Bonza has its AOC
I am fairly sure you can under a FATAOC. Is a few ACMI operators that have been given approval to operate domestic flights, for tour groups or whoever, but nobody seems to exercise the privilege.
As the AirAsia boss is famous for saying, anyone who comes here to start up airline is on drugs. Tiger was heavily drugged up, Bonza is probably on something also.
As the AirAsia boss is famous for saying, anyone who comes here to start up airline is on drugs. Tiger was heavily drugged up, Bonza is probably on something also.
However it’s going to be excellent for the Australian pilots flying for foreign operators who want to be based in Australia.
Would be an operators dream, move and base pilots around the world on a contract based on schedule. Unlike JQ,QF and VA that have to pay pilots to sit around on the lows.
Well to be honest QF are already doing similar things with the Finnair aircraft and crews, and JQ uses aircraft from Japan and Singapore although re registered here with Australian crews. Probably a smart move by Bonza.
Oh yes they are.
Foreign registered aircraft and foreign licenced crews being paid in Canada under the FLAIR agreement.
I would suggest the Qantas Group are watching and not opposing it.....
Foreign registered aircraft and foreign licenced crews being paid in Canada under the FLAIR agreement.
I would suggest the Qantas Group are watching and not opposing it.....
I'd reckon it's good to keep the birds in the air over the NW and earning money and to test the waters at OOL prior to committing to more MAXs for AB and recruiting local staff on an ongoing basis
I don't really see too much financial gain though for 777 Partners using Canadian staff
Yes; but this was with Aus registered planes, Aus operating and licenced flight crew, and Aus cabin crew. They were actually Virgin registered 737’s at the time painted in tiger livery flown by Virgin pilots; so not really at all comparable to the Bonza scenario
Foreign aircraft have a long history of wet lease operations in Australia, eg VH-NOA for Qantas, various Air Canada birds helping Ansett etc etc, from memory even Air Nz gave VA a hand with some wet leases. It’s a bit like the paper bags at supermarkets, what’s old is new again.
Are these pilots being employed on work visas under Australian industrial law? I don’t know - it’s a genuine question.
I put this to you - if it was not Canadian aircraft and pilots but instead aircraft/ pilots from Eastern Europe who are on significant less when it comes
to terms and conditions - would you be ok with this?
If the aircraft are being operated under Canadian aviation regs - does this give Bonza an unfair advantage when every other domestic operator has to comply with all of the nonsense regulation served up by CASA? How do Canadian flight time limitations compare to Australian ones?
There’s a myriad of issues here. And I guarantee it would not be acceptable to any pilot group in North America if one of their airlines suddenly wet leased Australian aircraft and pilots to fly over there. So why then is it acceptable here?
Foreign aircraft have a long history of wet lease operations in Australia, eg VH-NOA for Qantas, various Air Canada birds helping Ansett etc etc, from memory even Air Nz gave VA a hand with some wet leases. It’s a bit like the paper bags at supermarkets, what’s old is new again.
If the aircraft are being operated under Canadian aviation regs - does this give Bonza an unfair advantage when every other domestic operator has to comply with all of the nonsense regulation served up by CASA? How do Canadian flight time limitations compare to Australian ones?
There’s a myriad of issues here. And I guarantee it would not be acceptable to any pilot group in North America if one of their airlines suddenly wet leased Australian aircraft and pilots to fly over there. So why then is it acceptable here?
What do you mean by "it's been happening"? Do you mean that you buy a domestic RPT ticket with Sunwings only to arrive at the aircraft to find it is a Transavia aeroplane, with 100% foreign crews not paying Canadian Tax, regulated by the European Authority??
It has been permitted for considerable time here, it’s just nobody has really bothered to use the option. I recall it was taken up in the 80s and 90s but nothing much since.
Is a UK A321 doing domestic hops here at the moment also for a tour company.
The costs involved to bring a foreign set of crews down under would be quite considerable. 70/80 crew being based here for 6 months won’t come cheap. And that’s just one part of the wet lease bill. That’s a whole lot of cost to be running half empty flights to Isa and back for the summer.
Is a UK A321 doing domestic hops here at the moment also for a tour company.
The costs involved to bring a foreign set of crews down under would be quite considerable. 70/80 crew being based here for 6 months won’t come cheap. And that’s just one part of the wet lease bill. That’s a whole lot of cost to be running half empty flights to Isa and back for the summer.
There were about 20 aircraft sitting at the various holding points waiting for it to pass and these guys just blasted off… straight into it
If it’s the black one I’ve seen recently take off straight into one of the worst storms seen at Sydney for a while, I’m surprised they haven’t ended up on the side of a hill somewhere.
There were about 20 aircraft sitting at the various holding points waiting for it to pass and these guys just blasted off… straight into it
There were about 20 aircraft sitting at the various holding points waiting for it to pass and these guys just blasted off… straight into it
The Canadian flight time regulations appear to be less restrictive than CASA, which would normally favour the operator, not the pilot (unless pilot overtime is lucrative...).
However often a requirement in any FAOC arrangement is that the operator must apply whichever country's regulation is the more restrictive.
As for CAsA turning a 'blind eye' to fully crewed wet lease ops, the great precedent was set back in 1989. It's common enough in many countries where pilot unions or public servants are weak.
However often a requirement in any FAOC arrangement is that the operator must apply whichever country's regulation is the more restrictive.
As for CAsA turning a 'blind eye' to fully crewed wet lease ops, the great precedent was set back in 1989. It's common enough in many countries where pilot unions or public servants are weak.
The following users liked this post: