43Inches

Care to specify which regional townships that you think this will occur in, and why? :confused:

In regard to the market I am refering to the need for VB to fill at least 50% of an EJet on these flights. REX and QFLink which have comparable fares but increased frequency at favourable slot times still get light loads throughout the week out of Albury, this is with 30-50 seat aircraft.

Embraer suggest the E170 needs 60% load factor in typical operations, obviously this will depend on ticket price compared to cost of operation.

Again boils down to the Prop vs New Jet argument.

Can they find 200 pax a day to fly between Albury and Sydney consistantly at a competitive price?

From what i've seen QLink is trying to improve their OTP and Qantas customers tend to stick with them in the face of competition, especially if they get in front on reliability.

The serious side to the argument is that if REX gets knocked out and then VB find the route not viable then pull out what next?

The Embraers will end up supplementing usual routes (if they can crew them) and east coast country services monopolised by QLink.

OR

Virgin will get full loads on all flights and make millions!

Transition Layer...... just out of interest have you had any intell on our mates at Rex that arent enjoying themselves...... I understand that they want to move on to greener pastures (not poached) but Rex is still a fun company to work at from my understanding.

Rex (mis)management are just playing the game with the pollies and trying to keep up face so the share price rug isn't pulled out from underneath them. Potential earnings are looking pretty shaky. Increased competition from VB, QF will ramp up competition in response. No one left to fly the Saabs. Interesting times ahead. With less and less check and training staff to actually train people, training could be slower at a time when it should be at its greatest.

Gone are the days where there would be an abundance of 2000 hour tt plus pilots with 1000 hours on twins. We won't see that for probably another 10 years when the next down turn has had a few years to take affect. So in the mean time the market is so good to get a jet job with better T&Cs, that a lot of these GA guys are waiting for the Jet job call up instead of applying to the Regionals and being bonded for 2 years or paying $10k :ugh:(that can't last @ Qlink).

On the Poaching issue...... Every regional airline including the one that I used to fly in has had a huge turn over of pilots and the smaller ones than Rex have lots a far greater % of pilots and indeed captains than Rex but they have not bleated about being Poached. GB is just playing the PR game but its very very poor choice of words - maybe a sign of desperate times in the front office.

I hope Rex lasts and that it remains a fun place that many of my buddies did and still enjoy

Hey Aircraft,

the Mayor put it simply - just for you...

QFlink also take note.

Aircraft the only point I'd like to comment on is that their needs to be adequate renumeration for pilots at rex.

I'm not going into any other specifics as they were passed on to me in confidence and I don't think it would be constructive nor right for me to comment on a public forum about them as I do not work for the comapny nor do I wish its employees any harm (the opposite actually). All I can say is that people are/were not happy and the renumeration was simply not worth it.

The old supply and demand argument was okay to keep wages low when demand was low. Demand is high now Aircraft. Whats the reason now?

Personally I'd like to see the company survive as I've got good mates there. But it gets my goat when I hear them struggling to make ends meet and even more when pople start pointing the finger at other operators.

Come on - lets cut the crap - an effo living in Sydney is worth more than 40k. Other companies have made the adjustment and reaped the rewards.

Times have changed.
Let go of the past.
There is a shortage of families that can AFFORD to live on 40k.

Oh aircraft you are so silly. We are not talking about a loving spousal relationship we are talking about an employee/employer relationship and you know it. Unless you are trying to say REX looooooves its pilots.

And we all know that if you love somebody that way, you will do almost anything to keep them around. That doesn't seem to be the case though does it?

Hi 43 inches,

I think you will find that unless Qantaslink pilots receive a proper form of career progression into mainline, a similiar situation to what is happening at Rex will occur.

At the moment Qantaslink has had pretty close to a 100% success rate at Virgin interviews and the guys are applying there rather than mainline, just due to the lack of bullsh!t you have to go through at Virgin.

Rex bleating about 'Poaching'.....what, exactly, were THEY doing on their recent 'round the country 'Recruiting' drive, if not 'Poaching' from GA operators at those locations?:rolleyes:

One mans 'Recruiting' is another mans 'Poaching' I guess.:=

$40K for a Saab FO?:eek: Strewth! Gotta be worth more than that! You can get more than that driving a piston twin!:oh: (and we are hiring at the moment too.......:E)

43Inches

True! I had a look at the proposed timetable for the Albury - Sydney route, and for the two trips a day it works out that Virgin will need to attract (about) 40 new/existing passengers per day on each of the services, doesn't it?

