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

Qantas Engineering tech training disgusting new low

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

Qantas Engineering tech training disgusting new low

Old 6th Aug 2015, 20:42
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Under the big blue hangar
Age: 36
Posts: 222
Qantas Engineering tech training disgusting new low

For those that don't know, with the lack of aircraft type training going on there is a growing number of LAMEs opting to pay for their own training in hope of some extra job security. Nothing new here

What is new is that the low life that is the manager of the tech school has decided to rent out a room in the school to Queensland aerospace to run a 738 course for mainly QF LAMEs. And the company is supposedly giving them access to an aircraft for the practical component.

I know paying for your own training is not new but having the school conspire in this way is a kick in the guts to all LAMEs.
Bootstrap1 is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2015, 20:52
  #2 (permalink)  
IAW
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Over there
Posts: 167
Sounds like a reasonable arrangement to me. Access to aircraft for POC can be hard for some approved training providers. The more assistance the airlines provide, the faster people will get the rating.

The old way of filling out a SOE book and doing an in depth course run by the manufacturer is dead and buried. It produced a higher quality of LAME to be sure, but it is gone and not coming back.

So embrace the new way: dig your next rating out of a cornflakes packet and hopefully one day an airline will even pay you for it!
IAW is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2015, 21:58
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 297
World's Best Practice! And the regulator is where? Striving to be average won't stop until there is a loud noise.
busdriver007 is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2015, 22:26
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: The Outer Marker hut
Posts: 205
Agree 100% busdriver!

The regulator can't do anything though until a law has been broken (and then it's usually bugger all) and I don't believe one has.

IAW I hope you are taking the piss, god help us if you're not.
bazza stub is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2015, 14:07
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Bubble
Posts: 636
Having participated in extra long courses of days gone by with a SOE book spending over a year to fill it out, a not so long course with PCT and an even shorter course with POC my point of view is as follows.

The long course was painful. I don't care about the internals of every single LRU fitted to the aircraft and I certainly don't remember. The SOE book catered for the area in which you filled it out. A SOE book filled out in line was useless in heavy and vice versa. Only looking back now having done PCT does it seem like a very poor option.

Medium length course and PCT provided the best teacher/student ratio covering the everything I feel I need to know in the right amount of depth, I actually felt quite confident certifying and working safely around the aircraft in various stages of maintenance.

Short course and POC, bare bones course touching on the high points only and the POC felt rushed through no fault of the provider, but the limited access to aircraft.

In my own opinion, industry/airlines have it in their own best interest to facilitate access to aircraft for a substantial amount of time to private training providers if they choose to not train their own staff. Not everyone is fortunate enough these days to a) be employed and b) get the best training offered to them through their employment. After all, these guys will probably be working on either Qantas or Virgin's aircraft one day, it'd be good if their training was as good as it could be given the fact that most people can't be in full time training for 3 months at a time.

Besides, there's no point blaming the player for playing the game, blame the body who sets the rules of the game if you've got a problem.
600ft-lb is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2015, 09:52
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 362
Well, from the perspective of a pilot who worked for a 737 operator in remote parts of the Pacific, far and above the best LAMES to have around to fix problems were those who'd done it the "long" way. Their depth of knowledge, their lateral thinking towards a resolution and their resourcefulness generally left those who had done their training in a "shorter" form scratching their heads in disbelief at their lack of knowledge despite being licensed and qualified.

Likewise my own training, the old "chalk and talk" was so superior to current CBT's with multiple choice answers and left me in a better position when things went pear shaped than those denied that opportunity. Not that I had all the answers, far from it, but I at least had some whereas my offsiders were often left "scratching their heads in disbelief at their lack of knowledge despite being licensed and qualified". "Long" course painful, yes, but worth it 'cos it was usually imparted by those with shop floor experience and of whom you could ask questions and get meaningful, knowledgable answers. Try that with a computer.

But I live in the past and now the $$$$$'s rule - and that's why we find ourselves where we are today. What was the title of an old British comedy? Ah, yes, "Never mind the quality, feel the width"!!!!
witwiw is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2015, 10:37
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: melbourne
Posts: 28
@ bootstrap

what you have said is dumb
doug606 is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2015, 23:27
  #8 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Under the big blue hangar
Age: 36
Posts: 222
Thank you for your feedback doug. It is duly noted and filed in the round filing cabinet.
Bootstrap1 is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2015, 00:11
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: The Outer Marker hut
Posts: 205
Care to elaborate doug606? It seems reasonable to dislike the way QF are doing things these days.
bazza stub is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2015, 02:23
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: melbourne
Posts: 28
@ bootstrap

What should the company have done instead? The training would have happened anyway without the training schools help.

Location is likely easier for the qf guys. The situation is created by company not wanting more LAMEs but workers going and getting there own license anyway.
doug606 is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2015, 07:29
  #11 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Under the big blue hangar
Age: 36
Posts: 222
QF are giving false hope. Fair enough that many have and will continue to pay for their own training.
But now QF have blurred the line by having a third party provider inside their own establishment training QF staff, doing the Prac on a QF plane but then at the end of the day saying no sorry we don't need your licence.

