View Full Version : Jetstar Australia time in the sun expires

9th Oct 2009, 20:41
Anyone doubting where Boston Consulting Group (little broocey) and Oldmeadow will take J* is becoming clearer by the day.Was always part of the grand strategy and Joyce will stay on message as long as Leigh lets him..

Looks like "opportunities" are becoming scarcer downunder...Wonder where all those aircraft will be based? Singapore? Turkmenistan?

Jetstar Mulls Southeast Asia Base for Europe Flights (Update2) - Bloomberg.com (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601081&sid=as2aumseAnGI)

9th Oct 2009, 21:57
Good luck getting tech crew to operate them out of those places. Cabin Crew shouldn't be a problem, but are Jetstar planning on using expats or do they think there will be thousands of local pilots queuing up to join them just like Australia?

9th Oct 2009, 22:15
This is indeed worrying news Insider.

Have read elsewhere on Pprune that: Qantas can't, but Jetstar can join with Ryan Air, hire pilots/cabin crew offshore and get its maintenance done in Asia.
Very unaustralian and should not be allowed. The travelling public and the workforce deserve better.

Australia isn't Hong Kong but business downunder is increasingly behaving like it is.

10th Oct 2009, 00:20
More to the point GM, what Qantas is doing with Jetstar breaches its obligations under the Qantas Sale Act, a public law of the Commonwealth of Australia?

Shame on AIPA for pulling the rug from under the feet of its past president. The following quote from another union official sums it up nicely.

· ‘Offshoring we fight our way, the pilots only hope was via that case.’

Sorry to say, but the games over guys.

10th Oct 2009, 02:38
Doesn't Jetstar have 2 more 330s due in the coming months? Wonder which base they will end up in....

10th Oct 2009, 02:53
HI everyone, the word up here is the base is to be in Ho chi Min using expats and locals, crewed by Pacific Jet*, some feelers are out in the water as we speak regarding conditions and perks.
Also just saw Jet* has applied for unlimited seats into Vietnam .

Cant see the problem with this solution myself , but I am sure some A330 Australian Jet* guys might.

A. Le Rhone
10th Oct 2009, 02:58
Game over - nonsense.

Too many planes being built and nowhere near enough pilots to fly them. Little economic upset seems to be receding already and very soon we will be back to the desperate situation airlines were in 2 years ago. Simply not enough qualified and experienced aircrew.

There will always be good and bad airlines from an employees perspective but if anybody tries to force pilots offshore their airline will experience immediate difficulties. Jetstar might need to think about that next time they try another Darwin act. Once the industry fully turns, watch pilots bail from there faster than you could imagine.

10th Oct 2009, 07:45
Doesn't Jetstar have 2 more 330s due in the coming months? Wonder which base they will end up in....

This would be my bet.
2x A332 bassed in AKL
Overnight they would run AKL-LAX & LAX-AKL
Durring the day one A331 would do a AKL-SYD-AKL run which would replace one of the last remaining QF 763 on the SYD-AKL-SYD route. And AKL-SYD return would say only take 7h30m block time up.

10th Oct 2009, 08:37
Never flown an A332 and cant be assed doing the maths so can someone in the know tell us if it will do AKL-LAX and vv with a decent load?

10th Oct 2009, 08:41
QF used the A332 on AKL-LAX last year during the Winter.

With JQ's new A332 being HGW it should help on this route

Dropt McGutz
10th Oct 2009, 09:22
Alan Joyce has stated that the U.S. is not the right market for Jetstar and they won't be operating there.

10th Oct 2009, 10:03
Just like they will never operate business cityflyer routes. I HATE to say it but give it time and they will find a way to infiltrate other high yield business destinations. :mad:

10th Oct 2009, 10:07
If that quote from Joyce is accurate then its a lay down mazare that AKL-LAX-AKL will be flown by JQI as soon as is humanly possible.

Perhaps that route can be 'enhanced' like the Japanese market has been...............

