Jetstar legal action update
Nunc est bibendum
Something about Lots of talk, lots of spin, AIPA are doing this, AIPA are doing that, but zilch when it comes down to actually doing anything...
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps a casual read of the FWA transcripts would be more appropriate.
I have been a "sponsor" of AIPAs industrial naivete since joining Jetstar.
I cannot think of an issue where they have actually been successful.
The fact that the AFAP has been able to achieve something, has placed the doubt in my and many others minds, as to the benefits of continuing with AIPA.
I have been a "sponsor" of AIPAs industrial naivete since joining Jetstar.
I cannot think of an issue where they have actually been successful.
The fact that the AFAP has been able to achieve something, has placed the doubt in my and many others minds, as to the benefits of continuing with AIPA.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: south pacific vagrant
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A rather simplistic view there mate.
Its a bit harder in FWA when AFAP and company brown noses actively take Jetstars side. Something AFAP hasnt had to deal with I'll point out.
The issues that AIPA have been less successful with are less to do with its "naievity" and more to do with trying to defend pilots against company finding the holes in an EBA you could drive a truck through that you lot voted up.
Its a bit harder in FWA when AFAP and company brown noses actively take Jetstars side. Something AFAP hasnt had to deal with I'll point out.
The issues that AIPA have been less successful with are less to do with its "naievity" and more to do with trying to defend pilots against company finding the holes in an EBA you could drive a truck through that you lot voted up.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: south pacific vagrant
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Again, why the assertion of naievity?
The JetConnect case was about Qantas using loopholes and grey areas that the laws of neither country had forseen or given any protection against.
The JetConnect case was about Qantas using loopholes and grey areas that the laws of neither country had forseen or given any protection against.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What has AIPA done-
Ok no legal battles won but management at least thinks twice before doing whatever it wants legal or otherwise.
Management now to some extent consults with the JPC as opposed to their previous definition of consulting, which was basically just telling the JPC what they are going to do.
They now consult with the JPC, AIPA and the AFAP.
Forced AFAP to start representing.
Therefore in my opinion AIPA has done a lot, we are in a much better position than we would have been otherwise.
Ok no legal battles won but management at least thinks twice before doing whatever it wants legal or otherwise.
Management now to some extent consults with the JPC as opposed to their previous definition of consulting, which was basically just telling the JPC what they are going to do.
They now consult with the JPC, AIPA and the AFAP.
Forced AFAP to start representing.
Therefore in my opinion AIPA has done a lot, we are in a much better position than we would have been otherwise.
Kelpie, you are barking up the wrong tree. As Lawrie has pointed out, the Jetstar EBA is a pre Fair Work EBA. The BOOT (better off overall test) did not apply and nothing has been tested with regard to the transitional arrangements from Workchoices to the Fair Work Act with respect to the Jetstar EBA.
If a cadet has a problem with the base pay then all they have to do is start the grievance procedure as outlined within their EBA. Before they do that they should have a look at what the Air Pilots Award (what the BOOT test is compared against) provides for FO’s on A320 equipment.
Air Pilots Award $81,781 (Base = $71,397, Jet = $5,524, Instrument = $4,860).
Jetstar Junior FO 2011 $57,118 + 6% Retention = $60,545.
Jetstar Junior FO 2012 $58,831 + 6% Retention = $62,360.
The Cadets are on the flexi line deal but guaranteed the full time JFO pay (the above pay rates). The flexi line deal is a part time policy with 75% availability (working 15 days per month instead of 20).
If you apply the same pro ration to the Air Pilots Award, you end up very close with $81,781 x 0.75 = $61,335. So a commissioner my be less sanguine than yourself when confronted with a bolshie cadet, who originally signed up for a crap $42,000 NZ contract, with 6 years of debt servitude. Remember, the Cadet is not paying a single cent for their training under this deal (originally they were paying in the vicinity of $80,000), in fact, they are having all monies paid to Jetstar REFUNDED!!
Thanks to the AFAP’s legal strategy, the cadet has been blessed with incredible good fortune. They signed onto a crap NZ deal, and then walked away with free training and an A320 endorsement, enough seniority to be based on the east coast of Australia and covered by a collective agreement.
There will be no more cadets with this luck.
Kelpie, you are being mischievous and stirring up trouble. If AIPA want to test this arrangement, go right ahead, but as the Majority of Jetstar pilots are discovering, they haven’t been successful in any single attempt. Instead, they have been setting dangerous precedents left right and centre by challenging and loosing weak cases time and time again. These precedents ultimately weaken any future challenge before they get started. Sometimes it is better to keep your powder dry and fight from a position of strength.
For those with the AIPA blinkers still firmly strapped to their noggins, have a close read of the AIPA insights dated 2 September 2011 which relates to the Jetstar Cadet issue and answer one question:
Insights
WHAT IMPENDING FEDERAL COURT ACTION IS AIPA TALKING ABOUT???
I would contend that the only reason the company saw any sense with regard to the Cadet issue (and flexi line employment) is that the AFAP were putting the companies balls in a vice with their two applications in the Federal Court. I challenge anyone to find AIPA’s application to the Federal Court.
