What The Real Problem Is In South African Contract Flying
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: East
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What The Real Problem Is In South African Contract Flying
Yours truly is now ready to “gooi” another “klip in die bos” after my “klippies & coke” into an industry that I know quite well.
Many of us older contract dogs will remember the Rossair days and end saga’s fondly and some sadly. During my time at this company I actually managed to make a bit of money because the rand dollar was then in my favor and I reached a stage of my life where my family became a lot more important to me than “braaivleis rugby and Chevrolet!” in sunny South Africa and we migrated to Canada.
Initially I did some work for Rossair from Canada and then after their collapse I worked for different Organizations that does Contract Flying, two were Canadian Companies and also some South African ones. Thus I have been around the patch and have seen the movie in the world’s nice places that Lonely Planet says do not exist.
For a start there are four elements in this contract game and they are the actual Flight Operations Department and those are the guys that pole the aeries through the skies. Then you have the Engineers and without good ones you can just as well close the shop before you even start because they are the ones that keep the aircraft serviceable. Then you got the “Main Office” in Johburg that are the Back Up staff, they make sure you have a ticket to come and go, and actually arrive on the date required and leave on the day your contract is over. And the last main peanut in the packet are the clients or aka WFP, the so called World Food Program a UN side kick with an empire in Rome.
So let us deal with the dynamics of who actually makes the money for the contract company and those are the qualified guys that have a thing in their pockets called a license and a logbook that shows enough experience. Very few Contract Dogs are prima Donnas. Most Contract Dogs are professionals that get on with the job of fixing the aerie or actually flying it under very trying circumstances. Without “those people that earn good money” for living like H
ts in the bush, eat ****, get Malaria, put up with idiot WFP “aviation emperors” and then still have a 14 year old kid shove an AK up your nose before a breakfast of bully beef and cold coffee are the ones that actually ensure that the bosses back home have a nice car to drive and the backup staff have jobs in air-conditioned offices.
But for this to happen the backup staff in the offices have no idea how to run or manage a contract or an aviation crew roster for two very simple reasons. They are staffed by people that have no concept of the field as a bigger picture and they think on behalf of you that flying you in and out on time is not of importance to you. Normally they have a cheapskate accountant that was a failure in most industries in the first place and he holds the purse strings and cut corners with aircraft parts and crew salaries. By doing this you end off with an aircraft in the field that has two “O” rings that are the “parts inventory” and field crew that are screwed around because salaries “that sound oh so big” can be hived off by letting crew that have planned time off with family stay longer with no notifications!
The next horror in the saga is that each given contract is wholly understaffed so you cannot effectively manage a crew roster & with the pilots and engineers that you have. The fact that “there aren’t any guys” actually translates to a thing called “supply and demand”. The short term solution to this is that the so called Chief Pilot that stays in the office and the Chief Engineer that start making promises to the crew that cannot effectively be kept and the crew is rotated at very quick intervals all over the world. These promises range from a cushier posting to a command upgrade or a rating. This has the knock on effect that the contract that you initially have to staff is still wholly underfunded with lack of crew, parts and resources. This has a continued knock on effect that keeps going around in circles.
The only way to really run a contract is ask two questions. The first one is what is the aircraft that you are placing on contract worth, and secondly what is the contract income realization out of this contract worth to the company? Once you have these answers you see very quickly that in sheer terms of money you are in the same league as road builders and construction crews that have a specific set method of standards and we can take something from their book and that is:
1. You are hired at a market related salary for the conditions you will be deployed to fly a specific make of aircraft in a specific capacity for the term of that contract.
2. You have the crew to back up the above when they go on R&R.
3. You have the engineer and his back up in place.
4. You have ENOUGH parts with the aircraft to be deployed or you make darn sure you can get them on the contract if something goes wrong under the terms to which YOU agreed to supply an aircraft.
5. You make sure the crew is sufficient to fulfill the FDP requirements of the client and you make sure that if needed more flying can be done because in simple terms more flying means more hours and after 20 years I know that WFP is incapable of making any rational decision based on experience because there staff is generally unemployable in any other industry on earth so they are by default generally idiots that used to fly for a piss pot country’s air force and knows dangerously to much about flying and to little about management. Capacity does not mean more aircraft necessarily; it means more crew to fly the one aircraft you have on that contract to ensure that no FDP stoppages occur.
6. You don’t get a 22 – year old Gofer to run the field base because he is fundamentally not trained to manage a ground operation that involves several million dollars; he is a trained pilot and not a paper shuffler.
7. You make sure that the crew roster is pre planned for a year so you can get good deals on airlines to fly crew in and out on time and you do not deviate from that and low and behold you will find that pilots are actually people and all people have one desire they want to plan their lives! Thus they can do by knowing how long and for how much they will work in what capacity and actually also do little things for themselves to make life more bearable while on contract.
8. Now all you have to do is look at the Zimex stability and how they pay and treat all their field based crews and maybe a thing called “wow” will happen in your planning schedules!
If only this is done you might actually run a successful enough contract that will be renewed in your favor. But for stability you must realize that greed will break you and that a slower and paced growth will increase your fleet and staff capacity and stability over the long term. It might mean that WFP will have to go back to the drawing board and decide if they really want safe operators and operations then they should actually pay for it and not get it on the backs of the field crews that are busting their asses day in and day out. Sadly as no South African Contractor will actually tell WFP to go and fck themselves and pay so much per hour for an operation they will keep on shafting the field crews and show very little real if any stable long term growth.
Today we see a very interesting thing happening and my crystal ball tells me that in about 18 months time the existing South African Field crews will be swallowed up by the bigger airlines as the industry is on the move, leaving hundreds of youngsters with 400 hours on piston pounders that do not meet the WFP requirements on the ground. Once this happen the industry will grind to a halt and for this collapse to be avoided contract companies must now band together and ensure that WFP pays enough money so that everyone can be well funded, including the aircraft and the staff. Your staff is the only real long term effective asset that could give you stable and long term growth. Everything else can be replaced, but good staff that you lose is lost forever.
Many of us older contract dogs will remember the Rossair days and end saga’s fondly and some sadly. During my time at this company I actually managed to make a bit of money because the rand dollar was then in my favor and I reached a stage of my life where my family became a lot more important to me than “braaivleis rugby and Chevrolet!” in sunny South Africa and we migrated to Canada.
Initially I did some work for Rossair from Canada and then after their collapse I worked for different Organizations that does Contract Flying, two were Canadian Companies and also some South African ones. Thus I have been around the patch and have seen the movie in the world’s nice places that Lonely Planet says do not exist.
For a start there are four elements in this contract game and they are the actual Flight Operations Department and those are the guys that pole the aeries through the skies. Then you have the Engineers and without good ones you can just as well close the shop before you even start because they are the ones that keep the aircraft serviceable. Then you got the “Main Office” in Johburg that are the Back Up staff, they make sure you have a ticket to come and go, and actually arrive on the date required and leave on the day your contract is over. And the last main peanut in the packet are the clients or aka WFP, the so called World Food Program a UN side kick with an empire in Rome.
So let us deal with the dynamics of who actually makes the money for the contract company and those are the qualified guys that have a thing in their pockets called a license and a logbook that shows enough experience. Very few Contract Dogs are prima Donnas. Most Contract Dogs are professionals that get on with the job of fixing the aerie or actually flying it under very trying circumstances. Without “those people that earn good money” for living like H
ts in the bush, eat ****, get Malaria, put up with idiot WFP “aviation emperors” and then still have a 14 year old kid shove an AK up your nose before a breakfast of bully beef and cold coffee are the ones that actually ensure that the bosses back home have a nice car to drive and the backup staff have jobs in air-conditioned offices.But for this to happen the backup staff in the offices have no idea how to run or manage a contract or an aviation crew roster for two very simple reasons. They are staffed by people that have no concept of the field as a bigger picture and they think on behalf of you that flying you in and out on time is not of importance to you. Normally they have a cheapskate accountant that was a failure in most industries in the first place and he holds the purse strings and cut corners with aircraft parts and crew salaries. By doing this you end off with an aircraft in the field that has two “O” rings that are the “parts inventory” and field crew that are screwed around because salaries “that sound oh so big” can be hived off by letting crew that have planned time off with family stay longer with no notifications!
The next horror in the saga is that each given contract is wholly understaffed so you cannot effectively manage a crew roster & with the pilots and engineers that you have. The fact that “there aren’t any guys” actually translates to a thing called “supply and demand”. The short term solution to this is that the so called Chief Pilot that stays in the office and the Chief Engineer that start making promises to the crew that cannot effectively be kept and the crew is rotated at very quick intervals all over the world. These promises range from a cushier posting to a command upgrade or a rating. This has the knock on effect that the contract that you initially have to staff is still wholly underfunded with lack of crew, parts and resources. This has a continued knock on effect that keeps going around in circles.
The only way to really run a contract is ask two questions. The first one is what is the aircraft that you are placing on contract worth, and secondly what is the contract income realization out of this contract worth to the company? Once you have these answers you see very quickly that in sheer terms of money you are in the same league as road builders and construction crews that have a specific set method of standards and we can take something from their book and that is:
1. You are hired at a market related salary for the conditions you will be deployed to fly a specific make of aircraft in a specific capacity for the term of that contract.
2. You have the crew to back up the above when they go on R&R.
3. You have the engineer and his back up in place.
4. You have ENOUGH parts with the aircraft to be deployed or you make darn sure you can get them on the contract if something goes wrong under the terms to which YOU agreed to supply an aircraft.
5. You make sure the crew is sufficient to fulfill the FDP requirements of the client and you make sure that if needed more flying can be done because in simple terms more flying means more hours and after 20 years I know that WFP is incapable of making any rational decision based on experience because there staff is generally unemployable in any other industry on earth so they are by default generally idiots that used to fly for a piss pot country’s air force and knows dangerously to much about flying and to little about management. Capacity does not mean more aircraft necessarily; it means more crew to fly the one aircraft you have on that contract to ensure that no FDP stoppages occur.
6. You don’t get a 22 – year old Gofer to run the field base because he is fundamentally not trained to manage a ground operation that involves several million dollars; he is a trained pilot and not a paper shuffler.
7. You make sure that the crew roster is pre planned for a year so you can get good deals on airlines to fly crew in and out on time and you do not deviate from that and low and behold you will find that pilots are actually people and all people have one desire they want to plan their lives! Thus they can do by knowing how long and for how much they will work in what capacity and actually also do little things for themselves to make life more bearable while on contract.
8. Now all you have to do is look at the Zimex stability and how they pay and treat all their field based crews and maybe a thing called “wow” will happen in your planning schedules!
If only this is done you might actually run a successful enough contract that will be renewed in your favor. But for stability you must realize that greed will break you and that a slower and paced growth will increase your fleet and staff capacity and stability over the long term. It might mean that WFP will have to go back to the drawing board and decide if they really want safe operators and operations then they should actually pay for it and not get it on the backs of the field crews that are busting their asses day in and day out. Sadly as no South African Contractor will actually tell WFP to go and f
ck themselves and pay so much per hour for an operation they will keep on shafting the field crews and show very little real if any stable long term growth.Today we see a very interesting thing happening and my crystal ball tells me that in about 18 months time the existing South African Field crews will be swallowed up by the bigger airlines as the industry is on the move, leaving hundreds of youngsters with 400 hours on piston pounders that do not meet the WFP requirements on the ground. Once this happen the industry will grind to a halt and for this collapse to be avoided contract companies must now band together and ensure that WFP pays enough money so that everyone can be well funded, including the aircraft and the staff. Your staff is the only real long term effective asset that could give you stable and long term growth. Everything else can be replaced, but good staff that you lose is lost forever.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: In the Spiral
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Expansion
Great post SAT BOS
And there is not one contract company (except NAC) at Lanseria that are not buying more aircraft. Interesting thing is that these new aircraft don't fall in the "grey" part 61 area and all require ATP drivers, not even to mention UN requirements..
Are we looking into the same crystal ball here??
And there is not one contract company (except NAC) at Lanseria that are not buying more aircraft. Interesting thing is that these new aircraft don't fall in the "grey" part 61 area and all require ATP drivers, not even to mention UN requirements..
Are we looking into the same crystal ball here??
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: world
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Solution to the problem
At the end of the day we ,Captain , are in charge.Well we all need to grow in self estime and start to say NO!!!
1)Ground the aeroplane
2)Do not accept contracts without garantee
3)we have to be one word against abuse
Riccardo Volante
1)Ground the aeroplane
2)Do not accept contracts without garantee
3)we have to be one word against abuse
Riccardo Volante
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Still looking for a place
Posts: 351
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1900 D.
Beech 19.
..
Just a slight change here..they grey area in Part 61 is not so grey after all, as even now it is also not so grey.
I take it that you are referring to the 1900.
