Merged: Jetstar EBA 4
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: thelodge
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Professor of misinformation
Professor,
It is indeed true that full service carriers have higher costs than those of low cost airlines.Your post is poorly argued and in my eyes a "wind up".
To blame pilot salaries as the make or break difference to the Qantas group shows your lack of understanding of basic airline operations.Obviously you have little grasp of different business models given the lack of depth of your argument.
As a full service carrier the costs are higher due to cleaning of A/C on turnarounds,increased catering costs for business class and economy, amenities, provisions for valet parking etc etc.The extra yield compensates for this.
LCCs rely on high frequency flights with short turnarounds.Food is charged for and cleaning is done by cabin crew on transit.Ticket sales are by majority internet based which lowers costs.Ticket protections are not equal to full service carriers either.
Full service airlines target high yielding customers and the business model is therefore different.
Below is a quote from Geoff Dixon on Lateline business with Alan Kohler.
GEOFF DIXON: You've got to understand, the Qantas mainline operations also earns a much bigger margin than the Jetstar. Jetstar is a low cost airline and a low fare airline, and that's quite different. Qantas is a medium cost airline. Obviously we have a different product, we put more money into that product but we get quite much larger fares for business and first class travelling.
To further provide rational debate I provide further company information.
The company says by the beginning of next year the Qantas Group will have a lower cost base than rival Virgin Blue. Qantas will get greater efficiencies when it introduces new aircraft and it's well down the road of restructuring its business, developing the freight and fleet ownership divisions and mooting a new, still unclear ownership structure for the frequent flyer program.
Professor you obviously know how to run an airline better than our CEO.
For your information Southwest pilots are paid more than both Qantas S/H pilots or Jetstar pilots.
A low cost airline model does not need to translate to poor pilot pay and conditions.In the case of Southwest the pilot terms and conditions are excellent along with morale.
The aim should be that all Qantas group pilots are represented by one united association.
Jetstar and Qantas pilots BOTH deserve good pay and conditions.We are all highly skilled and a profession in short supply.
Your divisive comments are not welcome here.
It is indeed true that full service carriers have higher costs than those of low cost airlines.Your post is poorly argued and in my eyes a "wind up".
To blame pilot salaries as the make or break difference to the Qantas group shows your lack of understanding of basic airline operations.Obviously you have little grasp of different business models given the lack of depth of your argument.
As a full service carrier the costs are higher due to cleaning of A/C on turnarounds,increased catering costs for business class and economy, amenities, provisions for valet parking etc etc.The extra yield compensates for this.
LCCs rely on high frequency flights with short turnarounds.Food is charged for and cleaning is done by cabin crew on transit.Ticket sales are by majority internet based which lowers costs.Ticket protections are not equal to full service carriers either.
Full service airlines target high yielding customers and the business model is therefore different.
Below is a quote from Geoff Dixon on Lateline business with Alan Kohler.
GEOFF DIXON: You've got to understand, the Qantas mainline operations also earns a much bigger margin than the Jetstar. Jetstar is a low cost airline and a low fare airline, and that's quite different. Qantas is a medium cost airline. Obviously we have a different product, we put more money into that product but we get quite much larger fares for business and first class travelling.
To further provide rational debate I provide further company information.
The company says by the beginning of next year the Qantas Group will have a lower cost base than rival Virgin Blue. Qantas will get greater efficiencies when it introduces new aircraft and it's well down the road of restructuring its business, developing the freight and fleet ownership divisions and mooting a new, still unclear ownership structure for the frequent flyer program.
Professor you obviously know how to run an airline better than our CEO.
For your information Southwest pilots are paid more than both Qantas S/H pilots or Jetstar pilots.
A low cost airline model does not need to translate to poor pilot pay and conditions.In the case of Southwest the pilot terms and conditions are excellent along with morale.
The aim should be that all Qantas group pilots are represented by one united association.
Jetstar and Qantas pilots BOTH deserve good pay and conditions.We are all highly skilled and a profession in short supply.
Your divisive comments are not welcome here.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“To blame pilot salaries”.
You will note that at no stage have I attempted to place “blame” on any employee group for anything.