AIPA has been caught with their pants down in dealing with the biggest threat to the Jetstar pilot EBA and ultimately collective bargaining in this industry. If Jetstar was successful in undermining the pilots EBA, the contagion would have spread through the industry, eventually undermining every collective agreement including the Mainline longhaul agreement. Thank your lucky stars there are still some AFAP stalwarts in Jetstar that saw off this threat. Red ties and sternly worded PA’s are no match for the ruthless operatives at the helm of Jetstar.
If a cadet has a problem with the base pay then all they have to do is start the grievance procedure as outlined within their EBA. Before they do that they should have a look at what the Air Pilots Award (what the BOOT test is compared against) provides for FO’s on A320 equipment.
Air Pilots Award $81,781 (Base = $71,397, Jet = $5,524, Instrument = $4,860).
Jetstar Junior FO 2011 $57,118 + 6% Retention = $60,545.
Jetstar Junior FO 2012 $58,831 + 6% Retention = $62,360.
The Cadets are on the flexi line deal but guaranteed the full time JFO pay (the above pay rates). The flexi line deal is a part time policy with 75% availability (working 15 days per month instead of 20).
If you apply the same pro ration to the Air Pilots Award, you end up very close with $81,781 x 0.75 = $61,335. So a commissioner my be less sanguine than yourself when confronted with a bolshie cadet, who originally signed up for a crap $42,000 NZ contract, with 6 years of debt servitude. Remember, the Cadet is not paying a single cent for their training under this deal (originally they were paying in the vicinity of $80,000), in fact, they are having all monies paid to Jetstar REFUNDED!!
Thanks to the AFAP’s legal strategy, the cadet has been blessed with incredible good fortune. They signed onto a crap NZ deal, and then walked away with free training and an A320 endorsement, enough seniority to be based on the east coast of Australia and covered by a collective agreement.
There will be no more cadets with this luck.
Where is Lawrie shouting victory from the rooftops now??
The silence is deafening!!!
The silence is deafening!!!
For those with the AIPA blinkers still firmly strapped to their noggins, have a close read of the AIPA insights dated 2 September 2011 which relates to the Jetstar Cadet issue and answer one question:
Insights
The result would not have been possible without your support in challenging the Company and asking why the need existed to circumvent the EBA. Of course, impending Federal Court Cases by both AIPA and the AFAP, as well as the complaint lodged by AIPA with the Fair Work Ombudsman, created a very strong incentive for the company to solve this problem out of Court, and to its credit the Company has seen reason in this instance an changed its approach to dealing with AIPA.
I would contend that the only reason the company saw any sense with regard to the Cadet issue (and flexi line employment) is that the AFAP were putting the companies balls in a vice with their two applications in the Federal Court. I challenge anyone to find AIPA’s application to the Federal Court.
AIPA has been caught with their pants down in dealing with the biggest threat to the Jetstar pilot EBA and ultimately collective bargaining in this industry. If Jetstar was successful in undermining the pilots EBA, the contagion would have spread through the industry, eventually undermining every collective agreement including the Mainline longhaul agreement. Thank your lucky stars there are still some AFAP stalwarts in Jetstar that saw off this threat. Red ties and sternly worded PA’s are no match for the ruthless operatives at the helm of Jetstar.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keith
With the greatest of respect it is you that are barking up the wrong tree.
The BOOT applies only to Enterprise Agreements made since the FWA was introduced and to EBAs made under the WR Act during the FWA bridging period as defined in the transitional provisions legislation. The legislation absolutely does not require or suggest that the BOOT should be applied to agreements made under the WR Act.
It is this fundamental misunderstanding of the Act that you do not seem to be grasping. I would encourage you to personally read both the Act and particularly the transitional provisions legislation and the wealth of information available on the internet on this very subject. If you want to be sure that you are talking fact then you should do the research yourself instead of listening to, and being pursuaded by others who quite obviously have a fundamental misunderstanding of the requirements of the Act. For a union that represents a large number of members this is very disturbing as these guys should be the smartest in the room when it comes to the requirements of this Act.
The transitional provisions legislation classifies all existing EBAs as 'transitional instruments' and more particularly 'agreement based transitional instruments' and calls for all existing EBAs signed prior to 1/1/09 to remain in force. There is an exception to this in relation to Base Rate of Pay and complying with the NES which i will cover later. To verify the correctness of this statement that i have made I would encourage you to go onto the FWA website and look up Schedule 3 of the Fair Work (Transitional Provisions & Consequential Amendments) Act 2009.
The following is extracted from an article written by Professor Andrew Stewart and was published in the Piper Alderman publication Employment Matters, March 2009. It summarises the legal situation of tge Jetstar EBA. (my bolding)
Keith, you also make reference to the cadet agreement. Again, read it, carefully, and you will see that when read in conjunction with the FlexiLine agreement in does not stack up as you suggest.
....and a threshold of 56 flight hours per roster period after which Extra Flying Allowance (EFA) is paid according to the provisions of the EBA. You casually left that bit out!!!
As far as the cadets are concerned the $56k is not a payment for 56 flight hours per month as the flexi-line agreement and you suggest, it is a minimum payment to undertake all flight hours as directed by management within the 15 duty days. The flexi line agreement clearly requires a pro rata calculation to be made by dividing the $56k by 12months and then by 75flighthours. The result is then multiplied by 56flighthours to determine the new salary under flexi line.
