The Fight is On, Gloves are off

[Mean, Nasty & Tired]

In an unusually quick response to management's demand that the LAMEs stop doing walk around preflight safety checks, the ALAEA (Australian Licenced Aircraft Engineers Association) has fired off a letter to all bases telling it's members to completely and utterly IGNORE management's demands for a LAMELESS tarmac and continue to protect the safety of ALL those who fly.

The gloves are off and the gauntlet down, I wonder what cheapshot the company will fire off next, maybe another false accusation or a stand down for doing his/her job.

Having lived both lives as fixer and flyer I know the respect and responsibility of both professions and thus I find this the absolute beginning of the end for Australia's incredible safety record will they only learn when there's a GREAT SMOKING HOLE in the ground.

Give'em Hell lads and never give up
:ok:

[Sunfish]

The ALEA? Standing up to Qantas:confused:

"The ultimate treason - to do the right thing for the wrong reason."

T.S. Eliot

[schnauzer]

Say what you mean, Sunfish, and mean what you say.

[Kornholio]

He doesn't know what he means. He feels a need to simply make "noise".

Stick at it MN&T.......

[Three Bars]

I await the inevitable "this militant union is holding a gun to the head of the travelling public" line from management.

[The masked goatrider]

The ALAEA to stick up for it's members? You must be joking. The Melbourne members initial reaction to the notice was met with comments such as "about time" but it wasn't long before we smelt a rat in the pipes and it stinks of Oldmeadow.

Reading the EBA notice it seems to all come together when the second page talks about the LAME-less tarmac issue being included into the EBA log of claims. Why would the ALAEA wish to include the LAME-less tarmac issue which can be argued primarily on the grounds of safety into an EBA log? You would lose the safety argument then and leave yourselves open for comments about wages demands for reduced safety. Well done ALAEA you really know how to f**k things up.

What concerns us Melbourne troublemakers is what could now happen if we follow the direction of the ALAEA. Prior to the issue being linked to the EBA, we could continue to do our job and if stood down would have this done on full pay. Now the employer has every right to lock as many of us out without pay as they like. It could be the bloke who disobeys management orders. It could be the entire lot of us or maybe just the ALAEA Executive chief opponents. They just happen to be the ones getting stood down for the overtime bans.

The members don't trust you Bexley and will not follow. You wouldn't support Industrial action at the last EBA when 79% voted in favour so why should you want it now?

[BankAngle50]

As for Engineers doing walk arounds; well anyone can walk around an airplane looking at the sky. Junior FO’s have spotted more stuff. We were all able to walk around a Turbo-prop OK, so I think well manage without that service now.
Preflight Safety checks—like leaving oil caps off. Humm CFM56 without oil after T/O! Gee thanx!:ok:

[socks]

I haven't yet seen a F/o check an oil cap and doubt whether he would know what end of the engine it's fitted.

Some of the dumb questions second officers. come and ask the engineer make you wonder where they come from.

And if it's a windup <50 you are trying to get don't start something you will regret. We humor second officers with their youthful requests because everyone needs to start some where, But if you wish to make it a battle between Engineers and Pilots, then I think your motives are misguided. Perhaps you are from management and only attempting to redirect this discussion away from the more important issues.

And if an oil cap has been left off, you should be grateful that there was an engineer there to blame, one day you may be topping up your own oils.

[Agent Mulder]

Easy Tiger,

Focus on the issue. It is either safe or it is not.

Is it less safe than two pairs of eyes doing the walk around?

Absolutely.

Is it UNSAFE?

Not according to Boeing, Airbus, CASA, FAA, JAA, Virgin and Jetstar. With Corporate liability as it is today do you seriously think that the Board of Qantas would leave themselves open to being joint and severally liable in the event of an accident?

I hope not. Retirement does not save you from a civil lawsuit either.

Is it the work of Oldmeadow?

Definitely.

When are the shareholders of Qantas, who have had their shares languish for years, going to demand that Qantas not use an outside contractor for their industrial relations? The ridiculous situation is that if relations with the workforce are good then Oldmeadow doesn't get paid. In my opinion he manufactures disputes and sponsors an antagonistic approach to the workforce to create work for his company.

I for one would love to see the ATO do a master servant audit on this despicable turncoat.

The sooner Packer uses his JP Morgan nominees holding to launch a takeover of Qantas the better. Bin the retreating cowards and take on the world.

Then again he may just sell off the businesses which have been nicely segmented by Geoff and Co. and pocket the profits.

New World Order ladies and gentlemen, get used to it.

[Mean, Nasty & Tired]

'As for Engineers doing walk arounds; well anyone can walk around an airplane looking at the sky. Junior FO’s have spotted more stuff. We were all able to walk around a Turbo-prop OK, so I think well manage without that service now.

