What is the Federation

[Lawrie Cox]

The Australian Federation of Air Pilots (AFAP or Federation) operates as both a trade union and a professional association of all air pilots in Australia. Importantly we represent pilots only and are not affiliated to any political party or peak union body.
The role we have as a trade union is to protect and improve the conditions of employment for its members involved in Airline, GA, Helicopters, Aerial AG, EMS, charter and Flight instruction.
As a professional association, the members and Federation's staff are active in promoting flight safety and improving Australian and Global aviation standards.
The Australian Federation of Air Pilots is also a founding member of the International Federation of Airline Pilot Associations (IFALPA). IFALPA provides an international forum for the Federation to discuss important aviation policy issues such as airspace reform, dangerous goods, operational techniques, CRM, flight and duty time limitations, flight data recorder legislation and many other significant operational and legal matters. Today our representation at IFALPA is made up as part of AUS-ALPA.
The structure of the Federation is based on six State Branches governed by Branch Committees elected by pilot members. The Branch Committees in turn elect local chairman and delegates to the Executive Committee and Convention. The President and Principal Officers of the Federation are operating pilots elected by all financial members through a secret postal ballot conducted by the Electoral Commission.
The Convention meets annually to deal with rule amendments and policy changes. The Executive Committee ensures that the policy changes are implemented.
Meetings of these bodies are open to the general membership. New members are encouraged to develop an active interest in the affairs of the organization.
The Federations Constitution also provides for Councils to be elected to cover groups of pilots organised along enterprise lines at present the CASA pilot group form their own council.
In summary, the Australian Federation of Air Pilots primary responsibility is to directly represent in industrial matters all pilots making a living out of flying in Australia other than Military and Qantas (International and Shorthaul) pilots. It is also very active in promoting flight safety and improving standards.
I feel it important to publish this statement as there are many misinformed and deliberately destructive comments/statements about the Federation and what we do.
We are not claiming to be perfect but what we are offering to those who want it is a pilot body focused only issues affecting your career as a professional pilot. We do not claim to be the guardians or be able to win every fight nor is the body ego driven by the employer relationship or type we fly.
We are open to all from the time you learn to fly to the highest airline positions you can attain as we consider you all professional pilots with a part to play in deciding the future of Australian aviation.
Our policies are structured to cover all companies and types of operations our members and industrial/technical staff has had significant involvement in the industry over several decades. We have continuing roles with the regulator.
The important fact is it is you as a professional pilot that makes the Federation not the other way around. So next time you want to criticise us please consider how active you have been on a committee, as a negotiator, representative at regulator forums or plainly as a member and work out if you can supply the solution or are in fact part of the problem?
Lawrie Cox
Manager – Industrial Relations
AFAP

[bimmer1615]

Thanks Lawrie,
Not many of our younger pilots know of or even understand the function of the AFAP.
The AFAP has served me well for these past twenty years and I would feel uncomfortable and very vulnerable if it did not exist.

The staff at the AFAP are a great bunch of dedicated people. Everyone in the idustry should get to know about them

Cheers,

Bimmer

[Bob Murphie]

There was a thread here on Pprune the other day concerning AFAP Union ?/ membership drive ?/ It has gone.
So I ask is the following that was posted on another forum, is this AFAP policy or is it a "wind up"? (I add that the words "sterile environment" were used). May I quote your answer?
"A thread was running that was debating the pros and cons of Australia employing a system of 'see and be seen', to provide separation between airline, RPT and all other traffic, at certain airports.
My opinion ( the poster, not me), is that for the SAFETY of all, aircraft making leisure, and non-scheduled flights should be excluded from airspace within 10nm and below 5,000' for a period of 15 minutes prior to scheduled time of arrival (STA), and for 20 minutes after scheduled time of departure (STD) when an airline or RPT aircraft is scheduled for arrival and departure.
The concept of 'see and be seen' is less than 50% effective, at best, and more realistically has a 15% - 25% success rate.
This is totally unacceptable in my point of view, and amounts to Russian Roulette, using aircraft.
At work today, with visibility of around 30nm, TCAS and ATC advice, we were given 2 aircraft (and vice versa) as traffic.
The first was 1,000' below, 11 o'clock and ranged from 8 nm until passing directly below.
The second was initially 3,000' below, 1 o'clock, 15nm and climbing through our level as it crossed our track at approximately 30 degrees, coming within 5nm.
Good vis, TCAS readouts, and ATC advice.
In both cases, no crew members of the 3 aircraft made sightings.
'See and be seen' is not a SAFE method to use for aircraft separation involving 2 and more aircraft using a common airport, and those aircraft having mutual radio contact

