ANTI- ANSETT.. for the press please read.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let me get this straight. An Ansett pilot has died in tragic circumstances. Although one respondent referred to the fellow as a captain, I understand he was a First Officer, which means he wasn’t on any list compiled outside AN in 1990 unless he was a long term permanent First Officer of at least 11 years standing, (which means he was virtually unemployable on the overseas market, so ‘threats’ to his future job prospects overseas because he was on any such list were academic.)
So if that is so, whatever the stressors he felt he was under were, they weren’t to do with any list compiled in 1990. So the calls for the hard hearted ‘89ers’ to call a moratorium on comments about (and to) their former colleagues (like the aptly named ‘captainschlonger’), in this case at least, appear to be misplaced. (Seriously, whoever you are, what were you thinking when you gave yourself that ‘handle’? You might not appreciate it, but it reinforces a lot of people’s perceptions of the type of ‘man’(!) who flew for AN post 89.)
It’s interesting to note that the very people now calling for others to ‘lay off’ and ‘show a little respect’ after this tragic occurrence weren’t showing any similar regard for the feelings of others twelve years ago (and for 11.95 years afterwards) when they were at the top of the heap.
It’s a bit like the calls for ‘let bygones be bygones’ and ‘forgive and forget’ and ‘make peace among yourselves’. Isn’t it amazing that it’s usually the people who’ve achieved an advantage at the expense of others who make these calls? It’s a bit like the Japanese position at the end of 1942, (which they planned all along to negotiate from): “OK, world, we’ve conquered half the western Pacific after a surprise attack on your unprepared forces. Now let’s negotiate a peace settlement and we might even be convinced to give 5 or even 10% of it back if you’ll all forgive and forget - and buy our goods.” For some obscure reason, the nations who’d suffered the surprise attack didn’t feel much like letting ‘bygones be bygones’ then any more than quite a few who watched the ‘heroes’ gain rapid advancement and huge pay rises after their self-serving actions in returning to work or ‘blowing in’ to AN and TN from outside in 89-90.
Along with, I’m sure, every other ‘89er’, I deeply regret that this man, whoever he was, could see no other option in the current crisis he was undoubtedly going through than to take his own life. My thoughts go out particularly to the family I assume he has left behind, for they are the ones who will suffer the most, and for many years to come, no matter how well he may have provided for their futures from a monetary point of view.
He’s not the first post 89 AN pilot who has taken this course of action and I can never begin to guess what factors might have been at the forefront of his mind when he made that fateful decision to end his life. But if he was a First Officer (and not a long term permanent First Officer), it could not have been any fear of his future job prospects because of his name being on any list compiled in 1990.
So if that is so, whatever the stressors he felt he was under were, they weren’t to do with any list compiled in 1990. So the calls for the hard hearted ‘89ers’ to call a moratorium on comments about (and to) their former colleagues (like the aptly named ‘captainschlonger’), in this case at least, appear to be misplaced. (Seriously, whoever you are, what were you thinking when you gave yourself that ‘handle’? You might not appreciate it, but it reinforces a lot of people’s perceptions of the type of ‘man’(!) who flew for AN post 89.)
It’s interesting to note that the very people now calling for others to ‘lay off’ and ‘show a little respect’ after this tragic occurrence weren’t showing any similar regard for the feelings of others twelve years ago (and for 11.95 years afterwards) when they were at the top of the heap.
It’s a bit like the calls for ‘let bygones be bygones’ and ‘forgive and forget’ and ‘make peace among yourselves’. Isn’t it amazing that it’s usually the people who’ve achieved an advantage at the expense of others who make these calls? It’s a bit like the Japanese position at the end of 1942, (which they planned all along to negotiate from): “OK, world, we’ve conquered half the western Pacific after a surprise attack on your unprepared forces. Now let’s negotiate a peace settlement and we might even be convinced to give 5 or even 10% of it back if you’ll all forgive and forget - and buy our goods.” For some obscure reason, the nations who’d suffered the surprise attack didn’t feel much like letting ‘bygones be bygones’ then any more than quite a few who watched the ‘heroes’ gain rapid advancement and huge pay rises after their self-serving actions in returning to work or ‘blowing in’ to AN and TN from outside in 89-90.
