Jetstar EBA 2019
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Garbage shoveled point 1.
The idea that somehow the AFAP has failed at 'negotiations'. You have been challenged on this point so many times now I have lost count, up to and including my very last post. And as always, like clockwork, you just neatly step around it and pretend like it never even happened.
The idea that somehow the AFAP has failed at 'negotiations'. You have been challenged on this point so many times now I have lost count, up to and including my very last post. And as always, like clockwork, you just neatly step around it and pretend like it never even happened.
There. Is. No. Offer. Of. Negotiation. From. The. Company. Its 3%, that's it. Nothing else. Every material thing the AFAP has put forward has been simply dismissed out of hand by the company. The company has written to the pilots and the union and stated in the clearest possible terms that they will not even meet with AFAP unless they agree to the 3% policy and don't even ATTEMPT to bring up any bargaining point that they company rejects.
Your point is garbage because it relies on the false premise that the company has any interest in negotiation. They do not, and demonstrably so. The fact you haven't made a single criticism of the company or its 'negotiators' belies your position and intent in this thread.
Exactly, listen to your own advice here.
On the other you wish to declare that the precedent being set by our peers in competitor and group airlines are irrelevant, and we should all be happy with being the considerably lowest paid pilots in the category, whilst doing the most work and holding the most responsibility.
How are we going to solve this problem? Same way Ryanair solved their problem from an equally belligerent management group. For all their bluster, threats and insults of their own pilots in the media (sound familiar?), there is a financial reality to what we can do that ultimately cannot be ignored.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So carmelsquadron,as pointed out you are happy to throw inaccurate info around in many of the forums but cant back any of them up.
Not long ago you posted that the actions of Steve Purvinas & the ALAEA had cost the jobs of 5000 engineering staff during the dispute when the $24m man shut down the airline.
I am still waiting for you to tell me where these 5000 came from.
So,where did they come from????
Not long ago you posted that the actions of Steve Purvinas & the ALAEA had cost the jobs of 5000 engineering staff during the dispute when the $24m man shut down the airline.
I am still waiting for you to tell me where these 5000 came from.
So,where did they come from????
Lots of engineering jobs went. Avalon. Tullamarine, Sydney.....around 1200 in the first 12 months.
Ask Steve himself, he should know how many jobs have been lost.
What do you think happened around the Qantas board room table after the dispute? Do you think they just ignored the dispute? No chance. Any half decent board member in any half decent company would be asking what the company can do to ensure it can never again be held to industrial ransom by a disruptive employee group. The solution - more outsourcing to multiple suppliers. It was an obvious outcome and that is exactly what has happened.
The troll is an overseas contractor. Look at his posting times.
His messages:
- The unions are poor negotiators.
- The union negotiators are afraid of their members finding out they are poor negotiators.
- The company makes a reasonable offer.
- The union request is unjustified, greedy and stupid.
- Resistance is pointless for the company will never give in.
Do you see what he is doing now?
His messages:
- The unions are poor negotiators.
- The union negotiators are afraid of their members finding out they are poor negotiators.
- The company makes a reasonable offer.
- The union request is unjustified, greedy and stupid.
- Resistance is pointless for the company will never give in.
Do you see what he is doing now?
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Outsourcing has cost more than they will ever admit. Maintenance, ground handling, flight crew, you name it, have all had a deleterious effect of the brand at times. It will never be known how much the most expensive CEO in our nations history has cost the airline. Outsourcing is never more than a own goal and an impotent threat.
Executive management "buy" the concept and take the consulting project to board for approval. BCG have deep tentacles at QF.
A Star was born, having Geoff Dixon et al frothing at the mouth: A way to grow market share AND lower unit cost.
In comes Little Napoleon. The original market share argument long forgotten, and as convicted felon former CFO Gregg detailed at a parliamentary enquiry, Jetstar would create "competitive unit cost pressure"
Jetstar became the solution to everything; viewed through the IR prism it made complete sense as long as one ignored the actual subsidy required to create the illusion. The QF group has actually contracted in revenue and footprint. Clever accounting and well timed write offs aside, its peer comparison is poor.
Poor corporate governance, led by the idiot Clifford saw no questions asked: Jetstar expanded.
Focused entirely on internal wars, something that led to the hurried exit from Rio Tinto, was Clifford's only play.
A more nuanced and balanced board and executive management would have seen the natural limits and inherent weakness to Jetstar's model: unit elastic demand.
Blind to the obvious, the village of idiots outsourced everything they could to Jetstar.
There is a very real reason why no other airline has the scale of operation that Jetstar has.
