I suggest the ATO won't see them as 'contractors' no matter what the supposed contract says. An implication of being a contractor is supply of labour etc to more than one party.
If the work situation looks like a duck, quacks like a duck & ****s like duck then the ATO will see it as an employed duck.
Tins. You are correct - the pilots are not contractors if they are employed by only one operator. And I doubt they are "casual". Read the article "Are your casuals really casual" and "Termination of casual employees" at the
Office of the Employment Advocate site.
And the "contract" I've seen seems to be a total waste of good paper! I can't see how anyone could take it seriously.
Woomera