The reasons I'll be voting no:
1. No attempt made to retain the lifestyle a lot of us came here for. Management might think we're all here because we have to be but a lot of us have/had other options but turned them down to maintain a decent lifestyle. We chose lower pay in return for not being away on 3 day trips all the time. But now a lot of us have what must be the highest duty hours in Australia with the lowest pay to boot. If lifestyle is gone for good (as I suspect it is) then you'll need to do better with the compensation for being away from home or more time off.
2. $25,000 training bond for new Commands. Really? So just coming off a 3 year FO bond they now want to hold us hostage for another 2 years? That'll be over $50,000 and 5 years in training bonds for the current FO's. If a command bond has to be in the mix it would be a lot fairer to waive it for current FO's. Although I admit this would probably negate the point of it from the companies point of view.
3. New hire FO conditions. This is a pretty abysmal base pay. About $850/week after tax. No need to kick the people who aren't around to defend themselves. If the trade off for lower new FO pay was the removal of the training bond and training wage I say bring them back and keep base pay % as it is. It's not unreasonable to expect a new hire to stick around for three years. If they leave due to a better offer in that time then they will do so knowing they will need to pay their bond out. Leave the new hire bond in place and get rid of the command training bond.
As mentioned above, Qantaslink has more than pulled it's fair share of weight with regards to QF group performance. I suspect we have been the backbone of the group over the last few years while other sectors of the business were struggling. It's time we were rewarded for our efficiency now that the business is supposedly going to make decent profits.