Pilot shortage
No not ironic - that would just be just typical of the way these people operate.
Unreality Czech- You are living in a parallel Universe from the majority and you obviously have not read the transcript of the Fairwork Decision. The New Zealand Corporate veil was well and truly lifted and it was proven that the Jetconnect operation is truly funded from Australia as described by Senior Deputy President Drake as a "sham". I agree that the potential here has similarities to the "Flags of Convenience" arrangements that has taken over our oceans, especially around Australia. Norwegian is the precedent that the world wants to follow but remember they are paying a lot more than the going rate for pilots. I am sure they would like to try to operate domestically and also base a few B787s in Auckland. I feel for any aspiring pilots entering the workforce, they will have a unsettling future and need to have a backup plan! This will not stop anytime soon. The MBA heroes still do not recognise loyalty. As Mr Dixon stated "if I wanted loyalty I would have got a dog!".
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas and others moved quietly to secure 457 Visa, ask your self why?
If they did so to secure supply in a world where supply was previously assumed infinite, is it not interesting that simultaneously the Jetconnect issue and A320 issue arrived almost too close to be coincidence?
Unfortunately as 2011 showed even protected and Fair Work sanctioned action taken by pilots was opposed by the government; The message being clear that withdrawal of labour is not longer possible (unless very small impact)
As pilots expect union leadership to now be ahead of the playbook, it would appear that the 457 announcement caught organised labour off guard.
Qantas pilots are being stalked: stalked by the bogey man of job security and outsourcing. The union is nowhere near dictating terms. The agenda is being driven by IR. Playing catch up is anticipated but highly predictable.
What is not predictable is the individual pilot response. If indeed the intent is to spook the pilot group it appears a success. Jetconnect and other subsidiary airlines already struggle to attract qualified applicants.
However, quiet and dignified passive resistance cannot by modeled. Withdrawal of co-operation, working specifically to the contract, not what the employer EXPECTS is not considered to be likely. Ryan air pilots showed that O'Leary was bluff. It is highly likely that securing a spooked pilot body, fearful of job loss is the intent. Sign them up for a 5 year deal, below real CPI and the unit labo It didn't work for O'Leary, but whether each individual pilot sees through that bluff is a question for themselves.
If it were me sitting in IR shoes, I would anticipate the pilots responding, flights but will continue to be crewed, policy to be carried out and duty to be extended as usual. After all pilots are predictable, that is why they were hired. Quiet personal and legal measures are in the hands of the pilot himself (or herself) and not needing union directive.
Perhaps searching the internet will show that Australia is not exceptional, it is a globalised pilot market like any other.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-1...ortage/9332260
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/pilo...er-t-1.4451976
http://www.traveller.com.au/pilot-sh...-answer-gy1bj9
If they did so to secure supply in a world where supply was previously assumed infinite, is it not interesting that simultaneously the Jetconnect issue and A320 issue arrived almost too close to be coincidence?
Unfortunately as 2011 showed even protected and Fair Work sanctioned action taken by pilots was opposed by the government; The message being clear that withdrawal of labour is not longer possible (unless very small impact)
As pilots expect union leadership to now be ahead of the playbook, it would appear that the 457 announcement caught organised labour off guard.
Qantas pilots are being stalked: stalked by the bogey man of job security and outsourcing. The union is nowhere near dictating terms. The agenda is being driven by IR. Playing catch up is anticipated but highly predictable.
What is not predictable is the individual pilot response. If indeed the intent is to spook the pilot group it appears a success. Jetconnect and other subsidiary airlines already struggle to attract qualified applicants.
However, quiet and dignified passive resistance cannot by modeled. Withdrawal of co-operation, working specifically to the contract, not what the employer EXPECTS is not considered to be likely. Ryan air pilots showed that O'Leary was bluff. It is highly likely that securing a spooked pilot body, fearful of job loss is the intent. Sign them up for a 5 year deal, below real CPI and the unit labo It didn't work for O'Leary, but whether each individual pilot sees through that bluff is a question for themselves.
If it were me sitting in IR shoes, I would anticipate the pilots responding, flights but will continue to be crewed, policy to be carried out and duty to be extended as usual. After all pilots are predictable, that is why they were hired. Quiet personal and legal measures are in the hands of the pilot himself (or herself) and not needing union directive.
Perhaps searching the internet will show that Australia is not exceptional, it is a globalised pilot market like any other.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-1...ortage/9332260
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/pilo...er-t-1.4451976
http://www.traveller.com.au/pilot-sh...-answer-gy1bj9
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Lost and running
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unreality Czech- You are living in a parallel Universe from the majority and you obviously have not read the transcript of the Fairwork Decision. The New Zealand Corporate veil was well and truly lifted and it was proven that the Jetconnect operation is truly funded from Australia as described by Senior Deputy President Drake as a "sham".
I am sorry to tell you I was in the court room when this happened. A bit more insight than you have! I am on a board right now and I know what I am talking about. Do not try and overstate your knowledge in this regard.
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Lost and running
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Congratulations. Perhaps that time spent on boards and in court rooms meant you were too busy to read paragraphs 59 and 60 of the judgement. (Hint: the parts where the majority specifically declines to lift the corporate veil.)
All three members found that jetconnect was funded by Qantas. That wasn't disputed. This does not amount to lifting the corporate veil, nor did it amount to a 'sham' in the view of the majority. Funding a subsidiary doesn't equate to it being a 'sham' for the purpose of lifting the corporate veil.
All three members found that jetconnect was funded by Qantas. That wasn't disputed. This does not amount to lifting the corporate veil, nor did it amount to a 'sham' in the view of the majority. Funding a subsidiary doesn't equate to it being a 'sham' for the purpose of lifting the corporate veil.
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Lost and running
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is not a Business. It does not own an Aeroplane, it does not sell tickets and it does not have a Bank Account. It is a Labour Hire Company set up by Boston Consulting. Obviously Reality Czech is one of their Employees.
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: DeShire
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FWA challenge lost in 2010 as Jetconnect was a NZ company. NZ registered aircraft. That was the company line too.
Case lost on a jurisdictional basis.
Now QF propose merging Jetconnect into Australian AOC using VH Aussie registered aircraft.
Take it to FWA plain and simple.
Currently Qantas are giving nothing so might as well try for something. Union got a tonne of cash for reasons just like this. Increase the subs if need be and go for it. Grow a pair.
If Qantas are threatening to pull their “game changing “ orders then they must feel they might run into trouble in FWA and hence feel the need to threaten. If they thought AIPA had no chance they wouldn’t threaten taking away some toys. Pilots are pretty dumb collectively when it comes to new toys. So AIPA need to lead strongly on this.
F&$# them. If they were not planning anything sinister then they would give a written assurance outlining what they had “assured” without hesitation.
If you’ve got nothing to hide then......................................................
Case lost on a jurisdictional basis.
Now QF propose merging Jetconnect into Australian AOC using VH Aussie registered aircraft.
Take it to FWA plain and simple.
Currently Qantas are giving nothing so might as well try for something. Union got a tonne of cash for reasons just like this. Increase the subs if need be and go for it. Grow a pair.
If Qantas are threatening to pull their “game changing “ orders then they must feel they might run into trouble in FWA and hence feel the need to threaten. If they thought AIPA had no chance they wouldn’t threaten taking away some toys. Pilots are pretty dumb collectively when it comes to new toys. So AIPA need to lead strongly on this.
F&$# them. If they were not planning anything sinister then they would give a written assurance outlining what they had “assured” without hesitation.
If you’ve got nothing to hide then......................................................
Regardless of your position on the JC/JQ (insert next entity here) competent management would use their time for good and not evil. Messing around with AOC's is an exorbitant time waster when Qf have an appalling fleet and are hell bent on reducing flying. Ever since the APA bid, the effort of management has purely been in trousering as much cash for themselves as possible, with zero effort being put into the long term health of the company. If we had 80 777's or (AND would be even better!) 787's and hadn't wasted that money tilting at windmills around the globe (Red Q, J* HKG, J* Pacific, J* etc, etc) for ZERO return I would be hard pushed to make that accusation. Unfortunately we have all of 2 787's with another massive delivery of 6 arriving shortly. That's 615 787's too late and don't forget the 777 first flew in '94 and is still an obvious world beater. Qantas has incompetent management with completely the wrong (and ultra short term) focus. Trust me, pilots and engineers would be the LAST people to ever complain if the airline was thriving. It isn't and unless things change FAST the only thing left will be a phoenix like array of Chairmans Lounges - with little to drive people to them. It is not up to Court to point out to grossly overpaid manager's of very dubious ethics that their business thinking is self defeating and plainly bizarre! I mean, really - among many other things, what company BORROWS money to pay staff bonuses when Qf is so short of decent aircraft? It is absolutely insane!!
