View Full Version : Jet* BIG expansion

29th Jul 2007, 23:09
Wots the big expansion beyond 2009??:confused:

Qantas Airways' low-cost subsidiary, Jetstar, said on Tuesday it was looking at making a large order for Airbus A320 aircraft to meet its growth plans for Australia and Asia.

Jetstar Chief Executive Alan Joyce said the airline needed a "very large" order to meet growth plans from 2009 onwards, particularly in Asia where it has bought a stake in Vietnam's Pacific Airlines.

"We have been talking to the Qantas board about the potential for a big fleet order to cover our long-term growth aspirations and we are working through that evaluation," Joyce told reporters on the sidelines of the Asia Pacific Aviation Summit.

"We do need a significant order of A320s to cover our long-term growth aspirations."

Parent Qantas said in March it had ordered nine additional A320 aircraft for Jetstar, which is also scheduled to take delivery of 15 Boeing 787 planes in 2008.

Qantas earlier on Tuesday unveiled a modernized version of its famous Flying Kangaroo logo and launched a new "premium economy" class on international long-haul flights.
The logo, released amid a fanfare of publicity, still features a white kangaroo on a red background but the shape of the image was tweaked to fit on the tails of Qantas' new super-jumbo A380 aircraft.

Richard Branson's rival carrier Virgin Atlantic responded, accusing Qantas of "jet lag" because Virgin introduced premium economy in 1992.

Jetstar is expanding domestically and wants to grow in Asia. Earlier this year it bought a 30 percent stake in Vietnam's Pacific Airlines.
The deal is due to be completed on July 31 and Pacific will be re-branded with the Jetstar brand by mid-2008, Jetstar said.

Joyce said the low-cost carrier was still interested in taking stakes in more Asian airlines in the longer term but was currently focused on Pacific and its subsidiary Jetstar Asia.

Jetstar is losing money on its Japanese routes as the Australian dollar rises against the yen, keeping some tourists away from Australia. Joyce said the airline expected to remain profitable.

29th Jul 2007, 23:27
Jetstar is losing money on its Japanese routes as the Australian dollar rises against the yen, keeping some tourists away from Australia.

do you reckon it's not the yen thats the problem here so if the bean counters want japanese tourists back on oz then give them what they want and not a backpackers bus to get them here.

Douglas Mcdonnell
29th Jul 2007, 23:52
Interesting times ahead indeed. With a supposed 30-40 pilots, Captains and F/Os, leaving to go to Tiger, an EBA coming up that will not see any major improvements,poor staff morale and big expansion plans Id reckon that someone may be backing themselves into a corner fairly quickly!!. Good luck hanging onto experienced staff AJ. Time to show us the money matey.


The Kavorka
30th Jul 2007, 00:59

What makes you think that will will be no major change in the next EBA?

You can be sure that if it's not significantly improved there will be ABSOLUTLEY no chance of it getting through!!!

I do agree that AJ will back himself into a very small corner if he doesn't come to the party..

Douglas Mcdonnell
30th Jul 2007, 02:18
Given industry events in the last 12 months Id say that it will have to be a largish pay rise and much better conditions in many areas of the EBA to have even the slightest chance. The unfortunate treatment of the pilot group starting from the top down has only hardened the group to push VERY hard for much a much better package. I think my cynicism probably comes from watching the unfolding events here for the last few years. The track record isn't a good one. Anything below other current averages across the industry will see scores of good people leave and a continual void within the company. Obviously this isn't isolated to just Jetstar. The modern day "management styles" of most airlines forget that its people that create the wealth for the airline. A nice smile at check in could make you millions.


30th Jul 2007, 03:01
Do I detect an inference that some Jetstar pilots now think they should push for far better terms and conditions? Perhaps parity with the QF Mainline (LH or SH)/Australian Airlines would do, or even Virgin? But aren't those contracts the ones so comprehensively undercut just a couple of years ago by the Jetstar Award variation because the JPC knew so much better? :rolleyes:

I wish the pilots well in the negotiations ahead and trust that, this time, bluff and intimidation won't sway the vote when pilots realise their worth to a company desperately in need of on-side staff during a phase of unprecedented expansion. :ok:

ps How are the planned DEC 787 commands looking, on AWAs to circumvent pilot seniority, after all the loyalty and "good working relationship" established by AJ with existing pilots to date? :yuk:

30th Jul 2007, 03:07
Exactly Jetsbest....

You lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas!

