Meloz and 89

[mainwheel]

How about some 3 word liners and see if he guess's correctly?
.................?

[SOPS]

Its allready locked!!!!!!!!!!!

[Wizofoz]

Aw geeze Woomera, couldn't you have let it go for just a couple more hours? Just till there were at least one or two one sided, vitriolic, revisionist rants by one of the "Usual Suspects?"

then at least I might have had a chance in the pool!!

PS Keep up the good work!!

[greybeard]

Gidday SOPS, still no air too Ruff for a comment or two?

THE LIST, the dreaded and maligned LIST.

At the risk of being Binned, here is I hope a reasonable rant on that item.

The item was produced as an almost correct document to indicate to ALL who might be interested in the particular event in Australia's Aviation Industrial History that certain people DID and certain people DID NOT take a particular stand on the matter at hand at the that time in history.

At a time soon after the matter was seen to be resolved, some people who said they represented the "people on the List" produced a document that indicated that "SAFETY" could possibly be a factor if "on" and "non on" people were mixed in the Cockpits of certain Airlines aircraft.

This among other things prevented certain actions of perceived descrimination being persued, and a minor number of "non list" people were employed to further seal the discrimination argument.

The world went around 11*365 times and behold and lo, the blue part of the list went tits up.

So some people had to revise their CV's and proceed on the well trodden path of employment in other parts of the world.

Many people who had trodden that path were "happy" and "content" in those places, some had even taken a return path to D&G climes.

Now all was supposed to be "forgiven"/"forgotten" and we are all mates again.

WRONG in bigger words than this band width can handle.

Many pages have been written and "Locked" on this subject,
BUT, here is my piece,
-------------
I am indeed a "Lurking PPRuNer" having signed on before the 2000th was reached, and have had a regular session of "Lurking" on this and other sites since then.
The 89's will always be a factor in Aviation History, particularly in Australia, and affect many people whichever side of the fence they found their place was to stay, head up or down.
Unless you were an ACTIVE participant it would be difficult to be well informed on the problem as the day to day events were quite overwhelming at times, and many comments reflect that lack of knowledge and basic understanding.

When you have a meeting which has a 95%+ vote for a particular course of action and find 20%+ don’t follow that decision, you have a case for a mistrust of those people. Many were mentors, course mates and cockpit companions on numerous previous occasions of Company vs Pilot negotiations at all levels.

When you are in conversation with a fellow pilot who you held in high regard and he has indicated his support for the "Cause" in an emotional and tearful speech at a private gathering and you find he has already SC%BED, do you want to sit next to him and believe his judgement on a dark and stormy night. NFW

Do you want to work for, or with, employees of a company who causes some of those employees to activate the following against you as a previous employee?

1. Phone Taps
2. Death threats to you
3. Death threats against your family, with accurate knowledge of there movements. When an anonymous caller tells you to check if the kids horses still have riders when they come home and your kids are actually on a ride, you begin to see life in a very different way. Similarly when an accurate sighting of your wife, car description and shopping habits is reported to your children with, "I hope she gets home OK", there tends to be a long-term effect on your thinking about people and their motives.
4. Accurate reporting of my overseas trip, specific to even the hotel and my supposed liaison with a very pretty girl. Which is where it fell apart a bit, as it was my daughter. However, not bad tracking to try to get me to SC%B.
5. High speed, gravel gouging vans of an International Transport Co invading my semi-rural property at all hours to throw correspondence on my doorstep with no regard to safety of humans or stock.
6. Two years after the 1990 cease fire my mere presence in the domestic terminal caused a security alert and previous workmates in dispatch advised me afterwards, to be seen talking to me was a sackable offence

Would you support a Government/Country, which allowed the ego driven fury of a small number of people to do the following?

1. Bend double the Constitution to allow the Military to operate as it did.
2. Bend the Immigration Laws to allow certain people to enter under a relaxed and unfettered way denied to others.
3. Bend and manoeuvre the Aviation Laws to allow some of those people an Australian ATPL
4. Cause a number of us to be declared "Political Dissidents" which really looks good on a security check.