10th Oct 2009, 10:48
Oh yeah, Japan is enhanced...

Wasn't Westaway claiming swine flu? 44% down is a lot of swine flu. Passengers go out of their way to avoid flying J* out of Japan......
Mini me is a little more eloquent than his angry little predecessor, but his script is identical.

Of course customers prefer J*. It's all about 'experience' and most cutomers agree. "Never again"

The so called Low cost model does nothing except bleed yield. Dixon succeeded at something, convincing many they don't need to pay enough for an airfare to return cost of capital. Not sure the p$*@k was worth $11million for that sort of legacy.

11th Oct 2009, 03:13
Menadue was the last decent CEO Qantas had.The man had integrity credibility and intelligence.His remuneration was $200K.
With Dixon he was paid more and contributed less.
Gotta love the free market.
Jet Star will be known as the subsidiary that ate the parent.
Any decent Ad Exec will tell you that trashing the QF brand is about the most imbecilic act in recent aviation(if not corporate) history.
All for what ?
Lower costs and break the employee culture that made Qantas what it once was.
Qantas is now a second tier carrier.Something that is recognized by everyone except Qantas Management.
They simply dont spend enough on the product.
Costs over safety and service.The Qantas mantra since privatization.
The JetStar parasite will eventually kill Qantas.
Start buying Qantas memorabilia now

11th Oct 2009, 04:02
I must be some sort of dinosaur. I agree with everything Packrat just said!

11th Oct 2009, 04:41
Even more of a worry is the following quote by an ex QF Exec..

''Qantas is destroying its brand name,'' a former Qantas executive says. ''They are cross-subsidising Jetstar like you won't believe.''The former executive argues that low-cost airlines are not feasible on routes of more than five hours because international travellers prefer full-service airlines for the long haul. He is also critical of such strategies as replacing Qantas flights with Jetstar on most flights between Australia and Japan.

''The low-fare market is the blue-singlet boys - the fellas going up [to Asia] for the buck's party and the silver hairs. It's the newly-weds and the nearly-deads,'' the former executive says. ''It's just a flying bus service, making its money from ancillary services.''..............

The loss of market share on international routes means that Qantas must allocate its fixed costs over less flying, which forces up unit costs.

''It's making Qantas dearer and dearer relative to their competition,'' the former executive says.

''They are effectively saying to the unions, 'If you guys don't come up with a radical plan to lower unit costs, we will just melt Qantas on the vine and do it all on Jetstar'.

Full article available at Joyce ready for great leap at Qantas (http://www.smh.com.au/business/joyce-ready-for-great-leap-at-qantas-20091009-gqr4.html)

11th Oct 2009, 07:20
Joyce is destroying Qantas, he has given away all the corporate market in NZ to Air Nz. People get sick of LCC.

11th Oct 2009, 23:57
Alan Joyce has stated that the U.S. is not the right market for Jetstar and they won't be operating there.
Sounds like another inept quote from some goon CEO many years ago that stated - "I personally don't know where FedEx and UPS are going with this. There's no money in freight". :ugh::ugh:

12th Oct 2009, 01:36
I find it hard to argue with packrat's post #15........... so I won't. Everything that packrat has written is true & correct. Sadly I envisage the day when a book will be released titled 'The Destruction of Qantas ---- and the people who caused it' ........ with Darth's face prominently on the cover. :(

12th Oct 2009, 01:53
The JetStar parasite will eventually kill Qantas.

And what happens to the parasite when the host dies?

12th Oct 2009, 02:24

Mr. Hat
12th Oct 2009, 03:05
All for what ?
Lower costs and break the employee culture that made Qantas what it once was.

Its the obsession with the concept that the tightening in conditions/costs and renumeration leads to profitable business. And it does to a point beyond which it sharply decreases.

From an outsiders perspective and from people in the employment market that I speak to now QF does not even rate a mention. Once seen as the holy grail now as packrat put it it seen as "second tier" and irrelevant.

