal people against management in and around the crew room is one of the people who keeps coming in to do RDOs every second day.
Complains about terms and conditions, yet is cleaning up with 3-4 callouts every fortnight while every one else misses out while fighting for the future. :mad:
Struggling FOs with a family to raise who can't pay the rent and bills, fair enough... that's a different story.

I'd hardly call it "cleaning up",

what is it again for day off pay $350 ($220 after tax)...what a joke, don't these fools realise they are pharking it for the rest!!

Geez Rex get your act together, even we get $550 for call in on an RDO, and I am in 'GA'!;)

Vast number of Aeroplanes does not make an airline they are still GA or at least pay like GA of a few years ago.

Krusty, having a CPL rather than ATPL does not restrict ICUS on these aircraft, but, having said that the candidate should be undergoing some sort of formal monitoring/assessment which would require the supervision of at least a training captain, i can't see how that could be changed.

Icus was introduced primarily because of this CAO requirement;

8A Conditions on aircraft endorsements
8A.1 For the purposes of regulation 5.25, it is a condition of each command endorsement that authorises the holder of the endorsement to fly an aeroplane with a maximum take-off weight of more than 5 700 kg that the holder of the endorsement must not act as pilot in command of such an aeroplane if:

Civil Aviation Order 40.1.0
17
(a) the aeroplane is engaged in charter operations, or regular public transport operations; and
(b) the aeroplane’s flight manual specifies that it may be flown under the I.F.R.;
unless the holder satisfies the aeronautical experience requirements set out in paragraph 8A.2.

8A.2 Unless CASA otherwise approves, the endorsement holder’s aeronautical experience must consist of:
(a) at least 50 hours of flight time as pilot acting in command under supervision in the type of aeroplane concerned; or
(b) at least:
(i) 25 hours of flight time as pilot acting in command under supervision in the type of aeroplane concerned; and
(ii) the successful completion of an approved training course conducted in an approved synthetic flight trainer.

Note The circumstances in which a person may fly an aircraft as pilot acting in command under supervision are set out in regulation 5.40.

It was never intended as an hour building exercise rather than another arm of LOFT to be conducted to monitor a command candidate in commercial operations. It has now been extended to a lot of other applications and has been abused in the past by GA operators as a means of supplemental income, hence why the hours are discounted by most operators.

CAR 5.40 is actually pretty clear, its just that it doesn't support what have been long held views / operating mthods in Oz Aviation. However it is interpreted by various CASA FOIs and airlines, the fact remains that a Supervisory position is a company appointment and is not required for the logging of ICUS as per CAR 5.40.

The PIC of the aircraft must be an ATPL holder, however the PICUS must have a Command Endorsement, CPL (or ATPL) and have a valid MECIR. The reality is that the biggest prohibition to this is industrial (ie the point made re the REX EBA) and not regulatory.

I don't see a problem with FOs logging their sectors as ICUS, providing that they meet the requirements of CAR 5.40. What is the difference between this and the P1 / P2 system that seems to work so well in other parts of the world? If a C & T system is good enough, standards aren't a problem. I also don't think its neccessarily a big problem industrially. It will still take approx 2-3 years for a cadet to attain enough experience to meet the requirements for an ATPL and command. This means quicker commands for everyone else.

Cadet programs are never the whole solution to a problem for this reason.

“I don't see a problem with FOs logging their sectors as ICUS, providing that they meet the requirements of CAR 5.40.”

This statement, IMHFO is missing the point. ICUS is exactly that, In Command (under supervision).There is more to command than simply poling (or providing AP input) on a particular sector.

Being in command is being responsible for the conduct of the entire flight, including subordinate crew.

Therefore the ICUS argument requires a complete structured environment, where the Supervisory (or whatever terminology may be used) Captain, has received appropriate training and certification in the role, i.e. early error detection, correction and communication to his trainee. The trainee is briefed preflight on what is expected, monitored, mentored, tested (orally) during the flight and then properly debriefed and the progress recorded.

Most FOs after several months line flying will or have reached a good standard of line flying, but can they adequately Command a flight?