30th Jul 2007, 05:59
Hay Doug,
what makes you think they will renew your EBA with all new employees having to go onto AWA's and the JPC doing zip about it...
If you haven't read one yet i suggest you take a look.... they are undercutting you....:rolleyes:

The Kavorka
30th Jul 2007, 07:01
At the recent JQ staff get together in MEL, a number of pilots spoke to AJ directly about pilots numbers and future plans. He conceded that they will have to pay a lot more cash to attract the numbers required for their expansion plans and to keep current drivers....

Looks like the next EBA should be a step in the right direction for the guys on the eba, however seeing there is a performance base clause in the AWA I'm not sure if these guys will also prosper. I have not read one yet so I can't comment on it's entirety.

If the AWA guys don't get the same rate as the EBA pilots JQ will suffer in the long run as people will leave in droves as they are in VB.....

30th Jul 2007, 07:29
Speaking of VB, interesting to see if a NO vote from JQ will emerge, just to say thanks for the AWA's and future promotions!:D

31st Jul 2007, 00:16
What is it specifically about the AWA thats undercutting new employees?

31st Jul 2007, 02:39
This specific AWA?

I'm sure it is a genuine question, so excuse me for saying ---That is a little bit of a naive question.

Lets say you are choosing a new vehicle to take you to and from work. A four cylinder car would do. A 50cc scooter or even a motorbike would do the job too.

However, once you come to live with them, you notice some differences. You can easily listen to the radio in a car. You don't mess up your hair by wearing a helmet. You have plenty of space for your nav bag and your overnight bag. You don't need to don a waterproof suit in the winter. The fuel economy of a large motorbike is not that much better than that of a small car. Running costs are similar.

There is only one reason that the Federal Government, the Business Council of Australia, the HR Nicholls Society etc pushed for, and got, legislation permitting individual agreements:

To re-jig the power relationship between employers and employees. Forget "flexibility, productivity, etc." The use of those terms has been distorted, it is spin.

It is impossible to look at an AWA and an EBA/certified agreement and compare them "apples to apples." This is because there is a fundamental difference in what takes place during the life of an AWA.

David Peetz, "Brave New Workplace" 2006:
"In any of these comparisons of pay or conditions between collective and individual arrangements, it is important to compare like with like."

Here are a few things where AWA (in the aviation industry) fall short of union collective agreements.

-> More likely to use forced redundancy, without seniority provisions, and a "skills required at bases remaining" priority when the employer wants to downsize. EBA are more likely to require the employer to offer voluntary redundancies, recognise "last on first off", cover relocation expenses where necessary. Think Kendalls under administration and the CRJ was no longer required.

-> Less likely to have a satisfactory mechanism for grievances, disputes and complaints. AWA have a basic grievance procedure through your supervisor to your manager. It is possible to drag out disputes over promotions, unpaid allowances, etc for YEARS.

-> Less likely to provide a structured and fair mechanism for promotion and training.

-> Less protection for rostering, hours of work, duty extensions, and other "lifestyle" issues.

-> More likely to "annualize" allowances, overtime and penalty rates over the life of the agreement. Gives the impression that the employee is being paid more, but employee often has items that were previously tax exempt, but are now locked in, not subject to review, and to add insult to injury, paying tax on.

-> More likely to tie you in for long periods (average 4-5) years without a robust and fair method of calculating pay increases.

-> More likely to link pay increases to HR or manager's 'performance reviews' instead of a straight CPI or agreed annual % increase. Therefore the pilot has to 'justify' his/her performance or lack of performance can be used as a reason to deny payrises and hinder promotions. Basically changes pay increments from an economic benchmark to an employee/employer power relationship.

-> More likely to have you spending more hours at work or doing work related tasks with no increase in remuneration.

These are just some.

After all the to- and fro- here about Virgin EBA, Jetstar EBA, NJS AWA, etc it would be very hard for any Ppruner to say they were not aware that professional pilots that have lived with AWA are almost universally very unhappy with them and either leave that environment or try to get union collective agreements in place.

Any pilot that does not "factor" in the hidden costs, the losses, the lack of normal protections, when comparing AWA to EBA is going to be very disappointed.

Add to that, the fact that most of the other JQ pilots you will work with are on an EBA. As a pilot on an AWA, you will be very much a second-class citizen. It will be in your face every time you go flying, every roster issue, every beer call on overnights, and every time you go to change type or rank.

Boss, you asked specifically about J* AWA. I just wanted to make the point that you have to look a lot harder into any AWA than the salary and the overtime rate if you are going to compare it with the EBA.
Rant over!

Going Boeing
31st Jul 2007, 02:59
A large employer in a medical related industry said that as his staff have skills that are not in an abundant supply, AWA's have caused a huge increased in staff costs as compared with a collective EBA. His staff know the value of their skills in the workplace job market and are negotiating very attractive packages.