“The make or break difference to the Qantas group”
No, I did not suggest that salary levels enjoyed by staff at QF would “make or break” the airline. Managers at Qantas, like any business, make decisions every day that are motivated by business reasons that have nothing to do with saving the airline. Qantas has been profitable despite having a high labor cost base and cutting pilot costs alone is probably not an imperative. But the stakeholders in Qantas have charged the CEO and his underlings with trimming the operating cost of the airline and this will inevitably involve reducing the cost of all labor groups. Where costs savings can be made, they will be made if possible. As I said, reducing the salary levels of pilots is not a “make or break” decision. However, National Jet, Virgin Blue and Jetstar have proven that there is room in the “new”market place for reducing the cost of cockpit crew to the business. This will occur.
“The Company says that by the beginning of next year the Qantas group will have a lower cost base than rival Virgin Blue”
This is pretty much what Dixon is expected to say to a business audience keen to see Qantas trimming costs. Do you really think QF will match the operating costs of Virgin Blue without some extensive creative accounting (which is precisely what Dixon is doing)?
“For your information, Southwest pilots are paid more than etc etc”
This little gem highlights the simplistic approach taken by most pilots when debating such an issue. I did not suggest SWA pilots were poorly paid, I did, however, refer to the value they provide their employer. These are two very different things. What do Qantas pilots provide Qantas that a more cost effective Jetstar pilot doesn't?
“Jetstar and Qantas pilots both deserve etc etc”
No. Wrong. Employees do not DESERVE anything except for the pay and conditions that the market place sees fit. The airline industry in Australia has for most of its history been a protected one and as such the market place has had little impact on the competitiveness of employees. These barriers have been virtually (but not entirely) removed and yet pilots such as yourself are naive enough to think you deserve a salary level as determined by . . . .yourself. Its not the strongest that survive, or the smartest.
Its the most adaptable.
You will note that at no stage have I attempted to place “blame” on any employee group for anything.
“The make or break difference to the Qantas group”
No, I did not suggest that salary levels enjoyed by staff at QF would “make or break” the airline. Managers at Qantas, like any business, make decisions every day that are motivated by business reasons that have nothing to do with saving the airline. Qantas has been profitable despite having a high labor cost base and cutting pilot costs alone is probably not an imperative. But the stakeholders in Qantas have charged the CEO and his underlings with trimming the operating cost of the airline and this will inevitably involve reducing the cost of all labor groups. Where costs savings can be made, they will be made if possible. As I said, reducing the salary levels of pilots is not a “make or break” decision. However, National Jet, Virgin Blue and Jetstar have proven that there is room in the “new”market place for reducing the cost of cockpit crew to the business. This will occur.
“The Company says that by the beginning of next year the Qantas group will have a lower cost base than rival Virgin Blue”
This is pretty much what Dixon is expected to say to a business audience keen to see Qantas trimming costs. Do you really think QF will match the operating costs of Virgin Blue without some extensive creative accounting (which is precisely what Dixon is doing)?
“For your information, Southwest pilots are paid more than etc etc”
This little gem highlights the simplistic approach taken by most pilots when debating such an issue. I did not suggest SWA pilots were poorly paid, I did, however, refer to the value they provide their employer. These are two very different things. What do Qantas pilots provide Qantas that a more cost effective Jetstar pilot doesn't?
“Jetstar and Qantas pilots both deserve etc etc”
No. Wrong. Employees do not DESERVE anything except for the pay and conditions that the market place sees fit. The airline industry in Australia has for most of its history been a protected one and as such the market place has had little impact on the competitiveness of employees. These barriers have been virtually (but not entirely) removed and yet pilots such as yourself are naive enough to think you deserve a salary level as determined by . . . .yourself. Its not the strongest that survive, or the smartest.
Its the most adaptable.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Four questions if anyone knows the answers.....
1. Did Southwest always pay top salaries or did that build up over time?
2. Do prospective Southwest pilots have to provide their own 737 type rating as a condition of employment?
3. How many hours a year do Southwest pilots fly?
4. Are Southwest pilots members of ALPA or do they have their own union suited to the needs of their business?
1. Did Southwest always pay top salaries or did that build up over time?
2. Do prospective Southwest pilots have to provide their own 737 type rating as a condition of employment?
3. How many hours a year do Southwest pilots fly?
4. Are Southwest pilots members of ALPA or do they have their own union suited to the needs of their business?
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's a good question...I think we all, at least anecdotally, know the answer. I'd be guessing that management style aside the fact that the airline's CEO's have delivered consistent profitable growth and jobs has helped a lot. Still would be good to get answers to the other 4 questions though....
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: godsville
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The company says by the beginning of next year the Qantas Group will have a lower cost base than rival Virgin Blue. Qantas will get greater efficiencies when it introduces new aircraft and it's well down the road of restructuring its business, developing the freight and fleet ownership divisions and mooting a new, still unclear ownership structure for the frequent flyer program.
I wonder how the situation would be now if Qantas had not started Jetstar? I would have thought that someone like Tiger would have been well established and as big or bigger than Jetstar. So what pressure would that have put Qantas mainline under? A lot more than what they fear from Jetstar?
Qantas has Jetstar as a vehicle to take on other low cost operators, Qantas mainline should be thankful of this, else it would be mainline under much greater cost pressure.
Jetscabster
Most informed observers of the Oz aviation industry would agree with you in that it was essential for Qantas to start a LCC to fill a gap in the market that other operators could quickly fill - it certainly would have been easier for Tiger (& DJ would have greater market share) if Jetstar had not been established.
The main issue here is Pilot remuneration and Ts & Cs which is a separate issue as was very well stated by fearcampaign in his post. Fellow pilots understood that the Impulse pilots were forced to sign the first Jetstar agreement but the second agreement (widebody variation) involved no gun being held to the heads of Jetstar pilots. They voted in an award that very few of them were prepared to accept (& most of the guys now flying under that award really hate the conditions). This recent EBA was the Jetstar pilots chance to get decent remuneration as well as improved Ts & Cs (and to redeem themselves after the poor widebody decision) during a period of industrial strength and with the support of the rest of the Qantas Group pilots.
Sadly, they succumbed to Oldmeadow tactics:- 1. Fear - the (empty)threat of 457 visa DECs, 2. Short Term Greed - the temptation of extra money in the pay packet right now rather than significantly higher long term remuneration and 3. Shaft the New Hires - sell an EBA to existing staff by saying that their pay rise will be funded by paying any new hires less (makes for cohesion on the flight deck - NOT). This tactic was also used in the Mainline Short Haul EBA (all new Captains) and the Mainline Long Haul Flight Attendants where they signed off on paying all new hires 1/3 less to work 1/3 more hours (something that I believe will eventually cause the demise of the FAAA).
All the Jetstar pilots that I have had a chance to talk to (<10) all strongly opposed this EBA and one even said that he would be looking for other employment if it got up.
I've previously stated that it is in the interest of all the F/Os at Jetstar to get the salary package as high as possible in order to attract new pilots and thus free F/Os for command training. If there are few pilots joining then Jetstar's expansion will be severely limited and thus time to command will increase.
There was so many reasons why it should have been rejected and thus enable stronger negotiators a chance to gain appropriate remuneration.
Most informed observers of the Oz aviation industry would agree with you in that it was essential for Qantas to start a LCC to fill a gap in the market that other operators could quickly fill - it certainly would have been easier for Tiger (& DJ would have greater market share) if Jetstar had not been established.
The main issue here is Pilot remuneration and Ts & Cs which is a separate issue as was very well stated by fearcampaign in his post. Fellow pilots understood that the Impulse pilots were forced to sign the first Jetstar agreement but the second agreement (widebody variation) involved no gun being held to the heads of Jetstar pilots. They voted in an award that very few of them were prepared to accept (& most of the guys now flying under that award really hate the conditions). This recent EBA was the Jetstar pilots chance to get decent remuneration as well as improved Ts & Cs (and to redeem themselves after the poor widebody decision) during a period of industrial strength and with the support of the rest of the Qantas Group pilots.
