Joint Airline Industrial Action
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No I won't post a link as I do not want to potentially offend any of the people involved. As a famous prune poster says: it's all there to be seen if you are a union member. It also happens to be in one of the unions latest updates freely available in all crew rooms.
Don't see a problem with your seniority rationale but could you direct me to the criteria for 'bad attitude'.
No need for a helmet, just a mature debate that's all.
Don't see a problem with your seniority rationale but could you direct me to the criteria for 'bad attitude'.
No need for a helmet, just a mature debate that's all.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sydney
Age: 53
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just went to the AFAP website and the latest VAUS briefing just said the company was examining the AFAPs submission of a four level scale. This was in response to the companies 10 level scale. I assume this is what people are talking about. The problem I have here is people must be speculating on the specific content which is still subject to negotiation. Not much point in that when these are effectively suggestions from each side and there is no detail on the AFAPs counter proposal.
Ultimately though there will be give and take. Interestingly I had a quick squiz at some websites (I will list below accuracy not known) for B777 pay and assuming 1000 hours year in (rough) AUD BA top level $221000 AA $205000 Delta $208000 VB last company offer was in this ballpark at the upper end. I don't know how apples for apples this but is an interesting starting point. I deliberately didn't include carriers from less inviting countries which would have a "hardship" component!
British Airways jobs, payscales and entry requirements.
Airline Pilot Salary and Pay Rates
I agree "bad attitude" is difficult to quantify but is important as the person is a leader of the crew and the front face of the airline on the aircraft. I guess I would wrap it into the "command potential" box on the sim/command development forms. If enough training/check captains say this guy rolls up with no study/treats the crew or ground staff poorly/looks like he crawled out of the bush then it is reasonable to overlook that person. However!, this should always be clearly articulated so that said person knows what they need to do to fix said problem/issue. I think this is one area where we do poorly.
I would also add that all things being equal then seniority should be the decider.
Ultimately though there will be give and take. Interestingly I had a quick squiz at some websites (I will list below accuracy not known) for B777 pay and assuming 1000 hours year in (rough) AUD BA top level $221000 AA $205000 Delta $208000 VB last company offer was in this ballpark at the upper end. I don't know how apples for apples this but is an interesting starting point. I deliberately didn't include carriers from less inviting countries which would have a "hardship" component!
British Airways jobs, payscales and entry requirements.
Airline Pilot Salary and Pay Rates
I agree "bad attitude" is difficult to quantify but is important as the person is a leader of the crew and the front face of the airline on the aircraft. I guess I would wrap it into the "command potential" box on the sim/command development forms. If enough training/check captains say this guy rolls up with no study/treats the crew or ground staff poorly/looks like he crawled out of the bush then it is reasonable to overlook that person. However!, this should always be clearly articulated so that said person knows what they need to do to fix said problem/issue. I think this is one area where we do poorly.
I would also add that all things being equal then seniority should be the decider.
Arnold
As much as I love nurses.....
They, like doctors can only kill one at a time.
An airline pilot can do 3,4, now 500 plus on a bad day.
Having said that I would pay a lot for a good nurse.
As much as I love nurses.....
They, like doctors can only kill one at a time.
An airline pilot can do 3,4, now 500 plus on a bad day.
Having said that I would pay a lot for a good nurse.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sunny QLD
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah I'll stick my head up on this. Sure for some things seniority probably should be the decider (eg base transfers). However, I firmly believe that command upgrade opportunity should have a merit component. I see no reason to give someone a "go" if all their reports suggest they will not pass or are slack or have a bad attitude
You are first assesed as being up to having a 'go'.Based on all your results from your career sims and route checks. If you are borderline you must be put through a series of sims to asses you further.
Only then are you allowed to have a 'go'.If not you wait another cycle until your marks improve.
So it is merit based, after a fashion.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Airborne
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ignoring seniority takes us right back to the pre-60's era where if you want a promotion you have to play at the appropriate golf clubs. Or be the son/daughter of the right family. It was never merit based.
Ignore seniority promtotion ideas and enter corruption.
Ignore seniority promtotion ideas and enter corruption.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Krumlov, using overseas airlines as a gauge is always going to be overly simplistic. You would need a forensic accountant or two to be able to accurately compare the rates. Or do you want me to pull out some figures on house prices in the Sydney base? The only possible comparison is Qantas Long Haul and Jetstar Long Haul take home pay.
Anyway I think we started a thread drift here, I was just trying to convey that some of the spin is starting to wear thin on some of my colleagues. Full service ticket prices low cost conditions (have cake and eat it). I'm happy where I am. Apologies to the thread starter.
Anyway I think we started a thread drift here, I was just trying to convey that some of the spin is starting to wear thin on some of my colleagues. Full service ticket prices low cost conditions (have cake and eat it). I'm happy where I am. Apologies to the thread starter.
Krumlov
The current "offer" from the Company for salaries has new Captains (after 1July 2012) starting on $186k. That is level one of a 10 step salary scale. All the steps are 3%, so probably not keeping up with CPI and less than the 190k VB Captains will be on as of 1 July 2011. So what that would translate to is that a new 777 Captain will never get paid as much as a current 737 Captain. I would suggest that meets most criteria for a B Scale.
You are quite correct in stating that this is still under negotiation, and additionally the pilots, as well as the unions, have made it clear to the company that such an offer will be voted down.
Nevertheless, the company is currently offering a "B Scale" for want of a better term.
If we were to hypothesise and take the worst case that it got voted up, because CRFO's have been offered a reasonable increase, and they make up 50% of the voting pilots, then the next step by the Co will be to waive that under the noses of VB pilots and say 777 Captains are on 186k, therefore a new 737 Captain will have to be less than that. And so the downward pressure would continue.
The good news is that it appears most of the CRFO's can see that short term gain will be a serious long term loss for them, and everyone else. So I don't have any real concerns about the current offer being voted up by anyone.
You are quite correct in stating that this is still under negotiation, and additionally the pilots, as well as the unions, have made it clear to the company that such an offer will be voted down.
Nevertheless, the company is currently offering a "B Scale" for want of a better term.
If we were to hypothesise and take the worst case that it got voted up, because CRFO's have been offered a reasonable increase, and they make up 50% of the voting pilots, then the next step by the Co will be to waive that under the noses of VB pilots and say 777 Captains are on 186k, therefore a new 737 Captain will have to be less than that. And so the downward pressure would continue.
The good news is that it appears most of the CRFO's can see that short term gain will be a serious long term loss for them, and everyone else. So I don't have any real concerns about the current offer being voted up by anyone.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 58
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I really cant see any prospects of a 'joint' effort industrially with collusion between theQF and Virgin groups. My understanding of this is that it would be illegal as a secondary boycot to give industrial support to employees at another company or even under a different EBA.
(As a side note regarding datal seniority vs meritorious: both systems are capabile of being corrupted by dysfunctional managment. Seniority does not ensure 'fairness' eg:
Not to mention that Datal Seniority has the effect of reducing or T&C's. Pilots cannot vote with their feet and easily get screwed down by the company. How else do you think that industry conditions have become what they are during 10 years of explosive growth and demand for our skills? Our T & Cs should have boomed if subject to market forces, but Datal Seniority has distorted the demand equasion to our great and profound detriment.
A proper promotions system should select the best, most experienced, qualified and suitable candidate by way of a properly selected promotions commitee that has input from the C & T group and representation from the union, HR and management. Guidelines for promotion established the the pilot body during their EBA ).
(As a side note regarding datal seniority vs meritorious: both systems are capabile of being corrupted by dysfunctional managment. Seniority does not ensure 'fairness' eg:
- Company A operates 2 types. A pilot who is not liked by managment because he/she has spoken up on safety issues is next in line for a command on the smaller type. He/she is called by a manager and told that his/her command bid is going to be trumped by more datally senior FOs on the larger type and it is suggested that he/she bids for an FO slot on the larger type otherwise they will be stuck on the smaller type as FO "for years". Pilot does this and 2 days into the ground school for the larger type new commands are announced on the smaller type with all positions being awarded to FOs current on the smaller type who are all datally junior to said pilot. No senior FOs on the larger type had bid for commands at all.
- Company B has 2 commands coming up and the Most Senior Guy(MSG) is not in the 'beer and BBQ' mate's list of the Fleet Manager(FM). FM has a really good mate who is 3rd in line. The FM decrees that a new "Command Upgrade Check" is to be used. MSG fails his check when the FM changes the assigned altitude indicator when MSG is doing some thing on the overhead panel-result: altitude bust on a check. This means that BBQ mate gets the command. MSG told "don't worry, you'll get the next one" (which he did).
Not to mention that Datal Seniority has the effect of reducing or T&C's. Pilots cannot vote with their feet and easily get screwed down by the company. How else do you think that industry conditions have become what they are during 10 years of explosive growth and demand for our skills? Our T & Cs should have boomed if subject to market forces, but Datal Seniority has distorted the demand equasion to our great and profound detriment.
A proper promotions system should select the best, most experienced, qualified and suitable candidate by way of a properly selected promotions commitee that has input from the C & T group and representation from the union, HR and management. Guidelines for promotion established the the pilot body during their EBA ).
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sydney
Age: 53
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A proper promotions system should...
On the other points:
therefore a new 737 Captain will have to be less than that
using overseas airlines as a gauge is always going to be overly simplistic
I'm not trying to argue for lower pay I am just trying to formulate a tight argument for justifying a particular pay scale.
A lot of the arguments don't hold water for example the debt at the end of training easily compares with a uni degree per the following "A members survey by the Australian Scholarships Group found that the average total education costs for a three year degree was $39,466 for a HECS student and $51,034 for a full fee student. Students in six year courses faced average education costs of $82,602 for HECS students, and $106,717 for full fee students."
In the end I want to be on the maximum sustainable pay. That is, I want my company to grow and be profitable. The best argument I can think of at the moment and I dont have any figures is to show the revenue you generate by carrying the passengers and use that to justify more cash. Using intangible reasons for higher pay can only be a small part of the overall argument I think.
This is way OT and I am musing more than anything.
Your argument falls down here because this is not true. The VB group just wouldn't vote for a pay cut. Currently these are still two separate businesses as far as EBAs are concerned and neither have any influence over the other.
Firstly, VB have already voted for a pay cut. When VB pilots accepted lower conditions for Ejet crew, they cast the mould for the future. We are all now fighting a rear guard action to regain that lost ground.
Secondly, to think that it is as simple as two different companies is naive in the extreme. VB negotiators will be sitting across the table from the same individuals as the VA negotiators are. To think that those individuals, who are representing the Virgin Group, are not working to a Group strategy is folly.
The company strategy is now in the open for all to see, and make no mistake, it is to lower the cost of pilots over the long term. They have already been very successful in achieving that with the Ejet conditions and V Australia's current contracts. Clearly they are working toward locking that into the EBA with lower salaries for new Captains at V. There is no doubt that if they are successful in doing so, they will be putting forward a proposal to VB that gives modest increases to current pilots in return for lower salaries for new pilots.
I am quietly confident that we are reaching the end of the era where pilots sell out the next generation for their own gain. The market is turning in our favour, so hopefully some strong leadership from the unions will put the steel into the boys to stand firm on not selling out the next generation.
Last edited by virginexcess; 28th May 2011 at 13:09.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Soap box
I hope you are right virginexcess.
Krumlov again I don't see any point in applying broad brushstrokes when making these comparisons. Forensic accountants are the people for this job not pilots.
Assuming that QF's problems are because of pilots salaries is a bit strange. Lets not forget one of those "overpaid" individuals saved 400 odd lives only a few months ago. Can you put a dollar figure on that? Would you prefer that guy to be working in the middle east for Emirates? I'd like that guy on my team infusing his skills and imparting knowledge to myself and other future captains. Its a bit like the English Premier league. If you want to attract and retain the top players you've got to fork out the cash! Its worth it though, they collect all the trophies and sell the tickets and merchandise.
Yes QF pilots are paid well but there are also numerous costs to the business; other legacy systems/structures, maintenance, aircraft types, fuel, the economy etc. You seem to link high pilot salary with poor financial performance. Last year they made 500 million and a billion not long ago and have been doing so year in year out for decades. You might want to factor into your calculations their zero turnover and thus not only retention but the growth of experience. This leads to further safety, expertise and efficiency on their various types. Sure you can attract experienced people but they don't tend to stick around if the conditions aren't good enough and why would they?If you want the best team you've got to be willing to invest in skilled people. The opposite will just cost you money in the long term.
Good solid conditions=stable work force=zero turnover=experience=safety=profits
When you have the best conditions you can pick and choose from a very large pool of applicants, collecting all the cream on the way. The opposite is also true. Don't get lured into exciting graphs and spreadsheets my friend, if you think pilot conditions are expensive try having an accident or try getting them seriously offside. This hip era of cutting costs in areas of skill is a cancer of common sense. It makes me immediately question iq levels, eduction, agendas and or mental stability/maturity. I immediately know that they are the wrong person for the job as they are putting their short term goals ahead of the company's long term plan. They are either out of their depth or very calculating and cunning.
AIPA and the ALAEA are trying to protect the shareholders, myself included, from these blow-in ego driven executives (The Joyce's and Buchanan's of the world). They come and go collect their golden handshake and when they've left we all sit up and say "well that was expensive wasn't it?". What do you reckon an accident will do to the share price? How about grounding a fleet or worse the whole company? Don't worry about those last two (won't happen in Oz
).
You have to keep an eye out for these types or you end up with mishaps like; no QF777's, VB17/190's, Live2air, not buying Ansett real estate, Premium economy where you buy meals, VA 777's with Cessna 210 cargo doors and finally take overs that line peoples pockets. Here's a refresher from the telegraph in 07:
Anyway thats my take on it.
Krumlov again I don't see any point in applying broad brushstrokes when making these comparisons. Forensic accountants are the people for this job not pilots.
Assuming that QF's problems are because of pilots salaries is a bit strange. Lets not forget one of those "overpaid" individuals saved 400 odd lives only a few months ago. Can you put a dollar figure on that? Would you prefer that guy to be working in the middle east for Emirates? I'd like that guy on my team infusing his skills and imparting knowledge to myself and other future captains. Its a bit like the English Premier league. If you want to attract and retain the top players you've got to fork out the cash! Its worth it though, they collect all the trophies and sell the tickets and merchandise.
Yes QF pilots are paid well but there are also numerous costs to the business; other legacy systems/structures, maintenance, aircraft types, fuel, the economy etc. You seem to link high pilot salary with poor financial performance. Last year they made 500 million and a billion not long ago and have been doing so year in year out for decades. You might want to factor into your calculations their zero turnover and thus not only retention but the growth of experience. This leads to further safety, expertise and efficiency on their various types. Sure you can attract experienced people but they don't tend to stick around if the conditions aren't good enough and why would they?If you want the best team you've got to be willing to invest in skilled people. The opposite will just cost you money in the long term.
Good solid conditions=stable work force=zero turnover=experience=safety=profits
When you have the best conditions you can pick and choose from a very large pool of applicants, collecting all the cream on the way. The opposite is also true. Don't get lured into exciting graphs and spreadsheets my friend, if you think pilot conditions are expensive try having an accident or try getting them seriously offside. This hip era of cutting costs in areas of skill is a cancer of common sense. It makes me immediately question iq levels, eduction, agendas and or mental stability/maturity. I immediately know that they are the wrong person for the job as they are putting their short term goals ahead of the company's long term plan. They are either out of their depth or very calculating and cunning.
AIPA and the ALAEA are trying to protect the shareholders, myself included, from these blow-in ego driven executives (The Joyce's and Buchanan's of the world). They come and go collect their golden handshake and when they've left we all sit up and say "well that was expensive wasn't it?". What do you reckon an accident will do to the share price? How about grounding a fleet or worse the whole company? Don't worry about those last two (won't happen in Oz
).You have to keep an eye out for these types or you end up with mishaps like; no QF777's, VB17/190's, Live2air, not buying Ansett real estate, Premium economy where you buy meals, VA 777's with Cessna 210 cargo doors and finally take overs that line peoples pockets. Here's a refresher from the telegraph in 07:
..The result is also a slap in the face for private equity barons and their investment banking partners who have recently been attempting to carve up some of Australia's finest corporate assets.
The Qantas board will meet this morning to discuss the result, with question marks now hanging over the head of chairman Margaret Jackson – who enthusiastically endorsed the takeover offer when it was launched in December last year...
The Qantas board will meet this morning to discuss the result, with question marks now hanging over the head of chairman Margaret Jackson – who enthusiastically endorsed the takeover offer when it was launched in December last year...
Last edited by Mr. Hat; 29th May 2011 at 02:45.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sydney
Age: 53
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Time will tell how it pans out for QF. Whilst I agree in general with what you are saying I think there is probably a point somewhere between Jetstar and QF conditions that is sustainable. Your English football example only holds because the team makes money. QF International is losing money, so something has to give eventually. Perhaps it is getting rid of management and starting again although I think that is also overly simplistic. You can have the best conditions but if that means you run at a loss then that is a problem. I would also say I am not singling out pilots here, I think they have a problem across their workforce which is probably a problem for all old carriers. Plenty of bankruptices across the world:
U.S. Airline Bankruptcies and Service Cessations
Bankrupt Airlines from around the World and the most recent Chapter 11 filings from US Airline Companies
To add to that your equation doesn't hold. Just because an airline is safe doesn't mean it makes a profit. It is certainly an enabler because if you are not safe then you likely will not make a profit. Also experience alone doesn't make you safe, plenty of experienced pilots have speared in.
P.S. Because I don't know what are the pilots and engineers offering to give in return for pay rises, ancillary perks, and job security?
U.S. Airline Bankruptcies and Service Cessations
Bankrupt Airlines from around the World and the most recent Chapter 11 filings from US Airline Companies
To add to that your equation doesn't hold. Just because an airline is safe doesn't mean it makes a profit. It is certainly an enabler because if you are not safe then you likely will not make a profit. Also experience alone doesn't make you safe, plenty of experienced pilots have speared in.
P.S. Because I don't know what are the pilots and engineers offering to give in return for pay rises, ancillary perks, and job security?
Last edited by Krumlov; 29th May 2011 at 10:03.
