Well I will start with by saying that I have had my issues with the way trustees have dealt with claims over the years. But I will say one very clear and absolutely unambiguous outcome I would rather deal with them than an insurance company anytime.
The only cover for LOL that is not an insurance company is the MBF. It is pilots looking after pilots. The alternate is a two bob POM based in London with no interest in the outcome other than the underwriting policy.
Yes there are times when the trustees are required to say no due rules or viewpoint but I would much rather someone that actually knows what you do than the shiny pants in in an insurance office.
What I do know is that the campaign to discredit MBF needs to take into account that two
VB pilots have been paid out in last few weeks to the tune of a $1 million show me the track record of the ‘snake’ fund which is underwritten by an insurance office on their payouts???
If the pilots have an issue they can and do approach individual trustees for discussion and at times go through the formal process of the rules. Where is the shock and horror in that??
Give it break boys & girls and look sensibly at what this is about trying to deride something that your predecessors set up in 1961 to look after pilots not an insurance company. I can give you many examples of companies who have denied claims regularly (NJS, QantasLink, etc) as against the MBF who have occasional issues covered under their rules and access to assistance from fellow pilots.
Go to an insurance company and cop the pain but please do not say the MBF is the same as it is not.
As usual happy to put my name to this rather than hide and provide b******t as fact.
Lawrie Cox
Manager – Industrial Relations
Australian Federation of Air Pilots