[slice]

Bob, I don't know who that poster is on PIREP as there is nothing in their profile to indicate if they are even a pilot. Brianh seems to think that they are just a stirrer and I guess he could be right. I am certain that this 'sterile environment' is not in any way the current AFAP stand - just someones idea (they may or may not be an AFAP member - who knows?) or an idea that has been suggested in the past.

[VirginBlueDriver]

In summary, the Australian Federation of Air Pilots primary responsibility is to directly represent in industrial matters all pilots making a living out of flying in Australia

Really? Ask most Virgin Blue pilots if they feel you are doing that, or whether you are more aligned with VB management.

The important fact is it is you as a professional pilot that makes the Federation not the other way around.

Interesting to hear you say that! The AFAP appears to be so full of their own self-importance and we, the pilots who pay your wages feel as if we are being taken for granted. You will probably begin to realise this as the number of pilots renewing their membership declines.

So next time you want to criticise us please consider how active you have been on a committee, as a negotiator, representative at regulator forums or plainly as a member and work out if you can supply the solution or are in fact part of the problem?

We are indeed part of the solution, that solution being the formation of VIPA, and you can rest assured that with over 50% of Virgin pilots represented already, this is certainly more than just a couple of disgruntled blokes talking in the crew room.

About time YOU started being part of the solution!

[Lawrie Cox]

Firstly Bob M have no idea of any post re policy as attached our technical people send time responding to many issus and these are regularly communicated to members on our webpage. I will say that our members in the Regional Airline sector were and still are concerned with the actions and tactics of some to change air space rules without considering the impact upon those using it.
VirginBlueDriver thanks for identifying one of the major problems. If pilots cannot use current organisations to achieve change what does trying to form a new one do? Waste a lot more resources which are better placed trying to do the job that the registered rules provide for that is looking after your members.
The attack that the Federation is close to management is the standard response of those who wish to disparage the efforts of those pilots who put in significant effort to get a positive outcome. It may come as huge surprise to you the fact that you ask for something in a negotiation does not automatically mean that you will get it without question.
Same goes for the direction of negotiations I understand a couple of you are frustrated because you feel you are not getting your own way; guess what that happens in every negotiation. Be it Virgin; Qantas; Jetstar; Eastern; Sunstate; REX; CHC Helicopters; Bristow Helicopters; and the list goes on. I can say it because I have been through that process time after time as have my colleagues and the pilot representatives who volunteer to do the job.
What is dissappointing is the attacks against those individuals who have been working long and hard to get a positive outcome having rocks thrown at them based on an agenda to set up a new group.
As for your solution someone thinks this is new?
An AIRC commissioner in the mid-ninties once commented that a new pilot group doing the same thing has as much relevance as the "Bunbury Basket Weavers Association".
I do not feel that we are full of our own self importance nor do we take our members for granted. But equally I will not trade on falsehoods to justify my existence as I have seen in the publications supporting an alternate body.
Please note that registration of an organisation takes a lot of money, time and you actually have to comply with some rules of the real world not just some wish lists (many of which we would all like).
The door is open to bring about unity of pilots that means a body involving all not just some and a protection that it cannot be dominated by one group but the actions of some leave little hope of that in the near future.
Lawrie Cox

[Wizofoz]

Lawrie,

Quick question-

Was not the AFAP the first organisation to accept terms and conditions SUBSTANTIALLY below the then market standard for airline pilots, when it negotiated the employment terms for Compass 1 and 2 and Virgin Blue?

