Last time, REX scoured G/A and then went overseas in an effort to find "suitable" pilots. The G/A experience whilst initially sucessful, soon became problematic as most of the prime candidates had already accepted jobs with the Majors. Subsequent candidates were of a calibre that made them increasingly "unsuitable", but not for the reasons that Jim Davis has purported!

REX then went to Eastern Europe, but this amounted to naught. One can only speculate at the miriad of reasons for this. REX found some relief by going to South Africa. They employed 6 guys with a variety of experience, the last of whom are now completing their Command upgrades. By and large these guys have worked out well (I have personally flown with them all), but IMHO they were no better or worse than one would have expected from the ranks of Aussie G/A applicants with similar experience.

So why had the Experienced G/A applicants (and there are still plenty of them) become unsuitable, but more to the point, why are the South African Guys who come from similar backgrounds, suitable? Simple, as far as the Aussie G/A applicants are concerned, THERE WAS NO WAY REX COULD HOLD ON TO THEM! The Law and Order issues in South Africa, and the desire for these pilots to provide a better life for their families, enabled REX to "secure" their services. REX paid for their relocation costs, and provided up to $30K in settlement expenses for them to come over. In return, they give REX 7 years service, or they have to pay the money back. Do we see a trend here? In a similar way the same applies to the Cadets, Captive Workforce.

Senator Heffernan's remark about REX not being here today if it weren't for the Cadet Scheme is unfortunate, but not surprising. He has taken REX management at their word, and as such has failed to grasp the true nature of the problem. REX would most certainly still be here today. The company's impressive debt/equity ratio would have seen to that, but one of two things would have happened. Either REX would have contracted in size, or the company would have had no choice but to compete for experienced pilots. Jim Davis has stated on more than one occasion that the latter course of action would bankrupt the company. The fact of the matter is, that to effectively compete for the limited experience pool out there, REX would probably need to increase fares by approx $7 dollars per ticket! If such an increase would lead to financial disaster, especially when you consider REX enjoy a virtual monopoly on 90% of their routes, then they should probably close the doors right now! Somehow I don't think so.

So what will happen in the not too distant future when REX are once again cancelling flights because of a lack of Captains? Well, they could pray for GFC MK2, or hope that another friendly English speaking nation descends into chaos, or they they can do the only thing that will lead to workforce/schedule reliability into the future. $7 a ticket? Money well spent I would say.

Unless of a course a fundamental make-up of your DNA (see Airline management) prohibits any thought of such a response! :rolleyes:

I think the good Captain 'struggled' answering the Rex question because in reality the answer is an industrial one. If Senators start to see this as pilots whinging about wages then the real point will be lost.

That said, the reason Rex is not an option for me is the massive paycut I'd have to take from my GA gig. Can't fund a mortgage on what they offer.

In his interview GK was asked about the statement he made in his submission relating to a strategic objective voiced by Bruce Buchanan to make cost savings year on year by 10%. GK was not able to recall where that was published and replied to the Senator's question on that basis. The manner by which the Senator then responded sounded like the good senator fully intended to find out (words to the effect of 'not to worry we can find that out). I would imagine it is certainly something that BB will be asked about next Friday.

Does anyone know where the 10% saving statement originated from?

There is evidence that BB has made similar comments publically but only to the extent of 5% savings year on year. He is quoted in the press as follows:

Jetstar Chief Executive Officer, Mr Bruce Buchanan, said the cooperative approach was a result of the two organisations’ strong focus on costs.
“Jetstar and AirAsia are passionate about offering consistently low fares,” Mr Buchanan said.
“Year on year, Jetstar is reducing its controllable costs by up to five per cent annually. This agreement will enable a further step-change in our cost position and ensure sustainable low fares.

Not quite the 10% but the intent is there and if BB denied to me that he had ever made the 10% statement I would have to doubt whether he was being honest with me.

