Umm, credit hours still exist! From my understanding of some of the positions put forward, you'd still be looking at a divisor of 160 for an 8 week roster. You'd still be getting 1040 hours per annum as min guarantee. Night credits may be worth 30% but on many trips they don't actually add 30% to the credit of the trip.
Rotating seniority is the barrow been pushed by people who don't like the present system.
Damn straight. Of course it is. That's because the present system is inequitable and in times of stagnation- like we've had for 6 years now- it ensures that those who are trapped on the bottom of the pile suffer a crappy life for considerable amounts of time. We've tolerated it because it's in and it's difficult to change for fleets that have been around. I acknowledge that many people stayed on type in category because they didn't want the disruption of being junior.
A new type changes all that. You bid (or not) knowing that you can get the weekend off that you want (probably) but you don't get that and the best trip and another other six weekends off whilst someone else gets the worst trips and no weekends off.
This isn't a vested interest here either. There are 8 people in Qantas senior to me who are younger than me. I end up very, very senior. I said as a senior S/O on the 744 who only rotated for 1 bid period that it was unfair. I said as a junior and senior F/O on the 767 that it was unfair. I said as a middle level 744 F/O who didn't rotate that it was unfair and I've said the same whilst being 40 of the bottom of the 767 command pile.
(As an aside, I know of some relationships that have gone through some tough times in the last six years because of the lifestyle impacts of the stagnation of the mainline and being trapped junior).
Many people do like the present system.
I bet they're not in the bottom third or have been trapped for the past six years in those numbers. I'd be interested to hear why they think that continuing a system that ensures those senior on fleet- particularly a potential new fleet where everyone knows what they're getting into- get everything they want whilst those junior get nothing of what they want is a system worth continuing. To put it another way, were we to have a fair share system, what justification would there be to move to a pure seniority system?
No change to the bidding system should be made without a separate vote from the EBA been called for and passed.
We've done that a couple of times over the years. The majority at those times have indicated a desire for a fairer system. Why not introduce a new type with that fairer system. You still bid for the aeroplane on seniority. Lifestyle (and pay if there is diversity in O/T between trips) on that fleet would be far more equitable.