AIPA or AFAP FOR JETSTAR [Archive]

Keg

16th Sep 2008, 11:02

Tell me Led, what sort of things arise that 2000 AIPA members vote on that would be binding or otherwise impact on J* pilots? The answer is 'none'. We don't vote on their EBA, they don't vote on ours. That actually currently occurs within Qantas at the moment with respect to the SH EBA I don't get a vote on it, they don't get to vote on the LH EBA.

However, I do recall an AIPA president trying that line on years ago when representation of J* (and regionals) was being pushed hard by the rank and file. He tried the line on that we didn't want to hook up in case the other groups had a disagreement with their management that we didn't want to be dragged in to. I asked at the time how that was any different to the SH EBA.

The comment by the AIPA president was wrong then and it's wrong now. All it serves is to keep the pilot groups suspicious of each other.

So why are you so desperate to keep the pilot groups from working together? It's a question you've been asked a few times and not once have you answered. I won't hold my breath this time.

Flava Saver

16th Sep 2008, 11:57

At least AIPA provide better support should any incident occur oversea's (which JQ seem to be doing more of these days). It cost's less to be a member of AIPA compared to the alternative, and at least AIPA have said they will channel a percentage of the membership fee to the JPA day to day running costs.

Anyway, as a side note, just look at how the QF Engineers all stuck together recently. Its amazing what happens when everyone is singing to the same song.

Keith Myath

16th Sep 2008, 13:03

Keg,

I am reminded of an old oils song 'Short Memory'

Court action trying to prevent J* int expansion springs to mind, and many other acts of bastardry (ETOPS approval, training standards etc) all trying to thwart the growth of J*. It might be a bridge too far to expect a majority to want to join AIPA. Although on the other side of the fence there are many now in J* that will have nothing to do with the AFAP after their experiences of 89.

Getting all Qantas group pilots in one union, probably easier to herd cats.

apache

16th Sep 2008, 13:08

Tell me Led, what sort of things arise that 2000 AIPA members vote on that would be binding or otherwise impact on J* pilots?

how about the integration of JQ into QF? the winding up of JQ into QF, on JQ terms and conditions.... including retention of current position etc.?

just a thought

Keg

16th Sep 2008, 13:32

ROFL. An issue such as that has already been dealt with in QF's recent history! An issue such as that would require a majority of both pilot groups.

The exact year escapes me as to when the agreement was struck but it was September '92 when it was announced that Qantas would take over Australian Airlines. The integration agreement between 'A' and 'Q' pilots groups still stands.

Don Diego

16th Sep 2008, 21:54

Keg,

The self appointed AIPA rep in the regionals could not even make to the table for the recent SSA EBA let alone actually do anything constructive,perhaps he was to busy over in the war office planning the next round of litigation against a fellow CoM member.:=

waren9

16th Sep 2008, 22:01

Im not advocating one union or another but when you have 2 pilot groups represented by one body, make no mistake the majority group will always end up with what it wants.

If you want any clearer example of this take a look at what happened to the Freedom pilots in NZ when they were recently integrated into Air NZ. Senior checkers have become S/O's. None retained a command. ALPA had a very hard time convincing the minority that it didnt have a conflict of interests.

Good luck with the vote fellas.

Keg

16th Sep 2008, 23:02

Don, is he allowed at the table? I thought AFAP was the current respondent to the SSA EBA?

I'll keep saying it though. We achieve much more united than we ever will divided.

swamp monkey

16th Sep 2008, 23:53

IRRESPECTIVE of which UNION gets the VOTE...............you still need people to become members of that union.

Time will tell...................

Tassie Devil

16th Sep 2008, 23:55

Every argument against joining forces is based on whats happened in the passed, Look forward at how it should be and work towards that. Together we stand , Devided we fall!:)

Don Diego

17th Sep 2008, 08:25

Keg,

It would have been possible for the self appointed one to be at the SSA EBA table had he any mandate to do so,and clearly he does not.As for one association for all professional pilots in Australia,it will happen eventually and we will all be the better for it but when is the $64 question.Cheers.

Led Zeppelin

17th Sep 2008, 09:46

Keg -

AIPA has attempted to thwart JQ at every stage as it expanded. And you wonder why some of us are somewhat skeptical about your organisation and some of the "luminaries" running it.

Examples have been well documented and again repeated in this thread.

The AIPA has created this situation out of its' own selfishness and while I support the principal idea of a "universal" union, now is NOT the time to jump into bed with people who may well have agendas that could have negative implications for JQ pilots.

As unpalatable as the AFAP may seem, it is the lesser of 2 evils in this current environment.

WhoFlungDung

17th Sep 2008, 10:20

Globalisation - sooner rather than later is the big game in town. AIPA, representing 2500 QANTAS pilots will be the only pilot group with any relevance if and when Qantas becomes part of a larger aviation community. JQ guys and girls have a choice. Remain on the fringe or be part of next major evolution in our industry. AFAP or AIPA? Doesn't sound too difficult to me.

Keg

17th Sep 2008, 11:59

Led, you and I have had this discussion before. The stated stance of AIPA is that J* flying is done by J* crews and they get first look in at promotion on J* aircraft. All QF crew are subordinate in seniority until we get to the 7:20 numbers and then we interleave.

In essence it's an extension of the 'Y' seniority that came in when QF and TN 'merged'. A pilots had first access to promotions on their fleet and after that it was Q pilots in seniority. Same, same with J*.

fender

17th Sep 2008, 14:37

AFAP is a joke.
I cancelled my subsciption today.
They are not interested in conflict with J* FOOL STOP

Don Diego

17th Sep 2008, 21:45

Keg,

I was in the room (Graphic Arts Club Mascot) a few years ago to listen to the then AIPA President (RH) address the assembled regional pilots on how life would be under AIPA.The most poignant statement made IMHO was in regard to seniority that being that AIPA would decide who flew what and that decision would be based on what was best for the whole "group".In the following years I have attended other AIPA briefings where this has been reiterated (under the present regime).This is what J* pilots will be burdened with if AIPA gets in the door.Do you really think they will let J* get all those 78's??

Led Zeppelin

17th Sep 2008, 22:01

WFD,

This is not about the altruistic ideals of a "brotherhood" union covering all and sundry, as admirable as it may seem.

AIPA is not in this business. it is only in the business of protecting its QF mainline membership and their jobs.

Seniority and "Y" lists are just a sideline and a distraction compared to the main subject of job security should Qantas* in it's infinite wisdom* decide to (for example) transfer some of the A380's or extra 787's to Jetstar and have them operated by Jetstar pilots under reduced terms and conditions (cf QF award).

Jetstar pilots would be left trampled in the dust as AIPA scrambles to look after redundant QF pilots.

