Origin Pacific survives (for now)

[Raw Data]

Interesting news today:

New Zealand's second biggest airline carrier appears to have rescued by its creditors which will lose millions of dollars in the move.

Origin Pacific's creditors voted on a rescue plan which would see them write off $7 million or 60% of the airline's debt.

The creditors, such as Wellington Airport, had little choice as voting against the plan would have most likely grounded the airline and left them with nothing.

The airline started getting into trouble last month when Qantas pulled out of a lucrative passenger-sharing arrangement that generated 30% of Origin's business. Origin is the only competitor to Air New Zealand on regional routes.

Its passengers, like Richard Wilson, want to keep it that way.

"I am always a battler for the smaller operator and I think they are doing a jolly good job. So they should keep going," he said.

Other passengers expressed concern ticket prices would rise if Origin dropped out of the market.

Origin's boss Robert Inglis has been battling to save the airline he set up eight years ago.

"Hopefully the impact won't be too severe. But what we are focusing on is that the bulk of Origin's operations continue and the majority of jobs are preserved," he said.

Next week 75 staff will lose their jobs and some of Origin Pacific's routes will be scrapped. But the layoffs have been signalled for some time.

"We've never had to make significant number of people redundant. Yes, it's very difficult," Inglis said.

Inglis and a partner will also pump in $2.5 million of their own money into the airline.

He says his airline was making money before the government rescued its main competitor - Air New Zealand.

"It has to be remembered they bailed out a foreign owned airline and allowed it to compete extremely aggressively with a 100% New Zealand owned airline," Inglis said.



Just how much of New Zealand's airline market Origin Pacific can keep out of the hands of foreigners is Inglis's ongoing challenge.

Source: RNZ

[snail]

Hey R.I,
How about you take some responsibility for your piss poor management decisions and stop blaming other companies!
You mean to tell us that you didn't expect Qantas to pull out of your code share agreement, when you wouldn't agree to an exclusive contract with QF?

[Thump & Go]

Now I'm as pleased as anybody that Origin hasn't gone t!ts-up, they do, do a good job, AirNZ does need competition and NZ pilots don't need another airline to fall over, but......................

Let me see if I got this straight. Air NZ routes fall into NSN hands when the friendship days end, Air NSN pick them up, make a killing on (now)uncompetitive routes, then R.I sells Air NSN to Air NZ, gets rich and then sets up in oposition to that very company.
R.I. then makes it abundantly clear that he thinks the government bail-out has played a role in his (current) company's near demise????
1. It was AirNZ money that made him who he is.
2. If he doesn't like foreign owned airlines, why did he sell to AirNZ?
3. As already mentioned on this forum, had Origin been NZ's "overseas" airline, or"the face of NZ"internationally or supplied cargo space to some of our most lucrative exporters,etc then the government would have bailed them out instead of Air NZ(assuming the roles and not the names were reversed). Would he have complained then?
4. Why would you set up in oppositon to a "monopoly"?

I'm not trying to be a smart-arse, just a little sick of hearing about the bail-out. I wonder if anyone else can see the twisted irony in this?

Thump:(

ps: a little simplistic, I know so consider this a quick precis of the Air NSN situation rather than an in-depth analysis.:ok:

[TAY 611]

He wasn't directly bailed out by NZ govt however Air NZ was a fairly big creditor that didn't pull the pin on him when they had the opportunity.. So where to next for OPAL? :}

[aerocom]

Robert and Nicky have not done to many clever things here with O.P lately but in their defence think how many of you wouldn't of got a start in the airlines if these guys had never kicked off. If it wasn't for these small operators including the likes of Albatross, Pacifica, and James Air a lot of Pilots would still be driving singles or gone to another industry. I hope they survive for the sake of all involved.

[belowMDA]

So with other investors bringing money into OPAL does this mean that RI's shareholding will decrease and if so his control over the company? I have heard that his management style is "My way or the highway" which may explain the huge turnover in lower managers such as marketing, is it 13 since they started?
The loss the company has acknowledged is 12 mill but RI has pumped in 16 mill of his own over the last 6-9 months (even before QF pulled out of the codeshare) so the real loss is in the region of 28 mill. I personally hope they get some goodpeople in there who will make the staff happy and the company productive.

[ZK-NSN]

I agree with some of what you chaps have mentioned above (especially aerocom) but im a bit indifferent to some of it.

thump - just because airnz brought part of his old airline off him doesnt mean he has to kiss their :mad: for the rest of his life. I cant really remember back that far (as i was probably still in primary school) but was the ownership of airnz the same then as we see today?

