View Poll Results: Which airline would you like to work for:
JetStar?
59
23.32%
Virgin Blue?
157
62.06%
Neither
37
14.62%
Voters: 253. This poll is closed
Jet* or Virgin Blue - what would you choose?
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi all,
New to this forum. Only a minnow GA pilot at the moment, but I thought I would weigh in on the topic of 'To pay or Not to pay for an endorsement'. If this was any other industry they would be laughing at us. If you don't have the qualifications/experience you simply don't get the job. As can clearly be seen from previous posts that quote VB & J* you need to have that type endorsment already before you start. Can any of you think back to when you were starting out as a commercial pilot and you needed a certain twin endorsment to get a good/better job, you simply went out and paid to get that endorsment! So it's no different now only that the aircraft are bigger and cost more.
Take this as an example; A truck driver is tired of doing interstate runs and decides to go into the Minig industry as a Dump truck driver. (You know those huge mutha's you see around mines). He applies for the position, but does not get the job becuase he hasn't the qualifcations/ driving skills to operate the machine. So he goes out and gets the qualifications/skills(ie; pays for the driving instruction &license), re-applies later on down the track and hey presto he get the job. So why is this different in the aviation industry? These days there is no loyalty in any industry, get what you can out of your employer as they are trying to get the most out of you for as little investment(your salary) as possible. Look at the bright side, if after 6 months you don't like working for an airline them simply go to somewhere else without the burden of being bonded.
I would prefer to be bonded, as it is more stable work wise and you don't have to concern yourself with if you will be the first to go when cost cutting/redundancies get put on the directors/accountants table.
With VB now getting the E-Jets, I would go with VB as prefered employer. Notwithstanding if I got an offer from J* I'd take it and look at VB later down the track.
my 5 cents worth(No more 2 cent pieces)
New to this forum. Only a minnow GA pilot at the moment, but I thought I would weigh in on the topic of 'To pay or Not to pay for an endorsement'. If this was any other industry they would be laughing at us. If you don't have the qualifications/experience you simply don't get the job. As can clearly be seen from previous posts that quote VB & J* you need to have that type endorsment already before you start. Can any of you think back to when you were starting out as a commercial pilot and you needed a certain twin endorsment to get a good/better job, you simply went out and paid to get that endorsment! So it's no different now only that the aircraft are bigger and cost more.
Take this as an example; A truck driver is tired of doing interstate runs and decides to go into the Minig industry as a Dump truck driver. (You know those huge mutha's you see around mines). He applies for the position, but does not get the job becuase he hasn't the qualifcations/ driving skills to operate the machine. So he goes out and gets the qualifications/skills(ie; pays for the driving instruction &license), re-applies later on down the track and hey presto he get the job. So why is this different in the aviation industry? These days there is no loyalty in any industry, get what you can out of your employer as they are trying to get the most out of you for as little investment(your salary) as possible. Look at the bright side, if after 6 months you don't like working for an airline them simply go to somewhere else without the burden of being bonded.
I would prefer to be bonded, as it is more stable work wise and you don't have to concern yourself with if you will be the first to go when cost cutting/redundancies get put on the directors/accountants table.
With VB now getting the E-Jets, I would go with VB as prefered employer. Notwithstanding if I got an offer from J* I'd take it and look at VB later down the track.
my 5 cents worth(No more 2 cent pieces)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here and there.
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Notwithstanding if I got an offer from J* I'd take it and look at VB later down the track.
D.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In a burrow
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It might come down to who has the best EBA?
VB recently pulled the proposed EBA from voting at the 11th hour, due possibly to a 95% NO vote on a poll of over 300 pilots who voted (not the official EBA vote), and huge backlash from the pilot group over the poorly written, and one-sided document. You can guess which way it favoured in ALL respects. VB did not want to re-negotiate after a massive NO vote. They are working on a revised edition.
Time will tell.
VB recently pulled the proposed EBA from voting at the 11th hour, due possibly to a 95% NO vote on a poll of over 300 pilots who voted (not the official EBA vote), and huge backlash from the pilot group over the poorly written, and one-sided document. You can guess which way it favoured in ALL respects. VB did not want to re-negotiate after a massive NO vote. They are working on a revised edition.
Time will tell.
PhotoRecon you are joking aren't you? Since when did a Haulpack driver have to fork out $100k for a basic drivers licence (and two years study to boot) and then another $30k+ for his big truck ticket?
but then:
So what IS your position? Are you agreeing with up-front training costs or not?
