Air Pilot No.1 | 2017

NO. 1 | 2017

AIR PILOT

AFAP Mentor Program, 8 Hours Bottle to Throttle, Accident & Incident Checklist

The Journal of the Australian Federation of Air Pilots

AIR PILOT CONTENTS// 2

PRESIDENT’S VIEW

FEATURES 6 DRONES & HELICOPTERS The Journal of the Australian Federation of Air Pilots NO. 1 | 2017

20 NEW WINGS

32

30 8 HRS BOTTLE TO THROTTLE

REGULARS

EDITORIAL STAFF

14 THE WOMEN’S NETWORK

Editor: Emma Young Assistant Editor: Danielle Roberts Production Editor: Danielle Roberts Contributors: David Booth, Marcus Diamond, David Kelly, Cate Larkins, Patrick Larkins, James Lauchland, Simon Lutton, Simon Miller, Andrew Molnar, Danielle Roberts, Julian Smibert, David Stephens, Joseph Wheeler, Emma Young.

17 WELFARE 22 HIMS

14

Printed by: Paterson Press (Tripart Marketing Pty Ltd) Designed by: Danielle Roberts

30 PILOT HEALTH 36 MBF

16

T +61 3 9928 5737 F +61 3 9699 8199 ADMIN@AFAP.ORG.AU

COUNCIL REPORTS 3 JETSTAR COUNCIL

SEND TO AIR PILOT

4 EASTERN COUNCIL

Email emma@afap.org.au if you would like to contribute to Air Pilot.

5 SUNSTATE COUNCIL

All suggestions, ideas, articles and advertisements are welcome.

10 VIRGIN COUNCIL

The deadline for the next edition is 3 November.

24 TECHNICALLY SPEAKING 32 LEGAL

AUSTRALIAN FEDERATION OF AIR PILOTS 4/132-136 ALBERT RD SOUTH MELBOURNE VIC 3205

WWW.AFAP.ORG.AU

23 IFALPA

24

8 TIGER COUNCIL 18 HELICOPTER COUNCIL 26 NATIONAL COUNCIL 34 COBHAM COUNCIL

30

The views expressed in this magazine in any article, letter or advertisement are not necessarily those of the Australian Federation of Air Pilots.

AIR PILOT reserves the right to reject any advertisement it deems not to be in good taste or adverse to air pilots, the AFAP, its interests or policies.

The attention of advertisers is drawn to the section of the Trade Practices Act 1974 and the provisions in the Act which apply to advertising. It is not possible for the Federation or Publisher to ensure that advertisements which are published in this magazine comply in all respects with the Act and the responsibility must therefore be on the person, company or advertising agency submitting the advertisement for publication.

All original material produced in this magazine remains the property of the publisher and cannot be reproduced without authority. No responsibility is accepted for incorrect information contained in advertisements or editorial.

AFAP PRINCIPAL OFFICERS// President, Capt David Booth (Virgin Australia)

VP Admin & Finance, Capt Louise Pole (Sunstate)

VP Membership, Capt Ben Bollen (Jetstar)

Technical Director, Capt Peter Gardiner (Jetstar)

Senior Trustee, Capt George Brown (Sunstate)

Trustee, Capt John Absolon (Virgin Australia)

Trustee, Capt Bryan Murray (Virgin Australia)

AFAP STAFF// Executive Director, Simon Lutton

Operations Manager, Joanne Janes

Senior Industrial/Legal Officer, Deanna Cain

Senior Industrial Officer, David Stephens

Senior Industrial/Legal Officer, Patrick Larkins

Senior Industrial Officer, James Mattner

Senior Industrial Officer, James Lauchland

Legal Counsel, Andrew Molnar

Aviation Legal Counsel, Joseph Wheeler

Industrial Officer/Welfare Coordinator, Cate Larkins

Industrial Advisor, David Kelly

Industrial Advisor, Simon Miller

Marketing & Comms Manager, Emma Young

Marketing & Comms Assistant, Danielle Roberts

Organiser, Michael Salt

Safety & Technical Consultant, Captain Marcus Diamond

Safety & Technical Consultant, Julian Smibert

Office Manager, Ray Aspinall

Membership Officer, Sophie Isaacs

Finance Officer, Lennie Kovac

NO. 1 | 2017 1

the

PRESIDENT’S VIEW//

Captain David Booth Dear Members,

As President I get to see first-hand some of the great work our pilot representatives and staff do for members. Whether on the industrial, legal, technical or welfare front I am very proud of the work that your Federation does for you.

There has however been one thing which troubles me. That is, the reluctance of members to get the Federation in the loop at the earliest opportunity. In most cases I suspect this reluctance is based on not wanting to burden other people and/or a belief they can handle things themselves. While independence is generally a healthy trait for any aviator, this tendency can be very unhelpful following an incident or serious workplace conflcit.

If I had one piece of advice for all members with an issue or problem it would be to get your Federation in the loop early.

The Federation has a network of pilot representatives and trained professionals who can coordinate their knowledge and expertise to deliver you the best possible outcome to any issue. Why not use them?

Even if we are just a sounding board to discuss your options and help you make your decisions, we want to hear from you. We will never betray a confidence or make a member do anything against their will.

This advice applies for virtually any issue, including an EBA entitlement query, standards matter, safety concern or welfare matter. We want to hear from you and we want to help.

The earlier we hear about it, the better.

This situation is most glaringly obvious in the case of accidents and incidents. Your Federation spends a great deal of time highlighting the importance of notifying us as soon as possible after an accident or incident. Despite this, we commonly get contacted by members well after the event. Not having input into the initial safety report and/or any interview can compromise a pilot’s interests and can limit the level of service we can subsequently provide.

Do not be afraid to let us know at the earliest opportunity, any time of day. Our service to you reflects your own unique shift cycles and is not limited by 9-5 schedules.

The AFAP has a dedicated after-hours accident and incident hotline, 0459 747 757, staffed by our senior industrial and legal staff. This number is on your membership card, in your AFAP diary, on the AFAP website and part of the AFAP mobile phone app.

Further information on what to do in the case of an accident, including details of the Accident and Incident courses we run for members every year throughout Australia are provided in this edition of AIR PILOT. Please enjoy this edition of AIR PILOT and safe flying.

Yours sincerely

Captain David Booth 2

Air Pilot

JETSTAR Pilot Federation

2017 has proven to be an adversarial year so far, which is a disappointing continuation of 2016. Your AFAP continues to be forced to seek resolution to fairly simple problems in the Fair Work Commission and the Federal Circuit Court.

On 27 April 2017 however, the AFAP was successful in the Fair Work Commission in a decision concerning a pilot’s entitlement to a simulator training programme where their recency has expired during a period of annual leave. Jetstar argued that the first day of a cyclic simulator was itself a training programme and also that it had the absolute discretion to determine that no training programme was required. Both arguments were rejected by Commissioner Roe. At the time of print it remained to be seen whether compensation could be agreed between the AFAP and Jetstar. However, if it is not, Commissioner Roe indicated that he is willing to assist in this regard. We would hope that in future this decision will influence Jetstar to resolve disputes at a workplace level rather than in the public forum of the Fair Work Commission.

AFAP pilot representatives have also been involved in continuing issues related to payment summaries. Jetstar will now provide pilots with two payment summaries at the end of this financial year. Both will list all total allowances including meal allowances. Pilots who receive meal allowances will receive an addendum which will break down meal allowances by meal category.

The AFAP have raised the issue of some pilots being rostered insufficient DDOs during 2016 with Jetstar.

Jetstar are in the process of reviewing those rosters and the proposal for resolution put forward by the AFAP. If this matter does not resolve shortly, the AFAP will be commencing proceedings in the Federal Circuit Court and will seek penalties to be applied to Jetstar in addition to compensation for the affected pilots.

As you are aware, proceedings have commenced in the Federal Circuit Court over breaches of the roster balancing provisions of your EBA and the ability of Jetstar to offset overpayment against underpayments where the overpayment was made over 12 months before. Although discussions to resolve the issues are continuing, no agreement has yet been reached. The Court proceedings have been listed for mediation on 15 May 2017 and the AFAP hopes that a resolution can be reached. If mediation is unsuccessful, the matter will proceed to trial before Judge O’Sullivan. In addition to compensation for loss, the AFAP is seeking penalties to be applied against Jetstar. Should the matter proceed to trial, the Court has informed the parties that it will not be heard before February 2018.

As you can see, it has been a busy time for the AFAP in its dealings with Jetstar. Although the AFAP will always take matters to the Fair Work Commission or a Court where necessary, it is always better to resolve these things at the workplace level rather than undergoing the delay of a trial.

NO. 1 | 2017 3

EASTERN Pilot Federation

The Eastern Pilot Council looks like it is finally getting back on its feet after being decimated by the large influx of pilots moving to Qantas Mainline and overseas.

COUNCIL Your Chairman is Cam Terry, and now we have Johnno Wenzel as Secretary and Timothy Glabattz as Vice-Chair. James Thorne is a new elected Council member and Nathan Hayes and Alistair Campbell have joined in an ex-officio capacity. Now that there is a full Council there will be a renewed focus on the basics- rostering, lifestyle, meals and accommodation. Our last meeting focussed on allocating the new Council members to their portfolios and making sure they have some support on hand from some more experienced members and ex-members of Council. Rob Anderson will continue to deliver the welfare rep portfolio.

FATIGUE The issue of deductions from sick leave has reared its head again, and this matter has been taken to the Company for a clarification of the policy. The policy has previously been understood to be that sick leave will only be deducted where fatigue has been the result of a pilot’s personal conduct. While the AFAP do not accept that sick leave can be deducted for fatigue at all, at the moment, the issue is that the policy appears to be arbitrarily applied. Clarity will be sought and the membership will be briefed shortly.

4

EBA A very successful EBA session led by Dave Griffiths updated the pilot group in February 2017. Over 30 pilots attended to hear about allowances claims under the EBA and the new annual leave policy. Dave and Cam Bailey drew up a new annual leave bidding system, which was accepted by the Company. On the whole the pilot membership is very happy with this system as it streamlines the process and increases the likelihood of successful and/ or optimal bids. Further EBA sessions will be conducted later in the year to ensure that our pilot members have a sound understanding of what can and cannot be claimed as allowances, and how to raise disputes.

WELFARE There will be a meeting on 2 May 2017 with Ian Verner and Adrian Young of Q/Link to discuss welfare initiatives for Eastern pilots. The AFAP really wants to push pilot welfare, and to this end, we invite pilot submissions about how we can improve pilot welfare at Q/link in the lead up to this meeting. Simply call Cate at the AFAP Office or email her on cate@afap.org.au. We intend to build a solid relationship with the Company that will prioritise pilot welfare, particularly good mental health. Rob Anderson has already been doing fantastic work in this area. So far he has assisted over 8 pilots to maintain their jobs and access the extra support provided by the psychologists at our Membership Assistance Program (1300 307 912) along with extra personal leave and advocacy with the Company. There should be some more exciting developments after 2 May to report!

Air Pilot

SUNSTATE Pilot Federation

The Sunstate Pilot Federation Committee is made up of Rod Millroy (Chair), Russell Thompson (Vice-Chair), Louise Pole (Secretary), Ben Davis, George Brown, David Nelson, Alex Potter and Jarrod Blaker. Matt Vaughan recently resigned after accepting a position at Jetstar. His position on the Committee is currently being filled by Will Tremayne in an ex officio capacity until the next formal election is undertaken by the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC).

Far and away the biggest issue at Sunstate is rostering. This has been the case for many months. Despite continual promises from the Company of systematic ro s te r i n g i m p rove m e n t s b e i n g “ j u s t around the corner”, the situation remains a significant area of concern for Sunstate pilots. Examples of some of the problems include: • • • • • •

Late finishes and early starts after a day off; Out of base rostering; Sitting around between sectors for extended periods; Multi Reserves (stacked together); Paxing on Q400 sectors for no apparent reason/necessity; Min 36 hours not being rostered around single days off;

The Committee has also experienced difficulties with representative roles and meetings being rostered as agreed. Other concerns include pilots not being provided duty travel in business class and the Sydney based Regional Operations Centre (ROC) staff being unaware of the specific Sunstate Pilot EBA entitlements.

