GA in the news for all the wrong reasons
Thread Starter
GA in the news for all the wrong reasons
Articles like this really don't help things much....maybe AOPA will want to do a rebuttal:
https://www.news.com.au/travel/trave...344c8422a94907
https://www.news.com.au/travel/trave...344c8422a94907
Why does there need to be a rebuttal?
Should you believe there are untruths in the article I would suggest it is your knowledge that is deficient, for what it is worth the scenarios contained in the articles align with my own experience.
CC
Should you believe there are untruths in the article I would suggest it is your knowledge that is deficient, for what it is worth the scenarios contained in the articles align with my own experience.
CC
Some things never change. My first GA job over 50 years ago saw me sleeping in a converted shearing shed in a one pub bush town, sharing with some rather, shall we say, 'rough diamonds' (today we'd call them bogans on the run). Air conditioning was only for the wealthy back then - few country pubs had it. Many a sleepless sweaty night spent swatting mosquitoes.
I was lucky in that I clocked up 800 single engine then 600 twin hours in 18 months. The RDO was that day last week you did not fly because you were doing an oil change, or the customer cancelled. But it was worth the short term effort. Got an airline gig out of it and really never regarded what I did from then on as work. When I left my first job, the boss squealed like a stuck pig because he had 'given' me an Aztec endorsement and only had 18 month's service and 1400 revenue hours in return! But to his credit he did pay a liveable wage long before there was any such thing as a GA Award. Back then I think most employers did the right thing as far as paying went. Nowadays some will stiff you with superannuation, leave entitlements etc, but there are protections in place for those willing to challenge these a$$wipes.
Although nothing seems to have changed, the rate at which airlines are recruiting will put the dodgy employers out of business all the sooner. Pilot turnover will cripple them.
Had to laugh at CASA's claim in the article that they have robust fatigue rules. Which, of course they have the motivation and means to enforce. Never did, never will.
I was lucky in that I clocked up 800 single engine then 600 twin hours in 18 months. The RDO was that day last week you did not fly because you were doing an oil change, or the customer cancelled. But it was worth the short term effort. Got an airline gig out of it and really never regarded what I did from then on as work. When I left my first job, the boss squealed like a stuck pig because he had 'given' me an Aztec endorsement and only had 18 month's service and 1400 revenue hours in return! But to his credit he did pay a liveable wage long before there was any such thing as a GA Award. Back then I think most employers did the right thing as far as paying went. Nowadays some will stiff you with superannuation, leave entitlements etc, but there are protections in place for those willing to challenge these a$$wipes.
Although nothing seems to have changed, the rate at which airlines are recruiting will put the dodgy employers out of business all the sooner. Pilot turnover will cripple them.
Had to laugh at CASA's claim in the article that they have robust fatigue rules. Which, of course they have the motivation and means to enforce. Never did, never will.
Last edited by Mach E Avelli; 3rd Aug 2018 at 08:28.
For Michael, work in the Kimberley typically meant spending at least two months away from home, camping in the sweltering desert with no aircon, loved ones or entertainment.
He would work six days on, one day off, for two months straight — which adds up to 56 days’ work and only six days’ rest.
“You’re away for two months at a time and getting paid $45,000 a year for working 12-hour days
— nobody wants to spend $100,000 to live in a box in Katherine,” Michael said.
Michael said he should work a maximum of 48 hours a week under his licence — split between flying hours and additional duties, such as maintenance — but usually worked more than 60.
“Every pilot that doesn’t work at Qantas is being underpaid at least seven hours a week. Everyone is doing 45 hours if not 70 a week,” he said.
{ I will call BS on the above Qantas statement}
Did Michael's helicopter/fixed wing break down a lot or has the 100 hr (*) a month been lifted a x check of his log book to MR would be interesting - at $45 k for the year under those conditions that will be a big back pay when he leaves- but I expect the $45K will be the base pay and not include per diems or OT and other.
He would work six days on, one day off, for two months straight — which adds up to 56 days’ work and only six days’ rest.
“You’re away for two months at a time and getting paid $45,000 a year for working 12-hour days
— nobody wants to spend $100,000 to live in a box in Katherine,” Michael said.
Michael said he should work a maximum of 48 hours a week under his licence — split between flying hours and additional duties, such as maintenance — but usually worked more than 60.
“Every pilot that doesn’t work at Qantas is being underpaid at least seven hours a week. Everyone is doing 45 hours if not 70 a week,” he said.
{ I will call BS on the above Qantas statement}
Did Michael's helicopter/fixed wing break down a lot or has the 100 hr (*) a month been lifted a x check of his log book to MR would be interesting - at $45 k for the year under those conditions that will be a big back pay when he leaves- but I expect the $45K will be the base pay and not include per diems or OT and other.
This sort of thing is not something AOPA would be interested in. "AOPA Australia is the beacon for those who cherish the freedom to fly" .they say among much other flowery, emotive language. Far removed the gritty reality.
Surely this is AFAPs business?
and if the pilot has a problem with roster, then I would suggest they do their job - which is to make a command decision. And if that involves reporting or leaving unsafe or unfair work conditions, well, so be it.
and if the pilot has a problem with roster, then I would suggest they do their job - which is to make a command decision. And if that involves reporting or leaving unsafe or unfair work conditions, well, so be it.
Thread Starter
Every industry has its rogue operators who will cut costs by any means, the only differences I see in aviation are:
Industry accepting this is normal. Even telling young pilots that this is what you have to do.
Unions unwilling to invest time and effort in investigating small operators.
An industry the does not support those operators who play by the rules with some good press and and continues to support those who flaunt the rules.
