Air Nelson ALPA pilots to strike
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: NZ
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remoak, you make comments about the Ansett NZ dispute but were not involved yourself apparently. If the pilots had not had 2 single day strikes, then perhaps they would not have been (illegally as it turns out) locked out. No lock-out then no loss of jobs is a stretch. You do know the company went on for nearly 2 years after the dispute? Also, I seriously doubt it all went as "carefully planned" by the company. The lockout produced a $20 000 effective pay cut for Captains and a similar amount proportionally for F/Os. The company still went bust. The strikes occurred because management refused to negotiate....just offered a pay cut and expected it to be taken.
I am proud of my colleagues who refused to lie down. We have all moved on. Most are now better off, but many of us devoted a large part of our lives to try and make Ansett NZ a success...that's why we don't easily let it go. All of the non-flying managers combined had less time with the company that I did at the time of the dispute. And there were many pilots who had been there longer than me. One of the managers involved said to someone "don't take it personally". That was the difference between us and them, and what made Ansett NZ such a great place to work up until "they" arrived. We did take it personally, and that was why the airline had such a great customer service reputation, and why Air NZ finally built airbridges and introduced food and drink on domestic flights, and generally dragged themselves out of the stone age.
There are certainly many lessons to be learned from our experience, and for sure there were a lot of mistakes made, but that doesn't mean that managers are always right and industrial action is always wrong. Sometimes it is all that is left to employees when they are afflicted by poor management tactics. Like I said earlier, a good managaer would never let things reach this stage.......look at what poor management cost Mt Cook during their recent dispute.
I am proud of my colleagues who refused to lie down. We have all moved on. Most are now better off, but many of us devoted a large part of our lives to try and make Ansett NZ a success...that's why we don't easily let it go. All of the non-flying managers combined had less time with the company that I did at the time of the dispute. And there were many pilots who had been there longer than me. One of the managers involved said to someone "don't take it personally". That was the difference between us and them, and what made Ansett NZ such a great place to work up until "they" arrived. We did take it personally, and that was why the airline had such a great customer service reputation, and why Air NZ finally built airbridges and introduced food and drink on domestic flights, and generally dragged themselves out of the stone age.
There are certainly many lessons to be learned from our experience, and for sure there were a lot of mistakes made, but that doesn't mean that managers are always right and industrial action is always wrong. Sometimes it is all that is left to employees when they are afflicted by poor management tactics. Like I said earlier, a good managaer would never let things reach this stage.......look at what poor management cost Mt Cook during their recent dispute.
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: ...second left, past the lights.
Posts: 1,101
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I feel no particular urge to support a companies shareholders at my expense.
If you can't pay me enough to keep me reasonably happy and still make money for yourself then you have failed as a manager/business. (Burty)
To the point and the core of many an airlines' problems, evident throughout this whole region.
If you can't pay me enough to keep me reasonably happy and still make money for yourself then you have failed as a manager/business. (Burty)
To the point and the core of many an airlines' problems, evident throughout this whole region.
Good to see a few of the lads who've been kicking around these boards for a while try to right this whale.
Having gone through the 'Air NZ experience' before, stick to your guns boys. That time round, I think the big cheese came down to find out what all the noise was about, and on hearing it, couldn't figure what the problem was, not long after new contracts in the cubby-hole.
Those on top of the link pile ain't all that far up the koru pile, just gotta get past them to those who make the real decisions, unfortunately it seems a lot of noise needs to be made to upset the comms link.
Luck boys.
lame man, lame.
Having gone through the 'Air NZ experience' before, stick to your guns boys. That time round, I think the big cheese came down to find out what all the noise was about, and on hearing it, couldn't figure what the problem was, not long after new contracts in the cubby-hole.
Those on top of the link pile ain't all that far up the koru pile, just gotta get past them to those who make the real decisions, unfortunately it seems a lot of noise needs to be made to upset the comms link.
Luck boys.
I won't tell you what the pay is, it would be too upsetting for you...
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: NZ
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Get over it Cockroach
Dude - you and your mates screwed it for everyone and you know that. The sooner you come to terms with that fact the better, no matter how you paint the picture you got it wrong at the expense of lots of families. The only thing the Air NSN guys can learn from the Ansett NZ ALPA stuff up is what not to do.