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Ballarat
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We could go around in circles like this endlessly. What breaks the cycle are 2 parties willing to actually negotiate, not simply the dictation of terms. AFAP is willing to negotiate. The company in no uncertain terms, regardless of your garbage assertions, are not.
Originally Posted by CamelSquaron
Again sounds very much like someone has complicated matters by setting the expectations of what could be negotiated at a level that cannot be achieved.
It is the very definition of bad faith negotiation, and the exact reason that AFAP sought PIA before an offer was even on the table.
Originally Posted by CamelSquaron
3% is already on the table at a time when CPI is 1.7%. Its not like they have offered nothing.
Originally Posted by CamelSquaron
There is no rebuttal to this argument. It is fact. If one group gets 7.5% then everyone else will be asking for 7.5%.
Paddleboat : You don't get to pick and choose which precedents suit you.
CamelSquadron : Exactly, listen to your own advice here.
Exactly? Exactly for whom? Given that I have proven beyond question that this is precisely what you lot are doing, what on earth leg do you think you're standing on right now? With this EBA JQ pilots are being asked to work more than ever before, take on a new operation, further responsibility and a new aircraft type. At the same time, they're being asked in real terms to be doing it for an effective pay cut (due reduction in flying density), and remaining firmly at the bottom of the pay table whilst their peers (you know, the people your salary is benchmarked against) disappear into the distance, working far less. And the arrogance to assert that we're the ones operating in bad faith. Its truly breathtaking.
Originally Posted by CamelSquadron
Good luck.
To those reading, Camel has provided valuable insight into the QF management mindset, and the complete contempt it holds for the JQ pilot body. There is, and has never been a good faith attempt to reach an agreement. Instead simply arrogance that they can bully and insult us into submission, whilst attributing any delay in the agreement entirely as the fault of the pilot body. They speak out the side of their mouths as they proclaim they're motivated to negotiate an agreement, whilst arbitrarily setting bounds that apply only to us, and not to them. There is no negotiation, only capitulation in their eyes.
This is why PIA was undertaken before an agreement presented. Nothing can be achieved until its made clear to the company that negotiations cannot be entered into until they are actually willing to negotiate.
Last edited by Paddleboat; 5th Jan 2020 at 23:14.
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Ballarat
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My comments have been consistently in reference to the 4 main airlines in Australia conducting RPT. Network has 2 ex JQ 320s on FIFO runs last time I checked.
edit: I don't want to disparage fellow pilots. I'll just say that I think the operation is sufficiently different in both scale and capability that the comparison isn't apt.
edit: I don't want to disparage fellow pilots. I'll just say that I think the operation is sufficiently different in both scale and capability that the comparison isn't apt.
Last edited by Paddleboat; 5th Jan 2020 at 23:50.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rated - you and I both know that AIPA has recommended the revised SH EA. It will be up to the pilot group to once again decide whether they think the agreement is suitable (I actually don’t know the feeling amongst the troops with regard to this revised offer).
AIPA have still been in negotiations with JQ as well. The issue with this is that AIPA represent under 20% of the pilot group at JQ, so even if they reached a deal with JQ management and every one of their members voted YES to a subsequent agreement, in all likelihood the agreement would be voted down convincingly. Given this, JQ management’s decision to essentially not meet with the AFAP perhaps indicates how serious they are in trying to get an agreement up.
What is more difficult to understand is the thought process AIPA is going through at JQ. They are the clear minority union, yet are still actively meeting with the company (and taking a very adversarial approach towards the AFAP). Because they would not get involved in PIA (despite their negotiators at the time pushing for exactly that), they lost about 100 JQ members. After continuing to negotiate with JQ, if AIPA come to an agreement with the company, and the EA subsequently gets voted down, where does that leave AIPA as an organisation representing JQ pilots? I think it is important that unions have healthy relationships with employers, but this can’t be at the expense (or against the wishes) of the majority of the pilot group (the union’s members!).
A rare opportunity presents itself when you have QF SH, QF LH and JQ agreements all up for negotiation - now is the perfect opportunity for AIPA to show that they could be a very strong organisation industrially - however, they just seem to be missing the mark as they seem to not want to rock the boat.
Good on the JQ guys for standing your ground with both AIPA and JQ. Sorry that it's a battle on two fronts; it shouldn't have to be this way.
Good on the JQ guys for standing your ground with both AIPA and JQ. Sorry that it's a battle on two fronts; it shouldn't have to be this way.
