Merged: Joe Eakins: Brave?....or....
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am still to see what it is you Gen Y folk are so stirred up about - apart from, it seems, life just aint living up to your preconceptions.
And when I was young it was the Gen Xers like myself who were clueless and wanted everything for nothing.
And when my father was a boy, it was the baby-boomers who had no respect and didn't know the meaning of hard work.
......and so the meaningless and useless generational blame-game continues.
That perhaps in fact their job is to keep the airline running so that the pilot actually has a job to complain about...
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Oz
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm,
Well Chuck, if J* need a new PR man, I think you may well be first in line for the position!!
Your posts normally appear well thought out and balanced, but I've got to say, you seem to be on a bit of a mission with this one.
I think you're giving the company to much credit for being incompetent rather than intentionally malicious.
In my experience (2.5 decades in aviation, so I'm very much not Gen Y), all these little "errors" committed by companies such as these are very much deliberate, and whilst fairly insignificant on their own, they do add up when all put together, and serve as a reminder as to "Who is Boss".
The good companies I have worked with, by and large, do not treat people in this manner (with the possible exception of some middle managers, but you're never gonna get perfection, no matter where you go.)
I think the J* guys bought a lot of this on themselves when they signed up to the crap remuneration they were offered in the first place, but that does'nt mean that J* dont have a case to answer in the way they continue to shaft people.
Try to put aside the minor issues and look at the big picture, there are some basic principles involved and we should be standing up for them, not running away (or voting with ones feet).
Well Chuck, if J* need a new PR man, I think you may well be first in line for the position!!
Your posts normally appear well thought out and balanced, but I've got to say, you seem to be on a bit of a mission with this one.
I think you're giving the company to much credit for being incompetent rather than intentionally malicious.
In my experience (2.5 decades in aviation, so I'm very much not Gen Y), all these little "errors" committed by companies such as these are very much deliberate, and whilst fairly insignificant on their own, they do add up when all put together, and serve as a reminder as to "Who is Boss".
The good companies I have worked with, by and large, do not treat people in this manner (with the possible exception of some middle managers, but you're never gonna get perfection, no matter where you go.)
I think the J* guys bought a lot of this on themselves when they signed up to the crap remuneration they were offered in the first place, but that does'nt mean that J* dont have a case to answer in the way they continue to shaft people.
Try to put aside the minor issues and look at the big picture, there are some basic principles involved and we should be standing up for them, not running away (or voting with ones feet).
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You been drinkin SP?
The ACTU Executive yesterday passed a unanimous motion of support for Joe (mentioned by name) and others under fire atm. I will start a new thread on it when I get the word version through.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Hold on guys....... stop for a minute.
This thread was about Joe Eakins and his article, which has subsequently been the cause of his sacking. Hence the BRAVE or what title?
I personally do not think the JQ wages for pilots is all that bad. I do think the fine print is a bit draconian, but it is what it is.
The fact of the matter is his articles were not about the current EBA's and his deal. It was about the future trend of the industry and how the recent actions of BB and AJ were in conflict with each other.
Basically Joe Eakins has been sacked for pointing out the irony of the senior management’s own public statements about company direction.
He did not go public with information which was "Commercial in Confidence". Big difference.
Maybe everyone on here needs to read the article again and see where this debate is getting off the rails.
Up, up and away, but not in Australia
J* have found out the hard way about setting up illegal shelf companies, and they have also found out the hard way with recruiting in NZ and had to pay hefty sums of cash to plug the holes. So they are getting the message albeit slowly.
This started out as someone speaking out about the future in Australian airlines and how JQ were going to try something clever and failed. In the end Eakins has been sacked for publically pointing out the contradiction made in public by management.
This thread was about Joe Eakins and his article, which has subsequently been the cause of his sacking. Hence the BRAVE or what title?
I personally do not think the JQ wages for pilots is all that bad. I do think the fine print is a bit draconian, but it is what it is.
The fact of the matter is his articles were not about the current EBA's and his deal. It was about the future trend of the industry and how the recent actions of BB and AJ were in conflict with each other.
Basically Joe Eakins has been sacked for pointing out the irony of the senior management’s own public statements about company direction.
He did not go public with information which was "Commercial in Confidence". Big difference.
Maybe everyone on here needs to read the article again and see where this debate is getting off the rails.
Up, up and away, but not in Australia
J* have found out the hard way about setting up illegal shelf companies, and they have also found out the hard way with recruiting in NZ and had to pay hefty sums of cash to plug the holes. So they are getting the message albeit slowly.
This started out as someone speaking out about the future in Australian airlines and how JQ were going to try something clever and failed. In the end Eakins has been sacked for publically pointing out the contradiction made in public by management.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: australia
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yup, well said Jabs. So back to the thread.
The silence thus far has been deafening in relation to both the Jetstar Pilot Council, and Jetstar pilots on this BB. Why is that? Why no support for a colleague trying to look after YOUR interests?
Jestar pilots? Yoohoo? Where are you?
The silence thus far has been deafening in relation to both the Jetstar Pilot Council, and Jetstar pilots on this BB. Why is that? Why no support for a colleague trying to look after YOUR interests?
Jestar pilots? Yoohoo? Where are you?
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: The Beech or the Office.
Age: 14
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And once again I will say
PILOT UNITY IN THIS COUNTRY IS NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN. PILOTS HERE CAN'T HELP BUT HANG **** ON EACH OTHER. SELF DESTRUCTION AS A GROUP.
Sad, but true.
PILOT UNITY IN THIS COUNTRY IS NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN. PILOTS HERE CAN'T HELP BUT HANG **** ON EACH OTHER. SELF DESTRUCTION AS A GROUP.
Sad, but true.
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brave but stupid. I understand why some are ready to support Joe but this is a business where we are playing for sheep stations and it is naive to believe that a company wont take action for such a public bagging. Having said that, for those on the inside of the industry if you feel strongly enough make a submission to the Senate enquiry. I would check with a lawyer first but it is my understanding that you are covered by parliamentary immunity so there is less chance of come back. I note that there are some submission with the authors details not publicly disclosed. So put up or...
I love it when expats start telling those of us who have chosen to stay here to harden up.
No xmas/easter holidays for anyone ever or just YOU didn't get what YOU want? It might surprise you to learn that we are in the business of taking people on THEIR holidays. If I get xmas off 1 time in 5 I feel lucky. Its the nature of the beast....it works on seniority...if you don't like it leave the industry.
Not available for anyone, fullstop, blocked out, can't bid for it regardless of seniority.
Base security? Yeah I know moving is a pain...believe me it gets harder as you get older...but again its the nature of our industry and many others. I have been in the same house the last 7 years - by FAR the longest time in any one place in the last 25.
If they need to move an aeroplane to another base where it can get better utilisation so it can make money and pay everyones wages what do you expect them to do?
I expect them to honour their obligations when they state that a pilot will be based in MEL for eg then shortly after state that in fact they have changed their mind and now will be based in DN then continue to have crews overnight and have those based in DN sitting around on STBY. If it was about keeping the company afloat there would be no protest but it is about short term greed. Grown up airlines accept that crews need to be overnighted, its all part of the airline business.
As far as temping in Singapore is concerned if an A320 Capt/FO based Sydney bids for a Sin slot he comes back 2 years later to his same seat in Sydney. Fact.
As J* have proved its only a fact at the time its stated. They will change their mind if its "important for the business to remain profitable" (management speak for stuff you my bonus is under threat).
Stealing flying from your fellow pilots? Are you taking the piss?
The J* EBA is written in such a way that if you want to work hard you get paid ****loads. If you like your roster set in stone not so much. Most people fall somewhere in between those extremes with some variation from time to time.
