Personally I feel that the AFAP and AIPA should amalgamate. That would probably solve a lot of the issues, however, I thought that it would be management who decides who flies what aircraft not AIPA. Am I wrong?

Seems AIPA is serious? Here's the drum:

"For the last 3 days AIPA been involved in Roadshows in Brisbane, Adelaide and Melbourne, with Sydney to be held on Friday. Those 3 days have been a great opportunity to talk with Qantas Jetstar and Regional pilots, renew some old acquaintances and make some new ones.

With the re-vote of EBA4 open, the clear message AIPA has been getting from Qantas Jetstar pilots is that the re-vote should not be happening and that a proper, consultative process should be put in place for future negotiations on it. AIPA fully understands this message and shares the concerns that underlie it. Similar concerns formed the basis of AIPA’s decision to advocate a NO vote on EBA4.

In fact, having now considered the Roadshow feedback, responses to our letter urging a NO vote from last Friday (attached) and the importance of bringing together all Qantas Group pilots, AIPA has filed a Notice to Initiate a Bargaining Period on Jetstar and with the Australian Industrial Relations Commission.

In filing the Notice, AIPA has sought to preserve the rights of Jetstar pilots in regard to a proper negotiating process.

Also availoable on the public part of the AIPA website is an audio recording and presentation from the AIPA Roadshows to Jetstar pilots. The recording and presentation can be accessed by the following link: http://www.aipa.org.au/AboutAIPA/tabid/57/Default.aspx

AIPA URGES YOU TO LISTEN TO THE RECORDING AND REVIEW THE PRESENTATION BEFORE VOTING.

It is important to remember that a NO vote for EBA4 is the beginning of a proper negotiating process, and not the end."

Roll on March 4.:ok:

Sorry Led, I cant see a away forward with what you are saying. I've been in QF mainline approaching 6 years now and am still waiting for a right hand seat, ( and yes, it will be the first opportunity in mainline for an fo spot.) I returned from the UK to this gig.
Whilst overseas I saw the advantage of one union, ie BALPA, in trying to advance the benefits for all pilots. This model is exactly what AIPA is trying to implement.
Jetstar will still have its own governing council, as would QF mainline and QF regional, but have the advantage of an umbrella of a overall body, that will hopefully, in time, provide independent negotiators, lawyers, etc,etc just as BALPA operates in the UK.
During all of this, there is no way that the QF mainline com can dictate to you about your future terms and conditions. You are still in the driving seat, but hopefully fully resourced to extract a deal that is great for everyone.

If this doesn't occur of course, I look forward to seeing what contract you have negotiated for me when I'm made redundant from the 76/744 or whatever aircraft type I may be on at the time and told here it is, take it or leave it.:ok:

I'm seriously running out of pearls for you Led Zep
 

You just don’t get it do you Led Zep. If you go with AIPA you won’t have them fighting for YOUR 787 jobs. That is what your quote in red refers to. No surprise really. Of course if Jet* pilots take the path management is attempting to steer then down AIPA will have to take serious action to protect their members future. It’s if something ISN’T worked out between us that that may occur. I repeat, the whole point of AIPA representation and a GOAL is to avoid this situation occurring. How many times do you have to be told that AIPA can’t insist where Qantas allocates its 787s? You will do ALL the Jet* flying on any aircraft type (or at least have the first choice to it) before any QF mainline guy will.

I’m surprised that you say,


I agree with the sentiments here (Glad we share a common aim) but you’re heading the other direction. The short term result of voting yes is a handful of cash (a gain) and setting in motion a divide between pilot groups which I fear will be difficult to ever repair, and result in a long term degradation of ALL pilots’ terms and condition in this country. It’s interesting too how you seem worried about long term security of your position and union division. That’s exactly what we’re concerned about. And your solution is to fracture the pilot groups further and vote in a deal which you know will cause further division. Even Fistfokker agrees that a GOAL is a good thing for you LONG term (Though he does have short term reservations). On that subject, Fistfokker, if the GOAL was setup as a Y and thus ensured all current Jet* pilots had first access to Jet* flying where do you see the short term danger for Jet* guys. (Obviously if it wasn’t going to be a Y I agree that it could well be detrimental for you and I would totally understand you not wanting to align with AIPA.)

The AN pilots set up their own association as they had no other available representation and no-one able to cover them. Given the recent history before this (1989) I don’t think there is any similarity to their situation and the threats we face today.

I repeat again, you don’t have time to set up a new association in time to deal with today’s situation. The JPA and AFAP have shown through their actions that they will sell you out to management. AIPA hasn’t. The negative stuff you hear about them is misinformation spread by those from the two previous groups and Jet* management muses. I stress again, get along to a road show or call AIPA, (02) 8307 7777, and speak to someone. Then make your own decision.

The situation Keg referred to of QF and JQ pilots being interleaved on the 787 was ONLY for if QF decides to keep them on 1 AOC. It means that even if this situation was to occur Jet* pilots and Mainline pilots have first access to the same amount of flying as if they were under separate AOC’s i.e. Jet* pilots fly Jet* 787s and QF pilots fly QF 787s. Again, no QF mainline pilot is stealing any Jet* flying or promotional opportunity.

I ask of you again Led Zep, what is this terrible history you have with AIPA that you speak of when it’s obvious from your previous posts that you have been at Jet* for a maximum of 13 months? (In your post 21 Dec 2006 you discuss the lateness of your January 2007 roster.) From what you write I can only be lead to think that you want your promotion at ANY cost. I think you are letting this cloud your judgement here. A GOAL will be a win/win for both groups.

Nuf.

HnH -

I think you miss the point of my argument. The issue is not the fact that we would have a separate council etc etc and would operate under an autonomous umbrella.

The problem lies in what you say "....that will hopefully, in time, provide independent negotiators, lawyers, etc,etc just as BALPA operates in the UK...."

In the short to medium term (which is when this will all come to a head), how can this possibly be independent when the umbrella body is looking after the interests of QF mainline drivers, especially in the event that AIPA QF COM decides to proceed under the basis of Ian Woods scenario and tries to ban 787 flying from everyone except QF mainline. Under any examination, it's unworkable.

BALPA is a truly independent body and a very different creature from AIPA with it's vested interests.

An Australian BALPA equivalent is an ultimate and absolutely desirable aspiration - but would QF AIPA members be prepared now to dismantle their existing organisation and combine with J*, Qlink, Rex, Virgin to start a new "Australian ALPA" body. Somehow, I have my doubts.

OTOH, I reckon the other groups might be ready to consider the option as a way of achieving true solidarity while we still have some good times ahead.

Ah, now I get it. What is your agenda Led? You've been pretty quiet on that so far. However here are a few interesting observations from this thread thus far. You don't pay attention to the totality of statements made by AIPA on Qrewroom. You don't listen to any of the QF drivers on here. You don't listen to the reason of the QF drivers when they talk about how incorrect your views are (seriously, as if the QF drivers could vote for the J* 787 drivers to not fly their own aircraft :rolleyes: ), you actively push disinformation.

In fact, the totality of your comments suggests being a lot closer to the action than an average line driver.

So are you one of the JPA negotiators? Are you a member of AFAP? Captain or F/O? Joined J* when? If you're going to bang on about hidden agendas then you had want to be very sure that you're not pushing one of your own. :rolleyes:

Led, part of Ian Woods comments......

*Should Qantas not wish to agree to the GOAL, I believe, assuming the Company does not reneg for problematic operational, commercial or financial reasons, on its promise to Jetstar pilots that they will operate the first 15 B787's, that it would, nonetheless, be economically cheaper to have all B787's operating under one AOC with one training regime and I believe that the AIPA COM would support the interleaving of 15 Jetstar B787 crews into Mainline 787 operations in the same way it did SH A330 crew? Again B787 allocation to Jetstar or Mainline could then be in accordance with market forces but both Jetstar and Mainline pilots would be on LH EBA 8 salaries.*Should Qantas management not endorse either of the above, I believe the AIPA COM will be required by its membership to take action to have put in place a binding irrevocable agreement that mainline pilots will operate all B787's (other than the 15 B787's that current Qantas management have promised to Jetstar). While this outcome does not, in itself, stop management allocating B787's other than in accordance with market forces, it would stop Qantas group pilots being played off against each other so Qantas management can gloat that they have achieved the world's lowest B787 piloting salaries.

At no time has Ian Woods hinted or suggested that 787 flying would be banned from Jetstar.
Facts are pretty important here....

And yet you won't take the logical first step of having all pilots in the same group come together. :rolleyes: Why is that? What is your agenda in blocking what is the logical first step in a truly industry wide industrial organisation?

If that is the outcome- and I think it's a great outcome- then lets start working towards it. Join AIPA and we've got a great first step. Then you and I can stand side by side and push harder for it. Don't think for a second that there aren't those of us who aren't pushing for it. The response I get from those I know and trust in AIPA is 'one step at a time', 'walk before you run, etc'.

Of course then there are the nay sayers who think that AIPA is out to 'control' the industrial landscape in Australian Aviation and who would view such an overt and public push by AIPA of more evidence as to their deviousness. It can't be had both ways. Either it's good for the industry for all of us to get together or it's not.

So what's it going to be Led? Going to take the first step towards what you reckon is a good thing or are you going to keep pushing your own hidden agenda?

LED, mate have you had a listen to the podcast from AIPA on the JQ website? If not, give it a go. :ok:

Projection
 

From Led Zep,

Total bulls@it. He never said this at all and the only thing he said remotely similar was for the situation of a GOAL and AIPA representation NOT happening AND management trying to isolate QF pilots from the 787. Certainly not a secret agenda. Again, the above situation is what we're trying to prevent here.

To quote myself,

Or maybe Keg’s right and it’s you with the secret agenda. After all it’s you who keeps using the term. There’s a psychological term for that, it’s called projection. PROJECTION.

Nuf.

Sorry, part of my last post was incomplete it should have read:

Nuf,

Sorry, don't understand??????:confused:

Ian Wood IS on record as stating:

Is that selective hearing Condition Lever? Is there more to that quote?

Of course, there always is.

Nuf's statement needed to be corrected though.

The full quote is posted above by HotnHigh.
Couldn't understand how Nuf could be selective in his hearing (reading etc etc)

Seriously Condition? Are you playing politics with semantics? You didn't even read the rest of his quote.

Been biting my tongue for a while now ......

Please .... someone, anyone ... convince me that giving clowns like Led Zep and his mates the opportunity to join AIPA is the best way to go for the current AIPA membership. I'm hoping they aren't indicative of the attitude of the Jetstar pilot group as a whole, but just a vocal minority.

Maybe they do have a hidden agenda.

Maybe they are sitting at their computers wearing aluminium foil hats.

Either way, supposing they did join AIPA, how would we negotiate and reason with people like this? How could we be certain that, as soon as something didn't go their way, there wouldn't be a group of them running off to sign the first AWA they tripped over?

In an ideal world, I'm all for unity. But you can only work with what you are given.

This is one time I'm hoping I can be proven wrong .....

EBD could you please tell us exactly what it is that AIPA has done for you since you joined?:)DD.
Holic,unity is the only way.

Seriously Driving????
That is what he wrote - can you really argue with that????

I am just astounded. This really is a joke.:ugh:

I graduated from pre-school quite some time ago Condition.