SPRING 2014

OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE AUSTRALIAN AND INTERNATIONAL PILOTS ASSOCIATION

A SINGLE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT FOR QANTAS MAINLINE? PAGE 8

INSIDE: US ALPA Training p12 • New Flight Crew Regulations p16 • Year in Review: S&T p18 • Controlled Rest p21

CONTENTS

2 5 8 WELCOME LEGAL / FEATURE TO ALTITUDE INDUSTRIAL THE QANTAS AIRWAYS LTD PILOTS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT

12 15 16 18 21 FEATURE FEATURE FEATURE SAFETY & SAFETY & What can we learn CASA’S ‘REASONABLE’ NEW FLIGHT CREW TECHNICAL TECHNICAL from our colleagues DELAYS LICENSING AND TRAINING Year in REVIEW 2014 CONTROLLED REST in the US Airline AND CHECKING ON THE FLIGHT DECK Industry? REGULATIONS

24 CORRECTION 22 23 In the Winter 2014 edition of Altitude, the article SAFETY & SAFETY & FEATURE The 2014 Reduction in Numbers; a lesson in genuine TECHNICAL TECHNICAL Annual Dinner consultation and how to kick the can down the road ‘WILDLIFE CSI’ WILDLIFE AND 2014 (pages 8-10) contained the following text: AIRPORTS “Since Alan Joyce announced sweeping changes to the structure and management of Qantas Airways Limited on 27 February 2014, we have seen broad ranging changes across the organisation that have, in one way or another, impacted upon many aspects of the business. It would be safe to say that the pilot body has strongly felt the effects of these changes, particularly with the announcement of a group-wide pay freeze, the early retirement of the B767 and B747 as well as a reduction 26 28 of the number of Qantas employees by one WELFARE MEMBERSHIP third.” NEWS The one third figure was incorrect and it should have read “…reduction in Qantas employees by 5,000 on an FTE basis over three years.”

Suite 6.01, Level 6 Scheduling (24 hrs) President Treasurer 247 Coward Street Tel: 02 8307 7711 F/O Nathan Safe F/O Adam Susz Mascot NSW 2020 Emergency (24 hrs) Tel: 02 8307 7777 Vice Presidents Secretary Tel: 02 8307 7788 Fax: 02 8307 7799 Capt Jason Beavan F/O Chris Hewett Capt Theron Busby (‘A’ Pilots) Capt Brad Hodson Assistant Secretary Capt Shane Loney F/O Jason Lipson

The inclusion of advertising material on various products, services and resources in Altitude is not to be interpreted as AIPA endorsement of the products, services or resources. Although Altitude is the official journal of AIPA, the views expressed by individuals in any article included are not necessarily those of the association. All rights reserved. The material in this publication may not be reproduced without the express written permission of AIPA. AIPA does not accept any responsibility for any unsolicited manuscripts, photographs or illustrations sent to their office and will not be liable for any loss or damage to any such material. WELCOME TO ALTITUDE

THE VIEW FROM THE corneroffice NATHAN SAFE, AIPA President

The recent AGMs and annual results of Australia’s two airline groups demonstrated many similarities, but also a number of key differences between the two Groups. It seems clear enough that the so-called ‘capacity war’ will be remembered as a catalyst for significant changes (positive and negative) in both organisations, with one journalist I spoke with recently even drawing analogies between it and the 1950s-1970s ‘space race’ between the USA and USSR!

Anyone who has studied economics least to some extent, caught off-guard by and game theory at tertiary level will that development. One would hope that understand (and maybe even appreciate) lessons have been learnt from that episode. the logic behind the Qantas Group’s By contrast, Qantas was positive $1.06 65% ‘line in the sand’ public market share billion from operations and negative the position. My own view is that such a same amount from investment. This means strategy is a double-edged sword for two important things; first, the enormous pilots. First, it is important in terms of difference in operating cash flow shows affecting the capacity decision making of that at a fundamental level, Virgin’s Virgin by informing it (as well as Qantas business model faces far more underlying corporate customers) in advance how structural challenges than Qantas’s – Qantas will respond, however this is clearly perhaps most clearly reflected in its only a credible strategy for a competitor relatively small share of the higher yielding with a superior cash position and luckily, corporate market. Secondly, it shows that Qantas’s cash position is vastly superior there is more than six times the amount to Virgin’s. As the saying goes, ‘cash is king’ of cash being used for asset investment and quite remarkably, Virgin was negative into the Qantas Group’s assets than our $8 million from operating activities and competitors. While we may disagree a further $177 million negative cash flow about where some of that money is from investment. Virgin would likely have being invested, and many Qantas people completely run out of ‘free’ cash twice in have and still do make overtures about the last couple of years had it not been the merits of the two Group CEOs, it for a $350m capital raising from its key is obvious whose financial position one state owned shareholders in 2013 and a would rather be in. further raising of $350m from a one-third Virgin’s recent acquisition of the sale of its Velocity loyalty program in remainder of TigerAir demonstrates mid-2014. This is clearly not the kind of that the industry is in some ways coming business model that is sustainable once full circle and we are now in a position Virgin’s big three shareholders have turned with similarities to the regulated market off the cash tap. Reflecting upon the slightly structures of the 1980s – except that ‘hysterical’ response to Virgin’s 2013 capital instead of a two airline duopoly, we now raising, it would seem that Qantas was, at have a two Group duopoly comprised of four distinct brands. The Qantas Group’s proposition that any union leader relishes in Air France of $316,700, compared apparent determination to maintain its trying to ‘sell’. And regarding the former, to $46,600 in Malaysian Airlines. That is first-mover advantage in the domestic I frequently hear pilots comment along not to say that pilot costs are the silver low cost space by dwarfing TigerAir with the lines of ‘if we can sack 5,000 people, bullet of airline profitability. Ultimately we fleet scale means that reduction in Jetstar why did we hire them in the first place?’. are a necessary part of the airline and a domestic capacity is unlikely in the near This is not a question that I can answer, well-rewarded, engaged and productive future. The complete retirement of 767s but AIPA’s own analysis shows that the pilot workforce is an asset to Qantas. by the new year means that mainline Group is significantly above average in I firmly believe that this is slowly being domestic will likely seek to maintain its terms of staff per airframe on a worldwide realised and acknowledged by our management and the responses to developments in short haul, Jetstar, The downside of the capacity war for pilots and other staff is that Network, QantasLink and ultimately we are now all being made to pay the price for this large scale long haul bargaining will tell us whether commercial warfare. This is in both the form of 5,000 job cuts and that is the case. Regarding long haul, an 18 month wage freeze. The latter is not a proposition that any it would be a ludicrous situation to be having further discussions around union leader relishes trying to ‘sell’. managing a pilot surplus and voluntary redundancies in mainline in the same schedule advantage on key routes like basis. There is no doubt many urgent week that Cobham is again hiring 717 the SYD/MEL/BNE triangle with more demands facing the Qantas Group, pilots. There will no doubt be many frequent 737 services and peak A330 including staffing levels and costs. rapid and significant developments in options. In his seminal book Flying Off Course: our EA negotiations between now and The downside of the capacity war for Airline Economics and Marketing, former the next edition of Altitude. Please keep pilots and other staff is that we are now Easyjet Director Rigas Doganis noted in touch with your representatives – all being made to pay the price for this that average employee costs can vary by they are ultimately only as strong as large scale commercial warfare. This is in up to 800% between full service airlines. the pilot group supporting them. both the form of 5,000 job cuts and an For example, Doganis’s analysis showed 18 month wage freeze. The latter is not a an average annual expenditure per pilot QANTAS SHORT HAUL AND JETSTAR PILOTS VOTE PHILIP VAN DEN HEEVER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

Interestingly enough, the most and instructions, but often the interests the vote! Everything done at the table; comprehensive and descriptive definition of their constituency prevents them from every claim pressed, every rejection or of negotiations I could find was on Wikipedia ‘shaking hands across the table’. I have sat admission, is aimed at acquiring a positive of all places! It defines negotiations as through many meetings and inevitably, vote from members. This is because ‘voting negotiators are looking at each other is the foundational act that breathes life into a dialogue between two or and without saying anything, they’d ask the principle of the consent of the governed.’ 1 more people or parties intended the question: “where to from here?” The It is the one and only opportunity for you, predicament of not reaching agreement the members, to have a real and direct to reach an understanding, is inadequate and annoying for both – the impact on the negotiations – and the resolve points of difference, to one thing they do share is their despair! negotiators on both sides know it! It is gain advantage for an individual It is tough. It is a harsh environment the only occasion you can influence your where edginess and exasperation can be own terms and conditions of employment or collective, or to craft outcomes disastrous while patience and commitment – the opportunity should be cherished. to satisfy various interests. (and a lot thereof) sometimes gets If it’s ‘yes’, the deal is done, it’s over. rewarded – but only in small instalments! The negotiators groan big sighs of relief Whilst the definition is helpful, it fails to It’s a place where anger and frustration – the journey has ended… for now! If mention that in negotiations the intentions achieve very little – in fact, these intrusions it’s ‘no’, the negotiators are back to the of the parties are also to actually reach set dialogue back immensely. Instead, table and obligated to sharpen their agreement on something. You see, to date, composed and measured thinking can tenacity to get a deal done. I have been employed by AIPA for seven accomplish more than a thousand words. At the time of writing, the short haul years and for five of those years, AIPA Listening is an essential trait, a quality pilots have voted overwhelmingly against has been actively involved in negotiations. that is often neglected. It is a perplexing, the proposed offer for a new agreement. It feels like a never-ending story. Throughout interesting and thought-provoking The Jetstar pilots are about to vote and, this time, Qantas and its pilots have only environment. Strategic decisions are given the general attitude displayed at agreed once and Jetstar and its pilots constantly considered and debated roadshows it is difficult to see how it will also achieved settlement on only one internally amongst the teams – late nights survive the scrutiny of democracy – it agreement. It seems like a lot of work and restless sleeps aplenty. Exhaustion seems a repeat of the short haul vote and a long time for only two ‘handshakes’. and lethargy are your biggest enemies is inevitable. But negotiating is an extreme and and, to add to it, to remain mindful of The voting phase is arguably the most complex process – it is exceptionally that, is even more tedious! important one in the negotiations process. challenging to achieve ‘agreement’. But through this process, both sides It is often said that ‘the first duty of man is In my experience, the parties are fully of the table are fully aware that a final to think for himself’ and that is what voting ‘understanding’ of the other side’s concerns endorsement is required before anything is all about. can be achieved; that is the final act – I hope you enjoy this edition of Altitude.

