Still flying after Ansett - Vol 3 - if allowed.

[Eastwest Loco]

I hope Woomera will allow this, as there have been more positives than negatives in the preceeding and immensely well populated similar rooms.

Keep the same level of decorum, and maybe it will.

I just needed to say - leftfrontside - Thank you so much for what you have said. I did step on toes but out of ineptitude in phrasing what I wanted to say. The day I get nasty and venemous, I want Woomera to put a permanent block on me and my ISP.

I do not think myself worthy of being an honourary member of either group leftfrontside, as I do not and will never have the skills of you good people. My skills are doing the impossible with fare constructions and routings these days, but that comes with the inevitable disaster in the accounting system that a lateral mind produces. God help my accounts dude - he needs all the help he can get.

With regards to having the bottle that all showed in the face of a mongrel regime, I applaud you all for taking your individual stands. Apart from those that sought to do it for anything but survival or solidarity, that decision would be the hardest any of you will hopefully have to make in your lives, on both sides. In the case of us mere groundies, there was no support system such as the AFAP. I was Sales Manager Tas for Eeenie Weenie then, under the auspices of Ansett and on the skids to inevitable oblivion - no Union covered us, so we were just passengers. Same applied to the trafficys - FCU - think of he worst possible permutation of those letters and you have them totally described. Totally useless. Just a money collecting and practising disappearing acts when Members were in trouble.

I take on board the "never forgive" LFS and do understand it deep down, as I understand those that went back defending that action. The majority did what they did for reasons that they rationalised after much gut wrenching and indecision. It cannot have been easy either way.

It is nearly a Masonic Lodge, our industry. Mates I have worked with over the last 28 years are still mates, and get togethers bring back all the old memories, the good and the bad.

A stalwart of TAA DPO, Jack Snare was buried this week. Our beloved "Commission Man" (stood for election to the ANAC) succumbed to cancer, but up to 2 months ago he was regularly in my Agency discussing what the industry was doing. It is and alway is what we are, from refueller to Senior Check Captain.

My main worry for all of you now is, as I have said your vunerability as a group. If a compromise cannot be reached, then an accord must be made to watch each other's backs. We seem to be moving back into the same "dead zone" that preceeded '89, this time from external events and not necessarily Management excess. Please please please, tolerate to the point you can present a front that is truly united and strong.

I do not think Australia or the world could cope with a meltdown such as '89.

We groundhogs who worked the Airports considered 95%of the tech crew our mates, and they considered us the same but a subtle and omnipresent sense of who was in charge was all pervading. The other 5% were probably deselected from your blocks too.

The flight deck crew was our God, as it indeed should have been. Apart from a few instances from the 5%, what was said was what was done.

The internal confusion when our mates fought each other was incredibly disorienting. No ever seeing some of those wonderful guys and girls again cut deeply.

All I want is an Airline back and mates to be mates again.

Thanks again leftfrontside.

My late Uncle Ken "Boomer" Collins would approve of what you said, and that is more than good enough for me.

Best all.

EWL

[amos2]

Well, I gotta give you full marks Loco!

You should have been one of us!

Then again, I guess you really are!! ;)

[Woomera]

Nurries Loco, you are doing a very excellent "moderating" job.:D :ok:

Woomera shall smiteth any knave from either side who gets "up close personal with you".:p

Unless of course she's a gorgeous, young thing, seeking succour, solace..... etc etc, blah blah blah.:}

[Eastwest Loco]

Amos - thank you too - that is high praise indeed. It also very much appreciated. I still feel I would have failed the physical though, but will settle for the position on resident idiot savant.

I am neither one nor the other amos, and cannot select a side as all were and in many cases still are my mates, and I would like to include yourself and all other PPruNers in that if I may be so bold.

Please all address the "clear and present danger" the current situation presents as one - just for yourselves, if not for each other. Just be bleeding careful and look for the hidden agendas.

Woomera - it is good to know that common sense and moderation is still no replacement for outrageous levels of testosterone. Go you good thang!

ps: Woomera - always ask for a current medical clearance and have your entire body vulcanised just to be sure.

best all

EWL

[Spad]

Interesting how you repeat you still have ‘good mates’ on both sides, EWL. A quick question, if I may… you’re in a real family crisis – and I mean a real family crisis – where let’s say the life of one of your kids is at stake. For whatever reason, maybe a serious illness yourself, you can’t do the necessary yourself – you have to rely upon one of your mates, and it’s a huge ‘ask’, for let’s say it’s not a simple matter of a quick drive to the hospital for the person you choose, but a really hard slog, where the person you choose will have to show extreme intestinal fortitude, even courage, in keeping EWL Jnr alive, where everyone else will be screaming at him to let the child die, maybe for their own safety

It’s pretty obvious that most parents in such a horrible situation would think very carefully (if they were in the ‘lucky’ position of having more than one option in such a terrible dilemma) as to who they’d entrust with their child’s life. You’d consider many things, but surely one of your first considerations would be the track records of the people available your mates. (I won’t prolong the agony here, for everyone here must know exactly where I’m going with this.)

So which mate are you going to ask, EWL? The one from Camp ‘A’(fap), or the one from Camp (sca)‘B’?

[leftfrontside]

EWL thanks - compardraie appreciate your understanding.

[Eastwest Loco]

Spad

That is an interesting situation you paint, and I am sure a call to one on either side would produce the same satisfactory results.

Now, right back at you - in the same situation yourself, if the only person available within range was a "former mate" now on the other side, do you not think he would do everything he could to ensure a safe outcome? I believe he would, as I am sure you would if the help was asked of you by a former mate.

Some things go beyond personal differences, no matter how deep and bitter and such a situation I believe to be one.

Looking beyond the dispute, we are all still humans Spad and I don't think this is realy a relevant "what if" as I do not know anyone in any walk of life that would not do their damdest if called upon in such a way.

Good food for thought though.

Best regards

EWL

[phnompenhkid]

EWL,

What a diplomat you are, and I sincerely mean it. You have made it quite clear to all that you take no sides, but yet they come back at you with the most stupid scenarios looking for support, and making the ridiculous assumption that they have that support. I read nothing of the sort in your posts, just middle ground, and only a total moron could read it otherwise.

For you Spad, I would do all I could to assist you in the situation you outline, i.e., sick child etc., and I would extend that to you as well even though you`d be calling me a F$%#&%g $cab whilst I was doing it - if you were conscious.

You guys` minds must be full of $hit. Once again this is akin to likening yourselves to holocaust survivors or WWII diggers both of which are dumb analogies.

Good on you EWL. You`re a decent bloke, and I commend you on your position. So say all of us.

[TheNightOwl]

You beat me to it, EWL, but I'd like to ask Spad - If you ever found yourself in the overly-dramatic position you painted, are you claiming that you would, in spite of the obvious antipathy toward perceived "scabs", consider asking one to help? Could it be that a "scab" would be unacceptable in terms of dire assistance and, if so, then what does that say about your system of priorities? Alternatively, would you offer to help a "scab" in the same position, or would your "principles" choke you to the point of being unable to offer assistance?

Kind regards,

TheNightOwl.:*

[leftfrontside]

PPK I think we all know whose mind is the only one full of $hit on this forum, it's obvious with your limited vocabulary that you are unable to conduct a civilised debate without the sort of diatribe below.


You guys' minds must be full of $hit


:8

[phnompenhkid]

Are you kidding lfs? On the odd occasion I sprout something like this, and it is the worst I ever have, then you come back with this rubbish.

So it`s OK to call someone a F$%#&%g $cab, applaud such $cabs committing suicide, liken yourselves to holocaust survivors, etc., but not to suggest that somebody`s head is full of $hit. You`ve got me. You are quite obviously at the lower end of the IQ scale, if not the lowest.

I must have too much spare time sitting in the office today. Must stop this or I could end up being as fanatical and stupid as you guys.

[Eastwest Loco]

Hose it down guys, please.

I am starting to think it is easier to take sides than stay just where I am. No intentions of doing so, but please play nice.

It is patently obvious that the rift will stay. So be it. I tried, not that I had the slightest right to wade in in the first place. Thank you all for your tolerance on that point.

Fifth attempt - are you guys and girls in a position to enact a united front if management decides to wield the axe? Please have a little look at that for me and assess your risk factors and support mechanisms.

Can we at least get you to discuss this without degenerating into a slagfest?

Woomera, please hand me a number 7 nulla nulla mate. Some serious thacking needs to be enacted.

I also wait with interest to see Spad's reply.

Best all

EWL

[bonvol]

United front. I don't think so these days EWL.

Unity and pilots don't go together in Australia anymore. If management want to give us a good rogering then the best we can hope for is they use at least a modest amount of vaseline.

Qantas dont even bother consulting AIPA before they institute unilateral changes to seniority so you can see how much respect they have for the union and their own pilots.

With the world situation the way it is though pilots with jobs are sitting ducks for a "restructuring". It's happening in SIA as we speak. Not good for the young fellas coming up at the moment.

[Wiley]

‘B’ Team, (liked that one, Spad), I appreciate that it’s good debating technique, but I believe you’re (deliberately?) missing Spad’s point.

EWL, he’s asking you if had a choice of two people to carry out a task that was vitally, even terminally important to you and your loved ones, which would you choose?

(1) The one who’s displayed that he’ll go with the flow or act in his own self-interest (eg, “for the sake of his family”) when things get really tough, or

(2) one who’s shown he’ll hang in there, (maybe “on a stupid matter of principle”?), even when everyone around him is telling him that all is lost?



-------------

I know it really upsets many (most, it would seem, in the ‘B’ Team) when military parallels are drawn to the 89 business, but, without in any way attempting to put ‘the stay out’ 89ers in anywhere near the same ballpark as our soldiers who fought and died in real wars, I believe I can still ask a question using a military campaign to give an example very similar to the one Spad has put.

Everyone acknowledges that with the notable exception of the withdrawal, the Gallipoli campaign was in almost every way a total and utter cockup, from initial planning right through to the most mundane points of execution. And I’m sure that no one was more appreciative of this than the soldiers on the peninsula, right from Day One when the Australians and New Zealanders saw that they were even put ashore at the wrong *** spot to face near impossible terrain as well as Turkish guns.

If ever anyone had the right to say “This is bloody ridiculous. The leadership’s got it all wrong. We’re out of here.”, it was those men. But they didn’t. They stuck it out despite successive mistakes made by their leadership and even if they didn’t win, they prevailed. The much larger battles in France weren’t much different until the Australian General John Monash took over the ANZAC Corps – a succession of huge blood-lettings planned and directed by Generals who had little idea of what they were asking their men to face.

There were a few, even if we rarely hear of them, who did ‘get out of there’ by one means or another, either by crawling across to the enemy to surrender or by some less direct means, like desertion. (Although none that I know of took up arms against their former comrades.) [I’m drifting off the point, but after the Armistice in 1918, it’s documented that some Australian units went in search of the deserters from their units who were hiding in bunkers in the old front lines and carried out summary justice on some of those they caught.]

My question is the same as Spad’s. If later in life, you had to trust your life or your family’s lives to one of two men and one of those two men had placed himself in category ‘1’ as above in the past, which one would you choose?

I can’t say I’m sorry if this offends some, (because I’m not), but I think most people would give the same answer to my question that they’d give to Spad’s, and those who are offended by Spad’s question are in fact affronted because, however proud they say they might be of their actions in 89, they’re very uncomfortable with the answer they know damn near every person in such a situation would give.

Over to you, Ross… Tell us again how proud you are of yourself.

[Eastwest Loco]

Wiley, I fully understand the implications of Spad's question and embelishing the alleged character of either side will not change the answer, nor will it make a person on either side less lilely to assist the percieved "enemy" in a time of major trauma for them.

You dressed it up nicely, Wiley is indeed a good pseudonym, but the answer stands. I would not hesitate to call either becuse I fail to percieve that either group was wrong in following their personal convictions.

Hello??

Are you really there??

You are reminding me of several clients I have. They think that asking the same question a different way over and over will eventually get them the answer they want. Sadly - for them at least - it will not.

Likewise with your query. My statement stands.

bonvol - damned shame, as you are all very vunerable, which is a fallout situation of '89 and perhaps what management wanted.

It may be time to address that little problem before it bites.


Best regards

EWL

[leftfrontside]

Man ppk YOU are something else where do you drag up that sh......t from I could think of a lot of words to describe someone like you but I guess "microbe" just about says it all.

I'm with SPAD the whole of the World Aviation Scene knows that the "B Team" was AN after '89, their record stands as testament. A now defunct Airline and 16000 on the street. So if you hire something from that wreckage you get the "B" mob.

:} :}

[Wizofoz]

“Errr… I think we’re going the wrong way to get to the Children’s Hospital, Spad.”
Said Eastwest Loco, pensively.

“Maybe so, but this is the way we ALL AGREED we would go, so we’re STICKING WITH OUR DECISTION!” Said Spad, proudly fondling his “Brian for Pope” badge.

“Yes, but surely the POINT was to get my sick kid to hostpital.” said EWL, trying to be reasonable.

“Maybe at first, but since that cop sent us on this detour, it is our DUTY to maintain our course, REGARDLESS of the consequences!!” Spad espoused.

“Mate, that sign said “Cliff ahead”, maybe we should think about stopping?”

“Never!!” said Spad, “We WILL NEVER STRAY FROM OUR COURSE, and if it hurts other people that’s just TOUGH TITTIESS (got that one from Kap M, good eh?)”

“Mate, you are headed for disaster, everyone has told you so, you are taking my family with you, LETME OUT!!!” Said EWL, leaving the vehicle.

“WHAT!!” said Spad “You TRAITOR!! You’re nothing but a SC….” His voice trailed off as the car disappeared over the precipice.

EWL picked up his sick child and trudged off towards the hospital.

