A320 Pilots's Cull TESNA
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: AUS
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dearest Zoo, It is only a war if both sides have weapons to pursue the conflict. Tesna has all the ammo. There will be no war, just immediate capitulation to an overwhelming force, sad but inevitable. Look after your families first and worry about everone else afterwards. Christmas greetings to all professional pilots and cabin crew, especially those with an uncertain immediate future.
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Unfortunately for the Ansett pilots, Zoo, you are not a united force, and unemployment will cause some individuals to take extreme steps - at the expense of both their peers, and their OWN integrity.
I would concur, from the information that I have been able to gather, the Ansett Pilots' Association has sold a lot of their members down the drain, probably to try to guarantee their own survival and that of the "executive members". My guess is (that) the ACTU will (successfully) try to incorporate the APA into the ACTU "fold" within a short period of Ansett Mk3 commencing operations.
The only other alternative (to long-term aviation unemployment in Australia) I see at the moment, would be for a united group to present a more "attractive" (for the employER) employment package to TESNA's principles, and effectively cull APA! <img src="eek.gif" border="0">
[ 24 December 2001: Message edited by: Kaptin M ]</p>
I would concur, from the information that I have been able to gather, the Ansett Pilots' Association has sold a lot of their members down the drain, probably to try to guarantee their own survival and that of the "executive members". My guess is (that) the ACTU will (successfully) try to incorporate the APA into the ACTU "fold" within a short period of Ansett Mk3 commencing operations.
The only other alternative (to long-term aviation unemployment in Australia) I see at the moment, would be for a united group to present a more "attractive" (for the employER) employment package to TESNA's principles, and effectively cull APA! <img src="eek.gif" border="0">
[ 24 December 2001: Message edited by: Kaptin M ]</p>
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back Seat Driver, I am trying to do TESNA a favour here and save FLEW big bucks in retraining costs. Firstly I know for a fact that a quite a number of A320 check captains have had interviews with various airlines. Why is this so? Obviously they are worried about their careers and will not work for peanuts. You see in Australia if you earn reasonable money the taxation department wants half of what you earn. Also the oz peso is depreciating at an alarming rate, just ask the yanks and canadians who came out here in 1989 how much their assets are worth now. The CRJ fiasco should have proved to management how expensive employing offshore Pilots is. I have heard that the CRJ captains from OS were paid tax free in US dollars and provided with free accomodation and a car (can anyone confirm this?) The bottom line is if you **** off enough Pilots you will be paying through the nose for years!
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: HK
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KM - the Ansett Pilots' Association has sold a lot of their members down the drain, probably to try to guarantee their own survival and that of the "executive members". My guess is (that) the ACTU will (successfully) try to incorporate the APA into the ACTU "fold"
Who gives a **** about the APA? The aim of the APA has been to look after it's members. No-one is worried about the APA surviving as an entity.
The guys who are working there are not getting paid and, most likely, will be victimised by management for standing up and speaking out and/or disagreeing. They are not ensuring their own survival but, most probably, the opposite.
I do agree, however, that the weakest link in the APA is that we are not united. We didn't have any ammo and yet we have managed to draft an agreement that will pay an A320 captain $160k+ for 700 hours per year, $200k if you fly 900.
BTW, the APA are already affiliated with the ACTU...
Who gives a **** about the APA? The aim of the APA has been to look after it's members. No-one is worried about the APA surviving as an entity.
The guys who are working there are not getting paid and, most likely, will be victimised by management for standing up and speaking out and/or disagreeing. They are not ensuring their own survival but, most probably, the opposite.
I do agree, however, that the weakest link in the APA is that we are not united. We didn't have any ammo and yet we have managed to draft an agreement that will pay an A320 captain $160k+ for 700 hours per year, $200k if you fly 900.
BTW, the APA are already affiliated with the ACTU...
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: From a suitcase
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[quote]I do agree, however, that the weakest link in the APA is that we are not united.<hr></blockquote>
Given the pasts of every one of APA's founding 'every man for himself' members, does that come as any surprise?
Given the pasts of every one of APA's founding 'every man for himself' members, does that come as any surprise?
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Callbutton,
".....we have managed to draft an agreement that will pay an A320 captain $160k+ for 700 hours per year, $200k if you fly 900."
Shame, shame, shame!!
The PRIORITY should have been JOBS for ANSETT pilots - NOT salary!
The APA (as the REPRESENTATIVE of the Ansett pilot group) should NEVER have agreed to allowing pilots' jobs to be terminated because of (biased) check reports.
I'm sorry to have to recall something quoted by a senior Virgin Blue pilot, however the APA's (disgraceful) handling of these events drives it even further home:
"The Ansett pilots, in general, display a culture of INEXPERIENCE!".
".....we have managed to draft an agreement that will pay an A320 captain $160k+ for 700 hours per year, $200k if you fly 900."
Shame, shame, shame!!
The PRIORITY should have been JOBS for ANSETT pilots - NOT salary!
The APA (as the REPRESENTATIVE of the Ansett pilot group) should NEVER have agreed to allowing pilots' jobs to be terminated because of (biased) check reports.
I'm sorry to have to recall something quoted by a senior Virgin Blue pilot, however the APA's (disgraceful) handling of these events drives it even further home:
"The Ansett pilots, in general, display a culture of INEXPERIENCE!".
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
No Kraptin_X...sorry, Rabid Dog 89....I honestly feel sorry for the 75% of the poor, young, unemployed Ansett pilots who have been shafted by the deceit and self-serving objectives of a group that promotes itself as THEIR representatives - the APA!!
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: HK
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you're a tosser KM. I am one of THOSE poor ypoung pilots.
The only objective that we had was to maintain as many jobs as possible. Look at the amount spent on the ANstaff gamble - just to maintain jobs for ALL employees. Should we apologise if we (they) also earn half decent money?
The only objective that we had was to maintain as many jobs as possible. Look at the amount spent on the ANstaff gamble - just to maintain jobs for ALL employees. Should we apologise if we (they) also earn half decent money?
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kaptin M,
You've got it wrong AGAIN!!!
Rabid Dog 89 and I are not one and the same.
When will you get something right???
Further, AN pilots were not highly paid by world standards. High by some, even some Japanese companies, standards, but not high generally.
The APA spent a LOT of money putting together a proposal that would utilize all types, and most pilots, so they weren't in it to sell out their own members.
As for culling the bottom 5% or so on standards, I don't think anybody would have a problem with that except the lowest 5%. The problem with doing that though is the next 5% becomes the lowest 5%, and where does it stop?
Once again K M, when will you get something right and not be driven by malice and ill considered opinion??
[ 25 December 2001: Message edited by: Kaptin_X ]</p>
You've got it wrong AGAIN!!!
Rabid Dog 89 and I are not one and the same.
When will you get something right???
Further, AN pilots were not highly paid by world standards. High by some, even some Japanese companies, standards, but not high generally.
The APA spent a LOT of money putting together a proposal that would utilize all types, and most pilots, so they weren't in it to sell out their own members.
As for culling the bottom 5% or so on standards, I don't think anybody would have a problem with that except the lowest 5%. The problem with doing that though is the next 5% becomes the lowest 5%, and where does it stop?
Once again K M, when will you get something right and not be driven by malice and ill considered opinion??
[ 25 December 2001: Message edited by: Kaptin_X ]</p>
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
What's this "world standards", Kaptin_X? I have NEVER seen any salaries published or otherwise that allude to "world standard" salaries for pilots, but would be appreciative if you'd publish them here for all of us to view.
By Australian standards, Ansett's pilots WERE overpaid - obviously - otherwise they would not have received the changes they have, had the previous salaries been affordable.
Had the salaries NOT been excessive before, why would so many foreign scabs have rushed to Australia from the USA, Canada, and the U.K. -understandably they also came in from "third world, eastern European countries as well, where the wages and living conditions were well below Australia's.
As for "culling" the "bottom 5%" - why has this group been acceptable until now, and as it now appears TESNA will fall short of the A320 endorsed pilots required this qualified group will not be considered?
Could it possibly be to allow other APA committee members the chance to slip in? How cynical of me!! <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
By Australian standards, Ansett's pilots WERE overpaid - obviously - otherwise they would not have received the changes they have, had the previous salaries been affordable.
Had the salaries NOT been excessive before, why would so many foreign scabs have rushed to Australia from the USA, Canada, and the U.K. -understandably they also came in from "third world, eastern European countries as well, where the wages and living conditions were well below Australia's.
As for "culling" the "bottom 5%" - why has this group been acceptable until now, and as it now appears TESNA will fall short of the A320 endorsed pilots required this qualified group will not be considered?
Could it possibly be to allow other APA committee members the chance to slip in? How cynical of me!! <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Sydney
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You sure Buster?Public holiday and all.Some A320 crews who haven`t received January flying have been told to contact their managers!
Kaptain M-I thought you didn`t subscribe to a conspiracy theory.Would appreciate if you keep a reasonable debate going as some bunnies are blinded by the spotlights.
Kaptain M-I thought you didn`t subscribe to a conspiracy theory.Would appreciate if you keep a reasonable debate going as some bunnies are blinded by the spotlights.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kaptin M,
Not only do you not listen, but now I have to give you a lesson in comprehension. This is becoming tiresome.
I didn't say a 'world standard'. I said 'world standards'. The first would be quotable as a standard, but the second is a general term covering what is generally paid in the developed world, and Australian pilots were not highly paid by comparison with other airlines in the world.
If they were/are overpaid, then why is QF still in business whilst paying the same salaries? The demise of Ansett was attributable to disastrous management, and that alone. Pilots' salaries played no part.
The overseas pilots rushed here because they were unemployed. Braniff, Wardair and others had gone out of business, and there were about 7000 US pilots unemployed.
You obviously don't read and comprehend. I gave a several page discourse some weeks ago on how the new contracts were structured, and camparative rates pre and post 1989. An A320 captain was paid $50+ LESS post 89 than he was pre 89. To earn the bulk $$ they were, a pilot had to fly 850+ hours pa, whereas previously, they worked 300 - 400 pa depending on whose propaganda you relied - the compay or AFAP.
As for why the bottom 5% being acceptable till now, I can't explain. I'm not TESNA management, nor am I still employed by Ansett. It's not my business, nor do I care, but I also found it curious. Not why they were not acceptable when they previously were, but the next 5% then becomes the bottom 5%. Whichever system is adopted, there will always be a bottom 5%.
The above is a perfectly reasonable response to the subject matter of this thread, that which I have deleted constitutes a very personal and therefore unprofessional attack. Neither you nor I are qualified to make such assertions and whatever professional judgement required on the matter will continue to be made by the appropriate person at the appropriate time. In the absence of evidence to the contrary it would be safe for all of us to assume that this judgement has been made and that we can all continue to safely enjoy the services provided by them. W
Please read Capt PPRuNes post in the aus.aviation forum.
[ 28 December 2001: Message edited by: Woomera ]</p>
Not only do you not listen, but now I have to give you a lesson in comprehension. This is becoming tiresome.
I didn't say a 'world standard'. I said 'world standards'. The first would be quotable as a standard, but the second is a general term covering what is generally paid in the developed world, and Australian pilots were not highly paid by comparison with other airlines in the world.
If they were/are overpaid, then why is QF still in business whilst paying the same salaries? The demise of Ansett was attributable to disastrous management, and that alone. Pilots' salaries played no part.
The overseas pilots rushed here because they were unemployed. Braniff, Wardair and others had gone out of business, and there were about 7000 US pilots unemployed.
You obviously don't read and comprehend. I gave a several page discourse some weeks ago on how the new contracts were structured, and camparative rates pre and post 1989. An A320 captain was paid $50+ LESS post 89 than he was pre 89. To earn the bulk $$ they were, a pilot had to fly 850+ hours pa, whereas previously, they worked 300 - 400 pa depending on whose propaganda you relied - the compay or AFAP.
As for why the bottom 5% being acceptable till now, I can't explain. I'm not TESNA management, nor am I still employed by Ansett. It's not my business, nor do I care, but I also found it curious. Not why they were not acceptable when they previously were, but the next 5% then becomes the bottom 5%. Whichever system is adopted, there will always be a bottom 5%.
The above is a perfectly reasonable response to the subject matter of this thread, that which I have deleted constitutes a very personal and therefore unprofessional attack. Neither you nor I are qualified to make such assertions and whatever professional judgement required on the matter will continue to be made by the appropriate person at the appropriate time. In the absence of evidence to the contrary it would be safe for all of us to assume that this judgement has been made and that we can all continue to safely enjoy the services provided by them. W
Please read Capt PPRuNes post in the aus.aviation forum.
[ 28 December 2001: Message edited by: Woomera ]</p>
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Kaptin_X, your posts are merely an attempt to justify the gutless, self-serving decision (that) you and the minority took in the past, and the continued deceit and fallacies you and your ilk spruke are NOW being revealed as such, by the actions of the incumbent Ansett scabs.