Keg and others may say this is not possible, but no one thought Lehman Brothers Bank would go under either.

I agree the AFAP does have dirty laundry dating back to the late 80's and is very problematic in its' ability to effectively represent pilots at the same level as AIPA does with Qantas.

it's such a pity we don't have the desire, numbers or resources to have an independent organisation such as BALPA.

Have a look at the structure of BALPA in this link:

Balpa (http://www.balpa.org.uk/intranet/About/Structure/index.htm)

It works.

(* Some may well think that the words "Qantas" and "wisdom" are mutually exclusive)

'holic

17th Sep 2008, 22:14

This is what J* pilots will be burdened with if AIPA gets in the door.Do you really think they will let J* get all those 78's?? Do you really think AIPA has any say in who gets what?

now is NOT the time to jump into bed with people who may well have agendas that could have negative implications for JQ pilots.Read a lot of crap on this forum. Makes you wonder who actually is a J* pilot and who has agendas of their own.

To the real Jetstar pilots, you have every right to be suspicious of AIPA. But rather than sticking your heads in the sand and hoping the big bad AIPA men go away, wouldn't it be better to
engage in meaningful discussions with AIPA
get advice from your legal representation
have an agreement drawn up that is 100% bulletproof
if you're still not happy - walk awayNothing lost, and who knows, we all may end up with a win/win situation.

VH-JJW

18th Sep 2008, 00:00

1. I believe Keg is genuine in his position regarding JQ pilots and AIPA. Unfortunately, I also believe he is part of a minority of AIPA members.

2. AFAP is not perfect, far from it. But they have stable leadership and appear to adopt a realistic approach to dealing with pilots and management. AIPA seem intent on political infighting and legal stouches with QF. AJ will not treat them any differently to GD with their current leadership.

3 It would appear from the latest longhaul EBA fiasco that 2/3 of the AIPA committee (voted in favour of failed EBA) are out of touch with 76% (against) of Long haul pilots, how on earth then can JQ pilots expect a QF longhaul dominated com to be in touch with issues relating to a predominantly short haul Low cost airline?

AIPA have some wonderful attributes, and if I were a QF pilot I would wholeheartedly agree that they serve their members well (a good thing as their members have no other choice!).

However, I am not convinced that that the same levels of service can or would extend to JQ pilots. There is a conflict of interest here which AIPA simply cannot get around.

Better the devil I know.

Keg

18th Sep 2008, 00:26

JJW, I'm not amongst the minority at all. Most line drivers feel the same way. I've seen enough in the various insights over the last couple of years to believe that the current leadership views it the same way- once you cut through the usual argey bargey. That said, my personal feeling is that we're very close to a new President. Much more moderate and a bloke that I know 100% backs the unity of the pilot group and appropriately representing the J* and regional pilots.

A couple of other points.

1. Your comments about the COM. A number of COM members who put the EBA to the vote actually voted 'no'. With the mandate from the crew they are now in a far better position to go back and bargain with the company rather than just send the negotiating team back from the COM unsure of whether they had rank and file support. It should be noted that a number of those who voted to give the membership it's vote on EBA8 changed the wording from the AIPA COM 'recommending' to just 'acknowledging' the EBA offer before passing it on. Of course the President supported it but a number of those who said 'yes' on COM said 'no' in the final ballot.

2. My understanding of the proposed working structure is that whilst there would be J* seats at the AIPA COM, it would still be up to the J* COM members to recommend any proposed J* EBA to the J* pilot group. QF COM members would not be able to veto that with the strength of numbers.

Led, I'd be very surprised if QF decided to make crew redundant in order to send aircraft to J*. The redundancy package is generally 4-6 weeks per year worked. Given that under our EBA redundancy is offered before it's made compulsory in a 'last on, first off' type deal I suspect that we'd have a number of very senior crew with 30-40 years experience deciding that they may just like the three years pay on offer to go (and not forgetting the generous tax advantages of redundancy and the tax free super either). Then QF has the ongoing costs of promotion and type transfers to replace those crew. All this to save about $300K per airframe in pay terms? I don't think so. Sure, we can use your Lehman's analogy. It applies equally to the J* international operation. I bet if that happens the J* crew will be desperate to take up the 7:20 slots set aside for them and won't mind being a part of AIPA then.

PS: The BALPA type set up is what is proposed for any coverage of J* and regional crew. They still have their own COM but they have the support of the wider organisation and other pilot bodies.

WhoFlungDung

18th Sep 2008, 01:41

JJW and others.

Firstly, I have known Keg for a long time and you won't find a more genuine guy.

Back on thread. What could happen over the next few years? It is an interesting question. One thing I do know is that Qantas will still be here and I can only hope that the JQ guys and girls pray every night for that to be so. Why? Because what is JQ? It is nothing other than another startup airline, nothing different to Compass Mk l/ll/lll, etc EXCEPT that it is associated with Qantas - "A Qantas Group Airline". To put it another way. Is there a single JQ employee that really believes that JQ would be here today without the support of Qantas? As I have said before, strangle the mother and the breast milk will dry up very quickly.

Closer to topic. Where do you think the Qantas group is going? Hands up if you think that Qantas will become a subsidiary of Jetstar? GD might have wanted you to think that but LC seems a little more circumspect. According to GD, globalisation is just around the corner. Who do you think AA/BA/SQ etc are going to talk to when they start putting deals together? Who do you think ALPA, SPA, BALPA are going to negotiate with when/if Qantas merges into a mega carrier? AFAP or AIPA? Interesting question. I wouldn't like to be trying to get on board after the horse has bolted. Would you?

AIPA has had a tough few years. GD and assoc made it a mission to undermine AIPA however, the organisation has survived. The chairs are being reshuffled in QF and I suspect there will be a reshuffle at AIPA as well. AIPA is not perfect but it is the main player at Qantas. You guys and girls can join the team or risk becoming entirely irrelevant. I don't think you have to be a brain surgeon to work this one out.

VH-JJW

18th Sep 2008, 02:17

WTF - I never said Keg was not genuine, quite the contrary. I merely said I believe he is in the minority.

So JQ pilots MUST join AIPA or ELSE eh! Yes I see the stick, just not the carrot. Perhaps you are part of the majority I am referring to, just masquerading as otherwise.

Keg - Most crew is a strong statement, can you back that up? I hear otherwise, however I will stop short of claiming it as anymore than anecdoetal.

Your point 1 - Sorry, a cop out. They voted YES so the crew could vote no...... What happened to leadership from the Com? Aren't these the people who are 'on the inside'? Are they not your 'representatives'? You say some voted YES so they could find out what the pilots thought, doesn't it appear that was obvious BEFORE the vote, the pilots were never asked... Anyway, your EBA is not my business, however, if you want to inflict your Committe on me, that is. BTW I do hope that BJ becomes Pres as I agree he would be a vast improvement. But lets deal with the known for now.

