Pilot Industrial Awards

[Lawrie Cox]

It has been a while and I am entertained from time to time reading the pages of PPRUNE. I will make one thing very clear from the outset I will not post under a false name to hide my identity and what I publish is based upon fact.

The Awards covering pilots are published on our web page for all to see www.afap.org.au . These particular awards are the legal safety nets for pilots. In Victoria, Northern Territory and Australian Capital Territory they apply to any pilot and employer as they are ‘common rule’ documents. In all other states it will depend upon the company being a respondent or what we call a successor to the company who is already named.

The base rates are as follows:

Fixed wing single engine $29,182.00
Fixed Wing Multi engine $35,116.00

Helicopter
Single engine $40,448.00
Multi engine $43,344.00

If you are a casual then the hourly rates are:

Fixed wing single engine $45.60 per hour
Fixed Wing Multi engine $54.87 per hour

Helicopter
Single engine $66.16 per hour
Multi engine $70.85 per hour

As a permanent employee you also get other conditions such as 6 weeks (42 days) annual leave, Payment up to $1000.00 to purchase Loss of Licence insurance, meal allowances, sick leave etc. Your hours of work give you two days off in seven and the rest is in line with CAO part 48.

The Federation works for its members we are not perfect and have never claimed to be. We do not always win but we certainly do not always lose. If a pilot wants help in recovering their entitlements as a member it costs nothing for someone who joins we will provide assistance to enable you to claim back but we will not represent you in those circumstances. For everybody else there is the Department of Workplace Relations office in each State or pay for an experienced industrial lawyer.

Ultimately it is up to you if you want to be a professional pilot do not prostitute yourself as some do (John in The Australian today). The above is your minimum legal entitlement I cannot force you to take it but if you don’t the only winner is the crooks in our industry

Lawrie Cox
Manager – Industrial Relations
Australian Federation of Air Pilots
[email protected]

[Woomera]

Thank you and welcome back, Lawrie.

I've "stickied" this thread.

If we invite any Award or entitlement questions from our PPRuNe users I trust you will be able to respond?

"Ultimately it is up to you if you want to be a professional pilot do not prostitute yourself as some do (John in The Australian today). The above is your minimum legal entitlement I cannot force you to take it but if you don’t the only winner is the crooks in our industry."

Never a truer word was said........... :ok:

Please, if you have a question, check the Award (http://www.wagenet.gov.au/WageNet/Search/view.asp?docid=262211&query=&page=0&quickview=Y) first!

Again, thanks for your participation in PPRuNe.

Woomera

[Erin Brockovich]

Sent John this web address as well.

[wishtobflying]

Why is there a $2,896 difference between helicopter single and multi but a $5,934 (more than double) difference for fixed wing?

Almost any multi engine endorsement on helicopters will be a twin turbine endorsement (all? - I can't think of any piston multi-engine helicopter), and therefore extremely expensive in comparison to a twin piston fixed wing endorsement.

Sure, the starting rate there is higher, but we're looking at close to $50,000 just to get to CPL level, let alone Command Instrument Rating on top of that.

Is this a misprint, or is there some reasoning behind this that I'm not seeing?

[ITCZ]

Jesus wept.

The first question for Lawrie is "how come I only get this much more and HE gets this much more ........"

Us and them doesn't mean this group of pilots and that group of pilots.

Us and them is supposed to mean... all us pilots, and all them companies.

:hmm:

[Capt Snooze]

wishtobflying


What you are looking at is simply the facts of what various people should be paid at this moment in time. Nothing more. Nothing less. The most important thing right now is to ensure that people are actually paid these amounts.

No-one has said that they are fair or equitable. No-one has suggested that they provide a reasonable recompense for the work performed, or for the effort involved in achieving the qualifications required. No-one has suggested that they cannot be improved. I doubt very much that there was any particular reasoning behind the perceived discrepancy in the relationship between categories that you highlight. They are simply the result of a lengthy negotiation and legal process involving the AFAP, who represent some of the pilots in this country, and representatives of some of this country’s aviation employers. Doubtless the AFAP tried to get more, and the employer groups tried for less. Subsequent sets of negotiations may produce different relationships between employment categories.

They do however represent the minimum wages for all pilots in some states, and probably the majority of pilots in the others.

Let’s at least have people paid what they are legally entitled to, which is not happening in a large portion of the industry now, and worry about ironing out the perceived inequities in the detail later.



Snooze

(Disclaimer: not a member of, nor an apologist for the AFAP, one of the diaspora)



Thank you Snooze. I hope you don't mind me bolding your last two paragraphs?

:ok:

Woomera

[psycho joe]

If a pilot wants help in recovering their entitlements as a member it costs nothing for someone who joins we will provide assistance to enable you to claim back but we will not represent you in those circumstances. For everybody else there is the Department of Workplace Relations office in each State or pay for an experienced industrial lawyer.
Been there, tried that.

