PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - AFAP (Federation) takes legal action against Jetstar
Old 20th Jun 2011, 05:42
  #131 (permalink)  
Tony the Tiler
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Hong Kong
Age: 58
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Have the same demands been made of the Federation?

Were the Federation in attendance at the same meeting?

I told you there was something sneaky on foot with regards to the rank of captain.
It looks like everyone is jumping at shadows. Of course Jetstar want to hire DEC’s on contract into Australia, however as yet they haven’t and have no contract on offer. What is the AFAP to do, launch a legal action on the hunch that Jetstar are up to something regarding Captains? That sounds like something AIPA would do (stupid and probably thrown out of court). Why AIPA have criticized the Feds in their latest Insights propaganda is a mystery. They crap on the AFAP’s strategy – yet they have done nothing to help the cadets or stop the contract recruitment.

The AFAP have successfully stopped recruitment of all contract labour in Australia via a Federal Court order. They have a legal action proceeding with dates set down for Jetstar to file a defense and the AFAP to file a rebuttal. The case is strong – ring the AFAP or the pilot reps. They even have legal precedent backing up their case. The bond AND the training repayment schedule ARE NOT legally enforceable under a common law contract. This means that the cadets (or any pilot on a common law contract) can walk away from Jetstar tomorrow and not pay a cent back to Jetstar. This idea has legal precedence in the Federal Court. This completely undermines Jetstars plan to employ pilots on contract. Jetstar have no way of legally compelling the cadets to pay back the $80K (Advanced) or $150K (ab initio) or FO’s 40K.

Jetstar have been completely blindsided by the AFAP’s action which simply states that a common law contract must comply with the Air Pilots Award. This premise has legal precedent. Jetstar were probably expecting a sham contracting argument that has no precedent under the current legislation. If this (sham contracting) argument is lost would set a very dangerous precedent for the Qantas group. The AFAP can still run the sham contracting argument – but it is not without risk. Why would you blunder into a fight when your opponent is expecting and anticipating your every move? (again – wait for AIPA’s next move) For the moment, I cannot fault the strategy of the AFAP. They have stopped contract recruitment, and are applying the screws via their continuing court action to bring the cadets under the EBA.
Tony the Tiler is offline