B1900D or DHC8-300?
The Fed contract is better
From what I've heard their fees are, I'm buggered to know how they can even afford to pay for advice to be able to negotiate a contract to start with.
Oh,........ I know they just sit back undermining their fellow pilots and let the ALPA guys do the hard yards then accept a similar deal to the ALPA one.
Meanwhile back to the topic.
The salary at either place doesn't tell the whole story. Allowances and much quicker progression can make the Eagle deal OK from what I've been told. Either one not a bad choice.
Last edited by 27/09; 12th Dec 2012 at 08:29.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: .
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Better for who? The company I'd say. Divide and rule is all the Fed contract is about.
From what I've heard their fees are, I'm buggered to know how they can even afford to pay for advice to be able to negotiate a contract to start with.
Oh,........ I know they just sit back undermining their fellow pilots and let the ALPA guys do the hard yards then accept a similar deal to the ALPA one.
From what I've heard their fees are, I'm buggered to know how they can even afford to pay for advice to be able to negotiate a contract to start with.
Oh,........ I know they just sit back undermining their fellow pilots and let the ALPA guys do the hard yards then accept a similar deal to the ALPA one.
Ask the guys that have ditched ALPA for the Feds at Nelson. Current Fed contract has some big improvements over the ALPA one.
Blah Blah Blah,
We're getting off topic a bit here but I think you missed my point. I don't need to talk to anyone to know what's better or worse. I know what I'm talking about.
The Feds contract is purely there as a divide and rule tactic. Have a look and see where the Feds came from. Their contract might be better right now, I don't know and don't care. I don't work there, but I do care when there's deliberate attempts to undermine terms and conditions of pilots as a whole.
From what I've been told, as it is right at the moment, the Feds don't have enough penetration at Air Nelson to really have any impact when it comes to negotiation time, which is something the company would dearly love as then they can play one group off against the other. If the Feds contract is better as you say, it's no wonder the company has done this to encourage short sighted people to jump across to the Feds. Short term gain with long term pain is all I see for the Air Nelson pilot group.
So to sum it all up, the Feds contract - better for the company I'd say.
We're getting off topic a bit here but I think you missed my point. I don't need to talk to anyone to know what's better or worse. I know what I'm talking about.
The Feds contract is purely there as a divide and rule tactic. Have a look and see where the Feds came from. Their contract might be better right now, I don't know and don't care. I don't work there, but I do care when there's deliberate attempts to undermine terms and conditions of pilots as a whole.
From what I've been told, as it is right at the moment, the Feds don't have enough penetration at Air Nelson to really have any impact when it comes to negotiation time, which is something the company would dearly love as then they can play one group off against the other. If the Feds contract is better as you say, it's no wonder the company has done this to encourage short sighted people to jump across to the Feds. Short term gain with long term pain is all I see for the Air Nelson pilot group.
So to sum it all up, the Feds contract - better for the company I'd say.
Last edited by 27/09; 12th Dec 2012 at 21:06.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: DOWNUNDER
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
27/9 You have no idea. ALPA has turned its back on its Air Nelson pilots and therefore there has been many ALPA pilots jumping ship. One in particular was a negotiator when we went on strike a few years back. The reason he went was nominal pay. The feds negotiated for FOs years of service to be recognised when starting out on command pay. One ex ALPA guy got a 50000+ pay rise when he finally got into the left hand seat as a Fed. ALPA gave up nominal pay in favour for other things. Probably the instructers pay going up. Others have left because the FOs pay on the Fed contract is better because the Fed Captains negotiated a lesser pay increase for themselves in exchange for more of an increase for the FOs. If ALPA wanted a unified pilot group they would not turn their backs on their members and charge pilots up the ass for the pleasure.
Bongo,
Yep, I do have no idea what's the deal at Air NSN.
However I will make four points.
One; A good, strong, fair union is a necessary evil to ensure a fair deal for all, however unfortunately it cannot be all things to all members.
Two; The members are the union whether it be ALPA or the Feds. ALPA or the Feds are not some separate entity from their members. You get who you choose as reps. All members need to be involved, if there's apathy you get what you deserve. Like in any democracy.
Three; When it comes to negotiations, the negotiators work out a deal with the company, the members vote, majority rule wins the day. The deal get accepted or rejected. Everything is a compromise, there are swings and round-a-bouts. You give something to gain something, and not everyone is happy with the outcome. Jumping ship because you're not happy is very short sighted. Refer to point two, get involved to influence the outcome.
Four; The Feds originated when Air NZ wanted a different deal on the 747-400. If my memory serves me correctly the Feds or it's predecessor was set up by Air NZ and was used to try and weaken ALPA. The Feds are still being used today to weaken the collective bargaining ability of the various Air NZ pilot groups.
To finish, you seem to see ALPA as a separate entity when you say ALPA gave up nominal pay, and ALPA turned it's back on it's members. The members, that's all the ALPA pilots voted on the agreement. Refer to points two and three above.
Good on the Feds for making improvements to conditions, however I suspect the both the ALPA and Fed contracts have areas where each is superior to the other. Swings and round-a-bouts, refer to point three.
Yes, ALPA subs are high, but I fail to see how the Federation can deliver the same level of support as ALPA does to it's members on the subs the Fed members pay. Does the Federation get money or support from somewhere else? Could the Federation provide the support like ALPA has to the Pacific Blue pilot in the Queenstown incident?
ALPA has a good history of helping/supporting members in a wide variety of ways and if nothing else provides a good "insurance" for its' members. Money well spent.
Yep, I do have no idea what's the deal at Air NSN.
However I will make four points.
One; A good, strong, fair union is a necessary evil to ensure a fair deal for all, however unfortunately it cannot be all things to all members.
Two; The members are the union whether it be ALPA or the Feds. ALPA or the Feds are not some separate entity from their members. You get who you choose as reps. All members need to be involved, if there's apathy you get what you deserve. Like in any democracy.
Three; When it comes to negotiations, the negotiators work out a deal with the company, the members vote, majority rule wins the day. The deal get accepted or rejected. Everything is a compromise, there are swings and round-a-bouts. You give something to gain something, and not everyone is happy with the outcome. Jumping ship because you're not happy is very short sighted. Refer to point two, get involved to influence the outcome.
Four; The Feds originated when Air NZ wanted a different deal on the 747-400. If my memory serves me correctly the Feds or it's predecessor was set up by Air NZ and was used to try and weaken ALPA. The Feds are still being used today to weaken the collective bargaining ability of the various Air NZ pilot groups.
To finish, you seem to see ALPA as a separate entity when you say ALPA gave up nominal pay, and ALPA turned it's back on it's members. The members, that's all the ALPA pilots voted on the agreement. Refer to points two and three above.
Good on the Feds for making improvements to conditions, however I suspect the both the ALPA and Fed contracts have areas where each is superior to the other. Swings and round-a-bouts, refer to point three.
Yes, ALPA subs are high, but I fail to see how the Federation can deliver the same level of support as ALPA does to it's members on the subs the Fed members pay. Does the Federation get money or support from somewhere else? Could the Federation provide the support like ALPA has to the Pacific Blue pilot in the Queenstown incident?
ALPA has a good history of helping/supporting members in a wide variety of ways and if nothing else provides a good "insurance" for its' members. Money well spent.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: waitahanui rip
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any truth to the rumour that the Alpa leave bank is in the red over 500k?
The Feds also have plenty of legal support when and if needed, both here and overseas. They have no need to have a couple of full time lawyers taking our subs and annual leave.
CL
The Feds also have plenty of legal support when and if needed, both here and overseas. They have no need to have a couple of full time lawyers taking our subs and annual leave.
CL
Join Date: May 2005
Location: DOWNUNDER
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
27/9 I used to agree with alot of what you say and have made the same arguements.
