Air Nelson [Archive] - PPRuNe Forums

remoak

24th Feb 2009, 01:45

That kind of discrimination just has to be illegal (not to mention comprehensively stupid).

If that's the level of professionalism that they demonstrate in their recruitment... well...

And yes, I was told the same thing in years gone by. I mean, the very thought that NZ IFR is harder than, say, the London TMA, is so laughably ridiculous that it beggars belief.

We all fly to the same ICAO standards, so exactly why is NZ IFR so hard?

Although I suppose it's about all you can expect from a management straight out of the aero club who have never flown anything bigger than a Dash... :ugh::ugh:

Pool Boy

24th Feb 2009, 02:53

Bull****. During my years at air nelson i flew with many returning expats (africa, aussie, hong kong etc) and overseas pilots who had not any recent nz flight time, in some cases had never set foot in nz prior to starting with air nelson. Me thinks its a nice way of saying thanks, but no thanks to filter out angry men. nuf said.

minimum_wage

24th Feb 2009, 03:00

There are pilots in Air NSN that have come for overseas airlines without NZ ATO time.

remoak

24th Feb 2009, 05:08

Funny then that in my case - and I am sure others will have had similar experiences - I was told about the 50 hour requirement before I had even submitted a CV or applied in any way. I hadn't even given them my name, I just happened to meet the then Chief Pilot, who told me about the requirement when I made a general comment about entry requirements for Air Nelson. he went on to comment on how it was designed to weed out those who had gone overseas and "jumped the queue". I never bothered applying and went on to much bigger and better things.

Anyone who knows how Bob Inglis operates will not be surprised in the least - that's where it came from.

Angry? No. Relieved? You bet! Saved from years on little turboprops.

More to the point, it doesn't matter who such a rule is intended to weed out, it is still illegal under NZ discrimination laws.

snakeslugger

24th Feb 2009, 05:30

Yes, Yes the 50hr requirement - It is a load of crock!
I too asked the powers that be about it when I worked there some years ago and got the whole queue jumper story. Kiwis go abroad for experience and that experience gained is called queue jumping WTF?

Remoak, you are right on the money!

Steve Zissou

24th Feb 2009, 05:36

And what's so wrong with 'little turbo-props' ? As my wife reminds me :( it really isn't the size that matters.

remoak

24th Feb 2009, 14:48

Turboprops are great, I was thinking more of the number of years without parole that you can end up doing on them in companies like Air Nelson.

Had a lot of fun flying Jetstreams and F27's, but four of five years of it was more than enough!

Yeah, NZ (and Aussie I guess) is the only aviation environment in the world where you get penalised for widening your horizons and experiencing airspace that is actually busy. Such is the small-mindedness that exists in some companies. Bitter and twisted ex-instructors who saw some of us getting some overseas experience on fast shiny things while they were still circuit-bashing, and decided to get even with any who dared to go overseas, when they eventually rose to power in the likes of Air Nelson. If it wasn't so sad, it would be funny.

DeltaT

25th Feb 2009, 07:28

minimum wage, and pool boy, perhaps those guys got in when 'experienced' pilots were scarce, or they simply called when SB wasn't at her desk...

ZK-NSN

25th Feb 2009, 10:14

Remoak - Get your hand off it, if overseas is so sweet then why do you want to come back. I think its bloody good Air NSN do it. It means some dude who has gone overseas, made his money and has flown around this busy airspace you w@nk on about, cant come back to NZ on a whim and take a job away from a young guy who has done his yards in GA and wants to move up.
If you think these guys go home and cry on thier pillows because they didnt go fly "fast, shiny things" overseas you'd be sadly mistaken, who'd want too if you had to sit next to a somebody with your attitude. They probably go enjoy the outdoors, spend time with the family or take the boat out. Which is probably why they stayed in NZ in the first place.

"Angry? No. Relieved? You bet! Saved from years on little turboprops"
Im relieved too. Its means I dont have to fly with you.

If anyone is bitter and twisted its you.

remoak

25th Feb 2009, 11:15

Lots of bollocks here.

The idea that some young guy who didn't go overseas has automatic ownership of jobs here - bollocks.

The idea that a returning Kiwi is less entitled to work here than someone who has never left these shores - bollocks.

The idea that those of us who went overseas didn't also do the hard yards in GA - bollocks.

You represent all that is worst about NZ aviation. Parochial, xenophobic, completely ignorant of aviation outside these shores. Head stuck firmly 30 years in the past (or up your arse, if you prefer).

Some of us were like you, until we went overseas and had our eyes opened for us. We discovered a world where pilots are employed on the basis of their skill and ability, not on where they have been flying recently. We discovered that getting a job was not about how many times you washed the planes for free or how often you stuck your tongue up the bosses butt. It was about your CV and how you perform in the sim. This known as a Level Playing Field - a rare thing in your world.

Thank God we didn't end up as ignorant and blinkered as you clearly are. As you say, it is good that we won't fly together, as I have little time for bigots.

Daffyd Thomas

25th Feb 2009, 11:24

lol :rolleyes:

Daffyd Thomas

25th Feb 2009, 11:34

:rolleyes:

Bless. Long may the hiring process continue to filter out as much bull sh1t as poss.

Baccardi and coke thanks Myfanwy.

haughtney1

25th Feb 2009, 14:18

NSN, there have been more than a few times where I have nodded in agreement with you on a great many things....

