Keg, what you say is undoubtably true, however, the fact is that the company looks at the bottom line savings. ASK is a good measure of cost comparisons, but it is only when you multiply it out that the real savings are apparrent.
The fact that the company has come after such cost centres as transport and accomodation should indicate this. I am sure if we worked out how much per hour of rest the new London hotel would save, similar parrallels could be drawn. However, the overall saving in the order of $1.5 million per year is significant.
It may sound petty in the overall scheme of things, but this is how finely tuned the airline needs to be.
My issue is that the savings given by aircrew seem to be disproportionate.
What irritates me is that AIPA has not slammed the company for the deal it struck with the TWU over Jetstar. 5% less. Do we know what the average earnings of a bag snatcher in Sydney was last year? Would anyone believe $70k. I have reason to believe it to be more like $80 - $90k. For slinging bags.
The problem is we are not as industrially smart as these guys. They have just as much incentive to keep their work as we do (probably more), and I can guarantee if QF advertised for ramp staff tomorrow, fixed price $50ky they would get innundated. So why is it these guys keep their jobs and maintain their pay?
Quite simply because they play hard, their union does not constantly bow to management and its officials are not falling over one another to engratiate themselves with management.
Send the AIPA team back in to the negotiating room, if Jetstar pilots want to fly for less than the bag snatchers then thats their business, but AIPA should aim higher. Furthermore, for every 737 removed and replaced by an A320, QF pilots should be offerred 20/20 positions.