That’s the abridged version of my passage to the wide outside world.
My REFUSAL to RETURN was not understood by many of my family and friends.
I have gained great personal and professional experiences not available in Australia.
I have a dependable circle of friends and professional peers
I missed my children's late teens and their emergence into a changing Australia.
I missed the last years of my Fathers active life

Apart from the above, the trauma of "resigning" my job, suffering delays to company payouts, trying to remain a useful family member in that time, and since,
I am, in the main, perfectly normal, well adjusted, unforgetting, unforgiving, SC%B hating to the third generation, 89er.

I WALKED THE WALK AND I WILL OCCASIONALLY TALK THE TALK
----------------
Sorry Danny et all if I offend but the presence of some of these cretins in my present Asian company is sufficient to make me PUKE.
Note that the Safety Item has reared it's head in the reverse sense!!!!!!!
I am on the other hand friends with many members of the other disciplines in the defunct Airline and know what the process is to attempt to re establish your life after the shock of sudden unemployment and am assisting as and when I can.

[Woomera]

greybeard

Thank you for that very "reasonable rant" and calm exposition of those extraordinary events from someone who was there.

That is as reasonable summary of the issue from the '89er perspective as I have seen and I do recall that post in the past.

I am sure there will be an attempt at a countervailing view and rebuttal of the facts as described by greybeard and if it possible that it can be rendered in the same manner and without resorting to vitriol, not present in greybeards post, we can go forward.

Think carefully before you post, any attempts to derail the thread with vitriol will be deleted, I will remain the sole judge of that, the issue is too important and too many peoples lives are affected for it to be swept under the carpet as an irrelevance.

For those who are tempted to suggest that I, Woomera, am supporting one side or the other, please go back and read my words again.

I may have a personal view, but as Woomera it is not my job to support or not, any or either, just to try and keep it upright.

The simplest course of action to me, would be to just ban anything to do with the issue.

But that would 'disadvantage' one side or the other, the Forum does not provide that opportunity to me or anyone else.

But I will say this, Australia is a very precious and robust democracy that has resisted any number of attempts to make it otherwise.

I was tempted to move this to "Aircrew Notices" but as the issue seem to be still very much alive in Oz aviation I will leave it here for the moment.

PLEASE HELP ME HELP YOU.

[Al E. Vator]

Yes indeed greybeard.......thanks for an interesting, all too familiar and sobering post. Good luck.

[Wiley]

Brisboy, I'm looking forward to your contribution to this thread.

[sightboard run]

ok, here goes.......

It seems the opposing view-point to greybeard's (and others') will never win around here but in spite of that, and despite the fact I agree with much of what greybeard has said, I still have to ask:

reference: Phone taps, death threats, high-speed gravel, etc...

All pretty unpleasant stuff, I can only imagine. But I thought most of that behaviour was directed at the OTHER SIDE??? Clackers, items left/interfered with in cockpits on turn-arounds, intimidation in terminals, cars interfered with, phone calls, etc, etc. All intended to induce individuals NOT to sc@b.

Was that not how it happened? Or have we only heard one side of the story when it came to the employment of under-handed, despicable, immoral, illegal, unpleasant, down-right nasty tactics to achieve the desired result back then? (All the sort of acts I would never have thought your average professional pilot capable of, by the way.)

It's a serious question. And like I said before, I support your argument, greybeard, but I don't support the sort of shi.t behaviour you describe having been directed AT YOU. (And others on both sides.)

[Tool Time Two]

It would be remiss of me to disappoint Wizofoz et al.
Did anyone read the Herald Sun and or The Australian today?

[ironbutt57]

The person I wouldn't want to sit across the flightdeck from would be the one involved in generating the death threats, high speed gravel...etc....etc....hope they are as proud of them selves as greybeard is of himself.....

[Kaptin M]

To deny that there weren`t "incidents" on both sides would be unrealistic and untruthful. 1989 was transformed from an industrial dispute into a "war" ("this time it`s war, boys", the infamous R.J. Hawke, then Australia`s P.M., and a tool of Murdoch, Abeles, and the ACTU), some of the casualties of which were:
TRUTH - as the old adage goes, the first casualty in any war is TRUTH; the long-established representative of ALL of Australia`s domestic airline pilots and many G.A. pilots, the AFAP (The Federation); the careers of 78% of the "combatants".