Alan Joyce has used AWA's to offer very attractive packages to experienced B777 pilots to oversee the introduction of the B787. The AWA gives him freedom to ignore limitations of the current Jetstar International EBA, ie the seniority system and unattractive remuneration. It is obvious that he doesn't want to put the main J* pilot body on AWA's because it will end up costing him a lot more because of the reason given above. The fact that he is opening up the Jetstar pilots EBA negotiations early is so that he can offer a better package now to reduce the number of pilots who are planning to go to Tiger. I hope that the JPG finally wake up to the market conditions and grow the balls to drive a very hard bargain - I suggest a minimum of $250,000 for captains on the A320 with F/O's on 65% of captains rate. The B787 should command $350,000. Some may think that I'm dreamin' but I believe that I understand where the market is at and our skills are worth at least that amount.

Sonny Hammond
31st Jul 2007, 05:18
So then the J* pilots will earn more than most qf pilots. What will stop an exodus then?
Oh that's right, Geoff's promise of 5 million mainline commands in the next 2 years.

How ironic would it be if the pilots wages end up higher than before despite the mess that reigns today.

I guess they got the wage freeze out of the mainline pilots for 3 years at least.:D

Jet Jockey
31st Jul 2007, 06:17
I think the only reason the Irishman is opening negotiations early is to try and lock in a 5 year eba early cause the polls point to Johnny howard taking a walk, Apa has won a court case to represent all Qantas subsidary pilots and the inflation figures look like they are on the way up. The landscape next year will be a whole lot different and more teered the pilot's way for sure.
Bottom line!

31st Jul 2007, 11:50
GB: Couldn't possibly agree more mate. Don't reckon it'll happen, but I hope for everyone's sake that JQ management heed your advice.:ok:

31st Jul 2007, 12:03
GB, it seems to me that you need to differentiate between two types of pilot.

If AJ needs pilots with (a) a lot of experience on type and (b) specialist abilities that are needed in the introduction of the type, then yes, that is where individual contracts have always had a place, even before AWA.

A head of training, fleet managers, planners, c+t with bagfuls of CASA approvals, yes. These are people with skills that the employer wants to get in place. Key people. Seniority is not an issue, these people are needed because they have climbed the mountain before. They can make something where nothing existed before.

Those people aren't reading this.

But when it comes to line pilots -- are you suggesting that the entire 787 fleet will be manned by expats on AWA? No existing JQ guys or new hire GA pilots moving up the ladder to take FO and cruise FO positions?

I can't see that happening.

In the meantime, the ABS statistics, the Griffith Work Time Project, the OEA data, all say -- for people doing the same job, with no differentiation between skills (eg a captain is a captain is a captain. One goes sick, call in another one), the result is the same. Line pilots under AWA are worse off in salary and conditions compared to line pilots on EBA and CA.

31st Jul 2007, 14:22
ITCZ said:
Line pilots under AWA are worse off in salary and conditions compared to line pilots on EBA and CA.
Don't you mean "tend to be worse off"?

My understanding is that, as far as the contents are concerned, an AWA can be identical to an EBA or CA. In other words, each can contain the exact same terms and conditions.

1st Aug 2007, 00:19
aircraft -
When I first read your question, I thought "aargh these guys still dont get it!":ugh::ugh:

But I lightened up and thought - you have actually given me a great example to explain the difference.:ok:

In most cases it would be next to impossible to draft an AWA as a word-for-word copy of an EBA. Mainly because of the 'AWA prohibited content' legislation that attacks union participation in agreement making (most EBA are union collective agreements and enable the union to act on your behalf, etc).

But lets ignore that - lets imagine that an employer went to the trouble of taking an EBA, and copied it word-for-word, and gave it to you as an AWA.

There would still be a difference. Because not everything relevant to an AWA or EBA is written into the document. The document operates in accordance with the supporting legislation.

AWA and EBA, even if they could be identically worded, would operate differently because the legislation behind them is quite different. EBA are most commonly ruled by sections 117LJ and 117LK of the Workplace Relations Act. AWA are ruled by other section of the Act specific to AWA.

(There are actually two breeds of AWA - pre Workchoices legislation and post Workchoices legislation - and more than two flavours of EBA).

Think upon this. There is a big difference in legislated performance requirements between a Cessna 402 and Dash 8. They are both supposed to climb out after takeoff in the event of an engine failure, but the Dash 8 is ruled by CAO 20.7.1B and the Cessna is not.

Does that help paint the picture?

Even if an AWA had exactly the same words, allowances, terms and conditions as an EBA, they would still be different in the eyes of the law.