However is it fair that a Training Captain on ten year command pay plus their training allowance get a big payrise compared to a FO struggling to make ends meet. No. What should have happened is the majority(ie FOs) should have taken precedence over the minority. This however was voted in due to the apathy of those who remained in ALPA which you elude to in your second point. I sit next to these people everyday. They whinge and moan but do not the balls do anything about it such as get involved or leave for a better deal.
No union is a separate indentify from its members but I never had a say on who are my negotiators would be at ALPA. I applied and never got look in to be one. This I believe is because the greater ALPA leadership has an agenda that involves mainly the jet ANZ fleet. They select negotiaters that will follow the direction they want things to go not the direction the members want. Many ALPA members ratified the current ALPA contract as they were sick and tired of the time it was taking to get their payrise.
At the Feds everyone was offered a spot on the negotiaters course. There is regular email debates about a variety of issues that are listened to and responded to by the leadership. Every email I sent to my ALPA leadership went unanswered! More importantly the Jet Feds leave Air NSN Fed leadership to go for whatever they want offering support if it is needed.
Lets talk about support. How come when I was facing a trip to the boss's office for big chat I could not get legal support from ALPA? No was the word they told me. Yeah thats great support. I guess you have to blantantly break the rules or shag a FA half your age to get a return on your investment at ALPA? Whatever happened to the FO from the shagging incident? Thats right he didn't sleep with her but he is still on the Dash and will stay there because future emplolyers think he was equally resonsible for that mess. We as a membership should have gone to the wall for that guy but the apathy 27/9 mentions lead to the big pineapple he currently lives with. Eventually the Captain did pretty well through excellent ALPA support. But he was a negotiater!
As for the devide and rule tactic 27/9 refers to all I can say is most of loyality I have shown to other pilots has been thrown back in my face so read my previous comments re dogs and loyality.
OK back on thread.
For you new pilots hoping for a start the point I would like to make is take what you can fleet wise. If you get a choice go for the one that is best for you. Either one will get you further down you career path. As for the contract do your research which must include more than reading this forum. 27/9 says themself that they only suspect the ALPA contract is better. They do not work at Air NSN so how can they offer you any real insight. If you read some of my previous posts you will find I was a big advocate of ALPA until I was left to defend myself and I started to see through the BS. So I too have a tainted view. It is up to you to make up your own mind and representatives from both organisations will be available to you all as will both contracts.
However is it fair that a Training Captain on ten year command pay plus their training allowance get a big payrise compared to a FO struggling to make ends meet. No. What should have happened is the majority(ie FOs) should have taken precedence over the minority. This however was voted in due to the apathy of those who remained in ALPA which you elude to in your second point. I sit next to these people everyday. They whinge and moan but do not the balls do anything about it such as get involved or leave for a better deal.
No union is a separate indentify from its members but I never had a say on who are my negotiators would be at ALPA. I applied and never got look in to be one. This I believe is because the greater ALPA leadership has an agenda that involves mainly the jet ANZ fleet. They select negotiaters that will follow the direction they want things to go not the direction the members want. Many ALPA members ratified the current ALPA contract as they were sick and tired of the time it was taking to get their payrise.
At the Feds everyone was offered a spot on the negotiaters course. There is regular email debates about a variety of issues that are listened to and responded to by the leadership. Every email I sent to my ALPA leadership went unanswered! More importantly the Jet Feds leave Air NSN Fed leadership to go for whatever they want offering support if it is needed.
Lets talk about support. How come when I was facing a trip to the boss's office for big chat I could not get legal support from ALPA? No was the word they told me. Yeah thats great support. I guess you have to blantantly break the rules or shag a FA half your age to get a return on your investment at ALPA? Whatever happened to the FO from the shagging incident? Thats right he didn't sleep with her but he is still on the Dash and will stay there because future emplolyers think he was equally resonsible for that mess. We as a membership should have gone to the wall for that guy but the apathy 27/9 mentions lead to the big pineapple he currently lives with. Eventually the Captain did pretty well through excellent ALPA support. But he was a negotiater!
