Federal Labour Standards Review

[John Moore]

Helicopter companies issue advertisements for pilots, not janitors. A person who applies for and succeeds in acquiring employment as a pilot has the right to expect that he will be used as a pilot, to do the things that are required of a pilot for the safe and efficient operation of aircraft and little else. If the employer wants to use the pilot for things other than those involved with flying, it should be made crystal clear before the job begins. It is a good argument for written contracts between employer and employee stating precisely what the job responsibilities are. Lack of written contracts is one of the main reasons that unions form.

 

The Federal Labour Standards Review of Part III of the Canada Labour Code has recently been completed. It is interesting reading. The plight of helicopter pilots is specifically mentioned. This review was initiated by the last Liberal government and may not get much attention under the Conservatives. Fortunately, the Conservatives will not have much longer to ruin the country as they appear to be intent on doing. There will be an election in 2007 and the result will be a Liberal majority. If even half the recommendations made by the Federal Labour Standards Review are implemented, the changes will be sweeping. Helicopter pilots and those in similar situations may actually have a chance to enjoy satisfactory personal and professional lives.

 

There are some younger contributors to this forum who seem a little too eager to please. When the time comes to refuse to fly an overweight helicopter, or to refuse to fly in bad weather, or refuse to fly when you are tired, will you be able to do it?

[Blackmac]

Hey JM, thanks for the update.

 

At last pilots will have a job description.

 

I can remember when La Verendrye bought out Viking, it was suggested that we drive trucks in the slow times, Provost Transport.

 

Probably make more money.

 

Merry Exmas. :punk: :punk:

[skullcap]

John Moore;

 

Once again showing your lack of respect and knowledge of OUR industry.

 

Young pilots have been eager to please for as long as there have been young pilots. Duh, WW1, WW2 Korea, etc. It is not up to the young pilots too figure it out on their own it is up to thier mentors, chief pilots and peers to help/train/ show by example. My first year flying was done flying numbskulls like you around and trying their best to put me and my aircraft in harms way. These were supposed seasoned geos and one had been in a hiller 12e crash and was the biggist pusher of the crew. If not for guidance from a Mr. Al Engst helping me whos knows.

 

As far as pilots doing odd jobs, I think is ridiculous to say all they should do is fly. If left alone most of us get extremely board sitting around and to help out is something I enjoy. Getting a new pilot to help doing various things, it is a very efficient way to find out the work ethic of a pilot without having to expose customers to a lazy lou. I was at a large company's hanger for 5 days working with an engineer on an engine, this base had whole slew of young pilots, being brought up by senior bm who was never around unless to go flying. In the five days ONE pilot came by an said hello and offered a hand. If not asked to help do all the odd jobs then people will generally run around without knowing the right of wrong way to do things, in other words lost. These folks were not even allowed to wave and converse with the Canadian guys next door.....weird. Yes some employers have be known to take advantage but that again is up to the individual and the industry is very small and we all know who the dorks are. I think that the pilots who stick it out at so and so and think they are doing themselves a favor are foolish. The ones who bail from a dumpy company living in a refurbished horsetrailer are worth their salt. The ones who bail for a better job from on a large company who gave them tons of training are sacks of ####,,,simple.

 

 

sc

[Helimac]

Well said scully! :up: :up:

 

And Merry Christmas.

 

HM

[John Moore]

I believe your words have helped make my point regarding pilots who are eager to please when you related your story. You said:

 

“My first year flying was done flying numbskulls like you around and trying their best to put me and my aircraft in harms way. These were supposed seasoned geos and one had been in a hiller 12e crash and was the biggist pusher of the crew. If not for guidance from a Mr. Al Engst helping me whos knows.”

 

The conclusion seems to be that if not for the presence of Mr. Engst something very bad may well have happened. This underscores my contention that pilots often have a very difficult time saying no and at times cannot say it.

 

You also said:

 

“Getting a new pilot to help doing various things, it is a very efficient way to find out the work ethic of a pilot without having to expose customers to a lazy lou.”

 

Perhaps in some cases this may be true but if this method of gauging a man’s mettle in the field is the only one you use, I am afraid you will be in for a few surprises. The two environments are so vastly different that I fail to see how performance in one can reliably predict performance in the other.

 

You said:

 

“I think that the pilots who stick it out at so and so and think they are doing themselves a favor are foolish. The ones who bail from a dumpy company living in a refurbished horsetrailer are worth their salt.”

 

Perhaps it says something good about a man who “sticks it out” in an uncomfortable situation. Perhaps he is trying to make things better and feels an obligation to the company who gave him the job. If you are the owner of a company or at least involved in the management of one as I suspect you are, then do you not appreciate this quality in an employee?

 

You have called me a “numbskull’. I don’t really mind this sort of thing as I believe men are entitled to express themselves even if they do so clumsily. As this rather mild insult has withstood the moderators’ axe for about 24 hours I believe I am entitled to a ripost. Helimac declared, “Well said scully!”. But it was not well said, certainly not by any critieria for well-written prose with which I am familiar.

