Erosion of Pay and Conditions - What are we doing about it?
Join Date: May 2000
Location: honkers
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
electra
you saying the guys that ran off overseas displayed solidarity?
whose jobs were all the foreign scum that were welcomed here by hawke and abeles taking ?
only one answer to all this. get an in-house union, similair to AIPA and work hand in hand with management.up here the HKAOA still haven't figured it out and we are losing members so fast. below 50% now i am told.
That solidarity is critical and is where airline pilots were let down in 1989, despite promises and secret ballots, by a number of people, the last dozen or two of whom made ALL the difference.
.........pilots wander across a picket line singing the old refrain "I'm just taking my job back"
only one answer to all this. get an in-house union, similair to AIPA and work hand in hand with management.up here the HKAOA still haven't figured it out and we are losing members so fast. below 50% now i am told.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A lot of you guys just don’t get it ……….. the industry is full of “I did it for my family” ….. …… “I had to save the company”……….. “I can't believe I get paid to do this" ……….
“I don’t give a dam for fellow pilots it’s every many for himself ” …………. “The AFAP (or any other association) lost the plot” ……. “International (QF) pilots are different to domestic pilots, therefore we need a separate (and blinkered) association” .... The list just goes on and on and inevitably conditions will go down and down.
It won’t be long before some operators realize that the world is full of wana-be’s who will sell their mothers into prostitution if it means getting a job or experience.
The end result will be amoral or savvy operators advertising for F/Os’ or inexperienced Captains, to work for literally nothing, after paying for their own endorsement, of course, to gain experience etc. etc. They will be flooded with applicants if it offers real time experience and the prospect of an illusionary job with better pay and or conditions.
Only by then, the attitude of these pathetic individuals, including some qualified pilots, will have reduced the profession, to what it was after WW11 when pilots were paid less than bank clerks.
Our industry / profession, needs a huge dose of reality and a unified approach to the problem ( a unified and combined form of association) or face professional disaster. It applies equally to VB or QF
“I don’t give a dam for fellow pilots it’s every many for himself ” …………. “The AFAP (or any other association) lost the plot” ……. “International (QF) pilots are different to domestic pilots, therefore we need a separate (and blinkered) association” .... The list just goes on and on and inevitably conditions will go down and down.
It won’t be long before some operators realize that the world is full of wana-be’s who will sell their mothers into prostitution if it means getting a job or experience.
The end result will be amoral or savvy operators advertising for F/Os’ or inexperienced Captains, to work for literally nothing, after paying for their own endorsement, of course, to gain experience etc. etc. They will be flooded with applicants if it offers real time experience and the prospect of an illusionary job with better pay and or conditions.
Only by then, the attitude of these pathetic individuals, including some qualified pilots, will have reduced the profession, to what it was after WW11 when pilots were paid less than bank clerks.
Our industry / profession, needs a huge dose of reality and a unified approach to the problem ( a unified and combined form of association) or face professional disaster. It applies equally to VB or QF
Last edited by Snowballs; 18th Sep 2003 at 10:02.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Cambodia
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A union is only as strong as its members
Let's just focus for the moment on QF who are unionised and VERY much in the frontline.
I ask:
1. What are the members doing to push the AIPA to protect their wages and conditions with JC firing up etc.
2. Why is there no (obvious) pressure being applied to QF management by the union/members in the form of any threatened or actual industrial action? (I mean if baggage handlers can go on a snap strike and canthreaten the companies/shareholders profits, I would expect that pilots could pose a greater threat to damage the profitability of the company)
3. How much more pressure will you guys take from management with regard to the intrusion of low cost 'members' of the QF Group and their potential to replace you, initially at least TransTasman & domestically or worsen conditions and job 'security'
4. Where and when will you draw (to quote your CEO) the 'line in the sand' where the QF pilot group says "This goes no further'.
I ask:
1. What are the members doing to push the AIPA to protect their wages and conditions with JC firing up etc.
2. Why is there no (obvious) pressure being applied to QF management by the union/members in the form of any threatened or actual industrial action? (I mean if baggage handlers can go on a snap strike and canthreaten the companies/shareholders profits, I would expect that pilots could pose a greater threat to damage the profitability of the company)
3. How much more pressure will you guys take from management with regard to the intrusion of low cost 'members' of the QF Group and their potential to replace you, initially at least TransTasman & domestically or worsen conditions and job 'security'
4. Where and when will you draw (to quote your CEO) the 'line in the sand' where the QF pilot group says "This goes no further'.
Last edited by Col. Walter E. Kurtz; 17th Sep 2003 at 16:36.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Over there now
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its quite simple we have too many Wannabe's and too few Jobs. Add to that a bunch of airlines that require you to pay for your endorsement and recruit on a first thru the door with a shiny new endorsement basis (Keen to get some jet time at any cost) and you have a situation that will only lead to spiraling pilot conditions (dog eats dog) and I suspect lowered standards. Its here now and probably will stay which is a damn shame. The guild sounds like a good idea but it won't do any better than what the unoins have allready failed to do because the ranks will still be full of the same greedies, wobblies, fat cats & wannabe's. It is the Business end that needs to change (or forced to change). How ? I have no idea.
The silence is deafening
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Colonel I agree with your last comment. It should have been preceeded by "Australian". Oz pilots are the worst in the western world for lack of conviction and solidarlity toward a common objective. We all like to talk tough however we are in fact pathetically gutless when push comes to shove. Listen to all the brave souls gasbagging at the bar about what should happen, then see the same people clam up at pilot forums etc when they have the opportunity to have their say.
Enough of the problem. What about the solution?
I have never been an advocate for red ragging militant action. However, if companies are to continue on their mind numbing pusuit of industrial bastardry, there may be little option. The key is to be ALOT smarter than some of those who condoned the same over the past 50 years. We need to pick the brains of as many (successful) union hard nuts as possible. Colate the info and put a plan in place for the execution of our objectives. Legal issues are many so being collectively smart about this is a must. It is however very achievable. The underlying question is "who has the guts to join in"?
Enough of the problem. What about the solution?
I have never been an advocate for red ragging militant action. However, if companies are to continue on their mind numbing pusuit of industrial bastardry, there may be little option. The key is to be ALOT smarter than some of those who condoned the same over the past 50 years. We need to pick the brains of as many (successful) union hard nuts as possible. Colate the info and put a plan in place for the execution of our objectives. Legal issues are many so being collectively smart about this is a must. It is however very achievable. The underlying question is "who has the guts to join in"?
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
This isn't something that is going to be fixed quickly, Colonel. There appears to be a consensus opinion that pilots - like any other group - need to be UNITED if they are ever going to again be able to achieve anything.
The battle against pilots, on an international basis, has been going on for many, many years.
Remember Frank Lorenzo and Continental, then Eastern?
How about Murdoch, Abeles and Ansett, TAA, East-West and IPEC?
Then, in the same year, it was the Air New Zealand pilots' turn.
Ansett New Zealand copped it back in 1999.
Cathay pilots were assailed by Eddington back in the mid '90's, and again within the past 12 months.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the American pilots are still fighting to retain long held conditions.
The airline managments are united - the name of the organisation escapes me at this time.
Pilots WERE united in greater numbers, at one time, when most pilots belonged to ONE association in their country, which was an IFALPA associate.
Individual company unions are a start, but I believe that they need to come under the one umbrella.
The Australian Federation of Air Pilots (AFAP) provides ALL of that, and that was why it was important for the employers to try to break that unity.
The ONLY way to effect change for ALL, is for EACH pilot to join the SAME association that represents PILOTS.
IMO that association - for professional pilots - is the AFAP.
The battle against pilots, on an international basis, has been going on for many, many years.
Remember Frank Lorenzo and Continental, then Eastern?
How about Murdoch, Abeles and Ansett, TAA, East-West and IPEC?
Then, in the same year, it was the Air New Zealand pilots' turn.
Ansett New Zealand copped it back in 1999.
Cathay pilots were assailed by Eddington back in the mid '90's, and again within the past 12 months.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the American pilots are still fighting to retain long held conditions.
The airline managments are united - the name of the organisation escapes me at this time.
Pilots WERE united in greater numbers, at one time, when most pilots belonged to ONE association in their country, which was an IFALPA associate.
Individual company unions are a start, but I believe that they need to come under the one umbrella.
