No-frills kangaroo ready to hop [Archive] - Page 2

proplever

13th Nov 2003, 13:19

Now, I've been pretty much sitting back watching this discussion, mainly because it's clear that I have a rather large chip on my shoulder where Impulse pilots are concerned. So I've shut up. But enough already.

Their behaviour is nothing short of disgusting! I think many now will understand my angst with this organisation. A substantial number of these guys are mainline rejects, for whatever reason. But suddenly, they are suitable for mainline flying, simply because they are cheap enough? Good lord, go figure that one!

These guys have come along, and prostituted themselves twice now, once when they first began 717 ops, and now offering themselves for the LCC at "no extra charge". You guys would be getting at least some respect if you'd done this for a modest pay increase, but none at all? Shameful. Hang your heads in shame, Impulse.

You are continuing your campaign of undermining our profession throughout Australasia. Where will it end? Even the VB management now have significant leverage against their pilots.

Don't bother walking through the terminals any more, guys. Even the cleaners won't have any respect for you. Don't bother with your usual proplever taunts. Apart from the fact that you have disgusted just about everyone on these forums, I'm just not listening.

James4th

13th Nov 2003, 13:57

Oh Dear! Proplever, I am not going to enter into a debate with such a vitriolic tirade but to say that "mainline rejects" is a form of compliment as far as I am concerned! :=

Wirraway

13th Nov 2003, 16:17

Dow Jones

Australia's Qantas: To Decide On Low Cost Fleet
-By Lilly Vitorovich; Dow Jones Newswires;

Wednesday November 12, 10:52 pm ET SYDNEY -(Dow Jones)- Qantas Airways Ltd. chief executive Geoff Dixon said Thursday that the national carrier will make a decision in the next two days about the planes to be used by its low frills operation.

Dixon told reporters that the choice between Boeing Co. and Airbus will be put to the Qantas board early next week.

He said talks are being held with three Australian states as the possible head office of the discount carrier, which is set to begin next May. Dixon has previously said the airline won't be based in New South Wales, which is the home of the parent company.

Virgin Blue, the low-cost carrier that has about 30% of the domestic market, is based in Queensland.

Qantas has said it will buy an unspecified number of Boeing 737-800 or A320 planes for its low-cost operation, with a fleet of 23 aircraft by mid-2005.

"The management will make a decision within the next 48 hours. We'll be putting a recommendation to the Qantas board early next week on offers we have had from Boeing for 737-800 aircraft and from Airbus for A320," Dixon told reporters at a joint briefing with industry group Oneworld.

The branding and naming of the carrier will be finalized around the same time.

Dixon declined to comment on rival Virgin Blue's plans to raise A$500 million- plus via an initial public share offering. "I've got nothing to say about the Virgin Blue float," he said.

Separately, he said bookings are improving and capacity is back to pre-SARS levels.

"Network-wide our bookings are quite good and the market's coming back better than we probably anticipated two or three months ago," he said.

"And our capacity is back now to about pre-SARS levels, so while it's still a difficult industry and a difficult market, things are not looking too bad."

Asked about the airline's results for the six months ending Dec. 31 and the impact of the stronger Australian dollar and the Rugby World Cup, Dixon said: " We anticipate a better overall result this financial year than we had last year. But in the last two months bookings have been a bit stronger than we thought, and we're just quietly confident that the business is returning to some strength."

Dixon said every subsidiary of Qantas is now profitable.

He dismissed suggestions that Qantas may pull out of the New Zealand market because its loads were very low and marketing had declined.

"Nothing could be further from the truth, we have 111 flights a week, our load factors are over 80%...," he said.

Qantas is still weighting up whether to appeal the New Zealand Commerce Commission's decision to reject its strategic alliance with Air New Zealand Ltd.

"It's still very much an open game as far as we're concerned," Dixon said.

Qantas is appealing the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission's decision to reject the alliance, which involves Qantas buying a 22.5% stake in the New Zealand carrier for NZ$550 million.

===========================================

Agent Mulder

13th Nov 2003, 16:35

Here is the Impulse Award. This is what these blokes are prepared to do to the Profession. Someone put it on that Qrewroom website.
http://www.wagenet.gov.au/Wagenet/Search/view.asp?docid=176785&query=(IMPULSE%20PILOTS)&page=0&showlink=Y

DirectAnywhere

13th Nov 2003, 17:41

For the first time in my time in the red rat, I've seen an issue that has got the troops really riled. There are some mighty pissed off guys and girls out there. I can tell you now, if this goes through and we end up getting paid 40% less to do the same job, and that's what we're talking about here, NEARLY A 50% WAGE CUT, I won't be there for long. I'm sure that'll make a lot of people's days, another opening at QANTAS. If you want it, you're welcome to it. So much for having a reasonable job still to aim for in Australia. Let me spell this out for all of you, this doesn't only affect QANTAS or Impulse pilots, this will affect ALL OF YOU who may ever want to work for a decent wage in this country.

So, if this happens I'm going to become a plumber or brickie and take home a s$%tload more for a lot less stress and hassle, buy a nice place on the Hawkesbury and laugh when I see you lot go overhead while I stand there with a beer in my hand at 5.30 on a weekday or maybe even on a Saturday afternoon. This is a disgrace. Plain and simple.

dirtylittlefokker

13th Nov 2003, 17:56

"DirectAnywhere"

Don't be a ********!!

$95,000.00 as anything but a pilot is huge money!

You guys at the White Rat MUST have seen it coming.

There are MANY pilots out there who would kill to fly again for half of what you are getting, you are obviously unaware of what the situation is out there in the real world.

Good luck in the future, the LCCs are as good as QF and they are here.

Stand by for lift off!
:}

Rostov

13th Nov 2003, 18:48

Well I guess it's an obvious answer then isn't it. All VQ pilots should either strike,professionally cut there own throats or quit in protest as to what QF management is offering them. I mean who are they to think they have any right to a job.:rolleyes:

payload777

13th Nov 2003, 19:44

dirtylittlefocker:

let me guess, you are either flying for a LCC or trying to get into one after missing out on QF. How can you say that LCC are as good as QF when:

- you have to pay for your own training which is minimal.
- you don't get any kind of training wage.
- pilots of LCC get check and trained half the amount.
- the comparison in experience of the two pilot groups is huge.

Yes 95k is a lot, but look at it from the bigger picture. Compare it to another career that pays the same and consider these points/questions that differentiate from any other career:

- are you away for 6 months of the year
- we have a medical every 12 months, which could end you career
- your job is on the line everytime you get checked
- any mistake could cost your career
- you have peoples lives in your hands everytime you go to work
- did you spend 50k - 60k just to get the qualifications
- how hard and what have you had to do just to get here.

There are many pilots out there who would do it for half, thats because of where they are, and if they did do it for half would soon realize how they have just shot themselves in the foot, there is suddenly no light at the end of the tunnel and no reward.

If you still think pilots should be payed less, next time you are on a flight at night, through severe turb, in rain, crap weather, ask the person sitting next to you what a quality pilot is worth!!