I think its bloody good Air NSN do it. It means some dude who has gone overseas, made his money and has flown around this busy airspace you w@nk on about, cant come back to NZ on a whim and take a job away from a young guy who has done his yards in GA and wants to move up.

That isn't one of them.........
Many of us left to go overseas thanks in no small part to the attitude you have just put into words, it merely reinforces the perception that NZ can and is a small place with even smaller minded people, it also goes to show that lurking beneath the surface..there exists all the same old petty attitudes.

I'm sure that Air Nelson has its good points and its bad points, moreover I'm also fairly confident it has its fair share of good buggers and bastards, but to suggest that those of us who went offshore (in many cases making far far bigger sacrifices than those who stayed) are less worthy/capable/deserving....makes you no better than the Aeroclub management who instituted these alleged policies in the first place.

Your comments are in a word, pathetic.

snakeslugger

25th Feb 2009, 19:18

Remoak - Get your hand off it, if overseas is so sweet then why do you want to come back.
ZK-NSN you reek of inexperience and I would guess that Air Nelson is your first airline job so congratulations!:ok:

I have been overseas and don't regret it one bit but there does become a time when one wants to return home. Cash and experience gained abroad are vaulable but what draws most kiwis home is the lifestyle. GET IT?

ZK-NSN

25th Feb 2009, 20:09

I guess its just a matter of perspective. Sorry to offend but I have to say I found remoaks post to be extremely arrogant, hence my terse reply. Maybe thats why overseas returnees have difficulty?
I find the idea that you think these guys who stayed, got to a management position are that upset at the guys who did well overseas that they wouldnt give them a job...Thats bollocks, but like i said its all about perspective.

Better get to work.

glekichi

25th Feb 2009, 21:28

Haughtney and remoak are right in a way, it is certainly not fair to simply write people off because they have moved overseas. But, many in the company say that either that rule is long gone, or exemptions are frequently made.

At the same time, yes, NZ is a small place. If the airlines were to hire purely on CV and flight hours then no-one would ever move from NZ GA to the NZ airlines, because there will always be an applicant overseas with turboprop or jet experience wanting in. Always!

When they hire from the NZ GA pool, every person in NZ GA benefits in terms of progression. Is that not good for the industry as a whole?

So, perhaps its more about helping General Aviation in general, as opposed to 'punishing' those individuals that move overseas!?

troppo

25th Feb 2009, 22:51

The primary reason why people go overseas is there is simply not enough entry level jobs nor progression. Supply of pilots exceeds demand and those leaving NZ are headed where there is grater demand. The shiny jets, money and rapid progression come with the territory that isn't offered in NZ.
In days gone by 2000-3000 hours to get a job in the right hand seat of an EMB110 you have got to be forkin kiddin me.

kiwi1011fe

25th Feb 2009, 23:59

I would agree with that...I did my training in NZ and at the end, due to the fuel crisis of the 80's and the then economic climate found my self driving trucks in NZ and Australia because there were no jobs in aviation at all at that time for low time guys.
I eventually ended up in the USA where I started Flight Instructing then on to the commuters, Navajo Chieftain's, Metroliner's, Brasilia's and then on to the big iron, L1011, B727 and B737-300....however none of these were considered new and shiney when I got my hands on them and as for the money...it has been OK for a while, but when you start in the F/E seat and then just about get enough seniority to make right seat and the company shuts down....well its start at the bottom again...and then when you make the right seat the economy flattens and you just sit with no movement towards the left seat...needless to say it not as rosey as one might think!!
And now with the cargo carrier I had been with for 10 years shutting down early in 2008 , I find myself seriously looking to return to NZ now to fly out my remaining years, and to be closer to family...(.and I will admit the lifestyle seems more appealing now than when I left ) and I hope that my experience will count for something and that I will get a fair shot at a job I apply for...I am after all still a New Zealander and it was only due to timing and the situation in NZ avaition at that time that made me look elsewhere to seek the job I had trained to do!
At the time when I left NZ, both NZ and Australia were very regulated with regard to the airlines...ie there were no new start/entrant carriers and there was no indication that there would be any significant change in the scene at that time..especially to a young guy with a fresh ticket in his pocket eager to persue a career in aviation as a pilot.

remoak

26th Feb 2009, 01:21

On the subject of perspective...

When I was a young instructor, it was virtually impossible to get anything approaching an airline job unless you had already been instructing for several years. When I left, my flying buddy and I were instructing on Tomahawks.

So I decided to go to the UK, where there was a massive pilot shortage at the time.

Looking back, it would have been a lot easier to have stayed here. First, I had to travel to the UK, and then survive there while not earning any money while getting a UK licence. it cost about NZ$20,000 just for that.

Then I had to get a UK licence, which basically took a year even with first time passes in everything. The Brits wouldn't give me any credit for my NZ CPL, so I had to sit all the ATPL exams and 4 flight tests to get a UK CPL. That cost me well over NZ$100,000.

A week after I passed my General Flying Tests, I had a job flying a turboprop. But it had cost me over NZ$120,000, taken a year, and been a pretty hard time in a new country where I knew nobody.

Two years later, I had 1500 hours turbine and my mate back home was still instructing in the Tomahawk.

Now the idea that any of this was "taking the easy route" is, quite frankly, offensive. it would have been a lot easier to have just stayed in NZ, enjoy the lifestyle and hope there was a Metro in my future somewhere.