Well so soooorrry for a lot of people, the D model, with more than 9 pax is a two crew aeroplane and requires an ATP captain....take a look at the MEL and you will see as clear as the day.
For those of you who think I am talking trollip, take a chance with your comm as PIC and see what is now going to happen.
Sorry chaps, but certain people have been pushing the boundaries, and now is the time to say, enough is enough.
If there is an accident (please no), the insurance is going to say no, up yours, the poor comm peeloot is going to be sued for all his hard earned
bucks and have his licence suspended.
But regardless of having an accident, comm pilots in command of D models, think twice before polling as PIC.
Goffel by the office.
..
Just a slight change here..they grey area in Part 61 is not so grey after all, as even now it is also not so grey.
I take it that you are referring to the 1900.
Well so soooorrry for a lot of people, the D model, with more than 9 pax is a two crew aeroplane and requires an ATP captain....take a look at the MEL and you will see as clear as the day.
For those of you who think I am talking trollip, take a chance with your comm as PIC and see what is now going to happen.
Sorry chaps, but certain people have been pushing the boundaries, and now is the time to say, enough is enough.
If there is an accident (please no), the insurance is going to say no, up yours, the poor comm peeloot is going to be sued for all his hard earned
bucks and have his licence suspended.
But regardless of having an accident, comm pilots in command of D models, think twice before polling as PIC.
Goffel by the office.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: In the Spiral
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Goffel
Yes I am refering to 1900's and I do know about the regs but there is still operators that do fly CPL's in the left seat which me off because it's keeping the salaries low for us ATP drivers.
Time will tell....
Yes I am refering to 1900's and I do know about the regs but there is still operators that do fly CPL's in the left seat which
me off because it's keeping the salaries low for us ATP drivers.Time will tell....
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Still looking for a place
Posts: 351
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No more comm PIC on D model
Yep, it certainly does mess up the market for the guys that have sat down, slaved, and eventually (some of you anyway), passed those elusive ATP exams, only to now go off to the boss man with your green book and ask for a raise.
The boss man takes one look and laughs whilst you stand there all twittered.
Plenty of comm pilots out there that can fly the 1900 on contract at half the price, take it or leave it...so what do you do, you HAVE to take it otherwise you are without a job.
I'm certainly not saying the ATP pilot is better than a comm pilot, but hells bells, there is a law regarding the weight category.
Funnily enough the very (one of them),guys that are screwing the system are the very guys that inadvertently faxed thru the D's MEL to CAA where it states that with more than 9 pax, it reverts to either a definite 2 crew, (which means an ATP), or you get rid of the excess seats.
Now we all know that there are no excess seats sitting in the hangar....so, put an ATP pilot in the left seat or face the consequences that are about to be implimented, (they were always were there, but never enforced).
Hopefully the ATP pilots will demand more pay, the contract pilots will be happier.
By the way, have you ever seen a chief pilot, when he was just a common peeeloot.....ranted and raved about those beautiful conditions, the excellent food, busting of FDP's, which was brilliant as it gave you more hours for the logbook, the having to stay on for another two weeks because the clever accountant refused to let go of extra funds to pay for your relief to arrive on time, so you got another 2 weeks work,or holiday.......
Now as soon as he becomes the hoof peeeloot, he forgets his friends and buggers the whole system up, has brown rings around his toes from slurping the boss's ass, and is adamant those times were the best times he ever had.
Ja well no fine........when the operator's screw the system, they must remember that some of the peeeloots do have friends in positions that can help the peeeelooots.
Goffel on the warpath..
The boss man takes one look and laughs whilst you stand there all twittered.
Plenty of comm pilots out there that can fly the 1900 on contract at half the price, take it or leave it...so what do you do, you HAVE to take it otherwise you are without a job.
I'm certainly not saying the ATP pilot is better than a comm pilot, but hells bells, there is a law regarding the weight category.
Funnily enough the very (one of them),guys that are screwing the system are the very guys that inadvertently faxed thru the D's MEL to CAA where it states that with more than 9 pax, it reverts to either a definite 2 crew, (which means an ATP), or you get rid of the excess seats.
Now we all know that there are no excess seats sitting in the hangar....so, put an ATP pilot in the left seat or face the consequences that are about to be implimented, (they were always were there, but never enforced).
Hopefully the ATP pilots will demand more pay, the contract pilots will be happier.
