VIPA application for VirginBlue Union registration dismissed.
Contrails,was the commission from the LOL that you refer to disclosed fully prior to purchase or did this come to light as a result of the hearing???(I shall take no reply as "no disclosure").DD.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just had a look at the VIPA LOL advertised on this very web site. No mention of a portion of the fee not going into LOL. People pay union fees to support their chosen union. If I pay for LOL I expect my money to pay for LOL and nothing else. The LOL could have been either a lot cheaper or have provided and increase in cover if the full amount was used for LOL. I look forward to the full transcript being posted here for all to read.
Did not read on any post that "money was pocketed as has been frivolously claimed". What was suggested was that money was used for a purpose that was not disclosed to members at the time they signed up. If this is not true then you guys have nothing to worry about as the transcripts will reveal all.
Did not read on any post that "money was pocketed as has been frivolously claimed". What was suggested was that money was used for a purpose that was not disclosed to members at the time they signed up. If this is not true then you guys have nothing to worry about as the transcripts will reveal all.
FMCINOP
Did you also read the bit where pay-outs are based on you not being eligible to hold a medical anywhere in the world for the next 5 years.
So, for example, if beautiful downtown Bangladesh changes its medical standard to allow your disability, under the terms of the policy, if you had been paid (?), you would be liable for restitution to the insurer. No matter that you have no desire or ambition to go fly in B'desh.
And did you notice that disability benefits are limited to 2% of insured benefit, per month, for a maximum of just 12 months. i.e 24% of nominated benefit.
Talk about a second rate policy!
Maui
Did you also read the bit where pay-outs are based on you not being eligible to hold a medical anywhere in the world for the next 5 years.
So, for example, if beautiful downtown Bangladesh changes its medical standard to allow your disability, under the terms of the policy, if you had been paid (?), you would be liable for restitution to the insurer. No matter that you have no desire or ambition to go fly in B'desh.
And did you notice that disability benefits are limited to 2% of insured benefit, per month, for a maximum of just 12 months. i.e 24% of nominated benefit.
Talk about a second rate policy!
Maui
Last edited by maui; 18th Feb 2009 at 20:05.
Contrails,that part of the transcript has not been released to the public yet so as it is apparent you were in the Commission at the time the evidence was given would you just answer the question??
Maui,did you happen to notice what the no claim period was??
Maui,did you happen to notice what the no claim period was??
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
D,D I do not wish to give my own coments and opinions on a matter that is before the courts and is subject to an appeal. Especially on a rumour network.
I direct you to the decision handed down by SDP Richards and the court transcripts when they become available. If any issues are highlighted regarding LOL surely they will appear there
Regarding the LOL product, and it's virtues or otherwise, for a more balanced view you can call 07 3226 2066 where any questions can be answered.
If anyone has any questions you can contact the guys at VIPA.
I direct you to the decision handed down by SDP Richards and the court transcripts when they become available. If any issues are highlighted regarding LOL surely they will appear there
Regarding the LOL product, and it's virtues or otherwise, for a more balanced view you can call 07 3226 2066 where any questions can be answered.
If anyone has any questions you can contact the guys at VIPA.
Last edited by contrails03; 19th Feb 2009 at 06:11.
Contrail,it was you that directed me to the transcripts to find the answer and those documents are not yet available so now I am curious as to your source??If you were at the hearing then it is a simple matter of recalling what was said,if you were not at the hearing then how reliable is your source that you refuse to repeat their information??You have still not answered the original question.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
D,D I do not wish to give my own comments and opinions on a matter that is before the courts and is subject to an appeal. Especially on a rumour network.
I direct you to the decision handed down by SDP Richards and the court transcripts when they become available. If any issues are highlighted regarding LOL surely they will appear there
Or the alternative is:
If anyone has any questions you can contact the guys at VIPA.
Last edited by contrails03; 19th Feb 2009 at 06:10.
Contrail03,your refusal to answer the question is in itself the answer,thank you.As for an appeal pending,perhaps,but as of now I have seen nothing so why not discuss it??Thank you for the link to the decision,it is old news now and to save others who may be less interested it really goes to the legal reasons for the rejection and does not mention the LOL aspect.Another diversion to keep us off the LOL bit eh Contrail??So I have another one for you,bearing in mind VB management refused to have dealings with the new lot(VIPA),what exactly was it they were going to do??
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: HOBART
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why are so many of you upset about another Union, its a personal choise and if someone wants to be a member of the TWU, CFMEU or what ever, whats the big deal? Everyone is starting to get personal here, its quite fanatical. Its as if someone does not agree with another's views, they are wrong and to be chastised.
Does anyone get hasseled because they shop at Shell instead of BP for their petrol.
Its about free choise, and competition creates value, and at the moment some of these Unions are backwards in their theory/action yet have a good framework.
Its a shame that some of these Airlines are not Unions. If we could put that much energy into fighting another Union's registration, imagine what that Union could do to really start to represent it's members and put the gloves on from time to time and take the opportunity to really listen to it's members. If they did, would there be another Union trying to register itself. The road to recovery is firstly admitting you have a problem.
Does anyone get hasseled because they shop at Shell instead of BP for their petrol.
Its about free choise, and competition creates value, and at the moment some of these Unions are backwards in their theory/action yet have a good framework.
Its a shame that some of these Airlines are not Unions. If we could put that much energy into fighting another Union's registration, imagine what that Union could do to really start to represent it's members and put the gloves on from time to time and take the opportunity to really listen to it's members. If they did, would there be another Union trying to register itself. The road to recovery is firstly admitting you have a problem.
contrails03
You brand my post as being "unbalanced".
As a statement of an actual condition, balance does not come into the equation. If I was comparing the provisions of one product against those of another, then there would an element of "balance" or "unbalance".
Does the policy not state at 4.1
Does the policy not say at 5.7 b)
Does the policy not state at Item 7 Insured events and Compensation
Does 12 months multiplied by 2% per month not equal 24%.?
Pray tell, what is unbalanced about those quotes.
On the other hand if you were suggesting that I am unbalanced. Who knows? Krusty34 will agree with you, but it concerns me not at all.
Don Diego
In answer to your question.
You must notify the insurer within 30 days, or no deal. Then the clock starts ticking and you will have to wait for 90 days after the insurer recieves that notification or in the case of an "Undiagnosed Illness" 180 days.
Maui
You brand my post as being "unbalanced".
As a statement of an actual condition, balance does not come into the equation. If I was comparing the provisions of one product against those of another, then there would an element of "balance" or "unbalance".
Does the policy not state at 4.1
The Underwriters may at their option settle the claim in yearly installments and require proof of the continuing disability if in their opinion it is not unlikely that the Licence(s)/Certificate(s) will be restored or the revocation cancelled and/or similar Licence(s)/Certificate(s) may be obtained anywhere in the world within five years of the Date of Loss
the inability of The Insured Person to obtain any similar Licence(s)/Certificate(s) anywhere in the world within a period of sixty (60) months from the date of the issuance of the unfitness assessment or revocation
7.2.1 and 7.2.2 2% per month
7.2.5 Benefit period 12 months following Excess Period
7.2.5 Benefit period 12 months following Excess Period
Pray tell, what is unbalanced about those quotes.
On the other hand if you were suggesting that I am unbalanced. Who knows? Krusty34 will agree with you, but it concerns me not at all.
Don Diego
In answer to your question.
You must notify the insurer within 30 days, or no deal. Then the clock starts ticking and you will have to wait for 90 days after the insurer recieves that notification or in the case of an "Undiagnosed Illness" 180 days.
Maui
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Darwin
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just so that I can understand this thread and offer an opinion.
Two AFAP people (Don and maui) are arguing the merits of opposing Loss of Licence schemes i.e. the AFAP MBF v the VIPA deal, when the issue is pilot representation.
Isn’t that exactly the problem?
If the AFAP continues to rely on the MBF to attract members rather than providing what members perceive to be effective representation then there will be more VIPA’s as pilot groups go it alone.
This is not about LOL schemes, it is about being seen to be doing the right thing by the pilots in this country and negotiating good outcomes.
Unfortunately, whether you like it or not and whether it is true or not, the AFAP is perceived to be working with the companies to drive down terms and conditions. This is certainly the case with both VB and JQ. That is the issue the Executive of the AFAP need to face and address before everyone walks out the door IMHO.
Two AFAP people (Don and maui) are arguing the merits of opposing Loss of Licence schemes i.e. the AFAP MBF v the VIPA deal, when the issue is pilot representation.
Isn’t that exactly the problem?
If the AFAP continues to rely on the MBF to attract members rather than providing what members perceive to be effective representation then there will be more VIPA’s as pilot groups go it alone.
This is not about LOL schemes, it is about being seen to be doing the right thing by the pilots in this country and negotiating good outcomes.
Unfortunately, whether you like it or not and whether it is true or not, the AFAP is perceived to be working with the companies to drive down terms and conditions. This is certainly the case with both VB and JQ. That is the issue the Executive of the AFAP need to face and address before everyone walks out the door IMHO.
What The
Early in the life of this thread I posted a query about AIPA's covert support of VIPA. Remember the old adage "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".
I have made no mention of AAPMBF. I have merely pointed to a couple of glaring inadequacies of the VIPA LOL policy.
If you want a detailed comparison I will be happy to oblige, but it will take a while to get one together and it is probably better addressed in a dedicated thread.
Maui
Early in the life of this thread I posted a query about AIPA's covert support of VIPA. Remember the old adage "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".
I have made no mention of AAPMBF. I have merely pointed to a couple of glaring inadequacies of the VIPA LOL policy.
If you want a detailed comparison I will be happy to oblige, but it will take a while to get one together and it is probably better addressed in a dedicated thread.
Maui
Last edited by maui; 21st Feb 2009 at 03:56.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Darwin
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm afraid I don't understand your gibberish about covert ops Mav.
I say again:
Don't miss the message.
I say again:
Unfortunately, whether you like it or not and whether it is true or not, the AFAP is perceived to be working with the companies to drive down terms and conditions. This is certainly the case with both VB and JQ. That is the issue the Executive of the AFAP need to face and address before everyone walks out the door IMHO.
Don't miss the message.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: melbourne
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I might be missing something here but at what stage has VIPA represented any pilots in dealings with management at either VB or JQ? Certainly if you look at the VB conditions they are miles better than the original agreement so I can't see how they have gone backwards.
Guys I am really having a problem here, perhaps you could put me straight. Why does VIPA exist and why is allowing itself to be courted by AIPA?
Apart from Hang Ten the consensus from this and other threads is that unity is paramount, that more can be achieved together than can be when apart.
For a variety of reasons a group in VB and now a few from VA have a desire to do their own thing (VIPA). Reasons as diverse as, disenchantment with the incumbent legally recognised AFAP, and for others power and/or ego.
To assist in their aims and under the guise of unity, VIPA and AIPA have come together for assistance and guidance.
AIPA is an organisation born of a splinter group, who decided that unity within the AFAP was not serving their best interests and that they wanted to do their own thing.
Led by two who subsequently became management (Westwood and Cant), rather than staying unified and working to change the structure of AFAP, to allow themselves a little more autonomy, they petulantly stormed out and broke unity within the pilot ranks of Australia.
From that action, evolved a change in the AFAP structure such that now there are several “Councils” (as well as Branches) working under the one umbrella. The pilots who are now AIPA could have been a part of that structure, but they chose disunity.
That same group, in more recent times, refused to recognise or assist those pilots who have become Jetstar. Now that Jetstar are taking away great chunks of mainline work, AIPA are suddenly interested in taking those pilots under their wing, IN THE NAME OF UNITY.
VB have always posed a threat to Q Dom flying and now we have VA on the scene as a potential threat to Q mainline flying. Given the chameleonic nature of AIPA is it any surprise that suddenly they want to embrace the V A&B pilots, in the spirit of unity of course. Gentlemen that is utter BS.
AIPA want to have a degree of control over any entity that has the potential to erode the Q network. Fair call that is what they are paid to do, protect their AIPA members.
The point is, do not be seduced by protestations of brotherly love, they are a single focus group, and if they suck you in they will exert control, to their benefit, not necessarily yours.
If you are unhappy with the AFAP, get in and take responsibility.
Nominate for membership of your council or branch and do some work for yourselves. It is a self help organisation, with tremendous resources, but the outcomes will only be a reflection of the input.
If you choose not to have representation that is your choice, always has been, and will be respected by the AFAP.
If you have had a bad experience with AFAP, look at the circumstances and ask yourself was the outcome reasonable given the circumstances or was I expecting too much.
A union cannot and should not defend reckless, irresponsible or criminal behaviour. A union can only defend a just process.
If you still have a problem write it all down and send it to Albert Road, don’t get on the phone and rant.
As far as terms and conditions are concerned, have a look at where you are now. Who has achieved what you have now. Was it AIPA? Was it VIPA?
The government and 6 airlines failed to destroy the AFAP and such is the nature of things that the only one left standing out of all the protagonists, is the AFAP. Learn to live with it cos it will be around until you retire. Better stiil get behind it and mould it to what you want. You can do a lot more with constituted play-doh than you can with the unmixed ingredients.
Maui
Apart from Hang Ten the consensus from this and other threads is that unity is paramount, that more can be achieved together than can be when apart.
For a variety of reasons a group in VB and now a few from VA have a desire to do their own thing (VIPA). Reasons as diverse as, disenchantment with the incumbent legally recognised AFAP, and for others power and/or ego.
To assist in their aims and under the guise of unity, VIPA and AIPA have come together for assistance and guidance.
AIPA is an organisation born of a splinter group, who decided that unity within the AFAP was not serving their best interests and that they wanted to do their own thing.
Led by two who subsequently became management (Westwood and Cant), rather than staying unified and working to change the structure of AFAP, to allow themselves a little more autonomy, they petulantly stormed out and broke unity within the pilot ranks of Australia.
From that action, evolved a change in the AFAP structure such that now there are several “Councils” (as well as Branches) working under the one umbrella. The pilots who are now AIPA could have been a part of that structure, but they chose disunity.
That same group, in more recent times, refused to recognise or assist those pilots who have become Jetstar. Now that Jetstar are taking away great chunks of mainline work, AIPA are suddenly interested in taking those pilots under their wing, IN THE NAME OF UNITY.
VB have always posed a threat to Q Dom flying and now we have VA on the scene as a potential threat to Q mainline flying. Given the chameleonic nature of AIPA is it any surprise that suddenly they want to embrace the V A&B pilots, in the spirit of unity of course. Gentlemen that is utter BS.
AIPA want to have a degree of control over any entity that has the potential to erode the Q network. Fair call that is what they are paid to do, protect their AIPA members.
The point is, do not be seduced by protestations of brotherly love, they are a single focus group, and if they suck you in they will exert control, to their benefit, not necessarily yours.
If you are unhappy with the AFAP, get in and take responsibility.
Nominate for membership of your council or branch and do some work for yourselves. It is a self help organisation, with tremendous resources, but the outcomes will only be a reflection of the input.
If you choose not to have representation that is your choice, always has been, and will be respected by the AFAP.
If you have had a bad experience with AFAP, look at the circumstances and ask yourself was the outcome reasonable given the circumstances or was I expecting too much.
A union cannot and should not defend reckless, irresponsible or criminal behaviour. A union can only defend a just process.
If you still have a problem write it all down and send it to Albert Road, don’t get on the phone and rant.
As far as terms and conditions are concerned, have a look at where you are now. Who has achieved what you have now. Was it AIPA? Was it VIPA?
The government and 6 airlines failed to destroy the AFAP and such is the nature of things that the only one left standing out of all the protagonists, is the AFAP. Learn to live with it cos it will be around until you retire. Better stiil get behind it and mould it to what you want. You can do a lot more with constituted play-doh than you can with the unmixed ingredients.
Maui
Perhaps AIPA live by the credo - "keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer"
Splitting representation at this critical time is just plain dumb in my opinion.
like them or hate them the AFAP are the reps for VB.
I cant help thinking that an AUSALPA is the way to go - however the petty turfwars between the AFAP and AIPA will put paid to that I think.
Splitting representation at this critical time is just plain dumb in my opinion.
like them or hate them the AFAP are the reps for VB.
I cant help thinking that an AUSALPA is the way to go - however the petty turfwars between the AFAP and AIPA will put paid to that I think.
Hang Ten,are you suggesting that a better way to go would be to have many smaller "independant" unions each doing their own thing???
What The,I asked Contrail a question about a post of his that he will not answer,however,with the passage of time the transcripts will be public and I expect a response on this forum at that point.
What The,I asked Contrail a question about a post of his that he will not answer,however,with the passage of time the transcripts will be public and I expect a response on this forum at that point.
Thread Starter
Dehavillanddriver, whilst there may be some personality issues I think the big problem is the AIPA hierarchy and leadership, having for all of its existence being in total control of its constituents, can't accept or adapt to what would be a far more devolved entity with various Pilot Councils. They have been very insular in the past towards any 'outsiders' and strike me as a very ossified organization stuck in an ever decreasing comfort zone (QF mainline). Many within QF mainline itself have become unhappy with the direction of the Association and I believe there was a large turnover at the last election.