And Burty if thats how you think the world should work you have been seriously mislead.
MT
And Burty if thats how you think the world should work you have been seriously mislead.
MT
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: The Orion Arm
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So how should the world work, then? Please explain. Your silence on the topic is deafening.
I do agree on one thing though - NZALPA, and in particular the insane Industrial Director at the time of the Ansett NZ dispute, did **** it up...and yes, I'm talking about you, "Wild" WMcI - you stupid incompetent ****. You coudn't have fought your way out of a wet paper bag without spending 20k of the union's money.
I was there, watching you spend it, naively thinking you knew what you were doing.
Having got that one off my chest, it still wouldn't have mattered what NZALPA did - Ansett was terminal long before it finally died. It just needed an excuse for those lame-brained yet somewhat intelligent managers to pin it on.
Through little fault of their own, the pilots provided exactly what the managers ordered.
I do agree on one thing though - NZALPA, and in particular the insane Industrial Director at the time of the Ansett NZ dispute, did **** it up...and yes, I'm talking about you, "Wild" WMcI - you stupid incompetent ****. You coudn't have fought your way out of a wet paper bag without spending 20k of the union's money.
I was there, watching you spend it, naively thinking you knew what you were doing. Having got that one off my chest, it still wouldn't have mattered what NZALPA did - Ansett was terminal long before it finally died. It just needed an excuse for those lame-brained yet somewhat intelligent managers to pin it on.
Through little fault of their own, the pilots provided exactly what the managers ordered.
Last edited by deadhead; 7th Apr 2008 at 09:50.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
burty
That is miles from the point. I know, from personal experience, that if you spend a few months out of work it can take years to recover the losses, and that doesn't even begin to address the stress and relationship issues. Just look at the baggage that distracted cockroach is still carrying...
That depends entirely on your expectations. If I'm a burger flipper at McDonalds and want to get paid 100K, does the fact that McDonalds fail to pay me that mean they have failed? The profits suggest otherwise. How you value your services, and how the market values them, are often two different things. Why should a business fail, just because you choose to over-value your services?
And hands up all those pilots who actually are grateful to have a job...
Very noble. Enjoy that momentary feeling of smugness as you enjoy the view from the dole queue...
But hey, you might get another job. At which point you will discover that the imaginary world where everyone is paid what they think they are worth is just that - imaginary (in NZ at any rate - not so much where I am).
deadhead
Ah OK, so let me see... your employer is losing shedloads of money, so you and your pilot mates decide that now is a good time to strike. Right. Very smart. All they did was guarantee that Ansett NZ would fail.
I don't agree with your figures, in any case. Ansett was far from dead, before the strike. Struggling, certainly, but not dead -one decent investor or alliance would have saved it. And I don't believe for a minute that the Air Nelson is generating 2M a week profit. I doubt they even turn over 2M a week.
distracted cockroach
I absolutely agree. However, industrial relations history in NZ (and Oz) is littered with examples of unions who 1) completely failed to properly understand the big picture, and 2) rushed in with flawed strategies with no regard for the welfare of those they were supposed to be protecting in the first place. Unions in NZ just NEVER learn. In the case of Ansett NZ, it was completely the wrong time to strike - you boxed the management in and gave them few options. They certainly couldn't afford to pay you more when they were losing money, and it was incredibly foolish to push the issue in that situation. You could have chosen a dozen other strategies, but no, you chose the one that virtually guaranteed the failure of the company. You made it easy for those who wanted Ansett NZ gone - you gave them the perfect excuse.
Ansett NZ was a good airline that I completely supported, from flying them exclusively, to joining the Golden Wing club, to wanting to work for them. I had my chance, too, when the strike happened, but crossing picket lines isn't really my thing. To this day, I have no idea what the pilots and the union were thinking. Perhaps you were all distracted?
How many of those pilots are still out of work now? How many of them are earning less than when they were with Ansett New Zealand/Qantas NZ?
If you can't pay me enough to keep me reasonably happy and still make money for yourself than you have failed as a manager/business. Better that your business go under than I stay as your effective surf. Maybe you think I should be greatful for the job as well?
And hands up all those pilots who actually are grateful to have a job...
...the skys may fall on our head. Should this happen then I will look forward to the new opportunities that will come with a further evolution within the industry, knowing that at least I was paid what I felt was my due.