It should be kept at arms length. Either endorse third party training and recognise the time and money spent or keep them out of the QF training school. This is QF having their cake and eating it too.
Bootstrap1 is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2015, 08:06
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Looking for the bridge of trust
Posts: 117
It is unfortunate that we are now in a race to the bottom, having to now go out and buy our own courses.
I have to be frank, and I know from personal experience as I am guilty of paying for and sitting one, the licences gained by doing a QAC course at Wooloowin can only be described as the corn-flake packet type. How on earth this mob survived CASA audits is beyond me but when I asked how they did when half way through the one I sat, they assured me they passed with flying colours.
If this is the way we have to now go, I guess if you have it conducted at a reasonable facility near easily accessible aircraft instead of what is an equivalent to an isolated tin shed in a backwater suburb, so be it.
IT STILL FREAKING STINKS.

I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired.
The Bungeyed Bandit is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2015, 12:40
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Downunda
Posts: 118
I've done a type course with this mob. The quality of the training was rubbish and you would have to be retarded not to pass with the exam previews they give. God help anyone that gets their first licence that way. It's a means to an end unfortunately. I'm no longer a "legacy LAME" and I can still pay my mortgage. When I'm in a delay and don't have the answers, they can wait while I look up the manual. QF get what they pay for.
CoolB1Banana is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2015, 09:44
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: On the chopping board.
Posts: 910
If people have a problem with it then don't participate. Plain and simple.


Seems to me the people funding this are mostly QF LAME's, so why blame the company? If they choose to make a buck out of it, and people are happy enough to pay, then good on them.


And will these licences ever be used???? Seems like money well spent, not!


We have finally found a way to train LAME's on type without costing the company a single cent, in fact they make money out of it!!!! MH would be rolling in laughter if he were still around. No shift penalties paid, no instructors to employ, no text or computers to foot the bill for, just a few $$$ revenue made for the facilities and get the staff to foot the bill.


My mind boggles at how these Licences could be utilised as it appears to go against all award conditions.

Last edited by Ngineer; 14th Aug 2015 at 10:26.
Ngineer is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2015, 10:31
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: australia
Posts: 333
And will these licences ever be used???? Seems like money well spent, not!
Well they turned on mine and many more. In cabin interiors they turned on 5 A330 and 12 737 licences, All people who hold new gen licences from Queensland Aerospace external training are now Qantas licenced in cabin interior
domo is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2015, 10:36
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Orstraylia
Posts: 285
I've done a type course with this mob. The quality of the training was rubbish and you would have to be retarded not to pass with the exam previews they give
Tend to disagree with this, it's up to the individual to pay attention and/or read the text to get an understanding of the systems information if the instruction is lacking, it's not unique to QAC on that front.
Had a few QF instructors I wouldn't trust with teaching me about lawn mower maintenance over the journey.
If you're relying on the review to pass an exam then you yourself are part of the CASA/industry induced problem.

God help anyone that gets their first licence that way. It's a means to an end unfortunately
A statement that was flagged many years ago by industry representatives that went largely un-heeded and now the chickens are coming home to roost.

When I'm in a delay and don't have the answers, they can wait while I look up the manual.
Couldn't agree more. Part of their MERBS and due process isn't it?

If people have a problem with it then don't participate. Plain and simple.
Seems to me the people funding this are mostly QF LAME's, so why blame the company? If they choose to make a buck out of it, and people are silly enough to pay, then good on them.

Ngineer also agreed, it's an unfortunate element of business these days.
Bumpfoh is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2015, 02:40
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 310
There is another side to this coin.

Without external training providers like QAC all of us are at the mercy of our employer to receive the privilege of type training. When at their mercy and if your face does not fit your career is in the toilet.

I have done a QAC type course and I agree you get what you want out of the training they provide. For me they were fine. Who needs to spend hours going over the inner workings of a hydraulic valve. That is what basics are for.

QF assisting with a training room and access to an aircraft is not the end of the world.
Gas Bags is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2015, 05:21
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 8
I have had both internal and external training to Qantas. I was very happy with both. Some instructors are better than others much like some LAMEs are better than others.

QAC have provided a lot of guys with opportunities they most certainly would not have been given by Qantas.

Qantas is a business and to their credit have recognized the use to the business of some of these externally trained people with their newly gained qualifications.......surely this is a positive from Qantas.

I take my hat off to all the guys who have taken the bull by the horns and invested in themselves by way of external type courses. I am sure these individuals are grateful to QAC (as I am) for providing the training.

Smart people will be proactive, investing time and money in their greatest asset, i.e. themselves. Others will continue to wallow in mediocrity and cry fowl, unwilling to spend a cent on their careers to better themselves, becoming more educated and qualified in their chosen field. If they aren't willing to invest their own resources into themselves..........then why the hell should anyone else??!!!!
cocobananas is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2015, 08:01
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Cloudcuckooland
Posts: 16
As a Qf LAME, I often wonder where we'd be if our remuneration wasn't directly tied to Type Training and Type Licenses but some other measure or payment structure. Interested to hear comments.

Last edited by Hugh Mungous; 15th Aug 2015 at 08:15.
Hugh Mungous is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2015, 12:04
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 70
Posts: 1,371
As a Qf LAME, I often wonder where we'd be if our remuneration wasn't directly tied to Type Training and Type Licenses but some other measure or payment structure. Interested to hear comments.
I am curious as to what you mean by this?
Do you mean that you wonder what it would be like if you were in GA like most of us? I mean, we have to have all the licences just to survive. What exactly o you mean?
Arnold E is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

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