Racing to the bottom.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Pass A Dimwit,
I believe the term is 'Brother' and I'd prefer you didn't use it as you are not one.
Yep, it's me again, I'll try and keep it short as I know you've (or whomever's views you represent) been awaiting my reply.
There you go assuming again 'The situation you are clearly in'
mmmmm, look at my profile dood. I'm well into the top tax bracket which means I subsidised your education by more than the average punter. User pays eh, pay for your education in full as you would an endorsement, I'll even cop you donating the money to my favourite charity (The Royal Children's in Melbourne). But you'd think they are bludgers and should pay for their own treatment? User Pays??
I'm also a Company Director, yes a capitalist with a social conscience. Not a bad situation to 'actually' be in eh? (Not the 'assumed' situation you think I'm in)
There are few things that make me angry, Melbourne not getting the Super 14 franchise upset me, what really makes me angry are people who don't leave a place in better condition than what they found it. I'll bet you leave your sh!t every where when you've finished your macca's? But then again, after a hard days yakka trying to upsize everybody you deserve a rest?
The same goes for a work place, YOU have benefitted directly from the union movement in your work place environment i.e. pay and conditions. If you signed them away in place of a WPA or a contract that strips all of your conditions away you are a FOOL. I enjoy very good benefits and conditions, hard fought for and deserved, all of which are affordable to my employer. I contribute levies (happily) in return for the negotiation my representatives provide. Those levies also protect me from legal action and other issues.
YES THE CHILDREN ARE NOW OUT OF THE MINES, BUT WHO GOT THEM OUT OF THERE???????
God help you sunshine if you get sick or injured and are working on a contract, you're on your own.
How about you leave the place in a better condition than you found it rather than sh!tting in mine and our childrens nest?
Yours faithfully again.
I believe the term is 'Brother' and I'd prefer you didn't use it as you are not one.
Yep, it's me again, I'll try and keep it short as I know you've (or whomever's views you represent) been awaiting my reply.
There you go assuming again 'The situation you are clearly in'
mmmmm, look at my profile dood. I'm well into the top tax bracket which means I subsidised your education by more than the average punter. User pays eh, pay for your education in full as you would an endorsement, I'll even cop you donating the money to my favourite charity (The Royal Children's in Melbourne). But you'd think they are bludgers and should pay for their own treatment? User Pays??
I'm also a Company Director, yes a capitalist with a social conscience. Not a bad situation to 'actually' be in eh? (Not the 'assumed' situation you think I'm in)
There are few things that make me angry, Melbourne not getting the Super 14 franchise upset me, what really makes me angry are people who don't leave a place in better condition than what they found it. I'll bet you leave your sh!t every where when you've finished your macca's? But then again, after a hard days yakka trying to upsize everybody you deserve a rest?
The same goes for a work place, YOU have benefitted directly from the union movement in your work place environment i.e. pay and conditions. If you signed them away in place of a WPA or a contract that strips all of your conditions away you are a FOOL. I enjoy very good benefits and conditions, hard fought for and deserved, all of which are affordable to my employer. I contribute levies (happily) in return for the negotiation my representatives provide. Those levies also protect me from legal action and other issues.
YES THE CHILDREN ARE NOW OUT OF THE MINES, BUT WHO GOT THEM OUT OF THERE???????
God help you sunshine if you get sick or injured and are working on a contract, you're on your own.
How about you leave the place in a better condition than you found it rather than sh!tting in mine and our childrens nest?
Yours faithfully again.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dunnunda & Godzone
Age: 74
Posts: 4,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr matca is taking stress leave for a short while.
Not for his views by the manner in which he adresses others.
By all means have a vigourous discussion but name calling doesn't make your case.
Not for his views by the manner in which he adresses others.
By all means have a vigourous discussion but name calling doesn't make your case.
Pass-A-Frozo
You are trolling at a level rarely noted on Pprune.
Have you ever bemoaned your military wage or conditions? ( you'd be a first if you hadn't )
Imagine if your neoconservative theories of capitalism pervaded in the RAAF. Rare, expensive to train, expensive to maintain commodities such as bomber/fighter pilots would be paid twice as much, get more promotion and better pensions than lesser more common, transport commodities.
If you are in the profe$$ional civilian world now, take some advice, you will realise nobody is shooting at you very soon.
Keep your hair on!
My contibution to the discussion - Australian pilots stay where you are! Voting with your feet abroad is feeding a far worse foe than Dixon/Godfrey. Not to mention the woes of being paid in USD!
You are trolling at a level rarely noted on Pprune.
Have you ever bemoaned your military wage or conditions? ( you'd be a first if you hadn't )
Imagine if your neoconservative theories of capitalism pervaded in the RAAF. Rare, expensive to train, expensive to maintain commodities such as bomber/fighter pilots would be paid twice as much, get more promotion and better pensions than lesser more common, transport commodities.
If you are in the profe$$ional civilian world now, take some advice, you will realise nobody is shooting at you very soon.
Keep your hair on!
My contibution to the discussion - Australian pilots stay where you are! Voting with your feet abroad is feeding a far worse foe than Dixon/Godfrey. Not to mention the woes of being paid in USD!
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Zer Gut Ya?
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed, Gnadenburg is quite correct. Judging by what is happenning on the outside, our Military "brothers" are way overpaid. We should all be writing to our local MP's and lobbying to reduce PAF's pay and conditions. In accordance with his own theories, he clearly doesnt deserve the pay.
Have a nice day!
Have a nice day!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paying for Herc endorsements make it hard but you really struggle when you have to pay for the F111 endoresement, that old thing just chews so much fuel. But what really makes it hard is 20% pay cut afterwards (because the hours are gonna look great in ya log book son).
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's get a few points straight. You are extending my arguments out to other areas and topics in which I never even made my opinion known. You're drawing a very long bow indeed to assume I'm "one of the people that leaves my stuff out at maccas" ? Or even assuming what my views on health care are? Where the hell did that come from anyway?
I think you believe my opinion is "f#ck everyone". Well it's not
User pays / Paying for endorsements - I believe there is nothing wrong with a company asking you to pay for the qualifications you attain. Do I think it is a good business decision to do so? Personally no, because they are limiting the prospective employee field by pricing some out of the job. Do I think companies should be allowed to ask, yes.
Pay and conditions - Do I think companies should pay $1 an hour. No. Do I think the market should set wages - Yes with the limit of minimum wage still applying. This is why we have laws protecting society against market failings. However, you get to make the decision as to whether you wish to work in that job for that pay.
Unions - Do I think it is right to strike for better pay / Do I think unions serve the greater community. No! I raised in a previous post an example where hundreds of families were left on welfare because of a group of people striking. The company they worked for went bankrupt , and to this day they still hate that group.
So what's next Matco, I suppose next you'll say I kill small animals, simply because I don't like unions
I do find your 1+1 = 758 approach to what I've been saying amusing though.
Oh and schnauzer, I think you'll be surprised to find that I'm quiet happy to accept the wage that the market deems I deserve. I have the choice to move on if I wish. I'm all for choice.
Anyway, I guess I better get back to killing small animals and dancing with the devil
I think you believe my opinion is "f#ck everyone". Well it's not
User pays / Paying for endorsements - I believe there is nothing wrong with a company asking you to pay for the qualifications you attain. Do I think it is a good business decision to do so? Personally no, because they are limiting the prospective employee field by pricing some out of the job. Do I think companies should be allowed to ask, yes.
Pay and conditions - Do I think companies should pay $1 an hour. No. Do I think the market should set wages - Yes with the limit of minimum wage still applying. This is why we have laws protecting society against market failings. However, you get to make the decision as to whether you wish to work in that job for that pay.
Unions - Do I think it is right to strike for better pay / Do I think unions serve the greater community. No! I raised in a previous post an example where hundreds of families were left on welfare because of a group of people striking. The company they worked for went bankrupt , and to this day they still hate that group.
So what's next Matco, I suppose next you'll say I kill small animals, simply because I don't like unions
I do find your 1+1 = 758 approach to what I've been saying amusing though.Oh and schnauzer, I think you'll be surprised to find that I'm quiet happy to accept the wage that the market deems I deserve. I have the choice to move on if I wish. I'm all for choice.
Anyway, I guess I better get back to killing small animals and dancing with the devil
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Zer Gut Ya?
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Choice. Yes. What a load of tripe, PAF.
Believe me mate, I have done the military thing, and I know where you are coming from. As I am, most in the military are right wing conservative. BUT, you my friend have apparently seen only the military and what you read in a text book. And believe me too when I tell you that you lead a terribly sheltered existence, because I did too.
I got a little bit of a shock when I came into the big scary world. And I realised that text books are irrelevant and there are employers out here who don't read 'em either. Collectively, they want one thing. That is - cost reduction. And they will stop at nothing to achieve it. They don't give a sh1t about your concept of choice.