FFRATS

13th Nov 2003, 20:38

dirtylittlefokker,
I think it is ashame that pilots don't believe they are worth
$95 000, and more++.
First job usually away from society (NT, PNG) for prolonged period of time while having to pay back large training debt on min wage. Eventually get a jet job then; sim checked 4 times a year for career, work back of clock hours, family strains due time away from home, promotion conversion courses, etc.
Ask yourself, when was the last time you think a doctor was quizzed/tested on his knowledged and if so was it was every 3 months.
Responsibility per day at work involves 100++ lives where one big mistake could not only cost your job, but you and others mentioned above.
A recient paper artical showed what 100 CEO's earned in OZ. VERY large sums for a job I understand in most cases would involve stressfull decision making, long hours, management of people, UNI level education, etc. Sound familiar.
The major difference between many CEO's and pilots is after a mistake is made they can walk away from it and most continue employment or get a payout.
Don't sell yourself short! The real world shows you are worth it.

FFRATS

;)

Next Generation

13th Nov 2003, 20:57

dirtylittlefokker

Well said.

I get pissed off with the comparisons between other professions.

As for you other wingers, WHO HELD THE GUN TO YOUR HEAD AND FORCED YOU TO BECOME A PILOT? IF YOU DON"T LIKE IT, GO AND BECOME A BRICKIE OR A PLUMBER AND I WILL WAVE BACK TO YOU WHEN I FLY OVER THE HAWKESBURY, YOU LOSERS.

Wirraway

13th Nov 2003, 22:19

Fri "The Australian"

Qantas near no-frills plan
By Steve Creedy
November 14, 2003

The Qantas board is expected to make a decision early next week on which aircraft to fly for its new low-cost carrier.

Chief executive Geoff Dixon said a decision on where the new airline would be headquartered and what it would be called would also go to the board.

Boeing and Airbus have been keenly competing for the Qantas custom in what is understood to have been a closely fought contest.

The new carrier will have at least 23 aircraft by mid-2005.

There have been persistent rumours that the airline had already selected the Airbus A320, but Mr Dixon said yesterday this was not true.

Speaking after a Oneworld alliance meeting in Sydney, he said management would make a decision within the next 48 hours on offers from Boeing for 737-800s and Airbus on the A320.

Qantas was in negotiations with three state governments about where the new airline would base its headquarters and discussions with two others about other issues.

Picking a name was proving a problem but it would not include Qantas.

Mr Dixon said he did not know whether the new carrier would prevent Virgin from growing but he believed there was room for another airline. "I believe that both Qantas and the new carrier will grow and I believe there will be quite substantial market stimulation," he said.

The new airline will follow the traditional low-cost model and Qantas is being advised by former executives with aggressive European low-cost carrier Ryanair.

While Mr Dixon said Qantas liked the Ryanair model, it had yet to decide whether to start a fresh airline or use its Impulse subsidiary as a base.

Executives would not decide whether it would use Impulse's 14 Boeing 717s in the new carrier until they knew which model was being used.

Asked about Qantas overall, Mr Dixon said the airline expected a better result than last year and bookings in the past two months had been stronger than expected.

"We're just quietly confident that the business is returning to some strength," he said. "Every part of the Qantas business, all our subsidiary businesses, all our airline segments, are now profitable."

But there were angry words for suggestions Qantas was about to pull out of New Zealand due to poor load factors and that there was too little capacity on Australia-US routes. He said the airline was making money on its 111 trans-Tasman flights, which were flying more than 80 per cent full, and he did not see that changing.

"Our commitment to New Zealand – we've been there 60 years – is total and we have no intention of withdrawing in any way, shape or form," he said.

The airline had more capacity between the US and Australia than before 2001's September 11 attacks and load factors "were in the 70s".

===========================================

balance

14th Nov 2003, 01:47

Gotta have my 2 cents worth here.

NG, you are kidding right? Now you are saying we can't compare employment remuneration - simply because you say so? Give me a break.

Brickie's, plasterers, plumbers. They are all earning close to what we are as pilots. In many cases, more. Over $100K is not at all unusual for a tradesman these days. Now here's the comparison, and it is quite valid.

When I became a pilot - and it wasn't all that long ago, these fella's weren't earning anywhere close to what I was. Now they've caught up, and even overtaken.

The comparison is justified because it is a yardstick upon which we as pilots can measure our worth. And it seems our worth has been going downwards at a steady rate since the early '90s. Then along come Impulse. These blokes try and tell us we are worth even less again???

Sorry, but I must agree with the general thrust of this thread. That is that the offer put by the IPG is seriously disgusting. And it does affect all pilots in this country.

And James4th? Your reply to prop's post? Equally disturbing. I work for that carrier too and your post was simply offensive.

Johhny Utah

14th Nov 2003, 05:04

Rostov & DLF

I don't think anyone begrudges you an opportunity to employment here in Australia. What rankles people is the fact that you seem to be attempting to do so in a matter that will greatly undervalue not only yourselves, but also the wider pilot body within Australia..

Why has the IPG proposed to fly what will be the same type/size of aircraft as DJ for substantially less money? I would have thought that a rational point to begin negotiations from would have been the AFAP sanctioned Virgin Blue EBA - doesn't that make sense? After all, numerous people on here have repeatedly pointed out the benefits of going with Impulse as the model of choice for the LWA - already operating under Qantas colours/SOPs/policy - so I would have thought that these points would have been used as positives for the impulse side of negotiations.

Instead rumours suggest that the IPG representatives have come in & not only undercut the rest of the market, but have also undercut themselves.

To take the brickie analogy one step further; what do you think would happen if you turned up on your (well paid) brickie mates job site & informed everyone that you could do their $100k job for $60k...? I'd imagine that you'd probably be waking up in hospital.

Can you see why Qantas mainline pilots (plus others elsewhere in the industry) might be decrying the recent manouevres of the IPG?

All I'm suggesting is that perhaps a more realistic starting point for negotiations would have helped matters.

Just my thoughts... :(

Douglas Mcdonnell

14th Nov 2003, 05:43

Vitriol! Hijacking the industry! We have all seen the same rubbish over and over again. The 1900 was no good. Impulse would never get jets. Impulse got jets but they were no good. Impulse gets brought buy QF. The pilots are now " Destroying Conditions for all". The LCC comes along, now its a plot buy pilots to undermine the whole industry.

F@#K ME Swinging! Who actually makes the decisions when it comes to running an airline. Would it be management? I for one dont sit down and plot the LCCs moves at home! So its actualy management that makes the decisions.

Perhaps the pulse group should should just give up their jobs, forgo the mortgages, and take jobs out of the industry doing whatever they can find, as long as it keeps all the real proffesionals happy. Oh, but hang on, alot of us have already done that some 14 years ago.

How many of the knockers happily stepped into "OUR SEATS" then?

An adult view of the situation would leave you to conclude that the impulse drivers have very little control over procedings. Just as in most other airlines. I havent seen too much angst directed to the mother companies tactics.

At the end of the day, The continual knocking only goes to show what a sad small sandpit mentality Australian aviation has been cursed with. The irony is that the guys and gals at Impulse have worked very hard to create an effective airline. It is obvious that what happens at the pulse works. Why else would they be involved with the LCC.