More to follow

The Kelpie

Kelpie on Klouth
 

Kelpie,

Given you thought to provide Geoff (and the rest of the PPRuNe world) with the benefit of your critique of his live performance, can you just let me know which of the submissions are yours and when you are to appear before the Committee so that I might be able to see how it is done? :cool: :cool:

It will be good to see you control the Committee members to ensure that they ask you only the questions that provide the vehicle for you to correct all the misconceptions under which the members are currently labouring. :ok:

I guess you will also be helping Geoff put together his supplementary submission to correct the errors and missed opportunities that you have identified.....

Krusty on Wild Bill
 

Krusty,

That is what is supposed to happen in the absence of dissenting testimony. If no one is prepared to say it, it doesn't exist.....

Here's the transcript for Captain Klouth's statement to the Senate Inquiry, a very balanced and true to life presentation of the current state of affairs in Australian aviation. I only hope the Senate Committee took notice!!??:D

http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/senate...tee/S13622.pdf

Here's hoping there is more G.Klouth's to come........

cheers

Sarcs

YouTube - 747 Pilot Flying Lesson

A light hearted look at The Future

I don't know why Captain Klouth needed to give evidence. Heffernan knows everything already. :ugh:

Geoff klouth, one of aviations true gentleman.

Well done!

Submission 45 and 46
 

The two latest submissions that have been processed are also very good :Parliament of Australia: Senate: Committees: Rural Affairs and Transport Committee: Pilot training and airline safety including consideration of the Transport Safety Investigation Amendment (Incident Reports) Bill 2010: Submissions Received

Mr Laming's submission also includes a thread from pprune, hinting perhaps that he is a member on here!:ok:

The GKs and JLs of this world keep up the good work!!!:D

Don't get too excited. The government have staff who troll through the media collecting data, information, articles and stories not because they care but so they can prepare statements and comments in response to any negative publicity, especially during senate inquiries and anything else that raises public awareness of their little hidden secrets or 'dirt' that could affect the poor Ministers lucrative political career.
Spin doctors and PR machines, thats all. The pollies will have a print-out of each story, blog or Pprune post on their table each morning. Same goes for the airline CEO's.

The details of the 25th February hearing has just been posted on the APH website although no Agenda as yet.

9am until 4pm.

Wow 7 hours!!! (although I expect there will be breaks) I don't know who is appearing but if it is just Alan and Bruce they had better take their vaseline!!!

More to Follow

The Kelpie

We are in for a good day!!!



Mr Alan Joyce,

I haven't read J. Laming's submission but can tell you that he is a true gentleman. I can imagine already what he says in it.

A very experienced aviator and a lovely fellow. He has my total respect.

Yes Mr Hat I too have sat in a sim with John and he is indeed a Gentleman

I have had dealings in person with one of the CASA people to speak before he held his current office, over a percieved licencing issue. Even in his regional role he was so far out of touch with the reality of the industry and so obstructive that a simple matter took weeks to sort. He clung to his rule book like it was a life preserver after a ditching when it was clear the rules had short comings in the paticular situation and some judicious use of his powers was the sensible option. I concluded after (when the dust had settled) that a combination of jealousy and ego must have been his prime motivators. I am saddened to see he has the audience he has now and hope that his CASA colleagues aren't cut from the same cloth.
Framer

What the hell is a Permission Application Centre?

Is this the same John Laming?

John Laming - 10 Squadron RAAF - Townsville

framer, I can only speak of the experience I've had. Found him to be pretty helpful and a nice guy. I'll have a read of the submission and get back to you.

I don't know of the role in CASA but understand your frustration if you had dealings with them. You're not alone it seems. That's government for you.

Parliament of Australia: Senate: Committees: Rural Affairs and Transport Committee: Pilot training and airline safety including consideration of the Transport Safety Investigation Amendment (Incident Reports) Bill 2010: Submissions Received

Read it and all I have to say is:

GAME, SET, MATCH: John Laming.

60 years of experience and nothing to gain from his submission. Recommend the read. There's even a few laughs in it.

If the Senators can't work it out after that submission then they either don't want to or... I let you figure out the rest.