Structural changes in policies and a number of laws caused dispute among the Australian pilots in 1989. One such law is the Accord Mark VI. This law had resulted in the altering of long-established working conditions and practices where employers (Wilson 1998:551; cited in Learmonth, 2005) were able to exploit the workers by paying them little and expecting them to give maximum productivity according to AFAP (O’Connell 1988:10; Learmonth, 2005). These legal implications arose following the breakdown of negotiations, resulting to the longest and most bitter dispute between the AFAP and the Australian government.
The laws before the adoption of the Industrial Relations Reform Act of 1993 did not allow workers to strike, and hence AFAP could not seek this as the option. The pilots were left to, one; hope that the government and the airlines would reconsider their attitudes. This would make them place their superannuation, savings and family home in jeopardy. Secondly, pilots had the option to resign in order to guarantee the safety of their family assets, and according to Takver (2004), this is the alternative they took.
The Hawke government had introduced the Prices and Incomes Accord in 1993 and this, according to M. Browne, had played an important role in the 1989 dispute. This accord was perceived to put a constraint and avoid the ballooning of wages which would lead to inflation, which would in turn affect the economy. The impact of the accord was the decline of pilot wages from 1983. Two major factors have been attributed to leading to the dispute on pay increase: one is that pilots got dissatisfied with the announcement which was made in the middle of 1989 that a 15 to 20 % salary increase would be given to them. This is because they felt that this would equate them to judges and made them be dissatisfied. The second factor that contributed to the dispute was that Ansett pilots were being paid better. The salary for the Australian Airline pilot Captains had gone down by 23% and that of First Officers by 21% according to Takver.
The dispute did not only cause a problem amongst the pilots but also affected negatively the Australian economy and those industries relying on airlines. Moral and legal issues associated with the dispute can be contemplated; one, the airline industry would suffer by loosing skilled pilots to oversees markets. Secondly, the 30% increase in pilot wages through the Prices and Incomes Accord, would not only impact negatively to the economy, but would also set a precedent for other employees in different industries. The dispute also left the members of families and those connected to pilots emotionally affected.
The reaction of the Australian government to deregulate the aviation industry and disband the AFAP can be termed as unethical. The reaction also affected the Australian public. The government’s failure to negotiate with the AFAP has been seen as indicating that the government wanted to deregulate the industry instead of solving the problem. The pilots, following the failure to settle the matter, sought drastic options leading to their loss of jobs and evitable downfall.
Although the actions to deregulate the industry may have had negative impacts, it resulted in positive impacts. These include stimulating competition in the aviation industry and thus eliminating monopolization. This has benefited the whole public in terms of lowering the prices of air travel.
Reference List
Learmonth, Anne (2005). Government policy, aviation deregulation and the 1989 pilots’ dispute. Swinburne University of Technology. Web.
O’Connell, Terry (1988) Frustration sets in Air Pilot November 1988AFAP Melbourne
Takver. (2004). The Australian pilots dispute in 1989. Radical Tradition.
Wilson, Penelope (1998) ‘The Accord, the ALP and the ACTU: The effect of the Accord on a contentious alliance’ The Proceedings of the 12 AIRAANZ Conference Wellington NZ February Z Conference Z Conference 1998 547-55