Rumour: Sunstate Engineers suspended over aircraft sabotage?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have heard a certain Mr Hill has stepped into the breach, though it seems like the frying pan and fire come to mind. http://www.pprune.org/forums/images/.../eusa_wall.gif
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Olympic Dam
Age: 60
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not a new poster on here. Had to go 'under cover' to avoid the QF lawyers. I will have more to say about this matter, particularly the 'show cause' once the MODS give me room to move and my posts are cleared.
I won't post too much detail but enough to fill you all in with what is taking place, it is a disgrace..........................
I won't post too much detail but enough to fill you all in with what is taking place, it is a disgrace..........................
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: The AUK
Age: 80
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Greetings GD.
Please send me a PM. I am willing to maintain the "Gray List" of these unscrupulous pen people who are an utter disgrace to the MROs who employ them. The vast majority of highly skilled, knowledgeable, and
professional LAMEs
have no place on their horizon for the activities of these dumbass characters to be superimposed on their well meaning and their well being. Safety is the name of the game, and these gross under performers have no real grasp or understanding of its "true meaning" 
. They obviously fall well below the 'Fit and Proper Person' criteria, and this should be pursued by Regulatory authorities.
Regards, Big E.
Please send me a PM. I am willing to maintain the "Gray List" of these unscrupulous pen people who are an utter disgrace to the MROs who employ them. The vast majority of highly skilled, knowledgeable, and
professional LAMEs
have no place on their horizon for the activities of these dumbass characters to be superimposed on their well meaning and their well being. Safety is the name of the game, and these gross under performers have no real grasp or understanding of its "true meaning" . They obviously fall well below the 'Fit and Proper Person' criteria, and this should be pursued by Regulatory authorities.Regards, Big E.
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Olympic Dam
Age: 60
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So the game continues under the red tailed banner!
Why hasn't the 'SHOW CAUSE' notice they received been aired publicly?
They did receive a SHOW CAUSE.
Why is the Group CEO still CEO when it is obvious his 'Group Airline' is falling apart at the seams? A SHOW CAUSE for Christ sake.
Why hasn't the 'SHOW CAUSE' notice they received been aired publicly?
They did receive a SHOW CAUSE.
Why is the Group CEO still CEO when it is obvious his 'Group Airline' is falling apart at the seams? A SHOW CAUSE for Christ sake.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: aus
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well what’s the goss? Is Sadstate still treating employees like mushrooms (most likely!) 
and foremost what has been the verdict of the fed court? It is coming close to a year now surly a decision has been made!!!
and foremost what has been the verdict of the fed court? It is coming close to a year now surly a decision has been made!!!
Last edited by L Riding hood; 6th Aug 2012 at 09:15.
Maybe the ramifications of this judgement is whats causing the judge to take his time. It could be massive for our industry. If you find a defect that isn't explicitly stated in the company provided inspection task, report that defect... what happens then.
The independence of the LAME in this country is riding on this case. Yes it's your licence, but the company might see your employment after failing to follow directions as something else.
The independence of the LAME in this country is riding on this case. Yes it's your licence, but the company might see your employment after failing to follow directions as something else.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 65
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Stink
It would seem some of the connies are as rascally as the former full timers.
What a shame moving them on after a 400 course too I suppose, obviously no penalties involved as the company try to get the "right people".
What a shame moving them on after a 400 course too I suppose, obviously no penalties involved as the company try to get the "right people".
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: tarmac
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MULTILE ENGINE PROBLMS
Good to see you don't need engineers!
Just seen on other thread they had engine problems down south?
How many did they get rid of and how long ago was, is it over 12 months ago now?
Just seen on other thread they had engine problems down south?
How many did they get rid of and how long ago was, is it over 12 months ago now?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So Bigdog they have got rid of some more connies, you really don't surprise me, if they complain or raise safety matters they are history, don't rock the boat and you stay.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 65
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The stink saga
It has been 14 months since they moved on, most are doing well elsewhere.
Have spoken to those who stayed (occasionally) and it would seem the situation although no worse hasn't improved.