Really whether Robert likes it or not the govt really had to bail out airnz (if no other takers had been interested) as it is nz's only locally operated interntional airline, otherwise we could be quickly isolated by other carriers and we'd end up with :mad: international and limited domestic service, but the govt is setting a dangerous precident if it bails out one private company that finds itself in trouble, where do you draw the line?
tay611 - I dont think airnz were anywhere close to being the biggest creditor (about $350k)but... If there is no domestic compitition in nz, then how much of a chance has airnz got of getting it's alliance with qantas?... slim to :mad: all.
Its not over till the fat lady start singing. :ok:

[Bombay]

Word around the playground is that there has been a major shakeup at middle-management level.

Perhaps there is some truth that RI didn't know the real situation of his company because his faithful middle-management didn't give him the real picture.

In any case, a shakeup has got to be good. We can all agree that continuing on in the same style is disasterous.

Also, I hear that RI is very likely to become a minority shareholder soon with the injection of some capital from new investors. This also can only be good.

Watch this space. The game's not over yet.

Bombay

[Sqwark2000]

ZK-NSN,
That fat lady must be ready to sing soon, cause she's been warming up with her vocal scales for a while now.


My question/thought is:

Surely the creditors that are prepared to write off 60% of their debt and wait 5 years for the other 40% are not going to let OPAL have credit as before, therefore I assume cash up front or on-time payments would be the likely scenario, if OPAl couldn't pay bills at all, let alone on time how will they cope with the new arrangement?

The fat lady is clearing her throat.


S2K

[Blue Line]

With the amount of restructuring & changes in routes etc I think the Fat Lady will properly Hibernate for the winter & she won't be out and about till atleast ( hopefully never ) till the silly season begins ,who knows what will happen after winter ..........

[Split Flap]

ZK-NSN

God help us all if NB starts singing! Watching her walk is bad enough! :) :{ :yuk: :bored: ;) ;) ;)

[Bombay]

Split Flap,

She doesn't walk - she waddles...

[Thump & Go]

S2K let's hope the fat biatch falls off the stage before she hits the high note aye?

NSN, not suggesting Robert kiss ar$e because Air NZ bought all of his old airline, merely that, back then he obviously thought he couldn't beat 'em so joined them, then it was OK this time it's not alright? Twisted irony no?
The whole bail-out thing is a rouge herring I believe. Whether you be in business,sport or trying to get your first flying/paying/twin/IFR/turbine (delete that which is not applicable)job the one thing you can't complain or worry about is what the other guy has got/does/did, the thing you have control over is YOU. There's no point in concerning yourself with HIM because there's probably diddly you can do about it, you just make yourself better (point of difference/price/value/flash as suit :ok:etc).
As for AirNZ's owners at that point, Qantas had 50% around then didn't it? - more irony for ya.;)
If you were at primary back then, I must be getting old! :\

Thump

[stillalbatross]

Let's hope that those who are facing the loss of their job with Origin and who are NZ ALPA members get some help in job hunting by the Union.

I appreciate that in the past the thieving, POS that make up the union's upper hierachy have repeatedly screwed their members over (when they weren't kicking them in the teeth) and spent union money on anything but supporting their members.

But I remain hopeful that for once they will decide to totally change their ways and actually help instead.

[ZK-NSN]

Split flap - Thanks for that disturbing mental picture mate. If i didnt already have enough trouble getting to sleep at night. Can anybody recommend a good therapist?

:yuk: :}

blueline is right. there is a :mad: load of changes going on at origin so give it time. as was mentioned in the agreement with creditors all bills from 01/04/04 will be paid in full when they fall due and yes some companies are requiring money up front (fair enough too)

Thump - I see your point, but still cant agree with you 100%. Keep your freinds close and your enemies even closer. there comes a point where Bob needs to quit crying about it and get on with it. your only as old as the woman you feel dude.:ok:

[Thump & Go]

Under 30 then!!! phew!:D

[splatgothebugs]

I was going to say you must be a young man then Thump:p :p :p :p

Has anybody ever wonered how the big Q (jet conn) managed to get into this country and stay here after shafting ORG? Surley the Bee Hive wouldn't be happy about it.

splat

[Don Won]

