Correct but in the context of the original Crikey article, it was a VERY big difference to how the article panned out.
There are two sides to this coin. I remember a 744 going empty to LAX a couple of years back due to short by two crew members even though the pax ratio works out. FAAA screamed about lack of 'coverage' for sick leave over the chrissie period. The company meanwhile screamed about the 400% rise in sick leave for trips that were away from home over the Chrissie period.
Two sides to that coin and they were both right to a certain extent. As to this crikey story, I'd bet money that they've got a few important details incorrect!