Maybe I am just stupid but losing half if not more of your experience must damage the business. Obviously they had too many engineers for these new aircraft, with the canny buying of such quality aircraft by the been-counters reliability not affected (must be those special aircraft that don't require the added cost of maintenance).
No news on the court case ?
Have spoken to those who stayed (occasionally) and it would seem the situation although no worse hasn't improved.
Maybe I am just stupid but losing half if not more of your experience must damage the business. Obviously they had too many engineers for these new aircraft, with the canny buying of such quality aircraft by the been-counters reliability not affected (must be those special aircraft that don't require the added cost of maintenance).
No news on the court case ?
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Devonport Tasmania Australia
Posts: 1,837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tarmacrat
Good call.
Over the last 4 weeks there have been 4 cancellations on the QF2061 or the QF2050 the following morning with the 300 cacking itself.
These things do run in spasms where you look at an aeroplane the wrong way and something falls off, but I have been reaccommodating passengers with outbound connections for over a month.
The 400s seem to be doing fine but the 300 is currently a worry to those who book clients, particularly those with outbound connections overseas on them.
Best all
EWL
Good call.
Over the last 4 weeks there have been 4 cancellations on the QF2061 or the QF2050 the following morning with the 300 cacking itself.
These things do run in spasms where you look at an aeroplane the wrong way and something falls off, but I have been reaccommodating passengers with outbound connections for over a month.
The 400s seem to be doing fine but the 300 is currently a worry to those who book clients, particularly those with outbound connections overseas on them.
Best all
EWL
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Devonport Tasmania Australia
Posts: 1,837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Understandable call Stationair, however DPO would lose out overall.
We currently have the only TAS airport that is full service on every departure, has full bag check through (on a single ticket) internationally and can start overseas fares on QF, EK, BA, FJ and a bunch of others on the one fare basis which means the ticketing airline is responsible for the passenger all the way if a connection falls over.
If DJ dropped an ATR in it would most likely be middle of day unless they commit to 3 flights daily on the plum spots which I well know. The travel patterns haven't altered in over 30 years and most likely will not ever.
At best, the market for a single flight per day is not early or late which are the higher yield slots for the corporate/ sportsfans markets. Take a look at mel MQL - middle of the day, lower yield traffic for an aeroplane that can be much better utilized on the 0600 to 0900 and 1630 to 1930 slots on a market that pays the bigger bucks elsewhere. The MQL operation could be seen as "nuisance value" against Rex and Ratlink and no more. I would love to see the P+L on the route.
The other thing is thowing an ATR or whatever equipment into DPO would dilute the flow from the coast to LST and therefore reduce viability and returns ex there. When EW was operating ex DPO we were pulling an average of 25% of each load out of other catchments. That and other facto that the loads we were pulling out of LST and WNY as well as the damage being done on SYD OOL and SYD MCY among many others meant that slimebag Fatman with the help of his pocket pal the Bodgie had to buy us.
I can't see DJ entering, and hope they don't. They aren't required and will degrade the overall service as if Ratlink reduce flights the overnighter which is the most costly to operate due to hotel/cab/crew costs will most likel;y be the 1st to go and that is the most useful flight to the North West Coast.
If the low yield stuff can't get a seat cheaply ex DPO to MEL, they either get dropped at LST or get the Housing Commission Taxi, the Spirit of Tasmania.
Ratlink is providing a very good service, and hopefully the recent Q300 brain farts are cyclic and in general the service is excellent, but the jury is out on this matter to see if the reliability issues are because of a change in maintainence protocols we are unaware of.
I would like to think not.
Best regards
EWL
We currently have the only TAS airport that is full service on every departure, has full bag check through (on a single ticket) internationally and can start overseas fares on QF, EK, BA, FJ and a bunch of others on the one fare basis which means the ticketing airline is responsible for the passenger all the way if a connection falls over.
If DJ dropped an ATR in it would most likely be middle of day unless they commit to 3 flights daily on the plum spots which I well know. The travel patterns haven't altered in over 30 years and most likely will not ever.
At best, the market for a single flight per day is not early or late which are the higher yield slots for the corporate/ sportsfans markets. Take a look at mel MQL - middle of the day, lower yield traffic for an aeroplane that can be much better utilized on the 0600 to 0900 and 1630 to 1930 slots on a market that pays the bigger bucks elsewhere. The MQL operation could be seen as "nuisance value" against Rex and Ratlink and no more. I would love to see the P+L on the route.
The other thing is thowing an ATR or whatever equipment into DPO would dilute the flow from the coast to LST and therefore reduce viability and returns ex there. When EW was operating ex DPO we were pulling an average of 25% of each load out of other catchments. That and other facto that the loads we were pulling out of LST and WNY as well as the damage being done on SYD OOL and SYD MCY among many others meant that slimebag Fatman with the help of his pocket pal the Bodgie had to buy us.
I can't see DJ entering, and hope they don't. They aren't required and will degrade the overall service as if Ratlink reduce flights the overnighter which is the most costly to operate due to hotel/cab/crew costs will most likel;y be the 1st to go and that is the most useful flight to the North West Coast.
If the low yield stuff can't get a seat cheaply ex DPO to MEL, they either get dropped at LST or get the Housing Commission Taxi, the Spirit of Tasmania.
Ratlink is providing a very good service, and hopefully the recent Q300 brain farts are cyclic and in general the service is excellent, but the jury is out on this matter to see if the reliability issues are because of a change in maintainence protocols we are unaware of.
I would like to think not.
Best regards
EWL
Last edited by Eastwest Loco; 25th Sep 2012 at 08:50.
just in:
Engineers part of 'subversive' campaign | News.com.au
Engineers part of 'subversive' campaign | News.com.au
SIX aircraft maintenance engineers complained about the safety of doors on Qantas-owned planes as part of a subversive campaign for better pay, a court has ruled.
The engineers reported in October 2010 that cockpit locks on Dash 8 planes operated by Qantas subsidiary Sunstate Airlines could be opened with an ice-cream stick or a rolled-up boarding pass.
They also noted the cockpit door could be opened by leaning against an adjacent toilet wall.
Almost the entire fleet of aircraft was temporarily grounded, disrupting the company's operations.
Each of the engineers received a letter from Qantas later that month, accusing them of misconduct over claims the complaints were part of unauthorised union action.
Qantas said there were no safety issues with the doors and that workers were simply using the "defects" to bargain for more money.
The men were stood down for 13 weeks while an investigation was conducted.
They later started working again, however each was docked four hours' pay over the incident and had an official warning letter placed on their permanent records.
The men, through the Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association, took the matter to the Federal Court in Brisbane in September last year.
They argued Qantas should be fined for breaching the federal government's Fair Work Act.
However, in a judgment handed down on Tuesday, Justice John Logan dismissed the application.
He found the engineers' actions "were not the acts of men faithful to their trade responsibilities".
"It is subversive of such a culture and antithetical to the public interest for what are, in reality, industrial actions to be cloaked as aviation safety issues," he said.
The engineers reported in October 2010 that cockpit locks on Dash 8 planes operated by Qantas subsidiary Sunstate Airlines could be opened with an ice-cream stick or a rolled-up boarding pass.
They also noted the cockpit door could be opened by leaning against an adjacent toilet wall.
Almost the entire fleet of aircraft was temporarily grounded, disrupting the company's operations.
Each of the engineers received a letter from Qantas later that month, accusing them of misconduct over claims the complaints were part of unauthorised union action.
Qantas said there were no safety issues with the doors and that workers were simply using the "defects" to bargain for more money.
The men were stood down for 13 weeks while an investigation was conducted.
They later started working again, however each was docked four hours' pay over the incident and had an official warning letter placed on their permanent records.
The men, through the Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association, took the matter to the Federal Court in Brisbane in September last year.
They argued Qantas should be fined for breaching the federal government's Fair Work Act.
However, in a judgment handed down on Tuesday, Justice John Logan dismissed the application.
He found the engineers' actions "were not the acts of men faithful to their trade responsibilities".
"It is subversive of such a culture and antithetical to the public interest for what are, in reality, industrial actions to be cloaked as aviation safety issues," he said.