“Voting is the one and only opportunity for you, the members, to have a real and direct impact on the negotiations – and the negotiators on both sides know it! It is the only occasion you can influence your own terms and conditions of employment – the opportunity should be cherished. “

1 DeForest Blake “Buster” Soaries, Jr. (born 20 August 1951) Former Secretary of State of New Jersey. The Pointy End an industrial report from AIPA’s Legal and Industrial Relations group

RESERVED JUDGEMENTS AIPA has appealed Vice President conducted by the Federal Court, but they ATO LOL Taxation Dispute: On Watson’s decision to the Full Bench of the were unable to settle our member’s claim. 8 October 2013, Justice Mansfield heard Fair Work Commission and this appeal Qantas continues to rely on the ‘psychosis/ AIPA’s appeal of the taxation of the Loss was heard on 25 September 2014 before psychoneurosis’ exclusion for defeating of Licence capital benefit (lump sum Justice Bolton, Senior Deputy President claims of depression despite the matter so payment) matter in the Federal Court of Lawrence and Commissioner Bull. At the recently being considered, and resolved by Australia.LEGAL+INDUSTRIAL We are still waiting for Justice time of publication, no decision has been the Full Bench in the arbitration. Since that Mansfield to issue his decision. handed down. mediation, AIPA has filed its evidence in the Underpayment of Superannuation matter and the case will be heard in March Contributions to Short Haul Training RECENT JUDGEMENTS and April next year. Captains: As previously reported, a dispute Federal Court Proceedings Against Unfair Dismissal: Earlier this year, one arose between AIPA and Qantas in CASA: On 18 September 2014, Justice of our members was dismissed from his relation to the correct calculation of the Bennett of the Federal Court of Australia employment due to an alleged breach of superannuation salaries of Short Haul decided to strike out AIPA’s statement the Company’s Standards of Conduct Policy. Training Captains. AIPA initially sought of claim against CASA which alleged that AIPA is assisting our member with an to deal with the dispute by commencing CASA owed applicants a general duty of unfair dismissal application in the Fair Federal Court proceedings for the care. This unfortunate decision is discussed Work Commission and – to date – all underpayment of superannuation salary in more detail in Sarah McMillan’s article attempts to resolve the issue privately contributions to Training Captains. “CASA’s ‘Reasonable’ Delays” found on have not been successful. We are in the Qantas responded by filing an page 15 of this edition of Altitude. process of preparing our member’s application in the Fair Work Commission evidence and submissions, after which the for the variation of the Qantas Airways LITIGATION Company will be required to provide its Limited Flight Crew (Short Haul) Loss of Licence Disputes: AIPA has evidence and submissions in reply. The Workplace Agreement 2007 (EBA6). previously reported that Qantas has matter will be heard by the Fair Work The matter was heard by Vice President exercised its discretion to deny one of Commission on 4 and 5 December 2014. Watson between 18 and 20 March 2014. our member’s claims for a capital benefit Vice President Watson issued his decision under the Loss of Licence Plan. In June GENERAL MATTERS on 16 June 2014. 2014, the parties attended a mediation LAX Hotel Complaints: AIPA has heard numerous complaints about the Anaheim Hilton since long haul crew were moved to this hotel earlier in the year. Your AIPA representatives have had regular meetings with Qantas and the hotel to attempt to resolve the concerns and unfortunately these meetings are ongoing. We encourage crew who experience issues with this making an additional payment to all pilots has recently refused claims to pay the hotel to lodge flight crew reports and with less than two years’ service as at meal allowance and we are assisting pilots to advise AIPA of any problems with the 6 March 2013 in order to rectify Jetstar’s to utilise the dispute resolution procedure accommodation. We will continue to underpayment of the 2013 Retention to ensure the meal allowance is paid. work through these issues. Bonus. This means all pilots in that category, Disputes: AIPA has been assisting a number of members who have been “This means all pilots in that category, including those who have involved in various incidents and disciplinary not raised a dispute, should receive an additional amount for the matters. These matters are often sensitive underpaid Retention Bonus.” in nature and are subject to confidentiality but we are happy to report that numerous Jetstar Retention Bonus Underpayment: including those who have not raised a members who have been assisted through Under the terms of Jetstar Airways Pilots dispute, should receive an additional amount difficult times have had satisfactory outcomes Agreement 2008 (Jetstar EBA), Jetstar was for the underpaid Retention Bonus. through AIPA’s involvement. These types required to pay a Retention Payment to WDOS: AIPA is assisting a Jetstar of matters range from allegations relating to eligible pilots on 6 March 2013 (the fifth pilot who has worked numerous DDO’s staff travel, sick leave monitoring, standard anniversary of the date of lodgement of the without receiving the relevant WDO of conduct breaches and training issues. Jetstar EBA). The Retention Payment was payments and entitlements. AIPA is We urge members who are asked to meant to be 6% of eligible pilots’ annual assisting this pilot to run through the salary plus all amounts paid as extra flying dispute resolution procedure to ensure allowance for the preceding 24 months. that entitlements that are owed are It was brought to AIPA’s attention paid appropriately. that Jetstar had miscalculated the 2013 Missed Meals: AIPA is assisting Jetstar Retention Payment. Consequently, AIPA pilots to ensure that when a suitable raised disputes on behalf of about 35 meal is not provided during a flight that members who did not receive the correct the allowance they are entitled to value of the Retention Payment. is paid. Unfortunately we Although it has taken a little while for understand that Jetstar Jetstar to deal with the number of disputes AIPA raised, at the time of publication, Jetstar had advised AIPA that it anticipated attend meetings or issued formal letters Short Haul: As the short haul vote recommend a particular vote to our by the Company to discuss this with your was concluded with 79.4% of pilots members and instead recommends that Association and seek advice and/or rejecting the proposed agreement, your our members inform themselves about assistance. negotiators have surveyed the pilot body the offer and vote accordingly. to determine what changes need to be Network: Network bargaining has BARGAINING made to provide an acceptable agreement been progressing slowly over the last few Long Haul: With the long haul agreement to short haul pilots. With the results of months but it appears that there is now expiring on 31 December this year and the survey now received, at the time of more progress and momentum. Your the Workplace Determination allowing writing, AIPA and the Company are negotiators are meeting with the Company bargaining discussions to commence 6 continuing discussions. to continue to advance their log of claims months prior to expiry, the AIPA long haul Jetstar: At the time of writing the and hope that the progress continues so team has been hard at work preparing for Jetstar proposed EBA is being considered an offer can be made next year. Further bargaining and having informal discussions by pilots and the vote will conclude on updates about this progress will be provided with the Company. Your bargaining team 4 December 2014. AIPA does not through our regular emails. has poured through the EA survey results which have given a strong indication about the direction the membership wish the “Network bargaining has been progressing slowly over negotiating team to take and what issues the last few months but it appears that there is now they should prioritise. Further updates from the bargaining team will be forthcoming. more progress and momentum.” THE QANTAS AIRWAYS LTD PILOTS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015

