PDA

View Full Version : Australian Airlines concerns.


ANFO
7th Oct 2002, 12:11
I heard an interesting story the other day that Australian Airlines have some rather inexpeienced crews coming on line. Of the first group of 7 CSMs 4 of them (get this:rolleyes: ) have never worked as Flight Attendants before. I find this incredible., but my source is impeccable. I also heard from several sources that Australian will be the new source of initial commands at the Big White Rat. Word also is that Australian has no automonous safety deptartment. How did this get past CASA? Another story doing the rounds is that QF has given AWOPS B767 crews the flick and some 20 pilots will be turfed out on the street at the end of the month. I would have thought that some of these guys and gals might have been given a shot at Australian given that many of the B737 have been asked to stay on and have been given frozen seniority. :confused:

fistfokker
7th Oct 2002, 12:14
ANFO, and your point is?????

ftrplt
7th Oct 2002, 14:47
I also heard from several sources that Australian will be the new source of initial commands at the Big White Rat.

So what?? Some FO's have been awarded Command Upgrades into Australian, just as there are FO upgrades into Australian.

Word also is that Australian has no automonous safety deptartment

Its no secret, Australian will fall under the Qantas safety department - no problems there.

Another story doing the rounds is that QF has given AWOPS B767 crews the flick and some 20 pilots will be turfed out on the street at the end of the month.

So what, they have had a lifeline for over a year that others havent had, and are holding slots that QF are training their own employees to fill. Sounds fair to me.


I would have thought that some of these guys and gals might have been given a shot at Australian

Australian management negotiated with AIPA for QF mainline crew to get the gig, why should AWOPS crews get a go?

funbags
7th Oct 2002, 21:34
ANFO , so AA should overlook current Qantas F/O's who want a command and have been in for 10 years - and offer them to AWOPs guys who have been on contract for around 1.
Same would apply I guess to S/O's in Qantas who want to upgrade to AA F/O's.They should wait till after AWOPs guys have filled the positions.

Why ????

Positions in AA were negotiated by AIPA and the company to an acceptable conclusion.If insufficient applications were received for the positions then I don't think anyone would have had a problem with them being offered to outside pilots , for eg AWOPs.

ANFO
7th Oct 2002, 22:22
Sorry FF that it has to be spelt out to you, but one would think it desirable that CSMs had some experience in the job and airline operations. There is a whole raft of safety implications in this. If you can't see this, then your professional competance must be called into question.

Icarus2001
7th Oct 2002, 22:37
ANFO that is what training is for.

What about when a GA pilot gets his/her first airline right seat job, with no airline or jet experience, that must be outrageous in your world? F/Os promoted to Captain with NO Left hand seat jet type experience; a travesty of justice, something should be done!

Tell me how did you get your first go at anything?

You certainly put the R in PPRUNE.:D

If you can see this, then your professional competance must be called into question.

Would you like to read that again, are you incontinent?

Dan Kelly
7th Oct 2002, 23:04
ANFO,

many experienced F/As from various airlines have been recruited by Australian, I know several. So there's bound to be a pool of experience from which to draw CSMs.

Sometimes, reliable sources are not quite so accurate.

RaTa
8th Oct 2002, 04:44
ANFO my source has it that there will be initial commands in both the white and black rats!

ANFO
8th Oct 2002, 10:51
My point exactly, Dan. As I said before. 4 of the CSM have NEVER worked on an aeroplane before. (Thanx Ic, typo rectified). Some years ago, a prominent Australia airline started international operations. 3 weeks later they caused themselves much embarrasment by landing with the nose gear retracted at SYD. The BASI report said, in part, that AN had failed to make use of experienced individuals within the company. It seems that AA is being set up with the same cavalier attitude; experienced FAs (incl. some with CSM experience) have been over looked to the dismay of even those in the QF training system. Experienced tech.crew who were already trained and experienced on type (and I mean with many years, not 1 year, of experience) and experienced in international operations who were employed by AWOPS (which is owned by QF, remember) are about to lose their jobs. Sure, nice for the SO getting FO slots and the FOs (some very junior, I hear) getting commands. Congrats. to them. A bit sad that the by-product is: 1) heartache for those concerned ( I see that some out there think that now their 1 year lifeline is finished, they can just drop dead)(incidently, about half are '89ers, so I hear) and 2) the unneccessary expense in training costs. If I were still a QF share holder(sold 'em on 1 July) I'd want some bloody answers about this

Capt Fathom
8th Oct 2002, 12:06
ANFO...chill out!

