JHAS Keeps 457's over Local workers in new Redundancy round
 

It's a pretty sad state of affairs when you hear of this sort of thing happening to local workers.

So much for working for an Australian Company like JHAS. (John Holland)

JHAS has made a commitment to keep it's temporary Visa (457) staff and make local workers redundant.

How is that even possible?

Surely there are laws to protect Australian Citizens from being exploited by companies like this. It's not like we are in a corrupt third world country or anything!

With all the workers from Qantas being out of job surely these people should not be allowed to stay. But to axe local workers and retain these temporary workers is an outrage!:confused:

I think they have to? I think having 'sponsored' the people concerned under the 457s, they can't just drop them like a hot potato if they still have employment for them.

Ludicrous I know but they are responsible for those people during the term of the visa and thus they're more likely to let locals go whilst they still have that responsibility.

Thank Julia's Fair Work Act.

"In Webster v Mercury Colleges Pty Ltd, Fair Work Australia held that
termination of a sponsored teacher was unfair because of the serious financial
consequences to the teacher and the social dislocation that was inevitable as a
result his summary dismissal."

457 Visa Legal Position

One would suggest that applies to all 457 visa holders who only have 28 days to get another sponsor or leave the country. In several instances 457 visa holders now have greater protection than local employees.

Webster v Mercury Colleges Pty Ltd was a case of wrongful dismissal for gross misconduct.

Whilst the above quote is true the ruling by FWA was not purely based on the issue of the visa, it was also ruled on with consideration of the employer not following due process and the employee not given procedural fairness in the dismissal. The outcome was too harsh. Basically the punishment outweighed the crime in such that the punishment would have resulted in the employee, due to the terms of his visa, being required to return to his homeland and would have caused "harsh" financial consequences far beyond that of a citizen of Australia.

On the flip side this case also puts a more onerous burden on an employer. Employers maybe more prone to hire a local worker than a V 457ener in the future as it potentially could be harder to dismiss the fly ins in the case of any misconduct.

In regard to preferential treatment given to 457eners, my opinion is an employer cannot discriminate when determining a reduction in staff in a work force. An employer on a 457 visa will be subject to the same conditions of employment and the same due process as a local employee subject to the conditions of their contract/award.

Correct on all counts.

The 457 harshness test now includes the consequences of visa loss, something that simply isn't an issue with local employees. And that's the crux of it, common sense dictates you never pick a fight that's harder than you need to, so unless emotion gets in there somewhere the usual targets of Anglo Saxon males (ASM) as the obvious course of action remain.

We can all say how unfair it is and that the same group gets advantages elsewhere but until there is a counter to the current orthodoxy businesses know they can't fire women or minorities as easily as they can the ASM.

It should also mean that in good times more ASMs get hired, but that's a practice that comes under a lot more scrutiny for discrimination.

My God!
Who are you Romulus?
What HR rock did you climb out from under?
Would you prefer if we went back to slavery as well?

You obviously had something to do with JHAS. Can we thank you for helping it get to its current glory (not)? The bottom feeders of aviation.
Your ideology has certainly worked wonders there.

If you read that in my post then you need to reread it until you understand what I wrote.

The analysis is very simple, why on earth would you pick a fight with an opponent who has the ability to line up Govt institutions that are exceptionally well funded against you?

In short, if you have any kind of common sense, you wouldn't.

Hence the ASM cops the sh*tty end of the stick when it comes time for layoffs.

That was my point.

And it's largely the same the world over.

Not saying it's right, just that it is the way it is.

JHAS is alive and employing people, would you prefer it closed?

I haven't been there for at least 5 years so I can't comment on what they're doing with anything but an outsider's view.

As for being bottom feeders - that's pretty unfair. But then, typing mindless criticism whilst behind a keyboard is pretty easy isn't it NF?

Who do you work for? What are you afraid of?

Methinks you have some inner self loathing bubbling away.

Those are the words, the reality is a bit different (refer previous quotes).

Same as female employees, the words say equal treatment, the reality is often different (in both directions).

