A question to QF pilots

[AirborneSoon]

I have nothing to say about QFs plans for Asia, but I do have a question.

What makes QFs pilots uniquely entitled to job security in an economy where no other worker has that? Now before you go on about saving lives and your $100k investment in self education let me enlighten you about working conditions or non-aviation Australia.

As an Australian worker you have the right to pay for your own education. I paid for mine out of my own pocket and it cost me well over $60k. It was also education essential to attaining my job. My employer paid for absolutely none of that. In return to my $60k self-funded investment I [eventually] achieved a lordly wage of $70k a year.

As an Australian worker you have the right to spend years in low paying sucky jobs at the bottom of your industry before getting a decent wage. I spent 4yrs in a $36k a year job just to get my foot in the door of my industry after spending thousands on my own education because I needed experience. Buying experience is something every Australian worker has to do in the course of their career.

As an Australian worker you don't get travel in J class. Corporate Australia doesn't pay for that anymore unless you work in higher level mgt. We've all been told it's an extravagance that the company just can't afford. You get to travel for your job in the cheapest seat your company can source on the schedule you need to fly. You can be expected to travel 10hrs overnight in a cramped economy seat and attend work the next day, some 8hrs later. That's just the way it is.

As an Australian worker you can lose your job at any time through redundancy and your company doesnt have to prove to the public or the government a good reason for offshoring your work. They can just decide to do it and you are out the door with the minimum legal requirements for redundancy. If your company is really nice they might hook you up with a recruitment agent who will then help you find another job. Otherwise it's goodnight nurse. I lost the job I had trained for, worked in and paid to be in virtually overnight when the industry boom was over and outsourcing to the 3rd world became the next great mgt idea.

As an Australian worker on a salary, you are required and expected to work daily overtime, weekends and whatever else the company might need without being paid anything extra for it. You're expected to do this because you value your job and if you don't they are quite willing to give your job to someone who will. There are no seniority lists for promotion, it goes to the person willing to do the most for the least cost. You also don't have minimum rest periods, maximum duty hours or buffers around your day off.

As an Australian worker you are free to choose your employer and seek the best working conditions your skills, experience and talents will afford. You you wil also find many workers doing identical work, with identical skills and experience, in the same company on vastly different rates of pay. Companies pay each worker the lowest rate they can to secure their services, this often means coworkers can have as much as $10k difference in pay rates based on nothing more than a persons willingness to accept $10k less. You cant go to your employer and say company B is paying more so they need to pay more. Our boss will just tell you, if you dont like it you can leave. Your employer can without notice change your working terms and conditions to suit market conditions. When times are tough your employer will work you harder because they know you will not easily find another position. When times are good they tend to be more lenient and it's a good time to go back to market and get
another job with more favorable pay. Thats just how it's done in the Australian market today.

It seems to me all the things pilots are taking action against are just par for
the course for most Australians. This is probably why the Australian worker has a hard time finding sympathy and support for pilots and their job guarantees. You are asking for a working condition no-one else in this country enjoys. Why shouldn't pilots be subject to the same market forces and struggles that everyone else is?

You go on about EK and SQ paying their pilots more with better travel entitlements but that's no different to anyone else saying....geez if I could just get a job with Company X, I'd get paid more with more opportunities and have better benefits. If you want that you have to go and work for the companies that offer that. You can't expect your present company to offer it just because it exists somewhere else. :hmm:

I could go and make much more than I do right now working in the mines. But I'd have to work in a hole in the ground to get it. I don't want to do that so I settle for the lower pay of where I am. Thats my choice and freedom as an Australian worker.

[Tuner 2]

Your entire post demonstrates you do not actually understand the QF long haul pilots' "job security" claim you criticise, which is not even titled "job security", and that you have little idea about how industrial agreement negotiations work. Nor do you understand the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act, substantive sections of which practically mirror the WorkChoices legislation and previous Workplace Relations Act.

[AirborneSoon]

You are probably correct. But what I do understand are the working conditions for the vast majority of Australians which afford us no bargaining power beyond the market demand for our individual services in any given moment. And possibly why public support for your claims appears to be dwindling. So please tell me why I should support the cause of pilots in this country? After all Fair Work and Work Choices affects non-pilots too.

[LT Selfridge]

Another willing recruit sleep-walking into slavery. You go on being a cog in the machine and be thankful for people like the Qantas guys who are propping up your conditions by not being smashed by the 1%. Make no mistake - the CEO club wants compliant, 'who am I to argue', 'I guess I'm happy getting the crumbs from the big boy's table', serfs like you. Why do you think you get the money you do? Don't say market forces - the 'market' is fixed.

Also if you think Qantas is made up wholly of one trick pony guys who can't do anything other than operate aircraft then think again. Sure, some will be like you - struggled every inch of the way to get were they are but essentially out of ideas on how to be anything other than a slave. But a significant number will be assessing the angles, bringing out their plan B - the law degrees, the business plan, the MBAs, the corporate jet positions, the military skill-set they may have, while at the same time squeezing as much out of the acceptable conditions they currently enjoy before they move on to another situation where they can retain control of their lives.

Just say thanks and hope they don't fancy your job.

[Tuner 2]

Your oversimplified, free market views on the labour market are entirely up to you to subscribe to. However many people do not.

The notion of "if you don't like it, leave" is extremely naive and denies those who have a personal and financial stake in their job a right to negotiate around their employment conditions. This includes the 100% legal right, under current and previous legislation, to take protected indutrial action to advance their claims.

Just because a large proportion of the community is not industrially organised does not mean those who are should be denied these rights.