P.S.Both Airlink and Pelair AOC authorise RPT, therefore, their regulatory minimas reference flight crew are the same as Rex

5.40 Pilot acting in command under supervision (1) A person may fly an aircraft as pilot acting in command under
supervision only if:
(a) the person holds:
(i) a commercial pilot licence or an air transport pilot licence;
or
(i) a certificate of validation that has effect as if it were a
commercial pilot licence or an air transport pilot licence;
and
(b) the person holds an aircraft endorsement that authorises him or
her to fly the aircraft as pilot in command; and
(c) if the person proposes to carry out an activity for which a flight
crew rating is required—the person holds a flight crew rating, or
grade of flight crew rating, that permits him or her to carry out
that activity as pilot in command of the aircraft concerned; and
(d) the person is the co-pilot of the aircraft; and
(e) the operator of the aircraft permits the person to fly the aircraft as
pilot acting in command under supervision; and
(f) the pilot in command of the aircraft is appointed for the purpose
by the operator of the aircraft.

(2) The operator of an aircraft may permit a person to fly an aircraft as
pilot acting in command only if:
(a) the person holds:
(i) a commercial pilot licence, or an air transport pilot licence,
that authorises him or her to fly the aircraft; or
(ii) a certificate of validation that has effect as if it were such a
licence; and
(b) the person holds an endorsement that authorises him or her to fly
the aircraft as pilot in command; and
(c) if the person carries out an activity for which a flight crew rating
is required—the person holds a flight crew rating, or grade of
flight crew rating, that permits him or her to carry out that
activity as pilot in command of the aircraft concerned.

My bolding

I just wanted to ask Krusty about these parts, because the way I read it you don't require a CPL/ATPL which allows you to fly as PIC, only to fly the aircraft. i.e. CPL required to fly in commercial ops in any capacity. Definitely agree re CMD Endorsement, that part is quite clear.:ok:

Thanks Capt' et, al.

Am I drawing a long bow with regard to the definition of "fly the aircraft" as a Co-pilot or as a Captain, because the reg apparently doesn't specify. Some have taken the definition as irrespective to what seat, others have taken the view that a catagory of licence be applicable to "command" be it ICUS or otherwise. My interpretation (as well as at least one FOI I know) is that the intent of the reg be applicable to at least an ATPL holder for Aircraft above 5700kg and CPL for aircraft below 5700kg.

If you read the ATOG proposal, the author attempts to validate the logging of ICUS by invoking ICAO annex 1 which permits this activity for the attainment of a "Higher Grade of Licence". If there is no barrier to a CPL holder logging ICUS on aircraft above 5700kg as "defined" in CAR 5.40, then why does the ATOG proposal attempt to redefine the Reg in this manner? My only conclusion is that the author has recognised the prohibition to logging ICUS in aircraft above 5700kg by anyone other than the holder of an ATPL!

Now if I'm wrong (and it certainly won't be the first time), then why all the effort to augment the Reg. Why not simply give the green light for operators to do it. For that matter, why don't operators just do it if the Reg is so clear? The reason; No one wants to stick their necks out. And frankly who could blame them.

As I said, I believe CAR 50.4 is as clear as mud!

p.s. Marauder.

Agree totally. The ATOG proposal also makes mention of due governance by the operator when assigning "Supervisory" Captains for ICUS flights. An obvious attempt to aportion responsibility. The problem is, the due governance it refers to only makes referance to the "Supervisory" Captain as being qualified to fly with a junior albeit qualified First Officer! In other words, no requirement whatsoever above the normal qualification of line Captain.

What a joke!

My interpretation (as well as at least one FOI I know)

And thats the problem Krusty. Not that you have an opinion, but that the FOI has his/hers and seeks to impose it on operators. This is where the whole regulatory system breaks down, it has human beings in it :}

I believe this is the reason for the ATOG clarification.

As to why it isn't done more often; I'd suggest that its mainly because operator's haven't needed to in the past because the established practices worked.

In accordance with CAR 5.40 an FO can log ICUS as long as they meet the requirements of the CAR and as long as the operator approves it. The fact that operators are unlikely to approve it in most cases due to CASA pressure or industrial pressure doesn't undermine the reg. I'd like to see CASA try to take action against an individual or company for doing it, the reg is clear.

Quote;

"I believe this is the reason for the ATOG clarification."

Fair enough JetA_OK, and far from argueing with you on that point, it is quite possible you are right. If this is the intention of the ATOG submission then it is possibly the most p!ss poor attempt at such that I think I have ever seen. The Author justifies the proposal by using some fairly spurious references to say the least.