PHILIP VAN DEN HEEVER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

It is rumoured around the pilot ranks the meaning of the word ‘scope’ as it’s used WHAT DOES THE ACT SAY that a single Qantas pilots’ agreement will in the American aviation industry. In the ABOUT SCOPE? go a long way in rebuilding the relationship United States, the word ‘scope’ usually If the employer and employees between Qantas and its pilots. refers to clauses in agreements which (through their ‘bargaining representatives’) You will recall in a previous edition of are intended to ensure certain work is during commencement of bargaining Altitude we informed members that unless performed pursuant to that agreement for a new agreement, disagree about Qantas and the respective pilot groups can in reference to aircraft types, aircraft sizes the scope of an agreement (i.e. who the reach agreement, as at 1 January 2015 all or types of flying. In Australia, however, agreement will cover), either party may, Qantas Group pilots will be legally able the ‘scope’ of an agreement defines the under section 238 of the Act, apply to (subject to meeting requirements of the employers and the employees who will the Fair Work Commission (FWC) for Fair Work Act (the Act)) to commence and be covered and bound by a proposed a so-called ‘scope order’. participate in protected industrial action. enterprise agreement. If a bargaining representative is This will be the first time that all Australian Under the Act a single-enterprise concerned the bargaining is not proceeding based Qantas pilot agreements will be agreement is an agreement between efficiently and the reason for the concern ‘open’ and subject to negotiations at the an employer and the employees of the is that the single enterprise agreement will same time. employer. ‘Enterprise’ is defined as a not cover appropriate employees or will What this also means is that, provided ‘business, activity, project or undertaking’ cover employees that it is not appropriate Qantas and its short haul pilots do not and the Macquarie Concise Dictionary for the agreement to cover, it may apply reach a settlement of the Short Haul goes further and defines it as ‘a company for a scope order. The FWC must then Agreement before 1 January 2015, both organised for commercial purposes’. In the analyse all evidence and make a decision Qantas mainline pilot agreements will Qantas Group for example, it is likely based on whether the group of employees be subject to negotiations as both have that Qantas or so-called ‘red-tail flying’ that will be covered was ‘fairly chosen, passed their nominal expiry dates. will be deemed ‘a single enterprise’. This taking into account whether the group is geographically, operationally or organisationally Unless Qantas and the respective pilot groups can reach agreement, distinct’. as at 1 January 2015 all Qantas Group pilots will be legally able to The implication of this would seem commence and participate in protected industrial action. This will be to be that if the proposed employee the first time that all Australian based Qantas pilot agreements will coverage of an agreement is related to the geographical, operational or organisational be ‘open’ and subject to negotiations at the same time. distinctness of the employees, that it is a This provides unique opportunities to perhaps can be contrasted with Jetstar matter that tends to support the conclusion all Qantas Group pilots, especially Qantas and Qantas where it would be more that the coverage group is ‘fairly chosen’. mainline pilots. difficult to assert that Qantas and Jetstar It must be pointed out that while the One such opportunity is the creation together form a single ‘enterprise’. But satisfaction of various matters is necessary, of a single enterprise agreement covering certainly, if one considers the meaning of it will not automatically mean that a scope mainline pilots. But what is a ‘single the term ‘single enterprise’, it would seem order of the kind sought must be made enterprise agreement’? How will it work? mainline (that is both long haul and short by the FWC, as its power is discretionary. What does the Act say? What are scope haul) and Eastern and Sunstate (in the Thus other matters of industrial relations orders and are there precedents in case case of QantasLink), could be categorised significance, particularly those that can be law for them? What are the benefits, the as ‘single enterprises’ respectively. related to the objects of the Act, must also negatives and the possible mechanics ‘Scope’ is a word that is used in the be advanced as relevant considerations. around a single ‘Qantas Airways Ltd Pilots Act and by lawyers to describe the group Enterprise Agreement 2015’? of employees and employers who are WHAT DID QANTAS SAY IN bound by an agreement. Therefore, THE ABRITRATION ABOUT THE WHAT IS THE SCOPE if anyone says “we don’t have a scope clause DISTINCTION BETWEEN LONG OF THE AGREEMENT? in our agreements”, they are technically HAUL AND SHORT HAUL? When lawyers or IR professionals wrong – all collective agreements in In 2012, during the long haul arbitration in Australia talk about the ‘scope’ of an Australia have clauses which describe proceedings, Mr Gareth Evans (Qantas agreement, it shouldn’t be confused with its scope. Chief Financial Officer) testified as follows: “8. From an organisational perspective, Qantas Mainline, stated that Qantas “Qantas” or “QantasLink”. There are the Qantas Group is split into 5 employed approximately 2,225 pilots three airline businesses which fall within business segments: as at mid February 2012. Captain the Qantas Airlines business segment: (a) Qantas Airlines; Wilson explained that: (a) Qantas Mainline, branded as (b) Jetstar; 1. (a) 1,556 of these were LHPs; Qantas, which operates mainline (c) Qantas Frequent Flyer; 2. (b) 528 were Short Haul Pilots routes domestically and (d) Qantas Freight Enterprises; and (SHPs); and internationally; (e) Qantas Corporate (which includes 3. (c) 141 were on leave without pay. (b) Regional Airlines, branded as specialist centralised functions 54. The dichotomy between LHPs and SHPs QantasLink, which operates such as treasury, legal and is explained by reference to aircraft regional routes in Australia; and communications). type, not by reference to domestic and (c) Jetconnect Limited, a New 9. While the business segments involved international. That is, SHPs operate 737s, Zealand company which in flying (i.e. Qantas Airlines and Jetstar) while LHPs operate A380s, B747s, operates a number of Qantas are managed in an independent A330s and B767s, regardless of the branded services between manner, most major network and route on which those aircraft operate Australia and New Zealand. strategic decisions are made at or whether the aircraft is travelling 4.2 EMPLOYMENT OF PILOTS Qantas Group level. internationally or domestically.” [30] In Qantas, there is one pilot workforce 10. … A vast majority of these submissions falling into two groups: Long Haul Pilots 11. Qantas Airlines is the business segment were accepted by the Full Bench of the (LHPs) and Short Haul Pilots (SHPs). under which the ‘Qantas-branded’ flying FWC and repeated in the decision that SHPs are pilots who operate Boeing businesses sit. These businesses are was handed down on 17 January 2014 in 737 aircraft. Qantas operates these branded as ‘Qantas’ or ‘QantasLink’. relation to the structure and employment aircraft almost exclusively on Australian There are three airline businesses of pilots with Qantas (paragraphs [23] domestic flights. The remainder of the which fall within the Qantas Airlines to [31]): Qantas pilot workforce are LHPs. business segment: LHPs operate four types of aircraft: the 4.1 STRUCTURE (a) Qantas Mainline, branded as Boeing 747-400 (B744), the Boeing [23] Qantas is the publicly listed entity Qantas, which operates mainline 767 (B767), the Airbus A330 (A330) and the overall parent company for routes domestically and and the Airbus A380 (A380). These all entities falling within the Qantas internationally; aircraft operate nearly all Qantas Group. The Qantas Group, which is (b) Regional Airlines, branded as international flights and a number of “commonly used to describe the QantasLink, which operates domestic flights. As at 14 February group of various companies, within regional routes in Australia; and 2012, Qantas had 2,225 pilots of ultimate ownership of Qantas Airways (c) Jetconnect Limited, a New whom 1,556 are LHPs, 528 are SHPs Limited, that operate airline and Zealand company which operates and 141 are on leave without pay. 69 airline-related services”. a number of Qantas-branded Currently Qantas employs approximately services between Australia and [24] From an organisational perspective, 300 more pilots than are required to New Zealand.” the Qantas Group is split into five carry out the available work, 70 the In terms of pilots, the function of Qantas’ business segments: vast majority of whom are LHPs.71 Flight Operations department and work - Qantas Airlines; The SHPs are covered by the Qantas performed pursuant to the workplace - Jetstar; Airways Limited Flight Crew (Short Haul) instruments, there is no distinction between - Qantas Frequent Flyer; Workplace Agreement 2007. The LHPs ‘Qantas domestic’ and ‘Qantas international’. - Qantas Freight Enterprises; and are covered by EBA7v and are the In the same proceedings, Mr Edward - Qantas Corporate. subject of the current proceedings. Haggerty (Qantas IR Manager) referred to [25] There are a number of entities that [31] The LHPs (excluding those on leave the above and under the heading “Industrial are 100% owned by Qantas or its without pay and undergoing conversion environment at Qantas” testified: subsidiaries within the Qantas Group. courses) are distributed by rank and “5 In Qantas Mainline, there is one pilot These include: aircraft type as follows: - Jetstar; workforce which can be described in Rank B744 B767 A330 A380 - Jetconnect Pty Ltd; two groups: Long Haul Pilots (LHPs) Captain 180 147 162 103 - Eastern Australian Airlines Ltd; and Short Haul Pilots (SHPs).” F/O 183 126 136 95 - Sunstate Airlines (Qld) Pty Ltd; And finally, in Qantas’ submissions to S/O 203 0 59 128 - Express Freighters Australia (EFA); the Full Bench during the arbitration, it - Jetstar New Zealand; and PREVIOUS DECISIONS: HSU v ROYAL submitted under the heading “Pilot workforce - Network Aviation. DISTRICT NURSING SERVICE AND in Qantas mainline and industrial framework” OTHER CASES [26] … the following: In the FWC’s decision in Health “2.4.1 – The pilot workforce [27] Qantas Airlines is the business segment Services Union v Royal District Nursing 53. Referring to the pilot workforce, under which the “Qantas-branded” Service [2011] FWA 8033 (24 November Captain Peter Wilson, the Chief Pilot for flying businesses sit, branded as 2011), the employer sought to split its previously existing single agreement that making the order would adversely affect Given that all the other pre-requisites for covered approximately 1500 health care the ability of bargaining to meet the needs the making of the order sought have been staff into two separate agreements. As a of the changing structure and objectives met I must now pursuant to Section 238(4) result the Health Services Union applied of the business in the Head Office area. (d) consider whether or not it is reasonable for a scope order confirming bargaining I am also satisfied that there will be no in all the circumstances to make the order. for a single agreement. In finding for the significant negative impact on fairness The making of an order is discretionary. Union, Commissioner Roe found at in respect to the bargaining strength I consider that it is appropriate in all the [71-72]: of employees or the employer or the circumstances to make the order. There are a number of considerations prospects of reaching an agreement if As such, this litigation stands as a limited I have set out earlier which favour a the order was made. Taking all of the authority for the ability of employees to conclusion that making the order will matters into consideration I am satisfied successfully seek scope orders in some make the bargaining fairer and or that the test in Section 238(4)(b) is met circumstances. Of note, the context of more efficient that [sic?] if the order in that I am satisfied on balance that this matter is both similar and different was not made. In addition there are two bargaining will at least be fairer and more to those facing AIPA. Scope orders were considerations where no positive finding efficient than it would be if no order were also considered by the Full Bench in some can be made. However, in respect to those to be made. The order would promote the other cases: two considerations I am not satisfied that fair and efficient conduct of the bargaining.

Citation Summary Outcome The Australasian Meat Industry The AMIEU sought a narrow scope order for The application was dismissed at first instance on Employees Union v Woolworths its meat workers employed by Woolworths jurisdictional grounds because the AMIEU did not Limited [2010] FWAFB 1625 that opposed being part of an agreement properly communicate with the rival union about (3 March 2010) with the Shop Assistants Union. its concerns. This decision was upheld on appeal. Liquor, Hospitality and The LHMU sought a scope order to The application was dismissed at first instance on Miscellaneous Union v cover all of Coca Cola’s South Australian jurisdictional grounds because the LHMU did not Coca-Cola Amatil (Aust) Pty Ltd employees, while Coca Cola sought to provide the employer with enough time to respond – re Appeal against the decision bargain over three separate agreements. to their ‘notice of concerns’. This decision was [2009] FWAFB 668 (28 upheld on appeal. October 2009) Australian Nursing Federation The ANF sought a scope order for nurses The Tribunal rejected the application because it [2012] FWA 452 (7 February to fall within the scope of the St John of was not satisfied that making the order would 2012) God Healthcare Inc, Australian Nursing promote the efficient conduct of the bargaining Federation and Health Services Union (section 238(4)(b)) nor that the group was fairly Agreement 2008. chosen (section 238(4)(c)). National Union of Workers v The NUW lodged an application under The FWC was “unable to conclude that the making of Super Retail Group Ltd [2012] s.238 of the Fair Work Act 2009 for a the scope order sought by the NUW would promote FWA 3753 (13 June 2012) scope order. the fair and efficient conduct of bargaining” and was “not satisfied that the making of the order would be reasonable in all the circumstances”. Australian Rail, Tram and Bus The order sought would have the effect of The FWC was of the “view that … bargaining had Industry Union and another v excising employees who are appointed to concluded at the time that each of the applications Australian Rail Track Corporation the classification of Network Controller and for a scope order were made. Put simply, it is my view Limited [2010] FWA 6428 who are engaged outside New South Wales that the unions’ applications were filed too late in the (31 August 2010) from the scope of a proposed enterprise process”. agreement. Wattyl Australia Pty Ltd v Liquor, The LHMU’s new enterprise agreement The FWC issued the Order as it was satisfied the Hospitality and Miscellaneous would not apply to those covered by group of employees “who will be covered by the Union; Liquor, Hospitality and the two other agreements, namely the national enterprise agreement proposed to be Miscellaneous Union v Wattyl distribution employees at Kilburn in South specified in the scope order sought by the LHMU Australia Pty Ltd and WP Australia covered by the Distribution was, with the deletion previously mentioned [of some Crowhurst Pty Limited [2010] Agreement or the maintenance employees employees in Blacktown], fairly chosen. The group of FWA 2587 (31 March 2010) at Blacktown in New South Wales employees is largely the same as that covered by the covered by the Maintenance Agreement. 2005 Agreement”. Citation Summary Outcome The Reject Shop Limited v The employer sought a scope order to The FWC found “…The matter has a longer history National Union of Workers limit the scope of the bargaining to its that involves the extension and variation of the 2005 [2011] FWA 5481 (19 August Victorian distribution centres (DC). The Agreement, an MOU and extensive negotiations for 2011) NUW opposed the application. There a greenfields agreement for the Ipswich DC. …In this was no counter claim for scope from case the question of scope has been an issue not just the NUW. in the negotiations for a replacement to the 2008 Agreement but also in 2008 when the 2005 Agreement was extended and varied. It is not a recent issue between the parties. In all of the circumstances I have decided to grant the application of TRS”.