"And possibly why public support for your claims appears to be dwindling"
Please provide me with scientific evidnce of this. Please note that online comments on news media websites are not a scientific form of polling.

[DutchRoll]

What makes QFs pilots uniquely entitled to job security in an economy where no other worker has that?
You don't really understand the particular pilot claim, do you? Fair enough. Qantas wants it to stay that way.

I paid for mine out of my own pocket and it cost me well over $60k.
You don't know how much it costs to attain your Airline Transport Pilot's Licence do you? Qantas do not pay for that.

As an Australian worker you have the right to spend years in low paying sucky jobs at the bottom of your industry before getting a decent wage.

Many Qantas pilots have done exactly that. Spent several years (at least) getting paid wages which are barely enough to buy food and pay rent, while flying rustbucket poorly maintained aeroplanes out of Oonawoopwoop with the Civil Aviation Regulations "bent" into the preferred shape by the employers. Just to get the hours necessary to even qualify to apply.

You can be expected to travel 10hrs overnight in a cramped economy seat and attend work the next day, some 8hrs later. That's just the way it is.

No probs. If you want me to fly a $100 million 400 tonne aeroplane at 1000 km/h at 38,000 ft with no place to pull over, having had no sleep, with the known and measured (in flight simulator studies) physical and mental performance decrements that brings, no worries. We'll do that. Fingers crossed the engine doesn't explode to coincide with all that. Feeling lucky?

As an Australian worker you can lose your job at any time through redundancy

That's pretty much how it works at Qantas. The only reasons pilots haven't been made redundant is through mutual agreements with Qantas where they take all their accrued leave and long service leave. We've even previously taken pay freezes to avoid this, again, through mutual agreement and negotiation.

As an Australian worker on a salary

Qantas pilots are not on a salary. They are on an hourly wage. The income varies from week to week, month to month, and year to year with hours worked. Just like anyone else on an hourly wage.

You also don't have minimum rest periods, maximum duty hours or buffers around your day off.

No worries again. You want me to take you flying having been awake for 24 hours? I can't do that in a large heavy jet, but I might be able to arrange it in a private plane, providing you sign a waiver first. Can I take your family too?

As an Australian worker you are free to choose your employer and seek the best working conditions your skills, experience and talents will afford.
So too are Qantas pilots. And indeed they are doing exactly that.

You are asking for a working condition no-one else in this country enjoys.

And which one is that?

[Oriana]

But what I do understand are the working conditions for the vast majority of Australians which afford us no bargaining power beyond the market demand for our individual services in any given moment.That's because so many regular people buy into the Capitalist mantra that unionism is evil, and individualism is the better option all the while pouring scorn on an organised workforce - whilst they themselves enjoy conditions that were hard fought and won by unionised workers.

Since when did **** kicking workers become capitalists?

[AirborneSoon]

Just as I thought. No-one willing to articulate their claims in a way that's convincing or understandable but plenty of people willing to belittle and be nasty. With the exception of DutchRoll whose comments actually came close to an answer.

In my world view - we take industrial action because it's our right - doesn't provide me with any information on why your claims are valid. And of course I got made redundant because I'm talentless and a fool. Nice.

Well enjoy your right to industrial action and your fight ahead of you. I don't have a scientific poll on how much community support you have, but there are several hundred posts on here made by pilots talking about how QF keeps trumping you in the PR stakes and not many about how you're winning your war. If you want massive public support then perhaps not attacking anyone who asks you about your cause would be a way to go...

I'd wish you good luck but thanks to Selfridges post I no longer feel any moral obligation to care.

[muffman]

I'll start by saying I'm not a Qantas pilot, but I do have a couple of things for you to consider.



The job security claim has nothing to do with J class travel or absurdly high incomes. It is simply a case of a unionised workforce using their (tentative) bargaining position to ask the company for some commitment to keeping their jobs available. Any other Australian worker could ask for the same thing. Whether they get it depends on how strong their bargaining position is - the same applies here. What is wrong with the pilots asking for it?
The consequences of the company not agreeing to this are more serious than the lack of ongoing job security for Qantas LH pilots. Qantas has a reputation for safety and excellence despite being the longest continuously operated airline in the world, operating along some of the longest routes in the world. By refusing to invest in the future of their current workforce on any level (remember, the pilots have never ruled out a pay cut to keep their jobs), Qantas are saying they do not value the investment they have made in the training and experience of their current staff'. Any moves to replace their staff will inevitably be a lowering of standards. Furthermore, the economic significance of sending Australian jobs offshore affects everyone, not just those left unemployed by the decision. Australians should not be supporting this.
Australia does not need to be in a race to the bottom on every front. Why is the media comparing pilot salaries with the minimum wage? Why are you suggesting pilots should show up for work with no rest after flying all night in an economy class seat? The possible outcome here is not a financial disadvantage, it is the death of innocent, fare paying passengers who expect that whoever is up the front is well rested and capable. Look at the Colgan Air accident and many others to see where fatigue leads.
The J class seats argument is a moot point because your company would pay the full fare price for a J class seat. When your employer is an airline, it's fair to say they can obtain the seat at no more than the opportunity cost plus the cost of meals, etc. I would suggest that is always going to be less than the cost of an accident.

Just some thoughts.

[Arnold E]

DutchRoll seems to me to have put forward a reasonable argument, please elaborate where you think he may be deficient. Please put forward some questions that you would like more directly answered.:ugh:

[Fuel-Off]

Whilst NO ONE in this country has guaranteed job security in this country, I have to ask all those neigh-sayers, is it wrong for at least one union in at least trying to get said job security clause? If successful, the legal precedent would be astonishing where those very neigh sayers thanking their lucky stars! I hope they don't have to go through what the QF boys and girls are enduring at the moment however a bit of perspective is needed.

