Ex AN pilots now in QF - the cancer within??
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Funny, but in the many years of my previous aviation life we tended to whinge & moan about things a bit. Sure, there was plenty of room for improvement, & the heirarchy were a bit silly at times, but I had a good salary.
Then I joined a major airline. I get paid a bucket more. I get a crap-load of time off (had to acquire some extra hobbies). But I now realise just how weak and amateurish my bleating & moaning was. Now I'm being taught by the professionals. I mean to say, they're bloody good. Real good. They even give me extra opportunities to learn 'the ropes' by posting their cr@p on PPRUNE.
Sancho, you forgot to add:
'And if you really really don't like the aviation industry in Australia and can't be bothered doing anything about it except moaning like a BSE infected cow, then P155 OFF out of the country and fly for Air Botswana. I hear they're hiring!!'
Then I joined a major airline. I get paid a bucket more. I get a crap-load of time off (had to acquire some extra hobbies). But I now realise just how weak and amateurish my bleating & moaning was. Now I'm being taught by the professionals. I mean to say, they're bloody good. Real good. They even give me extra opportunities to learn 'the ropes' by posting their cr@p on PPRUNE.
Sancho, you forgot to add:
'And if you really really don't like the aviation industry in Australia and can't be bothered doing anything about it except moaning like a BSE infected cow, then P155 OFF out of the country and fly for Air Botswana. I hear they're hiring!!'
Last edited by DutchRoll; 18th Jul 2003 at 08:18.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is a question to Kaptin M and all the other '89ers from a junior S/O in the Qantas ranks. When we embark on this industrial action to protect our wages and conditions and our union comes to us and says"Sign this letter of resignation, we won't be using them its just a tactic to get them to talk to us." what would you recommend we as individuals do?
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Thread Starter
Not ever having been asked the question that you pose, permFO - ""Sign this letter of resignation, we won't be using them its just a tactic to get them to talk to us."" - I feel it is something that will be encumbant upon you to think about, IF that situation ever arose.
Personally, I'm not aware of this so called "tactic" that you discuss EVER having been used as such.
What does surprise me (but not too much), is the apparent inability of some of the latter posters to interpret the subject matter.
Some have obviously posted a response based on the thread TITLE only, without bothering to read the individual posts.
"Quick draw McGraws"?? Or just a short attention span?
Now let me ask you a hypothetical question, permFO - possibly one that might be more relevant to your situation.
On Monday morning every QF pilot is hand delivered a letter from management telling them that the company needs to take sudden, drastic measures if it is to survive. The letter might read something like.
Dear Employee, As you are aware the past several months have been considerably punishing for our company, and it is with considerable regret that despite our continued efforts, QF needs to take immediate drastic measures if it is to survive in today's competitive market, which has seen a number of other large carriers enter Chapter 11, or cease to exist entirely.
Therefore I call upon each of us to make a personal sacrifice, for the benefit of the group. I understand that this may involve making some adjustment to your personal life in the short term, however it is the longer term that will see the benefit.
If each employee - myself included - were to forego a salary trimming in the order of 29.47%, then it could be almost assured that there would be no need for retrenchments across the board.
This salary adjustment would be effective immediately forthwith, if you were to agree to it. For those who are willing to take this option, it would necessitate that you return the accompanying consent letter, signed and witnessed by no later than midday Wednesday - 2 days hence - and would ensure your ongoing employment.
Should the company receive nothing from you in respect of this matter, it would then be assumed that your employment future under the current terms and conditions would be seen as unsustainable.
Sincerely.......
And now your union calls you (and every other pilot) and tells you to NOT return the letter, whilst they try to negotiate with the company.
What are YOU going to do, pFO?
Personally, I'm not aware of this so called "tactic" that you discuss EVER having been used as such.
What does surprise me (but not too much), is the apparent inability of some of the latter posters to interpret the subject matter.
Some have obviously posted a response based on the thread TITLE only, without bothering to read the individual posts.
"Quick draw McGraws"?? Or just a short attention span?
Now let me ask you a hypothetical question, permFO - possibly one that might be more relevant to your situation.