YOU know VERY well the reason for the "cull" of the so-called "bottom 5%"! It is to allow types such as yourself (the "scabs", as they are called) the opportunity to continue employment, at the expense of junior pilots.
"The overseas pilots rushed here because they were unemployed". I am more than happy to provide names of MANY foreign pilots who were EMPLOYED, and left jobs to take up work in Australia.
I shot 3 gaping holes in the fallacious answers you gave on another thread regarding this, and in true fashion you skulked away from that without further word, having AGAIN been exposed. Truly pathetic, and true to form I've been told that you are not forthcoming about your actions in 1989.
As suggested by another poster, Kaptin_X, your handle should perhaps be changed to Norman - the psycho psychologist - because your finger-pointing at other people does not detract from your own obvious flaw!
[ 28 December 2001: Message edited by: Kaptin M ]</p>
YOU know VERY well the reason for the "cull" of the so-called "bottom 5%"! It is to allow types such as yourself (the "scabs", as they are called) the opportunity to continue employment, at the expense of junior pilots.
"The overseas pilots rushed here because they were unemployed". I am more than happy to provide names of MANY foreign pilots who were EMPLOYED, and left jobs to take up work in Australia.
I shot 3 gaping holes in the fallacious answers you gave on another thread regarding this, and in true fashion you skulked away from that without further word, having AGAIN been exposed. Truly pathetic, and true to form I've been told that you are not forthcoming about your actions in 1989.
As suggested by another poster, Kaptin_X, your handle should perhaps be changed to Norman - the psycho psychologist - because your finger-pointing at other people does not detract from your own obvious flaw!
[ 28 December 2001: Message edited by: Kaptin M ]</p>
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Australia
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You just can't accept the facts can you, KapM? If the cull applied at the expense of junior pilots, how is it that quite a few of your so called heroes have been dropped and some very junior pilots picked up.
The 5% cull does not mean that the affected pilots were below standard as you wish to believe but that they were at the lower end of their peer group. So why would you want to include them when you had better pilots on other types, many of whom had been on the A320 before.
The new assessment system (PATS) has many checks and balances which would avoid the situation where a particular check captain took a dislike to a particular pilot. In fact the check pilots performance is monitored and moderated to smooth out the assessments of so called "hard bastards" and "soft touches."
No doubt you will seize on the above terms to further distort the facts. They were chosen to reflect the fact that there is a possible variation in assessments from one to another. An adverse assessment by one would be moderated by different assessments by several others.
Woomera,
Why is it that Kap M is permitted to continually indulge in personal attacks ( ex gutless applied to Kap X) with apparent impunity?
[ 28 December 2001: Message edited by: Flat Side Up ]</p>
The 5% cull does not mean that the affected pilots were below standard as you wish to believe but that they were at the lower end of their peer group. So why would you want to include them when you had better pilots on other types, many of whom had been on the A320 before.
The new assessment system (PATS) has many checks and balances which would avoid the situation where a particular check captain took a dislike to a particular pilot. In fact the check pilots performance is monitored and moderated to smooth out the assessments of so called "hard bastards" and "soft touches."
No doubt you will seize on the above terms to further distort the facts. They were chosen to reflect the fact that there is a possible variation in assessments from one to another. An adverse assessment by one would be moderated by different assessments by several others.
Woomera,
Why is it that Kap M is permitted to continually indulge in personal attacks ( ex gutless applied to Kap X) with apparent impunity?
[ 28 December 2001: Message edited by: Flat Side Up ]</p>
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Australia
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Noted your late editing Kap M. Doesn't alter anything.
You still can not address the FACTS as stated above. Why don't you try to establish the reality rather than distort things to your own ends? So often you have been proved wrong and inconsistent. AN pilots paid too much one minute, not enough the next and then too much again. Waiting for you to volunteer to reduce your self proclaimed BIG salary so that your company can employ more pilots in accordance with the principles you espoused in an earlier post.
But that is different isn't it?
You still can not address the FACTS as stated above. Why don't you try to establish the reality rather than distort things to your own ends? So often you have been proved wrong and inconsistent. AN pilots paid too much one minute, not enough the next and then too much again. Waiting for you to volunteer to reduce your self proclaimed BIG salary so that your company can employ more pilots in accordance with the principles you espoused in an earlier post.
But that is different isn't it?