The underlying cause for many of the problems appears to be the relatively high levels of attrition being experienced within QantasLink.

In recent months the Committee has also dealt with a number of accommodation issues. An example of this is the complaints about the accommodation standard in Cairns and Rockhampton. The Committee has again requested visibility on contract expiry dates so that feedback can be provided and options evaluated before contracts are

Sunstate Committee Meeting at AFAP Brisbane Office

renewed. The Company has undertaken to provide the expiry dates but (at the time of writing) the Committee was yet to receive this information.

On the meals front, we recently became aware that Cairns meals had fallen outside the most recent meal specification. This has been addressed and, along with the ongoing problems with meals for those pilots operating in New Zealand, will continue to be monitored.

Recently the Committee also became aware of instances where the company required DAMP testing outside of the intention of CASR 99. An example of this is testing after an aircraft system malfunction causing a ground or air return. The Committee have taken this issue up with the Company and requested that they provide the pilot group with clarity on exactly when they will be tested.

The Sunstate Pilot Federation Committee is an experienced, dedicated and well run committee. We are however looking for additional involvement from other Sunstate pilots. Vacancies for pilots with an interest in welfare, FOQA and the Command Review Panel have all been called for in recent months. We encourage all Sunstate pilots to get involved with their Federation.

Finally, it should be noted that the Federation recently hired an experienced Senior Industrial Officer based out of the AFAP’s Brisbane Office, James Mattner. It is anticipated that James will transition to primary responsibility for Sunstate matters. Please feel free to chat to James if you have any work related questions. His email is jmattner@afap.org.au.

NO. 1 | 2017 5

FEATURE

THE DANGER OF DRONES AND RPA’S WITH HELICOPTERS

Technical and Safety Representative, Captain Phil Stevens discusses the current problems with drone regulations in regards to helicopter safety.

Whilst a drone can enter the engine of a large commercial jet, and will no doubt cause an engine failure and possible fire, the crew can hopefully deal with the fire and successfully land on the remaining engine or engines. However, the risk to helicopters is even greater because many helicopters operate at a low level and CASA currently allow drones to fly up to 400 feet.

HELICOPTERS: There are two main operations in which helicopters operate at low level. One is surf rescue. The main function of the crew is to find the survivor in the surf, so they will not be looking for drones. The second is Emergency Medical Services helicopters. Their main concern on landing at a crash site is wires, because they know that police, ambulance and fire personnel do not always set up the landing site free from wires. Therefore they will not be looking for drones.

A typical scenario could be an emergency situation where a drone operator decides to fly overhead to obtain video footage to sell to a TV network. Even if limited to CASA’s 400 feet, the drone will still present a serious hazard to a rescue helicopter coming in to land or a searching the surf. The crew will be intently looking for wires or the survivor, so may well not see the drone at all. If it hits the tail rotor the helicopter will crash, probably into the emergency scene below. There will almost certainly be fatalities.

Other possible problems for helicopters that now cruise at 140 knots are if the drone comes through the windscreen the crew may be injured and the helicopter will crash. The drone may also hit the main rotor or flying controls to the main rotor, jamming them and again resulting in a crash.

Should the tail rotor of a helicopter fail, the fuselage will rotate in the opposite direction to the rotation of the main rotor because of the torque being applied. The only way to stop this out of control rotation of the fuselage is to remove all power from the main rotor.

With all power removed the helicopter fuselage will stop rotating but the helicopter is now in autorotation with rates of descent between 2,000 and 4,000 feet per 6

minute. The pilot will require a large flat area to land safely. If this is not available the helicopter will crash.

In my experience perhaps only about 50% of helicopter pilots will successfully land without a tail rotor.

The CASA proposed weight restriction above which drones will need to be regulated is 2.0 kg. At this weight the tail rotor will absolutely be destroyed if hit by a drone.

In fact, even a 250 gram or 500 gram drone will probably destroy the tail rotor as they typically rotate at 1500 to 2,000 RPM. The 2.0 Kg weight limit is far too high.

The top speed of a helicopter’s main rotor blade is around 550 miles per hour. Should the helicopter crash, bits of the composite material of the rotor blade will be flying in all directions at that speed, so the risk of serious injury or death for people on the ground is greater than for the crew. Should a drone cause a helicopter to crash the fatalities could be very high. The crew of a rescue helicopter is typically about 5. They may be ok but the rescue personnel on the ground will be at very high risk indeed, so there may be 10 or more fatalities.

For example, in 1968 a Bell 205 ferried 26 journalists to a Bass Strait oil rig. They were all dropped off and then the helicopter went up to get photographs. On arriving in the hover at the rig, the tail rotor failed and the helicopter spun and crashed on the deck. Those on board suffered minor injuries. Those below the deck level were all ok.

The three standing on the steps and having some part of their body above the helideck level were all killed.

I am enclosing a link to a video on Youtube that demonstrates what can happen. Whilst it is dramatic, it does accurately portray the typical result of a drone hitting a tail rotor when there is no where for the pilot to make a safe, emergency landing. https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=w7WrOpsn_so Phil Stevens is a retired 50-year professional helicopter pilot. He is currently a Safety and Technical representative for the AFAP, AIPA and AusALPA for RPA’S, helicopters, HUPER and ADO. His initial training was with the RAAF on the Winjeel and then the Australian army on Bell 47 helicopters. During his career, he has been a Chief Pilot, a CFI, a Deputy Chief Pilot and Head of Training in Abu Dhabi Helicopters (75 pilots flying 35,000 hours a year), Operations Manager of Abu Dhabi Aviation, a VVIP pilot in Royal Flight Oman and Line Training Captain in Bristow Australia. He is am also a certified CRM Facilitator.

Air Pilot

FEATURE

SUPPLIERS OF DRONES: I have been doing an unofficial survey of the many suppliers of drones in the shopping malls. This is what I have found: •

•

•

Most do not supply the CASA regulations to the purchasers and do not even know there are regulations.

Many drones are being purchased as toys for children. Presumably these children will operate the drone unsupervised.

Some drones go out of range of the controller at about a kilometre. After that the drone is uncontrolled.

Faculty of Science School of Aviation

My question for CASA is, “Would you issue a pilot licence to an 8 to 10 year old child? No. So why will you allow a similar child to fly a drone?”

POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS: 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Do not have a weight category under which drones do not need to be regulated.

All drones should be supplied with a copy of CASA’s regulations.

All operators should be licenced and trained to operate a drone.

Al l d ro n e s s h o u ld h ave t h e operator’s name, address and l i c e n c e d e ta i l s e n g r ave d o n the drone or the serial number recorded so that the owner can be traced in the event of an accident. This will also enhance the operator’s tendency to abide by the regulations.

Any time an aircraft or helicopter is seen the drone should be landed immediately until the aircraft/ helicopter is clear of the area.

How far can our Business Class take you?

Take your career to the next level and undertake a degree in Aviation Management with one of Australia’s leading research and teaching universities.

• Courses delivered online giving you flexibility to study anywhere anytime.

• Choose courses according to your interests in law and regulations, safety and security, airline and airport management, aviation economics, and aviation technical operations.

• Learn from industry experts in courses developed for the industry.

• Programs tailored to your level of academic qualifications and experience.

If you are looking to take the next steps in your Aviation career, contact UNSW Aviation to find out how we can take you there.

Email: aviam@unsw.edu.au Web: www.aviation.unsw.edu.au Phone: 9385 6767

NO. 1 | 2017 7

TIGERAIR Pilot Federation

WITHDRAWAL OF BALI FLYING

EBA

After an unfortunate run of events, Tigerair made the decision in early February to withdraw from its Bali flying.

This followed several temporary cancellations by Indonesian authorities of Tigerair’s approval to operate into and out of that country. While this caused major inconvenience for some passengers, and disrupted rosters for several months, the reduction in overall flying has been relatively minor, with the Company continuing its recruitment and training programs. In addition to this, there were numerous unresolved industrial issues around international flying that can now be dealt with in the more appropriate forum of EBA negotiations.

With continued uncertainty around the international operations and fleet transition, just prior to Christmas, the Company proposed an interim salary increase of 2%. The intention was to delay negotiations by 12 months to give parties a clearer view of the landscape.

The pilot group rejected this by a considerable margin, preferring to commence negotiations for a new agreement. Pilots are understandably keen to update the terms of the EBA to reflect the current nature of the operation. The negotiating team has now conducted a comprehensive survey of the pilot group and, has developed and served the log of claims on the Company.

TRANSITION TO B737 At the time of writing, Tigerair had not yet received AOC approval to allow commercial operations on the B737.

While numerous deadlines have been missed, there is a now sense of optimism from Company management that this will be finalised soon. In the meantime, pilots continue to be recruited and trained on this aircraft.

Unfortunately, the delay has caused a number of industrial issues, for example delayed rosters and a reduction in flight pay for newly endorsed B737 pilots. It has also resulted in the need for a temporary wet lease arrangement with Alliance Airlines. The delays continue to cause frustration within the pilot group, making it in everyone’s interests for the approval to be finalised soon.

8

We have also met with the Company to establish bargaining protocols and to introduce the negotiating teams, with future meetings to take place monthly from late April. The meetings will run for two days at time, with the Company assuring us that sufficient resources will be assigned, including preparation days for the pilot representatives.

Unfortunately, in what could be a bad sign for the future of these negotiations, the first of these meetings was cancelled with less than a week’s notice, apparently due to the Company’s lack of preparedness.

While we expect this to be a fairly demanding process, we have a strong team of pilot representatives, and with the pilot group continuing to grow, AFAP membership is at a historic high.

Air Pilot

NORWEGIAN AIR EXPERIMENT

Joseph Wheeler, AFAP Aviation Legal Counsel

Flags of convenience (FOC) used to just be a creature of maritime operations, whereby Shipowners hunted the globe for favourable tax, labour and regulatory havens to register their fleets.

Yet this practice is increasingly utilised in today's highly competitive and discount-fare commercial airline atmosphere. The traditionally understood concept of aircraft nationality is eroding as a result.

ICAO is even encouraging this practice.

If the Air Transport Regulation Panel (ATRP) has its way it will liberalise market access globally in an allencompassing multilateral air services agreement, that is purpose-built to minimise barriers to starting airline operations and freely expanding them.

NORWEGIAN AIR INTERNATIONAL (NAI) Imagine a carrier which has its parent company based in Norway, but starts an offshoot in Ireland to take advantage of that jurisdiction's laws, which permit contracting in pilots from Singapore and Thailand to operate its international routes.

The Obama Administration’s decision to permit carriers like this one, who are able to undercut the rights of airline workers by selectively yet legally excluding the workers of the airline's national namesake has been vocally challenged by US ALPA and a variety of other labour organisations.

The activity arguably breaches aspects of the Open Skies agreement between the US and Europe. While this paves the way for very low fares on transatlantic flights which NAI can now compete with US carriers on, US ALPA argues that it consequentially encroaches on the interests of US Citizens because US jobs would likely be lost when consumers flock to cutprice deals with which US carriers cannot compete.

In response, the US DOT has claimed that they had no choice but to agree to NAI's foreign air carrier permit application.

The legal challenge by the unions siding with US ALPA must be watched closely for the sake of US airline workers' rights, but we must also be vigilant so that we can ensure similar situations don't emerge closer to home.

A proposal which could hit close to home is in the midst of development, and it has ICAO Council sanction.

If it comes into force, a proposed multilateral agreement threatens to potentially derail and substantially change the landscape for pilots operating internationally.

IFALPA The proposed multilateral air services agreement (MASA) seeks to liberalise aviation markets, leading to lower airfares for passengers through greater airline competition and lower economic regulatory burdens. This proposed MASA has its genesis in a frustrated economic bent held by ICAO - a scratch not properly itched by the signing of the Chicago Convention, which was born without the economic controls and freedoms for airlines that many States sought.

This MASA would liberate aviation markets by essentially permitting air carriers to start up or structure themselves under the NAI model, or rather, let them decide for themselves.

This would mean, for example, if Australia and Thailand were in agreement with the MASA, that an Australian carrier could set up in Thailand crewed entirely by foreign workers under individual contracts. This crew could work under less favourable conditions than Australian workers; and without typical safety regulatory oversight by CASA as a regular "Australian" airline would be subjected to for a carrier flying into and out of Australia under existing bilateral rights.