On Monday morning every QF pilot is hand delivered a letter from management telling them that the company needs to take sudden, drastic measures if it is to survive. The letter might read something like.
Dear Employee, As you are aware the past several months have been considerably punishing for our company, and it is with considerable regret that despite our continued efforts, QF needs to take immediate drastic measures if it is to survive in today's competitive market, which has seen a number of other large carriers enter Chapter 11, or cease to exist entirely.
Therefore I call upon each of us to make a personal sacrifice, for the benefit of the group. I understand that this may involve making some adjustment to your personal life in the short term, however it is the longer term that will see the benefit.
If each employee - myself included - were to forego a salary trimming in the order of 29.47%, then it could be almost assured that there would be no need for retrenchments across the board.
This salary adjustment would be effective immediately forthwith, if you were to agree to it. For those who are willing to take this option, it would necessitate that you return the accompanying consent letter, signed and witnessed by no later than midday Wednesday - 2 days hence - and would ensure your ongoing employment.
Should the company receive nothing from you in respect of this matter, it would then be assumed that your employment future under the current terms and conditions would be seen as unsustainable.
Sincerely.......
And now your union calls you (and every other pilot) and tells you to NOT return the letter, whilst they try to negotiate with the company.
What are YOU going to do, pFO?
Last edited by Kaptin M; 18th Jul 2003 at 17:56.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Everywhere and Nowhere
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kapt M. Is this your own personal website. Do you have a life away from here in the land of the sushi. Everyone is getting pretty sick of you treating this site as your very own political platform, prune is loosing punters by the droves because of your spleen venting, get over it or get off and do something meaningfull with what is left of your miserable life.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Here and there.
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ur2......whether one agrees or not with Kaptin, he has just as much right to post here as anyone else and as often as he likes.
Other cotributors don't have to read his offerings!
Other cotributors don't have to read his offerings!
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you saying Kaptin M that you were not required to sign a letter of resignation? You also seem to be suggesting that the 29.47% payrise you were after was in fact a paycut required by your employer. The format of your hypothetical letter would in fact be illegal under current industrial law (re: the wharfies dispute with Patrick) so in answer to your question, no I would not sign it, however if my Union said look sign this letter instead and it looked ,smelt and tasted like a letter of resignation to be used as an industrial tactic I would not sign that letter either.
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Thread Starter
For those who find it hard to read past the title of this topic, here's a clue:
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=96595
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=96595
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very interesting thread Kaptin but whats your point? Someone with a greater understanding of IR law could correct me but that sort of wildcat strike would actually be illegal in Australia. Back to my point, could you clarify your statement about not being required to sign a letter of resignation during the dispute.
[quote]Not ever having been asked the question that you pose, permFO - ""Sign this letter of resignation, we won't be using them its just a tactic to get them to talk to us."" - I feel it is something that will be encumbant upon you to think about, IF that situation ever arose.
Personally, I'm not aware of this so called "tactic" that you discuss EVER having been used as such.[quote]
It would seem that you may have gone to the David Irving school of modern history. If not the AFAP then who did encourage you to resign your position with Ansett.
[quote]Not ever having been asked the question that you pose, permFO - ""Sign this letter of resignation, we won't be using them its just a tactic to get them to talk to us."" - I feel it is something that will be encumbant upon you to think about, IF that situation ever arose.
Personally, I'm not aware of this so called "tactic" that you discuss EVER having been used as such.[quote]
It would seem that you may have gone to the David Irving school of modern history. If not the AFAP then who did encourage you to resign your position with Ansett.
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Thread Starter
"not being required to sign a letter of resignation ....no-one was required to sign a letter of resignation."
Required by whom, or what??
"If not the AFAP then who did encourage you to resign your position with Ansett."
The companies - by their issuing INDIVIDUAL writs on personal assets - and the best LEGAL advice available in Australia.
permFO, you are but another who is either totally ignorant of the FACTS, or another attempting to re-write history to justify the actions of a MINORITY....22% in fact....of pilots involved in what is probably the testing ground for many employees not just in Oz, but in an area that is rapidly about to become endemic.
For those who thought that 1989 in Australia was "irrelevant", look at what's happening in B.A.
......but then of course, we're all just TOO smart to make the same mistakes as everyone else.
Aren't we!!
Required by whom, or what??
"If not the AFAP then who did encourage you to resign your position with Ansett."
The companies - by their issuing INDIVIDUAL writs on personal assets - and the best LEGAL advice available in Australia.
permFO, you are but another who is either totally ignorant of the FACTS, or another attempting to re-write history to justify the actions of a MINORITY....22% in fact....of pilots involved in what is probably the testing ground for many employees not just in Oz, but in an area that is rapidly about to become endemic.
For those who thought that 1989 in Australia was "irrelevant", look at what's happening in B.A.
......but then of course, we're all just TOO smart to make the same mistakes as everyone else.
Aren't we!!
ACTUALLY,
At one of the subsequent hearings on award respondancy, when the issue of the resignation was raised, one of the AFAP Lawyers said, through gritted teeth and obviously pi55ed off, "Tha AFAP were given a range of options!"
Resignation was by no means the only option. It was taken out of malice because the AFAP committee thought it would do maximum damage to the companies (such was there concern about their members future!)
Had they agreed to drop the 9 to 5 campaign and return to normal work, no doubt the writs would have been lifted (They were for all that DID go back to work!)
At one of the subsequent hearings on award respondancy, when the issue of the resignation was raised, one of the AFAP Lawyers said, through gritted teeth and obviously pi55ed off, "Tha AFAP were given a range of options!"
Resignation was by no means the only option. It was taken out of malice because the AFAP committee thought it would do maximum damage to the companies (such was there concern about their members future!)
Had they agreed to drop the 9 to 5 campaign and return to normal work, no doubt the writs would have been lifted (They were for all that DID go back to work!)
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Thread Starter
It would appear that being a pathological liar must be ONE of the pre-requisites to qualify as a scab. Both Wizofoz and phnompenhkid - now Miyazaki-based - do admirably in that area.
From "Sky Pirates" p58 & p60,McCarthy had received legal advice that morning from the union's lawyers, including Neil McPhee, QC, and Tony North, that a mass resignation by the pilots was the only way to avoid further liability during industrial action if the airlines issued writs for damages.......O'Connell thought the resignations were a bad tactic industrially and had advised against them on this basis.
Also from "Sky pirates" -
Legal advice showed that the airlines had a good case to sue pilots fo damages due to their industrial action. Even if legal moves were not pursued to their conclusion, Ansett's object at this stage was to add as much as possible to the almost unbearable pressure on pilots. The threat of exhausting the funds of pilots and their union might force them to crack. More writs were served on individual pilots after the resignations..
Blows your bs right out of the water AGAIN, Wizofoz. The LIES you guys come up with all the time are incredible!!!!
From "Sky Pirates" p58 & p60,McCarthy had received legal advice that morning from the union's lawyers, including Neil McPhee, QC, and Tony North, that a mass resignation by the pilots was the only way to avoid further liability during industrial action if the airlines issued writs for damages.......O'Connell thought the resignations were a bad tactic industrially and had advised against them on this basis.
Also from "Sky pirates" -
Legal advice showed that the airlines had a good case to sue pilots fo damages due to their industrial action. Even if legal moves were not pursued to their conclusion, Ansett's object at this stage was to add as much as possible to the almost unbearable pressure on pilots. The threat of exhausting the funds of pilots and their union might force them to crack. More writs were served on individual pilots after the resignations..
Blows your bs right out of the water AGAIN, Wizofoz. The LIES you guys come up with all the time are incredible!!!!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Haven't got my dictionary handy either. Fortunately I was given the opportunity to attend school and learned the lesson that history repeats itself. But I digress....
Lacking the Oxford definition just for the moment I'd guess that "Piracy" might be well described by at least some (maybe all of the following:
1. Acts by management involving stealing or destroying several zillion dollars of shareholders money by refusing to negotiate with employees, rather preferring to see four airlines disappear down the gurgler.
2. Acts by individuals who, having voted to stick together in secret ballots, "stole" seniority way, way ahead of their years of service by crossing picket lines.
