QF loses Tasman Flights to Jetconnect

[Barbers Pole]

Times are a changing, first AA now Jetconnect... Wonder what the QF pilots union thinks of this? The Squeeze has started!

From todays Press.

Qantas recruiting pilots for Jet Connect NZ subsidiary
18 June 2003

Qantas Airways is recruiting pilots for its lower cost New Zealand subsidiary Jet Connect to fly the Tasman from September.


Qantas spokesman Michael Sharp said there would be no change to the schedules or number of flights, currently 27 return flights a week, and all planes would have the Qantas livery.

Jet Connect flights will leave Wellington and Christchurch for Sydney, Melbourne, and Brisbane. Qantas will still fly out of Auckland under its own steam.

Qantas has begun recruiting 14 additional pilots and 25 flight attendants to operate the new flights as of September. Staff would be employed by Jet Connect, not Qantas.

Mr Sharp would not comment on whether the situation would change if the deal with Air New Zealand went ahead.

He said Jet Connect had a cheaper operating model than Qantas' main operation, and different union agreements.

The cost of labour and other costs would be cheaper in New Zealand dollars.

"It is true that Jet Connect has a lower cost base than the Qantas main line operation, but also for these services that will be operated by Jet Connect, the aircraft overnights in New Zealand," Mr Sharp said.

"It obviously makes sense from a use of aircraft point of view to have those services operated by Jet Connect, based in New Zealand."

Qantas had not released any figures on projected cost savings.

The airline established its Jet Connect subsidiary in 2001 for an air operating certificate to fly in and out of New Zealand.

In an effort to cut $A1 billion ($NZ1.2 billion) of costs, Qantas has flagged plans for a radical overhaul of its labour structures.

Over the past four months, the airline has announced thousands of jobs would be abolished through natural attrition, redundancies and forced leave.

[Mud Skipper]

I would suggest the 744 oops, the QF pilots union doesn't really care. They have know about this happening for probably well over a year and endorse the companies position as it doesn't really effect the core operation.

Next will be 767's to Jetconnect, probably before the end of the year. What will AIPA do about this, particularly at a time when we are looking at a lot of lost flying, the answer - NOTHING!

When 744's are sent to Jetconnect perhaps they will notice.

Now I can see why some companies have had second unions set up by their pilots.


Scream, Rant, Rage, F'ing F'ing F'ing, to no avail.

:( :( :(

[Barbers Pole]

Dixon is pretty cunning he's slowly chipping away at the unions,staff conditions,etc

Quite clever how he is setting up competition for flying/routes within QF between AA & Jetconnect & QF, very soon he'll be asking the QF pilots to take condition cuts if they don't want more flying to disappear to AA/JC.

[fornique8]

I have heard that the QF union was approached by one of the JC pilots over a year ago to ascertain if they were interested in a New Zealand membership.

The response was a pretty cool "No thanks".

Might come back to bite them yet!!!

Fornique8

[Keg]

I think the answer would have been more along the lines of 'sorry, but we can't. Thats not quite legal!'. :rolleyes:

[Clive]

I personally called Chris (union leader - now CP) during the changeover from AWAS to AWOPS then Jetconnect to advise him of the dramatic reduction in terms and conditions that was being forced through by the new management (total cuts in the order of 40% - in net worth). I made him aware of my personal concern that this may well be the "thin edge of the wedge" and that he and the union should be very concerned that this Qantas flying (albeit by contractors) was being "sold" for such poor terms and conditions. To be totally honest I was looking for some sort of assistance for the "troops" on the issue who had no union protection.

His response to me (which was not in confidence - and I feel can be repeated here) was that the union didn't really care and that they did not regard the flying as "theirs". I suggested that this may well be short sighted. IMHO it indeed was.

[WalterMitty]

A.I.P.A

Anyone Interested in Promotion to Administration!:mad:

A joke of a union.:yuk: :yuk: :yuk:

Lets add National Jet 10 years ago and Impulse and soon Air Sheep.

