View Full Version : Stoush royale coming in Qantas
9th Jul 2004, 00:04
Well, it had to happen some time and the mainline Q list pilots are finding themselves under assault from a predictable source….the 89 returnees from Australian/TAA.
Under the integration agreement in QF we have the A list and the Q list (not to mention the Y) and without getting too technical a situation has arisen whereby the two have met with the introduction of the A330.
So who gets the best cut of meat? The datally senior Q list pilots or the A list scabs. The very vocal scabs believe they are entitled to essentially infiltrate the Q list and enjoy artificially advantaged seniority. Amazingly, due to the wording of the agreement they may have a case.If the Q list pilots end up with the short end of the stick then the bitterness will last as long as that from 89.
Leopards never change their spots and the Q list pilots are now finding how true this is.
9th Jul 2004, 00:11
Personally I reckon the shorthaulers who are now flying the 330, can have their system on it, I'd love to seem them cry out when a 7 day 50 hour trip is taken off them and they have no pattern protection, and no time to make it up, and then have the rest of their line "destroyed". it should be a real Hoot!
9th Jul 2004, 00:31
Yeah, that would be toooo funny!
9th Jul 2004, 17:59
A very well written piece of half truth and vitriol.
As you are well aware, at the time the 100% government owned Qantas "bought" the 100% government owned Australian Airlines, Qantas was pure international and Australian pure domestic. The integration meant QF pilots had first shot at all "International" types whilst the AA guys got any expantion in "Domestic" types. All fair, right? Except, of course, that the major source of expantion for the next decade was the "International" B767 taking over the burgening domestic capacity, whilst the domestic A300s were got rid of. In other words the long-haul guys did very well out of the deal thank you very much.
Now, of course, a new "domestic" type appears, and what do we have? Long haulers squealing like stuck pigs and trying to reneg on the deal.
And before you go dragging out the "S" word, ask the average long-term AFAP member how much they appreciated your staunch support during the dispute (NOT!!)
9th Jul 2004, 21:18
Well I recall that they all "just wanted to take their own jobs back" in 1989. Is it possible they were telling whoppers and want someone else's job now? Maybe on the 380?
9th Jul 2004, 21:37
a 7 day 50 hour trip Never heard of such a thing..... I don't think it exists.
And why would you derive pleasure from the misfortunes of others? I'm sure you're not serious.
9th Jul 2004, 23:25
Your post also contains half truths.
Yes a new "domestic" type did appear in the form of the A330. However there is an itergration document that basically says that when a new type is introduced, it will be flown as a percentage by each "haul" in accordance to the type of flying it is going to do. (domestic/ international) This percentage also governs whether it was operated under SH or LH award.
When the A330 was introduced it did 100% domestic and about 90% of the Captains were SH, it is also operated under the SH award. The rest came from LH as Qantas had a small amount of domestic before the purchase of Australian.
Now the trigger has taken place that within the next 12 months it will be doing more than 50% international flying, it will come under LH's award.
The SH Captains got onto the A330 with their seniority and operated under the SH award, now that it is about to change awards they are not too happy about seniority on the LH award, mainly rostering. They say seniority was not discussed and that it should be "something else" or "we" will take it to the industrial court.
I certainly believe that which ever award the aircraft is operated under, it should be just that and not "something else".
I agree that LH pilots did do well out of the 767 being introduced to domestic flying. The 737s have also done well and has also expanded since then. There is also nothing to stop Qantas putting 737s international or 747s domestic, this does in fact happen.
We now have a new type and also an integration agreement which covers the crewing of it..........it has nothing to do with "stuck pigs" etc!
10th Jul 2004, 03:18
Just a note to remember… When Qantas and Australian merged…
Australian Airlines owned Eastern Airlines etc (who by the request of the AFAP were not involved in the 89 dispute) and were not given the opportunity to integrate at all…
What would happen if the two lists (A & Q) were merged on date of joining, surely the earliest date for an Australian Airlines pilot would be 89….
10th Jul 2004, 03:34
If the A330 can "Change" from being an SH type to a 50% LH type, why wasn't the 767 "Changed" to a 50% SH type?