Food for thought...

Fuel-Off :ok:

[Angle of Attack]

Companies pay each worker the lowest rate they can to secure their services, this often means coworkers can have as much as $10k difference in pay rates based on nothing more than a persons willingness to accept $10k less

Well thats the Employees tough luck, as they obviously have not joined a union, you can go it alone if you wish but you will get sucky conditions..

So please tell me why I should support the cause of pilots in this country?

You don't have to and no one really cares mate

Its not about Job security it is about Qantas planes Qantas pilots nothing more, now maybe you should go back to your desk boy, come and see me in 10 years when you turn 21!

[Ixixly]

I'm not a Qantas Pilot, i'm just a lowly GA Pilot, heck my ambitions aren't even to go to Qantas, personally I'd much rather fly for someone like the RFDS.

But I think I might be able to answer your question.

"What makes QFs pilots uniquely entitled to job security in an economy where no other worker has that?"

Nothing, is probably the best answer. Nothing makes them Uniquely entitled to "Job Security" as you've put it, even if that was entirely was this stoush is over, and once again, not being a Qantas Employee I won't directly argue on what the whole point is. But the fact that they are fighting for what they want is something that all Employees can do, but have chosen not to.

There is so much talk about how Unions are evil and are causing too many problems. In my mind the Unions are fantastic, i'm a Member of the AFAP, purely because of the peace of mind it gives me. Like the majority of GA Pilots out there, my bosses are continually trying to underpay me, its nothing new. So having a Union to be able to call on and gain advice on what can be done so that i'm getting what i'm entitled to according to the Air Pilots Award empowers me in a way. It means that unlike quite a few other GA Pilots out there who simply put up with it, get their Hours and get out and hope the next mob will be better, I can still get my Hours, get what i'm owed and if they should choose to disadvantage me because I simply ask what they promised me when they said i'll be paid according to the Award, the AFAP can help me deal with that as well!!

In my Mind, if more people were part of Unions this might be less of an issue with Employers who feel they can rip off their Employees as the Employees can stand together as a group and not feel afraid to comeforth with their complaints or problems for fear of being "Dealt with" by Management looking to make a point.

Personally i've found this to be an incredibly big problem in GA, a lot of Pilots accepting sub-standard treatment because of the efforts they went to to get that First job and not wanting to lose it by putting their neck on the line because they feel they'd be doing so alone.

Don't get me wrong, i'm not someone who lives beyond their means, I don't take Money for things I feel I have not earnt, but I damned well want to make sure i'm getting what i'm owed, no more, no less.

I also feel this situation with Qantas has far more ramifications as others have pointed out. What happens if the Unions are smashed down? I get the feeling that a lot of CEOs will take this as a precedent and start doing the same with no fear and this will cause much larger problems. Whats the point of dirt cheap products when the number of un-employed rises dramatically due to outsourcing in a number of industries and no one has any money to spend in the first place?! What happens when all these people who are un-employed start taking the dole and start training the Governments Coffers?

As I said, i'm only a Lowly GA Pilot and still young, but I fear that this is where the world is heading and that it has already caused many problems. Maybe i'm wrong, i'm not too big headed that I couldn't admit it, but for now, with what I know, thats how I feel and is my opinion based on that information.

[Explicitus]

Personally, when I'm sitting at the back of the aircraft I'm not happy to think that those up front are anyone who has managed to get an ATPL. I want them to be way overqualified. I want even the Second Officers to all have real command experience and have actually been through the wringer a few times and have demonstrably handled the pressure. There are plenty of other pilots who could no doubt operate the aircraft; but I want more.
To do that, the conditions for the pilots have to be good enough to get good, experienced pilots to apply.
My father was a slaughterman, and he was perfectly capable of neatly removing a spleen. I'm sure if asked to do any number of operations he could have managed it. If someone is cutting me open, however, I want it to be the smartest person they could find for the job - not just someone who could manage to do it. Being a surgeon is a very good wicket, and they get very smart people doing it, and I am very happy about that.
There are plenty of people who could manage to do the job. I prefer it to be done by a select group out of the set of people who could do it, and to be sure to get them, they have to be well paid.

[Arnold E]

I can assure you, that you are not wrong, good to see a young person standing up for themselves and there work mates. Well done that man.:ok::ok::ok:

[LT Selfridge]

AS,

Let me spell something out. The boss wants a slave (but without room and board). The employee wants what the boss gets. Somewhere in the middle is a situation which satisfies neither party but can be lived with by both.

In a globalised economy there are two ways for an employee to secure their situation. The first is by being an agent for the boss in the undercutting of his workmates. The second is by teaming up with his fellow workers to push for the industrial sweet spot described in the first paragraph.

[QUOTE]And of course I got made redundant because I'm talentless and a fool./QUOTE]

[QUOTE]I'd wish you good luck but thanks to Selfridges post I no longer feel any moral obligation to care./QUOTE]

For Buddah's sake pull yourself together man.

A few more Ixixlys in the world please.

[Keg]

If you want massive public support then perhaps not attacking anyone who asks you about your cause would be a way to go...

The problem is that rather than ask the question, you start from some very flawed premises that show how little you understand aviation, what it involves to get into an airline, what it takes to stay in an airline, and what the pilots are asking for. Rather than simply ask why do pilots get J class travel, you start from your flawed default position that it's inappropriate for them to get it. Rather than ask why pilots stay in nice hotels or have mandatory rest periods you start from your flawed default position that 'I have to fly all night and work all day the next day, why shouldn't pilots'.