Keg, I admire your loyalty to the AIPA but aren't you a little angry. Can forget the 767 command you used to talk of until just recently. The AIPA remains a little club for the good old boys, and now even the good older boys are getting your slot on the 6. ouch, that's gotta hurt.
A union has to fight the fight no matter what. The message sent to Dixon is that he can basically do whatever he wants to the pilots and there will be no repercussion. This is a clear transmission of business yet silence from the AIPA. I can see the whole QF pilot gig imploding.
:uhoh:

[huan hung lo]

Its all a bit of a worry I say. Its pathetic really, narrowminded freckly little snotty nosed pukes with the personality of an elephants sphincter after a good fart, these accountant pricks.

Oughta string them up by their nuts I say. Economic rationalism gone bonkers.

This industry is beginning to smell!

[Nose Wheel]

"Oh Dear" please don't tell me the pilots from QF International are going to have to realise that they are vulnerable to what has been happening in the rest of the world ......:{

Pay & other conditions have been lessened at many major and minor airlines throughout the world to maintain their existance .... and then there is those that didn't survive!!

The QF guys and Gals have been on very very good conditions for a very long time and well .... they may have to give a little now .... acceptance for the commencement of Nat Jet, Air Link, Impulse, AA and now Jet Connect (The TJ caberet) as subsidiaries in the QF camp are because their unions allowed them to be a part of their ops.

Time to smell the roses & time for me to duck below the firing line:ouch:

[Barbers Pole]

The bit that intrigued me was the comment that Jetconnect has a different union agreement! :* What union agreement??

Fast turning into the thick end of the wedge.

[Sonny Hammond]

Funny thing...The QF mainline guys really used to be the low cost guys by world standards, now they are under siege.

It's obvious that management are trying to turn pilots into run of the mill bus drivers and pay them accordingly.
To the low cost guys....are you confident that the management will be satisfied with your pay and conditions?
The jetconnect guys are on probably the worst pay etc of ANY 737 pilots on the planet.

Management will not be happy until we are all on this wicket.

IT IS NOT JUST THE QF MAINLINE GUYS UNDERSIEGE, ITS OUR WHOLE PROFESSION.

Doubt me? Lets have this discussion in 10 yrs and see how things are progressing.

[apacau]

Not all flights are being lost to Jetconnect. If you look at Qantas' draft northern winter schedules on the IATA page you'll see that most of the SYD-AKL, SYD-CHC and MEL-AKL will be operated by the A330-200!

[mulgabill]

Judging by the number of incidents that the domestics boys are having, QF already has a B (minus) scale operation. ie runway excursions, airframe vibration (oops the airbrake was out...) slats stuck out (oops, the flap lever was not put to zero correctly..) etcetera, etcetera, etcetera......

All management wants to do is to match the pay scales to the quality of the product being delivered by the flight ops department, or be able to hold pilots accountable for their decisions.

[rockarpee]

Excellent post mulgabill, QF needs more slick operators like yourself to raise the bar.Getting yourself geared up for an interview I hope.;)

[huan hung lo]

It seems that airline bean counters are not the only ignorant short sighted gits around here.

Reading Mulgas stupid post its plain to see that this forum is plagued with a number of parasites that seem to exist as reminders of why most airlines use personality screening as part of the interview process.

Your post is horse****. Whats the matter mate suffering from a little case of sour grapes are we?

[balance]

Mulga,

You are a faaaarkhead. You know nothing of what you have stated.

As for AIPA, perhaps it's time for another thread.....

[go_dj]

Hmmm, looks like this could be the long awaited line in the
sand Mr Dixon has been promising, would not be suprised
to see the Jetconnect aircraft utilised also doing a few Aussie
sectors before returning to NZ, effectivly undercutting DJ, so
much for DJ reducing pay and conditions that QF people have
been raving on in these forum's for the past couple of years.

[FFRATS]

Quote:

Walter Mitty: " A.I.P.A .... Anyone Interested in Promotion to Administration!"

Clive: "I personally called Chris [union leader (of AIPA at the time)- now CP(of QF)]"

Nose Wheel: "acceptance for the commencement of Nat Jet, Air Link, Impulse, AA and now Jet Connect (The TJ caberet) as subsidiaries in the QF camp are because their unions allowed them to be a part of their ops."

I read this as the former 'team coach' of the AIPA UNION was worth poaching, considering all the deals done where infavour QF's bottom line. He is now the CP and know's all the moves from the previous 'games' played, leaving us in the s**t for future rounds.

Barbers Pole "Quite clever how he (Dixon)is setting up competition for flying/routes within QF between AA & Jetconnect & QF, very soon he'll be asking the QF pilots to take condition cuts if they don't want more flying to disappear to AA/JC"

Funny how we were told NO routes would compete between QF
and AA etc. WE should have read the fine print.... if we take the route from QF (due loads, profit), thay can use AA etc. as they are not competing with you.

Sonny Hammond "IT IS NOT JUST THE QF MAINLINE GUYS UNDERSIEGE, ITS OUR WHOLE PROFESSION."

As Sonny says, the whole industry is getting a flogging. If QF, as the largest pilot group in OZ starts to under-cut it own staff, the flow down will be quick to come to the allready" low cost" employes. The conditions that people before us cemented will be chipped away forever in agreements that were over-looked by shortsighted union members "Interested in Promotion to Administration!"

I don't know an answer, just hope in 20 years we are not on 'bus driver' wages and the local bus driver is not "driving/flying" his craft to SIN for twice as much pay!

FFRATS

;)

[Three Bars]

With all due respect FFRATS, I don't think that the blame for the current erosion of pilot's conditions can be put at the doorstep of the current QF pilots percieved lack of industrial fortitude.

Virgin Blue were very lucky to have started up just as AN was about to go belly-up. With such a surplus of pilots, they were able to find the required numbers who would accept such drastically reduced conditions to keep flying. And I don't really blame them - altruism does not pay the mortgage or the school fees, or put food on the table. Would they have found the numbers if Ansett was strong in a strong aviation climate?

Now we at QF get preached at ... endlessly ... by or CEO about our cost-base compared to Virgin Blue's. Personally, I've had a gutful of it, and I'm sure that a lot of other people in QF feel likewise. To the company, most staff these days are perceived as nothing else except a drain on the financial bottom-line. No wonder company morale is on the slide. Combined with this, the Company seem to be finding new and interesting ways to undercut us by setting up new companies or using other strategies at a time when the industrial ball is firmly in the employer's court.

Yes, FFRATS I suppose that we could all walk-off the job, but I know that there would be 10 guys for every one of us in QF who would be prepared to do our jobs for less than what the Virgin Blue guys get paid - we know that they're out there. And in my opinion, they're the ones who are responsible for the slide in conditions - some of them appear on these forums and tell us that we're so overpaid. It's probably really the progression of people who allowed AN to become a basket-case who are responsible - and they're probalby still enjoying their big management bonuses somewhere on the Gold Coast. :mad:

[huan hung lo]

Good post Three Bars!

You are spot on when you talk about the various wannabes out there who are the real threat to the pay and conditions of all airline pilots.

They just dont get it do they?

[Sonny Hammond]

Well, everyone here makes a valid point.
Are we going to read post after post of the same stuff?

The real question is "What can we do about it?"

I feel we need cohesion amongst the groups. While everyone is worrying about everyone else, the management play us off.


I am not sure of the answer.

Firstly, we need the ball back in our court for a while and that might take a little while whilst the industry recovers from the recent events. Once that happens we have some weight in negotiation.

But we must start thinking as a group now.

How do we do that? Dunno, but we have to if we want a decent career in the future.