By the way, have you ever seen a chief pilot, when he was just a common peeeloot.....ranted and raved about those beautiful conditions, the excellent food, busting of FDP's, which was brilliant as it gave you more hours for the logbook, the having to stay on for another two weeks because the clever accountant refused to let go of extra funds to pay for your relief to arrive on time, so you got another 2 weeks work,or holiday.......
Now as soon as he becomes the hoof peeeloot, he forgets his friends and buggers the whole system up, has brown rings around his toes from slurping the boss's ass, and is adamant those times were the best times he ever had.
Ja well no fine........when the operator's screw the system, they must remember that some of the peeeloots do have friends in positions that can help the peeeelooots.
Goffel on the warpath..
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Thank GOD for engineers! I sometimes know my co-pilots name.
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Contract flying
One of the best posts I have ever seen-I will sleep on this one, but don't fret, I will throw my 2 Zim dollars in tomorrow!!
Count on it!
Count on it!
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Thank GOD for engineers! I sometimes know my co-pilots name.
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ex Air Force Mentality
I hope that you differentiate between ex Air Force pilots and ex Air Force Management.(Present management included) The folks that I flew with during some difficult years were ,some of the finest human beings that I have ever been associated with.
Some of these gentlemen I am sorry to say are no longer with us, they made the ultimate sacrifice and there, but for the grace of GOD go I.
Some of these gentlemen I am sorry to say are no longer with us, they made the ultimate sacrifice and there, but for the grace of GOD go I.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Planet Tharg
Posts: 2,472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately, the good guys are screwed over by the dodgy barstewards at every opportunity. Most of them are just gritting their teeth and trying to hold out until retirement without moering someone.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too true Sat Boss
I have often wondered at the sheer waste of money through poor planning, and the fact that no-one ever seems to make the connection between a stable contented workforce and the bottom line. You are so right about putting a 22 year old gopher in a pivotal position that he/she has no interest in or training for (in many cases).
High crew turnover is very evident to the clients, a lesser service is provided since crews are less familiar with the operation, training costs are higher, maintenance costs increase. Most importantly high crew turnover has safety implications and the cost of a single accident can be catastrophic.
Zimex is an excellent case in point - they pay their crews well, treat them well, and the crew turnover is a fraction of the South African contract companies.
I have often wondered at the sheer waste of money through poor planning, and the fact that no-one ever seems to make the connection between a stable contented workforce and the bottom line. You are so right about putting a 22 year old gopher in a pivotal position that he/she has no interest in or training for (in many cases).
High crew turnover is very evident to the clients, a lesser service is provided since crews are less familiar with the operation, training costs are higher, maintenance costs increase. Most importantly high crew turnover has safety implications and the cost of a single accident can be catastrophic.
Zimex is an excellent case in point - they pay their crews well, treat them well, and the crew turnover is a fraction of the South African contract companies.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: In the Spiral
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crew turnover
Spot on Woof etc.
These companies all want to learn the hard way by the looks of it. They all have million dollar contracts in hand and to pay a Captain $10 000 odd a month wont even show on the annual budget as they are paid in excess of this by the client on a monthly basis by the client for a "suitable" and experienced Captain. But, instead they use this deficit to pay for airfares and other crew salaries etc. When will they wake up? When all the suitable drivers has left to greener pastures???
I feel sorry for the wannabees because this might ruin the contract industry in the long run and then everyone will have to revert to circuit bashing to build up their hours.
Not a good thing bosses, wake up and look after your crew!
These companies all want to learn the hard way by the looks of it. They all have million dollar contracts in hand and to pay a Captain $10 000 odd a month wont even show on the annual budget as they are paid in excess of this by the client on a monthly basis by the client for a "suitable" and experienced Captain. But, instead they use this deficit to pay for airfares and other crew salaries etc. When will they wake up? When all the suitable drivers has left to greener pastures???
I feel sorry for the wannabees because this might ruin the contract industry in the long run and then everyone will have to revert to circuit bashing to build up their hours.
Not a good thing bosses, wake up and look after your crew!
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: London
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cpl/b1900
Goffel
The fact that you sujest that seats be removed to make the 1900 into a 9 seater means zip, zero, didly scuat. The aircraft is certified as a 19 seater, and if you remove the seats you have to recertify the aircraft as a 9 seater. Remember the old system when some 200s were Part 121 and some part 91. In the states this is a reg now, for 200 with more than 8 pax seat needs to have more restrictive maintenance.