And there are still mobs like ALG trying to bring in 457 visa holders this is just madness given current conditions in Australia.:mad::ugh:

Romulus. Employers of overseas workers are subject to randon audit by DIAC. If you are aware of instances where overseas workers are not being paid an industry standard wage, I suggest you contact DIAC HERE.

The problem Tailwheel, from a LAME's point of view, is Juliar's "modern" Aviation Award allows a minimum rate of pay which is far, far below what the airlines are actually paying, as they have realised some time ago that no one would work for them. Unfortunately, this is where the bottom feeders like AMSA, IASA and JHAS come in. :*
It is not only pay rates that are a concern. Since CASA have foisted the Part 66 system upon us, with the lie that the existing Mechanical LAMEs won't be affected, the reality is a foriegn full B1 rated LAME is much more economically useful than a legacy CASA LAME, especially if said companies don't want to pay for training.:mad:
I'm sorry, but the whole system is a complete and utter shambles.:ugh:

TW, I suggest no such thing and there was certainly none of that when I was there. JH employs a lot of 457 visa holders throughout their business, there is an entire support unit at Corporate level there to assist Regional Businesses (as the various state groups are called) as well as the various specialist businesses inc JHAS. 457 visas are critical to JH operations so there is a commensurate level of focus. Bear in mind that if you get the process wrong when dealing with Indonesians for instance then JH managers can be done for people smuggling. There are VERY strict processes in place to make sure this thing is done correctly, right down to informing any foreign Govt of relevant visiting JH management because to even talk to people about job placement in Australia without due notice to the local authorities constitutes a breach of anti people smuggling laws.

What I am saying is that there are a number of potential avenues open to 457 visa holders, most notable the adverse action for significant impacts as noted above. There is also an avenue for claims of racial discrimination or vilification, harassment, etc etc etc.

In short if a 457 worker wants to make a fuss it is far easier for them to do so than an ASM.

Can't comment on AMSA or IASA but JHAS certainly weren't paying low end.

A key concept was to move to annualised salaries so guys get paid a good living regardless of overtime, the theory being that the incentive is then to get the work completed appropriately in less time with no need to do anywhere near as much overtime i.e. JHAS pays a level of overtime regardless but then gets the benefit of productivity boosts as things get completed more quickly and clients get value for money on the basis of quicker turnarounds.

In exchange JHAS needed the flexibility to roster people differing hours per week depending on the work required at that time. When your entire earning comes from selling time then time not billed is a major business killer. If you make 15% margin on a person's total cost then if 1 hour is wasted it takes approximately 7 hours of billed work to cover that wasted hour. That was why flexibility of hours rostered was critical. I know a number of the guys hated that, but essentially that is one of the key differences between working for an MRO and an airline where the load can be balanced and any overflow work outsourced.

I don't know how successful it was in practice, I left before it really got going, but that was the rationale. At the time it also meant that the guys got paid superannuation on the built in components like overtime and all other allowances which didn't all get paid on a more traditional hour based pay system.


You are correct but I disagree with your conclusion. The system is a shambles, your point that a full B1 is much more economical than the CASA LAME hits the nail on the head. In the modern environment you need those efficiencies or your costs blow out massively.

This is where I think QF have missed THE critical point. It doesn't matter if you give the guys a 3% pay rise, that's not where the problem lies. Heck, as I recall it LAME's took a 0% pay rise around 9/11 and SARS. The problem lies in the restrictive work practices requiring too many people compared to the B1/B2 system. That is just structurally inefficient and the costs associated with that are far more significant than any 3% pay rise.

As for training, one of my beliefs was that a JHAS training school was a must. Any AME who showed the initiative to get their basics in place would be given a type course to become a LAME. From memory the average LAME age when I did the numbers was over 53, to me that represented a major issue. The other key benefit of an in house training school was if there were ever a period when no major work was won then the guys could be given additional ratings or whatever via modular teaching. Multiskilling is also essential if an MRO based in Australia is to be viable.

Ultimately the school was something that didn't proceed, was disappointed that it didn't.

Romulus, I totally agree with you that the full B1 is far more efficient that the old CASA system, and I will go as far to say that it should've been introduced 15-20 years ago, with the introduction of fly by wire aircraft. A lot of people should be hanging their heads in shame that this mess has dragged on for so long - CASA, its political masters, the ALAEA and airline management.
My point is now, to stay employable and competitive with all the imports, I and lot of other CASA LAMEs, are now expected to cough for up to $28,000 and 2 1/2 years of rec leave.
I read with (non)amusement in the last week where the federal gubmint have bent to media pressure and are going to fund completion of training for a bunch of foreign medical students. It's funny how they can instantly find the resources to look after medical students, but Australian LAME's are expected to take a (savage) haircut when CASA changes the rules. :mad:

Mightyauster, as I understood it if you qualify as a LAME under the old system you get a cutover to the new until 27 June 2015 based on your existing CAR 31.

Civil Aviation Safety Authority - Becoming a LAME

Yes Romulus, CASA have allowed four years to change over. But how is that certain companies are allowed to import LAME's with full B1 Licenses, to the detriment of their own CAR 31 LAME's, telling them they need to fund their own license upgrades? It is a blatently discriminatory practice.:*

DIAC, like most of Australia, recognise the Modern Awards are not a basis for employment of overseas skilled workers (or local employees). DIAC have established a TSMIT (Temporary Skilled Migration Income Threshold) of $51,400 from 1 July 2012.

However, the TSMIT is only a base. The actual salary paid must be determined by market survey and the results submitted to DIAC with the Visa Nomination. The salary paid to an overseas worker must be equal to the salary paid to an Australian worker doing the same job. If there is no comparable Australian worker in the applicant company, the applicant company must submit wider industry market salary documentation.

You are all arguing over semantics, the whole point is that AUSTRALIANS must come first. They are not, and have not been for a long time.

Can anyone name any other country in which a foreigner, non-citizen is kept over a national......? In a lot of countries foreigners have less rights than nationals. We are already doing them a service by A, giving them a job and B, giving them the same protection as Australian citizens.

An Australian should not lose their job and a foreigner keep theirs where it can be reasonably retrained. END OF STORY!

There is the argument that by forcing employers to treat them on all respects as an Australian there is a disincentive to employ a foreigner. But its a strange dynamic where this regulatory framework has been adopted so late in the world Australian LAMEs are at a competitive disadvantage in the world today, our employers and training organisations are playing catch up or just importing because that's cheaper. Coupled with most employers not wanting to spend to upskill their staff whilst trying to remove the LAME from the tarmac as much as possible... Situation as today currently stands.

Well .... no ...... to you and empire 4.

Overseas skilled workers, working in Australia on a sub class 457 Visa have full entitlement to protection under Australian industrial and WH&S laws, as it should be. Australia does not have two classes of workers.

However, overseas workers do not have access to all the benefits enjoyed by Australians. For example, they can not access Medicare benefits but must buy and hold current Private Medical Insurance at their own expense. They can also not access any Australian social welfare benefits nor can they or their family obtain education or vocational training at Government expense.

If their employment is terminated for any reason they must either find an alternate sponsoring employer or leave Australia within 28 days of ceasing employment.

DIAC has a high priority to ensure Australians first and that no overseas worker shall displace an Australian Citizen or Australian Permanent Resident.

If you are aware of any instance where there are two identically qualified workers, one a tempory overseas worker, the other an Australian and the Australian is terminated in preference to the overseas worker, I am sure DIAC would want to be informed.

Does the ALAEA not take an interest in these matters?

Tail Wheel, I partly agree with what you say. 600ft-lb is correct in what they said.

You and I both know 2 LAMEs by your definition are not the same. The Australian Mech licensed on B737-800 that just got sacked from Tulla compared to the French 457 visa holder Mech licensed on A330 are not considered the same. They do however hold the exact same base trade, license and with PCT can be retrained. Money is the only constraint as experience can be argued.

Is the definition of "Same Qualifications" suitable for the Aircraft maintenance engineering industry?? I don't think so.

Due to money only companies will take the 457 holder in this case. Is this right by Australians? I understand it is the best thing for the Company to do in regards to the bottom line, but this is something that the Unions MUST push to stop. We need to be nationalist, and protect ourselves and the future generations.

do you see my point? Have you worked overseas?

Tailwheel, i was casting a wide assertion in regards to a disincentive. You won't pay the thousands to the immigration dept for an application to employ a 457 when you can get the same locally at the same price.

as it stands for aircraft engineers, due to the lack of investment in skills training, lack of regulatory reform, looter management style etc, Australian LAMEs are being replaced by 'super' 5 cat mech/av combined lames trained in Singapore and china, imported by jhas and amsa because those companies can rightfully assert that bugger all Australians hold those qualifications and the ones that do won't work for 100k/year.

That's the dynamic currently in place in aviation, Australians are 10 years behind the world and therefore discriminated against.

Normally its a disincentive - in aviation its an incentive. Plenty of jobs for foreigners.

Transition to b1 from mech is about 6 weeks theory and 3 weeks prac
At Aviation Australia.
Plus addition type requirement
They don't want b1 in Qf heavy it seems! They still train mech type
For them. Whilst training line to b1 type in the same class.
Question is has competency been achieved in the very short
Time frame. Europe had big issues on this.

All looks good on paper, but .....??? CASA worlds best at lowering standards

600ft-lb, you've learned a hell of a lot in that bubble. 100 % correct in every way.

600ft-lb, you have hit the nail square on the head!
Further to your contribution rudderless1, the Singapore CAAS conversion from a SAR 7 License to SAR 66 is only four weeks, theory and practical included, at a cost of about $4500. CASA then rubber stamp the Singaporean's CASA license. Again, the Australian citizen is at a competitive disadvantage; but it is all legal and the so called "Fair" Work Australia and the Immigration Dept is not interested.:mad:

I am not familiar with the new LAME licensing system.

The intend of the 457 Visa is to supplement skills shortage areas, not replace training Australians.

What does ALAEA Fed Sec have to say about this? He is in a position to raise the matter with the Minister for Immigration.

Good Luck with that .

I have raised this isue with the ALAEA previously and they either cannot or will not do anything about it. It is one of the reasons I will not renew my membership.

Right the Minister is sitting in his office waiting for the call FFS get real .

So. I don't read Pprune for a couple of days and all of a sudden we aren't doing something about a problem that we know about. Horsesh!t.

In the last few days we have written to the Govt about this in a lenghty submission to a review of the skilled 457 visa class list that is currently under review. So some poster here won't join us becasue we won't do anything about it? Who do you think we are bloke, the Govt? This whole sham was not our doing and the knobs in power now won't fix any of the draconian laws put in place by Johnny and his HR Nicholls mates.

Does anyone know what dealing with this Govt is like. Take this comment -

Yes I can raise it. I make an appointment to go to Cbr, I even have my own friggen ID to get in th place these days. I wait in the Bowen office and he gives me 15 minutes as we sip a luke warn tea prepared by a staffer. He shows much concern with the matters I raise and promises to continue to show much concern about it. What do you think happens? Nothing, absolutely friggen nothing. The idiots in Canberra are useless.

Jethro you may take aim and say this is the ALAEAs fault because we haven't bulit a nice relationship with the Govt. Have the other unions fixed the problem? Virtually every god damn profession you can think of is on that 457 list and not one union can convince a Labor Government to put Australian workrs first. If you can tip that I may be a little angry, frustrated and ready to step away from the great big line of union leaders heaping false praise on the current Govt, you'd be pretty close to the mark.

FED SEC i was just pointing out to the other poster that if they think the minister sits in his office waiting for a call from you they are dreaming I agree with you that the governments bloody useless so calm down.

I'm not angry at you Jethro. I'm angry at the issue. What is occurring is so morally wrong and unions for the last 10 years have been banging their heads up against the wall to get things fixed and nothing happens.

Romulus is so correct about most the things he has posted on this thread. The laws have loopholes and the companies make the most of them, I would even go as far as to say that the the loopholes were made deliberately so companies could act immorally and say they are just doing what is lawful. The law is an a$$. The lawmakers are a$$holes.

Romulus is however wrong about the creation of employment. Aircraft fly and must be fixed. JHAS doesn't create the need for labour, they just supply it. If JHAS go away, someone else will supply it. The work being done cannot be carried out offshore.

JHAS want to keep the 457 imports because they are non union and some cut corners on the job. They do not hold the Aussie values of pointing out deficiencies and demanding they get fixed. They are more inclined to turn a blind eye to aircraft defects and certify defective aircraft as fit to fly. This is why JHAS are losing contracts, the quality is getting worse.

JHAS are not meeting training obligations to overcome the shortfalls in labour that create the need for 457 holders in the first place. No apprentices and bugger all training. They are destroying our industry and really, it would be better off for safety outcomes and the industry in general if they just left town.

I hear ya SP, but there is no point in spending what few shekels I earn on union dues if I can't get results and I am heartily sick of being shat on, by virtue of the misfortune of being born here.

Because once, many moons ago it was considered the right thing to do... And there goes Australia, the basic values that established a nation are shot. Corporations had an obligation to shareholders and the community in which they existed, that is employment. But now it's shareholders only, as if we all own companies and employ foreigners to do the hard stuff, sounds like the Middle East. I work in a country where the foreigner (me), is very much second behind the local who gets paid more for the same job. If the work dries up I will be short shifted well before they will and....so I should. Useless Government more concerned about the letter of the laws they have cobbled together rather than their true reason for Government, that is for the benefit of their people. Get out now....

Talk about selective quoting FSM! You've completely changed the context of what I wrote.

If you have a situation where you need to make a worker redundant and Worker A is an ASM whereas Worker B is a minority female on a 457 visa, both of whom have the same written legal rights, why would you make B redundant when they also have the options of placing the racist card, the sexist card and the harshness test cited previously? Add the fact you've paid for their visa and once they are redundant the odds are they will have to leave the country whereas the local will usually be available to rehire if things pick up and the case for keeping Worker B gets quite a bit of backup. So why would you make B redundant?

In short, you wouldn't, it makes no sense.

Leaving aside true Line activities Virgin used to get most of their hangar checks done in NZ and took the cost of ferrying rather than building a team in Australia.

Are you sure it can't be done overseas for Qantas as well?

Most of the Virgin HM is still done in NZ. I think though Romulus the thrust of your point here is correct. Any airline can take a plane half way around the world if they like to get a light bulb changed. My point though is that the JHAS activities are predominently tasks that are practically unable to be sent offshore (like overnight or short checks). If you did you would be pi$$ing money up against a wall, so yes it may be something Qantas would consider.

Steve, I think concentrating on who started 457 Visas is a little silly. They are needed for a lot of Australia's industry. Every country needs immigration to move forward. Whether it be Howard, Rudd or GIllard the problem lies within the IR laws allowing them to stay when times get tough or they are not needed. At present JG's Fair Work Australia is anything but. We have to look forward, looking backward will do jack S#*T

I do acknowledge that the ALAEA are trying to do something, and you are doing a job I could not do. This problem has been dragging on for years. The defense needs to be ramped up.

I think time would be better spent by not fighting these changes but by actively lobbying the government to give Qantas and every other employer an incentive to train to upskill their own blokes. Tax breaks, funding whatever. The government has been handing out cash year after year to the car industry which has shrunk unrecognisably, it would be a pittance compared to that. The government is the ones responsible for the current state but time won't be turned back on this regulation. We need everyone on board to train up our local workforce to be competitive in the world.

JHAS and AMSA for example will not employ a local 2 or 3 cat traditional LAME when they can assert the ones they want, 5 cat's, do not exist on shore - they then have justification to look overseas, so good luck getting this trade of the 457 list as long as this situation exists.

And to qualify the last statement, good luck getting the government to discriminate between LAME sub types in the 457 list to only allow super LAMEs.