And now in the medium to longer term, the realisation that, like fish, "pilots EAT other pilots", given the perceived opportunity for advancement. And that the events of that year were successful in removing from Australia`s airline companies, a culture that was (in the main) one of a willingness to accept a seniority system that dictated promotion, rostering, aircraft type, etc, and replacing it with one that REWARDED greed, and instant gratification.

Of the 1642 pilots involved, only approximately 22% "returned" during the 8 month period, the rest were recruited from previous rejects, past employees - comprised of those who has taken "Golden Handshakes", or retired medically unfit ("suddenly, the blind could see, the deaf could hear, and the lame could walk".....with apologies to Brian McCarthy ), and those for whom Hawke temporarily broke Australia`s constitution (to save face) and allow immediate entry, the foreign pilots - British, Canadians, Americans, Polish, Hungarians, Yugoslavians, French, etc. All in this group were - and remain today - listed as scabs, for the reason (that) ALL were aware at the time that there was an industrial dispute in progress - it received DAILY coverage in Australia`s media - and that their employment would effectively remove the opportunity for the AFAP pilots to return to their positions. And now we KNOW we`re going to hear the pathetic and ONLY argument that "they" are able to muster, "But you resigned"
For those oblivious to the REASONS for our resignations, this might hold some water, however the resignations were NOT a tactic - they were a very REAL necessity to prevent all of us from losing our homes, cars, and anything of value one would lose when being sued by BIG COMPANIES!

So yes, there WERE the phone calls (but to my knowledge no death threats, though I don`t disbelieve it). Of course there were, who would NOT want to call someone whom you had believed to be your friend, to demand a reason WHY he was turning his back on you?; the "clackers", although I`M not sure what damage they inflicted; intiimidation in terminals - yes, I experienced that firsthand, from the TNT Security goons; items left/interfered with in cockpits on turn-arounds..can`t comment on that, as none of US were allowed anywhere near the aircraft.

Enough for now - duty calls. Hope you weren`t disappointed, Wiz!!

[Pole Vaulter]

Well Woomera let us see if the "other side" can take a reasonable rant without the usual hatred that eminates whenever an opposing view is shown.

The events of 89 had had started a long time prior to the event in an effort to extract as much as possible frm the companies prior to deregulation as it was clearly known there would be very little more could be extracted after that event.

The contract at the time of the dispute was already like a copy of "War and Peace" as it had grown from a reasonable document to an almost unworkable document with one section contradicting another section plus numerous letters of aggreement to cover areas not covered in the original document. Obviously if the airlines were to survive in deregulation something was needed to rectify this situation. We had such anomolies as a car allowance each month of $250.00 tax free (even if you did not have a car).

Then the AFAP decided their pay had fallen behind the cost of living (as it had with every other employee in the country) and as they could not get their way with their pay rise (which was outside the accord) which almost every one else had agreed to so the words used were "They pay us office pay so we will work office hours" so started the 9 to 5 campaign. Except it was not really 9 to 5. If they signed on at 9 the first departure was at 10 as it was a 1 hour sign on in 89 and as you had a 15 minute sign off the aircraft had to arrive at 1645. So we effectively had a 10 to 1645 operation. I can remember one memorable event when one "captain" kept finding little reasons in Rockhampton to keep delaying his flight one afternoon, as the ground staff worked their bums off till the point was reached when he advised he could not make BNE until 1650 so he walked off stranding 90 plus people in ROK. I can vividly recall when one of the AFAP hirachy addressed a group of ground staff telling them they had better plan some long service leave or holidays as and I quote "We are going to screw this company into the ground until we get our claims, however long it takes" Just how long could any employer accept such standover tactics without taking some sort of action? Just put yourself in a situation where you were paying an employee to do a job and they openly refused the do the job they were being paid for (and paid very well) would you just sit back and accept it.

Then come the resignations (which were supposed to be used as a threat) and the next thing we know we have all resigned and in effect the dispute is now finished. At this stage would you believe, some even went to management and asked for concessional travel so they could have a holiday until "the dispute is settled" They were totally disbelieving whe told they were no longer employed as they had in fact resigned from their employment. Whether the companies would have taken legal action against their employees would have depended if the continued blatent refusal to do the work they were paid to do continued.

For months after the resignations the daily papers carried full page adds requesting them to return to work but as these were continually ignored the requests were changed to advertisments for positions vacant. The people who accepted these positions were simply filling positions not wanted by the people who previously held them. The reasons they did not apply are their business whether it was because their union told them not to or they elected they no longer wished to work their but what ever the case they did not apply and the companies used whatever methods necessary to recruit.

By the time the AFAP now said it is OK to reapply for the positions the whole matter had been well and truly resolved and no more positions were available. Hence the LIST that does not exist. Everyone who answered an advertisment and obtained employment as a result was now declared a scab.
Up until the collapse of Ansett in the eyes of many the dispute would not be resolved until all 89 pilots got their jobs back.
As to the harrasment, always denigned by the other side There were the midnight phone calls, the weedkiller poured on grass the coin scratches along cars and like said in a previous post I am sure it went on with both side as it was "war".

Unfortunately also as previously stated "Truth" suffers the most as the real story is distorted by what you see as the correct answer. This "War" will continue (unfortunately) until all the combatees have passed into the "Big hangar in the Sky" as no one will chang the ideas on either side of the arguement. It will live on while ever we live on.

[Wizofoz]

Kap m,

The oft quoted reason for the mass resignation is the legal writs against the pilots for breaching their (legally binding!) contracts.

If the AFAP had agreed to an immediate return to work under their previous conditions while a pay-rise within the accord guidelines was negotiated, don't you think the writs would have been dropped?

[greybeard]

Sightboard Run

It's not that opposing views will not win, it's that opposing views should be allowed to exist and to be sustained as an individual right.

As to the bad things that happened, they form lasting mind-sets and although it's a long time ago, I felt that then, and even now, that MY FAMILY WAS AT RISK at that time.

As to wilful damage and interfering with Operational items, I plead NOT GUILTY, and as I am aware the damage in the "Western Approaches" was to "non listed" people's property, most occurring whilst those members were at a farewell for the many who departed overseas. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to be able to work that out.
We did not cause physical harm, although it was suggested, the result would never have been changed by that method.

I did stand on picket lines as is my right, I did make calls to people who I thought could have needed support, provided financial support to some who needed it, only to find some who took the help bloody well went back.

Some people really are from the shallow end of the gene pool.

I hassled the then PM and some of the "listed people" as is also my right or maybe my privilege(?), and will do so again if the circumstances warrant that action.
I received seriously threatening letters from my previous Employer as to the with-holding of monies due, further legal action even IF they, out of the goodness of their hearts, actually paid it all, IF AT ALL. I was accused of DEFALCATION (look that one up, I had to). The letters began as "Dear ****" and went through the Capt/Sir/ SIR or Madam to Previously Employed Pilot??
As to previous Management of our "Western Outpost", they said in public places that 'I would never work again while they were in charge". The Police at that one "cautioned" the staff involved.
The office of the then PM also wrote at some length in various veins from requests to poorly veiled threats.

I am saddened that people who had my trust and respect in the main could vote one way and go in the other.
There were the Rock Apes who took the chance for "greatness"; there were the "go back or I leave you" pressures from Wives, Concubines, Families, Bank Managers and many others.
Some stood, some didn't, the system went on and History was made.

The "Listed" are in my Ops Centre, my condo, in many places.
They will receive the operational courtesies, as would any Pilot, that is professionalism and is REQUIRED FROM ALL, on or off the list so to speak, but, I reserve the right to pass the time of day with my choice of friends. Sadly, and I mean this, they cannot now or ever be my friends.

The sad and terrible thing of it all is that the jobs I have had since 1989 and the jobs all others have had, were not there because we had a DISPUTE, but available to all, and the Agency Commissions and many combinations of deals could have flowed into Aust. instead of the Squillions that were taken out.

The whole tenure of Unions, Workplace Agreements, conditions and stability of the Industry was stuffed down the drain by personal agendas we will only find out when the last of the players is dead, and I will **** on his grave!!!!!
THAT IS ALSO MY RIGHT!!!!

To Kaptin M

You are right on

To Pole Vaulter

Possibly the wrong end of the telescope

[Kaptin M]

Simply amazing, Pole Vaulter, that YOU - like the rest on that list - have decided to re-write history as would LIKE the uninitiated to believe!.

But first to Wiz, who asks, "If the AFAP had agreed to an immediate return to work under their previous conditions while a pay-rise within the accord guidelines was negotiated, don't you think the writs would have been dropped?.
As a matter of FACT - something that eludes the Pole Vaulters - the AFAP requested to do PRECISELY that...a "cooling off" period, and a full return to work under the old contract to try to allow some of the heat to dissipate.

Now back to Pole Vaulter re-written events of 1989. As stated earlier, "The first casualty in any war is usually the truth, and Pole Vaulter has exemplified that with,

"They pay us office pay so we will work office hours" so started the 9 to 5 campaign. Except it was not really 9 to 5.

The FACT was, it was Abeles who told the AFAP "pilots are no different to other workers, and deserve no extra consideration." And it was, in FACT, one of your contemporaries (from Perth) who suggested the 9-5 campaign to illustrate that IF pilots worked the same hours as other workers the operation of the airline would be far less efficient than it is because of the requirement for pilots to work at ANY time, regardless of holidays. This is one aspect of our job, and I realise that there are many other occupations that also fall into THIS category.
And although YOU were "only an F/o" when the Dispute began, PV (and I`ll BET you had a meteoric rise when you "went back for the family"), even YOU must realise NOW, if you didn`t then, that Flight Planning, aircraft and document inspection and checking, setting up of the aircraft`s systems prior to flight, etc, are a NECESSARY part of trying to provide a SAFE flight!
But then, upon reflection, there was a new and different culture that filled the void when the established group were displaced.

Similarly, "block in" is NOT the end of our duties, and as another matter of FACT, a full planeload of pax with 1 or 2 wheelchairs takes at LEAST 15 minutes to deplane.

Then come the resignations (which were supposed to be used as a threat)

Had I not earlier stated that the sc@bs would try to portray the resignations as something they were NOT.
The resignations were NOT a tactic!
In excess of 70 writs had been served on pilots for UNSPECIFIED DAMAGES. This was what forced our resignation.
YOU know that FACT, Pole Vaulter - but you and your ilk prey on the LACK of knowledge of others who haven`t read (or were not involved in) about the events of `89.

The people who accepted these positions were simply filling positions not wanted by the people who previously held them.

LIAR! If that had been the case, why did the AFAP (on behalf of the pilots) continue to try to secure our positions.
You have TOTALLY blown any credibility you might have been trying to achieve with that blatant LIE! Thank you.

By the time the AFAP now said it is OK to reapply for the positions the whole matter had been well and truly resolved and no more positions were available. Hence the LIST that does not exist. Everyone who answered an advertisment and obtained employment as a result was now declared a scab

The list exists, have NO doubt about that!
But it was formulated from the day the first sc@b re-applied, or confirmed that his non-resignation was due to his desire to work in contravention of the democratic voting system of the AFAP, to which he had agreed to abide.
The "list" was never an official AFAP publication, but a communal effort by ALL the pilots at the time - including some who subsequentl "went back" - assisted by Crew Scheduling, ground school instructors, simulator instructors, and officers in the Immigration Department!

Time changes many things, Pole Vaulter, but it NEVER alters the FACTS!

[Wizofoz]

Actually Kap, the offer to return under the old conditions did not come until around christmas, five months AFTER the resignations, when a couple of hundred pilots had been employed by AN and TN, blacklisted by the AFAP and subjected to the intimidation you gleefully admit to.

Obviously to little to late.

My suggestion was that if you had honoured your contract INSTEAD of resigning, the whole episode could of been avoided?

Also Kap, I have had MANY pre '89 pilots, both returnees and not, tell me that at the time they signed their resignations they were told these were a tactic to be used in bargaining, and would not be actioned without further consultation with the membership.

As one guy said to me (and he DID NOT return!) "I woke up the next morning and read in the paper that I'd resigned".

