I think of hellva lot of what Mr Dixon said in the Koheler interview is 'right.'
One of the mistakes in this debate that people are making is that they are assumming that QANTAS and JETSTAR piloting to be '"the same job." Well it is not the same job. The people flying the jets for QANTAS work for one of Australia's most recognisable brands (if not in the world) with a market reputation for safety and service. Entry to QANTAS is highly competitive and highly sought after.
JETSTAR on the other hand is a start-up company without a history and a brand recognition that says 'el cheapo'. Plus, it is a small outfit when compared to the might of QANTAS. I am talking in the 'airline exec speak' of ASK's here.
It has nothing to do with the so called 'piloting standards' or 'same routes, same aircraft' claim. JETSTAR pilots are more than capable of piloting a QANTAS mainline aircraft it is just that they didn't get the job in the first place.
What is the difference between the remuneration received by an accountant for say KPMG, and another accountant working for Smith, Smith and Sons? Is it not the same job? QANTAS can afford to pay more because it generates more (a fact acknowledged by G. Dixon).
Contrary to popular belief JETSTAR was not set up to attack pilot salaries and conditions it was set up to, firstly, to put the brakes on our domestic competitor and, secondly, to exploit an international market that QANTAS Mainline will never operate in. And in doing so it protects the QANTAS Mainline a.k.a. The Brand!
The JETSTAR Pilot Council negotitated for their members the best possible deal available from the company they work for. I don't see JETSTAR salaries coming much further north than what they presently are, nor do I see my QANTAS salary retreating south in an major way to line up with JETSTAR.
Oils and Oils, Sol. And that is way that AIPA should play it. Look after No 1 and not worry about JETSTAR. Because they are doing just fine without the help of AIPA.