Originally Posted by Ragnor
(Post 10842362)
Those 7 we’re in individual contracts I believe, they have already been let go at the start of all this.
|
Originally Posted by ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE
(Post 10842374)
Why were pilots being hired on individual contracts?
|
Originally Posted by chazwazza14
(Post 10842377)
Can’t be forced to join a union in NZ. If you’re not part of the Union, you can’t be a part of the collective agreement. Hence you’re put on an individual contract. For all intensive purposes, the contract is identical to the collective agreement.
So I guess those union fees really paid off for the NZ guys then |
Originally Posted by ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE
(Post 10842379)
ahh, interesting.
So I guess those union fees really paid off for the NZ guys then I’ve got no idea about the JQ NZ situation, but if those rumours are true they sure did. Pretty interesting QF/JQ can get away with that though... |
Originally Posted by Ragnor
(Post 10842362)
Those 7 we’re in individual contracts I believe, they have already been let go at the start of all this.
The company has apparently come up with an optimised figure of approximately 11 crew per frame, which translates to an excess of 2 FO’s in Chc, and 5 in Auckland. Six Chc Captains are also forced to move to Akl. All part of the long term plan to “resize NZ bases”. |
I am not sure why the consensus seems to be hanging onto provisions of the EBA going forward, it has been said at various levels of government that these are unprecedented times, and the travel industry has been hardest hit. If there was ever a time to terminate an EBA in exceptional circumstances for an airline, it would be now with the majority of the fleet grounded because of governmentent imposed restrictions which have no foreseeable end. If we could see the end date of this it would be different, that is not the case.
The public interest going forward is for two viable domestic airlines, which will require significant downsizing from the current size. Cuts would have to go across the board, head office, catering, ground support/engineering, cabin crew, and pilots. |
Originally Posted by chazwazza14
(Post 10842377)
For all intensive purposes,
|
Originally Posted by das Uber Soldat
(Post 10843130)
|
|
Originally Posted by Capt Fathom
(Post 10843137)
You missed "renumeration" too. |
Somethink doesn't look right?
I've aksed around and no one has an answer |
Originally Posted by Going Nowhere
(Post 10843154)
Somethink doesn't look right?
I've aksed around and no one has an answer |
For all intensive purposes it's a mute point. Are we really going to correct everyones grammar in one foul swoop? Surely there are bigger issues, like our boarders for example. Your just wasting you're time.
|
Originally Posted by mppgf
(Post 10843194)
Borders is the word you are looking for and moot is the other one. And it's actually One fell swoop.
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....ae1391b4b7.gif |
You missed "Intents and purposes" and "you're just wasting your time" I hope maths is your thing
|
I'm chomping at the bit to see where this goes......
|
A word of advise for you...
|
Give Chazza et al a break.
It has been a deliberate policy of the Education Departments for at least the last 20 years ( 30 ? ) to undervalue History and Grammar. Because policy is run by teachers. And teachers think that rigorous learning , especially rote learning , is an expression of white privilege , post-colonial , Fascist , male-oppression......(insert grievance here)............ Not his fault really. |
Did you just assume Chazza’s gender pronoun.
|
Could of been a mistake?
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 23:15. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.