Deskjocky

OK, see your point- thanks for that!

The Actuator

ERJ135 - I'm trying to figure out what your angle is with your last comment -
"Sometimes one has to wonder "who" will have a great part to play in the real demise of SAA..?" Correct me if I'm wrong but you seem to be suggesting that if the pilot's at SAA were pushing for a pay rise this would cripple the airline further. If that is indeed what you mean allow me to clarify a few things.

Firstly - You get paid what you can negotiate - PERIOD. No more no less. The company will try to pay you the minimum they can to keep you in a position of relative comfort and the pilots will try to better that.
Secondly - The onus is on management to negotiate and understand the agreements they sign and the long term implications thereof. If they fail to do this it does not become the pilot's perogative to bail them out.
Thirdly - if as you claim the pilots are PUSHING for a 34% pay hike then that is what they have negotiated in terms of their agreements. Of course if the company is unable to pony up, perhaps management would be willing to repay the bonuses that they have recieved in the time period it has taken them to comply with the pilot's agreements - I ain't holding my breath.

What surprises me is that you seem to be having a go at the salaries at SAA in comparisom to the rest of the market. It seems to me that the pilots at SAA have proven (with arbitration) that they are underpaid in terms of the international market. That should be good news for all pilots in our country because it should surely follow that it would be a cinch to prove you are underpaid if you are paid less than what SAA pilots are paid - get thee to the negotiating table I say.

Q4NVS

To clarify, I say one gets paid what one is worth (in context).

Sure, if all 737 drivers as an example, were worth R1.3 mil or whatever per crew, where does that leave the guys at CE for instance?

I understand that they did not negotiate for better and therefore have to take what they get, but hey, I'm willling to bet my last $ that if they were given the option, they would probably have those jobs than nothing at all..

My opinion (mayb it sounds a bit socialistic, but I assure you that is not my inclination): If one is worth so much more and is feeling hard done by it, why not go where one can get what one deserves. If you have to go overseas, then go.

Secondly (and this is what I am trying to say), if the company (whatever it may be, not necessarily only SAA), is making millions or billions, then surely one can get compensated through a proper Profit Share system. A proper system such as this, can easily double or triple one's annual income (I've been there..).

But, when things are going bad as they are, one sometimes has to keep the bigger picture in mind in order to maintain sustainability not only for oneselve but also for those to follow.

Wrt to the training aspect, it is expensive yes, but cannot be close to the Total Cost to Company, as affected trough huge salary packages.

All I say, as it is not really my business anyway, is that I would hate to see SAA go through a scenario where the company is simply shutdown and a month or two later reopened under another similar name, in order to rid itself of all these agreements etc. (aka Swiss Air versus Swiss).

NOTHING is impossible and NOBODY invincible, ask the guys at ENRON...

Deskjocky

The Actuator- this is very emotive issue, you are right -you get what you negotiate- but you should apply your argument both ways- if top management come on board with a contract that says he gets a bonus and the company agrees, then he must get his bonus! Why should he pay it back? Do I agree with it when the top dog gets his cash- of course not, but he has it in black and white…

reptile

This is a very important point, with SAA being the highest benchmark in the South African market, an increase there would certainly have a ripple effect.

CE (and for that matter a number of smaller operators) cannot be used as an example - pilots are not organised in a strong union and therefore unably to negotiate fair wages.

The Actuator

ERJ135 you say
"To clarify, I say one gets paid what one is worth (in context)."
You and I would have to disagree. Nobody gets paid what they are worth because that would involve subjective opinions. If it was the case our teachers and non corrupt policeman would get top dollar and politicians would get the least - no? You get paid what you negotiate - that's it.
Then you say
"If one is worth so much more and is feeling hard done by it, why not go where one can get what one deserves. If you have to go overseas, then go."
Nobody feels hard done by, I don't want to go overseas and no, again you won't get what you deserve. If profit share was what we agreed to then yes one would have to take ones medicine but this is not what was NEGOTIATED!
We are very much aware of the state of the company and the point I was making to you was that it is not the pilot's fault and so we ought to be compensated in the manner that our agreements say we should. None of these agreements are as onerous as the company would have the public believe and NONE of them were agreed to in isolation. For example if we have a free ticket available to us then it was negotiated in lieu of cash that was due, if we may use the business class lounge then it was negotiated in lieu of some or other benefit that was due etc etc.
If you scrap every agreement you have to revert to what was due (impossible to calculate but I would bet far more onerous).
Management must take responsibility for their actions - that is why they get the big cash when things go right but if your managerial skills are such that you cause a huge loss should you still be entitled to your bonus?
- If that's what you negotiated then yes . You cannot then come and cry that it is the pilot's salaries that are killing the company.
Deskjockey that is precisely my argument... if you have it in black and white... as we do. Now they blame us and our agreements for the state of the company, when what is required is leadership and management. The point about them paying back - we have been negotiating for 3 years now and have only taken minimal increases, whilst negotiating they have taken the normal bonuses (sp) and now cannot afford to pay what is due. Don't forget this is a company that "announced" an unheard of profit and turnaround last year, one year on and we are up the creek....smoke and mirrors me thinks
Thanks for the back up reptile.

GreenOnGo

Well said bro!

It is far too easy for an airline in trouble to point fingers at "excessive" pilot wages.