So let's stop kidding ourselves that you lobbed on here wanting to find out what the claims are, the reality is that you wanted to have a rant because you feel the pilots get something that you don't. You don't like it and despite the fact that you know nothing of our industry, our work or what it entails, and our claims, you want to believe that we don't 'deserve' it.

Dutch roll has probably covered off the issues. Our 'job security' claim is that if Qantas are going to trade on being the worlds 'most experienced airline' then it's only right that they continue to use the pilots that made it thus. Qantas flight, Qantas pilot is what we've asked for.

Travel claim? I spend 2/3 of my life away for home. Once upon a time I had 1-2 seats on every flight that I could use so that I could have my spouse or one of my kids with me at Christmas. They wer uncomfortable but if the cabin was full, they could still travel. Due to some terrorists I o longer have that. Pilots are asking for the ability to ensure that a month prior, if there is a seat available, I won't have to worry about leaving my 11 year old in Darwin on her own because I've taken her away on her birthday due to not having physically seen her on her birthday for the preceding four years. Kids tend to remember these things.

Seniority lists are a double edged sword. They allow an orderly line to allow people to attempt promotion and to ensure transparency- particularly given merit is hard to measure in an airline environment. You still have to complete the training and I can't comment for other airlines command training but command training was harder by a significant margin than my bachelor degree. However, seniority chains you to an employer because despite my three years command experience, I start as the most junior F/O were I to go to Virgin.

Qantas too can off shore our work and make us redundant. In that respect we are no different to you. Personally I think that's a backward step for Qantas flight standards and would ultimately be the undoing of an aviation icon. Joyce et al have shown they don't care about standards and so perhaps your wish of a bunch of Qantas pilots being made redundant may come true. However, given how much I love Qantas and everyone it (used to) stand for, you'll excuse me for fighting to retain the high standards that most Aussies want to retain in Qantas aircraft.

Hope that answers some of your questions.

[Captain Gidday]

Airborne Soon said :

Just as I thought. No-one willing to articulate their claims in a way that's convincing or understandable but plenty of people willing to belittle and be nasty.

I'm really disappointed that so many people, even some Qantas pilots apparently, are falling for the Qantas PR Machine "It's all about job security" line. It's not. Let me take a stab at putting it clearly and simply.

Let's say Qantas sold seafood. Qantas says 'buy our seafood because it is caught by good Australian fisherman in Australian trawlers, complying with all Australian regulations'. So, you believe that and go and buy your fish from Qantas.

Then the Trawlermen try to tell you, 'Hey, wait a minute, some of those fish you are buying are from fish farms and some of them soon enough will be coming from rice paddies in Vietnam'.

The fishermen say, if it's got Qantas Australian Wild Caught Fish on the label, then you should be 100% assured [just like under the fair trading laws] that your fish is caught by genuine Australian fishermen, in Australian waters. Otherwise, Qantas, label your damned fish 'Raised in Fish Farms' or 'Produce of New Zealand'. Or if you are too :mad: to put proper labels on, Qantas, Aussie Trawlermen insist that at least you pay those fish farming folk the same wages as Aussie Trawlermen, so that you might then have no incentive to be 'clever' [I don't think I can use the 'de' word, for legal reasons] and you'll have no incentive to take the cheap and morally uncertain option of labelling all your fish sold under the Qantas brand the same.

Look, the Aussie Trawler Fisherman don't really care if Qantas chooses to bring out a canned product using farmed fish or imported fish, just so long as it is properly labelled. But people buying product A are currently getting product B or C, in the opinion of the Trawlermen.

That's what it is all about. [Just my own opinion, not an AIPA announcement]. I am using the term '..man' in it's wider form, as in 'hu.man'. If you are gender sensitive, please replace with the gender-neutral word 'folk' as required.

P.S. The Trawlermen know that their fishing skills are in high demand in other places, and if the big Qantas Fish Retailer denigrates them much further, they'll all take their trawlers to the Gulf, where prawns are plentiful and they can make a good living, tax free. The Aussie consumer will find it hard to find wild caught Aussie fish if that happens, in my opinion, though most seem not to care or even to know what good fish tastes like. Just so long as it is cheap.

[chuboy]

AirborneSoon's questions are validly directed at engineers also.

Would they care to answer?

[teresa green]

Why should you ask, in a country as rich and diverse as this one, is no one entitled to job security? Without job security, who wants to take on a mortgage? Who wants to risk having kids? You come out of school all bright eyed and bushy tailed, ready to take on the world, you are one of the lucky ones, born and bred in this country that has so much to offer, and yet you are not entitled to job security? Bull****. The question should be why in the lucky country is that people should be afraid for their jobs, not that they are not entitled to think they should have job security. Of course they should, Australia is forging ahead in the world, despite a govt. that is as useless as t#ts on a bull, but forging ahead anyway, its people are rich in so many ways, it amazes me that people still think that there is no job security, nor should there be, even in a airline that has been :mad: for the last ten years by firstly Dixon and now this bloke, it is still a very viable airline, and could and should offer job security especially to those it has heavily invested in, namely pilots and engineers, the fact that it cannot or won't shows the problem lies with the management of the airline, not the unfortunates that it seeks to destroy.

[doubledub]

AS, your post summarises some of the worst aspects of industrial relations in this country, yet you criticise pilots for taking a stand against the deterioration of working conditions. The fact that the education costs and despicable work practices you have experienced are widespread does not make them fair, or right. The pilot body, and other unions, should be commended for taking a stand in their employment negotiations. If you had some b@lls, maybe you'd stand up for yourself too and you wouldn't be the bitter, envious individual that you appear to be.

