Jetstar (and VA) issues towards NZ negoiations
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: ..
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jetstar (and VA) issues towards NZ negoiations
Since the last thread got closed down ( doesn't seem to happen to Qantas threads) I thought I would continue one under an accurate title to avoid being closed again.
As a Kiwi working in Australia I am in total agreement with what I was reading.
My Kiwi colleagues have without exception taken the moral high ground with VA Australian colleagues, they have been asked to fly domestic in Australia and the first thing they do is ok it with Australian Unions. That is called courtesy and professionalism my friends and something that is not always reciprocated.
If we did all work together, as QF should have done with JQ, this infighting would largely cease.
Why did Australian based pilots undermine a NZ group wishing to negotiate? If the Kiwis were to reciprocate that favour can you imagine the abuse,
some would call that hypocritical.
I am heartened that many at VA would not do this to VANZ, although they are still looked down upon by some. The treatment of their seniority is insulting and does not create any sort of comradeship between groups. How do the VANZ guys respsond now if the company offers them some bigger Metal or routes into Asia. Gets harder to take the moral high ground as this sort of treatment continues.
Bula, what Jetstar NZ did to Australia is exactly what you did to QF. However at least the NZ guys lived in a different country with a completely different set of laws and conditions and fly NZ based routes. Not quite the same can be said of what JQ Austraia did, some may call you a hypocrite also, but not me.
As a Kiwi working in Australia I am in total agreement with what I was reading.
My Kiwi colleagues have without exception taken the moral high ground with VA Australian colleagues, they have been asked to fly domestic in Australia and the first thing they do is ok it with Australian Unions. That is called courtesy and professionalism my friends and something that is not always reciprocated.
If we did all work together, as QF should have done with JQ, this infighting would largely cease.
Why did Australian based pilots undermine a NZ group wishing to negotiate? If the Kiwis were to reciprocate that favour can you imagine the abuse,
some would call that hypocritical.
I am heartened that many at VA would not do this to VANZ, although they are still looked down upon by some. The treatment of their seniority is insulting and does not create any sort of comradeship between groups. How do the VANZ guys respsond now if the company offers them some bigger Metal or routes into Asia. Gets harder to take the moral high ground as this sort of treatment continues.
Bula, what Jetstar NZ did to Australia is exactly what you did to QF. However at least the NZ guys lived in a different country with a completely different set of laws and conditions and fly NZ based routes. Not quite the same can be said of what JQ Austraia did, some may call you a hypocrite also, but not me.
Last edited by astinapilot; 3rd Apr 2013 at 03:17.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are there any direct entry commands available in the land of the long white cloud presently?
AirNZ are offering them on the B777. The only problem is you have to do min hours, have a great lifestyle and get paid twice as much as the other pilots.
Just ring HR and they will book you in for the free type rating.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote
Did you have some spare asterisks lying around that needed to be used or something?
Seriously, do you have to just be critical of something so trivial. Grow up. Not wally related to the topic, but I bet you are a kiwi hater too...
If you don't have anything constructive to say, then keep quiet...
Yep, I had a few spare full stops...
Did you have some spare asterisks lying around that needed to be used or something?
Seriously, do you have to just be critical of something so trivial. Grow up. Not wally related to the topic, but I bet you are a kiwi hater too...
If you don't have anything constructive to say, then keep quiet...
Yep, I had a few spare full stops...
Last edited by always inverted; 3rd Apr 2013 at 02:48.
First up, youre dealing with jetstar, not aussies. Second of all, jetconnect.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: ..
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maggot. First point taken although the attitudes exist elsewhere and as I said I don't think VA would do this to VANZ.
Second point, yes partly agree, QF built up those routes. However it was managements decision to start that flying based in NZ, such as should Air NZ open a Brisbane base pilots would apply should the conditions satisfy them. Obviously the $ play a big part, but traditionally Tasman flying is much better based out of NZ due time zones and consequent productivity/utilisation that results.