Everyone knows that the growth will now be in JQ VB and Tiger. Very sad indeed.

12th Oct 2009, 06:27
But what happens to those airlines you just mentioned Mr Hat when Qantas management's tactics succeed and Qantas staff are at LCC terms and conditions? What advantage will the original LCC's have then?:bored:

12th Oct 2009, 06:35
There is no doubt that the Kangaroo’s Head Shed know that it is Senior Counsel’s view that Jetstar International is a breach of the Qantas Sale Act and suspect Qantas is making vigorous efforts to procure an amendment to it.

How the Government is reacting won’t be known until the aviation white paper is released late this year.

Nevertheless, if it is not clarified as Qantas would like, continuing to grow Jetstar at the expense of Qantas may well turn out to be the folly that eventually replaces continuing obsession with tightening conditions, costs and remuneration with a new strategy to reduce aircraft leasing costs by 40%.

Expect 2010 will be a very ‘exciting’ year in many, many respects.

Mr. Hat
12th Oct 2009, 07:29
blown , this is what you get: Mike's Blog #1: 'Pilots on Food Stamps' | MichaelMoore.com (http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/must-read/mikes-blog-1-pilots-food-stamps)

From a thread in the GA section.

12th Oct 2009, 09:07
blown, the LLC will still have not only less managers but they will still be paid a pittance compared to QF. still a hell of an advantage for them

12th Oct 2009, 21:17
Future tickets will read


*Jetstar flights to the USA are operated using subsidiary airline Qantas Airways Limited A380 aircraft in a 650 seat configuration:eek:

13th Oct 2009, 02:38
be running the sandwich shop in the terminal. imagine the money you make:ok:

13th Oct 2009, 08:27
.....'the' book is already at final ed stage
from the cover artwork:


[author's name] jumps the Q with an insider's view
of the demise of an Aussie Icon.

from the synopsis I briefly saw I think there's more than a few that will squirm - not just those at the Exec level either !

13th Oct 2009, 15:44
"But what happens to those airlines you just mentioned Mr Hat when Qantas management's tactics succeed and Qantas staff are at LCC terms and conditions?"

They start cutting costs again to maintain the comparative advantage. Wages will go even lower. Take a look at how Virgin America and Jetblue have undercut the traditional low cost carriers. Its started again.

"What advantage will the original LCC's have then"

Lower overheads. Less complexity. Ability to change within the market place.

LCC's are here to stay. In the future, there will be no HCC's.

13th Oct 2009, 20:19
LCC's are here to stay. In the future, there will be no HCC's.
Only half true....the other half is rubbish...

There will always be people who have money and are not only willing to spend it but will demand full service....

13th Oct 2009, 20:19
The amazing part of this rubbish is that the aren't any such thing as low cost carriers or high cost carriers, it is all management BS. It is really a LOWER WAGE carrier. Ponder if you will,

Aircraft costs- Fixed
Navigation Charges- Fixed on route
Fuel Charges- Fixed
Ground handling Mostly fixed

The list goes on, the aircraft carry roughly the same passengers. These airlines may stimulate demand (at the margin) However the very passengers who are enticed to fly at $50 are incredibly price sensitive. (elastic) The real variable we are playing with is crewing costs and they actually aren't that much different. The irony is Dixon succeeded at something; He convinced people there is no need to pay a premium to fly.Price expectations of the travelling public for flights are now lower than catching a bus to Sydney. How that increases future profitability is beyond me.

At least "management" can reinvent the wheel and look spectacularly busy whilst they flounder with the real business of "running"an airline. At least the consultants are busy...I doubt Joyce could boil an egg without consultants.

So just how much is the crewing cost differential? Me thinks that there are plenty of ways to ensure the J* Australia pilots are "competitive". Just move the flying offshore....Sadly the time in the sun has expired for you chaps(ettes) at J*. How you tackle it is up to you, but with a former BCG consultant "running" J* who has sufficient knowledge of aviation to fill the back of a postage stamp it may prove an interesting battle...