And by the way, most Australian pilots pay significantly more than $60k for their training, and for the majority, a $36k/year pay cheque upon completion of training is like hitting the jackpot. Your woe is me attitude is not very endearing.

[Arnold E]

AirborneSoon's questions are validly directed at engineers also.

Would they care to answer?

Ask specific questions and I am sure you will get specific answers

[Sunfish]

AIrbornesoon:

What makes QFs pilots uniquely entitled to job security in an economy where no other worker has that? Now before you go on about saving lives and your $100k investment in self education let me enlighten you about working conditions or non-aviation Australia.


The simple answer is risk and return. There is only one employer of B747 and A380 pilots in Australia as far as I know, and if you don't work for them you don't work at all. When you consider that there is at least a Ten year apprenticeship to get to the controls, you are making a very serious investment of your working life, perhaps a quarter of it, in support of your goal.

If you are a simple plumber or electrician, you can choose from thousands of jobs with multiple employers, not so the highly specialised employee.

From a management perspective Qantas is being stupid. They invest considerable sums in the recruitment, selection, training and maintenance of very skilled pilots - then they turn a round, tell them there is no job security; thereby inviting them to consider taking their skills to an employer offering better career prospects.

This, as well as their calculated offensiveness towards their engineering workforce, is going to bite Qantas very, very hard in future. Loyalty is a Two way street as any manager who has seen a prized employee walk out the door will tell you.


From your point of view soontobeairborne, I would stick with flying C172's. There are always plenty of low skilled jobs.

[FGD135]

Ask specific questions and I am sure you will get specific answers

Ha!

The original poster asked a very specific question. That question was:


What makes QFs pilots uniquely entitled to job security in an economy where no other worker has that?

Was it answered?

Several QF pilots pretended to answer it, but did not.

It was answered, correctly, twelve posts later, by a non QF pilot (the poster Ixixly). His answer was "nothing".

muffman (another non QF pilot) gave the next closest thing to an answer via his quaint assertion that the unions were merely "asking" for job security! The reality is that they are going way beyond merely asking.

How about these "answers" from actual QF pilots:

From Tuner 2:

Your entire post demonstrates you do not actually understand ...
FAIL.

From DutchRoll:

You don't really understand the particular pilot claim, do you?
FAIL.

A few other QF pilots said that the "job security" was really about QF flights being flown by QF pilots, but this is not what the "job security" stuff is actually about, and they know it. They push this line because it has some (limited) appeal to the Australian public.

What the "job security" claims are really about:

Getting Qantas to pay all pilots the same rates as the mainline pilots. If Qantas were bound to this condition, then there would be no need to utilise cheaper "off shore" pilots to fly their aircraft. Hence, the derived "job security".

Can Qantas afford to do this? Of course not. As a business, Qantas is a basketcase. They made a profit of $500 million recently, and the unions think this is a lot of money, but in reality the profit margin was razor thin (about 1.6%).

A number of posters seem to think they are better off because they are in a union. To those posters I urge you to realise that your union will, more often than not, put you out of a job.

Unions have their place (given the right circumstances), but give them enough time and they will destroy the jobs of their members. We may be about to be reminded of that in this case.

I too have a question for you. Please actually answer it.

Do you seriously believe your job security will be enhanced if your demands are met?

[OhSpareMe]

What the "job security" claims are really about:

Getting Qantas to pay all pilots the same rates as the mainline pilots. If Qantas were bound to this condition, then there would be no need to utilise cheaper "off shore" pilots to fly their aircraft. Hence, the derived "job security".

Sorry. FAIL. That is not R not what this is about. That is how QANTAS spins the argument (they want us to pay Jetstar the same as QF) but it is not in reality what our claim is about.

Once more for the dummies - we are not asking QANTAS to guarantee our jobs. We just want a QANTAS Flight/QANTAS Pilot clause in our agreement and we have offered serious offsets and/or efficiencies to achieve that. All have which, to date, been refused.

[oicur12.again]

“QANTAS Flight/QANTAS Pilot”

I am interested to know what the opposite would look like. Has there been a suggestion that Qantas is considering crewing QAL aircraft with contract pilots?

In the discussions thus far, has there been an indication at all that QAL aircraft will be crewed by anything other than a Qantas pilot?

How has this been worded? Where did the information come from? Who will the pilots be?

[4Greens]

Qantas has never had a passenger killed in the jet age - try to find another airline that can say that.

Quality of Pilots, maintenance etc , etc is the reason. This is being eroded.

Next ??

[Zapatas Blood]

Air Lanka
Aerlingus
Hawaiian
Virgin America/Blue/Atlantic
Jetblue
Jetstar
America West

These come to mind without much trouble. Want more, I could do some research if you like? There are plenty.

You would be very foolish to think you provide something to QF that others cannot provide.

[Kelly Slater]

AirborneSoon, please don't become airborne any time soon.

[DJ737]

try to find another airline that can say that.

Just about every major low-cost airline currently operating. :E

[Tankengine]

Yet......................................................... .............................................

[Keith Myath]

Captain Gidday

Let's say Qantas sold seafood. Qantas says 'buy our seafood because it is caught by good Australian fisherman in Australian trawlers, complying with all Australian regulations'. So, you believe that and go and buy your fish from Qantas.

Then the Trawlermen try to tell you, 'Hey, wait a minute, some of those fish you are buying are from fish farms and some of them soon enough will be coming from rice paddies in Vietnam'.

The fishermen say, if it's got Qantas Australian Wild Caught Fish on the label, then you should be 100% assured [just like under the fair trading laws] that your fish is caught by genuine Australian fishermen, in Australian waters. ..........

