It simply isn't sustainable to have people being paid double or more overtime on long flights. As far as I know, no other airline does it. It makes the long flights prohibitively expensive in a lot of cases. Remember the profit margin is paper thin, and the good times have to cover the bad, so yes doubling the crew cost would impact profitability.
The proposal seems a very fair offer, modernising some of the outdated provisions of the current LH determination.
The only thing QF can compete on, given high wages in Australia compared to our competition, is point to point long routes out of Australia. If we can do those for a reasonable cost we will expand. Expansion and promotion is where a pilot makes their money, and career. Sitting as an SO earning $200k+ might be nice but there is no future in it.
There are many positives: the best B787 rate in Australia, expansion (maybe a lot depending on economic circumstance) the protections of Australian employment conditions. Staying in the QF ecosystem and in Australia. Unlike what some say, awards can and do evolve over time. If there is something that is really not working, then in the next EBA we negotiate to change it.
We also negotiate from a MUCH stronger position in the next EBA, because the aircraft will have arrived and they will be profitable. At the moment our profitablilty rests pretty much on fuel prices and it can evaporate quickly.
Change is not always a bad thing...and just because something is different does not mean it is automatically bad!
Oh and well done to the negotiators, good to see that the non-combative approach can work.
Last edited by Sprite; 14th Jun 2015 at 23:22.
Reason: Sp