But hey, you might get another job. At which point you will discover that the imaginary world where everyone is paid what they think they are worth is just that - imaginary (in NZ at any rate - not so much where I am).
deadhead
Ansett was losing 2m/wk. Air Nelson is generating a little less than that on the plus side. That's why the Ansett pilots lost their jobs - because that outfit was a long way from being a going concern.
I don't agree with your figures, in any case. Ansett was far from dead, before the strike. Struggling, certainly, but not dead -one decent investor or alliance would have saved it. And I don't believe for a minute that the Air Nelson is generating 2M a week profit. I doubt they even turn over 2M a week.
distracted cockroach
but that doesn't mean that managers are always right and industrial action is always wrong.
Ansett NZ was a good airline that I completely supported, from flying them exclusively, to joining the Golden Wing club, to wanting to work for them. I had my chance, too, when the strike happened, but crossing picket lines isn't really my thing. To this day, I have no idea what the pilots and the union were thinking. Perhaps you were all distracted?
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: with the porangi,s in Pohara
Age: 66
Posts: 983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cockroach quote..."Remoak, you make comments about the Ansett NZ dispute but were not involved yourself apparently"
neither was I mate,my association came about with a phone call,from an Ansett HR,Offering me, on the phone....a direct entry Capt Position,(as I had a current CV,on file).......which I refused,and immediatlely called the Pilots MEC and informed them of such tactics.............my biggest issue with this sagarso,is the fact that I now fly with current company pilots,who took it upon themselves to entertain (my current company,s ) offer ....to bugger off downunder.and literally screw fellow Alpa pilots.....to fly the line as if nothing happened...yet with our current company issues(today) we are fighting for our existence and these very same jokers are calling foul....hypocrits!!!!
Remoak....would agree,they walked into a carefully laid trap,and that I believe becomes more apparent everyday.....illegal mgt doings....christ it happens everyday...
this week Aloha,skybus,ATA,went t@ts up and currently 'CHAMPION" (a 727 op) may also be on the chopping bloke....who,s to blame???....for Airlines on the brink,verge of financial stability.....survival is a 2 way street......
I have never advocated screwing mgt,they are and integral part of the plan for sure,....but they must be held accountable,...The Mt Cook pilots,have every right to do that...fair and equitable means just that!!
neither was I mate,my association came about with a phone call,from an Ansett HR,Offering me, on the phone....a direct entry Capt Position,(as I had a current CV,on file).......which I refused,and immediatlely called the Pilots MEC and informed them of such tactics.............my biggest issue with this sagarso,is the fact that I now fly with current company pilots,who took it upon themselves to entertain (my current company,s ) offer ....to bugger off downunder.and literally screw fellow Alpa pilots.....to fly the line as if nothing happened...yet with our current company issues(today) we are fighting for our existence and these very same jokers are calling foul....hypocrits!!!!
Remoak....would agree,they walked into a carefully laid trap,and that I believe becomes more apparent everyday.....illegal mgt doings....christ it happens everyday...
this week Aloha,skybus,ATA,went t@ts up and currently 'CHAMPION" (a 727 op) may also be on the chopping bloke....who,s to blame???....for Airlines on the brink,verge of financial stability.....survival is a 2 way street......
I have never advocated screwing mgt,they are and integral part of the plan for sure,....but they must be held accountable,...The Mt Cook pilots,have every right to do that...fair and equitable means just that!!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds as though you and I got the same phone call, PB! 
Yep, ALPA and the Ansett pilots walked into that one with their eyes wide shut. The pilots were led like lambs to the slaughter, by union goons who were so breathtakingly naive that it beggars belief.
I had several friends in Ansett NZ at the time. You don't actually have to be on the picket line to understand what went on - the idea that you have to actually be an employee to understand what happened is complete nonsense, in fact you often get a more balanced view from outside.
The sad thing is that the pilots and ALPA didn't just screw themselves and the airline, they also screwed those of us who were hoping to join the company at some point.
Anyway, to get back on topic, hopefully the Air Nelson pilots will learn from history and be more successful (not holding my breath though).
Yep, ALPA and the Ansett pilots walked into that one with their eyes wide shut. The pilots were led like lambs to the slaughter, by union goons who were so breathtakingly naive that it beggars belief.
