Stoush royale coming in Qantas
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: someplace else
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speedy
I think you should read the LOA and the LH certified agreement again.
Part 6 of the LH award refers to "Hours of work, scheduling and related matters". Included in this is allocation in accordance with "bid line preferences in order of seniority".
Definitions in the LOA refer to "scheduling and hours of work provisions contained in Part 6..."
The LH award includes the definition of seniority.
The LOA states that when the change over takes place, the LH award in its entirety applies.
That is what is written. It satisfys the integration agreement, but it appears that some have trouble remembering what they agreed to now the consequences are revealed.
I think you should read the LOA and the LH certified agreement again.
Part 6 of the LH award refers to "Hours of work, scheduling and related matters". Included in this is allocation in accordance with "bid line preferences in order of seniority".
Definitions in the LOA refer to "scheduling and hours of work provisions contained in Part 6..."
The LH award includes the definition of seniority.
The LOA states that when the change over takes place, the LH award in its entirety applies.
That is what is written. It satisfys the integration agreement, but it appears that some have trouble remembering what they agreed to now the consequences are revealed.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sunshine Coast
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello Speedy, or should I say ******** you know the rules once more and you are banned W
I am not on the A330, but am close enough to get the facts about some of the idiot 'A' listers who are on it.
Your seniority is somewhere in 1989. You have recieved a command on the bus 5 yeras ahead of when you should.
If I were you I would be keeping my head down and not inviting scrutiny, particulary over your involvement in the forumlation of the 'b' scale
I am not on the A330, but am close enough to get the facts about some of the idiot 'A' listers who are on it.
Your seniority is somewhere in 1989. You have recieved a command on the bus 5 yeras ahead of when you should.
If I were you I would be keeping my head down and not inviting scrutiny, particulary over your involvement in the forumlation of the 'b' scale
Last edited by Woomera; 11th Jul 2004 at 09:53.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: somewhere in Australia
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hay Yorik,
Something else to ponder, a little less talked about threat is National Jet Systems who currently contract to Qantas to operate BAE 146’s and who are rumored to get the 717’s from Jetstar, if AIPA were serious about securing futures for Qantas pilots they would be fighting to bring this in-house also.
Something else to ponder, a little less talked about threat is National Jet Systems who currently contract to Qantas to operate BAE 146’s and who are rumored to get the 717’s from Jetstar, if AIPA were serious about securing futures for Qantas pilots they would be fighting to bring this in-house also.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Yonder
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't disagree with you, spin.
There are a lot of significant threats to our future, but does AIPA care? Nope, they are more upset about the political infighting, issues such as the A330 seniority, hotels, over 60's etc. The real issues don't rate a mention, because we have to be politically correct. And god help anyone who isn't.
AIPA and AIPA members, if you don't pull heads out of your ar$e$ and start addressing the real threats facing us, then we as a group are farked. We will be extinct. Replaced by NJS and Jetscab and Jitcinnict. Its already happenning!
If there are any of you old 744 captains reading this, then for gods sake wake up! It's because of you ignorant old b@stards that we are in this predicament! Your future is at risk here too! Don't think it isnt. What is stopping Dixon from starting up another international carrier now with 744's?
And for those of you at Jetscab, Jitcinict, and NJS who are sitting back thinking that you are absolved of any of the blame here? Well, I can understand how desparately you want a secure jet job. But if you continue to undermine the last bastion of decent pay in Aust flying, then well, you have written your own death sentence too.
Because unless something is done soon to stop the slide, then the suits will grow fatter, and we will be lucky to earn more than cleaners....
This is a quote from Qrewroom which is interesting reading...
There are a lot of significant threats to our future, but does AIPA care? Nope, they are more upset about the political infighting, issues such as the A330 seniority, hotels, over 60's etc. The real issues don't rate a mention, because we have to be politically correct. And god help anyone who isn't.
AIPA and AIPA members, if you don't pull heads out of your ar$e$ and start addressing the real threats facing us, then we as a group are farked. We will be extinct. Replaced by NJS and Jetscab and Jitcinnict. Its already happenning!
If there are any of you old 744 captains reading this, then for gods sake wake up! It's because of you ignorant old b@stards that we are in this predicament! Your future is at risk here too! Don't think it isnt. What is stopping Dixon from starting up another international carrier now with 744's?
And for those of you at Jetscab, Jitcinict, and NJS who are sitting back thinking that you are absolved of any of the blame here? Well, I can understand how desparately you want a secure jet job. But if you continue to undermine the last bastion of decent pay in Aust flying, then well, you have written your own death sentence too.
Because unless something is done soon to stop the slide, then the suits will grow fatter, and we will be lucky to earn more than cleaners....
This is a quote from Qrewroom which is interesting reading...
How unrealistic, how unaware, how Alice in Wonderland does one have to be to believe that a major problem facing you guys is the dreaded "over 60s". How many are there, not counting (and for some reason they aren't counted) the 737 "over 60's"? Four? How many max, ever? Say 20? All taking lots of leave, flying low lines, not flying international where that is applicable. How many commands and F/O slots lost to Jet Connect? Jetstar? How many hundreds of commands that is! And what did you guys do? Had a meeting!! Wow, bet Geoff just felt weak at the knees. And you "need" "must have" coverage of the Jetstar pilots? Which will solve what? You will get another pack of disaffected moaners, you will get back to the plethora of problems not ours that we left the AFAP to avoid, but any "advantage" is absolutely lost upon me. What is not lost upon me is the effect that supporting the Mount Cook pilots had on the Air New Zealand Association. They delayed the introduction of the -400 awaiting an undertaking that Mount Cook pilots would be guaranteed a slot in mainline (sound familiar?) for I think several years until the pilots split on the issue and some told the association to get lost and volunteered to fly the -400 for what was on offer. That explains the low wages paid to Air New Zealand pilots to-day, in my opinion. Weren't they fortunate to have coverage of the Mount Cook pilots! You are being seduced by the Attraction of the Achievable Aim. "Fix" the over 60's! Buy an AIPA building! (Put your money where the Company can see it, and you can't use it, reduce flexibility, get involved in side issues for a possible fraction of a % reduction in dues. You would have to be crazy, or wishing to avoid the real issues, to even consider the proposal.) Get coverage of other pilots? Achievable? Yes. Relevant? Don't think so.
You guys need to go into the next EBA demanding a "scope clause". Demanding, not asking, not begging. You need an enforceable undertaking from Q that these outfits will grow so big and no bigger. They can achieve the aim of blocking new entrants and stopping Virgin yet remain relatively small. If you aren't tough enough to do this, (never ask for anything that you aren't prepared to take), if you don't stop fiddling with minutiae and face up to the real problems, kiss your careers goodbye. Other men fought for and won your pay and conditions, but if you aren't prepared to box on to keep them, you aren't going to keep them. Nor do you deserve to do so.
You guys need to go into the next EBA demanding a "scope clause". Demanding, not asking, not begging. You need an enforceable undertaking from Q that these outfits will grow so big and no bigger. They can achieve the aim of blocking new entrants and stopping Virgin yet remain relatively small. If you aren't tough enough to do this, (never ask for anything that you aren't prepared to take), if you don't stop fiddling with minutiae and face up to the real problems, kiss your careers goodbye. Other men fought for and won your pay and conditions, but if you aren't prepared to box on to keep them, you aren't going to keep them. Nor do you deserve to do so.
Last edited by Yorik Hunt; 11th Jul 2004 at 00:54.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rehab,
Nice try, however a quick read will not do, please read it again. I know this thing inside out and back to front, I am not going out on a wing here.
Page B:392 paragraph 1.12 of the Award (LOA 156A) states quite clearly what is required in regards to Part 6. Part six talks about scheduling and hours or work and does refer to the allocation of work v/v seniority, however it does not mention what the seniority is.
You would be aware that the squirrel cage is still seniority (just a different type), part 6 embraces seniority but does not talk about how it works, that is precisely why there is an ENTIRELY separate section of the award dealing with how seniority works, but as I have pointed out the LOA and the IA never refers to this section, for very good reason.
There is NO reference in the LOA regarding a switch to the LH award in its ENTIRETY. That is just a Lie… Either use facts or you do your argument no good at all.
Maybe you second guessed what AIPA was doing when both the IA and the LOA were written. That it has now turned out different to what you imagined is immaterial.
But what is written is written, why is not relevant now, but the FACT is that seniority will have to be decided to the satisfaction of BOTH Q and A pilots, if not, then it will go to the umpire. I say bring on the umpire….NOW.
PS – Pollution: **, I don’t think so - **** you too W , try again...
Nice try, however a quick read will not do, please read it again. I know this thing inside out and back to front, I am not going out on a wing here.
Page B:392 paragraph 1.12 of the Award (LOA 156A) states quite clearly what is required in regards to Part 6. Part six talks about scheduling and hours or work and does refer to the allocation of work v/v seniority, however it does not mention what the seniority is.
You would be aware that the squirrel cage is still seniority (just a different type), part 6 embraces seniority but does not talk about how it works, that is precisely why there is an ENTIRELY separate section of the award dealing with how seniority works, but as I have pointed out the LOA and the IA never refers to this section, for very good reason.
There is NO reference in the LOA regarding a switch to the LH award in its ENTIRETY. That is just a Lie… Either use facts or you do your argument no good at all.
Maybe you second guessed what AIPA was doing when both the IA and the LOA were written. That it has now turned out different to what you imagined is immaterial.
But what is written is written, why is not relevant now, but the FACT is that seniority will have to be decided to the satisfaction of BOTH Q and A pilots, if not, then it will go to the umpire. I say bring on the umpire….NOW.
PS – Pollution: **, I don’t think so - **** you too W , try again...
Last edited by Woomera; 11th Jul 2004 at 09:55.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sunshine Coast
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well speedy getting tired of this W no matter how things pan out, at least you and the rest of the 'A' list have been exposed.
See you in court
See you in court
Last edited by Woomera; 11th Jul 2004 at 09:56.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: someplace else
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speedy
EBA6 Letters of Agreement B:398
Click here to see the LH award and scroll down about 3/4 to see LOA156A - A330 Aircraft Pay and Conditions, and then read item 16.
http://www.wagenet.gov.au/WageNet/Se...w=Y&page=whole
Got Yu!
16. Governing agreement if change over takes place
When the change over takes place, this Letter of Agreement will automatically be cancelled and the Long Haul Certified Agreement (including any agreed variations to it) will apply in its entirety.
When the change over takes place, this Letter of Agreement will automatically be cancelled and the Long Haul Certified Agreement (including any agreed variations to it) will apply in its entirety.
Click here to see the LH award and scroll down about 3/4 to see LOA156A - A330 Aircraft Pay and Conditions, and then read item 16.
http://www.wagenet.gov.au/WageNet/Se...w=Y&page=whole
Got Yu!
Last edited by rehab; 11th Jul 2004 at 11:04.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: home with mum and the kids
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
despite the 'Q' listers position, I still do not understand how they justify the gains made with the 767 flying (promotions) and then put the other hand out for the A330??????
Either way it will not affect me, but it would appear that some are being greedy.
I dare say that AIPA will fight desperately for this to stay out of the commission. After all, aren't Qualifications and Experience the only allowable promotional criteria to be decided by the AIRC?
If so then surely RAAF, ex Airline and even Ex GA stand to gain.
Better to give the A listers a fair go and keep the pandora's box closed me thinks.
Either way it will not affect me, but it would appear that some are being greedy.
I dare say that AIPA will fight desperately for this to stay out of the commission. After all, aren't Qualifications and Experience the only allowable promotional criteria to be decided by the AIRC?
If so then surely RAAF, ex Airline and even Ex GA stand to gain.
Better to give the A listers a fair go and keep the pandora's box closed me thinks.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
longjohn
It has nothing to do with being greedy, there is now an integration agreement which includes rules for introduction of a new type and who will fly it under which award. Note that the 767 was introduced before this. As an aside the 737 has also done well to the point that the vast majority of "A" (SH) FOs have their commands. Recent commands have now come from "Q" (LH) FOs as they have run out of suitable "A" FOs.
There are about 30 SH Captains on the A330 flying under the SH award. The trigger has now happened for the A330 to go onto the LH award, this is because it will be doing in excess of 50% international flying in the next 12 months. There are SH pilots who believe this to be unfair, I gather mainly in the rostering area.
If the A330's operation was a majority of domestic flying, then I believe the SH award should be used. If it were mainly international, then the LH award should apply. Thats fair is it not? However some think it is not.
I agree with you with regards going to the commision. It will be a pandora's box where ALL sides will loose.
It has nothing to do with being greedy, there is now an integration agreement which includes rules for introduction of a new type and who will fly it under which award. Note that the 767 was introduced before this. As an aside the 737 has also done well to the point that the vast majority of "A" (SH) FOs have their commands. Recent commands have now come from "Q" (LH) FOs as they have run out of suitable "A" FOs.
There are about 30 SH Captains on the A330 flying under the SH award. The trigger has now happened for the A330 to go onto the LH award, this is because it will be doing in excess of 50% international flying in the next 12 months. There are SH pilots who believe this to be unfair, I gather mainly in the rostering area.
If the A330's operation was a majority of domestic flying, then I believe the SH award should be used. If it were mainly international, then the LH award should apply. Thats fair is it not? However some think it is not.
I agree with you with regards going to the commision. It will be a pandora's box where ALL sides will loose.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Sydney
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not that I buy into the whole, "my haul/airline is better than yours" argument but it should be noted in the interests of clarity that the failures on the 767 years ago were command upgrades from FO whilst the failures on the A330 have been 737 Captains failing the conversion course. Three of them so far.
It is a bit of a difference.
It is a bit of a difference.
Evertonian
Ladies & Gentlemen, the Captain has illuminated the Seat Belts sign. Would all passengers please store their trays & return their seats to the upright position...this is gonna get bumpy!!!!"
Last edited by Buster Hyman; 14th Jul 2004 at 12:46.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Qld
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cutest of Borg,
Good point, also the 767 training (checking) at the time was very different to the training now! As opposed to the 737 training which gives you 2 - 3 times more sectors to iron out the problems. Very few, if any, failed 737 training, unlike the long haul fleets, because of the training system in place, not necessarily because of the candidate!
Good point, also the 767 training (checking) at the time was very different to the training now! As opposed to the 737 training which gives you 2 - 3 times more sectors to iron out the problems. Very few, if any, failed 737 training, unlike the long haul fleets, because of the training system in place, not necessarily because of the candidate!
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Next door
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QFandTUGGINGit 
How many of the people you so vividly describe are already QF pilots as a result of intergation? 400-500?
Also, why not come clean and admit that you are not a QF pilot; and that you are nowhere near the left seat of anything bigger than your home lounge.
Finally, it would be damned funny watching you jump the hoops in CAL, SIA or EVA.........little child you wouldn't last the simple act of filling in your name on the application! Now run along to your can of VB and your game-boy.
QFandTUGGINGit deleted his post, well well.........heh,heh.
How many of the people you so vividly describe are already QF pilots as a result of intergation? 400-500?
Also, why not come clean and admit that you are not a QF pilot; and that you are nowhere near the left seat of anything bigger than your home lounge.
Finally, it would be damned funny watching you jump the hoops in CAL, SIA or EVA.........little child you wouldn't last the simple act of filling in your name on the application! Now run along to your can of VB and your game-boy.
QFandTUGGINGit deleted his post, well well.........heh,heh.
Last edited by E.P.; 17th Jul 2004 at 00:03.