Your point 2 - Agreed. There would be no other way to do it. However, are you saying that outside of contractual issues, AIPA has never made any calls on behalf of the entire membership? Court cases, representations in Canberra, media conferences etc. any of these ring a bell?

At the end of the day the facts are:

AIPA, as a democratic organisation will represent the majority of its membership.
The majority of AIPA members are Qantas Mainline pilots.
The majority of the AIPA com are Qantas Mainline pilots
ALL AIPA presidents of recent times have been 747 - 400 CaptainsSo what happens when there is a conflict of interest?

Condition lever

18th Sep 2008, 02:20

Keg,

Your continued reference to
the 7:20 slots set aside for them
really does show how little you know/understand the MOU.
There are 150 J* pilots that may be able to utilise this option out of 508 total.
You aren't helping your case with this.

WhoFlungDung

18th Sep 2008, 03:06

JJW.

There is no stick. I really don't care if JQ pilots join AIPA or not. I say that for a very genuine reason. If JQ pilots do join AIPA, they will run there own show. I know that because I would not expect any JQ pilots to join AIPA unless that was the case. Would you? Now if they do join AIPA and do run there own show, then that is fine and has little if any effect on myself or colleagues. Hence, I don't really care. What I am really trying to say is that to remain relevant in a bigger picture will be almost impossible from the sidelines and that is where you are destined to be if you are outside AIPA. Do the recent attacks on AIPA make more sense?

Tester Call 121.5

18th Sep 2008, 03:15

Hey dungheap,
With sentiments like yours it is no wonder the division between the Qf and Jq pilot groups becomes wider and wider.
Your argument that Jetstar is nothing without Qantas mothership is irrelevant to any argument.
They are here, you are here.
Do something that will instill confidence in the other group to work together rather than telling them they are irrelevant because I can guarantee they ain't gonna lay down and play dead so you can be happy.
You obviously feel your position is threatened by Jetstars pilots.
Now stop frothing at the mouth and fling your dung.

Keg

18th Sep 2008, 03:32

JJW, I've met three QF pilots who have said 'screw J* pilots'. Every other QF driver I've spoken to has held a similar position to mine. Sure it's anecdotal and I'm not claiming that those three are the only three in existence. It is however my experience that the overwhelming majority of those I come into contact with hold virtually the same view I do about J*.

Tester, if QF fails. J* too is gone. Our futures are inexorably linked whether you like it or not. With a common future we should be looking at a common voice. So you can continue to look for any/all of the minutest of examples that confirm your distrust of mainline crew (and continue ignore the statements from people like me while you're at it) but we all know that confirmation bias is not a good thing on the flight deck and probably not a good thing in the remainder of life also. Choice is yours.

Sad though that we can't even agree to disagree without getting into the name calling and insults. :ugh:

WhoFlungDung

18th Sep 2008, 03:51

Tester. Are you Genex's little brother? Your right. The gap widens. Every time a d#@k h^#d like you opens there trap, you drive yourselves further away from the big game. You just don't get it. No Qantas Pilot cares if you join AIPA or not. But right now, AIPA is Qantas Pilots. When ABC airlines comes looking for a partner, they will want to talk to the association representing Qantas Pilots. Do you think you will be heard from the office down the road? Start broadcasting on guard tester, its your only chance of rescue.

RAD_ALT_ALIVE

18th Sep 2008, 04:25

Like most industrial-representation issues, this one is;

(a) liable to inflame sensitivities on both sides,

(b) full of pros and cons and, thus, must be looked at from a 'big picture' view point,

(c) vital to the future of BOTH pilot groups, and

(d) if not settled by an overwhelming majority decision, is likely to result in deep divisions for a very long time (wouldn't management be pleased?).

For those of you who think that AIPA haven't changed their position on JQ (and, probably, the other subsidiaries), consider this; whatever you might say about AIPA and the COM, they are generally comprised of intelligent, level-headed members. To think otherwise would be to accept that the QF selection process allows mostly other-minded individuals to slip through the rigorous system.

When JQ was first mooted, it was not unreasonable for the AIPA COM (and let me say here, that I'm not at mainline) to bluster about who would fly what, and to campaign that AIPAs mainline majority should get most if not all of the slots. Management had the final say (as they will about which Group element will get what equipment).

Four years on, and it's become obvious to any blind freddie that JQ is now a long-term stand-alone element that has the propensity to grow to a vast size in its own right.

AIPA and the majority of QF mainline pilots know this, and have altered their standing and strategy as a result - exactly as I would want a representative body to be able to change with a change in industrial circumstances. They now see that it is vital that AIPA hold on to the representation of all Group pilots; not to benefit mainline pilots to the detriment of JQ pilots, but to benefit and safeguard conditions/opportunities for all pilots within the Group! I'm sure that it would be seen as advantageous if there could be a permanent 'extention' of the MOU set-up, which would effectively result in a Group bidding system. And how good would that be? Outstanding! The only thing that pilots love above good pay and nice planes to fly, is the ability to choose their career path.

Having AIPA represent us would not, I'm sure, mean that - if chosen as the representative body for JQ pilots (and I do so hope and pray that they do) - they would chase windmills in trying to get JQ parody with mainline, but that they have a powerful influence on ensuring that conditions are never eroded, but instead are improved over time.

AFAP are so obviously too close to management that, taking recent minor issues as an example, they would be hard-pressed to instil any confidence in the pilot group that they could do the same as AIPA have proven they're capable of doing (the recent issues I refer to were handled efficiently, quickly and successfully by AIPA on behalf of its members).

Where was the AFAP?????? I certainly saw and heard nothing!

To those colleagues at JQ who suspect AIPAs intentions, I say this; forget the politics of years ago, look at recent track records of both suitors, and be very careful about which way you vote.

I can see this promising company of ours go down the same industrial path towards the nightmare that Air New Zealand pilots found themselves in when they were represented by two or three unions. Completely splintered with self-serving interests at a huge advantage over the moderates.

Lets not go there!

Keg

18th Sep 2008, 05:34

What he said! :ok:

Beer Baron

18th Sep 2008, 06:13

What a refreshingly sensible post from RAD_ALT.

The fear mongering regarding joining AIPA is madness. To think that if JQ pilots joined AIPA that AIPA would suddenly have the power to direct aircraft towards mainline and away from JQ is utterly ridiculous.
Firstly, no union has any power to direct where the QF Group places A/C, despite what they may wish.
Secondly, even if AIPA did have this power surely they would be more inclined use it if JQ pilots were covered by a separate union.

If they choose to join AIPA, Jetstar pilots will have their representatives that look after their issues, just as short haul have their reps, 'A' pilots have their reps and the Flight Engineers have their reps (for now). This way no group of members, no matter how small, is ignored. The strength comes from knowing the company can't play one group off against the other.

Finally, if one looks only at the fact that the company is fighting tooth and nail to stop AIPA representing all Qantas Group pilots then it can only mean that we would all be stronger if this were to occur.

Don Diego

18th Sep 2008, 08:29

Rad Alt,

The AIPA does not give a woolly rats about regionals, this has always been about J* and how AIPA can wrest control of that flying.They do not come to the regionals as there are no jets there but rest assured if jets appeared tomorrow then the very next day the AIPA would be calling up to tell those hapless regional pilots "sorry matey you blokes are ok with the props but this is a JET so we will be doing that flying for you,hope you don't mind".
So what the heck,sign up now and have your prospects flushed down the crapper but don't say you were not told.:ugh:

RAD_ALT_ALIVE

18th Sep 2008, 09:14

Don,

I'm truly sorry you feel that way - and I say 'you' collectively and individually. I'm guessing that your experience is none too different from the original JQ (read, Impulse) crew; that you'd been ignored by past AIPA COMs because your sphere of ops weren't seen as being important or desirable enough to warrant any care.

I can just tell you that in my dealings with AIPA, everyone I've spoken to, pilots and non-pilots on their staff, have all been talking about 'The Group'. They go to great lengths to emphasise that AIPA feels that all parts of 'The Group', mainline, JQ and regionals (they mention regionals as frequently as JQ) should be represented by the one body, and that all pilots within the business should have the ability to pursue opportunities throughout the business, i.e. something akin to a Group opportunity list.

Sure, old wounds take time to heal. I'd just ask that all who feel they've been wounded look ahead to see how best those wounds could heal. Look to see if there's still a danger of further wounds, and if there's not, venture forth to see if there are benefits to be had in a new, hopefully very productive relationship.

blow.n.gasket

18th Sep 2008, 10:47

Some of you guys need to stop listening to management spin.
As far as I can see ,AIPA is the only pilots Union in Australia with a plan for the future.
They don't want a turf war with the AFAP.
They want to get an AusALPA type structure up and running and I've been told AFAP have been invited to participate.
AIPA's vision is for each pilot group to have an independant Pilots Council that looks after day to day issues with a head office for administration.
No point in having 1 mega pilots union like the AFAP was back in the late Seventies/ early Eighties.
Why do you think the Qantas pilots broke away and formed AIPA.
Pilots want some self autonomy.
All this malarkey just plays right into managements divide and conquer tactics.
Management contrived tribalism at it's best.
What better way to introduce a new airframe than to have pilots worried about their futures vying to cut each others throats to keep their jobs.

Wingspar

18th Sep 2008, 11:12

Spot on Blow!

GD, AJ and their mates are laughing at the primal behaviour the pilots are exhibiting at the moment.
Have I missed the memo that QF are giving all the 78 flying to JQ?????
They have no intention of doing that.
Why would they?
They have already got A380 flying for 400 rates with most probably more gives from AIPA to come.
They are no doubt licking their lips at what they'll get the 78 for!!!!

At the end of the day they just want more productivity. They will push as hard as they can but they will not shoot themselves in the foot.

VH-JJW

18th Sep 2008, 14:00

Warning - it is late, much red and ready for bed.

I think I spun similar lines to these sometime in the past....different context of course.

I know I ignored you in the past.

I realise that I never saw you as important.

I know I always saw you as an inferior being.

But now that I see you as a potential THREAT, quick, jump into my bed.

Promise I won't screw you..........again.

The only joke is that some people fall for the same bs lines over and over.

So, to all the AIPA advocates, whose sum total of union membership and experience since 1981 gives us a grand total of 1, please once again explain how you will deal with the conflict of interest issue........

Ahhhh, I can almost hear the tumbleweeds rolling on by.

Don Diego

18th Sep 2008, 21:08

Gasket,

At the recent IFALPA conference in Mexico the AIPA and the AFAP (at the request of the organiser) met to discuss how one representative body for pilots might be formed in Australia.I respectfully suggest to you that if you really want to be informed as to the progress in this matter that you contact a participant of that meeting in Mexico and disregard all else.

JJW,

Perfect.

'holic

18th Sep 2008, 21:14

So, to all the AIPA advocates, whose sum total of union membership and experience since 1981 gives us a grand total of 1, please once again explain how you will deal with the conflict of interest issue........

As I said in an earlier post, come to an agreement signed by both parties that will protect you. Oh yeah, and being part of the same union as opposed to a different union probably helps by giving you representation.

Using your logic, we should split AIPA into a dozen different unions, 744 Capts, 330 SOs, 767 FOs who commute etc etc ...... Do you honestly think there is never any conflict of interest between various groups in AIPA? The best results are always obtained by sitting down and resolving the conflict together.

toolish

18th Sep 2008, 21:33

Notice how everyone is playing nice at the moment this always happens.
Lets see if history repeats and if the vote does not go the way QF pilots would PREFER the JQ bashing starts again in full force, you are your own worst enemy.

That being said I am going to give AIPA the benefit of the doubt, anything has got to be better than the representation we have previously had.

Captain Sherm

18th Sep 2008, 22:40

Just a thought to increase the transparency of this discussion:

For all those whose posts in any way reflect the view "What has the union (AIPA, AFAP, JPA,VPA etc etc etc) ever done for me....?

Please, at the end of your post attach a brief summary of what YOU have done for the union.

1) When was the last time you spoke to a union rep

2) When was the last time you visited union HQ?

3) How many years on a relevant branch committee/council?

4) How many years as an office holder?

I sleep well at night knowing that through my career I actively provided good answers to 1,2,3,4. I think it would help if all posters fleshed out their input.

Beer Baron

19th Sep 2008, 02:22

Sherm, are you suggesting that paying your union fees does not entitle you to the services of the union? One must be a committee member or hang out at the union office if you want representation?

....Oh and to follow your new rule; I have attended all recent union briefings and SGMs, made a few trips to the office and even emailed a few of my issues to the committee in the past.
Do I now qualify for fair representation?

Captain Sherm

19th Sep 2008, 03:02

Beer Baron

I didn't make a new "rule". It's always been there. A union, any union, is the sum of its members, nothing more, nothing less. Once it becomes "me" instead of "we" it dies.....been true for unions, guilds, clans, tribes, families, regiments, sects and sporting clubs for hundreds of years.

On occasion, a member may need way more from his fellow members, and their paid officers, than he/she can ever repay. So be it. But that is not a daily event. In general....it's a mutual effort.

So...you need to think about your answers (and responsibilities) to questions 3 and 4 before you can ask again..."what must THEY" do for "ME"

Beer Baron

19th Sep 2008, 03:28

Sherm

As I do not believe that I yet know all the ins and outs of the airline union game I will leave the committee and office bearer positions for those with more experience than myself. I still have a few decades to take up options (3) or (4) but in the meantime I would hope that I could expect the support of my union regardless. After all the union is expected to represent all it's members not just past and present COM members.

I am happy to say that so far they have not failed my expectations.

Tester Call 121.5

19th Sep 2008, 03:53

AFAP let me down for the last time.
My decision is made.
My post isn't that relevant other than to say, I am more than disappointed in their support. Waste of money, time and effort.
:yuk:

Don Diego

19th Sep 2008, 04:58

Tester,

Care to give us the details of these events where you were "let down" and/or "not fully supported" by the AFAP??Thank you.

Tester Call 121.5

19th Sep 2008, 06:06

I won't give details on this site but pleased to if you PM me.

jakethemuss

19th Sep 2008, 06:31

Go on Dave, P.M. him.

Whilst you are at it, stop telling lies Don (Dave).

I too was at the meeting you mention and your version of things is an out and out lie and smacks of desperation.

Don Diego

19th Sep 2008, 07:17

Jake,

It was put clearly in almost those words and I remember it as if it were yesterday, and to this day the "self appointed" one is happy to preach that under AIPA that is exactly how it will work.So you tell me now,if I can't trust the word of my local CoM man on all matters AIPA, then just who can I trust??Furthermore he claims AIPA owns the seniority list and can do with it as they see fit!!Is he wrong on that as well??Cheers for now.:=

max autobrakes

20th Sep 2008, 08:01

JWW wrote:

Warning - it is late, much red and ready for bed.

I think I spun similar lines to these sometime in the past....different context of course.

I know I ignored you in the past.

I realise that I never saw you as important.

I know I always saw you as an inferior being.

But now that I see you as a potential THREAT, quick, jump into my bed.

Promise I won't screw you..........again.

The only joke is that some people fall for the same bs lines over and over.

So, to all the AIPA advocates, whose sum total of union membership and experience since 1981 gives us a grand total of 1, please once again explain how you will deal with the conflict of interest issue........

Ahhhh, I can almost hear the tumbleweeds rolling on by.
http://static.pprune.org/images/statusicon/user_offline.gif http://static.pprune.org/images/buttons/report.gif (http://www.pprune.org/report.php?p=4404890)

Conflict of Interest and AIPA?
Ever heard of Australian Airlines nee TAA?
How did the integration of those pilots into Qantas go JWW?
Better and fairer than anything attempted at Ansett!
Who ran those integration negotiations whenever Ansett was involved?
Wouldn't be the AFAP now would it!

As to your other statements :

I know I ignored you in the past.

I realise that I never saw you as important.

I know I always saw you as an inferior being.

But now that I see you as a potential THREAT, quick, jump into my bed.

Promise I won't screw you..........again.

There may very well have been a modicum of truth with what you wrote as a result of WorkChoices and how the Dixon plan relyed upon aspects of that contentious legislation such as Operational Redundancy to force Qantas crews onto JetStar inspired agreements. ( I however believe the Dixon Plan was more to do with "press ganging" Qantas crews onto JetStar conditions rather than just a straight replacement of one group with another)
However now a great deal of the more contentious aspects of WorkChoices are dead, so just how is Qantas going to replace Qantas pilots with Jetstar pilots now?
The redundancy and associated retraining cost as imposed by the relevant Qantas Agreement would cost way, way in excess of any small savings in using JetStar crew to fly Qantas liveried aircraft.
Then we have the Qantas Sale act that prevents Qantas management from off-shoring pilots jobs. No "flag of convienience carriers" able to be used whilst the Act remains in it's present form.
I believe it takes an Act of Parliament to change said Act.
I don't think Dixon has the ear of Government to the same extent today now that Johnny is gone.
Somehow I think the balance of power may have shifted.
Don't you think it would be prudent to get to know AIPA a little better?

http://static.pprune.org/images/buttons/report.gif (http://www.pprune.org/report.php?p=4404890)

genex

20th Sep 2008, 20:45

No doubt about it, AIPA is responsible for Qantas mainline being the airline it is today.

Jetstar pilots wishing their company to go the same way should vote for AIPA.

mohikan

20th Sep 2008, 21:23

Jetstar pilots should not vote to join AIPA as this will preclude them from deliberately undercutting other pilots in the future in order to get work.

I agree with Genex and VVW - dont join AIPA.

genex

20th Sep 2008, 22:51

Mohikan is onto something here.....

His two basic principles stand out, shining like the morning sun:

1) Any group of pilots whose pay and conditions affect job opportunities for other pilots within their airline or within the same airline group should be condemned

2) Any group of pilots who attempt a smash and grab raid, however politely disguised, on the job opportunities of another group of pilots should be condemned.

Thank you Mohikan, it is much clearer now.

milkybarkid

20th Sep 2008, 23:23

Genex,
Let's look at history...

AIPA has looked after all its members well.
AIPA successfully integrated the Australian Airlines pilots.
AIPA stayed at arms length from the AFAP's '89 insanity.
In the last, almost, twenty years the AFAP has done nothing to regain the strength and integrity so carelessly tossed away.

If you want realistic union representation it's a no-brainer.

Back to watching the arrival of the 380.

captaintunedog777

20th Sep 2008, 23:38

Genex I think you are delusional.

Instead going after Jetstar pilots. With most captains on 200 plus a year, which doesn't sound like too bad a pay to me and and go for the likes of Skywest, NJS, Skyworld, Alliance etc who pay their pilots crap.

Get over it son. The Jetstar bashing is pointless. The star is here to stay.:sad:

Capt Kremin

20th Sep 2008, 23:46

Did anyone notice that the A380 arrived in mainline colours, flown by mainline pilots, on mainline rates of pay?

Thanks AIPA.:ok:

Keg

21st Sep 2008, 00:28

tunedog, I suspect that genex was being either cynical or sarcastic and possibly both. The other option is that genex is an equal opportunity sledger and anyone who isn't him/her cops it with both barrels. :ok:

Led Zeppelin

21st Sep 2008, 03:26

Did anyone notice that the A380 arrived in mainline colours, flown by mainline pilots, on mainline rates of pay?

Thanks AIPA

Exactly sums up AIPA - (Rightfully) looking after Qantas mainline pilots.

milkybarkid

21st Sep 2008, 05:17

Zep

Did anyone notice that the A380 arrived in mainline colours, flown by mainline pilots, on mainline rates of pay?

Thanks AIPA
Exactly sums up AIPA - (Rightfully) looking after Qantas mainline pilots.

Almost right...

AIPA looks after AIPA pilots.

Jetstarpilot

21st Sep 2008, 23:22

Now we can finally get some REAL representation!!

Question 1.
Do you wish to be represented by a recognised industrial body?

Yes 226
No 29

Question 2.
Which industrial body do you prefer?

AIPA 151
AFAP 91
:ok:

toolish

22nd Sep 2008, 03:24

Given the result I hope aipa gets out and does some roadshows because if the pilots don't sign up it all means nothing

The ball is in aipa court lets see how they handle it

max autobrakes

22nd Sep 2008, 12:03

Toolish,
I believe AIPA's ultimate goal is independant pilot councils under one all encompassing Industrial umbrella.
The name APA Australia Pilots Association ,or such like, I've heard bandied around ,a-la Aus ALPA.
Let's hope pilots in this country with proper leadership can overcome their percieved differences and actually work together and make a difference!
:ok:

Beer Baron

23rd Sep 2008, 02:58

Sounds like a great plan Max but I think APA is still a dirty word for most Qantas employees so we may need a different name.

(I did like seeing David Coe having to sell his mansion on the news:E)

Ragnor

27th Aug 2019, 22:49

It bemuses me why any JQ pilot is with AIPA!

Keith Myath

27th Aug 2019, 22:52

11 years on I just wanted to see what everyones opinion is regarding best union for Jetstar Pilots. I've seen a few posts saying loss of licence insurance is better with AIPA and membership fees are lower. But a lot of people saying AFAP is better for JQ with AIPA better for Qantas pilots.

AFAP is the majority union in Jetstar with over 80% of the membership.

AFAP have fought and won multiple Fair Work disputes for Jetstar members.

AFAP have fought and won a number of number of federal court cases for Jetstar members.

AFAP have a far superior loss of licence scheme.

AFAP negotiated the iPad agreement (more cash), WDO payment even of flight cancelled, WDA buffers the same as WDOs etc

AFAP Jetstar committee is controlled by exclusively by Jetstar pilots.

Blueskymine

28th Aug 2019, 01:13

Maybe the title needs to be renamed AFAP or AIPA for mainline? :)

YMML

28th Aug 2019, 08:54

Perhaps pause for a moment to consider who would want to attempt to reopen old issues...

I have a huge amount of respect for pilots on both sides. QF and JQ pilot groups only have one common adversary. It's EBA time right?

dragon man

28th Aug 2019, 09:06

It bemuses me why any JQ pilot is with AIPA!

It bemuses me why any Qantas pilot is with AIPA also.

Blueskymine

28th Aug 2019, 10:24

It bemuses me why any Qantas pilot is with AIPA also.

I’m an aipa member. I’ll remain so. I Just think every market need competition. It gives better results to members.

fmcinop

29th Aug 2019, 00:48

Because pilots have very short memories. A number of years ago AIPA tried to muscle in on Jetstar and promised the world. The end result is that AIPA are there to represent QF pilots and they will always come first. In the end a large number of those who left to Join AIPA, returned to the AFAP.

How will things be different this time around? They won't.

Capt Colonial

29th Aug 2019, 02:17

It bemuses me why any Qantas pilot is with AIPA also.

I’m an AIPA member. I’ll remain so. I Just think every market need competition. It gives better results to members.

Latest rumour Dragon Man is that a new mob called the QPA with some alleged 200 LH Members /Covenants and Pledges have been formed. Maybe unhappy AIPA members or Pilots not happy with the previous LH EA outcomes? Allegedly QPA has met with Qantas over the LH EA and Project Sunrise. Not sure if AFAP has a hand in this, however maybe there is a representative alternative of sorts?

One might ponder, is this free-market competition or very concerned and wary Pilot representation. I guess time will tell!

ruprecht

29th Aug 2019, 02:43

QPA? Are they a secret society?

The only place I've heard of them is on here!

theheadmaster

29th Aug 2019, 09:01

Allegedly QPA has met with Qantas over the LH EA and Project Sunrise. Not sure if AFAP has a hand in this, however maybe there is a representative alternative of sorts?

Sounds like wishful thinking.

The Fair Work Act states that a bargaining agent can be an employee organisation that represents someone working under an agreement, a person designated by an employee covered by an agreement, or an employee covered by an agreement that has nominate themselves as a bargaining agent. QPA is not registered under the Registered Organisations Act and the AFAP do not have coverage of mainline pilots (yet), so neither of these organisations can represent Qantas longhaul pilots in the current negotiations.

Capt Colonial

1st Sep 2019, 09:54

Headmaster, with respect, not the way I read the Fair Work Act 2009 in regards to Bargaining Agents!
From my quick appraisal, I understand that for employees who are members of a trade union (I guess that means the AIPA), the default bargaining representative is their trade union (AIPA) unless the employees appoint another person or persons.

Employees, however, can generally appoint whoever they wish as their bargaining representatives.
Persons so appointed are specified in writing, as bargaining representatives, by the employees who would be covered by the E.A. agreement.
Thus, it would appear that the QPA members etc have appointed their Bargaining Agents and have apparently already had meetings with Qantas regarding the Longhaul E.A and Project Sunrise meetings.

Having found a copy of the E.A the following sections 1. (1.2.3) Parties Bound, 9. (9.3) Consultation, and 10. (10.1.1) I.F.A’s, would tend to underline to some degree the Fair Work Act scope and intention in this area?

You may be correct regarding the AFAP I am not sure if they could be involved at all at this time? Of course time will tell!

theheadmaster

1st Sep 2019, 14:13

I still stand by what I stated Captain Colonial, and in your latest post you change what you stated previously to agree with what I said. That is, the only organisation that can be a bargaining agent is a registered organisation that covers employees under the agreement. The QPA is not a registered organisation under the Act, so it can't represent anyone. What you are now saying (and this is different from what you stated above) is that either pilots covered by the agreement have nominated a bargaining agent, or individuals have nominated themselves as individual bargaining agents. This is entirely consistent with what I stated above. There is a difference between the QPA representing pilots, and individuals representing themselves or someone else.

However, there does appear to be one plausible situation in which both of your apparently inconsistent statements may be true. As the Act states that nominated bargaining agents (and self nominated bargaining agents) have to be a person, if the QPA was an organisation consisting of one person, then if one of the independent bargaining agents was the sole member of the QPA, both statements could be true.

Capt Colonial

1st Sep 2019, 21:53

Yes, Headmaster, I note you stand by what you wrote.

Even though you are blatantly wrong!

The nominated Bargaining Agents do not need to be a registered organisation other than notifying the employer of who the nominated agents are and whom they represent.

