Network aircraft to be crewed by JQ pilots

[Iron Bar]

Well come on Lez', show us your depth of IR knowledge and strategy, tell us all what should be done?

[Lezzeno]

A visit to FWA would be appropriate, however to be successful it would require spending money on decent legal representation. It all comes down to priorities, I hear Luxembourg can be very expensive.

[Iron Bar]

Luxembourg? Lost me.

Well your expensive legal representation would need the juice to re-draft the Fair Work Act. Because as it stands, there ain't **** in there that can prevent QF from doing exactly what they have with Network and J Connect.


No point on spending time and money in FWC ("C" for Commission "A" for Act) arguing a losing position. Unfortunately that's the reality right now. Blindly throwing crap at AIPA doesn't achieve ****.

[Lezzeno]

I'm confused what is a loosing position?

[Street garbage]

Originally Posted by Lezzeno

I'm confused what is a loosing position?

Your typo, not his.

[Street garbage]

Originally Posted by Lezzeno

I'm confused what is a loosing position?

Nothing AIPA can do, but August isn't too far away...

[Lezzeno]

Your typo, not his.

Afraid not, a post on this site can be edited after submission as anyone who saw Iron Bar's original post would know.

Nothing AIPA can do, but August isn't too far away...

Another IFALPA conference in August?

[Rated De]

Heard a whisper that the AFAP may have find themselves able to represent Qantas pilots, although my sources tell me AIPA are 'vigourously' defending their sole representative rights. Interestingly Qantas also oppose the AFAP.

Is it a case of Qantas has AIPA's measure, or is it seen as providing a viable alternative with an unknown opponent that has Qantas and AIPA on the same side of the boat?

From our perspective the silence emanating from AIPA are not good optics.
The fact that it was widely known outside Qantas that Jetconnect was a real possibility to be rolled into mainline Qantas for nearly a year, it is scarily foretelling that AIPA were not ahead of this issue far earlier. The position should have been established far in advance of now. Further Network Aviation had an application into amend the AOC for A320 how long ago? (if AIPA didn't know, then the appointment of the Current CP was at least a head's and given his A320 experience at JQ) to have seen the warning signs is a sad indictment of priority.

Sitting at IFALPA conferences in Europe and silence are not good optics given Qantas (as lead advocates for 457 skill shortage visas) are now lobbying for five year visas.


The original 457 announcement by Oberführer Dutton was in the Christmas New Year break and NOW this announcement on the eve of Easter is a sure sign that Qantas pilots are again being played, their union leadership silent and sampling beer in Luxembourg is not a good omen. A dollar short and a lot late, playing catch up is not a good look.

[CaptCloudbuster]

Wrong question?

Originally Posted by Iron Bar

What do you propose AIPA do Rated De?

Seems like the appropriate question is why should we keep paying Union fees to an Organisation that proposes nothing?

[CurtainTwitcher]

Originally Posted by CaptCloudbuster

Seems like the appropriate question is why should we keep paying Union fees to an Organisation that proposes nothing?

What are unions actually able to do? Outside protected industrial action there is virtually ZERO scope to have any meaningful leverage by virtue of Federal Industrial Relations law. Unions and union official are personally liable for damages to any company and third parties for non-protected action. Are members asking their representatives to take actions that virtually guarantee personal & family bankruptcy?

The only avenue to effect change and leverage is during an EBA bargaining period. Use this time extremely wisely. Keeping an EBA as short in duration as possible will extend your leverage.

Yes, we woke up to find ourselves living in a fascist state with wage price controls. There is no pilot market in Australia by order of the State at the demands of business, backed ultimately with the full force of violence and incarceration.

However, the problem with price controls is they usually result in a shortage of the suppressed good or item as no producer will willingly voluntarily undertake production at below the risk/reward cost for any length of time. Stockpiles are diminished, this masks the reality, and once they are exhausted they are not replenished. This equates to observed reality for pilots.

If it was such a "glamours" job that rewarded the financial & personal risks there would be a continuous queue of ATPL holders who have risked a deposit on a Sydney or Melbourne house just to get to the starting line. Until airlines start to genuinely bare financial risk for training to CPL level or pay substantially more for the the bottom rung of the Commercial ladder (instructing is one the key positions, because without them NOTHING can change). But of course paying instructors more will simply increase the cost of gaining a licence, thus make it less affordable, and even risker. Sucks to be them.

Next up will be the demands for Commonwealth Scholarships & subsidies for civilian training... and they will get it too.

