PDA

View Full Version : Ex-AN drivers taken for a ride???


Home Brew
16th Dec 2002, 01:25
Heard from the "Swanston Street cleaners" over the weekend that a certain Western District (Victoria) fellow with aviation interests, has been revalidating some ex-Ansett pilots in the simulator. Just wondering if it is correct that these blokes have been promised a "good job based in Australia", but have not been told that they are possibly being used to oust several expats already working for a small Pacific airline? Can it be confirmed that these pilots are apparently being offered a deal, at less money than is presently being paid to the current pilots.? In these circumstances, where no dispute exists between the existing pilots and the airline and, into what category would the ex-Ansett pilots fall should they take the job.

Just hope you guys are listening out there, and are fully aware of what's going on. Nothing worse than signing a dodgy contract, with hidden small print, and end up working ya butt off to fill some other bludgers wallet!!:confused:

capt moonlight
17th Dec 2002, 22:49
It appears that your post is more fact than fiction. The Gentleman concerned used to enjoy a lurid distaste for his present companions to the point of obsession. However it appears he has traded his morals for money. The fact that this group is attempting to undermine a group of guys who have no dispute with the Company but have only spent their days repairing the damage done previously by the said gentleman. It becomes easy to see how the people of the Pacific have come to distrust the whiteman. I hope for their sake the powers to be look back into recent history and realise who has had their best interests at heart and who hasn't. Although I'd like to think we have heard the last of this I suspect we haven't.

Knave
17th Dec 2002, 23:33
Would it be impolite to ask which small pacific airline is involved?

TIMMEEEE
18th Dec 2002, 20:07
Am I reading this right?

A former Ansett Management Captain (possibly having been working there during the dispute in 89 and possibly very very high up on the B737?) now working for a Pacific Airline (starting with P perhaps?) is trying to get his own yes-men mates into the same airline by undercutting the current wages/conditions and getting those already employed removed?

Not only would this individual go down in my books as a true low-life bottomfeeder if its true but just remember.It's a long drive from Tullamarine to Geelong!

I understand the country's GDP barely covers the lease costs for the aircraft but to do that is repugnant and true to form for some people.

chookchaser
19th Dec 2002, 00:44
Home Brew is very close to the truth.
Capt Moonlight is spot-on in all that he says.
Timmeee's comments are very valid, but his ident is slightly off.
'The Gentleman' in his former life signed off as Gilligan of Gilligan's Island, and he was not an Ansett management type, so it is indeed surprising that he has made a pact with the devil, so to speak. If recent ex-Ansett Captains have parted with their own money to get this character to reval them in the simulator, they should perhaps ask their accountants if they can write it off against their future earnings as taxi drivers or waiters or whatever.
The airline is very small, the owner nation also small, so we know exactly what is going on.

SOPS
19th Dec 2002, 01:13
:confused: I dont believe this!!!! Well yes, I suppose I do. I do know the small airline involved and the rest of the details. But Woomera says ( as his/her right) we can not go into 89 talk, with out risk of death. All I can say is, once again, for reasons I have never understood, they remain protected, to proceed,and profit, without any comeback. This was the only avenue, buit it has been stopped as well. When I come back next time, I want what ever power they have, or whatever "magic dust" they possess.

It seems what ever they do is Ok, but if you want to discuss it, well, no, thats all too much!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

Oh well, I post this at my own risk, and if I am band, well see ya all!!!!!!!!!!!!!:cool:

fruitbatflyer
19th Dec 2002, 13:04
Hey, SOPS, we can and are discussing it, so far without descent into any '89 sledging. What _The _Gentleman is cooking up is doomed to failure; if not by non-payment or very late payment by him to his misguided recruits for services rendered, then most likely by treatment that will be meted out once they leave the protection of these fair shores for a night or two in this Pacific Paradise. _The _Gentleman has made a few enemies out there in his time, and they do deal with those who cross them in a fairly basic fashion. This would be a fact which should not be lost on him if he reflects on what happened to him elsewhere
in his sad career.
And just how is he going to get all this past the regulatory authority, which as I understand it, is quite happy with the current crewing arrangements? He would need at least some cooperation and handover procedure from the existing C&T people, plus route checks etc , before his own C&T could meet the required ICAO criteria. (ICAO right now is taking quite an interest in the Pacific region in general).
Let us not pillory this guy, or his gullible newfound mates; let us pity them for their delusions - and maybe SOPS you need to trust in Karma - it may be slow, but it's bloody good stuff.

Woomera
19th Dec 2002, 14:18
SOPS

You will not be banned for discussing '89 events or the consequences of the AN collapse, whilst you do not, as you have not now, or as far as I can remember, descended to sledging.

If there is skulduggery afoot and it needs to be exposed then here is a good place, as long as it is done with discretion and regard for the rights of others and the law.