[stillalbatross]

Qantas management's approach is nothing new. Problem is that the mainline pilots see this happening but it doesn't affect them initially and to some extent they don't seriously believe anyone would take a job that pays so little. So they do nothing to prevent the erosion and the Jetconnnect guys take the jobs because they need to put food on the table. At the end of the day it is up to qantas mainline guys to fight to stop this happening but why bother when they have nothing to gain. An erosion of conditions in 10 or 20 years doesn't seem worth it to many people.

[Going Boeing]

Three Bars - You've hit the nail on the head with your post.

As far as stopping QF management from using their Jet Connect operation against pilots on Australian salaries, the only way that I can think of (without resorting to illegal strikes) is to persue QF in court for illegal transmission of business. If memory serves me correctly a call centre in Tasmania successfully did this to prevent their jobs going offshore.

Any other ideas would be very welcome.

GB

[Pimp Daddy]

Interesting approach GB.

Wasn't the call centre one against contracting out though?

In the Jetconnect case it is a wholly owned subsidiary business so would the illegal transmission of business still apply then?

[Capt.XXXX]

Well said Three Bars!
Sadly we are competing with an airline (DJ) who has the audacity to expect its pilots to pay for their own training, and there are enough of the plucky hopefuls holding up their hand to accept it. I understand their need to work, but if they were a little more cohesive in their stand, their conditions would improve, their training would be paid for, the competition gradient between QF and DJ (and soon Jetconnect) would reduce, we wouldn't be clawing eachothers eyes out, and we'd all be better off as a body of professionals.

[elektra]

Here's an idea..

Lets pool our resources to build a time machine. Then we can go back in history to the time many years ago when the QF pilots left the AFAP because: "shock horror", it was involved in grubby issues like wages and conditions. And horrible things like Scope Clauses.

Maybe with what they now know the QF elites might have taken a better decision and not divided the pilot group in the belief that nasty things would never happen to them. Like workers everywhere we either have solidarity and unity of purpose or we have nothing but what we're given.

And a unified pilot body with the whole hearted support of "ordinary" QF pilots would be a great start to rebuilding safety and operational standards in the industry as a whole.

Decent conditions, salaries and industry safety standards are in everyone's interest. They are not "anti-management". Doing things properly is the best form of company loyalty you can get. One of the lessons that we've all learned over the years is that good standards pay for themselves.

So let?s not blame VB drivers or other similar groups for a process that started on its nasty way quite a few years back with the same people who are now starting to feel the pain. The events of 1989 had their genesis years before in the naivety of a group of pilots who should have known better.

[bitter balance]

Elektra, that's one of the best rationalisations I've ever read. I was wondering where you were going until I read the first line of your last paragraph. I think there is sufficient evidence (ie its bloody obvious) that QF's push to reduce its cost base is directly related to VB.

[Three Bars]

I agree with you GB - there would appear to be very few options available at the moment.

The trouble with the current industrial situation is that it is the Company who makes all the moves and the unions then have to react. The Company knows the game in advance and can work out counter strategies upfront, while the unions are always catching up. I'm sure that the legal counsels (three I think at AIPA) must have been working overtime for the last year or so.

Combined with this, a succession of governments (of both pursuasions) have made industrial action more and more difficult to sanction. Even to the point that CPI increases are not an automatic entitlement under the enterprise bargaining process.

The most alarming development of recent times, in my opinion, was the findings of the high court (I think) at the conclusion of the MWU dock strikes of several years ago. While on the surface, it appeared that the wharfies had won again, the courts upheld a company's right to reorganise its work force.

To put it practically, and if I remember the court's ruling correctly, QF could reorganise itself so that its pilots were employed by the Qantas Crewing Co. Pty Ltd. If this company then started to lose money, theoretically it could declare its employees contracts invalid and open for renegotiation.

I believe that, in this climate, AIPA has little choice but to avoid militant industrial action and continue to explore the limited legal avenues that are open to us. The Company knows that if we were to go on strike, they could find a cheaper replacement workforce very easily - many people on this forum tell us so. We also know that we would not get much backing from other sectors of the industry and that we would be protrayed as silvertails by the press.

With regard to Jetconnect - the trans-Tasman situation is very volatile at the moment and maybe all party's intentions will become a little clearer when the final decision regarding the AirNZ-QF tie-up is announced.

[Ralph the Bong]

Ya know I am just PIS SING myself laughing at the utter, abject arrogance contained in some of these posts, but in a way, it’s just so sad. Look, I mean this in the nicest way, but don’t you guys see how divisive your own comments are? From Huan Hung lo: "You are spot on when you talk about the various wannabes out there who are the real threat to the pay and conditions of all airline pilots.

They just dont get it do they? " So, who are ‘they’ Huan? Experienced people who would like to come back and live in Oz or NZ and be with their families instead of languishing in some 3rd world hotel? Speak here of the ex-AN and AN new Zealand guys who have essentially become career path refugees thru no fault of their own. Or younger Pilots who are self improvers and have the commitment to push themselves and put their own finances on the line for a job they love? From Stillalbertross: "So they do nothing to prevent the erosion and the Jetconnnect guys take the jobs because they need to put food on the table." True. Food needs to be put on the table, people have a career that they have worked so hard to attain and maintain. Those at Jetconnect who I know are decent individuals worthy of remaining in the industry. And Capt.XXXX: " ..if they were a little more cohesive in their stand, their conditions would improve, their training would be paid for, the competition gradient between QF and DJ (and soon Jetconnect) would reduce, we wouldn't be clawing eachothers eyes out, and we'd all be better off as a body of professionals." Sadly, these are part of the market forces at work in the airline industry today. But in reality, how do you expect such individuals to be “cohesive in their stand”? give us all a suggestion. The prevailing industrial situation has been quite correctly defined by several postings; Australian corporate law allows the establishment of offshoots and subsidiaries and the Workplace Relations Act limits the coverage of union representation. The demise of Ansett has allowed the QF pilot body unprecedented promotional opportunities and please bear in mind that this has occurred at the personal expense of many, many competent and professional people. With this in mind, I find the bleating of some posters to be sickening. It is futile to suggest that pilots who are candidates for the discount airlines somehow group together to flex some industrial muscle and deny themselves a job unless training is payed for and salaries increased by DJ and the like. I mean, really..these companies will just sent a job offer to the next punter. And anyway what did AIPA do to help those at NJS; what are they doing now? Nothing! Did AIPA do anything for Eastern Pilots in regards to a career path?-No. Impulse drivers-No. Some Impulse pilots remained effectively furloughed whilst QF was recruiting. Did they help AWOPS Pilots get jobs at QF?-No. Jetconnect?- See post by Clive above. It is only fair to suggest that those who aspire to employment at DJ and the like refuse to accept the conditions on offer if YOU are prepared to help them. After all, it’s now YOUR problem. To even contemplate that such individuals deny themselves a career because you find it personally inconvenient smacks of outrageous arrogance.

[Capt.XXXX]

Ralph, I appreciate the points you have raised, and I completely sympathise with those trying to get back home etc. ( I was one of them!). My point simply is that if we keep seeing our conditions eroded away by greedy management and shareholders, what will we be left with? I think an ideal that has been lost over time is that we are actually needed, and if we keep accepting lower conditions through the fear that someone else will take our jobs, this weakness will be played upon, and things will get progressively worse. If the VB drivers had all refused to pay for their training, would they have scrapped the idea all together? Not on your life, but sadly the only place where such a scheme would have been acceptable was good old Oz (and suprise suprise now Easyjet in the UK!)

[stillalbatross]

I agree with you Ralph, the sad thing is that some will be looking back upon all this 10 years from now and wondering how they let it happen and those already in Qantas will still be saying "I can't believe management snuck up and did this" Do they expect some new or potential employee at Jetconnect to say to management "I'll only take the job with better conditions?" It is up to Qantas mainline to take a stand IF they think it's worth fighting for......................

