Kiwi pilot shortage
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NZ
Posts: 835
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
will do as much as possible for the guy/girl below
Don't take things so personally and maybe one day you will fly something that can stay in the air for 18 hours!
Seriously though, good on you for sticking up for your mate/aquantance. Next time you're having a beer with him, remind him about the old saying to do with catching flys, because there's still far too much vinigar being slung around here for most people to listen to what he's actually saying.
Good luck young skywalker
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
I've kept mostly outta this thread...cos its safer me thinks
But then you read and digest comments like....
and it makes me think that what remoak has done is get some on here to prove his point for him.
Kiwiblue you should be ashamed of yourself for that comment mate, your comment sums up what is rotten at the core of aviation in NZ and Oz at times
All the rest of this thread has happened because of your small minded comment.
But then you read and digest comments like....
There is absolutely no reason to **** on NZ, NZ aviation or current NZ aviation participants because you didn't make it.
Get a life.
Get a life.
Kiwiblue you should be ashamed of yourself for that comment mate, your comment sums up what is rotten at the core of aviation in NZ and Oz at times
All the rest of this thread has happened because of your small minded comment.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: ENZED
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The huge movement in the industry in NZ is obvious, those of us in GA are having a major problem training and keeping instructors..........
The biggies are vacuum cleaning up everything in their path, I cant even get a C Cat for basic training......and a lot of organisations are in the same boat.
Trained up a new C cat, and he got sucked up at 310 hrs into a charter op.
The next couple have been bonded for a short period.(to the organisation, not to each other!)
Just hatched a new CPL who stated that cpl's in the future wont do instructor ratings, they wont need to , to get hours, well, i have news for him!
Without instructors, there wont be any new CPL's!
GA is about to start bumping up rates and paying staff what they deserve.
Its all go!
Cheers!
The biggies are vacuum cleaning up everything in their path, I cant even get a C Cat for basic training......and a lot of organisations are in the same boat.
Trained up a new C cat, and he got sucked up at 310 hrs into a charter op.
The next couple have been bonded for a short period.(to the organisation, not to each other!)
Just hatched a new CPL who stated that cpl's in the future wont do instructor ratings, they wont need to , to get hours, well, i have news for him!
Without instructors, there wont be any new CPL's!
GA is about to start bumping up rates and paying staff what they deserve.
Its all go!
Cheers!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Wherever I Lay my Hat...
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jet_A1 and haughtney1... whatever. If he is such a paragon then why do so many of his posts in here consist of such arrogance and scorn for any who dare challenge him on any point??? I meet people here largely on how they portray themselves on here. As far as I'm concerned no more or less in this case. As you have pointed out haughtney1, I will not tolerate anyone denigrating my country, family, friends or profession -as your mate did.
Far from being ashamed of myself for challenging him -I would have far more reason for shame had I not. You two appear to know him well. From what I've seen of him in here, I have no wish to know him at all. Despite your efforts to assume the moral high-ground and portray me as the villain, it is your friends own words & actions over months that have bought him his dues, not me.
Thanks Jet_A1 -I still have absolutely no desire to fly anything remotely resembling what might loosely be referred to as an 'airliner', as I thought I had made clear earlier. I have no wish to remain airborne for 18 hours -don't assume it to be otherwise.
I have nothing further to add to this discussion. You will just have to play amongst yourselves or if necessary, with yourself.
Far from being ashamed of myself for challenging him -I would have far more reason for shame had I not. You two appear to know him well. From what I've seen of him in here, I have no wish to know him at all. Despite your efforts to assume the moral high-ground and portray me as the villain, it is your friends own words & actions over months that have bought him his dues, not me.
Thanks Jet_A1 -I still have absolutely no desire to fly anything remotely resembling what might loosely be referred to as an 'airliner', as I thought I had made clear earlier. I have no wish to remain airborne for 18 hours -don't assume it to be otherwise.
I have nothing further to add to this discussion. You will just have to play amongst yourselves or if necessary, with yourself.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
No KiwiBlue......you began to challenge his point of view...and then decided to get personal, so please don't try to justify your comments on the basis of "country, family, friends or profession" because last time I looked...there were no specific points made with regards to ANY of this..until you decided it was time to sling the mud.
We all have our views relating to a great number of issues that affect all of us to a greater or lessor degree, the difference is, most of us on here can contribute without resorting to name calling.
Moral high ground I think not...just some robust intelligent debate.
BTW...I'm as Kiwi as anyone here..
We all have our views relating to a great number of issues that affect all of us to a greater or lessor degree, the difference is, most of us on here can contribute without resorting to name calling.
Moral high ground I think not...just some robust intelligent debate.
BTW...I'm as Kiwi as anyone here..
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Briefly...
FL440
Well I'm not going to tell you who I am unless you do the same (although it isn't hard to work out). So far this year (since June) we have employed 12 new pilots. Some of those have already moved on to bigger types, plus we are expanding, so we need more.
The rest of your post is too moronic to be worth responding to.
Cloud Cutter
Pot calling the kettle black... you seem more than happy to fling "vinigar" (sic) around.
Kiwi Blue
Do please stop acting like a spoiled infant. When have I denigrated your friends, family or country? Being a little precious, aren't we? And as for "arrogance and scorn", your last post is an object lesson in both. Grow up.
FL440
so why not tell us who you work for and how many people you have given their first big job in the last 12 months......then we really will be able to understand... and compare.
The rest of your post is too moronic to be worth responding to.
Cloud Cutter
Pot calling the kettle black... you seem more than happy to fling "vinigar" (sic) around.
Kiwi Blue
Do please stop acting like a spoiled infant. When have I denigrated your friends, family or country? Being a little precious, aren't we? And as for "arrogance and scorn", your last post is an object lesson in both. Grow up.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NZ
Posts: 835
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, yes, we all know I can't spell. You're entitled to that opinion, but I don't think it's correct. Anyway, that's for others to judge. That's it from me, have a good weekend all, including you remoak.
Over and out.
Over and out.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Tropopause
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remoak -
Nope, i dont work for Air Nelson
if thats who you were refering to?
sorry wasnt trying to be 'moronic' was just trying to add a little humour to a thread thats gotten a little bit bitter and twisted!
With the pilots that you have been employing is that due to company expansion or other pilots moving on?
Nope, i dont work for Air Nelson
if thats who you were refering to?sorry wasnt trying to be 'moronic' was just trying to add a little humour to a thread thats gotten a little bit bitter and twisted!
With the pilots that you have been employing is that due to company expansion or other pilots moving on?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FL440
Actually what I meant was it isn't hard to work out who I am... not your good self - sorry.
A bit of both. Hiring over here is fierce - it's a bit like it was in the '80s. Some regional airlines have hired in excess of 250 pilots in the last year, again partly due to expansion, partly due to folk moving on to bigger types. And that is REGIONAL airlines... I guess that is why I find NZ hiring figures somewhat underwhelming.
In our case, in order to attract new pilots, we are substantially increasing pay packages, which I am sure would be music to the ears of NJS pilots. Our crews didn't ask for it - we just did it, because we recognise that we need to safeguard our workforce for the long term. In addition to that, we are also in the process of improving conditions - better hotels, friendlier rosters, more time off, better equipment in the aircraft, and so on. Again. we are doing this without being asked, for the same reasons. We take the view that we want to be known as a good employer, and we want our company to be a good place to work. Achieve that, and pilots will beat a path to your door... it is the part of the Southwest Airlines model that most low-cost operations conveniently forget. Our company ethos is to ensure that lifestyle is considered on an equal footing with profit.
Why, you might ask, would we do such a thing? Well, it comes down to the fact that for most pilots, once they have achieved a reasonable level of employment (say, their first jet), lifestyle issues start to dominate and the desire to fly the bigger jet starts to recede. Most pilots who have been in the airlines for more than five years are mostly concerned with lifestyle, once you get to ten years in the job, 90% of pilots are primarily concerned with lifestyle issues.
Pretty unusual business model, eh? Not much like Oz or NZ... maybe now you can see why such nonsense as the AN thing, or the various other hiring practices in NZ, don't find much resonance with me.
I come back to NZ every 6-8 weeks for a break, and I often test the water with various employers, partly to keep track of hiring trends but also to find out how they work. In general terms, they are years behind the rest of the world in terms of their processes.
Anyway... enough already. A good weekend to all, including cloud cutter!
Actually what I meant was it isn't hard to work out who I am... not your good self - sorry.
With the pilots that you have been employing is that due to company expansion or other pilots moving on?
In our case, in order to attract new pilots, we are substantially increasing pay packages, which I am sure would be music to the ears of NJS pilots. Our crews didn't ask for it - we just did it, because we recognise that we need to safeguard our workforce for the long term. In addition to that, we are also in the process of improving conditions - better hotels, friendlier rosters, more time off, better equipment in the aircraft, and so on. Again. we are doing this without being asked, for the same reasons. We take the view that we want to be known as a good employer, and we want our company to be a good place to work. Achieve that, and pilots will beat a path to your door... it is the part of the Southwest Airlines model that most low-cost operations conveniently forget. Our company ethos is to ensure that lifestyle is considered on an equal footing with profit.
Why, you might ask, would we do such a thing? Well, it comes down to the fact that for most pilots, once they have achieved a reasonable level of employment (say, their first jet), lifestyle issues start to dominate and the desire to fly the bigger jet starts to recede. Most pilots who have been in the airlines for more than five years are mostly concerned with lifestyle, once you get to ten years in the job, 90% of pilots are primarily concerned with lifestyle issues.
Pretty unusual business model, eh? Not much like Oz or NZ... maybe now you can see why such nonsense as the AN thing, or the various other hiring practices in NZ, don't find much resonance with me.
I come back to NZ every 6-8 weeks for a break, and I often test the water with various employers, partly to keep track of hiring trends but also to find out how they work. In general terms, they are years behind the rest of the world in terms of their processes.
Anyway... enough already. A good weekend to all, including cloud cutter!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Tropopause
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ahhh,
Still dont know who you work for but thats alright!
I guess the only thing that explains the New Zealand industry numbers is purely the size of the 'triangle'. I guess most of the companies in New Zealand have not more than 20 aircraft to their name.
Also i would say that alot of pilots in NZ especially Eagle Nelson are using it as experience to move onto jet rather than settle down as a long term career. I am sure there are a few people in Eagle and Nelson that are looking at a career but i wouldnt say the pay would be good enough long term to stay there.
Agree with your comments regarding as pilots grow older priorities change, yep fresh outa school all you want is that 747 a340 etc etc, then you get older and realise there is more to life than sitting behind the wheel, Hey its a great job but theres a lot to life other than just flying.
So agreed the 'perks' of the job start to become more important....i am guessing here that you have 146's and other jet aircraft in your fleet so im also sure you dont have a junior bunch as such behind the wheel and hence why in your company 'perks' (i use that term loosely) are a major part of your companies work/employment policy, which i admire and certainly im sure some NZ companies would do well to adopt.
Another thing that i dont think alot of companies in NZ have realised yet (maybe you have) is that if you keep the pilots happy then generally they stick around....pay etc, if their happy then they have the companies interests at heart (good for everyone) also it must be cheaper for a company to keep staff turnover at a low rate due to the cost of training and new staff etc etc
I guess New Zealand is just a smaller market and is behaving in a reactive manner rather than a proactive manner? Also maybe the companies here are well aware that they are 'used' as a stepping stone so have made no attempt over the years to put policies in place to try and keep pilot retension to a maximum?
Ps i know this doesnt justify how some businesses operate but i guess until the hand is forced....you know how it is im sure.
Still dont know who you work for but thats alright!
I guess the only thing that explains the New Zealand industry numbers is purely the size of the 'triangle'. I guess most of the companies in New Zealand have not more than 20 aircraft to their name.
Also i would say that alot of pilots in NZ especially Eagle Nelson are using it as experience to move onto jet rather than settle down as a long term career. I am sure there are a few people in Eagle and Nelson that are looking at a career but i wouldnt say the pay would be good enough long term to stay there.
Agree with your comments regarding as pilots grow older priorities change, yep fresh outa school all you want is that 747 a340 etc etc, then you get older and realise there is more to life than sitting behind the wheel, Hey its a great job but theres a lot to life other than just flying.
So agreed the 'perks' of the job start to become more important....i am guessing here that you have 146's and other jet aircraft in your fleet so im also sure you dont have a junior bunch as such behind the wheel and hence why in your company 'perks' (i use that term loosely) are a major part of your companies work/employment policy, which i admire and certainly im sure some NZ companies would do well to adopt.
Another thing that i dont think alot of companies in NZ have realised yet (maybe you have) is that if you keep the pilots happy then generally they stick around....pay etc, if their happy then they have the companies interests at heart (good for everyone) also it must be cheaper for a company to keep staff turnover at a low rate due to the cost of training and new staff etc etc
I guess New Zealand is just a smaller market and is behaving in a reactive manner rather than a proactive manner? Also maybe the companies here are well aware that they are 'used' as a stepping stone so have made no attempt over the years to put policies in place to try and keep pilot retension to a maximum?
Ps i know this doesnt justify how some businesses operate but i guess until the hand is forced....you know how it is im sure.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NZ
Posts: 835
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why, you might ask, would we do such a thing? Well, it comes down to the fact that for most pilots, once they have achieved a reasonable level of employment (say, their first jet), lifestyle issues start to dominate and the desire to fly the bigger jet starts to recede. Most pilots who have been in the airlines for more than five years are mostly concerned with lifestyle, once you get to ten years in the job, 90% of pilots are primarily concerned with lifestyle issues.
Thankyou for your constructive input
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Seems to be no shortage of Kiwi pilot's in Oz!
Are you gonna take some of them back...
Are you gonna take some of them back...
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FL440
Correct on the fleet, however I am now looking to recruit some people with very low hours... in my experience, it builds stability into the F/O side of the operation as they will generally stay for three years or so before they move on (and of course they are bonded for those three years in any case). We used to recruit 250 hour, brand-new CPLs onto the 146 fleet in my previous company, and generally found them to be excellent.
You have ABSOLUTELY hit the nail on the head. In my last company, it was conservatively estimated that we had spent over 1.5 million pounds on training directly attributable to higher than normal pilot turnover. The reason that the estimate was conservative, was that the bean counters got very scared when they realised how big the figure really was, and low-balled it. And, as you say, happy pilots go the extra mile... proven to save millions over a year.
I'm afraid NZ is slow to adopt modern employment techniques. The current hiring mentality in some airlines has changed little since the '80s. As you say, they have made no attempt to retain pilots... they believe that it is inevitable that pilots will leave. I agree that some will leave, but many will stay if the lifestyle/pay issues are sorted. It is perfectly possible to structure a salary package that rewards loyalty - but they simply don't bother.
Now revisiting the AN 50 IF thing for a minute, the point about that policy is that, quite apart from amounting to a discrimatory employment practice (as it has no demonstrable impact on any employment parameter that matters), it is preventing AN from hiring some people who would probably stay with them forever, just to get the gig. When I did actually apply to AN, back in the early 90s, I got knocked back on that requirement, and so did at least five Kiwi mates of mine who were flying in Europe. All of us just wanted to go home, we all had over 5000 hours including lots of jet time, and we were all experienced skippers. We would have happily stayed with AN to get the base and the lifestyle we wanted -but they didn't even offer us interviews. By comparison, Origin Pacific were completely different in their approach.
As it happens, we all ended up being glad that we didn't end up in AN as our careers in Europe really took off, but AN missed a golden opportunity to get some experienced people who would have stayed for a long time.
The point I am making is that a forward-thinking airline will find ways to include experienced, capable pilots, rather than trying to find ways to exclude them. It is a very "old school" mindset that you see in NZ aviation.
Cloud Cutter
I couldn't agree more. It was interesting that flybe in the UK essentially equalised the payscales on turboprops and jets a few years ago. They realised that they needed to make the turboprop more attractive in oder to retain pilots, so they raised the pay dramatically. They probably saved half of the increase in less training costs (fewer turboprop to jet conversions), and the other half in the increased effectiveness of very happy turboprop crews.
Imagine if Link carriers were making the same pay as mainline 737 drivers... now what would that do to the employment picture in NZ? It works in Europe...
i am guessing here that you have 146's and other jet aircraft in your fleet so im also sure you dont have a junior bunch as such behind the wheel
Another thing that i dont think alot of companies in NZ have realised yet (maybe you have) is that if you keep the pilots happy then generally they stick around....pay etc, if their happy then they have the companies interests at heart (good for everyone) also it must be cheaper for a company to keep staff turnover at a low rate due to the cost of training and new staff etc etc
I guess New Zealand is just a smaller market and is behaving in a reactive manner rather than a proactive manner? Also maybe the companies here are well aware that they are 'used' as a stepping stone so have made no attempt over the years to put policies in place to try and keep pilot retension to a maximum?
Now revisiting the AN 50 IF thing for a minute, the point about that policy is that, quite apart from amounting to a discrimatory employment practice (as it has no demonstrable impact on any employment parameter that matters), it is preventing AN from hiring some people who would probably stay with them forever, just to get the gig. When I did actually apply to AN, back in the early 90s, I got knocked back on that requirement, and so did at least five Kiwi mates of mine who were flying in Europe. All of us just wanted to go home, we all had over 5000 hours including lots of jet time, and we were all experienced skippers. We would have happily stayed with AN to get the base and the lifestyle we wanted -but they didn't even offer us interviews. By comparison, Origin Pacific were completely different in their approach.
As it happens, we all ended up being glad that we didn't end up in AN as our careers in Europe really took off, but AN missed a golden opportunity to get some experienced people who would have stayed for a long time.
The point I am making is that a forward-thinking airline will find ways to include experienced, capable pilots, rather than trying to find ways to exclude them. It is a very "old school" mindset that you see in NZ aviation.
Cloud Cutter
I must admit it does baffle me how many NZ airlines will screw their pilots down on employment conditions, only to shoot themselves in the foot when it comes to recruitment and retention.
Imagine if Link carriers were making the same pay as mainline 737 drivers... now what would that do to the employment picture in NZ? It works in Europe...
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: back to the land of small pay and big bills
Age: 50
Posts: 1,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its not what you initially get payed. Most starting salaries are reasonable enough. Its just a great need to have regular increases..like first, second, third year FO pay..incentives for ATP subjects..First, second, third year captains pay etc... Allowances etc..get creative..Everyone loves to get called in to the managers office and told..you are doing a great job..have a pay rise.
Then you feel bad when you eventually move on!!
IMHO
Then you feel bad when you eventually move on!!
IMHO
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey guys
I was just wondering, and I'm sure people on here will know. What are the minimum requiremnts for Air NS? And what are the realistic requirements?
I'm talking about twin time, totale time, ATO time, and I know about the 50 hour minimum IFR in NZ time but are realistic requirements more (like say 100 IFR NZ time)
The reason I'm asking is I cant find a website that says anything and I've heard many vastly conflicting things. One guys says 10 hours ATO time while another says 100 hours ATO time. Both these guys are not inside so its all speculation, would anyone on here be able to clear this up?
Thanks in advance
I was just wondering, and I'm sure people on here will know. What are the minimum requiremnts for Air NS? And what are the realistic requirements?
I'm talking about twin time, totale time, ATO time, and I know about the 50 hour minimum IFR in NZ time but are realistic requirements more (like say 100 IFR NZ time)
The reason I'm asking is I cant find a website that says anything and I've heard many vastly conflicting things. One guys says 10 hours ATO time while another says 100 hours ATO time. Both these guys are not inside so its all speculation, would anyone on here be able to clear this up?
Thanks in advance
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Somewhere in Indo...
Age: 48
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hiring over here is fierce - it's a bit like it was in the '80s. Some regional airlines have hired in excess of 250 pilots in the last year, again partly due to expansion, partly due to folk moving on to bigger types. And that is REGIONAL airlines... I guess that is why I find NZ hiring figures somewhat underwhelming.
NZ has what... something like 4 to 5 million... with around 1/4 of that living in one place...
How many people live in Europe?