|
Originally Posted by KZ Kiwi
(Post 11080466)
Actually that statement is complete rubbish. Having done a number of jobs outside aviation in the last 16months for minimum wage I can say that from my perspective 100K plus a year to be a SO above 20000ft is a very good wage.
|
Originally Posted by KZ Kiwi
(Post 11080466)
Actually that statement is complete rubbish. Having done a number of jobs outside aviation in the last 16months for minimum wage I can say that from my perspective 100K plus a year to be a SO above 20000ft is a very good wage.
Some may think 747/380 SO rates with overtime should be the standard for a cruise relief position, the market thinks differently. There’ll only ever again be a small handful of SOs getting those legacy rates when a number of 380s return for a while, and then eventually none. At the end of the day the job can be done by pilots with 250 hours and a bare CPL. It’s a lot of money for an entry level position. Those old school 747/380 rates aren’t ever coming back, regardless of how some wish for a career as a permanent SO. |
Originally Posted by beautiful_butterfly
(Post 11080465)
Yes.
They would be a highly engaged member of the team, with appropriate qualifications and recurrent training. Cruise relief is an old legacy concept which is redundant in a modern flight deck, particularly for operations requiring four pilots. |
Well then surely we can drop the rate of first officers and captains too? Let’s put the whole lot out to tender and see what the lowest possible salary is when someone will take the job.
It’s been demonstrated that people will actually pay for a job flying a jet. Perhaps we could have an eBay style auction to see just how much someone will pay to get in the flight deck of a wide body jet? And so now we have a sprint to the bottom. There is always someone who will do your job cheaper. It’s easy to argue market dynamics, until it’s about your job. |
Originally Posted by Tucknroll
(Post 11080478)
Well then surely we can drop the rate of first officers and captains too? Let’s put the whole lot out to tender and see what the lowest possible salary is when someone will take the job.
It’s been demonstrated that people will actually pay for a job flying a jet. Perhaps we could have an eBay style auction to see just how much someone will pay to get in the flight deck of a wide body jet? And so now we have a sprint to the bottom. There is always someone who will do your job cheaper. It’s easy to argue market dynamics, until it’s about your job. |
Originally Posted by Tucknroll
(Post 11080478)
Well then surely we can drop the rate of first officers and captains too? Let’s put the whole lot out to tender and see what the lowest possible salary is when someone will take the job.
It’s been demonstrated that people will actually pay for a job flying a jet. Perhaps we could have an eBay style auction to see just how much someone will pay to get in the flight deck of a wide body jet? And so now we have a sprint to the bottom. There is always someone who will do your job cheaper. It’s easy to argue market dynamics, until it’s about your job. |
Student in Debt,
It is not about a name change. EK only had FOs- no SOs. Yes there is a higher training cost in using FOs as augmenting pilots, but you get a safer operation. In three pilot ops, EK went to TWO Captains and 1 FO, as certain states demanded that you always had a captain in a seat. So in summary FO is safer than an SO but is also more expensive, which is why Qantas et al went down the SO track. |
Originally Posted by dr dre
(Post 11080487)
Captain and FO conditions for the 787 and 350 are fine. The new contracts for those aircraft were more about correcting SO pay. When you have conditions that were encouraging SOs to remain in that position for a career, declining upgrades to widebody FO slots, and making more than SH Captains base pay then you know the position has morphed into something it was never intended to be.
|
It’s a lot of money for an entry level position. Those old school 747/380 rates aren’t ever coming back, regardless of how some wish for a career as a permanent SO. |
Originally Posted by neville_nobody
(Post 11080549)
Argue all you like about money but it isn't a entry level position. Plenty of people with FO jet time and/or regional airline commands have taken SO positions.
Plenty of 25 years olds with a couple hundred hours on a Seminole also get the gig. |
So, the industry is facing the biggest crisis in living memory, and the discussion is SO pay.
Tackling the big issues here. |
Originally Posted by ruprecht
(Post 11080682)
So, the industry is facing the biggest crisis in living memory, and the discussion is SO pay.
Tackling the big issues here. |
Originally Posted by Keg
(Post 11073963)
Keg’s Law: The longer a PPRuNe discussion about Qantas goes on the greater chance there is of it turning into a mainline v JQ stoush. |
Originally Posted by Capn Rex Havoc
(Post 11080488)
Student in Debt,
It is not about a name change. EK only had FOs- no SOs. Yes there is a higher training cost in using FOs as augmenting pilots, but you get a safer operation. In three pilot ops, EK went to TWO Captains and 1 FO, as certain states demanded that you always had a captain in a seat. So in summary FO is safer than an SO but is also more expensive, which is why Qantas et al went down the SO track. |
Originally Posted by neville_nobody
(Post 11080549)
Argue all you like about money but it isn't a entry level position. Plenty of people with FO jet time and/or regional airline commands have taken SO positions.
Doesn’t matter what experience you had prior, that’s your own choice (and plenty make it) to leave another job to join Qantas. Some even leave Jet commands because of the allure of a red tail! Want to join QF in a position that’s befitting your prior experience? Get rid of seniority |
Of course it is an entry level position, it should be paid as such. The fact of the matter is, the previous A380/747 SO Contract was too bloated and overpaid for the position, good on those who were on it but ultimately you should never have a contract that allows you to stay in that position forever as getting a 'promotion' may cost you money. All airlines have learned this, in BA the pay scales were re-done and FO pay scales were capped as they were in the situation that senior FO's would be turning down shortfall commands as it was a pay drop. It doesn't matter that highly experienced people apply for the job, they are doing so as things like lifestyle, location etc are overriding the conditions. Hell, during the last 18 months I worked in a post sorting office with a Check Captain, an ex Emirates A380 Captain and numerous Uni Graduates, the qualifications of the applicants don't change what the role is. In Qantas Mainline the SO position is the entry level position and $100k plus is good pay for such a position. If you were lucky enough to have been on previous gold plated contracts with Qantas, Cathay, BA etc then good for you and defend those conditions aggressively but the market has changed.
|
3 Greens - I think China mandated it after a few incidents in their FIR with FOs in the flight deck. So that affected South Korea, and Japan Flights as well.
|
Must be an EK only rule then. I flew into Shanghai last week and the S/O was sitting in the LHS while the Captain was snoozing in the bunk.
|
I flew into Shanghai last week and the S/O was sitting in the LHS while the Captain was snoozing in the bunk. |
I’m not debating the safety of having a different crew complement but simply pointing out that it’s hard to believe China has a ‘Captain on the flight deck at all times’ policy.
|
Originally Posted by Capn Rex Havoc
(Post 11080936)
3 Greens - I think China mandated it after a few incidents in their FIR with FOs in the flight deck. So that affected South Korea, and Japan Flights as well.
in Korea, it came about as a result of AF447. |
Originally Posted by Beer Baron
(Post 11081204)
a ‘Captain on the flight deck at all times’
The trouble starts when you have more than one! :}:oh: |
Now that’s funny!!!😂😂😂
|
What about when you have 3! Two do the work but only one gets to write the book.
|
Nice one Lookleft🤣
|
All these stories of that event that are circulating. When will the other members release their book? Surely at least two of them be near or at retirement
|
All three Captains have retired from QF. Every time I ran into Dave Evans I’d ask when I could expect to read his book. He would always reply with a wry smile.
|
Originally Posted by ekolbregit
(Post 11081244)
in Korea, it came about as a result of AF447.
|
Maybe having a command endorsement ticks the box.
|
Originally Posted by maggot
(Post 11081694)
All Korean airspace? I've flown through there with capt in bunk and s/o presenting to laugh at my jokes in the lhs
Sorry I wasn’t clear. Only applies to Korean Air ops and probably Asiana as well. |
With over half of Australia locked away being kept safe how will QF/JQ look? Surely there will be major cut backs announced without gov money injection. VA are expanding bringing back some redundant wide body pilots and Bain I would think have deeper pockets now.
Currently what we see is the new normal as idiot Australia think they can eradicate this. |
Eradication is next to impossible and most of them now concede as much, so other than nutters or those with a political axe to grind to whom are you referring?
|
Where have you been the last week? Journos, TV news even premiers want or will only accept zero cases and in deaths. They were talking about the 90 odd deaths in the UK on morning show and carrying on if it was a crime against humanity to open borders as there should be no deaths.
|
Australia is not going to open with low vaccination rates.
The UK are doing us all a favour by demonstrating what happens with no restrictions and similar levels of vaccination that we will get here. If they succeed then we have a pathway. If they don’t then we’re back to the drawing board. Epidemiologists seem to be suggesting that the UK opening won’t go well at all. Lets see what happens. |
Originally Posted by Tucknroll
(Post 11082235)
Australia is not going to open with low vaccination rates.
The UK are doing us all a favour by demonstrating what happens with no restrictions and similar levels of vaccination that we will get here. If they succeed then we have a pathway. If they don’t then we’re back to the drawing board. Epidemiologists seem to be suggesting that the UK opening won’t go well at all. Lets see what happens. Frankly, I'm surprised that there's not more of a focus on Israel. 58 percent fully vaccinated, seeing rising cases but with hospitalisations, critical care hospitalisations and deaths running about an order of magnitude lower than their pre-vaccination numbers. |
Originally Posted by SHVC
(Post 11082152)
With over half of Australia locked away being kept safe how will QF/JQ look? Surely there will be major cut backs announced without gov money injection. VA are expanding bringing back some redundant wide body pilots and Bain I would think have deeper pockets now.
