All Qantas Short Haul and Jetstar Pilots

[ROH111]

You all need to re read Carla's email:

"A key part of the cost reductions across the business is the minimum 18 month wage freeze with all employees have accepted (cough) or WILL BE ASKED TO ACCEPT........."

Ask...

That's all they are doing. Asking.

95% is the answer. Keep it the answer! It only goes to their pocket if you accept. Not the company, not a charity but to someone who would earn my annual salary in 4 weeks!!

[Angle of Attack]

I agree and feel the mood swinging in Shorthaul, a lot are now going to reject any offer with a pay freeze, or if there is a pay freeze some incentive bonus in the future when trading terms look good, which looks like it's happening already..

[Oakape]

Don't EBA's generally have any pay increases annually? If that is the case with yours, why don't you offer a pay freeze for 12 months instead of 18 months as a negotiated compromise. If Management buy this, they can crow that they have some sort of pay freeze in place & pat themselves on the back & the troops will have no difference to what they would have had anyway. Might just be silly enough to work!

[Oakape]

or if there is a pay freeze some incentive bonus in the future when trading terms look good, which looks like it's happening already..

As far as I'm aware, every airline that has offered an incentive in the future for a pay freeze or a return to original pay after a pay cut, once they have returned to better trading conditions, has reneged. Be very careful about going down this road!

[hotnhigh]

The hypocrisy about this relates directly to the examples shown by senior executives themselves.
As they continue to demand a pay freeze, they fail to mention the amount of bonus shares they are entitled to under the long term investment plan.
Lets not for a minute think that the airlines results haven't been structured in a way to guarantee a success when it comes to achieving their bonuses.
The qantas annual report talks about the number of shares in the scheme, one has to wonder why the scheme has been loaded in a way since Nov 12 and beyond with upward of 25 million shares. Why???:mad:
And the arrogance of these people who think that it's fine not to acknowledge the schemes existence until challenge by some of the unions.
And then for Joyce to suggest that if pilots wanted a piece of the abhorrent scheme, they need a 30% base cut in their pay!:mad::mad:
How about this one for all of us including Alan and every other senior executive in the joint, everyone gets paid a salary, no bonuses, and if you don't like it, well F^%% off!:mad::mad::mad:
Finally, every pilot in the group needs it to last longer than four years, that's why they need a future. The current awards, qantas and jestar, provide no security.
Security isn't an issue I suppose if you have your nose in the long term investment trough. Oink Oink.

[neville_nobody]

Yeah it's just what one of the US carriers did post 9-11(either united or american, can't remember) Went out to the staff crying poor, got all sorts of concessions and pay freezes then the executives absolutely cleaned up on the bonuses in an airline that was basically bankrupt.

Nothing new in the QF strategy that's for sure.

[Willie Nelson]

After 9/11, some US Airlines went in to Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection as they were deemed too big to fail, as a result they received almost unrestricted exemptions to US fair work law equivalents. This has left many US pilots on food stamp eligible pay. (Colgan Air Q400 being the classic example)

Australia is a different market:

1) As much as nobody would like it, no part of the Qantas group is too big to fail. The Virgin group would pick up the slack, as was demonstrated following the collapse of Ansett. (albeit with Qantas and Impulse)

2) Despite last years results and rubbish return on equity, the Qantas group is a long way from going under,

3) Neither side of Australian politics is likely to give blanket exemptions to workplace laws due to "tough times" within the Qantas Group when it has been clearly established by the senate enquiry that many of the Qantas Groups poor results were arguably self inflicted. Hence no taxpayer funded line of credit. Regardless of your thoughts on this government, Joe Hockey has already flagged an "end to corporate welfare" specifically in relation to matters such as Qantas.

4) The post 9/11 problems that have characterised the U.S. Airline industry still permeate today as these marginal terms and conditions still apply and better managed organisations are forced to compete with carriers that, notwithstanding food stamp wages, would otherwise be deemed unprofitable and ultimately forced to go under.

Almost none of these circumstances apply in Australia at this point in time, despite AJ's desire for it to appear so. QF pilots have already demonstrated that post 9/11 and post SARS they will always sit down and talk about helping out their employer in the event of an actual crisis.

In the mean time however AJ can get his backside down at the negotiating table and negotiate in good faith.

