ALAEA - Welcome to ALAEA Tue, 31 May 2016 06:11:47 +1000 Joomla! - Open Source Content Management en-gb B767 LAME Vacancies

The ALAEA has been asked to circulate our members seeking expressions of interest in two flying spanner jobs with a VIP charter organisation. They are seeking a full 767 B1 with the P&W engine installation variant and a Full B2 for the aircraft.

As well as the appropriate technical skills they are seeking persons with good interpersonal skills as they will form an integral part of the operating crew and there will be direct contact with the passengers.

If you are interested please respond to the ALAEA office  or contact the GA councillor  for further information.

Featured Latest News News Thu, 21 Apr 2016 11:03:56 +1000
Pionair Australia BAE146-200QFT B1 AND B2 Engineering Positions

Pionair Australia has won a 3 year contract operating BAE146-200QT freight aircraft with bases at Cairns and Adelaide.

We also require line maintenance support at MEL, SYD, BNE, TSV locations. The services will operate between 1800-0800 AEST. As such we require suitably qualified staff B1 and B2  LAME coverage.

The start date of the contract is 01JUL2016 however we will need to interview potential candidates immediately to be based in Sydney to help roll out  the first of three BAE146 aircraft prior to this date. The other 2 aircraft will need to be ready later in the year.

I look forward to hearing from you.


Michael Lee
General Manager
PO Box CP411
Condell Park NSW 2200

Pionair   Australia Pty Ltd
URGENT, Oversize & Dangerous Cargo
FIFO | Logistics | ACMI | Airline Support
+61 2 9707-1117 T
+61 408 796 030 M

Featured Latest News News Thu, 21 Apr 2016 10:57:28 +1000
Notice 008/2016 - All Members - Small Aircraft Licencing

To All Members

Small Aircraft Licence Proposal – Consultation closing soon.

Your comments and input, particularly if you are a member who works in GA, are needed.

The introduction of the EASA-style CASR Part 66 licences in 2011 transformed what was a relatively straight forward licence document with a positive statement of licence coverage into a document that had extensive information of what couldn’t be signed for.

Many members would be aware that CASA has been in the process of creating a licence structure to cater for General Aviation and non-Type rated aircraft for several years now. Consultation and feedback with ALAEA members in General Aviation, as well as some GA organisations, gave the strong message that the preferred option was to revert to the CAR 31 Group Rating system of licencing.

The ALAEA has been participating in a CASA-lead working group and has provided that feedback to CASA. CASA indicated from the outset that that wasn’t an option, so with that option off the table we worked towards a compromise.

The result was a proposal to reintroduce Group Ratings within the Part 66 structure i.e. B1.2 Group 1, Group 2 etc.

About 4 weeks ago CASA released a Discussion Paper for industry comment. This document included, for the first time, a draft of the changes to the Part 66 Manual of Standards (MOS) that provides the actual mechanics of how the new licence structure would work. The ALAEA has reviewed the draft and we are of the opinion that there is a considerable amount of work to be done to ensure that any changes to licencing will achieve the desired outcome. The changes also need to be able to be accomplished with the minimum amount of pain and anguish to an already-weary GA sector.

There are simply too many individual areas that required addressing to list here so we will highlight some of the main areas for concern.

  • Complexity – the MOS amendments are unnecessarily long and complex in detail.
  • Accuracy – there are multiple areas where incorrect training provisions have been made.
  • Clarity of privileges – the MOS has not clearly defined the scope of privileges for the licence holder.
  • Privileges not provided for – there are a number of areas (such as Instrument privileges for mechanical LAMEs that were provided for under CAR 31) that aren’t readily evident in the draft.
  • The structure of the Mechanical licence.

This last point is one of the most important things to get right throughout this process. We obviously want to ensure that every existing LAME (with minor exceptions) that held a Group Rated CAR 31 licence would fit into the new structure and would be able to be issued with a licence with Group ratings if they chose to apply. This was made clear in our submissions and appeared to be accepted by the working group in general.

Unfortunately the final structure published in the 3rd consultation document doesn’t meet that specification. CASA is insisting that a Mechanical LAME hold both Airframe and Engine ratings before they are eligible to be issued with the Basic licence. As such any existing LAME that holds only an A/F rating or Engine Rating can only hold the massively-complex EASA style airline licence. It also means that any new prospective LAME utilising the Basics Examination and SOE pathway will not be able to apply for the Small Aircraft Licence until they have gained enough experience in both A/F and Engine categories.