Let me riddle you this........................
Origin has never been in a stonger position:confused:
Heard that form a source within OPAL then I thought well maybe? when the company started up back in 1997 as a charter airline and then grew from there, it would have incured all the normal start up costs associated with a new airline, buildings,planes crew training ect ect and where Origin sit at the mo is a fully operational airline that has effectivly zeroed it's bank balance.
And in saying that if OPAL do have a investment partner or code share in the wind, say PB or EK I'm sure they be saying to RI dude we ant't haven a bar of this place while it's in the red get it sorted and then we can talk turky.
OPAL was in the red round fig's 12 big ones four weeks after the code share deal was axed, I simply don't buy that, that's three mill a week I mean I know the boyz are haven great time there but that's a pretty big habbit.
So what I'm saying is that the company must have been loosing that coin even while the code share deal was going or were they??
So why would a company continue to opperate if it was loosing money while it was ment to be in a good market position only to reinvent it self in a worse market position? either RI is got somthing on the table or is very smart man or delaying liquidation next time the bills pile up again . look who was owed the most amount of money buy OPAL, Air NZ(say no more) Air ways 2 mill (govt owned,get that one up ya ) BAE (origin dirty @ them for been shafted on J41 lease deals) don't forget all the little guys been paid in full.
So maybe these creditors may have even been targeted over time? you don't crank up these kind of debt over nite,Cos I'm sure the fuel man would not be owed a cent!
Look who's been in every paper, Tv and raido the last two weeks and portrayed and the "little guy being bullyed" whats
that worth?
Who need's a labour govt bail out , just a smart accountant:E

[ZK-NSJ]

wasnt the boss of pacific blue formally of origin?

[CT7]

RI hasn't changed.
When he ruled Air Nsn the various airport cafes were always screaming out for their 4 months overdue chow $$$ ......

[ZK-NSN]

Tony Marks ( pac blue man) was in charge for a while but RI wanted his baby back. Tony was spending a heap of cash creating jobs ( lots of middle management tossers) and extra departments, It was a bit of a free for all so bob took over.

splat - I doubt the govt can really do anything about jetconnect as on one hand it would be stopping the merger between ainz and Qantas on the grounds of limited competion(leading to less consumer choice, prices blah, blah) but keeping them out would mean they are effectivly blocking out competition. Airnz and Qantas need origin to stick around or what little chance they have of a merger is screwed.

[Bombay]

I agree that Origin has been in financial difficulty for much longer than 3 weeks.

One of the business section articles in the Press said that the shareholders have pumped in an ADDITIONAL $16.15 million over the past 10 MONTHS in an effort to get rid of the debt.

So, this is not the beginning of the crisis period, rather the end and the creditor bail out was really the last resort, not just a restructure.

Also, it seems unlikely (read impossible) that RI and NS would "inject $2.5 million of their own money" if their intention was simply to delay liquidation. I'm certain that their intention is to keep going.

Don't forget: RI LOVES sticking it to Air NZ in as many ways as possible. As long as Air NZ exists, RI will be doing something to rattle them up.

Even if the rumours of new investors with heaps of capital are true, there are going to have to be some major changes in the way Origin does it's business if it wants to get back in the black. Middle management really are going to have to be shaken up.

Origin ARE in a good position. Air NZ and Qantas DO need Origin to survive.....but only until the game changes again. If a new competitor checks in (perhaps EK expands as the rumours suggest) then maybe the merger is more likely.

I for one have always said that the merger between Air NZ and Qantas can't possibly go ahead, especially after United pulled out of it's transpacific operations. However, the arrival of Pacific Blue and Emirates internationally and Origin domestically might give weight to the appeal process in Air NZ's favour.

Personally, I think Origin's creditor bailout has bought the airline maybe another 3-6 months of trading IF THEY DO NOTHING. If they get with the programme, the future might be a little more rosey.

In any case, Origin immediately need to do something clever to get back in the black and I think the creditor bailout was the start of the process. We shall see if there are any clever moves in the coming months.

Fark! That's altogether too much typing this early in the day.

Bombay

[piontyendforward]

After being clobbered by Air New Zealand's cut-price express fares, crippled Nelson carrier Origin Pacific last September asked the government for a $7.5 million bridging loan to fund a redeemable preference share issue until the airline completed its own capital raising.

Origin had raised $2 million privately but needed $10 million to compete in the aggressive fare environment created by government-controlled Air NZ, says Origin CEO Rob Inglis.

Regional Development Minister Jim Anderton turned down Origin's request after consulting with colleagues, including then Transport Minister, Paul Swain. Instead, he arranged a meeting between the two airlines for Origin to discuss its concerns. Not only were the two carriers arch-rivals, but the government has always maintained it plays no part in Air NZ's operations.

Also at issue is how much, if any, of Origin's confidential financial information might have fallen into Air New Zealand's hands. Significant information was provided to the government to support Origin's loan request.

"What we do know is that it was made clear to Air NZ we had financial difficulties," says Origin independent director Bruce McCallum.

"The upshot was they [Air NZ] used it against us."

Two weeks ago Origin told its creditors it had financial difficulties. If creditors didn't accept its compromise proposal, the airline would be placed in receivership and liquidation. Late last week the plan was accepted. Of Origin's 345 creditors, 89% by number and 86% by value voted in favour.

