Bendigo.
Maybe you win a court case and you get the job.
You then fail your check to line.Are you going to take them to court again?
Maybe just maybe they have seen something in you they didnt like.

Bendigo - another thought! If you were to win a discrimination case against QF they may not be obliged to employ you and if they were Bush Mechanic has given you a possible scenario.
On the other hand such a victory would be all over the Australian press and every CP from Broome to Hobart would know that you are the litigious one and not want to employ you either. Every one is human and makes mistakes but they don't need you sitting on their shoulder to point them out!
Any victory would indeed be pyrrhic, suggest you put QF behind you and move on, convince yourself that not only do they not need you but that you do not need them! Best of Luck and once again I suggest you heed the advice from The Voice and many others on this thread.

Well i guess you can never really project tone on these boards. I am really pretty happy with my present career , and still fly regularly. Maybe i will take QF on maybe i won't it's really not something i obsesse about.

This post isn't a wind up. BM: I think you definetly have to pick you battles -life isn't fair - that is something i understand. So i 'd reckon it would be pretty unlikely that i'd issue legal proceedings following a busted sim check. I've always copped sweet any test result from school, or flight school.If you went around issuing writs every time you got the shaft- you would be a pretty unhappy camper.

I don't agree with the naysayers on this thread though-Who seem to be putting the view that QF is so powerful and mighty , and their lawyers so crash hot that it would be a pointless fight.Ordinary people do have the ability to take on corporates/government and whip em good. WWW.austlii.edu.au will provide you with thousands of examples.

If i do decide to take action i would be fairly unconcerned to say the least if the matter attracted any publicity, and any CP forming the view that i was "litigious".

Enough...
 

Okay Bendigo. You tried for something, and you didn't get what you wanted. Now you want to go to the courts.

(Sounds a familiar tune of the times, or is it just me?)

And yet here you are, asking for our help/tips, possibly even sympathy, and yet it is obvious that you're not levelling with us.

Your posts are contradictory. Read through them again, if you will, including your bold statement on D&G Reporting points where you "Will be taking on QF - regards employment discrimination - Pilot." How does that reconcile with your posting of only 3 hours prior, and your more recent postings?

While I agree that you cannot post tone on these boards, IMHO, you appear to be a bitter and litigious person (despite your denials).

Please do not insult our intelligence by claiming that you want to take them to court JUST TO PROVE A POINT!

Regardless of what you've read, or heard (or watched on L.A. Law or Ally McBeal) litigation of any kind is a traumatic experience for both sides of the case. While I've never "had the pleasure", I know a few who have, and they are not the same people afterwards (not in a good way). The best advice I've ever had from a Barrister is "Don't be on either end of a Subpoena".

Read the advice from The Voice, BlueEagle, and Bush Mechanics.
They are trying to help you.

Get on with your life.

P.S. Why do you think it would be simply CP's that were concerned with you? The publicity wouldn't be limited to just flying employers...

Bendigo,

Have a look at the third or fourth page of:

http://www.equalopportunity.wa.gov.au/pdf/dm2.pdf

or put "Blatchford v Qantas" into Google and have a read;

you won't get anywhere though as Qantas will always win, just

reconcile yourself to the fact that if your over forty you'll never be

good enough to be a member of the boys club at QCC2.

Well this thread is starting to get interesting.


Funnelweb:

Thanks for the case. My reading of the reference was the Blatchford won , i'm pretty sure on this but check it again. I checked austlii and couldn't find any appeal from Qantas either.So
it seems someone has taken on QF in the relatively quick ,and cost effective forum of an EOC tribunal and won. I couldn't find the case on the NSW EOC database- they don't list all cases. Does anyone know any more about the case, ie: what orders were made eg: compo or directive for person to be employed? The other thing to consider is that others may have taken action and had their applications settled before a public hearing-so for sure there may well be a few bodies buried somewhere.

My gut tells me that very few flight crew take on QF in this regard. It seems some folks really get quite emotional when this topic is discussed.

At the risk of further inflaming further emotions,my reference to surnames(prior post) referred to those who had others with the same surname already employed as flight crew.I also hear that some within QF felt that the many contract 737 FOs from Ansett, were given a pretty raw deal when many were rejected for permanent employment.

Come on ,who is Blachford,someone must know what orders the EOC made. Seems like the " You've got buckleys mate, you can never beat Qantas" Brigade have quietened down very quickly when it becomes apparent that they are incorrect.

Just had a look on the crew lists and whoever "Blatchford" may be they're not working for QF mainline anyway.

People quiet down for other reasons...
 

Personally, I couldn't be bothered discussing it further with you.

IMHO, you are wrong. You disagree.

You seem determined on your course of action, regardless of the advice/opinions that you asked for.

Look at the positive side. QF knocked me back about four years ago after my second interviews. Looking back on it, I'm glad they did.
I'd much rather fly for a living anyway.:cool:

Well, for someone who comes here seeking advice, (and gets it), you can certainly be bloody rude can't you Bendigo?
Like Di_Vos and many others we frankly couldn't give a toss, we have lost all interest. Go ahead and sue, make a name for yourself, though possibly not the name you would be hoping for.

The very attitude you display here may well be the reason that QF said "No thanks" - one could hardly blame them.

Bendigo ..

It is very hard to have a reasonable and logical discussion with someone who is neither ..

so, go take your tough guy stance and use it somewhere else, it is neither warranted nor appreciated in this place.

Well i haven't come across a group(last few) who are as defensive, reactionary, and quite frankly as dim for some time. Your standard response if someone does not agree with you is to insult them.
Most of the advice given by the last few is wrong as the Blatchford case proves - you seem to have some conceptual difficulties accepting this.I suggest this is because of you education level,and where you are at mentally.The arguments you make demonstrate a lack of maturity and sophistication in your thought processes ,and reasoning ability.

Bendigo

Go ahead and sue QF. Personally I think you’re treading on your own d**k. Failing an airline interview can be a major body blow to one’s ego, but don’t let it cloud your judgment. From someone who has conducted interviews for another airline, technical ability is very black and white but personal attributes are very subjective. Just because you may think you are a great bloke doesn’t mean everyone does. If QF knocked you back because they thought you didn’t fit the personality profile they were looking for, I think you have bucklies of winning. They have every right to refuse you employment on these grounds. You mightn’t like it but that is life and I think you should get over it. My suggestion to you is to re-apply and try and get another interview. Next time though, sell yourself better. After all that is all a job interview is and as pilot’s we are generally pathetic at it. Oh and may I suggest you loose the attitude. The people on this forum are trying to give you advice. You don’t have to take this advice but there is no need to be rude about it. :rolleyes:

Titan404 ahhh. now there's a great workhorse and a lovely ship to fly.:O

Thank you and on that note and a cornucopia of the best advice around.

I think I might sue them too, for not giving me Geoff Dixons job :rolleyes:

click!

W