Instead of hanging their heads as suggested in an earlier post. I feel that all concerned can be proud of their achievements. And the fact that they dont stoop to a gutter level standard when dealing with other companies/ pilots. Its probably not the modern thing, but sledging is just for kids in the playground. Openly critisising an organisation because of its success speaks volumes as to the quality of these individuals character.

I think alot of the knockers should perhaps be a little more concerned with the goings on in their own back yards rather than the easy usual target.

So what would it be Gnandenburg and proplever,
Slide the licence across the desk to keep guys like you happy?

Let me think about that for a moment...................

James4th

14th Nov 2003, 06:42

Nice one Doug.

Balance, I am sorry if my post offends you but the truth is I see inside both mainline and Impulse and I would put our pilots up against any of yours anytime. Our experience is a lot more varied than yours and there is much more dedication, enthusiasm and camraderie.

As for Check and Training, we do the same amount as mainline, maybe even more line training and surveilliance in certain areas. Endorsement/initial line training is extremely comprehensive and as for the experience difference; it depends on what the experience is doesnt it? If you dont believe ask Rod McCallum, he flew with us for a few weeks and had formed an opinion.

So if you want to be a tradey, go and good riddence. Leave the industry to us that still enjoy flying for a fair and equitable salary. I too will wave at you when I fly over and mutter "It must be hell down there." Get your head out of the sand and look what is happening around the world. You cant live in your sheltered workshop for ever. Go overseas and work for anyone over there and see how long it takes for you start missing Oz. Unless you are a complete slave to mammon you will be ready to come back at half pay in 2 years......

However I believe that the money is SO important to you all now that nothing else matters.......you would do ANYTHING for extra pay..........so who is the prostitute?

I assume that all the vitriol is coming from mainline pilots; are there any out there that are not and still have strong feelings against Impuse and the IPG. Let me hear from you, I have heard enough from the sheltered workshop.........

Cheers

Jim4

:= PS. "A line in the sand" Havnt I heard that before somewhere? No, not Bush, around that year we are not allowed to mention.:rolleyes:

Pete Conrad

14th Nov 2003, 10:51

Quote from James4th,

Balance, I am sorry if my post offends you but the truth is I see inside both mainline and Impulse and I would put our pilots up against any of yours anytime. Our experience is a lot more varied than yours and there is much more dedication, enthusiasm and camraderie.

What??!!! - Jeez, give a GA operator jets and overnight they become the Chuck Yeagers of the industry - pitting their skill,ability to push the outside of the envelope in a 717,taking on the demon that lives in the thinner air becuse they have vastly more experience than the mainline QF pilots!!

You might want to be carefull James4th, watch you don't screw the pooch.

If I was a QF mainline guy reading that i'd be a bit perplexed - no wonder you guys at VQ are not popular - not only are you prostitutes, but you guys invented jet flying!.........LOL!!!!!!!

longjohn - no scab here, joined the AN group well and truly after the event. Can we lose the Scab thing, 14 years later there is a more serious epidemic within the industry.

KapitanFinglis

14th Nov 2003, 11:39

BTW - what logical individual thinks remuneration isn't an issue in comparing jobs?

Are young kids going to beg $$$s from their folks for training, take crappy p/t jobs, keep fit (off the booze while their mates go berserk every w/e) and do the hard yards in charter/bush flying when they can cruise through uni' and get that accountant's job? Starting on 45k+o/t in Melb/Syd, in five years they'll be making 80-100k if they're smart; then get a PPL+ratings and fly for fun on weekends!

Heck, what sort of people will be attracted to the industry in the future the way things are going? You do get what you pay for.

Agree re an earlier post - this is a precedent of things to come industry-wide!

Aircrew - yeah, sell yourselves short! My plumber charged me AUD180 for 1hr 20mins work and an unblocked drain! What do you get for keeping pax safe for 1hr 20mins?!

Next Generation

14th Nov 2003, 12:09

So if you want to earn that kind of money, for christ sake go and become a plumber !!!!!!!!

Leave the flying to those who actually want to do it.

Gnadenburg

14th Nov 2003, 14:42

The whole problem is.......The Qantas Pilot Psyche Evaluation.

1) Cleverly, a generation of pilots who will only threaten a line in the sand, not pursue strike action. Due an admirable higher sense of duty.

2) The QF Psyche rejection is such a cold slap in the face. You now have a New Generation of pilots whose professional satisfaction is partly fueled by witnessing and assisting, a possible decline in QF pilots' conditions.

Had a genuine hope that exAnsett pilots and Impulse pilots could be rewarded with LCC. QF pilots doing OK, don't be greedy etc.

As a professional pilot I hope to see LCC a QF Mainline operation as conditions are preserved.

Are Next Generation and friends showing us why they have had to buy a profession?

Did AirNZ pilots have any success blocking Freedom pilots?

Would an integration of Impulse pilots into QF(without psyche profiling) raise their professional bar?

A friendly wave right back at you Next Generation. Unlike the finger you will be getting from Virgin Atlantic pilots( your widebody chance gone) or Pacific Blue( if not a captain, your command gone).

CaptCloudbuster

14th Nov 2003, 15:35

I am saddened but not surprised at the comments made by Dirty Little Fokker. This guy was one of the first to shaft his "mates" in the now defunct Flight West Airlines by signing up to the AWA.

Same old tricks.... :mad:

longjohn

14th Nov 2003, 17:49

Could we please put away the little violins, I am just about ready to start a new welfare organisation for all the hard done pilots in this world.

I find it quite hilarious when I read strongly worded messages from 20 year old second officers about how Impulse pilots are devaluing the profession and threatening 'their' future.

This from pilots who are yet to even LAND a jet!!!

Give me a break.

18 years old - Leave school.

18 months later - a Qantas pilot on Minimum $80ky. (yes with a $100k training debt)

As against the years and hours most impulse pilots spent just getting to where they are. Maybe that is why they appreciate it enough to sacrifice to keep it.

If you are a 20 year old Qantas pilot complaining about Impulse pilots taking your flying then pull your head in and relax, you will still be flying in the left hand seat well before your 35th Birthday.

Yes I too would like the promotions, but not so badly as to see others on to the street for it, its called empathy and it comes with experience (and age).

Chad's Funk Blaster

14th Nov 2003, 18:22

As an ex AN Airbus driver, I hope Skimpy operate A320’s and advertise for crew with Airbus type ratings.

I would happily come back to Oz to fly a red tail machine for QF LCC especially with the salary paid to short haul pilots.

I would be less enthusiastic to do it for VB wages but would still not hesitate – it beats O/S.

This may result in slower career progression for many of my good buddies at QF and that would be unfortunate, but not the end of the world. At least they wont lose their jobs like I did.

I fail to see how my refusing to work for skimpy could possibly assist the financial future of QF pilots. Dixon will make his decision on skimpy regardless of how many type rated or experienced pilots sign or don’t sign. I cannot influence that. More importantly, the decision to work for skimpy or not work for skimpy is my decision and no one else’s.

I find it quite odd that I know QF pilots that cannot understand why I would want to work for “poverty wages” when these same people in another breath inform me that they are the “lowest paid 767 pilots in the world”. So its ok for them but not for me.