 

The original intent of the thread was to inform readers of the existence of the Federal Labour Standards Review and to comment on the practice of using individuals trained and hired to do a specific job for other menial tasks. I believe that Scully’s post does nothing to refute my contention and everything to support it.

[Blackmac]

Scully, would you help an oldtimer here and tell me what was wrong with JM's post??

 

Quote:

"The original intent of the thread was to inform readers of the existence of the Federal Labour Standards Review and to comment on the practice of using individuals trained and hired to do a specific job for other menial tasks. I believe that Scully’s post does nothing to refute my contention and everything to support it."

 

As an oldtimer I can go back to the days of Carl Agar and advise you that pilots were pilots and ame's were ame's. If one helped the other it was on there own terms and not the companies, nor was it a company requirement.

 

Those were the days when jobs were a dime a dozen.

 

When things actually fell apart in the early eighties and the industry when down the tubes, things changed.

 

Then the turkeys in Ottawa decided to deregulate in 87, made things worse.

 

For the next ten to fifteen years with an overabundance of helicopters and enough experienced people still around starving themselves and the companies taking advantage of same, people would almost work for anything.

 

Now the SHOE is on the other foot and the companies will finally have to start training people again and giving low time pilots, jobs as pilots, as in the old days.

 

On another subject, I notice that HAC is calling themselves an affiliate of HAI. When did that happen???

 

If such is the case, maybe HAC will now provide an association for pilots and engineers. Dream On.

 

Merry Exmas, Don

[xrkyle]

The Federal Labour Standards Review of Part III of the Canada Labour Code has recently been completed. It is interesting reading. The plight of helicopter pilots is specifically mentioned.

 

Just to confirm, this is document LT-182-10-06E you're talking about correct?

 

The only direct reference regarding helicopter pilots that I can find is in regard to hours of work (p. 72). The report mentions training bonds when talking about aviation as a whole (p. 261). I can't find anything else with a direct of obvious indirect impact on pilots.

 

Not disputing your claim but maybe you could list off some of the issues and recommendations (with page numbers) and explain how you think they'd benefit pilots?

[FREDDIE]

Well Lohn I see you like to stir the pot. If there is an Election in 2007 who is to say who will win.My vote is for the conservatives just to offset you.Enough about Politics.

 

I have a few hours and 15 years in the Industry.We have always had the option of flying or not if the conditions were not satisfactory.The only peaple who pressure air crew are the ill informed customers.

 

As for advertisement's for young and old Pilots the ones that show up where I work had better be able to mop, clean floors ,paint ,run parts,pump fuel,mow grass ,and Clean their A/C plus fly said A/C.Some peaple have forgotten that a crew that works together is more succesfull that a building full of primadonna's.

[Wet Spline]

Sheesh, I can't remember ever seeing a complete job description(any type of work) that didn't state something to the effect of, " and other duties as assigned.", and I now wrench for the government, and it was in that job description as well........ I never could respect a co-worker( pilot or not) that didn't respect the tools(hand tools, heli's, hangars, etc) of the trade, it's how we earn our living..... take care of it!

[gwk]

Once again John Moore graces us with his lack of wisdom and his inflamatory rhetoric. It is subtly disguised as a statement about Federal labour Laws, but, in reality, just another jab at us, and our industry.

 

If John truely knew what it was like to work in our industry,and was not just another outsider looking in, he would have long ago realized that just wiggling the sticks is not all a pilot has to do, and that aviation related, non flying jobs, are all an important part of a pilots job.

 

True, as Black Mac states, a pilot or engineer should not be expected to perform non aviation related work, such as truck driving,walking the bosses dog, or taking his daughter shoppping, unless it was agreed to prior to their employment. If the person agrees to do such non aviation related work, it should be out of the goodness of their heart, and not because they are told to. I am thinking of all the work that went into Transwest Christmas party, and as I stated, that extra curricular work should come from volunteering, as I am sure it did in their case.

 

This is where I think Scully may have been suckered in by John, as Pilots, we have a lot to learn from doing aviation releted,non flying work, such as washing a/c, wiping down a/c, and even running customers to the terminal, or such, because, after all, we are a service industry. But, non aviation related jobs should not be expected to be a part of ones job, nor should they be used as a bargaining chip to intimidate a person to remain on the payroll.

 

Thankfully, with the shortages of expierenced aircrew, we should see less of this attitude, and aircrew will once again pick up a sponge or mop, because they want to, and the days of having to paint fences in High Level are long gone.

 

As for John Moore, out of consideration for those of us who are tired of your bashing of this industry, and particularily of us pilots, your opinions and thinly disguised help, are not appreciated, and please, just move on!

 

Merry Christmas to all,

 

GWK