Agree - the out-of-touch AIPA exec and a handful of CoM have recommended the very average QF SH deal version 2. Didn't mean to thread drift with that but to bring it back to JQ, there's now a track record of those in charge at AIPA doing everything they can to please the company and zero to actually represent the people they claim to. Some will scoff at that but give me a contrary example, and I'll counter with the mass-resignation of AIPA JQ members and representatives as well as the QF SH mess and LH, well, what can you even say. They haven't read the room at all and it's amazing a group of pilots can't see themselves group-thinking their way towards disappointing everyone except QF management. AIPA has a pretty good history overall but unfortunately this lot is trading on that history whilst simultaneously destroying it.
Good on the JQ guys for standing your ground with both AIPA and JQ. Sorry that it's a battle on two fronts; it shouldn't have to be this way.
Good on the JQ guys for standing your ground with both AIPA and JQ. Sorry that it's a battle on two fronts; it shouldn't have to be this way.
Any of this seem familiar?BoxerFirst appearanceAnimal FarmLast appearanceAnimal Farm (Only Appearance)Created byGeorge OrwellVoiced byMaurice Denham (1954 film)
Paul Scofield (1999 film)InformationSpeciesHorseGenderMaleOccupationLaborer at Animal FarmBoxer is described as a hardworking, but naive and ignorant cart horse in George Orwell's Animal Farm. He is shown as the farm's most dedicated and loyal laborer. Boxer serves as an allegory for the Russian working-class who helped to oust Tsar Nicholas and establish the Soviet Union, but were eventually betrayed by the Bolsheviks.
Boxer is compassionate and dim-witted. He is described as "faithful and strong";[1] and he believes any problem can be solved if he works harder.[2]
Boxer can only remember four letters of the alphabet at a time, but sees the importance of education and aspires to learn the rest of the alphabet during his retirement (which never happens). Boxer is a loyal supporter of Napoleon, and he listens to everything the self-appointed ruler of the farm says and assumes, sometimes with doubt, that everything Napoleon tells the farm animals is true, hence "Napoleon is always right."
Boxer's strength plays a huge part in keeping Animal Farm together prior to his death: the rest of the animals trusted in it to keep their spirits high during the long and hard laborious winters. Boxer was the only close friend of Benjamin, the cynical donkey.
Boxer fights in the Battle of the Cowshed and the Battle of the Windmill, but is upset when he thinks he has killed a stable boy when, in fact, he had only stunned him. When Boxer defends Snowball's reputation from Squealer's revisionism, the pigs designate him as a target for the Great Purge, but he easily out muscles the dog executioners, sparing them at Napoleon's request. When he collapses from overwork, the pigs say they have sent him to a veterinarian, when they actually have sent him to the knacker's yard to be slaughtered, in exchange for money to buy a case of whiskey for the pigs to drink. Benjamin, who is described as "devoted to Boxer," recognizes that the dogcart that Boxer is taken away in is the knacker's; however, Squealer deceives the other animals by saying that the dogcart was possessed by a veterinarian who failed to repaint the dogcart. Squealer concocts a sentimental tale of the death of Boxer, saying that he was given the best medical care possible, paid for by the "compassionate" Napoleon.
During Old Major's speech, which inspired the principles of Animalism, a specific reference is made to how Boxer would be turned into glue under Farmer Jones' rule, thus implying that it would not happen to him under Animalism. "You, Boxer, the very day that those great muscles of yours lose their power, Jones will send you to the knacker, he will cut your throat and boil you down for the fox-hounds
Paul Scofield (1999 film)InformationSpeciesHorseGenderMaleOccupationLaborer at Animal FarmBoxer is described as a hardworking, but naive and ignorant cart horse in George Orwell's Animal Farm. He is shown as the farm's most dedicated and loyal laborer. Boxer serves as an allegory for the Russian working-class who helped to oust Tsar Nicholas and establish the Soviet Union, but were eventually betrayed by the Bolsheviks.
Boxer is compassionate and dim-witted. He is described as "faithful and strong";[1] and he believes any problem can be solved if he works harder.[2]
Boxer can only remember four letters of the alphabet at a time, but sees the importance of education and aspires to learn the rest of the alphabet during his retirement (which never happens). Boxer is a loyal supporter of Napoleon, and he listens to everything the self-appointed ruler of the farm says and assumes, sometimes with doubt, that everything Napoleon tells the farm animals is true, hence "Napoleon is always right."
Boxer's strength plays a huge part in keeping Animal Farm together prior to his death: the rest of the animals trusted in it to keep their spirits high during the long and hard laborious winters. Boxer was the only close friend of Benjamin, the cynical donkey.
