Can we just put this S/O-bashing cr*p back in the box please? I'm sure there have been threads and threads on this in the past, and it is just more smokescreen at the moment.
There are three points about the S/O situation:
1. As already pointed out, a four-man crew with two S/Os is a SAVING to Qantas compared to how other airlines crew their long-range flights.
2. Under the QF contract, the S/O rate of pay is a pure MATHEMATICAL proportion of the CPT's pay for that fleet - A380 crew make more per hour than B767 crew (I'm sure there have been a million thrads on this too). If S/O pay is drastically cut, then it would be an extension of the same argument that an A380 F/O makes more than a B767 CPT etc.
3. Ask any Qantas S/O whether they WANTED to be a S/O when they joined Qantas and I'm sure their answer would have been a resounding NO! - but that's the way it has always been for Qantas longhaul. Since the advent of J* (and particularly since the rise to power of the twerp) advancement in mainline is non-existent. Since there is more money to be made on the senior fleets, it is only natural that seniority is used to move onto a higher paid aircraft - the prestige of a window seat or the extra gold/silver on the shoulder doesn't pay the bills!
Now, to answer the other question of NETWORK, I don't think there will be capacity "ready to hand" for strike-breaking. If shorthaul is a goldmine and longhaul is a DOG and Jetstar is an amaaaaaaazing business, why would you divert capacity to support a DOG. If you were looking at wet-leasing, this is very expensive and difficult to organize if its a medium (long?) term requirement. Besides which, I don't think AIPA will be going to hit the big red all-out STRIKE button for some time - it will be a range of other annoyances for management first (and by legal definition, Qantas's response can only be commensurate and proportional to the action taken by us against them).