There is no "magic dust" for either side here and whilst there may appear to be no comeback out there, if we talk to each other here, we at least can go some way to keep the bastards, whoever they be, on whatever side, "honest".
If there is a "magic dust" it is the internet available to all.

But to do that we must keep talking to each other as you are here, in a civilised manner.

If we cannot do that then we will indeed lose this "magic" opportunity.

Since a recent Australian Court judgement on the "internet" the rules have changed dramatically.:(

Kaptin M
20th Dec 2002, 23:24
Mr Fishhead and his band of sandcrabs are indeed walking a dangerous path with these dirty, underhanded tactics. IF they were successful, what`s to stop ANOTHER group of mercenaries from doing the SAME thing to them?!! :D Undercut THEIR salary by a grand or 1500 bucks.

If management accept Fishhead`s offer based SOLELY on reduced salaries, then they`ll be sure to follow the same line WHEN a similar discount deal is offered.
And be very sure it will, Fishy.

Just to be CERTAIN tho`, maybe you and your sandcrabs should offer to fly there now, for FREE!! :cool:

But then again, there would probably be some pilots who would be willing to PAY for the experience, just to get some time on type.

And once again, this tiny airline will enter another turbulent period IF Fishhead`s plans go ahead. :confused:

VH-WASA
21st Dec 2002, 10:47
I wish somebody would have the guts and spill the beans. You all sound like either a management pilot or a training captain.
' I know something that you don't know " attitude.
A Merry Xmas and happy new year to you all.

Gnadenburg
21st Dec 2002, 21:18
I agree WASA.

Racking my brains but it isn't easy! The whole Ansett 737 management team was loathed for its bastardry.

My favourite was Swampy and his regular chastisement of F/Os for the most menial of indiscretions.

His classic was the dresssing down of F/Os looking to have their logbooks stamped a few days before the Sept capitulation. Alluding to a jumping ship mentality! Weeks later he was in SQ on the 777.

I am sure his SQ application was in well before Sept.

There must be an obscure little park in Keilor somewhere. I propose a monument to the achievments of AN Flight Management. In bronze of course, to perpetuate their legacy for future generations and gloriously inscribed with the words-

"Lesser Men We Have Not Met".

Sadly, nothing learnt, as present day Qantas Management would be well represented at the ribbon cutting ceremony!

fruitbatflyer
21st Dec 2002, 21:57
This is no management wind-up. Comments above are from those of us (mostly line pilots) who are concerned that Gilligan and his new found chums will con the money men with promises of huge wage savings just long enough to de-stabilize our little airline. Once established he will of course move the money goal posts and if he runs to usual form, the first time he has a problem and does a dummy-spit, he will seek revenge or to blackmail the airline's owners with threats of AOC suspension. Only problem is, next time there is ANY cessation of service, we lose our major client and the airline folds - permanently. Gilligan would of course be ready to take over the client's flying on his own behalf, as I am sure his interests probably include some sort of shelf AOC plan. Do I need to spell it out any clearer without spelling the ident of the airline and persons involved??

Snowballs
21st Dec 2002, 22:49
There are fleas amongst the pilot fraternity willing bite and suck the blood out of any unfortunate they come upon. In unmentionable bygone days there was some loyalty and honor amongst friends and fellow pilots. The industry (from a working point of view) is in a mess because of the lack of honor amongst fleas / thieves who only see short term personal gain and are blind to the hurt and harm done to others …………… a tragedy if this is allowed to happen :mad:

amos2
22nd Dec 2002, 01:13
Why are we playing games here?
The island is Nauru and the airline, of course, is Air Nauru. ;)

Z Force
22nd Dec 2002, 01:44
Does this mean they'll be going back to Guam?

Spad
22nd Dec 2002, 12:49
Now let me get this straight... someone is alleging that a person, unnamed and ungender specific, (I’m attempting to be REALLY Politically Correct here, chaps and chapesses, hoping I won’t offend our much esteemed moderator, the Spear Thrower).

Where was I? Oh yes… someone is alleging that a person, unnamed and ungender specific, who has been a, shall we say, First Division stay-at-home player in the Australian Aviation 'sceen' these last twelve years, is alleged to be acting, shall we say, in a less than totally altruistic manner in his dealings with colleagues in a less favourable position than his good self.

Some might even be alleging that he could be less than 100% above board in his actions. Indeed, it seems he might be taking advantage, not just of his employer, but his ex-colleagues as well, who he is allegedly inviting to join him in what some might call (yet another) heroic enterprise undercutting the living conditions of pilots in another country.

They say experience counts for everything in this game. Well, quite a few of his potential recruits are certainly experienced in what he seems to be planning. What surprises me is that some should express surprise that he (and they?) might become involved in something as underhand as this seems to be.