It's their train set.
Who gives [email protected]#$ !...apart from you.

By the way, the regionals have been employing Flight Attendants off the streets for years..and putting them into aeroplanes..on their own, without any problems...great bunch of guys and gals!

Evacu8
8th Oct 2002, 12:18
ANFO

In regards to f/a's with no expereience being cabin managers. The word is 'Manager'. They learn their EPs and safety in training, then they are going through cabin manager training.

Just because someone has not been a flight attendant before does not mean they do not have the management skills to run a cabin effectively and safely. The only role difference between f/a's and cabin managers is management skills - the safety/ EPs skills are the same level for all cabin crew on board, regardless of position.

They are taught EPs/ safety - they obviously posess credible management skills/ abilities, or they wouldnt be selected for the job.

And finally, just because someone has held a cabin manager's job in the past, for another airline, does not automatically mean they would make great cabin managers for Australian.

All airlines choose people for these positions based on their own particular airline's needs.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Mr Seatback 2
8th Oct 2002, 13:24
re: inexperienced CSM's

Evacu8 - CSM's hired purely on the basis of management merit, with no flying past? Whilst I agree that being a CSM at one airline doesn't necessarily make you a better CSM at another, nor can it be said that having someone manage a very unique environment for the first time can be justified against those who have flown before.

There are events and incidents that can occur in-flight which are very different to those you may encounter on the ground. Certainly, all FA's and CSM's have the same EP and safety training provided to them - that isn't what is being solely called into question. What I do believe is an issue is having someone hired to the position of managing a group of Flight Attendants and an entire cabin of passengers who probably has less flying experience (in some cases nil) compared to those who can bring more experience to the role.

Whilst I am sure the Australian crew being discussed at the moment are exemplary choices for the role, it is hardly fair on them EITHER to throw them into both flying for the first time, as well as flying AND managing the entire cabin at the same time.

QF don't hire direct entry CSM's - nor do they hire people to the CSM role without prior flying experience (min 2-3 years as I recall before any FA can apply for a CSM role).

This is the same at most other airlines that I know of - including those that offer direct entry positions (eg. Impulse, KLM uk, etc) - none would ever offer a CSM role to someone who had never flown before - because there are just too many things that can happen that training cannot cover alone.

funbags
8th Oct 2002, 20:49
ANFO -regards those F/O's who are taking promotion - junior as you put them - the most junior has been in the company as an F/O for over 5 years. I believe this is a little bit more senior than current command trainees in Virgin.

Lose the chip on your shoulder.

f4ko340
8th Oct 2002, 23:52
ANFO,
the no.1 rule with pilots is to look after no. 1 and f##k the rest.
The fact that AA didn't open the doors to AN Drivers is a real shame,in fact its a disgrace.

Wizofoz
9th Oct 2002, 00:57
I gotta say I think ANFO has a good point WRT the CSMs. I actually object to the tittle cabin SERVICE manager. FAs are there to fill a very important saftey role and are vital to the survival of the maximum number of people in an emergency evacuation.

The Purser, CM, CSM or whatever tittle you car to put on them have a very important leadership role in handling the crew in an emergency. If AA are using CSMs with no previous flying experience, they are obviously being selected for their percieved abilities as service people. I can't help but think this is not in the best traditions of saftey first.

Perhaps after they blow a couple of slides because their crew gave priority to customer service ahead of correct procedure, they might get the message (That's what it took in Ansett!!).

As to who's flying them, I would have been p1ssed off if AN started a subsidury and didn't make the flying available to their existing pilots (in fact we WERE pissed off with the CRJ situation!!) so, much as it is a shame to let so many experienced pilots stay out of work, I can't support any argument against it going to the Qantas guys.

invertedlandings
9th Oct 2002, 01:15
f4ko340,
A disgrace not using AN Drivers fdor AA??
You are kidding mate.
QF mainline have filled all the slots- and with AA reducing the amount of International 767 ops, where would the surplus of 767 pilots go?? More unemployed pilots??
ANFO
you quote fo F/os getting command "some very juniour, I hear"
So how much experience do you require then?? The most junior to be allocated a slot has been in the company 6.5- 7 years ( he has probably around 4000hrs on type)- I am sure there is a lot less experienced guys and girls who have commands out there (look at VB, they are doing fine with some inexperienced Captains).
As for the AWAS guys- that was alwasy going to be a short term contract until QF could fill the slots- I do feel sorry for those guys, the should had a minimum of preferential interviews or at least a seniority to be a S/o

topend3
9th Oct 2002, 02:57
ah....i have worked out what ANFO stands for - Ansett Forst Officer!!! bit bitter you didn't get a gig with AA mate????

justcruzin
9th Oct 2002, 10:22
whilst on the subject of low experience levels, the Evil Empire seems to care very little about the experience levels of its subsidiary companies. One only has to look at the complete lack of jet experience of the boys and girls at the Impulse Hobart operation. It is a junior base ie no one wants to go there so they have a junior captain (500hrs jet is all that is required but that is ok as they have Beech 1900 time!!!) crewed with very junior F/Os and in the cabin they have very average Pursers and totally inexperieced F/As.
Not sure why this does not concern anyone.

Keg
9th Oct 2002, 15:24
ANFO, I've always thought that your posts were pretty good. Unfortunately, this one has lowered your standard somewhat.

As others have pointed out, the AA Command upgrades (about a half dozen out of the 25 initial commands out there) come from blokes and girls who have been in QF for about eight years and been F/Os on the 767 for at least the last five. Now considering that 'from what you heard', they were quite 'junior', does that also mean that some of the other gen that you have got may also be (how do I put this nicely....) inaccurate?

I'll admit that the potential of a CSM on their first couple of flights having never been exposed to aviation much before strikes me as an ill advised way to do it, having worked in a lot of 'service' industries previously, there are a lot of people out there that would just eat the role of a CSM for breakfast and believe it or not, are smart enough to pick up the 'safety' side of things in a real hurry. Besides that, I understand that a LOT of the cabin crew are ex Ansett and so the team won't be all that 'new' to the air.

Finally, four CSMs out of how many? Four aircraft at seven crew per aircraft equals 28. Four out of 28. Hardly a big percentage to be getting worked up over. Lots of 'other' experience to fall back on there too. CASA proving flights and all!

GoodToGo!
10th Oct 2002, 00:03
Hang on a sec...... How long did you hold QF shares for ANFO? Did you have them in the employ of AN? I detect a possible conflict of interest.... Oh heck, it doesn't really matter anymore anyway. I hope you made a tidy little profit.


f4ko340, why is it a disgrace? A real shame, yes, but I don't think a disgrace.

justcruzin...interesting first post. Have some insider info do you? Or an axe to grind?

Cheers!
GTG! :D

Going Boeing
10th Oct 2002, 00:36
ANFO

To put things into perspective, the pilots in the initial intake to AO have a lot more experience than the majority of pilots at DJ and when DJ started operating their cabin crew had a similar mix of experience levles as the AO cabin crew.

Only six of the Captains are being promoted into AO and they are all very experienced pilots. The other Captains have held their commands in QF for a number of years.

To those who saw Australian Airlines as their direct path into a top RPT pilot job, just remember that the guys (& possibly gals) who now have these slots have "done the hard yards" by starting years ago as Second Officers in QF. Those who are not prepared to take the normal path and start as S/O's at QF must understand that they will be competing for a smaller number of jobs with other operators

Boeing Belly
10th Oct 2002, 01:46
You've just worked that out now have you topend.......no flies on you pal, you're a smart cookie!!!!!!

longjohn
10th Oct 2002, 09:34
ANFO,

Aviation is like a black womans left tit,

It's not fair and it's not right.

At the end of the day QF pilots (yes even junior S/O's) have all the spoils of Ansett's carcass to feed their promotion. (so too do Virgin)

It would have been the same if the shoe had been on the other foot.

