I am a long time pprune poster and have the interests of pilots in mind.
It is drawing a very long bow to assume that an FWA ruling is comprehensive enough to withstand scruitiny re industrial type PAs. QF can dismiss the concerned pilots summarily and they then have to fight for their jobs. If the union encouraged the PAs and the result is unfavourable, the union is in trouble also.
My opinion is that QF will be satisfied with what they can achieve. Outcome for pilots can be disasterous when it is not necessary to take this risk. Just like in 1989, union executive are getting the support of members. Executive led industrial choices need to be much safer for members.
QF most fears subtle work to rules. Those that refuse to consider this excellent possibility are digging a deep hole. No QF pilot deliberatley flys into a Cb, accepts a high sink rate on final, accepts an obvious unservicable aircraft, fronts up for sim without previewing the planned exercises, or acts impulsively landing at high speed half way down a wet runway. When these things are accepted, there can be difficulties as we all know.
So when it comes to industrial matters, they do not apply the general principles of safe flight operation learnt over decades. Beats me why QF pilots decide to engage in risky behaviour that has a better chance of benefitting management
Unbelievable! No excuse for risky action. Like there is no other choice?
In 1989 our executive refused to consider work to rules.. Only God knows why. Don't let your executive lead you down that same path.
Last edited by autoflight; 20th Jul 2011 at 23:47.