Sadly, they succumbed to Oldmeadow tactics:- 1. Fear - the (empty)threat of 457 visa DECs, 2. Short Term Greed - the temptation of extra money in the pay packet right now rather than significantly higher long term remuneration and 3. Shaft the New Hires - sell an EBA to existing staff by saying that their pay rise will be funded by paying any new hires less (makes for cohesion on the flight deck - NOT). This tactic was also used in the Mainline Short Haul EBA (all new Captains) and the Mainline Long Haul Flight Attendants where they signed off on paying all new hires 1/3 less to work 1/3 more hours (something that I believe will eventually cause the demise of the FAAA).
All the Jetstar pilots that I have had a chance to talk to (<10) all strongly opposed this EBA and one even said that he would be looking for other employment if it got up.
I've previously stated that it is in the interest of all the F/Os at Jetstar to get the salary package as high as possible in order to attract new pilots and thus free F/Os for command training. If there are few pilots joining then Jetstar's expansion will be severely limited and thus time to command will increase.
There was so many reasons why it should have been rejected and thus enable stronger negotiators a chance to gain appropriate remuneration.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Going Boeing....
You talked to some (<10) Jetstar pilots and you listened and formed an opinion. Listen then when an independant election, totally secret ballot, says that 38% more pilots wanted the EBA than not (i.e. 240 YES vs 173 NO).
The Jetstar pilots voted to:
You talked to some (<10) Jetstar pilots and you listened and formed an opinion. Listen then when an independant election, totally secret ballot, says that 38% more pilots wanted the EBA than not (i.e. 240 YES vs 173 NO).
The Jetstar pilots voted to:
- Have a pay rise
- Get rid of AWAs
- Have representation by a recognized professional pilot association
Last edited by genex; 6th Mar 2008 at 20:36.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whose EBA was it after all?
It sure as hell wasn't the AWA pilots EBA when they voted.
The majority of pilots covered by EBA3 DID NOT want it to be replaced.
Will all those AWA pilots who voted, actually switch to the EBA? I would say that the early DEC's on $250k won't be switching....So is their vote invalid? How does all that work? Smelly, very smelly!
In answer to your earlier questions:
1. They were always pretty proud of their pay levels, unlike Jetstar management who seem to enjoy belittling their pilots by publicly screaming from the roof tops that they earn $100 grand less than a Qantas pilot, the SWA management are proud of their good pay. They were only slightly behind the majors when they started, but they did work harder, now, of course, they are the highest paid narrow body pilots in the world.
2. Mostly Yes, but there are some exceptions.
3. 800 to 900, but can get close to 1000 on occasions if little or no leave is used in that year, exactly the same as QF 737.
4. Their pilots are represented by the SWAPA. Interestingly, unlike Jetstar who shuns unions (except when the have no choice), SWA is the most highly unionised airline in the world at 85% and their management is proud of it. American by comparison is 63% unionised. BTW before you start don't compare the SWAPA with the JPC, it will only lead to embarrassment, their histories, structure, and methods are quiet contrary.
I don't know what all that proves, but can you answer my questions now:
1. Is voting to replace an EBA that you are not covered by actually legal?
2. Do the AWA pilots who voted HAVE to switch to the EBA? If not, do we know who voted and who didn't to ensure that those who don't switch did not have a vote for an EBA that has nothing to do with them.
3. If all this is so kosher then why didn't the AWA pilots get a vote last time?
I await your response.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Australia
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Grandpa Aerotart
Ignoring for a minute the difficulty of trying to directly compare wages across international boundaries what do SWA captains get paid that makes them 'the highest paid narrow body pilot in the world'? How much annual leave, and is it, typically for the US, a sliding scale where you get 1 week/annum for the first x years and then 2 weeks, etc.
The Ryanair banner adds on this site suggest up to GBP120k for captains and up to GBP70k for FOs and markets themselves as 'the high paying airline'.
GBP120k does not equate to AUD280k or whatever the exchange rate indicates these days. Ryanair pilots are being paid in GBP and spending in GBP. The only part of their wage that is effected by any exchange rate is that % that may be remitted to their country of origin. I am going to suggest that for an Ozzie working at Ryanair, and there are some, GBP120k (and I bet they work their coits off for that) equates to something like AUD150-170k depending on a variety of factors.