Funny that all the executives at Q love swanning around in P class, whilst espousing the virtues of so called low cost.........

13th Oct 2009, 20:37
The other part of the rubbish is that if you check the fares they are not cheaper if you are booking a flight at the last minute....

On top of that is that a number of Legacy carriers have holiday packages that are basically the same price as those so called LCC's...and you don't have to pay for a pillow or a cup of tea let alone a meal....

13th Oct 2009, 21:01
QF Insider

You could add:
• Single seat layout all economy getting more punters per flight
• Higher crew productivity ( and very simple training pipeline) due single type
• Simplified work rules allowing higher overall labour productivity
• Shorter turn times and much higher aircraft utilization
• Many fewer layers of management
• Handling innovations such as the power push back with a single person
• “B” scale labour rules without union interference
• Use of second-tier airports
• Simple web based distribution channels
• “User pays” focus for services and add-ons
• Ability to access the “parents” resources at marginal rather than average cost
• “Can do” attitudes at all levels allowing routes and initiatives to open and close without months of planning

Much of this is not without pain or predatory behaviour by overly zealous management ideologues and it may or not be sustainable in the longer term. It is not for every passenger and nor should it be.

But….these are the things that make LCCs work….and as you know very well it is a great thing for the Qantas Group that it has Jetstar inside the tent pissing out rather than outside the tent pissing in (to paraphrase LBJ).

If Qantas had tried to carry the 32 million Jetstar passengers at its long run average cost it would have slowly gone broke.

If Qantas hadn’t carried those passengers but VB and Tiger had….it would have been a holocaust, not just a bankruptcy.

And Lowerlobe...it has been and always will be true that big legacy carriers canoffer specials at the lowest market rate. Look at the fares QF has been sellling to fill the 380 to LAX recently. They do not meet the long run average cost of providing the service but they cover the marginal cost and that, for a very perishable commodity...is fine. Don't confuse that with the economics of LCCs though.

Hope this helps our collective understanding of a difficult issue. I didn't invent the LCC concept....I don't even always support it and often feel ill at some less lovely parts of what I see....but it's a fact of life and Qantas has at least its own LCC rather than just being beset by them.

13th Oct 2009, 22:48
Much of this is not without pain or predatory behaviour by overly zealous management ideologues and it may or not be sustainable in the longer term.....I don't even always support it and often feel ill at some less lovely parts of what I see....but it's a fact of life and Qantas has at least its own LCC rather than just being beset by them. Welcome inside the tent brother.

14th Oct 2009, 00:09
However "Brother" the tent is still segmented and one side is not allowed to enter the other!
Imagine how different all this would be if Management had worked with staff rather than against them!:eek:

14th Oct 2009, 02:27

I don’t think you understand my point.

“There will always be people who have money and are not only willing to spend it but will demand full service....”

This is true however nowhere in my post did I suggest that full service would become a thing of the past. You are assuming that a lowering cost base implies a reduction in service level.

14th Oct 2009, 04:53
nowhere in my post did I suggest that full service would become a thing of the past.
Now I wonder where I would have got that idea from in your first post?
LCC's are here to stay. In the future, there will be no HCC's.
You are assuming that a lowering cost base implies a reduction in service level.
Nothing to assume at all.....it's a fact if you are referring to a LCC compared to a legacy airline.

Cutting costs in a legacy airline is a different matter to a LCC....You are talking apples and oranges

14th Oct 2009, 06:15
Why companies fail :E

"The poor performance or even bankruptcy of companies is caused by the failure of employees to work more for less in order to compensate for the mismanagement of the executives."

Not my quote but I like it!

Richard Kranium
14th Oct 2009, 07:53
well thats dead right, want employees to work more for the incompetancies of management.

I have been on this band wagon for quite some time, most management are legal criminals, they award themselves huge salaries while cutting costs and wages every where else.

