PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific-90/)
-   -   Has the AFAP ever had a decent win? (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/416983-has-afap-ever-had-decent-win.html)

apache 2nd Jun 2010 11:44

Has the AFAP ever had a decent win?
 
just wondering, in the wake of lots of very negative views, whether the AFAP has EVER had a decent win in Australian aviation history? or have they consistently made a bit of noise then folded?

Slasher 2nd Jun 2010 14:36

Im sure Paul Makin could answer that one better than I could.

Di_Vosh 2nd Jun 2010 23:57

Depends on what you mean by "Decent win"?

There are many individuals who've had reason to thank the AFAP for chasing back-pay, non-payment of xxx, etc.

Similarly, there are many individuals who've had the AFAP represent them successfully in disputes against their employers.

On the collective front, the feds recently have facilitated some very good EBA's, especially with some of the helicopter outfits.

Last year, the Feds drove the FWA to make a ruling that gave Eastern and Sunstate pilots to change companies (within the Qantas group) without having to take three months off work. A big win for us; especially the Sunstate guys who wanted to transfer to Melbourne/Sydney!

There are plenty more. But you wont hear about them here. :ooh:

Here, you'll mostly get ill-informed comment and general negativity.

A good example being the AFAP trying to improve the T&C's of VA Crz FO's. They've only just started their action, and there is a queue on Prune to shoot them down.


DIVOSH!

Lawrie Cox 3rd Jun 2010 00:07

Wins are in the eye of the beholder.

Let’s look at the day to day stuff that goes unreported on salary, allowance, unfair dismissal, accident/incident support etc...

Whilst I could go to many cases to prove our worth that is not the point of the exercise is it. Let’s just slag the Feds and hide under the rock like a slimy viper rather than be constructive.

It is easy to be critical but the challenge is getting pilots to get off their collective backsides and working together instead of constant sniping at each other let alone the organisations formed to improve their lot.

The Federation does not look after one employer it covers hundreds in every part of the Australian industry whether it be Airline, GA, Heli, Aero Med, Flight Instruction and more.

Look at the history pilots formed under one umbrella in 1938 and grew into a strong and respected body. The Qantas pilots walked out in 1981 and post the dispute a number of splinter groups based on single employers formed.

On each occasion this has weakened the collective strength of professional pilots.

Does this help the collective lot? NO

Will it help pilots going forward in the future ? NO

Again throw your spite and enjoy the anonymity or perhaps one day grow some balls and be prepared to put your hand up and be elected by your fellow pilots to represent the views expressed under one umbrella.

As a body we often have divergent views but in the end we achieve by working together as professional pilots irrespective of who we are working for. The policies in our organisation are developed by pilots for pilots and the staff is tasked accordingly.

Keep fighting amongst yourselves and the boss always wins as your leaving him/her alone.

Lawrie Cox
Manager – Industrial Relations
Australian Federation of Air Pilots

Brian Abraham 3rd Jun 2010 00:43


The Qantas pilots walked out in 1981 and post the dispute a number of splinter groups based on single employers formed
The formation of one splinter group, as you call it, in the early eighties, was the result of bully boy tactics (read threats made) from the Federation. And this is not a

Let’s just slag the Feds and hide under the rock like a slimy viper rather than be constructive.
Rather the opposite.

paul makin 3rd Jun 2010 03:09

As one who was peripherally involved at the time, it is my recollection that the walk out was not as a result of threats either real or implied. It was more a petulant dummy spit by Messrs. Westwood and Cant, who (not without cause) had had a gutful of sitting through arguments about Domestic matters, and felt that the Qantas pilots could do better for themselves, by themselves.

The split had a significant influence on the future direction of the AFAP, as from that, the concept of pilot councils, operating under the umbrella organisation, evolved. That structure exists to this day. That structure has allowed individual pilot groups to pursue their own interests whilst having the backing and resources of the organisation.

As to the question of whether or not the AFAP has had any significant wins, consider that post WW2 pilots had no representation. From that evolved the AFAP, and through that organisation Australian pilots domestic and international sat fairly high in the rankings of salary and conditions. Within the IRC, the government, at the instigation of the AFAP, recognising the unique and specific conditions of the industry, appointed a dedicated commissioner the Flight Crew Officers Industrial Tribunal. From that Tribunal came the framework of pay and conditions that put Australian pilots in a strong and healthy condition. Then came that scumbag Hawke.

But the advances achieved by the AFAP are not just in the area of terms and conditions. The AFAP has always been active within the technical area. Many who read this forum may be unaware of the contributions, made by AFAP volunteers, to the regulatory structure and safety of our industry not just in Australia but worldwide. AFAP members have been involved at all levels up to and including ICAO panels, in setting the standards that have led to the safety standards our industry now enjoys. At a local level AFAP had representation, access, and input to all significant legislative and safety related matters. AFAP opinion was actively sought, on most matters relating to aviation. Then came that scumbag Hawke.

AFAP had the foresight to set-up the AAP MBF, an organisation that is run by pilots for pilots, to ensure the welfare of its members. The success and reputation of the AAPMBF is such that organisations across the world have sought assistance from AAP MBF, in the design and management of funds for other pilot bodies. Through astute control and management that organisation has grown to a substantial Fund that controls a bit short of $100 million of members funds and assets. Despite multiple attempts, by commercial entities, to compete AAP MBF is, by way of it's overall cost and it’s portability, as yet unassailed in its benefits.

Unfortunately we see here on this forum a few of the aggrieved. Those whose expectations of the AFAP, outstripped the reality or the result that they considered, or could expect as, their due.
The organisation was never intended to fight for those who are not prepared to do the right thing. It was intended to ensure that those who have been wronged receive “due process”.
Given the diverse interests of the membership, the AFAP has an extremely difficult job trying to ensure everyone gets a fair shake. I for one believe they perform that task well in extremely difficult circumstances.

Don Diego 3rd Jun 2010 03:45

OI Lawrie, I think your spelling on "viper" may be wrong.:eek::eek:

wombat watcher 3rd Jun 2010 05:07


As one who was peripherally involved at the time, it is my recollection that the walk out was not as a result of threats either real or implied. It was more a petulant dummy spit by Messrs. Westwood and Cant,
Anything but!
Try circumventing of AFAP route protection policy (Ansett to Singapore).
Try Melbourne office inteference in Sydney office operations.
Try AFAP executive (read domestic pilots) inteference in QF pilot business.
Try Ansett domination of AFAP due to its branch structure.
Try QF pilots paying 60% of AFAP income but getting <30% of vote.
Try promises made to correct all of the above but not implemented.
:ugh::ugh::ugh:

pill 3rd Jun 2010 06:11

FE's on the ansett 76's. Or was that not the AFAP? More a strange joke than decent win.

Slasher 3rd Jun 2010 08:15

Well stated Paul.

tiptoeturkey 3rd Jun 2010 12:36

.... love the show Laurie...your amazing,,, hard to swallow though...

tiptoeturkey 3rd Jun 2010 13:22

Go Laurie Cox, your a Champion.
As per your award...

The award? WTF
What sort of di@33heads are paying money to be part of your gang?
I earned 125k in 1990 as an F/O with no AFAP connection ..
And now The F/O 's are on 105K for the same job in 2010.
As per AFAP claim
Not sure if you care cause your clearing 300K plus as a rep for those 2500 plus pilots.
Whatever

psycho joe 3rd Jun 2010 13:51

I too have found the brown text which obviously makes my ranting asertions infallable & cerebrally superior of all hereafter.

Why is there a general assumption that AFAP deniers' have either never been actively involved in the AFAP or are cerebral minnows? In my experience it's quite the opposite. :ugh:


Last year, the Feds drove the FWA to make a ruling that gave Eastern and Sunstate pilots to change companies (within the Qantas group) without having to take three months off work. A big win for us; especially the Sunstate guys who wanted to transfer to Melbourne/Sydney!
OMG, OMG, OMG, they did? WOW this is huge, I'll bet all the Sunny's Pilots' (Pilot's formerly known as sunnies pilots) are absolutely thrilled at this spectacular gain. So can Qlink pilot's now transfer to mainline? :D

I take back every negative thing that I've ever said about our illustrious union (federation)

LeadSled 3rd Jun 2010 15:42

Folks,
Wombat Watcher has a number of the points right, there are more. It was no dummy spit, Westwood had almost 100% backing.