Firstly He/She declares that the dramatic fall in airline recruits with the required Multi-Command hours is due to the emergence of single engine turbine equipment, effectively replaceing the traditional multi piston aircraft in G/A. CRAP!

Secondly, He/She quotes that ICAO annex 1 allows for the logging of ICUS in this situation for the purpose of attaining a "Higher Grade of Pilot Licence". D!CKHEAD! The proposal is aimed at allowing the candidate to log ICUS so they may qualify for the Multi-IFR requirement of the AOC. The term of a "Higher Grade of Pilot Licence" can only mean for an upgrade to ATPL, and as we all know, you don't require any Multi time for that!

Finally, He/She proposes that for a candidate to qualify to log ICUS, they must be able to satifactorily perform all the duties of the Pilot in Command (except taxiing) from the right seat. I love the way this sidesteps taxiing. I guess the skills required during this operational phase, along with the short term decision processes are not deemed to have any value. If that is the case, then why do we log block time, and not just wheels up/down? As well, does this mean that candidates will now be

Starting engines
Shutting down engines
Performing the Captains cockpit setup
Performing the Captains pre-flight duties
Performing the Captains post-flight duties
Making decisions and being responsible for the provisions of the MEL
Signing the NOTOCS
Etc, etc, etc....Don't get me wrong guys, I want to see people advance as much as the next person, but this whole exercise is nothing short of bullsh!t! And not very good bullsh!t at that. Irrespective of what interpretation people have of a poorly written Reg'.

Our Tax dollars at work!

Ok Guys, Jet OK in particular, the point that I was trying to make (amongst others) is that there is more to being in Command than poling the aircraft. Often, the PNF sectors are more demanding than the flying ones.

I think, to regard yourself as ICUS, simply because you re flying the sector takes you back to the DC 3 days, where the FO closed the door, operated the radios, had a ‘drive’ in the cruise, and hoped one day, the grumpy old basket next to him might give him a landing.

CRM for better or worse has come a long way

As a matter of fact on a normal line flight, when it starts to get untidy, I prefer to be PNF, with the FO concentrating on the flying, whilst I can devote most effort to sorting out fuel remaining, wx,alternates, LTD etc, whilst monitoring the conduct of the flight.


Simply put, holding the controls does not necessarily mean in Command

Well said MARAUDER.

I doubt many here would disagree with you :ok:

Afternoon, where is this info/ruling ? from ATOG regarding ICUS ?.

Thanks in advance.

Gidday LHRT.

The ATOG proposal first saw the light of day back in April 2007! If CASA has any sense at all, they'll bury it so deep that it never sees the light of day again. At the time it was the subject of a confidential submission. It may or may not have been modified since then, but I have heard nothing to the contrary. The fact that (to the best of my knowledge) it still hasn't been implimented after nearly 18 months, probably indicates it is a troublesome document at best!

Hopefully R.I.P.

Speaking as nothing but SLF, I hope you guys and the company can sort things ASAP. Mrs Max Noise has now given up on ZL for the last flight of the day (ABX-SYD) after being stuck there last Friday when the SYD-ABX-SYD was cancelled. She (and I) want to support ZL "to keep the other b@<hidden> honest", but can't risk it now and will take the red rat when there are deadlines.

Question; With regard to performing all the tasks of PIC in the RH seat, if the SAAB dos not have a tiller on the RH seat, is it possible to conduct a take off from a standing start or must it be done from the LH seat?

Left Hand Seat

Gidday MAX'

Thanks for the patronage, I'm sure all at REX appreciate it. As for brand loyalty, my advice would be if you can find a better deal on the Rat' then that's fair enough. Problem is QFLink are also chronically short of Captains, but I think they tend to preserve the integrity of the non monopalised runs a little better than REX. JD in his latest letter to staff has stated that by years end REX will have a surplus of pilots! If that's true then we will see the reinstatement of the QLD operation, the restart of GTH-ML, and the shelving of plans to cancell the MIA-SYD service. Not only that, the current situation of up to 40 sectors uncrewed at the beginning of each weekend will be a thing of the past, and we will see no more cancellations when a pilot or pilots have the gall to call in sick, as there will be adequate reserves to cover them!

Or you could believe the truth.

mr flappy.