And whilst our respective associations are as weak as p1ss, they are something that we can hang our hat on. They make the occasional earth shattering break through (like the Captains car park, and no foil trays! ) and for these little triumphs we are grateful. They hopefully prevent our profession from spiralling into oblivion.
But the main point here is CHOICE. OK, so I've made the choice to come to QF, supposedly the ultimate job in Aussie Aviation. But you are advocating GOD's antics with fanatical cost reductions and the associated anguish caused to employees of airlines Australia wide, on the basis of "well YOU made your choice!" Hmm, well, what would you have me do, PAF?
That is absolute bullsh1t my friend. It is a simplistic cop out. When you have spent a little time in the REAL world, then please feel free to lecture all about your economic theories. Until then, that is all they are. Theories.
Cost reductions are fine, but in this case they have gone too far and are having an inverse effect upon the bottom line. Staff are disenfranchised and so are the punters. There is a limit, and we have definately reached it.
Believe me mate, I have done the military thing, and I know where you are coming from. As I am, most in the military are right wing conservative. BUT, you my friend have apparently seen only the military and what you read in a text book. And believe me too when I tell you that you lead a terribly sheltered existence, because I did too.
I got a little bit of a shock when I came into the big scary world. And I realised that text books are irrelevant and there are employers out here who don't read 'em either. Collectively, they want one thing. That is - cost reduction. And they will stop at nothing to achieve it. They don't give a sh1t about your concept of choice.
And whilst our respective associations are as weak as p1ss, they are something that we can hang our hat on. They make the occasional earth shattering break through (like the Captains car park, and no foil trays!
) and for these little triumphs we are grateful. They hopefully prevent our profession from spiralling into oblivion. But the main point here is CHOICE. OK, so I've made the choice to come to QF, supposedly the ultimate job in Aussie Aviation. But you are advocating GOD's antics with fanatical cost reductions and the associated anguish caused to employees of airlines Australia wide, on the basis of "well YOU made your choice!" Hmm, well, what would you have me do, PAF?
That is absolute bullsh1t my friend. It is a simplistic cop out. When you have spent a little time in the REAL world, then please feel free to lecture all about your economic theories. Until then, that is all they are. Theories.
Cost reductions are fine, but in this case they have gone too far and are having an inverse effect upon the bottom line. Staff are disenfranchised and so are the punters. There is a limit, and we have definately reached it.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You've missed the mark my friend assuming I have not worked in the real world.
Think what you may, but unionism is not a fair solution. Unions cost jobs, and cost the economy overall.
What would I have you do? Well, that is for you to decide. Unfortunately some people think the answer is to strike and cost the company (and many others, that's what most forget) millions and millions of dollars. That is what I have a problem with.
So explain to me how you think in the "real world" employers will be able to hire the same number of employees if you jack up wages 28%?
Think what you may, but unionism is not a fair solution. Unions cost jobs, and cost the economy overall.
What would I have you do? Well, that is for you to decide. Unfortunately some people think the answer is to strike and cost the company (and many others, that's what most forget) millions and millions of dollars. That is what I have a problem with.
So explain to me how you think in the "real world" employers will be able to hire the same number of employees if you jack up wages 28%?
Last edited by Pass-A-Frozo; 10th Mar 2005 at 02:17.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: NSW Australia
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PAF,
You criticise others for their "illogical" posts on this topic, yet you keep talking about unions demanding 28% payrises. This is complete crap!
Unions in all industries these days feel that they have done well if they can negotiate a 5% increase. As for QF, they want offsets for measly 3% (less than CPI) increase. Who's trying to screw who here?
I know that nothing will ever change your mind. You can have your opinion, but don't expect to get much support for your views here.
You criticise others for their "illogical" posts on this topic, yet you keep talking about unions demanding 28% payrises. This is complete crap!
Unions in all industries these days feel that they have done well if they can negotiate a 5% increase. As for QF, they want offsets for measly 3% (less than CPI) increase. Who's trying to screw who here?
I know that nothing will ever change your mind. You can have your opinion, but don't expect to get much support for your views here.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union last month "negotiating" with Toyota. Were they asking for 3-5%? No, they wanted a 10 percent payrise each year for three years. So I guess you're right. That's not 28%, it's 30%. Give it a few years and they'll be complaining that Toyota is moving off shore.
I'm not expecting to change the left wingers that have emerged in this thread. However, don't expect every pilot to join your union.
So I guess you're right. That's not 28%, it's 30%. Give it a few years and they'll be complaining that Toyota is moving off shore. I'm not expecting to change the left wingers that have emerged in this thread. However, don't expect every pilot to join your union.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: OZ
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PAF - You are remarkable! How have you managed to gain all of your experience "working" in the real world between joining the Defence Force Academy at age 17 or 18 and the Squadron you are flying with now?
Another thought. I seem to recall not too many years ago Military aviators receiving quite a reasonable Flying Pay increase. To the extent that now, outside of the major airlines, the military would probably be next best paid flying jobs in Aust. The reason for the payrise was to try and stem the flow of military pilots leaving for the improved pay and conditions offered by the major airlines. Pay and Conditions negotiated over many years by the relevant Union/Associations with their employer. So PAF may be indirectly, you actually have the Unions to thank for your current pay and conditions.
Another thought. I seem to recall not too many years ago Military aviators receiving quite a reasonable Flying Pay increase. To the extent that now, outside of the major airlines, the military would probably be next best paid flying jobs in Aust. The reason for the payrise was to try and stem the flow of military pilots leaving for the improved pay and conditions offered by the major airlines. Pay and Conditions negotiated over many years by the relevant Union/Associations with their employer. So PAF may be indirectly, you actually have the Unions to thank for your current pay and conditions.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OBNO:
You do not know what my situation or history is. You assume.
Perhaps if you think you know me you can approach me at work some day and I'll explain it to you. I'll keep my eyes peeled for a communist
Yes, military pay was based on stopping people from leaving. As in "I'm not happy with my pay and conditions, I'll quit". But hang on, I thought that was all "theory" , not "real life". You have just proven my point. People had the CHOICE to leave.
Anyway, I'm suprised you aren't protesting for the government to cut funding to all university economics programs -- they don't provide anything useful for "real life"
While you're enjoying the "pay and conditions" negotiated over the years perhaps you can visit Kalbarri and explain to them why hundreds of them ended up on the dole queue. I'm sure they'll be happy for you.
You do not know what my situation or history is. You assume.
Perhaps if you think you know me you can approach me at work some day and I'll explain it to you. I'll keep my eyes peeled for a communist
Yes, military pay was based on stopping people from leaving. As in "I'm not happy with my pay and conditions, I'll quit". But hang on, I thought that was all "theory" , not "real life". You have just proven my point. People had the CHOICE to leave.
Anyway, I'm suprised you aren't protesting for the government to cut funding to all university economics programs -- they don't provide anything useful for "real life"
While you're enjoying the "pay and conditions" negotiated over the years perhaps you can visit Kalbarri and explain to them why hundreds of them ended up on the dole queue. I'm sure they'll be happy for you.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a 10 percent payrise each year for three years
you go in asking for this and that, know full well you wont get it, then it becomes a game what we can trade for what
eg, we drop our 15% pay claim to 7% and you drop your Pay for endorsements claim, and so it goes on until an agreement is reached.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: NSW Australia
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And I'll stand by it PAF.
You can't just add three percentages together and represent it as a total figure.
While 3 lots of 10% may be 30% of one year's salary, it is still only 10% of 3 years salary.
Your figure is sensational nonsense.
PS I too, have done my time in the military. Are you hoping for an airline job in the future? If you are, I anticipate your politics will change in the future.
You can't just add three percentages together and represent it as a total figure.
While 3 lots of 10% may be 30% of one year's salary, it is still only 10% of 3 years salary.
Your figure is sensational nonsense.
PS I too, have done my time in the military. Are you hoping for an airline job in the future? If you are, I anticipate your politics will change in the future.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Oz
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ultralights
I curious as to what makes your experiences more "real" than those of PAF?
Surely you're not suggesting that his employment with the military lacks credibility as being "real" when compared to the sheltered workshop that is Qantas?
After all, isn't this what the majority of posts in this forum are about.... whinges and bleats from QF employees who are unable/unwilling to accept the realities of employment in a commercially competitive marketplace; justifying why they need to hide behind the skirt-tails of unions to protect employment conditions based in the days of a government owned monopoly?
I curious as to what makes your experiences more "real" than those of PAF?
Surely you're not suggesting that his employment with the military lacks credibility as being "real" when compared to the sheltered workshop that is Qantas?
After all, isn't this what the majority of posts in this forum are about.... whinges and bleats from QF employees who are unable/unwilling to accept the realities of employment in a commercially competitive marketplace; justifying why they need to hide behind the skirt-tails of unions to protect employment conditions based in the days of a government owned monopoly?