Most other industries (especially Haulpack drivers) are probably saying "you blithering idiots for putting up with all that just to fly an aeroplane".
If this was any other industry they would be laughing at us. If you don't have the qualifications/experience you simply don't get the job.
I would prefer to be bonded
Most other industries (especially Haulpack drivers) are probably saying "you blithering idiots for putting up with all that just to fly an aeroplane".
PhotoRecon
Yes I can. Never paid for a twin endorsement in my life except the one I got when I did my initial twin rating. I have about 10 endorsements at last count excluding jets. I worked in GA for over ten years as well.
Yes it is. These airlines are profiteering on the backs of new pilots wanting to work for them. I’ve never paid for a jet endorsement and never will. It has been my choice to follow my convictions and only work for an employer who pays me to get endorsed on his jets and not the other way round.
That’s not true. I have an uncle who is very big in the gold mining industry up north. He will quite often train at his expense those who get the job to drive the haul trucks but haven’t driven them before. The only requirement is a truck driving licence.
Can any of you think back to when you were starting out as a commercial pilot and you needed a certain twin endorsment to get a good/better job, you simply went out and paid to get that endorsment!
So it's no different now only that the aircraft are bigger and cost more.
Take this as an example; A truck driver is tired of doing interstate runs and decides to go into the Minig industry as a Dump truck driver. (You know those huge mutha's you see around mines). He applies for the position, but does not get the job becuase he hasn't the qualifcations/ driving skills to operate the machine. So he goes out and gets the qualifications/skills(ie; pays for the driving instruction &license), re-applies later on down the track and hey presto he get the job.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Perth
Age: 55
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to flog a dead horse here people but in the mining game if you start a new job in W.A. you will need a MARCSTA ticket $300.00 and probably your senior first aid. When the industry was slower about 10 - 15 years ago you Might have needed to pay for quals but to drive a dumpy you need a B class liscence. Again about $300.00, no real comparison there. The only other thing people paid for were degrees same as everyone else.Nothing else significant from my memory of working underground about 15 years ago.
The other importent factor here is supply and demand. There is currently an undersupply and while there is no significant union involvement, wages seem to have gone up accordingly. Is there an oversupply of Experienced pilots right now? Also wages in the mining game never got to the low levels we are seeing in aviation right now even when things were tight, why is that? Maybe because employers recognised the importance of keeping good staff and the possible need to keep them when things improved.
VB for me
The other importent factor here is supply and demand. There is currently an undersupply and while there is no significant union involvement, wages seem to have gone up accordingly. Is there an oversupply of Experienced pilots right now? Also wages in the mining game never got to the low levels we are seeing in aviation right now even when things were tight, why is that? Maybe because employers recognised the importance of keeping good staff and the possible need to keep them when things improved.
VB for me
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: utopia
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Experience to be a dump truck driver-------who are you kidding.
Its the old story of supply and demand.
At present the companies who have mining towns are a bit short of accomodation,so if you have a place to stay your on.Wives ,friends ,even mothers get on as drivers.
Now only A class licence as well.
Maybe mining or all companies,but i seem to remember a few years back where it was law to dedicate a certain time to training ie ,new emplyees or present ones.Be worth looking into.
Its the old story of supply and demand.
At present the companies who have mining towns are a bit short of accomodation,so if you have a place to stay your on.Wives ,friends ,even mothers get on as drivers.
Now only A class licence as well.
Maybe mining or all companies,but i seem to remember a few years back where it was law to dedicate a certain time to training ie ,new emplyees or present ones.Be worth looking into.
Mining endorsements
Stated mining 5 years ago, never paid for an induction or for training on any equipment.
Now pulling over $100k. Makes flying look silly doesn't it?
Now pulling over $100k. Makes flying look silly doesn't it?
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking forward to returning to Japan soon but in the meantime continuing the never ending search for a bad bottle of Red!
Age: 69
Posts: 2,980
Received 109 Likes
on
62 Posts
I did a trip up to a mining area in the north of SA a few months ago and did the rounds putting my name down for any type of a job there. The first question I was asked every place I went was "Do you have accommodation organised?"
One place I applied I was told that if I already had accommodation lined up I could start there and then!!
The local caravan parks were 'chockers' to the extent that some were living in tents!!
Tickets, first aid. previous experience/training did'nt even get a mention!
Apologies for thread hijack; back to subject!
One place I applied I was told that if I already had accommodation lined up I could start there and then!!
The local caravan parks were 'chockers' to the extent that some were living in tents!!
Tickets, first aid. previous experience/training did'nt even get a mention!
Apologies for thread hijack; back to subject!
To me the pay for endorsement arguement is a bit like the "which is heavier - a tonne of feathers or a tonne of lead" riddle.
Which do people prefer - pay for the endorsement yourself up front but earn full pay (i.e. no training pay) from day one - and not be bonded, OR have the endorsement funded by the airline and be on graduated pay - i.e training pay for a period of time and also be bonded.
To my way of thinking there are advantages for the pilot in both and advantages for the employer in both. The pay for training model actually works to the pilots advantage in times of pilot shortages as he/she is not shackled to an employer and can move as appropriate to take advantage of opportunities as they arise.
But which is better?
You can look at the Virgin Blue model versus the QANTAS mainline model.
Perhaps people from QF can give us the salary rates for PUITS and 1st and 2nd year S/O's
Whilst I accept that there is a bit of a difference in that you join VB as a F/O and QF as a S/O but the principle remain the same.
Which do people prefer - pay for the endorsement yourself up front but earn full pay (i.e. no training pay) from day one - and not be bonded, OR have the endorsement funded by the airline and be on graduated pay - i.e training pay for a period of time and also be bonded.
To my way of thinking there are advantages for the pilot in both and advantages for the employer in both. The pay for training model actually works to the pilots advantage in times of pilot shortages as he/she is not shackled to an employer and can move as appropriate to take advantage of opportunities as they arise.
But which is better?
You can look at the Virgin Blue model versus the QANTAS mainline model.
Perhaps people from QF can give us the salary rates for PUITS and 1st and 2nd year S/O's
Whilst I accept that there is a bit of a difference in that you join VB as a F/O and QF as a S/O but the principle remain the same.
Which do people prefer - pay for the endorsement yourself up front but earn full pay (i.e. no training pay) from day one - and not be bonded, OR have the endorsement funded by the airline and be on graduated pay - i.e training pay for a period of time and also be bonded.
I know which I would prefer
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bank loan?
A sensible arrangement would be for the pilot to pay for the endorsement with a bank loan, and the company to pay the repayments until it is paid off, or until the pilot leaves the company, whichever occurs first.
Poto,
I dont believe that there is much of a difference in dollar terms between the 2 schemes
The risk attaches to the entity paying the endorsement cost, but that is a difficult thing to quantify in dollar terms.
At the end of 18 month to 2 years of employment I believe that both schemes would be even on terms of dollars in the pilots hands
I dont believe that there is much of a difference in dollar terms between the 2 schemes
The risk attaches to the entity paying the endorsement cost, but that is a difficult thing to quantify in dollar terms.
At the end of 18 month to 2 years of employment I believe that both schemes would be even on terms of dollars in the pilots hands
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dehavillanddriver,
Your comments might be correct, however IMHO paying for the endoresment does little to engender the loyalty of it's pilots when a company chooses not to invest in their future. Similarly, such companies have little interest or desire to retain pilots they have not invested in financially as "there will always be a supply of pilots prepared to pay."
Working for VB you would know what I mean.....
Your comments might be correct, however IMHO paying for the endoresment does little to engender the loyalty of it's pilots when a company chooses not to invest in their future. Similarly, such companies have little interest or desire to retain pilots they have not invested in financially as "there will always be a supply of pilots prepared to pay."
Working for VB you would know what I mean.....
Now what if this become reality?
http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/n...67651022.6/afp
AirAsia, Virgin, EastJet plan global pact for long-haul flights: report
Three of the world's top budget carriers including Richard Branson's Virgin, will soon form a global alliance based in Malaysia to fly long-haul routes, a report has said.
Kamarudin Meranum, AirAsia's deputy chief executive officer declined comment on the report but told AFP that the profitable budget carrier was always eying growth opportunities to boost revenue.
"I do not discount the fact that AirAsia is always on the lookout for growth opportunities and we talk to various parties for mutual benefit," he said.
"We thank the governments in the region and passengers for their continued support and we promise a lot of excitement this year," he said.
Kamarudin said AirAsia's expansion plans were designed to ensure Malaysia becomes the low cost hub for the region. Neighbouring rival Singapore is also competiting for the spot.
