The problem of rates of pay for the B747 freighter is a complex one.
Just because the Qantas crews are paid a different scale is not necessarily relevant.The final cost of crews is a result of many things including actual rate of pay,efficient utilisation of crew and aircraft,accomodation costs, allowances and duty travel (pay and costs).
At this stage there appears to be only one B747 being discussed here. If it is an "orphan" project then there will be a lot of long slip times in international ports with the resulting hotels,meals and allowances or there will be a lot of downtime on the aircraft. Neither option is very efficient unless costs are very low for either option or both options. So if it is possible to integrate the freighter crews into the QF B747 pax ops, then the end cost may be actually less, even if the crews may be full QF award pay and conditions.
Similarly using the QF hotels etc may be cheaper because of the bulk purchasing that results even thoughthe standard of hotels is higher than the normal for freighter crews.
However if there is a plan for more aircraft and from the work I did on this in the late 90s, that would be at least 3 for efficient ops, then this matrix changes substantially towards favouring a self sufficient lower cost operation.
The other unknown is what happens to the US CRAF wet lease outfits when the Afghanistan withdrawal is completed. Will they go back to their old ways with cheap charters or will they go away quietly. Again a lot of that is unknown as their low rates in the past have depended on endorsed crews being out of work/furloughed from the majors and continued behind the scenes support from a now financially challenged US Government.
And finally, not all freighter crews are on low pay. Fedex, UPS etc seem to do pretty well when stacked up against US pax ops. They pay high wages but manage the entire operation very efficiently so the end result is financially acceptable to all parties.
Wunwing
Last edited by Wunwing; 16th May 2013 at 10:30.