Ansett Mk II Folds Nov. 12
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Australia when not slaving
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FSU & Buster H get your facts straight U lot that scurried back got the 30% (more like 50%) I hear.
WE GOT THE SHAFT and WE RESIGNED to protect our assetts after the "fat man" threatened to sue us for commencing a perfectly legitimate right to work to rule albiet 9 to 5.
WE GOT THE SHAFT and WE RESIGNED to protect our assetts after the "fat man" threatened to sue us for commencing a perfectly legitimate right to work to rule albiet 9 to 5.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Timbuktu
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am afraid FSU, and I note BH, are both masters at justifying the act, (of scabbing).
There is little that can be written which doesn't draw acerbic remarks from FSU about the leadership of the AFAP of the day ('89).
Well, FSU and all his fellow scabs, still sneaked away and took their (in excess of) 30% pay rise from Abeles. NEVER, did any of these weak characters EVER rise in front of the AFAP forum and protest the case to return together, present a resolution to alter he course.
It is far too easy to protest their justification now, under the protection of anonymity, which is why most scabs never flag their intention to turn their backs on their colleagues. Especially when the famous 30 (pieces) are involved.
If FSU and his kind were so upset with the 30% pay claim in '89, where was the objection from them then?
Methinks they protest too much.
There is little that can be written which doesn't draw acerbic remarks from FSU about the leadership of the AFAP of the day ('89).
Well, FSU and all his fellow scabs, still sneaked away and took their (in excess of) 30% pay rise from Abeles. NEVER, did any of these weak characters EVER rise in front of the AFAP forum and protest the case to return together, present a resolution to alter he course.
It is far too easy to protest their justification now, under the protection of anonymity, which is why most scabs never flag their intention to turn their backs on their colleagues. Especially when the famous 30 (pieces) are involved.
If FSU and his kind were so upset with the 30% pay claim in '89, where was the objection from them then?
Methinks they protest too much.
Evertonian
Dear oh dear sniffer, this is going nowhere again. Let me clarify a few things.
I am not a pilot. I am a Load controller. I, and I'm sure you'll see the funny side of this, can see both sides of the argument, Hawke was gunning for you lot over your refusal to accept the Accord. Abeles just plain didn't like you guys. They were both ready to tackle you, and methinks the AFAP walked right into a trap. As a member of the PlSSWEAK FSU at the time, we were told , basically, to keep out of it. The FAAA followed suit I note, I wonder if there was a tipoff?
Now, with regard to the 30% & resignations, I'm happy to be corrected if I am wrong as, like I'm sure many of the "combatants" on Pprune, I was not party to the inner workings of the dispute. In re-reading my post just above, I am not happy with myself for getting sucked in yet again to '89, because I was not immediately affected by the actions of crews & management around Oz, although, I was as busy as all hell at the time!! To others on Pprune, I'm sorry for getting this fired up again.
I agree that everyone has a legitimate right to "work to rule", but I suspect that 9-5 was a restriction of trade & that your award didn't specify a basic working hour limit? Hence the threat to sue. Again, happy to be corrected.
Right. Time to get back in the box I think!
I am not a pilot. I am a Load controller. I, and I'm sure you'll see the funny side of this, can see both sides of the argument, Hawke was gunning for you lot over your refusal to accept the Accord. Abeles just plain didn't like you guys. They were both ready to tackle you, and methinks the AFAP walked right into a trap. As a member of the PlSSWEAK FSU at the time, we were told , basically, to keep out of it. The FAAA followed suit I note, I wonder if there was a tipoff?
Now, with regard to the 30% & resignations, I'm happy to be corrected if I am wrong as, like I'm sure many of the "combatants" on Pprune, I was not party to the inner workings of the dispute. In re-reading my post just above, I am not happy with myself for getting sucked in yet again to '89, because I was not immediately affected by the actions of crews & management around Oz, although, I was as busy as all hell at the time!! To others on Pprune, I'm sorry for getting this fired up again.
I agree that everyone has a legitimate right to "work to rule", but I suspect that 9-5 was a restriction of trade & that your award didn't specify a basic working hour limit? Hence the threat to sue. Again, happy to be corrected.
Right. Time to get back in the box I think!
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: NSW Australia
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a few points thet I would like to make:
The first is that the adminestrator has stated that everyone that is on duty will be payed the award but less any penalty rates.
If anyone is being payed less,I would contact the adminestrator like yesterday.
The second point I would like to make is that all the regionals that Ansett owned are good going concernes and could be sold off as such. It depends on the ultimate byers wishers.
The other point I would like to make is that Ansett is loosing about $100,000 a week at the moment with the feebel opperation it has going at the moment but if it sat on the ground with no flights it would cost the adminestrators $20 million a month.
Ansett is not going to dye in the short term and if it is going to dye in the long term it is going to go down kicking hard. 
The first is that the adminestrator has stated that everyone that is on duty will be payed the award but less any penalty rates.
If anyone is being payed less,I would contact the adminestrator like yesterday.
The second point I would like to make is that all the regionals that Ansett owned are good going concernes and could be sold off as such. It depends on the ultimate byers wishers.
The other point I would like to make is that Ansett is loosing about $100,000 a week at the moment with the feebel opperation it has going at the moment but if it sat on the ground with no flights it would cost the adminestrators $20 million a month.
Ansett is not going to dye in the short term and if it is going to dye in the long term it is going to go down kicking hard.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: vic
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JMJ- Iam an A320 f/o and have been flying from the right hand seat, as you would expect.
I was also at the administrators meeting this week and have no doubt that we have a future in Australian aviation.
The press last week also said that SQ had left the country never to return, however on thursday there was a whole floor of SQ execs at 501.
Why does every post ALWAYS end up crapping on about 89?? Get over it.
I was also at the administrators meeting this week and have no doubt that we have a future in Australian aviation.
The press last week also said that SQ had left the country never to return, however on thursday there was a whole floor of SQ execs at 501.
Why does every post ALWAYS end up crapping on about 89?? Get over it.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NICEONE
Couldn't have said it better myself. Half the people on this site seem to think that the world revolves around what happened in '89. It doesn't, and the purpose of these forums is to try and see into the future not backwards over the chip on some people's shoulders.
Now that I've got that off my chest I'll just mention a few facts: The sectors I've flown up and down the coast have had load factors averaging between 40 and 74% depending on the time/day.
Couldn't have said it better myself. Half the people on this site seem to think that the world revolves around what happened in '89. It doesn't, and the purpose of these forums is to try and see into the future not backwards over the chip on some people's shoulders.
Now that I've got that off my chest I'll just mention a few facts: The sectors I've flown up and down the coast have had load factors averaging between 40 and 74% depending on the time/day.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Niceone, did I mention anything about 1989 in my post? My Q was on the seniority list. Obviously you are under a lot of stress not knowing what the future holds and you lash out, try to lighten up mate, oh by the way I was in the RAAF in 1989.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: australia
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm, what untamed hatred again from some 89ers. I like 15999 other AN employees face job loses and are we bitter about it, NO! Rather we are upset, disappointed, bur more importantly positive and united to one cause.
Ask anyone on the street about 89. Most will say it was when the pilots went on strike but most would not even remember what year or what it was about. Do you think they care about it anymore, I think not. My point, your a forgotten breed. People have moved on, it is a dead arguement, no one is interested anymore. Bitter angry people like Kaptin M and others....Move On!!!
Oh again for the record, I was too young to be a scab. Oh ho hum...................back to you 89ers no doubt
[ 04 November 2001: Message edited by: beerpleasehostess ]
[ 05 November 2001: Message edited by: Woomera ]
Ask anyone on the street about 89. Most will say it was when the pilots went on strike but most would not even remember what year or what it was about. Do you think they care about it anymore, I think not. My point, your a forgotten breed. People have moved on, it is a dead arguement, no one is interested anymore. Bitter angry people like Kaptin M and others....Move On!!!
Oh again for the record, I was too young to be a scab. Oh ho hum...................back to you 89ers no doubt
[ 04 November 2001: Message edited by: beerpleasehostess ]
[ 05 November 2001: Message edited by: Woomera ]