I had an employer that stopped paying wages and refused to pay super and other entitlements to the pilots.

The union wouldn't do anything because; "It's your word against theirs (the employer)."

the DWR wouldn't act because; "we're busy and you pilots are payed a fortune so you're not a priority to us".

This isn't an isolated case, the fact is that the union isn't interested in GA pilots. I can't go further without naming and implicating, but words to this effect have been mentioned several times by senior members of the AFAP.

A agree that the crooks are winning, but with the help of union complacency. When was the last time anyone in GA saw a union rep come into the work place as is common in any other industry.

Just remember GA pilot's become airline pilot's, by then they've learnt to go elsewhere for representation.

[Barons Forever]

Lawrie, nice to see you posting here.

Readers, please note the reference in Lawrie's post that in the NT, ACT and in Victoria the award applies to all. Pity it is not so in the other states, but the good news is that in the three states that it is the law you will have the right to claim the proper rates.;)

[Lawrie Cox]

In answer to Physco joe.I have said that we are not perfect but who in this industry is. My concern with your point is that for us to not pursue the claim would be a couple of factors at play. The first being what position are you classified in; to give you an example there are many pilots under the misunderstanding that if you hold the qualification you get paid for it. this is not always the situation if the employer classifies you as a Grade 2 instructor even though you hold a Grade 1 then the pay rate is at Grade 2. a similar situation in the ATPL allowance if you hold but are not required to use or exercise its privileges then you do not get the allowance.
If your case was clear cut that the job you were classified for was being performed then not paid I do find it a little hard to believe that frst we wouldn't do it or secondly even Department of Workplace Relations do not dismiss an application they may take a little longer dependent on their workload.

I certainly agree with your point about helping in the 'nursery' of flying this is something the Federation has always done and will continue do. With the exception of the split away Qantas overseas committee in 1981 (because they did not want their money spent on other than Qantas pilots) the Federation has actively supported helping GA members and for every bad story i am sure we can produce ten good results. One of our flaws is that we don't flaunt it like others perhaps and allow people with minimal info bag us. However we have survived the bad times and will continue to service our members who want our help.

Lawrie Cox

[OpsNormal]

Lawrie, thank you for the responses to date and for placing yourself in a position to answer some questions. I will put my hand up and say that I am one of the lucky ones who enjoy working for one of the respondents to the award who sees fit to reward its employees well. However I have no doubt that in this day and age of radical IR overhaul by the Federal Govt there is a need for a strong union to ensure at least the status quo remains.

The issues I raise are these....

* There is a significant CPL populous of an "older" age group (ie; married, second or even third career, family on the way or similar) that need to be able to take advantage of the advocacy of an industry group that will prove itself to be worthy and relevant to their needs. There are also a significant number of pilots who will never make the step into airline ops, and will remain at the "piston GA level" of the industry. While your recent gains in the NT are a fantastic indicator that things are progressing in the right direction, what steps has your organisation taken to filter this message down to the general CPL populous that membership will be a positive step toward the greater good?

* I talk to many who have joined the AFAP and while some will argue that I am wrong, I don't see the "coalface" being visited all that often by your organisation. Why? I would have thought that if an organisation (a Trade Union) of your calibre is to flourish and prosper in this climate of IR changes and uncertainty, then you must make strong cases for people to join and become members. I realise that because of GA pay rates and scales there is a smaller amount of "dues" coming in per member from the lower end GA sector, but wouldn't an increased membership allow more into the coffers to help promote further growth and advocacy, especially for those most vulnerable to exploitation? (I read of instructors on $12/flt hr etc).

* The GA industry isn't stupid, they do however need to be shown what benefit you can be to them in negotiating on their collective behalf. You'd possibly be surprised that many from GA watch your organisations attempts at collective bargaining (and see the outcomes that seem almost not worth the effort) on behalf of some Airline Pilot Groups and ask themselves "what good they could possibly do me if they cannot get substantial concessions for larger pilot bodies?" There is no suggestion that there should be any form of ambit claim well beyond the bounds of reason (forcing mass redundancies), but after reading and hearing much of late about pay and conditions of some employers in parts of the country where the GA Award is not common rule, then one could be forgiven for thinking that places like (high profile at the moment) Nth Qld are out of sight, out of mind and simply do not exist in your scope of ops. How do you intend to change this bearing in mind that you have stated in your opening post that the AFAP will provide assistance, yet not represent those affected? I was under the impression that as a Trade Union "representation" was part and parcel of membership during times of dispute with an employer, whether singularly or as a group?

I guess that many (including myself) have not joined to date due many factors.... personal relevance, lack of disposable income and apathy.