T Hairy Henry

I think you'll find that it's not the pay that is going to be the issue. The main thing for SAA to get a grip of for its new LCC will be the productivity of the pilots.
easyJet and Ryanair pilots fly around 850 hours each year. Do you think you boys down south would be up for that?

GreenOnGo

Productivity is going to be a big issue in any airline these days. The days when a senior pilot could earn USD300000 pa and only fly one or two trips a month are fast passing. For the big bucks, companies are now increasingly expecting the big hours.

The market is competitive, for sure, so we all need to do our bit. However, when faced with management stuff ups and strategic messes, it is hard to feel enamoured when these same management boys stroll off with big bonuses.

For example, I'm sure many pilots would be happy to fly more hours than they are at the moment, but are less inclined to spend that extra time deadheading around unproductively because management can't get its ducks in a row and put the pilots rated on a particular aircraft in the correct base for that aircraft.

T Hairy Henry

If the new carrier only has one aircraft type, as per the traditional low cost model, AND the airline recruits the relevant type rated pilots on new contracts, then this should no longer be a problem!

reptile

That seems to be the plan.

New AOC -> means new regulating agreements -> means much higher productivity.

GreenOnGo

Very true T Hairy. That was just one example though.

A true and "traditional" LCC that wants to be successful had better be based on the very lowest costs throughout the company. You will have to have the minimum staff, lowest cost per aircraft and VERY high utilization. Can this be achieved when leasing aircraft that are already over-priced? It doesn't neccesarily mean low pay for the pilots though, and I only mention them because this is PPruNe.

The boys in this job will graft for their bucks. They will, or should, be doing max duty every day with min turns, whilst doing the fuelling, W&B and helping out with the cleaning. They will be working 1000 hours a year. In return, and for this, they should get an equitable pay. It is a hard game, and will make you old fast. Will the SAA boys wanna part of this?

We seem to have diverted off the discussion that was being held and back onto the topic.........

Q4NVS

I understand (from my point of view) that at the moment, as in any company in trouble, there are more questions and frustrations, than answers...

But hey, for now all we can do is ask them and who knows, someone might just end up asking the right one at the right time

"In this world there is no security, only opportunities"
John C. Maxwell

Reptile
You seem to know most about this SAA LCC.
How do you see them putting this to work wrt crew etc.

Is it true that SAAPA is rumoured to approach the SAX union asking them not to accept these conditions or aircraft..?

reptile

I believe that the new AOC will come into effect once SAA and SAX is moved to DTI. By creating the LCC as a seperate entity, and thus "ring fencing" the pilots who will fly those aircraft, new regulating agreements will come into effect. To achieve maximum productivity, you need to; a) fly more, or b) get paid less, or for the best result, c) fly more and get paid less. Option c would be what they are aiming for.

No need for SAAPA to approach SAXPA. The quality of life for SAX drivers will be as adversely affected as those at SAA. I still believe that the powers that be will get it right though. SAA scope clause states that only SAA pilots may drive SAA aircraft, however, the 738's are leased, and that means once thay are utilised by the LCC, they are strictly no longer SAA aircraft. Secondly, there are many (young) drivers at SAX who would jump at the opportunity to get their hands on the 738, even if it means more work and less pay. Thirdly, there are a good number of SAA SFO's who are realising that SAA's fast tracking of certain demographic groups will mean a much longer wait in the right hand seat - and there you have your source of captains.

The willingness of many pilots to work their asses of for peanuts in order to get a good rating is going to play nicely into the hands of the bean counters - to the long term detriment of every single pilot in the market. This has unfortunate been happening for a number of years (Nationwide, Interair, etc, etc).

Pilots need backbone and a united front now more than ever, or our quality of life will slowly be eroded - worldwide!

Solid Rust Twotter

The number of unemployed pilots out there is going to make this a very difficult proposition. Asking someone on the bones of his arse to stand firm and not accept that job to further the agenda of those already employed has little chance of success. The longer term implications are not really at the forefront when the rent is due yesterday.

reptile

SRT - you are 100% correct. That is exactly why the bean counters will succeed in marginalising pilots to second rate citizens in their own industry.

GreenOnGo

You only have to look at the discussion on the D&G forum regarding Qantas and Jetstar to see a similar situation and a dark warning for the future.

Q4NVS

Could the crew also be an ex SAA SFO (as PIC) + SAA Cadet with limited time at Airlink or SAX?

Just thinking in terms of the cost structure then.. Even cheaper still...

Shrike200

Or how about this? Just grab the pilot/cabin crew at CE? For that you would, in one fell swoop get:

a) Pilots/crew who are accustomed to working 1000 hrs in 11 months.
b)...for less than EVERYONE else in the local airline market (so just offer them slighly more, with better perks, not difficult at all)
c) who are basically type rated (if one were to use B73X's), or would require only differences courses (for B733/4/5/)
d) the chance to demolish one of your competitors on local routes in one go.
e) Pilots/crew who are accustomed to working in a LCC environment.
f) Pilots who are accustomed to working sans union, who just get their heads down and do the job.

Shew, I could become a businessman yet!

(Tongue firmly in cheek there.... )

Deskjocky

I have a question, if you hold a B732 type rating, to convert onto a B738 do you only need to do a differences course or do you need a whole new rating?
This actually happened in the late 90's SAA went on a major recruiting drive amonst Comair and Nationwide cabin crew- caused major disruptions to both carriers operations at the time I remember