Don't you mean the Waitaki River??? :} And of course we know there's life there -it's just not life as we know it :ok:

A few people on here are missing the point. The policy is dressed up as a fatigue mitigation measure but it literally does nothing to address fatigue. All it does for current commuters is force them to buy more expensive flights. There is also a couple of fish-hooks in there that go well beyond the company's rights over it's employees. For example, if an employee wishes to move house they have to ask their managers permission, which he may deny. Also, if they apply for any internal position, and remain living outside of Auckland, they will only be granted this position under "exceptional circumstances". These two policies are completely in breach of the pilots contract and so far beyond their rights that I can only assume they are trying it on in order to antagonise the pilots before the upcoming contract negotiations. The next step will be an effort to get around the scope clause and blackmail the pilots over the 787 fleet introduction. (Watch out Mt Cook, it's coming your way too with the new ATR's).

And as for it not being aimed at pilots alone..... Well, I accept that a number of flight attendants commute, but otherwise, pilots are the only significant group of commuters. In fact, of 860 odd pilots on the jet fleet, 450 live outside the Auckland area.

I've just read the new policy and have to say I'm very surprised by this. Have I got it right in that if you want to use subload you have to sign a declaration about commuting (read you do what we say) but if you buy a firm ticket like joe public there's no problem? Crazyness.

Yousef

There is provision for a "firm" staff ticket but afaik you can still be trumped for the last seat by a last minute regular full fare passenger.

According to the policy, fatigue is only a risk for new commuters, not the existing ones. Go figure.

Can I ask how the commuters respond to the idea that the International job has been quite clearly an Auckland based job?

I can perhaps understand some displeasure from those on 73 or Bus jobs in WLG or CHC who thought they would be able to stay there long term and commute. That said I can understand Air NZs point of view and don't have an issue with it myself.

No problem with that myself either. Its the moving of the goal posts and inconsistency in the application of the rules, i.e. OK for some and not others especially when fatigue is given as the reason for policy change.

Lets face it. The gaps between duties are generally big enough you can live where you like. If people are turning up to work eye balls hanging out with tiredness or missing sign on due to the vagaries of standby travel then howabout they punish the repeat offenders. Not upset the majority of professionals who, left to themselves, get it right year in year out.