This, and the fact that the AFAP did little to get AFAP members NOT to take jobs elsewhere whilst banning people from joining the Australian airlines (I know one guy who was working for Elliot flying a Biz jet. He was about to upgrade to Elliots 737 when guess what? Two type rated AFAP guys approached Elliot and put him out of a job. Surley you can see that HE had a case to not be very supportive!!) were major factors in many guys returning and many more joining from the ranks of GA and overseas.

[Tool Time Two]

"Well Woomera let us see if the "other side" can take a reasonable rant without the usual hatred that eminates whenever an opposing view is shown." Read on. "The events of 89 had had started a long time prior to the event in an effort to extract as much as possible frm the companies prior to deregulation as it was clearly known there would be very little more could be extracted after that event.” Amazingly partly true. But PV ignores the primary fact that it was Abeles who started the discontent years before. "The contract at the time of the dispute was already like a copy of "War and Peace" as it had grown from a reasonable document to an almost unworkable document with one section contradicting another section plus numerous letters of aggreement to cover areas not covered in the original document. Obviously if the airlines were to survive in deregulation something was needed to rectify this situation. We had such anomolies as a car allowance each month of $250.00 tax free (even if you did not have a car)." Again – amazingly true, but who were also signatories to the LOA? THE COMPANIES no less. And why was the car allowance, et al, placed in LOA? Because that was the only way to try to recover significant lost ground as a result of THE ACCORD. THE ACCORD – that holy icon developed by Abeles, claimed by Hawke and Kelty as their brilliant “take care of low paid workers” plan. Well look at Unions now. The ACTU is an anachronism, thanks to the stupidity of Kelty and Hawke, and their stupid mates.Friend PV and his fellow scabs seem to portray the THE ACCORD as some iconic plan which had to be revered – in hindsight of course. Well, seems to me that they were the first out of it with the scab contracts. These documents were unbelievably lucrative, well beyond ANYTHING the AFAP had in mind, and the truly great thing about it was that after all those months, less than 23% of the AFAP membership involved, scabbed. MOST of ‘em because they knew it was WRONG! "Then the AFAP decided their pay had fallen behind the cost of living (as it had with every other employee in the country) and as they could not get their way with their pay rise (which was outside the accord)" No – the PILOTS decided they had fallen behind, and PV conveniently neglects to record the meetings, and the discontent which was rampant among pilots in crew rooms, on the tarmac, in the cockpit, because of the downgrade which had occurred over the years of THE ACCORD!Make no mistake, the dispute in 1989 was membership driven, and the leadership was acting in accordance with that drive, not the reverse, as PV and his ilk now like to push .….." ‘We are going to screw this company into the ground until we get our claims, however long it takes’ Just how long could any employer accept such standover tactics without taking some sort of action? Just put yourself in a situation where you were paying an employee to do a job and they openly refused the do the job they were being paid for (and paid very well) would you just sit back and accept it. Now, this is an interesting quote from PV.The words claimed by PV as coming from an AFAP rep may, or may not, be accurate, but the venue in which they are alleged to have been used, indicates the usual rhetoric in such contexts. They merely allow PV and his mates to recall them to use now to advance their specious arguments.But then PV suggests the poor old employer is looking down the barrel, and claims pilots were paid very well. Well, clearly PV and the scabs were NOT paid very well, for they scampered back to claim even more – but remember – these failures were not getting their own jobs – but someone else’s and that former colleagues pay as well.The hypocrisy never ceases to astound. "Then come the resignations (which were supposed to be used as a threat) and the next thing we know we have all resigned and in effect the dispute is now finished." Never at any time did the AFAP leadership claim the resignations would be used as a threat.They DID say that they would be used in the event pilots were sued – they were, and the resignations were used.Then comes the stupidity of Australian rejects and foreign scabs alike – “you didn’t want the jobs”! "For months after the resignations the daily papers carried full page adds requesting them to return to work but as these were continually ignored the requests were changed to advertisments for positions vacant. The people who accepted these positions were simply filling positions not wanted by the people who previously held them. The reasons they did not apply are their business whether it was because their union told them not to or they elected they no longer wished to work their but what ever the case they did not apply and the companies used whatever methods necessary to recruit.” Here is another example of ignoring the facts. The dispute existed. PV was a part of it, and still is, just like the rest of us. If he wasn’t he wouldn’t be writing about it now. So here he paints a picture to suggest it didn’t after the resignations- another favourite ploy of scabs.“ "Everyone who answered an advertisment and obtained employment as a result was now declared a scab." TRUE – Can’t avoid the fact, PV. "Up until the collapse of Ansett in the eyes of many the dispute would not be resolved until all 89 pilots got their jobs back." Yep! "As to the harrasment, always denigned by the other side There were the midnight phone calls, the weedkiller poured on grass the coin scratches along cars and like said in a previous post I am sure it went on with both side as it was "war". Amazingly generous of you PV to acknowledge your side might have been responsible for some of this behaviour.” "Unfortunately also as previously stated "Truth" suffers the most as the real story is distorted by what you see as the correct answer. This "War" will continue (unfortunately) until all the combatees have passed into the "Big hangar in the Sky" as no one will chang the ideas on either side of the arguement. It will live on while ever we live on." And THAT’S the truth!