I can't see Virgin attracting of the existing morning business traveller market on the SYD-ABX and ABX-SYD legs, because it's proposed morning flight, which runs SYD-ABX-SYD, is too late for your usual 'day trip' business traveller.

But I can see Virgin attracting a lot of holiday travellers from the region, particularly those who are travelling by air to destinations beyond Sydney, eg., Gold Coast.

Whatever happens, travellers to/from places like Albury WILL benefit in the short-term from the increased competition. Let's just hope it continues!

KRUSTY 34
I view you as nothing other that an individual who can see the impending trainwreck and carnage to follow - and wonder why none of the "managers" are able to see it.
Also strange the major shareholders are content to accept the bull**** propogated by management as to why their investment, therefore their $$$, are going backwards; and for some reason I believed the investors actually had some nouse - silly me!

On a different note - :) - you say two C&T over the age of 50 are off to VB; I ASSUME to DEC JungleJet (or very short time RHS???)

Pass-A-Frozo
After so many of your rather blunt (nay: bludgeoning) posts on a number of topics we now find out that you ("the customer") will work your day around what the business ("the service provided") is willing to provide, and when.
At the very least a totally unexpected revelation! :ok:

Galdian... there was a time when moving from SF340 capt to B737 (or similar ie e170)F/O was a Huge pay drop. Alas, nowadays, it is not so. With overtime offered at the likes of VB and JQ, it is now a big pay JUMP!!!
B737 F/O an A320 F/O earning 84500 pa BEFORE o/t and allownces, vs 84544 for a 10th year capt at REX... well, you tell me! AND, these guys flying the jets get OVERTIME!!!!!!!

E170/190 F/Os can't be on too much less after overtime!

Check and trainers at rex??? well, OK, 84544 plus 20%... plus DTA prolly equals close to 120k.... take away the fact that they are away from home nearly 5 nights a weeekSTRAIGHT, every week, and that 120k don't look so good.

money talks

Hi Apache

Thanks for the figures - will admit I am not up to date, based on what you say even moving onto the 73 as F/O is pretty much a no brainer.

Things really do not bode well for REX (and any other operators who do not have some sort of a progression scheme with someone in place.)
So: will REX now be smart enough to approach VB to organise some sort of "career advancement" deal??
Is the situation so tough VB could, in the short term, tell REX to "f**k off, we don't need you??"
And the cadets - WHEN they are let loose when could they be upgraded?? 2 years?? 3 years?? never??
Will REX still be around TO upgrade them??

Finally a small nugget of insight for REX management: no matter how tightly you think you have bonded/tied down employees IF things are moving and IF people think they are being screwed over THEY WILL FIND A WAY OUT! :ok:

"But that's not what our lawyers say!!" response from Management 101 :ugh:

Just a thought from the course: Management 102.
PS: course "101", although excellent in its own way, being relevant to the days before computers, colour TV and the miniskirt, is probably no longer applicable to your present conundrum (or nightmare??:E)

Wind-up Aircraft
 

Wake up and smell the bull****, Krusty is not just knocking Rex for the sake of it. If you had lived long enough to know you would realise that if you stay with an organisation long enough and put heart an soul in to help make it a success you get pretty peeved when new management comes along and through their own short-sightedness run it into the ground. He like many of their pilots have had enough of the way it is being run into the ground. Some leave to better conditions, some stay and battle on.(Don't mean to fight your battles Krusty but this self-opinionated clown is getting up my nose).......

SemperFly,
I am astonished that you are having so much difficulty with the meaning of the word "value". You should throw out that dictionary you quoted from as it goes nowhere near giving the full range of meanings (my dictionary gives 13 different meanings). Your meanings included only monetary and material worth values, but everybody will tell you that people (or objects) can be valued in intangible ways (e.g importance is one such intangible measure of value).

The most important thing about the meaning of "value" is that it does not have to involve money. And, there is no meaning that is dependent on the relationship between the parties (or objects) involved - this means that a company may value an employee exactly the same way that one spouse values another.

Consider a pilot that gives his services voluntarily to Angelflight for example. Under your definition, his value to Angelflight is zero because he does not receive payment. Of course, Angelflight would actually consider his value to be considerable.