"We will ensure Malaysia's becomes the low cost hub of the region. One thing for sure, it will a Malaysian-led initiative in line with government aspirations of encouraging Malaysian companies going global," he said.
The Star citing unidentified industry sources as saying the new joint venture would first fly between Kuala Lumpur and Manchester in Britain and Amritsar in India.
There are future plans for flights to Hangzhou near Shanghai, China and Tianjin near Beijing, it said.
A source familiar with the discussions told the Star that fares on the long-haul network for destinations in China could be as low as 100 ringgit (28 dollars).
Fares to Britain will be between 300 ringgit and 2,500 ringgit, about half the price of the normal ticket on a regular airline.
If the plan to fly to London is realised, the source said the AirAsia could use Luton airport just north of the capital as a hub because Virgin already operates a rail link from there to central London.
In return, the alliance will give Virgin and EasyJet access to Kuala Lumpur's low-cost airport terminal, the gateway to "a dream Asian hub for their Europe to Australia routes," the Star said.
AirAsia was launched as a budget carrier in December 2001 with just two aircraft now offers more than 100 domestic and international flights to destinations in Southeast Asia and China.
EasyJet, which started in 1995, was one of the first low-cost carriers in the world to sell tickets on the Internet. It flies 224 routes between 67 key European airports including Britain.
Virgin Atlantic's network covers the United States, Hong Kong, South Africa, the Caribbean and Australia.
Low cost carriers have largely focused on short-haul routes but given their succes, there has been much talk of a long-haul budget business model, with Oasis Hong Kong setting up late last year to fly initially to and from London.
http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/n...67651022.6/afp
AirAsia, Virgin, EastJet plan global pact for long-haul flights: report
Three of the world's top budget carriers including Richard Branson's Virgin, will soon form a global alliance based in Malaysia to fly long-haul routes, a report has said.
Kamarudin Meranum, AirAsia's deputy chief executive officer declined comment on the report but told AFP that the profitable budget carrier was always eying growth opportunities to boost revenue.
"I do not discount the fact that AirAsia is always on the lookout for growth opportunities and we talk to various parties for mutual benefit," he said.
"We thank the governments in the region and passengers for their continued support and we promise a lot of excitement this year," he said.
Kamarudin said AirAsia's expansion plans were designed to ensure Malaysia becomes the low cost hub for the region. Neighbouring rival Singapore is also competiting for the spot.
"We will ensure Malaysia's becomes the low cost hub of the region. One thing for sure, it will a Malaysian-led initiative in line with government aspirations of encouraging Malaysian companies going global," he said.
The Star citing unidentified industry sources as saying the new joint venture would first fly between Kuala Lumpur and Manchester in Britain and Amritsar in India.
There are future plans for flights to Hangzhou near Shanghai, China and Tianjin near Beijing, it said.
A source familiar with the discussions told the Star that fares on the long-haul network for destinations in China could be as low as 100 ringgit (28 dollars).
Fares to Britain will be between 300 ringgit and 2,500 ringgit, about half the price of the normal ticket on a regular airline.
If the plan to fly to London is realised, the source said the AirAsia could use Luton airport just north of the capital as a hub because Virgin already operates a rail link from there to central London.
In return, the alliance will give Virgin and EasyJet access to Kuala Lumpur's low-cost airport terminal, the gateway to "a dream Asian hub for their Europe to Australia routes," the Star said.
AirAsia was launched as a budget carrier in December 2001 with just two aircraft now offers more than 100 domestic and international flights to destinations in Southeast Asia and China.
EasyJet, which started in 1995, was one of the first low-cost carriers in the world to sell tickets on the Internet. It flies 224 routes between 67 key European airports including Britain.
Virgin Atlantic's network covers the United States, Hong Kong, South Africa, the Caribbean and Australia.
Low cost carriers have largely focused on short-haul routes but given their succes, there has been much talk of a long-haul budget business model, with Oasis Hong Kong setting up late last year to fly initially to and from London.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hosties at Vb are the best....!
Trust me ...I know
Still plenty more hotties than boys!
Eba vote will cease on 10th Jan......Will not get up.
Were making a stand on this one people....!
Unlike Jet*
Trust me ...I know
Still plenty more hotties than boys!
Eba vote will cease on 10th Jan......Will not get up.
Were making a stand on this one people....!
Unlike Jet*