How about Captains flying as F/Os when F/Os are sitting on STBY. Or the one about the pilot on holiday sitting in a hotel in DN taking flying off those who are based there and not reaching the overtime limit.
I know where SW replacement will come from.
This is why Joe spoke out. Enough is enough and he wanted to make public some of what the company was doing. The fact that they dismissed him rather than taking a less provocative course of action shows in what direction their HR policies are going.
No xmas/easter holidays for anyone ever or just YOU didn't get what YOU want? It might surprise you to learn that we are in the business of taking people on THEIR holidays. If I get xmas off 1 time in 5 I feel lucky. Its the nature of the beast....it works on seniority...if you don't like it leave the industry.
Not available for anyone, fullstop, blocked out, can't bid for it regardless of seniority.
Base security? Yeah I know moving is a pain...believe me it gets harder as you get older...but again its the nature of our industry and many others. I have been in the same house the last 7 years - by FAR the longest time in any one place in the last 25.
If they need to move an aeroplane to another base where it can get better utilisation so it can make money and pay everyones wages what do you expect them to do?
I expect them to honour their obligations when they state that a pilot will be based in MEL for eg then shortly after state that in fact they have changed their mind and now will be based in DN then continue to have crews overnight and have those based in DN sitting around on STBY. If it was about keeping the company afloat there would be no protest but it is about short term greed. Grown up airlines accept that crews need to be overnighted, its all part of the airline business.
As far as temping in Singapore is concerned if an A320 Capt/FO based Sydney bids for a Sin slot he comes back 2 years later to his same seat in Sydney. Fact.
As J* have proved its only a fact at the time its stated. They will change their mind if its "important for the business to remain profitable" (management speak for stuff you my bonus is under threat).
Stealing flying from your fellow pilots? Are you taking the piss?
The J* EBA is written in such a way that if you want to work hard you get paid ****loads. If you like your roster set in stone not so much. Most people fall somewhere in between those extremes with some variation from time to time.
How about Captains flying as F/Os when F/Os are sitting on STBY. Or the one about the pilot on holiday sitting in a hotel in DN taking flying off those who are based there and not reaching the overtime limit.
I know where SW replacement will come from.
This is why Joe spoke out. Enough is enough and he wanted to make public some of what the company was doing. The fact that they dismissed him rather than taking a less provocative course of action shows in what direction their HR policies are going.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Casablanca
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Plenty of comment about the JPC and its perceived silence on the matter. Let me explain a little.
Publically, yes they are silent. Why? Unlike AIPA or the AFAP, the JPC is an un-resgistered, un-insured body of volunteer pilots. Its existence, although guaranteed in the EBA, is almost entirely at the whim of management in that it relies on the company for the allocation of days off to meet and the provision of flights to a central location for members outside of Melbourne. Further, each of the JPC flies a full roster every month.
Therefore, by publically speaking out against the airline, not only do the JPC face the same fate as Joe Eakins, they also face the very real prospect of being allocated ZERO resources to do the job they have volunteered to do. In fact, it is not a prospect anymore. They are already allocated ZERO resources to do this job.
Why?
Because the present JPC and its immediate predecessor adopted a stance against the industrial direction of Jetstar Airways and instead in full support of the Pilot's Agreement and the needs and rights of not only the Jetstar pilot body but the Australian airline industry as a whole. This has included extended efforts to formalise all communications (no backroom deals), define consultation (presently viewed as "company talks, pilots accept without argument"), protect seniority (hence the "Right of Return" case in FWA) and involve the pilot body in the decision-making process (guardians of the agreement without the right to tamper with it un-invited).
Also, the JPC has at all times been against the formation of JQNZ, JQ SIN and any out-sourcing of work and mixing of crews on different contracts in the same flight-deck.
Now more than ever before, but certainly at least since June of 2009, the JPC has been performing in the role Jetstar's pilots deserve; not as a rubber-stamp but instead as an advocate of the pilot body.
