Originally Posted by
dragon man
There is an alternative claim from a non AIPA group of pilots for all ops over 20 hours to be paid credited hours plus 25% . We won’t all roll over.
From a purely strategic point of view a group of pilots breaking away is good strategy.
It appears that a few well placed 'opinion carriers', (think a stream lead type individual) and the herd is easy to panic.
The 'reliability' of your association is extremely pleasing to IR. Volunteer office holders (all employed by the company) budget transparency make for pleasing optics from an IR perspective. Nothing like knowing your enemy!
However from a regulatory point of view a TOD over 20 hours
is not yet legal. Whilst Little Napoleon likes giving tips on Ultra Long Haul travel and even donates money to a university sector rampant with commercialism 'for a study into LH flying' that doesn't include the employees is ominous. Under Annex 6 ICAO permits contracting states flexibility with respect to local deviation of flight and duty limits, but limits at this point, are limits.
Little Napoleon's lobbying of a captured and impotent regulator will involve all aspect of rampant commercialism, yet a commissioned study (paid for by the benefactor) is not robust.
Before this 'break away group' considers the money, it may well be prudent to commission and consider the impact of ultra long haul flying on people's health. Particularly those poor souls having to do it repeatedly, given that there is zero science supporting the narrative that QF wish to establish.
A puff piece in the AFR with Little Napoleon talking of teddy bear PJs and eating light as well as 'adjusting one's bed time a few days before' may be fine for passengers, but for crew on minimum rest in some cheap dingy hotel an extra 25% may not be compensation for adverse health impacts.
After all limits are targets. Where the TOD limit is insufficient for 'commercial purpose' lobby the regulator for a bigger limit.