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: thelodge
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a clear F$&* you from senior management who are the highest paid in the world by a crazy margin.
What a snub to the SH pilots.
Still all the text messages begging the guys and gals to crew flights get promptly answered and the record on time performance keeps the managers on $8,000,000 to $25,000,000 salaries with their KPIs set to these metrics. Single engine taxi at a record high.Discretionary fuel at record lows. Jackets on in sweltering heat.
Seems clear that they think the SH pilots are stupid bus drivers and should just roll over.
Perhaps they are right? Talk It tough in the Jet and at the bar. Can’t stand up when you have already rolled over.
What a snub to the SH pilots.
Still all the text messages begging the guys and gals to crew flights get promptly answered and the record on time performance keeps the managers on $8,000,000 to $25,000,000 salaries with their KPIs set to these metrics. Single engine taxi at a record high.Discretionary fuel at record lows. Jackets on in sweltering heat.
Seems clear that they think the SH pilots are stupid bus drivers and should just roll over.
Perhaps they are right? Talk It tough in the Jet and at the bar. Can’t stand up when you have already rolled over.
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a clear F$&* you from senior management who are the highest paid in the world by a crazy margin.
What a snub to the SH pilots.
Still all the text messages begging the guys and gals to crew flights get promptly answered and the record on time performance keeps the managers on $8,000,000 to $25,000,000 salaries with their KPIs set to these metrics. Single engine taxi at a record high.Discretionary fuel at record lows. Jackets on in sweltering heat.
Seems clear that they think the SH pilots are stupid bus drivers and should just roll over.
Perhaps they are right? Talk It tough in the Jet and at the bar. Can’t stand up when you have already rolled over.
What a snub to the SH pilots.
Still all the text messages begging the guys and gals to crew flights get promptly answered and the record on time performance keeps the managers on $8,000,000 to $25,000,000 salaries with their KPIs set to these metrics. Single engine taxi at a record high.Discretionary fuel at record lows. Jackets on in sweltering heat.
Seems clear that they think the SH pilots are stupid bus drivers and should just roll over.
Perhaps they are right? Talk It tough in the Jet and at the bar. Can’t stand up when you have already rolled over.
There in a few paragraphs is why despite reams of evidence of a shortage world wide, management at Qantas think the pilots are pushovers.
- Sadly the union did not see the 457 visa announcment coming
- The union is playing for time and you collectively have little.
- The union has limited room with the industrial landscape
To paraphrase (badly) Sun Tsu,
'kill one (not literally) and terrorise 1000 pilots'
It appears from my observation, that Qantas pilots are genuinely surprised by developments. Pilots ought not be, this role is defined by HR/IR. Pilots represent a cost, and labour unit cost is to be reduced.
As organised labour attempts catch up, Qantas seems to be moving ahead. By the time pilots formulate a collective response Jetconnect flying will be online. You can bet all the check airmen are doing just that; training Jetconnect pilots.
Individual pilots may be targeted if they don't comply. Answer the phone, extend when asked, or indeed carry company policy fuel, suffice to say towing the line is expected.
Of course that is our fear, that a company management will target individuals, we have all heard the stories.....I have been party to some interesting developments and high level conversations where behaviours of employees were discussed ( I ought stress not in Australia) HR relies on predictability, so does the whole model of airline operation. No one is pushing commercial negligence, the response to airline management starts and ends with the individual and a thorough understanding of protections afforded in statute.
When pushed to extend for commercial reasons, a Captain refused. He was tired and not inclined to place the safety of passengers and crew, indeed the commercial reputation of his employer in jeopardy. Instead of being thanked for his consideration, he was as he told me 'threatened and not even subtly'. He was told 'that there would be ramifications and that the duty pilot wanted to speak with him'. He politely informed the caller that this was welcomed and he would need a few minutes to arrange the conference call with his legal representatives.