Go Here: https://www.fairwork.gov.au/how-we-will-help/templates-and-guides/fact-sheets/rights-and-obligations/enterprise-bargaining and read the synopsis of facts, please!

Regardless apparently the QPA has done so late last year and had meetings already with Qantas over the;

a) B-747 RIN and

b) The L.H. E.A and

c) Project Sunrise

According to your “Strawman Argument”, this cannot happen! However, Headmaster, it has!

Sorry, however, I think you are in denial.

Also noted when speaking to a QPA member late last night that a very succinct and separate group of some Twenty Pilot members of the AIPA are standing as a separate group in the elections against the incumbent AIPA Executive. Notably, an Ex-AIPA President, Ex- AIPA Vice President and Ex- AIPA Secretary are part of that group too!

I checked that out on QREWROOM as well!

Would appear in observation of these apparent facts, that if we have separate entities (QPA) and a challenge mounted by twenty or more individuals at the AIPA against the incumbent AIPA regime all must not be so comfortable for the general membership with the incumbent AIPA management.

Time will tell!

I won’t comment on my personal thoughts other than highlight as BLUESKYMINE elegantly suggested... that perhaps greater competition will produce better outcomes!

dragon man

1st Sep 2019, 22:19

All the above is correct , the AIPA elections will be fascinating to watch as a lot of members aren’t happy and are doing something about it, I think a changing of the guard is underway. As for the EBA negotiations after talking to other people in Qantas it would appear that the company has gone from 3% no offsets to wanting offsets now and dragging the chain. Anecdotal evidence to me would indicate that loads internationally especially to the US are deteriorating and unlike domestic you can’t just cancel them , so I hint there is some financial pressure on. We live in interesting times.

Rated De

1st Sep 2019, 22:36

And right on time.
The ever reliable SMH runs a puff piece to pressure the pilot body. Folks, don't worry it isn't the 20 year service life of aircraft, the intricacies of fleet economics and indeed the $200 million per jet price tag, it is the pilot (more particularly the cost) that determines whether a project lives or dies.

The Australian and International Pilots Association's president Mark Sedgwick said Qantas' self-imposed deadline would not influence their members' bargaining position.“Sunrise is a decision for Qantas management to make," he said. "The timeline at this point is very ambitious."

Kudos where kudos is due, Mr Sedgwick ought simply offer the binary; buy it or don't, pilot cost is not the defining input cost.
The former AIPA President enjoys First class travel and other perks, while taking orders from IR, his reward for selling the 787.

Pilot costs are at the margin and not usually any influence on the capital expense/purchase decision. It is though, after all, contract season.

https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/qantas-faces-tough-new-york-london-non-stop-deadline-with-pilots-20190901-p52ms5.html

dragon man

1st Sep 2019, 22:51

What does Qantas want, it’s not hard to figure out, TOD over 20 hours with a four man crew plus no overtime. With pilot costs at 5% of operating costs a 20% increase for doing this would equate to only 1% in operating costs. Then you have to offset the savings from not having crews overnighting on the way to JFK and London but they won’t mention that all they will do is dangle the shiny new jets and more promotions. F##k them and the horse they rode in on.

theheadmaster

2nd Sep 2019, 00:42

Capt Colonial

2nd Sep 2019, 03:00

You have not shown how I am wrong.
Headmaster! Really? I can only give you the link. You have to be able to read and comprehend the information therein!

Both the fact sheet you linked to and the sections of the Fair Work Act that deal with this confirm what I stated. .
Incorrect. The bargaining agents are nominated by individuals. Please read the detail in the Act! Alas, you are wrong once again!

The path that you have taken is nominating yourself, or someone else has nominated you.
I have not nominated myself for anything. That emotional assertion is totally incorrect. You seem very frustrated even angered by this discussion and the existence of the QPA! I wonder why?

The only organisation that can represent Qantas pilots at this stage is AIPA. .
That once again is incorrect! Please read the Act and the current L.H. E.A. on who may participate in Bargaining. It's all their in black and white you just have to read it and understand what is written.

You can beat your chest about the QPA, but at this stage, we are just talking about independent bargaining agents.
Wow! I am sorry this upsets You! I am not beating my chest over anything. It's just a discussion!
I was just highlighting and discussing the existence of the QPA and its relevance in this thread.
At least I took the time to research some facts and spoke with some Pilots who are in the QPA and they confirmed my previous post.

Regretfully therein you are ignoring these facts, as I am advised, that Qantas has already met with the QPA Bargaining Representatives on no less than three occasions discussing;
a) The B-747 Rin
b) The LH E.A
c) Project Sunrise

As this upsets you so much I'll leave the discussion here. What I think of AIPA, AFAP or the QPA is irrelevant. I just highlighted as a point of interest on this thread the reality that the QPA exist!

The reality is that the QPA has allegedly met with Qantas and it represents a percentage of Qantas Long Haul pilots and is in negotiation with Qantas.

If you wish to ignore these facts thats your position.

benttrees

2nd Sep 2019, 04:02

Capt Colonial,

You say “ The reality is that the QPA has allegedly met with Qantas”, I would have thought you can’t have both ie. the reality and allegedly ?

If QPA exist they’re not doing a great job of recruiting members, I’ve not heard of them !

dragon man

2nd Sep 2019, 04:09

benttrees

2nd Sep 2019, 04:15

I made an assumption, I’m happy to take it back.

My main point was that it was said “the reality” and “allegedly”, which one was it ?

Street garbage

2nd Sep 2019, 05:13

Considering what has been offered in the SH EBA, it is little wonder that AIPA membership are pretty pissed off (all I going to say is that the Company is stonewalling, that the deal that is to be voted on was not endorsed by the Comm says it all...)
The understanding from AIPA was that LH negotiations were not going to start until SH was signed-off on- and considering the sentiment on the line, my best estimate is probably a 80% no vote next week...
QPA is just another effort to get LH EBA 8 over the line by the same suspects..

theheadmaster

2nd Sep 2019, 05:14

Headmaster! Really? I can only give you the link. You have to be able to read and comprehend the information therein!

Providing a link does not prove an argument.

Incorrect. The bargaining agents are nominated by individuals. Please read the detail in the Act! Alas, you are wrong once again!

The Act states that the bargaining agent in this specific circumstance is a 'person'. The Act also makes specific reference to employee organisations representing employees. As I have stated, only employee organisations that are registered under the RO Act that cover an employee under the agreement can represent someone as a bargaining agent. As I said on my first post on this matter, there are three possibilities under the Act:

1. A bargaining representative is a registered organisation that covers employees working under the specific agreement (s176(1)(b)). Note also that s176(3)(b) specifically states that an official of an employee organisation cannot be the bargaining representative of an employee if that organisation is not entitled to represent that employee. As stated previously, to have that entitlement, the organisation has to be registered. The QPA is not registered, therefore cannot be a bargaining representative under s176(1)(b).

