Dixon crosses the line in the sand...

[N2O]

Subtle but important difference

Quote
"When considering work to rule...

http://www.actu.asn.au/work_rights/n...976_17416.html

These folk lost a weeks pay because they refused to work OT, during a "protected period" of industrial action... The ETU is taking it to the federal court, the outcome has far reaching consequences for all of us."

These employees probably didn't have a statutory licence.
The PIC is the ultimate authority in the flight deck and answers to the regulator for decisions made.
Is a court (industrial context) really going to decide after the event that a diversion was for other than "operational reasons" and additional fuel should have been ordered?
Are these same courts going to become arbititors of when an MEL should be carried, whether an ILS or instrument time should be logged? Is the court to decide the pilots fatigue levels and hence whether an TOD should have been extended?
On the other hand, if the Federal Goverment wants to complete control for the operational decisions for "industrial reasons", they are quite welcome to legislate for operational control. Do they really want that responsibilty? I don't think so.

[Al E. Vator]

AIPA have four enemies to battle, but it's a battle they MUST fight and NOW:
I accept the following is idealistic but what are the alternatives?

1) Airline Management: They usually stay with airlines for a few years and then leave for other airlines or often other industries. Their priorities are first themselves and then the shareholders. Pilots are a pain-in-the-bum commodity and they will stop at nothing to reduce the cost of that commodity. They are outsmarting AIPA time and again. They are winning handsomely. AIPA are so afraid of a 'repeat of 1989' that they are effectively impotent. What they must do now is join forces with the AFAP, try to mend relationships with the J* pilots and fight the common enemy. Idealistic - true, but there is no other way.

2) Other Pilots: Just trawl the pages of PPRUNE to see those myopic few who delight in denouncing the Qantas pilots at every opportunity. It doesn't matter if they were knocked back at an interview or take offence to some Qantas pilots' arrogance, there are those who delight in the thought of knocking these folks off their 'pedestals'. Well, that might feel good in the short-term but what benefit does that bring the Professional Pilot in the longer term? Get over it.

The same thing happened in 1989 (without opening up that can of worms). Pilots undermined their colleagues and signed individual contracts. Managers didn't destroy that industrial action, pilots did. Unity within the industry has never been the same since.

So there are dispute pilots holding a grudge agains scabs, J* pilots with a grudge against Qantas pilots and vice versa and GA pilots with a grudge against them all! Who needs management to undermine your progress when you do it all so well yourselves! Time to mature girls and develop some form of unity.

3) Media: You will probably never win this battle, certainly not using the 'Marquis of Queensbury' rules pilot unions seem to prefer. Qantas pay for advertising, AIPA don't, so editorial opinion will always be pro-airline. The lower echelon of the media is populated by cynics who just want today's good story and then to move on to the next good story. Tall-Poppy cutting IS a national skill and the media repeatedly use this as their formula for selling papers and advertising space. Qantas pilots are in fact paid modest salaries by global standards (have a look at what a Fed Ex Captain gets or an A-Scaler at Cathay or A JAL Captain). You need to get this information out there.

The only way to beat the management in the media, should you wish to, is to play them at their own game - dirty. Pictures of CEO eating caviar in Paris whilst laying off hundreds of LAME's etc. Stories perhaps of wayward manager's daughters in driving accidents where daddy uses influence to have her released etc. It's filthy stuff but to survive in the world of media today unions need to play the modern game. It's appalling and we'd all aspire to rising above such nonsense but it's the way the 'game' is played. Only for us it's not just a damn game it's our careers.

4) The 'Average' Mentality: Why do we always hear this line 'Oh well, given the average salary in Australia is $56,000, we can't grumble at getting $180,000 or $220,000 or $70,000' or whatever. What a load of nonsense. That is a non-empirical method of judging ones' worth and stupidly self-defeating.

Why this obsession in Australia with what's 'average'. Who cares? I didn't bust my guts working crap jobs, studying after hours, having no social life, driving crap cars, and moving all over Australia (and the world) to get a decent flying job just to compare myself to Joe Average. He left school in Year 10, got p!ssed at the pub every Saturday and aspired to nothing more than a Commodore and a Mortgage. Good for him. No criticism of him intended but that's not what I wanted from life and I took sacrifices to make sure I didn't do that. I'm not going to let some little Irish Jet* airline manager or media person tell me 'Joe Average gets $56,000 so you should be grateful' or that I'm overpaid. Tom Cruise gets $20m for a movie. Is he overpaid? A 28 year-old options trader on Wall St gets a US$7m bonus annually, so what. Good luck to them. They have a skill somebody wants.