Boxer fights in the Battle of the Cowshed and the Battle of the Windmill, but is upset when he thinks he has killed a stable boy when, in fact, he had only stunned him. When Boxer defends Snowball's reputation from Squealer's revisionism, the pigs designate him as a target for the Great Purge, but he easily out muscles the dog executioners, sparing them at Napoleon's request. When he collapses from overwork, the pigs say they have sent him to a veterinarian, when they actually have sent him to the knacker's yard to be slaughtered, in exchange for money to buy a case of whiskey for the pigs to drink. Benjamin, who is described as "devoted to Boxer," recognizes that the dogcart that Boxer is taken away in is the knacker's; however, Squealer deceives the other animals by saying that the dogcart was possessed by a veterinarian who failed to repaint the dogcart. Squealer concocts a sentimental tale of the death of Boxer, saying that he was given the best medical care possible, paid for by the "compassionate" Napoleon.
During Old Major's speech, which inspired the principles of Animalism, a specific reference is made to how Boxer would be turned into glue under Farmer Jones' rule, thus implying that it would not happen to him under Animalism. "You, Boxer, the very day that those great muscles of yours lose their power, Jones will send you to the knacker, he will cut your throat and boil you down for the fox-hounds
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One party has set expectations at a level that cannot be achieved. But both parties are losers from PIA.
No vested interest. How about you? Do you have a vested interest? You have tried to sidestep this question already.
The context here is important. Camel is replying to my point that the company has definitively rejected negotiation and entirely refuses to meet with the AFAP unless they simply agree to their original dictated terms. Camels statement here should not be overlooked for the profound meaning it contains. It is managements belief that ANY negotiation on the part of AFAP is an un-achievable false expectation. That the pilot body should believe that the company terms are the only terms that will ever be offered, and that it is futile to even attempt negotiation.
Oh the $24 million dollar man has thrown some crumbs from his table that leave us firmly at the bottom of the pay table, whilst asking us to do even more work, take on more responsibility and experience a pay cut through the Jeppesen Optimizer that would entirely nullify this 3% anyway. I can't believe the pilots aren't lining up to thank him.
You lot aren't subject to this imaginary 3% rule, and you're directly benchmarked against your peers for salary review. In doing so, you've paid yourselves far in excess of the market averages. Yet you have the gall to complain when we seek to do the same, when we only ask to meet the market average, let alone exceed it.
As per above, this has nothing to do with me.
As per above, has no impact on me.
But hows your job security looking if the forward bookings do decline? Is that a good thing for your job security and that of your fellow JQ employees?
To those reading, Camel has provided valuable insight into the QF management mindset, and the complete contempt it holds for the JQ pilot body. There is, and has never been a good faith attempt to reach an agreement. Instead simply arrogance that they can bully and insult us into submission, whilst attributing any delay in the agreement entirely as the fault of the pilot body. They speak out the side of their mouths as they proclaim they're motivated to negotiate an agreement, whilst arbitrarily setting bounds that apply only to us, and not to them. There is no negotiation, only capitulation in their eyes.
It is ok to have different opinions.
Soften them up first with a few punches - is that your strategy? Looks like that is working very well. LOL.
Look at the troll - he must be in Europe - posting 2336 hrs again as he starts his mornings work. The message always the same; Fear, uncertainty and doubt - FUD.
Look at how he goes to work; the message is always the same, each paragraph contains its own negative idea.
Starting from the top of his last post:
- Nobody wins, you are a failure by attaching yourself to the PIA.
- The union expectations are impossible.
- The union negotiators are dishonest frauds.
- More than what the company wants to give (3%) is unreasonable. -
- Your pay is already very good, you are being greedy by asking for more
- You cannot win, you are unreasonable. Pilots should not be unreasonable, it’s unprofessional, you must be logical.
- Your negotiators are idiots, you should fire them.
- There is no alternative to giving in to the company.
- You will lose your job if you ask for more than the company is offering.
He follows that by dissembling that this is nothing to do with him, it’s just his opinion. I suspect that his previous posts follow the same structure. Each paragraph contains a negative idea, probably sometimes disguised as a positive.
He invites me to lose my temper, post insults so that I will be banned. I wonder how much they are paying him?
Last edited by Sunfish; 6th Jan 2020 at 21:21.
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Ballarat
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you think the pilots who engaged in PIA at Tiger and secured a 16% pay rise lost from PIA?
Do you think the pilots from Cobham who secured a significant pay rise following PIA are losers too?
Should I go on?
Chuckle.
edit : And for the love of god, Your != You're.
Captain James Bigglesworth would be turning in his grave at such alliteration! As would W.E. Johns.
In CS's defence - at least he's read a book on aviation. It may not be 'Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators' but it's something. Perhaps it's required reading in the Troll Dept at Qf?
In CS's defence - at least he's read a book on aviation. It may not be 'Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators' but it's something. Perhaps it's required reading in the Troll Dept at Qf?
Aviation is a 24hr business, how do you know this guy doesn’t do back of the clock flying like freight or something?