New Ticket Team vying to wrest control of AIPA
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 74
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New Ticket Team vying to wrest control of AIPA
I see there is a new group using a voting ticket to take control of the AIPA executive in the upcoming elections.
The last time this was tied was by a mob calling themselves the AIPA REFORM GROUP (ARG).
What's this new mob going to call themselves?
Any ideas to give them a hand?
The last time this was tied was by a mob calling themselves the AIPA REFORM GROUP (ARG).
What's this new mob going to call themselves?
Any ideas to give them a hand?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not quite Mr Gasket. The upcoming election is for the position of AIPA President only. Two candidates have nominated and voting is only open to the current committee of management members. This is not an election for the Committee of Management, where a ticket has been used in the past. I believe a current committee member has, in support of one of the presidential candidates, suggested on another forum that there are some like-minded individuals on the committee. Can't rule out another ticket being used though when the next committee election occurs!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mostly at home
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To clarify ....
It is the normal election by the Committee of Management as to which of them will be Office Bearers ..... they are already elected by the membership, they are deciding who does which job ..
N
It is the normal election by the Committee of Management as to which of them will be Office Bearers ..... they are already elected by the membership, they are deciding who does which job ..
N
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Kremin, I was trying to say executive elections, not CoM elections. Sorry Blown, missed the word 'executive' in the first line of your original post and thought you were talking about CoM elections and the previous use of a ticket in them.
Last edited by slim; 14th Sep 2008 at 12:52.
Nunc est bibendum
CL, my understanding is that if you're part of the QF group then you can be an AIPA member. Australian & International Pilots Association (I think) and give them a call. 
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 74
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks as though the transformation is almost complete.
A mate on Comm just told me Bazza's got Welsh back to negotiate the new EBA 7.5. All they need to do now is invite the "gimp" brothers back and the transformation will be complete.
PS The feed back I'm getting from the line is that a lot of pilots who voted NO on EBA 8 now regret that vote and wish for a few tweaks and have it finalised.
How about it?
I'd suggest if enough pilots push this sentiment on the survey it would be a brave President who would ignore the push.
We live in hope.
A mate on Comm just told me Bazza's got Welsh back to negotiate the new EBA 7.5. All they need to do now is invite the "gimp" brothers back and the transformation will be complete.
PS The feed back I'm getting from the line is that a lot of pilots who voted NO on EBA 8 now regret that vote and wish for a few tweaks and have it finalised.
How about it?
I'd suggest if enough pilots push this sentiment on the survey it would be a brave President who would ignore the push.
We live in hope.
Blow'n, I don't know your situation or where your coming from but I don't understand your position. If you look at the history of the new President and the Vice Presidents, you will see a lot of experience on the B767 & A330 - they may have recently moved onto the A380 & thus became tall poppy targets but knowing the personalities involved, I have a lot of faith in them negotiating for the good of all AIPA members. We now have a president with good communication skills & who hasn't burnt bridges with the new CP.
As it is a new EBA negotiating team, it is understandable that they invite experienced past negotiators to assist them in identifying the many land mines that QF management will put in the next round of EBA negotiations. BW is a balanced & very experienced negotiator so if they did not invite him to assist them they would be castigated by the majority for not using all available assets to achieve the best outcome.
Your loyalty to the previous "ticket" is commendable but blind - three years of toil but with nothing in the credit side of the balance sheet. We all need to get behind the COM & new executive and assist them in achieving the best possible outcome.
PS. I don't regret voting NO to the EBA8 proposal.
As it is a new EBA negotiating team, it is understandable that they invite experienced past negotiators to assist them in identifying the many land mines that QF management will put in the next round of EBA negotiations. BW is a balanced & very experienced negotiator so if they did not invite him to assist them they would be castigated by the majority for not using all available assets to achieve the best outcome.
Your loyalty to the previous "ticket" is commendable but blind - three years of toil but with nothing in the credit side of the balance sheet. We all need to get behind the COM & new executive and assist them in achieving the best possible outcome.
PS. I don't regret voting NO to the EBA8 proposal.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Stralya
Posts: 577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think there ought be a paradigm shift..
As someone else pointed out bringing back the genius that pushed the Singapore basing on S/O's (not B744 Captains of course) to handle the "negotiation" is a reminder of the more things change the more they stay the same..
For those who weren't aware, the Singapore basing was an ill concieved poorly thought out, never costed and divisive little thing, that gave to one group at the expense of the other...Does that sound familiar to EBA8?
As someone else pointed out bringing back the genius that pushed the Singapore basing on S/O's (not B744 Captains of course) to handle the "negotiation" is a reminder of the more things change the more they stay the same..
For those who weren't aware, the Singapore basing was an ill concieved poorly thought out, never costed and divisive little thing, that gave to one group at the expense of the other...Does that sound familiar to EBA8?
Not costed, hey? I clearly remember seeing and reviewing the costings for the Singapore basing, although I admit the cost saving was miniscule in comparision to the grief that a forced posting to Singapore might have caused some people. Frankly I didn't think it was worth the hassle of establishing the base.
However, those SO's (and some 744 Captains who advised me that they had approached the Management with an offer to be based in SIN) who had bothered to the sums on the tax position were onto it like rats up a drainpipe. By my calculations I was going to be taking home more dough than the Sydney based FO. Everytime I climbed onto the jet it was an overtime sector. A published roster for 12 months (well until a certain person invoked seniority in order to establish preferential bidding) preallocated leave and sim cyclics, 175 hr divisor without blank lines. No more slipping in SIN southbound for two days so you could act as a third or forth pilot back to Australia. It had a lot going for it. In many ways it was a shame that it didn't get going.
However, those SO's (and some 744 Captains who advised me that they had approached the Management with an offer to be based in SIN) who had bothered to the sums on the tax position were onto it like rats up a drainpipe. By my calculations I was going to be taking home more dough than the Sydney based FO. Everytime I climbed onto the jet it was an overtime sector. A published roster for 12 months (well until a certain person invoked seniority in order to establish preferential bidding) preallocated leave and sim cyclics, 175 hr divisor without blank lines. No more slipping in SIN southbound for two days so you could act as a third or forth pilot back to Australia. It had a lot going for it. In many ways it was a shame that it didn't get going.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: NSW
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed Blown, ya statement that 'those who voted NO on EBA 8 now regret that vote and wish for a few tweaks and have it finalised,' does seem to be gaining momentum.
But yas also got to remember that when 1661 people vote No to LHEBA 8, el presidentay's political enemies nailed him and his supporters promising that a new look Qantas will be kind to pilots led by a more enlightened AIPA Team and we've got to give the new team time to deliver.
I hope they can, because if they can't, Christmas won't bring much to celebrate. An awful lot of people will have no one to blame other than themselves and the loudmouths on Qrewroom and Pune who blew off LHEBA 8 with scant regard for the innocent.
But yas also got to remember that when 1661 people vote No to LHEBA 8, el presidentay's political enemies nailed him and his supporters promising that a new look Qantas will be kind to pilots led by a more enlightened AIPA Team and we've got to give the new team time to deliver.
I hope they can, because if they can't, Christmas won't bring much to celebrate. An awful lot of people will have no one to blame other than themselves and the loudmouths on Qrewroom and Pune who blew off LHEBA 8 with scant regard for the innocent.
Last edited by Gingerbread; 11th Nov 2008 at 05:40.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: airside
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is definitely more to this than meets the eye.
Didn't the Short Haul first round vote during their EBA negotiations end up with a similar % No vote to the Long Haul EBA8 ?
The Union then went on to negotiate a better outcome on the back of that result, despite the simpering letter from a certain individual admonishing anyone that might vote No.
So why is it that the New Team are hell bent on applying bandaids to EBA7 and not bringing EBA8 to a conclusion?
I understand that the economic winds have changed 180 degrees but there were a number of good aspects to EBA 8.
Don't just throw the baby out with the bathwater in order to satisfy a political whim.
Any truth to the rumour that the company doesn't wish for EBA8 to ever see the light of day because they got their costings back in the last 3 weeks of the negotiations and blanched when they saw how much the pilots would gain.
Didn't the Short Haul first round vote during their EBA negotiations end up with a similar % No vote to the Long Haul EBA8 ?
The Union then went on to negotiate a better outcome on the back of that result, despite the simpering letter from a certain individual admonishing anyone that might vote No.
So why is it that the New Team are hell bent on applying bandaids to EBA7 and not bringing EBA8 to a conclusion?
I understand that the economic winds have changed 180 degrees but there were a number of good aspects to EBA 8.
Don't just throw the baby out with the bathwater in order to satisfy a political whim.
Any truth to the rumour that the company doesn't wish for EBA8 to ever see the light of day because they got their costings back in the last 3 weeks of the negotiations and blanched when they saw how much the pilots would gain.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
5 Posts
The difference between the large SH NO vote and the large LH NO vote was that the COM did not endorse the SH EBA; they just put it up to for a vote expecting it to fail. The opposite happened with the LH EBA. The NO campaign run to all the S/O's was very effective and resulted in the large NO numbers.
A couple of exec guys who had nothing to do with the EBA got tossed as collateral damage, I have no idea why the Treasurer got tossed, he did a good job but maybe was seen to be a supporter of the now ex-president and hence had to go. The same goes for one of the VP's who had nothng to do with the EBA apart from trying to explain it to the troops on Qrewroom. Too close to the ex-president as well I guess.
The jury is out for a while on the new team. They are already undermanned with one of the guys out on long term illness. Lets see what happens. Apparently they are going to "ask" for things like a return of salary sacrifice for laptops instead of using the big stick. Is that giggling I hear from QCC3?
I also believe that when the details of the new EBA deal that the Company will push for become known, then the voting down of EBA 8 will be seen by many as folly. Two months is a long time in aviation.
A couple of exec guys who had nothing to do with the EBA got tossed as collateral damage, I have no idea why the Treasurer got tossed, he did a good job but maybe was seen to be a supporter of the now ex-president and hence had to go. The same goes for one of the VP's who had nothng to do with the EBA apart from trying to explain it to the troops on Qrewroom. Too close to the ex-president as well I guess.
The jury is out for a while on the new team. They are already undermanned with one of the guys out on long term illness. Lets see what happens. Apparently they are going to "ask" for things like a return of salary sacrifice for laptops instead of using the big stick. Is that giggling I hear from QCC3?
I also believe that when the details of the new EBA deal that the Company will push for become known, then the voting down of EBA 8 will be seen by many as folly. Two months is a long time in aviation.
I concur. The decision to vote down EBA8 is looking more stupid by the day.
Yes, there were some things in the EBA that I didn't like, but I felt that I could live with it. As far as pilot contracts go it wasn't that bad. By taking a balanced view of the proposed EBA, coupled with the indicators of the forthcoming economic turmoil, I thought it was too big a risk to vote it down.
Despite my best efforts out on the line to support a YES vote I just couldn't get through to some. Voting NO because you didn't like one aspect of the contract was foolish. Knocking it back because "you always knock back the first offer" was just plain stupid.
We are going to cop it now!
Yes, there were some things in the EBA that I didn't like, but I felt that I could live with it. As far as pilot contracts go it wasn't that bad. By taking a balanced view of the proposed EBA, coupled with the indicators of the forthcoming economic turmoil, I thought it was too big a risk to vote it down.
Despite my best efforts out on the line to support a YES vote I just couldn't get through to some. Voting NO because you didn't like one aspect of the contract was foolish. Knocking it back because "you always knock back the first offer" was just plain stupid.
We are going to cop it now!
"Well it appears, so I'm told, that self-interest, personal political agendas, greed and the desire for revenge by a vociferous few, all nauseatingly portrayed as altruism and a cloying but insincere concern for the careers of younger AIPA members, has won the day."
A vociferous few! 70 odd percent of the membership voted it down you clown.
This was a s
t EBA, and it got what it deserved. You blokes live in fairyland.
A vociferous few! 70 odd percent of the membership voted it down you clown.
This was a s
t EBA, and it got what it deserved. You blokes live in fairyland.