For Christ sakes be fair dinkum, pilots fly aircraft and LAMEs find faults and fix aircraft end of story, this partnership has worked perfectly in the jet age in this country, to preach you know better than someone who does what you do part time, full time is bloody ridiculous

Open your eyes the whip is out for all of us, in this I'm reminded of a WWII story
" First they came for the jews I did not speak up for I was not a jew,
then they came for the coloureds I did not speak up for I was not coloured,
then they came for the catholics I did not speak up for I was not a catholic,
then they came for me and there was no one left to speak up for me."

Be careful what you wish for your life may depend on it one day:E

[Kanga767]

So. Pilots doing walkarounds

Two years later, same issue, same pathetic argument, different operator.


K

[TIMMEEEE]

Some of the dumb questions second officers. come and ask the engineer make you wonder where they come from.

Socks.

You should be glad that these Second Officers have the common sense to come up and ask questions, even knowing that the questions may be "dumb".

It shows that they have the right attitude and that they want to do their job the right way - and learn in the process no less.

Gee, I wonder whether you asked any dumb questions when you were an apprentice or learning Socks????
I sure did and had somebody else that was in the same shoes years earlier explain it in a friendly fashion !!

[planemad2]

Here we go again. :{

It MUST be safer to have 2 independent checks on/for anything, that is why for important systems like flight controls, there must be 2 totally independent inspections by Engineers.

YES, it is cheaper to only have 1, but safer with 2. :rolleyes:

Now this applies no matter who does it. ;)

It MUST be safer to have 2 Pilots do independent checks, rather than 1 Pilot. :ok:

However why change a system that has worked well for decades, where you have 1 check done by a Professional Pilot, and another independent inspection by a Professional LAME?

The ONLY honest answer can be, to save money. :uhoh:

[Mr.Buzzy]

Ever play KERPLUNK? The kids game that scores you more points for removing the most number of sticks supporting the marbles.... Ill just see if I can remove ooone more stick........

bbbbbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzzzzzbbbbbbbbbbzzzzzzzzz

[planemad2]

Yes, and no matter how clever you are playing it, eventually you go too far, remove too many supports, and the whole thing comes crashing down. :rolleyes:

VERY GOOD analogy. :ok:

[Mr.Buzzy]

Thats the one... "The Kerplunk theory" Whoever removes the most support wins!

bbbbbbbbbbbbbzzzzzzz.. kerplunk!!!!!.....bbbbbzzzzzz

[planemad2]

Sadly, this is currently obviously the most popular executive toy in the board rooms of the Airlines in Australia. :(

[Lodown]

Ahhh! But to be fair, the rules aren't the same as Kerplunk. The object of the game here is to constantly remove, relocate, reshape, do away with, rearrange and replace as many sticks as possible while retaining a stable support for a constantly changing pile of marbles. The sticks used to be very strong but lately have been showing signs of wear and tear.

[planemad2]

So basically the same rules. ;)

Must be some of those airline executives getting very close to removing too many sticks. :eek:

[Kaptin M]

It used to be called Fiddle Sticks, when I was a kid - and it does seem there are too many people, with too little aviation knowledge, fiddling with things solely for the sake of saving a few cents here or there (pull another stick out here and there), mindless of the SAFETY repercussions...until, in the end
KERPLUNK :{

Of course, it's only the LAST stick that is pulled, that will be identified as the cause.

[Stall Margin]

The ALAEA has done a complete backflip! When Jetstar introduced the no man transits where was the ALAEA then.It is still an RPT operator and they were non-existent in their requests for the LAME's requests in sorting out this issue.We were doing pre-flgith and pushouts one day and the very next day the express ground handling wre doing the receipt of the aircraft,talking to the pilot and pushing out the aircraft via the power push unit effectively putting the LAME out of a job.Watch out Qantas and Virgin the same thing is coming your way"unfortunately'

[VTM]

How is it QF operates with 2 S/Os on some flights, may be they should increase the flight time limitations and only use 2 pilots or do they need the 2 S/O to do the walkaround.
Seems like a waste of time and money having 4 pilots crew a 2 pilot aircraft or maybe it is pilot union issue, enough said.:ok:

[The Enema Bandit]

How do expect Qantas to change CAO 48 for long flights you farken twit?

[vortsa]

The same way that Qantas got them to change the reg's regarding preflt/maint. releases, you ****. ( FEMALE TWIT SPELT WITH AN 'A')

[BankAngle50]

VTM—either you are retarded grease monkey or your post was an attempt at a good wind up; and once again displaying the general sense of resentment towards SO’s. SO position by its virtue is a learning/apprentice job, so I cannot understand why the LAMEs give them such grief for their stupid Q. Did you guys know everything when you were an apprentice? I think not. For those of us lucky enough to avoid being a radio operator for a few years,great (lucky me), but I don’t understand why you guys keep referring to SOs. They may think they are gods gift to aviation but they are not screwing it for all of us.

