TJ RESIGNS FROM AN

[rescue 1]

I hear what you are all saying about the management ability of certain Flight department types in the new AN. There is no doubt that their people skills are lacking, and it is time to get some fresh blood and new ideas into the airline - ideas that reflect the new operating [low cost] environment, and not the old style thinking.

However, it is I believe, unfair to say that there actions or lack thereof alone will place this airline into Administration again. Last time it was a team effort - as it will be this time if they don't change the way they do things.

As I said on another post - nothing changes if nothing changes.

[ 26 January 2002: Message edited by: rescue 1 ]</p>

[Buster Hyman]

Nice analogy there Kaptin X... <img src="eek.gif" border="0">

Perhaps we can all hope that the probationary period applies to all staff! There's hope for us yet! <img src="wink.gif" border="0">

[abovedownunder]

E.P. Don't worry - mow his lawns on Sunday - fix the wife on Mondays. Home duties the rest of the week. That's the way it works in The Club. Whatever you do don't show the slightest hint of personality - suck all the way - they're too stupid to work it out.

[Kaptin M]

And I suppose M.R.'s replacement made the same teary-eyed speech to the pilots recently, as he made in Brisbane in 1989,"I won't go back to work until the most junior F/O has been re-employed!!"

He was back within days!

If only FLEW really knew the past history of the lack of integrity and calibre of the people they are allowing into these positions. . .Like a pyramid of cards, each is worried that if one goes the whole lot will then fall as well. Insecure pr!cks!

[ 27 January 2002: Message edited by: Kaptin M ]</p>

[Thumbs up]

Yes Kaptain M.I to remember that teary speech from him.I've neither forgotten or forgiven him for that and still cannot bring myself to look at him in the eye.

[Spad]

Who has replaced Rindfleish? There's surely no requirement to hide the man's (sic) name now?

[Kaptin M]

[quote]Don't be puritanical boys and girls.. .M.R.s replacement is J.S. He personally selected the A320 pilots he wanted removed to make way for his 'ol mates. At this very moment he is tripping over his hard-on, screaming his short-man abuse at anyone who so much as blinks disdain at his mismanaged machinations.<hr></blockquote>

..longish grey/blonde hair, hunched shoulders, whispering voice..... same name as the author of "Gulliver's travels" (minus the "h" in the first name). Surname = rapid, fast, prompt.

Buzzzzzzz - time up!!

[ 02 February 2002: Message edited by: Woomera ]</p>

[4dogs]

Creampuff,

Need your help during a little senior moment I am having - what, if any, effect on the civil aviation law is generated as a consequence of administration?

Is AN Whatever (In Administration) held to be the same legal entity as AN Whatever, the unencumbered entity to which the AOC was issued?

Does the passing of executive management control to the Administrators mean that there is a legally effective change in Key Personnel, ie the CEO?

How, if at all, is CASA required to deal with the Administrators, as opposed to the Key Personnel set out in the application for the extant AOC?

I suspect that such advice that you may deign to offer will be of interest to many in the thread, not least me.. . <img src="confused.gif" border="0"> <img src="confused.gif" border="0"> <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

[Going Boeing]

Having read all the posts on this thread, I am more convinced that all the pilots with good personal and management skills don't want to be managers - they just want to fly aeroplanes. That means that pilot management positions in airlines are generally filled by those who don't have these skills.

There certainly will not be a party to welcome TJ back to Qantas and he certainly wont be getting his seniority number back. <img src="mad.gif" border="0">

[abovedownunder]

"Hello" In the real world, you apply for a job/promotion and submit an application that addresses the 'essential criteria' of the job ie leadership skills/ability to manager a budget etc (run a successful/profitable airline) and provide examples of your previous successes.

The selection panel, which includes an outsider (read non biased person) then judge applicants and the unsuitable ones ie the applications for those who don't meet the essential criteria get put in a different file (the round one under the desk).

In the airline industry, something different happens............. <img src="wink.gif" border="0"> <img src="frown.gif" border="0">

[Woomera]

This post was removed to "Admin" to allow a review of it's content, which, generally, was acceptable in discussing a 'significant' event but all too quickly degeneratd into some unpleasant descriptions of to some, easily identifiable characters.

This not acceptable.

I am not here to barrack for one side or the other, neither do I have first hand knowledge of the characters to decide what is or is not so, nor is it my job, I'm just here to keep the peace and keep it legal.

It is possible to discuss these important issues without getting personal, regardless of how strongly you may feel about it or the person.

Further we received an email from a respected PPRuNer who indicated that one of the persons mentioned was so devastated by the apparent acrimony he has raised that he immediately took steps to mitigate his involvement and behaviour.

Take notice we are talking about REAL people, with REAL feelings here.

They do take notice of what they read here and it is possible that they may actually respond in a positive way to everybodys benefit. But I gaurantee that that will not happen in an negative environment.

It MUST be more constructive to use these halls to tease out any problems that they may or may not have or be aware of, in a way that may not be possible directly and allows them and you some dignity in the process.

I don't recall who said it first but, [quote]would we were able to see ourselves as others do<hr></blockquote> is a pretty fair observation for us all.

I will not allow it to become a negative slanging match.

Here is the opportunity for you to allow others to see themselves as others do. . .Whether this can be made to produce a positive result or not is up to you.

After all, we have all seen the benefits of CRM.

And, there is a Two Round the World First Class tickets on the airline of your choice, with 6 weeks 5 Star accomodation and $100,000 spending money for any of you who has done a formal CRM course, who can prove that they didn't need to mofify their behaviour at work or on the Flight Deck in some form or another.

Of course, you would all understand that anybody who attempts to do so would automatically disqualify him/herself wouldn't you?

[Woomera]

This thread is back for as long as it stays upright.

[Skol]

I would like to hear what someone who goes under the pseudonym 'T' has to say about this thread. On the last one regarding TJ he was very vocal indeed about what an overall good bloke and excellent manager TJ is. There was even a veiled threat of legal action against me, which resulted in a ticking off for 'T' from Woomera.

[ 02 February 2002: Message edited by: Skol ]</p>

[Flat Side Up]

Can't possibly imagine that the subject of this thread would ever suffer from self doubt or reassess his modus operandus.

An impossible proposition!! <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

[Skol]

It's an unfortunate fact of life that many airline managers, flight instructors, training staff are incompetent. Appointments for political affiliations rather than ability are common.. .Ego is a problem for some and for some senior airline management it's booze.. .Many in my experience as an aviator (longer than TJ's and 3 airlines) head for management because of their flying skills or lack thereof, in preparation for the day they resign from flying rather than get pushed. Some are perennial backstabbers and generally nasty pieces of work who think they will achieve a level of respect in management they never got on the line. Some have dodgy medicals.. .There is certainly a culture of fear and this creates the yes-man. Sycophantic, bullying individuals who will do anything to get to the top. Many have an appalling shortage of people skills.. .Then there are the instructors and check captains who even after a good check will ask a stupid question or offer some trivial unjustified criticism to show who knows best.. .Maybe I shouldn't be too critical. A mate of mine a while back told me not to complain about incompetent training staff. He reckons because they're so incompetent they make the rest of us look good.. .I hope some of them read this.

[Flat Side Up]

THe question does arise as to why a pilot with QF less than 50 years of age would choose to leave for a Management position (non flying) with AN. Obviously not an aviator at heart or misadventure of one kind or another spring to mind. Alternately as Skol suggests ego and boundless ambition/optimism could be in play.

Whatever it may be it is always a good policy to prevent ambition exceeding ability, or as a very experienced and wise aviator once said, "Never accept a situation where you will be exceeding your level of competence, whether in the air or on the ground."

[ 03 February 2002: Message edited by: Flat Side Up ]</p>

[dingo084]

4 dogs asked some pertinent questions in his post of 27/01 @ 0852 (bottom of page 5).

As I have more than a passing interest in these questions, I would be greatfull for some discussion on them.

From my point of view the continuance of the original AOC (pre-14/9) is tenuous at best. The small matter of compliance with both regulatory and with written undertakings (appended to the AOC and hence conditions of) could not be seen to be being met.

The regulator seems to have been very quiet in this regard compared to all the noise they made around Christmas 2000 and Easter 2001!

WHY?

ding

[Creampuff]

4dogs – sorry about the delay. Have been on a week’s holiday, and don’t like prooning on my time.

Complicated questions – just a few general – repeat general points in response.

