Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

QF piot retrenchments

Old 19th Jul 2009, 01:14
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 39
Not being good enough, Qantas regional pilots had to watch the non Qantas regional pilots getting selected as if they already had a seniorority number at Qantas, like 10 a month to our 1 in 5 years. Then they wind us up and we got a token interview wich 1 or 2 got in. Thats how the group takes care of its own . How ever because your mainline you got more of a right to any job anywhere in the group. Every argument your using was used by us , it made no difference then and it should make none now.
Tassie Devil is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2009, 03:02
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Training is not free, and airlines would rather train one pilot than two.
bushy is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2009, 03:09
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Brisbane
Age: 45
Posts: 9
Ah you have to love the 'tall poppie' attitude of aussie's.

All we are discussing is how the QF boys can save about 100 blokes/girls from losing their job, but some cannot help themselves from starting a bashing match against the Qf pilots and their award.

I know it might be stating the obvious ... but... If any of the people were not with QF they would be sitting next to you, regeardless of where they came from, we all do the same shit and are just happy to get home each day !

Big picture everyone

Imagine if it was you after just joining !!!
Bundy Bear is online now  
Old 19th Jul 2009, 04:14
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 39
Use what ever names you want, just keep in mind your asking a pilot group to support your idea of looking after a few brothers who are not needed in mainline when the same senerio was reveresed not that long ago and the silence was deafening.
I'm about finished here , its been good thearapy . I personally left a long time ago and should have listened to the 89er's earlier and got out years before I did . Thanks for the advise and yes you were right.
Good luck to THE GROUP !
Tassie Devil is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2009, 04:26
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,177
I gotta agree. Here we are talking about the possible retrenchment of pilots who were still in school when some of these incidents supposedly occurred, and people are willing to stick the knife into them because they happen to be members of big bad AIPA. Get a grip!

Mainline pilots are not expecting to enter VB, or Tiger or even Q-Link. Jetstar however is a different kettle of fish. Qantas, Jetstar and AIPA pilots are signatories to an MOU. That is the difference. If I was a Judge trying to decide whether or not there was a connection between the airlines and the MOU was waved under my nose, it would be hard to conclude otherwise.

It is a crap document, however it exists and it is legal. Jetstar pilots are flying aircraft gifted to the airline from mainline. One day those aircraft are slated to return to mainline. The latest mainline seniority list was just published with a stack of Jetstar MOU slots on it.

There is a link between the two that cannot be denied. Therefore if mainline pilots are retrenched and not able to take up slots in Jetstar, I can only conclude that what an AIPA VP told me will be true. I don't want to get inflammatory, because I know this board has a wide readership, but lets us say that the gloves will be well and truly off.
Capt Kremin is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2009, 05:26
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Syd, NSW
Posts: 353
bareknuckles

Gotta wonder what it's gonna take for team Bazza to realise the time has passed to get the gloves off.

If my source is correct then the membership should be concerned that the AIPA EXEC stymied a COM briefing this month from the Barrister actually conducting the QF Sale Act Case !

Talk about soft! They can't handle the truth!
CaptCloudbuster is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2009, 07:36
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 327
Would the MOU help those who are facing retrenchment? Those facing retrenchment would not have been in mainline when the MOU was signed and that would make them ineligible.
Lookleft is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2009, 08:20
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The dark corner of the bar
Posts: 351
Cool

Some of the posts here are beyond belief. Y generation predominately by the looks of the childish remarks posted by "professionals". Im using that term extremely loosely!.

Best of luck to the descent guys affected.

Doug.
Douglas Mcdonnell is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2009, 10:34
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 116
As a pilot I can say that I love my job, but hate the aviation industry!!!
Any wanna be pilots listen up - if you think that you will one day be a rich captain flying for Qantas, you are wrong. If you got in to QF right now, it would be at least 15 years, if not more, before you get a look at a command position (if there are any QF guys that think/know I am wrong please correct me).

I believe that QF will shrink and only provide a service on high yielding routes with lots of business class flyers. The rest of it will go to jetstar, where the salaries a significantly lower. You also have to pay for your endorsement. Dont get me started on this.

I pray for the day when young guys and gals cringe at the thought of becoming a pilot and joining this industry. Its only when this happens that there will be less pilots to go around and then we can maybe enjoy good conditions like other industries.

Sorry about the negativity. Dont mean to upset anyone. Just venting.
lemel is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2009, 10:52
  #70 (permalink)  
Keg

Nunc est bibendum
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 5,241
Lightbulb

If you got in to QF right now, it would be at least 15 years, if not more, before you get a look at a command position (if there are any QF guys that think/know I am wrong please correct me).
Pretty close to the money at the moment. Took me 13 1/2 for a Sydney base. Some guys went to AO in Cairns after 9-11 years but there is no way I could have done that to OIC home command. Some recent guys who took Perth based 737 commands also did it in 9-11 years I think. MEL 767 command was a little more junior than mine but not by much.

As to how long it will take those that join now, it depends on whether we have some sort of GOAL in the future. If we don't then I fear the rest of your assessment may be spot on.
Keg is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2009, 10:56
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 70
Posts: 879
Correct Lookleft,
However if eligible pilots took up the MOU positions then the result would be the same ,would it not?
Saving pilots from possible retrenchment.
blow.n.gasket is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2009, 13:16
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 27
Some are about to lose there jobs and this tosser wants to hold onto to his F/O spot.
I think the idea is that if he keeps his F/O slot he's not taking an S/O slot from someone who would otherwise be retrenched...
carbonneutral is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2009, 13:27
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Land of Oz
Posts: 180
Quote from all the old people I know...


"ooohh well..."


Ever noticed that?
ROH111 is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2009, 13:55
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: right now.....in front of the computer
Posts: 41
What happens to seniority??

I know a few turboprop drivers who have recently been employed by Jetstar. (Starting this month and next month) If anyone from mainline goes across to Jetstar will they be junior to Mr/Mrs Turboprop who joined the company earlier??

The people i know at Jetstar all reckon the people transfering will be regarded as lowest seniority??
High-Bypass is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2009, 21:34
  #75 (permalink)  
Keg

Nunc est bibendum
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 5,241
Danger

I don't want to be rude or flame you...
All evidence to the contrary!

... but as a CAPT you should be aware of how your comments can be construed.
You mean taken completely out of context like you have done? I suppose I should allow for poor comprehension skills when I make a statement. My comments were in direct response to lemel's post who basically asked if his assessment of time to command in QF was accurate. My numbers were to illustrate how long it is currently is and some of the variables.

Then again, you taking my comments out of context are consistent with how you've taken that former classic S/Os. I'm not going to bother going through that here though I do note the lack of comment along your line of thought (labeling him a moron and taking him to task over six years of SYD-PER-SYD in the back seat, etc) on Qrewroom.

Only a moron would not consider the possibility of protecting those in rank as well as protecting those who are potentially going to be made redundant. Protecting the latter protects the former and vice versa.

There is moronic behaviour around, no doubt. I just reckon you're looking in the wrong place to find it pigs. Try a mirror perhaps.

High-bypass. There are a number of 'reserved' seniority numbers on the J* seniority list for QF pilots employed when the MoU went active- 7 in every 20 slots new slots after that date would have the potential to be taken up by QF pilots. These reserved numbers are only able to be allocated to pilots employed at the date of the MoU and new QF pilots would not be able to avail themselves of the MoU slots. Same applies for J* pilots employed after that date wanting to take up the reserved J* seniority numbers on the QF list. Depending on the deal negotiated, any junior S/O who goes to J* instead of being made redundant would likely be on the bottom of the J* pile.
Keg is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2009, 01:25
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone is zero
Posts: 731
pigsarse, big man. You take something someone else says on a named forum, but yet choose to reply on a (un)anonymous forum, why is that? It really take guts.
Stand up like a man and name yourself or retract & pray the individual chooses not to sue you for defamation.
breakfastburrito is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2009, 01:39
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oz
Posts: 126
Yeah those lowly inexperienced Turboprop drivers - goddamm- flying around at the most favourable levels, carrying unlimited amounts of fuel, flying from ILS to ILS in brand new machines with the latest technnology - not having to worry about much.

Some of the current turboprop drivers have quite a bit of expereince on some of those fandangled planes with no them thar airscrews - they have just been unfortunately caught up in the GFC.

Careful on the comments, the bigger they get the easier they get- try no to convince yourself otherwise.
wateroff is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2009, 02:37
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 956
I wonder how much money the new website cost?
mcgrath50 is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2009, 09:13
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 387
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the MOU between J* and QF only apply to those QF pilots who started on or prior to December 2004 (pretty much like Keg mentioned without dates)? In other words, the MOU has zero effect on this situation regardless of where they place in seniority? Any transfer would have to be under a whole other agreement or worst case, direct entry.

Right?
Dragun is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2009, 13:31
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 24
That is correct Dragun. I am working from memory here, but the MOU only applies to "eligible pilots", the definition of which is something similar to your post. Pretty much those employed in either company as at the date of execution. So any transfers of recently hired QF SO's could not be under the MOU and if they tried to do it there would be grievances. The reason is that the MOU entitles you to slot in at a reserved seniority number, whereas if you went in direct entry you would of course start at the bottom.

MB
Metroboy is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.