Mr Seatback 2
Thanks for history on the Impulse/Jet* progression agreement. I just love how they drag out the progression agreement when they want something voted up, pleased to hear we are not the only ones effected. Its a good strategy by Qantas maybe one the FAAA should be adopting with Qantas, most Eastern crew would be happy to trade off some things for better access to progression and when I mean access I dont mean the current arrangement.
Eastern crew work hard and have no problem with that its just not sustainable for 6-8 years and get paid what we get. We were told progression would take x years during our interview and that was the selling point used by Eastern to recruit crew and still is to this day. However the post keeps moving and everyone washes their hands of the situation while externals and the casuals enjoy the positions.
To clarify a few points in regard to our agreement:
1. We are entitled to 20 positions per year. This is ahieved (but never will be) if 32 or more externals are placed into permanent positions between 1 Jan to 30 Jun = 10 progression from Eastern and same for the period 1 Jul to 31 Dec = another 10.
2. MAM's were not given preference as such as the progression agreement states that 32 or more externals in this case it was MAM have to be made permanent before activating progression. Progression is only suppose to happen once externals have been converted to permanent. This being my point on 1 July 2005 this year was the first time it has happened since March 2003. I agree Qantas should look after their own but they dont and the FAAA has to work for everyone therefore pushing for MAM's to be made permanent therefore triggering the progression agreement at the same time.
The things that disappoints me is why didnt the FAAA/Qantas factor in progression and timing when the MAMs were made permanent and possible take more from each airline as a show of good faith and considering the chances of progression happening for at least another year are slim to none. They knew they would have to take progression and they even acknowledged that to the FAAA. It can be delayed for operational reasons but when they start putting through casual ground schools I dont think they have an operational problem. Unless of course a senior executive bonus is now regarded as an operational problem.
3. We dont start at the bottom in terms of base pay but close to it. All true about the staff travel and B Scale bands and I doubt QF would care about our senority and I agree the training costs are nothing, look at the $$ they would have spent in the last year on casual training.
Like you I dont get it.