The event of administration does not change the identity or legal capacity of the entity in administration. The same legal person continues to exist. In the case of each of the companies in the ‘Ansett’ group that have gone into administration, each company continues to exist and continues to be able to hold an AOC.

Given this, the event of administration in itself has no effect on an entity’s authority under an AOC it holds. (I am not aware of CASA having purported to impose an AOC condition to the effect that the authorisations contained in the AOC are conditional upon the entity not entering administration – such a condition would probably been invalid. CASA does, however, occasionally impose conditions requiring the holder to notify CASA in the event of administration or other external control occurrence. Such a condition is probably valid, as there is probably a nexus between CASA’s preventative/safety powers and the potential for financial matters eventually to impact upon the corporation’s capacity to comply with the safety rules.)

The management of the entity becomes the administrator. The directors are prohibited from dealing as the corporation (though 3rd parties who are not on notice of the administration can enforce agreements entered by the directors – but a bit difficult now to argue ignorance of ‘Ansett’s’ administration) unless authorised by the administrator. Thus an effect of administration is that there is a change in the person “that carries out the duties of” ... “the chief executive officer” of the corporation. That is, one of the “key personnel” in terms of subsection 28(3) of the CAAct changes. Mr Jensen presumably occupied a position within the subsection 28(3) definition as well.

CASA has to deal with the administrator, simply because (short of a court order otherwise) there is no one else who has authority to bind or run the company.

(Interesting related point: the two Marks are not the administrators. The administrator of Ansett Airways Limited is Andersen. I think Andersen is also the administrator of Ansett International. I think there are different administrators for some of the other corporations in the group.)

One of the conditions that is imposed on all AOCs under CAO 82.0 paragraph 4.4 via paragraph 28BA(1)(b) of the CAAct, is that the holder of the AOC “must continue to satisfy CASA in relation to the matters specified in section 28 of the Act.” (Quare whether that is a valid exercise of the section 98(4A) power.)

Assuming that is a valid condition, each AOC holder must continuously satisfy CASA as to all of the matters set out in section 28 – i.e. all of the criteria for the initial issue of the AOC – including all the organisational- and key personnel-related criteria.

This is one of the issues with which I have concern. It seems to me that the Easter and Christmas groundings suggested systemic problems with the ‘Ansett’ organisation. We then had the first administrator stating that the organisation had been without management in the three months previous to the administration commencing. I have great difficulty in accepting the suggestion that there was no substantial link between the ‘administrative’ management of the organisation and its ‘operational’ management. Am I to believe that the flying and maintenance side of the organisation were not controlled or financed in any way by the people who controlled the company and its finances in law? How did the “carcass” (the Deputy Prime Minister’s word, not mine) become a fledgling?

The biggest concern is that all indications are that Tesna will get an AOC come what may. The Deputy Prime Minister’s and Mr Gibson of CASA’s comments certainly point that way. In other words, it seems to me that the decision is a foregone conclusion for political reasons. Any administrative law lawyer can tell you why a foregone conclusion is an erroneous decision in law: there is no proper exercise of the relevant discretion.

Any air safety expert can tell you why the AOC-issuing decision should be, and is in law required to be, based upon objective safety-related criteria alone.

[Kaptin M]

Mat I impose upon your knowledge, Creampuff, and also ask a couple of questions - how long will the B737 and 767 remain on Ansett's AOC, now that they are no longer flying those aircraft?. .Also, as FLEW have indicated, the Maintenance section of Ansett will be removed from the airline body - how will this affect the AOC?

[Willie Nelson]

I remember being fifteen years old, and like a junkie willing to sell his sould for one more hit,I was plane crazy.

When somebody told me they new a pilot that "you would like to talk to" I remember thinking "yeah great; some guy who owns an ultralight, who scares his neighbours once a month"

When it turned out to be TJ (pre management infamy), I was blown away, this guy was nothing short of inspirational, he didn't tell me how good he was, but I could see that he was no privateer. (no offence guys)

He did everything he could to display to me what a great career path lay ahead for me, should I decide to put in the work required.

Many years later, having succeeded bug smashers, I wait with baited breath to hear from the man who inspired me to pursue a career path I have cherished so much.

I want to know why you have done this to your peers....!

I hope this would not be the long and pensive wait that I suspect it will.....

dissapointed