VA EBA ???
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 51
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No. Not released yet.
The main issues:
The main issues:
- Career path for CFOs and SFOs.
- More pay.
- Overtime payments.
- Rostering.
Feedback I'm getting thru management contact (so maybe BS) is that AFAP ispretty much trying to rehash VB EBA with VIPA trying to be more long haul oriented.
One thing is for sure, the VIPA reps have a truck load more Long Haul experience than the Fed reps. Not sure if that really matters though........
One thing that is certain is that the Feds are supporting individual contracts for the A330 (they said so in latest update). I can't see how this is going to be helpful with the VA EBA.
One thing is for sure, the VIPA reps have a truck load more Long Haul experience than the Fed reps. Not sure if that really matters though........
One thing that is certain is that the Feds are supporting individual contracts for the A330 (they said so in latest update). I can't see how this is going to be helpful with the VA EBA.
Virginexcess
If your going to be "so certain" about an issue how about you explain the whole issue and the reasoning behind the 'Feds' approach.
Your truckloads of infomation here is a little misleading!
If your going to be "so certain" about an issue how about you explain the whole issue and the reasoning behind the 'Feds' approach.
Your truckloads of infomation here is a little misleading!
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 58
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Career path for CFOs is that they join VA. The company provides their type rating (as they do for all pilots, including SFOs and CAs). After a time, they can be considered for promotion to SFO (provided that they have the experience level required: Several CFOs have done this) or interview for VB and have ejet/B737 type rating provided for (numerious CFOS have done this).
The word is that separate VA/VB EBAs will eventuate.
The word is that separate VA/VB EBAs will eventuate.
interview for VB and have ejet/B737 type rating provided for (numerious CFOS have done this).
I'll play Devil's advocate Nev.
The pilots who chose to join VB, did so with the understanding that they were required to be in possesion of a 737/EJ endorsement. Not so for the CFO's at VA. On the other hand, those who joined VA as CFOs were taking a monumental punt with their careers. It was this lack of career progression, and of course the disgraceful T&C's that drew the most criticism from not only myself, but just about everyone else as well. If that punt happens to pay off (at least in some reasonable measure), then really, the pilots at VB shouldn't have a complaint comming.
For the record. If the pilots at VA manage to secure a proper EBA with a defined career path, then finally some industrial justice will have been done. I for one will be pleased not only for them, but for all pilots that have the right to expect reasonable tems and conditions after so many years of hard work. Amazingly, all the angst and bitterness that has been allowed to grow over the past 3 years could have been avoided if common sense amongst management had prevailed from the beginning. Ooops! Sorry, Oxymoron.
Oddly, a few VA F/O's and some of their ex-pat mates incorrectly assumed that my past criticism was somehow aimed at them personally, and the resulting venom directed at me was something to behold!
The pilots who chose to join VB, did so with the understanding that they were required to be in possesion of a 737/EJ endorsement. Not so for the CFO's at VA. On the other hand, those who joined VA as CFOs were taking a monumental punt with their careers. It was this lack of career progression, and of course the disgraceful T&C's that drew the most criticism from not only myself, but just about everyone else as well. If that punt happens to pay off (at least in some reasonable measure), then really, the pilots at VB shouldn't have a complaint comming.
For the record. If the pilots at VA manage to secure a proper EBA with a defined career path, then finally some industrial justice will have been done. I for one will be pleased not only for them, but for all pilots that have the right to expect reasonable tems and conditions after so many years of hard work. Amazingly, all the angst and bitterness that has been allowed to grow over the past 3 years could have been avoided if common sense amongst management had prevailed from the beginning. Ooops! Sorry, Oxymoron.
Oddly, a few VA F/O's and some of their ex-pat mates incorrectly assumed that my past criticism was somehow aimed at them personally, and the resulting venom directed at me was something to behold!
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: QLD, Australia
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Krusty,
Those CFO signed up for a 777 rating only under a 30 month bond. This bond has now been reduced to 24 months and they are now getting a 737 job ahead of those Ejet FO's who paid for their rating and if they want to move over to the 737 they have to the company another $50000.
Those CFO signed up for a 777 rating only under a 30 month bond. This bond has now been reduced to 24 months and they are now getting a 737 job ahead of those Ejet FO's who paid for their rating and if they want to move over to the 737 they have to the company another $50000.
Fair point F111.
The industrial justice I was refering to was progression (transparent progression that is) within VA itself. If there were to be any sort of formal arrangement with progression from VA to VB, then surely the interests of both pilot groups must be served. VA management made a point of stating that the 2 companies were completely seperate when it suited them (poorer T&C's even though a much larger aircraft), so surely any cross crewing must result in a change to that stance. To this end, I would imagine there needs to ba a fair and transparent negotiation agreed by all parties (VA pilots, VB pilots, and management). Is there such a negotiation under way?
Anything less will more than likely result in friction and pilot group disunity. Errr... wait a minute? Hope it's not too early to break out the bubbly!
The industrial justice I was refering to was progression (transparent progression that is) within VA itself. If there were to be any sort of formal arrangement with progression from VA to VB, then surely the interests of both pilot groups must be served. VA management made a point of stating that the 2 companies were completely seperate when it suited them (poorer T&C's even though a much larger aircraft), so surely any cross crewing must result in a change to that stance. To this end, I would imagine there needs to ba a fair and transparent negotiation agreed by all parties (VA pilots, VB pilots, and management). Is there such a negotiation under way?
Anything less will more than likely result in friction and pilot group disunity. Errr... wait a minute? Hope it's not too early to break out the bubbly!
ad-astra
I don't know the reasoning behind the feds approach.
The only info i based by comment on was an AFAP document that said in part
I'm no industrial lawyer, but as a layman, who has an understanding of the VA individual contracts and their limitations, I am greatly concerned that a pilot Union is promoting the use of common law contracts.
But i am open to being convinced otherwise.
The only info i based by comment on was an AFAP document that said in part
With this in mind, the AFAP has formed the strategic view that common law contracts would be a workable interim measure until the renegotiation of the existing VB Agreement, provided that pilots were still afforded EBA protections (i.e. work rules, OT, callouts etc) and an undertaking was given by the Company to incorporate the A330 in the next Agreement as outlined above. This was the position put forward at the meeting.
But i am open to being convinced otherwise.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capt Baldman is right...maybe "virginexcess" could have posted the part before ....."With this in mind"......
Here it is again, but this time in context and without his "Selective editing"..
But lets get this forum back on track, VA's EBA
Here it is again, but this time in context and without his "Selective editing"..
Despite some of the ill-informed propaganda on the VB pilots forum apparently originating from XXXX, be advised that the AFAP is not actively promoting common law contracts. Our legal advice is that there is no ability under the Fair Work Act to vary the existing VB agreement to incorporate the A330 operation. Under the transitional provisions of the Act a WorkChoices agreement (which is what the 2007 agreement is) can only be varied in limited circumstances (i.e. to remove ambiguity) which are not relevant in this case. Further an EBA covering the introductory phase of the A330, as XXXX is advocating, would only cover A330 pilots and could only be voted on by pilots engaged on the A330 – currently there are two. This would mean that some 900 pilots would not get a vote – extraordinary!
With this in mind, the AFAP has formed the strategic view that common law contracts would be a workable interim measure until the renegotiation of the existing VB Agreement, provided that pilots were still afforded EBA protections (i.e. work rules, OT, callouts etc) and an undertaking was given by the Company to incorporate the A330 in the next Agreement as outlined above. This was the position put forward at the meeting.
With this in mind, the AFAP has formed the strategic view that common law contracts would be a workable interim measure until the renegotiation of the existing VB Agreement, provided that pilots were still afforded EBA protections (i.e. work rules, OT, callouts etc) and an undertaking was given by the Company to incorporate the A330 in the next Agreement as outlined above. This was the position put forward at the meeting.
Last edited by Wellhung Unit; 16th Oct 2010 at 07:28.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lord Howe
Age: 44
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Both the company and the union will/must act carefully here as one leads/influences the other with respect to the VB330/VA777 pay at a time of similar negotiation.
There was no selective editing, i just chose the paragraph that, in my view, seemed to contradict the statement that the Feds were "not actively promoting common law contracts"
As i said earlier, i am no lawyer, but my interpretation of the brief is that at best it seems to be ambiguous and is at the very least contradictory. But regardless of my personal interpretation, it certainly seems to imply that they are in fact supporting common laws contracts at this point, albeit as an "interim measure".
I cannot say with authority that in this case common law contracts are a bad thing. What i can say with authority is that the common law contracts that are in existence at VA are a very bad thing for employees because they make it impossible for employees to collectively approach the company about any employment issue. Therefore, each employee is on their own until we get an EBA.
Whether common law contracts at VB for the 330 will prove to be equally disadvantageous for employees is outside my area of expertise.
As i said earlier, i am no lawyer, but my interpretation of the brief is that at best it seems to be ambiguous and is at the very least contradictory. But regardless of my personal interpretation, it certainly seems to imply that they are in fact supporting common laws contracts at this point, albeit as an "interim measure".
I cannot say with authority that in this case common law contracts are a bad thing. What i can say with authority is that the common law contracts that are in existence at VA are a very bad thing for employees because they make it impossible for employees to collectively approach the company about any employment issue. Therefore, each employee is on their own until we get an EBA.
Whether common law contracts at VB for the 330 will prove to be equally disadvantageous for employees is outside my area of expertise.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Virginexcess,
Under the current regulations regarding EBA's this appears to be the only option. If a change to the current EBA (13 months to run) is done then no industrial action can be undertaken by the pilot group (A330, 737 and Ejet) should the need occur over the next 13 months.
Under the current regulations regarding EBA's this appears to be the only option. If a change to the current EBA (13 months to run) is done then no industrial action can be undertaken by the pilot group (A330, 737 and Ejet) should the need occur over the next 13 months.
Huh?
I would have thought that the introduction of a new type not yet covered by an airline's EBA (ie what's it's pay rate going to be?) actually is ambiguous and could, should the parties agree, lead to a 'variation' negotiated under the existing agreement.
But, then again, that would be a test of a company's goodwill and desire to 'engage' with its pilots. Time will tell the VB/VA pilots whether their management are actually their friends, or wedge-drivers.
But, then again, that would be a test of a company's goodwill and desire to 'engage' with its pilots. Time will tell the VB/VA pilots whether their management are actually their friends, or wedge-drivers.