Myself, the phrase ‘leopards not changing their spots’ comes immediately to mind.

Wizofoz
22nd Dec 2002, 15:06
Spad,

I might be reading this wrong (I know no more than what I'm reading here), but it sounded to me like it was one of YOUR mob (E.G. pre some date or other) recruiting recently unemployed AN guys.

Just how I read it, correct me if wrong.

But that would mean someone from that era not being a saintly being of the highest integrity...

Surely not!

Kaptin M
22nd Dec 2002, 23:56
Let's put it into its correct context.

Yes, Wiz, your assessment is correct.

Captain Fishhead, or Gilligan as nominated by Chookchaser reportedly enjoyed a somewhat "checkered" past on a small island nation in the past - I think the term "square peg in a round hole" was used.

Having had to indignantly leave their employ, Fishhead aka Gilligan has now decided to plot his REVENGE on all the expats currently employed.

What can he do? :confused:

"Ah yes" - he knows that there are DESPERATE "men" in Australia who will (and have previously, as their history shows) stooped to the lowest depths of opportunism and immorality, by shafting Australian pilots before simply to further themselves at the expense of others.
Strange thing is, Fishhead aka Gilligan HATED their guts with a vengeance, for what they did to HIM and the other 78% of Australian airline (and not only TAA) pilots, 13 years ago.

But for the sake of VENGEANCE, he's now willing to enlist their services!

Seem like a stable individual to head the pilot group out there? Someone management could truly trust?

Another FACT of this case is that the pilots NOW working for Air Nauru, are supporting families on a contract that has only recently been mutually agreed upon and accepted.

Sal-e
23rd Dec 2002, 04:42
What if you were local management of this airline?...or what if you were a local pilot?
Should any of these issues be important? Issues that do not involve them, ie the '89 thingy? (whatever it was)
What if this "Gilligan" really is offering this airline some pilots who would cost the airline half than the ones already there regardless of where these pilots are from or what their backgrounds are so long as they meet all the requirements?
Would it be okay for management of this airline to employ these characters? Or should they sought permission of '89ers from the other side first?
If their airline is struggling, shouldn't they seek every reasonable means to improve their situation without a compromise with legalities etc?
It is their business after all and the bottom line is theirs.
I believe any business reserves the right to make these decisions. Don't you?

Spad
23rd Dec 2002, 04:45
Apologies, Wiz… But I did start my post with “Now let me get this straight…”. It would seem I didn’t, at least in regard to the main player in this little drama. “get it straight”.

I don’t think anyone on what you refer to as “YOUR (ie, my) mob” would assert for one moment that everyone of the 78% majority was “saintly’. One comes to mind who might be said to be a little Thinnish in his business dealings in a closely-related field to the subject of this thread, and I’m sure that among the 78% there could be found any number of people who wouldn’t come out looking like Mother Theresas if their private lives were put under the microscope. However, I won’t retreat from my comments about the people this “Gilligan” individual seems to be hoping to use in his venture.

I don’t know who “Gilligan” is and it would probably mean little to me to be told his name, as it would be unlikely that I would recognise it. He sounds, from what little I’ve read of him here, a rather embittered and not very nice person. (I don’t know what led to the ill-feeling between him and the rest of the pilot group in question.) If he’s attempting to do what people here are asserting, it’s unforgivable. But, just as in that year-we-dare-not-mention-here, he won’t be able to get past Square One unless others, seeking short term personal gain at the expense of others, jump aboard his ill-starred ‘boat’. He’ll need a special type of person to join him in any such venture, and say what you like about his shortcomings, going on past performance, you can’t fault him in his choice of a candidate pool.

Regarding the doubtless many shortcomings of many on the 78% ‘stay outs’ in that year-we-dare-not-mention-here, I’m reminded of a comment that one of the two Eastern Airlines pilots who came out to Australia during that year-we-dare-not-mention-here. It’s best said with a long drawn out Southern (US) drawl. “Ya’ll cin cheat a man out of his life savin’s, sleep with his wife, even shoot his favourite huntin’ dawg, an’ he may one day forgive yuh… but no one will ever forgive yuh if ya’ll ever (delete unacceptable word/insert Politically Correct word)[i]‘hero’s’.”

Kaptin M
23rd Dec 2002, 06:44
The issues you raise, Sal-e, are NOT those being discussed in this thread.