Just try and stay out of the cycle of bitterness and remember the lessons from AN's collapse.

Cheers;)

Mr Seatback 2
11th Oct 2002, 07:20
Justcruzin - I have to take issue with you

Re:Impulse crew in HBA

Our tech crew are some of the nicest, most professional crew I have ever had the pleasure of working with. Now on my third airline, the tech crew we have at all of our bases are the best guys and girls I could ever have at the control end of an aircraft - to even call into question their suitability for their role as Captain, FO, etc on the 717 is unfair. They would not be Captains or First Officers if they didn't meet the standards required of them!

As for the cabin crew - do not even go there. Yes - some of our Flight Attendants are new to the role, but at the same time, we have also picked up a wealth of experience from crew who were originally with Kendell, Southern, Ansett (Domestic and International), and Eastern. Additionally, ALL of the Pursers we have based in HBA are thoroughly experienced Flight Attendants, all with many years experience in flying.

Get over it.

Don't call into question what you don't know for certain.

Boeing Belly
12th Oct 2002, 08:49
I think what we are really talking about here is the size of our penis'...........whoops, I meant to say aeroplanes!! The QF LongHaul guys could care less that the Bae146 and B717 operation severely impacted ShortHaul flying. They didn't give a stuff about those "small" aircraft. Never mind that the flying they took was normally performed by the 737. But when it comes to a "real" aeroplane, well, "we must fly it". We're all the same. At Ansett we happily ( well most of us anyway) sat back while the Saabs, Brasillias and even the F28s and F100s replaced Ansett aircraft on many sectors. Most of us didn't want to fly those "small" aircraft. By time everyone realised that the CRJ was doing the same it was too late. I agree that the QF guys should be doing the Australian flying, but don't you think ( guys like Keg) QF pilots should also be flying the 717 as well? Or is that different?

Capt Fathom
12th Oct 2002, 13:05
Boeing Belly,

Sorry...I'm a bit slow...you'll have to translate that into English...?

Going Boeing
12th Oct 2002, 13:14
Boeing Belly

Every post of yours that I have seen lately has had a very sour tone to it. Perhaps Longjohn's suggestion to ANFO might also be appropriate to you.

I, as a QF long haul pilot, am concerned with the problems that my peers (irrespective of aircraft type) encounter in todays industrial relations climate. I am concerned that regional pilots do not have an a progression system in place to become a "mainline" pilot. I am concerned that NJS staff in Rockhamton may soon be out of work because of decisions made by my employer, even though these staff are employed by another airline and are technically not QF's responsibility. QF pilots are very aware that the "small" aircraft (as you describe them) are likely to make serious inroads to mainline QF (in particular B737) operations over the next few years. Faced with this dilemma, AIPA has been able to extract the best possible conditions from management at the same time as allowing management to transform the company to meet the challenges of the new aviation envirionment. Perhaps if Ansett management had approached their respective unions, explained their predicament, and asked for major productivity improvements then they may not have suffered their ultimate fate. In an article in an aviation magazine about six months ago, Geoff Dixon stated that he was amazed that AN management never approached the unions and asked for the major concessions that were needed to keep the airline operating.

In short , Longhaul pilots are concerned with the erosion of pilot conditions, but it is important that, as a group, we avoid the tall poppy syndrome as that can only lead to a degradation of the top positions that we all aspire to. And as a final observation, QF Longhaul B767 Captains are paid less than Shorthaul B737 Captains (the relative F/O rates is a separate issue that I don't want to touch on this thread).

druckmefunk
12th Oct 2002, 15:43
Going Boeing

Please fill me in. What exactly is hard about the yards at Qantas?

dmf

bluefly
13th Oct 2002, 02:22
I, as a **** kicker, note the arrogance of QF individuals almost every day; their right to this, their right to that!, though there are some exceptions. Interesting to see it displayed so clearly on this forum. The QF group as a whole, needs to be bought down a few pegs, hopefully your mate Dixon's the man.