[pig dog]

Where has the "18 month pay freeze" mantra come from anyway! The original statement from Joyce at the announcement made on February 28th this year was that all open negotiations would include a pay freeze from that date until qantas returned to profitability. It has already been announced that all business units are already profitable and have been for a number of months now. Joyce has already been heralding the "amazing" business turnaround. I do not accept that a pay freeze is required in light of the management incentive plans being handed out, however if one is to be had, surely it will be in line with our illustrious CEO's stated agenda, from Feb 28 until a return to profitability (sometime around April or May by my reckoning!).

[Keg]

The 18 month timing came in when they realised that they were going to be in profit when all the EBAs opened up at the end of this year. Or is that too cynical? :ok::} :E

[lotsta]

Is it actually an 18 month pay freeze if the pay rises are 3% or averaged at 2.3%?. No. But don't let that stop the experts on here making an argument that it is.:sad:

[theheadmaster]

If the choice is conspiricy or stuffup, take stuffup!

If you think about it, the original policy was unworkable. If you don't know how long it will be until profit, how long do you make the EA? What do you bargain for if there are no pay rises on offer? The answer is there could be no agreement because bargaining representatives are hardly going to trade anything away for a zero pay rise policy. So, it quickly became apparent that the original policy was going to be a complete failure ending up with open negotiations and being exposed to industrial action. There were other problems, but I think these were the main ones.

[theheadmaster]

lotsa, why does it have to be one or the other? It could be both.

[lotsta]

Bingo headmaster!

The only error in your post is beginning with "if you think about it". This is PPRUNE. That doesn't really happen much.

[Angle of Attack]

A pay freeze for 18 months is far worse than an average 2.3% over 5 years, because unless you blow your salary each week, you are losing investment power. A pay freeze for 18 months is a massive boon for management, that is why now no one is going to vote for any pay freeze at all.....bring it, PIA is the way forward...

[lotsta]

A pay freeze means your pay is not going up relative to 'something'. That something would logically be CPI. If you aren't getting 3% then yes, you are getting less. But you are not necessarily getting an 18 month pay freeze.

[Derfred]

Well, AJ and everyone else involved is calling it an 18 month pay freeze, so what unique breed of accounting are you drawing upon?

[lotsta]

The one that says it's obviously an 18 month pay freeze compared to 3% annual pay rises but not an 18 month pay freeze compared to current CPI pay rises.

[Flava Saver]

He'll be calling for an 18 month freeze on discretionary fuel uplift after the flight logs I've being seeing. :8

[atlas12]

Well I can say with almost complete certainty that no pilot will be accepting a pay freeze now that Alan and his buddies are handing each other bonuses :ok:

[Derfred]

CPI is not the only measure of inflation. Try AWOTE, or perhaps a different basket of goods such as utilities, school fees, insurance and housing... The big ticket items that measure the inflationary impact on a typical family's budget.

[lotsta]

If you think AWOTE is a measure of inflation then I'd hate to think what marks you got in high school economics. CPI IS a "basket of goods such as utilities, school fees, insurance and housing"... Good lord. No wonder Joyce and co aren't scared of pilots

[Oakape]

Who really cares?! It's all economic mumbo jumbo, with no real relevance to every day life, despite what they would have you believe.

NZ is supposed to have a 'rock star' economy going by the economic indicators. Even Mr Hockey wandered over to take a look. But tell that to the average man on the street who is struggling to put sufficient food on the table, and he'll probably laugh in your face!

[lotsta]

Right.

So if CPI was running at 6%, there would be no pilots on here pointing to CPI and saying we are being ripped off? No, of course not! We would never just use arguments when they suits us and write them off when they don't! :rolleyes:

[Oakape]

You mean like economists, management & politicians do?

[lotsta]

Not sure about that one but if so, then we're all wrong, aren't we? And we might as well just say greed is good and have an all in brawl and see where that gets us.

[Popgun]

What's the word on the street for the revised QF Shorthaul document?

Thumbs up?

Or down, down, down again?

PG

[Derfred]

I'm pretty sure I've read the same books as you but in the words of a famous actor "they're the wrong fcuking books".

CPI does not represent the cost of standard of living.

And for what it's worth, the last 6mths CPI does not represent what a 4 year EBA should be voted on

[lotsta]

I'm pretty sure you haven't and your comment that AWOTE is a measure of inflation makes that clear.

And if "CPI does not represent the cost of standard of living" please tell me what does.

[Derfred]

My god, if you think it does you haven't read any books at all.

[lotsta]

I understand that you are tying to backtrack from your initial posts containing complete garbage and illiteracy. Let's leave it at that :ok:

[Derfred]

Ah, the classic "back-pedalling" trick. I won't point out your spelling mistakes but it is getting late on a Thursday. You have presented that the latest 6mth CPI should persuade employees to accept an 18mth pay freeze on the basis that it isn't really a pay freeze at all because CPI is currently 2.3%. Correct? And I suppose the assumption in your argument will be that CPI will remain at that level for 4 years, correct?

[lotsta]

No. I presented the last 12 months CPI and then made the point that it was below the 3% pay rises on offer when the freeze does not apply. I did that to make the point that it isn't necessarily an '18 month wage freeze' at all and may end up being something less. Then you turned up and tried to say that AWOTE is a measure of inflation, which it is certainly not. Then you also said I should consider a 'basket of goods', which is exactly what CPI is.

It's all been downhill from there :cool:

[Derfred]

The basket of goods that represents CPI is not the basket of goods that costs The average family. There is plenty of evidence of that.

That is why the benchmark pay rise is 3%

That is why an 18mth pay freeze is benchmarked against that.

But you already knew that didn't you?

So you are only here being paid a crap wage by your employer to stir up **** on a chat room for baby sitting dollars, right?

[Australopithecus]

Lotsa, why don't you have a peek at the weighting that the Bureau of Statistics assigns to the various elements of the basket. The official CPI does not accurately reflect the basket that a typical "middle class" family would be concerned about. Education for example. Typically 7% annually, which should be enough to skew the numbers, but it never does because of the small representation in the assumptions and the sample population.

If the true CPI was flat then the reserve bank would have failed in its stated goal to maintain inflation around 3%. Since that has been expressed as national goal, who are we to argue for less than 3%?

[lotsta]

Thanks for the top tips, gents, but I've seen plenty of the CPI basket mix and how it has changed over the years as part of my macro studies at business school. 7% on education may not be what you pay, but it is extremely close to what the average household pays. I guess not everyone chooses to spend their money on expensive private schools? I never said CPI was "flat" so I have no idea why you wrote "If the true CPI was flat..."

As for the RBA target, it's actually 2-3%. not 3%.
RBA: Inflation Target (http://www.rba.gov.au/inflation/inflation-target.html)

Sure, CPI is not perfect. But it's a hell of a lot more relevant than AWOTE if you're going to discuss a pay freeze and its impact.

Derfred, I'd be happy to see your "plenty of evidence" why pay rises are "bench marked" (by who?) against 3%. I guess no one has told Borghetti that in his latest offers to staff!

[newsensation]

another angel to add to the ignore list

[Australopithecus]

No, but you advanced the hypothetical 6% fantasy, my example of "flat" was a counterpoint.

I do indeed pay an average of 7% higher school fees every year. My point is that private education does not appear with sufficient weight in the statistics, and hence the CPI is skewed too low.

Speaking of the basket...how much do energy costs affect the basket? They really only show up as a fraction of the transportation element, yet electricity, and soon gas, are soaring in price.

For the spectators, the following items comprise the basket, but not all have equal weight, nor are any of them sampled or assessed in a manner which would always reflect your actual expenditures.

Food and non-alcoholic beverages
Alcohol and tobacco
Clothing and footwear
Housing
Furnishings, household equipment and services
Health
Transport
Communication
Recreation and culture
Education
Insurance and financial services.



Qantas angels are surging into as many internet sites as they can the past few weeks...Little Alan feeling insecure?

[lotsta]

You guys can call me a qantas angel all you like. Maybe I'm just offering a different view to the pprune group think. I reckon that most intelligent people enjoy having their views challenged every now and then and I've found this discussion useful. Fact is that a number of false statements have been made here: eg, AWOTE is a measure of inflation and the RBA target is a hard 3%. I prefer to deal with facts. At least you have the decency to admit that 7% is not a good education figure for you because you choose to send your kids to expensive schools. I think you will actually find that private schools fees are given appropriate average weight when you consider the tiny cost of public schooling.

Over and out.

[FYSTI]

but it is extremely close to what the average household pays.