Dear Wiz, please research the newpapers three weeks after the the dispute proper began. You will find reports there that the President of the AFAP proposed a return to work under the old conditions under a cooling off period.
Yours sincerely, but with no regard, TTT.

[Pole Vaulter]

Good old TTT. Your version of the TRUTH happens to be different to mine and a whole lot of others. Fact is Mr TTT I can give you the name (But I dont stoop to those measures) of the AFAP rep who made those statements, I stood there along with about 15 others and listened.

It was also interesting to listen to the AFAP rep who did much of the negotating for AN at the time and his stories of negotating with the hated ABELS. He used to laugh and imitate his accent and tell us what an easy touch he was as compared to Sir Reg when it came to negotating and perhaps one of the main reasons the AFAP continued down their path of destruction was they believed they were invincible. Amazingly when you talk to so many today that did not go back but did not totally agree with what was happening most will admit they were afraid if they did go back and they AFAP won the fight treir carreer would be finished. Of course this would have happened but of course no 89er will admit to that.

Ables, like others who up to that stage has been an easy target suddenly realise they have been used and turn nasty. You Mr TTT would do the same. This all has been stated before but as I have said you have no intention of changing your mind and I have no intention of changing mine but it still amazes me the unwillingness to see what was really happening around you and to this day you still cant see it.

Again the reason the companies gave in to some of the crazy demands is the shotgun tactics worked fine with Sir Reg as he openly admitted if the airline was on the ground for more than 5 days he was history. This changed when the company had the money of your hated Ables and Murdoch.

The great KM has his usual tunnel vision on this matter and as I expected came out with his usual statements. Nothing changes. Also Kap I dont know where you got your info as to I was only an F/O at the time. I have never made that statement. Just keep to the facts

[BAE146]

A few more minor facts

FACT: Before the dispute started, the AFAP executive assured members that writs would be issued by the companies but they would only be a scare tactic and not to worry about it.

6 days after the dispute started, the same executive handed in to the companies the resignations of 1640 pilots because of the writs!

FACT: The executive advised members the resignations would not be delivered to the companies without further meetings and approval by the membership.

The resignations were delivered to the companies without any further consultation with the membership.

FACT: The AFAP executive assured members in September there was no truth in the rumour that many America West pilots were headed down under for jobs.

Three days later they arrived on our shores and were chauffered to the best hotels in town.

FACT: The executive went to the IRC in October and tried to call a truce - the "war" was not going well. Go back to work in time for Christmas.

Airlines reply - Pilots offer to little too late!

FACT: AFAP try again in December to go back to work - all bets off.

IRC advise media - AFAP are "whistling in the wind!"

FACT: Any pilot who returned to work before the October capitulation by the AFAP is a downright scab!

Anyone after that day were just getting THEIR own , rightful positions back before some low breed foreign SCAB took it offa them!

[MTOW]

FACT: Any pilot who returned to work before the October capitulation by the AFAP is a downright scab!

Anyone after that day were just getting THEIR own , rightful positions back before some low breed foreign SCAB took it offa them!

So, BAE146, do I take it from that ‘fact’ that within the ranks of the returnees/blowins, there are degrees of ermmm… heroism? Or should that be hero-iness?