The list is not exhaustive and there 9. Two pay (stick and credited hours structured and drafted in such a way that are many other cases not listed above systems) and two roster systems essential elements and characteristics of but, I believe it is fair to conclude that, under one agreement may lead to both the Workplace Determination and considering recent decisions, scope orders easier blending. Short Haul Agreement remain intact – as are very difficult to obtain from the FWC. stated before, this could result in multiple WHAT ARE SOME OF THE pay and rostering systems in one document. WHAT ARE SOME OF THE ‘CONS’ FOR A SINGLE QANTAS ‘PROS’ OF A SINGLE QANTAS PILOT AGREEMENT? IN SUMMARY PILOT AGREEMENT? 1. Less focussed approach to B737 It should be pointed out that at this The benefits of a single Qantas Pilot negotiations. stage AIPA has made no decision to pursue Agreement include: 2. Need agreement from Qantas. Failing this avenue – many have doubts as to the 1. Unity – it unites all Qantas pilots agreement, application needs to be made real benefits of having only one agreement, under a single enterprise agreement. to the FWC pursuant to section 238. whilst others see the alignment of the stars 2. Avoids or undermines possible Company 3. Litigation could be costly to AIPA. as a real opportunity to finally re-unite the strategies such as ‘divide and conquer’. 4. Negotiations could be more complex, Qantas pilot body. Rest assured, AIPA’s Committee of 3. Will accommodate and involve the especially different rostering and pay Management will not take action without streamlining of administrative processes systems. proper consultation and majority support such as allocation of annual leave, long WHAT ARE THE POSSIBLE from our membership. These are your service leave, vacancies and one dispute MECHANICS AROUND A agreements and your futures. But we settlement process. SINGLE AGREEMENT? would be derelict in our duties as elected 4. Provides certainty in relation to It is important to remember that before representatives if we did not consider reduction in numbers, introduction of AIPA will pursue this avenue, it would the possibilities we are presented with. new aircraft types, the role of seniority require consent from a majority of pilots We would neglect our responsibilities if across hauls, redundancies, etc. to be covered by the single agreement. we did not inform you, the membership, 5. Provides certainty to both Qantas and The views of the employees are therefore of this opportunity. pilots in relation to the introduction an extremely important consideration The idea of a single Qantas mainline of new aircraft types. for the FWC. In addition, in all previous pilot agreement is an exciting prospect. 6. Less pressure on the Integration Award. scope order decisions by the FWC, It opens up the door for huge potential 7. No need to bargain separately for particular caution and care has been shown for the entire pilot body. But, at the same long haul and short haul pilots. to the current terms and conditions of time, it is challenging and difficult to 8. Pilots will have fairer bargaining powers employees and the continuing protection achieve. Some will no doubt describe it when negotiating, i.e. better industrial of those conditions. Therefore a single as ‘opportunistic’ – and then for others, leverage. agreement for Qantas pilots has to be perhaps, it will be a bridge too far!

This article is not intended to be legal advice and should not, in any way whatsoever, be relied on in any circumstances. Please contact AIPA for legal advice specific to your situation. What can we learn from our colleagues in the US Airline Industry? DR MATTHEW CUMBERWORTH, Economic and financial analyst

In July this year, AIPA’s President Nathan Safe, Treasurer Adam Susz and Economic and Financial Analyst Matthew Cumberworth visited US ALPA in Herndon, Virginia for three days of training. The training covered three areas; how to cost pilot contract concessions, how to structure negotiations on a strong commercial basis and how to model changes affecting pilots such as fleet retirements or new type introductions.

The training employed the use of Financial Analysis, Ana McAhron-Schulz renegotiated within the confines of advanced spreadsheet skills in Excel and (28 years of experience), its Senior Chapter 11. complex macro models developed by Economic Analyst Paul Karg (15 years) Why has there been resurgence in ALPA over a number of years. and its Lead Financial Analyst Kye profit share clauses in pilot contracts? US Johanning (12 years). pilots have reasoned that if they share in The Air Line Pilots On the first day, Ana provided a macro their company’s financial difficulties via hefty Association: 50+ years view of the North American bargaining pay cuts, they can at least gain exposure to of experience analysing environment including an overview of the company’s upside in the form of profit changes to pilot recent key developments. Of considerable sharing clauses in renegotiated contracts. contracts interest was the inclusion of “snap back” So it’s a quid pro quo – I’ll take some pain AIPA was fortunate enough to again clauses in pilot contracts, activated either now but I want some of the future gains have access to the ALPA Economic and by a financial trigger (such as the company’s in return, should the airline’s performance Financial Analysis (EFA) department. The return to profitability) or at a certain turn around. Importantly, the preparedness depth of experience within ALPA’s EFA point in time. In addition to snap backs, to take a hit is contingent upon gaining department is nothing short of impressive, profit share schemes have re-emerged exposure to future gains. comprising the Director Economic and as a major element of pilot contracts

Y/N Type % of Wages Pensionable Incentive NOTES American N None None None $50 to $150 based on None performance each month Delta Y Profit 10% - 20% Yes $100/month (based on - 10% pre-tax income levels up to and performance criteria) including $2.5B and 20% over $2.5B. United Y Profit Variable based on - - - 15% of pre-tax income in excess of employee earnings $10M, less one-time events. Southwest Y Defined- 0.01% - - - 15% of operating profit. contribution and - Minimum of 0.01% of annual stock ownership compensation for each eligible plan employee. - Established as a money purchase. JetBlue Y Profit-sharing 5% - - *Guaranteed profit-sharing percentage: retirement plan* 5% is a component of defined contribution plan. Alaska Y Performanced- 5% - - - based Spirit N - Same as all - Sharing/bonus - “Me Too Clause” if any other employee employee groups group get profit sharing, pilots will also. Hawaiian Y Performance-based 5% - $150/quarter - The plan pays employees, except management employees, 5% of adjusted pre-tax income. Source: Allied Pilots Association, Contract Comparison, January 2014 Some US pilots have also developed depicts the number of training events, by and VP Government Affairs Bob Coffman. a variant to this approach in the form of type, that occur when a key parameter is Discussion centred on the Qantas mainline profit sharing into an hourly wage increase varied, like the retirement of a fleet such – Jetstar Australia relationship and the (performance based wage adjustment), as the B767. In addition to going through commercial effect of a low cost airline thereby locking in any gains. The net effect the movement model in detail, we also on a mainline carrier within an airline is to restore part or all of the wage discussed how one might model moving group. concessions agreed to earlier. In addition to from a credit hour to a stick hour system. The Allied pilots were particularly incorporating performance based wage In particular, Paul discussed how the interested in the cannibalisation of the adjustment clauses, US pilot groups have primary measure is “pay to block” (PTB), mainline airline by the low cost sibling, as learnt that it has been better to trade pay what Qantas refers to as “the premium” they have concerns over American Eagle than give conditions away, as the latter is and is often compared to other airlines. Airlines. Being a wholly owned subsidiary harder (if not impossible) to claw back This metric is an indicator of pilot utilisation. of the American Airlines Group, American in the future. The closer the PTB to 1, the more Eagle Airlines provides regional jet, feeder In addition to snap backs Ana efficiently the pilot is being utilised and the services to the American Airlines network. highlighted the increasing convergence of less the pilot is being paid for non-flying Recently rebranded as Envoy Airlines, it’s pilot contracts, in terms of the four key or overtime hours. Alternatively, one can a very sizeable operation with about 1800 elements of pay, benefits, job security and view the PTB concept as a measure of flights per day, serving 159 cities across the work rules across the big four carriers; pilot contract efficiency. Clearly where a USA, Canada, Mexico and the Caribbean. American, Delta, United and Southwest. PTB equals 1, pilots are paid solely for Naturally, APA was interested in the pilot This convergence followed each airline’s block hours flown and no more. pay relativity between Qantas mainline passage through Chapter 11, with each For example, at Delta Air Lines, it has a and the low cost Jetstar and the likely pilot body in the four major airlines1 having pay to block comparable to Qantas long outcome of Qantas short haul pilot EA their contracts renegotiated, except for haul pilots’ premium, so for every block negotiations. Southwest. hour flown, Delta pilots are being paid The extent of pilot contract something like an extra half an hour. Southwest Airlines Pilots’ renegotiations was severe. US Airways To no surprise, low cost airlines typically Association – leaders in pilots conceded very deep pay cuts for have a PTB much closer to 1 as their harnessing commercial example, after the company first entered pilot contracts have been birthed in a data for strategic Chapter 11, taking a 32.5% pay cut. more competitive environment where decision-making To understand why the pilots had there is a greater focus on cost. At SWAPA, Matthew met with the conceded such a large reduction in rates, Following the ALPA visit, Nathan and Director of Strategic Analysis and it is important to note they occurred in Adam returned to Sydney while Matthew Strategic Planning Committee, John the context of repeated threats by Delta went on to Dallas to meet with the Allied Pepper and members of the SWAPA to seek bankruptcy protection (enter Pilots Association (APA), representing Chapter 11) unless its pilots agreed to about 10,000 American Airlines pilots and cut their wages and benefits which had the Southwest Airlines Pilots’ Association led them to being the highest paid in the (SWAPA), representing more than US airline industry. 6,300 pilots. Post Chapter 11, what emerged across the US airline industry was a reduced Allied Pilots Association variance in pilot pay and conditions across – our largest counterpart the majors. In the area of profit sharing in oneworld for example, Delta pilots gained 10% of At APA, Matthew met with the pre-tax income levels up to $2.5b and Economic and Financial Analysis Manager, 20% over $2.5b; United 15% of pre-tax Allison Clark and members of the Allied income in excess of $10M; Southwest Executive including President Keith Wilson 15% of operating profit. On the second day of our visit, Paul and Kye reviewed elements of the major airlines’ recent pay contracts. Paul and Kye also examined and critiqued AIPA’s long haul pilot productivity study from 2012, providing constructive criticism of AIPA’s methodology and findings. They also reproduced a number of airline pilot productivity metrics for each of the airlines. On the third day, Kye walked us through ALPA’s pilot movement model, which Executive including SWAPA’s 2nd already passed over the industry, leaving and Baltimore/Washington. It presented Vice President Richard Forlano and relatively few possibilities for Southwest Southwest with the opportunity to extend Government Affairs Committee Head to consider. its service to many smaller domestic cities Paul Jackson. From a commercial perspective, where it had no presence but also provided It was evident SWAPA’s operations Southwest faced being locked out of a access to key near-international leisure are focused on harnessing the power number of cities where it had no presence markets in the Caribbean and Mexico. of information. By utilising a vast array or a limited presence. These included In 2010, when Southwest’s CEO Gary of commercial information drawn from Atlanta, the busiest US airport and the Keller approached SWAPA and invited such sources as OAG, key decisions by largest domestic market not served by SWAPA’s President to a meeting to discuss the Executive or the Master Executive Southwest, and Washington, DC via their intentions, SWAPA’s EFA department’s Council are made on the basis of sound Ronald Reagan National Airport. Clearly analysis had already concluded AirTran economic and financial analysis. Southwest’s intention to consolidate was the best option. In addition, SWAPA The analysis incorporates information mirrored Delta and Northwest’s desire had gone on to examine how the two from a wide variety of sources – the to merge in 2008 and United and airlines’ pilot seniority lists might be company itself which provides a considerable Continental’s in 2010. merged and what it would mean for amount of commercial data, subscriptions Well aware of Southwest management’s SWAPA members. to key industry data providers (OAG for desires, SWAPA undertook its own analysis Being informed by independent and example, at US$50K per annum) and and identified the two best options for accurate analysis gave SWAPA critical government sources. Southwest; Air Tran and Canada’s WestJet. lead time when it came to dealing with A recent example from SWAPA Both were low cost airlines with similar the problematic issue of integrating the highlights the benefits of well-informed business models to Southwest. AirTran pilot seniority list. As they already analysis serving as the basis for strategic After extensive analysis of the network knew which way the company would go, decision-making. synergies between Southwest and the the SWAPA leaders had the strategic In 2009 Southwest expressed a desire two options of AirTran and WestJet, advantage of being prepared for the to acquire another airline rather than just SWAPA determined conclusively which challenging pilot integration exercise that continuing to grow organically. Given airline would be a better choice. lay ahead of them. And because they had extensive consolidation had occurred in SWAPA’s analysis identified AirTran wisely used all the commercial information the US following the passage of most US as generating the best synergies for available to them, they had bought valuable major airlines through Chapter 11 (except Southwest’s expansion in the key markets time and put themselves ahead of the game for American), a wave of consolidation had of New York LaGuardia, Boston Logan, to the benefit of their members.

1 American Airlines was the last of the U.S. legacy airlines to seek court protection from creditors through Chapter 11 in 2011, following its competitors’ entry into Chapter 11 some years earlier; United Airlines in 2002-2006, Delta Air Lines 2005-2007 and US Airways 2002-2003, 2004-2005. CASA’S ‘REASONABLE’ DELAYS SARAH MCMILLAN, AIPA IN-HOUSE LAWYER Many members have struggled with the amount of time CASA takes to make determinations, particularly with respect to the time it takes to issue medical certificates. One such pilot, Captain Angus Eagle (B737), commenced legal proceedings against CASA for what appeared to be an excessive delay in determining whether or not he met the requirements to be issued with a Class 1 Medical Certificate (medical certificate). The Court decided that CASA does or in part, for a failure to disclose a the necessary satisfaction to issue the not owe a duty of care to exercise its reasonable cause of action. The parties medical certificate.6 Justice Bennett held statutory functions, such as issuing medical subsequently attended an interlocutory that Captain Eagle had not made out a certificates, without unreasonable delay, hearing, where the parties made basis for a breach of this duty. as its overarching duty is to place air safety submissions on the merits of CASA’s Common Law Duty of Care first in the public interest. The effect of application. Justice Bennett was not satisfied that the decision is that CASA does not need JUSTICE BENNETT’S DECISION Captain Eagle had established that CASA to consider the amount of time it takes In making a determination of CASA’s owed a specific duty to not delay in exercising its statutory functions, as interlocutory application, Justice Bennett unreasonably for Captain Eagle’s private its paramount duty is to the safety of air had to consider whether Captain Eagle’s interests as “…such a duty would not be navigation and the general public; not pleadings had disclosed a ‘reasonable’ cause compatible with the other duties which CASA the individual. of action, which requires an assessment of owed, specifically the statutory imperative to FEDERAL COURT PROCEEDINGS whether the matter would have to have place air safety first in the public interest.”7 In February 2014, Captain Eagle some chance of success if the Court only Moreover, in Justice Bennett’s view, Captain commenced proceedings in the Federal considered the allegations and pleadings Eagle had not established that CASA owed Court due to CASA’s 18 month delay in made by Captain Eagle.1 In doing so, Justice him a general duty to ensure he did not issuing his medical certificate. As a result of Bennett had to assess the material facts suffer economic loss in its exercise of CASA’s delay, Captain Eagle was not able plead by Captain Eagle and determine its statutory functions and powers. 8 In to exercise the privileges of his air transport whether it was possible to impose the recognising the existence of such a cause pilot licence or fulfil his employment duties asserted duties of care on CASA. 2 of action, it would be contrary to the with Qantas. He was forced to take a Statutory Duty of Care general public’s interest to divert the significant amount of leave, depleting all Justice Bennett determined that: decision maker from his or her duties by of his balance of accrued sick and annual requiring an assessment of what constitutes “The implied duty as alleged by Mr Eagle 9 leave, resulting in a loss of income. …to issue a Medical Certificate without an unreasonable delay. Captain Eagle argued that CASA owed unreasonable delay, is inconsistent with IN CLOSING him the following duties: CASA’s statutory obligations which require it This is a disappointing result for AIPA, 1. a statutory duty to issue a medical to regard the safety of air navigation as the Captain Eagle and our members generally. certificate if Captain Eagle met the most important consideration and to issue There is little doubt that the decision will requirements of regulation 67.180(2) a Medical Certificate only if it would not be make it more difficult for pilots and AIPA of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations likely to have an adverse effect on the safety to prosecute, write demands or simply 1988 (Cth) (the CAS Regulations); of air navigation.”3 get CASA to hasten its approval and and The implied duty alleged by Captain assessment processes. The best advice 2. a common law duty to ensure that Eagle cannot arise in circumstances where we have for members is to communicate it did not unreasonably delay any it conflicts with the express statutory frequently and openly with CASA and decision to grant Captain Eagle duties imposed on CASA.4 your employers, make them aware of your a Class 1 Medical Certificate in CASA had to reach a state of matter and ensure it is not left behind in circumstances where the previous satisfaction and make a determination someone’s ‘inbox’. Class 1 Medical Certificate issued that Captain Eagle met all the relevant to Captain Eagle had expired or requirements and that granting the would expire and where he met medical certificate would not have an 1  Wride v Schulze [2004] 3 Ibid at [55]. the requirements of Reg 67.180(2) adverse effect on the safety of air FCAFC 216 at [25]; see 4 Ibid at [56]. of the CAS Regulations. navigation.5 In consideration of Captain also Polar Aviation Pty 5 Ibid at [52]. Ltd v Civil Aviation Safety 6 Ibid at [55]. In response, CASA filed an interlocutory Eagle’s history, the mere receipt of a Authority (2012) 203 7 Ibid at [59]. application for an order that Captain clinical opinion from a medical specialist FCR 325. 8 Ibid. Eagle’s application be struck out, in whole was not sufficient for CASA to reach 2 Ibid. 9 Ibid at [60]. ! SAFETY MATTERS NEW FLIGHT CREW LICENSING AND TRAINING AND CHECKING REGULATIONS: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

CAPTAIN BRIAN GREEVES, SAFETY AND TECHNICAL CONSULTANT Understandably there have been some questions asked regarding the new regulations on flight crew licensing and other matters that came into effect on 1 September 2014. The ones that affect you directly are the Part 61 (Flight Crew Licensing) and the Part 142 (Training and Checking Operators). The Part 61 Manual of Standards (MOS) supports these new licensing rules and contains the aeronautical knowledge and practical competency standards for all Part 61 licences, ratings and endorsements. It also contains all flight test, proficiency check and flight review standards.

One of the objectives of these changes General Issuance of Part 61 Licence was to align the Australian regulations (as • Aircraft endorsement system for Qantas will send all the necessary far as possible) with the International Civil pilots to be simplified through details to the CASA Licensing and Aviation Organization’s Standards and adoption of ICAO system of Registration Centre (CLARC) on your Recommended Practices contained in its aircraft type and class ratings. This behalf. This will be done in batches Annex 1 – Personal Licensing. includes introducing type ratings for and you will be notified accordingly. In short, the provisions contained in all aircraft certified for multi-crew CASA will then issue you with a Part Part 5 of CAR 1988 (apart from those operations. (Refer instrument CASA 61 Licence… for balloon pilots) have been replaced by 186/14) If you have qualifications or those in Part 61, Part 64, Part 141 and • Once issued, all flight crew endorsements stamped in your Pilot Part 142. qualifications will remain valid Log book that are not included in the There will be a transition period of 4 indefinitely subject to demonstration CLARC database, these will not years until 31 August 2018, during which of ongoing competency (flight reviews automatically be included in your existing authorisations will remain valid. or proficiency checks) linked to the new licence. In this case, you will “Despite Parts 11 and 61, the holder of a aircraft and operational ratings need to download the form 61.9TX continued authorisation is taken to have rather than its periodic renewal. and submit it to CASA. (See QF FSO applied for, and to meet the requirements • ATPL and MPL flight test to be 048/14 for further instructions) for, the grant of the equivalent new conducted in a multi-crew environment. Remember to check that the authorisation.”1 new licence has all of your previous In preparing this article, I have • instrument Rating (Proficiency) to permissions plus any new ones, consulted both CASA and the Qantas include approach procedures without e.g. a new type rating. Flight Training department and would vertical guidance (2D) and with like to acknowledge their assistance. vertical guidance (3D). This enables approaches other than a NDB/VOR Whilst this article is not endorsed by 1 or ILS to be used.  Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998, Part 202, either organisation, it hopefully reflects a Subdivision 202.CB.1.3 New authorisations for picture of where we are today and the • The flight crew licensing system holders of continued authorisations – 202.272 future based on those discussions. to be competency based. Grant of equivalent new authorisations. What Does This Mean To Me? provide an appropriate rating for to conduct checks. Flight examiner Command Ratings (Captains and First Officers) pilots who provide relief in the ratings are required to conduct • There will be some format changes cruise phase (for the co-pilot) as Operator Proficiency Checks. to your new licence. part of an augmented crew. This • Pilot and flight engineer examiner • under the new rules, the ATPL(A) rating is also allowable under the ratings will be introduced to replace authorises the holder to conduct a International Civil Aviation the delegation scheme for Approved flight under the IFR provided they also Organization’s Standards and Test Officers. Examiners will conduct have a valid Instrument Proficiency Recommended Practices contained flight tests for the issue of all licences Check (IPC) for the aeroplane. Pilots in its Annex 1 – Personal Licensing. and ratings. The aim is to provide with a CAR Part 5 ATPL(A) and • Although you presently hold an independence of the testing process command instrument rating will have Instrument rating with a multi- from the training process, particularly the ATPL(A) and IR with equivalent engine aeroplane endorsement; for professional flight crew qualifications. endorsements on their new Part 61 – as a Cruise Rated Pilot, you will • The current ATO approval remains licence. now maintain your “privileges to until 30 June 2016 or earlier if the ATO Impact of the Instrument Proficiency Check (IPC) operate the aircraft under the IFR transitions to the Flight Examiner • The IPC is satisfied by your successful through successful participation in Rating. participation in the Qantas training the Qantas training and checking • Qantas Training has advised that and checking system, as approved by system, i.e. the cyclic training”. the present training system for CASA under Regulation 61.040, • This rating will apply to all pilots check and training staff is already though it is applicable only to transitioning to a new fleet. In compliant. operations conducted by Qantas and other words, your licence will be Recent Experience Requirements (“Recency”) does not extend to other operations. endorsed with a Cruise Pilot Type The changes to the “type recency This means that you must complete Rating and not a “full” type rating requirements” were made in an a full IPC in a multi-engine class for the new aircraft as your rating amendment to Civil Aviation Order rated aeroplane to be authorised to will have been issued after the 82.0-8B issued on 27 August 2014. conduct an IFR operation in aircraft commencement date of the Part In plain language, this states that a outside of Qantas operations, for 61 MOS on 1 September 2014. pilot-in-command must have carried out example, a Baron. • Qantas Training has emphasised one take-off and landing within the preceding that most of the time in the 45 days. In the case of the co-pilot, he/ Co-pilot Ratings (Second Officers) simulator sessions (Cyclic Training) • The co-pilot type rating and co-pilot she must have: for Second Officers will be devoted • within the preceding 45 days, instrument rating no longer exist under to training rather than checking and Part 61, but during the transitional flown as a pilot crew member that this training will include V1cuts, in that aeroplane type; or period (until 31 August 2018 [see LVTOs and other handling exercises. Regulation 202.271]), you will be • have undertaken the airline’s approved able to maintain the privileges of Check and Training Pilots and Simulator refresher simulator training (of at these ratings. Instructors least one hour); or • For example, if you hold a co-pilot • The CAR 5.20 and CAR 5.21 • flown with a check pilot or a pilot rating on the B747-400 your Part training approvals are replaced by appointed to exercise the necessary 61 licence will include a B747-400 the Part 61 Flight and Simulator supervision. rating, but with the condition Instructor Ratings. All new training Other recent experience requirements “Not authorised to act as pilot and checking pilots will be required (“recency”) are satisfied if the pilot is in a in command” for the instrument to complete training and be training and checking system (i.e. Qantas) rating and pilot type rating. competent conducting training for which CASA has issued an approval, • In practice, however, you will be limited depending on the training role. for example 3 night take-offs and landings to operating above 20,000 feet as Check pilots will also need to within the previous 90 days to carry a your proficiency check will be for a complete training to be competent passenger. Cruise Relief Type Rating (see below). Cruise Relief Type Rating (Second Officers) Come and Find Out More • A new rating (at least new to Australia), known as the Cruise Relief CASA and Qantas Training have both kindly agreed to come and address AIPA Type Rating, has been introduced. members to help resolve any remaining questions and I am sure there will be This will limit the holder to operate some! The seminar will be held in Sydney in early December 2014. Please see the aircraft above 20,000 feet. the AIPA website (under ‘AIPA at Work’) for seminar details and RSVP to The purpose of this rating is to [email protected] by 5 December 2014. A Year in Review

2014 has kept AIPA’s Safety and Technical Subcommittee (S&T) on its toes as a result of the many challenges which presented themselves throughout the year. With the year almost over, we reflect on the issues that have kept us busy and some of the successes that have been achieved to date.

ACCIDENT ANALYSIS diversion. The aim was to identify any Airport Safety Action Plan and other AND PREVENTION (AAP) immediate safety recommendations/ initiatives. We are also currently the Incident Response actions and develop a gap analysis only provider of Local Runway Safety • AIPA has responded to 13 incidents based on the feedback generated Team training. Most recently, AusALPA and has accompanied the majority of by the Forum. has been tasked to participate in a those involved to both Company safety • Approximately 80% of AIPA’s suggestions sub-group to determine the best way and ATSB interviews. have been/will be incorporated into to ensure the longevity of effective • Remember that if you are involved in the Bureau’s report/gap analysis. LRSTs. an accident or incident, call the AIPA • If you identify a risk or hazard which ‘Hotline’ as soon as possible: +61 (0)2 AIRCRAFT DESIGN AND may potentially impact your working 8307 7788 or refer to AIPA’s Emergency OPERATIONS (ADO) environment, remember to report Contact Directory. Remote Pilot Aircraft Systems (RPAS) this to AIPA. • AIPA has recommended CASA • AIPA has a number of trained, qualified Wildlife Management and experienced representatives develop educational requirements for hobbyist operators, especially • AIPA is a member of the Australian available to assist you and we strongly Aviation Wildlife Hazard Group encourage you to always have an AIPA those that are unlikely to be involved with groups/Associations providing (AAWHG) Executive Council, which representative accompany you to an is the designated national “wildlife interview. education services. This should ensure hobbyist operators are aware of the hazard committee”. In July 2014, AIPA AIPA/Qantas Flight Data Analysis Program regulatory and operational environments presented a pilot’s perspective at the (FDAP) such as controlled airspace. CASA is AAHWG annual forum, focusing on • AIPA worked with Qantas to update currently developing an education the need for formal education and and incorporate amendments to the and communications programme as training for pilots during licensing 2011 AIPA/Qantas FDAP Protocols. suggested. courses and refresher training. The document was finalised and signed • Additionally, the Australian Museum by both Qantas and AIPA in May 2014. AERODROME AND GROUND and AIPA have been liaising closely to (Note: this change did not affect the ENVIRONMENT (AGE) establish training for pilots in various underlying Deed.) Airport Matters areas of wildlife hazard mitigation. Find Continued Relationship between AIPA • AIPA representatives have continued to out more on page 23. and the ATSB work closely with airport management CAT II and GLS in Sydney • AIPA attended the ATSB Safety Forum and Airservices Australia to ensure • Sydney Airport now has a precision early in 2014 as part of its investigation a safe working environment. approach navigation system to guide process into the “Serious Incident” • AIPA, through AusALPA has assisted aircraft to within one metre of the resulting from a weather related with the development of the Australian runway centre line on every approach. ! SAFETY MATTERS

The ground based augmentation system AusALPA played a very active role, health effects. At this point in time, landing system (GLS) is the first of its and is now endorsed by organisations AIPA does not believe that there are type in the southern hemisphere. AIPA such as ICAO, IFALPA, IATA and sufficient studies to properly develop has been instrumental throughout the IFATCA. a position. implementation of this system and our Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) • In the meantime, members are strongly attendance during the check flight of • The relationship between BoM and encouraged to consider submitting a the High Intensity Approach Lighting AIPA has flourished over the past few Form 2000 or similar to the Company System was specifically requested. years and AIPA is now involved in a in case a future Workers’ Compensation claim arises and have blood samples AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES (ATS) number of working groups including TTF, TAF Verification, and Graphical taken for the Washington University Australian Strategic Air Traffic study after experiencing a fumes event. Management (ASTRA) Council Area Forecast. • The ASTRA Council is the “voice of • Although all major players, such as Fatigue Risk Management Systems (FRMS) the Industry” in terms of air traffic airlines, are supposedly involved, there • Since the amended CAO 48.1 management and its future requirements. have been times when the only Instrument (Flight Time Limitations) The Council has been instrumental in person with “hands on” airline took effect in 2013, AIPA has been the introduction of the ADS-B, TCAS experience is AIPA’s representative. working closely with the Company in order to implement the FRMS. II Version 7.1 and Mode S mandates, HUMAN PERFORMANCE as well as the implementation of PBN AIPA has also continuously sought (HUPER) clarification from CASA in relation to approaches and airspace. As a member PCAIRE – Radiation Monitoring of ASTRA, AIPA has been able to a number of issues stemming from Program the new CAO 48 as a result of the counter commercial interest within • Since 2011, the Radiation Project the Council. regulation’s deficiencies and its inability has been set up to provide Qantas to sufficiently capture the ICAO SARPs Airservices Australia ATS/Airline crew with information about their or its inadequate reflection of scientific Safety Forum occupational exposure to cosmic principles and knowledge. • This is an invitation-only forum and radiation and gives detailed information AIPA has been the only Association about individual accumulated doses. Part 61 Manual of Standards (MOS) in attendance as a result of our S&T To view your accumulated dose of • CASR Part 61 took effect in expertise and active involvement in cosmic radiation, visit qantas.pcaire. September 2014 and in its response other ATM forums. This year’s forum com or qfflightcrew.com. Click on AIPA opined that the MOS 61 was focused on “Good Risk Habits” which ‘safety’, then ‘crew radiation’. Once ambiguous and inconsistent in quality. works around a systemic, standardised logged in, navigate to ‘Applications’. AIPA has sought clarification on a approach across the industry in number of issues relating to Part 61, Cabin Air Quality specifically relating to Cruise Relief managing risks to maintain safe • AIPA has been actively involved in cabin operations. Rating and the discontinuation of the air quality for a number of years. Since ‘co-pilot type rating’. Go-Around Workshop 2008, AIPA has also been participating • AIPA has been invited to take part in the University of Washington study in the AsA Go-Around Workshop, into the genetic biomarkers of which aims to examine the causes organophosphate (OP) exposure. of go-arounds from a pilot, controller • Although there are some preliminary and other perspective. This follows studies focusing on the biomarkers the successful program on Runway of fume events, more studies are Safety overseen by CANSO in which needed, especially on the long term Transport and Logistics to Commercial Pilot roles, for inclusion recommended that you report this Industry Skills Council in the new Aviation Training Package. to AIPA either through the “Security (TLISC) Screening Incident Report” form, • AIPA has recently accepted an SECURITY AND DANGEROUS available in the Members Area of the invitation to take part in the TLISC GOODS (SEC/DG) AIPA website or via [email protected]. Aviation Advisory Committee. The Screening Targeting Please provide as much detail as possible. Council is tasked by the Government • The apparent ‘targeting’ of flight crew to set competency levels for industries as part of security screening before involved in either transport or logistics; flight has always been a contentious For more information and specifically for the aviation industry, issue for pilots. There have been reports AIPA is active in many areas related pilot training and licencing with of members being asked to go through to safety and technical matters both reference to the regulations. the full body scanners multiple times within Australia and internationally. • Upcoming projects include “Aviation to prove that they were not a risk. AIPA, through AusALPA, also provides Safety Skills”, which focuses on Human Unfortunately, the Office of Transport expertise in many of the other IFALPA Factors, CRM and Risk Management Security has indicated that there is no committees, as well as to a number of industry benchmarks and standards, limit as to how many times a person significant aviation forums in Australia. and “Commercial Pilot (Aeroplane)” can walk through the scanners. Without this representation, changes which aims to review existing units of • Should you ever face difficulties at an and decisions, not always favourable competency and qualifications aligned airport screening point, it is strongly to pilots, could occur. ! CONTROLLED REST SAFETY ON THE FLIGHT DECK MATTERS ANGELA WILLIAMS, SAFETY AND TECHNICAL OFFICER CAPTAIN BRIAN GREEVES, SAFETY AND TECHNICAL CONSULTANT