As for the devide and rule tactic 27/9 refers to all I can say is most of loyality I have shown to other pilots has been thrown back in my face so read my previous comments re dogs and loyality.
OK back on thread.
For you new pilots hoping for a start the point I would like to make is take what you can fleet wise. If you get a choice go for the one that is best for you. Either one will get you further down you career path. As for the contract do your research which must include more than reading this forum. 27/9 says themself that they only suspect the ALPA contract is better. They do not work at Air NSN so how can they offer you any real insight. If you read some of my previous posts you will find I was a big advocate of ALPA until I was left to defend myself and I started to see through the BS. So I too have a tainted view. It is up to you to make up your own mind and representatives from both organisations will be available to you all as will both contracts.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: DOWNUNDER
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The legal support at the feds is funded by years of wise investment of membership fees and not wasting it on BS cases.
Feds
Hi Bongo,
I just tried to make a post explaining a lot of the questions around the Feds. As Im new it has to go via a moderator first.
Would you mind just letting guys know that Ive written something and that it should be showing up shortly?
Ive gone through how the Feds cover legal costs etc.
Cheers
Feds
Hi Bongo,
I just tried to make a post explaining a lot of the questions around the Feds. As Im new it has to go via a moderator first.
Would you mind just letting guys know that Ive written something and that it should be showing up shortly?
Ive gone through how the Feds cover legal costs etc.
Cheers
Last edited by Bongo Bus Driver; 16th Dec 2012 at 06:56. Reason: From a new member via PM
Hi all,
New here so go easy!
27/09 - I can answer any questions you may have about the Feds. The question is will you believe what I say? Often I tell people how the Feds operate and they simply dont believe me. Their loss.
Anyway, here goes. First of all the Feds weren't set up by Air New Zealand. A heap of ALPA members left for various reasons (up to them to explain why, I wont put words in their mouths) when the 747-400 was introduced. There were issues around the demands ALPA was making around the introduction, but also general issues with ALPA that caused people to leave. Whatever the reason, those pilots were entitled to make their own decision. They set up a new union. A second union was set up a few years later. Eventually these two unions joined together and called themselves the Federation of Air New Zealand Pilots. Beyond recognising these unions there wasn't any input from the company.
Anyway, you had a question around legal support, I presume to mean for an incident? The Feds negotiated a clause in their contract to include provision of costs for any on duty legal incident. This was negotiated for as the Feds decided that it was to be a high priority. This means that all legal fees stemming from an incident will be paid by the company. As such there is no need for the Feds to have large funds available to pay lawyers. They are members of an international pilot association (there are other options out there apart from IFALPA) in case help is needed overseas. All this means that if there is an incident, such as the Pac Blue one that was mentioned, then the Feds get a lawyer and send the bills to the company.
Earlier you asked how the Feds could afford to pay lawyers for advice around contract negotiation. Quite simply they have a significant amount of cash that has built up over the years. This is used to pay lawyers as and when required. They dont have lawyers on staff with all the associated costs.
A point to note is that the Feds work solely for Air New Zealand pilots. As such they have a very clearly defined role. They work on improving their contract and supporting their members with any issues that they may have, such as say a personal grievance.
Also worth noting is the mention of the ALPA leave bank. The Feds operate in a very different way. Each member gives up leave from their annual total. This makes a pool. Each principle officer in the Feds is allocated a percentage that their position is deemed to be worth. They then are recompensed for their work by that percentage. ie if someone is deemed to do 20% of the Feds work then they will get 20% of the leave days given up by the members. This means that there is no deficit. No one can be owed money or leave days.
Final point Ill make is that the Feds have insurances that equal or surpass what ALPA provide. Salary continuance, life, loss of licence. These have actually been used and there havent been any problems.
Well thats my point of view. Whether you believe me or not is up to you. Feel free to ask me any questions on here or pm me.
New here so go easy!
27/09 - I can answer any questions you may have about the Feds. The question is will you believe what I say? Often I tell people how the Feds operate and they simply dont believe me. Their loss.
