DJ Turboprops announced in Skywest tie up
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Brisbane
Age: 43
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: right now.....in front of the computer
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's be clear on one thing ...
Skywest is not Virgin Blue. Just like QANTASLINK/COBHAM is not QANTAS.
Those wishing to join the turbo prop arm of VB, will not be employed by VB. They will be employed by Skywest.
Therefore, any 737/777/EMB-190 First officers/second officers etc... would have to resign from VB/VA and be re-employed by Skywest, unless there is an under lying agreement I have not been privy too ??
Those wishing to join the turbo prop arm of VB, will not be employed by VB. They will be employed by Skywest.
Therefore, any 737/777/EMB-190 First officers/second officers etc... would have to resign from VB/VA and be re-employed by Skywest, unless there is an under lying agreement I have not been privy too ??
Last edited by High-Bypass; 20th Feb 2011 at 16:15. Reason: Because the Pprune gods have given me the opportunity to!!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: eca
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
any 737/777/EMB-190 First officers/second officers etc... would have to resign from VB/VA and be re-employed by Skywest
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: DSS-46 (Canberra Region)
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Posts were deleted because, yet once again, a reasonable thread was hijacked into yet another conditions of employment discussion.
Now let's stay on topic.
Now let's stay on topic.
Gidday TID'.
When the "Australian Pilots Time to unite" thread was started, some discussion was had regarding the deterioration of Wages and Conditions of pilots, and the effect that this would eventually have on safety. Your reason for the deletion of many of these posts were words to the effect..." this issue is too important to become another debate over T&C's" or something along those lines.
As that topic progressed it became apparent that the inexorable lowering of pilots wages and conditions was in fact relevant. Reference to the appalling working conditions of the Colgan pilots, and the need to guard against it happening here was suddenly tolerated, and in fact became a significant topic of discussion within the thread, (ie: Jetstar Cadets/overseas basings). The original posts however were not re-instated?
In my opinion, the outcome of whatever pilots are paid to operate the Skywest/DJ turbo-prop services may very well determine the stability of the operation. That's why I threw it into the mix.
It seems however you feel this is of no relevance. I appologise for the "Thread-Drift" and for what it's worth I will refrain from the offending discussion.
This post will self-destruct in 30 seconds!
When the "Australian Pilots Time to unite" thread was started, some discussion was had regarding the deterioration of Wages and Conditions of pilots, and the effect that this would eventually have on safety. Your reason for the deletion of many of these posts were words to the effect..." this issue is too important to become another debate over T&C's" or something along those lines.
As that topic progressed it became apparent that the inexorable lowering of pilots wages and conditions was in fact relevant. Reference to the appalling working conditions of the Colgan pilots, and the need to guard against it happening here was suddenly tolerated, and in fact became a significant topic of discussion within the thread, (ie: Jetstar Cadets/overseas basings). The original posts however were not re-instated?
In my opinion, the outcome of whatever pilots are paid to operate the Skywest/DJ turbo-prop services may very well determine the stability of the operation. That's why I threw it into the mix.
It seems however you feel this is of no relevance. I appologise for the "Thread-Drift" and for what it's worth I will refrain from the offending discussion.
This post will self-destruct in 30 seconds!
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: In command
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No offence mate but props are for boats!!!
Small peni$ syndrome was my initial thought when I read your post. Do you say that in normal conversation or only when you have the protection of the internet or the radio?
Unless you are an astronaut, the aircraft you fly must have a "prop" somewhere?
Those things under the wings, the BRT's, (or Big Round Things for you) have things inside them that perform the same function as a "prop".
Please don't insult your colleagues...we all learnt to fly and it was not in a boat.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Props vs Jets
Nice is what you like.
However anyone that thinks Jet FOs are going to move over to a turboprop for a command are either smoking weed or asleep and actually dreaming whilst typing on pprune.
Command is great but it ain't the be all and end all people. I'd sooner stay an EFFO for the rest of my life than fly a turbo prop again. Thats my like I'm sure plenty of people love them and good for them.
As for the Ejet argument? My EFFO mates love it (money only complaint) and the captains say they wont be going back to the boeing. They all say they fly gentleman's hours in comparison to the 73. They fly 50 to 70 hours a month and the salaries are:
FO
Level 1 $83747
Level 2 $91360 (500 hours on a company type or a/c above 50,000kg)
Level 3 $98974 ( 2000 of the above)
CAPT
$152267
All figures as of July 2011.
The big difference I've noted in their morale is that VB have changed the rules and the FO's are free to move around to whatever type. Hence a number of Ejet guys are now speaking French and eating croissants for breakfast.
Back to the top.
However anyone that thinks Jet FOs are going to move over to a turboprop for a command are either smoking weed or asleep and actually dreaming whilst typing on pprune.
Command is great but it ain't the be all and end all people. I'd sooner stay an EFFO for the rest of my life than fly a turbo prop again. Thats my like I'm sure plenty of people love them and good for them.
As for the Ejet argument? My EFFO mates love it (money only complaint) and the captains say they wont be going back to the boeing. They all say they fly gentleman's hours in comparison to the 73. They fly 50 to 70 hours a month and the salaries are:
FO
Level 1 $83747
Level 2 $91360 (500 hours on a company type or a/c above 50,000kg)
Level 3 $98974 ( 2000 of the above)
CAPT
$152267
All figures as of July 2011.
The big difference I've noted in their morale is that VB have changed the rules and the FO's are free to move around to whatever type. Hence a number of Ejet guys are now speaking French and eating croissants for breakfast.
Back to the top.
Last edited by Mr. Hat; 21st Feb 2011 at 20:43.
However anyone that thinks Jet FOs are going to move over to a turboprop for a command are either smoking weed or asleep and actually dreaming whilst typing on PPRuNe.
Definitely awake and not smoking weed.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair enough but the vast majority wouldn't. There is always an exception.
I suspect that you would have to resign from VB as someone said here. I hope this is not the case.
As I understand it you have first rights to any new 73 slots over any externals.
I suspect that you would have to resign from VB as someone said here. I hope this is not the case.
As I understand it you have first rights to any new 73 slots over any externals.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for the Ejet argument? My EFFO mates love it (money only complaint) and the captains say they wont be going back to the boeing. They all say they fly gentleman's hours in comparison to the 73. They fly 50 to 70 hours a month and the salaries are:
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guess my mates just don't like the boeing! They laugh when I tell them they should be coming back (obviously I'm keen to fly with them).
Looks like they might not have the option anyway as the long term look of the Ejet isn't good. Depending on who you talk to some are adament that the 190 is here to stay for the "thinner" 73 routres. Personally I think the 170 is the writing on the wall. 170's gone 190s will follow eventually.
Looks like they might not have the option anyway as the long term look of the Ejet isn't good. Depending on who you talk to some are adament that the 190 is here to stay for the "thinner" 73 routres. Personally I think the 170 is the writing on the wall. 170's gone 190s will follow eventually.
Last edited by Mr. Hat; 21st Feb 2011 at 22:32.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Hat, the last sentence in your last post is the reason why some Ejet FOs may have taken a command on the turboprop.
All command courses have been canned, external recruitment has stopped so the Ejet FOs can't move over to the 737, again another reason why some may have taken a turboprop command.
The turboprop flying going to Skywest is not a good thing for any FO at Virgin Blue.
All command courses have been canned, external recruitment has stopped so the Ejet FOs can't move over to the 737, again another reason why some may have taken a turboprop command.
The turboprop flying going to Skywest is not a good thing for any FO at Virgin Blue.
