The more J* pilots look at the deal the more it is likely to get the nod.
Chimbu summed it all up nicely.
Some are concerned about how much money hinges on the "bonus". Given that QF management are able to set targets that guarantee themselves substantial bonuses every year it virtually guarantees it to the pilots. It's not all just profit based, it can be on industry relative performance etc, management constantly move the goal posts to suit.
Given this financial year is likely to be a bumper for bonuses, is it worth the risk of a "no" vote?
A "no" vote may send a terse message to AJ & Co. but what is that going to do? Do they really care about morale, engagement etc? - No!
I don't think there is an extra $20-30k per pilot to be gained in a "no" vote, there may be a small increase but more likely a re-jig of the money as per the QF shorthaul EBA - rob Peter to pay Paul as Paul will get the vote up!
Rostering issues are a big concern but these are more an issue for a strong JPA - which there is not. In the current EBA, rostering issues are almost totally outside the EBA and done by consultation between JPA and management.
I would prefer a "yes" vote to get the cash and then throw out much of the existing JPA and get some people in there who can achieve results with rostering. Basically it requires people willing to do the work and provide the solutions to the company (the company will not waste time nor effort on rostering for "lifestyle"). The JPA need to closely monitor the rosters and patterns to ensure equity, fatigue management, lifestyle etc. At present there is little if any of this occurring.
The JPA need a big shake-up. They supposedly represent around 400+ pilots but are more like a Friday night social poker club, fumbling and bluffing their way through. New Hires do not receive a scrap of information on the JPA, many do not know who is on the JPA, there is no published contact information, they provide no information except individual comments on a private website, no newsletters, no nothing. They often do not respond to emails (when you can find an email address that is). They ride on the company roadshows which shows no independence from the company viewpoint. They are ill-funded, ill-equipped, ill-informed, ill-experienced.
What legal opinion has the JPA independently sought about this EBA? The simple grammar and vagueness of the last EBA shows how amateurish and unprofessional the JPA can be when dealing with such important issues and how much it opens the door for a company "interpretation".
They are reticent when dealing with the company, they will not take them on. The sim payment fiasco is a prime example, they take the company view rather than one of the few clearly worded EBA clauses.
They (no doubt under company direction) seemed determined to sideline both the AFAP and AIPA with the current negotiations. They were held in secret with no chance for the pilots to seek AFAP/AIPA representation. They claim no one asked, pretty hard when you are not told of when and where negotiations were held
Lets hope there are no hidden traps or "interpretations" in the new EBA.