However, imo, given the general scenario(s) you have outlined, I'd say, in a broad sense that you are more than likely, probably correct. :)

knackeredII
23rd Dec 2002, 08:41
You mean his ponts are not Sal-e-ant...?

amos2
23rd Dec 2002, 09:35
Just to add a little more to this interesting story of Gilligan, and he is an interesting character, the type of person to whom things seem to happen...like lowering the gear on approach and finding out that a frozen stowaway dropped out with the Dunlops!
I think someone has already alluded to his Bangkok Bar episode and there was also the time he took on a car when he decided to cross the road regardless of traffic, and came off very much second best, but to his credit he doesn't wimp and whinge about these distractions to his life but just carries on.
Anyway he was employed by Air Nauru a few years back and when the Chief pilot went on sick leave Gilligan became acting chief pilot. Well as is the wont with the board of Air Nauru, while the CP was on sick leave they sacked him... the CP that is, not Gilligan.
Gilligan, being the soldier of fortune that he is, accepted the CPs position when it was offered to him much to the disgust of his fellow pilots.
An interesting time followed until the board of Air Nauru, as is there wont, sacked Gilligan!
After some behind the scenes manouvering Gilligan got himself re-engaged as a consultant to Air Nauru until the board composition changed and he got the boot again.
Since then he's been tied up with things like starting a new airline, trying to take over Qantas, buying out Virgin etc. All those things that budding entrepreneurs are always wanting to do.
But you know what...he never quite succeeds! He will go to his grave trying but he can never quite pull it off.
So , whilst I can't admire this latest venture of his I wouldn't really be too concerned if I were one of Air Naurus current pilots.
Gilligan tries hard to be a thorough bastard but in actual fact he's just a lighweight, likeable rogue!
;)

Eastwest Loco
23rd Dec 2002, 10:27
Isn't the correct medical term for when nobody in the room remember anything when quizzed on a set of past circumstances called Polynesia??

Seems logical to me.:D :D

Best all

EWL

fruitbatflyer
23rd Dec 2002, 10:57
Amos, thank you for the accurate biography on our mtual friend Gilligan, though I hesitate to describe him as in any way likeable. Detestable, perhaps.
Sal-e, you are right in asserting that any airline management worth its salt would want to contain costs, including crewing costs.
A problem arises though when a management seeks to replace overnight an entire skilled section performing a task which requires such subtleties as currency in the airline's own EPs, own SOPs, own recurrent simulator program and recency on the particular air routes. Now, this management has so far NOT indicated that it wishes to sack us, so I am not accusing them of anything.
However, we have evidence that Gilligan has written to the airline board via at least one minister in the government with a fabulous offer of huge savings in pilot costs. Sure, if there was an orderly and planned handover he could probably do it for less salary, though any pilot brought up in the Ansett system would need a lot of re-education in areas of ETOPS and other operating economies in a very demanding area where 'stuff' doesn't always happen like it does in Oz.
Even if a handover was properly executed, the big cost up-front would be the learning curve, and rest assured, Gilligan would gouge the locals just like he did in the past.
As for the aspirations of the local pilots - they are probably better served under the present administration than ever before.
Then there is the matter of that vital contract which WILL go elsewhere if the airline gets the wobblies. The airline wouldn't survive without that contract, and the hardship if it failed would hit the Islanders much more than we few pilots who would probably find other work.

Sal-e
24th Dec 2002, 05:37
You are right Kpt M. I wasn't addressing the issue . But all the constructive comments made on this matter is really a matter of cabinet in the Nauru parliament and regardless of all that had been said on this thread, I feel that my previous comment had been pointing more towards the eventual conclusion. I'm afraid to say then that every statement made sounds a little whingey and nothing said here would change the owners of the airline's mind.
For the record though, from my limited knowledge of issues that are almost strictly Australian, I do not support people who cross floors in the name of vengeance.
I think this comment had been more.... ummm Sal-e-nt. ahem.

Sal-e
25th Dec 2002, 20:17
I think Gilligan plans on paying the replacement pilots salaries in the Isle of Mann or the Canaries to avoid this whole tax thing. It would cost the company half as the company pays for the incumbents taxes to maintain their net pre July tax ruling.
What does anyone think of that?

DOWN, THR33_GR33Ns
26th Dec 2002, 00:17
It doesn't matter where those treachorously pinching the jobs of others are paid, they WILL be liable for Australian tax if they don't meet the Oz Tax Office's requirements for non-residency. They may get paid an amount into their "Swiss Bank" but if they don't declare it and the ATO finds out (it's amazing what information they get fed covertly) then the penalties are severe. The ATO changed the rules significantly recently, ask a lot of CX pilots.

If this Gilligan fellow is telling the potential job thieves otherwise (ie their salaries will be tax free) then they are being further led up the garden path than was at first evident.

Sal-e
26th Dec 2002, 03:12
Down3gr33ns,

for what i understand, the ATO does not have access to anyones account in these kind of overseas banks. hell, those accounts don't even have to be in their names. off course bringing the funds to australia would have to be on a cash basis only. you are permitted to bring in $20,000 at any one time without declaring. everything would have to be on a cash basis. but if the ATO decides to raid their homes to collect evidence of tax evasion, all their(ansett jockeys) assets would have been there already prior to July. like i mentioned, taking on the job would only serve to top up their retirement petty cash. they leave aust on visas and come back in on visas. nothing sus about that at all. unless off course ATO waits for them at the airport everytime to see them arrive in uniforms!! highly unlikely.