Regards,

OpsN ;)

[drshmoo]

Opsnormal - Gold as usual


Question? If an operator in NSW is not a respondent to the award, then what are the options apart from departing for another job, do the employees have. I appluad the steps taken by Vic, NT and ACT to make the award wage manditory (full or part time). But unfortunately with the new IR reforms that will be in place shortly, things look like they will be getting far worse before they get better.

[Erin Brockovich]

I think for the AFAP it’s a matter of picking the battles they can win at the moment. It doesn’t make much sense to go up against companies that are not respondents to the GA Award where it is not common rule. Let’s concentrate our efforts to where the GA Award is common rule. There the AFAP has some legal might.

NAC was a great success story of what pilots and union representation can achieve but, ultimately it is up to the pilots. I hear that some of the new casual pilots at NAC are still working for free, not because the company won’t pay them accordingly but because they won’t put down hours worked or duty on their time sheets. Having said that, I believe NAC are the best paying non-turbine GA company in the NT.

The rest of the companies are either close to the GA Award, still in the dark ages or paying cash. It has to be the pilots that approach the AFAP for representation, not the other way around. However, every pilot should be made aware that discreet representation is available to them at very little cost. If more pilots become members, more could be helped.

It is up to us. Saying that there will always be someone out there that is willing to degrade conditions just makes it worse. It condones those who are doing it.

Lets all start by doing something about pay and conditions of the companies we’re in. At least where the GA Award is common rule. Then we can pressure the other States to follow suit. Eventually the GA Award can be overhauled to meet current living standards. Sh#t, flying might even be a viable profession.

If an operator in NSW is not a respondent to the award, then what are the options apart from departing for another job, do the employees have.Drshmoo, it starts by sticking together.

[Capt L]

I believe NAC are the best paying non-turbine GA company in the NT.

I don't know what NAC you're thinking of!

Why would a GA company voluntarily pay more than the award?

[psycho joe]

Laurie,

Self congratulatory drivel.

FYI, Mine was a simple case of ME Twin IFR Charter. Perhaps it wasn't interesting enough for the Federation Magazine. Like I said, mine was not an isolated case. It was made clear to me that the Federation was, and is not interested in focusing resources on GA.
One of our flaws is that we don't flaunt it like others perhaps and allow people with minimal info bag us.
Why Not??....So that us ignorant masses may behold the awesome might that is the federation. :ugh: if only
However we have survived the bad times and will continue to service our members who want our help
So after 5 yrs of union membership and several months of phone calls and letters, I was either not a member or not really asking for help.:mad: you.

[YBRM]

After working this industry for 16 years or so, I can honestly say I haven't seen anything overly encouraging from the AFAP. A bit like the dog that does a lot of barking but has no teeth.

I must admit though, that it will only have power if it has the members. And I'm afraid that we work in an industry full of lunch cutters. Very sad..........

Better off saving the bucks and get yourself a big time lawyer if sh_t hits the fan (or a good hitman :} )

[pilatapus]

Hello, perhaps some experiences shared may help some of you with your wage issues. Having worked in an engineering trade for some 10 years, in government and private sectors, before becoming a pilot. I have found that all employers wish to own your skills for as little as possible. Government sectors have political issues to deal with so pay rates and entitlements are usually good and adhered to. However, private organisations who are signatories to the award still insist on trying to weasel out of paying entitlements.

Pilots ar not the odd ones out. We are just smaller in number and less visible to te rest of the country if entitlements are denied.

You have to make the decision to put everything on the line for what you believe in. If you are not prepared to do that, you should put up and shut up.

Most people who take on a shonky employer, (in any industry) lose their job or are harrassed into leaving.

Yes, this too is illegal. However none the less true.
It is possible to win against any shonky employer and gain your monetary entitlements back, however you usually need to start again, hopefully with a better employer.

I think it would be accurate to say that most employers fitting the category are in GA, have a high staff turnover, operate cross hired aircraft and are seasonal type operators (wet/dry season, tourism etc)

Most pilots employed in this situation, have been looking for next step up since day one and will not risk a year or two unemployed, for a couple of hundred or even thousand dollars.

I think that all employees in any field deserve an award and should have a union or association to back them up. However as individuals, we should have the rocks to stand for our rights if we believe in them.

This all may be all well and good, but there is a problem which is festering at a grass roots level in the aviation industry. New pilots are prepared to prostitute themselves and bring the entire GA industry standards lower.

Operators come and go in aviation, it is tough, but many should never have started in the first place, because they never had capital enough to undertake the enterprise in accordance with fair workplace practices or awards.
As each pilot who works for less moves on, they leave a legacy for the next one to equal. The employer then expects this from potential and current staff.

I believe that this problem partially begins at the flying school and then continues into the GA environment.

Most pilots I know from bugsmasher to 737, have mentioned stories of flying schools enhancing the realities of the industry in order to futher their own business. The rookie then walks out into the world with a debt of 40k plus looking for their first job. The flying school then tells them, its a bit tough right now, take what you can, even if the pay isn't good, until it gets better.(they will not say the industry isnt growing as rapidly as you were led to believe)
So the cycle continues. This is where aviation is completely different to other professions. Most(not all) budding pilots are given career advice/direction from other budding pilots(flying instructor) with no more idea than the student.