It is our view, and we have made this clear to CASA, that this is an unnecessary burden on both the industry and CASA resources and should be changed. Originally CASA had applied the same principle to the Avionic licence; meaning that a B2 LAME had to hold E, I and R before they could hold the Basic licence. We submitted the same argument to CASA and, to their credit, they amended the B2 structure to allow for single category B2 Groups. We are at a loss to understand why they would not apply the same logic to the Mechanical licence.

CASA have included in the discussion document a reference to this matter and have asked specifically for feedback from the industry. They didn’t include the full reasons we put in our submissions, but gave (what we think) is a pretty vague reason why they thought they shouldn’t make the change.

Request for specific comments - proposal to split privileges
Both the Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association (ALAEA) and Aviation Maintenance Repair and Overhaul Business Association (AMROBA) have indicated their preference to split out the airframe and engine privileges currently prescribed under the 'Group B - basic maintenance' group rating for the B1 licence into two separate Basic group ratings (in-line with what has been proposed in this draft MOS for the basic B(E), B(I) and B(R) group ratings for the B2 licence). While splitting out this B1 licence privilege provides flexibility for initial issue of a B1 licence, this flexibility would not provide the industry request for a single LAME, who after receiving the appropriate training could certify release of an aircraft after a 100 hourly maintenance event.

CASA would appreciate your comments on this alternative approach to the structure of the basic maintenance privileges for the B1 licence.

Our view is that putting a road block in front of an engineer training to become a LAME by preventing them from obtaining their licence incrementally, as they become familiar and competent with the aircraft and engine systems, is a backwards step.

The solution to this is simple – make provision for the Engine to be covered as a Group Rating as it was under CAR 31.

Generally most members rely on the Association to provide comment on regulatory matters on their behalf but it appears on the surface in this instance that CASA has included this “request for specific comments” as a means to “test” the submissions made by both ourselves and the employer association AMROBA.

To that end, we are not going to tell you how you should think, but if you agree (or disagree) with the submissions we have made in this respect we would appreciate you providing some feedback directly to CASA on the subject.

The consultation documents can be found and downloaded here and comments can be made by email to (copy in if you like). The closing date for comment is the 8th of April (this Friday).

A further CASA working group meeting to go through the document in detail is scheduled for the 13th of April where the bulk of the issues will be debated and hopefully corrected before a Notice of Final Rulemaking is proposed.

Your prompt participation in the feedback process to CASA is very valuable.


Steve Re

Featured Notices 2016 Notices Wed, 06 Apr 2016 15:29:11 +1000
Notice 007/2016 - All Qantas members - Leave burn update

The ALAEA now has about 50 members who have indicated to us they wish to pursue action against the airline to seek to recover forced leave and seek penalties against managers and the airline for breaching the EA. As usual Qantas are continuing to try and confuse the issue by handing further letters to those members who have raised a dispute and to trick others by an offer to adjust their leave burn dates to a more suitable time. Members who take up the offer to adjust leave burn dates should know they will potentially waive any chance to recover lost leave as it may be taken as “approval” for leave burn to be applied to them as individuals.

If you have handed the dispute form to management, you will receive another letter from them where they disagree that the matter is in dispute and advise you that you should not be on standby to work when you are away. As you have already notified them that the matter is in dispute, you do not have to do this again. Additionally, you have also advised them that you will be on standby to return to work whilst away and should not approach them to argue this matter. Qantas are attempting to bully employees by suggesting you discuss this matter with managers as individuals and bypass union representation (which you are entitled to). A letter has been sent to management last Friday (as attached) responding to their post dispute individual letters and no further action is required by members.

For those yet to receive letters forcing you to take leave or confused about the process, our instructions have not changed and the pre-prepared paperwork and instructions sent in our 16th March notice again appear below.

This notice is for those Qantas Sydney LAMEs who have been directed to take leave and have personal letters

Checklist (if you want to dispute the direction):

  • Print the following draft and fill in the blank sections.
  • Take a copy of the filled in, completed form.
  • Hand the original to the manager who handed you your direction to take leave.
  • Copy the original letter they handed you with dates you were ordered to take the leave.
  • Copy any rejected leave applications you may have.
  • Get copies of all of the above to the ALAEA by MMS, fax or email.


Steve Purvinas


Federal Secretary




To__________________________________________________________________________he Qantas Manager

who handed me a letter directing me to take leave as part of a leave burn program.

This matter is in dispute as I do not believe Qantas are in a situation in Sydney where there is a surplus of employees. The ALAEA was consulted extensively regarding redundancies and staffing levels in 2014 and the company declared the number of staff required based specifically on the amount of projected work known at that time.  Since that time new work has been added, staff who have applied for VR have not been released, decisions which were cited as reducing the need for staff in 2014 have been reversed and positions are now being covered by the pool of remaining staff which were not considered by Qantas during the original calculations. These, and other factors, demonstrate to me that Qantas does not have a surplus of 46.5 persons (and may have no surplus employees at all) and the amount of leave being directed is incorrect.

