One pilot union for all Australian pilots.
Individual Contracts...pfffftttt.
Lucerne, please define "relevant" and "effective" that you mentioned in your post.
Please also define "spitting poison".
If you are not currently in Management ie you used to be, or will be, you should be able to clearly define all three of these in the context of negotiating with Unions.
Lucerne, please define "relevant" and "effective" that you mentioned in your post.
Please also define "spitting poison".
If you are not currently in Management ie you used to be, or will be, you should be able to clearly define all three of these in the context of negotiating with Unions.
By 'relevant' I mean a negotiation that is relevant to the individual negotiating the terms as opposed to those terms negotiated by a union thug on behalf of many. By 'effective' I mean the successful negotiation of a meaningful outcome for both parties. That is the only recipe for a sustainable agreement.
By 'spitting poison' I refer to the habit of union officials which sees them 'demand' position 'X' with regard to terms at all costs regardless of the relevance of that position to either party. This creates the divide between company and employee within which significant animosity is frequently cultivated by union representatives in order to guarantee the 'sustainability' of their own position.
I have filled numerous corporate senior management positions over the course of my career in aviation. At no time have I ever had the displeasure of dealing with a union and nor would I ever intend to.
If you mean by 'the industry', airlines you would be correct. No Union/Individual contract would see poorly remunerated, loosely defined contracts handed out on a 'take it or leave it' basis. They would take advantage of the massive cashed-up Australian Expat workforce who would take the contracts just to get home. Then they would target foreigners and those with work visas, then they will hit up the government for some imported labour.
All ranks and jobs would be viewed in isolation and to get promoted you would probably have to move airlines (and city) to gain experience at a lower pay level. Then you would have to compete with expats to get a jet command somewhere. Basically it will just become Australia GA on a grand scale with bigger aircraft and imported labour. You would also see little Cabals develop and move around the industry together, as someone gets a management gig they bring along all their mates from XYZ airline or the RAAF.
By scrapping Union contracts you would just create a massive glut in the short term and no incentive for anyone to be a pilot in the long term. Not to mention all the nepotism, commercial pressure etc that would go along with a non seniority based system.
All ranks and jobs would be viewed in isolation and to get promoted you would probably have to move airlines (and city) to gain experience at a lower pay level. Then you would have to compete with expats to get a jet command somewhere. Basically it will just become Australia GA on a grand scale with bigger aircraft and imported labour. You would also see little Cabals develop and move around the industry together, as someone gets a management gig they bring along all their mates from XYZ airline or the RAAF.
By scrapping Union contracts you would just create a massive glut in the short term and no incentive for anyone to be a pilot in the long term. Not to mention all the nepotism, commercial pressure etc that would go along with a non seniority based system.
By using the word 'industry' I mean all of the aviation sectors inclusively. The same would apply outside of aviation. Other industries would do well to significantly limit the reach of their associated union groups as well.
As for the other alleged outcomes that you have suggested, networking is an effective way in which to avoid exclusion as a result of just about all of them.
By 'relevant' I mean a negotiation that is relevant to the individual negotiating the terms as opposed to those terms negotiated by a union thug on behalf of many. By 'effective' I mean the successful negotiation of a meaningful outcome for both parties. That is the only recipe for a sustainable agreement.
By 'spitting poison' I refer to the habit of union officials which sees them 'demand' position 'X' with regard to terms at all costs regardless of the relevance of that position to either party.
At no time have I ever had the displeasure of dealing with a union and nor would I ever intend to.
“Union thugs”, “spitting poison” What ridiculousness. You certainly have an active imagination.
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wellington
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lucerne..
Definition of thug: a violent person, especially a criminal.
EBA negotiations between AIPA and QF management are lead by pilots...
I would give to you the latest "negotiation" between AIPA and QF Management, where a "comfort letter" was given..for one reason or another, but that's for another thread..by AIPA. The Union body gained nothing. Hardly spitting poison, definitely not criminal behaviour.
Your take, like most in Management, is defined by union behaviour of the 80/90's.
"Meaningful for both parties" Really? By Individual Contract?
Definition of thug: a violent person, especially a criminal.
EBA negotiations between AIPA and QF management are lead by pilots...
I would give to you the latest "negotiation" between AIPA and QF Management, where a "comfort letter" was given..for one reason or another, but that's for another thread..by AIPA. The Union body gained nothing. Hardly spitting poison, definitely not criminal behaviour.
Your take, like most in Management, is defined by union behaviour of the 80/90's.
"Meaningful for both parties" Really? By Individual Contract?
Lucerne..
Definition of thug: a violent person, especially a criminal.
EBA negotiations between AIPA and QF management are lead by pilots...
I would give to you the latest "negotiation" between AIPA and QF Management, where a "comfort letter" was given..for one reason or another, but that's for another thread..by AIPA. The Union body gained nothing. Hardly spitting poison, definitely not criminal behaviour.
Your take, like most in Management, is defined by union behaviour of the 80/90's.
"Meaningful for both parties" Really? By Individual Contract?
Definition of thug: a violent person, especially a criminal.