The call never eventuated. He called the duty pilot and also requested to speak to the Chief Pilot. Both refused.
The statute provides protection, perhaps it is time to brush up, because now that Qantas has signaled
This is a clear F$&* you from senior management
When pushed to extend for commercial reasons, a Captain refused. He was tired and not inclined to place the safety of passengers and crew, indeed the commercial reputation of his employer in jeopardy. Instead of being thanked for his consideration, he was as he told me 'threatened and not even subtly'. He was told 'that there would be ramifications and that the duty pilot wanted to speak with him'. He politely informed the caller that this was welcomed and he would need a few minutes to arrange the conference call with his legal representatives.
That would depend on how you define a business. Not sure how that's relevant to this discussion in any case.
The best I got from my meetings and discussions on this point was from the secretary of a Manager hauling me in for berating the latest total waste of expenditure - and it was this: ‘Well, I think it’s too hard to say what QF does in one sentence because I think it means a great many different things to many different people’. I laughed in her face and said I really didn’t think she could have said anything better to prove exactly what I was pointing out the failings of Qantas to be.
In hind sight, I am now in awe of RC’s genius response above. ‘That would depend on how you define a business. Not sure how that's relevant to this discussion in any case.’ That is straight Catch - 22. And Catch - 22 is one hell of a Catch!
Maybe Elaine is a reincarnated Milo Minderbinder? Yossarians simple Catch - 22 is a tadge too simple for a tricky Pikey.
Being a simple man, I’ve never understood Milo Minderbinder’s brilliant plan, but this is lifted from someone of better brain:
This is where his cunning little tactics come into play. For instance, he buys eggs from Malta for 7 cents per egg and sells them to the mess hall for 5 cents per egg. Outwardly, this seems stupid. His business is at loss. But no, he earns a significant amount of profit. How?
Here is the answer. This egg business actually involves three places- Sicily, Malta and the mess hall in Pianosa. Sicily is a place where there are plenty of poultry farms and eggs are quite cheap. Milo buys eggs from Sicily at 1 cent apiece. Now Malta is a place where there are no poultry farms and there is quite a demand for eggs. Milo sells the eggs to the local traders in Malta for 4 and a half cents apiece. Then again, he offers to buy them back from the traders at 7 cents apiece, which they readily accept. The people in the mess hall know that he buys eggs from Malta at 7 cents apiece but they are unaware of his prior transactions. They are more than happy to buy the eggs at 5 cents apiece. In the end, Milo spends 1 cent in Sicily and 7 cents in Malta, totalling 8 cents. And he earns 4 and a half cents in Malta and 5 cents in the mess hall, totalling 9 and a half cents. The net profit he gets is one and a half cents for every egg he sells.
He uses similar tactics for his other businesses. And that's how his syndicate works.
Here is the answer. This egg business actually involves three places- Sicily, Malta and the mess hall in Pianosa. Sicily is a place where there are plenty of poultry farms and eggs are quite cheap. Milo buys eggs from Sicily at 1 cent apiece. Now Malta is a place where there are no poultry farms and there is quite a demand for eggs. Milo sells the eggs to the local traders in Malta for 4 and a half cents apiece. Then again, he offers to buy them back from the traders at 7 cents apiece, which they readily accept. The people in the mess hall know that he buys eggs from Malta at 7 cents apiece but they are unaware of his prior transactions. They are more than happy to buy the eggs at 5 cents apiece. In the end, Milo spends 1 cent in Sicily and 7 cents in Malta, totalling 8 cents. And he earns 4 and a half cents in Malta and 5 cents in the mess hall, totalling 9 and a half cents. The net profit he gets is one and a half cents for every egg he sells.
He uses similar tactics for his other businesses. And that's how his syndicate works.
CASA should also be on your side, as should your DAME.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 74
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder how much of this JetConnect manoeuvring to effectively merge it into Mainline , is due to the new International accounting standards ?
Just off the top of my head - IFRS 3, IFRS 10 ?
Just off the top of my head - IFRS 3, IFRS 10 ?
Last edited by blow.n.gasket; 1st Feb 2018 at 22:11.
Thread Starter
Wouldn’t have a clue about accounting but I don’t imagine the same accounting changes influenced the Virgin decision to do the same thing five years ago.