Still flying after Ansett - Vol 3 - if allowed.
Thanks Wizofoz, I enjoyed your very witty post, although I don't think it's quite correct. If we're talking in analogies, then forget about your car, it was actually a bus and yes, it was heading for the cliff, but with the AFAP's collective foot on the brake and with everyone sticking together, the bus would have stopped well short.
But, no, there was a group on board that panicked and lost their nerve. They took their foot off the brake and lept from the bus.
After dusting themselves off they then committed an even more atrocious act, by chasing after the bus and helping to push it over the cliff.
Cheers.
But, no, there was a group on board that panicked and lost their nerve. They took their foot off the brake and lept from the bus.
After dusting themselves off they then committed an even more atrocious act, by chasing after the bus and helping to push it over the cliff.
Cheers.
Last edited by Sid Departure; 4th May 2003 at 17:02.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"1) The one who’s displayed that he’ll go with the flow or act in his own self-interest (eg, “for the sake of his family”) when things get really tough, or "
Wiley.
This one statement speaks volumes about 89.
If choosing to support ones spouse and kids over ones beer buddy is self interest then that aint no "mate" of mine
Wiley.
This one statement speaks volumes about 89.
If choosing to support ones spouse and kids over ones beer buddy is self interest then that aint no "mate" of mine
Join Date: May 2000
Location: honkers
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But, no, there was a group on board that panicked and lost their nerve. They took their foot off the brake and lept from the bus.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: From a suitcase
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wizofoz, I did get a chuckle out of your witty reply - that's what good debate should be all about. However, you'll forgive me if I still prefer Sid Departure's slant on the topic.
It's quite obvious that this point (among many) was discussed at length in post 89 AN and TN cockpits as part of the rationalisation process, particularly in attempting to convince the new FO's as to the wisdom of their seniors' move back to work.
However, another slant altogether could be put to it. Most acknowledged quite early into the Dispute that jobs were going to be fewer post dispute, and the 'departed' were seen as only guaranteeing that all, even the most junior, still 'on the careering bus' would be assured of a job when all who chose to returned to work together still under the union. (You'll remember that one of the main sticking points with the companies leading up to the Dispute was the number of senior pilots leaving the two companies for far better paying work overseas - or doesn't that particular memory fit in as conveniently as others?)
But I'm sure that despit that, that argument will hold no water with 'Camp B'.
oicur12, glad to see you're still hard at it selectively picking the bits of the argument (and only those bits) that fit your argument. You know as well as I do that your comment is totally spurious to the point being raised.
It's quite obvious that this point (among many) was discussed at length in post 89 AN and TN cockpits as part of the rationalisation process, particularly in attempting to convince the new FO's as to the wisdom of their seniors' move back to work.
However, another slant altogether could be put to it. Most acknowledged quite early into the Dispute that jobs were going to be fewer post dispute, and the 'departed' were seen as only guaranteeing that all, even the most junior, still 'on the careering bus' would be assured of a job when all who chose to returned to work together still under the union. (You'll remember that one of the main sticking points with the companies leading up to the Dispute was the number of senior pilots leaving the two companies for far better paying work overseas - or doesn't that particular memory fit in as conveniently as others?)
But I'm sure that despit that, that argument will hold no water with 'Camp B'.
oicur12, glad to see you're still hard at it selectively picking the bits of the argument (and only those bits) that fit your argument. You know as well as I do that your comment is totally spurious to the point being raised.
Just Binos
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Mackay, Australia
Age: 71
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spad seems to be a little short of an answer to EWL's nice deflection of his ridiculous hypothetical. If Spad and any of the usual suspects would genuinely refuse to entrust the life of their loved ones to an 89er if there were no alternative it proves the extent to which their brain is corroded from the inside, and should provide them with a reason to rethink.
I always read these 89 threads because they continue to give me an insight into human nature which I have to accept, but I usually stay away from commenting since I had no part in the dispute. But Spad's desperate attempt to prove a point shocked me.
I can ignore amos's repetitive bile spitting with his ludicrous winking smilies (where is his literate alter ego Tool Time these days?), but Spad, can you be serious? Yeah, if your kid was sick and you needed to rely on someone, naturally you would take one of the "good guys" if you had a choice. But if you are prepared to come into this thread and state that you wouldn't trust one of the "bad guys" to look after said kid, you need psychiatric help.
I always read these 89 threads because they continue to give me an insight into human nature which I have to accept, but I usually stay away from commenting since I had no part in the dispute. But Spad's desperate attempt to prove a point shocked me.
I can ignore amos's repetitive bile spitting with his ludicrous winking smilies (where is his literate alter ego Tool Time these days?), but Spad, can you be serious? Yeah, if your kid was sick and you needed to rely on someone, naturally you would take one of the "good guys" if you had a choice. But if you are prepared to come into this thread and state that you wouldn't trust one of the "bad guys" to look after said kid, you need psychiatric help.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe Spad’s gone to work? I can’t answer for him, but if I can give my reply to EWL’s question: I think you’re all quite purposely missing Spad and Wiley’s point, which is, how could anyone ever trust one of these people with anything that really mattered? They’re ‘heroes’. They’ve been ‘heroes’ for fourteen years and they’ll remain ‘heroes’ to the day they die.