I had several friends in Ansett NZ at the time. You don't actually have to be on the picket line to understand what went on - the idea that you have to actually be an employee to understand what happened is complete nonsense, in fact you often get a more balanced view from outside.
The sad thing is that the pilots and ALPA didn't just screw themselves and the airline, they also screwed those of us who were hoping to join the company at some point.
Anyway, to get back on topic, hopefully the Air Nelson pilots will learn from history and be more successful (not holding my breath though).
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: back to the land of small pay and big bills
Age: 50
Posts: 1,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
..at least the Ansett NZ management team have taken the positives from their experience and discarded the negatives and gone on to head a new, stronger, equitable happy organisation which runs like a well oiled machine staffed by a contented and happy team 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: The Orion Arm
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remoak:
Um, I thought I made it clear that I agree with you on this point? "Wild" Wes convinced an ignorant NZALPA executive that his way was the only way, the fools - and yes, into the trap they went.
But that requires a "decent investor or alliance" to actually come along and save it. To rely on ethereal investors to save the day is really good business practice 
Didn't say that. But let me put it another way. The figures I understand are that a shareholder requirement exists for a minimum 15% return on the investment of 350M. This equates to 52.5M P.A. It is known that the actual return is well in excess of that, but the actual figure is not being released, for obvious reasons. Let's say that the actual figure is 60M. That's slightly more than 1M/week. About what I meant to say. Sory for misleading you. And that is PROFIT, not total revenue. Someone who is an accountant and/or a bit closer to the action might like to correct me as I am always open to a little adjustment 
Ah OK, so let me see... your employer is losing shedloads of money, so you and your pilot mates decide that now is a good time to strike. Right. Very smart. All they did was guarantee that Ansett NZ would fail.
Ansett was far from dead, before the strike. Struggling, certainly, but not dead -one decent investor or alliance would have saved it.
And I don't believe for a minute that the Air Nelson is generating 2M a week profit. I doubt they even turn over 2M a week.
But let me put it another way. The figures I understand are that a shareholder requirement exists for a minimum 15% return on the investment of 350M. This equates to 52.5M P.A. It is known that the actual return is well in excess of that, but the actual figure is not being released, for obvious reasons. Let's say that the actual figure is 60M. That's slightly more than 1M/week. About what I meant to say. Sory for misleading you. And that is PROFIT, not total revenue. Someone who is an accountant and/or a bit closer to the action might like to correct me as I am always open to a little adjustment
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: thereabouts
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remoak. A simplistic view. The collapse occurred because of a variety of circumstances. It is you who is being naive to imply that the two strike days caused the end of the airline. You show that you have little or no understanding of what went on. We weren't even asking for a pay rise for a start.
I am pleased for you that you enjoy a semi ex-pat lifestyle, I also thank you for not crossing the line in 1999. Please don't insult me with insinuation and a false impression of my circumstances. I can safely say that I am doing very well, but am able to do so from home. Seems I'm employable in NZ! I don't have to peddle my wares offshore, or wait for the phone call from an airline looking for sc*b labour. Cheap shot I know, but you asked for it; and, you've got all this wrong.
Air Nelson's situation cannot be compared to the Ansett dispute. It is a simple dispute over pay and conditions. The piolts are beating their heads against a brick wall of management that hasn't moved into the 21st century. They are taking limited and legitimate action to progress a negotiated settlement. The sky is not going to fall on their heads.
I am pleased for you that you enjoy a semi ex-pat lifestyle, I also thank you for not crossing the line in 1999. Please don't insult me with insinuation and a false impression of my circumstances. I can safely say that I am doing very well, but am able to do so from home. Seems I'm employable in NZ! I don't have to peddle my wares offshore, or wait for the phone call from an airline looking for sc*b labour. Cheap shot I know, but you asked for it; and, you've got all this wrong.
Air Nelson's situation cannot be compared to the Ansett dispute. It is a simple dispute over pay and conditions. The piolts are beating their heads against a brick wall of management that hasn't moved into the 21st century. They are taking limited and legitimate action to progress a negotiated settlement. The sky is not going to fall on their heads.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: with the porangi,s in Pohara
Age: 66
Posts: 983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
puma pants quote...."Seems I'm employable in NZ! I don't have to peddle my wares offshore, or wait for the phone call from an airline looking for sc*b labour. Cheap shot I know, but you asked for it;
mate...sort of take personal offence to that my self......I,m emloyable in kiwi myself,peddle my wares offshore because Ive previously flown in kiwi but its a 1 step fwd 2 steps back # for me,the phone calls I get for contract job offers are not looking for scab labour.....and nobody asked for it.