Look, the Aussie Trawler Fisherman don't really care if Qantas chooses to bring out a canned product using farmed fish or imported fish, just so long as it is properly labelled. But people buying product A are currently getting product B or C, in the opinion of the Trawlermen.




Are you saying that it is OK if Jetstar continue to expand as long as the public are clear that they are buying a ticket on a Jetstar Aircraft? What is your opinion on codeshare? Should Qantas be a part of the Oneword Alliance? Last time I checked, when you buy a ticket through the Qantas website, it says operated by Jetconnect, Jetstar or Air France et al.

Does your “Qantas Flight, Qantas Pilot” allow Qantas to sell tickets on other codeshare partner airlines or are you saying that they can only sell tickets on Qantas mainline flights only?

[muffman]

These questions are directed at someone familiar with the detail of AIPA's claim. I am trying to better understand their claim and decode the true meaning of Qantas's rebuttal.

- What effect will the job security clause have on current Jetconnect operations?
- What effect will the job security clause have on current Jetstar operations?
- What effect will the job security clause have on current QantasLink (all operators) operations?
- What effect will the job security clause have on current EFA operations?

[Capt Kremin]

Jetconnect, because they fly QF branded aircraft dressed as Qantas pilots, would be paid as per the applicable QF EBA. Whether or not this means QF would no longer employ them, no one really knows.

Jetstar pilots don't fly Qantas branded aircraft, so unless they start flying flights with the primary call sign as Qantas xxx, then there would be no effect. If they do then see above.

[Capt Kremin]

Qantas link.. No effect.

EFA see for Jetconnect

[Talkwrench]

Airbornesoon

What makes QFs pilots uniquely entitled to job security in an economy where no other worker has that?

AFAIK:

QFpilots (and engineers for that matter) are only entitled to job security where the appropriate clauses are included in their binding EBA's.

Thankfully, QF pilots, engineers and any other employee covered by an EBA in this country are entitled and have the right to discuss and negotiate to have job security clauses included in an EBA.

I feel sorry for you that employees in your chosen field are apparently unable to industrially organise in the pursuit of improved conditions of employment. Things sound pretty ordinary for you.

QF pilots and engineers have been able to effectively organise via their associations and by endorsement of the majority of their members to negotiate and utilise all legal tools to achieve a satisfactory outcome to their EBA negotiations. That's it.

[rh200]

I feel sorry for you that employees in your chosen field are apparently unable to industrially organise in the pursuit of improved conditions of employment. Things sound pretty ordinary for you.

Why would we want to "industrially organise", in our field, things where so much better when we got rid of the unions. Management was more at ease, had flexibility, and where that sh!t scared of the unions making a come back that they make sure that we stay ahead in terms and conditions.

So there's no jobs for life, you make your self be employable and its not an issue.

[fatmike]

Jetstar pilots don't fly Qantas branded aircraft, so unless they start flying flights with the primary call sign as Qantas xxx, then there would be no effect.

Kremin, I don't think you are correct. I think you will find that any flight which is part of the Qantas Group with a Qantas codeshare flight number on it gets caught the same way Jetconnect and EFA do. The Atlas 747 freighters get caught as they use Qantas call signs as do Cobham B717's for Qantas link. Nearly all Jetstar flights have a Qantas codeshare on them. It can be either.
You need your AIPA insider to give explain to you the definition of a Qantas flight. I've had it explained to me. Better still get a copy and read it yourself.

[Talkwrench]

rh200:

Why would we want to "industrially organise", in our field, things where so much better when we got rid of the unions.

erm, sorry rh200, I was actually responding to AirborneSoon's initial post. His/Her statements about His/Her experience "As An Australian Worker" do indeed sound pretty ordinary to me and, in my view, in need of improvement.

In response to your post, I can only agree wholeheartedly with you. If things are hunky dory in your field (as opposed to AirborneSoon's field) without the input of unions, I can only say good on yer! You're saving yourself annual union dues to boot! You're on a good thing.

Simple fact is, if employees are happy and looked after, unions wont penetrate.

[InTheWeeds]

I spend 2/3 of my life away for home. Once upon a time I had 1-2 seats on every flight that I could use so that I could have my spouse or one of my kids with me at Christmas.

Really? Seeing as though all I hear is QF pilots crying how tough they have it I want to put this in to perspective, and have you look in to my world.

I spend about 9-10 months away per year up to six month at a time. My spouse and son can't come an visit me over chistmas because no one wants their family in a conflict area. My wife gets to worry every time she sees the news.

I just watched a mate buried the other day because an "ally" shot him on parade. One of three good mates I have lost in Afghanistan.

When you go away you are safe in the knowledge that if you crash you are met by emergency services, people who want to help you. We have to extract ourselves from the wreckage and evade until rescue. If you don't get killed in the initial firefight then you can look forward to getting your head sawn off on aljazeera. All this for just under six figures.

When not overseas we can look forward to some annual leave...Bearing in mind that Christmas is disaster season - floods, cyclones and bushfires all get our leave cancelled quick smart - and takes us away from our families.

So forgive me if I don't lobby my local member or fly the "poor Qantas pilots" flag. You are like every other Australian worker. If someone can do your job cheaper then you get the chop - isn't the free market a bitch.


You don't have to and no one really cares mate


No one does mate...the Nation is over it.

[-438]

I didn't know national service was compulsory in Australia.

[OhSpareMe]

So forgive me if I don't lobby my local member or fly the "poor Qantas pilots" flag.