[Rated De]

What are unions actually able to do? Outside protected industrial action there is virtually ZERO scope to have any meaningful leverage by virtue of Federal Industrial Relations law.

Is that AIPA's position? Has that been communicated to members?

We fail to see how a binary decision regarding the Jetconnect model as detailed in Fair Work February 2011, stipulated that control was not Qantas' is not somewhat different in the present.

Given the aircraft are now returned to Qantas without a lease payment ever being made (or even being entered in the statutory accounts) it is ipso facto sufficient for Fair Work to revisit the notion of 'control'. If anything, doing nothing will only embolden the management.
If Jetconnect was something then, it is the other something now

Are the angels working on the weekend?

However, the problem with price controls is they usually result in a shortage of the suppressed good or item as no producer will willingly voluntarily undertake production at below the risk/reward cost for any length of time. Stockpiles are diminished, this masks the reality, and once they are exhausted they are not replenished. This equates to observed reality for pilots.

Having sent the wrong signals to the market for years, there are insufficient pilots. Demographics is the best bet there is, Qantas are posturing as they know this too.
You can almost expect some sort of an IR war as the cancellations in the MAINLINE fleet rise.
The drum is beating, again.

[neville_nobody]

Time to get serious. Pilot Unions historically have been weak, but the time is surely coming to grow a spine and sort out a few lines in the sand. Otherwise it will be a open door to the rest of the world.

[Rated De]

Time to get serious. Pilot Unions historically have been weak, but the time is surely coming to grow a spine and sort out a few lines in the sand. Otherwise it will be a open door to the rest of the world.

It is interesting Neville. In a show of co-operation the American unions were shown the books at a carrier in Chapter 11. Unions agreed to cuts of 21%, salaries, benefits and conditions. Sound familiar?

Sadly for the airline concerned the pilots found out from a media article that an 'executive retention plan' had bonuses safely tucked away 'elsewhere'. Two years later and the CEO gone saw the dispute settled.

Do pilots realise that although Qantas executives 'agreed' to pay freezes, the bonus this time was all those options..Vesting nicely after the fleet impairment made many rich managers, while the staff got stuck with the pay freeze.

It is obvious that an agenda is being rolled out. It was obvious from afar. We can disagree on things, but ultimately expecting the Unions to have learned to initiate a strategic campaign is akin to leaving it to someone else.
Can tell you US unions, with which AIPA claims affiliation will never forget the lesson.

In the case of another carrier flight cancellations bough the company to heel: Hint lack of crew. Do pilots have sufficient spine to fight themselves? Non -protected action plays to their strength and there is an array of employer friendly legislation just waiting for the careless. Waiting for union leadership may result in bitter disappointment. It appears that the union is more intent on protecting turf, fighting tooth and nail to keep the AFAP out of representation, rather than actually doing to protect the careers of their members. If our sources are correct expect 457 Visa pilots flying Network A320. Where will AIPA draw a line? Luxembourg?

[CurtainTwitcher]

Has that been communicated to members?

Yes, it was spelled out in exquisite detail verbally at the recent special general meeting by legal counsel for AIPA. I do not claim to speak for anyone else but myself.

Then there is the more general cases from the ABCC / CFMUE and the NSW train drivers. I contend that any meaningful leverage has been extinguished through legal mechanisms and arbitrary decisions that have in effect outlawed the ability to take any action that will harm an essential service or the public. Of course, these definitions now can be extended to cover 100% of work places.

It is true, there is scope to re-run the Jetconnect case. What would be the result of a win by AIPA? Almost certainly a change in legislation would be demanded (and received) in Canberra by Qantas to circumvent this outcome. A win by Qantas? A clear precedent will embolden them to further extend the strategy. Currently there is a degree of uncertainty & ambiguity.

Unfortunately there is a large asymmetry in the power relationship. A union is unlikely to provide complementary privileges of lounges and cabin upgrades to politicians and powerbrokers. In fact, if it attempted to do so, charges of corruption would be bought against the union leaders for misappropriation of members fund. To Qantas, that's just the cost of doing business to be deducted from any taxable income.

If you are referring to me as an angel, nothing could be further from the truth. My personal conviction is one of hatred for the egregious & corrupt business & political leadership that has resulted in a fascist state we find ourselves in. I will let my previous posts speak for themselves, and each reader can judge my standing on what I have said in the past.

[Rated De]

AIPA need better legal representatives.
Am well aware of whom you speak.



Maybe Dennis can be sent to the woodshed.

