PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions (https://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-aviation-questions-91/)
-   -   Merged: QANTAS/ALAEA EBA (https://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-aviation-questions/322438-merged-qantas-alaea-eba.html)

Headcone 21st Jan 2008 07:38

Merged: QANTAS/ALAEA EBA
 
All is quiet on the western front with the ALAEA PIA.
Have they accepted the 3% pay rise and are now off to convince their followers to accept it?
;)

Redstone 21st Jan 2008 09:15

Time will tell as to weather the hold fire order was a stroke of genius, or the bend over before the reaming. The time line now puts any possible action at earliest the 7th Feb, after the 380 announcement............
This could be the one defining decision in this whole campaign.

Redstone 21st Jan 2008 09:28

Hate to burst your bubble Mendaero, but from what I've heard there is no agreement on anything of substance. It looks like even a meagre 3% is going to cost, in kind.

sky rocket 21st Jan 2008 09:48


definition of an employee (written by the ALAEA),
This clause has to go. It doesn't matter who wrote it, It will always be twisted out of context and used used against us. As for 3%, I would only accept that if the board accepted it for themselves. The people on the coal face make the company what it is, not the board.

Redstone 21st Jan 2008 09:49

1st Feb is a Friday and you must give 3 clear "working days" notice, that puts a notice served on Friday the 1st for action as of one minute past midnight Thursday morning the 7th Feb.

As far as any "creative pay deals" don't hold your breath. There is only one way we are going to advance our claims and that is through action.

Members must not fall into a false sense of security, we are no closer now than we were two weeks ago. Steel yourselves.

Redstone 21st Jan 2008 10:29


Why cant we give notice before the 1st?
Because we agreed not to in the comission.

PIOT Bord 21st Jan 2008 19:12

Who's bent over what?
 
Whether the 1st or 7th for PIA to start, bring it on.
However, I disagree with the view that management have us bent over anything. It's their strategy that is failing. Bloomburg's study that found we are 10% more productive than Singapore; The blocking of their attempt to bring in foreign labour; The lack of scabs that have been willing to sign up; The awareness by the public of a management culture of staff shortages across the entire business; The commissioning of market research into the public attitude towards management.
It's the above, combined with a share price that is beating the market down even though they have announced higher record profits, that has management concerned. They are trying to make sure that we are not in a position to bend them over anything.
Good work so far ALAEA Exec, don't take a backward step!

Millet Fanger 21st Jan 2008 22:23

Notice should be given to start PIA on the 1st Feb.

We have given Qantas enough time to negotiate a deal if they had wanted one. Don't forget, "The EBA has to be concluded by February because QE has important decisions to be made re A380 and A330". Or was that statement just as valid as "This deal looks like a good deal to me"? (MH, KM and co)

Oh Please 22nd Jan 2008 09:32


Good work so far ALAEA Exec, don't take a backward step!
Is this the same executive?
http://www.cnet.com.au/wireless/0,23...9285323,00.htm

God help us...

upsidefront 22nd Jan 2008 10:02

MMM, Bring down the red Q!!! Make them beg.
Hit them hard. Now it's our turn to to show them.

Bush Pig 22nd Jan 2008 10:19

F**k the 380, f**k the 330, f**k it all. Long live the legacy fleet.

wingers 22nd Jan 2008 13:54

Gentlemen, i hope we settle this

i am reliably imformed that if we do not, things will never be the same again, i am asking all like members to be aware.....i am not a troll....i implore the ALAEA to be vigilant, please do not stuff up

company_spy 22nd Jan 2008 14:41


i am reliably imformed that if we do not, things will never be the same again
In what way? What have you been told?

Sunfish 22nd Jan 2008 19:45


i am reliably imformed


He is just spreading fear uncertainty and doubt like he always does. Same handiwork visible on the A380 thread.

rudderless1 22nd Jan 2008 20:37


i am reliably imformed that if we do not, things will never be the same again
Yes, thats true, for the first time in a long time LAME's will have proven they have a backbone, and the company better take notice. Bring it on, I am sick of my inflation/efficiency payrise paying managers bonus's and undeserved mega payrises.

I'd be happy with 1/6th of Cox's payrise and no bonus on my pidly income! But the again I not a greedy :yuk: psychopath.

Redstone 22nd Jan 2008 21:09


Gentlemen, i hope we settle this

i am reliably imformed that if we do not, things will never be the same again, i am asking all like members to be aware.....i am not a troll....i implore the ALAEA to be vigilant, please do not stuff up
If we let this EBA get rammed through in it's current wording then I am telling you now, things will definatly never be the same again for Qantas LAMEs, and it's not good. Now if you are in fact an operational LAME you should understand this and be outraged at the audacity of those who seek to impose such conditions. If you are infact an agent provocateur or a company stooge then you allready know this and are by association in agreeance to all the claims made by the company.

"The ALAEA" is the sum total of ALL it's members. Hold fast, suck it up and don't shoot untill you see the whites of their eyes.

another superlame 23rd Jan 2008 00:35

It is all smoke and mirrors. QF are just buying time it is a favourite tactic of theirs. The ALAEA might have one agenda but they haven't consulted the troops. I have said before if you want to be successful in this EBA keep focused on what you are fighting for and don't let the company or ALAEA cloud your vision.
I don't think the union is being as transparent as you think they are.

As for Wingers he must be a stooge,or he has other agendas himself

HotDog 23rd Jan 2008 01:19

Quoting Mr. Purvinas:

"In this case, we're talking both engines carking it at same time. At that stage the aircraft is tilted at a certain altitude so when the fuel moves back into the tanks, it may expose the fuel pumps to water which is contained in the tanks," he said.

A small amount of water is not uncommon in fuel, Purvinas said.

"When you're putting in a hundred thousand kilos of fuel, there is a small component of water but if that all rises to the top of the fuel tank is exposed to the fuel-pump intakes at same time, that is when you may have a problem at the same time on both engines," he said.
Well I guess Mr. Purvinas with 20 years of avionic experience does not need to have any knowledge of the rules of gravity and the S.G. of fuel.:confused:

another superlame 23rd Jan 2008 01:26

And being Mr Purvinas who are we mere mortals to question his comments

rudderless1 23rd Jan 2008 04:39

ever considered it being mis quoted?
 
if the water "could" float to the top it would not have been sucked in by the pumps would it! How often do we argue the accuracy of news reports on this forum? How often are pumps installed at the top of tanks?
I am sure over the 20 years he worked on the ramp and seen or done fuel checks he would know where to look for the fuel.

Hotdog, maybe you should learn where it is sucked from and why the attitude of the aircraft could play a roll after fuel had settled for some time and not so quickly take news reports as gospel.

Jet pumps should remove water as it settles though. Once again I am sure there is many slices of swiss that would have to line up for this theory to be right!


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:12.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.