I just love this new idea that shareholders could be judicial on these issues, most employees could run their company 10 times better than a lot of these slimes.

and they say we dont have a caste system in the western world, how is it that trickie-dickie gets 11mill for...how many months work?....:sad:

15th Oct 2009, 06:52

I agree on a few of your points and have added some of mine, namely;

-Shorter turn around times
-Better computer and crewing software
-less back office management/excessive pilot management
-Charging for food/revenue from hotels +car hire
-more online booking

The simple fact remains that the majority of airline costs as highlighted by the recent Qantas data book are fuel and aircraft/maintenance costs.

Flight crew costs are a very small segment of the overall cost base.

That is why airlines such as Southwest/ Easyjet and Ryanair all pay their crews well. Ryanair's relationship with crews is poor however they are well remunerated.

Qantas flying twenty year old gas guzzling aircraft that require lots of maintenance makes its overall cost base far more expensive than JQ regardless of flight crew costs.
If JQ were not to fly brand new A/C but the old QF aircraft I doubt the JQ business model would stack up.

To paint the picture of flight crew costs as the make or break figure is false and poorly researched.

15th Oct 2009, 07:57
As true as the following quote by FearCampaign is:'the picture of flight crew costs as the make or break figure is false and poorly researched.'

Until last years stouch with ALAEA, believe the logic, which flowed from the 89 duispute, was along the lines: 'keep the pilots in line and the rest of the workforce will follow'.

However, nowdays at Qantas in particular, believe it is the aircraft engineers that that keep the Execs awake at night. :oh:

Capt Kremin
15th Oct 2009, 08:16
Any truth in the rumour that the next two A330's going to Jetstar will be flown from a new base in Singapore... and not by J* OZ pilots?

15th Oct 2009, 08:50
If JQ were not to fly brand new A/C but the old QF aircraft I doubt the JQ business model would stack up.How's the gas guzzling Jetstar Pacific holding up? I see they are using that ancient fleet with a livery that looks wrong on a 737 and only have one 10 year old A322.

LCC's are here to stayTrue, but fuel is rising again, closing closer to US$80. Dont know what the benchmark breakeven line is for a LCC and fuel price, but I would assume not much steeper than that.

Any truth in the rumour that the next two A330's going to Jetstar will be flown from a new base in Singapore... and not by J* OZ pilots?
They are being based in Sydney with new flights to Hawaii, Thailand and Indonesia.

The Professor
15th Oct 2009, 16:50
Old world legacy carriers in western countries with high labor costs will simply either slash operating costs in order to survive or go out of business. Western airlines were built in a market place devoid of full service competition from Middle Eastern and Asian based airlines and must change.

The dollar savings from trimming labor costs are significant at heritage carriers where there is plenty of fat to trim but a secondary effect that should not be overlooked is that of efficiency and mindset.

QF is a great example where high salaries are combined with outdated work practices. Reducing labor costs will assist the business to regain the “comparative advantage” alluded to by another poster, but this will only achieve so much. The way employees go about the work they do must also change. This is why QF (and AN) sends aircraft overseas for maintenance. Its not the labor cost so much as the “job building” that has been constructed over the past 50 or so years that provides an impediment to the business. The downside of organized labor is that it has priced western countries out of the market. Take a look at the job building that occurs on Australia’s docks. How many manufacturing plants have been built in the US, UK or Australia recently?

The cost of crewing aircraft at QF is unquestionably high. The salary differential between parent and JQ sibling is enormous in labor market norms. But this is not the full story. JQ does not have the inefficiency bought about by seniority. Few low cost or new world carriers have this burden. This is just one example of where labor practices can be as important to cost savings as labor costs.

It’s no coincidence that the cutting edge work practices take place at low cost carriers.