J* captains on EBA 4 will now be on something like AUD200-220k.
Lets put that in perspective...J* pilots based in Oz will potentially net not much less than a UK based Ozzie Ryanair pilot grosses in AUD terms.
Lets cast our minds back to the origins of the QF Domestic package...it was a union busting package designed to induce 'individuals' to desert there former workmates and get an airline, TAA/Australian back into the air.
Lets also remind ourselves that the main difference between the QF Dom wage and J*'s is not the base pay but the point at which overtime kicks in. 55 hours in the case of the QF/TAA pilots and 75 hours for J* pilots.
The J* EBA got voted up in the end.
Everyone is united on an, arguably internationally competitive, EBA with union representation...and management are happy about that unity. Pick another airline in the region where that is the case.
No AWAs which, had the EBA been voted down would have become, irrespective of what the Rudd Govt says, the only option for new hires.
Everyone currently employed got a significant payrise with, not only no productivity tradeoffs, but 18 days/annum extra off. In a time of rapidly increasing costs of living and an uncertain economic future. How often have we seen that achieved of late...even by the much vaunted AIPA.
To put that 18 days in perspective that is significantly more than the annual leave of most US employees and comes on top of 6 weeks annual leave.
Seniority enshrined giving junior pilots a great deal of career protection if/when the planned expansion happens in the next few years.
Yes the new hire FOs will be on 55% of a captains wage for 12 months, what is the equivalent % for new hire QF mainline pilots?
Yes new hire, non type rated, pilots must salary sacrifice a type rating...not uncommon internationally...remind me again about QF mainline 'training pay' for the first 18 (or is it 12) months. Just because it is called something else in QF doesn't mean you're not paying for your type rating. Are QF SO's bonded?
Lets not forget that new hire will potentially be changing seats in 3-4 years. The new hire QF pilot might get a window seat in 3-5 years and wait 10-15 years for a command.
There are lots of things worth getting worked up about in this world...this is not one of them.
The Ryanair banner adds on this site suggest up to GBP120k for captains and up to GBP70k for FOs and markets themselves as 'the high paying airline'.
GBP120k does not equate to AUD280k or whatever the exchange rate indicates these days. Ryanair pilots are being paid in GBP and spending in GBP. The only part of their wage that is effected by any exchange rate is that % that may be remitted to their country of origin. I am going to suggest that for an Ozzie working at Ryanair, and there are some, GBP120k (and I bet they work their coits off for that) equates to something like AUD150-170k depending on a variety of factors.
J* captains on EBA 4 will now be on something like AUD200-220k.
Lets put that in perspective...J* pilots based in Oz will potentially net not much less than a UK based Ozzie Ryanair pilot grosses in AUD terms.
Lets cast our minds back to the origins of the QF Domestic package...it was a union busting package designed to induce 'individuals' to desert there former workmates and get an airline, TAA/Australian back into the air.
Lets also remind ourselves that the main difference between the QF Dom wage and J*'s is not the base pay but the point at which overtime kicks in. 55 hours in the case of the QF/TAA pilots and 75 hours for J* pilots.
The J* EBA got voted up in the end.
Everyone is united on an, arguably internationally competitive, EBA with union representation...and management are happy about that unity. Pick another airline in the region where that is the case.
No AWAs which, had the EBA been voted down would have become, irrespective of what the Rudd Govt says, the only option for new hires.
Everyone currently employed got a significant payrise with, not only no productivity tradeoffs, but 18 days/annum extra off. In a time of rapidly increasing costs of living and an uncertain economic future. How often have we seen that achieved of late...even by the much vaunted AIPA.
To put that 18 days in perspective that is significantly more than the annual leave of most US employees and comes on top of 6 weeks annual leave.
Seniority enshrined giving junior pilots a great deal of career protection if/when the planned expansion happens in the next few years.
Yes the new hire FOs will be on 55% of a captains wage for 12 months, what is the equivalent % for new hire QF mainline pilots?
Yes new hire, non type rated, pilots must salary sacrifice a type rating...not uncommon internationally...remind me again about QF mainline 'training pay' for the first 18 (or is it 12) months. Just because it is called something else in QF doesn't mean you're not paying for your type rating. Are QF SO's bonded?
Lets not forget that new hire will potentially be changing seats in 3-4 years. The new hire QF pilot might get a window seat in 3-5 years and wait 10-15 years for a command.
There are lots of things worth getting worked up about in this world...this is not one of them.
Last edited by Chimbu chuckles; 7th Mar 2008 at 03:08.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speedy....
I seriously doubt that SWA ever paid near the "majors" rates in its early years when they had to sell an aircrfat and spares to cover the payroll. nevertheless with some audacious marketing and operating practices that had the "majors" aghast, they made it.
Of course they are not perfect. They did a QF1 at Burbank then again at O'hare and in both cases came within whiskers breadth of a holocaust. But as with QF1 were very fortunate, thank goodness.
As for the AWAs vote....personally I'd be more focussed on the fact that there are now about 100 less contract pilot jobs than before. But if you work for Jetstar and are aggrieved then take them on in the courts. If it matters that much to see pilots stay on AWAs and for all the JQ pilots to take a pay cut then go ahead.
As for me....I read Chimbu's last line and commend it to you. There are things in the world to get worked up about and this isn't one of them.
Your energies would be better devoted to working within AIPA to get their house in order. Getting over the monkey photo tactic will take years.
I seriously doubt that SWA ever paid near the "majors" rates in its early years when they had to sell an aircrfat and spares to cover the payroll. nevertheless with some audacious marketing and operating practices that had the "majors" aghast, they made it.
Of course they are not perfect. They did a QF1 at Burbank then again at O'hare and in both cases came within whiskers breadth of a holocaust. But as with QF1 were very fortunate, thank goodness.
As for the AWAs vote....personally I'd be more focussed on the fact that there are now about 100 less contract pilot jobs than before. But if you work for Jetstar and are aggrieved then take them on in the courts. If it matters that much to see pilots stay on AWAs and for all the JQ pilots to take a pay cut then go ahead.
As for me....I read Chimbu's last line and commend it to you. There are things in the world to get worked up about and this isn't one of them.
Your energies would be better devoted to working within AIPA to get their house in order. Getting over the monkey photo tactic will take years.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: West of The East
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Monkeys.
Wow. You blokes really are sensitive. Some bloke posts a picture of a monkey, and that is going to take years to get over.
We are called Skygod, up-em-selves wankers all the time. And we just move on.
C'est la vie.
We are called Skygod, up-em-selves wankers all the time. And we just move on.
C'est la vie.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Australia
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Genex,
Southwest originally paid low salaries that were "topped up" in the form of employee share issues. These shares subsequently made the original Southwest Pilots very wealthy.
How many Jetstar shares did you get?
Southwest originally paid low salaries that were "topped up" in the form of employee share issues. These shares subsequently made the original Southwest Pilots very wealthy.
How many Jetstar shares did you get?
38% more pilots wanted the EBA than not (i.e. 240 YES vs 173 NO).
Seems a bit funny now.....apparently you need to get better scores in the QF psych and skills tests to allow you to work for the airline with less expansion and slower progression.........whereas you could have joined JQ as a CFO, almost instantly received a huge payrise, (which im told puts them on higher pay than a QF SO for the first 18 months) and just for fun...."here's you're FO slot" 3 months later.
I wonder how those who voted NO will go sitting next to the CFO/AWA that voted YES.
Genex, you made comment on one of the many points that I made in my post. Can I assume that you agree with the rest of my post?
If the <10 Jetstar pilots (ie 9) that I spoke to were representative of the eligible EBA voters then I would expect that 5 of them would have been for the EBA. I guess that I only met those that voted NO. GB
If the <10 Jetstar pilots (ie 9) that I spoke to were representative of the eligible EBA voters then I would expect that 5 of them would have been for the EBA. I guess that I only met those that voted NO. GB
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
aaaah, the sweet smell of aggrieved AIPA members venting their spleen. Like napalm in the morning....nothing quite like it is there.
GB....Had you been educated in statistics you would have known not to draw ANY inference from what 10 people do or don't say....even assuming they were a representative sample. Whereas several hundred in a secret ballot is likely to mean something.
And Dodgy....never having been near or under Allan Joyce's desk I couldn't tell you whether Chimbu lives there....I certainly don't. Do you have some secret fantasy? Don't share it with us.
As for the SWA salaries and shares....that's the point isn't it? That in the early days there wasn't a lot of cash. I guess if the Jetstar EBA includes some form of bonus plan then a JQ pilot could invest it. I have no idea how the Qantas group or JQ handle those things and don't really care.
I do care though that AIPA is advocating the retention of AWAs. That is tragic and short-sighted, however much you people dislike your lesser brothers in JQ. Do they not deserve a fair go?
Enough. There is a long weekend ahead.....the beach awaits and I will never again have to worry about crewing ringing as I pack the surfboard.
GB....Had you been educated in statistics you would have known not to draw ANY inference from what 10 people do or don't say....even assuming they were a representative sample. Whereas several hundred in a secret ballot is likely to mean something.
And Dodgy....never having been near or under Allan Joyce's desk I couldn't tell you whether Chimbu lives there....I certainly don't. Do you have some secret fantasy? Don't share it with us.
As for the SWA salaries and shares....that's the point isn't it? That in the early days there wasn't a lot of cash. I guess if the Jetstar EBA includes some form of bonus plan then a JQ pilot could invest it. I have no idea how the Qantas group or JQ handle those things and don't really care.
I do care though that AIPA is advocating the retention of AWAs. That is tragic and short-sighted, however much you people dislike your lesser brothers in JQ. Do they not deserve a fair go?
Enough. There is a long weekend ahead.....the beach awaits and I will never again have to worry about crewing ringing as I pack the surfboard.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well you all know what I think about Unions...
That aside the facts are:
If you think there is a pilot shortage and it will get worse in the future:
You are a chump to take a 3 - 5 year agreement unless it is something special.
If you think the pilot shortage has peaked and there will be a big downturn in the demand for pilots:
Lock in what you can now.
Remember that a 3-5 year agreement transfers the risk of inflation and a blow out in pilot wages to you (i.e. away from Jetstar). It's all about risk. If Jetstar can transfer the risk to you they win (when calculating future costs they don't have to factor in a percentage chance of a large increase in pilot wages). A transfer of risk makes their forecast figures look a whole lot better. (i.e. Imagine that in 6 months time inflation hits 6%... do you want to be stuck on an arrangement for years that provides less than that?). That's what companies like to do - lock in something that they consider a risk.
You may not like my opinion on "market forces" but you need to use then to your advantage whilst you can. Short term agreement is the way to go
Lock them into something short term and they'll have to re-negotiate when the numbers are worse than they are now.
I hate unions - so I'd say don't let the union lock you into something in the long term that may make you look like a chump in 2 years time.
Having said all that, you should NOT attack someone who likes their offer when moving up from a job paying significantly less. They have their family to look after and that is and should be their main concern.
That aside the facts are:
If you think there is a pilot shortage and it will get worse in the future:
You are a chump to take a 3 - 5 year agreement unless it is something special.
If you think the pilot shortage has peaked and there will be a big downturn in the demand for pilots:
Lock in what you can now.
Remember that a 3-5 year agreement transfers the risk of inflation and a blow out in pilot wages to you (i.e. away from Jetstar). It's all about risk. If Jetstar can transfer the risk to you they win (when calculating future costs they don't have to factor in a percentage chance of a large increase in pilot wages). A transfer of risk makes their forecast figures look a whole lot better. (i.e. Imagine that in 6 months time inflation hits 6%... do you want to be stuck on an arrangement for years that provides less than that?). That's what companies like to do - lock in something that they consider a risk.
You may not like my opinion on "market forces" but you need to use then to your advantage whilst you can. Short term agreement is the way to go
Lock them into something short term and they'll have to re-negotiate when the numbers are worse than they are now.
I hate unions - so I'd say don't let the union lock you into something in the long term that may make you look like a chump in 2 years time.
Having said all that, you should NOT attack someone who likes their offer when moving up from a job paying significantly less. They have their family to look after and that is and should be their main concern.
Last edited by Pass-A-Frozo; 7th Mar 2008 at 08:13.