Sauce for the goose?
10th Jul 2004, 03:47
Based on the history of these guys Wiz I don't believe they are even entitled to a job.
They got in after stabbing their peers in the back and now want to advantage their position even further.
Wizofoz as far as QF support goes in '89, we were in a different union and company. We did support you in as much as we refused to carry, at least knowingly, any purely domestic pax. We did carry pax who were ticketed on a domestic sector with us and that sector was part of an international trip. e.g. SYD-MEL-SIN or PER-SYD-LAX etc.
I remember at the time, I and many others were hoping you guys were going to come out of it okay, unfortunately this did not happen.
10th Jul 2004, 04:24
I probably wouldn't be as vitreolic as bonvol, but the reality is that the A330 captains who are now bleating like stuck pigs on seniority are the same ones who voted in the 'b' scale forF/O's transferring from longhaul.
Regardless of your position on the '89 dispute - this is dispicable, and leads me and other 'Q' listers to be less than charatable towards this group.
Another interesting fact is that statittically at present, the A330 has the highest command training failure rate of any of the QF fleets.
All these failures are ex B737 captains employed in the aftermath of 89.
Pilots who have been protected on the B737 up until now - but for the first time are now exposed to the wider QF training system.
None of these individuals have ever done the QF selection process, but have been inherited as a result of the merger.
One individual was so hopeless that not only was he sent back to the B737, he was sent back as an F/O.
The point is this. If I was a 'A' list captain on the A330, I would be gratefull that I have a position on an aircraft massively out of seniority and would shut my mouth.
Idiots like 'Harald' on Qrewroom do nothing but reopen wounds that are best left closed
10th Jul 2004, 04:56
And we all know the origin there. Couldn't agree with you more.
These guys just can't help themselves and should be grateful that post 89 they are the only ones who haven't had some sort of massive displacement and are in a position they don't deserve.
10th Jul 2004, 05:18
Pollution and bonvol. I dont really have an opinion either way on these blokes, but I wonder if you two, and others like you, will be so vocal in ten years time about the Jetscab people whining that they are entitled to a level playing field on the '7E7' (or another new qf type for instance).
Because the jetscab people today, are doing just what the 'a' list pilots did in '89. The scabs in 89 also complained that they needed a job, just like the Jetscab people are whining today. They think they will be entitled to a qf career path, just like the 'a' list pilots agreement.
It amazes me that you can be so vocal about seniority on the A330, and yet you can't see what is happenning right under your noses. We have scabs here in 2004, just like we had in 1989. Just the rules have changed.....
10th Jul 2004, 06:06
Nice first post.
A bit rich rolling out the command failure rate stats mate.
I seem to remember not so long ago the B767 well and truly held the failure rate record and they had ALL done the much lauded "QF selection process" and had been widely exposed to the "wider QF training system".
10th Jul 2004, 07:29
Yorik, I don't see the Jetstar people as scabs. They were not involved in an industrial dispute and AIPA gave them the cold shoulder when it counted.
It could have been much different if AIPA took a more pro-active stance but they put their head in the sand. Now they are trying to cobble together a bit of a broken down face saver that will appeal to no one.
That the Jetstar agreement may result bad things appearing down the trail look no further than AIPA. No scope clause guys....dumb.. dumb.. dumb.
10th Jul 2004, 10:03
No pilot has been demoted to F/O on any type after failure of the A330 command course, exaggerating just confirms any suspicions that you are a fool.
As others have alluded to the failure rate of the A330 is nowhere near the levels of the 767 some years ago. All of these 767 candidates were “Real” Qantas pilots, yet that didn’t help them.
There are also a number of Q Captains who have had trouble on the Bus, and are now regularly failing their recurrent sims.
Some Q pilots have even managed to fail the 737 command course, despite the excellent training (not checking) and the willingness to help anyone who needs it with extra sectors (a willingness that seems to be missing on the 330, unless you are a Q pilot!) etc…
I don’t make assumptions as to why these guys fail, just observe that it does happen. It might be best if you do the same. ;)
Enough about that…
Regarding the integration. The agreement makes it quite clear.
With a “NEW” type ALL conditions are up for grabs. Seriously you should read it. There is no clause which says it will be on the SH award during the Domestic phase and then the LH award for international. That was something that was agreed between the parties (Q and A) and resulted in the Letter of Agreement. This is proven by the FACT that the 330 is NOT on the SH award and NEVER has been.
Now that we have that established, the next item is what should happen now.
Well the agreed LOA says that when trigger 2 happens then AIPA can elect to change to the LH Pay and Rostering system (It is not a switch to the LH award because the 330 is already on the LH award).
Now the key phrase here is the “LH Pay and Rostering system”. If you refer to the award you will see that Pay relates to the PAY section, and Rostering relates to the ROSTERING section, there is no mention of seniority in EITHER of these sections. You will find this in an entirely separate section of the award called SENIORITY, which IS NOT referred to in the LOA for a very good reason, because it was not agreed to at any stage.
If you refer back to the integration agreement you will see that it is quite specific that seniority for the allocation of flying will be decided between the parties (Q and A) and if it cannot be decided then it will go to the commissioner. So what is the problem? Why not just take it straight to Palmer? I think you know that answer to that.
Whilst it has been an ‘A’ aeroplane (for want of a better term) you have enjoyed rotating seniority. In other words, despite being more senior to you on the A list, the A pilots have had no more or less advantages than you have had. But as soon as the change takes place you can’t wait to relegate them to the depths of the Q datal system for years to come, I see this as a just a little self serving. :mad:
Do A pilots “deserve” the 330?
Did the Q pilots “deserve” the rapid expansion resulting from 767 domestic flying?
Did the A300 pilots “deserve” to be forced back to the 737?
The answer to all these questions, and many more, is – WHO CARES! The rules are applied as written, not imagined, so stop being so childish and just get on with it.
Old Pollution had a farm E - I - E - I - O :ok:
10th Jul 2004, 11:45
On with the next crucifixion!
10th Jul 2004, 11:51
Gday, Bon. You may see the Jetscab pilots as you wish, but let me tell you, they (along with Jitcinnict) are a significantly greater threat to you and I as 'Q' pilots than the 'A' pilots are.
Yet we are doing ZERO to counter the threat. And there is the stoush from hell about this?:bored: :bored: Just doesnt make sense...
Yorik is having a couple of days R&R whilst he learns the phase "JetStar" rather than the offensive term he has been using. :mad:
10th Jul 2004, 13:14
I gave up after Jetconnect.
Subsequently at the Brighton RSL meeting the membership clapped the nice management chappie that helped to do us up the derriere. Never could figure that out. I can just imagine what he said when he reported back to Geoff how he was received.
"They clapped me Geoff!"
"Ah good says Geoff...continue the beatings"
Lets face it, the management treat AIPA (aka us) as pussies who will NEVER take a stand. The rely on us keeling over....and we do.
The A330 issue is one we just may??? be able to win.
10th Jul 2004, 14:55
I think you should read the LOA and the LH certified agreement again.
Part 6 of the LH award refers to "Hours of work, scheduling and related matters". Included in this is allocation in accordance with "bid line preferences in order of seniority".
Definitions in the LOA refer to "scheduling and hours of work provisions contained in Part 6..."
The LH award includes the definition of seniority.
The LOA states that when the change over takes place, the LH award in its entirety applies.
That is what is written. It satisfys the integration agreement, but it appears that some have trouble remembering what they agreed to now the consequences are revealed.
10th Jul 2004, 15:42
Hello Speedy, or should I say ******** you know the rules once more and you are banned W
I am not on the A330, but am close enough to get the facts about some of the idiot 'A' listers who are on it.
Your seniority is somewhere in 1989. You have recieved a command on the bus 5 yeras ahead of when you should.
If I were you I would be keeping my head down and not inviting scrutiny, particulary over your involvement in the forumlation of the 'b' scale
10th Jul 2004, 22:02
Something else to ponder, a little less talked about threat is National Jet Systems who currently contract to Qantas to operate BAE 146’s and who are rumored to get the 717’s from Jetstar, if AIPA were serious about securing futures for Qantas pilots they would be fighting to bring this in-house also.
