Tiger bonding
 

Just wondering if it's true that Tiger will apply a 2 year bond for the transfer to the 737 and, if so, what do the guys think of this.


After all, it is a mandatory aircraft transfer, no choice. Aircraft transfers within an airline have happened since Pontius was a co-pilot, and no bonding (as far as I know). And most of those transfers were pilot request when vacancies were advertised.


Is this just another sign of an industry changed for the worst? At least they haven't sunk to Cobham's ultimate low of making the pilots pay.


Rod

Yes.

And I hear Tiger value the endorsement at $45,000 :rolleyes:

So if you did the endorsement, and left on day one you would owe them $45K.

On what planet does it cost $45K for a 737 endorsement? Around half of that is the going rate.

I'd like to know what your union is doing endorsing this deal, it's a dud.

Qantas recruiting now, and for the foreseeable future, and in increasing numbers. Emirates desperately short and recruiting like mad. Contracts in China and Hong Kong becoming more attractive every time you look. Tiger should be trying to make the decision to stay and be trained on the 737 an easy one, not giving their pilots more reasons to leave.

One one hand, tying yourself to a two year bond in an airline with a questionable future, on the other a secure future in an expanding airline with no up front training costs or bond. No brainer.

I can see increasing numbers of people telling them to shove it and leaving for a more lucrative and more secure future.

I believe its actually 3 years and 45K.

The decision just got easier! :yuk:

QF have a three year $30K bond for initial joiners. It's pro rata though so decreases year on year. No up front costs though! :ok:

The rest of IsDon's point is quite valid though. :D

(Just quietly I think that the QF bonded amount is unchanged for quite a while. I don't have access to EBAs prior to the 2013 determination but it has $30K as well. So it's unchanged from 2013- 2019).

True Keg, you are correct.

Doesn't change my point though. Why shackle yourself with a two/three year bond when Tiger might not even be here in two/three years?

If the airline were to fail within that period, would the administrators still chase you for your bond? You betcha!

Yeah Keg an initial bond is fine. You choose to join, company trains you at their expense, voila, bonded. But this is a case of a fleet change at company's demand, in other words, you have to change fleets or no job, and by the way, we'll bond you. Were you bonded to change from 767 to 330? (serious question - not trying to sound malicious)

Bonded to go from jstar320 to qf mou?
Vv?

Cathay, Dragonair, Hong Kong Airlines, and Hong Kong Express are all hiring..

Starting salary for a A320 DEFO is circa HK $1.2 Million p.a less 12% tax.

Rodney. No. And nor would I have expected to be. I agree that what is being done to Tiger crews is uncool. I was simply pointing out that QF have an initial bond.

We can also be denied a type transfer of QF won't get a 2 year return of service on the new type but no $$$ are mentioned.

I think that's just pay for the endorsement maggot.

Since when have Cobham made you pay?

IsDon, 737 type ratings can be had for considerably less than $45K elsewhere. The cost of the TR to Tiger for transferring a crew member however may well come to $45K if the two months off line for the course is included.

I doubt you'll find anyone who is not already considering jobs OS will leave Tiger over this.

Virgin apply a 30k bond reducible monthly over 30 months where they pay for the endorsement, payable if you leave the business.

You also have a freeze period of 30 months, which means you can't change types inside the 30 months.

The true cost of the training is well in excess of 30k and in the current EBA negotiations they are trying to up it to 45k, which is still well below what it actually costs.

The bond isn't a bank type bond where you put up money and it is held essentially as a security deposit, it is just an amount they can recover from outstanding monies owed and send you a bill for the rest.

Now before anyone was a rant about how it doesn't cost 30k or 45k or whatever, the amount paid to the training provider is only part of the cost.

Even if you do the training in house you need to provide the training facility, licensing for the courseware, the cost of the sim in both fixed base and full motion, the cost of providing the various instructors and check pilots. You also need to pay your wages, and if the course is not in your home base then they pay allowances, accom, and have you offline not being productive and earning a quid for the business for a good two months.