Just because the Ansett issue didnt involve others world wide(it actually did) doesnt mean to say its not the same issue(s) we dont all face...they were ALPA pilots ,which means their were ALPA rules and by-laws..many of which were not adheared to by ALPA National...
One thing is for sure....try not to make a good point,and youve made a few, to your argument by using a cheap shot(by your own admission)
mate...sort of take personal offence to that my self......I,m emloyable in kiwi myself,peddle my wares offshore because Ive previously flown in kiwi but its a 1 step fwd 2 steps back # for me,the phone calls I get for contract job offers are not looking for scab labour.....and nobody asked for it.
Just because the Ansett issue didnt involve others world wide(it actually did) doesnt mean to say its not the same issue(s) we dont all face...they were ALPA pilots ,which means their were ALPA rules and by-laws..many of which were not adheared to by ALPA National...
One thing is for sure....try not to make a good point,and youve made a few, to your argument by using a cheap shot(by your own admission)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
deadhead
Sorry, didn't realise we agreed on the first point!
Sure - and that usually occurs at the last minute in these situations. Who knows what was going on behind the scenes. My point was that the end of Ansett NZ was not a foregone conclusion.
On the subject of money and numbers, we were discussing the negative side of the ledger (loss) and you mentioned Air Nelson being on the plus side (profit) to the tune of 2m/week. I have no idea what the actual figures are, or how the investment is structured, so I'll make no further comment on that.
puma pants
Simplistic? OK, let's talk simplistic:
It doesn't matter what you were asking for. The moment you withdrew your labour, you did two things - firstly, you pushed company even deeper into the red, possibly beyond the point of no return; and secondly, you made it clear to any potential investors or partners that you weren't interested in helping turn the airline around. Incredibly stupid.
Yes it was a very cheap shot, and totally uncalled for. As it happens, I'm also perfectly employable in NZ, but I choose to work offshore, where I can earn over five times what an Air Nelson skipper could ever hope to earn, have complete control of the Flight Ops department in my company, and enjoy the variety and challenges of flying in Europe - plus I get 3 weeks off in ever eight to relax in NZ. I wonder who really has the best deal...
No doubt what you said about the Ansett pilots. Industrial action is a high-stakes game; you shouldn't play it if you can't afford to lose.
Sorry, didn't realise we agreed on the first point!
But that requires a "decent investor or alliance" to actually come along and save it.
On the subject of money and numbers, we were discussing the negative side of the ledger (loss) and you mentioned Air Nelson being on the plus side (profit) to the tune of 2m/week. I have no idea what the actual figures are, or how the investment is structured, so I'll make no further comment on that.
puma pants
Simplistic? OK, let's talk simplistic:
The collapse occurred because of a variety of circumstances. It is you who is being naive to imply that the two strike days caused the end of the airline. You show that you have little or no understanding of what went on. We weren't even asking for a pay rise for a start.
Seems I'm employable in NZ! I don't have to peddle my wares offshore, or wait for the phone call from an airline looking for sc*b labour. Cheap shot I know, but you asked for it; and, you've got all this wrong.
The sky is not going to fall on their heads.
Remoak
Yes, the actions might have been wrong for the time, however a look at history might show things in a slightly different light. I wasn't involved but I believe my information to be correct, Puma Pants may be able to confirm or dispute what I write here.
Ansett NZ came about when Ansett Australia took over Newmans Air under the open skies agreement between NZ and Oz.
As part of the expansion that took place at Ansett NZ and the introduction of the BAE 146, Ansett brought quite a few Australian pilots over to NZ and with these pilots came the higher salaries that were being paid in Oz. These pay rates flowed thru to the complete pilot group. Obviously Ansett management considered they could afford to pay these rates.
The BAE 146's were owned by Ansett Oz and leased to Ansett NZ. I was told that the lease rates were very high. There was no reason given why this was the case, but it was certainly a good way to syphon off any profits to the parent co.