What would happen to Australian pilots amidst all of this? In the context of a recognised worldwide pilot shortage the MASA presents

one possible solution - but hardly the best one.

IFALPA's Legal Committee and Professional & Government Affairs Committees have their own working group which is observing the development of this MASA actively.

It also guides advocacy to national governments to convince them to either reject MASA, or alternatively, let it be born - but only with suitable labour protection clauses included.

As ICAO wants the MASA up and running in 2017, IFALPA is strongly driving objection to its creation and amassing support and arguments to raise with national governments along the way.

The arguments sometimes stem from unusual places. Research has uncovered that international maritime (treaty) law has long recognised that the labour conditions of maritime workers are agreed to be an essential aspect of the safety of shipping operations: Art 5(1), Geneva Convention 1958. This Convention is considered to codify customary international law or "unwritten" international law, and can thus be applied to international aviation: the result being that it may well be a breach of international law for states to agree to waive labour protections (or not explicitly deal with them) in any new MASA. Time will tell if the MASA can be stopped or whether the inevitability of a world of Norwegian-like carriers will characterise the aviation landscape in coming decades, with the associated erosions to air safety that accompany it. The only certainty is that we are working to protect all pilots' interests in this effort.

Joseph Wheeler MRAeS is Aviation Legal Counsel for the AFAP, a member of both the IFALPA Legal and Professional & Government Affairs Committees, and the aerolegal and aeropolitical affairs columnist for The Australian

NO. 1 | 2017 9

VIRGIN

Pilot Federation

WIDE BODY UPDATE In March Wide Body pilots emphatically voted down the proposed Wide Body EBA. 97% of all pilots eligible to vote took part in the ballot, with 85% voting “no”, reinforcing the high level of engagement amongst the Wide Body pilot group.

The outcome affirmed the AFAP negotiating teams’ assessment of the document. It also demonstrated to the Company that Wide Body pilots were not swayed by the short-term benefits of the offer, but instead considered the long term implications. This is a very positive message and we commend members for standing behind their representatives.

Following the “no” vote the Company were actively considering offering the A330 Hong Kong flying to pilots on the Long Haul EBA terms and conditions. The AFAP successfully prevented this occurring as it would have involved a reduction in minimum DDOs and introduction of composite rosters.

Instead the AFAP were able to ensure the Hong Kong flying was performed by A330 pilots without giving up any of their conditions of employment, but instead through two simple amendments to the Short Haul Work Rules: •

•

The augmented crew provisions from CAO48.1 (which were agreed by the AIC in 2015 pursuant to clause 32 of Appendix 2 – Part A of the Short Haul EBA) for the A330 to operate Charter flying would be extended to any A330 international flying; Rostering A330 pilots 6 day trips where it included at least one international overnight.

The above demonstrates that only minimal changes were required to operate the A330 internationally under the Short Haul Agreement and reinforces the AFAP’s position during the Wide Body negotiations that the Company were unnecessarily pursuing changes to the A330 work rules.

The parties have also reconveyed to discuss how to resolve the Wide Body EBA negotiations. The AFAP has made clear this requires the Company focus on the critical items rather than a wholesale reduction in terms and conditions of employment.

When negotiations recommenced our first item of business was to seek an equitable recognition of service for all current Second Officers to that offered to ATR pilots.

We also highlighted that the A330 pilot group remained the only pilots not provided an interim pay increase.

The AFAP also made clear that our members will not tolerate the Company engaging in underhanded conduct, such as amending clauses without notifying the AFAP representatives.

We also reiterated our advice that the Company change its obstinate attitude to basic recognition of pilots that could be achieved at little or no cost to the business and which would deliver a Wide Body EBA.

10

If the Company are genuine about delivering a Wide Body EBA it will ensure that is offer is equitable to all Wide Body pilots and provides appropriate recognition for the role that pilots perform.

NARROW BODY UPDATE AFAP representatives recommenced Narrow Body Enterprise Agreement (“NB EBA”) negotiations with the Company on 5 April. VIPA representatives also attended.

The intention of the pause in negotiations was to allow the Company to focus resources on concluding the Wide Body EBA negotiations, as members will recall.

Considering the recent 85% “no” vote for the ill-fated Wide Body EBA, coupled with negotiations being open at Tigerair and VAINZ, the AFAP are concerned about the Company’s ability to adequately resource NB EBA negotiations. And, this is before we consider the impact of the decommissioning of the E190 fleet and ATR fleet reduction.

Given the current instability in the Virgin Group and the clear hostility of the pilot group, the AFAP decided that it was best to get on the front foot and seek commitments from the outset of bargaining, rather than let negotiations meander to an inevitable stalemate later this year.

The AFAP stated clearly that the Narrow Body pilot group has no appetite for a lengthy negotiation and that the Company can take the 85% no vote at WB EBA negotiations as reflective of the general mood of the pilot group at Narrow Body. We sought commitment to engage in bargaining to resolve the NB EBA by July, failing which we would consider all options available to us under the Fair Work Act. • To achieve that goal, the Company was told that: • It had to move away from an adversarial pattern of bargaining, and look for solutions to the existing problems facing the pilot group, rather than create more; • Negotiations needed to be given priority, and a final draft agreement be settled on as soon as possible; • Company representatives with the power to make decisions needed to be involved in the negotiations; • The necessary resources and staff (on both sides of the negotiation table) had to be made available in the immediate future, to allow the rapid progress in bargaining; • Consideration needed also to be given to extended blocks of days, so that progress in negotiations does not stall between bargaining meetings.

Your AFAP representatives left no doubt in the

Air Pilot

VIRGIN PILOT FEDERATION Company’s mind of our member’s expectations going forward were to resolve an agreement quickly.

The AFAP also articulated we were prepared to adopt a different method of negotiating the NB EBA referred to as “interest based bargaining”. In essence, each party will present the aims or problems they seek to address with suggestions on how to achieve them. The parties would then jointly work through each issue until it is resolved and mutual agreement reached.

This would replace each of the AFAP, VIPA and the Company tabling a long list of claims which are discussed at a meeting then each party reserves a position until the next meeting, leading to little progress being made.

Instead we would focus on the critical issues that need resolving but otherwise use the existing Short Haul EBA as the basis to move forward.

P le a s i n g ly, t h e a b ove t i m e l i n e ( c o n c l u d i n g negotiations by July) and adopting an interest based bargaining approach to negotiations was agreed by both the Company and VIPA representatives. The Company also advised that it was removing one of its most contentious claims - the amendment of the job security clause to facilitate VAINZ pilot’s access to rostered flying on Australian domestic routes.

The Company also provided a high level overview of the modelling of the AFAP and VIPA work rules that we tabled last year. The Company modelling demonstrated that one of our important claims that would prevent a pilot getting a pattern of three early duties before being flipped onto a late duty would not increase costs. This situation presents an example of where we can achieve lifestyle improvements for the pilot group without driving further costs into the business.

Bargaining dates were also settled on in the meeting, to ensure that the negotiations can start building momentum.

While is clear that the track record of the Company in recent bargaining is far from acceptable, the above represents an opportunity for each party to take a fresh approach to negotiations. If the Company is serious about the negotiations, then by the end of meetings in June there should be tangible progress on the new NB EBA, which will demonstrate Virgin is serious about improving its relationship with the pilot group.

The AFAP’s priority is to ensure that we provide clear and timely answers to pilot’s questions, and that we present as many options as we can to mitigate the impact of the fleet reduction and base closure on the ATR pilot group.

While ATR pilots have waited far too long for this announcement we acknowledge that the Company is making a genuine effort to engage with the AFAP and will openly consider all options we put forward. The COO has contacted the Chair of the AFAP pilot committee and the Director of Group Flight Operations and flight operations management have also been in regular contact with AFAP staff and representatives.

It is a difficult time for our ATR members and continues the state of disruption in the Virgin Group since the decommissioning of the F50 and the E190 fleets. The AFAP will ensure any members who feel they need to remove themselves from duty will be fully supported.

A number of questions remain unresolved and the AFAP will ensure ATR pilots questions and issues are resolved as they arise in the consultation process.

Therefore, we have nominated Captains Richard RobertsThomson, Mark Stelzl, Timothy Gisik and First Officer Tom Hodgetts to participate in consultation meetings with AFAP industrial staff.

Even though a FAQ document has been released to the pilot group, there are a number of issues that AFAP representatives have not yet agreed upon, and that management has agreed to review further.

Finally, management has stated categorically that no “wet leasing” arrangement had been entered into with any Company to take over the Queensland ATR operation after July 2017, however it has not ruled out codeshare arrangements. The AFAP has expressed our concerns about this to management and will keep members advised of any developments.

ATR FLEET ANNOUNCEMENT The decision about the ATR fleet has finally been released. The Company have confirmed the fleet reduction plans slated for over a year as follows: • •

• •

The ATR fleet will be reducing from 14 airframes (8 x ATR 72-600 and 6 x ATR 72-500) to 6 x ATR 72-600 aircraft from July 2017; These remaining aircraft will operate 5 lines of flying, with the flying predominantly focused on NSW, ACT and Victoria (predominantly servicing the Sydney-Canberra route and Regional New South Wales flying); These aircraft will be operating out of Flight and Cabin Crew bases in Sydney and Canberra.

ATR operations based out of Brisbane will cease from July 2017.

W h i le p i lo t s m ay h ave b e e n ex p e c t i n g t h e announcement, we recognise that the confirmation is confronting, particular because the prospect of the Brisbane base closure only arose more recently.

The AFAP ATR Pilots Committee will meet with the Company at least fortnightly to actively participate in a structured consultation process.

NO. 1 | 2017 11

FEATURE

UNLAWFUL BRISTOW REFUSES TO PAY David Stephens, AFAP Senior Industrial Officer

In March this year the Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission confirmed that Bristow Helicopters acted unlawfully by standing down six pilots throughout 2016 and threatening to stand down a further thirteen.

More stand down notices were then issued. This time the Company tried to link those decisions to the Norway crash, and its decision to ground the EC225.

From June 2016, Bristow Helicopters progressively stood down a total of six pilots.

There were many backdrops to the dispute - the economic climate, uncertainty about contracts, and cost cutting, all culminating in redundancies which under the Bristow EA must be effected according to strict seniority.

In June, the Fair Work Commission ruled that under the CHC Helicopter Pilots’ Agreement the reference to redundancy being based on seniority from across the “whole pilot group”, narrowly means the pilot group of a particular contract, or type, or base.

This was a decision appealed by the AFAP, however it emboldened Bristow to “test” seniority.

After initially trying to “persuade” pilots into taking 12 months unpaid leave (after which you could be made be redundant) or to accept a voluntary redundancy, the company then threatened to make two pilots redundant despite being well up the seniority list.

After the Company’s refusal to retract the threat, the AFAP made an urgent application to the Fair Work Commission. However, the nature of the dispute transformed and the decision to stand pilots down took centre stage. The matter was set down for a five day arbitration hearing before Commissioner Cambridge to be heard in November 2016.

NORWEGIAN EC225 CRASH Following the Norwegian EC225 crash in April 2016, Bristow claimed the disaster forced it to “ground” its EC225 fleet. However, Airbus (the manufacturer), or EASA grounded the aircraft, while CASA permitted limited continuing operation. The Company even continued to fly the EC225 when necessary.

In response to the redundancy threats, the AFAP notified the company of a dispute. The Bristow Pilots’ Agreement requires the status quo be maintained until disputes are resolved. As a result, the Company was forced to withdraw its threats.

Instead, the Company issued stand down notices to two pilots who has resisted leave without pay.

12

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

AFAP KNOCKS OFF CHC DECISION On the day before the hearing, the Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission upheld the AFAP’s appeal and rejected the earlier CHC decision. It was found that the plain words of the CHC Agreement “whole pilot group” could only mean one thing – the entire pilot group!

Bristow’s strategy was dismantled and it was forced to concede.

COMMISSION ORDERS RETURN TO WORK AND BACK PAY Commissioner Cambridge found in support of the pilots. In particular, the Commissioner found that the real reason for the stand downs was not the Norway crash, but the desire to make pilots redundant out of seniority.

The Fair Work Act prescribes only three grounds for stand downs; 1. Industrial action being taken by others 2. A breakdown in machinery or equipment; or 3. A stoppage of work beyond the employer’s control Commissioner Cambridge found the real reason for the stand downs was the operation of the Enterprise

Air Pilot

FEATURE

Agreement (i.e., the status quo obligation), rather than a legitimate ground under the Act. The Company was ordered to return the affected pilots to paid work. He also ordered they be back paid all lost wages during the period of the unlawful stand downs.

BRISTOW APPEALS DECISION Expectedly, Bristow appealed the decision and sought a “stay” on the part of the decision to back pay. The Commission rejected and ordered that the back-pay owing be put in a joint account between Bristow and the AFAP until the appeal is heard.

The company argued two things. One; that Commissioner Cambridge was incorrect regarding the real stand down reasons. Two; even if he were right on the first point then the Commission has no jurisdiction to order back-pay.

AFAP SETS A NEW STANDARD The Appeal decision of the Fair Work Commission was handed down on 6 March 2017, finding in favour of the pilots.

The Bench upheld the original decision, which is a major outcome not only for the Bristow pilots, but all Australian workers.

As a Full Bench decision, this is now a precedent that can be relied on by Unions when their members face the same treatment.

F U L L B E N C H F I N D S BAC K - PAY TECHNICALITY Unfortunately, the Full Bench found that technically the Commission did not have jurisdiction to order the back-pay. This means that unless the Company agrees to do the right thing, the back-pay matter needs to be dealt in the Federal Court of Australia.

The Full Bench also referred the AFAP’s initial (s739 of the Act) dispute application over the redundancy out of seniority threats back to Commissioner Cambridge as it had not been closed off (the stand down dispute was dealt with under s 526 of the Act).

After waiting for the appeal period to end, the AFAP then wrote to Commissioner Cambridge requesting that he re-list the s739 application as soon as possible.

The AFAP also corresponded with Bristow’s lawyers posing two simple questions: 1.

2.

When does the company intend to pay the pilots for the period they were stood down (noting the monies are still in a joint account); and/or If the company does not intend to pay the pilots for the period of the stand down, on what legal basis are they not making the payment?

To date, neither of these questions have been addressed by either Bristow or their lawyers.

Commissioner Cambridge re-listed the matter on 12 April 2017. AFAP Executive Director, Simon Lutton, appeared at the hearing on behalf of the affected Bristow pilots. No representative of Bristow management appeared on this occasion, leaving it to their lawyers. A copy of the transcript is available on request from David Stephens, AFAP Senior Industrial Officer. David ran the initial case before Commissioner Cambridge and instructed our barrister Craig Dowling in the appeal.

While the transcript largely speaks for itself, the following comment from the Commissioner encapsulates the proceedings: “The legal basis is that there isn’t an order requiring them to pay it and, unless they get an order requiring them to pay it, they’re not paying. If that’s the approach they’re adopting, as I say I’ve only been doing this sort of thing for about 35 years but in most instances employers adopt a far more honourable approach than that, but be that as it may.”

FEDERAL COURT The AFAP’s legal and industrial team have reviewed the options and next steps. At the time of writing, the AFAP is preparing an application to the Federal Court, which is likely to be filed shortly.

The application will be seeking not only back pay, but interest and penalties against Bristow with a recorded breach against the Company.

It is important to acknowledge the tireless work of the Bristow Pilot Committee supporting not only the affected members, but the entire Bristow pilot body.

In closing, we are sure that every AFAP member wishes each of the affected pilots who were wrongly stood down and are now trying to recover their lives, the very best. They have been inspirational in their courage, while at all times maintaining their integrity.

NO. 1 | 2017 13

THE WOMEN’S NETWORK//

WOMEN’S NETWORK

INTERNATIONAL WOMEN’S DAY To celebrate International Women’s Day on 8 March 2017 the AFAP’s Women’s Network held a meeting at the Brisbane office.

This year the International Women’s Day campaign theme was #BeBoldForChange.

IWD was first rec ogni sed as an official occasion in the early 1900s. Today thousands of events around the world commemorate and inspire women’s achievements. There is much to celebrate as we reflect on the accomplishments of the generations of trailblazing women aviators before us.

Unfortunately gender and equity issues still present challenges in many sectors of the aviation industry, and we all need to strive to eradicate them. Each one of us can be a leader within our own spheres of influence by taking bold, pragmatic action to accelerate gender parity and participation rates in our profession. We can all do our part to help women advance and unleash their potential.

The AFAP is an active supporter of women pilots. Since its launch in 2010, the AFAP’s Women’s Network has provided a forum to identify and pursue industrial and professional issues relevant to our female members. Through our education and support programs, we aim to tackle the barriers preventing women from entering and progressing in the industry. The challenge is considerable and we are committed to increasing the participation rate of women in our great profession. Since its inception female pilot membership has increased five-fold.

ADELAIDE WOMEN’S NETWORK MEETING After a successful event in 2016, the AFAP Women’s Network returned to Adelaide on Tuesday 4 April for a meeting with our South Australian members.

A great afternoon was had where we discussed a range of industrial and professional issues relevant to our members.

14

Air Pilot

THE WOMEN’S NETWORK

UPCOMING EVENTS 2017 ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING The Australian Federation of Air Pilots Women’s Network 2017 Annual General Meeting will be held on 18 July in Brisbane.

Date: Thursday, 18 July 2017 Time: 13.00 – 16.00 Location: AFAP Brisbane Office. Suite 10, 137-143 Racecourse Rd, Ascot (above the Coffee Club) All AFAP members are invited to attend and are welcome to extend the invitation to a colleague who is not an AFAP member.

This is a fantastic opportunity to network with other women pilots from all corners of aviation.

Afternoon tea will be provided.

ASSERTIVE MANAGEMENT TRAINING Once again the AFAP Women’s Network is providing members with the opportunity to attend a full day course on Assertive Management Techniques, facilitated by international communications specialist, Karen Phillips.

Date: Wednesday 9 August 2017 Time: 9.30 - 16.00 Location: Australian Federation of Air Pilots, Level 4, 132-136 Albert Road, South Melbourne, VIC Being assertive isn’t always easy – but it’s a critical aspect of effective leadership This full day program aims to develop: •

the power of communication;

•

the ability to translate vision to action with win-win results;

•

consistent performance;

•

the ability to handle conflicts and crises with confidence; and

•

emotional momentum and balance of behaviour.

This year the course will be held at our Melbourne head office. Places will fill up fast so be sure to lock it in your calendars. We encourage you to bid for time off to attend this important event!

Please note this free course is available only to AFAP members.

To register your interest for either of these events or for further information please contact Marketing and Communications Manager Emma Young at emma@afap.org.au or 03 9928 5737.

NO. 1 | 2017 15

AVALON AIRSHOW 2017 28 FEBRUARY - 5 MARCH 2017 The 2017 Australian International Airshow hosted at Avalon Airport was once again a huge success.

This year welcomed the addition of new aircraft.

Australia’s first Joint Strike Fighters (JSF) made their debut at the show. Two F-35s were flown in from the United States, where they are currently being used to train Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) pilots.

The JSF is the world’s most advanced jet fighter and features many ground breaking technologies. Its sleek, low profile design makes it virtually invisible to radar at any speed.

The Federal Government is planning to spend $17 billion on 72 F-35 aircraft, with the first expected to be delivered in 2018 and in service by 2020.

As well as the performances in the sky and the planes displayed on the ground, there were a variety of international and local exhibitors with booths in the halls.

The AFAP and AAPMBF hosted an indoor stall which was routinely manned by AFAP pilot members, AFAP and MBF staff to speak to various pilots and airshow guests throughout the week.

Aviation Legal Counsel Joseph Wheeler (above), Industrial Advisor Simon Miller with AFAP representatives Captain Matthew O’Keeffe and Captain Brett Loeliger (right).

16

Air Pilot

WELFARE

Update

CAPTAIN MATTHEW O’KEEFFE & WELFARE COORDINATOR/INDUSTRIAL OFFICER CATE LARKINS The AFAP continues to make giant leaps towards becoming an industry leader in providing welfare support for pilots. Members will have the opportunity to vote for an official Welfare Director in July. The Welfare Director will sit on the AFAP Executive and drive policy initiatives and reforms.

The welfare portfolio currently consists of Cate Larkins as Welfare Coordinator, Captain Matthew O’Keeffe as acting Welfare Director, and a group of Pilot Welfare Representatives who have volunteered their valuable time to assist their fellow pilots.

Various initiatives have recently been rolled out, including: •

Pilot welfare referral form and procedures: This has allowed for Welfare Representatives to follow up on pilots who they are currently assisting, and for the Welfare Coordinator to be aware of specific requests.

•

Pilot Welfare awareness campaign: You may have seen a poster on your company noticeboard displaying your current AFAP pilot representative along with their contact details. There is also a Pilot Welfare pull-up banner that will be displayed at various events to open the topic of welfare for discussion and a new boutique welfare brochure is about to be released.

We would like to thank all contributors to the AFAP welfare space, including all those who have shared their very personal stories. There is nothing like hearing from pilots themselves about recovering form addiction and poor mental health and returning to flying- welfare issues are common and they do not have to mean the end of your career!

Pilot welfare representatives are a helpful resource and can give you professional welfare assistance when you need it. Your Virgin welfare reps are Captain Brett Loeliger and Captain Steve Lunn.

We will be conducting another welfare training session in August, so if you missed this opportunity and would like to be involved in assisting your colleagues, please contact the either Cate cate@afap.org.au or Matt matthew.okeeffe@afap.org.au for more information.

The Member Assistance Program (MAP) had 29 new referrals last quarter. We encourage all pilots and their families to access this free service provided by your AFAP. MAP provides 24/7 access to a trained occupational psychologist, who the AFAP have specially trained in Aviation-specific issues. MAP is delivered by the psychologists at PeopleSENSE who also provide EAP for Ambulance Australia. The service is totally confidential; from your employer and even from the AFAP. MAP has allowed far greater access to psychologists - the vast majority of those who have used our service have never been to a psychologist or EAP service before. We strongly recommend this service, whether you are experiencing poor mental health, or whether you just want an independent and confidential source to talk over an issue with - no issue is too small.

WELFARE REPRESENTATIVE TRAINING On 23 and 24 March 2017 our bi-yearly Welfare Representative Training was held in the AFAP Melbourne office.

Day 1 of the training was the first HIMS Peer Monitor training of its kind in Australia led by A/Welfare Director Captain Matt O’Keefe, with support from Dr Powell of Virgin Aviation Medical and Dr Brown of Qantas Medical. In addition to our 14 Welfare Representatives who were in attendance to commence their training as Peer Monitors, CASA was also represented. This was an incredible day which really demonstrated commitment and buy-in from across the industry for HIMS. All the attendees learnt about best practice for being a HIMS monitor and providing support for their colleagues in recovery after they exit residential rehab.

After a lovely dinner on Thursday evening with much to talk about, Day 2 of the training featured a presentation from Dr Powell on The Medical Model of Addiction.

There was a focus on mental health and addiction, as well as protecting relationships in the aviation industry and our new welfare initiatives. Day 2 was led by our Welfare Coordinator, Cate Larkins. The group heard moving and inspiring stories of lived experience and recovery from Troy Mussio from the Helicopter Council and Toby Messner from the National Council. Erica May, a pilot partner promoting her startup business, Sky Families, was also in attendance to talk about the importance of relationships for promoting good mental health and the need to help pilots by also helping their families. Cate rounded off the day discussing the need to reduce stigma in the industry around mental health. The more than 20 training attendees left galvanised to promote mental health support and facilitate discussion back in their respective workplaces.

Another welfare training will be conducted in the Brisbane AFAP office on 10 and 11 August 2017. This training will feature two specialised occupational psychologists from our MAP program who will be speaking on everything from duty of care versus confidentiality to how to build resilience in pilot workplaces. If you are keen to attend or are interested in getting involved in the welfare portfolio in general, contact Cate Larkins on cate@afap.org.au.

NO. 1 | 2017 17

HELICOPTER Pilot Federation A MIXED BAG FOR MAJOR ONSHORE PLAYERS So far 2017 has been a mixed time for onshore operators, starting with CHCs loss of the long standing Ambulance NSW EMS contract to TOLL. The transfer of the operations to TOLL has progressively taken place over the last six months with Orange, the last base to transfer, now finalised.

the court to allow the company to trade out of difficulty, without falling into administration. Earlier this year, in a positive outcome for the Company, CHC was granted the relief and officially came out of Chapter 11 and is now able to trade as normal. That in itself provides the Company some security.

Since losing the contract to Toll, CHC has secured further contracts with defence providing SAR for the army and most recently a contract with the navy out of Nowra with an Auto Hover AW139. These contracts have provided some of those pilots who did not go across to Toll with ongoing work with CHC.

Babcock onshore is progressing steadily since acquiring the Ambulance Victoria contract and the EMS operations in Mackay and Rock Hampton. Meanwhile Westpac Hunter have completed their transition to the Aw139 on the Northern region ANSW contract and are now operating all three bases, Newcastle, Tamworth and Lismore.

Throughout, the Company (US parent) voluntarily applied for what is called Chapter 11 relief in the United States courts. This is one step short of what in Australia would be administration. The process is oversighted by

18

The next big onshore contract which CHC, Babcok and Toll (at least) will be vying for is the renewal of the defence SAR contract due in June 2018.

Air Pilot

HELICOPTER PILOT FEDERATION

CHC EBAS In a significant step by the pilot body, pilots voted to split their EBA into two separate agreements – offshore and onshore. The emphasis of the agreements/ negotiations from the Company’s perspective was to position itself competitively for both existing (renewal) contracts and as new opportunities emerge. The pilots were concerned to not regress, but where possible make improvements.

ONSHORE APPROVED After more than 18 months since negotiations first started, the onshore group concluded their negotiations with the inaugural CHC Onshore Enterprise, approved by the Fair Work Commission. Reps Mark Gaudin, Rohan Armstrong and Chris Beauchamp are satisfied that the mutual objectives of the company and the pilots have been satisfied. The agreement was overwhelmingly endorsed by the pilot body.

OFFSHORE FRUSTRATED It is a little more frustrating for the offshore group.

Often, just as we believe agreement to be reached, a further hurdle is put up. This is due to the company keeping an eye on developments elsewhere in the industry, and existing and new contracts being on the horizon. As a result of a central plank of a proposed agreement (ie agreed to by Australian management) being rejected by the American parent, the parties have been forced back to negotiation. At the time of writing the company has tabled a revised proposal which is being responded to.

NO. 1 | 2017 19

The AFAP’s New Wings program seeks to ensure that pilots in the early stages of their career are effectively supported on the path to a fulfilling profession. More expansively, New Wings seeks to promote and advance the interests of Australia’s next generation of pilots.

MENTOR PROGRAM Our mentor program, Leading Edge, provides aspiring pilots with oneon-one assistance and support from a pilot with long-standing experience in the industry.

PROMOTING PILOTING AS A PROFESSION The AFAP seeks to promote flying as a rewarding and honourable profession. AFAP representatives present information sessions at universities, high schools and career expos. We provide information on how to become a pilot, in addition to honest, knowledgeable and positive insights into this profession.

20

ACHIEVING DIVERSITY IN THE FUTURE This initiative endeavours to foster equal opportunity so that future pilots stem from different parts of society. With the support of the AFAP’s Women’s Network, New Wings also strives to further gender equality in the industry.

CHALLENGING EXPLOITATION OF NEW PILOTS Our industrial staff provide advice on your employment rights and entitlements, review contracts and pursue employers in breach of their industrial obligations.

TRAINING AFFORDABILITY We understand that training is extremely expensive. The AFAP is committed to investigating and implementing ways to make it more affordable. We offer free AFAP membership to student pilots and scholarships to university students.

Air Pilot

Leading Edge is New Wings’ mentor program.

This service provides new pilots in a competitive industry with excellent networking opportunities, and the opportunity to learn from experienced pilots.

Mentees are matched with a mentor who has long standing experience in aviation.

Mentors are able to provide mentees with insight into the aviation industry, including their experiences, perspective and general career advice.

The program’s initial trial has already been rolled out in Melbourne and is currently ongoing. The intention is to roll out Leading Edge into Queensland later this year.

Please visit www.afap.org.au or call 03 9928 5737 to register your interest.

NO. 1 | 2017 21

Captain Matthew O’Keeffe & Industrial Officer/Welfare Coordinator Cate Larkins UPDATE

22

In various forums throughout this year we will be working hard to remove the stigma around mental health and addiction. Since November 2015 the interest in the HIMS initiative in Australia has grown significantly. The AFAP is proud to be a major HIMS supporter, having an active voice on the HIMS management committee.

Some particularly encouraging news from the HIMS program is the first pilot to have used the peer support program has returned to flying. He has actively embraced sobriety and has made an excellent recovery. This year HIMS is continuing to focus on helping pilots with addiction, particularly helping in various practical ways.

The Management committee meets bi-monthly with doctors, medical addiction specialists, union representatives and CASA to grow and support the roll out of HIMS here in Australia. There will be an opportunity for all members to learn about the HIMS initiative at an open forum in Sydney in November. The HIMS management committee is also producing an educational.

Our first in-house HIMS Peer Monitoring Training for our Welfare Representatives is Melbourne on 23 and 24 March 2017. It covers topics such as the Human Intervention Motivation Study (HIMS), the Member Assistance Program, the interaction between mental health and substance abuse issues, preserving positive relationships, and various coping strategies for pilots.

Air Pilot

MARCH UPDATE Below is the excerpt of IFALPA’s update on ICAO’s Conference in Montreal, where the AFAP were represented by Aviation Legal Counsel Joseph Wheeler and AusALPA. Once a month, Ms. Carole Couchman, IFALPA Senior Technical Officer, gives a recap of IFALPA’s activities at the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). If you have important news from your association, we encourage you to submit it to our Communications & Marketing Coordinator, Ms. Emily Bitting at emilybitting@ifalpa.org There were several ICAO Panel and Group meetings held in March.

IFALPA representatives took part in two meetings hosted by ICAO in Montreal with the goal of developing a packaging standard that will allow lithium batteries to be safely shipped as cargo on all aircraft.

This was the fourth meeting of the twenty member writing team which is drafting the actual standard that will be presented to a larger SAE, International Committee for consideration this year.

The standard is being written to ensure that if any lithium batteries go into thermal runaway within the package, there will be no hazardous effects outside the package, including flames, heat, or flammable gasses. There was a separate meeting preceding the writing team meeting to consider whether the effects of an external fire should be considered in the packaging standard, an issue of vital importance to IFALPA. Work on both of these topics continues, with the next meeting of the full SAE Committee to be held in Cologne, Germany, in early May. This was followed by the third meeting of the ICAO Task Force on Legal Aspects of Unruly Passengers, held in Montreal at the ICAO Headquarters during 13-15 March. This meeting was a continuation of the work on the update of ICAO Circular 288 on Unruly Passengers. It was attended by Mr. Roger Poulussen (VNV), Joseph Wheeler (AusALPA) and Sebastian Currás Barrios (IFALPA), on behalf of IFALPA. It is likely that the Task Force will require a fourth Meeting to finish the work which will most probably be during the month of June.

The Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP) Visionary Team met for the first time from March 15-17 in Montreal. This group brought industry stakeholders and States together in an informal setting to begin discussions on high level goals for updating the GANP in 2019. Further meetings will take place in June followed by a final meeting in September with industry leaders and States.

The seventh meeting of the Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems Panel (RPASP/7) took place in the middle of March. The CONOPS has a further draft which has now been sent out to other ICAO Panels for comment. The priority is now for the new part of Annex 6 to be completed. This will provide the first set of standards for integration but it is not without difficulties; should the license be issued to the State where the RPS (Remotely Piloted Station) is located? The c a r r i a ge o f d a n ge ro u s go o d s ; the balance between standards and guidance material. This is all covered in one of the 7 working groups. The issues with detect and avoid and how to integrate them with Air Traffic Management also continue. In particular to this last issue, contingency procedures need to be clearly identified and then relayed to the controllers. This would mean additional information being available through the flight p la n , s o f u r t h e r c o o rd i n a t i o n is required with the Air Traffic Management Requirements and Performance Panel (ATMRPP) and the ATMOPS Panel.

Concern about drones was again raised and ICAO has issued a State Letter reminding all States about their obligation to protect international traffic. The next Panel meeting will be in June where it is hoped that solutions to all these issues will progress further.

The last week of May saw the meeting of the Air Traffic Management Requirements and Performance Panel (ATMRPP).

Several key issues were discussed including Flight and flow – information for a collaborative environment (FF-ICE) where the work continues on the implementation guidance material, still a work in progress. This material is now being compared with Concept document to ensure that terms are in line with the guidance. IFALPA presented a s u g ge s te d rev i s i o n fo r t h e definitions related to flight plan which cause considerable confusion today.

In addition to the revisions we also suggested that the order in which they can be found in the Annexes and PANS should change by having Flight Plan (the generic definition) first and then the

other derivations underneath. If accepted this would pave the way for the additional definitions which are on the way (Preliminary, etc.) could also follow below. The Air – Ground System Wide information management (A-G SWIM) CONOPS was reviewed again and this will eventually be incorporated into Volume I of the SWIM Manual (Doc 10039) this will involve close coordination with the Information Panel (IMP).

There was an update on the Aircraft Access to System Wide Information Management (SWIM) (AAtS) demonstration project which was undertaken to determine the feasibility of airground communications for nonsafety critical information sharing and the lessons learned were discussed. In addition, there was a long brain storming session as to how to better identify Trajectory Based Operations (TBO) into the Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP).

The next Panel meeting will be in Montreal in October.

F i n a l l y , f o r M a r c h , I C AO launched the Competency-Based Training and Assessment Task Force on March 28, 2017. This group has been tasked with the update of PANS-Training provisions related to competency-based training for Pilots, Air Traffic Controllers, Flight Dispatchers, Maintenance Engineers and Electronics Service Technicians.

IFALPA was represented on the Pilot group which began the work of updating the MPL competencies and observable behaviours to be applicable to pilot licensing and recurrent training. The discussions focused on competencies that should be included, how to define the competencies and examples of observable behaviours that should be used to assess each competency.

The work of the group will continue until 2020, when Amendment 5 to PANS-Training becomes applicable and will include consequential a m e n d m e n t s to A n n ex 1 a n d u p d a te s o f r e l a te d g u i d a n c e material. ©2017 The International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations IFALPA provides this data for information only, in all cases pilots should follow their company’s guidance and procedures. In the interests of flight safety, reproduction of this publication in whole or in part is encouraged. It may not be offered of sale or used commercially.

NO. 1 | 2017 23

TECHNICALLY SPEAKING THE GO-AROUND NONCOMPLIANCE PROBLEM The following are excerpts from the Flight Safety Foundation’s final report of the Go-Around Decision Making and Execution Project.

Annually, 65 percent of all accidents occur during the approach and landing phase of flight. The Flight Safety Foundation studied 16 years of runway excursions and determined that 83 percent could have been avoided with a decision to go around. In other words, 54 percent of all accidents could potentially be prevented by going around. It is generally felt that an unstable approach is the primary cause of landing excursions. Just over half of the landing excursions followed a fully stable approach; in these instances, the flight became unstable only during landing.

A critical industry policy designed to help prevent such accidents is the go-around policy. Interestingly, and sadly, the collective industry performance of complying with go-around policies is extremely poor — approximately 3 percent of unstable approaches result in go-around policy compliance. Why is a critical policy designed to prevent the most common type of accident ignored by flight crews, and why is that policy not being managed effectively by management? Improving the go-around compliance rate holds tremendous potential in reducing approach and landing accidents (ALAs).

The go-around itself is not without risk. There is an increased risk in loss of control events during a go-around compared to exposure with all other phases of flight. It follows that we should only go around when the risk associated with an unstable approach is greater than the risk associated with a go-around. What is that balance, and how do we minimize go-around exposure to only those that are really necessary? The Go-Around Decision-Making and Execution Project was launched to research and answer the question “Why are we so poor at complying with established go-around policies?” It was also intended to improve our understanding of the risks associated with executing go-arounds and to make recommendations to improve compliance and mitigate risks associated with the go-around manoeuvre itself.

HIGH-LEVEL SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS ARE: 1.

2.

The collective industry norm is to accept the noncompliance of

go-around polices, despite empirical data that indicate this is the most common contributor to ALAs. The industry predominantly turns to reducing unstable approaches as the sole means to reduce ALAs, even though empirical data show that unstable approaches affect less than half of runway excursions.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

Pilots’ overall awareness of ALA risks — and of the impact those risks have on approach and landing safety — is low.

Management is generally disengaged from go-around noncompliance and has low awareness of the impact it has on ALAs. Management’s perception of risk is low.

Pilots do not see current go-around policy criteria as realistic for the operational environment.

Effective go-around decision making in flight deck communication is low.

Go-arounds, although considered a normal flight manoeuvre, are rare.

As reported by flight crews, one in 10 go-arounds has a potentially hazardous outcome, such as an aircraft performance exceedance.

There are variable go-around techniques and challenges, depending on the point during the approach when the go-around begins. Procedures and training do not adequately address many of these challenges.

Pilot experience in the aircraft type affects go-around proficiency.

Go-around complexity, including complex controller radio transmissions, can affect go-around proficiency.

HIGH-LEVEL STRATEGIC GO-AROUND EXECUTION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1.

2.

3.

Ensure that go-around training and awareness appropriately reflect different go-around execution risk scenarios.

Review go-around policy, procedures and documentation to maximize their effectiveness, clarity and understanding.

Ensure that low relevant experience of one or both crew does not prejudice the effectiveness of monitoring during approach, landing and go-around.

PROJECT CONCLUSION

The problem of go-around policy noncompliance is real and is arguably the greatest threat to flight safety today, and the potential impact

of improvement in compliance is significant. No other single decision can have such an impact in the reduction of aviation accidents as the decision to go around.

The industry must improve its awareness of the problem; to accomplish that, a shift in focus and cultural norms is required. It is believed that significant improvement is attainable; however, the cultural shift will be much easier if the industry shifts collectively, as opposed to individual companies taking individual action. However, several companies already have chosen to go it alone on this issue.

The full Go-Around Decision Making and Execution report is available at the FSF website https://flightsafety.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/ Go-around-study_final.pdf

24

Air Pilot

NO. 1 | 2017 25

NATIONAL AIRNORTH

Pilot Federation

We are pleased to say that negotiations for a new agreement at Airnorth are proving productive. The AFAP has met with Airnorth regularly over the past 3 months, together with Airnorth pilot representatives. The negotiations so far have been open and collaborative.

The current agreement was made in 2008 and is not reflective of the environment in which Airnorth and its pilots operate. Although there has been significant progress made, there are still many issues to address, particularly in relation to rostering, annual leave allocation, training and promotion. However, we look forward to continue working with the pilot representatives and the pilot group generally to have a new Airnorth Agreement finalised and approved by the Fair Work Commission well before the end of the year.

RFDS (LAUNCESTON)

Negotiations are ongoing for the introduction of a new Agreement with RFDS Launceston. The AFAP continues to work closely with the pilot group to achieve a fair and equitable agreement with the Company.

RFDS CENTRAL OPERATIONS

The AFAP visited Adelaide, Port Augusta and Alice Springs in late February to formulate claims for a new RFDS Central Operations Agreement. Meetings with the RFDS commenced in early April, with meetings occurring in Adelaide and Port Augusta. At the time of print, we are due to meet with the RFDS in Alice Springs in mid May. One critical issue of these negotiations is the issue of on-call work arrangements and how it relates to the RFDS utilising pilots beyond the end of the on-call period. Pilots are entitled to expect certainty with rostering practices (so as to achieve a realistic work-life balance) and significant gains made in the last agreement are being questioned by the RFDS. The AFAP will not

26

allow these gains to be eroded, rather they are a base from which to build. Notwithstanding this, the AFAP is hopeful that a replacement agreement can be approved prior to the nominal expiry date of the current agreement so that a smooth transition can occur.

RFDS WESTERN OPERATIONS

Rostering continues to be a primary concern for pilots in RFDS Western Operations. Significant changes to the way the roster is structured without consultation is, in the view of the AFAP, a breach of the current agreement.

We are in discussions with the RFDS about this issue and hope that recourse to the Fair Work Commission (or a Court) will be unnecessary.

NATIONAL COUNCIL NEWSLETTER

The first National Council Newsletter was distributed to National Council members in January 2017. The AFAP remains committed to producing more editions with an aim to make content relevant to current industry developments and news. We encourage any members to contact AFAP with any topics they would like to see addressed in future editions.

AIRWORK MEMBERS VOTE FOR PROTECTED INDUSTRIAL ACTION

Members at Airwork Personnel have been battling for over three years, going on four years, for a new EBA. The negotiations have been frustrated constantly with various delays along the way, including the company suggesting it may need to make redundancies, but never did, to the company putting out a non-agreed document only, sensibly, to withdraw it when it was clear it would not be supported.

In the middle of last year we thought we had come close to agreement but it was voted down by almost twothirds of the pilot body. The matters to be addressed to

Air Pilot

NATIONAL PILOT FEDERATION get the agreement over the line were clearly articulated to the company but nine months later we are only marginally closer.

This is Airwork member’s second protection action ballot application, with the first agreed to be adjourned and then withdrawn when the company made some promising offers, but continually fell short on key matters.

The protected action ballot was overwhelmingly supported by members, with all eligible voters voting and each question comprehensively supported.

The day following the declaration of the ballot, a further meeting was held with the company. In a final bid to stave off industrial action, the AFAP/Reps put forward a further proposal which the Company advised it would support and represent in favour of to their Board.

If agreed by the company industrial action will have been averted, and above all an agreement reached. At the time of writing we are waiting for the Company’s board to respond. Airwork is a freight operator based in Brisbane with TOLL and Virgin its clients. Pilot Reps Ron Sanders, Paul Masters, Kallan Bullivant, Clayton Cowled abd Glen Gilchrist are commended for their hard and resolve.

NETWORK AVIATION JOIN THE 21ST CENTURY

Members at Network Aviation in Perth finally have an enterprise agreement relevant to the 21st century.

Again, after nearly four years of hard slog, delayed with several changes of management, including the acquiring by Qantas to be part of the Qantas group, and then to be subject to the Qantas group policy members have strongly voted up a new agreement which was recently approved by the Fair Work Commission.

While the agreement adopts the Qantas wages policy, it strongly emphasises rostering equity and fairness, of which the lack has been the bane of Network pilots’ existence for years.

The new agreement replaces an archaic and draconian Work Choices agreement more at home in the chimneys and mines of 19th century London. While not fully achieving every aspiration of each pilot, it certainly goes a considerable distance to closing the gap and, above all, provides a significant launching pad for the next round of bargaining.

PEARL AVIATION CONTINUING TO DRAG ON

Pearl is not in very different situation than Network.

Pearl’s current agreement was made under the very former Industrial Relations Act in 1999 (and expired in

2002). However it predated work choices so in many ways is a fairer document. However, it has well expired and needs to be made as a Fair Work agreement.

We have been at for close to over four years. While we have also seen a change in the management structure, which has not helped the continuity of bargaining, the entire Darwin base closed after the company surrendered a long standing contract. The agreement, when its happens, will apply only the Brisbane based operations.

While the negotiations have been protracted and often laborious we are not at the drafting stage working our way through the final document. Further meetings are being arranged throughout May and June.

INDIVIDUAL MATTERS

The AFAP continues to assist members with a range of individual matters. There has been a large increase of member enquiries seeking to understand their rights and obligations in respect of the enforceability of training due to a number of larger airline operators commencing major recruitment drives. The AFAP recommends any pilot who is faced with or is seeking to break a return of service obligation in a training bond/agreement to contact an industrial advisor/officer for further discussion.

Not all training bonds/agreements are alike and the advice provided will differ from case to case.

The AFAP has also assisted members with a number of unfair dismissal applications, general disciplinary matters, incident investigations, and underpayment enquiries.

ALLIANCE AIRLINES

With Alliance keen to pay its east coast pilots approx.

12% less than their colleagues on the west coast, the negotiations for a Queensland agreement continue to drag on.

It has now been around two years since the first meeting, and while there have been some proposed improvements in conditions, the gap between the parties remains sizeable.

This is particularly unfortunate, considering the high workload of these pilots, and the value they continue to provide to the Company. We will keep exploring options to resolve this impasse.

NEW WINGS – LEADING EDGE MENTOR PROGRAM

We welcome the participation of numerous National Council members in the AFAP’s New Wings and Leading Edge programs. For more information on New Wings, see the feature article on pages 20-21 of this edition.

NO. 1 | 2016 27

HOW TO BE AN EFFECTIVE LEADER & HOW MAP HELPS Laura Fildes Clinical Physchologist & Principal Consultant, People Sense

“TRAIN PEOPLE WELL ENOUGH THAT THEY CAN LEAVE … TREAT THEM WELL ENOUGH THAT THEY DON’T WANT TO,” RICHARD BRANSON, CEO VIRGIN Recent research is showing that leadership has a key role in reducing mental health stigma, and there is a lot of evidence that shows emotional intelligence is the key to good leaders. Clinical Psychologist and Principal Consultant Laura Fildes shares how the AFAP Member Assistance Program (MAP) can not only provide support with mental illness but also help you improve your leadership ability.

cognitive-behavioural ones. Demonstrating appropriate emotionality and self-regulation enables leaders to better adapt to changing contexts, especially crises. It also allows followers to see the “human” side of their leaders.

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE

Organisational leaders communicate their vision to all those around them in a way that allows others to understand it, embrace it and pursue it. When enthusiasm and optimism are displayed by leaders, team spirit is aroused. The role of the leader becomes to help others utilise their own abilities to then lead themselves and others.

Effective leadership requires individuals to have welldeveloped emotional and cognitive intelligence to be able to identify their own strengths and weaknesses, as well as those of their followers. Recognising and taking opportunities to enhance a person’s skills, or help them improve in an area of weakness, is integral to building the leadership capabilities of followers. Leaders who are able to facilitate the positive growth of their staff are more likely to gain their loyalty, respect and engagement.

Research by Dasborough and Ahkanasy (2002) asserts that leadership is intrinsically an emotional process, in which leaders display emotions to evoke emotional reactions in team members and followers. Engaging people at an emotional level demonstrates that leaders care about the individual and their circumstances. Failed leadership is often a result of emotional issues, not

Effective leadership requires leaders to harness skills and competencies across a number of areas including: • Emotional Intelligence • Cognitive Intelligence • Personality traits

GOFFEE AND JONES (2000) DISCUSS FOUR QUALITIES THAT INSPIRATIONAL LEADERS DISPLAY:

28

1.

Revealing Weaknesses – Leaders who selectively reveal a tangential weakness engender trust with their followers. Sharing a flaw highlights a leader’s vulnerability and humanness, therefore showing followers that you are genuine and approachable.

2.

Become a Sensor – Inspiring leaders follow their gut feelings and collect and decipher soft data. They are able to read situations and judge whether relationships are working or not. Reality testing with a trusted member of your team is a good safeguard to ensure your read of a situation is accurate, as leaders may project their own ideas onto others.

3.

Practice Tough Empathy – Effective leaders take an approach that means giving people what they need, not what they want. This shows respect for the individual and for the task at hand. People want someone who cares intensely about them and the work that they do.

4.

Dare to be Different – Effective leaders recognise that remaining a little aloof, even as they are drawing followers close to them, enables them to capitalise on what is unique about themselves. Highlighting their separateness then enables leaders to motivate others to perform better.

Air Pilot

MEMBER ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

There is growing evidence that suggests demonstrating warmth is the key to influencing others and facilitates trust and communication (Cuddy, Kohut and Neffinger, 2013).

Trust is fundamental to organisations and effective leadership, as people in the organisation who trust their leader adopt the values, culture and mission of the organisation in a sincere and lasting way.

Understanding Emotional Intelligence Emotional Intelligence is “the ability to monitor one’s own and others’ feelings and emotions, to discriminate among them, and to use this information to guide one’s thinking and actions” (Salovey and Mayer, 1990).

Emotional intelligence is fundamental in assisting with self-development and the development of others.

As leaders who are aiming to develop leadership capabilities in others it is necessary to have a good understanding and working knowledge of the concept of emotional intelligence.

KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE 1. Self-Awareness - Knowing your emotions, strengths and weaknesses, values and drives and recognising their impact on yourself and others.

2. Self-Regulation - Managing your emotions by controlling disruptive emotions and impulses and adapting to changing circumstances.

3. Motivation - Motivating yourself and channelling your emotional energy toward achieving a worthwhile goal.

4. Empathy - Recognising emotions in others. Empathy is the ability to understand and consider others and use compassion with others at difficult times.

5. Social Skills - Handling relationships and having the ability to understand and manage people around you by using effective interpersonal skills.

Research indicates that effective leaders display a high degree of emotional maturity and stability (Goleman, 1995). Emotional intelligence is having the ability to manage yourself in all social situations.

Whilst cognitive intelligence and competence are vital to effective leadership, it is easier to use warmth as an indicator of leadership effectiveness. Warmth fosters trust, which in turn provides the opportunity to change people’s attitudes and beliefs; it enables you to get people to fully accept your message (Cuddy et al., 2013).

LISTENING AND LEADERSHIP The ability to listen effectively is an essential component of leadership and followership, and most leaders know they need to be good listeners to be effective. By learning the skills and behaviours of active listening, you can become a more effective listener, leader and follower.

Many leaders have development needs that directly relate to their listening skills: • • • • • •

Dealing with people’s feelings Accepting criticism well Trying to understand what others think before making judgments about them Encouraging direct reports to share Using feedback to make necessary changes in behaviour Being open to the input of others

MAP The Member Assistance Program (MAP) is available to help you to become a more effective leader. It can support you to increase self-awareness and improve your self-regulation and emotional intelligence.

MAP is available for everyone, not just for people with Mental Health difficulties. Psychology can support you to improve your leadership ability, learn how to support your colleagues, coach you to improve social skills, interpersonal relationships and so much more.

We can also provide professional external supervision, career advice, support for career transition or just lend an ear when you want someone to talk to outside of your immediate social or professional sphere.

We are only a confidential phone call away. We appreciate the demands and responsibility of your role, and we are here as a service and support offering your Federation help wherever we can.

“WHEN I GET READY TO TALK TO PEOPLE, I SPEND TWO THIRDS OF THE TIME THINKING WHAT THEY WANT TO HEAR AND ONE THIRD THINKING ABOUT WHAT I WANT TO SAY,” ABRAHAM LINCOLN NO. 1 | 2017 29

DISPELLING THE MYTH: 8 HOURS BOTTLE TO THROTTLE Joseph Wheeler, AFAP Aviation Legal Counsel

The rules in respect to drug and alcohol management policies (DAMP), together with rules to facilitate CASA tests of safety sensitive aviation participants have now been in place for almost 10 years.

However, there remains much confusion about “DAMP” and how it affects pilots, particularly given that previously well-known rules (such as the“8 hour bottle to throttle” rule) still remain in force.

How does CASA “police” alcohol with pilots? What are the limits, how does CASA deal with those who fall afoul of random tests, and what must we remember about company-specific DAMP tests?

CASA TESTS A CASA drug or alcohol test follows a process outlined in the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations (CASR). Only approved testers can test you if you are available to perform, or are performing a safety sensitive aviation activity (SSAA). This term covers almost anything you are doing at an airport if you are assigned to duty and have arrived to perform that duty. It’s imperative you comply with the tester’s directions, however you can refuse a test is if the approved tester refuses to show you their identity card. You should always ask the purported tester for their ID, and if they are legitimate, ensure you comply with all their reasonable directions.

An important direction that is easy to miss in the confusion and stress that sometimes accompanies such unexpected tests, is a direction to remain in the tester’s presence. The advice is simple – stay nearby to the tester, because failure to do so is a strict liability offence which carries with it a very strong likelihood of an infringement notice being issued, or worse.

The approved tester can ask for a breath sample for alcohol and a saliva sample for a drug test, not blood or urine.

DAMP TESTS Only your company’s approved testing personnel (which includes contracted laboratory/testing companies) can conduct

30

DAMP tests. All operators’ drug and alcohol management plans (DAMPs) require post incident/accident DAMP testing. This is something which typically requires managerial responsibility and decision making before it can happen. You should be clear about the fact that such approval to test has to be given before you submit to a DAMP test, but be guided by your own company’s DAMP, rather than general advice.

As with CASA tests, pilots should not leave test premises until the test has been conducted.

HOW MUCH IS TOO MUCH? It is beyond the scope of this article to analyse the science behind alcohol absorption or the half-lives of illicit and prescription drugs, and the factors that affect those matters.

For legal purposes, for alcohol 0. 0 2 % i s t h e m a x i m u m b l o o d alcohol concentration permissible.

For cocaine, cannabis, opioids and amphetamines, the test result must be below the confirmatory target concentration set out in Australian/ New Zealand Standard 4308:2006 for oral fluid testing.

CAR 256(3) continues to control the timing of alcohol ingestion for safety sensitive personnel: A person shall not act as, or perform any duties or functions preparatory to acting as, a member of the operating crew of an aircraft if the person has, during the period of 8 hours immediately preceding the departure of the aircraft consumed any alcoholic liquor.

While of course common sense, it must be remembered that the following are still strict liability offences under CAR 256, and do not explicitly refer to any blood alcohol percentage or drug blood concentration level. They therefore carry some ambiguity as to blood alcohol concentration levels in order to be enforced over a wide range of

scenarios where a person acting as crew is impaired: • Entering an aircraft while “in a state of intoxication”; •

Operate or “be carried” (for operating crew members) in an aircraft while being in a state where your capacity to act as a an operating crew member is impaired due to ingestion of any kind of medication or alcohol;

•

An operating crew member (whether “performing” duty or carried to perform duty) cannot consume alcohol on board;

The general advice of the AFAP is that one must not take any chances with borderline usage of alcohol up to the statutory 8 hours “immediately preceding the departure of the aircraft”. You must instead be acutely aware that any level of intoxication or impairment could be enough to result in prosecution or other CASA disciplinary measures, in addition to the employment consequences whether or not it was 8, 10 or even 12 hours since drinking the night before signing on. It is imperative that you know your body, your tolerances, and the implications of being wrong about either.

If you are concerned or curious as to whether you may have a problem with alcohol or another substance you can contact the AFAP’s confidential MAP service on 1 800 424 635 or through the AFAP website: www.afap. org.au.

If you would like to know more, it is imperative you come along to an AFAP Accident & Incident Training course, where DAMP comprises a major portion of the day.

Other useful links to learn more about pilot wellbeing and alcohol consumption are: • https://www.casa.gov.au/ wellbeing • http://services.casa.gov.au/ avmed/pilots/faq_facts_case/ facts/alcohol.asp • www.hims.org.au.

Air Pilot

REX

Pilot Federation

CADET ADVERSE ACTION MATTER IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Late last year, Rex sought special leave to appeal a judgement of the Full Federal Court which found that a registered organisation is entitled to represent the industrial interests of employees who are not members, but fall within its eligibility rules. Rex argues that the phrase “entitled to represent the industrial interests” in the Fair Work Act is limited to representation of members only.

This matter arises from a letter sent by Rex to potential cadet pilots. The AFAP alleged in the Federal Circuit Court that the letter constitutes a threat of adverse action against certain pilots. Judge Reithmuller found that the AFAP had standing to commence the proceedings, despite no individual member being identified. Standing was confirmed by the Full Federal Court.

The High Court heard the special leave application on 12 May 2017, and determined that the matter is of sufficient importance to proceed to a full appeal later this year.

While we are confident in our arguments, it should be noted the relevant phrase in the legislation has not been considered in detail by the High Court for a number of decades. Over that period, there have been substantial changes to the Act, meaning it is unsurprising that the Court is keen to consider the matter in a modern context.

TEMPORARY TRANSFERS In late 2016, Rex made the decision to send pilots on temporary transfers to the Perth and Cairns bases for up to 28 days.

As these transfers began occurring, it became clear that Rex did not intend to pay DTA in accordance with our reading of the relevant EBA clause, i.e. for the entire period away from home base. Following several

attempts at conciliation at the Fair Work Commission, the question of when and how DTA is payable for these transfers went to arbitration before Deputy President Clancy on 20 February.

Unfortunately, DP Clancy ruled against our interpretation of the EBA in one key respect, namely that pilots on temporary transfers should only be paid DTA during time signed on for flying duties. This is contrary to the established practice for all other types of flying duties, for example overnights, where a pilot is paid DTA for the entire period, including when signed off in an outport.

In our view, the decision is contradictory. In particular, DP Clancy supported our view that the only relevant sign-on and sign-off times are those at home base, i.e. at the beginning and end of a transfer. However, he ruled that these times simply set the outer limits of the time period during which DTA may (but not necessarily should) be paid.

Based on our view that there are significant errors in the decision, and due to its potential consequences, we have decided to appeal it to a Full Bench of the Commission. The matter will be heard on 14 June 2017.

It should be noted that the Rex DTA clause differs from all others in the industry, meaning we would not expect DP Clancy’s decision to have any flow on with other operators.

RECENT AIRCRAFT INCIDENTS Earlier this year, there were several technical incidents with Rex aircraft, which drew significant media attention.

As they are the subject of ongoing ATSB investigations, we are not able to comment on the details. Having said this, the consistent theme was the actions of the pilots, who were able to navigate difficult situations with skill and poise. This is a testament to the pilot group at Rex, as well as the Company’s check and training regime.

NO. 1 | 2017 31

PROTECTING YOUR INTERESTS IN THE EVENT OF AN ACCIDENT OR INCIDENT Joanne Janes, AFAP Operations Manager

It is an unfortunate reality that you may find yourself involved in an aircraft incident or accident at some stage during your career as a commercial pilot.

Your conduct in the immediate aftermath of such an event has the potential to significantly impact upon your livelihood. While you may find yourself surrounded by people offering to help (including well-meaning colleagues) it is important to be mindful of the many vested and conflicting interests of the parties involved, ranging from

company management eager to understand the event, insurers looking to apportion blame, ATSB and CASA investigators seeking interviews and media outlets eager for the ‘next big scoop’.

In the interests of protecting your career and wellbeing it is important to resist the urge to talk straight away. You may be suffering from shock or injury and your vulnerability could be exploited. So how do you best navigate your way through your responsibilities and reporting obligations while simultaneously protecting your own interests?

CONTACT THE AFAP AS SOON AS POSSIBLE The AFAP Incident Response Plan has been designed to ensure that members are supported through the provision of quality legal/industrial advice, representation, training and welfare assistance. We offer a number of services to guide members and their families through what can be an incredibly difficult time, including: •

AFAP Accident and Incident Emergency Hotline +61 (0) 459 747 757 - manned by senior staff 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Our experienced industrial, legal and safety and technical staff will provide immediate advice, assist you to fulfil your reporting requirements and will attend any follow up meetings with you). As a foundation member of the International Federation of Airline Pilots Associations (IFALPA), we are also in the unique position of being able to call on other international member organisations to provide local ‘on the ground’ support to our fixed wing and rotary members if they are involved in an accident or incident overseas.

•

AFAP Accident and Incident Checklist (see below) - provides a summary of key steps for members to follow in the aftermath of an accident or incident. Keep a copy of this checklist with you when flying. To request a hard or electronic copy of the checklist please contact admin@afap.org.au or call the AFAP on 03 9928 5737. These are also available on our website (www.afap.org.au) and on the AFAP/MBF App.

•

AFAP Member Assistance Program (refer to checklist for contact details) - a free, confidential service to assist members dealing with the psychological aftermath of an accident or incident. MAP can provide a critical incident response (available 24/7) designed to provide psychological first aid and get you back on your feet as soon as possible.

AFAP ACCIDENT AND INCIDENT TRAINING Available only to AFAP members, these free courses are run annually across the country. You will learn about: • The practical steps necessary to follow in order to protect your interests; • The regulatory framework underpinning accident investigation in Australia; and • Your rights, responsibilities and obligations in the case of an accident or incident (including DAMP requirements specific to your operator).

Further courses planned are as followed: AFAP Accident and Incident Training Thursday 7 September, 9.00 – 17.00. AFAP Brisbane Office, Ascot, QLD AFAP Accient and Incident Essentials Training Thursday 5 October, 8.30 – 12.30. Stamford Grand, Glenelg, SA To register please contact admin@afap.org.au or call 03 9928 5737.

32

Air Pilot

AFAP LEGAL

AFAP ACCIDENT AND INCIDENT CHECKLIST STEP 1: PROTECT PEOPLE AND GET TO SAFETY • Ensure the welfare of yourself, passengers and crew STEP 2: CONTACT THE AFAP • Our 24 hour hotline for accidents/incidents is +61 (0) 459 747 757 • It is important to get the Federation ‘in the loop’ early • Seek advice on any written report you are required to submit STEP 3: COMPLY WITH DAMP • All Operators’ Drug and Alcohol Management Plans (DAMP) require post-accident DAMP testing • Once informed of the requirement to undergo a DAMP test, do not leave the premises until the test has been conducted, unless otherwise advised • If you are not informed of the requirement to undergo a DAMP test you should advise the company of your intention to leave the airport STEP 4: COMPLY WITH REPORTING OBLIGATIONS • Refer to your company’s Operations Manual for the reporting procedure • AFAP industrial staff can assist with written reports • Immediately Reportable Matters (IRMs) must be reported to the ATSB as soon as reasonably practicable by telephone • Routine Reportable Matters (RRMs) must be reported to the ATSB by written report within 72 hours STEP 5: SEE A DOCTOR ABOUT BOTH YOUR PHYSICAL & PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH • You are encouraged to seek medical attention even if you are not physically injured - you will most likely be in a state of shock • Have a check-up and discuss any psychological symptoms with a GP • Request a medical certificate regarding fitness for interview/duty • Call the AFAP’s Member Assistance Program (MAP) on 1800 424 635 for free and confidential critical incident support with a trained occupational psychologist; and • Make a follow up appointment for a counselling session with MAP

Remember to phone the AFAP EMERGENCY HOTLINE +61 (0) 459 747 757 as soon as possible after an accident or incident.

NO. 1 | 2017 33

COBHAM Pilot Federation

Three of Cobham’s Business Units – National Jet Systems (Airlines), National Jet Express (Regional) and Surveillance (Coast watch) are immersed in negotiating new enterprise agreements, with each at different stages.

The fourth business unit, SAR, continues to be stuck on the previously reported sneaky and fourth rate deal the company did with the TWU for another two years.

Not only are the respective business units working to negotiate new agreements, they are also faced with various issues specific to them which the Cobham Pilot Council of Rohan Smith (Acting Chair), Belinda Baynham (Secretary), Rowan Ward and Bill Surtees (seconded) are working through with the AFAP.

NATIONAL JET SYSTEM: EBA AND TRAINING & CHECK DEPARTMENT RESTRUCTURE

It has been a busy couple of months at Cobham NJS. The current EBA expired on 28 February. Pilot Reps and AFAP Industrial Officers visited all the bases in the network to gather feedback from members to present the Company with a comprehensive Log of Claims.

Cobham also provided their Log of Claims to the Reps, which has now been distributed to members for consideration prior to the first meetings on 16 and 17 May. Importantly, all six bargaining reps, including the AFAP and TWU, are working towards the common goal of improved conditions for 717 pilots. This collaboration has already ensured consistent logs of claims being served by each group on the company. As negotiations continue members will be kept informed.

Throughout 2016 and into 2017, Cobham undertook a restructure of the Training and Check Department with, changes leaving many members worse off. This included not only demotions, but a significant reduction in remuneration and duties, qualifications and status.

The review caused significant changes to members, including a decision that there was an excess of Captains.

After significant efforts from the Reps, the Company called for two voluntary redundancies. This was taken up by two pilots, one of which is Captain Nick Hayes, previously the Chairman of the Cobham Pilot Council.

The negative impacts of these changes are still being pursued by the AFAP on behalf of members. One matter is still before the Fair Work Commission where the company is resisting the fact that these pilots, who were appointed to the positions for between 9 – 25 years, were not permanent, uninterrupted appointments.

Some pilots have since decided to leave the company as a result of their treatment and NJS has found themselves short of Captains. This requires upgrades and a major recruitment of First Officers. Unsurprisingly, this is putting a lot of pressure on the now very much depleted Training and Check Department. Much of this angst could have been avoided by treating the many long term, loyal and extremely skilled and competent pilots, with respect and dignity. Throughout all of this, including the bargaining, AFAP Cobham Council Reps Belinda Baynham

34

and Rohan Smith have worked tirelessly delivering significant outcomes for members.

NJE: BARGAINING ON HOLD AMID CONTRACT SPECULATION

Once again, Regional Service members have been the subject to client and contract volatility. A major contract involved Chevron, who was expected to make a decision on the RFP by the end of April 2017. However, Chevron subsequently advised that a decision is now not expected until the end of May 2017. We recognise that the delay in confirming this contract may lead to further uncertainty, however the Management Team are continuing to engage with Chevron on a daily basis. We will keep you informed of all developments as they come to hand.

This consequently prompted the Pilot Reps to offer to defer the negotiations for a new enterprise agreement until some certainty was known. However with the delay now extended to end of May (at best) those delays cannot continue. The company has agreed to resume negotiations on 15 and 16 June. AFAP Cobham Council Rep Rowan Ward is leading the negotiations on behalf of pilots.

Some good news amid this uncertainty is that the Business Unit was successful in its bid for the Prominent Hill contract in South Australia. This will create more opportunities for pilots to move to Adelaide. At this stage, there will be six services a week to the mine out of Adelaide, with one service via Port Augusta.

Captain Belinda Baynham, Secretary Cobham AFAP Pilot Council Air Pilot

COBHAM PILOT FEDERATION REPORT SURVEILLANCE MEMBERS CONSIDERING PROTECTED INDUSTRIAL ACTION

Negotiations for a new Surveillance enterprise agreement are well advanced, having commenced midlate late year. The negotiations are being led on behalf of the Surveillance Pilots by AFAP Reps Bill Surtees and Richard Hodgson.

The Surveillance negotiations have an added dimension as the agreement covers Pilots and Observers who are supportive of each other’s agendas. This makes efforts by the Company to split the groups impossible.

In 2012 both groups at the same time applied for, and were granted, protection action ballot orders which not long afterwards saw the finalisation of an agreement.

Both, again, are now preparing for protected action ballots as a result of the lack of responsiveness from the Company to key pilot and observer claims. Further meetings are scheduled with the Company.

FAREWELL AND THANKS TO CAPTAIN NICK HAYES

After more years than he would probably care to recall, Captain Nick Hayes has relinquished his place as a leader of Cobham pilots in which he represented the AFAP in fiercely advocating for members and, by definition, all Australian pilots. It would be hard for any Cobham pilot to not find a reason to acknowledge what Nick did to improve her/his circumstances. On the broader scale, we need only go back to his stance in the “relocation dispute”, which the Company failed to defend in the FWC, its decision that pilots must pay for their own relocation when the company makes their position redundant and they are redeployed to another base. This case saw an interpretation of the transfer provisions of the NJS Agreement which largely reflects the Award and the standard in other Pilot Agreements, making the decision applicable beyond NJS. Nick was the logical choice as the inaugural Chairperson of the Cobham Council which, along with Belinda, Rohan and Rowan, was instrumental in creating under the rules of the AFAP. The significance of this achievement can only be measured in Nick’s efforts to grow the profile and influence of the AFAP, particularly in NJS. To be eligible for Council status a minimum of 100 members is necessary. That target has been well surpassed to the point the Cobham Council is now entitled to additional committee members, and the AFAP is the dominant union within Cobham.

Nick left Cobham/NJS in January this year, accepting a voluntary redundancy, as mentioned in the NJS report above. Nick since accepted an A320 Command position in Japan, which in all accounts is going as well for Nick as all of us would hope.

Captain Hayes, on behalf of all Cobham and Australian pilots we wish you well for your future, both in your personal life and your professional career. Thank you Nick. Not everyone can get to say they made a difference, but you can, and you did.

Above: Captain Nick Hayes Below: the tradition of the firies “final spray” for Captain Nick Hayes on his final landing at YBAS

NO. 1 | 2017 35

MBF SPOTLIGHT

A PARTNER’S PERSPECTIVE ERICA MAY, PARTNER OF A VIRGIN FO, SHARES WHY LOSS OF LICENCE COVER IS SO IMPORTANT FOR FAMILIES At the age of 25 I received a phone call telling me that my 31 year old partner of four and a half years had been killed suddenly in an accident.

It’s now 15 years later and it remains as the worst moment of my life. It turned my whole world upside down in ways that I couldn’t even begin to imagine.

A few years before his death he had mentioned to me that he’d received a phone call from a company trying to sell him life insurance.

They had suggested he take out a policy in case anything happened to him. I scoffed at the time and said it was totally unnecessary! Little did I know what the future held for us.

After the initial few days and weeks of organising death notices, funerals, his daughter (who lived with us), work, appointments, rent, bills and counselling, it became obvious that there are a lot of costs involved when someone dies.

These are over and above your day to day living expenses.

over things that happened following his death easier to handle. It didn’t stop me from throwing up every time the phone rang and it didn’t make the red tape and bureaucracy that I faced for the following two years go away.

However, it did give me choices.

Having money in the bank meant I could go to work when the loneliness at home was too much to bear, or go home from work when I could no longer function there. I could take long lunch breaks and lie in the garden or on the floor of a colleague’s office when I needed to escape. I could afford to start kickboxing lessons that helped me manage my grief and anger. I could choose to move to Western Australia when everything got so bad I could no longer remain in my home town.

And I could slowly return to my career as an Occupational Therapist, first casually, then part time and finally full time. It also allowed me to pay all the bills that come with death, grief, moving house and later relocating to the other side of the country, without leaving myself in massive debt.

I am now a mother of two children and partner of a Virgin Pilot. I am painfully aware of what it would mean if my partner were to pass away. While we have some savings put away, I know that it would not last long if I had to cover all the costs associated with

a death, as well as pay the mortgage and bills, which won’t just stop if our main income does. I have ensured that we both have life insurance, trauma, total and permanent disablement cover, loss of income protection and a Will.

I’m sure you don’t think anything bad is going to happen to you. Most of us don’t. But it can, and once it’s happened it’s too late to go back and put something in place.

I have spent a few days over the last week with staff from the Australian Air Pilots Mutual Benefit Fund listening to them talking to pilots and partners of pilots about their Loss of Licence Protection and Death Benefit Cover.

I urge you to contact them to ensure you have this cover in place. You may not think you need it. Maybe you don’t have many expenses or you may think because you don’t have children that it’s not relevant for you. I didn’t have many outgoings at the time my partner died and his daughter wasn’t able to remain in my care, so I also had no children.

However, the lump sum that I received was enough to allow me to grieve and move forward with my life, without additional stress, pressure or worry. Doesn’t your partner deserve the same if it should happen to you?

We were beyond fortunate that he had some life insurance through his superannuation, and he was a l s o e n t i t le d to wo r ke r s ’ compensation, as he had died on the way to work (a policy that applied as we lived in NSW). While the bulk of the money went into a trust fund for his children, I was entitled to a portion of it as his co-dependent.

This money did not bring him back.It didn’t stop the sleepless night nor the tears.

It did not make my anxiety 36

Air Pilot

AFAP/UNSW COMMERCIAL PILOT FATIGUE SURVEY CASA have commissioned an independent review of Civil Aviation Order 48.1 Instrument 2013. To inform our submission to this review and provide data to improve fatigue management practices, the AFAP is collaborating with Transport and Road Safety (TARS) Research Centre in the School of Aviation at UNSW to survey the fatigue experiences of Australian commercial pilots under the existing legislation.

The survey is being developed and conducted by the TARS Research Centre under their independent ethics criteria and will seek to engage as a wide range of commercial pilots as possible.

The TARS survey is targeted to be released mid - May via a UNSW internet link which will be distributed to all members, with results anticipated in August.

Transport and Road Safety (TARS) Research is a research group at UNSW dedicated entirely to road and transport safety research. The philosophy of the road and transport safety research focus at the TARS is the safe system principle, commonly used in occupational health and safety and adopted by the Australian Transport Council in 2004

NO. 1 | 2017 37

ESSENTIAL LOSS OF LICENCE PROTECTION

Call us on +61 (0)3 9928 4500 or visit www.aapmbf.com.au