DOWN, THR33_GR33Ns
26th Dec 2002, 04:42
The first post on this matter mentioned "jobs based in Australia" so I think it reasonable that the ATO would expect the pilots to be earning an income, however paid. This is especially so when, from what I've been able to find out, Nauru Air pilots often operate into/out of Oz, and that means crew lists (my QF mates call them form fives or similar) for entry and not visas - that would certainly cause alarm bells to ring. The ATO legislation is quite specific, you MUST declare overseas income except in certain circumstances. I am informed that working in Nauru no longer attracts non-residence status (a search of the ATO archives indicates that pilots there some time ago had an appeal for partial relief on those grounds rejected) and that would seem to threaten the "tax free" potential. Unless of course the individuals want to take the risk and not declare their oversaes income - and wouldn't you think there would be some aggrieved individuals who would seek to expose that if Gilligan gets his way???

Don't you also think if the ability to be paid overseas was a realistic avenue then the current pilots would have done just that and the airline would have avoided the significant impost of Oz tax? That they didn't (can't??) seems to put things in perspective.

Incidentally, I think the limit is $10,000. Was on my last trip out of Oz a couple of months ago.

VH-WASA
27th Dec 2002, 04:31
You would have to be a real low-life, scum-bag son of a beach to even consider selling yourself cheap in an attempt to replace a stable existing pilot group currently enjoying employment.
I hope you ex AN pilots do not get mixed up in this low act. It's a funny profession, word gets around and your names will be mud for the rest of your careers.
As for that "Gilligan", seems like a piece of sheet to me. a loser like that should be stood on.

coco-nuts
27th Dec 2002, 11:35
GILLIGAN and his mob will not get a start!!!!
the new chairman is none other than kc who gilligan upset badly over the guam/loss of aoc issue a year or so back...

this is what the lawyer advising the board tells us anyway....

i think this will settle the issue until the next time he comes up with more of the same [email protected]

cheers and a merry new year to all.

:rolleyes:

Kaptin M
27th Dec 2002, 12:10
That's good news, Coco ('owzitgoinmate?} - hopefully the (sensible) decision is partly due to the real-time input here on PPRuNe :)

From the many contributions that Home Brew has managed to elicit, it would seem that the "chickens have at last come home to roost".

If only Danny's "baby" had been alive back in the late '80's, professional pilots might THEN have had the access to a medium that allowed FULL, UNADULTERATED ACCESS, to proper discussion of the current events.
Whether [GREED would still have prevailed (over moral upbringing) can probabaly debated until the chooks come home!!
Personally, I choose to believe that I would not have lost several of my valued friendships of that time, because of "forced errors". :(

Anyway, Coco a wise decision for your airline, imho.
The issues have been extremely well debated here, and Fish head aka Gilligan has likewise been exposed for trying to do WHAT he tried to do, for WHY he tried to do it.

Let's ALL wish your airline "Well", and hope to see YOU and Air Nauru prosper from all of your hard-earned efforts.

But above ALL else, let's NEVER forget those nights in Manila!!!!! :D :D :) :D :) :D :p :p

coco-nuts
28th Dec 2002, 13:11
Kapt M to your last post , thumbs up
to Manila ,2 thumbs up.
happy new year. :cool:

Kwaj mate
29th Dec 2002, 23:45
What about the small matter of the airline paying ATO costs for ex-pat pilots.
Understand that some nationals live off-shore as well.
What about their tax - or did the last GM look after this incidental cost as well ?
KC should bring things together again & get the airline running efficiently.
Will the "Silver Fox" have some say in operational matters again?
Trust KC brings him back as a consultant & keeps his other mate, the old Professor, out of the business.
Best of luck with the airline in the New Year.

TIMMEEEE
30th Dec 2002, 02:41
The sad fact is that the island state of Nauru is flat bankrupt and their previous funds (which were plenty) have been either lost through corruption or just withered away.

The only real income for Nauru apparently comes from foreign aid or the Australian govt 'donations' for holding assylum seekers on their island.

An even more sad is the fact that those in charge just may accept this offer for a 50% wage cut.
Reprehensible, but I would love to know if Gilligan and any ex AN guys have the guts to attempt such a low act.