Using the stated pro-rata calculation, A Cadets adjusted base salary under flexi line is $42,468 for working 56 flight hours. In order to qualify for the minimum payment provided for under the seperate cadet agreement they must work all additional duties as directed.
If you think the cadets will be paid 56k for flying 56 hours per month you are even more niave than i thought and you should read the documents, your comments on here suggest to me that you have not done so up to this point. Once you have read the documents you will clearly see that your calculations to demonstate equality between the JFO rate and the modern award are fundamentally flawed!!
Spot the JQ management slight of hand? Flight hours are the basis of pro-rata for salary then duty days are the pro-rata for when you have to work and not flight hours!!! WTF. At least that is what is written!!
Finally, the FWA definition of Base Rate of Pay does not allow the inclusion of allowances, bonuses and such like so these cannot be considered when drawing a comparison between the base rate of pay under the Jetstar EBA and the Modern Award.
Keith, i have no problem with you calling me mischevious but please only do so when you can present an argument that shows this to be case. So far you have failed to do this.
The fact that Lawrie has not responded to my previous post perhaps shows that there may be truth and fact in what i am saying. If the information you have posted is straight from the AFAP party line then let Lawrie fight his own battles and be held to account when the truth comes out. After all it is his job to be accountable to the membership for allowing AFAP to be hoodwinked by JQ managment. The best he can do now is not to bury his head in the sand and use the legislation to sort this situation out.
More to Follow
The Kelpie
Ps. Regarding the extinguishing of the cadet funding agreement - refer to clause 16.5 of the Air Pilots Award under which they were working for Jetstar Group prior to being taken under the EBA recently!!! It should have gone when they started with Jetstar Group. Do not even start the argument that this was a concession given by Jetstar Management.
With the greatest of respect it is you that are barking up the wrong tree.
The BOOT applies only to Enterprise Agreements made since the FWA was introduced and to EBAs made under the WR Act during the FWA bridging period as defined in the transitional provisions legislation. The legislation absolutely does not require or suggest that the BOOT should be applied to agreements made under the WR Act.
It is this fundamental misunderstanding of the Act that you do not seem to be grasping. I would encourage you to personally read both the Act and particularly the transitional provisions legislation and the wealth of information available on the internet on this very subject. If you want to be sure that you are talking fact then you should do the research yourself instead of listening to, and being pursuaded by others who quite obviously have a fundamental misunderstanding of the requirements of the Act. For a union that represents a large number of members this is very disturbing as these guys should be the smartest in the room when it comes to the requirements of this Act.
The transitional provisions legislation classifies all existing EBAs as 'transitional instruments' and more particularly 'agreement based transitional instruments' and calls for all existing EBAs signed prior to 1/1/09 to remain in force. There is an exception to this in relation to Base Rate of Pay and complying with the NES which i will cover later. To verify the correctness of this statement that i have made I would encourage you to go onto the FWA website and look up Schedule 3 of the Fair Work (Transitional Provisions & Consequential Amendments) Act 2009.
The following is extracted from an article written by Professor Andrew Stewart and was published in the Piper Alderman publication Employment Matters, March 2009. It summarises the legal situation of tge Jetstar EBA. (my bolding)
Status of old agreements
Any agreement-based transitional instrument that is in operation when the FW Act commences will continue in force, until terminated or replaced. This covers a collective agreement, certified agreement, workplace determination, s 170MX award, Australian Workplace Agreement (AWA) or ITEA made under the WR Act, as well as a preserved State agreement or an old IR agreement.
Such agreements do not just apply to the original parties, but to any new employees who fall within their coverage.
There is no sunset or ‘drop dead’ date for agreement-based transitional instruments – except those involving a non-national system employer, which cannot operate beyond 27 March 2011.
The permissible content of any old agreement is generally determined by whatever ‘content rules’ applied immediately before the commencement of the FW Act. Hence, for example, any workplace agreement made between 27 March 2006 and 30 June 2009 will remain subject to the ‘prohibited content’ rules in s 356 of the WR Act.
However, where an agreement confers any function or power on the AIRC, for example in relation to dispute resolution, the agreement will be taken to refer to FWA instead.
Old agreements will also generally be subject to whatever ‘interaction rules’ applied before the commencement of the FW Act, in determining whether it prevails or has priority over some other transitional instrument.
Modern awards will be generally be inapplicable while an old agreement remains in force. The main exception here is a pre-reform certified agreement (ie, a collective agreement made under the WR Act prior to Work Choices). This can operate alongside a modern award, though it will prevail over the award to the extent of any inconsistency.
[bold]As with EAs made under the FW Act, the basic rates of pay set by an old agreement cannot be less than the minimum rates set by a modern award or a national minimum wage order.[bold] If that requires a significant wage increase as from 1 January 2010 that would threaten the viability of a business, the employer can apply to FWA to phase in the increase.
Old agreements, like other transitional instruments, can generally be enforced under the compliance provisions in Part 4-1 of the FW Act. But no injunction can be granted by a court to restrain a breach of a transitional instrument.
Any agreement-based transitional instrument that is in operation when the FW Act commences will continue in force, until terminated or replaced. This covers a collective agreement, certified agreement, workplace determination, s 170MX award, Australian Workplace Agreement (AWA) or ITEA made under the WR Act, as well as a preserved State agreement or an old IR agreement.
Such agreements do not just apply to the original parties, but to any new employees who fall within their coverage.
There is no sunset or ‘drop dead’ date for agreement-based transitional instruments – except those involving a non-national system employer, which cannot operate beyond 27 March 2011.
The permissible content of any old agreement is generally determined by whatever ‘content rules’ applied immediately before the commencement of the FW Act. Hence, for example, any workplace agreement made between 27 March 2006 and 30 June 2009 will remain subject to the ‘prohibited content’ rules in s 356 of the WR Act.
However, where an agreement confers any function or power on the AIRC, for example in relation to dispute resolution, the agreement will be taken to refer to FWA instead.
Old agreements will also generally be subject to whatever ‘interaction rules’ applied before the commencement of the FW Act, in determining whether it prevails or has priority over some other transitional instrument.
Modern awards will be generally be inapplicable while an old agreement remains in force. The main exception here is a pre-reform certified agreement (ie, a collective agreement made under the WR Act prior to Work Choices). This can operate alongside a modern award, though it will prevail over the award to the extent of any inconsistency.
[bold]As with EAs made under the FW Act, the basic rates of pay set by an old agreement cannot be less than the minimum rates set by a modern award or a national minimum wage order.[bold] If that requires a significant wage increase as from 1 January 2010 that would threaten the viability of a business, the employer can apply to FWA to phase in the increase.
Old agreements, like other transitional instruments, can generally be enforced under the compliance provisions in Part 4-1 of the FW Act. But no injunction can be granted by a court to restrain a breach of a transitional instrument.
The flexi line deal is a part time policy with 75% availability (working 15 days per month instead of 20).
As far as the cadets are concerned the $56k is not a payment for 56 flight hours per month as the flexi-line agreement and you suggest, it is a minimum payment to undertake all flight hours as directed by management within the 15 duty days. The flexi line agreement clearly requires a pro rata calculation to be made by dividing the $56k by 12months and then by 75flighthours. The result is then multiplied by 56flighthours to determine the new salary under flexi line.
Using the stated pro-rata calculation, A Cadets adjusted base salary under flexi line is $42,468 for working 56 flight hours. In order to qualify for the minimum payment provided for under the seperate cadet agreement they must work all additional duties as directed.
If you think the cadets will be paid 56k for flying 56 hours per month you are even more niave than i thought and you should read the documents, your comments on here suggest to me that you have not done so up to this point. Once you have read the documents you will clearly see that your calculations to demonstate equality between the JFO rate and the modern award are fundamentally flawed!!
Spot the JQ management slight of hand? Flight hours are the basis of pro-rata for salary then duty days are the pro-rata for when you have to work and not flight hours!!! WTF. At least that is what is written!!
Finally, the FWA definition of Base Rate of Pay does not allow the inclusion of allowances, bonuses and such like so these cannot be considered when drawing a comparison between the base rate of pay under the Jetstar EBA and the Modern Award.
Keith, i have no problem with you calling me mischevious but please only do so when you can present an argument that shows this to be case. So far you have failed to do this.
The fact that Lawrie has not responded to my previous post perhaps shows that there may be truth and fact in what i am saying. If the information you have posted is straight from the AFAP party line then let Lawrie fight his own battles and be held to account when the truth comes out. After all it is his job to be accountable to the membership for allowing AFAP to be hoodwinked by JQ managment. The best he can do now is not to bury his head in the sand and use the legislation to sort this situation out.
More to Follow
The Kelpie
Ps. Regarding the extinguishing of the cadet funding agreement - refer to clause 16.5 of the Air Pilots Award under which they were working for Jetstar Group prior to being taken under the EBA recently!!! It should have gone when they started with Jetstar Group. Do not even start the argument that this was a concession given by Jetstar Management.
Last edited by The Kelpie; 30th Sep 2011 at 05:22.
OK Kelpie it time to sharpen the pencil. I understand the BOOT and its application under the FWA of today. I was using it to highlight the fact that using the BOOT the cadets ARE better off than the award. I also understand your contention that old EA’s (the Jetstar EBA) cannot pay less than the minimum rates set by a modern award. You have provided an academic’s thesis on the subject, which is nice and comfortable in academia, but a commissioner he isn’t and ultimately that is what counts in the real world. But before we get into the argument of the application of the transition arrangements, lets have a closer look at the Air Pilots award and how it compares to the Junior First Officer rate of pay in relation to the Cadets.
Firstly, the Air Pilots Award provides for a base pay of $81,781. This rate of pay is for a full time pilot. The award describes the full time pilot as one who’s “ordinary hours of work must not average more than 38 hours per week.” The generally accepted application of a 38hr week is 5 work days and 2 days off (refer 24.6). So here is where I sharpen my pencil. 5 workdays per week equates to 260 workdays per annum. NOTE – Public holidays are provided for within the Award annual leave of 42 days AND the minimum wage (refer 31.1 of the award). Cadets are provided with 42 days of Annual Leave. Cadets ALL work 15 days per month, which equates to 180 workdays per annum. The cadet is working 69.2% of a full time equivalent pilot as prescribed by the award (refer 11.4). 69.2% of the Award rate is $56,617. So we don’t need to get into a hollow argument over the transition arrangements when the Cadets base pay ($57,118 and $58,831 in 2012) is above the Air Pilots Award. The figures look even healthier when you consider that the Annual Leave HAS NOT been prorated under the Jetstar deal.
BS. Your argument regarding flight hours are plain wrong and deceptive. A flexi line employee (all cadets are flexi line) is a part time employee with reduced availability. What additional duties are permitted under the EBA? Can they be directed to work on duty free days or days off? NO!
I have read the documents. IF Jetstar roster the cadets for 56 hours flying per month for a year then the cadets WILL be paid the minimum salary of $57,118. THAT IS WHAT IS WRITTEN IN THE AGREEMENT THAT WAS STRUCK FOR THE CADETS!! Where is your EVIDENCE that the cadets will be paid less than $57,118. Your pro-rated $42,468 salary is utter tosh and has no basis in any agreement. You have invented this amount to back up your argument. The cadets will only have to work 15 days per month and be paid a minimum of $57,118.
You are selectively reading parts of the old Workplace Relations Act, Fair Work Act, Transitional Provisions, Jetstar EBA and the Flexi Line agreement and coming up with a Camel. Again, if you think you have a case then go test it in front of a commissioner.
Now, hard nosed IR operatives (The AFAP) would look at the above picture and think very carefully before encouraging any Cadet to start a grievance regarding their base rate of pay. You rely on an academic argument regarding untested transitional arrangements and have overlooked the fundamental premise that they are already above the award base rate of pay for a part time pilot. It looks to me as a classic case of READY…FIRE…AIM. That is why I assert that you are being mischievous in encouraging young and impressionable cadet pilots to get bolshie regarding their base pay. There are always consequences for those who agitate frivolous actions. The AFAP get it in the neck for providing sound IR advice, it is not always popular but they have had their waterloo, and learnt that treading the popular path can end in tears.
To the Cadets out there, be careful with the shiny baubles, false promises and platitudes from AIPA. Remember, their submission to the senate enquiry was entitled “Are we handing the keys of the Ferrari to a bunch of P Platers?”
Parliament of Australia: Senate: Committees: Rural Affairs and Transport Committee: Pilot training and airline safety including consideration of the Transport Safety Investigation Amendment (Incident Reports) Bill 2010: Submissions Received
Whilst the AFAP may not always take the popular path, they have achieved an enormous amount for you (and for the wider Jetstar pilot body) and genuinely have your interests at heart. There is no conflict of interest when it comes to the AFAP dealing with Jetstar pilots.
As for your assertion that the funding agreement was extinguished as a concession by Jetstar management – what the hell else was it. Jetstar CAPITULATED and accepted that they were on a hiding to nothing if they proceeded with the court action. They didn’t give up the funding agreement because they wanted to; they were forced to give the concession due ONLY to the AFAP’s court action.
Can you answer my question from the first post?
Firstly, the Air Pilots Award provides for a base pay of $81,781. This rate of pay is for a full time pilot. The award describes the full time pilot as one who’s “ordinary hours of work must not average more than 38 hours per week.” The generally accepted application of a 38hr week is 5 work days and 2 days off (refer 24.6). So here is where I sharpen my pencil. 5 workdays per week equates to 260 workdays per annum. NOTE – Public holidays are provided for within the Award annual leave of 42 days AND the minimum wage (refer 31.1 of the award). Cadets are provided with 42 days of Annual Leave. Cadets ALL work 15 days per month, which equates to 180 workdays per annum. The cadet is working 69.2% of a full time equivalent pilot as prescribed by the award (refer 11.4). 69.2% of the Award rate is $56,617. So we don’t need to get into a hollow argument over the transition arrangements when the Cadets base pay ($57,118 and $58,831 in 2012) is above the Air Pilots Award. The figures look even healthier when you consider that the Annual Leave HAS NOT been prorated under the Jetstar deal.
Keith, you also make reference to the cadet agreement. Again, read it, carefully, and you will see that when read in conjunction with the FlexiLine agreement in does not stack up as you suggest.
As far as the cadets are concerned the $56k is not a payment for 56 flight hours per month as the flexi-line agreement and you suggest, it is a minimum payment to undertake all duties as directed by management within the 15 duty days. The flexi line agreement clearly requires a pro rata calculation to be made by dividing the $56k by 12months and then by 75flighthours. The result is then multiplied by 56flighthours to determine the new salary under flexi line.
Using the stated pro-rata calculation, A Cadets adjusted base salary under flexi line is $42,468 for working 56 flight hours. In order to qualify for the minimum payment provided for under the seperate cadet agreement they must work all additional duties as directed.
As far as the cadets are concerned the $56k is not a payment for 56 flight hours per month as the flexi-line agreement and you suggest, it is a minimum payment to undertake all duties as directed by management within the 15 duty days. The flexi line agreement clearly requires a pro rata calculation to be made by dividing the $56k by 12months and then by 75flighthours. The result is then multiplied by 56flighthours to determine the new salary under flexi line.
Using the stated pro-rata calculation, A Cadets adjusted base salary under flexi line is $42,468 for working 56 flight hours. In order to qualify for the minimum payment provided for under the seperate cadet agreement they must work all additional duties as directed.
If you think the cadets will be paid 56k for flying 56 hours per month you are even more niave than i thought and you should read the documents, your comments on here suggest to me that you have not done so up to this point. Once you have read the documents you will clearly see that your calculations to demonstate equality between the JFO rate and the modern award are fundamentally flawed!!
You are selectively reading parts of the old Workplace Relations Act, Fair Work Act, Transitional Provisions, Jetstar EBA and the Flexi Line agreement and coming up with a Camel. Again, if you think you have a case then go test it in front of a commissioner.
Now, hard nosed IR operatives (The AFAP) would look at the above picture and think very carefully before encouraging any Cadet to start a grievance regarding their base rate of pay. You rely on an academic argument regarding untested transitional arrangements and have overlooked the fundamental premise that they are already above the award base rate of pay for a part time pilot. It looks to me as a classic case of READY…FIRE…AIM. That is why I assert that you are being mischievous in encouraging young and impressionable cadet pilots to get bolshie regarding their base pay. There are always consequences for those who agitate frivolous actions. The AFAP get it in the neck for providing sound IR advice, it is not always popular but they have had their waterloo, and learnt that treading the popular path can end in tears.
To the Cadets out there, be careful with the shiny baubles, false promises and platitudes from AIPA. Remember, their submission to the senate enquiry was entitled “Are we handing the keys of the Ferrari to a bunch of P Platers?”
Parliament of Australia: Senate: Committees: Rural Affairs and Transport Committee: Pilot training and airline safety including consideration of the Transport Safety Investigation Amendment (Incident Reports) Bill 2010: Submissions Received
Whilst the AFAP may not always take the popular path, they have achieved an enormous amount for you (and for the wider Jetstar pilot body) and genuinely have your interests at heart. There is no conflict of interest when it comes to the AFAP dealing with Jetstar pilots.
Ps. Regarding the extinguishing of the cadet funding agreement - refer to clause 16.5 of the Air Pilots Award under which they were working for Jetstar Group prior to being taken under the EBA recently!!! It should have gone when they started with Jetstar Group. Do not even start the argument that this was a concession given by Jetstar Management.
Can you answer my question from the first post?
WHAT IMPENDING FEDERAL COURT ACTION IS AIPA TALKING ABOUT???
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keith
I do not consider that I have provided an academic's thesis on any subject, I have simply referred to the Fair Work Act, the transitional provisions legislation and the other documents being discussed and presented the facts laid before me.
You said:
Are you suggesting that the Commissioner has a free rein to determine as he sees fit or is it not, certainly in this case, that he simply has to determine on the correct application of the Act?
Where did this calculation get dreamt up from? - And you say I invent things!!
This is another argument all together, albeit I accept it is connected to the discussion in hand as it may provide one method of pro-rata to the minimum wage stipulated by the Modern Award, so I will endulge you in debate on this occasion.
Whilst in the normal working world a 38 hour week is generally regarded as 5 working days and 2 days off (the traditional 9 'til 5), both you and I know that this is not true of the life of a pilot. Clause 24.6 does not prescribe this working pattern it simply states that a normal roster period will comprise of 5 working days and 2 days off, it does not say that a pilot must work on each or all of those days. Practically for various reasons a pilot does not necessarily work this pattern and the actual pattern is generally determined by flight time limitations and company operational requirements. The fact of the matter is that there are no stipulations as to the pattern of work, the number of duty hours that a pilot must work, or indeed flying hours that a pilot must fly in the Modern Award. The fact is that there only exists limitations which cannot be exceeded, an average of 38 hours per week in the case of duty hours as provided for in the NES and 900 flying hours per year (together with the progressive totals) stipulated by CAO48.1.
The Jetstar EBA through Clause 23.1.1 suggests that a Full Time Pilot's salary as detailed in Clause 25.1 of the Jetstar EBA is based upon 900 flying hours per annum, the maximum allowed under CAO48.1 Flight Time limitations (without the Jetstar exemption issued by CASA). This would be the same 900 hour flight time limitation prescribed by the Award. I would suggest that it is more appropriate to use the commonality of flight time between the agreements as the basis for the pro-rata. Indeed it is exactly this method that the Jetstar EBA uses to establish the salary applicable to a part-time or job share pilot so it must be valid. In the interest of comparing apples with apples I would suggest the commissioner would see that this is a reasonable assertion to make despite the possibility that he or she is not an academic.
Let me try to clarify what I meant. The flexi-line agreement provides for a reduced availability only as a direct result of the initial company requirement to offer contracts that guaranteed only a proportion of the full time credit hours in a given roster period which in turn, through the mechanism provided in the EBA, would lead to a reduced level of remuneration compared to a full time employee. The reduced availability in physical time was demanded as a secondary consideration by AFAP, and is in the same proportion to ensure the true part-time operation of the contract was preserved and to ensure it was not a full time role simply working less hours and being paid less.
What is actually happenning is the converse to that feared by AFAP in that the company is rostering cadets for a higher number of flight hours on the reduced number of available days (allowed due to roster flight hours being notional only), ie. a lesser number of longer duty periods but still within the reduced physical time provided for by the flexi-line agreement. The cadets must work these longer duty periods comprising more flight time as a condition to qualify for the minimum salary payment, clause 11 of the cadet agreement states (my bolding):
This is where the slight of hand takes place, and I feel you just aint getting it:
At last we agree on something!! Jetstar will pay a cadet as you have stated but only as a result of the minimum remuneration clause in the cadet contract. Unfortunately, as stated above what is actually happenning is that the company is rostering cadets for more than 56 hours per roster period but this does not necessarily lead to an increase in monthly salary payment. In fact they are actually being rostered for at least the full-time equivalent hours in each roster period.
This leads me on quite nicely to the next matter you wished to debate:
I never said that the cadet would be paid less than $57,118 per annum, what I said was that a Cadet's adjusted base salary, (note, not minimum salary) under flexi line is $42,468 for working 56 flight hours and that in order to qualify for this to be topped up to the minimum payment provided for under the seperate cadet agreement they must work all additional duties as directed. Hopefully the remainder of this post will illustrate what I mean.
The following is taken directly from the Flexi-Line agreement:
For illustration purposes lets work through the example quoted in the actual agreement using the benefit of an actual cadet roster of 75 flying hours (900 hours per year or the full time equivalent) in a given roster period:
In the legal profession we call this 'fortressing', it is usually seen where a lawyer believes his client's position is under attack and is in danger of crumbling. A lawyer will shut down, cease introducing new argument, put up the barricades and try and pass the buck to a third party. I am disappointed that our little debate has resulted in such a tactic.
Finally to a bit of unfinished business:
Sorry cannot help there, like I said previously you are are barking up the wrong tree!!
More to follow
The Kelpie
I do not consider that I have provided an academic's thesis on any subject, I have simply referred to the Fair Work Act, the transitional provisions legislation and the other documents being discussed and presented the facts laid before me.
You said:
You have provided an academic’s thesis on the subject, which is nice and comfortable in academia, but a commissioner he isn’t and ultimately that is what counts in the real world.
Firstly, the Air Pilots Award provides for a base pay of $81,781. This rate of pay is for a full time pilot. The award describes the full time pilot as one who’s “ordinary hours of work must not average more than 38 hours per week.” The generally accepted application of a 38hr week is 5 work days and 2 days off (refer 24.6). So here is where I sharpen my pencil. 5 workdays per week equates to 260 workdays per annum. NOTE – Public holidays are provided for within the Award annual leave of 42 days AND the minimum wage (refer 31.1 of the award). Cadets are provided with 42 days of Annual Leave. Cadets ALL work 15 days per month, which equates to 180 workdays per annum. The cadet is working 69.2% of a full time equivalent pilot as prescribed by the award (refer 11.4). 69.2% of the Award rate is $56,617. So we don’t need to get into a hollow argument over the transition arrangements when the Cadets base pay ($57,118 and $58,831 in 2012) is above the Air Pilots Award. The figures look even healthier when you consider that the Annual Leave HAS NOT been prorated under the Jetstar deal.
This is another argument all together, albeit I accept it is connected to the discussion in hand as it may provide one method of pro-rata to the minimum wage stipulated by the Modern Award, so I will endulge you in debate on this occasion.
Whilst in the normal working world a 38 hour week is generally regarded as 5 working days and 2 days off (the traditional 9 'til 5), both you and I know that this is not true of the life of a pilot. Clause 24.6 does not prescribe this working pattern it simply states that a normal roster period will comprise of 5 working days and 2 days off, it does not say that a pilot must work on each or all of those days. Practically for various reasons a pilot does not necessarily work this pattern and the actual pattern is generally determined by flight time limitations and company operational requirements. The fact of the matter is that there are no stipulations as to the pattern of work, the number of duty hours that a pilot must work, or indeed flying hours that a pilot must fly in the Modern Award. The fact is that there only exists limitations which cannot be exceeded, an average of 38 hours per week in the case of duty hours as provided for in the NES and 900 flying hours per year (together with the progressive totals) stipulated by CAO48.1.
The Jetstar EBA through Clause 23.1.1 suggests that a Full Time Pilot's salary as detailed in Clause 25.1 of the Jetstar EBA is based upon 900 flying hours per annum, the maximum allowed under CAO48.1 Flight Time limitations (without the Jetstar exemption issued by CASA). This would be the same 900 hour flight time limitation prescribed by the Award. I would suggest that it is more appropriate to use the commonality of flight time between the agreements as the basis for the pro-rata. Indeed it is exactly this method that the Jetstar EBA uses to establish the salary applicable to a part-time or job share pilot so it must be valid. In the interest of comparing apples with apples I would suggest the commissioner would see that this is a reasonable assertion to make despite the possibility that he or she is not an academic.
BS. Your argument regarding flight hours are plain wrong and deceptive. A flexi line employee (all cadets are flexi line) is a part time employee with reduced availability. What additional duties are permitted under the EBA? Can they be directed to work on duty free days or days off? NO!
What is actually happenning is the converse to that feared by AFAP in that the company is rostering cadets for a higher number of flight hours on the reduced number of available days (allowed due to roster flight hours being notional only), ie. a lesser number of longer duty periods but still within the reduced physical time provided for by the flexi-line agreement. The cadets must work these longer duty periods comprising more flight time as a condition to qualify for the minimum salary payment, clause 11 of the cadet agreement states (my bolding):
11. The Minimum Remuneration will only apply where the Cadet undertakes all duties as directed and the Cadet remains employed by JQA. The Minimum Remuneration will be pro rated in the event that a Cadet takes unpaid leave.
IF Jetstar roster the cadets for 56 hours flying per month for a year then the cadets WILL be paid the minimum salary of $57,118. THAT IS WHAT IS WRITTEN IN THE AGREEMENT THAT WAS STRUCK FOR THE CADETS!!
This leads me on quite nicely to the next matter you wished to debate:
Where is your EVIDENCE that the cadets will be paid less than $57,118. Your pro-rated $42,468 salary is utter tosh and has no basis in any agreement. You have invented this amount to back up your argument.
The following is taken directly from the Flexi-Line agreement:
1.1.2. Monthly base salary will be as defined by Subclause 25.1 of the Jetstar Airways Pilots Agreement 2008 (‘Agreement’) and will be calculated by dividing the relevant fulltime Pilot’s base salary by 12 months then dividing by 75 Credit Hours then multiplying that figure by 56 Credit Hours.
1.1.3. All hours worked in a Roster Period greater than 56, where there is no Annual Leave in that Roster Period, will be paid in accordance with Paragraph 25.5.1 of the Agreement (i.e., Annual Salary / 787.0).
1.1.3.1. For example, if a FL Pilot performs 77 Credit Hours in a Roster Period and there is no Annual Leave in the Roster Period, the Pilot will receive the following:
1.1.3. All hours worked in a Roster Period greater than 56, where there is no Annual Leave in that Roster Period, will be paid in accordance with Paragraph 25.5.1 of the Agreement (i.e., Annual Salary / 787.0).
1.1.3.1. For example, if a FL Pilot performs 77 Credit Hours in a Roster Period and there is no Annual Leave in the Roster Period, the Pilot will receive the following:
Credit Hours 0-56 = Base Salary divided 12 months divided 75 credit hours multiplied by 56 Credit Hours; and
Credit Hours greater than 56 will be paid in accordance with Paragraph 25.5.1 of the Agreement (i.e., Annual Salary / 787.0 multiplied by 21 Credit Hours (77 Credit Hours minus 56 Credit Hours = 21 Credit Hours).
1.1.4. If a Pilot performs less than 56 Credit Hours per Roster Period, Jetstar will pay the Pilot for a guaranteed minimum of 56 Credit Hours per Roster Period.
Credit Hours greater than 56 will be paid in accordance with Paragraph 25.5.1 of the Agreement (i.e., Annual Salary / 787.0 multiplied by 21 Credit Hours (77 Credit Hours minus 56 Credit Hours = 21 Credit Hours).
Credit Hours 0-56 = $57,188 divided 12 months divided 75 credit hours multiplied by 56 Credit Hours; $3,559 per month or $42,468 per year
Credit Hours greater than 56 will be paid in accordance with Paragraph 25.5.1 of the Agreement (i.e., $57,188 / 787.0 multiplied by 19 Credit Hours (75 Credit Hours minus 56 Credit Hours = 19 Credit Hours); $1,381 per month or $16,572 per year.
Total annual salary for the cadet rostered and working 75 flying hours per month (Full Time Equivalent)= 12 x ($3,559+$1,381) = $59,280.
The salary determined by the Modern Award as a direct comparison to the example given above is by your reckoning $81,781. Difference $22,501.Credit Hours greater than 56 will be paid in accordance with Paragraph 25.5.1 of the Agreement (i.e., $57,188 / 787.0 multiplied by 19 Credit Hours (75 Credit Hours minus 56 Credit Hours = 19 Credit Hours); $1,381 per month or $16,572 per year.
Total annual salary for the cadet rostered and working 75 flying hours per month (Full Time Equivalent)= 12 x ($3,559+$1,381) = $59,280.
if you think you have a case then go test it in front of a commissioner.
Finally to a bit of unfinished business:
Can you answer my question from the first post?
Quote:
WHAT IMPENDING FEDERAL COURT ACTION IS AIPA TALKING ABOUT???
Quote:
WHAT IMPENDING FEDERAL COURT ACTION IS AIPA TALKING ABOUT???
More to follow
The Kelpie
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How does every post about Jetstar end up being a pissing contest between AFAP and AIPA
At some stage, probably when we qualify for government assistance due to our income levels, you guys may start realising where the main game is and we are losing that one big time.
AIPA - the thorn in Managements side, good work although the achievements may not make headlines.
AFAP - Jetstar manangements "friend with benefits" that due to AIPA sabre rattling have woken up from a deep sleep and realised it may not be in their best interest to be in the managements pocket. Good work should have started that work 8yrs ago.
AIPA and AFAP working together which is the only way to achieve a decent outcome, I guess it doesn't hurt to dream
At some stage, probably when we qualify for government assistance due to our income levels, you guys may start realising where the main game is and we are losing that one big time.
AIPA - the thorn in Managements side, good work although the achievements may not make headlines.
AFAP - Jetstar manangements "friend with benefits" that due to AIPA sabre rattling have woken up from a deep sleep and realised it may not be in their best interest to be in the managements pocket. Good work should have started that work 8yrs ago.
AIPA and AFAP working together which is the only way to achieve a decent outcome, I guess it doesn't hurt to dream
Nunc est bibendum
Great post toolish!
(Glad I caught the auto correct then. It changed 'toolish' to 'foolish'. Only caught it on the proof read otherwise it could have been very embarrassing! )
(Glad I caught the auto correct then. It changed 'toolish' to 'foolish'. Only caught it on the proof read otherwise it could have been very embarrassing! )