With confidence, I can say with >99.0% accuracy that every man & every woman has exactly on average one testicle & one breast.

Does this prove that every man & every woman has one testicle & one breast?

[lotsta]

No it doesn't, but that doesn't make CPI irrelevant either. All your example does is show that some statistics are sometimes not useful to some applications.

What you need to do is prove why CPI is not relevant to average Jetstar pilots. So far the only reasonable argument is that maybe you all send your kids to private schools that increase their fees well above CPI each year and therefore instead of 7%, education should be waited more like 20% or so. That might have the effect of moving it from 2.3% to 2.5%, but quite possibly still well below 3%.

[FYSTI]

That right, the use of statistics, averages in particular can be highly misleading.

The CPI calculations are subject to frequent changes, substitutions and the infamous "hedonic adjustment".

The CPI is typically used by governments and employers as a benchmark for pensions/social security/entitlement & wage adjustments, and therefore have a vested interest in seeing that number as low as possible.

Australia is probably too small a market, but in the US one company, Shadow Stats (https://www.filterbypass.me/anonsurf.php?u=uOr9DFfmcf33bcwUFh5QnsM%2Bh1%2FyQhVbEk6gdNO7% 2FhTCMxJZpTOVSuZqC2YKsRJf7PlKRS2em%2Fg%3D&b=5) has unpicked all these continuous modifications to the official figure, and converted it back to to the mid 1980. Surprise surprise, the official figure is half the actual figure based on previous calculation.

https://www.filterbypass.me/anonsurf.php?u=uOr9DFfmcf33bcwUFh5QnsM%2Bh1%2FyQhVbEk6gdNO7% 2FhTCMxJZpTOVSuZqC2YKsRJf7PlDXTWWnOwmlRbCbis4g%2FD%2FCU1DaNZ aGeR9YeVubdWR72y%2FqxNQk7kj8VTCDI9%2BL3S2AQ%3D%3D&b=5US example:

http://www.shadowstats.com/imgs/sgs-cpi.gif?hl=ad&t=1416499189

Suffice to say, the picture is NOT clear about changes to the cost of living over time for any given household. Probably the best that can be said about the CPI is it measures the change in the cost of survival, not the cost of living.gl

[Australopithecus]

Lotsa, I do enjoy having my views challenged. If I can't find a reason that your position is wrong then I will revisit my own beliefs.

I was wrong to say that the RBA inflation target was 3%...that was something I took from a speech a few years ago and am happy to be corrected on. Officially it is in the 2-3% range, and the RBA has a 2003 speech on its website which explains the historical reasoning behind that target.

The discussion about CPI is a sideshow, however, and is a false premise that suggests that Jetstar pilots are paid a rate commensurate with their efforts and need only address inflation and not long term inequities.

Prior to Tigerair's recent spike in pay rates Carla Jayne was insistent that wage parity with Tiger was essential. How quickly that rhetoric was abandoned! Similarly, the company seeks to erode pilot's work/life balance while the same Carla Jayne famously holds down the CEO role on a carer's schedule.
Eventually the hypocrisy, greed and prevarications of management come home to roost. This would be one of those times.

[lotsta]

LOL.

Now we are going for the conspiracy theories about vested interests and reliance on fringe dwelling economic outcasts. I love it. Please give us more.

I have a good plan for you JQ guys to get you where you wanna go:

1. Lots of PPRUNE and Aircrew rhetoric and chest thumping to motivate the troops and make the CEO and COO nervous.
2. Make as many unrealistic demands that are inconsistent with other employee groups as possible before your January deadline.
3. When step 2 fails to get rid of the pay freeze, initiate a PIA ballot allowing a wide range of economically harmful options.
4. In response to step 3, Alan Joyce will immediately develop a severe case of hyperhidrosis and may possibly even wet himself.
5. Make an 11th hour offer to Jayne that you will withdraw PIA if they get rid of the wage freeze.
6. Alan will immediately telephone Peter Owens, apologise for imposing the nasty and unfair wage freeze and will agree to first class travel, 3% pay rises, foot rubs and also to paying school fees at Geelong Grammar for up to 9 of each pilot's offspring until Jetstar Hong Kong is profitable, after which, he will also pay for their Arts degrees at Box Hill Tafe.
7. Let's meet up back here in March to celebrate.

[smug basher]

Brrrr, it sure is shilly in here.

[Mstr Caution]

Perhaps I will be proved wrong.

But Alan already has one "legacy" airline in the Domestic arena in the form of QF Shorthaul.

I'm positive he doesn't want a second.

I'm guessing Management will go to great lengths to ensure JQ remains a low cost carrier.

Wages are a large component of the low cost equation.

[Daylight Robbery]

Well.... Total costs would be around 130 mil for QF shorthaul pilots annually. Get pretty good productivity out of that, too. Looks fairly cheap compared to writing out cheques for 57 mil in yen to keep a marginal proposition afloat. Guess Skymark/ Peach/ Vanilla etc haven't been told the only future in the Japan low cost market is Orange.

[Derfred]

Employers and their advocates HATE AWOTE because it demonstrates that other employees are getting larger pay rises. Or that the general workforce is earning proportionally more compared to their own employees.

That is why you will always see AWOTE figures obscured or shunned by these people and the right wing media.

[Keith Myath]

2. Make as many unrealistic demands that are inconsistent with other employee groups as possible before your January deadline.

We’ve come a loooong way if we think 3% is unrealistic. And to your point of being inconsistent with other employee groups, you do realise that JQ are paid less than QF, VA and TT.

But continue with your angelic rhetoric, maybe you can do the math for me on this one. Your mate announced to the world in February

Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce said the pay freeze would apply until the company was profitable.

And the headline from a couple of days ago

Joyce vows to stay on as $350m profit surge boosts Qantas stock
THE AUSTRALIAN DECEMBER 09, 2014 12:00AM

So 9 months after the pay freeze is announced, the company is profitable, remind me why we are taking an 18 month pay freeze:ugh:

[lotsta]

3% can be realistic - just not now in this environment with this policy. As for the rest, life wasn't meant to be fair and neither is industrial relations.

[Troo believer]

QF Short Haul isn't a legacy award. Far from it. Devised by Oldpasture after the 89 Dispute as an incentive based pay scheme the likes of which was never seen anywhere prior. Master Caution you should know better.

[CamelSquadron]

Interesting debate.

CPI is the accepted measure of inflation. Its an indicator of the average rise in the cost of living for Australian consumers.

AWE is a measure of the growth in weekly earnings. It is a measure of wage inflation but not inflation in the cost of living. However AWE will track CPI - rising above CPI in times of strong economic performance and falling below CPI in times of weak economic performance.

But both CPI and AWE growth are less than 3% at the moment.

Over the next five years it is highly like that AWE growth will fall below CPI in Australia. We are facing a period of wage deflation.

[Australopithecus]

Says who? Reckon Rupert will be able to continue to run the political agenda of this country from the grave? Real wage deflation would simply hasten the electorate back to Labor, and encourage the far left among them to roll back IR laws in this country right back to 1985.

But what do you care? As Alan goes so will go Olivia, and so too you. Bye.

[Mstr Caution]

QF Short Haul isn't a legacy award. Far from it. Devised by Oldpasture after the 89 Dispute as an incentive based pay scheme the likes of which was never seen anywhere prior.

Troo Beleiver

I provided the "legacy" comment for the following reasons.

When JQ was first started & in the infancy of it's operations I was repeatedly told that JQ was the "way of the future". That Qantas conditions were "legacy" and Qantas would die on the vine unless pilots became more cost efficient.

Its taken a bit longer than I first thought, however now the SJS & fast promotions have worn off it's of no surprise JQ pilots want parity with other jet operators around the company.

It will never happen.

[charlie uniform mike]

Oh I thought lotsa and camel squadron were same person? You are both talking on the same thread...
Is that to confuse people??:mad:

[Angle of Attack]

Forget this debate and keep voting NO, it's not the end of the world chaps, but it is the only way to make QF management squirm, No, No, and No.......keep all the EBA'S open and that is the road to unity, forget all the crap that is basically white noise....I noticed another crap deal has been authorised for Shorthaul to vote on, I really hope the troops have the balls to vote it down even harder than the last one....time will tell..

[Mstr Caution]

Angle of Attack.

Unfortunately Unity will never happen.

The Qantas Group have established two camps of pilots with their own vested interests.

One way of establishing Unity is a group seniority list between JQ & QF based on date of joining. This will never happen. Ever.