Greame Cant devoted an extraordinary amount of his private life to the welfare of his fellow pilots, from the time he was a S/O until he retired. How many of you have done that ???

I was there, in the middle of the whole thing, it became impossible to live with the domestic's attitude.

Qantas had to live with cost competition in the real world, not the cosy two airline policy world of Ansett and the National Airlines Commission ( by whatever trading name at the time).

Going along with "AFAP Policy" would have made QF hopelessly uncompetitive.

Ansett is gone, and Australian Airlines was broke when QF took it over, is there a message here somewhere.

Tootle pip!!

PS: AFAP did have one big win, the introduction of the "North American Contract" in the '60's.

I-Felt-Her 3rd Jun 2010 19:48

No results found for infallable: Did you mean infallible?
 
If brown text OBVIOUSLY makes YOU feel less cerebrally superior, then you probably are.:D

Also, don't assume anything on an internet forum is infallable. Pardon me, I mean, infallible. That is also OBVIOUS.

Lawrie Cox 4th Jun 2010 00:52

Hey Turkey
Don't know what your on but i would avoid the random testing as you might be in a bit of bother.

I will have to go and talk to the fianance committee about my contract as you obviuosly know more about it than me or the missus. If they dont pay up including the backpay i guess i will have to go to the Fair Work Ombudsman to recover it.

Nah i have a better idea what about i just get on a web page rumour site and throw a bit $hit around and see if it sticks. There that will make me feel better you muppet.

Back to the real world.
The Qantas pilots left when they couldn't get their own way and the Company partially funded this up till they withdrew the arrangement a couple of years ago and then Qantas pilots found out about having to deal with management that dont want to talk to you. Its working so well i am informed.
By the way the vote for the split was not 100% it was 65 - 35 and at least those who oppposed and were in the miniority supported the formation once it was clear there was a majority.

That is the point i am trying to get across we are not perfect, none of us, but by continuing to splinter and one group attempting to dictate over the others we will go further backwards.

A professional pilot is one that works for all pilots not just in your company or you are better because you an airline pilot. We have professionals in all areas Ag pilots, Helicopter, flight instruction, police, fire spotters, air ambulance, charter, corporate, regional, airline (domestic & international). As soon as you state that you are better than the other guy/girl then the argument is mostly lost.

Now back to my lost hundreds of thousands.

Lawrie Cox
Manager - Industrial Relations
Australian Federation of Air Pilots

max1 4th Jun 2010 01:03

tiptoeturkey


I earned 125k in 1990 as an F/O with no AFAP connection
And what were those with AFAP connection on?

psycho joe 4th Jun 2010 01:04


If brown text OBVIOUSLY makes YOU feel less cerebrally superior, then you probably are.

Also, don't assume anything on an internet forum is infallable. Pardon me, I mean, infallible. That is also OBVIOUS.
...And there's the response that I was waiting for. (do you mind if I stay in sexy brown). I can't say that I suffer from an inferiority complex; however I am a little dejected that only apache & tiptoeturkey rate a mention on your puerile hate website.

By transferring material from PPRune to your hate website etc, I can only assume that your nom de plume was created to be killed off by a moderator in an attempt to become a glorious martyr in your bizarre cyber kingdom.

Well good luck to you and i hope you get your 50 cyber virgins. :D

BTW love that bit on your website that explains how GA pilots don't earn enough (Pay enough) to be able to expect any union support/presence of any sort. Problem is that GA pilots become airline pilots with big salaries & long memories.

Van Gough 4th Jun 2010 01:30

I wonder what would happen if the AFAP amalgamated with the TWU ie like a branch of the TWU...

It would make them an immensely more powerful and effective organisation.:ok:

Could probably go a long way to stopping people working for free (cadetships):mad:

wombat watcher 4th Jun 2010 03:10


and the Company partially funded this up
Lawrie, that's not correct.
Fitzsimons and Coysh probably told you that, but not correct.
Qantas guaranteed the AIPA Loss of Licence scheme until it was up and running, at no cost to Qantas. Pilots who weren't interested in the politics only cared about the AFAP LOL scheme. If the pilot wasn't a member of the AFAP then he couldn't be a member of the Mutual benefit Fund. Westwood needed to cover this point off to get those pilots to vote "yes".
Cant actually opposed the breakaway as he was the VP International and put himself at odds with the Overseas branch so it is inaccurate and unfair to attribute anything in the breakaway to him. Yes, he jumped ship when the majority voted to go.

Dark Knight 4th Jun 2010 03:26

Wombat Watcher; Leadsled

As one intimately involved in the events when the Qantas pilots walked out of the AFAP and upon their fellow pilots; one who happened to be Chairing the Convention/Executive the day Westwood stood upon the table baring his A$$ to the Chair and AFAP Honour Board, I reject your recollection and assertion of events.

Yes Graeme Cant did devote a huge amount of his private, family life to his fellow pilots as did Bert Smithwell (QF), Dick Holt, etc, etc to name but a couple but to question `How many of you have done that ???is a gross slur upon, and insult to each and every pilot who has served his fellow pilots in any union! Of which there are Many!

It only became impossible for the Qantas pilots to live with the domestic pilot attitude purely and simply because of the Qantas pilots’ attitude, an attitude promoted to fester by the then leadership of the Qantas pilots.

`Qantas had to live with cost competition in the real world, not the cosy two airline policy world of Ansett and the National Airlines Commission ( by whatever trading name at the time).
Going along with "AFAP Policy" would have made QF hopelessly uncompetitive.’
Is indicative of this attitude as there were many within domestic side more than well aware of what was happening within the `real world’ and I reject those claims totally. (I suggest that should you go and check history you may find Ansett through the amalgamation of ANA and others airlines still held a number of international route rights in many world areas.)

Wombat watcher does NOT have a number of points right or correct as he would like to recall them; there are always two or more sides to any story.

I could argue/ debate many at length disputing them with facts, figures and records however, I have no desire to refight battles of yesteryear. Suffice to say there were many, many differences between all groups within the AFAP, Branches, etc, viz; Between Ansett - TAA; East West; Ansett – Qantas; TAA – Qantas; Between Branches, QLD – VIC – SA – NSW – International (Qantas) – WA and GA where many, many hours in meetings, behind the scenes meetings, etc, were spent attempting to resolve these. Most involved at the time were more than well aware of the politics, world aviation scene plus AFAP politics; through the perceived differences and difficulties of the time a review of improvements to Australian pilot salaries and lifestyles demonstrate a successful period of achievement comparable to any in the world.

One thing which really got up the Qantas pilots collective noses was the amount of time considering GA matters plus the fact `their’ annual; dues contributed to GA regardless that the AFAP was by and for all pilots.

However, within the AFAP was an overriding desire, intention, to improve the lot of ALL pilots where the selfish desires, aspirations, expectations of all were subject to examination and decision by their peers! Therein does lie the nub of alienation!

The process was often slow, long, tedious, and occasionally acrimonious with agreement or consensus reached however, as within any solution, particularly one involving compromise, not all could or will be satisfied. Enough of us learned, were taught, garnered the information to know the value of this, had the knowledge to understand further improvements could be sort in the next round of negotiations.

Whilst there was a desire to work collectively supporting gaining solutions and improvements for ALL pilots regardless of differences, much was achieved. When divisions were created and implemented the value of the cohesive group rapidly diminished, ultimate success then moved to airline management.

I suggest a comprehensive review of history and the value, standing and conditions of pilots within Australia today vividly illustrates the results of selfish division.

DK



PS: AFAP did have one big win, the introduction of the "North American Contract" in the '60's.
pps>> And, if it was not for Dick Holt, Ted Meredith and I think, Bert Smithwell (QF and a couple of other QF pilots), inserting a big rod up the Qantas pilots backsides for the only time the Qantas pilots ever stood up to go on strike, organising IFALPA to threaten to boycott flying into Australia then Qantas pilots probably would not benefitted from its introduction!

A compromise is the art of dividing a cake in such a way that everyone believes he has the biggest piece.

Lawrie Cox 4th Jun 2010 03:28

Wombat Watcher
I was not attributing anything to Cant and nothing should be read into that other than many Qantas pilots that i have spoken to about it who were there at the time confirmed the opposition but agreed to go with the majority.

In respect to the funding i was referring to the payment for duty of the officers of the Qantas Pilots union to do the job in the Union. This was something no other Union enjoyed from the Company and was recently withdrawn when the relationship soured. I was not referring to the LOL structure at all.

Trust that clarifies the point.

Lawrie Cox

Muff Hunter 4th Jun 2010 09:03

Lets have a look at the QF Pilots salaries (which AIPA negotiate)

VS the rest..vb, jq, rex, etc....(AFAP negotiations)

i know which one i would rather have!!!

psycho joe 5th Jun 2010 06:10

Something that I love about Australia's democratic society is that virtually no organisation is above the scrutiny (criticism) of the public or its members, whether it be government, religion, trade unions etc. Further, as a democracy we have the right to criticize (to within legal limits) anonymously. We vote anonymously, we can have letters published in newspapers anonymously, and we can use the internet anonymously. Without fear of being hunted down, jailed, killed etc. To question these rights is to question the fabric of democracy.

A question was posted here regarding positive AFAP activities or "wins".

Regardless of the posters intent it was an opportunity for the AFAP powers that be to communicate the pro's of AFAP membership, outline some of the short term wins and provide an overall "big picture" plan for where the Federation is headed in the future, particularly with regard to strengths, weaknesses within the organisation, dealing with a changing workplace legislative environment, and plans to work with/around/against other unions to achieve said objectives (threats). Sure some, if not all of this information is available elsewhere and if you're a member then you get the newsletter. But for the uninitiated & disillusioned this was another opportunity for the AFAP management types the spruik the product.

Instead, we get extremely reactive statements from the industrial relations man attacking anonymous criticism and a lot of dialogue about who said what to whom in 1981 and how they damaged the power base of the AFAP.

From this thread one could be of the belief that the AFAP is;
  • Reactive - rather that pro-active.
  • Is looking firmly into the past - rather than the future
  • Is largely preoccupied with power.

The only response that came close to answering the question is:


Last year, the Feds drove the FWA to make a ruling that gave Eastern and Sunstate pilots to change companies (within the Qantas group) without having to take three months off work. A big win for us; especially the Sunstate guys who wanted to transfer to Melbourne/Sydney!
Is that it? .:sad:

The Green Goblin 5th Jun 2010 07:43

IMO there should be a union rep in Kununurra/Broome and all the GAAP zones where there is extensive flight training batting for the guys as they enter the industry. Helping with T&Cs unfair dismissals and someone to go to when they are being asked to do things that are stretching the company/employee relationship anonymously (flight and duty times, weights, non pilot duties etc) If you gain their loyalty then you will have them for life.

Free membership should also be given to the unemployed (with a clause after 2 years or so that they must be working) and a free membership to every Australian who gains a CPL for the first year. You should also only pay your membership once you reach a cap (say 30k or so) and it should be a nominal fee for the guys earning a pittance at the lower end of GA.

LeadSled 5th Jun 2010 08:49


---who oppposed (sic)and were in the miniority (sic)supported the formation once it was clear there was a majority.
Dear Mr Cox,
Not really, and I, for one, opposed the original breakaway ( I was on the OSB Committee at the time) because I was one of a number who favored the ALPA framework, with a Master Executive Council, but each airline branch largely running its own race, within a policy framework which would NOT have allowed other pilot groups to dictate operational policy for "competitor" or "other" airlines.

But once the die was cast, all but a handful adopted the new framework, and I, for one, was happy to later admit that Westwood was right. There is no way the domestic recalcitrants of the day would have changed their attitude, as I later came to realise.

I was just as sick and tired of the domination of Ansett/TAA ( the cockeyed Convention voting structure --- with "Ansett" having all the state votes) as Westwood a Co, and the troglodyte approach to technical innovation ----- three pilots or two plus F/E on anything with more then 100 seats/no glass cockpits ( yes, that right --- and Cathay pilots were on the same tack) and many smaller but quite important issues: no reduced power takeoffs, no wet runway V1, no intersection takeoffs, yada, yada, yada.

A not inconsiderable concern of OSB was the party politics in Melbourne, and the attempts to turn the General Manager position into Executive General Manager. The OSB was not going to have a bar of AFAP becoming just another union supporting Labor. Nor would we have a bar of the "Executive General Manager" using our funds to promote his ambitions to become a Labor Senator for Victoria.

If you want to talk about rampant egos, have a look at the "management" of the 1966 QF strike (AFAP President Captain R. Holt) where we finally settled for a deal that was not as good as the QF "final offer" before the strike. "Somebody" was determined to have a strike. It took quite a few years for many F/Os and S/O salaries to catch up to pre-strike levels, I was on a "savings clause" for almost 5 years.We didn't even get datal seniority ---- and for whom to we give thanks for that.

And it was QF pilots who signed personal guarantees to raise enough money to get all the crews stranded overseas home --- quite a risk to take.

Mr. Cox, it is my opinion that, to this day, AFAP has followed a narrow, even introverted and myopic agenda, and I speak from years and years of listening to AFAP representatives talking unsubstantiated rubbish at various technical/consultation meeting ------ it is always the same agenda, making unsubstantiated safety claims to block change ------ pretty much the same as demanding three man crews on anything with more than 100 seats --- or no glass cockpits, because we would all become epileptics.

You will not probably remember, but I was instrumental in getting one of your members out of very serious p** in the west, but this is not the place to go further into that problem.

As to the comments about OSB and GA ----- again, absolute rubbish, as a member of the OSB, I spent many hours assisting the NSW GA guys, and one thing I noticed then, that I still see to this day ----- in an unfortunately large percentage of cases ---- as soon as a bloke gets an airline job, their suddenly adopted attitude of contempt for GA blossoms ----- something I never saw in the OSB/AIPA. I spent a lot of time as an OSB RAPAC rep. arguing against AFAP "airlines reps" demanding restrictions on GA operations ---- that had no evidence based safety case, just assertions. Assertions which, if accepted, would have cost quite a few GA members their jobs ----- and I am still hearing and seeing the same thing, to this day.

I never once heard the cost of supporting GA brought up at an OSB Committee meeting, and I spent more than enough time there.

Tootle pip!!

It even took a "wonderful chap" from Ansett to dob in our DDFO for alleged low flying at Oskosh --- the smallest of small time actions.

Dark Knight 6th Jun 2010 01:37


Just wondering, in the wake of lots of very negative views, whether the AFAP has EVER had a decent win in Australian aviation history? or have they consistently made a bit of noise then folded?

Regardless of the posters intent it was an opportunity for the AFAP powers that be to communicate the pro's of AFAP membership, outline some of the short term wins and provide an overall "big picture" plan for where the Federation is headed in the future, particularly with regard to strengths, weaknesses within the organisation, dealing with a changing workplace legislative environment, and plans to work with/around/against other unions to achieve said objectives (threats). Sure some, if not all of this information is available elsewhere and if you're a member then you get the newsletter. But for the uninitiated & disillusioned this was another opportunity for the AFAP management types the spruik the product.
Apache: there is a very large difference between your original post and what you now suggest was your `intent’. Had the original intent been phrased in such a manner then perhaps the answer to the question may have been forthcoming and educational. The history of the AFAP goes back to 1938 and beyond with ramifications from the historical evolution of pilot industrial relations in many countries.

Some of the achievements and particularly methods of doing things relate to or are derived from other industries ie. The original speed/weight formula for deriving pilot pay originated from the USA railways.

Has the AFAP ever had a decent win in Australian Aviation History? Yes!
There are many; many very successful ones.

However, the achievement of these successes derived from dedicated, meticulous research, advice by both pilots and their employed staff; hours of negotiation within the pilot group/s to arrive at a united claim to put to management followed by, often, long and tedious AFAP/Management negotiation some ending up in various Industrial Relation Courts/Tribunals.

Underpinning the successes was a united, supportive pilot group prepared to stand for the AFAP which in the end, and always is/was, the pilot group.

The moment this support and unity was shattered the level of success any pilot group was severely limited.

I suggest history fully supports degradation of pilot remuneration and working conditions within this country; Success of/by the AFAP is only achievable by the full and UNITED support of the pilot group!

DK

A compromise is the art of dividing a cake in such a way that everyone believes he has the biggest piece.

psycho joe 6th Jun 2010 02:23

Dark Knight: I am not, never have been, nor ever will be Apache! I don't know any Apaches' I've never worn feathers, I don't fly helicopters, and I don't hail from North America!

And at no point in your barely coherent rambling AFAP political rhetoric did you even come close to answering the original question. :ugh: :D

apache 6th Jun 2010 09:30

ummm... I have not posted since the thread started.

It has been interesting to see how quickly some people got all negative, and went on the defensive.

The reason i asked the original question was that it was interesting to read how many people were negative re the V-Australia post, and how they thought that the afap would not be victorious in this quest.

As far as I am concerned, the precedent has already been set at JQ intl, therefore should be an easy win, and good on them for championing the cause.I am all for progressing the terms and conditions of pilots the world over, starting right here in our own back yard.

wombat watcher 8th Jun 2010 00:07


(I suggest that should you go and check history you may find Ansett through the amalgamation of ANA and others airlines still held a number of international route rights in many world areas.)
Dark Knight,
An interesting variation on the theme. Just in case your theme holds water, what's your theory that justified TAA flying HBA/CHC. Now who did they amalgamate with to have international route rights?
Of course if you want to say the the AFAP route protection policy was just another useless policy that was a waste of paper and ink then I'd be happy to strike those 2 items from my grudge list.:p:p:p

ResBunny 8th Jun 2010 02:02

HBA/CHC
 
Very strange that I remember this, but I'm fairly certain that when TN operated the HBA to CHC service it also carried a QF flight number (in those days they were known as 'Joint' services rather than 'Codeshare'. QF around that era was a single type 747 only operator (may have been introducing 767s) so HBA to CHC would have not been viable in a 'Jumbo', therefore the route was palmed off for TN to operate.

Also remember Mum and Dad travelling to Portugese East Timor on an international TAA Heron.

So obviously not all international sectors were the sole preserve of QF.

Regards,

Packs on 8th Jun 2010 07:55

Gday Lawrie,

Although all this history is interesting would it not be far more beneficial looking forwards and getting both unions back working together for the greater good of the industry? The quicker the AFAP and AIPA start working with one another the better. Can you see this happening in the near future? Regards.

B772 9th Jun 2010 04:02

Wombat Watcher and Res Bunny.

The interest in HBA-CHC-HBA originated in Ansett and was marketed as the Southern Connection. Flight numbers were QF due to Qantas being the only designated International Airline. Due to the 2 airline policy both Ansett and TAA operated the service.

Ps1. There was an interesting rumour that a TAA B727-200 made contact with a man made object after lift-off on R/W12 on one occasion.

Ps2. There was also a B737-200 service for a period operated by New Zealanders.

Lawrie Cox 9th Jun 2010 08:01

Packs On
Whilst it would be nice to get over the history, it is unfortunate that we have a tendency to repeat the same errors if it is not understood.
You will find from all of my posts here that i have advoocated a united pilot body not the continuing splinters.
Will it happen it is up to you as pilots. As to how it comes together?

The one point that has been made time and again is that EQUITY in standing is necessary for it to work. That means the GA pilot has as much standing as the A380 Captain. This point has not been accepted by Qantas pilots since the talks started, if we have one group trying to 'control' the situation then we have a repeat of 1981 of the group in the minority (perceived or otherwise) taking their bat and ball and leaving.

Further it is clear to us that Qantas pilots are financially supporting and encouraging splinter groups that too defeats the purpose of unity and sets back any attempt to unite Australian Pilots under one umbrella.

I would encourage those who advocate one body to get active as there appears to be a long way to go if the current behaviour continues.

Lawrie Cox

GADRIVR 9th Jun 2010 08:46

Question to Lawrie Cox:
Lawrie,
Green Goblin has put forward a very straight commonsense post re; gaining new members.
My question is has AFAP ever looked at something along those lines?
I'll be honest, insofar as GA ( particulary at the lowest levels) is concerned, your organisation seems to be at best irrelevant.
?:ok:

Brian Abraham 9th Jun 2010 09:03


Whilst it would be nice to get over the history, it is unfortunate that we have a tendency to repeat the same errors if it is not understood.
You will find from all of my posts here that i have advoocated a united pilot body not the continuing splinters.
Will it happen it is up to you as pilots. As to how it comes together?
Lawrie, great sentiments, except it's not all up to the pilots, it's also about how the AFAP goes about it's business. The nail that was driven into one coffin, and went onto the formation of a splinter group, was the threat from Federation representatives to a pilot body, that unless they fell into line they would receive a visit from Norm Gallagher (remember him of BLF fame?) and his muscle. Might be a tactic that works with some, but certainly didn't on that occasion, quite the opposite.


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:31.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.