A few years later I tried to go back to NZ, to find that I wasn't welcome because I had dared to go overseas. So I traded what I wanted - right seat of a Saab - for a jet command in Europe.

So my point is this. A Kiwi going overseas, pays a very high price in doing so. He or she gets some valuable experience flying in a far more demanding environment, but finds that good old parochial NZ doesn't recognise or value that experience - probably the only profession in the country that takes such a view. Every other profession richly rewards overseas experience, but not aviation.

Sure, Air Nelson have employed people who didn't have the magic 50 hours, but only because they were desperate and conveniently dropped their own rule when it suited them. This is just another example of the lack of integrity in the management there.

kiwi1011fe summed it up well when he said "I am after all still a New Zealander and it was only due to timing and the situation in NZ avaition at that time that made me look elsewhere to seek the job I had trained to do!"

We trained in New Zealand and we are New Zealanders. We chose the hard road when we went overseas, and our gamble paid off in most cases. When we come back, all we ask is a fair shot at a job here, and not to be discriminated against by a rule that serves absolutely no useful purpose, other than to exclude returning Kiwis. That sort of unfair and bigoted attitude has no place in New Zealand.

I'm just glad I was able to bypass Air Nelson and move on to better things.

Captain Condom

27th Feb 2009, 07:35

"I'm just glad I was able to bypass Air Nelson and move on to better things."

Hey Remoak (and the others), we made our beds, now lie in them. You chose the overseas option, shiny jets, big money etc. Don't start whinging when the hard times come.

And just so you don't start on me, I did exactly the same as you. I did all my licences, instructing etc in NZ, then went to pommyland and did it all over again. I ended up back in NZ, and am still in the RHS of a "little turboprop". There isn't a day goes by when I'm flying into AKL or CHC and see Emirates etc and wonder if I shouldn't be using my JAR ATPL. But I've chosen to stay in NZ for the lifestyle, family etc and I accept the downside of that decision (including the crap money).

You guys need to do the same. Things will pick up again and soon you'll be flying your shiny jets in demanding airspace and getting paid the big bucks.

donkey123

27th Feb 2009, 08:02

Remoak.

Just interested to know where you got the $120k NZD to complete your UK ATPL? Instructing on Tomahawks?

flysaucer1200

27th Feb 2009, 09:00

Remoak,
I respect all the hard work that you put in and understand your argument regarding the unfair treatment of returning kiwi pilots. You have my sympathy.
But, maybe, there might be a chance that someone in management would be resentful against someone who could afford to take as much time off as you, ‘a year‘, and spend as much as you did, ‘120,000$’ on an overseas excursion to gain not an advantage over other pilots as such, but an optional avenue that is only possible for people with a large amount of money and time to spend. And, this is after all the money you spent to gain your original NZ pilots licence. I believe the majority of management and pilots would not be able to afford such an additional option in gaining aviation/management education such as the one you described about your own self. Maybe management know that people in your situation have spent a large amount of money over and above the standard amount of money one would spend to gain a NZ CPL, And, perhaps this is one factor in deciding the hiring of pilots.

FS1200:ok::)

remoak

27th Feb 2009, 10:22

Captain Condom

I am not in any way whinging about "hard times". As I have already said, I would happily have accepted a RHS in whatever Air Nelson had at that time, but was prevented from doing so by the rule of theirs that we have been discussing. My ONLY issue is with this discriminatory rule (and those who put it into play).

And for your info, I didn't lose my job in Europe. For mainly family reasons, I chose to return home and do other things (that make more money than I suspect you are earning - as you say yourself, the pay at the bottom of the heap is crap).

donkey123 and flysaucer1200

You shouldn't assume, flysaucer1200. I didn't use daddys money or win the lottery. I planned my move, and went out and got the highest-paid job that I could find, which at the time was as a sales rep. I worked very hard indeed and was successful, and that is where the money came from that allowed me to make the move. Most of my mates earned their money in Oz, either in the opal mines or driving truck trains. The point is that we went out and earned the money we needed, and we lived lives of abject poverty until we got our first airline jobs (until quite a long time after that, actually).

You say that what I did is only possible with large amounts of money. Quite right - but I went out and earned it, nobody gave me anything.

Despite what you think, anybody can do what I did if they want it badly enough.

So please explain why I should be penalised in the job market by a manager who is resentful of the fact that I got off my arse, put in the hard yards, and made my dream happen? All by my little old self?

And please explain to me why your net worth should have anything at all to do with your job prospects? Are we a Communist state now?

glekichi

27th Feb 2009, 10:32

Question for remoak.

Do you disagree that hiring someone from GA in NZ is good for the local industry?

As stated earlier, I don't think the 50 hr rule should be a firm one, but I do think there should be a heavy bias towards local candidates.

Also, you keep mentioning how much busier the European airspace is etc., but, just to throw the idea out there, perhaps its the other end of the scale that they are worried about such as remote and/or uncontrolled aerodromes, or maybe just the slightly different radio procedures.

All stuff that you would pick up in, well, about 50 hrs of local flying. :E

remoak

27th Feb 2009, 11:17

glekichi

And an answer for you... ;)

Do you disagree that hiring someone from GA in NZ is good for the local industry?Yes, I do. The point I think you are missing is that we all came from NZ GA, we all paid money into the local aviation economy. If you look at it from the viewpoint of simply trying to feed the flight schools, you miss the wider picture, which is that folk returning home have great experience, which is also good for the local economy in an indirect way.

Also, if you follow that logic, airlines should really employ pilots on yearly contracts and just dump them for a fresh set of flight school graduates every year.

All I am really saying is that the playing field should be level, and that pilots should be hired on the basis of skill, ability and experience. To discriminate against any particular group of pilots for any reason is not only essentially illegal - it is stupid. It takes us back to the bad old days when Air NZ refused to hire pilots that wore glasses - amongst other creative employment practices. You really want to go back there?

All stuff that you would pick up in, well, about 50 hrs of local flying.But it isn't 50 hours of local flying, it is 50 hours of IFR flying in NZ airspace (or it was when I last enquired). This is completely pointless, as NZ procedures all comply with ICAO PANS OPS II, in other words they are exactly the same as the procedures in Europe. There is nothing that is really different here, other than the density and complexity of the traffic and ATC structures, and one or two quaint local practices.

Even if it WAS 50 hours of local flying, there is nothing in NZ that you can't also find in Europe. Short, one-way strips in the Scottish Islands, alpine flying in the Swiss and Austrian Alps and Pyrenees... and weather that is generally more extreme than you see here in NZ. When was the last time anywhere in NZ got below -30C or above 40C? Both are relatively common in Europe.

The most amusing aspect of the Air Nelson rule is that if any of those defending it had ever actually set foot outside NZ, they would know it was bollocks!

Artificial Horizon

27th Feb 2009, 11:31

This topic tends to come around every 6 months or so here rehashing the same old arguments. I too completed all of my training in New Zealand at a time when the market for entry positions was in the dumps. I could have spent my time and energy seeking that first job in New Zealand or try other avenues. I decided at the time to move overseas (UK) and travel a bit after losing my non flying job in Wellington. This was not the 'easy' option that so many of you are saying it is. I worked in London for 12 months and saved every penny that I could get my hands on to convert my licence. 1 year of training, 1 year of of instructing on low wages my first break came in the form of a turboprop job, then 18 months later a job with one of the major carriers where I am now enjoying the RHS of a 777. I often think about returning home but have encountered numerous people who seem to be of the opinion that I some how traded in my rights to ever work in NZ because of my move overseas. Do I care? not really, I made my choice and have had a great time along the way, met some great people, flown some great aircraft and seen every corner of the world that I could hope to. I have found in the last couple of years that jobs can be had downunder, I am currently in the hold pool for Jetstar Aus and was recently offered a position with Jetstar NZ. On getting the offer I realised that I don't want to go 'home' at any cost and turned that position down. I now can't see myself ever returning in a flying capacity to NZ, the industry for me there is too small and inward looking. Good luck to all those that choose to stay and to those that come overseas, each has its merits and only you can decide what is best. Just don't complain once the choice is made.

waren9

27th Feb 2009, 22:33

Although I suppose it's about all you can expect from a management straight out of the aero club who have never flown anything bigger than a Dash...

Check your PMs mate.

And as for this little jem. The guys that invented the 50hr rule and got Air Nsn off the ground for the most part all came from Safe Air. A Dash8 is a comfy little airconditioned toy compared to what those guys used to trundle around the sky.

A few of them are still there.

donkey123

28th Feb 2009, 01:21

Remoak.

In my experience. I have found those that have travelled to Europe to seek employment, generally, in one way or the other had the money to do so gifted to them in some way, shape or form. I accept that there are a few exceptions to this. Do I begrudge them for it? No, definitely not. Use every string in your bow I say. But those people generally had an option other than sweeping the hanger floor etc etc etc. Thats all i'm saying, another avenue that most don't.

I agree that anybody should be able to return to NZ, apply to any airline, and if they have "the minerals" so to speak get the job. But I strongly disagree with the conspiracy theory bandied around here that Air NSN's 50 hr policy (if there is still such a thing) is designed to weed out those who "jumped the que".

I believe that whatever their requirements are, they are there to try ensure that whoever joins the company gets up to standard with minimum fuss within the given time frame, is going to get on with his/her colleagues and slot in. Simple.

Hence there are some working in Air NSN that have come from overseas operators and probably others overseas that have been given the "no thanks". Just like there is in NZ GA.

donk

flysaucer1200

28th Feb 2009, 01:39

Remoak,
I applaud you fully in your ability to amass wealth. I respect all the hard work you put in and admire very much your determination and dedication to aviation. You, in my eyes would certainly be deserving of a placement into a flying position in NZ.

Assumptions were never made, on my behalf, as to where your tuition money materialized from. I did assume nonetheless, that most kiwi pilots and managers would not be able to afford the amounts quoted in your passage. Whether it be from a factor of time, or ability to conserve money, I’m not sure. Personally, it would take me 3 or 4 years maybe less, to accumulate a saved amount of 120,000$, as you had done. Additionally, another challenge not touched upon in my last blog, was most pilots and managers are not fortunate enough to gain legalized employment in Britain/Europe. Whether that be from lack of correct passport or qualifications I am not sure. But, even with the necessary funds working legitimately in Britain/Europe for Kiwis/Aussies is not unproblematic.

As with penalizations, off course you should not be subjected to it. Maybe a lot of companies are not fully democratic and run with complete objectives, and free of all prejudices etc. Maybe some in NZ are a tad partial in various areas, such as employment. But, NZ, I understand is not a communist state.