[Chad's Funk Blaster]

Ralph,
Right on brother. About time someone jumped into this thread with a dose of reality.

Cap xxxx,
Many pilots applying to VB refused to pay for training - me included. Guess what. I was almost knocked over in the rush of people with cash in hand.

Elektra,
“Decent conditions, salaries and industry safety standards…”. Why do lump standards in with salaries. VB haven’t parked an aeroplane on a golf course.

Going Boeing,

Do you think maybe the QF legal folk have thought of that before obtaining aircraft and employing crew?

All the “thin edge of the wedge” comments do little for the debate. A competitor with a lower cost base has entered the market. Clearly, this will inflict damage on QF as previously its only domestic competitor had a higher cost base.

What proactive steps did AIPA take to fend off the challenge from VB?

[Capn Laptop]

Capt XXXX,

Hate to tell you this but the pay for your rating idea is actually a very old one, and one used by Southwest - the mother of all low cost airlines.

It isn't unique to VB or to Australia.

What it does do, apart from cost about 25 grand, is get guys that are genuine.

If you have to stump up the cash you have to want to do it.

The reality that a rating on a 737 and time on type will stand you in good stead around the world if you so desire - so it isn't wasted dollars as such.

I think that most people would like to have the company pay for training, and the reality of the VB situation is that the classic course is only part of the equation, the company pays for your NG rating.

But it has worked well so far - and having worked well thus far- it is probably here to stay.

[sirjfp]

I know why Dixon is acting to get jet connect to crew the trans tasman flghts. I know of a few people who are working with j/c in n.z and ,when you hear that a F/O with Jet Connect earns less than a a cabin Manager with Q.F , the economies are obvious.
All that he has to do is give Qantas link a few 737's and configure a few aus airlines 767's to J/C and operate them on a few " key " domestic runs and he has a low cost airline and F**K everyone else. The prospect is downright scary . Beleive me , that desk thumping megalomaniac T.J will screw everyone to feather his own nest and with Dixon in his earhole anything is possible.

Forget any public sympathyif you kick up. All the punters want is cheap travel on a safe airline. Come to think of it Q/F's immaculate and well deserved safety record may be the point worth arguing !

Fly safe, Fly happy

[Three Bars]

Chad, Ralph, Capt Laptop and stillalbatross,

What do you guys expect AIPA to do about these things? Ralph you mention all of these other offshoots and franchises - what do you expect AIPA (and therefore all mainline pilots) to do about it??

In my last post I pointed out that with the current industrial situation (not to mention the effects of SARS and the Iraq war etc) that any form of industrial action at the moment would be tantamount to suicide, let alone gross stupidity. You CANNOT hold QF mainline pilots responsible for what MANAGEMENT are doing - probably with extensive legal advice about the possible ramifications before they act. They must laugh their heads off when they see that they can offer crap conditions (and get pilots who will accept them) and then see these other pilot groups blaming AIPA for not waging industrial war on their behalf!!

Also, at the end of your posts, you say that if you don't take the jobs with the lowered conditions, then someone else will. THAT's EXACTLY MY POINT!!! If there was no-one to take the jobs, they might have to look at increasing the conditions. I have already said that I realise that this is not realistic either, and that people need to put food on the table. QF employed many ex-AN employees after the meltdown, but we were also aware that another contingent of ex-AN crew went to QF management and made an offer to do our flying for less. Do you think that this went over particularly well??

So I will ask the question again - what do you guys seriously expect AIPA to do in the current climate. People cannot expect to join a low cost operation on s&*t conditions and then expect AIPA to use industrial action to improve their conditions or, when the bottom falls out of their company or they are bought out, expect to be fast tracked into QF mainline.

I can see that push will eventually come to shove and industrial action will eventually happen - but for goodness sake, let's pick a time when there is a SLIGHT chance of success.

[Lazarus]

With this sort of bitching it appears the screening process is not all that perfect sometimes.

I agree you need to flight for your rights... but keep the personal attacks down. We are meant to be professional.

The more people I see missing out the more I wonder how I got in.

live long & prosper

[ferris]

Three Bars; a very reasonable post. There has been a lot of rubbish about the 'new guys doing all the work' a la the CX recruitment ban (what a joke). The only guys with ANY clout are the experienced pilots, and it's difficult to see them putting their necks on the block for the sake of the future, when they will be way too retired to care.
IMHO purely market forces are at work at the moment. Remember that the market fluctuates. In the near term it looks bad, but think ahead a couple of years and the shoe may well be on the other foot. The only current demand is from the lost cost start-ups, and that will be the case until their growth halts. The supply side of the equation will always suffer from too many young low-timers ready to do anything (and when you think about it, it's taken a long time for that to be exploited by anyone other than GA), yet even that fluctuates. There must be a current drop in training, due to the state of the industry ie prospects? As usual, things improve in a couple of years when there is a shortage of those at the bottom.
I agree that it is a disgrace the way conditions are being subverted ie. using start-ups to usurp the routes. But it's going to take some unconventional thinking to beat it (maybe along the lines of wresting control of that labour market back from the airlines- form a labour hire company of your own, negotiate an exclusive deal with a major such as DJ to provide the pilots [managers love outsourcing], hire all the available prospectives for 6 months to put pressure on supply, hire out crew anywhere and everywhere until you are entrenched etc etc. I don't know, just rambling. It's certainly more viable than asking new-hires to demand better conditions at interview!).
Either way, the party is over (see thread Whatever Happened To The Good Old Days). And the reason I gave up flying.

[huan hung lo]

Ralph,

I accept that the industrial laws of the land are making it difficult for pilots and others to maintain their pay and conditions.

I also understand that an individual has the right to accept work under any conditions at any time anywhere. The fact that one can sympathise with the plight of such individuals does not however diminish the threat to pay and conditions that such action represents to established people in this industry. It simply adds to the problem which when viewed with all other factors at play has the potential to create a catch 22. Company beancounters know this!

This is not an attack on these people simply an observation and statement of what I believe is fact.

The various comments about AIPA and its perceived lack of initiative in finding real solutions to this problem ignore the inescapable truth that the traditional methods used by unions in their response to such situations are inaffective and antiquated with their roots firmly entrenched in an irrelevant industrial past.

I believe that the current industrial laws make it necessary that unions go through a paradigm shift of sorts, one that will hopefully provide them with the resources to tackle the problem using modern ideas and methods.

Maybe they should spend more time and money coming up with sound business proposals as alternatives to those put forward by company beancounters.This way, the traditional confrontational approach gives way to one of a more conciliatory nature.
Unions spend a lot of time and money on lawyers but then so do the corporations. To be realistic this is something that i doubt will ever change. It is however an approach which invariably promotes confrontation and typically results in an impasse.

Why not spend the time establishing a dialogue with the company as part of a fact finding mission to try and define the objectives of both sides of the fence and then work together to find solutions?

Wouldn't it be interesting if a union engaged the services of young bright talented and upwardly mobile business minds at competitive rates( ones that undercut company beancounter rates ofcourse) to come up with good business models for the shareholders perusal? I am sure that there are minds out there that can develop good so called "low cost" airline models that can preserve the pay and conditions of a group of pilots and deliver tangible benefits to the company bottom line.

I wonder how these smart arse beancounters would respond to a threat on their pay and conditions, I mean after all they are not the only ones that can do the job!!

[Lloyd Braun]

Didn't Eddington "streamline" BA by slashing management jobs and the associated high overheads ? I don't remember him trying to introduce B scale etc. Maybe Geoff should try this first.