That's OK mate. We understand. Really we do.:D

No one does mate...the Nation is over it

They (we) certainly are, and have been since our committment to the nonsense that started in 2003. Perhaps we should outsource our military committment? Might be cheaper in the long run. Just a thought.

[Talkwrench]

InTheWeeds:

If someone can do your job cheaper then you get the chop - isn't the free market a bitch.



AFAIK you can sack an employee for a number of reasons but I'm pretty sure you can't sack an employee for the purpose of employing someone else to do their job for a cheaper rate. I think that could be possibly considered as unfair dismissal.

PS: Utmost respect to the Australian military personnel serving in Afghanistan and elsewhere around the world. They do a job I couldn't do and I'm grateful for their efforts.

[S70IP]

I didn't know national service was compulsory in Australia.

No one has a gun to your head either. F%$kstick

[Long Bay Mauler]

I think Airbornesoon is a wannabe sandwich chucker, and if he/she does now work in the industry, he/she is most likely with VA. I understand his/her animosity towards Qantas, as it seems that he/she wasn't even up to scratch for JQ.


4th Mar 2008, 13:55 #187 (permalink)
AirborneSoon

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 276
Attended a Jetstar Assessment day
Attended an assessment day. The session had very few applicants, about half as many as their were seats in the room. Almost none of them were local and had flown interstate for the day. I hope they went better than me because it cost them all a fortune to be there.

The presentation on Jetstar was about 2 mins long and contained no useful information about the position or the company. All they told us was that no matter which division you apply for (short or long haul) you'll probably have to work both. No mention of pay or conditions etc....I really wonder why Australian businesses decide to only let you know what you are applying for after they offer you the job. It seems a ridiculous practice. The good news for wannabees is that they will probably be recruiting constantly until 2010 with their ambitious fleet orders. So if you want it, there will be plenty of opportunities to do so.

They basically said they were desperate for staff and hoped we would all be called back. No call by a certain time that day, you can assume they don't want you. So I'm disappointed I didn't get a call back. I did my research, turned out in a business suit, appropriate hair, makeup the lot. I can now look forward to the next round of Qantas and VB recruitment I suppose.

Met a guy today who had already had 6 airline knockbacks so it helps me to take this one on the chin.


To be blunt, this industrial action is not an episode of Survivor, so really, who gives a proverbial what the public think. This is a dispute between an employer and employees. The public are not voting on our agreements, we are. I think you will find a lot of the negative, wind up merchants here, are those who have been knocked back by QF in the past, and therefore feel they can speak with authority on the subject of industrial relations at QF. Well let me tell you something for nothing, I don't really give a stuff about what your opinion is, as you don't pay my wage, and have no consequence over the matter. And since you have no input, and won't be voting on a 0055 number, just quietly, get lost champ.

[InTheWeeds]

Perhaps we should outsource our military committment? Might be cheaper in the long run. Just a thought.

Good luck with that chops... tell me how it goes.


I didn't know national service was compulsory in Australia.


And working for Qantas is? Spare me...

[Gnadenburg]

InTheWeeds

Poor form.You knew what you signed up for and comparing military service to an industrial campaign naive. Because one day, you may be fighting Veteran's Affairs for what you think is a fair go when the public has long ago not given a stuff.

[QF94]

Air Lanka
Aerlingus
Hawaiian
Virgin America/Blue/Atlantic
Jetblue
Jetstar
America West

These come to mind without much trouble. Want more, I could do some research if you like? There are plenty.

You would be very foolish to think you provide something to QF that others cannot provide.

Zapatas Blood

Aerlingus - 15 April 1936. First jet 14 December 1960.
Hawaiian - January 30 1929, became officially known as Hawaiian October 1 1941. First het 1966
Virgin Atlantic - 22 June 1984. Virgin Blue - 2000.
Jet Blue - Founded February 1999
Jetstar - May 2004
America West - established February 1981. First flew August 1983

DJ737

Just about every major low-cost airline currently operating. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/evil.gif

QANTAS has been around since November 16, 1920 and first entered the jet age in 1959.

On all counts, it has a much better reputation than the other airlines and is well renowned for its safety in the air. It has been around much longer, operates much more aircraft over many more miles than all the low-cost airlines.

For all the anti-QANTAS people out there, you won't be happy until you see the demise of this company. Hopefully, QANTAS will remain a thorn in your side for a long time to come, and the pilots and engineers continue to be paid what they deserve.

Maybe that's why those outside of QANTAS get paid what they deserve. Low-cost pay for low-cost employees. You get what you "bargain for" and what you're worth.

[InTheWeeds]

Gnadenburg InTheWeeds

Poor form.You knew what you signed up for and comparing military service to an industrial campaign naive.


Poor form? Naive? Get ****** mate. I had to watch three Australian Soldiers who sacrificed everything for their nation play second fiddle to this garbage. The CDF's media conference got turned into a "what's happening with Qantas." Don't tell me about poor form ********.

Yeah I knew EXACTLY what I signed up for, I'm not complaining - I love my career. I'm just adding some perspective to the bleeting.

[Fatguyinalittlecoat]

In the Weeds.

I, and every other Australian are thankful for the work our military is doing.

But be careful who you aim at:

The CDF's media conference got turned into a "what's happening with Qantas.

That had nothing to do with the pilots. The media did that.

[InTheWeeds]

Yep. That had nothing to do with the pilots what so ever.

I was just pointing out what REAL poor form looks like..

[-438]

InTheWeeds, I also could never contemplate doing what you do.
I have the utmost respect for what you do.
I am not involved in this current Qantas fiasco.
I would also say that most people who have been involved in Aviation for a period of time have lost close friends to aviation. I have lost 3 very goods friends to Aviation accidents.
People outside the negotiations (possibly) come on to this website asking loaded questions. People respond. Not all who respond are who they say they are.

[Gnadenburg]

Nope. Move away from this. Plenty of old blokes got two bob a day for killing Japs and Germans and were free to be involved in post-war industrial campaigns.

No disrespect to those serving but it doesn't belong here.

[havick]

Quote:
Perhaps we should outsource our military committment? Might be cheaper in the long run. Just a thought.

Good luck with that chops... tell me how it goes.


Are blue suiters really doing that bad of a job (in the training arena anyway) at the moment? Just thinking out loud here, there's CHC in Timor, Toll in the Solomons, host of other blue suiter companies contracted by other countries in conflict areas.

Now personally I don't think it's the best idea to have contractors in conflict areas however it is being done around the world with varying degrees of success. I wouldn't be giving any politicians any ideas, be careful what you wish for.

I agree with Gnadenburg.. The comparisons you're making don't belong in this thread.

[InTheWeeds]

Timor and the Solomons are low level peace keeping. Not warlike operations. Training is training. I will go out on a limb and say we will never see the pointy end of the ADF out sourced to the likes of blackwater.

We will always need a defence force... :ok:

[Oakape]

Another thread about to be locked, as it runs off the runway into the dirt. :ugh:

[Keg]

I spend about 9-10 months away per year up to six month at a time. My spouse and son can't come an visit me over chistmas because no one wants their family in a conflict area. My wife gets to worry every time she sees the news.


More power to you for your service. I've had quite a few friends deploy in recent times- including one at the moment- and I understand the toll deployments take on everyone acquainted with them but particularly the family. I've had the sad privilege of seeing a great gal respond with courage and dedication after she buried her husband a couple of years back. I smile every time I see the two year old who will never meet his Dad and think what a wonderful legacy he is of his Dad and what great job his Mum is doing with him and his older two siblings. I also understand that for many (most? ) ADF personnel, deployments are not a regular thing.

With that on the table, I don't think it's a valid comparison to get into the whole lifestyle/ deployment discussion because they are very different things. I know too that a number of QF contributors on this thread have first hand knowledge of both the military lifestyle (and possibly deployments also) but they still understand the significance of the airline pilot lifestyle and advocate the the action that the pilots are taking.

It it shameful that the sacrifice of three of our diggers was put to the back page by the immoral and narcissistic actions of QF's CEO? You bet. It's a tragedy that those sacrifices continue to be largely just a foot note to the day to day media cycle. However as others point out, if you're taking out your frustrations on the Qantas pilots then you're targeting the wrong people. I often make a PA during extended delays for passengers to not take their frustrations out of the cabin crew but to leave them for me when they disembark. I make that PA to remind people that it's not the cabin crew's fault that we're delayed and to be an adult about it. I've never had anyone have a shot at me. Perhaps the same applies to you with this particular gripe?

Finally, it's just a tad unsporting to pluck a comment out of context and attacking it without understanding what it was the comment was responding to in the first instance. That's OK, it seems to be par for the course on PPRUNE these days. If you're in AO then I can understand why you may not have the time, effort or energy to fully work through the issues.

[havick]

Timor and the Solomons are low level peace keeping. Not warlike operations. Training is training. I will go out on a limb and say we will never see the pointy end of the ADF out sourced to the likes of blackwater.

We will always need a defence force...

I agree, no arguments from me. Your whole comparison doesn't belong here though. You're not comparing apples with apples.

[mohikan]

In the weeds.

You are massively out of line here champ.

There is no relation to what QF pilots are asking for and the fact that 32 and 209 have given their all in Oruzgan and Shah Wali Kot.

Furthermore, it might come as a shock to you to know that quite a number of QF pilots have, without carrying on about it, taken substantial periods of LOA since 2001 to serve on operations overseas. I am not just talking about the RAAF here either.

One individual from Randwick spent 7 months in country last year right up the tip of the spear. Keg will know who I am talking about. If memory serves me correctly this was not his first deployment either.

I bet if your mates from MTF / CTU knew about the crap you were writing on this forum they would be horrified.

The final, and most salient point is that we are not asking for Job Security we are asking for a Scope Clause. There is a major difference and by Qantas's own numbers we have offered 22% of cost efficiencies as an offset.

If you dont understand what a scope clause is the google is your friend. Either way your arguments have no place in this thread.

[fatmike]

Mohikan

The final, and most salient point is that we are not asking for Job Security we are asking for a Scope Clause.,

And that is why the whole thing is a sorry mess. It is illegal to have a Scope clause in an Enterprise Agreement in Australia so the next closest thing to it is a Job security clause which is legal except that it doesn't apply to pilots who are worried about the offshoring of their jobs and LAME's who are worried about maintenance being off-shored. It does apply to bagsnatchers who are worried about their jobs being transferred to lower paid contractors. If you don't believe me ask AIPA legal, I did and that's what they told me.

[InTheWeeds]

There is no relation to what QF pilots are asking for and the fact that 32 and 209 have given their all in Oruzgan and Shah Wali Kot.

Never said that mate, my point is that when you are having a sook about how tough you have it think about those who are doing it tougher... For less. My initial comment was in response to:

Quote:
I spend 2/3 of my life away for home. Once upon a time I had 1-2 seats on every flight that I could use so that I could have my spouse or one of my kids with me at Christmas.


This whole i a QF pilot... Woe is me apprach is getting a little old, I think that some people need a reality check....

I bet if your mates from MTF / CTU knew about the crap you were writing on this forum they would be horrified.

Horrified, really? I don't think so mate. Try again...