But what the thread was talking about is the equivalent of JC operating domestic sectors while you had your argument with AJ.
Not good.
Anyway my post isn't intended to start a p. contest. Start the dialogue and work as one.
Second point, yes partly agree, QF built up those routes. However it was managements decision to start that flying based in NZ, such as should Air NZ open a Brisbane base pilots would apply should the conditions satisfy them. Obviously the $ play a big part, but traditionally Tasman flying is much better based out of NZ due time zones and consequent productivity/utilisation that results.
But what the thread was talking about is the equivalent of JC operating domestic sectors while you had your argument with AJ.
Not good.
Anyway my post isn't intended to start a p. contest. Start the dialogue and work as one.
Last edited by astinapilot; 3rd Apr 2013 at 05:56.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air NZ (ALPA) pilots have a scope clause. If AirNZ wants to start up a subsidiary jet operation anywhere, it has to be offered to AirNZ pilots first, on their conditions. I reckon you should look into it.......
Astina, good for you that you are attempting to discuss things in an open and constructive manner. My post was more of a reason, not an excuse. However, someone did mention it in the other thread, that paying the oz jetstar guys excessive amounts could have contributed to getting your deal? It does seem like a pretty good improvemnt too from my outsiders uninformed eye, youll never get everything you want and i can imagine the gutted feeling watching your 'collegues' behave in this way. Individual morals and ethics and excuses aside, the company will go out of their way to crew flights and, as sad as it seems, there will be the willing amongst us.
Youre right, i cant see the VA guys doing similar but you're talking about a very different company and contracts.
Youre right, i cant see the VA guys doing similar but you're talking about a very different company and contracts.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Astina, sorry, you misread my post... I was having a moan at AerocatS2A not you.
Guys, that's where you would be wrong... VAA are not entertaining any common ground with the VANZ crews, staying at different hotels. They want us right at the bottom of the list, even under s/o's who aren't even qualified on the types we fly, ie, they don't meet the req's for the 737 fleet and when they do, need to do another interview and sim I think... So why should they take precedence over guys that have been around for years longer...
Integrated seniority would have been better, BUT blocking off he Australian commands for the Aussie f/o's and the nz commands for nz f/o's until they have had a chance to attain the left seat then its open to all. But now they have VANZ on the bottom of the list, that's if the NZ crews want to be part of it... Aren't they negotiating at the moment as well.
Guys, that's where you would be wrong... VAA are not entertaining any common ground with the VANZ crews, staying at different hotels. They want us right at the bottom of the list, even under s/o's who aren't even qualified on the types we fly, ie, they don't meet the req's for the 737 fleet and when they do, need to do another interview and sim I think... So why should they take precedence over guys that have been around for years longer...
Integrated seniority would have been better, BUT blocking off he Australian commands for the Aussie f/o's and the nz commands for nz f/o's until they have had a chance to attain the left seat then its open to all. But now they have VANZ on the bottom of the list, that's if the NZ crews want to be part of it... Aren't they negotiating at the moment as well.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Under the VAA/VAI/VANZ integration policy the VANZ pilots have not been sold out at all!
Prior to the agreement, all operations were effectively silo'd, meaning neither group had any rights to the flying or operation of the other group..
Under the new agreement, VANZ pilots have been placed at the bottom of the VAA seniority list but with VANZ commands protected, VAA pilots have effectively been placed at the bottom of the VANZ pilot list as well.
No Australian pilot can take a job or promotion away from a VANZ pilot. What the agreement does is enable NZ pilots access to the Australian operation complete with better pay and conditions. A VANZ pilot employed 3 days ago is now senior to a VAA or VAI pilot for that matter who was employed yesterday. Is this not a better situation than VANZ pilots had previously?
I don't see any benefit in this deal for any Australian based pilot especially in the short term. VANZ access to VAI had ceased as of this year anyway so any hope these guys had to progress across to the 777 was gone.