I am suggesting that managers who hire are perhaps dictated by this one factor, amongst the others that have been mentioned. The factor of ones ability to afford time and money and I’ll add, EU employment entry Into their aviation lifestyle. This is perhaps something that might influence decisions inside indignant managers minds. But, in my belief Remoak, it shouldn’t at all. And, you should be judged equally as your uncharted peers here are.

FS1200

remoak

28th Feb 2009, 05:08

donkey123

But those people generally had an option other than sweeping the hanger floor etc etc etc.

If I am reading you correctly, you are suggesting that they people with the ability to earn big bucks are somehow qualified in areas that ensure a high income.

All I can say is that I was in no way qualified to be a sales rep, and my friends had no qualifications to work in Oz at the opal mines or driving trucks (apart from an HT licence). You simply have to want an aviation career enough to get off your chuff, find the high-income (and often unpleasant) jobs, and make your career happen. You make your own luck.

flysaucer1200

Personally, it would take me 3 or 4 years maybe less, to accumulate a saved amount of 120,000$

Sure, if you kept your present job and only worked 8 hour days or whatever. But if you really wanted to earn faster, and were prepared to do unpleasant work for long hours, and live frugally while doing it, I'm sure you could save 120K in a year or less (as many have).

This is perhaps something that might influence decisions inside indignant managers minds

OK, but any HR professional will tell you that bias is the very last consideration that should be allowed when selecting employees. You select on the basis of skill, experience, and whatever psychometric tests are in vogue this month. If you are allowing your decision-making process be influenced as you have described, you shouldn't be selecting staff at all.

Mind you it isn't a perfect world, and the Air Nelson management could hardly be described as perfect, so... nobody is surprised when what you describe happens!

DeltaT

28th Feb 2009, 08:25

I don't know where the NZ$120k figure has come from, I got the UK licence, IR, Instructor, MCC for UK£15k. I worked there for a year before doing the courses.

But I strongly disagree with the conspiracy theory bandied around here that Air NSN's 50 hr policy (if there is still such a thing) is designed to weed out those who "jumped the que".

Note in my original post at the start of this thread I used " " from a phone conversation. And I stand by it. Why don't you call Air Nelson and pretend to be an overseas pilot interested in coming back, don't just ask for the application form, ask what your chances are for interview too!

Yes, there are some 'ex overseas kiwis' in Air Nelson.
Were they hired when the supply was a little low?
Do tell, any recent ones hired?

When times were tough in NZ for aviation, when I had low hours I got off my butt and did something about it. I am not saying I should have a job by rights because of the experience, but I should not be prevented from having a crack at it. That IS discrimination.

This topic tends to come around every 6 months or so here rehashing the same old arguments.

I can't seem to find them, can you please post the references to this exact same topic from the past?

remoak

28th Feb 2009, 10:45

I don't know where the NZ$120k figure has come from, I got the UK licence, IR, Instructor, MCC for UK£15k.

Depends on way too many things to make valid comparisons. When I did mine in '88, there was 6-9 month waiting period for a CAAFU test slot, so many of us had to fly regularly while waiting for a test slot, just to stay current. At the time, schools were cashing in on the hiring boom and cheapest twin I could find, a Partenavia, was £350 + VAT per hour!!! And that is in 1988 pounds... maybe stuff is cheaper now. It cost me what it cost me. If you managed to get it done for less, good for you!

haughtney1

1st Mar 2009, 07:38

I'd still like to hear from anyone who actually has been through the process recently..mostly for alturistic reasons as the chances of me appling to Air NSN are now virtually zero , but part of me also doesn't want to believe I'd be discriminated against on the basis of my work history.

donkey123

2nd Mar 2009, 00:40

Remoak quote:

"If I am reading you correctly, you are suggesting that the people with the ability to earn big bucks are somehow qualified in areas that ensure a high income?"

No. Like I said, in my experience every individual that I have known who went to the UK had the money gifted to them. I accept there are more than likely exceptions to this, you being one of them.

I guess its irrelevant in this discussion how people came to be actually living and working in the UK. But I still standby my last post in that I don't believe any individual who has the experience/qualifications and would fit in etc would be grossly penalised because he/she had travelled to find employment overseas.

There are people in Air NSN without 50hrs NZ IFR. Fact. Were they Lucky?Unlucky? Was Air NSN just desperate and taking anyone with an instrument rating and a pulse? Maybe they promised JH that they would go on an individual? Or maybe, just maybe, they were right for the job at that particular time...?

Donk (looking through rose coloured glasses)

horserun

2nd Mar 2009, 02:24

There are heaps of people who got into Air Nelson without the 50hours kiwi instrument time.

Just let SB know your keen. Dont be a w**ker and cocky just because you have some jet time, and stay in contact.

Hell if you want the job that bad go hire an IFR 172 and go burn some holes in the sky. It would cost you f**k all with the pounds you have been earning.

It looks like Air Nelsons pay will be about the same as Jetstar NZ, and they wont charge you for the rating.

minimum_wage

2nd Mar 2009, 04:40

Air Nsn could do with some different experience joining the ranks. I say discrimination is bull:mad:. Having guys 'come home' could be of benefit to everyone.
Ok, so don't take all the jobs away from guys who have slugged it out here, but everyone has the right to a fair go.

I think the Cranfield study has shown that we don't know everything and could do with some overseas help. I think it is arrogance believing that the training department knows it all. And it has been proven that is not the case. Don't get me wrong, I think the training in NSN is great, but it isn't gospel and there is always room for improvement.

I'm happy to be flying in NZ but it sure is a small industry. The tall poppy syndrome is still alive and well in NZ.

DeltaT

2nd Mar 2009, 07:45

I don't believe any individual who has the experience/qualifications and would fit in etc would be grossly penalised because he/she had travelled to find employment overseas.

There is myself and others that have posted here that are telling you FACT.

Yet people are still sitting here thinking Air NZ is gods gift and the sun shines out their backside. They can't possibley do anything wrong can they?

TDK mk2

2nd Mar 2009, 18:45

I was born in NZ but have done all my flying overseas and now have about 5000 hours of turboprop and regional jet time, half F.O and half command. I had been thinking about moving to NZ and what I would have to do to convert my licences. I gather that I'd be applying for F.O. positions at the likes of Air Nelson or Mount Cook Airlines, even if they would consider me without any NZ experience. I'd heard that NZ aviation was a 'closed shop' and all I've read above does seem to bear that out...

DeltaT

15th Mar 2009, 06:24

pprune RNZAF (http://www.pprune.org/d-g-reporting-points/365923-rnzaf-pilots-fly-air-nz-maybe.html)

Its ok, Air Nelson are so short of pilots, they are using Air Force guys now...ha

Wake up you F/Os, can I hear your defense of the company now?

c100driver

15th Mar 2009, 07:22

Its is about a problem in the Air Force lack of flying time available not with Air Nelson! I believe the shadow roster for the airforce pilots.

Sqwark2000

15th Mar 2009, 08:16

If you guys have a prob with Air NSN why apply, Mt Cook pays more and has more time off and has recently hired a uk national with no, I mean no civil experience except for CAA flight tests for conversion of his military "license".

And if you join Air NSN now you could end up in the fiji of the south, Invercargill... :hmm:

S2K

remoak

15th Mar 2009, 10:21

I don't think that who has expressed a "problem" with Air Nelson on this thread is currently applying to them. I've never applied to them and I know some other posters haven't either.

We are simply exposing a behaviour and philosophy that should be deeply disturbing to anybody with half a brain.

Most of us get that, due to the parochial nature of the quaint backwater that is NZ aviation, many will deny that such things could possibly happen. We know better (from first-hand experience). The use of RNZAF pilots is similarly a disturbing development, which potential Air Nelson employees should be livid about - possibly existing employees as well if any of the RNZAF types get rapid commands...

I'm sure Mt Chook is a better bet. Anything would be!

waren9

15th Mar 2009, 22:06

I dont think the lads have got anything to worry about from airforce types getting "quick commands". CAA will only give them a CPL and at 400hrs they've got a way to go before they meet ATPL reqmnts.

Air Nelson has a long history of upgrades awarded very strictly on seniority. Its in the contract (or was) and the union keeps a pretty close on eye on it.

If an airforce type took up a spot below me on the list, I dont think I'd be overly concerned.

Having said that, I joined them with about 1800hrs (half of that multi IFR) and wasnt allowed near a Saab for two years, now these guys are on the Dash with 400 odd? My, how times have changed.

nike

15th Mar 2009, 23:22

Fair to say that is due to the boom and bust cyclical nature of the industry, i.e purely external influences. We've all got a line from that story.

ZKSUJ

16th Mar 2009, 01:13

Dumb question. But this whole RNZAF pilots with 400hrs thing shouldn't be seen as an opportunity for guys in GA with 500+ to apply and and be seriously considered should it?

remoak

16th Mar 2009, 02:08

No.

GA guys with 500+ hours haven't had the magical RNZAF training, you know, all that highly valuable Airtrainer time.

They also don't have access to the RNZAF Old Boys network...

By all means apply, but you are wasting your time.

Water Wings

16th Mar 2009, 02:42

Dumb question. But this whole RNZAF pilots with 400hrs thing shouldn't be seen as an opportunity for guys in GA with 500+ to apply and and be seriously considered should it?

I suspect SB would (pleasantly) tell you thanks but no thanks and wouldn't even mail you out an application form.

ZKSUJ

16th Mar 2009, 07:47

Cheers guys, I thought so

mattyj

16th Mar 2009, 08:27

You're forgetting the magic ingredient...The RNZAF guys are FREEEE!!:ugh:

remoak

16th Mar 2009, 10:14

I never thought this day would come, but...

I agree with you mattyj.

Man, that was hard. I hope I don't have to do it again for a while...;)

ZK-NSN

16th Mar 2009, 10:45

GA guys with 500+ hours haven't had the magical RNZAF training, you know, all that highly valuable Airtrainer time.

Allow me to play devils avocado (sorry, thats the quaint NZ backwater part of me coming out) for a moment, but GA guys probably dont have 150hrs on King Airs either.

If you think the pilots or ALPA for that matter are not watching this VERY close then you "Dont know better"

mattyj & Remoak - Better than free, they are probably making money on them.

ZKSUJ - What have you got to lose?

DeltaT

16th Mar 2009, 10:48

Mt Cook pays more and has more time off and has recently hired a uk national with no, I mean no civil experience except for CAA flight tests for conversion of his military "license".

Interesting, do Mt Cook still use the staffcv website?
The last employer search on there was 28/9/2008...how recently did they take him on? Clearly there is another avenue eh?

remoak

16th Mar 2009, 16:12

ZK-NSN

The problem with your squishy green theory is that these RNZAF guys probably don't have 150 hours on the mighty King Air either. Even if they do, they have a grand total of zero hours commercial flying experience, and relatively little total time.

Now if it was me, I'd be taking the guy with 1000 hours in a Chieftain over the military guy every day and twice on Sundays.

The whole shebang doesn't sit well with the Air Nelson desire to protect local GA guys against the evil horde of returning Kiwis. You'd think that they would also want to protect the local GA guys from the Air Force plebs who haven't paid a bean for their training, who have in fact had their training courtesy of the tax dollars raised from those self-same GA pilots.

Who cares if the pilots or ALPA are "watching it closely..." they have allowed it to go ahead, there is stuff-all they can do about it now.

Anyway, looking for consistency with Air Nelson is silly. As others have said, it's all about money...

hot tuna

16th Mar 2009, 23:48

I for one will write to my MP, if my taxes are spent in this way to subsidize a commercial operation. Just remind me who's paying their wages again.

c100driver

17th Mar 2009, 00:14

You tossas know nothing about the agreement between the RNZAF and Air NZ, and niether do I. The little I have heard is the RNZAF has contracted with Air NZ to provide flight time for new airforce wings graduates due to the lack of flying available in the RNZAF due to C130 and P3 fleet reduction as those aircraft are in the planned upgrade program.

The reason it went to Air Nelson is that they have a full flight simulator, and the aircraft is a glass cockpit similar to the upgrades on the C130 and P3. Plus being a straight wing TP would be similar configuration to what they are going back to!

This type of training has been provided before in Air NZ, most recently with Jet airways pilots flying the B777, Airwork pilots flying the B737 etc

The Aussies have also done it with VB and the RAAF before they picked up there BBJ's

remoak

17th Mar 2009, 02:32

Well I guess that makes you a "tossa" too, if you know as much as we do and yet still comment! :hmm:

Doesn't matter why they did it, it is the rampant disregard for the rights of poor NZ GA pilots that should be noted.

And as for "The reason it went to Air Nelson is that they have a full flight simulator, and the aircraft is a glass cockpit similar to the upgrades on the C130 and P3. Plus being a straight wing TP would be similar configuration to what they are going back to!" - what complete bollocks. The Dash is nothing like either the C130 or the P3 in configuration or performance, and the only way the avionics are similar is that they both have an ADI and HSI!

And if they really are recent Wings graduates - well, that is an even worse insult to poor downtrodden NZ GA guys looking for a break! ALPA and the Air Nelson pilots should hang their heads in collective shame!!!

Somebody needs to grow a pair and stand up to this nonsense! :ok:

blah blah blah

17th Mar 2009, 02:58

I agree with most of the comments on here, but not those regarding the ability of the RNZAF pilots about to come through.

To say that a guy off the wings course (BE200) is not up to flying the Dash is rubbish. These are guys that if things were running correctly would be operating as a Captain on the 200 and moving quite quickly on to either a Herc or P3. They are more than capable of flying the Dash. They will have a big advantage over a lot of GA guys coming through in that they have had exposure to multi crew ops, retract gear, pressurisation, relatively high speeds. Yes their total time is low, but they have had good training.

And as for "The reason it went to Air Nelson is that they have a full flight simulator, and the aircraft is a glass cockpit similar to the upgrades on the C130 and P3. Plus being a straight wing TP would be similar configuration to what they are going back to!" - what complete bollocks. The Dash is nothing like either the C130 or the P3 in configuration or performance, and the only way the avionics are similar is that they both have an ADI and HSI!

Yes, the avionics will be a little different, but the use of the Dash FMS will stand them in good stead, as will the use of the EFIS etc. Of course they will already have some experience of this from their training.

As to performance differences, I think you will find that the Dash and the Herc are remarkably similar. Yes the Dash is slower and a lot smaller, but in terms of handling there is a lot that can be read across. When one of these RNZAF guys moves from the Dash back to the Herc they will find the transition of handling skills pretty easy.

I just hope these guys are given a fair shot at the whole thing. Im sure they would rather be off flying a P3 than doing airline stuff, but they dont have the same rights to bitch/moan/complain that their civvy counterparts have. They are only doing what they are ordered.

As to whether this whole thing should have been set up in the first place, well thats a different story. Im sure it will help to mask a shortage in pilot numbers, and for that and many other reasons it deserves to be looked at very closely. But thats not the fault of these young pilots, and I think some people on here need to remember that.

remoak

17th Mar 2009, 08:49

I think you will find that the Dash and the Herc are remarkably similar

And I think you will find that you are talking through a hole in your head. The only similarity is that they both have a straight wing mounted on top of the fuselage. In every other way, they are quite different.

the use of the EFIS etc. Of course they will already have some experience of this from their training

What do they train on that is EFIS? Last time I was in an RNZAF Beech, it was very analogue indeed. Pretty sure the Airtrainers are too.

blah blah blah

17th Mar 2009, 20:02

Remoak,

My mistake, I thought the King Airs had been fitted with EFIS. That being the case it is still not much of an issue to move from non-EFIS to EFIS, whether they are civvy or Air Force.

As for speaking out of a hole in my head, you are quite right, its called a mouth. (Any particular need for the aggressive response?) I didnt say the two types are identical, I said there is a lot that can be compared in terms of the handling of the two. I stand by that, they are very similar.

In relative terms the controls are both quite heavy, the rates of change are similar, the approach and flare are much the same. Speeds on final are comparable, and t/o and landing distances are similar as well. The guys coming off the Dash and moving to the Herc will know that they are on a bigger aircraft, but the handling will be surprisingly similar.