This does not happen for Drs, nurses, accountants, engineers etc.

The bottom line for all business is$$$ Flying schools have their goals to meet in the form of licences and ratings, which take a priority over industry realities and the students best interest. Industry conditions will be dictated by the lowest cost they can achieve.

I do not blame flying schools for the problem. The rookie and the operator ultimately determine the outcome, but many flying schools are definitely part of the problem.

Operators cannot pay below the awards if no one will work for them!! obvious isnt it?
Demand what you are entitled to, take any action neccessary to achieve this or don't work for that operator.

Alternatively follow the status quo, put up and shutup, be proud of the standards being set for the industry.

[alky]

I hear ya psycho joe.

It was 93' when Impulses' current reign of terror on pilot conditions began.

Everyone was effectively sacked at midnight one day and appointed as shareholders of the pilot providing contracting companies (under duress) the next day.

A few of us were made redundant under very difficult circumstances, with no hope but too naively engage the help of the AFAP if we were to have any chance of re employment and/or seeing our quite substantial unpaid entitlements ever again.

Well that was the beginning of the end for us. The AFAP (T.O’C) lumped us with 1 and 1 only industrial officer who on the face of it seemed quite competent and confident in achieving a favourable outcome for us. Oh, were we wrong there. As soon as we walked into the commission, we were confronted by a QC, a Barrister and a couple of Solicitors. Our rep was tongue tied and bewildered for the rest of the proceedings and Gerry McGowan was rubbing his hands together with glee. Talk about inadequate preparation. The AFAP certainly can’t say they didn’t see this coming as it had been brewing for a few months prior to this event with everyone sh!tting there pants.

Well this went back and forward for a couple of years with the response from Impulse predominantly being “we don’t employ pilots apart from the CP and C&Ts so how can we re employ these guys, and in any case we are not respondents to the award so we don’t recognise any entitlements”.

We must have cost Gerry a large fortune in legal fees but he unfortunately got his way and held a guillotine over every pilots head from that time on. The AFAP on the other hand, got out of it quite cheap as they did sweet F.A. in return.

The AFAP were totally reckless in there handling of this case and information we obtained from an outgoing industrial officer suggested that we were pushing sh!t up hill with a pointy stick anyway as the AFAP still had many members in Impulse and didn’t want to rock the boat too hard. Well f@#k me, what do we pay our subs for if this is the attitude of our union.

You may be surprised to know that I have been “clean” of the AFAP for about 8 years now. If I had my day again, I would have gone straight to Gerry and avoided all the mess and misperceptions. Forget the AFAP, they have too many prejudices.

[Capt Snooze]

Question for Lawrie.

What is involved in implementing ‘common rule’ status in the remaining States?

Are there any negative aspects to ‘common rule’ versus the ‘award plus respondent’ system?


Curious!


Snooze

[turbantime]

I too have also wondered what it would take for the award to become a common rule in all states or even federally?

[zepthiir]

well as it stands industrial relations is handled by the state governments. But since Johnny howard wants to make award rates come under federal power as part of his IR reforms then you may find award rates for pilots will be binding across the country (although I very much doubt this system will leave us any better off)

Otherwise the only way for the award to be recognised as common law would be for the remaining state governments to rule them as such. I wouldnt be holding my breath waiting for that to happen though thats for sure.

[Lawrie Cox]

Starting at the top.
Opsnormal
*There is a sizable group who have chosen their career path to be in GA and it still up those individuals to make the decision to join they cannot be forced. I respect the right not to be a member and trust that the same individual who rings after the event understands why I cannot justify spending members money in their defence. The action in the NT for ‘common rule’ was not a government hand out or from generous employers it was Federation members ensuring the level playing field for our members and as a direct consequence non-members as well. We have published all the ads in the Friday AUS to bring to the attention of the companies and made sure that DEWR follow up as well.

*You may not see a staff member at the coalface on every occasion. Please know that the Federation is made up of professional pilots and as such we often rely upon a locally based pilot in the first instance to find out the basic info. You are right in terms of the costs we as a body spend more than we get in income that has been the same since before I joined the Federation as we want provide that support and as usual we get our far share of ‘knockers’. The theory is good that the more you have the more you apply pressure we certainly spend a lot of effort not just industrially but also in the regulatory field and assisting in incident/accident cases.