With respect to the title of this thread, the reality that management face is that demographics have ensured that their actions to denigrate and force downwards terms and conditions have been an incredible success. Bravo Ian Oldmeadow.

Network cannot crew the aircraft.
Qlink cannot crew theirs
457 Visas will continue to expand.

Am told from a reputable source Qantas cancelled a number of domestic 737 services. Perhaps the leverage need not be expended by the usual subjects in the usual directions.

[coaldemon]

At the risk of starting off the usual Diatribe I always enjoy reading comments that don't reflect on recent history (being the last generation time wise) . I wouldn't say Pilot Unions are weak I think they have usually shown a certain pragmatism until that year at the end of the 80's came and went. For those in the hierarchy of the Pilots Unions in Australia I have dealt with they are aware of the unspoken situation in that when required, Labour is mobile. Can the Unions control supply is what this whole argument is about. As the general public now consider travel as a basic necessity of life I would say that Politicians will gravitate to that angle rather than the opposite. Whether they are a member of the QF club or not is not what pushes their buttons. IT is votes. Certainly is interesting reading the comments though. Oh and for the subsequent posts I don't work for QF although obviously I may have worked for one of the domestic airlines a long time ago.

[Keg]

The continued snide references to Luxembourg are childish in the extreme. Were AIPA not engaging with other IFALPA members they'd be criticised from pillar to post for not trying to learn from others- and you'd be leading the charge Rated De. With AIPA having attended such a meeting you now imply criticism of AIPA with these inane asides about lines in the sand being in Luxembourg.

AIPA doesn't always get it right. However the criticism to solution ratio on PPRUNE is running about 1725:1. There is zero short IR term fix to the issues faced by AIPA members. There is zero chance that AIPA can even hint to crews about a withdrawal of labour as that'd be nailed very quickly in the FWC and AIPA (and individual members) held liable for damages. AIPA telegraphing long term IR strategies would be bloody stupid and would again attract criticism.

If whilst on time off at home crew decide of their own volition not to assist with crewing shortages then good luck to them. I can understand why busy and tired crew are starting to prioritise their quality of life ahead of a few extra $$$. If that helps the long term IR strategy then so much the better. It's certainly going to help a lot more than the same bunch of people spouting the same tired lines on PPRUNE.

[Lezzeno]

and you'd be leading the charge Rated De

A mind reader or a good crystal ball? Care to share the lotto numbers (but only in a PM please)?

The continued snide references to Luxembourg are childish in the extreme

It's certainly going to help a lot more than the same bunch of people spouting the same tired lines on PPRuNe

I think you will find this is more frustration than anything else. As a junior pilot in Qantas I have been arguably affected as much as anyone by the 'lost decade'. Now watching management lubricate another pineapple and witnessing a perceived lack of action and poor communication from the organization I pay to represent me I am beginning to wonder where my membership fee's are going. Whether AIPA can't or won't (either can be argued equally) take any action is largely irrelevant, all that matters is results. It is not a charity. Watching a pointless SGM followed by some of the exec heading to Europe for a conference is as Rated De pointed out not a good look. AIPA were able to act quickly and decisively when the AFAP applied to FWC (not FWA, thanks Iron Bar and I'm not suggesting the AFAP would be any better but an SGM was not required to decide on whether or how to take action). At the end of the day AIPA membership is not compulsory, something many pilots of similar seniority to myself are very aware of.

[Keg]

Sure, I understand frustration. I get the desire to ‘do something’ when the company reaches foe the pineapple. Not sure that references to AIPA and Luxembourg on PPRUNE achieve much to deal with the source of that frustration. Perhaps just a short term self righteous glow of venting? Ultimately that feeling is achieved by venting at the wrong people though.

So a couple of questions. The AIPA exec shouldn’t have gone to the IFALPA conference because of the optics of how that looks shortly after the SGM?? And what do you achieve not being a member of AIPA? What does AFAP or TWU membership achieve in these specific circumstances? You cite a perceived lack of action. Have you spoken to any of the AIPA exec? Emailed them seeking a specific response? Put your concerns directly to them? Did they get back to you?

Personally I think the SGM achieved far more strategically than what it’s being given credit for. The response by the Qantas execs at the SGM I think has been very instructive. It’s always instructive when you see your opponent over reach.

[Arthur D]

I find it somewhat hilarious that AIPA are expending so much energy (and money) on defending AFAP’s application to cover Qantas pilots.

What are they so afraid of?

Never mind the fact that AIPA did the same thing to the AFAP some years ago. Apparently the Feds have had enough and returned serve.

Wonder if that was discussed on the junket......