The ATOG proposal exempts taxiing as part of the plan to have ICUS logged from the RHS. Apparently the skills and short term decision making associated with that phase of flight is not considered of any command value! It is possible to conduct Take offs and Landings from Go to "Whoe" without nosewheel steering (and yes the SAAB does only have the tiller on the Captains side). It is an abnormal operation for which Captains receive specific training. As any sort of additional training (and expense) is to be avoided under the ATOG proposal, F/O's conducting ICUS under this scam are not permitted to taxy the Aircraft or in fact steer it on the ground at speeds below 80 knots!

JD in his latest letter to staff has stated that by years end REX will have a surplus of pilots!


Poor Krusty, you'll have to fly with these cadets! Good luck mate! Be sure to have your instructor cap on. :}

No real skin off my nose Altimeters. As long as the Cadets are up to the task, I'm happy to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Problem is, the chronic and worsening shortage at REX is for Captains, and for pilots that can be upgraded. If you understand why REX are employing low timers and Cadets, then there can only be one outcome for the company over at least the next 5 years? Contraction!

A paradox of this whole shortage may be that we will see redundancies in the bottom third of the seniority list. And that will include Cadets! Think it won't happen?

Just think about it!

I heard that there was only two FO's who applied for the recent four SYD command upgrade positions! Times could be starting to get interesting...


go_soaring! instead

I don't believe that for a second go_soaring.

They are going to have an "excess" of pilots by the end of the year!

Why would you want to go through the process of being upgraded only to get to the final check and get soc'ed twice for something minor and having to then go back as an FO for 6mths. What a joke!

Maybe a quick command and more money at Ma:mad:ir is the way to go! I hear they are taking, sorry, poaching FO's at the moment.

Radar.

XXXXGOLD,

Re-read my post, I said '...only two FO's (that I'm aware of) applied for...'

Doesn't mean that there isn't more in the pool that are available for the upgrade, in fact I convinced another mate with a few hundred hours on the SF34 to put a bid in last night! Just never know your luck :)


go_soaring! instead

Go_Soaring, my comments were tongue in cheek :ok:... you missed the point completely.

Anyway, your mate with only a couple of hundred hours on type who might get a command at Rex will be one of the oldies. Soon command candidates will have only a couple of hundred hours TOTAL TIME :D

P.S.Both Airlink and Pelair AOC authorise RPT, therefore, their regulatory minimas reference flight crew are the same as RexSo even non RPT flights, conducted under an AOC authorising RPT, must be operated by flight crew meeting the RPT >5700kg experience requirements?

Not that I believe this is a viable solution, simply curious, as it strikes me as slightly odd.

So, if I get fed up with jet lag and want to live in Auz and not fly anything big that goes too far. Who should I see? Rex, Brindabella, QF Link? Typed on the SF-340 with other stuff and just near 11,000 tt.

Absolutely K.C.

As long as you can live on the subsistance wages, only get one weekend off a month, only get 8 days off per roster (when other airlines have moved to at least 12!), then by all means.

REX needs all the experienced pilots it can get.

I do know for fact that one company operating metro RPT does allow it's pilots who are not yet up to the 2000hr for LHS RPT position to captain the charter runs.

But they would be in the metro II which are under 5700kg wouldn't they?

Startingout - this is yet another standardisation issue by CASA. Some offices hold that an AOC authorising LCRPT are bound by 82.3 even if they are conducting CHTR ops.

CAO 82.3 8.5

"8.5 In the case of a pilot operating an aeroplane having a maximum take-off weight of
5 700 kg or less employed in a regular public transport operation, the requirement that
the pilot must have the relevant qualifications set out in Appendix 4 applies only if the
operation involves the carriage of passengers."

I don't see how they develop a grey area out of that?

Krusty, under the ATOG proposal, will the ICUS pilots actually have to conduct take offs from the right hand seat from a standing start?
Will Rex (if they havn't already) ammend the ops manual to reflect this?
Will the ICUS be expected to carry out a rejected take off if necessary?

A big thing about being in command is that while the engines are running, 34+ lives rest in the command decisions that you make. As an FO, you don't have that responsibility, if anything happens it is up to the other guy to make the hard decisions, including the decision to abort a take off. This is why I ask the question about the take off, if the decision to abort or continue is not yours, you are not in command. If you are in command, you must have the ability to assume control in all situations that may arise especialy during take off!

Gidday mr flappy.

The normal operating procedures for REX is that the Left Pilot (Captain) always controls the direction of the aircraft on the ground at speeds less than 80 knots, irrespective of who's sector it is. Under the ATOG proposal this will remain unchanged. The only exception would be if the Captain becomes incapacitated.

The ATOG proposal is defective in as much to what it leaves out as to the flawed way in which it seeks to justify this whole excercise. Basically it seeks to allow line F/O's to log ICUS from the right seat during normal line ops without any sort of additional training or supervision whatsoever. The only stipulation is that in order to log the ICUS, then it must be deemed the F/O's sector!

Rejected takeoff training is conducted in the SIM as part of the ongoing cyclic program. F/O's are exposed to it, but the latter stages of the reject would still be handled by the Captain. If the reject was due to a Captain being incapacitated, then the F/O would be expected to bring the aircraft safely to a stop, and they recieve training to that effect. As far as further taxiing beyond exiting the runway is concerned, F/O's are neither trained nor approved for this type of operation.

The ATOG proposal is worded in such a way as to exempt the operator from any further training, or expense with regard to ICUS candidates.

As far as the command of flight is concerned, Normal line Captains apparently will recieve no additional training (or remuneration) when conducting ICUS flights! I would suggest the In Command Under Supervision will have zero Command and very little supervision, beyond of course the normal dynamic of a typical line flight.

Makes you wonder what the real agenda is doesn't it?

Same as Qantas 737 FOs logging ICUS.
Why are you all so petty?

So,

there's no supervision in Command under Supervision at QANTAS?

The way the check and training system is operating in Rex you would think there was no pilot shortage problem at all. The head of check and training needs to have his head examined. Never have I met someone so ego driven, yet so pathetic. As I understand it, unless you have a ZL background, you are not good enough to be in the training dept... at least thats how it appears in ADL. The FOM at that base should be embarassed from recent events.

Heres a news flash for thows that think the Saab is some sort of space shuttle....IT'S NOT. It's a Saab. A great plane that does a good job, but it ain't that hard!! The sooner certain people loose the "little airline syndrome" and except they are running a basic regional airline, that hires average pilots that now usually don't even have an ATPL, and stop trying to pretend Rex and the Saab is something it's not the better. Where are the next lot of Captains coming from? The last lot failed and the guys behind them have even less experience!!!

The head of T and C could also do with a few lessons on people skills. How someone even gets into that position when they have the same ability to listen as a door mat is beyond me.

Spot on Desk,

It's amazing how one man can create such a culture of anger and fear that permeates the entire company. I wonder if LKH really knows the true cost of the time and money which is wasted to satisfy one man's giant ego.

Id say LKH has no idea how much money this excuse for a leader has blown by having guys fail that are getting minor things wrong. Basic things don't get de-briefed...guys fail, have to re-do the check and then naturally get through. It's a joke.

I remember being trained by an ex KD pilot many moons ago, and when he found out NH was down to do my check to line decided to give me a few extra sectors training so I could avoid him. He said that I had a lessor chance of passing with him as I was trained by an ex KD guy. This was before NH was the head of check and training!! He had a bad rep then, and it certainly hasn't got any better. He should be a man and grow up! As I said earlier..it's a Saab...not that hard. If NH does find it to be the most complicated piece of kit known to man, maybe he is out of his depth.

F/o`s fly 50% of the time, and are expected to handle the aircraft as PF if an engine lets go on rotation or an engine catches fire, or if the whole freaken sky caves in. They are are expected to handle the aircraft safely in any emergency situation and make descions, WITH the captain to ensure a safe outcome. Perhaps if F/o`s went to work and did paperwork and just made radio calls it would be fair to say that the should only log co-pilot hours. but if old mate in the left seat carks it and, the weather is crap, throw in some failure of sorts, the F/o is still expected to bring the aircraft down safely.

Icus isn`t flawed, and Rex`s operation would be well suited to it. It`s the whole constant debate on pay and conditions that has made it a point of concern. :rolleyes:

Quote:

"It`s the whole constant debate on pay and conditions that has made it a point of concern. :rolleyes:"

Not an unreasonable statement M.L.

Isn't it amazing that after eons of pilot surpluses it has come to pass that when the tide is reversed, it's still all about the cheapest option. Your points have merit, but if they were the only dimension to what constitutes Command experience, then the provisions of the AOC would have been cast off years ago.

They wish to change the rules to suit their commercial imperitive. Simple as that!

Sure Krusty,
The guy in the left seat supervises the one in the right seat.:ok:
Rex Captains not able to do this???:confused:

Ok Tank', I'll bite.

When the QF F/O's (whom I assume have less than 250 hours Command under the IFR!) log ICUS, Is there a stipulated program or set of hoops that the candidate and indeed the "Supervisory Captain" must satisfy for this to happen.

Genuine question!

OK then.

Can anyone else out there who works for QANTAS answer my question?

We call it Command training!:p

However we went through years as a S/O and F/O in the system and it becomes the norm.

I presume at REX the F/Os do take-offs and landings??
The Captain already supervises these, just let the F/O do the flight planning, order fuel, liaise with other staff and make operational decisions [under his/her supervision] and this is ICUS. The Captain still boss, and if WX or X-wind not OK then Capt's sector. F/Os log co-pilot when Capt's landing and ICUS when it's theirs.

This ICUS goes towards ATPL hours for eventual Command.

Regards,
Tank

Thanks Tank'. Now we're getting some where.

Command training :p is one thing, but unfortunately that's not what we're talking about. Training is fine, but it is the lack of training that most concerns me and quite a few other Captains. You state that..."just let the F/O do the flight planning, order fuel, liaise with other staff and make operational decisions..." Is this part of a formalised process or is it left to the individual initiative of the Captain on the day?

Secondly, you presume correct. The F/O's at REX do conduct Take-offs and Landings. Usually on a leg for leg basis.

Finally, you state that the ICUS goes towards ATPL hours for eventual command. You only need to log 150 hours ICUS as part of the requirements for the ATPL. Indeed the ATOG proposal uses the ICAO annex 1 to justify this. The requirements of the LCAOC however demands at least 500 hours Multi-IFR. A completely unrelated requirement!

I'm not trying to be difficult. I am honestly attempting to get a handle on exactly what ICUS means at QANTAS and how it differs from what is being proposed by ATOG!

I'm pretty sure we are talking about two vastly different scenerios.

Krusty - its exactly the same scenario.

Under this interpretation ICUS can be logged for hours building towards licences and requirements. This is an issue for how the FO logs hours. This is separate from the ICUS required under a CAR 217 to attain a certain standard (ie Command on a SF340). This ICUS is conducted on a set syllabus by a Supervisory or Training Captains.

When someone has their 500 hours ME requirement to satisfy CAO 82.3 App 4 AND the company is prepared to upgrade them AND the seniority system if it exists allows it - THEN the candidate can then progress onto a Command Upgrade ICUS program under the CAR 217 system.

This entire process would take approx 3 years for a cadet at REX. A candidate who is well trained initially and operates within a disciplined multi crew IFR system with stringent C&T (which REX has) and meets these requirements, may actually make an excellent Captain :eek:

How do the RAAF do it? Do they send Herc drivers to the Bungle Bungles for 2 years or do they train them internally for command in a disciplined environment with checks and balances? Indeed, how does the rest of the world do it?

Just as a side note there, the RAAF are NOT bound by CASA rules/regs. They are a law unto themselves. They do not NEED top stipulate xxx hours in command etc.

whether they do or not, is an entirely seperate issue

time and money which is wasted to satisfy one man's giant ego.


Spot on. Everyone knows it but him.

How someone even gets into that position when they have the same ability to listen as a door mat is beyond me.

It's disgusting that CASA have allowed the appointment. Best mate as the FOI seems the ticket...

You know that the health of a check and training system is not good when you start hearing FO’s talk of not even wanting to aim for a command within the company. Reasons like not being happy with what they see the captains going through, or simply the process being too stressful. Why put the massive effort in just to have one of the above ‘implicated’ people crush your goals for something minor. Then have to wait 6 months to start the whole process again!?! Whatever! What a croc. When will they learn!
Radar.

How did Sunstate(Mildura) or then Southern get low time new hire co-pilots on the Shorts and then Dash up to command standard? They employed some low time guys with new CPL and IFR and put them into the right seat of the Shorts and Dash over the years. The former GM reckons they were easier to train, than some of the GA aces that they employed over the years.

Quote:

"Under this interpretation ICUS can be logged for hours building towards licences and requirements."