[vhxxxx]

I am amazed at the short memory of wiley. When it comes to similarities of a military campaign and 89. In 89 when the juniors were on bread and water for the union fight, the fat cats had already broke ranks and had applied for jobs with Cathay , SQ , Malaysian. Whist over there , they were telling us to hang in there and win the battle.When the fight was to be won , who were to be the first back? If the union had ordered us all to stay and fight as a group things might have been different. The deserters were the ones who left the battle early. These are the ones that need to tracked down and what ever.!!!

[M Nitpak]

vhxxxx,

It's called selective memory.

Young F/O's at the time were always going to lose out, but this was never explained to the junior troops at the time.

You can also add Gulf Air, Emirates as destinations for those "infamous elder statesmen" from the class of '89.:mad: :mad:

[Truth Seekers Int'nl]

the AFAP asked the membership to stick together- they NEVER DID. ask Cathay Pacific, Singapore Airlines, Malaysian, Gulf Air, Emerites and the list goes on.............

the AFAP said the writs would be a scare tactic used by the companies and would be dealt with accordingly - they NEVER WERE. the writs scared the AFAP into persuading the membership to resign their positions in the companies. this allowed EVERY FOREIGN MISFIT pilot into the country (assisted by Bob Hawke) to take the jobs of decent aussie pilots.

when 700 pilots had already left for overseas jobs, the AFAP were still insisting everyone STICK TOGETHER. the companies were filling positions with overseas rabble and the AFAP really thought the pilots left standing would continue to let this debacle proceed further.

NOT IN YOUR life !

[Sid Departure]

Thanks Wizofoz, I enjoyed your very witty post, although I don't think it's quite correct. If we're talking in analogies, then forget about your car, it was actually a bus and yes, it was heading for the cliff, but with the AFAP's collective foot on the brake and with everyone sticking together, the bus would have stopped well short.
But, no, there was a group on board that panicked and lost their nerve. They took their foot off the brake and lept from the bus.
After dusting themselves off they then committed an even more atrocious act, by chasing after the bus and helping to push it over the cliff.

Cheers.

[oicur12]

"1) The one who’s displayed that he’ll go with the flow or act in his own self-interest (eg, “for the sake of his family”) when things get really tough, or "

Wiley.

This one statement speaks volumes about 89.

If choosing to support ones spouse and kids over ones beer buddy is self interest then that aint no "mate" of mine

[Truth Seekers Int'nl]

But, no, there was a group on board that panicked and lost their nerve. They took their foot off the brake and lept from the bus.


................and Cathay Pacific, Singapore Airlines, Malaysian, Gulf Air were very appreciative that they did and re-paid them handsomely with generous expatriate remuneration packages, reduced income tax (in some cases zero tax), subsidised housing & schooling and many more benefits. the rest of the passengers that stayed on the bus soon realised they were being taken for a ride by the AFAP and decided to take control. luckily, only the very inexperienced passengers were left on the bus before it went over the cliff so in the the end the AFAP thought they had done a pretty good job !

[Spad]

Wizofoz, I did get a chuckle out of your witty reply - that's what good debate should be all about. However, you'll forgive me if I still prefer Sid Departure's slant on the topic.

It's quite obvious that this point (among many) was discussed at length in post 89 AN and TN cockpits as part of the rationalisation process, particularly in attempting to convince the new FO's as to the wisdom of their seniors' move back to work.

However, another slant altogether could be put to it. Most acknowledged quite early into the Dispute that jobs were going to be fewer post dispute, and the 'departed' were seen as only guaranteeing that all, even the most junior, still 'on the careering bus' would be assured of a job when all who chose to returned to work together still under the union. (You'll remember that one of the main sticking points with the companies leading up to the Dispute was the number of senior pilots leaving the two companies for far better paying work overseas - or doesn't that particular memory fit in as conveniently as others?)

But I'm sure that despit that, that argument will hold no water with 'Camp B'.

oicur12, glad to see you're still hard at it selectively picking the bits of the argument (and only those bits) that fit your argument. You know as well as I do that your comment is totally spurious to the point being raised.

[Eastwest Loco]

Spad

Speaking of points raised, your reply to my answer to your question would be appreciated.

best all

EWL

[leftfrontside]

The offer to share a malt with EWL is withdrawn - the bottle maybe, over the head.

lfs :E

[oicur12]

Spad,

Gee, sorry for debating an issue that fits my argument.

How silly of me.

[Binoculars]

Spad seems to be a little short of an answer to EWL's nice deflection of his ridiculous hypothetical. If Spad and any of the usual suspects would genuinely refuse to entrust the life of their loved ones to an 89er if there were no alternative it proves the extent to which their brain is corroded from the inside, and should provide them with a reason to rethink.

I always read these 89 threads because they continue to give me an insight into human nature which I have to accept, but I usually stay away from commenting since I had no part in the dispute. But Spad's desperate attempt to prove a point shocked me.

I can ignore amos's repetitive bile spitting with his ludicrous winking smilies (where is his literate alter ego Tool Time these days?), but Spad, can you be serious? Yeah, if your kid was sick and you needed to rely on someone, naturally you would take one of the "good guys" if you had a choice. But if you are prepared to come into this thread and state that you wouldn't trust one of the "bad guys" to look after said kid, you need psychiatric help.

[Fubaar]

Maybe Spad’s gone to work? I can’t answer for him, but if I can give my reply to EWL’s question: I think you’re all quite purposely missing Spad and Wiley’s point, which is, how could anyone ever trust one of these people with anything that really mattered? They’re ‘heroes’. They’ve been ‘heroes’ for fourteen years and they’ll remain ‘heroes’ to the day they die.

As for EWL’s call for them to join together with all the other people in Australian aviation to fight for a better deal, errr… we tried that, EWL – and not to put too fine a point to it, they piked when things got tough, so how in the world could you expect anyone to trust them to do anything but repeat their performance of fourteen years ago if it even got tough again?

Which is exactly the point Spad and Wiley were attempting to make. The ‘sick kids’ line is a red herring, but Binoculars, put me down as in need of psychiatric help as well, because there’s no way I’d trust one of my kids to any one of them if I could possibly avoid it. Spad’s question included the fact that you had the choice between a hero and a non-hero, which you conveniently forgot.

(PS: Spad, judging by the over-reaction in some quarters, I think you might have stung a few people with your question.)

[Wizofoz]

Fubarr,

Unless you and every other '89er has, for the last 14 years, refused to get on an Australian domestic flight, you've trusted the "Heros" to fly you and presumably your family in a jet transport aircraft! Or isn't flying "Something that matters" in your opinion?

And before you say "But I said if I had a choice" well, there was always the train, no doubt driven by a good, paid up union man.

To suggest someones decision during an industrial dispute identifies them as being a reliable person or not is drivel of the supidest kind. It was a hard choice in difficult times (ask Kap M, he made BOTH decistions!). There were good guys and ar....les on both sides.

If the AFAPs only strategy was based on the idea that no-one go back, it was flawed and unworkable from the start (as history bore out.). Human nature means that, in the end, most will do what is best for themselves. That is a mathmatical principle used in all manner of statistical analasis. And on that score, I contend that most of the STAYOUTS did so because they thought it best served THEMSELVES INDIVIDUALY as most believed the 1) The AFAP would win and 2)they would be blackbanned if they went back. It's easy to be noble when the alternative is a firing squad. If that is not the case, then why were the picket lines, phone calls, clickers, ganging up in pubs etc. etc. necessary? To "Remind" people to be noble and loyal?

[OhBehave]

The AFAP fell victim to “group think” - no dissenting voice was allowed (the town hall being a great example). History has shown the most common result of groupthink is to underestimate the strength and/or resolve of the forces working against you.

BM and JR had little idea of the forces they were up against.

Maybe a modicum of democracy would have allowed for a different outcome.

These pages are a valuable insight into the minds of the 89ers – although they see themselves as victors, they display classic traits of people suffering from victim mentality. Blame rests with everyone but themselves.

[Wizofoz]

Good point Ohbehave,

One guy I know voted "no" in the "secret" ballot, someone looked over his shoulder, and he was fronted and threatened by a vicious group of "professtionals" outside the meeting. Another told me he voted "yes"..Because the senior captain standing beside him watched what he wrote like a hawk!

Would any AFAP member like to state whether a dissenting point of view was ever aired at any of the meetings, and if so, what the reception to it was like?

[Eastwest Loco]

410

I take your point, and Fubaar I know you did try to restructure in '89 and it all went pear shaped. However in this day and age you collectively have a better chance of a fair go, as the heads of Government are not nearly as in the pockets of the airlines.

This age of freedom of information would make it impossible for the backhanders that obviously flowed to go unnoticed.

I reiterate what I said before, and would trust a loved one in the ridiculous, but not totally impossible scenario proposed by Spad.

I am also sure that if any of you had to call on a former mate in a time of dire trouble, that you would be surprised, even if they did give you an earful first.

My biggest worry with the aforementioned scenario is would you even call a former in the first place?

Humans first, '89er or heroes second good people.

Best all

EWL

[amos2]

Get a real kick out of setting up and sucking in the Sls like B... you've made my day, mate! ;) ;)

[Eastwest Loco]

Uhhhh amos?

May I please ask if I resemble that remark?

Just like to know who it was aimed at. PM if you like because I have lost the plot. Many would say i never had it in the first place.:}

Best regards

EWL

[amos2]

It ain't you EWL!

[Eastwest Loco]

Thanks amos

For a second there!!

Please do not let it get personal though. This had been going fairly well, with a good deal of venting and hopefully that will assist toward all of our futures. Woomera has been extremely tolerant and I am sure we all really appreciate that.

Best regards

EWL

Also, can anyone please advise if it is possible to post a pic here without having to load it into a website, and if so how so?

EWL

[Binoculars]

EWL,

I think the ever-eloquent amos has decided that I am a scab lover. You can't believe how shattered I am at that. :{ How proud the 89ers must be to have him on their side with his thoughtful opinions.

Now, which icon was it? Oh yes..... ;)

I'll leave the semi-literate amos to aim another brilliant, incisive and quirky one-liner at me. I won't bother to reply. Will that make it even, Woomera?

Fubaar, of course you would prefer one of your group A mates if you had a choice. Anybody in your position would. Equally, if you had no choice in the situation described you WOULD trust one of your adversaries, because you had to. If you didn't, that's when the psychiatric help would be required. So it's not really a matter of distrust, just a measure of your and Spad's distaste. Different things, really, and that's all I meant.

[elektra]

I must have been at different meetings then. My recollections are nothing like some of those posted here. Our secret ballots were truly secret, tho' not quite as secret as the activities of "mates" who voted one way but had already signed to croos the picket line

And at my union meetings, well into 1990, the entire union heirarchywas there and to my recollection, stayed to receive hefty zillion dollar fines for carrying out activity voted for by the very guys who ratted.

Perhaps it was too long ago and my memory's fading. The only thing I really recall was the bit where I voted to go back as an AFAP member or not at all.

Safe flying wherever you all are now

[amos2]

Go away B!...you're a ground hog, a Wannabee and a pest!

[vhxxxx]

The meetings were always a democratic technique Wizofoz! There was never such dramatic events as you described. There was , although , a more sinister technique applied. So called mates that wouldnt even piss on you in the crew room before the dispute, all of a sudden became your best mate during it.

[Rind Skin]

Strange how we get this warning on D&G to behave and be nice. But people like amos who happen to be on a particular side can make posts that "persistently flame" and the like. So what does an 89er or supporter of 89er or in amos's case, wannabe 89er have to do to get kicked out of here?

Amos adds nothing constructive to ANY debate but demonstrates its gross ignorance and contemptible nature by making comments like, and I quote:

"sod off tosser"
"Get a real kick out of setting up and sucking in..."
"you are a complete and utter twit!!"
"...What an idiot you are!!!"
"...puppets name is, to sod off..."
"Jeez!!...what a pathetic twit you are..."
etc

Plus innumerable, highly articulate posts using the word "scab", obviously one of its personal favourites.

Question: Would anyone supporting the other side live as long posting senseless abuse (flaming) ? I tend to think not.

[Eastwest Loco]

Now here is some food for thought for you ALL.

Back in the days when Brian G ran Eeenie Weenie, and the F28's were only just on fleet, there was a TN/AN Pilots strike.

The EW guys decided as a whole not to go out, as it was not of relevance to them and as a generality they loved the Company and their lot in life.

The 6pm rush out of TN gate 10 at Tulla consisted of 2 F27's rolling line astern - one to ABX to connect the F28 to SYD and one to Tas, beautifully orchestrated for the 6.30 news.

The threats started to roll in. Not to the Pilots themselves, but to family members after the pilot had departed home to fly their blocks. It was not just a handful of instances either, as I am sure will be attested to by EW crews of the time. Pilots calling and threatening the families of fellow pilots.

My late mate Peter Watson - ex everything to do with freight,and then EW Cargo and I were walking back to Gate 10 jut passing block 5 which was the TN Loco hideout with a couple of crew heading down to their aeroplane, when a couple of TN flight deck crew appeared ahead of them. They had gained security access on their ID cards, and were attempting to menace the crew.

Watto and I stepped in and offered new and FOC dental patterns and the threat sudenly went away.

This was well pre '89, and I knew both the TN captains involved as they were both ex F27. I later learned that one had gone back and the other stayed out and went overseas.

My point?

I am sure you all consider this to have been unacceptable behaviour, but wait! One was from each side of the fence, and who knows who might have been conducting the terror campaign on wives and families from the anonymity of a phone box.

It was perpetrated, in a visible and open sense by compatriots who later wound up on either side of a much more serious dispute.

How on earth you can justify slagging off at each other 14 years after a dark time for all of us, with a past that included such behaviour as mentioned above is of wonder to me.

For those in the room who were involved in that dispute, I would like to think that none of you were involved in the low acts perpetrated then, but be aware that there is good and bad on both sides of '89,as I am sure some are still out there somewhere. The king of the "embelished" log book was an '89er. The worst Commercial Pilot I have ever had the displeasure of despatching tried to go back, but management knocked it on the head.