Time will tell and if they do accept they will be the true pariahs of the pacific.

fruitbatflyer
30th Dec 2002, 09:43
OK, seems that with the good inputs above, TG and the Sand CrABs are stitched up. Long live pprune! Next on the hit-list has to be the 'consultants' (is a consultant one who can't hold down a real job because no-one will employ them, or perhaps because their useful input would never fill a 40 hour week??). A few of these parasites have had their snout in the trough for too many years already, and it really is time the government was weaned off these users.
One would hope that the new airline board and CEO (all of which have yet to be officially announced) will listen to the accumulated experience of those already serving the airline well. That may not be everybody, but certainly a few with a lot of time in the industry
are willing to put in the effort with no extra dollar expectations.
As for the tax question, it is only the expats that have a liability because the new rules suck them in regardless of where they actually reside. Locals still enjoy tax-free status, for now at least.

Kwaj mate
30th Dec 2002, 21:47
Thx fruity.
I was interested in the position of their nationals, who may reside in Australia or other regional states, & how they cope with their tax bills.
The act of the airline paying tax bills for Australian residents generates even higher income levels, including FBT; and that will make the ATO assessments very interesting.
The salary & tax bills to the airline must be rather impressive.

Gnadenburg
31st Dec 2002, 05:12
Young exAN F/O on the APA website imploring his former colleauges not to undercut at Air Nauru. What are his chances?

Good on him though, no alias used and you can only try to do what is right.

Spad
31st Dec 2002, 06:23
Doesn’t that ex-AN FO know that the gentlemen he’s addressing will simply have to take the job on offer ‘for the sake of their families’? (That phrase will have a very familiar ring to it to quite a few older readers from both sides of the ‘Great Divide’ (not the mountain range) who troll this site.)

And TIMMEEEE. you say in your last post that…Time will tell and if they do accept they will be the true pariahs of the pacific. Some would say that your use of the future tense in that comment might be somewhat unusual.

This unfortunate Nauru business is a bit like individual pain thresholds or different individuals’ concepts as to what is considered acceptable, say, on early evening television. One man’s light, perhaps slightly naughty entertainment is gross pornography to another.

While there are many who cannot see that the actions of ‘The Few’ in 1989 in taking back their (or coming in and taking) jobs in AN and TN was in any way wrong, it would appear that there are far fewer who would not feel that it would be morally wrong for anyone to take a job in Nauru now through the offer Gilligan is making to the Air Nauru management.

Unless, of course, you see no other way of looking after the interests of your family (there’s that phrase again). Then, the sharp, easily-defined lines denoting what is and isn’t morally acceptable can become somewhat blurred, especially if you’ve gone through the painful process once before in your life and managed to rationalise your actions into an acceptable form – to yourself, at least. There’s an old saying that no one misses another slice of bread off the loaf that’s already been cut. Rationalising (what for some is unrationisable) is a bit like that. Many think that decisions like the one made by ‘The Few’ in 1989 and the one some of those same people might be about to make now are exactly the same. There’s no degree to it – it’s exactly like being “only a little bit pregnant”.

Wizofoz
31st Dec 2002, 06:39
So the one identifiable individual who is doing the wrong thing is a PRE 89er, but we'll just hijack the thread and turn it into YET ANOTHER POST 89er bashing shall we?

BLINKERS- ON

FACTS- IGNORE

Ready to go Captain!!

Fubaar
31st Dec 2002, 10:05
"Blinkers -ON" Wiz? Bit of a pot and kettle situation between you and Spad from where I'm sitting. And far from hijacking the thread, I think Spad's comments are relevant to this situation given the pilos Gilligan's attempting to use in his foray into Air Nauru.

There's no question that this Gilligan bloke is punching well below the belt in his dealings with Air Nauru, but you can't ignore the fact that his choice of weapons has history on its side. Those weapons have proven they will work to order under similar circumstances already, so he's attempting to use them again.

Anyone who thinks a situation like this is cut and dried should get the old Mel Gibson / Sissy Spacek movie out from the video rental shop - I think it was "Coal Miner's Daughter", where Mel blacklegs to feed his family, knowing it was the wrong thing to do. but out of sheer desperation doing it anyway. At least Mel's character didn't try to rationalise his actions when the workers got back in and he and his mates had to 'walk the walk' through the strikers' wives.

Wizofoz
1st Jan 2003, 03:20
Histrionic comparisons with Mel Gibson??? (I?fm Taller!)

This thread was started as a warning that a PRE `89 EX AFAP pilot was actively seeking to do a very dubious thing, and was POSSIBLY intending to offer jobs to some Ex AN guys. No specific group was mentioned (many suitably qualified AN Captains fall outside the contentious date range) but what happens? Out pops the marching band using yet another pre text to trot out the same old vitriol.

Tar everyone in one group with the same brush, but quietly distance yourself from the miss deeds of one of the group you constantly imply are virtuous and beyond reproach.

Shame none of you got into politics...

