Pilots’ Fantasy

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 31989, 16 May 1969, Page 10

Pilots’ Fantasy

Airline pilots the world over have used the argument which Air New Zealand’s pilots have now put forward: other airlines flying over the same routes with the same aircraft pay their pilots $5OOO a year more than we get, so we want $5OOO a year more. Although airline managements have consistently refused to recognise parity with other airlines’ salaries as a basis for salary-fixing, several pilots’ strikes have been ended or averted by bargains which have the effect of reducing inter-line disparities. By international standards, Air New Zealand’s pilots’ salaries are modest: a senior pilot earns $10,550 a year compared with the $14,000 a year earned by his opposite number in 8.0.A.C., $19,000 in Qantas, $21,000 in Swissair, $27,000 in Air France, and $32,000 in Pan American. The Air New Zealand pilots may consider their request for parity with Qantas pilots within five years to be modest; but in the meantime the Qantas pilots will, no doubt, be staking their claim for parity with Swissair, Air France, or Pan American.

The short answer to this line of reasoning is that the management of an airline needs to pay no more than is necessary to recruit staff, either within the country where it is based or in some country where pilots are paid less. Few occupations in New Zealand offer such prospects as a starting salary of $4300 rising to $lO,OOO. If airline managements the world over were to give way on the “parity" argument they would all have to pay $32,000 a year for senior pilots; and airlines such as Australia’s or New Zealand’s—let alone India’s or Thailand’s —would be swamped with applicants for pilots’ jobs. Air New Zealand should tell the malcontents among its pilots that the only way they can earn an Australian salary is to work for the Australian airline—and pay the Australian cost of living.

The Air New Zealand pilots have said they are prepared to go to arbitration “ on all matters except “ the Doppler issue ” —Doppler being a navigation system. “ Basically we feel this is a matter that can “be judged only by a person who actually has to operate it”, their spokesman said. This is either arrogant nonsense—the Court of Arbitration decides, with the help of expert witnesses, on technical questions at every hearing—or is merely an excuse for not submitting to arbitration. Air New Zealand’s management has made a well-reasoned reply to the pilots’ argument, and should be able to count on public support in its determination to resist extravagant claims.

One disturbing aspect of Air New Zealand’s management has come to light during this exchange with the pilots. The pilots’ duty hours average 20 a week, or 80 a month, their actual flying hours only about 50 a month. Although this is not the lowest figure among international airlines, it is certainly well below the highest; and the higher the figure, within reason, the better use an airline makes of its highly-paid pilots. If Air New Zealand loses some pilots through taking a firm stand on this occasion, it should be able to make good their loss by working the remaining pilots a little longer each month.