Douglas Mcdonnell

14th Nov 2003, 19:14

Well put Longjohn.

DirectAnywhere

14th Nov 2003, 19:32

Ok. Been looking forward to this...where do I start?

Firstly, DLF, nothing like getting personal is there?? 95,000 AUS is no longer huge money and hasn't been for quite a while. Be realistic. It's OK but nothing fantastic. I could have earned that as a plumber or a lawyer, but no, I chose a profession I loved and hate to see devalued. Secondly, if you're happy to fly a Heavy Jet for $30,000 a year (about half of what I earn net - that's $600 a week take home - and you'd be looking at that until the day you retired plus CPI) welcome aboard. I'd be interested to see how long it lasts before you would start complaining. Watch this space. BTW, before you start, I'm not a S/O nor am I a Cadet having come through the same GA path as many of you. ie. instructing, charter etc.

Next Generation. I agree, nobody forced me to become a pilot. And once again, let's get personal in our posts shall we? I, like you, took a risk when I entered this profession. The risk however, was based on the idea that one day I may be earning somewhat more than an office clerk which would allow me to repay the debts I still have - and an Impulse F/O doesn't earn a lot more at 75K a year. A friend of mine earns 55K a year doing database entry all day. Would you value this profession as being at least worth more than 40% more than that? If not - welcome aboard. Hope to see you flying for Skimpy one day. I will wave at you as you fly overhead and think of how much fun you're having....Before you respond, "oh, if you don't want to fly let someone else..." let me make this clear. I love my job. It's a great job, but it's worth a lot more than 75K a year.

So, let me reiterate - this will not only affect QANTAS mainline pilots. VIRGIN pilots will suddenly become overpaid, expensive commodities. Your conditions are now also under attack. If 737 pilots (both QF and DJ) are being paid less than Regional pilots (assumption on my part - apologies if I'm wrong) where does that leave your conditions? and so on, and so forth. This is not only worrying for me it is worrying for us all...and yes, that includes even you, DLF and Next Generation.

I can understand why the Impulse pilots are doing what they are doing - thay have families and mortages to pay and are looking at the 717 disappearing entirely, that's the reality - and I sympathise with Chad's Funk Blaster - you were royally shafted. But, at the end of the day, if QF want to start a LCC - it has to be crewed by somebody. There will be a DEMAND for pilots. Why should negotiations on salaries and other remuneration start at the lowest possible point? To be honest, I don't really give a rat's if it's crewed by AIPA or AFAP crews, so long as those people flying those aircraft are being payed a reasonable salary for the work they are doing. And 75K a year is simply NOT a reasonable salary for an F/O on a 737. Just ask Virgin Blue...

Furthermore, if this happens, it means that many, and I won't say most, but many Flight Attendants and most, and I will say most if not all, CSMs in QANTAS will be being paid more than our new LCC pilots. And you wonder why I'm maybe a little worried about this?!!? Think long and hard about what I've just said...

I don't claim to be Chuck Yeager or any better than anyone else who posts on here. I'm sure I'm no better than most of you. I am someone though, who is proud to work for a pretty good airline, proud to be part of that airline and someone who is gravely worried about the future direction that airline and our industry is taking.

I await your replies with interest. Try and keep the personal vitriole to a minimum as it really serves no useful purpose. Oh, and DLF and Next Generation, please include some more information in your profile as I'd like to know where you're both coming from. I look forward to flying with you some day. Hopefully not in Skimpy...;)

Keg

14th Nov 2003, 22:31

And so say all of us! Nice job Direct. I hope it's not lost on some.

Chad's Funk Blaster

14th Nov 2003, 23:48

So direct and keg, I am unclear. Are you suggesting that I withdraw my application from Impulse based on your suggestion that I will struggle on the money they offer. Don’t you think that’s an issue for me to sort out, not you.

The salaries at QF mainline stand out like Mt Everest when benchmarked against similar aircraft types in the region – Aus/Pacific.

This is an observation, not a criticism of QF pilots.

Direct,

You are placing a value on the job of flying based purely on your perspective. If it’s not worth 95000 dollars a year TO YOU, then don’t apply.

Others have different perspectives. Ability to affect change within the organization is one. So is aircraft type. Location is a huge factor. Don’t try and tell others how they should value their own job.

You are gravely concerned about the “future direction” your airline is taking. I would suggest that Dixon is taking positive steps to ensure your airline has a direction to take.
Ansett did little to combat the low cost threat from Impulse and Virgin and fell to the canvas with a rapid thud. QF faces competitors unlike ever before – similar to the ones facing carriers in other parts of the world. Air Tran now has almost as much capital as Delta. Same with Ryanair and BA. Valueair is about to make an assault on SQ, as AirAsia already has.

Dixon drew the line in the sand as VB ate into QF’s market share. Now, it appears that VB has arrived at that line with little intention of slowing down. QF still offers poor service, operates old and often dirty aircraft, has an on time performance record so poor that even Dixon acknowledges it is in need of attention and still has decades of industrial inefficiencies not affecting VB and yet all you QF ppruners can do is blame this business conundrum on pilots seeking to be part of the action – people not even working for QF - in order to ensure your salary Is not touched.

Something is amiss with this argument.

balance

15th Nov 2003, 02:42

My goodness.

Well, with people like this I guess our industry has no hope. Pitting pilots against one another are we now? How seriously unprofessional do you get?

You just don't understand, do you? DM and James, this is not about a pissing contest. What you blokes do in the next few months may dictate the future of pay and conditions in aussie. Simple as that. If you want them to continue their downward spiral, by all means continue your campaign.

But if you can't even attempt to understand the point without resorting to responses such as the last two, then I guess there really is no hope.

Chad, no-one is saying don't apply. You obviously don't understand. This is a slightly bigger issue here, than just you and your Impulse mates, right here, right now.

Ten years from now, when plumbers, brickies and plasterers are earning $200K and pilots are earning $95K, will you sit up and take notice then?

Sunrise

15th Nov 2003, 04:00

No matter what happens in the future as to who ends up flying for "Skimpy", the conditions of employment for everyone in the Airline industry will be under extreme pressure......the corporate greed will try to whittle down the conditions even more! Virgin will suffer this just as much as QF mainline, and they will not leave "Skimpy" alone either!
I am sure this is a long term plan of QF management which has been hurried along by the advent of Virgin, why would Oldmeadow have been with QF for the last couple of years? Setting up different little airlines, devide and conquer!
I believe that AIPA has been caught napping, they should have seen this comming when QF bought Impulse and with the start up of Australian Airlines, they have a lot to answer for to their members. :mad:
To me the Airline industry in Australia is degenerating to the likes of GA, it is just about stuffed! I have only a few years to go, but I feel for those that do not. I certainly would not encourage any of my children to follow my footsteps.
I now believe the only loyalty pilots should have at work is to their passengers!!!!!!!

DirectAnywhere

15th Nov 2003, 04:41

Hi Chad's Funk Blaster.

At no stage, have I recommended you withdraw your application or suggested that the salary you choose to work for is an issue for anyone but yourself. I AM NOT BLAMING YOU FOR THIS SITUATION!

As I said, you were royally shafted. I am sorry for what happened to you. I can't appreciate what it was like for you. That said, Ansett was falling towards the canvas well and truly before Impulse and Virgin Blue came along - but that's another issue.

Firstly, at 95K for an F/O, I might look at applying. But we're not looking at 95K. Extracted directly from the Impulse Pilot's Certified Agreement to which someone has a link on the previous page.

For a B717 pilot,

Year 1 Captain $115,000, year 3 captain $122,004

Year 1 F/O, $69,000, year 3 F/O, $73,202

So I was even overoptimistic in my quoted figure of 75K a year. At no point did I mention 95K a year except in response to DLFs lovely little post. As I said, if that's acceptable to you, and it may well be for a number of circumstances, go ahead. I would again remind you of the fact that the company would value the Cabin Crew down the back of our longhaul flights more highly than they value you. If that's what they think with regard to salaries, what about all the other aspects of your Professional Life?

Once again, let's be realistic. QF is nowhere near where Ansett was. There was $2.5 billion cash on the balance sheet last year. That's short for excess money that the board doesn't want people to know about aka "a fighting fund". You all know about last year's profit in the face of extreme adversity. Aeroplanes are getting fuller with load factors running in the high 70s to 80s. Anecdotally, the last two flights I've flown have had 100% LF. Yields are improving as fares are rising again. Assuming no major disasters - which I wouldn't put aside - this year will be a HUGE year for QF. IMHO watch for a record profit. Fundamentally, this airline is safe, secure and growing.

My argument is this, plain and simple. Why should pilots - collectively - aim for the lowest possible salary when looking at crewing this airline? Take a deep breath and ask yourself why you got into this job. I got into it for a love of flying, but not at the expense of every other facet of my life. When you stop and think about the instability in your home life, the time away from loved ones, the extended times on reserve, the inability to plan even tomorrow let alone next week are you worth more than $69,000 a year as a Professional Pilot entrusted with the degree of responsibility that you are? I would suspect if you asked most of the travelling public they would say "Yes!!" So why shouldn't we think so as well? Value yourself for what you are worth.

This is NOT a personal attack on anyone, Impulse or ex-Ansett or from wherever, about the circumstances that may lead you to apply. I appreciate individual circumstances are all different. But please, give thought to what you and your profession are worth.

Once again, please keep any personal attacks to a minimum. Let's try and move this debate forward. Here endeth the lesson.:)

ExcessData

15th Nov 2003, 06:16

Direct's right on the money.

QF faces competitors unlike ever before – similar to the ones facing carriers in other parts of the world. Air Tran now has almost as much capital as Delta. Same with Ryanair and BA. Valueair is about to make an assault on SQ, as AirAsia already has.

Australia is no Europe or America. Whilst point-to-point low cost is a proven formula for some Australian travel (DJ), unlike Europe or the US there's only room for about 3 carriers in total here. In a few months' time that'll be QF, QF Jnr and DJ, the first and the last of which are already showing signs of settling into their respective market niches.

As Direct quietly suggested, assuming no major disasters, expect a record result from the big Q this year.

Dixon drew the line in the sand as VB ate into QF’s market share. Now, it appears that VB has arrived at that line with little intention of slowing down.

Rubbish - as conceded in an email to staff, Virgin Blue's domestic growth (other than organic increases in capacity) has stopped ( http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=101556 ) - short, in fact, of the '30%' they so readily published in their press releases (28%). Most analysts seem to have them plateuing at 30% in the near term (unadjusted for any clawing-back by Skimpy).

As for Virgin's market share to begin with - in the space of one day Qantas was handed 90%+ on a platter - everyone (including them) conceded that it was absolutely impossible to hang onto this, and that's where the 'line in the sand' comes from (in the same way that Godfrey concede's Virgin 'can't touch' the top 20% of the market with its business plan, Qantas mainline 'can't touch' the bottom 20% with it's own. Skimpy resolves that conundrum quite nicely..

So no, the sky isn't falling for Qantas (or Virgin) at all. Why, then, value yourselves as though it is?

ED

OBNO

15th Nov 2003, 07:51

There are two extremes with respect to pay and conditions. At one end, pilots want to be paid lots of money ( Fair enough) and the airline wants to pay as little as it can (Fair enough). But why start negotiating pay at the lower end of the pay scale? And $75000 per year for a FO on a 737 surely is at the lower end, don't baggage handlers get paid more than that, and yes a Long Haul CSM would be paid more, and a Flight Attendant not far off. You deserve more than that for the skill sets and levels of responsibility you have.

cunninglinguist

15th Nov 2003, 08:38

As mentioned previously ( numerous times ) , if you want to be up to your arms in sh1t 5-6 days a week, 8-10 hours a day for your 100K, go right ahead.
Plumber charged $180 for an hour and 20 minutes, this included his call out fee, super, sick leave, annual leave, workers comp. , GST etc. I can guarantee you he was'nt earning $135 an hour.

At NJS, I got paid more than that, averaged 12 days off a month ( inc. unused reserve days ), was home nearly every night, 6 weeks holidays, sick leave, super etc.
And where did the 95K come from ?, IMP captains earn alot more than that.

Since the stats say that less than 5% of the working population are on over 100K/annum, there are obviously alot less tradesman around than I thought.

Mr.Nightmare, you're a classic example of an LHP are'nt you ?:ok:

This is in no way comparable to '89, these guys are employed by a company and basically doing what there told, you should all be directing your invective towrd GD and Co.

TopperHarley

15th Nov 2003, 12:21

Plumbers, Brickies and Plasterers earn more cause they work a $hitload harder than I ever have.

Come on kids - 5 hrs a day in a 73 isnt exactly hard work.

I worked harder flying scenics in a 210.

The_Cutest_of_Borg

15th Nov 2003, 13:00

...sigh.... Here we go again.... idiotic comparisons between what plumbers and pilots make.

Can we look at it from the correct perspective please?

John Laws just signed a contract to stay on at 2UE for another seven years. While the details of the contract are not public we can safely assume it is for mega-bucks.

The man is on air for 3 hours a day. Obviously he just doesn't rock up to the golden microphone at 9.00am every day but lets say he puts another 3 hours into his show.

Obviously if you turned his contract into a per hour figure, it would come to an impressive amount. NO-ONE WORKS THAT HARD!!

Well it is true.... on an hourly rate, no-one can justify what John Laws earns in terms of pure exertion... nor can you justify what a film star gets paid on pure manual labour value.

What some mental giants in here do not comprehend is that these people are being paid on the basis of their ECONOMIC WORTH to their employers. The amount of money that having John Laws behind a microphone or Tom Cruise on the screen is worth to their employer.

IT IS NOT the hours they put in...

So we come to the economic worth of a pilot. Since we are discussing the LCC lets look at the 737.

What is the economic worth of a 737 pilot? The Companies will tell you their pilots are valued employees upon whom the safety reputation of the airline ultimately rests. Think about that statement for a company like Qantas.

An NG pilot will fly his 100 million dollar jet to ports such as Broome, Maroochydore and Uluru, carrying 185 pax at a time. they do this at all hours, in all weather conditions. In the course of the day they will encounter numerous threats to the operation. They must percieve each of these threats, and have the experience and foresight to manage each one routinely. It only takes one accident....

A 737 Captain should have the following desirable traits..

Flying ability of a high order

Experience.. several thousand hours worth on jets

Level headedness....

Situational awareness.....

Common sense......

The ability to manage a crew...

The ability to interact with the public......

The abilty to combine all of the above into a safe and efficent operation...

The abilty to combine all of the above at 4.00 am on a dark night with a red light flashing on the console.......

I could go on at length but the point is to those of you who insist on devaluing your profession is that you seem to have little idea of your own worth.

The economic worth to any company of a safe flight, each and every time an aeroplane in their livery takes to the air is incalculable.

With all that is at stake..220 dollars an hour is a bargain.... 120k a year is a insult!!

Leave the plumbing to the plumbers

Col. Walter E. Kurtz

15th Nov 2003, 13:47

QF pilots as a 'group' and - and I generalise here - have lacked vision. What has the AIPA REALLY done to protect the conditions of crews, and what have the crews, as MEMBERS OF THE AIPA, active done to protect their conditions??

Let me list the warning signs threatening mainline pay and conditions that have been popping up and been ignored: Impulse Acquisition, Australian Airlines (new), Qantas NZ , general staff restructuring.

Pretty obvious markers as to management intent on driving labour costs down, but with your head in the sand, well you have a better chance of not being seen, right?

QF have been making money, are cashed up, yet Dixon has been crying poor and 'the end is neigh', and you sit as high priests of the QF cockpit, up to your neck in ****e and not making 'waves'.

You have not taken any hard decisions, no lines have been drawn in the sand,no strike action or labour disruptions, just constant appeasement in the hope that the demands will stop, and as evident on this forum, an expectation that pilots not of mainline should keep away from the new LCC and preserve things for mainline.

You demonise all sorts of contenders, slander the professional ability of non mainline pilots groups, and lay the blame for your woes at the feet of others.

The barbarians ARE at the gate - make no mistake - and management is playing right up to this. With impunity.

Whilst there is no general pilots group - no unified workforce or fraternity - one responsible for the welfare of ALL pilots - it will be an ever tightening downward spiral. A 75grand job flying in an airline, is Valhalla for some chump busting his ass in a clapped out chieftain, flying around single pilot at the @rsehole of nowhere for $140 day, and being treated like ****e in the process, up to his/her neck in credit card debt.

Ahh, but 'that's GA". (read: let them eat cake)

When you are at the top, it's very easy to forget from whence you came, and not give a toss about the poor unwashed masses - a bit like Louis XV I suppose - until they come battering at your ivory towers. Then it's a case of Le Miserables having to carry the can for 'lowering the standard'.

Got nothing to do with greedy management, and a weak workforce, does it?

mulgabill

15th Nov 2003, 15:03

Unfortunately, it is easy to perceive the ogre to be Impulse or NJS or Virgin. The reality is the the problems for mainline crews lie from within. You make much of the "responsibility" etc of the profession.

If a crew can plant a 747-400 in the 19th hole of a you know where and NOT BE HELD FULLY ACCOUNTABLE for their shortcomings (read: GET SACKED) the why should you get paid the big bucks????

That episode and the ensuing inquiry was a disgrace and is a bigger blight on the profession than Impulse crews negotiating a future beyond the 717. No one else is going to help them, so don't blame them.

I hope this P*sses of a few people, It's the TRUTH.

zuluman

15th Nov 2003, 17:03

'Have got it on good authority that the new name of the QF LCC will be 'ROO'.

Zuluman

slice

15th Nov 2003, 18:08

They could merge with United's new LCC 'TED' and you have

ROOTED

:E

My suggestions

OZAIR

EUREKA

OCKA

REDAIR

QUOKKA

Keg

15th Nov 2003, 18:29

Mulga, the only truth expoused tonight is that you understand little about aircraft prangs. A whole bunch of different things have to go wrong before an aircraft ends up off the end of the runway. The crew is just one or two of them.

Let he who is without sin.... :mad:

QF Librarian

15th Nov 2003, 19:59

I find it incredible that most 744 second officers will earn more than captains flying for the LCC if wages suggested on this forum are correct.

Primary responsibility for the LCC captain.

The safety of 180 passengers.

Primary responsibilty of a 2nd officer.

Folding the flight plan into an amusing yet functional shape.

It just don't add up.

Still I would happily accept $120k to get my arse back in an Airbus.

Sit back and enjoy

spinout

16th Nov 2003, 04:12

Col. Walter touched on a couple of warnings the Qantas pilot group and AIPA had,

“Let me list the warning signs threatening mainline pay and conditions that have been popping up and been ignored: Impulse Acquisition, Australian Airlines (new), Qantas NZ , general staff restructuring”

What about when Qantas Started Airlink, (national Jet) jet flying was given to a subsidiary not even owned by Qantas, what about when Southern Australian Airlines started operating Jets, the Qantas Pilot group and AIPA did nothing to protect the wages and conditions then so why now.
:rolleyes:

Three Bars

16th Nov 2003, 06:53

Col. Kurtz,

On another thread you continually bemoaned the fact that QF mainline pilots were not offering an opinion. The reason for this is because, in your mind, there is no room for argument/discussion. You have your opinion on what should be happening and that's it! However, your last post has made me decide to enter the fray regardless.

Firstly, let me see if I have your argument correct. You feel that QF pilots should be embarked on a full-scale industrial campaign to defend (to the death) the future conditions of the barbarians at the gate who would climb over each other's cold, dead bodies to pay for the right to work for our employer if QF decided to sack us all! You find this logical and reasonable?

Okay, let me put a few points forward for discussion:

1. My understanding of current industrial law is that industrial action can only take place during "sanctioned" periods (such as enterprise bargaining negotiations). The days of downing tools at any time that you feel agrieved seem to be over.

2. Huge fines can be levied on organisations that break industrial laws. I believe that this is one of the reasons that AIPA and the AFAP have never merged - AIPA would then be responsible for the millions of dollars in fines that the AFAP incurred in 1989.

3. Don't you think that QF would have batteries of lawyers engaged in determining whether their current corporate plans are allowable under industrial law? Yes, AIPA have lawyers also, but these are funded by member's contributions and do not have the millions (billions?) at their disposal that the QF lawyers have. Any lengthy legal action against QF would also cost AIPA and its members many millions of dollars.

4. Don't you think that the availability of many pilots who would fly our jobs for a fraction of the price would seriously undermine the QF pilot's position duirng any industrial action? On this forum these pilots continually state that we are arrogant, overpaid, lazy prima donnas and that they would willingly fly our jobs for less any time that we are tired of them. Should we engage in industrial war to defend the conditions of those who hold us in such low regard and would stab us in the back in a heartbeat?

5. In 1989, I'm sure that those pilots involved in the industrial action felt that their position was strenthened due to the lack of available and skilled pilots to replace them. This is not the case in 2003 due to point 4 above, plus the fact that all QF would have to do would be to offer wages somewhere between QF and VB rates and VB's pilot workforce would probably evaporate overnight.

6. The argument used by those pilots who vent their spleen against QF pilots on this forum say that it is they who have had to work in crappy places overseas; it is their family and mortgage that they have to worry about; and it is their job satisfaction (by flying those shiny new jets eh New Generation) that concerns them, not anything that those arrogant, lazy, overpaid QF pilots have to say. Why then should QF mainline pilots be prepared to risk their jobs, mortgages, families and financial security by engaging in serious industrial conflict to defend the future conditions of those who would seek to so willingly undercut our pay and conditions, and do so with apparent pleasure?

7. "Pilot unity" and "supply and demand" are phrases often thrown around on this forum. Supply and demand is most commonly used in the context of "well, this is the going crappy pay rate and I must accept it." Supply and demand also has a flip side - if no pilots are prepared to accept those crappy conditions, then they might actually have to be increased. This action would also require pilot unity, but is usually met with the reaction that: "Gee those arrogant, lazy, overpaid QF pilots expect us to give up the chance of a shiny jet job just so thay can continue to get overpaid." Wrong - these actions are the most immediate way of stopping the erosion of pay and conditions. If you are prepared to accept very crappy levels of pay, how can you justify spending the many thousands of after-tax dollars necessary to pay for your own jet endorsement?

So let me summarise. The advent of the QF LCC is causing a lot of concern in the QF mainline pilot body. We see it for what it is - an attempt to further reduce costs by devaluing our profession! But waging industrial action is a VERY SERIOUS issue that would require a united resolve, safe in the knowledge that our actions would be in full compliance with the law. To expect us to wage industrial war to protect the conditions of those who would undercut us is as realistic as us expecting those who would undercut us to forego their shiny jet jobs to protect our pay and conditions. And therefore we have a stalemate! Colonel, if QF pilots go on strike - and many are still mindful of the smoking ruin of 1989 - it will be to protect our pay and conditions. I'm sure that those on this forum who are equally concerned with their own particular situation will fully understand!!

Douglas Mcdonnell

16th Nov 2003, 08:30

Balance. You have started to believe your own propoganda. As Mulgabill put it. No one has ever been interested in helping the pulse crews achieve wage reform. No help from the big player unions. Now the low cost carrier has come about the pulse blokes get villafied for trying to secure a future for themselves. Maybe if AIPA had been intersted in helping in the first place things would be different. So, being left to fend for themselves they have done the best they can. The level of arrogance that has surfaced since the inception of the LCC has been amazing.

I find it amazing that S/Os, obviously young, post about the safety issues of crewing the LCC. Laughable.

Why would you try to placate a group who has never accepted or helped you? Common sence really.

Has anyone stopped to think that maybe the mother company wants division and infighting. Think about it. They are just giving you enough rope.

Cheers DM

Three Bars

16th Nov 2003, 09:13

DM,

From memory, AIPA did have discussions with the Impulse pilot group, shortly after it was taken over by Qantas. I don't know what the outcome was, but has the IPG ever asked for AIPA membership?

Secondly, all QF pilots are S/Os at some point in their careers. Some have substantial military or civilian experience before they become S/Os. Many progress to be F/Os as soon as they can, while others remain as S/Os - this is their right under our contract. Some are now upset that they may have to remain as S/Os even longer, because of the jobs that may disappear as the result of the LCC.

To demean another pilot's argument, purely on the basis of their rank, smacks of the arrogance that is so often attributed to mainline QF pilots.

Douglas Mcdonnell

16th Nov 2003, 10:08

Three Bars, it was just an example. As I made the point in earlyer posts, the pilots just fly the planes to eak out a living. The average guy has no control over conditions or offers made for the LCC.

A cross roads where every direction is not realy an option. Certainly a difficult postion to be put in.

My understanding is that full AIPA membership has never been available to Pulse blokes. This might be incorrect. Im not exactly sure as to the out come of those early meetings.

What Id like to know is why there is a need for a LCC when execs get large bonus packages? Ive obviously missed something there.

balance

16th Nov 2003, 10:54

Thanks for the off thread point there, DM, but I'm not a S/O. And that would be irrelevant anyway. And frankly, as three bars correctly points out, the majority of S/O's in QF are highly experienced GA and military operators. So please keep your arrogance to yourself.

Now to the crux of your last post. Why should AIPA help you, as you infer that they should? And for that matter, why winge that nobody has attempted to "help" the IPG. Can't you guys help yourselves? Can't you see that the offer presently on the table is way substandard? (YES or NO answer please).

No point in getting on here and complaining that no-one is "trying to help you", any more than us QF guys getting on here and complaining that the IPG are trying to undercut us. It's a simple matter of action. And whilst I'm suddenly seeing action on AIPA's part for their members, I see or hear nothing from the IPG trying to improve their lot.

And yes, you are quite correct. Dividing and conquering is a tool GD and his thugs like to use. We can't let them. Nor can you.

Chocks Away

16th Nov 2003, 13:34

"Possible Name for the LCC : Roo"
My suggestions

Thong! ;)

Esky!

Champ!

oo-roo :ok:

Mr Nightmare

16th Nov 2003, 15:49

Mulgabill,

Do you really think that accepting the same pay and conditions that you currently enjoy on the 717 to fly a larger aircraft, is as you put it "negotiating a future beyond the 717" ?

If you really believe that then you truly deserve it!

Goodluck.

Keg

16th Nov 2003, 17:59

DM
The average guy has no control over conditions or offers made for the LCC.

Talk about a self fulfilling prophecy.

You guys could offer DJ conditions and QF will proabably go for it. I really doubt that they could get a green fields operation up and going in the time frame that they want so that means Impulse or mainline (not withstanding GDs comments about it being green fields or Impulse). That means that they'll pay a 'reasonable' wage. If you guys are silly enough to offer current conditions to guarantee your future than you deserve every cent you don't get.

Regards,

amos2

16th Nov 2003, 19:00

Balance has said...

"And frankly, as three bars correctly points out, the majority of S/O's in QF are highly experienced GA and military operators. So please keep your arrogance to yourself."

Highly experienced GA and military operators are highly inexperienced airline pilots, Balance. You may not like it, but it's true!

Wirraway

16th Nov 2003, 19:44

AAP

15:03 AEDT Sun 16 Nov 2003

New Qantas airline no threat: Virgin

Virgin Blue chief executive Brett Godfrey does not see a threat coming from the planned Qantas Airways Ltd discount airline believing it won't get below Virgin's costs structure.

Mr Godfrey said Virgin's no-frills model has the lowest operating costs and the lowest priced seats in the country.

"I'm pretty confident that even Qantas is going to find it difficult to get below cost our costs structure," Mr Godfrey told Channel Nine's Business Sunday.

Australia's flagship carrier Qantas is launching a new discount domestic airline next May to take on Richard Branson's Virgin Blue in a head-to-head battle for travellers.

"We've secured very, very long term and very, very good deals with Boeing on our fleet, not just for the next year or two, but for the next decade," Mr Godfrey said.

He said Virgin, with around 30 per cent of the market, had also locked in strong long term deals at the prime airports.

"My fundamental strategy is to make sure we maintain the absolutely lowest cost base of any airline in this country and I believe the revenues will still come," he said.

With Virgin Blue going public soon, Mr Godfrey said the appointment of Patrick Corp Ltd chief executive and Virgin part owner Chris Corrigan as chairman will not signal radical change.

