Ethics in Union Representation
Easy typo you should edit while you still have time.
I'm sure you meant to write, 'the individual WILL be allocated a Sydney position'.
2+2= whatever the party says it does, you know that!
He's got F11. Out of seniority, out of category awarding of a SYD base would be a walk in the park.
will the individual
2+2= whatever the party says it does, you know that!
He's got F11. Out of seniority, out of category awarding of a SYD base would be a walk in the park.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Easy typo you should edit while you still have time.
I'm sure you meant to write, 'the individual WILL be allocated a Sydney position'.
2+2= whatever the party says it does, you know that!
He's got F11. Out of seniority, out of category awarding of a SYD base would be a walk in the park.
I'm sure you meant to write, 'the individual WILL be allocated a Sydney position'.
2+2= whatever the party says it does, you know that!
He's got F11. Out of seniority, out of category awarding of a SYD base would be a walk in the park.
Is that equivalent to 30 bits of silver?
Great salesman for the Qantas agenda as AIPA President and rewarded accordingly.
Nothing more.
Nothing more.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Sydney Australia
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The part Nathan took pushing the night credit issue is not insignificant. This is, however, one thing I do not blame that incompetent CEO bully boy for. QF pilots DID vote for it. I can't for the life of me understand why, the one person who I have spoken to who admitted to voting for it, sheeted the blame down to Nathan and a couple of notable others pushing a company line saying the 787 would not go to Qf if Pilots didn't take the 787 flying on that offer. So they likely lied. Not like Qf have never done that before. Regardless, and I suspect mainly due to the atrocious conditions on the 737 - it got up. People will despise it in time, lives WILL be shortened because of it (like mesothelioma it will take decades to damage) but it did get voted in so with only a very few caveats, Pilots have themselves to blame.
Where Mr 'I Want A Job In Canberra' Safe's behaviour is unconscionable on ANY level is that his newest little stunt (gee I had to watch that spelling) is also aimed squarely at destroying the entire GA sector in Australia. He's actively attempting to destroy QF Pilot careers but arguably, he's done that before. Setting about destroying the careers of every future Australian pilot is a VERY new development.
Nathan would likely argue that if not him then someone else. In a dog eat dog world the Nuremberg Defence might just legally squeak through, but I hope he enjoys eating with equally popular Capt Discrepancy wherever he goes. In Nathan's world, ten pieces of silver is obviously an awful lot of money.
Where Mr 'I Want A Job In Canberra' Safe's behaviour is unconscionable on ANY level is that his newest little stunt (gee I had to watch that spelling) is also aimed squarely at destroying the entire GA sector in Australia. He's actively attempting to destroy QF Pilot careers but arguably, he's done that before. Setting about destroying the careers of every future Australian pilot is a VERY new development.
Nathan would likely argue that if not him then someone else. In a dog eat dog world the Nuremberg Defence might just legally squeak through, but I hope he enjoys eating with equally popular Capt Discrepancy wherever he goes. In Nathan's world, ten pieces of silver is obviously an awful lot of money.
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Elysium
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The thread was about an ex AIPA President And FO who now has F11 staff travel that trumps a Captain.
He’s not a Captain. Be drinking alone I’d agree.
Most pilots don’t consider this good form to put it mildly. It’s embarrasing trying to argue it’s ok.
Yes Wayne Kearns went on to work for Qantas but it wasn’t to become the lead company negotiatior right away. Wayne spent a lot of the time in various manager roles before becoming deputy Chief Pilot. Wayne and those before him won and protected a lot of conditions whilst at AIPA.
Manning achieved a lot for pilots also. Under his leadership AIPA achieved 5:30 MDC and a lot of improved conditions for commuters, a lot of improvements to MGH too. Dixon lured him to Chief Pilot as he would have been too effective as AIPA leader when he needed to start Jetstar.
Good deal for the A330 at classic plus 5% for a smaller airplane. Presidents Duggan and Jackson also achieving big improvements to MGH and also pay for the A380. Strong EA teams under their leadership.
Cant recall them falling for a lesser EA that was needed to secure airplanes.
Safe won no extra conditions during his leadership. Traded away protections of night credits and overtime. The biggest trades in the contract.
Yes the hourly rate may be higher but those with a year two understanding of mathematics can work out it doesn’t compensate for the loss of overtime.if your take home pay is less, the hourly rate is just a number. Whilst he’s not entirely responsible, the negotiating team under his leadership traded away the most in AIPAs history. It may have been voted up 80% but that doesnt mean it was a good outcome nor or a good deal. Maybe a very good sell granted. The rosters shown were best case scenario showing very little long range flying. Working harder for less. The Ex President did sell the EA for Qantas extremely hard so perhaps he has earned the first class ticket.
For all their flaws Wayne Kearns and Chris Manning were great AIPA leaders who won and protected conditions for pilots.
They were earmarked by Qantas because they presided over EAs that won big improvements. They were formidable opponents and better on the company side.
Credit must also go to the negotiating teams they lead.
NS is not in the same league as a Kearns or Manning. Great salesman for the Qantas agenda as AIPA President and rewarded accordingly.
Nothing more.
He’s not a Captain. Be drinking alone I’d agree.
Most pilots don’t consider this good form to put it mildly. It’s embarrasing trying to argue it’s ok.
Yes Wayne Kearns went on to work for Qantas but it wasn’t to become the lead company negotiatior right away. Wayne spent a lot of the time in various manager roles before becoming deputy Chief Pilot. Wayne and those before him won and protected a lot of conditions whilst at AIPA.
Manning achieved a lot for pilots also. Under his leadership AIPA achieved 5:30 MDC and a lot of improved conditions for commuters, a lot of improvements to MGH too. Dixon lured him to Chief Pilot as he would have been too effective as AIPA leader when he needed to start Jetstar.
Good deal for the A330 at classic plus 5% for a smaller airplane. Presidents Duggan and Jackson also achieving big improvements to MGH and also pay for the A380. Strong EA teams under their leadership.
Cant recall them falling for a lesser EA that was needed to secure airplanes.
Safe won no extra conditions during his leadership. Traded away protections of night credits and overtime. The biggest trades in the contract.
Yes the hourly rate may be higher but those with a year two understanding of mathematics can work out it doesn’t compensate for the loss of overtime.if your take home pay is less, the hourly rate is just a number. Whilst he’s not entirely responsible, the negotiating team under his leadership traded away the most in AIPAs history. It may have been voted up 80% but that doesnt mean it was a good outcome nor or a good deal. Maybe a very good sell granted. The rosters shown were best case scenario showing very little long range flying. Working harder for less. The Ex President did sell the EA for Qantas extremely hard so perhaps he has earned the first class ticket.
For all their flaws Wayne Kearns and Chris Manning were great AIPA leaders who won and protected conditions for pilots.
They were earmarked by Qantas because they presided over EAs that won big improvements. They were formidable opponents and better on the company side.
Credit must also go to the negotiating teams they lead.
NS is not in the same league as a Kearns or Manning. Great salesman for the Qantas agenda as AIPA President and rewarded accordingly.
Nothing more.
During WK’s tenure the airline was government owned with no public shareholders and did not need to compete for public capital and shareholder returns. There was no jetstar, cobham did not exist and LCCs were virtually non-existent around the world. The airline was effectively a public service employing public servants.
CM presided over a pre-jetstar, pre-GFC and pre-Joyce period with significantly less international competitions for Qantas. There was no huge increase in Emirates, Qatar and other capacity into Australia that wold eventually make life much harder for QF international.
Criticise the EBA as much as you like, but it opened the door to the promotions we are seeing now and it was approved by an overwhelming majority of long haul pilots. If you seriously think Joyce was going to publicly set a business case requirement for the 787 and then back down from that you are naive.
Have a look at today’s results for international. EBIT down massively and an operating margin of 2%. Such things didn’t matter in the WK era and mattered much less in the CM era.
I’ve no issue with you criticising the deal but at least be fair about the very different environments in which they were negotiated.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: AUS
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where Mr 'I Want A Job In Canberra' Safe's behaviour is unconscionable on ANY level is that his newest little stunt (gee I had to watch that spelling) is also aimed squarely at destroying the entire GA sector in Australia. He's actively attempting to destroy QF Pilot careers but arguably, he's done that before. Setting about destroying the careers of every future Australian pilot is a VERY new development.
I’ve no issue with you criticising the deal but at least be fair about the very different environments in which they were negotiated.
Now to something a little more relevant in relation to Nathan’s precious F11+++.
In the book of Exodus thirty pieces of silver was the cost of a slave who was killed. That I find quite significant in QF terms.
If the ox gores a slave, male or female, the owner shall give to their master thirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned. (Exodus21:32)
At least you could then invest your 30 pieces, unlike a seat on an aircraft which is gone forever. But maybe we shouldn’t be too keen to judge young Nathan merely on his staff travel triumph. There may well be the opportunity to appear on the Napoleonic Balcony on a future dated Street Appearance with the Great Man as well - we just don’t know the extent of his negotiating powers.
Nice one Nathan.
Tuner2: Cut Qf out of aspirational pilots in Oz and I see big problems for (want of a better word) The Outback. Very concerning IMHO.
Last edited by V-Jet; 21st Feb 2019 at 10:02.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: thelodge
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“If you seriously think Joyce was going to publicly set a business case requirement for the 787 and then back down from that you are naive.”
Absolute Rubbish Beaver. The issue is you’ll just fall for anything Alan Says. Cause he’s been right about Red Q, Jetstar HKG etc etc. What other work groups had to meet the business case for the 787?
Manning faced a recessionary environment post 9/11, albeit Australia narrowly avoided it.
A lot of airlines went to the wall. Ansett included.
Manning and AIPA were faced with Ansett 767 rated pilots out of work offering Dixon to do the work for Half the pay.
No fair work protections back then either. Dixon even threatened Manning with it but he didn’t flinch. Lucky it wasn’t you back then as President. You would of panicked and we would be on 50% less with no Min Daily Credit.
In that environment Manning and his negotiating team got 5:30 Min Daily Credit, a higher MGH and improvements to the contract.
AIPAs own economist said pilot costs are only 1-2% of the operation at the recent roadshow. If you seriously believe the whole deal hinged on a pilot EBA your a gullible fool.
Majority of pilots voted yes to many SH EBAs, according to your simplistic logic this infers that SH pilots have a good deal.
Re the Ex AIPA president switching teams and getting F11 First class travel as an FO. Good luck to him however
Crew are talking about it everywhere. Does not pass the pub test IMHO. 99% of pilots would agree.
You seem awfully defensive of him Beaver. Bit close to home?
Absolute Rubbish Beaver. The issue is you’ll just fall for anything Alan Says. Cause he’s been right about Red Q, Jetstar HKG etc etc. What other work groups had to meet the business case for the 787?
Manning faced a recessionary environment post 9/11, albeit Australia narrowly avoided it.
A lot of airlines went to the wall. Ansett included.
Manning and AIPA were faced with Ansett 767 rated pilots out of work offering Dixon to do the work for Half the pay.
No fair work protections back then either. Dixon even threatened Manning with it but he didn’t flinch. Lucky it wasn’t you back then as President. You would of panicked and we would be on 50% less with no Min Daily Credit.
In that environment Manning and his negotiating team got 5:30 Min Daily Credit, a higher MGH and improvements to the contract.
AIPAs own economist said pilot costs are only 1-2% of the operation at the recent roadshow. If you seriously believe the whole deal hinged on a pilot EBA your a gullible fool.
Majority of pilots voted yes to many SH EBAs, according to your simplistic logic this infers that SH pilots have a good deal.
Re the Ex AIPA president switching teams and getting F11 First class travel as an FO. Good luck to him however
Crew are talking about it everywhere. Does not pass the pub test IMHO. 99% of pilots would agree.
You seem awfully defensive of him Beaver. Bit close to home?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Criticise the EBA as much as you like, but it opened the door to the promotions we are seeing now and it was approved by an overwhelming majority of long haul pilots. If you seriously think Joyce was going to publicly set a business case requirement for the 787 and then back down from that you are naive.
It is to quote Donald Rumsfeld, an 'unknown-unknown'
The EBA of which you speak may or may not have been the reason that there were promotions. It is impossible to test the veracity of that statement.
It is also impossible to assess whether Little Napoleon would have backed down, it is naive, possibly serving your confirmation bias to believe this, but it is an unknown unknown: You don't know what you don't know.
Sources inside QF and public record attest there was no recruitment for years, very little promotion, a net reduction in air frames, routes and ASK. There were also demotions. That Qantas has an aging demographic like all airlines is accepted.These are established facts and are equally as likely to be the reason for 'promotion.' That the 'Stream Lead' has been actively involved in securing pilot supply for his new masters, indicates demographics, particularly increased retirement rates could be the reason for 'promotion'. That pilot costs are the carrying argument in any aircraft selection process may serve your pilot central view of the world and reinforce your personal conformation bias, but what you may be told and what actually occurs are two completely different things.
Further it is established fact, that despite howls of protest the 'Stream Lead,' a person of substantial influence, now occupies a sensitive position. He sits alone and opposite the very pilots he claimed to represent.
Whether others have occupied training, supervisory or indeed DFO/ Deputy CFO positions arguing a regulatory role is akin to an IR leadership role is naive.
Being rewarded with 30 bits of silver is commonplace, the leisure travel category a modern addition to the parable. What relationship does he actually have with IR? From whom does he take direction?
That the current union executive has no particular concern ought concern those pilots subject to 'newly negotiated best ever contracts' It is perhaps time that a new model of union representation is considered as the well worn goat path is collapsing under the steady stream of the disingenuous
Last edited by Rated De; 21st Feb 2019 at 10:58.
Relationship with IR? Ostensibly he is IR - at the very least he is instrumental in framing the terms of reference for the 'stream'.
Answered above but in a nutshell Qf has at the very least helped with dreams/aspirations/promotional opportunities of pilots throughout Australia since Qf was actually dreaming of expanding beyond Winton/Longreach. Import pilots from overseas and that comes to a crashing halt.
Answered above but in a nutshell Qf has at the very least helped with dreams/aspirations/promotional opportunities of pilots throughout Australia since Qf was actually dreaming of expanding beyond Winton/Longreach. Import pilots from overseas and that comes to a crashing halt.
Thanks, I think I get the picture, everything old is new again!!
Back in the 1960s, the QF answer to pilot shortages: hire offshore, particularly in UK and Canada.
There was one quite hilarious view in the staff department (as it was then) that hiring "British Officers and Gentlemen" would have an additional bonus, they would not become bloody minded union militants who wanted seniority, a North American style contract and more money, not the "basic wage plus a margin for skills".
They got that one badly wrong.
Some of the Canadians hired had little more than a CPL, indeed there was two way traffic between AU and CA, airlines on both sides of the Pacific had this odd idea that "imported pilots" had more experience --- presumably you accumulated more standard experiences per hour in CA, compared to AU.
The most infamous part of the program was the "Instant Captains" ---- by any measure that was an abject failure.
Enough thread drift.
Tootle pip!!
Both the company and pilots want the various EBA’s agreed upon. However, as good a negotiator as NS may or may not be, his presence and this thread highlights the unintended consequence of his involvement.
My crystal ball tells me no EBA is going to get up. I feel for the numerous people doing the hard work. The company simply doesn’t want to respect and acknowledge the shifted attitude. The company won’t recognise the costs already occurring because the industrial war on all employee groups is considered more important.
Of note the VIC metro firefighters have only now had their certified agreement stamped by fair work and guess what...it expires again in 6 months. The new frontier is a “slow bake” strategy. PIA is yesterday’s game plan because as individuals the people have the true power. The only question left is whether the pilots are willing.
My crystal ball tells me no EBA is going to get up. I feel for the numerous people doing the hard work. The company simply doesn’t want to respect and acknowledge the shifted attitude. The company won’t recognise the costs already occurring because the industrial war on all employee groups is considered more important.
Of note the VIC metro firefighters have only now had their certified agreement stamped by fair work and guess what...it expires again in 6 months. The new frontier is a “slow bake” strategy. PIA is yesterday’s game plan because as individuals the people have the true power. The only question left is whether the pilots are willing.
The “slow bake” is also underpinned by baseless implied inducements. Whether they be carrots or sticks, the company will try to get inside the heads of their staff and make them second guess their resolve. Unions have their work cut out for them, I hope they have the stomach for a fight.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: OZ
Age: 53
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What are you smoking?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only real restriction is 900 hours a year. The company choose what the divisor will be and they can make you do just as many night time LA’s on the 744 or the 789.
Night credits are about pay not health.
The same aircraft, flying the same routes at the same time would have just as many night hours regardless of the contract. It’s only the pay that changes.
The only real restriction is 900 hours a year. The company choose what the divisor will be and they can make you do just as many night time LA’s on the 744 or the 789.
Night credits are about pay not health.
Beg to differ. Night credits reduce the numberr of stick hours required to be flown when on a 4 person crewed flight. Example, with a 170 hour divisor on the 787 that w will be 170 stick hours , on the 747 on Syd/lax/Syd it’s 146.
Last edited by dragon man; 22nd Feb 2019 at 11:37.