Has this not had the effect of seriously lowering the market, with the now inevitable downward pressure on all pilots in the country as evidenced by Jetstar and the wages on offer from the likes of Tiger?

[Lawrie Cox]

WIZ
We negotiated rates that one our members were prepared to be employed for and two as a number were start up carriers were on offer. The market standard you refer to of course was not negotiated but offered to pilots who wished to join carriers at that time recruiting and seemed in need of offering a premium to attract recruits.
The same stands now for example if enough people sit on their hands then the offer must go up.
There is a big difference in the Industrial systems pre the abolishment of the Flight Crew Officers Industrial Tribunal and now.
The introduction of LCC was always going to have this sort of impact when we met with the Qantas pilots several years ago we suggested that we needed a strategy to protect the future but were informed that it would never happen to us. Lest we forget.
What many also choose to forget in attacking Jetstar is that 80% of the pilot group endorsed the wide body amendment, as such the Federation endorsed the wishes of its members. Or are you suggesting that we dictate to them what they can or cannot accept?
As for Tiger all they have to do is offer $20K more than Jetstar and you will see a mass exodus of endorsed drivers next day.
Lawrie Cox

[Next Generation]

the Federation endorsed the wishes of its members. Or are you suggesting that we dictate to them what they can or cannot accept?

So correct me if I'm wrong, but the Federation endorsed the Virgin EBA proposal that was voted down by 87%.

Wouldn't that indicate to you that you in fact DO NOT endorse the wishes of your members?

[Captahab]

Lawrie, when you start consulting with your members (remember them, the ones who pay the 1%) first as to what their problems are and how you can assist in representing them instead of your current approach of liasing with management first then you may regain some respect.

You are losing all that the federation has stood for over many years with your current "management will never agree to that" approach.

Get back to the basics Lawrie, your survival will come automatically when you do, your (fence sitting) stance over the last few years while attempting to shore up your survival has you losing credibility and respect on both sides.

Ahab

[Kelly Slater]

Does the AFAP belong to the ACTU?

[VirginBlueDriver]

Does the AFAP belong to the ACTU?

Nah, it belongs to Virgin Blue. :rolleyes:

[Lawrie Cox]

Next Generation
Yes I will correct you as the document presented was the outcome of the talks it was not endorsed as the preferred outcome by the Federation or the negotiators.
Again some pilots either deliberately or naively forget under the Act we are required to accept the document as being that reached before it can go out to vote not something we go and say you have to accept or reject. The pilots at Virgin voted it down and back to the table we went. It is in the Virgin pilot hands whether the document gets voted up.
As a parallel at Eastern we produced a document that was an outcome, I and the negotiators could read that we had reached an end. The pilots voted it down around 75% with encouragment for those wished to split away from the Federation. In the end a renewed document correcting typos and clarifying three clauses was voted up by over 80% but we lost the backpay which the company gained a net benefit of around $1million. The pilots lost significantly through a disasterous exercise in trying to split our resources.
Ahab
I sure it will not surprise you that the comment is not based on any fact. We have and will continue to respond to members views. Just because your view is not accepted does not mean it is not considered. That is why we have pilots at the table and they provide the direction. Yes I and others will often comment that some items are unable to be achieved but they are still put if that is what the negotiators wish to push. As for your comment about consulting management first total rubbish.
Kelly
No the Federation only has membership to IFALPA to which it is a founding member.
VBdriver
Thanks for the cynical response but I suggest the obvious we belong to our members at Virgin Blue/Jetstar/Eastern/Sunstate/National Jet/REX/Air North/CHC/Bristow/Jayrow/Flight schools/Charter ops/Aerial Ag/RFDS/EMS ops/Police and so on. All members of the profession of air pilotage in Australia by choice not by exclusion.