I have no doubt that the JPC supports Joe Eakins and is against the way in which Jetstar is behaving. By not speaking out publically on the matter they are not only protecting thier own employment, but also remaining "in the game" in their efforts to change the way Jetstar treats its pilots.
Publically, yes they are silent. Why? Unlike AIPA or the AFAP, the JPC is an un-resgistered, un-insured body of volunteer pilots. Its existence, although guaranteed in the EBA, is almost entirely at the whim of management in that it relies on the company for the allocation of days off to meet and the provision of flights to a central location for members outside of Melbourne. Further, each of the JPC flies a full roster every month.
Therefore, by publically speaking out against the airline, not only do the JPC face the same fate as Joe Eakins, they also face the very real prospect of being allocated ZERO resources to do the job they have volunteered to do. In fact, it is not a prospect anymore. They are already allocated ZERO resources to do this job.
Why?
Because the present JPC and its immediate predecessor adopted a stance against the industrial direction of Jetstar Airways and instead in full support of the Pilot's Agreement and the needs and rights of not only the Jetstar pilot body but the Australian airline industry as a whole. This has included extended efforts to formalise all communications (no backroom deals), define consultation (presently viewed as "company talks, pilots accept without argument"), protect seniority (hence the "Right of Return" case in FWA) and involve the pilot body in the decision-making process (guardians of the agreement without the right to tamper with it un-invited).
Also, the JPC has at all times been against the formation of JQNZ, JQ SIN and any out-sourcing of work and mixing of crews on different contracts in the same flight-deck.
Now more than ever before, but certainly at least since June of 2009, the JPC has been performing in the role Jetstar's pilots deserve; not as a rubber-stamp but instead as an advocate of the pilot body.
I have no doubt that the JPC supports Joe Eakins and is against the way in which Jetstar is behaving. By not speaking out publically on the matter they are not only protecting thier own employment, but also remaining "in the game" in their efforts to change the way Jetstar treats its pilots.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: InDahAir
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Pay For Training hadn't been part of the norm' for a Jetstar pilot this never would have been dreamed of by QF management. Pay For Training is a scam that should be outlawed.
It's "publicly", by the way; what on earth happened to the standard of education within our ranks?
It's "publicly", by the way; what on earth happened to the standard of education within our ranks?
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: australia
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for explaining that flying, I'm sure there is a lot of stuff there that most of us didn't know.
It seems to me though from what you say, that the very existance of the JPC is irrelevant, and the organisation serves no purpose, other than to be obsequious. To have some sort of teeth, or to be taken seriously industrially speaking, one must be a part of an organisation capable of being heard. Sounds to me like they werent "in the game" in the first place.
AFAP and AIPA being those organisations, but even as I'm writing this I realise the irony contained therein. The AFAP is almost NEVER in any media spotlight. Gotta shake my head and wonder at these guys naivety.
No wonder that Jetstar pilots negotiated such crap in the first instance. Any Jetstar pilot who now refuses to join AIPA should probably have a good long think about where they stand. I'm certain that will be a controversial statement, and about time I dive for the bunker!
It seems to me though from what you say, that the very existance of the JPC is irrelevant, and the organisation serves no purpose, other than to be obsequious. To have some sort of teeth, or to be taken seriously industrially speaking, one must be a part of an organisation capable of being heard. Sounds to me like they werent "in the game" in the first place.
AFAP and AIPA being those organisations, but even as I'm writing this I realise the irony contained therein. The AFAP is almost NEVER in any media spotlight. Gotta shake my head and wonder at these guys naivety.
No wonder that Jetstar pilots negotiated such crap in the first instance. Any Jetstar pilot who now refuses to join AIPA should probably have a good long think about where they stand. I'm certain that will be a controversial statement, and about time I dive for the bunker!
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Senate Enquiry yesterday seemed very interested in what the cadet schemes cost!
The Senate Committee specifically asked the question, and Rex told them that they charge $88,000 for the zero to RHS Saab 340.
Wonder how Jetstar and Oxford will justify to Senate charging circa $180,000 for essentially the same deal (albeit different endorsements)?
Jetstar and Oxford (and CTC for that matter) seem to be gouging the system. How can CTC and Oxford apparently charge more or less exactly the same cost despite being totally different business entities? Co-incidence? - Sounds like the prices have been artificially fixed to me.
Also I hope that Jetstar cough up to the fact that they are charging cadets circa $40,000 for the line training carried out in their own aircraft whilst on regular passenger carrying operations (ie at no cost to them) but because it is paid for through Oxford Aviation they feel they can legitimately charge for it!
More to come once I have been able to establish the facts!!!
The Kelpie
The Senate Committee specifically asked the question, and Rex told them that they charge $88,000 for the zero to RHS Saab 340.
Wonder how Jetstar and Oxford will justify to Senate charging circa $180,000 for essentially the same deal (albeit different endorsements)?
Jetstar and Oxford (and CTC for that matter) seem to be gouging the system. How can CTC and Oxford apparently charge more or less exactly the same cost despite being totally different business entities? Co-incidence? - Sounds like the prices have been artificially fixed to me.
Also I hope that Jetstar cough up to the fact that they are charging cadets circa $40,000 for the line training carried out in their own aircraft whilst on regular passenger carrying operations (ie at no cost to them) but because it is paid for through Oxford Aviation they feel they can legitimately charge for it!
More to come once I have been able to establish the facts!!!
The Kelpie
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: rangaville
Posts: 2,280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Joe has spoken publically on an issue that's maybe a moral one, probably not based on law (on what Jetstar can or cannot do legally). That he has the gumption to speak out on issue that he believes in should be applauded. Some call him stupid but I know who I'd rather have sitting beside me in a cockpit (or have a beer with)
That some gutless individuals (who choose to live on their knees) who would never have the gumption to do what he has done, have the gall to critisise him, call him stupid........you are beneath contempt.
"It is better to die on your feet than live on your knees". Emiliano Zapata
Mexican reformer & revolutionary (1877 - 1919) Hear Hear Joe
That some gutless individuals (who choose to live on their knees) who would never have the gumption to do what he has done, have the gall to critisise him, call him stupid........you are beneath contempt.
"It is better to die on your feet than live on your knees". Emiliano Zapata
Mexican reformer & revolutionary (1877 - 1919) Hear Hear Joe
Last edited by Jack Ranga; 2nd Dec 2010 at 04:09.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No wonder that Jetstar pilots negotiated such crap in the first instance. Any Jetstar pilot who now refuses to join AIPA should probably have a good long think about where they stand. I'm certain that will be a controversial statement, and about time I dive for the bunker!
Then there is that whole thing with certain members on the forum who are so badly hung-up on past events that it just obviously burns them to the core. And while they're forever looking at (and commenting about) the past, it is fixing the foreseeable future problems and issues which is what matters, and which is what this thread is about, and is what Joe Eakins comments were about, and is what his sacking is ultimately about.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought that the JPC were now all members of AIPA? I seem to remember this being mentioned at the meeting the other month.
Yep, naivete sums it up in one word. For god's sake, join a union whether it's AIPA, AFAP or whoever, if only for the protection afforded if you are involved in an incident. Because sure as 5hit the company will hang you out to dry.
Yep, naivete sums it up in one word. For god's sake, join a union whether it's AIPA, AFAP or whoever, if only for the protection afforded if you are involved in an incident. Because sure as 5hit the company will hang you out to dry.
For god's sake, join a union whether it's AIPA, AFAP or whoever, if only for the protection afforded if you are involved in an incident. Because sure as 5hit the company will hang you out to dry.
I am happy to admit that I was involved in an incident and I WAS NOT left to hang out to dry by the company at all.
I have heard directly from management themselves, that if you make a mistake (
up) and admit that you made a mistake ( "ed up"), you will not be in trouble.The company was really good to me. I was stood down and lost some overtime but they actually made it up to me down the track.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glad to hear you had a good outcome, I'm feeling warm and fuzzy all over.
Without knowing the details of your incident, I'd suggest to you that while the company took a supportive role in your case they could just as easily take an adversarial approach, particularly if your incident resulted in bad publicity in the media.
Would a surgeon operate without medical insurance?
Without knowing the details of your incident, I'd suggest to you that while the company took a supportive role in your case they could just as easily take an adversarial approach, particularly if your incident resulted in bad publicity in the media.
Would a surgeon operate without medical insurance?
Chimbu C contends
and that Jet * Captains earn
Lets assume a "fat cat" QF legacy Captain lazily earns $350 000.
$60 000 pa extra divided by 900 hrs = $66 per hour
$66 divided by 250 pax = 26 cents per pax per hour
Is it really your contention our industry depends on lower pilot wages as people will choose not to travel because of an impost of $1.82 per 7 hr flight !
If the only jet pilot wage scale in Australia was the QF mainline T&Cs J*/VB/NJS/Tiger et al simply wouldn't exist. ........ QF wouldn't be a whole lot bigger than it is now because fewer people would be able to afford the airfares.
circa 270-290k (real actual numbers)
Lets assume a "fat cat" QF legacy Captain lazily earns $350 000.
$60 000 pa extra divided by 900 hrs = $66 per hour
$66 divided by 250 pax = 26 cents per pax per hour
Is it really your contention our industry depends on lower pilot wages as people will choose not to travel because of an impost of $1.82 per 7 hr flight !
Grandpa Aerotart
Depends what segment of the market you're talking about. It remains the case that at some point increasing real wages reduces employment. I don't like it but that doesn't stop me accepting the economic reality of it. One segment of our potential customer base happily pays for their own executive jet and the other end will get on a bus if the airfares rise more than X%.
You going to try and tell us that if every pilot was on mainline T&Cs there would be as many pilots flying jets in Oz?
That DOES NOT mean there can't be more pilots on mainline T&Cs - just not in J*/VB/Tiger. I'd love to see QF mainline expand just as much as the FOs there would.
So I still haven't heard anyone come up with a good reason why a proportion of the JQ pilots are climbing the walls and banging their heads on the ceiling?
Aspects of the industry or individual human nature that are as old as the industry don't cut it.
Live on my knees?
Nope...couldn't be further from the truth - if you knew me and what I have done over the years you'd be mortified at that statement.
Some things are most assuredly worth fighting for.
Those J* pilots getting all worked up at the moment - let alone risking their careers - don't have a clue, in my opinion, how lucky they are.
When JQ attacks your EBA T&Cs, suggests pilots might like to share a room on overnights, or slash recurrent training, scare EBA staff into lower paid subsidiaries (like VB did) - if your CP tries to interfere with your fuel decisions - if your C&Ting department go rogue - if your traffic staff start trying to overload you secretly - your engineers are pressured to start pencil whipping defects...then I'll stand and applaud whatever actions you deem appropriate. I have seen all that over the course of a career.
One of the main reasons the 'unity' you all bang on about is illusory is things are nowhere near dire enough.
After WW2 the pilot market was flooded with truly experienced pilots - vastly more than the industry could absorb - how would you like to have been a freshly minted CPL in 1950 competing with ex wartime pilots for a job...any fcking job?
T&Cs in the 1950s and early 60s were TRULY DIRE. 100+ hrs a month of long days in a Dak/Anson interspersed with nights sharing a room in a tin shed with two army surplus cots off the side of some pub, or hangar, in an outback town. Low pay/not much in the way of leave/sick pay/super...don't like it? Fck off!
That united enough of the pilot workforce for long enough - and it took YEARS - to slowly drag the T&Cs to where they were in the 70s/80s.
That unity collapsed in '89.
Despite rampant inflation in the late 70s/early 80s (about 17%/annum) eating away at the purchasing power of wages (the reason they thought a 30% pay rise was justifiable - and I agree with them) domestic pilots T&Cs were still pretty bloody good compared to most Australians. Ask any pre 89 domestic pilot and if he gives you an honest answer you'll be amazed.
89 was much like now in many respects. A group of pilots were REALLY worked up (with some justification and prodding from dark forces). Their emotions took them WAY beyond rational and the rest is history. They misread the (changed) world around them. The AFAP leadership was not near as honest as you'd like them to be in that situation. Example? "We will not submit your resignations before having another meeting and voting on it" Pilots awoke the next morning, turned on the radio and discovered they had resigned en masse.
Unity collapsed because T&Cs were really not that dire to begin with - and the new individual contracts were better still.
There is not ONE company that went into the dispute that survives to this day by the way - for years after 1989 there were fewer pilots flying jet aircraft in Australia. I spent many more years in GA (having a ball) than I would have otherwise. The dispute ENDED a world wide pilot shortage of monumental proportions.
A large % of the senior captains in the industry now were junior FOs in 1989 - I was a freshly minted Twotter bush pilot - quite a few of my mates had only been FOs on F28s/F27s etc for 6 months after years in GA. They were VERY much like the FOs in J* today - young and industrially naive - and like young people more generally, convinced they can make the world a better place. They truly believed what they were told by their seniors, "Don't worry if we stick together we'll beat the bastards and save this industry for you and the pilots that come after you" type rhetoric.
The following years are seared in their memories and those of their families - what most suffered in the next 5 years makes a base change at J* look like a hard day at Kindy.
They look at what THEY have achieved for YOU in the last 5 years at J* and sit stunned at what they see going on around them.
Unity? Never going to happen on any of the issues I have seen put forth in the last few years.
Sacrifice a career? Sorry don't think so.
Don't get me wrong - if I was MR and JE came to my office tomorrow and apologised sincerely and asked for his job back I would be very tempted to put it down to impetuous youth - give him a long hard talking at - stick him back in the RHS and watch him closely for a few years. I can empathise with JE without agreeing with him. He's probably a great guy but I think he was VERY dumb to do what he did.
It has probably gone beyond that point.
I think I have put up with about enough vitriol aimed in my direction because I hold a different view to most of you. If you achieve a sense of higher calling/purpose by winding yourselves up into a frenzy and making yourselves look a bit silly, in my opinion, to your employer then so be it. If you don't think credibility with your employer and the general public is important if it ever gets to really important issues then you knock yourselves out.
Good luck and happy landings to you all...I have tried to give you a different perspective (and you might be amazed how many supportive PMs these posts have attracted - unity?). I am off back to Tiger Moth/PNG/C185 threads
You going to try and tell us that if every pilot was on mainline T&Cs there would be as many pilots flying jets in Oz?
That DOES NOT mean there can't be more pilots on mainline T&Cs - just not in J*/VB/Tiger. I'd love to see QF mainline expand just as much as the FOs there would.
So I still haven't heard anyone come up with a good reason why a proportion of the JQ pilots are climbing the walls and banging their heads on the ceiling?
Aspects of the industry or individual human nature that are as old as the industry don't cut it.
Live on my knees?
Nope...couldn't be further from the truth - if you knew me and what I have done over the years you'd be mortified at that statement.
Some things are most assuredly worth fighting for.
Those J* pilots getting all worked up at the moment - let alone risking their careers - don't have a clue, in my opinion, how lucky they are.
When JQ attacks your EBA T&Cs, suggests pilots might like to share a room on overnights, or slash recurrent training, scare EBA staff into lower paid subsidiaries (like VB did) - if your CP tries to interfere with your fuel decisions - if your C&Ting department go rogue - if your traffic staff start trying to overload you secretly - your engineers are pressured to start pencil whipping defects...then I'll stand and applaud whatever actions you deem appropriate. I have seen all that over the course of a career.
One of the main reasons the 'unity' you all bang on about is illusory is things are nowhere near dire enough.
After WW2 the pilot market was flooded with truly experienced pilots - vastly more than the industry could absorb - how would you like to have been a freshly minted CPL in 1950 competing with ex wartime pilots for a job...any fcking job?
T&Cs in the 1950s and early 60s were TRULY DIRE. 100+ hrs a month of long days in a Dak/Anson interspersed with nights sharing a room in a tin shed with two army surplus cots off the side of some pub, or hangar, in an outback town. Low pay/not much in the way of leave/sick pay/super...don't like it? Fck off!
That united enough of the pilot workforce for long enough - and it took YEARS - to slowly drag the T&Cs to where they were in the 70s/80s.
That unity collapsed in '89.
Despite rampant inflation in the late 70s/early 80s (about 17%/annum) eating away at the purchasing power of wages (the reason they thought a 30% pay rise was justifiable - and I agree with them) domestic pilots T&Cs were still pretty bloody good compared to most Australians. Ask any pre 89 domestic pilot and if he gives you an honest answer you'll be amazed.
89 was much like now in many respects. A group of pilots were REALLY worked up (with some justification and prodding from dark forces). Their emotions took them WAY beyond rational and the rest is history. They misread the (changed) world around them. The AFAP leadership was not near as honest as you'd like them to be in that situation. Example? "We will not submit your resignations before having another meeting and voting on it" Pilots awoke the next morning, turned on the radio and discovered they had resigned en masse.
Unity collapsed because T&Cs were really not that dire to begin with - and the new individual contracts were better still.
There is not ONE company that went into the dispute that survives to this day by the way - for years after 1989 there were fewer pilots flying jet aircraft in Australia. I spent many more years in GA (having a ball) than I would have otherwise. The dispute ENDED a world wide pilot shortage of monumental proportions.
A large % of the senior captains in the industry now were junior FOs in 1989 - I was a freshly minted Twotter bush pilot - quite a few of my mates had only been FOs on F28s/F27s etc for 6 months after years in GA. They were VERY much like the FOs in J* today - young and industrially naive - and like young people more generally, convinced they can make the world a better place. They truly believed what they were told by their seniors, "Don't worry if we stick together we'll beat the bastards and save this industry for you and the pilots that come after you" type rhetoric.
The following years are seared in their memories and those of their families - what most suffered in the next 5 years makes a base change at J* look like a hard day at Kindy.
They look at what THEY have achieved for YOU in the last 5 years at J* and sit stunned at what they see going on around them.
Unity? Never going to happen on any of the issues I have seen put forth in the last few years.
Sacrifice a career? Sorry don't think so.
Don't get me wrong - if I was MR and JE came to my office tomorrow and apologised sincerely and asked for his job back I would be very tempted to put it down to impetuous youth - give him a long hard talking at - stick him back in the RHS and watch him closely for a few years. I can empathise with JE without agreeing with him. He's probably a great guy but I think he was VERY dumb to do what he did.
It has probably gone beyond that point.
I think I have put up with about enough vitriol aimed in my direction because I hold a different view to most of you. If you achieve a sense of higher calling/purpose by winding yourselves up into a frenzy and making yourselves look a bit silly, in my opinion, to your employer then so be it. If you don't think credibility with your employer and the general public is important if it ever gets to really important issues then you knock yourselves out.
Good luck and happy landings to you all...I have tried to give you a different perspective (and you might be amazed how many supportive PMs these posts have attracted - unity?). I am off back to Tiger Moth/PNG/C185 threads
Last edited by Chimbu chuckles; 2nd Dec 2010 at 13:51.