Gee guys. Where is all this debate on Qrewroom in this honest formatt, with all the personal stuff?
We save that for pussies talking about airforce reunions.
11th Jul 2004, 00:41
I don't disagree with you, spin.
There are a lot of significant threats to our future, but does AIPA care? Nope, they are more upset about the political infighting, issues such as the A330 seniority, hotels, over 60's etc. The real issues don't rate a mention, because we have to be politically correct. And god help anyone who isn't.
AIPA and AIPA members, if you don't pull heads out of your ar$e$ and start addressing the real threats facing us, then we as a group are farked. We will be extinct. Replaced by NJS and Jetscab and Jitcinnict. Its already happenning!
If there are any of you old 744 captains reading this, then for gods sake wake up! It's because of you ignorant old b@<hidden> that we are in this predicament! Your future is at risk here too! Don't think it isnt. What is stopping Dixon from starting up another international carrier now with 744's?
And for those of you at Jetscab, Jitcinict, and NJS who are sitting back thinking that you are absolved of any of the blame here? Well, I can understand how desparately you want a secure jet job. But if you continue to undermine the last bastion of decent pay in Aust flying, then well, you have written your own death sentence too.
Because unless something is done soon to stop the slide, then the suits will grow fatter, and we will be lucky to earn more than cleaners....
This is a quote from Qrewroom which is interesting reading...
How unrealistic, how unaware, how Alice in Wonderland does one have to be to believe that a major problem facing you guys is the dreaded "over 60s". How many are there, not counting (and for some reason they aren't counted) the 737 "over 60's"? Four? How many max, ever? Say 20? All taking lots of leave, flying low lines, not flying international where that is applicable. How many commands and F/O slots lost to Jet Connect? Jetstar? How many hundreds of commands that is! And what did you guys do? Had a meeting!! Wow, bet Geoff just felt weak at the knees. And you "need" "must have" coverage of the Jetstar pilots? Which will solve what? You will get another pack of disaffected moaners, you will get back to the plethora of problems not ours that we left the AFAP to avoid, but any "advantage" is absolutely lost upon me. What is not lost upon me is the effect that supporting the Mount Cook pilots had on the Air New Zealand Association. They delayed the introduction of the -400 awaiting an undertaking that Mount Cook pilots would be guaranteed a slot in mainline (sound familiar?) for I think several years until the pilots split on the issue and some told the association to get lost and volunteered to fly the -400 for what was on offer. That explains the low wages paid to Air New Zealand pilots to-day, in my opinion. Weren't they fortunate to have coverage of the Mount Cook pilots! You are being seduced by the Attraction of the Achievable Aim. "Fix" the over 60's! Buy an AIPA building! (Put your money where the Company can see it, and you can't use it, reduce flexibility, get involved in side issues for a possible fraction of a % reduction in dues. You would have to be crazy, or wishing to avoid the real issues, to even consider the proposal.) Get coverage of other pilots? Achievable? Yes. Relevant? Don't think so.
You guys need to go into the next EBA demanding a "scope clause". Demanding, not asking, not begging. You need an enforceable undertaking from Q that these outfits will grow so big and no bigger. They can achieve the aim of blocking new entrants and stopping Virgin yet remain relatively small. If you aren't tough enough to do this, (never ask for anything that you aren't prepared to take), if you don't stop fiddling with minutiae and face up to the real problems, kiss your careers goodbye. Other men fought for and won your pay and conditions, but if you aren't prepared to box on to keep them, you aren't going to keep them. Nor do you deserve to do so.
11th Jul 2004, 08:48
Nice try, however a quick read will not do, please read it again. I know this thing inside out and back to front, I am not going out on a wing here.
Page B:392 paragraph 1.12 of the Award (LOA 156A) states quite clearly what is required in regards to Part 6. Part six talks about scheduling and hours or work and does refer to the allocation of work v/v seniority, however it does not mention what the seniority is.
You would be aware that the squirrel cage is still seniority (just a different type), part 6 embraces seniority but does not talk about how it works, that is precisely why there is an ENTIRELY separate section of the award dealing with how seniority works, but as I have pointed out the LOA and the IA never refers to this section, for very good reason.
There is NO reference in the LOA regarding a switch to the LH award in its ENTIRETY. That is just a Lie… Either use facts or you do your argument no good at all. :(
Maybe you second guessed what AIPA was doing when both the IA and the LOA were written. That it has now turned out different to what you imagined is immaterial.
But what is written is written, why is not relevant now, but the FACT is that seniority will have to be decided to the satisfaction of BOTH Q and A pilots, if not, then it will go to the umpire. I say bring on the umpire….NOW.
PS – Pollution: **, I don’t think so - **** you too W , try again... :ok:
11th Jul 2004, 08:57
well speedy getting tired of this W no matter how things pan out, at least you and the rest of the 'A' list have been exposed.
See you in court
11th Jul 2004, 09:39
...and the chickens have come home to roost!!...
been waiting years for this!...
go for it guys!!
11th Jul 2004, 10:39
16. Governing agreement if change over takes place
When the change over takes place, this Letter of Agreement will automatically be cancelled and the Long Haul Certified Agreement (including any agreed variations to it) will apply in its entirety.
EBA6 Letters of Agreement B:398
Click here to see the LH award and scroll down about 3/4 to see LOA156A - A330 Aircraft Pay and Conditions, and then read item 16.
12th Jul 2004, 11:05
despite the 'Q' listers position, I still do not understand how they justify the gains made with the 767 flying (promotions) and then put the other hand out for the A330??????
Either way it will not affect me, but it would appear that some are being greedy.
I dare say that AIPA will fight desperately for this to stay out of the commission. After all, aren't Qualifications and Experience the only allowable promotional criteria to be decided by the AIRC?
If so then surely RAAF, ex Airline and even Ex GA stand to gain.
Better to give the A listers a fair go and keep the pandora's box closed me thinks.
13th Jul 2004, 01:11
It has nothing to do with being greedy, there is now an integration agreement which includes rules for introduction of a new type and who will fly it under which award. Note that the 767 was introduced before this. As an aside the 737 has also done well to the point that the vast majority of "A" (SH) FOs have their commands. Recent commands have now come from "Q" (LH) FOs as they have run out of suitable "A" FOs.
There are about 30 SH Captains on the A330 flying under the SH award. The trigger has now happened for the A330 to go onto the LH award, this is because it will be doing in excess of 50% international flying in the next 12 months. There are SH pilots who believe this to be unfair, I gather mainly in the rostering area.
If the A330's operation was a majority of domestic flying, then I believe the SH award should be used. If it were mainly international, then the LH award should apply. Thats fair is it not? However some think it is not. :mad:
I agree with you with regards going to the commision. It will be a pandora's box where ALL sides will loose.
14th Jul 2004, 01:42
Not that I buy into the whole, "my haul/airline is better than yours" argument but it should be noted in the interests of clarity that the failures on the 767 years ago were command upgrades from FO whilst the failures on the A330 have been 737 Captains failing the conversion course. Three of them so far.
It is a bit of a difference.
14th Jul 2004, 03:53
Ladies & Gentlemen, the Captain has illuminated the Seat Belts sign. Would all passengers please store their trays & return their seats to the upright position...this is gonna get bumpy!!!!" :rolleyes:
WTF is it with you lot being stable at 2,000' how friggin boring is flying the Bus??????
15th Jul 2004, 01:03
Cutest of Borg,
Good point, also the 767 training (checking) at the time was very different to the training now! As opposed to the 737 training which gives you 2 - 3 times more sectors to iron out the problems. Very few, if any, failed 737 training, unlike the long haul fleets, because of the training system in place, not necessarily because of the candidate!
How many of the people you so vividly describe are already QF pilots as a result of intergation? 400-500?
Also, why not come clean and admit that you are not a QF pilot; and that you are nowhere near the left seat of anything bigger than your home lounge. :p
Finally, it would be damned funny watching you jump the hoops in CAL, SIA or EVA.........little child you wouldn't last the simple act of filling in your name on the application! Now run along to your can of VB and your game-boy. :E
QFandTUGGINGit deleted his post, well well.........heh,heh. :ok: