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

Sunstate pilot's Reps undercut Eastern pilots AGAIN

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

Sunstate pilot's Reps undercut Eastern pilots AGAIN

Old 14th Jul 2015, 05:34
  #121 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cairns
Age: 46
Posts: 286
I'm sorry to hear that, if that is the case, perhaps there is an emerging safety issue with mixed crew operations.......
Josh Cox is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2015, 05:55
  #122 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Home
Posts: 629
No safety issue if both crew are big enough to separate work and industrial issues.

But there is definitely some quite unpleasant comments out there at the moment.
Going Nowhere is online now  
Old 14th Jul 2015, 06:16
  #123 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cairns
Age: 46
Posts: 286
GN,

If what Fuel-Off is saying is true, which I see no reason why he/she would be less than truthful, there already is an issue.
Josh Cox is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2015, 08:52
  #124 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cairns
Age: 46
Posts: 286
One small amendment to my large post earlier, a disturbing question has presented itself.

No Training Wage ????, but what does it actually mean ?

In the old EBA, new pilots were payed training wage IAW 25.2 until checked to line or three months, then fleet pay as per section 25.

In the proposed EBA, no training wage, and salaries as per 25.1, but not until "endorsed"....

So does this mean, NEW FO's WILL NOT BE PAID, AT ALL, UNTIL ENDORSED ?

Check both EBA's.....
Josh Cox is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2015, 09:30
  #125 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Home
Posts: 629
So I'm sure you've emailed the EBA team with your concerns given they are all currently in the BNE roadshow?

You should get an answer soon enough!
Going Nowhere is online now  
Old 14th Jul 2015, 10:48
  #126 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cairns
Age: 46
Posts: 286
GN,

No, any words out of their mouths are irrelevant, all that matters is what is written in black and white within the instrument, nothing else.

All that matters is that which is legally binding, i.e. the actual EBA.

Not what someone who is trying to sell the deal says, never trust a salesman .
Josh Cox is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2015, 10:52
  #127 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: 10'S 100'E
Age: 42
Posts: 103
Josh I think part 47 "INITIAL ENDORSEMENT - FIRST OFFICER TRAINING ALLOWANCE" is what your after.
$665 paid weekly
Would have to ask the reps if DHA is payable on top of that as well.
30.7.2 "The Duty Hour Allowance is payable to Captains and First Officers for all Duty Hours."
noclue is online now  
Old 14th Jul 2015, 10:59
  #128 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cairns
Age: 46
Posts: 286
Hi NC,

Yes, I believe the training allowance is in lieu of the accommodation and any other entitlement under Clause 48 (meal allowances etc etc ).

DHA, is, what it is.

But what about salary ?

Clause 47.1 mentions an induction salary, what is that ?, no training salary as per Clause 25 ?, and normal fleet salary applies for pilots "endorsed" on Q1/2/300 (25.2) or Q400 (25.3) pilots.

Clause 47 applies for the first 8 weeks, but is not a "salary".
Josh Cox is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2015, 11:18
  #129 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 76
Josh - you're cherry picking problems that don't even exist...
The clause about Training wage remains because it was in the old EBA and it refers to the "training salary" i.e. those two words together, not their "salary" which is what they get paid from day 1 IAW 25.5.2. FO's will get their wage from day 1, there's not much more to say on that. There are other examples where historical paragraphs remain but have been nullified as such.

From the roadshow today we can all see there are a few things that are not ideal, but the vast majority like it and can see through the hysterical ramblings of the vocal minority.

Go to a roadshow - look at the facts - yes, ask the tough questions and you'll get straight answers.
roger_ramjet is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2015, 11:28
  #130 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cairns
Age: 46
Posts: 286
Hi Roger,

I do not feel I am cherry picking, this is a legitimate question / possible script issue with the document, the Clause 25.1.2 is (verbatim):

25.1.2 Pilots covered by this Agreement endorsed on Dash 8 100, 200 and 300 series aircraft shall be paid the following annual salaries in accordance with the following table on the first full pay period on or after the date specified:
So, if a new pilot is not yet "endorsed on Dash 8 100, 200 and 300 series aircraft", are they still paid as if they were "endorsed on Dash 8 100, 200 and 300 series aircraft" ?

Same issue for the Q400 (verbatim):

25.1.3 Pilots endorsed on Dash 8 400 series aircraft shall be paid the following annual salaries in accordance with the following table on the first full pay period on or after the date specified:
Legally binding documents must be tested for loop holes, is this an unintentional loop hole or intentional change ?

25.5.2 Subject to sub-clause 25.5.3 below, a First Officer employed by the Company on or after the date of approval of this Agreement, will be paid the applicable rates set out in the Tables at clause 25.1.2 or 25.1.3 above.
That does not mention new, old, endorsed or not endorsed.

I'm not seeing any hysterical ramblings on this thread, could you please point out which posts/posters you think qualify ?
Josh Cox is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2015, 13:20
  #131 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Home
Posts: 629
All new hires are paid from day 1 of joining the company, this was clarified tonight.

Also for those who it applies, the practice of the company removing all outstanding training bonds, INCLUDES all Traineeship ADL bonds that some are currently repaying back (post tax) to the company.
Going Nowhere is online now  
Old 14th Jul 2015, 23:04
  #132 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cairns
Age: 46
Posts: 286
Mr Dude,

Thanks for that.

GN,

That is good news, but it still needs to be pointed out, unless the document in corrected and sent out again in the corrected format, next week when everyone votes, they will be voting on the present, potentially "flawed" version of the document.

As per my earlier post, the words that come from the mouths of our reps or the company reps are meaningless without it being in black and white within the latest version of the proposed document.
Josh Cox is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2015, 01:08
  #133 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 2,080
Slight change of pace if I may.

What is happening WRT the introduction of an FRMS? My sources tell me that Qlink management have given up on the idea because they have been instructed that there will be no compensation for increases productivity.

Does that mean come May1 2016, it'll be CAO48.1 with further limitations of the original CAO 48 (as defined in the Agreement). If so, that'll cost them!
KRUSTY 34 is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2015, 01:11
  #134 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Home
Posts: 629
KRUSTY,

Correct. We were told at the roadshow that no one (CASA included) knows what to do with the FRMS so the status quo remains.
Going Nowhere is online now  
Old 15th Jul 2015, 02:33
  #135 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Hobart
Posts: 4
Also for those who it applies, the practice of the company removing all outstanding training bonds, INCLUDES all Traineeship ADL bonds that some are currently repaying back (post tax) to the company.
Are you sure about that GN? Where have you found this information? There are FO's who have only been in company for about 1.5 years and they will be released? It is something I will be asking at a roadshow.
Durandal is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2015, 13:27
  #136 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: In a pipe in the upstairs water closet
Posts: 220
All current bonds (if agreement is voted up) are WIPED CLEAN. ZIP, ZERO, ZILCH! Word directly from the DCP himself.

Fuel-Off

Last edited by Fuel-Off; 15th Jul 2015 at 13:28. Reason: Terrible grammar because I is a pilot...
Fuel-Off is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2015, 13:31
  #137 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Home
Posts: 629
Durandal,

What Fuel-Off said
Going Nowhere is online now  
Old 15th Jul 2015, 15:26
  #138 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Hobart
Posts: 4
Thanks very much for that Fuel-Off and GN.
Durandal is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2015, 02:03
  #139 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cairns
Age: 46
Posts: 286
Saying new pilots will be "paid" from day one and saying the new pilots will be "paid a full salary plus applicable allowances " from day one is not the same.

IMHO, the document must be redrafted, unless of course it is infact the intention not to pay them salary from day one....
Josh Cox is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2015, 02:18
  #140 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 69
Hi Josh,


I must agree with you, if it is not written down in black and white management interprets it differently to what pilots do and you won't have a leg to stand on.


It happens all the time, this is why these side letters and documents are written this way, otherwise they would be clear and concise.


Cheers.
teggun 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.