On the face of things Ansett NZ struggled all along to make a profit. I think the aircraft lease rate were a major factor in Ansett's apparently poor performance, and the market here in New Zealand wasn't as easy as they first thought.
The parent company decides that it wants to divest itself of Ansett New Zealand, but first needs to make it look attractive to a buyer. This is where the trouble starts. They want the pilots to take a pay cut. The dispute wasn't about the pilots being greedy but about the company trying to dig itself out of a hole of its' own creation.
To compare Ansett to the Air Nelson dispute doesn't stack up.
In the case of Ansett NZ, it was completely the wrong time to strike - you boxed the management in and gave them few options. They certainly couldn't afford to pay you more when they were losing money, and it was incredibly foolish to push the issue in that situation. You could have chosen a dozen other strategies, but no, you chose the one that virtually guaranteed the failure of the company. You made it easy for those who wanted Ansett NZ gone - you gave them the perfect excuse.
Ansett NZ was a good airline that I completely supported, from flying them exclusively, to joining the Golden Wing club, to wanting to work for them. I had my chance, too, when the strike happened, but crossing picket lines isn't really my thing. To this day, I have no idea what the pilots and the union were thinking. Perhaps you were all distracted?
Ansett NZ was a good airline that I completely supported, from flying them exclusively, to joining the Golden Wing club, to wanting to work for them. I had my chance, too, when the strike happened, but crossing picket lines isn't really my thing. To this day, I have no idea what the pilots and the union were thinking. Perhaps you were all distracted?
Ansett NZ came about when Ansett Australia took over Newmans Air under the open skies agreement between NZ and Oz.
As part of the expansion that took place at Ansett NZ and the introduction of the BAE 146, Ansett brought quite a few Australian pilots over to NZ and with these pilots came the higher salaries that were being paid in Oz. These pay rates flowed thru to the complete pilot group. Obviously Ansett management considered they could afford to pay these rates.
The BAE 146's were owned by Ansett Oz and leased to Ansett NZ. I was told that the lease rates were very high. There was no reason given why this was the case, but it was certainly a good way to syphon off any profits to the parent co.
On the face of things Ansett NZ struggled all along to make a profit. I think the aircraft lease rate were a major factor in Ansett's apparently poor performance, and the market here in New Zealand wasn't as easy as they first thought.
The parent company decides that it wants to divest itself of Ansett New Zealand, but first needs to make it look attractive to a buyer. This is where the trouble starts. They want the pilots to take a pay cut. The dispute wasn't about the pilots being greedy but about the company trying to dig itself out of a hole of its' own creation.
To compare Ansett to the Air Nelson dispute doesn't stack up.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
27/09
Your synopsis may very well be correct, it sounds completely plausible to me and does sound pretty much as I thought the situation was at the time. High lease rates are a standard method of avoiding tax and showing a paper loss. Startups paying more than the going rate for pilots is also normal, I am having to pay my guys more in Europe for the same reason.
So let's say your summary is correct.
Knowing that your employer is looking for a way out, and that your jobs (and the company) may be at risk, what do you do?
A) Take the pain for a while, in order to make the company look attractive to a potential buyer and thus ensure your continued employment - and haggle about salaries when the new operation is profitable; or
B) Dig your toes in, take industrial action, and guarantee the failure of the company by walking straight into the trap prepared for you?
Answers on a postcard...
Of course Ansett NZ and Air Nelson are different cases, I have never said that they were the same thing. The same principles still apply though. I have no issue with Air Nelson pilots taking industrial action, hell, I hope they get what they want. I am simply pointing out that the lesson of history is that industrial disputes rarely have the outcome that the aggrieved workers desire. I only got into this debate in the first place to refute the somewhat naive assertions of mattyj and co, who think all salaries should just be increased by some random (but large) amount, but have absolutely no idea of the dynamics of the business they are in, or how such increases might affect their company and their industry. The lessons of history are that such courses of action generally kill the goose that lays the golden egg.
Those who do not learn from history... etc.
Your synopsis may very well be correct, it sounds completely plausible to me and does sound pretty much as I thought the situation was at the time. High lease rates are a standard method of avoiding tax and showing a paper loss. Startups paying more than the going rate for pilots is also normal, I am having to pay my guys more in Europe for the same reason.
So let's say your summary is correct.
Knowing that your employer is looking for a way out, and that your jobs (and the company) may be at risk, what do you do?