SE MAAR NET
The fact that you sujest that seats be removed to make the 1900 into a 9 seater means zip, zero, didly scuat. The aircraft is certified as a 19 seater, and if you remove the seats you have to recertify the aircraft as a 9 seater. Remember the old system when some 200s were Part 121 and some part 91. In the states this is a reg now, for 200 with more than 8 pax seat needs to have more restrictive maintenance.
SE MAAR NET
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sat boss, I used to think like you and it used to frustrate me to the point of wanting to resign from siad contract companies. However, I did fly in the contract worl for the best part of 6 years, so I do feel qualified to have an opinion on this.
your view is a vaild and fair point, but you are not understanding the view point of the contract company.
They dont see it the same way.
They do not want highly experienced and loyal crews, because that would mean having to pay them a salary that keeps them loyal.
It just is not in their business plan.
They need crews who meet the contract requirements, and nothing more.
They want crews to use contract flying as a stepping stone from something to something else.
It is a self replacing system.
Think about it, it takes people who are fairly inexperienced and gives them a job. Relative to that inexperienced pilot's ability to command a high salary, it pays crews ok.
Now, this is the clever bit, when you become 'experienced', relative, you start to think you deserve more and undoubtedly you probably do.
But, the contract company never planned nor budgeted to pay you more and they sit tight.
The ball is back in your court, you either accept it or move on.
Most people move on to something else and the cycle starts all over again.
Forget trying to explain to contract companies managers that if only they rewarded loyalty and paid market appropriate salaries they would keep crews.
It is not in the plan to keep crews for long periods.
I found this out when we had a chat with a contract manager once and he said, 'of course what you guys are asking for would be perfect, if that was what we wanted, but we dont want you to work for us forever, we want 3-5 years from people and thats about it.'
The only solution is to understand and accept the way it actually is and stop trying to rewrite what doesnt want to be rewritten.
your view is a vaild and fair point, but you are not understanding the view point of the contract company.
They dont see it the same way.
They do not want highly experienced and loyal crews, because that would mean having to pay them a salary that keeps them loyal.
It just is not in their business plan.
They need crews who meet the contract requirements, and nothing more.
They want crews to use contract flying as a stepping stone from something to something else.
It is a self replacing system.
Think about it, it takes people who are fairly inexperienced and gives them a job. Relative to that inexperienced pilot's ability to command a high salary, it pays crews ok.
Now, this is the clever bit, when you become 'experienced', relative, you start to think you deserve more and undoubtedly you probably do.
But, the contract company never planned nor budgeted to pay you more and they sit tight.
The ball is back in your court, you either accept it or move on.
Most people move on to something else and the cycle starts all over again.
Forget trying to explain to contract companies managers that if only they rewarded loyalty and paid market appropriate salaries they would keep crews.
It is not in the plan to keep crews for long periods.
I found this out when we had a chat with a contract manager once and he said, 'of course what you guys are asking for would be perfect, if that was what we wanted, but we dont want you to work for us forever, we want 3-5 years from people and thats about it.'
The only solution is to understand and accept the way it actually is and stop trying to rewrite what doesnt want to be rewritten.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Joburg
Age: 43
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
South Coast, you is 100% correct. BUT, what a kak way to run a company.
Instead of trying to save a few dollars by screwing crews out of salaries and by skimp on maintenance and management, your company stays just what it began as, a two-bit doppie side-show which eventually gets kicked off whatever contract it gets when the client starts seeing through the bull****.
The contract company starts its contract with a full bucket of trust from the client. Every balls up costs them a little bit of that trust. Even small balls ups like crew missbehavior and roster messes cost trust. Unscheduled downtime costs lots of trust if it happens a lot. Eventually as the trust runs out they gets booted and a new company gets the contract and a new bucket.
The biggest mistake the contract company can do is to skimp on management costs. Businesses arent built on assets, they are built on solid management, primarily financial management. Get some cheap fools in there who have never managed anything except their failed air-force career or their bull**** CV and you have a recipe for disaster - high turnover, company retains no skills, transient staff have no pride, cheap staff hired (timexed old pilots, poor quality engineers), money wasted at every turn because of the crisis management style, contracts lost for silly reasons, and on top of it all the worse they do the worse these fools behave to try and cover their mistakes. They are so busy manageing their self-made crises that they have no time (and actually don't have the vision either) to actually BUILD the company up. Worst of all they just kick back and relax during the brief periods that there are no crises. How many of you work for a company whose admin and managemnt side hasnt changed for years and is still run on lines a Std 10 kid could work out in a few hours? NO TALENT, NO VISION, NO GROWTH.