My previous post was a little contrite and probably taken as a piss take. Let me extrapolate. I really don’t think it’s necessary for a LAME to a walk-around with the pilots after a cold start. Obviously it’s handy to have one around if something non-normal is indicated during the previous sector. I notice most guys walk around the plane in a half assed effort to satisfy the requirement that they indeed walked around the plane. Back when I flew turbo props we didn’t have a LAME for every walk-around and I think it’s a joke you need one just because the propulsion system is a ducted fan. I’m not in management either. Pilots and LAMES have always liked to have a good old poke at each other, but lets not forget who the real assholes are (they have CPA written after their names).

Unfortunately you guys are now getting a taste of the hot poker, which the pilots and cabin crew have been jammed with since ’89. The Nerds that run the airline are accountants and know jack-sh1t about anything other than cost cutting to improve shareholder return. Using this brilliant managerial brio, and after screwing Tech crew for years, they have turned their focus to you guys. Good luck guys, I hope you have a win, but I think the outcome is sadly already written in stone. They won’t be happy until everyone earns the same as a Vietnamese rice paddy farmer. Just look at all the Thais taking Aussie jobs (FA) on the 744 fleet. Forget about "i still call Australia home," I think the KD LANG remake of the song Helpless is more approriate.

Vortsa, has touched on the real problem in Oz. Our regulatory authority is a farce. A pathetic organization that only knows how to rubber stamp dispensations, without any regard to safety or fatigue. How ironic these minions include the word “Safety” in their name. JOKE!
http://xs13.xs.to/pics/05046/img_logo_qantas.bmp

[VTM]

TEB,
Mel-Sin a long flight! other operators only crew with 2 pilots,for info the CAO says 3 or more pilots, why have 4 when you only need 3, waste of space.
BA50,
A large RPT aircraft ie, 747,777, is a little more complicated than a piss ant turboprop and where in the CAOs do I find the definition for apprentice pilot.

[Kanga767]

Yes Mr Angle50! If your good old turboprop isn't so much different then why can't I sign out a heavy with my 1, 5, 6 and 10 airframe license? Why did I have to go through specific type training for my group 20 licenses???


K


P.S. - By the way, since you mentioned turboprop, as an example, the Maintenance Task Schedule for the EMB110 issued by Embraer actually requires a transit check to be performed each turnaround. For some reason, Australian operators don't seem to have it incorporated in their Systems of Maintenance. So just because you were doing walkarounds on turboprops it doesn't mean it was RIGHT!

[BankAngle50]

VTM you moron! How do you propose we get the 4th pilot to SIN or BKK for the flight to LHR (around 14 hours) then? I have flown B747, and currently B737 and there is no difference doing a walk-around on either of them or what you describe as a “piss ant Turbo prop.” You are looking for damage or defects which are the same, it doesn’t matter how big the plane is. Still picking on the poor SO I see. What happened crybaby did you try and wipe the grease of your hands and become one of us only to fail stage 1? :{

Kanga, Yeah I understand that. All I am saying is that I don’t think we need an engineer to do a walk-around after YOU have dispatched the aircraft for the day. Let say you sign her off at SYD and we fly to OOL with no problems, is it really necessary for you to do a walk around again with the pilots @ OOL? I see VB don’t have an engineer doing walk arounds at OOL, and they haven’t been falling form the sky. Never flown an EMB110 so no comment. If we can have an engineer paid to inspect her every time, then lucky us. I just disagree that its needed on every turnaround.

As I said before, the real people to blame for the erosion of safety is the regulatory authority and management; not pilots and engineers going for each others throats! In any case we will all be replaced with 3rd world nationals who will work for 40 USD a month if management get there way.

http://xs13.xs.to/pics/05046/img_logo_qantas.bmp

[VTM]

BA50,
How did you get to the first stage with your attitude, done any Human Factors training lately?
For your info CAO 48 says you can roster a 14 hour duty with only three pilots, grow up mate and see how the rest of the world operates their airlines, just like I did and then retired after 27 years of flying.

[DJ737]

How do you propose we get the 4th pilot to SIN or BKK for the flight to LHR (around 14 hours)

Why not employ offshore pilots from SE Asia?
If they can do it with cabin crew then why not pilots?

Probably be cheaper too :E

DJ737

[The Enema Bandit]

VTM, go back to school and redo your English. The way I read it was you say they should increase the flight times and only use two pilots. Well on that basis I reckon the punters would be pretty pissed off if they knew they had only two pilots to fly them all the way to London from Singapore.
Another mindless comment again from DJ737. I suppose you're one of those turkeys that volunteers to work in the office on your days off. You're not going to be happy until you start paying VB to fly for them are you boofhead? How come you removed your signature too? I don't get any more visions of you chock a block up a kangaroo's bum anymore.

