QD,
Better conditions - no - CHC intend to run a 3 x pilot roster for 24 hours C/F runs a 4 pilot roster. Crewies with CHC experience tell me CHC flog the cr@p out of them.
Better pay - questionable
Better A/C - C/F plans were to introduce same types should they have been successful.
GAGS
E86

eagle 86, I guess I was looking at the capacity for individuals to progress through the company the size of CHC, with regards to other types of flying, SAR, Offshore, CHC Global etc something which Careflight could never offer. It is interesting that Careflight operate with 4 drivers and CHC with 3, CHC is limited to the Fatigue Risk Management System that provides controls to capture levels of fatigue (not always correct though) for the pilots. Regarding the Crewies by saying that CHC 'flog the crap' out of them, this may be the case... however it could only done using the conditions set out and agreed to under the crewmans EBA. It's a bit hard to say on one hand that I agree with this EBA and then turn around and say that we are getting flogged. I haven't heard of too many Crewies or Pilot's leaving CHC because of their conditions of employment!

QD

QD,
Take your point but experience has shown that the dedication aircrew/medical crew have shown to CareFlight over the years indicates that the troops are happy to remain with the Company far longer than is the norm in the industry. It is hard to describe to the outside world the feeling that exists within the Company - a feeling of belonging, of family and knowing that the aviation/medical standards maintained were at least on a par with any in the world. The aviation member of the tender evaluation board has been quoted as saying that he hopes that the Company's above average aviation expertise will not be lost to the industry.
GAGS
E86

CHC AD in Australian NP
 

I'm curious as to why there is no 'reply by' date for the ad? Normally job ads have a cut-off date for applications to be in by.

Also why didn't CHC wait until the Aviation section was back in the paper again instead of putting it on page 3 of the paper at a time when many are away on holidays?

Maybe CHC wanted this way so that it would not get too many applicants outside of the Sydney based guys??

Since when does a private company 'legaly' have to advertise???

New one to me:confused:

I think its because they are working for the state of NSW that they have to advertise.

They are having trouble getting anyone from within or out who are interested in moving to Sydney/Orange and living within one hour's travel of the bases.
GAGS
E86

Further to my last re CHC aircraft,
CHC will provide 2 x AW139, 2 x EC145 and 1 x B412
CareFlight would have provided 4 x AW139 and 1 x EC145.
GAGS
E86

AW139 single pilot??
 

Just noticed another thread stating that EMQ (Formerly QR) will be training their aircrewmen as Co-Pilots on the AW139 at an additional cost of $7milhttp://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=258218

Does this mean that Agusta will not be certifying the 139 as SPIFR:eek:
I know bell weren't interested in certifying it as a SPIFR machine, The proviso for the QR AW139 purchase was that it would be certified SPIFR, have Agusta changed their minds???
I wonder what CHC thinks about running with Co's if this is the case....
There may be a request for further funding somewhere down the line from the NSW Ambulance servive, CHC could train their crewies too!!! Nice having 105hrs and your first job flying in a 139.
Or will CHC just use this as an excuse to stay with the ABW412 for a bit longer:E

This latest debate; when finalised, could change the face of HEMS/SAR in Australia forever.

We seem to be defining a heavy two pilot IFR platform for civil HEMS (and SAR?).

Are we preparing for a Coast Guard? If there was a change of government, then this could be their policy?

For the younger guys - you have a wonderful future ahead - so get your ATPLs and IREX out of the way.

The NSW Health Dep/Ambulance have no idea how much they are really going to pay for CHC.
GAGS
E86

Does this mean that Agusta will not be certifying the 139 as SPIFR.

Only Agusta can answer this but maybe EMQ is just adding another layer of checks and safety during nocturnal and hazardous flights as stated in the press report. If this is so, it makes Child flight look like a trendsetter in nocturnal flight crew safety doesn’t it. After the bagging child flight has received on this chat site some humble pie may need to be eaten in the future. :D

I don't think anyone actually bagged the company!
GAGS
E86

officially CHC take over helicopter ops on 14 May 07 and by the look of last weeks employment ads, still have positions available in Orange.

Time to resurrect this old thread. The rumour is that Toll has secured the contract for the South, and Hunter Westpac for the North. :D

I second that rumour............it's true then. Toll have hit the big time.

Helicopter Tender

There must be some head scratching in Perth, sad. Pardon my ignorance, but why have they retained the community funded machines up north? From an outsider seems a bit disjointed.

I guess the North Reg is Australian owned and now so will the South Reg.

Toll is an Australian company, CHC is an American owned company now.

I don't think the NSW government could care less what country the operator is from. It's all about the money. Northern Region (Newcastle, Tamworth, Lismore) come with lots of sponsorship money and community funding. Not to mention that it would be politically unacceptable for those communities to have their long serving 'charity' helicopters replaced by a purely commercial operator. Westpac was never going to lose this one.

Thats it.
 

The end of an era (& a 10 year thread). I believe that CHC have bugged out from Bankstown. The last few days has seen quite a few containers being trucked away from the hangar.

Is it true that Toll is owned by the Japanese government and all the profits and wealth creation is shipped out of Australia?

Can Aussies buy shares?

Dick,

Japan Post is publicly listed - :cool:

You can also benefit by being a indirect supplier, offering services such as parking or the temporary use of a facility to TOLL?