Talks About Talks
Copy of Vice President Professional’s post on CPrune, 11th March 2002:
These are my recollections and views…
"Talks about talks" comprised a series of meetings last year between ****, ****, ****, **** and me. The meetings were brokered behind the scenes by the work of several non-Committee
members. The purpose of the meetings was to establish whether or not there existed sufficient common ground to
enter a formal negotiation to resolve contract, rostering and 49er issues. A wide range of ideas were exchanged
and discussed during those meetings but they were just that – ideas. Offers are made during negotiations - “talks
about talks” was not a negotiation. It was about sharing where each side could go in the hope of getting a mandate
to enter formal negotiations.
Where the Company felt they could go with contract (pay structures, retirement age, timeframe, freighters, Clause
35, sickness management etc) was more than encouraging. To the credit of the Company the plan looked good.
My feeling was that a negotiation on contract alone would have produced a resolution acceptable to the majority of
our membership and equally importantly, would serve our airline well in the years ahead.
Rostering was, and always has been, a more tricky area. My feeling was that in the context of a package deal, we
had room to make sufficient concessions with rostering such that a negotiation would have produced a resolution
acceptable to the majority of the membership.
That left the very complex 49er issue. Clearly it was always going to be fundamental to both sides. Unfortunately
we were unable to come up with a mutually acceptable way to deal with it. The Company suggested hypothetically
that all the 49ers could apply to CX and those deemed acceptable may be offered a job. There was no indication
sought and no indication given as to “numbers”. The COS/seniority issue was no obstacle for either side. We were
dissatisfied because such a process lacks the transparency required to ensure fairness. We explored a range of
hypothetical alternatives such as full reinstatement or both sides reviewing the files or independent assessment or
arbitration, confidentiality agreements, media bans, “face savers” and others but unfortunately the Company
representatives did not have the mandate to agree to any of them.
The Company subsequently put out a newsletter describing “talks about talks” and that newsletter was factual with
respect to contract and rostering. Concerning the 49ers, the newsletter stated that the Association representatives
insisted on total reinstatement even for pilots now employed elsewhere. That was disappointing because it was not
a true statement and not consistent with the openness and honesty which otherwise characterised the talks.
I said during the talks and have said consistently at various Focus Nights since; it is not the remit of any union to
prevent members from being held accountable for wrongful acts. The remit of any union should be to seek fair
treatment for members through a fair process. Ultimately for the 49er issue to be considered properly resolved it
will be irrespective of “numbers”. Rather, someone in our Association will one day have to be in a position to
undertake to the membership that the process (whatever that may be) was proper and that each of the 49ers was
treated fairly. In my view, to do otherwise would be to call into question the very reason for having a union and just
as disturbingly, would call into question whether this great airline is still a career airline.
I suggest we get more unified, be patient and work hard for resolution together.
*** ******
shortly, this was written by one of the GC members that was there. I think "someone in authority" has come clean, months ago. Is this enough for you?
Now stop calling the members of the GC and the AOA President liars!