[Wizofoz]

All members of the profession of air pilotage in Australia by choice

Could you confirm that, in the past, the AFAP negotiated compulsory membership (i.e no choice but to join) at several airlines?

[Lawrie Cox]

WIZ
Yes I can confirm that subtle encouragement to join was done many years ago and even then it was not compulsory but a union member could choose not to fly with somebody who wanted all the benefits but was too lousy to put his/her hand in their pocket and be part of a solid group. Even the Companies saw the benefits of dealing with their pilots as a group but alas that was when you had real managers not the fluff and bulldust of today who consider themselves masters.
This process has fallen away and now is illegal under the workplace relations laws.
It actually benefitted a vast number of pilots over the years and certainly produced better outcomes than those being acheived under the constantly changing industrial landscape. For those who continue the push for further splitting of pilot groups please read a little history and see what can be achieved working inside the tent rather than trying to reinvent the wheel.
If you cannot be bothered reviewing history then expect to make the same mistakes again and again.
Sorry my point about choice is that we as an organisation are continuing to grow, despite some of the earlier comments, and that will only continue whilst we continue to aim to bring pilots together in one group not allowing one area to dominate the direction/agenda to the disadvantage of the wider group. If we look after the new generation at the beginning of their career then the future will look after itself well after we are gone.
Lawrie Cox

[Wizofoz]

Yes I can confirm that subtle encouragement to join was done many years ago and even then it was not compulsory

Then why was I informed, both at My Eastern Airlines interview in late 1988 and my Ansett interview in early 1989 that membership of the AFAP was a condition of employment?

[Lawrie Cox]

WIZ
As I said above the employers in those days saw benefits in dealing with a united body and did not wish to create disputes. Their choice at the time and was the opposite in the early ninties.
Lawrie Cox

[Wizofoz]

I'm sorry, Lawrie, but if you want to be taken seriously , revisionist, rose-tinten nonsense will not help your credability.

You firstly deny compulsory unionism existed. Now you try and say it was the Employers idea!!

Like many industries in that era, the Airlines had compulsory unionism because the unions imposed it through industrial muscle.

If the airlines had tried to change that at any time whilst the AFAP was representing the pilots (up until the time it became illegal), it would have resulted in aggressive industrial action.

I'm not passing judgment on the policy. It was common enough in that era.

But lets not go re-writting history, OK?

[Lawrie Cox]

WIZ
You have me wrong I am not denying that pressure was applied by virtue of pilots indicating who they wished to fly with and yes occassionally it went to the point of action.
The fact is if the employer stated to you in the interview that membership was required then that was part of the conditions that the company was prepared to engage you on. I still say that in every company there was not 100% as there was always 1 or 2.
Plus I am not trying to rewrite history you asked a question I have attempted to answer it also give me a little credit as I am not shying away from putting my name to all of these postings. How many others are prepared to do that?
Lawrie Cox

[amos2]

Lawrie conveniently chooses to forget that he and Terry helped destroy the careers of some 1400 pilots a few years ago. Whilst he and Terry may like to deny the past there are many of us who cannot. He and Terry are still employed in the aviation work place whilst many of us who had our careers destroyed in 89' have never worked in aviation since.
I have a problem taking anything that he or Terry says seriously.
I suggest you do the same

[Ol Shep]

WIZ Early 1980s "Closed Shop" arrangements were historically common in Australia, despite it apparently being beyond the capacity of the federal tribunal to include compulsory membership provisions in Awards. In the late 1980s employers were more than happy to agree to closed shops, seeing them as a means of reducing the likelihood of tensions between unionised and non-unionised employees and as simplifying the bargaining process. The 1996 Workplace Relations Act made it unlawful to discriminate against employees (including in relation to hiring) on the ground that they do not belong to a union - which brought us into line with ILO Conventions. [Creighton, Labour Law] Lawrie's comments are entirely credible, to the question asked. You'll never see the 'prepared to join union' tick box on an application form ever again. AMOS there was just that other little matter of the employers and the federal government's contribution into the history books.

Personalities aside, fact remains we aren't experts on the new IR regulations. We don't know what's in bounds and what's out; there are now minefields of fines that can stick if you don't know what you're doing in disputes or when bargaining. Only 2 sure things - death and taxes - let's get a decent gross income on which to pay tax and some reasonable conditions so that we can enjoy life; not what is around in other pockets of the industry, exactly what suits us. Splintering in different directions just highlights to the company that we can't come up with a joint position. Time to get over it, get smarter and get it together. Of course labour supply power today can be of benefit individually, but a 'closed shop' strategy nets longer term power to get what we want now and also when the labour supply pendulum swings back.

[j3pipercub]

Hey Lawrie,

Let me firstly say that I applaud you for putting your name to this. I agree wholeheartedly with Bimmer1615's post. I have only been in the game a short while but have been a Feds member since the day i was a fresh faced CPL. I didn't know any better at the time, but someone older, wiser and much less trusting than I signed me up for membership and I believe it is the best money I have spent since.

To any younger guys reading this, it is something you should seriously consider, I mean you're on the AFAP website looking at the jobs, why not have a proper look at the website and what they have to offer. :ok:

And Finally, let me also applaud you on keeping a level head amidst somewhat personal and derisive attacks

Cheers

j3

[TurbTool]

Poor amos2, still looking for someone else to blame for his/her own decisions.

The employees of the AFAP did as they were required to do in that time. Obey the instructions of their employer.

If anyone (other than the Government and Management) is to blame for the outcome it is the pilots/members at that time.

We all made decisions and did what we thought best, some went back to work, some didn't. It is totally wrong to blame the staff of the AFAP.

Same applies today. Crap conditions, crap management etc, it is still the pilots who decide when enough is enough. That time hasn't come yet. It may in the future. Thye current situation will not be changed until pilots get together again and demand that change. Don't go blaming people who are not responsible for the mess.

[amos2]

This thread has gone rather quiet!...I wonder why?

[Air Ace]

A union is it's membership and the members are the union.

There are democratic processes to remove the elected representatives if they fail to act in the interests of and at the direction of the majority of members.

[Lawrie Cox]

To those that have enterd the debate thanks. The intent was purely to spell out wht the organisation is. I note the negative comments from those with an axe to grind can I ask you whether this helps trying to ensure that ALL PROFESSIONAL PILOTS are covered?
To be specific does slagging at me change the direction needed to have all pilots in one body?
I have never denied history or my involvement in the events of the past. There were no winners out of it.
The Federation survived because of a need to ensure that pilots have some coverage in a pilot body in the future as your predecessors left you after some heavy battles.
Ultimately it will be the pilots that determine the future not me. What I encourage is those who want to be destructive and devisive is work within the current structures rather than destroy your predecessors good work from when the body was initially formed in 1938 till now.
Lawrie Cox

[Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower]

Hello Lawrie,
I have a few questions, i think it fair to assume that your intentions are good, i also think it fair to assume the reason for this topic is to try to drum up members, which is a good thing.

Personally i am a critic of unions, why, from a previous life i had to deal with the "Storeman and Packers Union" then the "TWU", from those experiences i did not like the bullying and god like status that was bestoyed upon the union reps in each workplace, but all that said, there were very very frequently very positive outcomes for the associated work force.

I am not a member, but would become a member if there was some positive commitment made by your goodselves, look through my posting history and you'll see my personal concerns.

In the past i used the term " WIFM", whats in it for me, well some believe this is against the concept of a union, the actual question is what in it for us ? ( the pilots from GA to skygods ).

It is pretty much common knowledge that the "Awards" as listed on your website are relevant in only a few states:

Q 1) why are there still pilots within those states being paid less than these rates ?,

Q 2) Why are there still states that these awards do not apply ?,

Q 3) Are the awards appropriate, for example the copilot salary for a Brasilia, how does this compare to the Australian IR minimum wage, is this a fair bench mark ?,

Q 4) What is you organisations stance on AWA's, specifically, is this the end for these awards you have published ?,

Q 5) Black lists, Protests and walking off the job are not techniques that can or should be used ( 89 ), every employee should have some level of commitment to their organisation that is based apon the fact that the company must meet its work commitments to continue paying its bills, How would you approach this sort of negotiation when there is a sticking point with T & C's ?,

Q 6) Legal representation - when do you guys draw the line, when do you no longer offer required services to financial members ?.

Thanks for your time Lawrie,

[Fhead]

here here LHRT

exactly what I was thinking, I'm newish to the industry and although I as well dislike unions (formally TWU member by force) this industry needs a union that is backed by the majority working within it. I am more than keen to jump into such a union, but I have yet to see how the AFAP has helped new guys like me apart from your job ads. I think a good initiative for you would be to challenge CASA and ASIC fees which would benefit the whole aviation industry which would inturn get every pilot on your side, and would it also be possible to get recreational pilots on board to boost number for a louder voice.

just a thought
Fhead

[Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower]

Hi Fhead ( have you been told today ? ),

I understand what you are saying but i feel there are bigger fish to fry than ASIC cards and CASA fee's.

T & C's within our industry are probably at the top, with house prices the way they are how are Pilots supposed too pay off a house and feed a family.

How do we get these dodgy operators out of GA ? ( there are some fantastic organisations within GA but they have trouble competing with these cut-throat rule bending aviation enthuasists that start aviation companies ).

Comparing pilots wages to the mining industry is a really poor suggestion, but comparision to an office worker, perhaps, there is some interesting inconsistencies to be seen.

If not for the AFAP's jobs page, i would have never heard of them.

Loss of licence insurance and free legal representation for a meager 1%, that sells itself, why then are we here in this topic ?.

[Lawrie Cox]

LRT
Yes guilty as charged regarding members. But the main point at the outset was to correct the often misleading info published about the Federation.
The WIFM was in fact the name of information packs we used to send out to prospective members,
To answer your questions the current legislation has changed the direction of the Award system and one of he reasons that little appears to be happening on it is that only some clauses are now enforceable which changes each time the Federal Government gets concerned about the next election.
There has been a review by the Award Review Taskforce chaired by a Senior Deputy President of the Industrial Relations Commission. This in turn has now been referred to the Fair Pay Commission. In the end the current policy is to remove industry Awards totally. As it is an unknown it is difficult for us to update the respondents list.
1. If the pilot accepts less than an award rate then it makes it difficult. In terms of the company they in most states need to be a respondent named or a successor to a named party. The recent legislation was to remove the succession clause effect.
2. The respondents list is updated when possible and as needed (bearing in mind the review). We have common rule available in Victoria because they ceded their powers to the Commonwealth. In other States there are still State General awards we will be reviewing once the legislation outcome is known and that probably will not occur until the Federal election is out of the way.
3. The Award rates have fallen behind on basis that you cannot vary for general increases without a full wage case which in effect was removed under work choices. The current wage system is based upon enterprise negotiations only and the current award rates are frozen in time as minimums and as such fall behind what the Fair Pay Case decision has determined as the Federal minimum rate. The short answer is that the current Awards do not reflect a fair outcome in my view but the legislation equally makes it near impossible to amend Catch-22 comes to mind.
4. The Federation is opposed to AWA’s for pilots but having said that we have worked with members where they apply. It is hardly choice if the employer refuses to give choice of a collective agreement as against an AWA on the same terms. Our experience is that AWA’s provide less overall and place the individual under pressure and are mainly used to ensure that the group does not unite. Our preference is a collective agreement negotiated and applicable to all pilots of that employee which is completely transparent.
5. Industrial action is always a last resort and will only occur when supported by the pilots involved. Can I say in 89 that pilots voted at meetings 95% to take action it was not something dreamt up and enacted by one or two people. Legislation has now changed which deals with these issues and some would not be able to occur in any case. Regards blacklists and the like the Act deals with it now specifically could I also make the point that yes there was a campaign against those who returned and commitments given to the AIRC in March 90 by the Federation but the company at the request of those individuals refused to employ Federation members. I will point out that I will not be responding further on this in any future postings as it dredges emotions on both sides and I am only responding in terms of the historical record.
6. Legal representation is always based upon advice of all involved. The initial situation is through the staff often we will get a legal opinion about the potential of success or otherwise. Ultimately the finance committee makes the decision as to how far we go this will always involve consultation and explanation to the member. The member has rights of appeal to the executive committee and the convention under our rules. This can be difficult for some people to accept due to emotional involvement in the outcome but has worked successfully for the body since its inception; I can point to cases that have been won against the odds and others that we thought a certainty lost comprehensively.
FHead
The Federation provides assistance and support beyond the industrial issues in areas such as incident/accident. We also work hard campaigning against costs imposed such as you refer these are done through the forums which has seen a little movement but not the outcome sought. We are working on issues such Drug an alcohol; FMS; the MPL proposal amongst others. we also attempt to work with other bodies in the industry in the past we did so with AOPA until their agenda was highjacked by personal interests. we would like to do so again in the future. As a body we are designed for pilots flying for pay and rewards.
Lawrie Cox

[Ol Shep]

I am not a member, but would become a member if there was some positive commitment made by your goodselves


I know that many people share this same thought process. If every pilot at your workplace got together, set a common goal and joined a union, then you have power to change whatever it is that you need or want. While people don't unify, you are restricting you own ability to effect better pay and conditions. It's a bit of a catch-22, but if you don't all join, then you'll never, never know ... if you never, never go there. As you know Lawrie is not the union per se, the union is made up by the people who are members. Once you're all members, then AFAP has real bargaining power to represent your interests. AFAP then has the numbers to file a bargaining period to try to get the airline to agree to a union collective agreement and improve things. While every individual accepts their own deals, it is individuality that lowers wages, not the other way round because the federal government is playing ping pong by not allowing Unions to upgrade their awards in line with the last Fair Pay Commission's recommended pay increase.

[Fhead]

LHRT. (I don't think so?)

again agree, T&C are more important and should be the main concern for any union. The problem is I don't see AFAP as having the resources or man power (if it came to action) to do much in the way of T&C at the moment, so little victories that get them publicity and the approval of the majority would build numbers. Am I wrong in saying that? Start small work your way up to the bigger issues. This forum is a good idea and maybe should be updated regularly with federations issues and the responses to the issues such as "Drug an alcohol; FMS; the MPL proposal amongst others"

Lawrie, you got my vote I'll sign up, however I don't see that many of your "issues" will help me in the short term but have the ability to make the industry more pilot friendly in the long run.

[Night Hawk]

Some ten years ago I saw a number of flight instructors all join the AFAP with happy smiles because they thought that they finally had a voice with wage negotiations with a GA operator. They were being under paid reference the award.

What did the AFAP do to help them….NOTHING. :mad: You’re too small a group to justify the expense. :ugh:

This is where pilots being shafted starts and so they then believe they have to do anything to get out of that part of the industry. Hence they now accepted the T&C the larger operators offer simply because it’s better than where they were. This is all in the hope that some day it will all get better. But now we see operators still trying to undervalue pilots with Endorsement requirements and low pay.

For me now it’s about getting enough pay to simply pay the bills, feed the family and not some day driving around a F40. Work on getting salaries that reflect the cost of living and the effort guys and girls do to keep there skills to a professional level.

The constant, “its best you’re going to get” line I hear from many mates that work at all levels of this industry about the AFAP is a sad reflection of your ability to represent pilot in this country.

Help the little guys out early in the piece and you wouldn’t be battling for members now.

After the response I saw ten years ago, there was no way I was going to join. I could add more on the level of interaction with company managements but you’re liable to take legal action. :eek:

If you had looked after the guys back then, many would still be members today. The (current or upcoming) pilot shortage will see many GA guys that could have been members now join larger operators with other unions supporting them.

You’ve made this bed you’re in a long time ago by being short sighted. :zzz:

Good luck with your PR/membership drive.

NH

[Air Ace]

Interesting that no one has commented on my Post # 25 above? :confused:

I have never been a member of any union and have no interest in union membership. However, I can't see why the members appear to be so critical of the union's actions or inaction yet fail to take action or become involved...? :confused:

Is it that they "talk the talk but can't walk the walk"?

[VirginBlueDriver]

An AIRC commissioner in the mid-ninties once commented that a new pilot group doing the same thing has as much relevance as the "Bunbury Basket Weavers Association".

We are not talking about an organisation doing the same thing!

That's the last thing we want.

What we do have though is a new organisation forming directly as a result of your inaction and ineptitude in representing your members.

The evidence of your close association with VB management is well documented in the public arena and revealed where your true allegiance lies.

No, we are talking about a new pilot group doing something very different to the AFAP indeed, and that is Representing the Pilots!

Splintering in different directions just highlights to the company that we can't come up with a joint position.

No, it just highlights the complete and utter dissatisfaction with the AFAP!
You will never receive another cent from me again!
I can get a diary for two bucks at the local newsagent thanks.

[Lawrie Cox]

VBD
I will stick to my position and I am sure you will to yours. You are trying to yet again reinvent the wheel. Again pilots fragmenting is a great victory akin to suicide.
Nightrawk
Do not know the specific case you refer to so cannot comment with any authority. As a organisation resources are still finite and what you may have described could be partially right but I would say that we would have provided advice and assitance on courses of action. At least we do get involved in General Aviation and other areas how many others do?
If you think this a recruitment drive you are wrong. Our staff are flat out keeping up with current demand and our membership has grown in recent years despite the critics and doomsayers.
Bottom line is that keep dividing and you will continue to be defeated. Answer is in your own hands. Mind you with such great attitudes I feel that the pilot community could really do without you. But it takes all types to make an active and diverse body which can always do with healthy debate.
Lawrie Cox

[Night Hawk]

Ok, so you’re involved with GA. Good for you !!! :ok:
GA needs to be represented, as it all starts at the grass roots and then follows on to airlines. So all I’m saying is help stop young guys and gals being mistreated when they enter the industry.
“What you may have described could be partially right”
But you still didn’t help them at all. I never heard of any advice or assistance. :ugh:
So you would have to admit that if you had helped out more guys early on in their careers, that you wouldn’t have so many “critics and doomsayers”? Only helping when their in the airlines is short sighted (IMHO).
“Mind you with such great attitudes I feel that the pilot community could really do without you.”
Play the ball Lawrie not the man!!! T&C etc...Such comments do not help your case to unite all pilots. :=

[Lawrie Cox]

With respect it is a two way street. I am not attacking you personally just the attitude expressed but you may have noted that I am not frightened to have a debate whilst being attacked. Note you said that I would probably launch a legal action based on some allegations about employers? Hardly not playing the man is it?

I will stick to my stated position that members would have been given resources to pursue through avenues such as small claims procedure or rectifying by contact with the employer. But again difficult to respond if I do not know the specifics.

I agree wholeheartedly with you about looking after GA see previous posts we do not just look after airline only despite your view I believe we at least spend time and resources doing just that but I hasten to add we do not have infinite resources to do it for nothing.
Lawrie Cox

[Night Hawk]

Lawrie,

"Note you said that I would probably launch a legal action based on some allegations about employers? Hardly not playing the man is it?"

Hence I didn't post them!! :hmm:

If I had, yes playing the man. :=