Even if the type rating provider charged say 15k, allowances, accom, salary would bring the amount to close to 50k assuming you were earning around 150k a year. Add super to that, the cost of a supernumerary FO during the first few sectors, the cost of the training captain (there is a differential cost between the cost of a line Capt and line FO and a training Capt and a trainee - particularly if the trainee is a capt) and the real cost of the training mounts up.

As an aside QF are charging external customers over 70k for a 330 endorsement and many providers in Europe are charging 30000 Euro for a type rating.

That all said I don't believe there should be a bond or freeze period for forced transfers, if you put your hand up and said I wanted to move to the new type fair enough, but if the company is forcing the move then it should be the company that bears the burden not the pilot.

Don't forget the lost productivity when you go to the toilet. You have to pay for that as well. Snakecharma, you sound like a company accountant, trying to spin things to get the highest cost possible.

That may well be true.

Explain to me why it's is a pilots responsibility to compensate his employer for a decision made by his employer to change aircraft types.

If Tiger wish to change types it is their responsibility to cover the cost of that change.

What about the income loss the pilot has to forego during the time off line for training?

What's next? Expect the pilot is to kick in for the cost of buying the aircraft?

If you think this won't influence anyone's decision to leave then you're kidding yourself. You can only kick a dog for so long until it decides to bite your leg off.

IsDon, absolutely correct. If a company requires you to be trained then they should wear the cost.
If you however apply for a position which requires training to a certain level, that then is a different story.
Make a stand on the principle I say.

oakape Well if I sound like an accountant trying to "spin" things then you clearly have no clue as to the realities of running a business!

There is no spin in the stuff I wrote, it is all fact.

I am not an accountant, never have been and never will be, but I do have a higher degree that taught me a thing or two as well as nearly 30 years as an airline pilot. I suggest you have a read of my post and tell me where I am incorrect, as I am happy to rethink based on your feedback.

You will also note that I wasn't advocating for higher bonds or in fact for bonds at all for those forced to make a fleet change, merely pointing out the fact that howls of indignation about the 45k and how a type rating "costs half that" are not in fact correct and there are other components involved.

At the end of the day we need to be aware of what the cost of our actions are so we can make a value judgement on whether we should be indignant or not!

Try and stick guys who bid for a type change with a 100k bond then there is reason to be grumpy and to fight it. Try and stick guys with a bond of 30k or 45k then fight it if you wish but if you ask for the actual cost to be the bond then you might be in for a surprise!

Same as the guys who bang on about wanting CPI pay rises instead of 2-3% (in the current environment). Be careful what you ask for as CPI isn't what you think it is.

6401.0 - Consumer Price Index, Australia, Jun 2016. rose 0.4% this quarter, compared with a fall of 0.2% in the March quarter 2016. rose 1.0% over the twelve months to the June quarter 2016, compared with a rise of 1.3% over the twelve months to the March quarter 2016.Jul 27, 2016

The company need you to fly their aircraft to make money, they are not doing you a favour. It is their responsibility to train you. Being time bonded for the cost of the rating (~30k) is fair, the cost of your line training? Sorry, their responsibility.

The end

I believe it's going to be a 2 year return of service. Not bad if you want to get out of your turboprop. 2 years would fly by. Who cares if it's $45k, you're not paying, and let's not even mention the quality of those $10k USD "type ratings" that are out there !

In relation to a current employee being forced over and sign up - hmmm yes a good point. Those with "itchy feet" might indeed refuse!

Pilots only have themselves to blame for bonds being introduced in the first place.

Bonds are the fairest way for all parties and for companies to avoid the large cost involved in guys leaving quickly. Paying upfront is a different kettle of fish though...

Good post Snakecharma. Shame some pilots let their sense of entitlement get in the way of accepting the facts.

Hey Snakey, I reckon you have this wrong.
6401.0 - Consumer Price Index, Australia, Jun 2016. rose 0.4% this quarter, compared with a fall of 0.2% in the March quarter 2016. rose 1.0% over the twelve months to the June quarter 2016, compared with a rise of 1.3% over the twelve months to the March quarter 2016.Jul 27, 2016


This statement shows the rise and fall of the CPI, ie CPI last year may have been 5.2%, and a fall of 0.2%, mean CPI this year is 5% - a whole lot more than a set 2-3%.

Ah Rodney

I think it is you who has it wrong.

From the ABS dated 27 July 2016

The rises and falls are not rises and falls from a set base number as you suggest, I.e. 5% +/- the rise and fall.

The CPI is a basket of good and services which they measure cost variations in order to determine a number which is just a number. It doesn't accurately reflect the cost of living changes as not everyone buys everything in the basket.

People hang their hat on CPI as the holy grail upon which cost of living payrise should be based,however in times of low inflation the make up of the basket of goods which goes into calculating the CPI can actually show a reduction in the cost of living. If you go with CPI you could well be selling yourself short.

It is swings and roundabouts of course and in times of high inflation CPI usually delivers a better payrise than the company is prepared to offer.

Change in CPI is what CPI is, when referred to colloquially by us pilots. When it says CPI rose by 1.0% in the year June 2015 to June 2016 then it means you would get a 1% pay rise if you wanted to tie your pay to CPI.

^^^

In response to Rodney, not Snakecharma.

Note also that the things putting downward pressure on the CPI are "luxury" items such as travel and accommodation costs. So if you are a low income earner who mainly spends their money on the necessities then you may find the rise in your personal cost of living is far outstripping the CPI.

Thread drift! This is. It about the definition or application of CPI, nor even bonds for turboprop drivers joining Tiger, but existing employees being bonded to keep their jobs as they experience compulsory type change. Not cool. Very not cool.

What happens if you object to the Bond and refuse to leave the A320? Do you then get retrenched?

Could make for an interesting IR situation if everybody refused to change types.

I would think, and this is without looking at their EBA, that you MIGHT be entitled to a redundancy of some form BUT the caveat is that many agreements have a redundancy clause that provides for the company to find "alternative" employment of a substantially similar nature and if you don't accept that then the redundancy comes off the table.

As I say I don't know the specifics, but it is an interesting area.

As I also previously said I don't believe in bonds being applied to forced transfers but at the end of the day if you have been overseas and come home to a job at tiger then you are likely to have come home because you want to be in oz and the job is secondary. Note the number of 777 and A380 captains coming back from EK to turboprop and F100 jobs.

So if that is the case then the bond, whilst a pain and unpalatable, may not be a big issue as they wouldn't necessarily be looking to leave anyway.

The guys who don't want to trade their nice 320's for Stone Age 737's (and I can't say I blame them!) then they are going to bail before the type rating and again the bond isn't an issue.

I don't really see the issue, if you aren't planning on leaving in the next two years then who cares how big the bond is, if you are thinking of going then you have a choice to make. Perhaps that is exactly why the airline is doing it, I know from my current and previous airlines that they all retained the right to bond for change of equipment and or upgrade training and the EBA had a clause like 'the pilot won't unreasonably withhold agreement to any such agreement'. So check you EBA, if you are planning on departing in the next two years then try and go sooner rather than later, if you are planning on staying then don't worry about it.

There is no bonding or pay for training in the Tigerair pilots agreement. Dunno what all the fuss is about.

I would advise to refuse to sign as a group.
What are they going to do , sack you?
Will they outsource the whole 737 fleet with people paying to fly?
I can imagine that they will get some people out of GA or the corners of the world who will pay but, will CASA approve it and, with Tiger's record?

Who is going to run the fleet, a guy with a bare endorsement with no heavy time, management experience or check approval and a Permit to fly on a foreign licence?

That would be a right good way along the road to being shut down again.

Why is it that these Lowcosts make decisions based on less than the best processes and then want to cover the possibility of having their incompetence been exposed by getting the little people to pay ( or take up some risk)?
Probably better chance of getting job somewhere with an Airbus 330 Rating than a 737.

The problem is International Trader, is that organising pilots is like trying to 'herd cats', not impossible but not likely to work. There will always be an element who will talk the talk but when push comes to shove they will look after number one and sign the bond to get ahead.

Well, I'm a ground person not a Pilot but this sounds to me like if QF decided to change its Departure Control and Reservations system and then tried to charge the employee for the training... it would be laughed out of the building - making changes like this is a business decision, last time I worked in a real airline, business decisions were made after a process of a business case and cost-benefit analysis - asking a Pilot to pay for their own training when they are internal is simply pathetic and why companies like these will never be 'real' airlines like QF and others are... external I can understand but internal, what a joke.

Yep!
I remember joining Qantas the bond was about $2K for two years, been there 28 so no issue.
T.

IsDon,

All true what you write, but who is hiring outside of Australia isn't really that relevant for most people around here. You don't see many pilots leaving VA or TT to go fly at EK and there is a reason for that. I used to be that person wanting to fly for EK before they dropped their mins to nothing, but now that they have I don't want to anymore. I'd rather wait out my spot in OZ and sit in the right seat of a 73 for $141k. Nice and cushy, 11+ ddos per roster and a nice safe environment. Maybe QF or AJX being some of the few jobs I would consider leaving for.

Agree completely mate. I've spent enough time in Dubai to know it's not a place I would like to work, or take my family to. That said I understand why people still want to go there, especially the young single guys/girls.

Qantas hasn't recruited externally since 2009. It's just about to crank it up. Our first tranch of guys started this week, and good luck to them.

Once Qantas makes its way through the QLink guys it will open the floodgates. That will happen soon.

Tiger, Rex, DJ and the military have clearly forgotten the impact Qantas recruitment has on the whole landscape in Australia. They are still living in their cosy little Utopia where they can get pilots to buy their ratings for the privilege of working for less than they're worth. It's been an employers market for so long.

Tiger attempting to change aircraft types, while they are already struggling to crew flights with one type, while Qantas is about to steal many pilots from them is a perfect example of atrocious timing. Add to that the attempt to extort a bond out of those considering whether they will stay or leave is just pig ignorant corporate stupidity which will bite them on the arse, big time.

IsDon,

Yes I couldn't agree more. Personally I know of many people who will flock from VA to QF given the chance next yr! Fingers crossed and good luck to all! It will indeed be a reality check for TT and VA :ok:

Mabye Virgin wants pilots to leave?

They are about to cut the E190 fleet and multiple props...leaving excess pilots.

What better way to sort out over crewing by people leaving?

No excess pilots, they are looking to recruit.

Shortage of pilots here at VA.... people resigning left right and center, Air NZ and AJX being the main culprits at the moment. Add QF to that and it could get interesting!

I've just had a chat from a very well placed bloke involved in the recruitment process.

He's been told QF will be recruiting 10 pilots a month for the foreseeable future. The 170 that has been bandied about is a very conservative stab in the dark from the very early stages after the 789 purchase was a very rough estimate of how many we'll need, but it's apparent this will be nowhere near enough.

The guy I spoke with expects the first external applicants to be starting courses in April/May next year which would mean recruitment processes starting in November.

Rumour has it though that QLink and JQ are so short already they are very reluctant to release those that have been successful in the QF recruitment process. I suspect there may be some deal done to keep these guys doing what they're doing until they can be released to QF, ghost seniority numbers have been mentioned by one manager recently.

The lesson to learn here is that there is obviously commercial realities that may come in to play here. Keeping those successful candidates in the regionals until they can be released without it affecting their operations. NO SUCH REASONS EXIST FOR EMBARGOING GUYS FROM TIGER OR VIRGIN. If QF need them, they'll take them. Cutting the throat of your competitor at the same time will just be a fortunate byproduct of that process.