I am not without blame either. It is amazing what you can do to the following day's consolidated plan with a bad attitude towards TN (who were giving us hell) ,and a programmers sign-in.

Please look within your own ranks and assess, before you have a go at former mates rather than some that allegedly stand beside you. The vast majority on both sides are good and decent people, but be aware there are some that you would not let slide out of your peripheral vision as well.

Best all

EWL

[permFO]

EWL - Its interesting that no one from the more aggreived side of the fence in this "discussion" have picked up on your point about the many businesses that went bankrupt because of their actions. Its all about "we was robbed" and the the hurt that was done to them and not a mention about the hurt that was done to many, many innocent individuals all because of a 29% pay increase. I also note a reference to the shearers strike in the 1890's and how the strike breakers were never forgiven. The irony in that is that strike was also a catalyst for the formation of the ALP! Also the BIG difference between 89 and Australias military past is that the military fought for their countries national interest and not for self interest.

[Eastwest Loco]

Your points are well taken PermFO, but what I dread now is the incoming.

'89 was the year we ALL lost.

A great deal more than just wages and material things.

EWL

[permFO]

On that I think most will agree. With the advent of low cost carriers and the current downsizing then pilots wages and conditions will be under considerable pressure. The pendulum I think will ultimately swing the other way but not for at least 10 years by which time there just won't be the flow through of self funded pilots and airlines are once again going to have to pay to attract enough people.

[leftfrontside]

That last post of yours leaves me speechless EWL, what were or who were you in a past life.

Sister Teresa!!!!!!!!

How many times do you have to be told

I DON"T WANT THOSE A......H.......s IN MY LIFE EVER, AGAIN

I have got on with mine THERE WILL BE NO RECONCILIATION and I don't need some Psalm singing SOB like you telling me and my compatriates to "kiss and make up"

Get a life EWL :* :*

[Rind Skin]

leftfrontside sums it up, really. So why does this thread persist other than as sport for some?

It's plain to see that the 89-ers aren't willing to forgive or forget. And the scabs can't un-do what they did, even if they wanted to. So who cares about discussing it anymore?

Why is EWL pushing this whole thing? Is it a feel-good mission? Give it up and move on to something worth pursuing.

Earlier references to letting this thread go on because "progress is being made" or "we're getting somewhere" or whatever are laughable. It won't end until both sides have been planted. Even then, children warped by endless indoctrination might even prepetuate it. I think this being allowed to continue here is just a way to let one side get their kicks just a little longer through childish torment.

[Wiley]

OK, permFO, I’ll give it a try.

It’s undeniable that the Airline Dispute was the coup de grace for many businesses that did go under in 89-90, but nothing is as simple as it seems. Many people in the tourist industry, particularly in North Queensland, blame ‘the pilots’ for their businesses’ demise, but a closer look will show that many were in serious trouble long before the Dispute, not because of anything the pilots did, but because of poor reading of the tourist market. All too many of the hoteliers had aimed for the top end of the market, providing four and five star accommodation to what turned out to be a majority back packer/economy tourist clientele. In the months before August 89, I heard of average occupancy rates of 30% and some as low as 10% in some of the resort hotels in Cairns (not to forget “the pilots’ good friend”, Keith Williams’ Hamilton Island Resort and other resorts in the Whitsundays).

Many proprietors and businessmen were on very slim operating margins, (like many are at the best of times, but 89 before the Dispute was much worse than usual for many if not most), and even had it lasted only a week or two, the Dispute would have undeniably been the straw that broke the camel’s back for those already hanging on by a thread.

So what would have happened if the Prime Monster had not quite literally thrown the law of the land out the window at the behest of his corpulent mate by ILLEGALY using the military and overseas aircraft and crews? If the RAAF, and later on, the overseas charter companies had not provided a vestige of an air service for those first four months, (for that’s all it was), a conclusion would have been reached within weeks if not days, and many of the businesses that suffered closure would have survived, even many of those already close to the brink.

Would that have meant that the pilots had ‘won’? Probably not. The pilots’ demand was not, as so many insist, a 30% pay rise – it was to be able to negotiate directly with their employers. The 29.47% pay rise was an ambit claim, and anyone with an even passing knowledge of the Australian industrial arbitration system would recognise that.

But the corpulent one didn’t want that. Mindful that deregulation was coming the very next year and rightly concerned because of the overall high AN staff costs (not just pilots) that would give a great advantage to any of the new start airlines sure to come into the Australian market post-deregulation, he’d been planning this ambush for too long to let the chance slip. It’s rightly been pointed out that the catalyst for the Dispute was the TN contract renegotiation and not AN’s, but TN negotiators had been instructed not to even open the file the AFAP presented to them one the first day of the ‘lock in’ at Lorne. They also admitted later in the Dispute that they had been told by senior TN management that “it was Ansett’s show” – that AN were calling the shots right from the start.

The whole idea of the contract negotiations being a ‘lock in’ affair was to force both parties into a quick result. The pilots may well have got their 29.47% pay rise, (although it’s highly doubtful), but they would have had to concede r quite substantial trade-offs, some of which were already in the document the AFAP put on the table – that remained unread by the TN negotiators.

There’s no way the AFAP can evade some of the blame for the events of 1989. Probably their biggest mistake was in not understanding that the people they were negotiating with came to the table in total bad faith, with no intention of reaching a negotiated settlement. Ansett had been planning the confrontation for some years and they had been advised by their highly paid advisors from overseas that, going on their experience in the US with Eastern and Continental, they could achieve total victory in a matter of days. I believe the figure they quoted was four days. And this might well have proven to be true had the companies managed to deliver the personal writs to each and every pilot.

To add to the confusion was the threat any catch up pay rise would have been to Hawke’s precious ‘Accord’. (And ‘catch up’ it was, for those who pillory the pilots conveniently forget that it wasn’t everyone whose pay had been tied to Hawke’s Accord over the years leading up to 1989, but just ‘the ordinary folks’. Those outside the Accord were giving themselves large, some would say enormous, pay rises – and before someone leaps on me for the pilots putting themselves above ‘the ordinary people’, let me remind them that, rightly or wrongly, the pilots’ salaries had for many years been tied to those of High Court Judges - who were not tied to the Accord.)

Yes, the Dispute put very many good, hard-working businessmen out of business and salary earners out of jobs, but lay the blame where it deserves to be laid, squarely at the feet of those who caused the Dispute to drag on so unnecessarily and for so long – Peter Abeles and Robert James Lee Hawke.

What so many forget in then heat of the argument is that only twelve months later, the ‘Accord’ was assigned to the scrapheap and ‘enterprise bargaining’ became the holy mantra of the Hawke Government. And enterprise bargaining is? –employees negotiating directly with their employers – exactly what the pilots were asking for, and for which they were called every name under the sun.