Continuing the twin engine analogy above, this does not make much difference while things are ok, while both motors are performing their task.
But it makes a very big difference when things go less than perfectly. And lets face it, the reason we have written contracts is not for when things are going well between us and our employer, but when we disagree.

Example. Its three years from now, the bubble has burst, and the medium to large operator you work for made a few mistakes, and now needs to downsize. Your agreement might have provisions for voluntary redundancy, and selection procedures if forced redundancy is needed.

Your operator appoints and administrator, who begins to think that the agreed forced redundancy procedures "do not make commercial sense." So they start laying off pilots with no regard for seniority.

The pilot body is incensed. It is unfair, it is not in the agreement. They stamp, they shout. No effect. So its off to court we go.

If you were under a section 117LJ or -LK certified agreement, you would be heard in the AIRC, your union or association could represent you as a group and get a decision as a group, and if it is in your agreement it is very likely to be upheld. The decision will be comparatively quick.

If you were a group of individuals under an AWA you might not be heard in the AIRC, you would each have to take individual cases to court one by one, and it could be dragged out for years. It is most likely to take longer, and be far more expensive to pursue.

EBA and AWA are different instruments. As different as a 402 and Dash 8. As different as VH- registered and Recreational. Very different in the most important part -- the ability to enforce the agreement in a speedy and inexpensive way.

Does that help explain the difference?

1st Aug 2007, 12:55
Well said ITCZ. The big gotcha as far as I can see is the clause which basically says a company can basically do whatever it likes for 'operational reasons'. As far as I understand, this is only applicable for new AWAs, not pre-Workchoice agreements.

This clause is so vague it's ludicrous. How many bastardly acts will be carried out by big corporations under this piece of legislation?


10th Sep 2007, 08:50
Well the time is nigh to vote the architects of this miserable legislation out!
Make every vote count!

10th Sep 2007, 09:32
So can anyone in the know reliably inform us as to whether the new starts at J* are going to be on AWAs or EBAs?

Capt Claret
10th Sep 2007, 11:57
To augment wot ITCZ & 'holic said

WorkChoices wording makes sackings easier: report

A new report has found a slight difference in the wording of workplace laws has given employers more opportunity to restructure their businesses.

The report was commissioned by Victoria's Workplace Rights Advocate, and
compiled by a senior lecturer in workplace law at Monash University.

Dr Anthony Forsyth says he concentrated on one aspect of the new
WorkChoices laws - the provision allowing workers to be dismissed for genuine operational reasons.

"In the past, the employer would have had to show some element of the necessity of the restructuring that they're going through, but under operational reasons, they don't have to show that there's any strong financial imperative," he said.

"The difference in terminology - operational 'requirements' under the past law, and operational 'reasons' under the new law might seem subtle, but it is in fact a very big difference in terms of the broad types of cases that can now be included in an operational reasons dismissal, that will mean an employee won't any longer have a claim."

Victorian deputy premier Rob Hulls says the report shows job security is a thing of the past under the new laws.

He says the report suggests that if a boss does not like a worker, or the company needs smartening up, a person can be sacked.

"Being able to dismiss an employee for operational reasons has been interpreted very broadly, which means that any employee in Victoria can virtually be dismissed without any valid reason being given," he said.

10th Sep 2007, 15:15
It will not be an EBA but a collective workplace agreement which it is now called under workchoices.

An AWA can still be offered individually however.

There will be more money for wide body experienced ex EK or CX managers and check+trainers on individual AWA's to get the operation up and running with the OK from CASA and a piddly collective agreement for everyone else.

I'd love to think that the group would bind together in a time of massive profits and pilot shortages however that is not reality and AJ knows it.

14th Sep 2007, 03:13
If "Jetstar is expanding domestically and wants to grow in Asia."
Why have they ignored Perth?
Do any of you guys know? Is it simply because of fleet size?
OK, so they fly MEL-PER once a day but that's it.
Would have thought there were opportunities ex PER to Asia? as OzJet have announced 3 flights a week ex PER to DPS.

15th Sep 2007, 01:05
QF mainline is now codesharing on the mel-syd-per sectors with J*. this has now been expanded to mel/tulla-syd sectors on certain city flyers flights. i wonder how the profits are shared. J* no meals/ drinks etc. QF free drinks and food. good if you geta cheap J* fare.:yuk:

15th Sep 2007, 01:13
Well the time is nigh to vote the architects of this miserable legislation out!Make every vote count!

And do you think that the ALP will rip up the AWA's? Nothing is going to change on that front. We're stuck with them no matter what happens.

15th Sep 2007, 01:16
then you can "tinker " with the goods, whatever they may be:ok: