PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - So you need a new fleet Leigh?
View Single Post
Old 21st May 2019, 04:57
  #920 (permalink)  
CurtainTwitcher
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Jetstar Aus/NZ Positions

Interestingly in another thread you post:
Originally Posted by ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE


Acording to the latest seniority list:

787 F/O approx 5 years from date of join.

A320 command currently around 6 years in Sydney.

Rough guides only of course as there are many variables, mainly how many extra airframes the A321LRs will result in.
Which brings up a very important point, there aren't any shortcuts in aviation. An East Coast widebody FO is running at 15+ years, a little more for a 737 command in mainline.

Jetstar are able to offer a lesser deal, as the time for promotion is much more rapid. You can go back to the original observation by the father of modern economics, Adam Smith in 1776 in the Wealth Of Nations for some guidance on these matters:

10.1.25 The probability that any particular person shall ever be qualified for
the employment to which he is educated, is very different in different occupations.
In the greater part of mechanic trades, success is almost certain; but very
uncertain in the liberal professions. Put your son apprentice to a shoemaker,
there is little doubt of his learning to make a pair of shoes: But send him
to study the law, it is at least twenty to one if ever he makes such proficiency
as will enable him to live by the business. In a perfectly fair lottery, those
who draw the prizes ought to gain all that is lost by those who draw the blanks.
In a profession where twenty fail for one that succeeds, that one ought to
gain all that should have been gained by the unsuccessful twenty. The
counsellor at law who, perhaps, at near forty years of age, begins to
make something by his profession, ought to receive the retribution, not only
of his own so tedious and expensive education, but of that of more than
twenty others who are never likely to make any thing by it.

How extravagant soever the fees of counsellors at law may sometimes
appear, their real retribution is never equal to this.

Compute in any particular place, what is likely to be annually gained, and what is likely
to be annually spent, by all the different workmen in any common trade, such as that
of shoemakers or weavers, and you will find that the former sum will generally exceed
the latter. But make the same computation with regard to all the counsellors and students
of law, in all the different inns of court, and you will find that their annual gains bear but a
very small proportion to their annual expence, even though you rate the former as high,
and the latter as low, as can well be done. The lottery of the law, therefore, is very far
from being a perfectly fair lottery; and that, as well as many other liberal and honourable
professions, is, in point of pecuniary gain, evidently under-recompenced
.
What Smith is saying is that, all things being equal, the pay matches the circumstances. Many Lawyers train, most don't aren't successful (in his day), those that do are rewarded well. But overall, of all those that study law, there is a net loss of income as a whole. Other jobs are quicker an easier to learn, but the income received is less. In a nutshell, the greater the risk to success, the better the pay.

Six years to command at a lower rate of pay, rather than 15 years as an on better conditions as an SO, which would you choose? I don't think it is any big secret that all the Qantas group entities are losing pilots to mainline.

So arguments about differing rates of pay need to be filtered through the lens of time to promotion as an adjunct to pay. Some will choose quick promotion, for age or the ability to fly as a contractor, others better T&C, but accept a slower career path.

One thing that is assured, if QF could wave a magic want tomorrow, and have all mainline new joiners on JQ T&C at the current extended time for promotion, those on the hold file with any experience would reconsider opportunities elsewhere. They need to offer better T&C to attract, the instant they don't they will struggle to crew aircraft just like everyone else.

I had a group general manager boast to me that he was going to pay 1/3rd less for his NZ Turboprop operation prior to startup. I don't believe they had a single application once they put it to the market. As I said, there are no shortcuts in aviation. Airlines have milked there once off screw-over of the industry, now they are paying the price with a big shortage. Qantas mainline is insulated only while it has better T&C with some semblance of delayed career progression. Remove either of those, things will change.
CurtainTwitcher is offline