3. Acts by a group of line crossers to blacklist all former colleagues whose main crime was to stick by their pledges of solidarity.
4. Acts by a government who coerced pilots, tried to destroy a union, sued its leaders and members, destroyed a tourism industry, gave all terminals to its mates, gave visas to imported pilots, lied about the progress of rebuilding and rented RAAF planes at well below cost to "mates"
5. Acts by individuals to enrich themselves at the expense of their colleagues by, for example, looting super funds and taking highly paid jobs as consultants" to the receivers when their airline was in its death throes
6. Acts by a government and ACTU ( despite the constitution giving the Commonwealth NO power to set wages) to reduce real wages by nearly 30% just because they could
Anyway, when I get my dictionary back I'll get it right but it seems to me that this is a good start. If you haven't caught the flavour of piracy in all this then maybe you too will be doomed to learn from history........
Lacking the Oxford definition just for the moment I'd guess that "Piracy" might be well described by at least some (maybe all of the following:
1. Acts by management involving stealing or destroying several zillion dollars of shareholders money by refusing to negotiate with employees, rather preferring to see four airlines disappear down the gurgler.
2. Acts by individuals who, having voted to stick together in secret ballots, "stole" seniority way, way ahead of their years of service by crossing picket lines.
3. Acts by a group of line crossers to blacklist all former colleagues whose main crime was to stick by their pledges of solidarity.
4. Acts by a government who coerced pilots, tried to destroy a union, sued its leaders and members, destroyed a tourism industry, gave all terminals to its mates, gave visas to imported pilots, lied about the progress of rebuilding and rented RAAF planes at well below cost to "mates"
5. Acts by individuals to enrich themselves at the expense of their colleagues by, for example, looting super funds and taking highly paid jobs as consultants" to the receivers when their airline was in its death throes
6. Acts by a government and ACTU ( despite the constitution giving the Commonwealth NO power to set wages) to reduce real wages by nearly 30% just because they could
Anyway, when I get my dictionary back I'll get it right but it seems to me that this is a good start. If you haven't caught the flavour of piracy in all this then maybe you too will be doomed to learn from history........
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Timbuktu
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wizo thinks he or she comes up with valid criticisms.
Nothinh could be further from the truth, adequately pointed out by KM and Elektra.
Statements such as that quoted by Wizo could not possibly be known by such an individual, yet tossed into this forum as fact.
The fact is, Wizo is quoting garbage.
Then again, what does one expect from a scab.
It is a part of the justification they all need to reconcile their appalling and immoral behaviour.
Nothinh could be further from the truth, adequately pointed out by KM and Elektra.
Statements such as that quoted by Wizo could not possibly be known by such an individual, yet tossed into this forum as fact.
The fact is, Wizo is quoting garbage.
Then again, what does one expect from a scab.
It is a part of the justification they all need to reconcile their appalling and immoral behaviour.
Touchy Touchy!
Must have struck a nerve!
Not surprising that Da Boyz need to believe that resignation was their "only option", or else they would have to live with the fact that the misery caused to themselves and so many others was avoidable.
Kap, funny that Sky Pirates (or at least selected passages quoted outside the complete context) has suddenly become the authoritative work on the dispute. I've read many of your ilk criticize it as it portrays the AFAP as arrogant and out of touch with reality, while tabling instances of flat out intimidation (the Perth Pub incident) and deception by the AFAP (quotes from the newsletter regarding the companies inability to find recruits, whilst these recruits were actually on courses).
That being said, you actually make my point:-
Pressure to do what? Join weight watchers? The companies objective at that stage was to have the pilots drop the 9 to 5 campaign, return to work as per their contract, and work within the industrial relations system as it stood.
Note During industrial action. In other words, drop the industrial action, and the writs would have likewise been dropped.
In other words, the AFAP had put its members in the firing line by and ill conceived, poorly instigated action and they paid the price
Not surprising that Da Boyz need to believe that resignation was their "only option", or else they would have to live with the fact that the misery caused to themselves and so many others was avoidable.
Kap, funny that Sky Pirates (or at least selected passages quoted outside the complete context) has suddenly become the authoritative work on the dispute. I've read many of your ilk criticize it as it portrays the AFAP as arrogant and out of touch with reality, while tabling instances of flat out intimidation (the Perth Pub incident) and deception by the AFAP (quotes from the newsletter regarding the companies inability to find recruits, whilst these recruits were actually on courses).
That being said, you actually make my point:-
Ansett's object at this stage was to add as much as possible to the almost unbearable pressure on pilots.
mass resignation by the pilots was the only way to avoid further liability during industrial action
Legal advice showed that the airlines had a good case to sue pilots for damages due to their industrial action.
Last edited by Wizofoz; 21st Jul 2003 at 04:43.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...O'Connell thought the resignations were a bad tactic industrially and advised against them on this basis.
So there appears to be a different point of view as to why you resigned Kaptin but the end result is that it was a wrong decision. If you resigned because of the writs then you are saying you resigned because of the money.
You thought that by resigning that it would force the Companies into negotiating with you and any other spin you put on it is rationalisation in its purest form.
.
Well as a matter of fact Kaptin we are
So there appears to be a different point of view as to why you resigned Kaptin but the end result is that it was a wrong decision. If you resigned because of the writs then you are saying you resigned because of the money.
You thought that by resigning that it would force the Companies into negotiating with you and any other spin you put on it is rationalisation in its purest form.
.
......but then of course, we're all just TOO smart to make the same mistakes as everyone else.Aren't we !!
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Thread Starter
"If you resigned because of the writs then you are saying you resigned because of the money." 
The resignations were considered necessary from a LEGAL point of view, to limit the actions (suing) the companies could take against us individually. The writs issued were for unspecified damages.
"You thought that by resigning that it would force the Companies into negotiating with you.."
That is absolute and utter bull
Read my lips, permFO, I'll say it once again just for your benefit as you're obviously a slow learner....The resignations were considered necessary from a LEGAL point of view, to limit the actions (suing) the companies could take against us individually. The writs issued were for unspecified damages.
......but then of course, we're all just TOO smart to make the same mistakes as everyone else.Aren't we !!
Well as a matter of fact Kaptin we are
Strange how ALL of the domestic pilots at that time were naieve, and duped by their union, and that some of the present lot consider themselves on a higher plateau than the 89 pilots.
I don't think we'll be waiting too much longer to see YOU having YOUR mettle tested, permFO.
Aviating was once a profession that one could look at as a lifelong career - not any more.
What else are you qualified to do, permFO?
Wizofoz, your feet must be full of holes - from where you keep shooting yourself!
The offer to return to work "work as per their contract" was made in September. A return to work under the then current contract and pay conditions to allow a cooling off period.
The companies REJECTED it!!
Try citing FACTS instead of your personal theories...but then the FACTS wouldn't fit in neatly with the LIES you try to propogate.
The resignations were considered necessary from a LEGAL point of view, to limit the actions (suing) the companies could take against us individually. The writs issued were for unspecified damages.
"You thought that by resigning that it would force the Companies into negotiating with you.."
That is absolute and utter bull
Read my lips, permFO, I'll say it once again just for your benefit as you're obviously a slow learner....The resignations were considered necessary from a LEGAL point of view, to limit the actions (suing) the companies could take against us individually. The writs issued were for unspecified damages.
......but then of course, we're all just TOO smart to make the same mistakes as everyone else.Aren't we !!
Well as a matter of fact Kaptin we are
Strange how ALL of the domestic pilots at that time were naieve, and duped by their union, and that some of the present lot consider themselves on a higher plateau than the 89 pilots.
I don't think we'll be waiting too much longer to see YOU having YOUR mettle tested, permFO.
Aviating was once a profession that one could look at as a lifelong career - not any more.
What else are you qualified to do, permFO?
Wizofoz, your feet must be full of holes - from where you keep shooting yourself!
The companies objective at that stage was to have the pilots drop the 9 to 5 campaign, return to work as per their contract, and work within the industrial relations system as it stood.
The companies REJECTED it!!
Try citing FACTS instead of your personal theories...but then the FACTS wouldn't fit in neatly with the LIES you try to propogate.