VANZ continues as per normal with jobs and commands protected for VANZ pilots. What has changed is they now have access to the Australian operation.. With all the expansion occurring at VAA currently this over time will be of benefit to VANZ pilots. With the demise of the VANZ domestic operation, realistically, how much future expansion is there? Any expansion will be protected for VANZ pilots anyway. There are only so many islands in the pacific to fly to..
Integration is not an overnight solution.. It is designed so that in the long term, all pilots may at some stage benefit. VAA command protection for FO's over VAI or ex VAI CRFO's has a sunset clause based on 20 years.
The other option was to silo VANZ. This would ensure no VANZ pilot ever transfers across to VAA unless they resign from VANZ and apply like everyone else,off the street.. Under the terms of the policy they can transfer inter company.
I know there are many senior Captains at VANZ annoyed that their years of service have not been taken into account by putting them at the bottom of the list.. On the flip side numerous even more senior pilots at VAA have been placed below less senior pilots at VANZ with VANZ commands protected..
The integration policy was not formulated overnight. It took over 8 months to design and write. It wasn't just a case of 'right we have our policy, now lets just put the kiwi's at the bottom and get this over and done with'. Much thought was put into their position and in the interest of fairness NZ commands were protected in the same way VAA commands were protected for the most junior F/O's.
There will always be those who can't see the woods from the trees and will always feel they have been shafted. Integration is never an easy job. Airlines in the US are still perusing legal action decades after their integration.
If VANZ got A330's (highly unlikely I think, although some in VANZ seem to think its going to happen even though JB has said they have no plans to do this) than I don't see why the VANZ senior pilots should not have priority to operate these.
Prior to the agreement, all operations were effectively silo'd, meaning neither group had any rights to the flying or operation of the other group..
Under the new agreement, VANZ pilots have been placed at the bottom of the VAA seniority list but with VANZ commands protected, VAA pilots have effectively been placed at the bottom of the VANZ pilot list as well.
No Australian pilot can take a job or promotion away from a VANZ pilot. What the agreement does is enable NZ pilots access to the Australian operation complete with better pay and conditions. A VANZ pilot employed 3 days ago is now senior to a VAA or VAI pilot for that matter who was employed yesterday. Is this not a better situation than VANZ pilots had previously?
I don't see any benefit in this deal for any Australian based pilot especially in the short term. VANZ access to VAI had ceased as of this year anyway so any hope these guys had to progress across to the 777 was gone.
VANZ continues as per normal with jobs and commands protected for VANZ pilots. What has changed is they now have access to the Australian operation.. With all the expansion occurring at VAA currently this over time will be of benefit to VANZ pilots. With the demise of the VANZ domestic operation, realistically, how much future expansion is there? Any expansion will be protected for VANZ pilots anyway. There are only so many islands in the pacific to fly to..
Integration is not an overnight solution.. It is designed so that in the long term, all pilots may at some stage benefit. VAA command protection for FO's over VAI or ex VAI CRFO's has a sunset clause based on 20 years.
The other option was to silo VANZ. This would ensure no VANZ pilot ever transfers across to VAA unless they resign from VANZ and apply like everyone else,off the street.. Under the terms of the policy they can transfer inter company.
I know there are many senior Captains at VANZ annoyed that their years of service have not been taken into account by putting them at the bottom of the list.. On the flip side numerous even more senior pilots at VAA have been placed below less senior pilots at VANZ with VANZ commands protected..
The integration policy was not formulated overnight. It took over 8 months to design and write. It wasn't just a case of 'right we have our policy, now lets just put the kiwi's at the bottom and get this over and done with'. Much thought was put into their position and in the interest of fairness NZ commands were protected in the same way VAA commands were protected for the most junior F/O's.
There will always be those who can't see the woods from the trees and will always feel they have been shafted. Integration is never an easy job. Airlines in the US are still perusing legal action decades after their integration.
If VANZ got A330's (highly unlikely I think, although some in VANZ seem to think its going to happen even though JB has said they have no plans to do this) than I don't see why the VANZ senior pilots should not have priority to operate these.
Last edited by fmcinop; 5th Apr 2013 at 22:39.
in the interest of fairness NZ commands were protected in the same way VAA commands were protected for the most junior F/O's.
If VANZ got A330's (highly unlikely I think, although some in VANZ seem to think its going to happen even though JB has said they have no plans to do this) than I don't see why the VANZ senior pilots should not have priority to operate these.
But of course when Virgin Pacific starts none of this will matter...
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So why do the VANZ pilots feel they have been hard done by and shafted (yet again supposedly)?
As I see it they have more to gain out of the deal than anyone else.
With bypass pay for VAI SFO's it was thought that not many if any SFO's would want to move to domestic. I would love to be a 777 f/o on captains wage. This is one reason the protection did not cover VAI Captains or SFO's.. If it did it would have been a very one sided policy.. We can come and fly the 777 based on our seniority but you guys can't come and do the same. Remember the 777 has no protection for its pilots unlike VANZ. All positions are pure DOJ from the seniority list which means no SFO will ever get a 777 command.
I know the policy does not afford protection for wide body aircraft for VANZ, but a: I don't think they will ever get them (both SD and JB confirmed no plans for this) B: if they did my personal thought is they should have first crack only for the guys employed before the integration policy of course.. Just my opinion.
Always inverted.
Your suggestion is exactly the was the policy works. VANZ commands protected for VANZ f/O's and VAA commands protected for VAA f/O's. maybe you misread the policy?
As for the CRFO's not meeting the requirement for a 737 F/O, really? Do you want to guess how many CRFo's have over 10,000 hours, were ex westwind/ Learjet training captains, ex Dash 8 check and training captains, ex Braz training captains, ex 727/767/757 F/O's. the Answer is a lot! sure some are low time but I recall VB hiring 737 F/O's at one stage with little over 1000 hours total and only a CPL. Contrary to popular belief, CRFO's didn't apply for a 777 position because they missed out on VB or were unqualified for a position on a 737. Many applied because they wanted to try long haul and because it was a good opportunity to have a go of a 777.
As I see it they have more to gain out of the deal than anyone else.
With bypass pay for VAI SFO's it was thought that not many if any SFO's would want to move to domestic. I would love to be a 777 f/o on captains wage. This is one reason the protection did not cover VAI Captains or SFO's.. If it did it would have been a very one sided policy.. We can come and fly the 777 based on our seniority but you guys can't come and do the same. Remember the 777 has no protection for its pilots unlike VANZ. All positions are pure DOJ from the seniority list which means no SFO will ever get a 777 command.
I know the policy does not afford protection for wide body aircraft for VANZ, but a: I don't think they will ever get them (both SD and JB confirmed no plans for this) B: if they did my personal thought is they should have first crack only for the guys employed before the integration policy of course.. Just my opinion.
Always inverted.
Your suggestion is exactly the was the policy works. VANZ commands protected for VANZ f/O's and VAA commands protected for VAA f/O's. maybe you misread the policy?
As for the CRFO's not meeting the requirement for a 737 F/O, really? Do you want to guess how many CRFo's have over 10,000 hours, were ex westwind/ Learjet training captains, ex Dash 8 check and training captains, ex Braz training captains, ex 727/767/757 F/O's. the Answer is a lot! sure some are low time but I recall VB hiring 737 F/O's at one stage with little over 1000 hours total and only a CPL. Contrary to popular belief, CRFO's didn't apply for a 777 position because they missed out on VB or were unqualified for a position on a 737. Many applied because they wanted to try long haul and because it was a good opportunity to have a go of a 777.
Last edited by fmcinop; 6th Apr 2013 at 04:01.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What the?
Any pilot employed into VAA will be on current VAA terms and conditions. Any pilot employed into VAI will continue to be on VAI terms and conditions and not some B scale VANZ contract. VANZ pilot will continue on whatever EBA they manage to negotiate. Like it or not NZ is a different country with different industrial laws and requirements. Superannuation, insurance, industrial law are all different. You can't expect any and all conditions to be made available to all parties across different countries.
Skywest will at some stage also be included into the seniority list but they will retain their own T & C's. if they choose to move to VAA, then they will then be employed under the VAA EBA be it better or worse than the Skywest one!
Any pilot employed into VAA will be on current VAA terms and conditions. Any pilot employed into VAI will continue to be on VAI terms and conditions and not some B scale VANZ contract. VANZ pilot will continue on whatever EBA they manage to negotiate. Like it or not NZ is a different country with different industrial laws and requirements. Superannuation, insurance, industrial law are all different. You can't expect any and all conditions to be made available to all parties across different countries.
Skywest will at some stage also be included into the seniority list but they will retain their own T & C's. if they choose to move to VAA, then they will then be employed under the VAA EBA be it better or worse than the Skywest one!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: ..
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FMC
Incorrect. VANZ had 2008 seniority with respect to VAI positions and have had a number of crew transfer over.
"On the flip side numerous even more senior pilots at VAA have been placed below less senior pilots at VANZ with VANZ commands protected
Incorrect also, unless VAA has a captain that started after July 2012 which I can name none, all VAA and VAI crew are senior to VANZ pre July.
My offsiders at VANZ are aggrieved as they have were told from VB 2008 is their group date for opportunities. This date has been used for VAI transfers, so to now place them at the bottom is an issue. Many felt 2008 should have been the date with VAA 737 F/O's protected. That was the status quo and left them opportunity to transfer to VAI slots.
However I agree, it is a good opportunity for them with no growth left on that side. Its also a lot better than what they had, aside from 777 transfers.
Also agree - no B scale here. Cathay don't pay HK wages to AKL base. If they transfer to VAA they get a VAA contract.
Incorrect. VANZ had 2008 seniority with respect to VAI positions and have had a number of crew transfer over.
"On the flip side numerous even more senior pilots at VAA have been placed below less senior pilots at VANZ with VANZ commands protected
Incorrect also, unless VAA has a captain that started after July 2012 which I can name none, all VAA and VAI crew are senior to VANZ pre July.
My offsiders at VANZ are aggrieved as they have were told from VB 2008 is their group date for opportunities. This date has been used for VAI transfers, so to now place them at the bottom is an issue. Many felt 2008 should have been the date with VAA 737 F/O's protected. That was the status quo and left them opportunity to transfer to VAI slots.
However I agree, it is a good opportunity for them with no growth left on that side. Its also a lot better than what they had, aside from 777 transfers.
Also agree - no B scale here. Cathay don't pay HK wages to AKL base. If they transfer to VAA they get a VAA contract.
Last edited by astinapilot; 6th Apr 2013 at 10:26.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not really incorrect at all.
VANZ had a number of pilots transfer to VAI. None of these pilots have had any 2008 date recognized under integration. Not a single one.. That door had also been closed permanently so the last VANZ pilot to transfer was really the last.
HR department who supposedly made the offer of a 2008 date to be recognized denigh it was ever given reference any Australian operation. How could it without consultation and approval of the Australian group or without at least a full reciprocal arrangement giving VAA pilots the ability to go to VANZ with a 2008 date for which there is none. There was no consultation with the Australian Union either on this matter.
VANZ have command protection for F/O's so by default even the most senior Captain from VAA with a start date of 20 Aug 2000 (the date the first 25 non management pilots were employed) cannot apply or be awarded a VANZ command ahead of any current F/O there for making them junior on the VANZ list. this is exactly the same for VANZ pilots on the VAA list. VAA pilots are at the bottom of the VANZ list and VANZ pilots are at the bottom of the VAA list. how can this not be fair? There is no 2008 date recognized for VAA pilots on the VANZ list.
VAA pilots are not trying to screw over VANZ crew. With little to no expansion and slow command progression who would really want to go. Add to that lower salaries and condition. With a few more 737 on the way, a few more A330's and either A350's or 787's announced by the end of this years I don't see anyone going anywhere.
We stay at a number of the same hotels as VANZ as well. Melbourne and Sydney and until recently Brisbane. VAI and VAA Don't even stay at the same place in Brisbane anymore. I'm not sure who told you we are to precious to stay at the same hotel as NZ crew? It's utter rubbish.
If this does change it will be a contract, room availability issue and not at the request of VAA/VAI crew.
VANZ had a number of pilots transfer to VAI. None of these pilots have had any 2008 date recognized under integration. Not a single one.. That door had also been closed permanently so the last VANZ pilot to transfer was really the last.
HR department who supposedly made the offer of a 2008 date to be recognized denigh it was ever given reference any Australian operation. How could it without consultation and approval of the Australian group or without at least a full reciprocal arrangement giving VAA pilots the ability to go to VANZ with a 2008 date for which there is none. There was no consultation with the Australian Union either on this matter.
VANZ have command protection for F/O's so by default even the most senior Captain from VAA with a start date of 20 Aug 2000 (the date the first 25 non management pilots were employed) cannot apply or be awarded a VANZ command ahead of any current F/O there for making them junior on the VANZ list. this is exactly the same for VANZ pilots on the VAA list. VAA pilots are at the bottom of the VANZ list and VANZ pilots are at the bottom of the VAA list. how can this not be fair? There is no 2008 date recognized for VAA pilots on the VANZ list.
VAA pilots are not trying to screw over VANZ crew. With little to no expansion and slow command progression who would really want to go. Add to that lower salaries and condition. With a few more 737 on the way, a few more A330's and either A350's or 787's announced by the end of this years I don't see anyone going anywhere.
We stay at a number of the same hotels as VANZ as well. Melbourne and Sydney and until recently Brisbane. VAI and VAA Don't even stay at the same place in Brisbane anymore. I'm not sure who told you we are to precious to stay at the same hotel as NZ crew? It's utter rubbish.
If this does change it will be a contract, room availability issue and not at the request of VAA/VAI crew.
Last edited by fmcinop; 6th Apr 2013 at 11:25.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: ..
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is unfair as I know first hand from several friends who did transfer to VAI, 2008 was used as seniority to gain an interview. Ie they could not get an interview unless they were in the top seniority of applicants. From there it was merit as there was no seniority for promotion. Some have also gone to 737 also at the level as VANZ.
Now they can't apply for those same VAI positions, don't know about you but that is unfair. VAI kept seniority into list so why were VANZ placed on the bottom. There were no promises to VAI either. Vanz are the group that had documents and precedents set for 2008. Why not just keep it simple, seniority based on when you joined the group, protect our F/O's for command.
VAA/VAI pilots have been transferring to VANZ with their group seniority date so you are incorrect. Odd DEC and quite a few F/O's. They still have group doj and are more senior to their examiners checking them to line.
Not sure where the hotel issue came from, but yes agree with you on that.
Now they can't apply for those same VAI positions, don't know about you but that is unfair. VAI kept seniority into list so why were VANZ placed on the bottom. There were no promises to VAI either. Vanz are the group that had documents and precedents set for 2008. Why not just keep it simple, seniority based on when you joined the group, protect our F/O's for command.
VAA/VAI pilots have been transferring to VANZ with their group seniority date so you are incorrect. Odd DEC and quite a few F/O's. They still have group doj and are more senior to their examiners checking them to line.
Not sure where the hotel issue came from, but yes agree with you on that.
Last edited by astinapilot; 6th Apr 2013 at 18:39.