The Australian Federation of Air Pilots (AFAP) provides ALL of that, and that was why it was important for the employers to try to break that unity.
The ONLY way to effect change for ALL, is for EACH pilot to join the SAME association that represents PILOTS.
IMO that association - for professional pilots - is the AFAP.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NZ
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can't fight market forces. The traveling public are making the budget carriers plenty of cash while the legacy carriers are going to the wall. It is the punter that is calling the shots. You can hold on to your pay and conditions like they did at Ansett until the receivers move in.
If your airline can't compete on price (without losing money) and stop the budget carriers expanding it’s only a matter of time. Face reality and just realise that the traveling public are tight and your high airfares that pay your legacy wages are not desirable.
If your airline can't compete on price (without losing money) and stop the budget carriers expanding it’s only a matter of time. Face reality and just realise that the traveling public are tight and your high airfares that pay your legacy wages are not desirable.
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Let’s sit down and see how much weight that statement of your’s carries, Tape It Shut, using approximate figures for VX (a fictitious airline) pilots, and an $89 airfare on a 1 hour flight.
Captain’s salary…$160k
F/O’s salary……..$100k
Total = $260k.
Assuming each pilot flies only 75 hours per month (and, in fact it’s considerably more I believe for this fictitious VX airline) – that is 150 hours for both pilots per month.
Taking out some vacation, and sick leave, and also training/checking simulator, let’s say they return 10 out of 12 months productivity. Total flight time 1,500 hours p.a.
Divivding the (pre-tax) figure of $260k by 1500, that works out at $346.70 per hour for BOTH pilots.
Okay, VX isn’t running full every sector – as a matter of fact they are averaging only a 60% load factor on a 150 seat aircraft, so that’s 90 seats per flight.
Dividing the TOTAL crew cost of $346.70/hour by 90 pax that works out at $3.85 for each passenger for a 1 hour flight – approximately 4% of the total ticket price.
On a load factor of 80% - 120 pax – the cockpit crew salary cost now drops to $2.88 per passenger per hour – about 3.2% of the ticket price, and whith the aircraft chockers, only 2.3% on the CHEAPEST TICKET.
Captain’s salary…$160k
F/O’s salary……..$100k
Total = $260k.
Assuming each pilot flies only 75 hours per month (and, in fact it’s considerably more I believe for this fictitious VX airline) – that is 150 hours for both pilots per month.
Taking out some vacation, and sick leave, and also training/checking simulator, let’s say they return 10 out of 12 months productivity. Total flight time 1,500 hours p.a.
Divivding the (pre-tax) figure of $260k by 1500, that works out at $346.70 per hour for BOTH pilots.
Okay, VX isn’t running full every sector – as a matter of fact they are averaging only a 60% load factor on a 150 seat aircraft, so that’s 90 seats per flight.
Dividing the TOTAL crew cost of $346.70/hour by 90 pax that works out at $3.85 for each passenger for a 1 hour flight – approximately 4% of the total ticket price.
On a load factor of 80% - 120 pax – the cockpit crew salary cost now drops to $2.88 per passenger per hour – about 3.2% of the ticket price, and whith the aircraft chockers, only 2.3% on the CHEAPEST TICKET.
Last edited by Kaptin M; 21st Sep 2003 at 19:28.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We all hear what you say Kaptin, but thats not what iuts about. It`s about airlines maximizing profits, not what we`re worth to them. If they pay us a tenth of what they are now, then they will still screw hard. ?@Unity, all that stuff is good rhetoric, but sooner or later the pricks win. Look at what`s happening here. New airlines offering miuch less kick off and guys go for it. You can`t blame them. Its a job and pilots will take jobs just like anybody else doies. This might be new to flying in Oz, but it`s not new round the world, nor is it new to other professions in Oz.
I don`t have the answers and I doubt anybody does, but I can tell you without doubt that it`s more than joining the AFAP.
I don`t have the answers and I doubt anybody does, but I can tell you without doubt that it`s more than joining the AFAP.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Aus
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The harsh reality of all this is that we are just part of the big globalised system, as some one wisely pointed out earlier on, the aim of just about everything these days is low cost. So what do we do?