If Qantas continue with the program as presented to the ALAEA (which requires Sydney LAMEs to cover for an additional 46.5 staff) then too much leave will be forced upon the current workforce. Qantas is not permitted to exercise clause 60 (surplus management) of the existing LAME Enterprise Agreement in these circumstances.  Therefore, I believe that doing so will breach the Fair Work Act and could expose the airline, and individual managers involved in the potential breaches, to penalties.  The amount of the penalty could be up to $54,000 for the company and $10,800 for an individual for each breach.

If Qantas continues to direct me to take leave under the leave burn program in 2016, I intend to authorise the ALAEA to seek breach orders, compensation and penalties on my behalf against the airline and any manager who was involved in a breach of the Enterprise Agreement. Qantas was fined heavily for breaching a clause in the LAME Workplace Determination in 2013 and is on notice about further breaches.

If the company maintains its instruction for me to take directed leave as part of a leave burn program I will, as directed, not present for duty. However I will remain on standby for recall at any time during the period of directed leave. I will do this as I do not consider this legitimate leave and will be seeking for it to be reimbursed or re-credited to me

I strongly recommend that you seek your own legal advice external to Qantas.  Involvement in a breach could lead to you being personally fined for your actions whether or not you assert that you are just “following instructions”.  A court has, in recent years, ordered personal fines against a Qantas manager who had breached the Fair Work Act after legal action brought on behalf of a member by the ALAEA.  I request that you cancel my directed leave and not be involved in any breach of the Enterprise Agreement or Fair Work Act.

I wholly reserve my right to take action to address any alleged breaches, with no further notice to you or Qantas.


Your Sincerely


Name: __________________________________________________________________________


Staff Number: ____________________ Section: _________________________________________


Date: __________________________ Signature: ________________________________________




Featured Notices 2016 Notices Tue, 05 Apr 2016 12:02:10 +1000
Notice 006/2016 Eastern Australia Airlines Engineers EBA Update

A further Eastern EBA meeting took place at Mascot on 15 March. Unfortunately the assessment of your negotiating team was that there was no real progress on the key issues that need to be resolved.

Given we have been in discussions with Qantaslink since the end of July 2015 the ALAEA believes we have now reached a level of impasse in these negotiations whereby we need to seek conciliation assistance from the Fair Work Commission. The ALAEA intention is to shortly lodge a bargaining dispute under s240 of the Fair Work Act and the next EBA meeting is therefore expected to take place at the Fair Work Commission in Sydney. Members will be informed when there is a confirmation as to when the conference before the Commission will take place.

The key issues that will be raised at the FWC are:

Significant concerns raised by the ALAEA negotiating team about future job security for LAMEs in response to the Company claim that a new Eastern Engineers EBA has to include provision for A Category Company Authorisations. The ALAEA preference is for A Cat provisions to not be included in the new EBA.

We have continued to raise concerns to the Company about having to accept an 18 month pay freeze especially considering the recent announcement on 23 February which confirmed that Qantas is now trading very profitably. The 18 month pay freeze proposed by the Company means that Eastern Engineers would receive a first pay increase under a new EBA from January 2017 instead of from 1 July 2015.

Other issues still to be resolved include a reasonable adjustment to the 717 tail payment, an increase to the Leading Hand allowance payment and inclusion of the DMS classification in the new EBA.

A further update will be issued once there are further developments to report. Thanks for your continued support and please encourage any LAMEs at Eastern who are not yet members of the ALAEA to consider joining to enhance our prospects of getting a fair and reasonable EBA outcome.


In Unity

Noel Speers
National Industrial Officer

Featured Notices 2016 Notices Tue, 29 Mar 2016 10:41:40 +1100
Notice 004/2016 - All Qantas LAME Members - Leave Burn Meetings

Yesterday we concluded a series of leave burn meetings for members in Sydney.  This notice is a summary of some of the matters discussed. 

Leave burn was an agreed step in our Enterprise Agreement that must be used by the airline as an alternative to compulsory redundancy.  It’s quite simple, the LAMEs who would be made redundant return to work and others take leave equivalent to the labour supplied by those who returned.  The work that the redundancies was calculated on was set out in consultation packs during 2014, since that time a substantial amount of new work has been added.

