This is absolutely not an attack on QF crew themselves, more management's inability to do anything constructive:
Finally, the company has had enough of these 4 engine 'la la's' and is currently exploring an international business model of twins only by 2020 at the latest. The line 767 pay and conditions ring a bell?
And there lies yet another argument for the 777. Can't change the past but the -300ER entered into service 10 years ago. QF could've had the majority of long haul crew on 767/330 rates, still could've kept the 380 as the so-called 'flagship'.
Not really my area but they also could've recruited FAs for the specific 777 fleet, like the cabin crew now on the 380 (as I understand it).
Finally (and I'm only using second hand information here - feel free to post actual figures), I've been told the 777-300ER uses ~20T less fuel on BNE-LAX than the 744 does. Figures are rough but that's 40T/day (return flight). Daily services so 280T/wk or 14,560T/yr. Converting kg/L (*1.266) gives $18,432,960/yr if QF managed to hedge fuel at $1/L, someone might know more though.
- - - - - - - -
Thanks McHale, so let's use that: 29,120T per year per east coast-LAX route. Daily flights from MEL/SYD/BNE (MEL used to be 744) so 87,360T/yr. That's $110.6M per year at $1/L. Disgusting hey..