Kaptin M
1st Jan 2003, 04:45
"One bad apple doesn`t spoil the whole bunch", Wiz, and no-one has attempted to refute that Gilligan was a non-returnee during the Dispute.

However, those ex-AN captains he chose to use as the "tool" for his personal revenge DID have a past history of scabbing - that sure as hell places THEM in one specific group.
"So the one identifiable individual who is doing the wrong thing is a PRE 89er.".
No, the others KNEW what they would be expected to do - try to undercut the entire group (of expats) currently with Air Nauru, and put them on the street. Delightful individuals.
I`m sure that their identities are no secret to YOU, Wiz, and to the guys they intended shafting.
FYI, a list of the current locations, and employers of ALL recent ex-AN pilots was circulated about a month or so ago. :)

If you are saying that you have heard that there were other post-Dispute "cleanskin" Captains who wanted to be involved in trying to steal jobs away from the incumbants out there, then shame on them.
If true, then it was probably because of their unfortunate association with the dyed-in-the-wool scabs, over the past 13 - (or should we make that 14, now) years.

Kwaj mate, I don`t quite get your statement, "The act of the airline paying tax bills for Australian residents generates even higher income levels, including FBT; and that will make the ATO assessments very interesting.
Gross salary = Net salary + tax (if taxation is liable).
That`s pretty much the way MOST companies work - deduct the tax for the employee, and pay it to the Government on behalf of the worker.

TIMMEEEE
1st Jan 2003, 20:35
Spad.

It may sound unusual that I use that tense in my former posting as I do believe that it may be a reality judging by history and seeing the individuals involved.

What does sicken me to my bones is that some people would gladly prostitute themselves so freely, degrade themselves without any shame and wilfully put others out of a job and place other families in the poverty line with absolutely no hesitiation.

I suppose it takes a particular disgusting individual that gives genetic sludge its true meaning.

Sure some people have families to feed but I would rather do it hard than place others on the poverty line by prostituting myself and for what?
A bloody meagre percentage of the former pay and the chance to yet again denigrate the pay and conditions of pilots around the world?

I would love to see one individual come straight out on this forum and say that they agree with such a practice.

Any takers ladies and gents or should I say anyone so bold, stupid and totally lacking in moral fibre and character?

tinpis
1st Jan 2003, 23:53
FYI, a list of the current locations, and employers of ALL recent ex-AN pilots was circulated about a month or so ago.

Where can this be seen?

Kaptin M
2nd Jan 2003, 01:22
If you didn't receive a copy, then I guess it can't.
Sorry, but the distributor made that decision! :(

EPIRB
6th Jan 2003, 03:12
Does anyone know if any ex AN pilots are actually going to do this? I have asked around the AN drivers and nobody has heard anything (or they aren't admitting to it). Most of the 737 AN pilots have now found work anyway.

Kaptin M
6th Jan 2003, 07:30
Your second, bracketed option...or they aren't admitting to it...has an all too familiar ring to it, EPIRB, based on the past, infamous history of the characters involved. :mad:

Wizofoz
6th Jan 2003, 10:10
So, to re-iterate, not ONE post '89 pilot has been identified as being involved in this, the ONLY character we know of just happens to be, apparently, the ONLY pre-loved who isn't related to Mother Teresa, but we'll just turn the thread into a bashing sesion anyway?

Still, if there ARE recent ex- Ansett guys having their careers ruined by listening to AFAP types, perhaps history IS repeating itself!

Spad
6th Jan 2003, 18:07
Err, TIMMEEEE, just so there’s absolutely no confusion here, I had my tongue so far into my cheek in that last post that it was in the ear of the bloke in the seat next to me.

I was attempting some (I thought) not s subtle irony in mentioning how some of the very ‘gentlemen’ who ‘Gilligan’ appears to be targeting as potential contractors/employees, (and who you describe as ‘genetic sludge’), have used the ‘I had to do it for my family’ as the all-forgiving excuse for doing something very similar some unmentionable number of years ago. Some of them even flew half way around the world to do so, and became ‘true blue (blew?) Aussies’ into the bargain thanks to Bob’ork’s rather lose interpretation of what constitutes a political refugee when he granted the same (to use your word again) ‘genetic sludge’ permanent Australian residence.

Some of think that the difference between what these people did then and what some of the same people MIGHT do if 'Gilligan' succeeds in his very dubious venture now is a bit like the diffreence between being a 'little bit pregnant' and 'very pregnant' - ie, no difference at all.

TIMMEEEE
6th Jan 2003, 20:53
Spad I stand by my previous posting.

Both Gilligan and whoever he recruits are in my mind genetic sludge to coin a phrase because thats what you'd have to be to undercut those actually peacefully employed and then put them on the street.