A) Take the pain for a while, in order to make the company look attractive to a potential buyer and thus ensure your continued employment - and haggle about salaries when the new operation is profitable; or
B) Dig your toes in, take industrial action, and guarantee the failure of the company by walking straight into the trap prepared for you?
Answers on a postcard...
Of course Ansett NZ and Air Nelson are different cases, I have never said that they were the same thing. The same principles still apply though. I have no issue with Air Nelson pilots taking industrial action, hell, I hope they get what they want. I am simply pointing out that the lesson of history is that industrial disputes rarely have the outcome that the aggrieved workers desire. I only got into this debate in the first place to refute the somewhat naive assertions of mattyj and co, who think all salaries should just be increased by some random (but large) amount, but have absolutely no idea of the dynamics of the business they are in, or how such increases might affect their company and their industry. The lessons of history are that such courses of action generally kill the goose that lays the golden egg.
Those who do not learn from history... etc.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NZ
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ansett NZ never made a real profit the whole time it existed. It was propped up by Ansett Australia who was pumping millions into it each year as a tax break.
This thread has drifted away from th original. Lets get back to what is important. the Air Nelson industrial action. Go for it guys/girls. this may be your only chance while there is a skills shortage.
One thing is certain. The present skills shortage will change as has every other pilot employment cycle since WWII.
Make hay while the sun shines. Ask any cocky!!
C72
This thread has drifted away from th original. Lets get back to what is important. the Air Nelson industrial action. Go for it guys/girls. this may be your only chance while there is a skills shortage.
One thing is certain. The present skills shortage will change as has every other pilot employment cycle since WWII.
Make hay while the sun shines. Ask any cocky!!
C72
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: thereabouts
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remoak, thanks for that, for a while there I thought we were comparing the size of our.... never mind!
You have a good grasp of matters commercial, that is why I can't accept your simplistic view of the Ansett debacle. The lease rates were OTT, the initial salarys were high but came into line after time (we were no better paid than Air NZ). The industrial action taken by the pilots was, no doubt PART of the reason for the eventual demise, but not THE reason. The industrial action taken by the company also played its part.
Air Nelson, at least we agree is different. These guys are not asking for the earth. They have been patient and long suffering. They are fortunate that at the moment, the industrial climate is in their favour. They are taking the positive steps in a legitimate way to get proper compensation for their services.
Their GM, JH is notorious for not giving in. He likes things his way. In this case, the pilots are doing the right thing in forcing his hand. The higher levels of management in Air NZ will not let this escalate to the extent of the Mt Cook action, which, by the way, the pilots won.
This is good and effective action by the pilots to achieve affordable and adequate T&Ms. This will not lead to the demise of an important part of Air NZs regional network. They are not advocating anything unrealistic.
You have a good grasp of matters commercial, that is why I can't accept your simplistic view of the Ansett debacle. The lease rates were OTT, the initial salarys were high but came into line after time (we were no better paid than Air NZ). The industrial action taken by the pilots was, no doubt PART of the reason for the eventual demise, but not THE reason. The industrial action taken by the company also played its part.
Air Nelson, at least we agree is different. These guys are not asking for the earth. They have been patient and long suffering. They are fortunate that at the moment, the industrial climate is in their favour. They are taking the positive steps in a legitimate way to get proper compensation for their services.
Their GM, JH is notorious for not giving in. He likes things his way. In this case, the pilots are doing the right thing in forcing his hand. The higher levels of management in Air NZ will not let this escalate to the extent of the Mt Cook action, which, by the way, the pilots won.
This is good and effective action by the pilots to achieve affordable and adequate T&Ms. This will not lead to the demise of an important part of Air NZs regional network. They are not advocating anything unrealistic.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK then, let's agree that Air Nelson's pilots are being entirely reasonable in the face of an entrenched and intractable management, and fully deserve to win the day. I can drink to that!
Haven't met JH but those I know who have, echo your assessment. If he is anything like RI, who I did have several dealings with, he must be a... ummm... "difficult" individual.
Management in the NZ third level operations is a joke... but that is an entirely different thread!
Haven't met JH but those I know who have, echo your assessment. If he is anything like RI, who I did have several dealings with, he must be a... ummm... "difficult" individual.
Management in the NZ third level operations is a joke... but that is an entirely different thread!