*Most of the press in recent years have quoted that under EBA’s you get higher increases in most of our cases we are looking for legal minimums to be applied. A fair call that pilot groups are very much divided in recent years and that acknowledged we work with what we have rather than allow it to distract as best we can. It is always disappointing that whilst we fight amongst ourselves we leave the boss alone. The ambit log is a quirk of the legal system not something that we spend a deal of time on, it will suit some to spend time distracting your attention from the task ahead. As expressed earlier increases in the safety net and the common rule is based upon our work not through handout. My comment on assistance is that we will help you prepare claims to pursue through the legal courses available but if you were not a member at the time we will not appear or advocate on your behalf.

Drshmoo
We still pursue roping in from time to time but you are correct the Federal Govt is aiming to remove those avenues.

Erin
The NAC group was a classic example of pilots sticking together. We spent time talking to the group ensuring they knew where we were going and ultimately removed the individual contractor position being pursued by the company. We didn’t get a huge increase but the pilots certainly proved that by standing together they would not bow to the pressure.

Psycho
You and I will continue to disagree no matter what I say it appears. However, if yours was such a simple claim I am surprised that if you were dissatisfied with the Federation that you did not pursue the other avenues. With your expert knowledge I am sure that you aware of the six year limitation on claims and if still within time there is nothing stopping you undertaking the back claim. I will even go so far as to say that I will revisit the claim given the opportunity but based on your message I wont hold my breath but recommend that you follow up with DEWR as they are legally obligated to follow up. Choice is yours and finally I am not doing this for a popularity contest despite your opinion.

YBRM
Again your opinion and for the record I disagree.

ALKY
Interesting can I suggest that you back further in history to when the merger with Oxley took place where we fought to protect the entitlements of the merged group and as I recall little support from within the impulse side of the camp. Ultimately many Oxley left or were pushed. In what was the new impulse we had little support on the ground from within the pilot ranks as they didn’t want to rock the boat. When the original structure of ‘shareholders’ was put up the Federation was told by the membership that we don’t like it but use our name to try to bring it undone. Despite your comments we ran many court cases over several years to bring about the demise of the shonky deal. I trust you still remember the four $2 shelf companies used sitefate, lunchbox, dustlink and I cant think of the other just at the moment but it is in the transcripts in the office. I served the log of claims on the shelf companies to get in the courts again with little on the ground support. We asked many times for the shareholder arrangement details so that we could involve the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) and the tax office (state and federal).
We ultimately convinced someone as you then formed Air Crews Control (ACC) and I remember the evidence in an unfair dismissal case where the shareholders (pilots) had meetings and sacked their fellow pilots if the Company (impulse) would not use them.
The end of that saga was our efforts to normalise the employment relationship and create a seniority list which occurred at the same time that Geoff and Gerry had their cup of coffee and Impulse was sold.
On another point I distinctly remember one pilot who rang us up and said he would help and wanted the structure changed but he went quiet when he became a director in ACC. The funny thing is he is now a member of the Jetstar Pilot Committee. So it wasn’t a case of rocking the boat we advised on several occasions how to fix it but the pilot group kept its head low.

Capt Snooze
The common rule application is not available in the other states at this point we are watching with interest the Fed Govt changes as this may force some changes in that area. Like I have said earlier we have kept moving the safety nets and common rule awards each time a National decision is handed down they only happen because we do the work they are not a handout. The downside is that you do rely upon those standards at a National level to provide movement rather than a easier variation to current Award.

I thank those that have taken the effort to ask questions on PM i will respond but there maybe occasions when when other matters have to take priority.
Lawrie Cox

[alky]

My point Laurie, and thankyou for replying, is that the AFAP never tightened the noose enough on McGowan and IMPULSE in the early stages to put a stop to the momentum that was gathering. McGowan did everything in his power, with extremely questionable legality, to avoid his obligations to his employees, creditors and the ATO.

The merger between OXLEY and IMPULSE was a no brainer. Simple transmission of business legislation covered that as well as all the efforts over the years by McGowan in changing company names again and again to attempt to cover his tracks.
Impulse remained a respondent to the award and reluctantly admitted that fact in the commission after much persuasion, but it was all too late for the retrenched by then in terms of re employment, because the pilot contracting companies had been formed and Impulse no longer employed any pilots other than the CP and C & Ts to maintain the AOC in its’ name.

We still had a shot at recouping tens of thousands of dollars in entitlements owed, but they went unpaid because the AFAP were too wrapped up in sorting out this ‘shonky’ shareholding arrangement, all to no avail. I personally could have done with that money.

I could have gone to DEWR, but at the time I wasn’t aware that it was a necessary alternative. I blindly accepted the federations course as the best option with NO advice otherwise.

A few more resources thrown at Impulse may very well have turned the tide here. But the AFAP was too weak to have any influence on this case and I doubt much has changed since then. If the feds can’t stop something as detrimental to conditions of pilot employment as this happening, then what purpose do they serve their members.

Yes you got your seniority list, however, I suspect that had more to do with the exit of McGowan and the arrival of Qantas as owner, than any influence the Feds had on the situation.

[Capt Snooze]

Thanks for your reply Lawrie.

If I understand you correctly, the ‘common rule’ process doesn’t legally exist in the other states because of state legislation or some such.
Are you also saying that it is easier to amend or update in the ‘award plus respondent’ process, than in a ‘common rule’ application?

Another question. If a company is not a respondent (in an applicable jurisdiction), how is the ‘roping in’ process initiated and conducted? How long does the process take? Is it retrospective in any way? i.e. to the date of application?

Inquiring minds etc.


Snooze

[Lawrie Cox]

Alky
You are right we didnt tighten the noose enough as i said it was my recollection that those in the impulse side were not supportive of the actions. I also remind you at that time we were still going through the S118A case with the domestics as a result of '89 that we still were not sure if the organisation would survive. I do not recall the lost money issue to the level you talk of as we did prove the transmission to impulse and the other point that you may have missed is that impulse wa not a direct respondent we used oxley to get that connection and we were challenged by the lawyers representing the shareholder as well as the company as an exercise. the action on the seniority list was a pain staking exercise through the AIRC and you can quote me as i had to do it as well keep up with everthing else that was going on around us at the time.
I readily admit we were not perfect but we were not going to give into those trying to destroy us at the time. I cannot change what happened but i do not accept that circumstances are now the same where pilots are united.

Capt snooze
The common rule does not apply in the other states. The Award responden claims are a process where we serve a log of claims generally considered by most to be excessive. We are required to do this to seek the maximum under the act and accept part settlement which is the Award. To do this we needto ensure the name ofthe Company, its registered street address and type of operation (GA fixed wing, Heli, Aerial Ag, or regional). We then go to a hearing have a dispute found between the parties and seek a roping in award that takes effect fromthe date of decision. This makes the employer then legally liabletothe safety net Award for recovery and enforcement purpose.

Lawrie Cox

[Stars Jewel]

The problems with aviation start as you make the decision to learn to become a Pilot.
You start the process by ringing around to find the cheapest and most affordable package you can, and thus the cancer starts, when the competition for you buck begins.
And in an industry where there are little standards for wage and conditions the Instructors have been are one of the hardest hit to enable flying schools to be competitive and still make money.
The changes in Victoria will hopefully changes this and conditions for Instructors will improve so they, who are the mentors (so to speak) for the new batch of pilots, can preach the benefits of the AWARD and sticking together as a pilot group.
But can Victoria now compete with its neighbouring states? Will Victorian wannabe pilots pack their bags and head interstate to save a few dollars an hour? Is it fair that Victorian flying schools have an unfair disadvantage over their rival states?

I for one and I suspect 99% of Pilots in Australia have at one stage earned less than the Award and in effect have created the present poor conditions, and a few people on here have given reasons for why. Do we now sit back and let the conditions remain as they are? And just demand that all new pilots should request nothing but the AWARD. A bit hypocritical in my book. Ask yourself wether the position you hold now changes your view on how passionate you are for the AWARD? It’s easy to sit back and say you wouldn’t work for less now that you earn more, after getting to where you are by taking the very jobs that don’t pay the AWARD. Ok we all do it but why not use our resources now to help the industry at the bottom. Making new pilots aware of how the industry works and it’s to their benefit and all the future pilots benefit that we don’t prostitute our selves. That we don’t WORK FOR LESS than we are entitled too.

The fundamental reason is that when you start your flying career you don’t know any different. You are told to take what ever you can to start the logbook ticking over and one day you will reach the heights of an Airline Pilot on the big bucks.

The airline pilots for Qantas, Virgin, the regional’s and all who have gone on to bigger and better things etc… seem to turn there back on there terrible past life in GA and tell stories of “ I did it tough” or “ gee he was a prick to work for”, and pass it off as Character building?? Sound familiar? .
They seem more worried about their conditions at the top rather than the health of the industry at the bottom, not realising that if they helped fixed the roots that the top will naturally bare the fruits that they and all of us are after.

I have always wondered why Airlines don’t ask questions like “have you ever worked for free? Would you take this job for 5k less than anyone else? Did you pay for your ICUS?
I'd say if they did ask those sought of questions and these sought of things were looked unfavourably against than less pilots would see prostitution as an option.
I have been recipient of the AFAP in an EBA negotiation and I thought they provided great support in our company’s effort to increase our standards but it was definitely support rather than muscle. In my experience they will fight as hard as you want them.
Our industry more than any needs a strong united work force that sets safety and work related standards. There always seems to be a healthy criticism towards Unions, why I don’t know? they are a democratically lead group of people who represents what ever the Members want. I can’t see why anyone would have a problem with that. Unless you believe employers are responsible enough to set these standard. And from judging our industry over the years most employers have had their chance and failed miserably.
With the new IR laws soon to be past there is no better or more important time to stand on a united front and any united front is only as good as it’s members

[The Baron]

I would like to refute the assertion that the AFAP don't give a damn about GA pilots. I remember a case in the early 90's when a NON AFAP pilot was sacked by the now defunct Darwin Aero Club and the local commitee went in to bat for him. There were several other instances I can clearly recall when NON AFAP pilots rang the Feds and asked for help and help was provided.
I'm a member for several reasons, THIS BEING JUST ONE.
I believe we should all be in our Federation, but I respect the right of people to go their own way.
Take a good hard look at the AFAP and what they offer to professional aviation in Australia.
I do get a bit tired of the old "What have the Feds ever done for us" it really does display ignorance of what the AFAP IS.

