Just a couple of things that I heard or asked when I was in the EBA Roadshow which might clarify a few things (although, I have heard that people are getting mixed information depending on WHO is taking the Roadshow for that day)
* Mr Tanner announced that overnights won't go all together. We would have to have bases at all ports where we overnight aircraft. (e.g. MKY, TSV, CNS, LST, HBA, CBR, OOL...etc) And could you imagine the start up cost of setting up bases in all these ports just for a few staff???
* Perth Base has been put on hold temproarily and may not open in 2009. Although they now have a pilot base there at the moment, as one poster mentioned, they have to as they cannot cross crew from EMB to 737 v.v. The increase in capacity at the moment is due to the mining contracts that we have to KTA and ZNE. With the economic downturn and the loss of hundreds of mining jobs because of this, who knows how long we can maintain these flights for during this period. If
VB employed a couple of hundred crew and the bottom end fell out of the mining industry during the recession,
VB would have to lay off all those crew, and perhaps shut the base down, costing them a lot of money. At the moment, it is cheaper for them to have an EMB/737 crew member (or CS infact) to sit on airport for 5 hours in PER which they are currently doing, and paying for them to overnight there.
* TOTALLY agree with Ozangel re middle management. We have 15-20 DM's and 2 BM's in Brisbane. In my calculations we have 10-15 DM's too many, and 1 BM too many. The DM's complain about having to manage 65-odd staff members when as CS's we are responsible for anywhere up to 700 guests A DAY!!!! Yet we don't complain about taking care of this many people. Hell, I heard that at EK, 1 CC Manager is responsible to 500 cabin crew members.... so what are our DM's complaining about??? None of them are even still current so they can't even comment to us on anything contained in our manuals. I think a cut to this department will save a considerable amount of money for the company. Why don't we start with job cuts from here. All those in agreeance raise your hands. Bring back some CCDL's, that way they are being more counter-productive.
* I too have done the calculations based on a 1680 hour year that we are doing at the moment and the proposed 1820 hour year that they want to do, and my calculations also come in short and for me that results in a NO vote straight up... You want me to work more hours in a year, then pay me for them. Don't tell me that I get an extra 10 days off in a year... that is irrelevent as I am working and extra 140hrs a year....It also means another month of Propels I need to write....
* We are always being told that we are paid to work 140 hours a month, but rarely are we rostered the full 140hrs a month. Say we are rostered 125hrs for the month, but pick up an extra 20 hours in Available pay. They are saying that 15 of those hours we are double-dipping because we have already been paid for those 15 hours. Well, why aren't we being rostered 140 hours a month if that is what we are being paid for.... There is a problem with Rostering not with the crew.... Don't blame us for something the company agreed to back in 2002 when they agreed to have available day pay and only roster us 125hrs a month. They need to fix the problems in their own backyard before trying to blame us.
* Here's one to think about. With the new 5 levels of CC they are looking at. If you were on CC5 and a new hire was on CC1, who do you think they would call out first if they needed someone for overtime??? Food for thought.
* Oh, and Cargoattendant, don't go round condoning graffiti in the aircraft. Not is it only against the law as you are tampering with an aircraft, but this is my work environment. How would you like it if I came into your bedroom and scrawled "VOTE NO" all over your bedroom walls??? Or any wall in your house for that matter. I spend a large majority of my day in these aircraft and I found it appalling and utterly childish when I saw it last time. In fact, I reported it last time. There are other more mature ways of discussing this and its not defacing company property.
* Also FYI, regardless of what Management tell you, there is already a project in the pipeline about reducing crew on a 170 to 2. I was told by management that this wasn't going to happen, then at a roadshow I had, it all came out in the wash. I have heard rumours of 3 in a 700, but to this date, yet to be confirmed.
*Well, that is my say.... Oh, one more thing, if you are not a union member, consider joining. Remember, there is strength in numbers. And Mr Tanner said he would be very very very surprised if at least 20% of CC were union members and wouldn't believe it if the number was higher.... Well, little does he know.... not very much I say.
Let me know your thoughts on my post people.
Cheers. ;o)