The ALAEA has advice that this new work amounts to more than can be supplied by the 46.5 extra staff Qantas say they have.  This being the case, there are no grounds for leave burn and if Qantas attempt to force it in, they are breaching the terms of the EA.  Qantas could be subject to massive fines from a court if they go ahead with their plans and breach the EA, fines which could be up to $27M for the airline and $5M personally for managers who are involved.  The ALAEA has made it clear that we will seek full enforcement of the law, including all penalties and compensation, if they demand LAMEs burn leave above the 5 weeks leave a LAME would normally take in a 12-month period.

Individual LAMEs who have ignored our previous advice and submitted more than 5 weeks leave may have given permission for Qantas to blow all their leave without recourse.  For those who have followed our advice, the following scenarios are likely/possible.

The first is for Qantas to reconsider and determine that it would not be in the best interests of the airline to breach the EA. 

The second is that they may assign leave above 5 weeks to LAMEs and, in doing so, breach the EA for each person they order to take this time off.

If the ALAEA find out that Qantas are moving to the second scenario, members will be given a pre-prepared letter to hand to managers outlining the consequences and fines that could apply to that manager and the airline.  The letter will also state that the member is willing and available to work as normal during any directed periods of leave over the standard 5 weeks if requested to do so.  That way an avenue is open for a judge to compensate LAMEs by, for example, returning the additional leave used.

Many questions were asked over the five meetings and some of the answers in brief follow-

• If a member is acting as an Ops manager and forces a person to undertake leave burn, we will not exempt them from prosecution.  We advise members who act up not to participate in a known breach of the EA such as this and tell more senior management to do their own dirty work.

• LSL calculations forwarded by the company are irrelevant.  Our position is that any forced leave of any type constitutes an EA breach so how these calculations are worked out is inconsequential.


• The ALAEA have made it known to the Qantas CEO that this situation is unfair and leaving the airline less safe than before due to massive understaffing.  This is leaving sections incapable of completing work without bending rules, a situation we should all be reporting regularly on form 500 and 2000s.

• DMMs and others who can decide whether to call LAMEs in on overtime should do so when required rather than expect everyone to be heroes and 2 LAMEs to attempt to complete the work of 5. 


• If leave burn ends, Qantas are not required to seek expressions of interest for redundancy every 6 months.  The ALAEA is not in the business of securing golden handshakes, our priority is to protect jobs.

• Members are doing themselves a disservice by making a broken system work.  Strictly comply with all Qantas procedures, as the airline expects you to, and do not take short cuts to get an aircraft out on time.


• If you have any leave forms that are rejected, keep them as they may be used in an upcoming court hearing.

• Expect Ops managers to keep hounding you to fill in leave forms, they have nothing better to do.  They want as many LAMEs as possible to give them consent to exhaust leave as this will reduce the fines they may be subject to.  Just say no to them as the matter has been referred to the ALAEA.

• If you genuinely want to take a long period off for a holiday, or other reason, then apply for it.  Every year some LAMEs like to take an extended break and this year is no different.

Some related matters were also discussed at the meetings and the one of most interest related to the prospect of Qantas Engineering securing upcoming work on the 787.  Federal President Paul Cousins and I met with the CEO Alan Joyce and the head of the Domestic airline Andrew David to discuss the new aircraft last week.  We explained that it was a requirement of the EA for those covered by the agreement to retain our existing job functions.  That being said we would not accept an argument that the 787 was a new aircraft and that we would have to “win” this work.  This may be a new aircraft but it is simply a Qantas aircraft flying Qantas routes and maintenance of Qantas aircraft is our job function.  This meeting was generally held in good spirits concluding with an offer from the CEO for the ALAEA to participate in the planning of the arrival for the 787.  This was not an assurance that we would be undertaking the work but it certainly seemed like a hell of a good start.

Too many other matters were raised at the feedback meetings to list them all in a notice.  We intend to release a survey shortly for members seeking your opinions on various issues we are currently facing.

Steve Purvinas

Federal Secretary

]]> (Gay Thompson) Featured Notices 2016 Notices Thu, 25 Feb 2016 09:41:45 +1100
E-Torque December 2015

President’s Opinion

Paul CousinsAs 2015 closes we celebrate the holiday season with our family and friends and take time to appreciate what we hold dear. We thank those that have helped us make it through and also use the time to “recharge our batteries” for the coming year. Our work often doesn’t allow for a “normal” life; many of us work rosters with shifts that run through the night or take place on that public holiday that everyone else seems to have off. So whilst 95% of the country will be celebrating Christmas and the New Year a select group will be holding the fort; making sure aircraft are safe for all those who fly. This is what we do, we are proud of it and without us the world of aviation would be a far different, and much more dangerous, place.

