Australian Pilots Ad Campaign

[Cost Index]

I've been thinking. The way the Aviation industry has been heading for a while now is pretty detrimental. Pilots are being viewed as nothing entities by a lot of the public, in part due to, perceived pay vs performance (glorified bus drivers) and company's spin in the media.

The only time a pilot is heard from in the public domain is when the pilots are approached by the media, i.e. a dramatic air incident or explanation of industrial issues.

With regards to the first point, the public don't view what we're worth from a big picture point of view. We don't "do" much in the plane and we don't "work" all that hard either according to them. They simply don't know (or care) about the type of lives we live that make us what we're worth.

With regards to the second point, companies are all over us. They have media exposure and PR machines behind them. They go to the media. They get the advantage of first shot over the bow, a slick PR "professional" to give a sound bite and get us on the back foot. This frames them in a higher position with us defending. Ever noticed how we are always defending ourselves in the media?

Time to get smart, be pre-emptive and take a different approach.

We need to go to the media by getting all pilot groups to contribute to a TV and Internet ad campaign explaining why we are worth what we are worth.

I've said we need to do this type of thing elsewhere and received a few PM's of support although not quite like this.

Many groups do this to get their side of the story across in a dedicated uninterrupted time frame. Greenpeace, GetUp Australia, Australian Mining and Tobacco is the latest (although each to their own..)

Our situation is political. With politics you can have negative or positive campaigns. The public switch off from negative campaigns after a while especially if the opposition is more on target. Past federal elections have demonstrated this. This will need to be a positive ad campaign.

Fellow pilots who want to help others out when they're mates in different companies are being shafted are prevented by the law. However this way all pilots voices from all airlines can be heard. It doesn't need to be one union against another.

Done well, explaining briefly and succinctly what our lives entail for 15 secs a piece and placed in prime spots will work wonders to the public thinking about what we're worth. It's actually not that expensive.

This will frame us in a positive light for whenever industrial issues rear their head...

I was thinking a slogan fading to black at the end along the lines.. "Australian Pilots, We're Worth It"

Discuss

[Wyle E Coyote]

hmmmmm...... can't really agree. I am over paid, and in reality do very little.

That's just how I like it.

[simsalabim]

Stick to your knitting.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

A reality TV show perhaps , how many people would tune in to see what we get up to day to day.

But serously, I think union associated TV ads would make a lot of people tune out straight away. It would need to be a non-secular approach in that regard.

[Wally Mk2]

"CI" although yr intentions are honorable & well meaning I think going direct to the public with our concerns wouldn't work in the short term anyway.

Okay lets say that we as pilots/ginger beers & anyone else involved in aviation that is hurting could get the public sympathy on our side with adds etc then what? The public couldn't do anymore about it than we can. Sure they could vote with their feet & not fly just to show the CEO's at the top that the man on the street won't accept their spin anymore by not flying with xx company but seeing as ALL Co's are tared with the same brush to some degree that's a merry-go-round in itself & only hurts us in the long run anyway. The gen public will only hang themselves for so long before they want to fly again, cheaply as possible & they won't care how they get that cheap fair, it just won't work going public I reckon.

Look we now have a major problem in this country (the world over really) Mr & Mrs Joe Bloggs now expect cheap fares (unrealistic really)a& there's nothing we can say or do to change their mindset as that's the way the world does business, to undercut the opposition at any cost (not just in aviation), that main cost is the human element to all this ugliness:-(

The Co's use spin & the media to their advantage as the gen public listen to them (after all that's whom they are directing it to & with good effect I might add), after all QF just as an Eg is Australian, all powerful & mighty & have almost God like status in the Australian business community s well as the public's eyes but who are we? Glorified over paid bus drivers as seen by the gen public, that unfair tag we will never rid ourselves of unfortunately despite trying to.............now that's the sad part about all this

All we can really do is fight the best we can at the coal face within our own organizations to try & stay in an industry that's forever changing where it's big business to disengage it's employees to stay in the CEO's minds, 'competative'


Wmk2

[airtags]

Why pay for media exposure when you are the story of the day ...........
..........choose the right time and tell your story factually with vision to back it up and it will run everywhere.

Timing is everything

AT

[The Bunglerat]

Gordon Ramsay's onto something. A "reality" show charting the career development of pilots from early days through to airlines - including all the joys & heartache along the way - would be just the thing. We've had numerous airline TV shows over the years that focus on cabin crew & disgruntled pax, but bugger-all concerning us guys up the front.

[the-flying-z]

Re-runs of Mile High........

[Weapons Grade]

A Balanced View?

If you (pilots) think an advertisement campaign will win the hearts and minds of the public, I would counter that view with this:

You (pilots) try to convince Mr/Mrs Public that you are not, as they perceive, a bunch of glorified bus drivers. The companies get the media to air/publish a "balancing" view with examples of, say TG, SQ, BR, CI, CX or any other "legacy" or "flag" carriers' pilots' terms and conditions (adjusted for local currencies against the AUD/USD).

After that airing/publication, what is the probability that Mr/Mrs Public's perception of you (pilots) would change for the better?

Your campaign would result in shooting yourselves in both feet with only one bullet.

[The Bunglerat]

Weapons Grade, I completely agree. Joe Public's perception of what we do is extremely limited, but what little he does know centres around the fact that we are overpaid & spend all day reading the paper whilst the autopilot does all the work. Unfortunately there is an element of truth to this (except of course when bells start ringing & lights start flashing & we get to earn our pay for the day), which is why a "reality" fly-on-the-wall documentary series would be far preferable to a union-led ad campaign.

The fact is that, relative to most people in the community, we ARE well paid, & we will NEVER get any sympathy or understanding from the public on this particular issue. On the other hand, if they were to gain an insight into the lives of REAL people trying to make a living from aviation - the recently qualified CPL, the regional turbo-prop skipper or the recently hired jet newbie - along with the challenges & expense of training & check to line, the impact of back-of-clock flying & roster issues on family & lifestyle, etc, these things would have far more impact & provide an opportunity for the general public to gain a far greater insight into the reality of working in aviation.

Mrs. Bunglerat is a hardcore "reality" TV junkie, & whilst she's never shown much interest in what I do for a living, I'm sure she'd be glued to the telly if what we do for a living were wrapped up in a neat little 30 minute weekly slot on Channel 7.

[ejectx3]

Except qf owns the media through advertising and would influence the editing such that we are made to look overpaid and lazy. Ben sandilands needs to start a tv network.

[Wyle E Coyote]

I suspect that the ones complaining here have never had any other job.

Those of us who have had a career/job in the real world quite like this flying lark.

Good money, little work, tasty hosties, time off.......

Do you really want to let anyone else know about this scam we have going here? I have to work for two hours tomorrow. Sure beats the ten hours I used to do regularly.

I say keep your mouth shut. The less they know the better.

[600ft-lb]

The fact that people in this country are tripping over themselves to pay $1 for airfares on any budget carrier (yet get ripped off on everything else on all of the auxiliary revenue) shows that they don't care what goes into making a plane fly, and fly safely, they selfishly care about their money.

Pilots on reasonable amounts of money are only an impediment to them getting their $1 fares, 200 hour cadets on $15/hour with a huge bonded slavery debt to the company they're working for are the catalyst for them to pay $1 for a cross country trip.

Bottom line is, people think emotionally when it comes to money, not logically. If it was logic and $1 x 177 seats didn't compute when they worked out just the fuel bill, they might think something if afoot. But they don't and won't, so the battle will be lost on them, they will be totally unsympathetic.

The drive to maintain a standard in the industry has to be through other means.. It might be a smoking hole in the ground, hopefully it's through management who don't think what their next KPI target bonus will pay for.

[TBM-Legend]

You Tube

[Oakape]

The fact that people in this country are tripping over themselves to pay $1 for airfares on any budget carrier (yet get ripped off on everything else on all of the auxiliary revenue) shows that they don't care what goes into making a plane fly, and fly safely, they selfishly care about their money

It's not that they don't care about safety, it's just that they believe that it is a level playing field & that the government makes sure all airlines are safe.

They don't realise that there is only a minimum standard set by the regulatory authority & that different airlines sit in different positions above that line (and occasionally below the line, but oversight & enforcement is a whole other topic!). People don't like to consider the fact that aviation can never be 100% safe (as is just about everything in life) & so they also don't grasp the fact that their individual chances of arriving safely at their destination vary according to which airline they are travelling with, depending on where that particular airline sits in relation to the minimum set standard.

So they believe that they will be just as safe on an airline with cheap fares as one with higher fares & that the one with the higher airfare is just ripping them off.

Bottom line is, people think emotionally when it comes to money, not logically. If it was logic and $1 x 177 seats didn't compute when they worked out just the fuel bill, they might think something if afoot. But they don't and won't, so the battle will be lost on them, they will be totally unsympathetic.

This seems to be a modern day phenomenon where the 'bargain' is the holy grail & responsibilty for one's actions is constantly shifted to others, ie the government is responsible to ensure that one is safe on an aircraft, regardless of the economic ramifications of cheap airfares.

Coupled with the fact that most people seem to leave their brains in the car when they arrive at an airport, it is going to be a long stretch educating them regarding the developing safety issues in the industry, how that directly affects every single one of them & how their choice of airline impacts this.

Most people would place a high value on their personal safety & many people have said that they would pay more of a higher level of safety. But they have to be convinced of a number of things before they will do this -
1. That they need to pay more to get better levels of safety
2. That if they paid more, they would actually get a higher level of safety & wouldn't just be delivering more profit for the company
3. That the promised higher level of safety is a significant improvement

People do trade a higher level of safety for savings. Often they do it unknowingly because they are ignorant of the risks involved. However, when people are fully aware of the risks, they tend to be more cautious in this area. In this case they tend to take the savings only if they percieve that the benefit outweighs the risk & that their exposure to the risk is low. For example, budget holiday makers fall into this category, as they only travel once every few years, value holidays very highly & often have little awareness of the industry & the potential risks.

It is usually the customer who drives change. It might appear at times that management are driving a lot of change, but that is generally just management response to perceived consumer pressure. Also, don't forget that management have two customers to satisfy - the consumer & the shareholder.

If the travelling public are not educated regarding safety & cost issues, nothing will change in the industry. And if we don't educate them, who will?

[teresa green]

You could always put me in the add, to show what all those sunrises, and hotels do to you. Nervous tics, wrinkles, sore arse and back, no hair, skin cancer, (please people use a 30 plus, any retired pilots reunion shows up blokes who look like Swiss cheese with so many holes in them, we did not know). Seriously, unfortunately the label of overpaid bus drivers has stuck since 89, and its hard to change it. The A380 incident gave the best publicity for pilots that you could have, and those images will stay in the public's mind, build on that, it a great foundation, that safety and training is nbr one, for the pilots but not necessarily the companies who are dictated to by the bean counters. That's your call I reckon.

[Lodown]

I think many of you are mistaken if you think Joe Public gives a damn. You don't think Joe and Sue Public have work issues of their own? The international pilots get to leave home for two weeks, leave the kids with the spouse, stay in nice hotels, drink booze and see exotic countries. The domestic pilots are away from the phone for the day or two, have nice views, aren't directly supervised, keep their hands clean, get served a suitable meal, have cabin stewards bring coffee when required and can lock the door and keep separate from the SLF. Meanwhile, Joe and Sue Public scrape by on minimum wage, cope with budget cuts and the same mis-management issues, sit in traffic to and from a dingy little cubicle, work 8-10 hours, have to find money to feed the kids and pay the mortgage, and have a telephone ringing all day and the boss staring over their shoulder.

And you want Joe and Sue to be sympathetic? What planet do you live on?

[simsalabim]

Damn straight Lodown.Get real guys, the following will have them pissing their pants.

I was thinking a slogan fading to black at the end along the lines.. "Australian Pilots, We're Worth It"

[FGD135]

Heh heh.

Reading through the posts, I was incredulous that no one seemed to have any idea of the perspective from which the public would view pilots.

Then I came to Lodown's post!

I think many of you are mistaken if you think Joe Public gives a damn. You don't think Joe and Sue Public have work issues of their own?

Well said Lodown. You are the only one here that has any connection with reality!

A special mention to Wyle E Coyote:

I say keep your mouth shut. The less they know the better.

[teresa green]

John and Sue Public sure give a damn when the aircraft is in heavy turbulence, and they are nursing their 6 month old baby. All of a sudden the people up the front take on a whole new importance. They are counting on those same people not wanting to leave this mortal coil any more then they do. And they are right. The public do have respect for Airline Pilots which increases in such times as above, in fact they would give you their life savings just to get them on the ground. Don't underestimate yourselves.