|
Zilcho, I suggest you either re-read your accusatory post, or Google straw man yourself, because you're obviously having a few problems there...
The Gympie Ultralight Club has no association with Qantas. Yet. But I hear that AJ is eyeing them closely. He believes they would be good candidates to undercut those pesky JC guys that are asking too much. You get my point now, or are you just gonna keep playing dumb? You mention a mate that was on hold with Air NZ for 7 years? Tell me, was he kept there because others undercut him? So I ask you, so what about your mate? They may get a start at QF, but it will 50 - 60 numbers lower, and the consequences to that are obvious. You say I have angst towards JC pilots? How do you figure that? I have no angst towards them? THAT my friend, is a straw man argument. You throw out something that I didn't say, and expect me to argue it? Seriously? Good grief. I'm not short sighted, nor am I focused on mates with a Yes letter. Sorry fella, that little gem doesn't work at all. By saying something ridiculous like that, you make it clear you have no concept of what I am saying. Which doesn't phase me at all by the way... Stop being a smart ar$e and start listening to some who have been around for a while. You mention that you are sitting in an A320, but I note you didn't say LHS, which you would be quick to point out if you were. Anyhoo, I have no interest in continuing this. It really doesn't mean that much to me. Enjoy your A320, dude. Airbus make a beautiful aeroplane... :-) |
Originally Posted by balance
(Post 10010759)
Zilcho, I suggest you either re-read your accusatory post, or Google straw man yourself, because you're obviously having a few problems there...
"A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent. The Gympie Ultralight Club has no association with Qantas. Yet. But I hear that AJ is eyeing them closely. He believes they would be good candidates to undercut those pesky JC guys that are asking too much. You get my point now, or are you just gonna keep playing dumb?
Originally Posted by balance
You mention a mate that was on hold with Air NZ for 7 years? Tell me, was he kept there because others undercut him? So I ask you, so what about your mate?
They may get a start at QF, but it will 50 - 60 numbers lower, and the consequences to that are obvious. As for "undercutting" (again, focused on the short term), whose to say AIPA don't negotiate for JC to get placed on bottom of the list below those on the active hold file? How do you know your mates wont get a start before any of this even happens?!
Originally Posted by balance
You say I have angst towards JC pilots? How do you figure that? I have no angst towards them? THAT my friend, is a straw man argument. You throw out something that I didn't say, and expect me to argue it?
Originally Posted by balance
Yet a bunch of guys who would gladly undercut their grandmother demand that THEY be given that right instead?
Originally Posted by balance
Seriously? Good grief. I'm not short sighted, nor am I focused on mates with a Yes letter. Sorry fella, that little gem doesn't work at all. By saying something ridiculous like that, you make it clear you have no concept of what I am saying. Which doesn't phase me at all by the way...
Stop being a smart ar$e and start listening to some who have been around for a while. You mention that you are sitting in an A320, but I note you didn't say LHS, which you would be quick to point out if you were. I guess you missed my subtle hints that Air NZ Pilots went through a similar situation with Freedom Air. The end result was integration rather than segregation.
Originally Posted by blance
Anyhoo, I have no interest in continuing this. It really doesn't mean that much to me. Enjoy your A320, dude. Airbus make a beautiful aeroplane... :-)
|
Jeez, man find a life. You might want to re-think that 787. Sitting with you in an aluminum tube for 15 hours would be an absolute riot.
|
As someone who actually is in QF and on the 737, id like nothing more than to see the JC pilots on the mainline list on mainline Ts & Cs. However, as I have no plans to leave the 737, sorry, you can’t be staying in those seats on a permanent basis. Give it 2-3 years, then as a mainline crew member is trained, you go where your seniority allows.
|
Originally Posted by goodonyamate
(Post 10010781)
As someone who actually is in QF and on the 737, id like nothing more than to see the JC pilots on the mainline list on mainline Ts & Cs. However, as I have no plans to leave the 737, sorry, you can’t be staying in those seats on a permanent basis. Give it 2-3 years, then as a mainline crew member is trained, you go where your seniority allows.
It also wouldn't result in a considerable amount of movement as I can't imagine too many people wanting to uproot families to move to NZ for a command. And even less for FO spots since no more than a couple of mainline SO's took up leave without pay to go to JC (though I do acknowledge that increased T's and C's would alter that slightly). |
Originally Posted by goodonyamate
(Post 10010781)
As someone who actually is in QF and on the 737, id like nothing more than to see the JC pilots on the mainline list on mainline Ts & Cs. However, as I have no plans to leave the 737, sorry, you can’t be staying in those seats on a permanent basis. Give it 2-3 years, then as a mainline crew member is trained, you go where your seniority allows.
It brings the jobs back under the mainline umbrella while solving the crewing implications of absorbing the Tasman flying overnight. Eventually the deck chairs get shuffled and everyone's where they should be. Can only hope that's achievable. |
Perfect solution. It’s not the first time that it would have been done. Now, try to get executive management onboard........
|
Jetconnect pilots would love the t&cs of the mainline agreement but would generally not be willing to uproot their lifestyle and be based in Australia to achieve it which is the only way it would go down, no one on mainline gets to choose their basing from day 1.
The group are generally happy with NZ terms (days off aside) with a NZ basing (especially WLG). I feel the captains are going to votes yes and the FO's with ambition to eventually work in Mainline will vote no naievely hoping the company will give them a QF seniority #. If ALPA AIPA QF and JC don't want it how can it happen? |
Originally Posted by balance
(Post 10010777)
Jeez, man find a life. You might want to re-think that 787. Sitting with you in an aluminum tube for 15 hours would be an absolute riot.
By the way it's aluminium tube and the 787 is carbon fibre. :ok: |
Originally Posted by goodonyamate
(Post 10010781)
As someone who actually is in QF and on the 737, id like nothing more than to see the JC pilots on the mainline list on mainline Ts & Cs. However, as I have no plans to leave the 737, sorry, you can’t be staying in those seats on a permanent basis. Give it 2-3 years, then as a mainline crew member is trained, you go where your seniority allows.
|
Originally Posted by balance
(Post 10010722)
Mate, I know a bunch of really good pilots that are on the QF hold file right now. They've passed the testing, they've earned the right. Yet a bunch of guys who would gladly undercut their grandmother demand that THEY be given that right instead? Some of them started off when Qantas NZ picked up where Ansett left off in New Zealand. Originally they were only operating within New Zealand. If you want to blame anyone direct your venom at Qantas management, as it was they who decided to replace the Qantas brand in New Zealand with Jetstar and redirect the Qantas NZ operation to Trans Tasman operations. By the way in case you're wondering I don't work at Jet Connect and I have never worked there but I do know some who have or still do. |
[QUOTE=Hawkeye787;10010889]Jetconnect pilots would love the t&cs of the mainline agreement but would generally not be willing to uproot their lifestyle and be based in Australia to achieve it which is the only way it would go down, no one on mainline gets to choose their basing from day 1.
The group are generally happy with NZ terms (days off aside) with a NZ basing (especially WLG). I feel the captains are going to votes yes and the FO's with ambition to eventually work in Mainline will vote no naievely hoping the company will give them a QF seniority #. If ALPA AIPA QF and JC don't want it how can it happen?[/QUOTE Hawkeye, you seem to be confusing the issue of the CEA vote and the proposed move to be under the QF AOC. No one is saying vote NO to the CEA because you should hold out for QF mainline conditions.... you should vote NO because the JC pilots are the lowest paid jet pilots flying across the Tasman. You have no bidding rights, you don’t get a meal or even provided with water when you duty pax on Jetstar, you don’t get credits for paxing or ground duties including sims, you haven’t had a pay rise in years etc etc etc! Also, this CEA introduces a B scale for new F/Os which is pretty low in my opinion. I don’t get why anyone would vote yes, it’s a crap CEA, and there’s NO down side to a NO vote. Send it back to be reworked and improved. And you have to ask yourself what’s the rush all of a sudden after 2 years of stalling. As far as getting mainline seniority numbers and mainline terms and conditions, AIPA have stated that that is one of their prefered options to deal with the issue of JC pilots flying VH mainline aircraft. And you’ve stated yourself that the JC pilots would love the mainline T &Cs. It’s only the company that want you on “local” conditions. If you do end up in mainline, I doubt if QF would close the NZ bases, so no one will be forced to move. |
I wouldn't put too much weight on JC Pilots being unwilling to move over the ditch. Demographics have changed over the years.
Plenty of Captains are either leaving, left or weighing up their options. China might pay more than a QF S/O, but there's more to consider than money when you're mid 40's with a young family. As for the FO's, well there's plenty of Aussies at JC these days... |
you don’t get credits for paxing or ground duties including sims |
Virgin Au had a similar fear about putting vanz on seniority list. FYI no pilots went across the Tasman. Now we have a few but they are pilots that are from Au and took a NZ base to get the 738. No New Zealander has moved in 5 years to the best of my knowledge, just as very few Au pilots would make a long term move to nz. NZ Pilots seniority would shortly award 738 commands in Au and still I know of no one.
|
All this heated debate of where JC pilots should fit in to a combined entity is largely irrelevant at the moment. Qantas are not asking the opinion of their pilots or the unions, they have no interest in combining the groups so there is little point in getting angry with each other about it.
What us pilots do get a say in are the terms and conditions that we work under, our EBA (or the NZ equivalent). The original post was about using the unique position JC pilots find themselves in presently to get the best possible outcome. You can effect your teams and conditions by voting accordingly. Remember a few key points; - Qantas are making a bucket loads of money at the moment. If you can’t improve things now then you never will. The next EBA vote may coincide with a downturn. - There is a local (QF group) and global pilot shortage. You are not easily replaceable and they need to stem the rate of attrition of JC pilots. - Network changes brought about by EK (mostly) exiting the Tasman in March are driving this new integration. There is a firm deadline and Qantas will want your EBA locked away by the time this starts in March. This time pressure improves your bargaining position. Don’t get rushed into a deal that you think could be improved. I would expect a NO vote would very quickly be met with an improved counter offer. I do not pretend to know your EBA conditions but even from across the ditch I can see that as pilots flying for the legacy airline side of the QF group you should not be on sub-standard conditions. You have the best possible combination of circumstances working in your favour right now as you try and improve your situation. Don’t let the opportunity pass you by. |
All this heated debate of where JC pilots should fit in to a combined entity is largely irrelevant at the moment. Qantas are not asking the opinion of their pilots or the unions, they have no interest in combining the groups so there is little point in getting angry with each other about it. It has been said by both Qantas and AIPA that they are in talks about the subject. Qantas wouldn't been talking if they didn't have to (unless they've had an attitude change recently). There is also a rumour that CASA isn't too impressed by the proposal either. Let's see what happens, and if the JC guys pick up the phone to AIPA, maybe the pilots can work together on what their preferred option would be, and go from there. In the meantime, voting down the proposed CEA might put more pressure on Qantas. Just my thoughts. |
I Listened to a meeting once between AIPA and ALPA discussing a group strategy with regard to negotiating CEA's (EBA's) for Jetconnect and Jetstar and if there was any possibility of helping each other out to move towards a group seniority list. Barry Jackson was there and I was in on it as a conference call. It broke down very quickly when AIPA stated that they would only negotiate in Qantas pilots interest even if that meant the end of Jetconnect and Jetstar with the loss of those jobs, that was the end of the meeting. I can't see AIPA spending ANY time on trying to accomodate the Jetconnect guys onto the seniority list, I get the feeling they would rather just see Jetconnect wound up with Jetconnect pilots offered interviews just like any other applicant. Hopefully I am totally wrong.
|
How can a president of a union negotiate to destroy his members careers?
Welcoming in is a different story |
Happy to say Ollie that you are wrong.
|
Happy to agree with the headmaster here... I happen to know that you are very wrong.
Regardless, that was then, this is now. Pick up the phone and keep an open mind. |
So whats the general consensus then?
Bring the entire JC pilot group into mainline at the bottom? That way it will bring the jobs back to mainline. Yes I agree it's better for Australian pilot jobs and conditions long term. If the JC pilots want their own EBA, then no mainline seniority. Unfortunately I do not see QF management getting rid of JC. |
Originally Posted by Beer Baron
(Post 10014626)
All this heated debate of where JC pilots should fit in to a combined entity is largely irrelevant at the moment. Qantas are not asking the opinion of their pilots or the unions, they have no interest in combining the groups so there is little point in getting angry with each other about it.
What us pilots do get a say in are the terms and conditions that we work under, our EBA (or the NZ equivalent). The original post was about using the unique position JC pilots find themselves in presently to get the best possible outcome. You can effect your teams and conditions by voting accordingly. Remember a few key points; - Qantas are making a bucket loads of money at the moment. If you can’t improve things now then you never will. The next EBA vote may coincide with a downturn. - There is a local (QF group) and global pilot shortage. You are not easily replaceable and they need to stem the rate of attrition of JC pilots. - Network changes brought about by EK (mostly) exiting the Tasman in March are driving this new integration. There is a firm deadline and Qantas will want your EBA locked away by the time this starts in March. This time pressure improves your bargaining position. Don’t get rushed into a deal that you think could be improved. I would expect a NO vote would very quickly be met with an improved counter offer. I do not pretend to know your EBA conditions but even from across the ditch I can see that as pilots flying for the legacy airline side of the QF group you should not be on sub-standard conditions. You have the best possible combination of circumstances working in your favour right now as you try and improve your situation. Don’t let the opportunity pass you by. |
Originally Posted by normanton
(Post 10015177)
So whats the general consensus then?
Bring the entire JC pilot group into mainline at the bottom? That way it will bring the jobs back to mainline. Yes I agree it's better for Australian pilot jobs and conditions long term. If the JC pilots want their own EBA, then no mainline seniority. Unfortunately I do not see QF management getting rid of JC. It's an interesting topic though. Personally, mainline seniority and T&C (likely at the expense of command prospects) would be ideal. In the short term, "what JC pilots want" (beyond the current proposal) will be largely irrelevant. The company (Qantas) is maintaining their cost-neutral stance on negotiation, and the information we have is there's very little to no room to move if the current proposal is voted down. This may turn out to be untrue. I'm sure we'll all find out soon. |
Originally Posted by fullnoise
(Post 10015454)
The company (Qantas) is maintaining their cost-neutral stance on negotiation, and the information we have is there's very little to no room to move if the current proposal is voted down. This may turn out to be untrue. I'm sure we'll all find out soon.
Stick with it.... |
Unfortunately buying into the company’s cost neutral bs has meant that things have been given up that needn’t have been.
Diddling FO’s out of $5580 per year on loss of licence insurance (over 60 FO’s ... not each) is penny pinching on the company’s behalf or pure incompetence by ALPA... probably both from what I’ve seen. Giving up stat days to get 10 days off (of which the company is only obligated to roster 9 plus an owed lieu) is basically what we’ve got now; it’s a shuffling of a clause now wearing a shiny new hat. Don’t be fooled, you haven’t REALLY gained much. Between 130 to 141 days off per year... let’s hope you’re the lucky one. Jetstar NZ get 142 by the way. But... You don’t actually get 10 days off for 6 months after signing AND you’re not entitled to monetary loss of those days off and over the life of a 2 year agreement you’re down to an average of 131. It was mentioned at the base meeting that the reserve call out couldn’t be changed because the company “doesn’t want pilots driving an extra half an hour due to fatigue” yet apparently doing an extra 5 hours duty per week has no effect on fatigue... again incompetence. Meal break payment under NZ Employment law... traded away... initial FO pay... traded away... in this market... incompetence or worse. The list goes on but I won’t clog the thread with anymore... if you don’t have a copy of the draft just look at the old contract and rearrange some words. “Cost neutral”... I’m sorry but this agreement is not worth the paper it’s written on. Voting yes is an affirmaion that JC Pilots aren’t worth anything more in this market than they were back in 2013. |
Originally Posted by Jetsbest
(Post 10015630)
Would you really expect the company to say, or admit to, any other possible outcomes? If the pilots can’t/won’t indicate a disbelief of such statements (by rejecting a low-ball offer) then the people on the other side of your table are not going to volunteer to explain how much ‘room to move’ they really have!
Stick with it.... And for the record, this is in no way a comment against the Council and the many days of hard work they've put in. |
Post edited
|
Originally Posted by fullnoise
(Post 10015646)
I agree with the above two posts and the bulk of the OP's points, we are sticking with it, and there's a very high chance this proposal will be voted down. I just hope our side of the table is up to it, as the feedback from the recent base meetings certainly didn't generate a lot of confidence in how future negotiations would go with a no vote. I hope you're all correct.
And for the record, this is in no way a comment against the Council and the many days of hard work they've put in. Fear of redundancy (or base closures) might have worked in the past, especially for the ex Ansett Pilots, but it's a different market today. |
The ball is certainly in the JC pilot’s court giving you a strong backhander from a weak serve. If as alluded to by many including AIPA that the JC pilots did get some sort of ghost seniority numbers and this current proposal is time limited for joint flying of OZ rego aircraft, what happens to all the ancillary staff and JC management in NZ? Why couldn’t the whole box and dice be operated and managed from Sydney? Is NZ JC AOC going to be dissolved? There must be some nervous managers hoping that the current division continues otherwise they just might be looking for a new job.
|
Originally Posted by Troo believer
(Post 10016486)
The ball is certainly in the JC pilot’s court giving you a strong backhander from a weak serve. If as alluded to by many including AIPA that the JC pilots did get some sort of ghost seniority numbers and this current proposal is time limited for joint flying of OZ rego aircraft, what happens to all the ancillary staff and JC management in NZ? Why couldn’t the whole box and dice be operated and managed from Sydney? Is NZ JC AOC going to be dissolved? There must be some nervous managers hoping that the current division continues otherwise they just might be looking for a new job.
Several folk will loose their positions including the Chief Pilot and other senior management pilots, engineering and safety department although the number is small. There are a few others here and there that will be made redundant due to the change however there are quite a few support staff required for the 600 odd FA’s and 120 odd pilots so they will thankfully not be looking for work elsewhere. |
Why couldn’t the whole box and dice be operated and managed from Sydney? It never made any economic sense as a business, but it made complete sense from an IR perspective..That was the entire raison d'etre SC MOSES Who paid the bills? DAFF We process the bills in our office and they get paid ultimately by Qantas. SC MOSESQantas pay the bills? DAFF Well, Qantas pays all our bills, yes. |
The Jetconnect guys voted AGAINST the new contract. The proposal was voted down just after lunch time.
Interesting times ahead for the boys and gals. Good on you! Don't settle for second class contracts. |
Originally Posted by Hold_Short
(Post 10024501)
The Jetconnect guys voted AGAINST the new contract. The proposal was voted down just after lunch time.
Interesting times ahead for the boys and gals. Good on you! Don't settle for second class contracts. |
Read this in today’s news, I guess the Jetconnect folk have options now more than ever.
SYDNEY: A recruitment drive by Australia's Qantas Airways after a seven-year hiatus is exacerbating shortages of pilots at regional air services that provide a lifeline to remote communities in the country's sparsely populated Outback. As airlines from Asia, Europe and North America vie for pilots amid a global shortage, there is growing concern among people in Australia's vast interior who rely on flights to major cities for medical treatment. Ewen McPhee, a doctor in the remote mining town of Emerald, said that when he referred patients for specialist care they often needed to travel nearly 1,000km to the nearest big city, Brisbane. "Then they have to fly," he said. "It is an 11-hour drive otherwise for an ill patient with quite a significant problem." Over the last four months the 80-minute flights have not been as reliable as usual, McPhee said, with last-minute cancellations for lack of pilots. Regional Australia's predicament illustrates the broader risks the aviation industry faces from a lack of pilots as the number of annual air passengers globally is expected to nearly double to 7.8 billion over the next 20 years. Advertisement Around the world, airlines will be forced to review the wages, training and conditions they offer younger pilots as they open new routes and pursue ambitious expansion plans. Australia's pilot shortage closely parallels one in the United States, where major airlines are on a hiring spree and regional carriers like Seattle-based Horizon Air have canceled hundreds of flights because of a lack of aviators. Both countries have a culture of pilots paying up to US$100,000 of their own money for training and flying for years at regional carriers on low pay to gain experience to be hired by major airlines. To help fill in the gaps, the Australian government has reopened two-year visas for foreign pilots. Regional airlines however say longer visas are required to attract pilots from overseas. Qantas began hiring again in 2016 after years of financial strife, during which it offered pilots leave without pay to work for other airlines. By mid-2018, it says it will have employed 300 new pilots, many from regional airlines. Virgin Australia Holdings Ltd hired roughly another 120 pilots over the past year to fly major domestic and international routes. HIGH COSTS, LOW PAY While the Australian government offers loans of up to AUS$75,000 for students at select flying schools, trainee flyers still need tens of thousands of dollars from other sources to get their stripes. Such costs are a major reason the number of student pilot licenses issued annually has fallen 23 percent since 2006, according to official figures. Once out of flight school, young first officers at relatively large regional carriers only earn about A$60,000 (US$48,000) a year, while being based in high-cost cities like Sydney where the average house price is about US$1 million. "There is not a lot of incentive for smart young men and women to get into aviation," said Shane Loney, a Qantas pilot and vice president of the Australian and International Pilot Association. "They have got a significant up-front cost to get qualified and then there isn't good pay unless they're fortunate enough to land a career with a big airline like Qantas or Virgin." Unlike major Asian and European carriers such as Singapore Airlines Ltd and easyJet plc , Qantas does not offer a cadet program, although it partners with universities for its regional arm. Virgin, meanwhile, had 2,500 applications for 12 cadet spots last year. Australia does not have a formal requirement for airline pilots to have 1,500 hours of flying experience like in the United States, but informally airlines want pilots with at least that number of hours for jets. Even junior turboprop pilots in Australia usually have hundreds of hours, said Kirsty Ferguson, the founder of Sydney-based airline interview coaching firm Pinstripe Solutions. "Australia is having the same gaps in regional flying as in the US," she said. GLOBAL CHURN U.S. regional carriers like Mesa Airlines Inc and Skywest Inc are so short of pilots they are raising salaries, offering sign-on bonuses worth up to US$50,000 and aggressively recruiting Australians and other foreigners eligible for visas. The U.S. Airline Pilots Association has said regional salaries are moving in the right direction. In Australia, airlines with tight profit margins have not raised pay significantly despite pressure from unions, even as profits have recovered due to heavy cost-cutting. At Regional Express Holdings Ltd (Rex) , which operates 33-seat turboprops, former cadets are paying agreed penalties of more than A$25,000 to escape a seven-year contract to advance to better-paid jobs at bigger airlines. Rex has seen a spike in turnover as bigger airlines recruit. It wants the government to open up four-year visas for pilots with a path to permanent residency, said Chris Hine, a senior Rex executive and chairman of its flying school. High turnover is not limited to Rex. Qantas's regional arm QantasLink, which employs 400 pilots, hired more than 80 last year and expects to hire another 100 this year as pilots leave for bigger airlines, including Qantas. Others are heading overseas to carriers such as Dubai's Emirates and Hong Kong's Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd while the opportunities are available. "It just follows the trend of cycles in aviation," Australian Federation of Air Pilots President David Booth, a Virgin pilot, said of Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news...orsens-9875098 |
I guess it’s not just Australia either, this is also from last week.
A pilot shortage across Canada is causing some regional carriers to cancel flights, put less experienced pilots in the cockpit and has even had an impact on some air ambulance services. A combination of factors is causing the shortage — ever-increasing air travel by Canadians, a shortage around the world and a large number of pilots reaching retirement. A soon-to-be released report by the Canadian Council for Aviation and Aerospace says Canada should be producing an extra 300 pilots a year to meet demand of a growing air travel industry. Furthermore, the report warns demand for new hires for expansion and replacement of retirees could mean a shortfall of 6,000 pilots by 2036. "Having fewer and fewer pilots to draw from, sooner or later the operators are going to have to start cutting routes," said Mike Doiron, an aviation consultant and CCAA representative. Northern airlines cancel flights as Canada faces shortage of 6,000 pilots ANALYSIS: WestJet at 20: Grown-up airline, grown-up problems "Those seats are going to be sold at a premium because you will have more people wanting those seats, so the end result is the cost of flying, I would suggest, is inevitably going to go up." Some in the industry say flight schools should be producing twice as many pilots to meet demand. New federal rules around pilot fatigue could make the problem worse as airlines may have to hire substantially more pilots to maintain current flight schedules, industry representatives and observers say Indian carriers are grappling with the pilot shortage and to stop them from migrating abroad, they have opportunities across the world primarily from West Asian carriers where income is tax free, airlines have no choice but to bear the extra burden of surcharge in addition to the tax,” said an executive of a private airline. RYANAIR pilots at each of the Irish airline’s 15 UK bases have voted to accept pay increases of up to 20 percent just months after rejecting the same deal last year. The U-turn follows Ryanair’s decision to recognise unions for the first time after it was forced to cancel 20,000 flights last Autumn over a shortage of stand-by pilots. The pilots originally rejected the offer late last year over concerns about pilot staffing and employment terms and conditions. The signing bonuses of up to $45,000 will go to pilots who already have a solid record and Part 121 commercial airline experience, Wilson said. “The actual amount offered will vary by candidate, but someone with a clean training record, reliable attendance and at least 600 hours of Part 121 experience can earn a check for $45,000 when they walk through the door,” he added. |
"U.S. regional carriers...aggressively recruiting Australians and other foreigners eligible for visas."
Who are the "other foreigners" being recruited by US regionals ? :confused: |
Originally Posted by Hawkeye787
(Post 10024544)
It really wasn't if you were a captain.
|
Originally Posted by fullnoise
(Post 10024914)
I'm not sure how you arrived at that. Spoken to a lot of Captains over the last month, and it was a resounding NO from at least 70-80% of them.
|
Originally Posted by Hawkeye787
(Post 10024544)
It really wasn't if you were a captain.
But agreed, interesting times ahead. Not my first rodeo, I have my predictions. Considering what you’ve already posted on this thread, I think any new predictions from you can comfortably be taken with the grain of salt they deserve. I’m still patiently waiting to meet one of these Jetconnect Captains you say are fearing for their jobs... waiting, waiting. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 23:06. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.