The net result of all this is that incoming pilots accept these conditions and dodgy operators have a competitive advantage over the good operators.
Everyone on here so far has acknowledged how bad this industry can be.......what are we going to do to make it as it should be? If AOPA is all about the P then why not provide these young players some education and support around thier employment rights. Or maybe that would be in conflict with the O part of the acronym.
Good post, Progressive, you've pretty much nailed it.
Unfortunately there will always be "white ants" in this industry. I get unsolicited job applications from people offering to work for me for free, or even pay me to employ them...so until the day comes when pilots can pick and chose the entry level jobs that's always going to be the case. Would be nice to have a pilots' market and turn the tables on those employers who pay below award and do sham contracting left unable to find anyone to exploit. But for as long as there is fee help churning out a supply of brand new CPLs, the problem will prevail. People who paid for their own training tend to value themselves more highly and have already shown that they have a commitment as well as life experience.
One thing we don't need is the kind of press full of saccharin tokens covered in bling.
Unfortunately there will always be "white ants" in this industry. I get unsolicited job applications from people offering to work for me for free, or even pay me to employ them...so until the day comes when pilots can pick and chose the entry level jobs that's always going to be the case. Would be nice to have a pilots' market and turn the tables on those employers who pay below award and do sham contracting left unable to find anyone to exploit. But for as long as there is fee help churning out a supply of brand new CPLs, the problem will prevail. People who paid for their own training tend to value themselves more highly and have already shown that they have a commitment as well as life experience.
One thing we don't need is the kind of press full of saccharin tokens covered in bling.
AOPA is supposed to protect the interests of owners and pilots. The article in question denigrates both.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: South East Asia
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LeadSled,
Exactly!!!!
I was holding off on commenting, but, to my detriment, here I go....
This article is full of self pity over being in flying training debt and not making enough money to both cope with the cost of living and paying said debt off.
No employer, either good nor bad, forced any prospective employee into personal debt to get a job.
This is was my direct quote to 20 Malay CPL holders who just completed an MCC course and B744 Type Rating, in Prague and Frankfurt respectively, with funds borrowed from the Malay Government (akin to the Australian VEET FEE HELP Scheme).
Note: they already had training debt from full time CPL MECIR, not flown one hour since completed training (4 to 8 years) and that there are over 2,500 unemployed Malay basic CPL MECIR Pilots in Malaysia, and the numbers are growing. These 20 guys got the money by way of application, through a broker, who skimmed a cut, then said broker, offered an incentive to the ACMI airline, I was with at the time, to provide line training on the B744, as Second Officers, with no guarantee of a job at the end of it.
”Would you, or your parents, take $120,000 USD and place it into an investment vehicle without doing any due diligence on that investment vehicle, or the broker selling it.”
Their collective answer was a resounding NO..
”Why then, did you do it for Aviation?”
What newly minted Australian CPLs fail to understand is that they do have a GA sector to which they can get a job, however lowly paid and remotely located. For in the majority of the world, there is only sausgage factory schools and Airlines - nothing in between.
For interest, only four of the 20 remained with the airline until it went bankrupt (I was long gone by then). Of those four... three were sons of Captains in the airline and the fourth was a Chinese Malay, who just worked/studied hard.
You get a sense of disbelief and empathy for these young CPLs and their plight when, in the sim, being a support pilot for them, they failed their final rides. The breakdown into tears/sobbing as they beg for another chance and the realisation of just how much debt they are in.....
Also of note, the company was under now obligation to pay them anything IAW with their training/loan contracts. But after four weeks in location Jeddah, the company started to pay them per diem at least.
Moral of the story......don’t bitch about what you already have...
Exactly!!!!
I was holding off on commenting, but, to my detriment, here I go....
This article is full of self pity over being in flying training debt and not making enough money to both cope with the cost of living and paying said debt off.
No employer, either good nor bad, forced any prospective employee into personal debt to get a job.
This is was my direct quote to 20 Malay CPL holders who just completed an MCC course and B744 Type Rating, in Prague and Frankfurt respectively, with funds borrowed from the Malay Government (akin to the Australian VEET FEE HELP Scheme).
Note: they already had training debt from full time CPL MECIR, not flown one hour since completed training (4 to 8 years) and that there are over 2,500 unemployed Malay basic CPL MECIR Pilots in Malaysia, and the numbers are growing. These 20 guys got the money by way of application, through a broker, who skimmed a cut, then said broker, offered an incentive to the ACMI airline, I was with at the time, to provide line training on the B744, as Second Officers, with no guarantee of a job at the end of it.
”Would you, or your parents, take $120,000 USD and place it into an investment vehicle without doing any due diligence on that investment vehicle, or the broker selling it.”
Their collective answer was a resounding NO..
”Why then, did you do it for Aviation?”
What newly minted Australian CPLs fail to understand is that they do have a GA sector to which they can get a job, however lowly paid and remotely located. For in the majority of the world, there is only sausgage factory schools and Airlines - nothing in between.
For interest, only four of the 20 remained with the airline until it went bankrupt (I was long gone by then). Of those four... three were sons of Captains in the airline and the fourth was a Chinese Malay, who just worked/studied hard.
You get a sense of disbelief and empathy for these young CPLs and their plight when, in the sim, being a support pilot for them, they failed their final rides. The breakdown into tears/sobbing as they beg for another chance and the realisation of just how much debt they are in.....
Also of note, the company was under now obligation to pay them anything IAW with their training/loan contracts. But after four weeks in location Jeddah, the company started to pay them per diem at least.
Moral of the story......don’t bitch about what you already have...
Last edited by FO Cokebottle; 5th Aug 2018 at 13:25. Reason: clarity