Answer, not much! You see eventually the system takes care of itself. Over the course of time costs will be cut to such an extent that people will no longer persue the profession. No doubt the airlines will still need drivers so they will put pressure on governments to lower qualification and experience levels. The end result will be that people with very low experience and limited qualifications will be placed in the left seat of a rather big jets.
And its not only pilots salaries that get trashed, its everything. You have kids at check in, no engineering staff on turnarounds, very little security, but hey, that's the model and hell I'm not complaining. Obviously this is what a large number of the traveling public want, it's just comes down to a question of choice. If the customer feels OK with that, then go right ahead.
The way I see it is this. I don't think this is the end of it, in fact this is just the start. Eventually you will see a new breed of airlines biting at the heels of what we now call the low cost operators. They will be leaner and meaner, they will be using every form of cost saving technology available to them and they will employ as few people as possible. As for pilots, it will be just like the bank runs in GA, you will probably be paid on a casual basis and you will be responsible for maintaining your own license and rating etc.
Pretty sad picture hey.
Answer, not much! You see eventually the system takes care of itself. Over the course of time costs will be cut to such an extent that people will no longer persue the profession. No doubt the airlines will still need drivers so they will put pressure on governments to lower qualification and experience levels. The end result will be that people with very low experience and limited qualifications will be placed in the left seat of a rather big jets.
And its not only pilots salaries that get trashed, its everything. You have kids at check in, no engineering staff on turnarounds, very little security, but hey, that's the model and hell I'm not complaining. Obviously this is what a large number of the traveling public want, it's just comes down to a question of choice. If the customer feels OK with that, then go right ahead.
The way I see it is this. I don't think this is the end of it, in fact this is just the start. Eventually you will see a new breed of airlines biting at the heels of what we now call the low cost operators. They will be leaner and meaner, they will be using every form of cost saving technology available to them and they will employ as few people as possible. As for pilots, it will be just like the bank runs in GA, you will probably be paid on a casual basis and you will be responsible for maintaining your own license and rating etc.
Pretty sad picture hey.
Kap,
Interesting point of view seeing as how you've often stated it was the level of pilots pay the caused Ansett to go out of business.
If it is that simple, VB should be able to pay all it's pilots properley, rather than starting a New Zealand subsidury to erode pay and conditions further, shouldn't it?
And if it IS ok for pilots to join a new start company at wages less than the going rate, why did you so vehemently attack the guys joining Skynet Asia?
Interesting point of view seeing as how you've often stated it was the level of pilots pay the caused Ansett to go out of business.
If it is that simple, VB should be able to pay all it's pilots properley, rather than starting a New Zealand subsidury to erode pay and conditions further, shouldn't it?
And if it IS ok for pilots to join a new start company at wages less than the going rate, why did you so vehemently attack the guys joining Skynet Asia?
Well it has to start with Qantas and Virgin Blue.
AFAP and AIPA? A full but damaging circle/cycle is complete.
The prospects for QF pilots becoming stark. A combination of the two unions has merit if some can look beyond their long noses.
Let's start with an association between AIPA and the AFAP on professional matters-air safety and airspace reform etc. See how it goes from there. With urgency.
The PM's reaction to any bonding between the two airline pilot masses? Immediate invitation to NZ companies to fly over Australian domestic routes!
AFAP and AIPA? A full but damaging circle/cycle is complete.
The prospects for QF pilots becoming stark. A combination of the two unions has merit if some can look beyond their long noses.
Let's start with an association between AIPA and the AFAP on professional matters-air safety and airspace reform etc. See how it goes from there. With urgency.
The PM's reaction to any bonding between the two airline pilot masses? Immediate invitation to NZ companies to fly over Australian domestic routes!
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NZ
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kaptin M
If the operator has 100 crews
2 Pilots at 160K/100K = $26 million per year
2 Pilots at 90k/40K = $13 million per year
The savings can be seen to be insignificant on a per ticket basis, but at the end of the year the profit is $13 million better.
When the savings are applied to engineers, ground support and cabin crew the numbers just get bigger.
If the airline could save 1 cent per litre on jet fuel the savings per flight would be very small. Multipy by the fuel used in the year and it's plenty. I am sorry but I think legacy conditions are in the gunsights of airline management. The unions are powerless because airlines can start up new carriers to lower costs and get around legacy conditions.
Australian Airlines
Freedom Air
Pacific blue (To lower legacy Virgin Blue conditions!!!!!!!)
If the operator has 100 crews
2 Pilots at 160K/100K = $26 million per year
2 Pilots at 90k/40K = $13 million per year
The savings can be seen to be insignificant on a per ticket basis, but at the end of the year the profit is $13 million better.
When the savings are applied to engineers, ground support and cabin crew the numbers just get bigger.
If the airline could save 1 cent per litre on jet fuel the savings per flight would be very small. Multipy by the fuel used in the year and it's plenty. I am sorry but I think legacy conditions are in the gunsights of airline management. The unions are powerless because airlines can start up new carriers to lower costs and get around legacy conditions.
Australian Airlines
Freedom Air
Pacific blue (To lower legacy Virgin Blue conditions!!!!!!!)
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Thought I might be hearing from you, Wiz 
As you were aware, Ansett pilots were paid a salary almost double that of VB pilots, for flying up to 55 hours per month only - VB pilots are, I am told, regularly flying 80-90 hours plus, per month for no extra. Call out on non-duty days ("We never had Reserve/Standby - no airline needs that") was reaping another $1600, if my memory serves me.
Using the same ticket structure for a VB pilot flying say 80 hrs/month fo 10 months, and the ex-AN pilots at 55 hours and say 50% more moolah, works out at $252.75/hr for the VB crew vs (Capt's salary = $122,545.00 & F/O = 65%..$79,655.00)$409.00/hr for the ex-AN.
On a 70% LF on a 150-seat a/c, the cost per pax hour for VB = $2.40 (2.7% of that $89 ticket).
For the ex-AN = $3.89 (4.37% of the $89 fare).
No disagreement there, Wiz.
The ? in the equation is how much is left after ALL staff and operating costs have been accounted for.
There appears to be little doubt that the airline business is indeed lucrative, and returns a most handsome profit.
One can only guess also, as to the degree of Federal and State assistance being dictated to/afforded the airlines, that sees them pursuing a policy of "reem out the worker - reward the boss".
Edit Good point, TIS - which brings us to the next point.
In your example you illustrate that by CONSIDERABLY reducing the salaries of 100 people a saving of $13 million can be made.
Let's look at the income of say ONE person, who ALONE earns >$1.3 million, and the next 10 under him/her, who earn >$1 million, but whose absence from the airline for 6 months would have ZERO revenue effect.
Where do you think it might be logical to start trimming?
As you were aware, Ansett pilots were paid a salary almost double that of VB pilots, for flying up to 55 hours per month only - VB pilots are, I am told, regularly flying 80-90 hours plus, per month for no extra. Call out on non-duty days ("We never had Reserve/Standby - no airline needs that") was reaping another $1600, if my memory serves me.
Using the same ticket structure for a VB pilot flying say 80 hrs/month fo 10 months, and the ex-AN pilots at 55 hours and say 50% more moolah, works out at $252.75/hr for the VB crew vs (Capt's salary = $122,545.00 & F/O = 65%..$79,655.00)$409.00/hr for the ex-AN.
On a 70% LF on a 150-seat a/c, the cost per pax hour for VB = $2.40 (2.7% of that $89 ticket).
For the ex-AN = $3.89 (4.37% of the $89 fare).
If it is that simple, VB should be able to pay all it's pilots properley, rather than starting a New Zealand subsidury to erode pay and conditions further, shouldn't it?
The ? in the equation is how much is left after ALL staff and operating costs have been accounted for.
There appears to be little doubt that the airline business is indeed lucrative, and returns a most handsome profit.
One can only guess also, as to the degree of Federal and State assistance being dictated to/afforded the airlines, that sees them pursuing a policy of "reem out the worker - reward the boss".
Edit Good point, TIS - which brings us to the next point.
In your example you illustrate that by CONSIDERABLY reducing the salaries of 100 people a saving of $13 million can be made.
Let's look at the income of say ONE person, who ALONE earns >$1.3 million, and the next 10 under him/her, who earn >$1 million, but whose absence from the airline for 6 months would have ZERO revenue effect.
Where do you think it might be logical to start trimming?
Last edited by Kaptin M; 21st Sep 2003 at 20:09.