[zepthiir]

Baron your point makes me think about a previous job in the hospitality industry where most of the staff werent in the union claiming the union did nothing for them.

It was amazing how many of these same people would then get walked all over by the management and then go running to the union for help. They always seemed surprised that having just joined and having paid no fees that the union were happy to give advice but would not foot the legal bills involved.

Everyone there is no point in bithcing that the AFAP has done nothing for you if you arent a member. If the AFAP has no supprt from you then they can not be expected to have the strength to give you support when you need it.

Only with members and therefore strength in numbers can any union be effective, they are not just there to get you out of s@!t when you stuff up but are there to fight for all of our rights and make sure that awards are followed and represent fair conditions in the first place.

As has been said many times before not only in these forums but probably by your mothers on several occasions. "Dont just sit there bitching, stand up and do something about it!"

Rant over
Zepth

[Frickman]

Nice barking, but I think it's up the wrong tree.

Nobody here seems to be complaining that the union isn't helping non union members, quite to the contrary. Being let down by your union when you're a card carrying member is a massive slap in the face and it's happened to plenty of GA pilots.

One of the problems is that low paid GA pilots lack the time and means to attend union meetings, so there's a total lack of representation and therefore voice from GA. This in turn allows GA pilots to slip under the radar whilst the attending airline pilots get to bitch and moan about the ridiculous and the petty.

I'd like to finish by saying that I know of at least a couple of state meetings in recent years that were held in a pub. I think that speaks volumes in itself.

[Lawrie Cox]

Frickman
On the contrary to your understanding the meetings have been organised by the pilots and the most active branches are those with GA based members. I do not agree with your claim about plenty of pilots being let down by their union. I do acknowledge and have that we do not always win and sometimes it has a lot to do with the expectations of the member.

It's been a long time since I have been at a branch meeting where the "petty and ridiculous" have held sway but then I do not believe you have either.

The last point is an absolute 'pearl' yes we do hold meetings in pubs as that is where quite a number of members actually get together and talk about the issues and they have meeting rooms. Hey guess what I am also involved in sports and we hold meetings in pubs too. I guess the Qantas pilots would be happy to know that they must be unprofessional as they hold meetings in many alcohol serving establishments as well. Recently many meetings held at the graphic arts club and advertised as 'free beer' in an effort to poach members from us.

Lawrie Cox

[Transition Layer]

Am I the only one who thinks that pilots having meetings in pubs makes a LOT of sense?

:} :} :ok:

[alidad]

A union is only as good as it's members. The AFAP is struggling to get 3 or 4 blokes to front the monthly meetings in most states. It is always the same few who attend.
Is it apathy, or not wanting to be seen or known as a "fed"?
We are unable to help people who for what ever reason will not help themselves.
Don't expect others to do the hard yards for you if you will not stand up and be counted.

[White Wagon]

I've just hit a wage where I can survive on food more stylish than 2 Minute Noodles.
I'm going to join the AFAP not because I expect I'll need help but because It might stop someone having to put up with the sh_t I did on the way.
It aint gonna send me broke.

[crash_comics]

Allot is said about the state of the economy and the rise of fuel prices in the current state of this country. The award, as I understand it, was issued in 1998. A far cry away from the current economic straglehold the gov't has on us at the moment. Why oh why is the award only looked at over such long periods? On that note, I would like to know the rationale behind the award structure. It comes from an era that no longer exsists. An apprentice type mentality, were it was an accepted way to get into the airlines. With fuel prices and trying to make the bottom line, allot of regionals are looking for a more econimic way of air transport, single turbines are being considered mearely for the sake of economics, ie Flying Doctor. My "beef" is that there is an award for single engine, when this mentality should have been dropped may years ago. When will this rot end and a fairer way of support for pilots in this country start?.

[medwun]

crash comics

A valid point re the single engine issue.

We are in the guts of an eba and the single engine issue surfaced during a eb negotiation discussion with management.

Basically we were trying to negotiate recognition of penalties for shift work using the multi engine base rate from the ga award. Management retorted with the fact that we couldn't use the multi engine base rate as we only fly single engine aircraft (PC12) with a base rate of about $30500. What an insult it is when management think that they can use the same rate of pay to a novice day vfr cessna 172 pilot to that of an experienced PC12 pilot that flies single pilot, IFR, at night, over water etc. with one fan.

The unfortunate thing about it is that as you say Crash, thats what the award sez so technically they may get away with it.

The AFAP really needs to make it a priority to revamp the GA award and fast.

PS. Watch this space for more on the EB issues

[tipan13]

Hi Laurie
Another question that needs some disscusion is that regarding contract pilots.
I my opinion it is just a way to avoid paying casual pilots super and other so called extras.
Where do we stand on insurance? being a contract pilot are we covered by the operator.
Cheers Tipan

[Woomera]

tipan13. Whilst I'd be interested in Lawrie's views, I would be very surprised if there are any "legal" contract pilots in Australian GA, especially if it is incumbent upon the contracting pilot to obtain an ABN, pay his own tax, superannuation and public liability insurance whilst accepting any remuneration, condition or benefit which is less than that prescribed by an Award or other legislation.

Here: (http://www.docep.wa.gov.au/lr/LabourRelations/Content/Types%20of%20Employment/Pages/Fixed%20Term%20or%20Contra.html)

"An employment relationship, established by a contract of employment, places certain rights and obligations on employers and employees. Some of these obligations will have been expressly stated in the contract itself, either verbally or in writing, and others are legal obligations that come from legislation, awards or agreements or from common-law employment principles. For example, employers must comply with State and federal laws in relation to pay rates, working conditions, taxation, workers compensation, occupational safety and health, equal opportunity and superannuation, in addition to any agreed conditions in the contract."

If the purpose of the "contract" is to avoid employer Award obligations or to deny the contractor fair and just arbitration, the "contract" is invalid.

Woomera

[puff]

It's amazing the strength in numbers you do get with union membership. I work now in an organisation with 100% union membership, twice in my time there we have had issues that have plagued us, and the union has gone to the company with a log of claims, and said that if they were not met, there would be industrial action, on both occasions we got our demands. Sure a difference from flying, was unusual not seeing guys running to the boss saying 'we won't do it'

Look at unions in this country, it's only the ones with near on 100% membership in workplaces that actually have any clout.

Not withstanding that most pilots FIGHT for the award, the figures in the award are a joke in comparison to 'similar' jobs. Most bus drivers are on 35-50k, train drivers $50-70+k....guess again we are talking again of unionised workplaces where the people value their labour and demand a decent wage/conditions for it.

[Lawrie Cox]

In answer to some of the more recent posts. the single engine rate is there for small aircraft, please note that the GA Award is but a safety net it does not recognise operations such as the PC 12 in its own right. The future of safety net awards is currently in the balance dependent on the federal government legislation. You should note that in the EBAs where PC12 and B200 operate it is a single rate of pay, that is the PC12 does not get lower.

Contract pilots are a myth in real terms. If you wish to work as a contractor then get all the protections in place such as your workers comp insurance, public liability, ACN/ABN arrangements and superannuation. More than happy if you want to do all that but remember the tax man has a view to called the 80/20 determination if you do more than 80% of your work with the one employer unless you have a very valid argument then they consider you an employee.

The bottom line is that it is a sham to avoid base line rates, allowances, superannuation and most likely liability in case of an accident.

But we know our industry would never do that sort thing. (joking of course)

The two ways that you can be legitimately employed are casual or full time both provided for under the safety net awards. As usual we can only appeal to your common sense not to debase yourself or your colleagues by accepting less.

Puff good call now all we have to do is stop the knifing of each other and get on with the task of bringing the standing of a professional pilot back up to where it once was.

There are many who do not like unions but a union is governed by its members and that group sets the policy. If you don't want to play in the sand pit don't get snakey when they take control of the bucket in effort to get things improved.
Lawrie Cox

[medwun]

Lawrie

Thanks for your continued interest in this thread, if nothing else it does give you some insight into the murmurings amongst the ranks.

As you point out where PC12's and B200's are dealt with as one in eba's where operators have both types. The RFDS central ops has only PC12's in its fleet and therein lies the issue of management trying to let us know that we are really only worth 30k odd per annum and that they are really generous by giving us a bit more than that.

The negotiations continue...

[bushy]

It is a very sick industry that pays RFDS pilots less than half than that paid to airline pilots.
Do they still roster back to back 12 hour shifts?

[gary gearbox]

Bushy,

Thats no good is it, but it seems to be the level that GA is stuck at. But where does it start? I love the GA flying, however it is hard to make a career out of it. It frustrates me and many, probably yourself too, that there are still GA operators that who dont cater for the pilot body properly.

Not paying for ferry flights,
Not paying for on the job waiting time,
Not ensuring the clients provide suitable resting accomodation,
making staff pay for training,
etc,

The list goes on. These basic issues need to be addressed by all operators for conditions to improve accross the board. More pilots may then choose GA as a career rather than a stepping stone.

GG