[DJ737]

TEB your comments still don't answer my question...Is there a reason why it can't be done?

Get JQ Asia 320 drivers to sit in the seat for a few hours staring at Central Asia.

DJ737
The Roo Rooter :ok: :E

and as TEB obviously missed my sig from the other post, heres one just for you

DJ737
The Roo Rooter :ok: :E

[The Enema Bandit]

You little pearler DJ! I've got those visions back now. Sorry, but I can't answer your question because I don't know Qantas's policies. But I would have thought it better that Aussie pilots fly Aussie aircraft and routes.

The Enema Bandit
The Virgin Rooter:ok: :E

[Metro Boy]

That's quite true about people going in on their days off to work in the office. I know of one captain that does it for the love of the company and he said that his help is really appreciated.

[BankAngle50]

I think DJ737 was having a poke at the current myopic management team, who want the cheapest 3rd world national they can get. Enema, I’m sure no Aussie pilot (QF or DJ) would want/welcome Thai’s flying the planes.

VTM, The CAO states a requirement for 3 or more pilots in excess of 14 hours. SIN-LHR is often planned well over 14.5 hours allowing no holding at LHR; hence Commanders discretion for extension (2 hours) is not legal. The SO’s are provided so that the landing crew is fresh for the approach etc. Would it really help safety to remove them? Perhaps you like to know the people up the front flying and your family are Zombies, if so then simply fly jet*. Those poor guys are doing over 8 hours stick in one day.

For someone who states he has had a flying career over 25 years I find it hard to believe you would want/wish for flight crew to be limited to 2 pilots for a long haul duty. I thought you wanted safety to be maintained? You question my CRM; well you come across as one of the nasty old f*ckers on the 744 fleet who suffer from the “god syndrome” driving people back to domestic just to get away from people of your ilk. I very much doubt that someone who makes moric comments about duty limitations, slates turbo props as “piss ant,” has ever worked in airline cockpit. Im sure all the professional -8 and Rex driver's appreciate your comments. If you have had a long sufferance in single pilot GA for past 25 years, then I’m sorry, but don’t take it out on us.:O

[VTM]

TEB & EB,
Having had the pleasure of operating with many now 737 QF Capts, in the days of the 727, I find your comments offensive.
The facts are:
1. You can operate, Mel -Sin under Australian regs with 2 pilots not 4.
(British Airways and Singapore do it with 2 pilots every day of course under their own rules.)
2. You can operate, Sin- Lhr under Australian regs with 3 pilots not 4.
My point or windup all along is you are only too willing to have a go at LAMEs regarding preflights but when somebody points out that cost savings can be made in areas that may effect pilots careers you get a little agitated.

[sport]

Well said VTM, but it is really a training flight for S/O (Mel/Sin/Lhr).

There is talk of the perception by pax not having a pilot in the cockpit, what if they new they had learner drivers up the front.

And on that subject of pilotless cockpits, again, many thousands of pax have signed up to pay hundreds of the thousands of dollars to fly into space on a pilotless shuttles ( aircraft) with only computers to make it possible.

Go Virgin, always looking to the future.

[Agent Mulder]

What worries me is that you all have a "my jobs more important than your job" thing going on and by the quality of your posts, none of you would contribute to the "Brain Drain" if you packed off overseas.

Crikey, get a grip and focus on the issue, not big swinging nobs. The enemy is not the staff, it's the management.

Game on!

[The Enema Bandit]

Sorry VTM, didn't mean to offend but your pronounciations came across very ambiguously to me. But lets face facts. Who gives a flying fark as long as everyone has a secure job and those pricks in management (and I mean in ALL companies where they are arrogant wankers who think their **** doesn't stink) are brought down fifty farcken notches to the real world.

[Mean, Nasty & Tired]

posted 31st January 2005 13:38
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What worries me is that you all have a "my jobs more important than your job" thing going on and by the quality of your posts, none of you would contribute to the "Brain Drain" if you packed off overseas.

Crikey, get a grip and focus on the issue, not big swinging nobs. The enemy is not the staff, it's the management.

Game on!

Exactly on the mark, Fox too many self inflated tw#ts thinking they can become superman and run the airline themselves (if they're not already).

Forget the inter profession rivalry.

Forget petty injustices of bygone eras.

Forget blatant greed and opportunism.

Remember just one thing it's a big wide world and everyone has to live in it, In this country we do so and do so well, don't let management take away our hard earned rights and privledges, fight back with all your might.

Just recently a memo was sent out by potato head stating the book must be followed to the letter of the law, work to the rules or face the punishment.

I couldn't have said it better myself

PS Pleasant days off at home with the family:ok: