National Jet Systems (Cobham) Fined
So a fine of $96K for underpaying pilots a total of $123.4K.
Corporate Australia really must be quaking in their boots.
How much was spent by them on defending the case?
How much did the taxpayer fork out to prosecute the case?
Will the defendant have to pay any costs?
Corporate Australia really must be quaking in their boots.
How much was spent by them on defending the case?
How much did the taxpayer fork out to prosecute the case?
Will the defendant have to pay any costs?
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So a fine of $96K for underpaying pilots a total of $123.4K.
Corporate Australia really must be quaking in their boots.
How much was spent by them on defending the case?
How much did the taxpayer fork out to prosecute the case?
Will the defendant have to pay any costs?
Corporate Australia really must be quaking in their boots.
How much was spent by them on defending the case?
How much did the taxpayer fork out to prosecute the case?
Will the defendant have to pay any costs?
Underpayment of legal entitlements appears to be quite prevalent whether deliberate or oversight, so the courts have to send a message out somehow.
Also a reminder to all to keep on top of their own payslips and take a greater role in knowing if they are getting all that has been agreed to in a contract/agreement
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If they happily paid up once FW Ombudsman was involved then why did it make it to federal court?
I reckon any fines don't work with companies - just gaol the CEO if the company has illegal dealing!
I reckon any fines don't work with companies - just gaol the CEO if the company has illegal dealing!
Are you saying the fine is not enough? Comparatively to other cases it seems to be on the hefty side
This was not a one off event. THIRTY THREE people were underpaid deliberately by their employer.
The message this sends to corporate Australia is if you are in a grey area or wish to try your luck with pay and conditions simply roll the dice and even if you lose the fine will be marginal in its effect on profits.
I believe the MAXIMUM fine is much higher, look it up. What about the argument that the fine should be for each EVENT. As it stands 96 divided by 33 is around $2900 per individual offence.
I believe the company spent much more than the 96 + 123 to defend the case, maybe that in itself may be the deterrent because the fine is not.
I reckon any fines don't work with companies - just gaol the CEO if the company has illegal dealing
The company will simply view a fine as a cost of doing business. Just like insurance, electricity and wages.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The quantum of the fine may appear small in consideration of the effect on the individuals concerned.
But it does have a sting in its tail, it will have to be declared to all who fund the operation as it is a judgement against the company, some funders will not be charmed by the thought that the managers are prepared to break the law to further their career objectives, it will make ongoing funding more difficult.
But it does have a sting in its tail, it will have to be declared to all who fund the operation as it is a judgement against the company, some funders will not be charmed by the thought that the managers are prepared to break the law to further their career objectives, it will make ongoing funding more difficult.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Bangkok & Vegas
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was this the magnificent B scale?
I have a mate now working at Emirates who was ex NJS. Are the company or the FWO attempting to contact ex employees to give them the cash?
He would probably use it for beer money or buy a camel with it.
5 years hey - swift justice.
I have a mate now working at Emirates who was ex NJS. Are the company or the FWO attempting to contact ex employees to give them the cash?
He would probably use it for beer money or buy a camel with it.
5 years hey - swift justice.
some funders will not be charmed by the thought that the managers are prepared to break the law to further their career objectives
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: oz
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a mate now working at Emirates who was ex NJS. Are the company or the FWO attempting to contact ex employees to give them the cash?
That is to say that as long as
s like National Joke keep your entitlements from you and then fight it until you resign, then that is apparently OK.On the bright side, your mate and I no longer work for Nat Joke
"The Fair Work Ombudsman also alleged that company had breached workplace laws by applying duress to two pilots in an effort to pressure them into signing workplace agreements.
However, Magistrate Lucev dismissed this allegation, finding that while National Jet Systems had applied pressure to the two pilots, it did not amount to unlawful duress."
Looks more like this was about "Workchoice Legislation" than CPI increases. Perhaps the focus was lost somewhere during the case.
However, Magistrate Lucev dismissed this allegation, finding that while National Jet Systems had applied pressure to the two pilots, it did not amount to unlawful duress."
Looks more like this was about "Workchoice Legislation" than CPI increases. Perhaps the focus was lost somewhere during the case.
That was an additional charge ("also"). I wasn't there but my understanding is that the underpayment was to do with CPI increases not being paid.
The B scale is still in place so it wasn't that.
The B scale is still in place so it wasn't that.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 79
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's all a matter of trust, and this is not an isolated incident of wrongdoing by this management.
The question Cobham's customers will be asking is: 'if Cobham can't be trusted to honor their obligations to their staff - and demonstrably they cannot - then how can they be trusted to honor commercial agreements?
The question Cobham's customers will be asking is: 'if Cobham can't be trusted to honor their obligations to their staff - and demonstrably they cannot - then how can they be trusted to honor commercial agreements?
Tenmen - really? I don't think that Cobham's customers really give two hoots about how they treat their staff. As long as the aircraft is there when they agree it will be, and everything is up to the right standards of safety and operations they are happy. I don't see Qantas or Bristow/Chevron getting too excited about how Cobham treat their own staff.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
having worked at NJS, I have seen first hand how management treat and relate to their staff, especially on this case of unpaid entitlements. Lets face it Airlines are now run by lawyers and accountants! the accountants cut cost to the bone, eroding terms and conditions and the lawyers determine if that the changes made are, at least, somewhat legal. The CEO controls the accountants and lawyers but also uses them as a sheild to protect his own arse. Just ask PN, ****s on his staff and takes a promotion to head of all cobham aviation worldwide. I met him once, A grade f#@kstick. If I meet him again I think I'll just hit the c#@t.