Anyway, here goes. First of all the Feds weren't set up by Air New Zealand. A heap of ALPA members left for various reasons (up to them to explain why, I wont put words in their mouths) when the 747-400 was introduced. There were issues around the demands ALPA was making around the introduction, but also general issues with ALPA that caused people to leave. Whatever the reason, those pilots were entitled to make their own decision. They set up a new union. A second union was set up a few years later. Eventually these two unions joined together and called themselves the Federation of Air New Zealand Pilots. Beyond recognising these unions there wasn't any input from the company.
Anyway, you had a question around legal support, I presume to mean for an incident? The Feds negotiated a clause in their contract to include provision of costs for any on duty legal incident. This was negotiated for as the Feds decided that it was to be a high priority. This means that all legal fees stemming from an incident will be paid by the company. As such there is no need for the Feds to have large funds available to pay lawyers. They are members of an international pilot association (there are other options out there apart from IFALPA) in case help is needed overseas. All this means that if there is an incident, such as the Pac Blue one that was mentioned, then the Feds get a lawyer and send the bills to the company.
Earlier you asked how the Feds could afford to pay lawyers for advice around contract negotiation. Quite simply they have a significant amount of cash that has built up over the years. This is used to pay lawyers as and when required. They dont have lawyers on staff with all the associated costs.
A point to note is that the Feds work solely for Air New Zealand pilots. As such they have a very clearly defined role. They work on improving their contract and supporting their members with any issues that they may have, such as say a personal grievance.
Also worth noting is the mention of the ALPA leave bank. The Feds operate in a very different way. Each member gives up leave from their annual total. This makes a pool. Each principle officer in the Feds is allocated a percentage that their position is deemed to be worth. They then are recompensed for their work by that percentage. ie if someone is deemed to do 20% of the Feds work then they will get 20% of the leave days given up by the members. This means that there is no deficit. No one can be owed money or leave days.
Final point Ill make is that the Feds have insurances that equal or surpass what ALPA provide. Salary continuance, life, loss of licence. These have actually been used and there havent been any problems.
Well thats my point of view. Whether you believe me or not is up to you. Feel free to ask me any questions on here or pm me.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
27/09,
Your post on page two is about the best summary of pilot industrial relations in Air NZ Jet/Link that I have seen. People always bitch about "The Union", but as you say, WE ARE THE UNION. Get involved! The only winner when pilots walk from ALPA is the company.
Your post on page two is about the best summary of pilot industrial relations in Air NZ Jet/Link that I have seen. People always bitch about "The Union", but as you say, WE ARE THE UNION. Get involved! The only winner when pilots walk from ALPA is the company.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: DOWNUNDER
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought Tarmac12 was trying to decide whether to accept a position on the 1900 or Dash. Surely lifestyle, terms and conditions is a big part of their decision? Thus the debate as to which contract offers the best deal for tarmac and others in the same position.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: NZ
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lifestyle and terms and conditions are definitely on most people's agenda when considering career moves, however do any of the successful RTG candidates get to pick and choose the operator they wish to fly for?
And even though it loathes me to dredge up unionism (again), are there even any Feds at Eagle?
With respect,
Healey 3000
And even though it loathes me to dredge up unionism (again), are there even any Feds at Eagle?
With respect,
Healey 3000
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Victoria
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Second hand from HR
I have 2 friends who interviewed in the last couple of months for the links and HR said the following to them.
If you don't have 500 multi or 100 hours for a charter operator, Eagle
If you do have the multi or 100 hours Charter you can choose between Eagle and Nelson. They both have vacancies to fill.
If you have turbine time or a lot of multi AND 100 Charter you can bid for Mount Cook. With a long wait until ground school starts.
If you don't have 500 multi or 100 hours for a charter operator, Eagle
If you do have the multi or 100 hours Charter you can choose between Eagle and Nelson. They both have vacancies to fill.
If you have turbine time or a lot of multi AND 100 Charter you can bid for Mount Cook. With a long wait until ground school starts.