JQ pilots asking QF pilots for support is effectively asking a QF pilot who's potentially been in the group longer and languishing in a lower rank. To support a JQ pilot who been fast tracked for promotion in the group for initially accepting lower terms and conditions to the detriment of the QF pilot.

Alternatively. Asking a JQ pilot to support a QF pilot to improve mainline terms & conditions only creates a greater divide in terms & conditions.

It's nobodies fault. Its just how it is.

What will happen. Is JQ and QF pilots will negotiate their own lot in life based on the leverage in their own silo'd business unit.

[crosscutter]

I tend to agree with Master Caution.

For 10 years JQ has grown under a low cost model. Pilots and everything about JQ has been low cost. For 10 years pilots have accepted and eaten the **** sandwich because "it was a job" or "I'll have 4 bars in a couple of years" or "I get thousands in day off payments". I don't begrudge any JQ pilot for this decision.

Now that JQ seems to be moving into a mature phase instead of growth, it seems pilots are now beginning to taste the **** sandwich that some have been eating for a decade.

We all have a right to fight for terms and conditions. I support the JQ no vote and fight as a pilot in this sometimes wretched industry. I support the merging of JQ and QF seniority numbers based on DOJ. However, a JQ pilot calling for support from QF pilots is akin to asking someone to kiss you whilst your mouth is full of.....well....a **** sandwich.

Just like those at QF have done, and are continuing to do....if you don't like it you are going to have to leave, because by voting no, your lot still isn't going to change enough to take away that horrible taste.

Good luck.

[atlas12]

A merging of the seniority list will NEVER happen. QF even laughed at QLink drivers when they asked to be put on the BOTTOM of the seniority list (allowing progression into mainline SO positions). Allowing JQ drivers in based on DOJ is even more heinous.

Forget. It.

[busdriver007]

A proposal was put to the Qantas board in 1999 for the pilots who joined Qantaslink would receive a mainline seniority number but it was rejected by Ian Oldmeadow who said, and I quote "pilots united they are in charge, Pilots divided we are in charge". Nothing has changed!:ugh: Oldmeadow has cost this company upward of $500 million yet he still is around. What the?

[Fuel-Off]

Back in 99... That's a rather long time from there and now.

Here's a hypothetical: management says to QLink, 'boys and girls, because QF and JQ are too expensive you guys will operate the new domestic aircraft to replace the 738s and 320s.'


Now, how are QLink blokes to react? We would be scum of the earth (which to be honest is how we're viewed by our mainline colleagues now) if we accepted on terms lower than what QF and JQ are fighting for. But if we said 'no, mainline should operate them because that's how a pilot should be paid.' QF blokes would just carry on, the battle won and the QLink blokes are left to viewed as the illegitimate back door sprog that just rocks up to events when it suits the family.

In honesty, we would probably accept less conditions. Why? Because there is no incentive to say get screwed. If we had an avenue of progression, the young guns would want to maintain those fantastic conditions (and not accept anything less if offered) because they hope to eventually enjoy those said conditions by virtue of progression.

VA has set the precedent - time for QF to step up to the plate too.

Fuel -Off :ok:

[Tankengine]

Fuel-off,
Have you ever talked to a mainline pilot? - I think you might be surprised at their attitude to Qantas link guys and gals.:ugh:

For years we have thought the same re group seniority.:ok:
In ancient times it was actually a small group of Eastern pilots against it, they may be retired by now.

There are many ex Qantas link pilots flying with mainline now, talk to them.


It is certainly true we would be stronger united.:hmm:

[Hugh Jarse]

The narrow body jet clause in your EBA is but a shiny trinket designed to divert your attention from the real issues at hand: Lifestyle, work rules and remuneration.

There was talk of Eastern getting jets way back when I joined in '94 (Southern Australia jet operation notwithstanding).

Just before I left in '08 I remember Sooty stating that Eastern and Sunstate will always be turboprop operators, while Cobham will be the Qantaslink jet operation.

Since then, you have Network making it onto the scene as well (as a wholly-owned subsidiary) with an RPT licence. I think it's patently obvious that the "fight" over 'jet flying' will be between those two groups in the not-too-distant future.

The best thing is to move on from the jet furphy, and do what you guys do best :ok: If you want to fly a jet - apply to a company that operates them.

That's where the smart money's at ;)