Currently what we see is the new normal as idiot Australia think they can eradicate this. What will be interesting is what happens with QF international. Almost totally existing by IFAM and Repatriation flights. What will happen if the government pulls support for these? Hundreds more stood down for 12-18mths? |
Why can't the people who want to avoid Covid at all costs stay locked down if that's what they're so keen for, and the rest of us get on with it?
At what point does it become a personal choice that if you are unrealistically risk averse, then YOU can make allowances to cater for that. Stay at home, get groceries delivered etc. It's totally possible. I know it is because it's how I spend most of my life at the moment, but not by choice. Keep all the reasonable restrictions in place but no more of this lockdown bs. It's the same group of us in society getting f**ked every time. I hope we do what the French did this week. Below is a little of what Macron said sourced from elsewhere: "I no longer have any intention of sacrificing my life, my time, my freedom and the adolescence of my daughters, as well as their right to study properly, for those who refuse to be vaccinated. This time you stay at home, not us." "It’s a matter of individual responsibility [...] but also a matter of our freedom" In France, those who do not get vaccinated will no longer be able to go to restaurants, cafes (from early August), cinemas & museums (from July 21) and get on airplanes or trains (from August). Alternatively, you will have to submit a negative test, which will no longer be free (49 euros for the PCR, 29 for the antigen). Macron then announced the vaccination obligation for medical personnel & for those who work in contact with fragile people. Since September 15, a nurse who has refused to be vaccinated will no longer be able to go to work and receive a salary. "We cannot make those who have the civic sense to get vaccinated bear the burden of inconvenience," Macron said. "The restrictions will weigh on others, those who for reasons incomprehensible in the country of Louis Pasteur, science and the Enlightenment still hesitate to use the only weapon available against the pandemic, the vaccine." "I am aware of what I am asking you," he said, "and I know that you are ready for this commitment. This is, in a sense, part of your sense of duty." “Get vaccinated!” was the president’s overall message. He even tweeted a GIF of himself repeating the phrase. “The equation is simple. The more we vaccinate, the less space we leave this virus to circulate.” Macron explained that the government was striving to achieve a 100% vaccination rate across the country.” |
Originally Posted by Fonz121
(Post 11082249)
Why can't the people who want to avoid Covid at all costs stay locked down if that's what they're so keen for, and the rest of us get on with it?
At what point does it become a personal choice that if you are unrealistically risk averse, then YOU can make allowances to cater for that. Stay at home, get groceries delivered etc. It's totally possible. I know it is because it's how I spend most of my life at the moment, but not by choice. Keep all the reasonable restrictions in place but no more of this lockdown bs. It's the same group of us in society getting f**ked every time. But, what's your plan until then? Hospitals that can't cope? 50 odd thousand deaths? Adjusted for population that's roughly what we'd be looking at, plus the effects of long-COVID. Of the 1360 COVID cases around the country, 128 are hospitalised, or roughly 10%. It should be only too apparent how this would go if governments allow people to continue on as normal at present. No-one likes it, everyone's had enough, I've had a gutful and I'm guessing I'll be stood down again in a few weeks without pay but seriously, what's the alternative for now? I'm sure those who want to "get on with it" would be amongst the masses clamouring for a hospital bed if they get seriously ill from COVID. |
Yup, maybe in 6 months when everyone has had the OPPORTUNITY to get vaccinated, with a vaccine that is recommended for them by ATAGI. ATAGI can go jump. They have one priority, and it's to the detriment of everything else which is no way to make decisions. Ultimately the politicians are at fault for ceding all decision making to the medicos. |
Whilst on the subject of AZ I thought this was interesting.
Data released last week from the Australian Bureau of Statistics shows that 35 per cent of unvaccinated people aged 50 to 69 and 26 per cent aged 70 and over cited “wanting a different vaccine” as a factor in their “ability to get a Covid-19 vaccination”. This compares with 7 and 9 per cent of those aged 18 to 34 and 35 to 49. But what if the problems plaguing the AZ vaccine were breathtakingly simple all along? On June 29, scientists from Germany authored a paper that was published in pre-print form on the biology server hosted by the world-leading Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. It provided compelling evidence that the clotting syndrome associated with the AZ vaccine is caused by accidental intravenous injection. The paper, which has not yet been peer-reviewed, showed in animal tests that the clotting can be induced when the injection site nicks a blood vessel instead of hitting the deltoid muscle. It could be avoided with a harmless procedure known as aspirating the syringe, which is standard in some countries around the world. Simply, the health professional draws back on the syringe at the injection site to check for blood before delivering the inoculation. In March, Denmark changed its guidelines to account for this as a precautionary measure. The theory had been circulating for months. The Saturday Paper can reveal the TGA is aware of the paper and is considering its implications. “If the TGA determines that further regulatory action is required on the basis of emerging evidence,” a spokesperson said, “we will make this information available promptly.” |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 20:30. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.