2. A bargaining representative is a person who is nominated by an employee working under the agreement (s176(1)(c). If you have read the Act, you will note that there is the word 'or' between s176(1)(b) and (c). This means that you can either be an organisation acting as a bargaining representative (and we have shown why this does not apply to QPA) or a bargaining representative that is a person nominated by an employee. As mentioned at point 1, that person cannot be an official of an organisation that is not entitled to represent the employees, to do so would be in breach of the Act.

3. Section 176(1)(4) clarifies that a nomination under s176(1)(c) can be someone nominating themselves. This section also gives an 'out' for someone who may otherwise not be able to represent themselves under s 176(3).

So, as I have previously stated, and as you have confirmed, people can nominate their own bargaining representative, but those representatives are individuals, not the QPA.

Wow! I am sorry this upsets You!

It does not upset me. I know that regardless of what I post, I will probably not convince you. However, I can at least separate the fact from the fiction for other people who happen to be interested in the discussion.

ruprecht

2nd Sep 2019, 05:55

Capt Colonial: a QF capt who uses 50 words where 20 would do.

I wonder who that could be... :rolleyes:

dragon man

2nd Sep 2019, 07:23

Beer Baron

2nd Sep 2019, 11:50

You couldn’t be more wrong, and the reason I think the company and current negotiating team are rushing this is they also believe that come December there will be a new AIPA president, executive and negotiating team.
“Rushing it” really?
Long Haul EA9 chapter 5
The parties agree to commence negotiations on an enterprise agreement no later than twelve (12) months prior to the expiry date of this Agreement (or such lesser period as agreed between the parties). The parties will use their best endeavours to complete negotiations for a new agreement prior to the nominal expiry date of this Agreement.
So given the EA expired 2 months ago, AIPA is contractually bound to have started negotiations 14 months ago. We are told substantive discussions only really commenced in the last 2 weeks. This doesn’t seem like rushing to me, it looks like it’s 13+ months overdue.

dragon man

2nd Sep 2019, 12:26

“Rushing it” really?
Long Haul EA9 chapter 5

So given the EA expired 2 months ago, AIPA is contractually bound to have started negotiations 14 months ago. We are told substantive discussions only really commenced in the last 2 weeks. This doesn’t seem like rushing to me, it looks like it’s 13+ months overdue.

The rush is to have it to a vote within 8 weeks with nothing presented or surveyed to the long haul pilots prior to the vote. I call that rushing in fact it smells awfully like the last one to me where even the current president now admits we gave up 30% to get some shiny new jets.

Beer Baron

2nd Sep 2019, 12:49

The rush is to have it to a vote within 8 weeks
Sorry if I missed an announcement but I certainly hadn’t heard AIPA say they were working to that sort of a deadline.
In fact, the President has said on numerous occasions that a resolution by the end of the year would be “extremely ambitious”. I think that is a delicate way of saying “there is fu#k all chance of that happening.”

dragon man

2nd Sep 2019, 14:10

Sorry if I missed an announcement but I certainly hadn’t heard AIPA say they were working to that sort of a deadline.
In fact, the President has said on numerous occasions that a resolution by the end of the year would be “extremely ambitious”. I think that is a delicate way of saying “there is fu#k all chance of that happening.”

Joyce has said he wants a decision on Sunrise for December’s board meeting and the pilots voting up a new EBA is needed for that to happen. On another forum it has been said that AIPA have met 5 times in the last 3/4 weeks on Sunrise and the EBA , where there is smoke there is fire in my opinion, only time will tell. If the short haul EBA is defeated then I think the long haul one will fade away till it is fixed. Or so I hope.

cloudsurfng

2nd Sep 2019, 22:04

I’m a QANTAS pilot. I’m a member of AIPA. What sh$ts me about this forum is other QANTAS pilots taking over threads that don’t relate to them, to talk about the same sh*t they bitch and moan about on other prune threads, and on qrewroom threads. This thread was about Jetstar. FFS let them have their discussion without changing it into yet another QANTAS thread.

Rashid Bacon

8th Sep 2019, 22:12

StudentInDebt

9th Sep 2019, 13:09

Until Jetstar Pilots form their own union and move away from multi union representation, expect the status quo to continue - Airline managers love nothing more than fragmented pilot representation each with their own vested interests.

A single union with professional negotiators delivering a united message is much more formidable to deal with from an airline management perspective.No need to form their own union, the AFAP is doing a pretty good job of representing Jetstar pilots, any members of AIPA and the other low-fare Union are free to join the vast majority of their colleagues at any time.

Denied Justice

9th Sep 2019, 21:31

No need to form their own union, the AFAP is doing a pretty good job of representing Jetstar pilots......

You miss the point - there are multiple negotiating interfaces happening here which will invariably dilute the outcome. A single, professionally managed negotiating front is a much better industrial tool.

The sad truth is that without this, Jetstar pilots will get the result they deserve.

LeadSled

10th Sep 2019, 03:46

No need to form their own union, the AFAP is doing a pretty good job of representing Jetstar pilots, any members of AIPA and the other low-fare Union are free to join the vast majority of their colleagues at any time.
S.I.D.
I make the assumption re. debt that you are relatively new on the scene.
I am at the other rend of the scale, and a former branch officeholder in the AFAP. Based on a perspective of some fifty or so years "in the business", I can say that, in my opinion, AFAP has never done a good job.
Indeed, at one stage, such a bad job, that it gave rise to AIPA.
All professional pilots in Australia would be/would have been better off represented by one union, but AFAP is not, in my opinion, that union, and never has been.
As far as airlines are concerned, the present setup is the gift that keeps on giving.
Tootle pip!!
Tootle pip!!

Lookleft

10th Sep 2019, 06:12

Indeed, at one stage, such a bad job, that it gave rise to AIPA.

And then at the next stage it imploded Both unions are working together under the guise of AusALPA to coordinate technical and safety issues. Its an example of how they can work together, its a pity it can't work at an industrial level.

StudentInDebt

10th Sep 2019, 11:34

S.I.D.
I make the assumption re. debt that you are relatively new on the scene.That’s the trouble with assumptions :p but I grant you I only have 6 years experience of AFAP’s relationship with Jetstar. In that time I have seen much success in how they’ve approached improving T&Cs including several victories at the FWC. But, given the history of airline/union relationships in Australia, it is no surprise to me that mistakes have been made in the past, hopefully they’ve been learned from.

Just to clear up your assumption I’ve been using PPRuNe since it was an email mailing list, should give you an idea as to how long I’ve been in the industry 8)