The big difference here Spad is that these people are happily employed and along comes this scum saying both he and his cohorts will undercut what the employer already thinks is fair and reasonable - thereby rendering those current employees jobless in whats currently the worst economic period in aviation history post WWII.
What's even worse is that Gilligan will be recruiting those that not only took his own job some years hence but that these other individuals will repeat the process yet again!!!!

There should be a descriptive term for someone that low on the food chain of life.

Sal-e
1st Feb 2003, 08:52
Hey guess what the latest gossip is? Air Nauru, after thoughts of getting an -800, have shelved that idea and are going instead for an ex Ansett 767, apparently at the same cost......hmmmm I wonder who'll be flying it??? Any thoughts?.....

amos2
1st Feb 2003, 09:13
I would think the Air Nauru pilots will be flying any equipment that the airline operates. Why would it be otherwise? ;)

Buster Hyman
1st Feb 2003, 11:45
SHlT boxes, for SHlT islands!!:D :D

Sal-e
2nd Feb 2003, 02:48
That was unnecessarily harsh, busterhymen. Are you like that by default?? Me thinks that the cheapest option, and being a bankrupt country, Nauru would do the unthinkable and hire ex-Ansett drivers and make the incumbents redundant,...under the guidance of Gilligan......only speculting off cours. But it is a worry.

Capn Laptop
2nd Feb 2003, 05:06
Well a new 800 is around $54 million USD. If they are paying more than $5-6 million for an Ansett 767 they are paying tooooo much!!

Sal-e
2nd Feb 2003, 06:05
I meant average operating costs all up, Laptop

amos2
2nd Feb 2003, 07:57
Aahh!...that name Gilligan again eh!...let's hope not!!

Capn Laptop
2nd Feb 2003, 11:57
Even for average operating cost the 767 would be dearer.

It has a capacity not much higher than an 800, the ANC's are much greater, the fuel burn significantly higher, the maintenance much much higher (being old buckets) and the crewing costs higher.

On a seat per km basis the 800 is miles in front...

cabin secure
2nd Feb 2003, 14:55
You boys at it again??
Ever heard the expression " let it go!"
I'd sooner see guys working than sticking their head in the oven..

DOWN, THR33_GR33Ns
25th Feb 2003, 08:24
Just when it looked like this Gilligan character had rightly disappeared into oblivion, a good sorce tells me that he has applied for the CEO vacancy at Air Nuaru. Unfortunately he appears not to have responded directly to the advertisement in the Friday Austalian some time back but has chosen to go directly to his mates in power to push his case. It is intriguing that, if he felt he was genuinely competitive in his pursuit for this position, then he would have been happy to be pitched on his merits directly against the other half dozen or so aspirants. Instead, it is said, he has had to resort to dubious means to try and get somewhere. What worries me is that the fellows currently employed there might find their jobs threatened again, as they were in the recent past, with his overtures to get cheaper pilots in place - and to whose ultimate advantage?

leopards NEVER change their spots.

fruitbatflyer
26th Feb 2003, 00:01
This advertisement brought the usual run of drunks, skunks, mercenaries and misfits out off their park benches and alleyways.
Fortunately, there were also a couple of good applicants, at least one of whom I am told did the job very well in the past, but would not grovel to some of the silly demands the government of the day put on him, so had to leave.
Let us just hope that the new government is enlightened enough to appoint someone who WILL stand up to them if necessary to look after the airline's interests rather than those of individuals.
If Gilligan comes, I predict that the high pilot turnover of the past will start all over. His el cheapo sandcrabs won't save the airline any money in the long term and you can bet his own expensive tastes will soak up any short term money that the government might think it is saving.

chimbu warrior
26th Feb 2003, 03:42
This may all be academic anyway.......................justplanes.com is reporting that Air Nauru are about to cease operations due to money problems.

Sal-e
26th Feb 2003, 21:41
chimbu,
air nauru has always been on the verge of folding. there is money to pay for it's leases and whatever debts they have. the good old pollies over there always leave it to the last minute and will even allow delays, disruptions, general panic, etc before stepping in. in fact, the longer they leave it, the more they look like heroes when they all of a sudden swoop down from on high to save the umbilical cord of the small republic. don't forget, it is election year. the man who dishes out to save the island wins the votes. (usually from embezzled republic funds anyway) the pollies would then thank the peoples republic of china or the republic of china or even australia for rescuing them, just to divert a little bit of attention away from themselves. the main thing is whatever it is that'll make em stay in office just a little while longer.....to really clean up the house!!!

Z Force
19th May 2003, 09:11
Obviously this didn't work out but I have heard someone was recently employed by Virgin.

vhxxxx
21st May 2003, 15:42
Am I correct ? Is this airline:s abeviation start with the letters PA or is gilligans PA???

amos2
21st May 2003, 17:50
...I can't believe it...the illiterate is here too!

Back to your swamp matey!!