As for EWL’s call for them to join together with all the other people in Australian aviation to fight for a better deal, errr… we tried that, EWL – and not to put too fine a point to it, they piked when things got tough, so how in the world could you expect anyone to trust them to do anything but repeat their performance of fourteen years ago if it even got tough again?
Which is exactly the point Spad and Wiley were attempting to make. The ‘sick kids’ line is a red herring, but Binoculars, put me down as in need of psychiatric help as well, because there’s no way I’d trust one of my kids to any one of them if I could possibly avoid it. Spad’s question included the fact that you had the choice between a hero and a non-hero, which you conveniently forgot.
(PS: Spad, judging by the over-reaction in some quarters, I think you might have stung a few people with your question.)
As for EWL’s call for them to join together with all the other people in Australian aviation to fight for a better deal, errr… we tried that, EWL – and not to put too fine a point to it, they piked when things got tough, so how in the world could you expect anyone to trust them to do anything but repeat their performance of fourteen years ago if it even got tough again?
Which is exactly the point Spad and Wiley were attempting to make. The ‘sick kids’ line is a red herring, but Binoculars, put me down as in need of psychiatric help as well, because there’s no way I’d trust one of my kids to any one of them if I could possibly avoid it. Spad’s question included the fact that you had the choice between a hero and a non-hero, which you conveniently forgot.
(PS: Spad, judging by the over-reaction in some quarters, I think you might have stung a few people with your question.)
Fubarr,
Unless you and every other '89er has, for the last 14 years, refused to get on an Australian domestic flight, you've trusted the "Heros" to fly you and presumably your family in a jet transport aircraft! Or isn't flying "Something that matters" in your opinion?
And before you say "But I said if I had a choice" well, there was always the train, no doubt driven by a good, paid up union man.
To suggest someones decision during an industrial dispute identifies them as being a reliable person or not is drivel of the supidest kind. It was a hard choice in difficult times (ask Kap M, he made BOTH decistions!). There were good guys and ar....les on both sides.
If the AFAPs only strategy was based on the idea that no-one go back, it was flawed and unworkable from the start (as history bore out.). Human nature means that, in the end, most will do what is best for themselves. That is a mathmatical principle used in all manner of statistical analasis. And on that score, I contend that most of the STAYOUTS did so because they thought it best served THEMSELVES INDIVIDUALY as most believed the 1) The AFAP would win and 2)they would be blackbanned if they went back. It's easy to be noble when the alternative is a firing squad. If that is not the case, then why were the picket lines, phone calls, clickers, ganging up in pubs etc. etc. necessary? To "Remind" people to be noble and loyal?
Unless you and every other '89er has, for the last 14 years, refused to get on an Australian domestic flight, you've trusted the "Heros" to fly you and presumably your family in a jet transport aircraft! Or isn't flying "Something that matters" in your opinion?
And before you say "But I said if I had a choice" well, there was always the train, no doubt driven by a good, paid up union man.
To suggest someones decision during an industrial dispute identifies them as being a reliable person or not is drivel of the supidest kind. It was a hard choice in difficult times (ask Kap M, he made BOTH decistions!). There were good guys and ar....les on both sides.
If the AFAPs only strategy was based on the idea that no-one go back, it was flawed and unworkable from the start (as history bore out.). Human nature means that, in the end, most will do what is best for themselves. That is a mathmatical principle used in all manner of statistical analasis. And on that score, I contend that most of the STAYOUTS did so because they thought it best served THEMSELVES INDIVIDUALY as most believed the 1) The AFAP would win and 2)they would be blackbanned if they went back. It's easy to be noble when the alternative is a firing squad. If that is not the case, then why were the picket lines, phone calls, clickers, ganging up in pubs etc. etc. necessary? To "Remind" people to be noble and loyal?
Last edited by Wizofoz; 5th May 2003 at 00:33.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Asia
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The AFAP fell victim to “group think” - no dissenting voice was allowed (the town hall being a great example). History has shown the most common result of groupthink is to underestimate the strength and/or resolve of the forces working against you.
BM and JR had little idea of the forces they were up against.
Maybe a modicum of democracy would have allowed for a different outcome.
These pages are a valuable insight into the minds of the 89ers – although they see themselves as victors, they display classic traits of people suffering from victim mentality. Blame rests with everyone but themselves.
BM and JR had little idea of the forces they were up against.
Maybe a modicum of democracy would have allowed for a different outcome.
These pages are a valuable insight into the minds of the 89ers – although they see themselves as victors, they display classic traits of people suffering from victim mentality. Blame rests with everyone but themselves.
Good point Ohbehave,
One guy I know voted "no" in the "secret" ballot, someone looked over his shoulder, and he was fronted and threatened by a vicious group of "professtionals" outside the meeting. Another told me he voted "yes"..Because the senior captain standing beside him watched what he wrote like a hawk!
Would any AFAP member like to state whether a dissenting point of view was ever aired at any of the meetings, and if so, what the reception to it was like?
One guy I know voted "no" in the "secret" ballot, someone looked over his shoulder, and he was fronted and threatened by a vicious group of "professtionals" outside the meeting. Another told me he voted "yes"..Because the senior captain standing beside him watched what he wrote like a hawk!
Would any AFAP member like to state whether a dissenting point of view was ever aired at any of the meetings, and if so, what the reception to it was like?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Devonport Tasmania Australia
Posts: 1,837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
410
I take your point, and Fubaar I know you did try to restructure in '89 and it all went pear shaped. However in this day and age you collectively have a better chance of a fair go, as the heads of Government are not nearly as in the pockets of the airlines.
This age of freedom of information would make it impossible for the backhanders that obviously flowed to go unnoticed.
I reiterate what I said before, and would trust a loved one in the ridiculous, but not totally impossible scenario proposed by Spad.
I am also sure that if any of you had to call on a former mate in a time of dire trouble, that you would be surprised, even if they did give you an earful first.
My biggest worry with the aforementioned scenario is would you even call a former in the first place?
Humans first, '89er or heroes second good people.
Best all
EWL
I take your point, and Fubaar I know you did try to restructure in '89 and it all went pear shaped. However in this day and age you collectively have a better chance of a fair go, as the heads of Government are not nearly as in the pockets of the airlines.
This age of freedom of information would make it impossible for the backhanders that obviously flowed to go unnoticed.
I reiterate what I said before, and would trust a loved one in the ridiculous, but not totally impossible scenario proposed by Spad.
I am also sure that if any of you had to call on a former mate in a time of dire trouble, that you would be surprised, even if they did give you an earful first.
My biggest worry with the aforementioned scenario is would you even call a former in the first place?
Humans first, '89er or heroes second good people.
Best all
EWL
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Devonport Tasmania Australia
Posts: 1,837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Uhhhh amos?
May I please ask if I resemble that remark?
Just like to know who it was aimed at. PM if you like because I have lost the plot. Many would say i never had it in the first place.
Best regards
EWL
May I please ask if I resemble that remark?
Just like to know who it was aimed at. PM if you like because I have lost the plot. Many would say i never had it in the first place.
Best regards
EWL
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Devonport Tasmania Australia
Posts: 1,837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks amos
For a second there!!
Please do not let it get personal though. This had been going fairly well, with a good deal of venting and hopefully that will assist toward all of our futures. Woomera has been extremely tolerant and I am sure we all really appreciate that.
Best regards
EWL
Also, can anyone please advise if it is possible to post a pic here without having to load it into a website, and if so how so?
EWL
For a second there!!
Please do not let it get personal though. This had been going fairly well, with a good deal of venting and hopefully that will assist toward all of our futures. Woomera has been extremely tolerant and I am sure we all really appreciate that.
Best regards
EWL
Also, can anyone please advise if it is possible to post a pic here without having to load it into a website, and if so how so?
EWL
Just Binos
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Mackay, Australia
Age: 71
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EWL,
I think the ever-eloquent amos has decided that I am a scab lover. You can't believe how shattered I am at that.
How proud the 89ers must be to have him on their side with his thoughtful opinions.
Now, which icon was it? Oh yes.....
I'll leave the semi-literate amos to aim another brilliant, incisive and quirky one-liner at me. I won't bother to reply. Will that make it even, Woomera?
Fubaar, of course you would prefer one of your group A mates if you had a choice. Anybody in your position would. Equally, if you had no choice in the situation described you WOULD trust one of your adversaries, because you had to. If you didn't, that's when the psychiatric help would be required. So it's not really a matter of distrust, just a measure of your and Spad's distaste. Different things, really, and that's all I meant.
I think the ever-eloquent amos has decided that I am a scab lover. You can't believe how shattered I am at that.
How proud the 89ers must be to have him on their side with his thoughtful opinions.Now, which icon was it? Oh yes.....
I'll leave the semi-literate amos to aim another brilliant, incisive and quirky one-liner at me. I won't bother to reply. Will that make it even, Woomera?
Fubaar, of course you would prefer one of your group A mates if you had a choice. Anybody in your position would. Equally, if you had no choice in the situation described you WOULD trust one of your adversaries, because you had to. If you didn't, that's when the psychiatric help would be required. So it's not really a matter of distrust, just a measure of your and Spad's distaste. Different things, really, and that's all I meant.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I must have been at different meetings then. My recollections are nothing like some of those posted here. Our secret ballots were truly secret, tho' not quite as secret as the activities of "mates" who voted one way but had already signed to croos the picket line
And at my union meetings, well into 1990, the entire union heirarchywas there and to my recollection, stayed to receive hefty zillion dollar fines for carrying out activity voted for by the very guys who ratted.
Perhaps it was too long ago and my memory's fading. The only thing I really recall was the bit where I voted to go back as an AFAP member or not at all.
Safe flying wherever you all are now
And at my union meetings, well into 1990, the entire union heirarchywas there and to my recollection, stayed to receive hefty zillion dollar fines for carrying out activity voted for by the very guys who ratted.
Perhaps it was too long ago and my memory's fading. The only thing I really recall was the bit where I voted to go back as an AFAP member or not at all.
Safe flying wherever you all are now