As always it's all about supply and demand and in Oz for the past few years there has been too much pilot supply and insufficient demand. Look at the back of Flight International now though and see what's happenning. The world is desperate for pilots and eventually Australia will follow. Emirates, Etihad, Singapore Airlines and the Japanese airlines to name just a few will all have to cancel flights very soon (if they aren't already) if they don't get more pilots. A sign of the times.

What better time for AIPA, the AFAP and the J* pilots to get together and do something worthwhile for the lot of Professional Pilots? What more evidence do you need that Dixon and his ilk are hell-bent on destroying your lot? The truth is you ARE a valuable commodity and airlines WILL succeed wether you are on $250,000 or $380,000pa. They would prefer it if you got less and less but it wouldn't be show-stopping if you got the global standard pilot salary.

The only thing you AREN'T it appears is united.

[Captain Sand Dune]

It's about now that I earnestly thank Qantas recruiting for not hiring me 6 years ago.

Well said Al E. Vator.

[crank]

Originally Posted by Charlie Rich

The final numbers, afetr 2 1/2 years, ended up very close ot the original, but at a MUCH higher wages bill, due to the greatly increased salaries needed to lure pilots.
As a result, NOT ONE OF THE ORIGINAL AIRLINES IN THAT DISPUTE SURVIVED.

but isn't that exactly the point? high wages bill = long term unsustainability?

[speeeedy]

Vorsicht wrote to me:

Whilst i wouldn't expect you to understand, you and your like are exactly the reason why Dixon is going to win this battle, and win it easily.

You're right, I don't understand....I have not made a post on this thread

[Vorsicht]

Speedy

Apologies

I had been trying to reply on another thread that became locked for some mysterious reason. It was 3am so i guess i was a bit confused.
Having said that the statement is still valid i believe.

V

[Taildragger67]

Al E. Vator's point #3 is spot on.

You blokes need to get some good relationships going with the press.

The Board certainly appears to have - I wouldn't exactly be backing a favourable run on a certain network.

I suggest to have a hope of winning, you'll need to get good media advice, get someone who looks good on camera, can interpret industrial and flying jargon into bogan-speak and can come up with good, hard-hitting soundbites for the TV news.

The last war had PR as one of its major battles. Your foe has oodles of cash and experience on that front. You'll need to be just as smart (so no in-fighting) as them. They will look for any and every chink in your armour.

Good luck. Not to say you can't win, but I reckon you'll need it. Add get ready for some nasty tactics and sleepless nights.

[SOPS]

My point exactly Taildragger..the media will chop them up into little pieces unless they are careful

[RedTBar]

There is a certain channel 7 female reporter who is in the news herself at the moment who would love this sort of story and both she and channel 7 would love to have a win over their arch rival...channel 9 ,who's owner just happens to be on the qantas board at the moment....

AIPA,FAAA ..if you are interested in putting your members case forward

Just an idea

[Sunfish]

This is beginning to sound like some of you know where the battles are going to be fought....in the court of public opinion.

My suggestion is to find out who the archtiect of the MUA's campaign was and hire him.

[DutchRoll]

Originally Posted by Taildragger67

Al E. Vator's point #3 is spot on.
You blokes need to get some good relationships going with the press.
The Board certainly appears to have - I wouldn't exactly be backing a favourable run on a certain network........Add get ready for some nasty tactics and sleepless nights.

Quite right. The press likes access to the big guns in the company. If the big guns happen to be a trifle...err...'loose with the truth' shall we say, the press doesn't really care all that much.

Nasty tactics from the company? They started some time ago and are becoming quite bold & brazen.

[Chronic Snoozer]

How about spinning it like this - the average Q pilot earns less than 5% of what the CEO and CFO do.

They pull in more than 20 times as much coin as the 'average' pilot.

Who is really reaping the benefits of the cost reduction program?

[aircraft]

Err, you guys are talking about taking industrial action?

Why? Because Dixon is giving too many routes to Jetstar? Because he is paid 20 times more than the pilots?

Forget it! If this is the best you can do, you are still a million miles from where you would need to be, as a starting point, if you want to have any public opinion in your favour.

[RedTBar]

Aircraft ...I don't think that an interview with the head of AIPA or the FAAA constitutes or can be construed by QF as industrial action.

QF gives interviews all the time and as such it can be argued that in a country with free speech and supposedly free media that it has nothing at all to do with industrial action.

The interview is simply that and in the interest of balanced and realistic information people can make whatever they choose of the information that is supplied to the interviewer.

If there is going to be a dispute or fight then you want your point of view known before you start anything....public opinion is a powerful tool and QF uses it all the time

[Vorsicht]

David McInnes

I dont think it has much to do with other pilots trying to bring Q T&C's down. The point is that the conditions of airline pilots has changed all over the world and Qantas will change with it, whether speedy likes it or not. It has little to do with being "the best" pilots and more about being an adequate pilot. There are Australians all over the world working harder, in worse environments for less money. They are not going to sit back and accept that as their lot,just because the Q pilot group would prefer them not to apply to J*.

On the other hand it is the right of the Q pilot group to use industrial muscle to achieve their preferred outcome. That would clearly demonstrate that the Q pilot group was prepared to fight their own fights rather than have everyone else do it for them. In that case i believe that very few Aussies would accept jobs that were associated with industrial action.

I would also suggest that if everyone who has ever applied to Q had to go through the process again, half of the guys that got in wouldn't, and half that didn't probably would. Qantas selection is far from an ability indicator.

As an aside, have you ever considered that the psych test may be a way of selecting self centred egotists who will never stick together when it comes to a fight with management. And with that in mind could it be that Dixon is now happy that he has enough of that type of person to know that the pilot group doesn't have a chance in the face of a management committed to cost reduction. The psych test is for the company's benefit, not yours.

just my view as an interested observer from the other side of the world.

V

[Al E. Vator]

......er, sure you're not going on TV to say that stuff! It's a PPRUNE point to make folks realise they shouldn't accept the spin-doctoring we all seem bound by in this country. The point was that there are even those amongst us that accept the argument 'Oh well, given the average salary in Australia is $56,000, we can't grumble at getting $180,000 or $220,000 or $70,000'. Why?

Tom Cruise doesn't say 'Oh well, Noni Hazelhurst gets $850 for each episode of Playschool so I should be happy with $25000 for Mission Impossible. No way - he jumps on couches like a Wally and gets $20 million and good luck to him.

You don't have to advertise the fact that you aren't average but you worked bloody hard to get to where you are and don't let any PR-savvy upstart try to ruin that. Aim higher, not lower.

Now AIPA President, go and jump on Geoff Dixons' couch......

[Taildragger67]

A bit more free advice, if I may.

"Dirty Tricks" - not just going through the garbage. Management has access to a range of sweeteners - a few miles in your QF account, lifetime platinum FF, etc. (or, the other way round, being nasty to those who write unfavourable stuff; amazing what the odd bag going to Vladivostok can do... )so you've got to come up with some stuff which is better journalistically.

Steps back into the shadows...

[Vorsicht]

Al E.Vator

There is a subtle difference. Tom Cruise is in demand and there is someone willing to pay him that amount of money. Pilots are arguably not in demand and management are not willing to pay them the amount of money they are currently getting.

Ask Tom how much he is being offered per movie now after jumping on the couch and making a goat of himself. I believe his contract was terminated in fact. Might be some food for thought there.
V

[speeeedy]

Vorsicht, you seem to keep draging me back into this, so let me respond.

On the other thread I went to lengths to explain what "not good enough" meant. You interpret that as you must be "the best", that's your words not mine.

My post was in response to someone who thought that it is OK to undercut purely as retaliation for missing out on QF, clearly someone you really shouldn't want to defend... or is it?

Now go back and read my analogy about the footy team I got knocked back from, my point was that I was actually a good footy player, this seems to be contrary to how you took my post.

[AnQrKa]

Cutest - Is it true that QF pilots are paid credit hours as apposed to flight hours? I was once told QF pilots are paid a higher credit hour on long haul at night for eaxample and paid credit hours during accomodation on nightstops.

Is this still the case?