The other people who should take a major share of the blame are Australian journalists, both television and print. They allowed themselves to be used, and the very few who did seek out the truth behind the airline companies sometimes grossly inaccurate propaganda were silenced without a whimper from the majority, who toed their proprietors’ line, it seemed to me at least, with undisguised glee, happy to be a part of pulling down what they perceived to be undeserving ‘tall poppies’ or ‘fat cats’.

[greybeard]

Wiley,

Well done, thats about the guts of it, sometimes lost in the bitterness and other emotional bits.

The reasons most people stayed out are in your post, we wouldn't work under those rules anymore.

Then along came "Enterprise Bargaining" and there for ALL to see was the agenda, SCREW THE PILOTS.

Those who stayed out were in many ways screwed by the circumstances, those who went back screwed themselves and eventually the whole industry not only Ancs&b.

None of us will forget, FEW will forgive, as to giving the $c&bs a call, forget that.

[sniffer dog]

Great post Wiley, now we shall see what spin the $c%bs can put on that.

With regard to the media one of the worst offenders at that time was non other than one Heather Ewitt - ABC who should be damned to hell for her part - her kick back you ask? Posted to Washington as Chief Political Reporter for the ABC :mad:

[OhBehave]

Kickbacks to a rerporter for not supporting your cause. If you want to think that - go for it.

The facts regarding 89 are not really in dispute so much as the personal opinions regarding the actions taken all those years ago.

These can not effectively be debated. My opinion is this - yours is that. 14 years later most people have re-constructed a picture in their mind that fits comfortably with how thay acted.

[sniffer dog]

Kickback or not she did a right hatchet job on the Pilots

Am I wrong in thinking that good reporting is about balance? :confused:

It wouldn't surprise me to find out in 30yrs or so (another 16 actually) when all the paperwork comes out;
that, THAT F%$&...g B@$ch was on THE FAT MANS payrole.

[Eastwest Loco]

leftfrontside

I have given up any hope there will be any reconcilliation, however was pointing out that no-one is perfect, least of all me.

Best regards

EWL

[permFO]

Wiley - Thanks for the reply it was one of the more rational and considered posts. I accept your argument that their were a lot of tourism operators who were sailing close to the wind anyway but the basis of any tourism operator is tourists and if they're not provided in great numbers by the airlines then all operators suffer. Some of your points highlight the fact that the AFAP was never going to win because the Government, the airlines and the media were all against you and had actually been planning for it for a long time. That the Government and the PM were less than ethical is beyond doubt. That the Accord only disadvantaged wage and salary earners is also to the ALP's and ACTU's shame. As to the medias bias I think reflects on the general public's attitude "I don't care who gets me there as long as I get there". This misreading of public attitude was best summed up by the airline pilot I met at the time who said "The public want their Federation pilots upfront". No they didn't, they demonstrated that they would even put up with the basic noisy conditions of RAAF Hercs in order to get to their destination. The point about Enterprise Bargaining is also a good one its one that continues to degrade wages and conditions. It doesn't justify the dispute however it just shows that its timing may have been ill considered. All of this is history and can be debated ad infinitum possibly being the subject of a future Phd. All protaginists were caught up in events bigger than they had envisioned and no one could consider themselves to be unscathed. All EWL is suggesting is that with the passing of time consideration should be given for people not let blind hatred consume them. Some won't or can't let that hatred go but I am sure their are moderates amongst the 89ers who could if they are allowed to by their peers.

[MTOW]

OhBehave and Sniffer Dog, you’re allowing your stance on this subject to colour your judgement. Think about what you’ve just said and how silly it really is. Substitute ‘promotion for a job well done’ for ‘kickback’ and you are describing all of the capitalist commercial world perfectly. If these journalists did what their superiors perceived to be an excellent job in covering a major story, they would deserve and rightly expect to be promoted, just as you would if you handled your job well.

In my opinion, (but you can bet your last dollar not in some other people’s opinion), Wiley is quite right. The Australian media, with only two or three exceptions, were highly partisan in their handling of the news regarding the Dispute, (whether from ideological commitment or in slavishly following the dictates of their bosses, I’ll leave for the individual to decide). I remember Heather Hewitt as well. I forget the other senior female ABC reporter who was so far in Hawke’s pocket she was in among the lint and small change, but she later became a Labor Member of Parliament, I think in one of the ACT electorates. (Was it Pru Goward? Apologies, Pru if you have not since gone into politics.)

Anyone who lived in Melbourne during those times will remember Neil Mitchell and I forget the other one, both presenters of prime time talk back radio shows on 3AW. Both had been giving the pilots a fair hearing, (to some effect, it would seem), which the likes of John Laws in Sydney and all the ABC presenters were definitely not after the first week or so). It would have been in October of November, (sorry, can’t remember exactly when), they were both sacked on the Friday – and when the ratings came out three days later on the Monday morning, both had secured the top ratings for their time slot.

This seemed very odd to me (and many other people who had nothing at all to do with the Dispute). A mate of mine who dealt quite closely with the media during the Dispute for the Feds told me that he called one of the producers at 3AW (who he’d got to know quite well) and asked her why the pair had been sacked when they’d both just got the top ratings. She told him that airline companies bought advertising time, airline pilots didn’t.

[Andu]

So, “OhBehave”, what you’re really saying is that “Wiley’s” account is pretty accurate but his conclusions don’t fit in with the way you’d prefer to remember them? (“The facts regarding 89 are not really in dispute so much as the personal opinions regarding the actions taken all those years ago. These can not effectively be debated. My opinion is this - yours is that. 14 years later most people have re-constructed a picture in their mind that fits comfortably with how they acted.”)

“PermFO” threw down the gauntletat the end of page 3 and “Wiley” answered it. However, as “410” said on page 3, while his answer might educate some newcomers who are reading this, it won’t change any opinions of those who were actually involved. Both sides have dug their respective trenches and I can’t either ever coming out into “no man’s land” until both sides feel they are confronted by a greater common enemy (which I suspect was the rather quixotic point “East West Loco” was trying to make).

However, even if that hypothetical situation ever was to arise, I can’t for the life of me see how the majority who stayed out in 89 could ever bring themselves to trust the minority who (as they see it) ratted on them then. I know I couldn’t.

[OhBehave]

MTOW. You are entitled to your opinion regarding kickbacks. Fill your boots. I say it sounds very paranoid.

Andu. I agree with a lot of the information presented by Wiley. As I say, there is little point in debating pay clame percentages, tourist industry woes etc. Wiley even had the balls to admit the AFAP was also to blame. Revolutionary.

But signing on the dotted line or standing the picket line are personal choices made in a country where freedom of association prevails. Wileys conclusion regarding the moral implications (as apposed to the factual substance of his argument) is just that - Wileys.

(Wiley, apologies for talking about you in the third person - the question related directly to your comments)

[TheNightOwl]

Just a picky point for the edification of sniffer dog and MTOW - the lady in question goes by the name of Heather EWART, if my memory serves correctly. The fact that you disagree with what she wrote does NOT make her a bad reporter nor a recipient of "kickbacks".