"I don't think it changes too much - historically the management team have run this business," Mr Godfrey said.

"I think (Chris Corrigan) has said he doesn't think there is too much wrong with the business at the moment and so I guess, as far as I'm concerned, it will be business as usual."

Virgin's founder Sir Richard Branson is selling a substantial stake in the company in the float which is expected to raise around $500 million leaving Mr Corrigan as the biggest individual shareholder.

AAP

============================================
Mon "The Australian"

Qantas can't match us: Virgin
By Michael Sainsbury
November 17, 2003

Virgin Blue chief executive Brett Godfrey does not believe Qantas can operate a new cut-price airline with a lower cost base than Virgin's.

Qantas chief executive Geoff Dixon said last week the company would unveil the new carrier within the next two weeks and that it would not have Qantas in its name.

But Mr Godfrey said Qantas would find it difficult to create cost structure as low or lower than the Virgin model, which had helped it grab about a third of the Australian market.

"They've talked about it entering on to the leisure routes," Mr Godfrey said.

"We don't make our money just on leisure routes. We've got 65 per cent of our capacity on the major routes, the triangle. We believe our model has the lowest operating costs.

"We have the lowest seats, the lowest priced seats in the country and the lowest costed seats in the country, and I'm pretty confident that even Qantas is going to find it difficult to get below our cost structure.

"We've secured very, very long-term and very, very good deals with Boeing on our fleet, not just for the next year or two, but for the next decade."

His comments back up those of Virgin founder Richard Branson, who has poured scorn on Qantas's plans.

"No other major airline in the world has successfully launched a discount airline," Sir Richard said.

In the year to March 2003, Virgin Blue posted a profit of $107 million on sales of $914 million.

In the prospectus for its forthcoming float, Virgin Blue forecasts that in the year to March 2004 revenue will be $1.386 billion with a profit of $150 million.

Virgin has gained its cost advantage by running a fleet with only one model of aircraft, having a new fleet which needs less maintenance and paying lower wages.

But observers argue that these start-up benefits will deteriorate.

Mr Godfrey, who stands to reap about $80 million from the float, claimed that money was not his motivation.

"I've always said that to me the challenge is getting up and doing better and better," he said.

Mr Godfrey said 85 per cent of the Australian market could be available to Virgin.

"I'm a very firm believer that there is only about 15 per cent of this market that we can't aspire to attain with our current model, so there is 85 per cent up for grabs," he said.

"Whether we get 30 or 35 or 40 per cent, ultimately, I'm not really too concerned.

"The important thing is to have profitable growth and maintain a significant enough margin which we have to our major competitor today."

============================================

Wirraway

17th Nov 2003, 04:32

And you think it's rough here !!

AFP

AirAsia spooks THAI offering
AFP

The launch of new budget carrier AirAsia, half-owned by the family firm of Thailand’s premier Thaksin Shinawatra, has sparked a storm of controversy and criticism it will undercut the national carrier, Thai Airways, just before a major share offering.

AirAsia announced last week that from January it would begin flying to popular Thai destinations, including the northern city of Chiang Mai and the holiday island of Phuket, at half the fare charged by the beleaguered Thai Airways.

Shin Corp, the telecoms empire which made Thaksin a billionaire before he went into politics and transferred control to his family, will own 51 percent of AirAsia Aviation in partnership with Malaysian low-cost carrier AirAsia.

Pro-democracy activists, competing airlines and aviation analysts are alarmed at the prospect of a carrier with close links to the prime minister competing directly with Thai Airways, which stands to be the big loser.

“This is unacceptable, it’s tantamount to sabotage,“ said Udom Tantiprasongchai, president of low-cost Orient Thai Airlines which is at risk of being swept aside by AirAsia.

“It’s a farce — no other country in the world would invite foreign airlines to operate domestic routes, the air traffic rights should be preserved for local operators,“ he said.

The timing of the AirAsia launch announcement last week is particularly unfortunate, coming ahead of an offering of 385 million Thai Airways shares which will reduce its government ownership from 93 percent to 70 percent.

“It could lead to less interest from investors, even if right now Thai is quite a profitable company,“ said an independent aviation analyst in Bangkok after the airline announced a 22 percent increase in annual profit Friday.

The Malaysian arm of AirAsia, which is following in the footsteps of successful European budget operators like EasyJet and Ryanair, has discounted as “irrelevant“ the links to Thaksin but commentators in Thailand disagree.

“It’s true that going with Thaksin is a fantastic advantage in the Thai market. He rules the country and every single project is decided by him, including all the aviation industry projects,“ the analyst said.

“That could lead perhaps to a boost for AirAsia and a decline in the domestic market for Thai Airways. It could be dangerous for them.“

Suriyasai Katasila of Thailand’s Campaign for Popular Democracy said the deal was improper and could be the downfall of the Thaksin administration which swept to power in January 2001 with an unprecedented parliamentary majority.

“Shin Corp should not use its political advantage to gain pace over other competitors and Prime Minister Thaksin also must be very cautious with regards to the family business,“ he said.

Suriyasai said it was clear Thaksin was still at the helm of Shin Corp despite the ownership shift to his wife and children.

“It’s laughable whenever somebody raises this issue. His son still lives with his parents — if he’s honest about it, why doesn’t he transfer his shares to a legal entity?“ he said.

“I think this issue will trigger the downfall of the Thaksin government. Thaksin must draw a clear line between his family business interests and the public interest.“

The democracy campaigner said that although in the short term the advent of the low-cost carrier would benefit the public, if it managed to put its competitors out of business, it could turn itself into a monopoly.

Spurred into action by the new threat, Orient Thai plans to launch flights between Bangkok and Chiang Mai from December at a cost of 999 baht ($25), one baht lower than AirAsia and half the cost of a Thai Airways flight.

“I am ready to fight and will directly position my business to confront AirAsia by operating flights on the same routes,“ said Udom, whose airline has operated for a decade, mostly in the charter business.

Thai Airways, criticised by Thaksin as lumbering and slow to innovate, is also planning to break into the budget airline business with “Sky Asia“ due to launch in April on the lucrative routes from Bangkok to Chiang Mai and Phuket.

But analysts say the initiative is too little too late.

Far from having any reservations over the possible effects on Thai Airways, Thaksin warned last week that the carrier must lift its game.

“Everybody must adjust themselves. In the near future there will be no monopoly and every business sector will be liberated,“ he told reporters.

Thai Airways, which Thaksin once famously declared “sucked“ because of its poor service standards, would be relegated to servicing the niche market of upscale passengers, he said.

The government has also admitted that the financially ailing State Railway of Thailand will be harmed as AirAsia’s fares will be on a par with rates for air-conditioned rail carriages.

“This conflict of interest is not the best way to develop a country,“ said the independent analyst, adding however that Thailand’s richest man had an unerring nose for a good deal.

“Thaksin has seen the fantastic development of low-cost carriers and this business could have some synergy with his telecoms network. The investment is not that great and it’s a good way to enter the transport business,“ he said.

“It’s true that for normal democratic countries it would be really very strange, but that’s the way business is done in Thailand.“

===========================================