The recent release of the official report on the Air Asia crash (flight QZ8501) once again brought the harsh realities of air travel and what can go wrong directly into lounge rooms around the world. Warning signs abounded in this disaster which was, I’m sad to say, avoidable. The pilot and co-pilot have borne the brunt of the responsibility for their “lack” of “out of the ordinary” flying skills. Let’s of course remember they aren’t here to defend themselves. The elephant in the room, in my opinion, was the maintenance defect that had shown up over twenty times over the previous twelve months yet had been consistently ignored and not properly investigated. Reading the official report is an eye opener and obviously there are serious issues that need to be attended to immediately at Air Asia. What struck me, and troubles me, is the similarities I see with occurrences that are now creeping into our own airlines, often created by management with little or no engineering experience. What isn’t clear from the report though is whether Air Asia had appropriately trained and licenced personnel looking at this defect in the various ports the aircraft visited over that twelve month period? Were parts available to carry out troubleshooting and rectification once the defect was diagnosed? Was sufficient time and resources allocated to the job? Was it a tragic example over schedule over safety and time-pressure to get the aircraft out on time? Or was it that properly-skilled personnel weren’t available to diagnose and troubleshoot the defect? The link to the Air Asia report can be found here

LAMEs are the last line of defence in air safety and we are responsible to the people of Australia to make sure every aircraft is safe. Do not be deterred. Do not be distracted. Do it right, the first time. Have a clear conscience that you have done everything in your power to ensure the safety of the aircraft you sign.It seems that manning levels in all airlines in all ports is a big issue currently. We are getting consistent reports from ALAEA Reps around the country that many operators are consciously dropping below their own specified minimum staffing numbers (in some cases an agreed staffing level in an Enterprise Agreement) to see how far the “machine” can run before it breaks. This, of course, exacerbates time pressure and schedule over safety. When you are pushed to rush from one job to another vital points of a job can be missed. Do not let it be you. Slow down; one job at a time, make sure every step is followed and every precaution taken. We do not want an Air Asia catastrophe on our watch. You are not in the wrong if you delay an aircraft because you want to be sure it is 100% safe. That is your job and responsibility.

Read More ...

]]> (Margaret Hearn) Featured e-Torque 2015 e-Torque Fri, 18 Dec 2015 18:40:16 +1100
Employment Opportunity for B1.1 LAME's in the GA sector

Attention B1.1 GA LAME's

Employment opportunities for B1.1 LAME's with experience with Cessna 208 or F406 and PT6 or TPE331 engine type ratings.

Required for "in house maintenance" and "field turnarounds".

Working directly for a global company. Permanent staff roles.

Domestic and international travel on a set roster of 6 weeks on 3 weeks off. Successsful applicants can be based anywhere in Australia.

Urgent requirement. Immediate Start required.

Applications close 29/2/2016

For more information contact

Featured News Fri, 22 Jan 2016 15:43:36 +1100
REX Technical Records Officer – Wagga Wagga

Regional Express (Rex) is Australia’s largest independent regional airline operating a fleet of more than 40 Saab 340 aircraft on some 1,400 weekly flights to 54 destinations throughout New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania, South Australia and Queensland.

An opportunity exists for a suitably qualified and highly motivated individual to work within the Continuing Airworthiness Management Organisation, Technical Records department in Wagga Wagga, New South Wales.

Click here to view further job details.

Featured News Mon, 11 Jan 2016 16:58:04 +1100
Final Report - The Future of Aircraft Maintenance in Australia: Workforce Capability, Aviation Safety and Industry Development

ReportAfter 4 years of intensive research and analysis the University of NSW's Business School's Industrial Relations Research Centre has released their final report into the future of aircraft maintenance in Australia.

 The project was initiated by the ALAEA in 2007 in order to properly gauge the value to Australia's economy and the safety benefits to the flying public and airline employees of a domestic based aircraft maintenance industry.

To ensure that the project produced an unbiased report with data that governments could rely on when formulating aviation industry policy a number of cross industry partners joined the project. They included partners from employers, unions and the training sector.

There has arguably been no other intensive study of this nature carried out in Australia. 

The report identifies a number of areas of opportunity for the Australian maintenance and maintenance training sector to grow and excel as global aviation continues its rapid expansion.

It also identifies some severe consequences if the actions aren't taken to address some key problems plaguing the industry at the moment.

The report is lengthy but is a worthwhile read. We encourage you to take the time to learn about the state of our industry and what the future holds.       


]]> (Stephen Re) Featured News Fri, 18 Dec 2015 14:49:49 +1100