Kind regards,

TheNightOwl. :mad:

[sniffer dog]

Thanks TheNightOwl couldn't remember how the B%&#ch spelt her surname.

Just a picky point NightOwl, shes NO lady and she doesn't write. :E

[Andu]

OhBehave and TheNightOwl, RTFP! (- ‘P’ for ‘post’). MTOW is disputing the ‘kickback’ comment, just as you are. OhBehave, how in the hell did you come up with calling MTOW ‘paranoid’ when he was agreeing with you? I think you’re so dug in to ‘your trench’ that you’re just assuming any post from ‘the other side’ must be hostile and therefore you MUST disagree with it.

MTOW offers his opinion, (he even calls it that) that the Australian Media were partisan in their reporting during the Dispute. You may disagree with that, (how, is beyond me, but I accept that you too are entitled to your opinion). Having lived through it, I also believe that the Media slanted their news heavily to the Companies’ point of view. Rupert Murdoch, owner of Ansett, owned a large slice of the Australian print media, while the ABC was then (and still are?) staffed almost entirely by the Bob Hawke Adoration and Glee Club, so that shouldn’t come as any surprise.

If you accept that, even without the ‘tall poppy syndrome’ lurking just below the surface in many Australians, is it any wonder that the Australian public, 99.9% of whom gleaned virtually everything they knew about the Dispute from the Media, were so virulently against the pilots? Besides, they were being inconvenienced and someone had to be to blame – who else but the driver who was refusing to drive as the obviously totally guilty party?

For anyone not aware of the Australian ‘tall poppy syndrome’, ask yourself how many times you’ve been in a bar, party or at some friend’s place for dinner and some bloke you’ve just met learns you’re an airline pilot. In Australia at least, in two out of three vases, he’s likely to say something along the lines of “Oh yeah, I was thinkin’ of beein’ a pilot when I was a kid, (but [unstated], I became a bank teller / insurance salesman / builder’s labourer instead).” – the heavy inference being, he could have been a pilot if he’d really wanted to, it would have been ‘no sweat at all’, and you’re now doin’ the ‘piss-easy’ job he would now love to be doing, (but with none of the work, time or expense involved in achieving it), “rootin’ all them hosties, only goin’ to work once a week, stayin’ in all them five star hotels, getting’ all them free trips overseas, and makin’ stacks and stacks of dough for doin’ nuthin’ [“Yuh don’t even do anythin’ anymore, do yer? It’s all done by computers, innit.”].”)

The Companies and their propaganda machines (both paid and unpaid) very effectively exploited that streak of envy not far beneath the surface in many Australians. How many times did we see the term ‘fat cats’ applied to the pilots? And how quickly some of us saw attitudes change in so-called friends and neighbours when they “learned all about “the strike’ ” from the drivel turned out on the television.

[Eastwest Loco]

Let us all get something very straight and up front here.

I am no bleeding mother Theresa as mooted by lefty, nor am I looking for a feel good fix, as nearly all the memories of '89 are distressing as they no doubt for all of you. Feel good is a distant memory.

I take no sides, and am amazed and distressed at the level of hate that is left behind after a very nasty dispute, especially as it was engineered to destroy you all. It worked too damned well.

47 years ago I was born to a teacher mother and a TN LAME father. Santa arrived in VH-THA not a sleigh and I would fight anyone who said otherwise. I have wing walked DC4s and 6s as a seven year old in the Essendon hangars, watched TJA on her first arrival into Essendon with nothing but pride and amazement. I am afraid that I still feel that way every time I see a commercial airliner, followed immediately by a wave of loss.

I am and always will be an Airline brat and will not apologise for that. You can take the boy from the airport, but you can never take the airport from the boy.

You guys are professionals of the finest kind, and I thank you for allowing me an opinion in these places, but feel I have probably pushed too hard at something that I felt you should have back. Each other.

Leftfrontside, amos2 et al - please - take it as the attempts of one who cares and wishes he had the pre '89 industry back and a load sheet in his hand on a rainy night trying to reclaim a near perfect world. You are right. It has left the building.

My head is officially pulled in on this subject and thank you all for your tolerance - particularly Woomera who has been extremely tolerant partly due to the fact that you guys have debated fairly reasonably with the occasional slagfest. Well done all. It is an improvement.

Fly safe and visit Jetset DPO and say hello if you get the chance, you will enjoy the commercial airliner models on display if nothing else, and hopefully a couple of coldies too.

Best regards

EWL

Ron Knight

[amos2]

...and being a Tassie lover, and visitor on many occasions to Ulverston, I shall certainly pop in via DPO and have a coldie with you, Loco!

[Eastwest Loco]

Do it Amos - on your way to Ulverrock - make it later in the arvo and I will pull up pegs and head to the RSL or the Formby!!

Looking forward to it.

EWL

[TheNightOwl]

Andu - since you obviously feel it incumbent upon you to clarify MTOW's and my intent, please try to get it right. My post was only to point out that 'sniffer dog' got the female's name wrong and that his disagreement with her contribution does not, of itself, make her corrupt, morally or otherwise. I understand that she is a TV reporter but, in my experience, they tend to write their own coopy, hence my comment.

You also appear to labour under the impression that those of us who are not pilots must, in some way, harbour suppressed desires as "wannabees", but lacking the ability. If you feel you must denigrate others to try to boost an obviously flagging ego, try to make less of a prat of yourself, we do not all speak with slurred speech and glottal stops, nor do we drag our respective knuckles on the ground. Most of us manage to hold down responsible jobs without the glamour and adulation you so obviously crave, you managed to demean only yourself with your post. In future, please engage brain before opening mouth!

Kind regards,

TheNightOwl. :(

[Kaptin M]

What a difference a fortnight makes!!

Away from PC's and other electronic gadgetry here in Hanmer Springs, New Zealand, and I stick my beak in to see that EWL of all people, has STARTED the 3rd run of "Australia, 1989" (or some pseudo title for the events of that year).
And not ONLY that, but it appears that EWL and Amos are best of buddies....Congratulations gents!!

No surprise to see that PPkid is STILL finding it difficult to come up with words of more than 4 letters.

Anyway, the weather's fanbloodytastic here - I'll be dropping in on BNE for a few days, later in the month.

The Hazo's 50th re-union in Orange was a "not to be missed" event. Maybe a few pics to come.

Regards to (almost) all.

K.M.

[Andu]

You’re outraged indignation is noted, TheNightOwl, but this attitude WAS there in many Australians (more frequently among the ones who use “slurred speech and glottal stops”, which is why I wrote it that way) and this certainly didn’t help win us any friends among the general public in 89. It happened to me on more than one occasion pre 89 – some idiot getting quite rude, even aggressive towards me the moment he learned what I did for a living.

It was in now way aimed at everyone, and I can only assume that anyone who would take umbrage at the comment found it a little too close to the bone. I can’t see how any non-pilot who didn’t harbour such feelings would take offence at it.

[leftfrontside]

Wondered where you'd been KM, sure you didn't go on hols with ppk he's been missing to, welcome back.

The true believers here have been having great fun belting their "balls" against a wall with a stout bat until they surrender :}

Yes EWL I'll come and have a coldee with you lfs.

[amos2]

Well, who knows what might happen here?

Perhaps even B the Owl and me, might make up!

And who knows, dare I say it, even TT2. (who has been conspicuous by his absence...perhaps in the sin bin W?)

Anyway, what's that old saying...

"When reasonable men get together.....!"

[Eastwest Loco]

leftfrontside

Consider it a date!! :}

I would be more than pleased to have a beer with you at the first possible opportunity.

I am glad no PPruNers chose to visit my office yesterday.

25mm of rain in 15 mins left 2" of water across the floor.

Sabre system shat itself too, so site was down for 24 hours, mainly because I couldnt get anyone on a help desk who had english as a first language.

Over a thousand litres of water extracted from a 10 metre square office. Not pretty.

The carpet has never been so clean.

Best

EWL:uhoh: :uhoh:

[Kaptin M]

Rumour has it that Sky Net - a B737 operator based in Miyazaki, Japan - has taken on another 10 pilots, of which 8 are ex-AN (and 2, ex Air New Zealand).
Rishworths (Jack Priest's company in N.Z.) apparently supplied the pilots, who are on USD8k per month and who are currently training in Tokyo in preparation for their JCAB exams and licencing.

Should be an interesting course, with well-known celebreties, Shave and phnompenhkid amongst the 10.....wonder if the ppkid has a "pad on the river" planned for Miyazaki?!!!! :rolleyes:

[M Nitpak]

It's no rumour Kaptin,

I don't know whether they are in Tokyo though. Anyway, what's the big deal ?

[amos2]

...Ah! Another one, eh!

When will they ever learn?

...stick your boofhead up mate, and we'll knock it off!!

[Kaptin M]

Then please correct me, Nitpak - where are they, if not in Tokyo? Apparently you are closer to the source than I.

And there's no "big deal", I was merely adding another post that was totally in accordance with the subject matter (Still flying after Ansett). Something that you apparently overlooked.

A little touchy, aren't we?!!

[Wizofoz]

SkynetAsia?

Isn't that the outfit some sage, completely expert in the Japanese aviation scene (And never EVER wrong (Though I think he changed his mind once!)) predicted would last six months?

I seem to remember some other worthy saying the Ex-AN guys were dis-liked by the locals. Strange then that they should employ 9 more. (It's 9 ex AN and 1 Kiwi Kap, perhaps your accountant was allowing for deflation.)

As for a river-side pad, I believe the Oyodo is lovely during summer. If Mekong has been grounded, sounds like PPK made a smart move.

As to where they are Kap...Let's see... Miyazaki based operator..Hmm.. Miyazaki Perhaps??? (Still, one japanese city is much like another. Kinda like Singapore vs Aussie dollars eh?)

[Kaptin M]

You've got me there Wiz!! Indeed from all reports that the co-pilots were passing on it seemed unlikely that Sky Net were going to last.
Yes, I DID post that, and at the time it appeared plausible that NO airline could survive on operating FIVE services daily between Miyazaki and Haneda.

Now I understand that they will operate Kumamoto-Haneda, and for this require ANOTHER 10 captains.

The F/O's in the company for which I fly, are extremely envious of the Sky Net co-pie's salaries - apparently flight pay is almost TEN TIMES...10 times.....that of our guys' (¥6,000 vs ¥700 per hour).

You're dead right too, Wiz, Miyazaki IS a top spot with some nice beaches near the N/E side of the Oyodo mouth.

As for phnompenhkid - he has proven himself to be an outright LIAR, and it surprises me that YOU would still wish to associate yourself with it!

I'm quite willing to concede, when proven wrong - as has been the case here with Sky Net. And btw, you have one of our ex-F/A's flying with you. Please pass on my best regards, and tell her, "Kiotskete kudasai, wata****achi wa kumiai tsubushi desu.". She's a sweet girl.

[mainwheel]

I think PPK was the gentleman seen last weekend being evasive to/with certain locals in a well known bar.Some building supplies not paid for is the rumour.There seem to be gaps in his story.

[VR-HFX]

Kap

You are trying t tell us that the F/O's at JEX make USD6 per hour or about USD500 per month!!

Average part time wage in a noodle store is USD9 per hour.

On that basis the F/A's must be paying the company to work for them. No wonder she left.

As to the 'wata****achi wa kumiai tsubushi' bit...that's a bit rich even by your standards.

[Kaptin M]

VR-HFX, "Kap, You are trying t tell us that the F/O's at JEX make USD6 per hour or about USD500 per month!!"

I not TRYING to tell you - I AM telling you!!
RTFQ, VR-HFX...FLIGHT PAY, an allowance over and above their base pay, that is paid for each hour actually flown (about 55 for F/O's).
On that basis the F/A's must be paying the company to work for them.
That isn't too far from the truth with this cheap company!!

...and as for the "As to the 'wata****achi wa kumiai tsubushi' bit...that's a bit rich even by your standards. It IS the truth wrt most of the gaijin in Sky Net - they are labour union [kumiai] breakers [tsubushi] ie. scabs.
The Japanese Pilots' Union fully supported the AFAP in 1989 by way of a letter, promising that they would send neither pilots nor aircraft to support Hawke, Abeles, Murdoch, Kelty & Co.

Not too rich at all http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/mica/exclaim.gif :ok:

[VR-HFX]

Kap

Thank you for the clarification and the bold type.

Me thinks you may be comparing apples with oranges.

As I understand it, the number you quote for Skynet is a total number not a flight pay increment.

I am also intrigued as how the 'sweet girl' would respond to the 'I am a union buster' intro. Probably something like 'so am I and all the other foreign pilots and part-time F/A's employed by JAL and its subsidiaries'

On another subject, I was intrigued at your persistent interest in directors' family shareholdings at CX. If there are any, which I strongly doubt, they would have been bought on market. I think Freehills has clearly pointed out that the options game of executive remuneration does not exist.

As to the options issued to flight crew as part of the 'new deal', most have been burnt in the barbies at DB.

4649

[Kaptin M]

The F/O's here have told me that the Sky Net F/O's receive a "flight allowance" of JPY6,000 per hour in addition to their base salary, HFX, and that likewise the JAL and JAS pilots also recieve this addition at a similar pay rate, however the F/O's in this company are on a meagre JPY700 per hour.
I understand (from the F/O's) that Sky Net F/O's gross around JPY8-900k per month.

To the best of my knowledge, neither JAL nor any of its subsidiaries employ part-time F/A's (although the way their pay is structured, it sure looks that way for the JAL Express girls), or pilots, and as the foreign pilots working in JALways and JAL Express were trained by JAL union pilots, and occasionally share the cockpit with them, there is no reason for the "sweet girl" to respond that way.

I share the same intrigue with you, VR-HFX, of the devious methods some company executives employed in "covering their trail", in trying to avoid what might appear to some to be corporate greed, when full disclosure is demanded.
It's not something new (to place assets in family members 'names), however that doesn't mean that it has stopped, does it?