Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

Air Niugini's subsidiary - LINK PNG

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Air Niugini's subsidiary - LINK PNG

Old 29th Apr 2017, 14:31
  #641 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Asia
Posts: 2,378
Being awarded the money is one thing, actually receiving it is another. Given the financial crisis in PNG, I wouldn't be holding my breath. The pilots my be dealing with an airline which can't pay instead of one which won't.

I would assume that the lawyers for ANG had the sense to get their fees upfront.
Metro man is offline  
Old 3rd May 2017, 21:15
  #642 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Aus
Posts: 706
All parties were back in Court yesterday for the issuance of orders but unfortunately the Judges written ruling had not been issued to either parties lawyers so another delay.

Hearing is now scheduled for May 10th partly to give PX's new lawyers (yes they dumped the old one) time to familiarise themselves with the case.
olderairhead is offline  
Old 5th May 2017, 04:50
  #643 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Suit Case
Posts: 107
Just to note that PX have used the change lawyer tactic in previous court cases in order to delay or slow progress
tripelapidgeon is offline  
Old 6th May 2017, 05:05
  #644 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Townsville
Posts: 76
Have not seen any coverage of the Judge's ruling in either of the two PNG newspapers.
Mangi Fokker is offline  
Old 11th May 2017, 05:14
  #645 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Townsville
Posts: 76
Both partirs have submitted their road maps for a way forward and the judge has retired to deliberate. He will hand down his directions on May 12th
Mangi Fokker is offline  
Old 12th May 2017, 03:00
  #646 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Townsville
Posts: 76
Ian Shepard is Air Niugini's new legal counsel.
Mangi Fokker is offline  
Old 12th May 2017, 23:13
  #647 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Aus
Posts: 706
I have just received a copy of the transcript and the following is an extract of the decision and directions:

CONTRACT LAW – Employment contract - Essential elements of a contract – Employer requiring employees to sign individual contracts to replace industry based agreements – Employer not meaningful involving the employees’ unions – No meaningful negotiation leading to clear offers and acceptances - No real and meaningful opportunity given to employees to seek legal advice before signing contracts - Effect of – Void and unenforceable contract.

EMPLOYMENT LAW – Employment under industry based agreement – Terms of – Agreement to continue to govern relationships between the parties until parties negotiate and mutually arrive at new agreement – Parties failing to do so – Employer producing individual employment contracts on terms less better than existing agreements – No input and free acceptance of the terms of the new contract by employees or their respective unions – Employees given no real and meaningful opportunity to seek legal advice and consider terms of contract before signing – Some employees refusing to sign new contracts while others signed under protest and pressure to avoid financial and other hardships – Effect of - New contract not legally binding and unenforceable – Existing contract continuing to run until all the parties enter into meaningful negotiations and mutually arrive at a new agreement.

INDUSTRIAL LAW – History and importance of trade union movements – An employee’s right to be a member of a union – Purpose of – Collective bargaining and collective agreement – Employers precluded from approaching employees who a members of a union individually and separately except only through their union - Correct way to legally depart from or terminate an industry based collective agreement – According to the terms of the existing agreements or by mutual agreement of the parties – Sections 47 and 48 (2) of the Constitution - Sections 63 of Industrial Organisations Act (Chp. 173) and Industrial Relations Act (Chp.174)

Orders
61. Accordingly, the Court makes the following orders:
1. The parties are required to consider the foregoing decisions and the reasons for those decisions and resolve the issue of what should be an appropriate remedy or remedies for the Plaintiffs.
2. The parties shall also resolve the question of who should pay the costs and at what rate.
3. The matter is fixed to return to the Court on 3rd May 2017 at 9:30 for the Court to endorse any agreement of the parties on the matters specified in terms 1 and 2 of these orders or failing any such agreement, make the appropriate decision and issue the appropriate orders finalizing these proceedings.
4. The time for an entry of the orders is abridged to take place forthwith upon the Court signing these orders.


The hearing on the 3rd did not eventuate due to the appointment of new lawyers for PX and the transcript not being available. Hearing rescheduled to the 10th.

At that hearing the Judge received the documents from both lawyers and adjourned until the 12th so as to be able to become familiar with the position of all parties.

Not surprisingly PX did not agree with the pilot submitted position.

The Judge has now deferred the hearing until the 15th.

Stay tuned.
olderairhead is offline  
Old 14th May 2017, 22:21
  #648 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Aus
Posts: 706
My sources have now provided me with a copy of both lawyers submissions and it is very apparent that there is no common ground.