EBA negotiations between AIPA and QF management are lead by pilots...
I would give to you the latest "negotiation" between AIPA and QF Management, where a "comfort letter" was given..for one reason or another, but that's for another thread..by AIPA. The Union body gained nothing. Hardly spitting poison, definitely not criminal behaviour.
Your take, like most in Management, is defined by union behaviour of the 80/90's.
"Meaningful for both parties" Really? By Individual Contract?
Yes. Really.
You really have no idea what you are talking about. Your ideas on unions are completely out of date. We are talking here about unions representing professional pilots. This is not about the CFMEU or the old Painters and Dockers. By your own admission you have had no interaction with a pilots union so your comments on their worth to the industry are based on your biased assumptions rather than reality.
“Union thugs”, “spitting poison” What ridiculousness. You certainly have an active imagination.
You have the right to hold your 'world view' with regard to unions in aviation Beer Baron. However, I don't share it. I simply hold an alternate view. I also have quite an informed idea regarding 'what I am talking about'.
Your attempt to insult by using the word 'ridiculousness' and siting my 'imagination' are also examples of 'spitting poison'. I therefore rest my case. Cheers.
Quite simply the last time such representation was made.
You have the right to hold your 'world view' with regard to unions in aviation Beer Baron. However, I don't share it. I simply hold an alternate view.
And if words like ‘ridiculousness’ and ‘imagination’ are too hostile for you then it is little surprise you would rather deal with a meek and compliant workforce with nobody to stick up for them.
You have formed your view despite proudly boasting that you have never dealt with a union. My view is based on many years of close interaction with an Australian pilots union. I guess it is up to others to decide which experience would lead to a more accurate representation of reality.
And if words like ‘ridiculousness’ and ‘imagination’ are too hostile for you then it is little surprise you would rather deal with a meek and compliant workforce with nobody to stick up for them.
Far from it BB. I would rather deal with a workforce, and co-workers for that matter, who have the inclination to row their own boat rather than hide behind union thuggery.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: thelodge
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Clifford please don’t jump online after drinking Scotch.
The majority of the pilot body would of told Qantas to get stuffed if threatened with aircraft orders without comfort letters.
It was in fact the union who panicked and gave in to unreasonable demands.
Careful what you wish for. Hardly got a militant union. To have that would take leadership, courage, organisation and some strategic ability. Been a large void after Chris Manning left and changed sides.
Enjoy your bonus and Johnny Blue. Perhaps read the children the comfort letter from AIPA tonight. Your smashing the pilots even in a global shortage. Can’t comment on the AFAP but imagine they will get plenty of members should they win in court.
The majority of the pilot body would of told Qantas to get stuffed if threatened with aircraft orders without comfort letters.
It was in fact the union who panicked and gave in to unreasonable demands.
Careful what you wish for. Hardly got a militant union. To have that would take leadership, courage, organisation and some strategic ability. Been a large void after Chris Manning left and changed sides.
Enjoy your bonus and Johnny Blue. Perhaps read the children the comfort letter from AIPA tonight. Your smashing the pilots even in a global shortage. Can’t comment on the AFAP but imagine they will get plenty of members should they win in court.
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wellington
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please enlighten in your wisdom then as to what a Pilot would GAIN if offered an IC?...and how this would vary between individual pilots....last time I checked, I do the same job as everyone else of same rank and same fleet (with extremely minor variations in days worked.
Didn't go so well at Rio did it?
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking forward to returning to Japan soon but in the meantime continuing the never ending search for a bad bottle of Red!
Age: 69
Posts: 2,974
Received 99 Likes
on
57 Posts
I'll call that statement for what it is..complete and utter crap.
And for what it's worth, I call out Lucerne as a (management) troll.
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wellington
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was it the red ties, the PAs to the passengers, or the ‘continuing to monitor the situation’ that you find most disturbing, Lucerne? Because that’s about as militant and thuggish as I’ve seen AIPA get. Still, let’s not let reality get in the way of a good narrative, eh?
Quite simply the last time such representation was made.
Are you referring to the 'Red tie & PA campaign' AIPA conducted? Hardly thuggery. It had little or no impact on the commercial or operational efficiency of Qantas unlike a decision made by another group (or person) at about the same time. I'd be interested in exactly which campaign you consider was overly aggressive, or from which association came a 'union official' "spitting poison". The last Qantas Longhaul EA negotiations were apparently conducted in a very cordial manner. Disagreements yes, but solutions found without any poison, bile or thuggery.
I regularly meet with a Senior official of AIPA and a Senior manager of Qantas on company business. What impresses me most about the two of them is the way they can disagree on an aspect of the business that we discuss, but in an amicable way, reach an agreed solution through formal and informal communication. More than most employees in an airline, Pilots have a long term (often 30+ year) view of the ongoing viability of the business - in most cases significantly longer term than most managers. That should be treated as a positive, not a threat!
*Unlike other groups, particularly in the building industry, of which I have recent experience.
. Your attempt to insult by using the word 'ridiculousness' and siting my 'imagination' are also examples of 'spitting poison'..