Yesterday Origin said it had made 93 of its 350 staff redundant.

Anderton says insofar as he is concerned, all financial details and forecasts Origin provided to the government were treated confidentially. He says Air NZ had no knowledge of what was in the documents and that he had called the meeting between the airlines in good faith.

"We are not in a position to say to Air NZ 'nudge, nudge, wink, wink, do A,B,C or D.'

"Government is not going to start being the lender of last resort and I am not going to say in this case it was, but obviously Origin have some financial difficulties."

Those associated with Origin recall the situation somewhat differently.
"He [Anderton] said it may well be in your interest, or words to that effect, to give [Air NZ chairman] John Palmer a ring but he never actually told us why," McCallum says.

McCallum met Palmer in Wellington a few days later but says nothing eventuated from the talks.

Anderton says Air NZ and Origin competed with each other on fares before the government bailed out Air NZ two years ago.

"I thought if Origin had some difficulty with Air NZ it might be worthwhile them both talking to each other ... I wanted to feel that at least Air NZ and Origin had talked about it and there was an opportunity for them to resolve issues that we couldn't resolve as a government by decree.

"People sometimes come to a conclusion which is quite beneficial to either or both but sometimes they don't."

Anderton says talks would never have centred on a merger because Origin wasn't interested. "They had a view Air NZ wasn't giving them a fair go. The meeting was to be on its terms, not ours."

Again, Origin perceives the issue somewhat differently.

"Jim Anderton says we are collateral damage," Inglis says.

"It is well evidenced around the world when governments take positions like this with airlines it does create huge distortions in the market and they have responsibility to make sure the playing field remains reasonably level. "When governments get involved with competing airlines, it clouds the issue."

Anderton says he strongly supported Origin because it has played a constructive role in maintaining and expanding air services to regional New Zealand but he didn't have "a pot of money" to give the airline.

He says the government was forced to buy into Air NZ because a large amount of the country's reputation and export earnings were tied up in its ability to transport tourists and freight.

After the Palmer/McCallum meeting came to nought, Origin laid a complaint of predatory pricing against Air NZ with the Commerce Commission. The complaint is still being investigated seven months later.
Commission PR-woman Jackie Maitland said yesterday the Commerce Act was complex.

Origin says its financial problems were exacerbated by Qantas ending a codeshare and wet lease agreement on 31 March because it was bidding for an alliance with Air NZ. Origin opposed the merger at Commerce Commission hearings last year.

Origin's financial restructuring sees creditors agreeing to accept payment of 5c in the dollar for unsecured creditors owed $10,000 or more, and payment in full to preferential creditors and unsecured creditors owed less than $10,000.

As part of the proposal Inglis is also injecting $2.5 million into the airline for shares.

Inglis controls 83% of the company. Last year Origin's shareholders introduced share of capital $16.148 million. Of that, Inglis is repaying $2 million to investor David Lucas who pulled out after certain conditions attached to the investment were not satisfied.

McCallum says it's no secret Origin is still involved in capital raising. It was put on hold when Qantas announced its withdrawal from its arrangement with Origin in December.

He says the creditors' compromise was necessary to stabilise the company. Origin would prefer to have issued shares to creditors instead of asking them to forgo debt but that would have meant issuing a prospectus, involving yet more expense.

McCallum says he hopes the airline can eventually offer creditors and the public shares through a stock exchange listing.

As he sees it, an alliance with an airline like Emirates would be perfect for Origin. It had talked to the large Arab carrier, which is increasing its presence in New Zealand, and is also talking to Richard Branson's Pacific Blue, freight companies and other investors.

He says deals with big airlines are hampered by Origin not being part of a global distribution system for fare bookings. "We would love to expand the freight business," McCallum says.

[stillalbatross]

Anderton riled at leak of Origin Pacific loan rejection

14.05.2004


Origin Pacific's revelations of an unsuccessful request last year for a $7.5 million Government loan have riled Economic Development Minister Jim Anderton.

The Independent Business Weekly reported on Wednesday that Origin Pacific asked the Government for $7.5 million last September as a bridging loan to fund a share issue while the company did its own capital raising.

Anderton had turned down the request, saying that propping up private companies would set a dangerous precedent. Yesterday he said the request had been "ludicrous".

"How could any Government say, 'Any time you're in trouble or need help, come to us'? How long would the queue be outside the Beehive?" he said yesterday .

He was disappointed Origin Pacific had spoken about the request, because he believed the meeting had been confidential.

"When people come to me for help, my door is always open. But it has to be dealt with confidentially."

Managing director Robert Inglis denied releasing the details.

"We have never, ever raised the issue. We accepted the Government's decision and remained silent. The Independent approached me after comments by Air New Zealand."

Air NZ chief executive Ralph Norris yesterday denied the information had come from him.

Anderton said he tried his best to help Origin Pacific, and took advice from people, including then Transport Minister Paul Swain, about whether to grant the loan.

"When I had fully considered everything and taken advice, the considered answer was no."

Inglis said he went to the Government for help because it was difficult to raise money in an "unstable market" that he believed was caused by the Government's bailout of Air NZ.

"We were trying to raise that capital in a time when Air New Zealand were applying to merge with Qantas. There was uncertainty from an investor's position."

He did not think it was hypocritical to ask the Government for assistance, despite being outspokenly critical of its involvement in rescuing Air NZ.

"The Government put us in that position. All we wanted was a level playing field."

Origin this week said it was laying off 93 staff and cutting flights after creditors accepted a rescue package.

- NZPA


He did not think it was hypocritical to ask the Government for assistance, despite being outspokenly critical of its involvement in rescuing Air NZ.

[ZK-NSJ]

unless you are the national airline, railways, bnz bank, etc etc dont bother asking the govt for money, rather than give it to struggling companys to help them keep peopl eemployed, they would rather dish it out to those unemployed ones who have no intention of getting a job, in my opinion if the govt was to give money to small/struggling companys it would help boost the economy, but the wicked witch of the north fails to see that

[slamer]

Stillalbatros......Are you STILL grinding your Anti-Union axe! Must be difficult to walk straight with such a large chip on your shoulder?

Guess we will never get to hear the/your "Real story" huh?....(thats the one about how you received this... "chip") these stories often include behaviour that involves little integrity by the teller, but always overlooked when told.

You clearly have great concern for ALPA members welfare and prospects, therefor I suggest you pay your subs (suspect this may be an issue) and focus your negative efforts to something more constructive, get involved in the Union and make for change from within.

Consider it "soul cleansing" to rid your Demons...its not to late

PS: RI never recognised the hand that feed him when it was Air NZ, (except maybe when he received his last few mill $$ from purchase)has anything changed in subsequent years?

[ZK-NSN]

NSJ - I dont think its up to the govt to bail out every private company that finds itself in the crapper. You end up with a heap of ineffecient companies dragging down those that can.

[stillalbatross]

Stillalbatros......Are you STILL grinding your Anti-Union axe! Must be difficult to walk straight with such a large chip on your shoulder?
I take it that since you ask about paying subs and haven't actually mentioned the Union lifting a finger for any of it's members with Origin Pacific that ALPA is once again going to screw the little guy.

While demanding subs.

After they have lost their jobs.

Niiiiiiiiiice.

And you ask about my integrity. What a joke. With an attiitude like that you've got ALPA committee member written all over you.

PS. I'll attempt to grind my axe while the union continues to operate in an unethical manner and treats it's regional airline members like sh*t. As for getting involved with the committee, I could only lop off a sick branch to save the tree and in this case the rot starts at the trunk.

[deadhead]

albatross - thought we'd put your issues to bed ages ago.

You are once again making serious allegations against the current union management which require an answer.

What you are saying is false. Have you checked your facts - like actually asking someone in union management what the hell is going on? Let me tell you what I know: international efforts are underway to place any members made redundant as soon as possible.

You should put up documentary evidence of the union's poor treatment of its regional pilots while it (the union) has been under the current management (not historical issues, please), since clearly you have a problem with the current management. Since they are not here to defend themselves (or are they???) I am happy to act as advocate on their behalf.

No one is demanding payment of anything, or perhaps you have ABSOLUTE PROOF that what I am saying is wrong. Who has been told to pay up? Who has been told that "we aren't going to help you?" FACTS PLEASE. (No need for names here, of course). The onus of proof is on you, since you are making serious allegations against the current union management under a pseudonym.

You make "ALPA Committee member" (whatever that is) sound like the most heinous thing ...

Since I know nothing about you, I will not question your integrity, but after reading a nonsensical post like yours, I am forced to seriously question your intelligence. Actually, your post reminds me of that sub-normal cretin caught bragging about sitting those exams for that Arab guy.

Now let us have a discussion about your beliefs, out here in the open (not via PMs). Your pseudonym should provide you with ample protection.

If what you say is true, I will be only too happy to confront the union management with it, unlike your good self, it would seem.

Or if you did, what did they say to you?

Hear from you soon, because this is not some playground squabble albatross, this is REAL. Because what you say needs to be proven (and shown here as) right or wrong, as soon as possible. Just because this is a rumour network, that doesn't mean that gives anyone an excuse to post rhetoric dressed as mindless invective.

dh

[deadhead]

Went and found out some more facts this morning, something someone else should try. NZALPAs phone number is 0800NZALPA if you want to call them, albatross.

This is what I was told over the phone:

FACT: No-one from OPAL has been made redundant
FACT: Eight J41 pilots from Contract Air Services have had their employment terminated by virtue of their employment agreements which made provision for an event like this. The J41 contract CAS had with OPAL was terminated, but the ATR72 contract is not affected. I understand all of the J41 pilots affected are members of NZALPA
FACT: those eight have, already were, or are in the process of, being registered with employment/contract companies such as Rishworths and PARC. Given the uncertainty surrounding security of employment at Origin and CAS, all other members are, or will be, contacted for authority to list them as well.
FACT: NZALPA is liaising with IFALPA via IFALPA's website www.globalpilotjobs.com to place these members.
FACT: some of these members are high on the list for jobs in Japan on Dash8s. Rating not required (!)

Now I have seen need at times to wade into union officers, and am not afraid to do it face to face, unlike others. But in this case I can only applaud what they have done/are doing.

Of course, all this could be lies, but if I had a choice of believing them or you albatross, I'd know who I'd believe - names and faces, or a faceless pseudonym?

A no-brainer, really. How appropriate.

dh (or perhaps d'oh, just for you alby!)

[Don Won]

Dh just a bit un shure on a few things on your post maybe I'm a bit slow today so maybe you could shed some more light?
The ATR 72 contract has not been affected?? thought both planes had been parked up
Then there's the J41 lads, well you mentioned that the great ALPA were listing them with places like Rishworths and PARC last time I checked anyone of us can do that for ourself's
The word on the street is that two of the J41 guy's have got cook jobs anyway sure it won't b to long till the rest are sucked up in the system

[deadhead]

I am only repeating what I was told on the phone, like I said, ph 0800NZALPA to get it first hand.

My understanding is that one of the 72s is parked but the other is still operating.

Yes, you can do it "for ourself's" :rolleyes: (register with agencies) but don't make grammatical howlers like that one on the reg. form or they might make you do an I.Q. test. :D I'm sure the office staff at NZALPA can help you fill it out. :=

You appear to be critical of NZALPA involvement, while albatross is claiming NZALPA is doing worse than nothing and is critical of that, (rightly so if it were true, I am satisfied that isn't the case) but really makes me wonder just what the hell it is that you buggers want the union to do???:*

Good news re the "cook jobs." I presume you mean Mt Cook and that they're not "flippin' burgers...".:cool:

All together now: "The Company's in trouble, we're haemorrhaging money everywhere. IT'S ALL ALPA'S FAULT! Let the members beware..." (sung to the tune of When the Saints Go Marching In, arrangement by any ignorant plonker who claims they have an axe to grind...) :mad:

[Plas Teek]

Ah, yes. The democratic world of NZ, almost.

Isn't it great to blame someone else for ones woes.....

However, I see that stillalbatross has been conspicuous by his/her absence..........:confused:

Seems pretty cut & dried to me.:cool:

[C.Ka]

Is it true that one of Origins ATRs is going to Mt Cook? I suppose they will need more pilots.

[stillalbatross]

Deadhead, thank you for finding out more about the plight of members currently wondering where the next meal is coming from. And Don Won, let's just say that anything the union does is a good step in the right direction.

Dh, I thought there was little nonsensical about my post however I wiill simplify it somewhat to ensure you are no longer confused.

As members, myself and my fellow employees utilised the Union to draw up a collective employment contract with our employer.

I assumed since the union put it together and helped us thrash out the terms with the company they (the Union) would have an understanding of what it was we were agreeing to. Or could utilise a (their?) lawyer if any matters arose that involved possible breaches in the said contract.

Dh, are you still with me?

Matters arose that were waaay in conflict with the contract, people elected to leave the company as a result. Not wanting to paint myself as a John Wayne here but I elected to contact ALPA and see if the company could continue to do what they were doing under the terms of the employment contract. If they were, in the eyes of a lawyer, directly contradicting the terms of the contract then I thought there may be some legal approach I could have used instead. The other option was to leave which, if I took my employer on and lost, would have happened anyway.

Dh, are you still with me?

I called ALPA about 30 times over the space of a fortnight. I went in to the ALPA office and sat and waited and waited and waited and waited from 9-5 for just over three days. Finally got a talk with an ALPA rep and a committee member who, after much thought, informed me that these cases weren't clear cut and they couldn't assess if there was a problem or not and no, ALPA lawyers were far too busy to look into it.

So I paid around $700 dollars to an employment contract lawyer to tell me that the contract (drawn up by ALPA) was watertight and the company didn't have a leg to stand on.

Downside was it was at least another $3-5000 to take it to court, money that I didn't have.

So I quit and headed off to pastures greener instead. If I had won then it would have set a precident to possibly stop others getting screwed too.

But I am only too happy to take it up with the Union, I have paid well over $700 in subs over the years and that was my legal fees. So if what you are saying is true and the union is supportive of ALL of it's members then I will be expecting the $700 back. I will drop in next time I am driving by.

[MOR]

Finally got a talk with an ALPA rep and a committee member who, after much thought, informed me that these cases weren't clear cut and they couldn't assess if there was a problem or not and no, ALPA lawyers were far too busy to look into it.

Doing what exactly...???

So I paid around $700 dollars to an employment contract lawyer to tell me that the contract (drawn up by ALPA) was watertight and the company didn't have a leg to stand on.
Downside was it was at least another $3-5000 to take it to court, money that I didn't have.


If the case was really watertight, you could reasonably have expected to be awarded costs. It wouldn't have cost you a bean.

So if what you are saying is true and the union is supportive of ALL of it's members then I will be expecting the $700 back. I will drop in next time I am driving by.

Don't hold your breath... ;)

[stillalbatross]

Doing what exactly...???

I have no idea, chasing up their drycleaning allowance maybe. I went there looking for help, getting agitated with them for dragging their heels in seeing me wasn't going to further my situation.

If the case was really watertight, you could reasonably have expected to be awarded costs. It wouldn't have cost you a bean

Maybe, but from memory I had to be prepared to outlay money for some initial work first to get the ball rolling. You ever tried taking a case against your employer?

Don't hold your breath...

We shall see.

[ZK-NSN]

Both ATR's are parked up with no scheduled flying but open for charters and have been approved to operate for Mt Cook should one of their ATR's fall over.
Although i fell sorry for the ATR guys i doubt even they are surprised at the situation they have been left in. When 40% of the outfits capacity is no longer required overnight it is obvious where cutbacks are going to take place and alot of them had seen it coming and started to act.
All the best to them and i hope ALPA or whoever can help get them back in the saddle ASAP.

[MOR]

stillalbatross

Sorry, being ironic. I can't believe that NZALPA, with the relatively small amount of airline flying going on here, couldn't see you within an hour of your arrival. That is truly appalling. How many other current cases do they have...???

Maybe, but from memory I had to be prepared to outlay money for some initial work first to get the ball rolling. You ever tried taking a case against your employer?

As it happens, yes. I ended up winning considerably more than the figure I went after, as well.

If the lawyer was that certain, s/he should have been prepared to do the work, and take their slice from the award... IF they were so sure of winning. Can't think why they wouldn't go for that.

[Crack]

STILLALBATROS.

If your contract is tight as you say, spend the money, get it into the court system, and if the union has signed the contract and negotiated it as well, go them too.

You will be amazed what happens when people realise you mean bussines.

The only time I ever did it, I had nothing to loose, and they offered to settle out of court, and made me sign that I would not make the contents of the settlement public?.

If you are short of money, take the contract into your bank manager, and use it as security?.

Think outside of the box. :ok:

Crack

[deadhead]

stillalbatross:
At last, you are starting to make sense. Compare that with what you wrote earlier, and you can understand why I questioned your intelligence. Now that you have posted facts (at least as you see them) we can make progress.

I have just had a look at the Rules of the Union. If you are like 90% of the membership and don’t realise they exist, rule 5 (3) (b) refers. It says, in part: “...members ... entitled to ... representation in employment matters TO AN EXTENT DETERMINED BY THE BOARD OF MANAGEMENT ... " (my emphasis).

This means the lawyers, or anyone else, cannot say to you that you don’t have a case, (which is what I am presuming you are meaning in your post) they can only make representations to that effect to the Board of Management. The Board is then required to determine the extent to which assistance is given.

It is unclear as to whether this has happened, but it sounds to me like it didn’t happen.

Therefore, by your statement, the union is in breach of its own rules.

There is a prescribed procedure for dealing with this sort of thing - it is called a COMPLAINT.

The procedure is the same as making a COMPLAINT anywhere, with whoever. You call the number and say "I wish to make a COMPLAINT."

Naturally you may get shunted from pillar to post, but eventually you will be referred to someone who can DEAL with your COMPLAINT. Like the President. You do have the power (like any member) to be referred to the President. If you (as a member) ask to be referred to an elected official, the office staff are OBLIGED to refer you. They cannot deny you. Obviously, elected officials won't be in the office all the time, but they will receive your referral. I’m not just talking about any “ALPA Committee member” either.

Alternatively, you could WRITE to the President. In fact, I suggest you do JUST THAT. It is what he is there for.

Of course, all this takes time and effort, and the natural reaction is "well, I pay my fees; I should not have to do this, and be subjected to this cr@p." And you'd be right.

Problem is, it happens with the phone company, the electricity/gas company, your gym, that bast@rd at the garage who tried to charge $400 for a brake repair (as happened to me recently) - it goes on and on.

Do you then do nothing except whinge on the consumers' equivalent of PPRuNe and leave it at that? No. You fight the bast@rds that p!ss you off, you don't whinge about them.

But that's what you did, just whinged on PPRuNe.

Sitting around “9-5 for 3 days waiting”, while abhorrent, doesn’t qualify as fighting. That only increases your chances of developing haemorrhoids. That's called terrorism.

Making a formal complaint, however, does.

That is why I got p!ssed off at you.

Your story is still incomplete. At least that is better than your previous effort, which so completely lacked substance that I was forced, in turn, to p!ss you off in order to have a chance at getting at what was REALLY on your mind.

PPRuNers are entitled to get both sides of the story, and that is what I was doing (or attempting to do). I see there is still more work to do on that, because, if your story is true, and I have no reason to doubt it, then it must be investigated further. I will do that by firstly emailing your posts – the sensible bits of them – to the Principal Officers.

Now, are you able to give me an approximate month/year your problem occurred? You can PM me with that if you wish. I will not need any other details at this stage. It sounds recent, which is of some concern.

In future, and this goes for everybody, if this happens to you, and you are (rightly so) p!ssed off, then treat the matter as for how you would make a complaint to anyone. Verbal messages are subject to all sorts of corruption, most of it accidental. Our brains/memories are the worst offenders. So get it in writing.

If the reply you get, in writing, is horseh!t, then feel free to post that so we can REALLY get to see if you were justified in your mindless vilification.

Only then would it not be mindless. Are you with me?

Because I’m with you.

dh

[stillalbatross]

Deadhead, I will take it up with the union myself when I have a bit of spare time on my hands and Pm you or post here the results. It isn't recent enough to really matter any more and nothing that they do now is going to alter what or where I am now with my career. My point in first posting was to try to ensure that the same treatment wasn't dished out to the OP guys and girls, some of whom have been through redundancy more than once. Sorry I had to hijack the thread and drag it through three pages in order to do it.

Crack, taking on your employer in the tiny world that is NZ aviation is bad enough without thinking about the consequences of taking on the union as well. Irrespective of whether I had a valid complaint or not it is easy to see from some of the replies here that I would have been vilified.

MOR good on you. You obviously understood your terms of employment better than I understood mine.

[deadhead]

Thank you stillalbatross, and good luck with it. I always knew we were on the same side, it is good to get an affirmation of that though. As for the troops at OPAL, make no mistake - they will be catered for to the fullest extent possible - or if not, call ALPA for a set of rules!

dh

[Don Won]

What's happened to the conair J41 guy's? are they just be waiting for other J41 driver's to leave, herd that the 41 feet was running fairly lean even before the QF code share deal went sour, diden't OPAL recently run a couple ground course's? maybe wont be to long till the guy's will be getten the call up from the g/c
Read in the paper the other day that origin may have investors any news on that,and then there's the DHL/NZ Post (Origin/Airwork) tie up wonder what's happening there...........

[ZK-NSN]

The conair J41 guys have had their conair contracts cancelled/ not renewed, no job offers from origin at all. I beleive 2 have gone to eagle and a few others had already had a yes letter from Mt Cook. The Boys who did the course's shortly before it went bad will just have to wait.

[Pitch Attitude]

Heard that 2 out of 3 ex-OPAL pilots who attended the last B1900 ground course told Eagle "Thanks but No thanks" to start dates as contract F/O's.

[charliemanson]

Ohhhh... Eagle won't like that!!!! Serves them right!!!! :p
Don't suppose that these two were any of the ones offered Mt. Cook interviews? One would assume they would have had something lined up.... If not... GOOD ON YA!!!!!!! Don't know of too many people that would be keen on stepping down from an ATR or J41 (whatever they were on) to a B1900 and another 18 month bond! (Could be 12... I have no idea)

[ZK-NSN]

I know 2 capt's who went for eagle course's, If eagle turned any of them down then well it's eagle's loss. I beleive the bulk of the guys going to Mt cook had been on the ATR and all those going to eagle are from the J41 fleet.

[charliemanson]

Captains from a J41... to a Co position on a B1900? :hmm:
Shorely Origin would eventually hire them back under the Origin banner instead of Conair? Keep the command that way, instead of jumping at the end of a long FO list... Or does it not work like my simple mind does? What about moving to the J31 fleet for these guys? Anything's gotta be better than going back to a Co... well unless it's a bigger/better machine... which a B1900 is not... (in my opinion)