The pilot's submission is for the 2012 contract to be reinstated, CP to be re-employed, back pay, costs etc as per the Judges ruling. All have been rejected by PX.

Today's hearing will be interesting to say the least.

Given the polarity of both parties an end to this conflict appears to be a long way off yet.

Will it be a matter of who runs out of money first or will the Judge order compulsory arbitration?

Either way no one wins.

Well done Rei.
olderairhead is offline  
Old 15th May 2017, 01:45
  #649 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: woop woop
Posts: 223
another typical air niugini **** up...list goes on and on and on...........
faheel is offline  
Old 15th May 2017, 10:57
  #650 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Aus
Posts: 706
Initial reports are that PX got a kick in the nuts.

The Court Ordered that

1. The Individual 2015 Contracts are ordered Unlawful.
2. The 2012 Agreement is current until replaced.
3. Clarke is to be reinstated.
4. Defendants to pay Plaintiffs costs.

When I receive the full transcript I will provide more details.
olderairhead is offline  
Old 15th May 2017, 12:14
  #651 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Aus
Posts: 706
Just received an unsigned copy of the draft orders from the Court.

It appears Pilots 1 PX 0. PX have no recourse

Will confirm when the signed copy is received.
olderairhead is offline  
Old 20th May 2017, 07:13
  #652 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Aus
Posts: 706
The 8 terminated National pilots High Court appeal is to go ahead.

http://www.looppng.com/png-news/date-set-pilots-appeal-59050
olderairhead is offline  
Old 20th May 2017, 09:51
  #653 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: airborne
Posts: 89
So the company has a shortage of pilots, it struggles to attract new ones, and it has 8 on Court enforced payroll since September last year,... for refusing to see the Company appointed Doctor, even though they supplied independent medical certificates!!

If it wasn't for the money their Union is handing over to the Lawyers they would have been gone long time ago.

Also told there are another handful of pilots who have been on suspension for the same reason, but not sacked. Sitting at home on pay with no indication of when they will fly again.

Brings to mind the Countries cultural practice of payback.
balusnomore is offline  
Old 20th May 2017, 13:11
  #654 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Long's
Age: 44
Posts: 44
Originally Posted by balusnomore View Post

Brings to mind the Countries cultural practice of payback.
I agree and unfortunately I think there will be more payback to come from the Fourth Floor. I doubt "management" will just roll over on all of this.
Loud Handle is offline  
Old 23rd May 2017, 22:02
  #655 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Aus
Posts: 706
Not only is PX giving the pilot's the sh!T's, now a local food outlet has given several pilot's a dose as well. It was so bad a number ended up on a drip.

Management of this food outlet will also be running the food hall in the newly built Taj. A sign of things to come?

http://www.looppng.com/lifestyle/sizzler%E2%80%99s-investigating-cause-reported-food-poisoning-cases-59222
olderairhead is offline  
Old 24th May 2017, 00:44
  #656 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Aus
Posts: 706
Keep receiving reports about maintenance problems. Last week 5 fokkers were on the ground sick keeping a couple of Dash's company.

Yesterday A Fokker departed Kavieng, had smoke in the cockpit emanating from the CB panel. Full emergency procedures completed with a return to land with no electrics.

No electrics - no anti skid. Both mains blew on landing leaving the a/c disabled on the runway causing closure. Took several hours for a rescue and removal.

Also hearing whispers about 767 issues.

Appears maintenance is still of concern given the lack of engineering support.

Things don't seem to be getting any better for PX.
olderairhead is offline  
Old 24th May 2017, 07:12
  #657 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: darwin australia
Posts: 105
AirH, Your KVG air return made todays "PosGuria" ......" as part of the A/C's inbuilt safety mechanism,one of the tyres deflated on landing...." shud be plenti fesbuk fotos of "smokin flat tyres" doing the rounds by now!
mauswara is offline  
Old 24th May 2017, 12:18
  #658 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Townsville
Posts: 76
Cockpit smoke and loss of electrics on the Port Moresby to Pohnpei sector at night, 350nm from land would be interesting.
Mangi Fokker is offline  
Old 25th May 2017, 02:56
  #659 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Aus
Posts: 706
Re the above it was actually 6 Fokkers 2 Dash's and a 767 in haus sic, the 76 was awaiting an engine replacement. Old one bugger up liklik.

And re the decision they are still waiting for the Court to provide a copy.

tick tock tick tock time moves slow in paradise.
olderairhead is offline  
Old 25th May 2017, 07:59
  #660 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Darwin and PNG
Posts: 908
Give them a bit of time, its election time up here. Lots of hugs and kisses going on at 6 mile the other day I hear.
Duck Pilot is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.