These SA companies could be world-beaters. Why is it that European companies like Zimex should even have contracts in Africa? Their costs are so much higher that those of the SA companies who should be servicing all the many contracts in Africa. The SA companies are outbid because they are outmanaged.
Instead of trying to save a few dollars by screwing crews out of salaries and by skimp on maintenance and management, your company stays just what it began as, a two-bit doppie side-show which eventually gets kicked off whatever contract it gets when the client starts seeing through the bull****.
The contract company starts its contract with a full bucket of trust from the client. Every balls up costs them a little bit of that trust. Even small balls ups like crew missbehavior and roster messes cost trust. Unscheduled downtime costs lots of trust if it happens a lot. Eventually as the trust runs out they gets booted and a new company gets the contract and a new bucket.
The biggest mistake the contract company can do is to skimp on management costs. Businesses arent built on assets, they are built on solid management, primarily financial management. Get some cheap fools in there who have never managed anything except their failed air-force career or their bull**** CV and you have a recipe for disaster - high turnover, company retains no skills, transient staff have no pride, cheap staff hired (timexed old pilots, poor quality engineers), money wasted at every turn because of the crisis management style, contracts lost for silly reasons, and on top of it all the worse they do the worse these fools behave to try and cover their mistakes. They are so busy manageing their self-made crises that they have no time (and actually don't have the vision either) to actually BUILD the company up. Worst of all they just kick back and relax during the brief periods that there are no crises. How many of you work for a company whose admin and managemnt side hasnt changed for years and is still run on lines a Std 10 kid could work out in a few hours? NO TALENT, NO VISION, NO GROWTH.
These SA companies could be world-beaters. Why is it that European companies like Zimex should even have contracts in Africa? Their costs are so much higher that those of the SA companies who should be servicing all the many contracts in Africa. The SA companies are outbid because they are outmanaged.
Last edited by gloBALcleaner; 8th Oct 2007 at 13:20.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree, totally naive way to run a business.
I think what normally happens is a company comes across a contract through someone who has a mate in the UN or something similar.
So, the company get the contract, they have a fairly unqualified group of people running their operations office who are now tasked to run the contract.
It is fine until unplanned maintenance is needed, fine until unplanned or even planned time off for the crews is required, basically, the snow ball has started to gather speed.
The low wages they pay the people in the office to manage and run the contracts reflects the level of qualification and experience those they employ have.
It is an age old situation, and this is not disrespectful to anyone.
'You pay peanuts and you get monkeys'
Simple!
Yes, it is a crap way to run a business, but the whole contract scene in SA is rotten, the UN and likes pay huge money for these contracts and there is absolutely no reason why the SA company should not make a good profit and pay their crews a decent salary.
Lets face it, all the directors still drive around in their BMW's and Merc's and 4x4's, oh and lets not forget the conflicts of interest by those concerned, forming consortiums of directors and buying planes which are then leased to the company they work for to go on contract for a fixed number of hours, regardless of how many hours the contract pays.
Oh, and who decides what plane to source and use on contract, the very managers/directors who own the planes.
I think what normally happens is a company comes across a contract through someone who has a mate in the UN or something similar.
So, the company get the contract, they have a fairly unqualified group of people running their operations office who are now tasked to run the contract.
It is fine until unplanned maintenance is needed, fine until unplanned or even planned time off for the crews is required, basically, the snow ball has started to gather speed.
The low wages they pay the people in the office to manage and run the contracts reflects the level of qualification and experience those they employ have.
It is an age old situation, and this is not disrespectful to anyone.
'You pay peanuts and you get monkeys'
Simple!
Yes, it is a crap way to run a business, but the whole contract scene in SA is rotten, the UN and likes pay huge money for these contracts and there is absolutely no reason why the SA company should not make a good profit and pay their crews a decent salary.
Lets face it, all the directors still drive around in their BMW's and Merc's and 4x4's, oh and lets not forget the conflicts of interest by those concerned, forming consortiums of directors and buying planes which are then leased to the company they work for to go on contract for a fixed number of hours, regardless of how many hours the contract pays.
Oh, and who decides what plane to source and use on contract, the very managers/directors who own the planes.
