Bristow & other Oz offshore pay deals
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not the best time to be looking down the Industrial Action Barrel boys.
It’s a high probability that Woodside has gone to CHC which means disaster for the last 40+ chaps on the inflexible Seniority Listing.
Unless of course you are in the protected senior boys listing.
It’s a high probability that Woodside has gone to CHC which means disaster for the last 40+ chaps on the inflexible Seniority Listing.
Unless of course you are in the protected senior boys listing.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: was there, now here
Age: 54
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LMN
What does industrial action have to do with pilot retention? The number of pilots required to fulfill contract requirements is a defined figure irrespective of salary or industrial action.
Anyone who believes that accepting a smaller payrise or not taking IA will somehow encourage a company to keep more pilots than is required is deluded!
What does industrial action have to do with pilot retention? The number of pilots required to fulfill contract requirements is a defined figure irrespective of salary or industrial action.
Anyone who believes that accepting a smaller payrise or not taking IA will somehow encourage a company to keep more pilots than is required is deluded!
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Around
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Co Pilot for CHC perhaps LMN?
As for the last 40 odd pilots, I think you might be a bit misinformed as to the size of the current Woodside commitment.
With recent work and ongoing exploratory stuff, along with any other requirements around leave and sim training, I doubt very much that there will be many if any pilots made redundant.
Besides, as already stated, regardless of the pilots pay, people will always be axed if they are surplus to requirements in the long term.
Good luck to all parties in any case. There should be more offshore work to keep everyone busy and well paid for the foreseeable future. Offshore pilots ought really be getting in behind the Bristow guys as they will all see a benefit in the long run.
As for the last 40 odd pilots, I think you might be a bit misinformed as to the size of the current Woodside commitment.
With recent work and ongoing exploratory stuff, along with any other requirements around leave and sim training, I doubt very much that there will be many if any pilots made redundant.
Besides, as already stated, regardless of the pilots pay, people will always be axed if they are surplus to requirements in the long term.
Good luck to all parties in any case. There should be more offshore work to keep everyone busy and well paid for the foreseeable future. Offshore pilots ought really be getting in behind the Bristow guys as they will all see a benefit in the long run.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: MPB
Age: 61
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are currently 3 a/c 
on the
Woodside contract and Bristow have just picked up the Apache contract for 5 a/c.
So by rights there will acutally have to put Pilots on.
Go for it.
on the Woodside contract and Bristow have just picked up the Apache contract for 5 a/c.
So by rights there will acutally have to put Pilots on.Go for it.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: was there, now here
Age: 54
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im hearing a whisper that the Aussie Bristow boys got a 19% payrise at the eleventh hour, before the stop work began?
Aren't these the same pilots that got 30% a couple of years ago?
Nice result for them if true.....not so nice for Alan Blake though!
Aren't these the same pilots that got 30% a couple of years ago?
Nice result for them if true.....not so nice for Alan Blake though!
I have watched this and other wage debates with interest over the years and I think the key word here is context...these figures need to be taken in context to the economic conditions at the time and the industry in which these offshore guys operate. Things are hardly winding down in WA at the moment, are they?!?
Comments regarding pay rates in this area have previously drawn debate from different quarters, so I am not going to try and reinvent another set of fresh debates. Remember recent arguments of cleaners/bed makers/kitchen hands earning more then some pilots? Even after this latest increase, you will still find such employment streams offering higher incomes then flying roles. You will most likely find that these operators are no different to the rest of us in the aviation game and were seeking a competitive pay increase that accounted for the usual CPI and a little on top of that that would ultimately lift the overall package to a level at which it should be at.
In any case, I am sure there would have been trade offs for such a payrise and when you also remember that these negotiated pay rates have come on the end of a low starting base, 30% and then 19% over a 5-6 year period, whilst sounding large, is not unreasonable considering these increases were necessary to provide some form of competitive remuneration. Furthermore, such increases ultimately benefit almost all the industry as the bench mark is thus set for competitive remuneration for all pilots across the board.
Operators like Bristow and CHC are large and professional organisations providing what is a professional, safe and reliable service to the oil and gas industry. It is appropriate that, for the service they provide, the people providing it are remunerated accordingly. I also believe that both of these organisations have recently passed very similar negotiated rate increases.
Comments regarding pay rates in this area have previously drawn debate from different quarters, so I am not going to try and reinvent another set of fresh debates. Remember recent arguments of cleaners/bed makers/kitchen hands earning more then some pilots? Even after this latest increase, you will still find such employment streams offering higher incomes then flying roles. You will most likely find that these operators are no different to the rest of us in the aviation game and were seeking a competitive pay increase that accounted for the usual CPI and a little on top of that that would ultimately lift the overall package to a level at which it should be at.
In any case, I am sure there would have been trade offs for such a payrise and when you also remember that these negotiated pay rates have come on the end of a low starting base, 30% and then 19% over a 5-6 year period, whilst sounding large, is not unreasonable considering these increases were necessary to provide some form of competitive remuneration. Furthermore, such increases ultimately benefit almost all the industry as the bench mark is thus set for competitive remuneration for all pilots across the board.
Operators like Bristow and CHC are large and professional organisations providing what is a professional, safe and reliable service to the oil and gas industry. It is appropriate that, for the service they provide, the people providing it are remunerated accordingly. I also believe that both of these organisations have recently passed very similar negotiated rate increases.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: retirementland
Age: 79
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When the big operators give into such bully boy militant tactics 
they are really pricing themselves out of the market, but they will at least encourage small new, more customer focused entrants, such as Caverton in Nigeria, who will take a more prudent approach to their wage bills. I'm sure this will happen in Australia too. It is not for nothing that the Shell lead International Helicopter Safety Team is focusing on developing safety in small operators. Such niche suppliers will be no doubt favoured by the top tier oil companies, that can properly supervise them, in the future. Bristow and CHCs future will no doubt shrink as they will only be flying for the small, lower tier independent oil companies that need to pay a premium to compensate for their own lack of aviation expertise.
they are really pricing themselves out of the market, but they will at least encourage small new, more customer focused entrants, such as Caverton in Nigeria, who will take a more prudent approach to their wage bills. I'm sure this will happen in Australia too. It is not for nothing that the Shell lead International Helicopter Safety Team is focusing on developing safety in small operators. Such niche suppliers will be no doubt favoured by the top tier oil companies, that can properly supervise them, in the future. Bristow and CHCs future will no doubt shrink as they will only be flying for the small, lower tier independent oil companies that need to pay a premium to compensate for their own lack of aviation expertise.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: ...
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Helicopter pilots are way underpaid compared to fixed wing drivers of similar experience level (10 years plus in industry) or in fact many occupations that require the same level of industry experience, so it shouldn't have to come to threatening industrial action, the companies should be agreeing on reasonable pay rises before it gets to that. I don't see how anyone involved in promoting safety thinks that having underpaid, disgruntled pilots flying him around is conducive to safety - pilot wage bills are not as large a proportion of operating expenses as to account for huge premiums to the end user. Also, companies that pay "more prudent" wages don't have the same retention of highly qualified pilots and you may find that replacing such individuals costs a lot more than paying slightly higher wages in the first place.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: retirementland
Age: 79
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dspite union propaganda there are always plenty of applicants (supply and demand) and modern training means the standard is high.
It facile to compare driving an S-76 and a 744 and expect the same pay. Thats like claiming a pub singer should be paid the same as Madaonna.
It facile to compare driving an S-76 and a 744 and expect the same pay. Thats like claiming a pub singer should be paid the same as Madaonna.
Thats like claiming a pub singer should be paid the same as Madaonna.
Our 747 captain is assisted by a cojo, he takes off from London, punches the autopilot at 1000 ft and calls the girls for a coffee.
Upon landing in SFO he takes over the aircraft at 1000 feet and lands it.
After that he puts 20 flight hours in his logbook.
What a joke.
How many days does a helicopter pilot have to work hard to write up the same amount of hours?
Four, five days of tough concentrated flying? Not just monitoring instruments?
Actually, it is ok to pay me just above wellfare, 'cause I love flying...
And it is better than not having a job at all, right?
Ah, well...
ring ring, ring ring..."Hello, it's the decade 2010 calling. We are just calling to advise that its time to update your thinking and consider modern day HR management principles as things have changed a little since the 1950's."
SM...I was not sure if too many people were saying that a 747 bus driver should be paid the same as a light, medium or heavy IFR driver of similar experience. I think the term reasonable was used to compare what an average pilot should expect, whether it be as an offshore pilot or a long liner in the hills in Canuckistan (in this case a multi driver for offshore).
That old chestnut of supply and demand is a great way to try to justify under payment of just about anyone these days. It's a well used excuse by aviation companies the world over and quite frankly it's a tired old one at that. If you want to start talking about cost minimization (ie prudent wage management) of any professional stream, perhaps we could start taking aim at many a senior manager/director/CEO or the like with all these so called performance and safety bonuses
Alas, I am quite open minded to some of these antiquated concepts of staff remuneration and perhaps we can apply the principle of supply and demand to the airlines, hypothetically speaking. For the sake of saving some cash (and being prudent at the same time), let us grab a few fresh 200hr plank wing pilots and stick them in that 747 that is taking us 12 hrs across the Indian ocean tonight. But don't worry (the modern day training standards are high these days), so nothing to be concerned with...and those higher time guys with the experience under their belts...nothing but a bunch of overpaid singers anyway. Send 'em to the bar or recording studio for a scotch, a smoke and one more appearance in front of the mic.
Better still, perhaps we could get SM together with the CEO of RyanAir. Believe he was quoted as saying pilots were over rated and that a flight attendant could assist in an emergency, alleviating the requirement of 2 pilots in the cockpit:
Replace Ryanair Michael O'Leary with flight attendant: pilot
Perhaps this could fit with the offshore world, except this time we could get a rig pig in to assist to 'bring her on home when its all turned to a can of worms'.
I'd be curious to find out what the qualifications are in any case, when comparing an offshore or an EMS twin captain to that of a jet captain. Off the top of my head, most require an ATPL, several thousands hours of ME command and IR renewals, multi-crew and glass cockpit experience. The question begs, if the skills set and the requisite experience levels are similar, then why should the remuneration not follow suit?
Apologies, I just get a little tired of the same rubbish that gets put forward when it comes to trying to explain or justify why we should continue to push the mantra of underpaying or exploiting pilots (or anyone of any professional persuasion).
SM...I was not sure if too many people were saying that a 747 bus driver should be paid the same as a light, medium or heavy IFR driver of similar experience. I think the term reasonable was used to compare what an average pilot should expect, whether it be as an offshore pilot or a long liner in the hills in Canuckistan (in this case a multi driver for offshore).
That old chestnut of supply and demand is a great way to try to justify under payment of just about anyone these days. It's a well used excuse by aviation companies the world over and quite frankly it's a tired old one at that. If you want to start talking about cost minimization (ie prudent wage management) of any professional stream, perhaps we could start taking aim at many a senior manager/director/CEO or the like with all these so called performance and safety bonuses
Alas, I am quite open minded to some of these antiquated concepts of staff remuneration and perhaps we can apply the principle of supply and demand to the airlines, hypothetically speaking. For the sake of saving some cash (and being prudent at the same time), let us grab a few fresh 200hr plank wing pilots and stick them in that 747 that is taking us 12 hrs across the Indian ocean tonight. But don't worry (the modern day training standards are high these days), so nothing to be concerned with...and those higher time guys with the experience under their belts...nothing but a bunch of overpaid singers anyway. Send 'em to the bar or recording studio for a scotch, a smoke and one more appearance in front of the mic.
Better still, perhaps we could get SM together with the CEO of RyanAir. Believe he was quoted as saying pilots were over rated and that a flight attendant could assist in an emergency, alleviating the requirement of 2 pilots in the cockpit:
Replace Ryanair Michael O'Leary with flight attendant: pilot
Perhaps this could fit with the offshore world, except this time we could get a rig pig in to assist to 'bring her on home when its all turned to a can of worms'.
I'd be curious to find out what the qualifications are in any case, when comparing an offshore or an EMS twin captain to that of a jet captain. Off the top of my head, most require an ATPL, several thousands hours of ME command and IR renewals, multi-crew and glass cockpit experience. The question begs, if the skills set and the requisite experience levels are similar, then why should the remuneration not follow suit?
Apologies, I just get a little tired of the same rubbish that gets put forward when it comes to trying to explain or justify why we should continue to push the mantra of underpaying or exploiting pilots (or anyone of any professional persuasion).
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Aus
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said Bluntendboy!
How many professions in the world (and definitely not the cleaners on a rig), have to undertake a thorough medical, a IR renewal, a VBC, an IBC etc etc just to be able to maintain your employment?
Failing any or all of the above will probably render you with an empty wallet.
A doctor probably doesn't have to jump through as many hoops as that to keep their job!
Lets keep pushing for reasonable remuneration.
cheers
800
How many professions in the world (and definitely not the cleaners on a rig), have to undertake a thorough medical, a IR renewal, a VBC, an IBC etc etc just to be able to maintain your employment?
Failing any or all of the above will probably render you with an empty wallet.
A doctor probably doesn't have to jump through as many hoops as that to keep their job!
Lets keep pushing for reasonable remuneration.
cheers
800
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Melbourne/Australia
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a CLOWN
SM,
Maybe its time that you hung up your gold bars old boy. Fancy saying that these Bristow/CHC guys will price themselves out of the market and a smaller operator will get the contracts, Maybe you should research a little better as if you noticed Jayrow and HNZ are just thoughts now.
As for pricing themselves out of the market, wages in Australia anyway are about 2% of total cost on any project.
You should be applauding the Bristow guys for setting a higher standard and not letting these multi national companies screw them down. Did you see the number on the top of this page? 87% voted to take industrial action. I have NEVER seen such solidarity among pilots in this country before. (then I have heard they DO NOT employ Kiwi's)
Banger
Maybe its time that you hung up your gold bars old boy. Fancy saying that these Bristow/CHC guys will price themselves out of the market and a smaller operator will get the contracts, Maybe you should research a little better as if you noticed Jayrow and HNZ are just thoughts now.
As for pricing themselves out of the market, wages in Australia anyway are about 2% of total cost on any project.
You should be applauding the Bristow guys for setting a higher standard and not letting these multi national companies screw them down. Did you see the number on the top of this page? 87% voted to take industrial action. I have NEVER seen such solidarity among pilots in this country before. (then I have heard they DO NOT employ Kiwi's)
Banger
Well said Bladebanger, SM is just a wind up merchant. The smaller operators just can't compete with the likes of CHC and Bristow, which is why we see the two big operators dominating the market in Australia again. Well done the Bristow pilots for negotiating this pay deal. On another note I see Jayrow have pretty much lost all their offshore operations and I don't think we will see them offshore again, they just don't have the money or resources to compete at the same level as Bristow/CHC in OZ from what I have heard.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: retirementland
Age: 79
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As Australians are well know work dodgers 87% seems low to me.
The low productivity in Australia is well known in the industry with touring pilots being usd in perfectly reasonable places to relocate too like Broome an Karratha.
Your 2% figure is also well off too.
The low productivity in Australia is well known in the industry with touring pilots being usd in perfectly reasonable places to relocate too like Broome an Karratha.
Your 2% figure is also well off too.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Beside the seaside
Posts: 670
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't react to Shell Management posts. He started on the West Africa Forum where his chosen name was designed to cause upset. He is obviously well pleased with the result and has chosen to spread his own brand of inflammatory commentary elsewhere on Rotorheads.
It has been a very successful technique for him so far - please don't let it happen here. Just ignore the bait.
It has been a very successful technique for him so far - please don't let it happen here. Just ignore the bait.
Don't react to Shell Management posts.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rise to the bait
Well Far East Driver you are so correct. I noticed SM on the Nigeria thread and wondered what sort of "A Hole" we had but now he is moving off home turf and trying to wind up people on other threads. As Epiphany and others point out it is best to ignore him.
Last time I will rise to the bait, besides I will be too busy spending my new pay raise. Good job and thanks to the Pilot Committee.
Last time I will rise to the bait, besides I will be too busy spending my new pay raise. Good job and thanks to the Pilot Committee.