Along with, I’m sure, every other ‘89er’, I deeply regret that this man, whoever he was, could see no other option in the current crisis he was undoubtedly going through than to take his own life. My thoughts go out particularly to the family I assume he has left behind, for they are the ones who will suffer the most, and for many years to come, no matter how well he may have provided for their futures from a monetary point of view.
He’s not the first post 89 AN pilot who has taken this course of action and I can never begin to guess what factors might have been at the forefront of his mind when he made that fateful decision to end his life. But if he was a First Officer (and not a long term permanent First Officer), it could not have been any fear of his future job prospects because of his name being on any list compiled in 1990.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tsnake and others,
I don't normally get involved in the 89 stuff even though I was there, but I thought I might offer a comment or two here.
I genuinely feel for the vast majority of the AN staff going through a very difficult time right now and hope that the airline does survive.
I do take umbrage at tsnakes suggestion that "those of us in the media" know who the 89 bores are. What is boring is the predictability of the media people to take whatever side seems expedient to their own career progression at the time. I would suggest that if the media had told the truth in 89 things may have been different. Many in the media still can't tell the difference between an A36 and a B757 but that doesn't stop them publishing their view on those differences. You refer to a minority "addled view" but the reality is many more harbour these views but realize that nobody outside our circle understands or cares, so you just get on with it. I personally admire Kaptin M and his like for having the balls to keep on reminding people what the go really is. In the end we know it doesn't matter a rat's a**e what the media think because they will change their view tomorrow anyhow.
It is so heartening to hear that the Sc**bs have contributed so much to the national economy, and naturally without a thought that the bloated salaries and restrictive work practices ( everyone in the industry knows that AN piots fly slowly, due to the poor overtime clause, compared to Qantas) would adversely affect the long term viability of the airline they sold their souls to serve.
I have not read anywhere in the last year of any aircrew suggesting that a pay cut, or (heaven forbid) a change in the way overtime is paid, may assist the airline out of its difficulty. No, let us blame the Prime Minister, or the Kiwi's or any one else but it couldn't possibly be us.
I do feel for the many pilots who have joined since 1990. But I will not feel an ounce of sorrow for those who rode so high on the lost hopes and aspirations of their former colleagus from pre 89.
Especially the foreigners who were so happy to save the Australian public from the ravages of the domestic pilots. I hope the remaining few go home with their reputations tucked under their arms.
I suspect we will never know the truth behind the sudden failure of Ansett but I believe there is no escaping the reality that it began with the events of 89 and the improper handling of that by the Government of the day and Ansett's owners.
I don't normally get involved in the 89 stuff even though I was there, but I thought I might offer a comment or two here.
I genuinely feel for the vast majority of the AN staff going through a very difficult time right now and hope that the airline does survive.
I do take umbrage at tsnakes suggestion that "those of us in the media" know who the 89 bores are. What is boring is the predictability of the media people to take whatever side seems expedient to their own career progression at the time. I would suggest that if the media had told the truth in 89 things may have been different. Many in the media still can't tell the difference between an A36 and a B757 but that doesn't stop them publishing their view on those differences. You refer to a minority "addled view" but the reality is many more harbour these views but realize that nobody outside our circle understands or cares, so you just get on with it. I personally admire Kaptin M and his like for having the balls to keep on reminding people what the go really is. In the end we know it doesn't matter a rat's a**e what the media think because they will change their view tomorrow anyhow.
It is so heartening to hear that the Sc**bs have contributed so much to the national economy, and naturally without a thought that the bloated salaries and restrictive work practices ( everyone in the industry knows that AN piots fly slowly, due to the poor overtime clause, compared to Qantas) would adversely affect the long term viability of the airline they sold their souls to serve.
I have not read anywhere in the last year of any aircrew suggesting that a pay cut, or (heaven forbid) a change in the way overtime is paid, may assist the airline out of its difficulty. No, let us blame the Prime Minister, or the Kiwi's or any one else but it couldn't possibly be us.
I do feel for the many pilots who have joined since 1990. But I will not feel an ounce of sorrow for those who rode so high on the lost hopes and aspirations of their former colleagus from pre 89.
Especially the foreigners who were so happy to save the Australian public from the ravages of the domestic pilots. I hope the remaining few go home with their reputations tucked under their arms.
I suspect we will never know the truth behind the sudden failure of Ansett but I believe there is no escaping the reality that it began with the events of 89 and the improper handling of that by the Government of the day and Ansett's owners.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: BNE
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Andu,
As I have said on another topic those of us who knew the individual concerned intend to keep any details private but I can assure you and others that he was indeed on your "list". So please do the aviation community a favour, cede to the request of "Woomera", and BACK OFF the subject.
TurbTool,
You are certainly living up to the second part of your moniker.
"Bloated salaries"... best not mention that concept to some of your mates at Cathay (Before you bite - IMHO I reckon they earn it!). I am currently considering 3 positions overseas all of which will pay 20 - 40% more than at Ansett - curious.
And what a good idea.... lets all use this forum to convince as many people as possible that the profession of pilot is an overpaid, underworked, and inefficient endevour. If we try hard enough we should be able to convince them that we should only be paid incomes on par with bus drivers!
"Restrictive work practices"... another interesting concept. Ansett's pilot workforce ran at around 4 - 4.5 crews per aircraft. Not too inefficient by world standards. Surely the 17 floors of management structure in Swanston St. and the 7 or 8 (I think) in Auckland had nothing to do with it.
So Ansett flew slow, and (by inference) Qantas fly fast.... which service would you rather your family was on my friend... the one that considers that comfort and safety is a priority over schedule. And the one that, due to "fat" schedules, allows the fuel savings of operating at efficient speeds and levels to be passed onto the companies bottom line. Or the one that stays at FL 260 accepting a few bumps, a noisier cabin, and a greater fuel useage because if you get there under sked you'll still get paid your rostered pay.
Please get your facts straight before going off half cocked (get it .... TurbTool... Tool.... half COCKED....oh doesn't matter).
Have to agree with you whole heartedly on your view of the media and government. And thanks for the kind words directed at those of us post 1990'ers.
Oh why, oh why do I take the bait like this.... too much time on my hands methinks!!!
As I have said on another topic those of us who knew the individual concerned intend to keep any details private but I can assure you and others that he was indeed on your "list". So please do the aviation community a favour, cede to the request of "Woomera", and BACK OFF the subject.
TurbTool,
You are certainly living up to the second part of your moniker.
"Bloated salaries"... best not mention that concept to some of your mates at Cathay (Before you bite - IMHO I reckon they earn it!). I am currently considering 3 positions overseas all of which will pay 20 - 40% more than at Ansett - curious.
And what a good idea.... lets all use this forum to convince as many people as possible that the profession of pilot is an overpaid, underworked, and inefficient endevour. If we try hard enough we should be able to convince them that we should only be paid incomes on par with bus drivers!
"Restrictive work practices"... another interesting concept. Ansett's pilot workforce ran at around 4 - 4.5 crews per aircraft. Not too inefficient by world standards. Surely the 17 floors of management structure in Swanston St. and the 7 or 8 (I think) in Auckland had nothing to do with it.
So Ansett flew slow, and (by inference) Qantas fly fast.... which service would you rather your family was on my friend... the one that considers that comfort and safety is a priority over schedule. And the one that, due to "fat" schedules, allows the fuel savings of operating at efficient speeds and levels to be passed onto the companies bottom line. Or the one that stays at FL 260 accepting a few bumps, a noisier cabin, and a greater fuel useage because if you get there under sked you'll still get paid your rostered pay.
Please get your facts straight before going off half cocked (get it .... TurbTool... Tool.... half COCKED....oh doesn't matter).
Have to agree with you whole heartedly on your view of the media and government. And thanks for the kind words directed at those of us post 1990'ers.
Oh why, oh why do I take the bait like this.... too much time on my hands methinks!!!
