QF Metals MOU for Cat A
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: The Big Smoke
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QF Metals MOU for Cat A
I hope I misheard this today - but I understand that the Qantas Metals Unions have taken the first step to hand complete industrial power to Qantas by attempting to allow Cat A LAMEs into their agreement.
All this signed up on a flight to Dubai and fuelled by Tattinger Champagne and a Neil Perry main course followed by a corporate mile high massage.
It is apparently known as the AME Scab agreement 2013.
Anyone know more?
All this signed up on a flight to Dubai and fuelled by Tattinger Champagne and a Neil Perry main course followed by a corporate mile high massage.
It is apparently known as the AME Scab agreement 2013.
Anyone know more?
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The soft unions can go and agree to anything they like but ultimately the Engineers will have to vote yes. That will not be a given considering it is an agreement to turn them into a roving band of strikebreakers.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: The Big Smoke
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You seem to have a lot of confidence. There's a hard core bunch of "reps" that are more concerned in getting in as much overtime instead of doing some hard yakka and study to advance their careers. That plus the fact that its not only engineers that vote on the metals EBA its also the other classifications that will vote for whatever if they get a tickle in their pockets from QF.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The selfish soft union Reps are not well appreciated by their workmates. Neither will be their advice. If the AMEs sign away their own future with a yes vote and become strike breakers it will be their own doing.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why are the metals involved, Rumour has it the cargo loaders will have the
CAT A, due to the AMEs being over qualified and way to expensive. A CAT A only requires Cert 11 training AMEs are Cert 4.
CAT A, due to the AMEs being over qualified and way to expensive. A CAT A only requires Cert 11 training AMEs are Cert 4.
Last edited by MR WOBBLES; 16th Apr 2013 at 01:33.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: BNE
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has it been officially determined which union will represent the CAT A guys?
Technically they're LAME's so I would think they should fall under the ALAEA's wing.
Who represents them at Virgin?
Technically they're LAME's so I would think they should fall under the ALAEA's wing.
Who represents them at Virgin?
'A' Licence coverage
going down-under
I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that 'A' Licences will be implemented.
What is in dispute is which union has legitimate coverage of the classification.
Our careers as licenced and unlicenced aircraft maintenance engineers are at a crossroads.
Qantas' desire to have the 'A' Licence covered by any union other than the ALAEA is motivated ultimately by the desire to cut costs. Great news if you are a shareholder or on a management contract because it means you should enjoy a boost in earnings as a result.
Bad news if you are an AME or LAME employed by Qantas because your career and earning potential will be cruelled.
For AME's thinking about voting yes for any agreement that results in the ALAEA not having coverage of the 'A' Licence, I respectfully request you think long and hard about the medium to long term ramifications.
Forget about the bluster around being labelled as roving strikebreakers - that will only happen once every three to four years when the ALAEA EB is in negotiation. People calling you names shouldn't bother you.
What you should be concerned about is the impact on your career and earnings potential if all Licenced staff are not covered by the one agreement.
With regard to AME delegates, they should be acting in your best interests, not in the interests of the union officials. Truly good and effective union delegates are a rare thing and they should be supported by the members. Bad union delegates are...well, bad and should be removed by the members.
Whenever a new classification is created, their will always be a fight amongst the unions about who should cover it (and receive the union fees and increased industrial presence that follows).
As I have said before, it is easy for any reasonable person to see that the Australian Licenced Aircraft Engineers Association is the union that should cover the 'A' Licence classification.
Cat A will be implemented, no stopping that!
Sorry......
Sorry......
I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that 'A' Licences will be implemented.
What is in dispute is which union has legitimate coverage of the classification.
Our careers as licenced and unlicenced aircraft maintenance engineers are at a crossroads.
Qantas' desire to have the 'A' Licence covered by any union other than the ALAEA is motivated ultimately by the desire to cut costs. Great news if you are a shareholder or on a management contract because it means you should enjoy a boost in earnings as a result.
Bad news if you are an AME or LAME employed by Qantas because your career and earning potential will be cruelled.
For AME's thinking about voting yes for any agreement that results in the ALAEA not having coverage of the 'A' Licence, I respectfully request you think long and hard about the medium to long term ramifications.
Forget about the bluster around being labelled as roving strikebreakers - that will only happen once every three to four years when the ALAEA EB is in negotiation. People calling you names shouldn't bother you.
What you should be concerned about is the impact on your career and earnings potential if all Licenced staff are not covered by the one agreement.
With regard to AME delegates, they should be acting in your best interests, not in the interests of the union officials. Truly good and effective union delegates are a rare thing and they should be supported by the members. Bad union delegates are...well, bad and should be removed by the members.
Whenever a new classification is created, their will always be a fight amongst the unions about who should cover it (and receive the union fees and increased industrial presence that follows).
As I have said before, it is easy for any reasonable person to see that the Australian Licenced Aircraft Engineers Association is the union that should cover the 'A' Licence classification.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Australia
Age: 47
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who represents them at Virgin?
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To any AME reading this, you should think long and hard about who you take advice from and who is representing you. Look at them and consider if that is where you want your career headed.
Do you aspire to be a LAME (of any sort) one day, earning decent coin? Or do you want to be spineless, disrespected, short sighted and rely on ridiculous amounts of OT to get a decent wage?
Is your rep helping your career advancement or lining his own pockets with OT $$$ while everyone else is trying to save their jobs.
Even a parked truck can't knock sense into some people...
Do you aspire to be a LAME (of any sort) one day, earning decent coin? Or do you want to be spineless, disrespected, short sighted and rely on ridiculous amounts of OT to get a decent wage?
Is your rep helping your career advancement or lining his own pockets with OT $$$ while everyone else is trying to save their jobs.
Even a parked truck can't knock sense into some people...
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: london
Age: 52
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear oh dear, JA1. After reading your last contribution, I seriously doubt any AME aspires to be an insulting, condescending, sort of LAME.
Are you a plant from one of the AME unions?
Are you a plant from one of the AME unions?
Having worked in outside industry and then working in aviation - I was very surprised and confused upon embarking in my career as an AME.
The 'us and them' attitude, and treatment, that does exist between AME's and LAME'S where I am employed will only work in the company's favour in introducing the Cat A licence.
I don't understand how it came to be that AME's and LAME'S were represented by different Unions. Shouldn't it have been united we stand?
But I guess that's is all irrelevent now.
Even though I will reject the proposal, it will be voted in, without a doubt.
The 'us and them' attitude, and treatment, that does exist between AME's and LAME'S where I am employed will only work in the company's favour in introducing the Cat A licence.
I don't understand how it came to be that AME's and LAME'S were represented by different Unions. Shouldn't it have been united we stand?
But I guess that's is all irrelevent now.
Even though I will reject the proposal, it will be voted in, without a doubt.
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Silverado makes a valid point. In fact qf already has an army of engineers with A cat licences ready to go. You might be a B cat on 744 but you can be task trained on all other types and use your A cat.
Every reference to A cat certifiers in all the CASA regs calls them "licenced engineers"
There is no debate as to who should represent these LAME's.
Every reference to A cat certifiers in all the CASA regs calls them "licenced engineers"
There is no debate as to who should represent these LAME's.
I don't understand how it came to be that AME's and LAME'S were represented by different Unions. Shouldn't it have been united we stand?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This will work surprisingly well, and if it's possible to to eliminate the LAME completely from the workplace, then that will help too!!!
After all, why cause a delay in aircraft departure when you can just ignore the fluid leaks, cracks, and missing parts. You don't have to have engineers for pre flight checks and if it looks OK, it probably is.
The only drawback is WHEN a "smoking hole" appears, someone is going to have to fill in a report.
Gee, it just doesn't get simpler than that, and you can take the money and run.
What's more, those who might get caught up in the wash out can sleep soundly knowing that this company will back you to the hilt.
After all, why cause a delay in aircraft departure when you can just ignore the fluid leaks, cracks, and missing parts. You don't have to have engineers for pre flight checks and if it looks OK, it probably is.
The only drawback is WHEN a "smoking hole" appears, someone is going to have to fill in a report.
Gee, it just doesn't get simpler than that, and you can take the money and run.
What's more, those who might get caught up in the wash out can sleep soundly knowing that this company will back you to the hilt.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For those who have some interest but are wondering what the thread is about, here is the content of a notice we oput out today -
ALAEA - Notice 12/2013 - Qantas Members - Qantas AME Wage Agreement
ALAEA - Notice 12/2013 - Qantas Members - Qantas AME Wage Agreement