AIPA
 

Word has it that Barry and co are concerned that there is nobody to to replace them on AIPA exec once they depart.
My concern is they can't leave quick enough after stuffing it up for everybody but themselves.
RW has cost the membership their careers after 20 years of pulling his own pude.
Please do us a favor BJ and and RW and leave.

(Sits back to watch)...

Yeah, cause this is the forum for it. :rolleyes:

If the job they have done is so bad why have so few members resigned. AIPA is not the cause of Qantas pilots problems, inept management is.

Barry and the boys are taking up the fight as best they can. Another option would be simply to roll over and give Qantas everything they want.

I'll give til this arvo before it goes click

Hay BigBoy, why dont you get yourself on the committee and do a better job!:D:ok:
I am sure you have all the answers....

BBB.

You are perfectly entitled to your opinion. So why give it on a forum such as this. Have some "bigboeingballs" and say it in public. Then people might sit up and take notice. Or better yet, run for com! Or even better still, run for president of AIPA!

Otherwise, as amp said, "click".

The thread is relevant. It's about the main Association representing pilots down under. It will be a problem if Barry, Dave and Richard all give it away at the same time. Fingers crossed that there are some dedicated Pilots out there ready to step up to the plate.

Word is some of the AIPA 'Young Guns' are stirring the pot.
If Barry wants to take a break, I'd hope to see Woody (RW) carry on.

It is called democracy, cloudbuster.

So whats your solution, my friend?

Whilst I am a supporter of our Assosiation I have to say that the comments made in the "Australian" today (Qantas pilots protest at changes to ownership rules, flight time limits, staffing levels) had me concerned how much the com might be out of touch with the current issues.

RW said;It is very hard to support these arguments regarding minimum crew as
a) Fatigue is a fact of life in long haul operations
b) We are very well compensated to manage the above.
c) Our competitors operate to the same standard of minimum crew
d) Crew surplus is a poor argument not to support efficiencies such as operating min crew.

Unfortunately past practices are finished, long layovers to work on the tan or to catch up with the girlfriends is over. It is now just all about the bottom line for the company. If we require an extra crew member that is not required due F & D limitations then i'm afraid we don't need them.
With the current situation of senior guys (over 60's) still hanging around and bidding pack to F/O positions on the 380 and 737 commands there really isn't a lot of sympathy being shown to the younger guys from their peers, despite all the rhetoric.

Realistically redundancies will be unavoidable so it would be advantageous of AIPA to negotiate the best deal possible for this inevitable outcome :eek:

In regard to the current award, and I do enjoy working under it and the benefits it has provided, its days are numbered. With the segregating of longhaul/shorthaul/Jetstar businesses I think "the black book" will be exposed for what it has unfortunately become, outdated and inefficient compared to what is around today.

The trick is to make sure we don't remain outdated and inefficient as well.

Inefficient
 

*Inefficient* - The word you use to blame your employees when you don't actually have a clue how to quantify or rectify what is going wrong.

I'm utterly sick and tired of sitting around on my ar$e for hours in every pattern because Qantas have to build all this "flexibility" into the trips so they can allow for the inevitable failure of their understaffed and under-resourced "support" organisations to play catchup with delayed services.

Honestly, their use of the word "efficiency" is just a joke. :mad:

And don't even get me started on "inefficient" as it applies to aircraft fleets versus fuel versus payload versus destinations! :mad::mad:

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

What he said!

There is no doubt the company and its pathetic management has been more inefficient than any of its collective awards or employees put together could possible be, I just thought that would go without saying. :ooh:

To be honest, I think all this industrial stuff is just a side show to what these Pr@cks are ultimately up to. Time will tell.

Interesting. No thread running like this on Qrewroom at the moment where the heroes like Bigboeingboy could actually be up front with his thoughts regarding AIPA. Why am I not surprised! :rolleyes:

What's that famous Churchill quote about democracy? Something along the lines of it being the worst form of government.... except for all the others that have been tried. I think that applies to AIPA irrespective of who is running it.

Excuse my ignorance. I just thought AIPA had more members than AFAP. To be honest, I wouldn't really know.

Bloody hell, nothing changes. Since the AIPA left the AFAP there are always the whingers, As a bloke who spent some 10 years on the AFAP commitee, if you know better, stop whinging and offer yourself and your ideas up for election, otherwise shut the :mad: up.

To my knowledge not true.

AIPA have a seat at IFALPA, are working with NZALPA and domestically, have been working with VIPA.

Happy to stand corrected.

Edited to add: I just wish what ever the differences are with AFAP, they could be sorted.

Keg, I understand your point of view, but the reality is that Qrewroom does not promote meaningful debate. Typically the usual suspects hijack threads to bully what is not necessarily the majority view. Many are uncomfortable with publicly expressing their opinions in what often becomes a hostile and confrontational environment. I've been controversial in the past to a chorus of public ridicule, only to have a bunch of private messages, emails and phone calls of support - that's not debate. Plenty of other PPRUNE vs Qrewroom examples, even now!

Although AIPA is democratic, the Exec hold most of the cards when it comes to internal political 'campaigning' (spin). For better or worse, meaningful change only occurs when a large group pool resources and form some sort of party... The last occasion might have been a political success story, but it quickly turned into an industrial failure :rolleyes:

I sat through an AIPA/AFAP meeting once. One of the parties began airing a grievance going back to the mid 1980's and it all became clear to me why, while certain people remain rusted on in certain positions, that there will never be a rapprochement. Can anyone guess who I am talking about?