Qantas recently issued Flight Standing Throughout the duration of sleep inertia, STRATEGIES TO COUNTER Order Operations No. 131/14 following people demonstrate all the outward SLEEP INERTIA FOR PILOTS a post implementation review of the physical signs of actually being awake, Fatigue management strategies controlled rest policy: however aren’t cognitively awake. The ATSB recommends “Sleep inertia countermeasures be incorporated “Periods of controlled rest must Effects of sleep inertia: into fatigue management systems or not exceed 45 minutes (including 10 impaired performance organisational risk/safety audits”. These minutes sleep preparation period) per and duration include “increasing response times to crew member twice per sector, with When awoken abruptly, the effects of provide adequate wake-up time, the use an additional 10 minutes required sleep inertia have been measured to last of automated flight planning (manual before resuming flight deck duties.” for periods of up to 30 minutes, although flight planning had previously led to an some researchers believe it may last in (Note: For 4 pilot operations, controlled increase in human error), and the use excess of one to two hours. During this of non-abrupt means to wake pilots.” rest is only to be used once per crew member time performance and reaction time per sector.) can be impaired on tasks ranging from Napping strategies A controlled rest or short nap can You may be wondering where these arithmetic to simple motor skills as well as causing a reduction in memory ability enhance alertness, communication and numbers came from and why Qantas performance during periods of sustained Medical requested clarification be added and impairment in our decision-making capability. That is why we need sufficient wakefulness when taken at an appropriate so that flight crew do not confuse the time and for an appropriate duration. 45 minute rest period for a sleep period time to recover after waking from a of that entire duration. controlled rest or nap. Application of alerting factors The intention is to limit actual sleep Factors that affect sleep inertia “Alerting factors” or in layman’s terms, to 35 minutes to minimise the risk of • Sleep deprivation methods of “restoring your alertness” used sleep inertia resulting from deep sleep. The more fatigued a person, the greater immediately after waking may counteract The 10 minutes that must be taken after the time taken to feel alert after waking. sleep inertia. A loud noise is one method controlled rest is to allow flight crew to This may seem obvious, but is why we (though your colleague may not appreciate return to adequate performance levels. need to manage our sleep. this!) and environmental factors such as The general wisdom is that some sleep • Stage of sleep cold (e.g. washing your face in cold water) is better than none, which is true as long The effects of sleep inertia are more and light are likely to have the same alerting as we understand the purpose of the pronounced when awoken from deep/ effect. The combination of a short nap with sleep and manage its length appropriately. slow wave sleep (SWS). SWS in a alerting factors would be most effective in A controlled rest is intended to give a well-rested person usually occurs within countering sleep inertia. quick “recharge of the batteries” whilst a 45 to 60 minutes after falling asleep, Education long rest in a designated crew rest area is whilst those already fatigued may reach Education is an important strategy to to restore cognitive and other functions. SWS in as little as 20 to 30 minutes. counter sleep inertia and fatigue within Hence the reasons for limiting the • Time of day aviation, hence this article. Although controlled rest period and adding a Sleep inertia will generally last longer technological methods for detecting fatigue recovery period to help overcome following naps ending between 0300 are being developed, self-assessment is the associated sleep inertia. to 0500. currently the most practical means of It should also be understood that • Individual differences detecting fatigue. controlled rest is not intended to replace Most people experience some effects of or be used instead of rest in a crew sleep inertia upon waking and this can CONCLUSION rest area. differ considerably amongst individuals. Pilots, such as those crossing multiple time zones, must learn to fully appreciate SO WHAT IS SLEEP INERTIA? The effects of sleep inertia and fatigue the consequences of sleep inertia (and Sleep inertia is the state of transition are similar in that both result in symptoms fatigue) and take appropriate action to from sleep to wakefulness that results in a such as reduced levels of performance, prevent or mitigate as best as possible the measurable performance decrement reaction times and memory ability, while symptoms and effects to ensure safety at immediately after waking. In plain language, also impairing decision-making. Although all times. it is described as “the grogginess, effects are similar, sleep inertia isn’t disorientation, and sleepiness that necessarily the result of fatigue as adequate accompany awakening from deep sleep.” rest may have been obtained. ! SAFETY MATTERS

DNA IDENTIFICATION ASSISTS ‘WILDLIFE CSI’ MANAGEMENT OF WILDLIFE HAZARD DR REBECCA JOHNSON, HEAD, AUSTRALIAN CENTRE FOR WILDLIFE GENOMICS At the Australian Museum we may be better known for our dinosaurs than our DNA but at the Australian Centre for Wildlife Genomics (part of the Australian Museum Research Institute www.australianmuseum.net.au/AMRI/) we are applying forensic DNA technology to better identify wildlife hazard to aircraft and ultimately make flying safer.

An unexpected but airport to airport, for example ibis, or with our knowledge of the distribution of successful partnership flying foxes in Sydney or black kites in that particular species shows it is from The Australian Museum has been Darwin), then from a risk mitigation a species more likely to be from the working with the aviation industry since and management perspective it might airport of take off rather than landing. This 2005, when upon the introduction of be strongly recommended that they scenario clearly has both a reporting and mandatory reporting in 2003, it was a dedicate their wildlife management management implication (and airports surprise to discover that up to 90% of efforts to minimising those particular are always pleased to be able to reduce birdstrikes, or more accurately ‘wildlife collisions. strike numbers from their airfield). There strikes’, were being reported as unidentified Upon landing, if all that remains is a blood are many reasons for this, a strike may ‘species unknown’ or were identified smear or tissue remains, DNA analysis is have been undetected at take off, or it so generically that there was no way of required for accurate identification of the may have even occurred at an altitude effectively assessing the hazard posed to species involved. Even if fur or feathers not commonly associated with wildlife aircraft by these collisions. Basically, if the are left behind, these are often very strike (i.e. >10,000 feet), but there are species is unknown the risk is extremely challenging to identify visually so typically many pilots who report encountering difficult to manage. DNA procedures are also implemented wildlife in such unexpected circumstances! in these circumstances. Further, our analyses sometimes show Why is it important to that a significant (or damaging) strike has identify species involved Sometimes surprising been caused by a very small bird such in wildlife strike? results! as a swallow or swiftlet. Critically, knowledge of the correct Accurate identification using DNA species involved in these collisions is often gives surprising results! We have Wildlife as a Hazard to important from both a risk assessment identified samples that have revealed that aircraft? and management point of view. For the wildlife strike had probably not taken Sometimes it’s difficult to imagine that example, if an airfield is experiencing place at the airport that reported the a small soft bodied animal such as a bird frequent strikes from species considered strike. For example, it is not uncommon or a bat could genuinely pose a risk to to be ‘high risk’ (which differs from to find that our DNA analysis, combined aircraft. However, if you think back to your basic physics (even if it was learned some time ago like mine!) you will recall the formula for kinetic energy (= ½mv2). This demonstrates that when two moving objects collide, even if one is relatively slow (such as an animal) but the other is fast (such as an aircraft), the energy of impact is substantially influenced by the “relative velocity” of the two objects. Therefore in the event of a collision, this high energy can cause significant damage, tearing alloy, smashing, cracking or spalding modified glass or acrylic windscreens, and even resulting in severe engine damage, compromised performance or failure (the most recent high profile example being the 2009 emergency landing into the Hudson River by flight US1549). How does it help Pilots? better overall management on their Wildlife management is a holistic airfield and surrounds. practice that now takes place, in some If there is a wildlife related NOTAM capacity, at all Australian airports. DNA or a warning on the ATIS; take note of DNA IDENTIFICATION ASSISTS analysis now routinely forms part of this it and take some preventative action, MANAGEMENT OF WILDLIFE HAZARD broader wildlife management practice at including slowing down below 10,000 many Australian airports and represents feet (remember your physics (½mv2), best practice for species identification the faster you are, the greater the in minimising the number of unknown energy!!) as wildlife/aircraft collisions species in wildlife management. can be catastrophic, and should not be deemed inevitable or ‘acts of God’. What can you do? If you suspect a wildlife strike then DNA – a new tool in the report it. Then if a blood sample, a carcass toolkit for wildlife or other remains are discovered then hazard management accurate identification of the culprit can Learn more about wildlife hazard and typically be obtained. As a consequence the role of the Australian Museum and that port can then feed that data into DNA analysis here www.youtube.com/ their wildlife management practices for watch?v=_JV-pv6W9gw WILDLIFE AND AIRPORTS RECAP FROM THE ANNUAL AUSTRALIAN AVIATION WILDLIFE HAZARD GROUP FORUM 2014

DR GRETA FRANKHAM, AUSTRALIAN CENTRE FOR WILDLIFE GENOMICS

Safety and Risk management is aircraft may pose a significant safety a great distance to share their own paramount at our airports. One risk not hazard to the passengers and crew on experiences in managing aviation wildlife always obvious to those working on an board and to the wider community. hazards around the Asia-Pacific region. airport, or to the general flying public, In July 2014 the annual Australian Presentations and topics at the forum is the grave hazard that wildlife pose to Aviation Wildlife Hazard Group (AAWHG) included wildlife strike case studies, statistics, operating aircraft. Forum was held in Melbourne. The purpose training and education for pilots (presented In Australia, according to the ATSB, of the forum is to bring together experts by the Association’s representative), runway it is estimated that around 1 in 1000 and representatives from the wide array safety, legal obligations and new scientific RPT movements result in aircraft/wildlife of stakeholders involved with aviation insights. Robust discussions were had collision. While these collisions don’t often wildlife management. Attendees this around newly introduced recommended result in serious damage being sustained year included representatives from both practices as well as future avenues and to the aircraft, when they do the repairs major and regional airports, airlines, pilots, coordinated approaches to wildlife safety and subsequent delays pose significant air traffic controllers, CASA, ATSB, management at airports. costs for aircraft operators which are Department of Defence, government The AAWHG welcomes all interested eventually borne by the general public, planners as well as aviation lawyers, parties to participate in future events. For (amounts around $45,000AUD for an insurers and scientists. more information about the 2014 forum AOG; or $1m AUD for a jet-engine being This year, the AAWHG also welcomed and the work of the AAWHG please sent to the manufacturer for repairs are sizable delegations from New Zealand, visit their website at www.aawhg.org/ not unheard of). Furthermore, a damaged Singapore and Indonesia who travelled How is your Association involved? Your Association is an active member of the AAWHG Executive and to date has drafted recommended practices for pilot training and for operator’s procedures to mitigate the wildlife hazard; given presentations on training and education of pilots; and helped (and starred in) a training/educational video which can be found here: www. youtube.com/watch?v=_JV-pv6W9gw annual dinner

This year AIPA’s Annual Dinner was held on Thursday, 6 AIPA’s 2014 Annual Dinner – celebrating the careers of: November 2014 at the Sydney Harbour Marriott Hotel. Our Master of Ceremonies, Second Officer Jarrod • Capt Trevor Aldous • Capt Martin Lutge Robertson set the pace for the evening with his clever • Capt Phil Beard • Capt Geoff Markwell and highly amusing ‘safety demonstration’ which had the • Capt Peter Boswell • Capt Peter O’Shaughnessy room in stitches. • F/O Dennis Caldwell • Capt Peter Raven Our special guest speaker was Peter FitzSimons, • Capt John Carr • Capt Ken Saward AM, one of the country’s most popular and engaging speakers. A well-known and respected broadcaster, • Capt Rick Collins • Capt Bob Smart author and columnist who also represented Australia • Capt Michael Condon • Capt Peter Smith in rugby union, Peter entertained with his stories and • Capt Paul Garland • Capt Mal Stewart experiences. • Capt Ian Getley • F/O Colin Tomlinson This year saw our largest attendance yet with more than 185 guests taking the opportunity to catch up with • Capt Barry Henwood • Capt Rick Verwoord friends and colleagues and to farewell 31 retiring pilots • Capt Gordon Henwood • Capt Murray Warfield – with a combined total of 1148 years of service or an • Capt Noel Horne • F/O Ian Watson average of 37 years of service. • Capt Chris Joynson • Capt Hugh Windsor each retiring member was given the opportunity to address the crowd and provide anecdotes and • Capt Ross Kelly • Capt James Wood stories from their career – it was very entertaining • Capt Dennis Lloyd • Capt Ian Woods to say the least! • Capt Bob Lumsdaine Congratulations and best wishes to all our retirees. captain MIKE HAWKE, WELFARE DIRECTOR

As we all expected, it has been a very interesting year to date with all of the changes to our aircraft fleets and crew. I have spoken to many pilots affected by the reduction in numbers who are in the process of or about to commence type changes. I must say, I have been so impressed with the professionalism and positive outlook you’ve all displayed. I know it to be a hugely difficult and frustrating process, sometimes making little sense, but well done on just ‘getting on with it’.

If it all seems to be getting too intense your super salary after annual and sick along the way, just pick up the phone leave is exhausted. We will be publishing and give one of us a call, that’s what we’re a summary document in the near future here for. explaining the basics of your various AIPA’s Welfare Team has been very insurance covers. busy with a good mix of issues from I have mentioned recently the need long term sick leave through to training to be very cautious about behaviour in difficulties, insurance matters and slip ports or in the workplace. Qantas disciplinary concerns. The current case has been very firm across the Group numbers are sitting at around 55-60 when dealing with breaches of the pilots who have contacted us for help ‘Code of Conduct’ policy, and we have of some kind over recent months. all signed off on that as having fully read With regard to the training issues, some and understood it. We have had to go of these relate to recurrent training and in to bat for several pilots recently and some to endorsement or conversion while most outcomes have been good, training. Converting across to the Airbus some have not. fleets is not always a straightforward A feedback survey has recently been process, though many have done it since developed to further enhance the way the A330 and A380 arrived in long haul. AIPA Welfare interacts with members. It’s not the huge mystery it’s sometimes The survey will be provided to members made out to be, but always requires plenty utilising AIPA’s Welfare service, with of work and a change of perspective. The responses fully de-identified. Thank you Flight Operations Training Managers have in advance for completing the survey, been very accommodating and helpful it goes a long way to ensure that AIPA with almost all of the cases when asked Welfare is a professional service, providing to assist. Please, as a first step, let them members with the support that they need. know if you have special needs relating Our very best wishes go to everyone to outside difficulties which impact on who will be leaving us this year having your training program. I think you will taken voluntary redundancy. It has been be pleasantly surprised at the response. an enormous pleasure to have worked They just need to know early, not after with such a fine group of professional the train has run off the rails. pilots. Thanks also to everyone who has Most of us are covered by numerous contacted AIPA Welfare over the last 12 insurances associated with our Qantas months – it is pleasing to see members (or other) Superannuation cover. It is placing their trust in AIPA’s Welfare Team. always good practice to keep up to date We are greatly privileged to be able to with what cover we actually have and help you out when and where needed. ensure it’s adequate for our personal As always, my warm thanks to the AIPA needs. Many of us are less than fully aware Welfare Team and many others for their of what protections we have. For instance, amazing help in looking after the needs most policies cover temporary disablement of our colleagues and their families. payment for up to two years at 75% of WHY A CONVERSATION COULD CHANGE A LIFE. Q&A with Rachel Clements, psychologist and Director of Psychological Services at the Centre for Corporate Health, on the importance of R U OK?Day, how to ask someone if they’re okay and what to do if they’re not. Rachel is an expert in occupational stress, intervention, treatment and prevention.

Why do we need R U OK?Day? you may make the situation worse. What should you do if Each and every day in Australia, six This is not the case at all. Starting a they say they’re not ok? people die by suicide, 180 people conversation with someone you’re Sit and listen without interruption or attempt it and more than 1000 people concerned about lets them know you judgement. Encourage the person to think about suicide. While most of us care and that they’re not alone. People explain exactly what it is that they are aren’t Psychologists, neglecting this issue often feel unsure about how to handle feeling and what their concerns are. Help – when there is a way to help combat it the situation if someone says “I’m not them to think about one or two things – is not only adding to the stigma around okay.” Before starting a conversation that can be done to help the situation mental health but is also costing lives. with someone you’re concerned about, and then encourage them to commit to Imagine if a colleague slipped in the you need to feel prepared and confident doing one of these things. If necessary, office kitchen, how many people would that you can go about it in a supportive encourage them to see a doctor or just walk by, ignore the colleague and think manner. other professional. This is really “well I’m not a Doctor, there’s probably important if they have been feeling nothing I can do to help”. How should you approach anxious or down for more than two So why don’t we show the same asking the question? weeks. Make sure you follow up with the concern or feel we can step in when we Here are some quick tips and steps person to check in to see how they are notice someone hasn’t been themselves to follow: getting on. lately or has been showing signs of distress? 1. Be relaxed. Approach the conversation If someone says they’re thinking Fear is usually what stops us. The fear in a casual and informal manner and of suicide it’s important to take the relates to what we don’t know, of not tone. comment seriously and don’t panic. knowing what to say and what to do. Explain that thoughts of suicide are 2. Make sure you are having the That is why R U OK?Day is so important. common and that you would like to conversation in a quiet place, free Not only is it a reminder to ask ‘are you support them by linking them in with from interruptions and where you ok?’, but it creates awareness about how someone who can help. Take all threats cannot be overheard. to start a conversation and sometimes seriously and don’t leave the person gives courage to those who are asking the 3. Start off with something like “I just alone. Link the person in with a treating question. It also plays an important role want to check in with you and see practitioner such as a GP, Counsellor or in breaking down the stigma surrounding how you are travelling? I have noticed Psychologist through your workplace mental health making it easier for someone a change in you in the last couple of Employee Assistance Program (EAP) or who may be struggling to speak up and weeks in that you don’t seem to be someone in the workplace such as HR reach out for the help they need. so happy. Are you OK?” or a Manager. Advise someone of your 4. Assume the role of the listener colleague’s disclosure and get yourself Why do you think people help in managing the situation. have a hard time asking and listen without interruption R U OK? or judgement. If you think someone is at immediate There are many misconceptions in 5. Gently encourage action to link the risk call 000 and ask for an ambulance. relation to mental health. One of the main person in with some help such as ones is thinking that if you ask someone a trusted family member, General www.ruokday.org.au you are concerned about, “Are you ok?”, Practitioner or Counsellor. MembersHIP NEWS We wish the following retirees all It has been said that AIPA’s goals cannot be achieved the very best during their retirement, without a strong membership support base. We would and we thank them for their loyalty like to thank all members for your continued support, Retirementsto AIPA throughout their career. First Officer Verne Baistow B767 and thank our new members for making the decision to Captain Phil Beard B747 join. Each of you make a difference and AIPA would not Captain Peter Black B747 Captain Les Bliem B767 be here if it weren’t for you. Captain Peter Boswell B747 First Officer Dennis Caldwell B747 AIPA LOSS OF LICENCE KEEPING OUR DATA ACCURATE Captain Ricky Collins B747 INSURANCE* IS IMPORTANT TO AIPA Captain John Dowe B747 It is here. AIPA now has a Loss of Licence Please be sure to keep us informed if Captain Ian Getley A380 (LOL) insurance policy. It’s exclusively open any of your personal details have changed. First Officer Robert Graham B747 to AIPA’s Jetstar members. This policy has It is important that we have on record Captain Gordon Henwood B747 been specifically formulated to meet the your correct rank, aircraft type, base, Captain Rob Kerby B747 needs of Jetstar pilots, so be sure to pass address, email and phone number. This Captain Graham Lingard B737 on the word to other Jetstar pilots who will ensure you are receiving the correct Captain Stuart Loudon B747 are yet to join AIPA. communications. To update your details, Captain Rob Maguire A330 When compared to Jetstar’s company please email [email protected]. Captain Graham McDonald A380 provided LOL policy, the AIPA LOL policy Captain David McIntyre B767 provides a pilot: AIPA’s 2014 ANNUAL DINNER First Officer Adam Samulski B747 • Aged 29, up to 41% more AIPA’s Annual Dinner was held on Captain Bob Smart B747 • Aged 39, up to 76% more 6 November 2014. A successful evening First Officer Colin Tomlinson B747 • Aged 49, up to 99% more saw 31 members celebrate their time Captain Ross Von Hoff B747 • Aged 54, up to 121% more with the Company and their retirement First Officer Roger Walter B747 • Aged 60, up to 217% more, and with friends and colleagues. AIPA would Captain Murray Warfield B747 • It also offers $225,000 worth of like to thank these members for their First Officer Dean Watson B747 cover to pilots aged 61 and older. support over the years and wish them First Officer Ian Watson B747 To discuss this matter further with all the very best for the future. Captain James Wood B747 an AIPA representative, please email Captain Ian Woods B747 [email protected]. Suite 6.01, Level 6 Scheduling (24 hrs) ALTITUDE ADVERTISING 247 Coward Street Tel: 02 8307 7711 BOOKINGS AND ENQUIRIES Mascot NSW 2020 Communications Manager Emergency (24 hrs) Tel: 02 8307 7777 Locked Bag 5747 Tel: 02 8307 7788 Fax: 02 8307 7799 Botany NSW 1455 Australia Email: [email protected] Tel: 02 8307 7777 Fax: 02 8307 7799