Yes, there are some meanings that strictly relate to money and material worth, but when it comes to the employer/employee relationship, each and every employee has a value that is completely separate from the monetary value represented by that employee's salary. One line pilot, on the exact same salary as another, for example, may be valued much more highly (or lowly) than the other.

apache, I hope I have finally made this clear. I thought the first example I gave (regarding a loved one) made it clear as that example showed that money does not have to be involved. Perhaps the better example is that of the volunteer, who despite receiving no payment, does an outstanding job and is highly valued by his company (he may even be more highly valued than some paid employees).

Getting back to the two departing check and trainers: They would have been considered to be extremely valuable by REX - the current circumstances absolutely guarantee that. So, the statement by KRUSTY 34 that "Virgin can obviously see the value of these people" (implying that REX can't) reveals just how ignorant that poster is.

Again I must ask how it is that REX are "not treating their people properly". They haven't provided a crew bus for transfers at Sydney, from what I can gather, but is that all? Mr Hat didn't want to answer this question as he felt he would be betraying somebody else's confidence, but surely somebody else, behind the cloak of anonymity, can spill the beans? KRUSTY 34, let's hear it.

galdian said:
The management know more about it than anybody. They wouldn't be instituting the cadet program if they didn't.

Yes, silly you - the shareholders have considerable nouse, and you would most probably find they have confidence in the management. Tell me, do you think everybody in the world is a complete moron, or just the REX management and shareholders?

So bored with these economic morons spouting theory out their ass (aircraft et al). History will judge the Singaporean idiots that rule Rex.

Z. :ugh:

Again, Aircraft, you have proved yourself to be a moron. We are NOT talking about "a loved ones value"or one who does volunteer work. We are talking about how EMPLOYERS value their EMPLOYEES!!!!
Your example of a loved one does nothing to illustrate an employees value.

Pass-A-Frozo

Geez PAF, with those sort of 'it's my way or the highway' attitudes, you actually get given the opportunity to travel on business then? :8

apache:
Amazing, absolutely amazing. I am now beginning to believe that some here genuinely lack the intelligence to understand this simple concept! Have you guys actually tried thinking about this for yourselves?

So much for thinking I had made it crystal clear! One last go at it now:

Leave aside the strictly monetary meanings of value that apply in the case of the employer/employee relationship - I know there are "value" meanings that apply that are based on the exact monetary amounts involved but ignore those meanings as I have never referred to those particular meanings.

The "value" I have been referring to all along is exactly the same value that occurs in a loving relationship! The process is exactly the same, the manifestation exactly the same and the end result exactly the same.

The feelings are not of love, obviously - but we are not talking about "feelings" and never have been.

Tthe example of the volunteer should have made it really, really clear that the worker can be highly valued even though they are paid nothing. So it should follow from that (to someone with moderate intelligence, anyway), that the amount of monetary payment directed at that worker has absolutely no bearing on the value they are held in by the company.

So, as per the case of the volunteer - the value the check and trainers were held in by the company was much higher than that reflected by the monetary amounts involved!

I will not be spending any more time on this matter.

aircraft
History will show how vicious a cycle it is - start cancelling flights whilst your opposition runs pretty much to normal, you get a reputation for cancelling flights, people start factoring in your perceived "unreliability" and off you go on the slippery slide.
I always thought aircraft not flying were losing you money; no pilots, no fly, no income. Maybe you have a new economic rational regarding how beneficial it is for aircraft to be sitting on the ground.

REX owners/management the only morons?? Indeed not, a certain previous situation regarding ANZ buying 100% of Ansett does spring to mind however we won't go there :E suffice to say the management should not be regarded as pin up boys for management (unless their pictures are on a dart board!)

And the cadets - still need suitable experienced pilots to train them.

The whole thing is a business/political play to (maybe) shed a few routes, primarily though to get the government to pay REX by either subsidising the cadet scheme or allowing foreign pilots in thereby keeping wages low.

I have no problems with REX playing games; I have a great deal of difficulty when what REX says is taken as gospel when there's a fair amount of bull**** mixed in and it appears no individual or organisation has the media outlet, or will, to challenge their crap. :mad:

Dear Mr Bank Manager

I have 2 kids, live in Sydney and make 49K a year and want to borrow 300K to buy a 1 bedroom dog box to house my family. I know I still owe you 40K for my flying training but hope you will consider this application as I am really "valued" by my employer.

Bank Manager laughing says - I can see by the money they pay you that you are indeed valued. Now get out of my office and stop wasting my time.

Aircraft, when you get past your early 20's, you will understand that money talks and bull$hit walks.

That's how management think and because the return on our investment leaves much to be desired, that is also how us regional FO's think.

After all, business is business, surely you would understand that?????