[slice]

Capn Laptop - never equate the ability of people to fork over a large sums of money with their ability to be 'genuine'. Many of those at VB who paid for a 73 rating would have had some sort of assistance that others simply don't have access to. Besides, are you telling us that those who have already paid 40-50k for the CPL/IR are not genuine? Or are you implying the more money you can produce the more genuine you must be! Plenty of halfwits with access to lots of money - just go down to any GAAP and look around.

[Clive]

3 Bars,

Have to correct you on your assertion in your 4th paragraph above.

The AIPA was approached BEFORE conditions became "sh!t". That was my point 3 or so pages ago. Nothing was done prior to the horse bolting. It is only now too late.

[balance]

Chad...

Sorry my friend, but salaries in most other occupations are related to performance. And in our field, performance is directly related to safety.

And the fact that VB hasn't parked one one a golf course? There but for the grace of god go you.... I would counsel you not to tempt fate.

Back to the topic...

What makes you think that a captain earning $100K NZ is particularly going to give a crap about an airline that clearly doesn't give a rats bum about him? And don't anyone try and tell me that the line does care about him, because that amount of money for the skills, training and experience that he posseses is criminal.

I don't have the answer to this difficult situation, but I can see that it is terribly wrong. Insinuating that the actions of those willing to work for peanuts is right, moral, and in the interest of the common good is simply ridiculous.

And yes, it is within the realm of possibility that safety could be compromised.

[Ralph the Bong]

Guys, it is not up to me to make suggestions as to what action AIPA should take on this issue, as some have asked. I am not a member of AIPA and to pontificate on any course of action would be bad manners. In any event, I really do think that management has you by the short and curlies on this one. I will tell you this, I was able to knock back a lower paying jet job awhile ago but only because I had other options. But that is the crux of the issue; number of Pilots vs. number of openings. Employers should take note that employee loyalty is a function of their happiness at work and by some measure, this includes the level of renumeration. As a suggestion, if you dont like what QF are doing, why dont you vote with your feet? Emirates continues to expand and I know that some QF pilots have left for the sand pit already. But to blame Pilots for taking lower paid jobs when they have no other option is pretty unfair and to suggest that it is immoral, extreme. As I have said on another thread, it is simply incorrect to also infer that Pilots at budget carriers are inferior to their better paid collegues and I find it remarkable that the anyone would make such an assertion in the first place.

Balence, I have not ever heard of Pilots salaries EVER being linked to performance. Traditionally, salaries have always been a function of the aircraft's MTOW. Nobody who gets straight 5s in their last Sim check gets more pay than someone who recieves all 3s. I really cant see the link between safety and level of pay. It is drawing a pretty long bow to say that lower paid Pilots are simply less safe.

Performance in other professions is usually linked to some measurable criteria, such as budget reduction or production output.

[oicur12]

Balance,

So are you saying that at QF you get paid more/less per sector according to how well/poorly you performed.

Do the better pilots get paid more than the bad ones.

Do you lose your bonus after a hard landing or wasting fuel.

Or do you just get a salary and overtime.

[balance]

No guys, what I'm saying is that the guy who gets a "5" will get more money than a guy who gets a "0" and fails. And think about it. What incentive has a person to do well when their company treats them like crap?

Have a deeper think about it. Flight crew salaries make up a very small proportion of the overall cost, but I will admit that to a nerdy bean counter, they are very attractive targets.

But what other safety related aspects are likely to be cut if the bean counters are targeting anyone that they can?

As far as the young guys and girls taking jobs for less and less? Well, who can blame them. It is a product of the times. But they most certainly are a contributing factor to our overall demise.

[dirty deeds]

Lets blame DJ for all of these world problems that are occuring at the moment, I heard they caused the war in Iraq, contributed to the SARS pandemic, caused HIH and One Tel to collapse, and I hear that David Hunter is going to head up some huge golbilzation conglomerate to lower the wages of QF pilots.

[balance]

Paranoia? Or just plain stupidity?