ZK-NSN

17th Mar 2009, 23:25

As for speaking out of a hole in my head, you are quite right, its called a mouth.

Touche. :D

Remoak, check your PM's

remoak

18th Mar 2009, 01:49

As for speaking out of a hole in my head, you are quite right, its called a mouth. (Any particular need for the aggressive response?)Yes sorry about that, I was going for the irony angle but realised later it was probably too obscure for a forum. It wasn't meant to be agressive.

Anyway, flew the C100 (civil Herc) once, many moons ago, and did half a Dash 8 sim course before being yanked off it to do a 146 course instead. They felt pretty different (in the finer points of handling) to me. Having said that, all civil aircraft of that size fly more or less the same, that is the whole goal of certification. I can honestly say, for example, that the old F27 I used to fly handles much the same, in general terms, as the 146 I flew for ten years after that. The differences are in systems and procedures, mainly.

Also important to realise that I have no issue at all with any of this, I was just pointing out in a slightly sideways manner that, if you accept the premise given to me and others by Air Nelson for requiring the infamous 50 hours (protecting local GA hopefuls), you would expect them to be consistent and not allow RNZAF chappies to "jump the queue" as they put it to me. You would also expect those trying to get into Air Nelson to be more than a little miffed, but they seem to be strangely silent.

So to summarise, all Transport Category aircraft fly more or less the same, analogue to EFIS is no biggie (although proper FMS can be a struggle for some), RNZAF pilots are fine chaps/chapettes and snappy dressers to boot, Air Nelson can do whatever they want, and all Kiwi pilots should be treated identically in the job market. OK?

Bongo Bus Driver

18th Mar 2009, 05:07

During the recent industrial action Air Nelson used Federation and indepedent pilots to crew aircraft during the strikes. This saw training captains used in the right hand seat as a large majority of non ALPA pilots are captains. Should this experiment with two air force pilots go well there is nothing to stop this from becoming part of the standard air force training progression with more than just two pilots on secondment.

Air Nsn get FREE pilots and the air force get increased flying experience without the expense of operating aircraft. Both parties win from the deal so would you not expand it. The examples given previously with Jet Airways and Airwork were as far as I know were short term. This could become permenent if the Air Force decide that a year on the Dash should be part of the training progression.

Should strike action be taken in the future the Air force FOs can be used to undermine the effect of that strike action as more aircraft can be crewed.

I do not like the idea that my taxes are being spent in a way that could seriously undermine my unions ability to negotiate increased terms an conditions in the future.

I am sure the two pilots in question are good guys but I am worried that they could be pawns in a much larger conspicacy.

waren9

18th Mar 2009, 09:55

And conspiracy I think it mostly will be.

Free seat fillers is all JH wants. Non unionised resources is something JH would love if it came to others downing tools for a while.

I cant see John Key loving the idea of tax dollars in effect crewing publicly listed companies. Political minefield if it goes too much further.

That the govt is the major shareholder is an awkward convenience.

I dont think it will come to any long term significance. Well, I hope not anyway!

Sqwark2000

20th Mar 2009, 08:37

A mate of mine got rung by Air NSN today and was given a heads up about an interview late April.

He was also told that there was to be two rounds of interviews and that they were struggling to find people with suitable experience, so for those keen, get your updates in and follow up calls dialed...

good luck.... have fun in invercargill :bored:

S2K

Uncle Chop Chop

20th Mar 2009, 09:37

One could hook up with a chick from the Invers cafe and get cheese rolls on tap.....!!!!!

ZK-NSN

20th Mar 2009, 10:15

Nice lady but a life supply of cheese rolls wouldnt be worth it. You would need a door big enough for me and my telephone pole.

remoak

20th Mar 2009, 11:59

interview late April.

Right, just for a bit of fun I'll apply and see how long it takes to get a letter telling me I need 50 hours recent NZ IF time. Then I can send all you doubting PPRuNers a copy, which should end that argument once and for all.

Just on the off-chance they don't play ball, is anyone prepared to supply the humble pie for me to eat?

Doubt I'll need it though. Who do you send your CV to?

This should be entertaining...

blah blah blah

20th Mar 2009, 21:24

Remoak,

Dont mean to be rude here, but have you thought that perhaps the 50 hour IF requirement that you talk of is perhaps a nice way for the company to say they arent interested in somebody?

Where I work stipulations like this are often used as a way of telling people thanks but no thanks. Perhaps Air Nelson are doing the same?

ZK-NSN

20th Mar 2009, 22:34

Remoak: Game on!

If you dont want someone to work for you just tell them, There is no point in making up some story. Even if you dont have the stones to tell them in person, you can just write a letter.

remoak

20th Mar 2009, 23:36

blah blah blah

Dont mean to be rude here, but have you thought that perhaps the 50 hour IF requirement that you talk of is perhaps a nice way for the company to say they arent interested in somebody?A lot of Air Nelson guys trot that one out in their rather smug way. The problem with that idea is that it is completely unnecessary; all they have to do is say "no thanks", they don't need to invent a reason why. And if you were going to invent a reason, it should be rather less specific.

The other problem with that reasoning is that if the pilot goes away and does the 50 hours, their reason for rejecting him or her evaporates and they either have to hire them, or invent another reason not to; or just say "no thanks", which they could have done in the first place!

Sorry, doesn't make any sense, even for Air Nelson.