Busdriver007 wrote
Credit where credit's due!
Nice propaganda piece. It could be used in a study of fictional revisionism. However, cast your eyes back to a previous AIPA insights from May 2011.
Whilst the AFAP has sought to stop the Company from employing cadets and first officers by issuing legal proceedings in the Federal Court, these proceedings only address the ancillary issues as to whether the contracts of, or offered to, cadets and first officers within Jetstar Group Pty Ltd meet the minimum terms and conditions in the Air Pilots Award 2010. It does not in any way address the core issue that these pilots should have been employed under the EBA in the first place, rather than the Air Pilots Award.
Accordingly, we will be demanding that the Company provide AIPA with a written undertaking that it acknowledges that it is the employer of the cadets and first officers, and that it will comply with the EBA with regard to their employment. If the Company refuses to accede to our demands, AIPA will commence legal proceedings against the Company, independent to those brought by the AFAP, to tackle the core and real issue.
In 2011 AIPA were saying that breaches of the Air Pilots Award were ‘ancillary’ and didn’t address the core issue. Yet it is exactly those breaches of the Air Pilots Award that the AFAP first identified in their Federal court action in 2011 that were the basis of the penalties just handed down.
Strange that AIPA find it necessary to now try to claim credit for penalties awarded in a case that was based on what they originally ****canned.
The AFAP’s proceedings were spot on, Jetstar breached the Air Pilots Award, and the Fair Work Ombudsman followed up on the breach the AFAP’s case highlighted.
Fair Work Ombudsman v Jetstar Airways Ltd [2014] FCA 33
It speaks volumes that no one thought it worthwhile to mention AIPA in the decision.
The next thing you know, AIPA will be claim to be instrumental in making the sun rise!!!