Pacific Blue Pilots
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
A rumour doing the rounds is that they're finding it quite hard to get the pilot numbers.
Could that be because of the pre-tax salary of NZD115K?
Or that the only base is CHC (in spite of having reputedly been granted very generous "incentives" from WLG airport)?
Or is it the $3 per hour paid whilst on duty?
If you were desperate to live in N.Z., then it might be a consideration, but there are plenty of other jobs paying WAY more available now, and coming up shortly.
Could that be because of the pre-tax salary of NZD115K?
Or that the only base is CHC (in spite of having reputedly been granted very generous "incentives" from WLG airport)?
Or is it the $3 per hour paid whilst on duty?
If you were desperate to live in N.Z., then it might be a consideration, but there are plenty of other jobs paying WAY more available now, and coming up shortly.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah that sorta cash isn't gonna intice anyone from AirNZ to jump, couple of our guys went for interviews, probably just outta curiousity.
They have hired 25 for first a/c starting 29th jan and 2nd mid March. Interesting to see they are too chicken to compete on SYD-AKL as there is "too much competetion" obviously don't back themselves that much!!
They have hired 25 for first a/c starting 29th jan and 2nd mid March. Interesting to see they are too chicken to compete on SYD-AKL as there is "too much competetion" obviously don't back themselves that much!!
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Barbers Pole, you obviously consider it acceptable for tax payers to prop up an underperforming airline. Do you work for AirNZ. Pacific Blue won't have that luxury. Perhaps also they realise that most tourists prefer the South Island, and rightly so.
Why does AirNZ not fly LAX-CHC (or several others) maybe they are too chicken, because they most certainly couldn't be called innovative or proactive, but I would rightly call them reactive. The Government should never have bailed them out!
Why does AirNZ not fly LAX-CHC (or several others) maybe they are too chicken, because they most certainly couldn't be called innovative or proactive, but I would rightly call them reactive. The Government should never have bailed them out!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: dubai
Posts: 942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't wait for the day when Branson takes over ANZ. Soon I hope.
By the way, if you ANZ employees think you're are indispensable, and a flag carrier is mandatory, I suggest you have a word with some ex-Sabena staff. In fact they are all ex-employees.
She got rid of the strike force didn't she? Dam sight more important than a flag carrier, in my view.
By the way, if you ANZ employees think you're are indispensable, and a flag carrier is mandatory, I suggest you have a word with some ex-Sabena staff. In fact they are all ex-employees.
She got rid of the strike force didn't she? Dam sight more important than a flag carrier, in my view.
Last edited by doubleu-anker; 18th Jan 2004 at 17:11.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kanga 767 you are Absolutely correct!
The song was initially about death and dying but the manager and promoter (Michael Gudinski me thinks) talked her into changing the title name.
A bit poetic really considering the death of an airline!
The song was initially about death and dying but the manager and promoter (Michael Gudinski me thinks) talked her into changing the title name.
A bit poetic really considering the death of an airline!
Lapsus Linguae
Last time I looked, Wellington was still in the North Island.
As to PB being NOT supported by the NZ taxpayer. Perhaps you need to establish where the (rumoured) $20 million Christchurch fronted up with, came from.
I might suggest that the reason PB cannot get a guernsey from AKL, is the fact that AKL was not prepared to offer a taxpayer funded 'incentive' for them to fly from there.
Seems strange that VB is happy to fly to the largest population centres in Oz, but curiously avoids it in NZ.
Not offering AKL in their network (where most of the traffic originates) is a curious way to be a viable alternative.
And when I last studied law and commerce, there was a marked difference in funding as a shareholder, and a direct "subsidy".
Just ask the good people of Queensland just how much of their taxpayers funds has disappeared into the VB coffers, and for what return. There is certainly no sustaniable asset to show for it.
Plainmaker
Last time I looked, Wellington was still in the North Island.
As to PB being NOT supported by the NZ taxpayer. Perhaps you need to establish where the (rumoured) $20 million Christchurch fronted up with, came from.
I might suggest that the reason PB cannot get a guernsey from AKL, is the fact that AKL was not prepared to offer a taxpayer funded 'incentive' for them to fly from there.
Seems strange that VB is happy to fly to the largest population centres in Oz, but curiously avoids it in NZ.
Not offering AKL in their network (where most of the traffic originates) is a curious way to be a viable alternative.
And when I last studied law and commerce, there was a marked difference in funding as a shareholder, and a direct "subsidy".
Just ask the good people of Queensland just how much of their taxpayers funds has disappeared into the VB coffers, and for what return. There is certainly no sustaniable asset to show for it.
Plainmaker