Traffic
13th Oct 2002, 05:24
If any of the AWOPS guys want to send me a private message thru this forum, I might be able to point them in the right direction.

justcruzin
13th Oct 2002, 11:13
Mr Seatback

I am not questioning the professionalism of the hobart pilots nor am I challenging how nice they are. I am however questioning the decision of management to promote a pilot to captain when he has but 500hrs toal jet time. I challenge you to seek the wisdom of some of your senior training captains on the subject. I bet they do not think 500 hrs is sufficient!!!!!

alky
13th Oct 2002, 12:13
They would not be Captains or First Officers if they didn't meet the standards required of them!

And these standards Mr Seatback 2, would they be the same standards presided over by the almighty 717 Chief Pilot, a person with quite a colorful history. Something many of us know for certain .

lackov
13th Oct 2002, 13:48
I find the stance that "it's a disgrace to not hire AWAS crews" offensive.

QF's hiring is currently conducted through the ranks of SO-FO etc, subject to all those nasty tests they make you do. If the AWAS crews are the most suitable for the job then surely they can compete on a more even playing field with all the other 'riff-raff' candidates (many of whom, I might remind, are just as unemployed and down on their luck as their AN counterparts, whether through GA or otherwise, but probably dont even have a jet endorsement, or house, to their name).

Just because they are supposedly more suitable, does that mean they don't have to prove it???

I feel extremely sorry for all those put out of work by the demise of AN, but perhaps it's time some of them realised that they share the unemployment queue with many others in the aviation industry (Namely from GA) who haven't/cannot ask/ed for special treatment, but deserve a much fairer go.

Before the barrage starts, no, I have no association whatsoever with Qantas.

invertedlandings
13th Oct 2002, 14:18
Boeing Belly,
Agreed with most of your post but the point about Long Haul not caring- just about everyone I know who is NOT a Captain does take an interest- unfortuntely the majority of the committee of AIPA are Captains. If Short Haul wants more of a voice on AIPA concerns, then (this has been said a few times before) they should nominate themselves for Comittee positions.

AS for you mr Blowfly- I can see why you are ####kicker with an attitude like that

Watchdog
13th Oct 2002, 22:29
Justcruzin,

"Your data is inaccurate" about the experience levels of the capt's in HB - looking at the list of names there I see that most are very experienced (some ex-jet) guys which joined VQ direct on 717 or guys ex MEL base who have been on type for 18 months plus. They'd all have 1000+ on type by now.

I also note that SY & ML Pursers have been doing week long slips in HB base whilst HB F/As build some time prior upgrading.


:)

ironbutt57
15th Oct 2002, 21:43
Lackov...the AWOPS fellows I know of were not unemployed by the demise of Ansett, their careers were ended by a decision (good or bad) they made in the interests of solidarity, and the good of all aviators....individual personalities cast aside, it is a bad reflection on union solidarity(oxymoron) that any pilot group could possibly begrudge any one of them a job... just shows what a sad and doomed lot we all are..:mad: :mad:

funbags
15th Oct 2002, 21:52
Ironbutt - no one is begrudging them a job. If they want to join Qantas or AA ( which is pilot fed by Qantas ) , why can't they start as S/O's like everyone else ?

Why can they take a command at AA straight off ,when others have been waiting over 10 years and have moved through their respective ranks.

Everyone seems to be in a rush and not prepared to do the time. If Ansett was still around and Qantas folded , the same would apply.Even though guys may have been a Capt in Qantas for 10 years- what right would they have to jump the pile at Ansett and take a direct entry command over those F/O's in the company ?

oldhasbeen
15th Oct 2002, 22:12
Who else thinks it would be fun to bring ol' Ramboflyer into this!!:D :D :D

PFM
16th Oct 2002, 15:04
Hmmmm, cant even see why there is an arguement about ex AN guys should be considered for the Australian Airlines jobs. How many of you AN guys thought that when Ansett International started, that the jobs should have gone to Qantas guys already suitably qualified on the 74? Looking around the room for raised hands.... Nobody?

AN international was a seperate company from mainline, separate AOC, etc, and the pilots were leased to International from AN mainline... Never any dispute as to who you thought should fly for AN international, why should the QF guys feel any differently to how you AN guys thought and felt back then?:confused:

I honestly wish all of those still out of work all the best with their futures. Whatever they may hold in store for you.