Rule changes at the ALAEA
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Austarlia
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rule changes at the ALAEA
Any-one heard anything about rule changes coming at the ALAEA regarding eligibility for membership?
Last edited by ellie1; 8th May 2010 at 11:09. Reason: Clarification
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.
Posts: 1,116
Received 13 Likes
on
8 Posts
In what regard? Rules governing members / officials?
The assoc itself is bound by the same laws of any industrial advocacy group.
And no, I have heard nothing as yet.
The assoc itself is bound by the same laws of any industrial advocacy group.
And no, I have heard nothing as yet.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Here and There in Australia
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Change the rules
ellie 1,
Could it be to cover Flight Attendants?
Or is it to cover people running for high office that don't actually meet the criteria...
Take your pick...
Then, it could be both.
P2G
Could it be to cover Flight Attendants?
Or is it to cover people running for high office that don't actually meet the criteria...
Take your pick...
Then, it could be both.
P2G
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll just be brief.
Our rules essentially are for us to cover LAMEs and all Forstaff employees. Changes to terminology in our industry now have persons eligable to carry out functions previously only delegated to a person licenced to certify.....
Now days, it is not necessarily called a licence. It may be an approval or just simply an authorised person. We are changing the eligibility rule so we can maintain coverage of those persons who carry out the functions that were always performed by LAMEs when the rules were registered in 1964.
A number of unions and Qantas have objected formally to the change. What makes me angry is that one of them recently signed off on a new EBA that expanded the scope of work that unlicenced Engineers could do to include functions previously only carried out by LAMEs.
Our members fought the good fight at Qf, won pay rises for all that were extended to other sections of the workforce and in order to get the same result, we were stabbed in the back in the process by having our work taken away. What goes around comes around.
cheers
Steve
Our rules essentially are for us to cover LAMEs and all Forstaff employees. Changes to terminology in our industry now have persons eligable to carry out functions previously only delegated to a person licenced to certify.....
Now days, it is not necessarily called a licence. It may be an approval or just simply an authorised person. We are changing the eligibility rule so we can maintain coverage of those persons who carry out the functions that were always performed by LAMEs when the rules were registered in 1964.
A number of unions and Qantas have objected formally to the change. What makes me angry is that one of them recently signed off on a new EBA that expanded the scope of work that unlicenced Engineers could do to include functions previously only carried out by LAMEs.
Our members fought the good fight at Qf, won pay rises for all that were extended to other sections of the workforce and in order to get the same result, we were stabbed in the back in the process by having our work taken away. What goes around comes around.
cheers
Steve