15th Oct 2009, 19:48
QF is a great example where high salaries are combined with outdated work practices
Now Prof...There is no need to talk about upper management and the board like that.....:E

15th Oct 2009, 20:06
Professor, be careful with your generalisations.
Are you comparing the longhaul or shorthaul operations to JQ?
I believe that many 500+ shorthaul crew (~30% of Captains & FO's) would take exception with the following sweeping statement:
But this is not the full story. JQ does not have the inefficiency bought about by seniority Yes, there is a cost differential between the rates of pay, but I suspect there is no difference in efficiency or mindset between QF & JQ shorthaul crew wrt work practices.
Perhaps you have a particular insight I don't, and would care to point out any flaw in my argument.

Captain Marvel
15th Oct 2009, 21:19
Joyce has stated in the paper today the replacing QF with JQ in New Zealand has turned a $30m loss into break even.

As the QF NZ operation was crewed by Jetconnect on salaries, conditions and work practices very similar to JQ, it shows that crew costs are not the holy grail to profitability as the professor seems to think.

More likely the turn around is due to:

1. More fuel efficient aircraft / utilisation
2. Add ons such as food sales
3. reduced overheads - cleaning etc
4. Scale economies such as utilising the Aus management / admin / marketing etc

15th Oct 2009, 22:23
Dear Professor,

With respect to your view:'legacy carriers in western countries with high labour costs will simply either slash operating costs in order to survive or go out of business'I respectfully refer you to Ginger's comment:'the continuing obsession with tightening conditions, costs and remuneration (could be replaced )with a new strategy to reduce aircraft leasing costs by 40%.
Have personally read the engineering analysis provided to a number of legacy airlines and understand that just about all airlines acknowledge that the strategy can reduce aircraft leasing costs by 40%, but would require a collaborate and cooperative approach to overcome constraints contained in:

· Competition legislation
· ICAO bilateral agreements
· Maintenance and operational regulations mandated by Sovereign Aviation Regulators responsible for issuing International Air Operator Certificates

And unless 'the continuing obsession with tightening conditions, costs and remuneration'Ceases!

Any such cooperation isn’t realistically achievable and regretfully thus far, there is scant evidence that senior airline management comprehend what is necessary.


15th Oct 2009, 22:36
In NZ would this turn around also be the same if Jetconnect had their B737-800's earlier, and tweaked their work practices and schedules?

16th Oct 2009, 03:51
The Professor wrote:.

But this is not the full story. JQ does not have the inefficiency bought about by seniority. Few low cost or new world carriers have this burden. This is just one example of where labor practices can be as important to cost savings as labor costs.

JQ does not have the inefficiency bought about by seniority.

Sorry Proffessor I think you will find that the JetStar Contract does have Seniority. There is however a provision for "Hot spot" Commands.
That little bone of contention is getting up the nose of quite a few of the JetStar pilots who are not of the "Blue Shirt Brigade" tribe.
Wouldn't be a concession to that Management Perrogative ideal of paternalism and nepotism ,that allows unscrupulous management room to manoevre as they wish would it?

I ask the question , Professor "Imortant labour cost savings" ,short term
but at what cost ,long term?

Here's a little piece on why Pilot's worldwide fought long and hard to establish these "outdated work practices" as you call them. It's called" lifestyle stability".
Without such niceties as these types of work practices afford, I can't see future generations of Pilots investing so much money, time and effort into what is quickly becoming such a unrewarding career choice.
The more things change, the more they stay the same!


The first pilots union in this country was the Australian Air Pilots Association (AAPA)
It was registered with the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission in 1946, the same year QANTAS became a government entity..
Australian pilots expected that they would enjoy legal and professional recognition as a result .However pilots soon became discontented with arbitrated decisions that were handed down by this body of the Menzies’ Government

This discontent ultimately led to the dissolution and withdrawal of the AAPA from the commission in 1959 and the formation of the Australian Federation of Air pilots (AFAP) based in Melbourne with an overseas branch formed and affiliated in Sydney for the Qantas Pilots.. A new constitution was drafted which allowed for support between the domestic pilots and overseas Qantas pilots, but not necessarily joint strike action. This new association was not a registered Union , consequently it was outside the jurisdiction of the Arbitration Court. This now allowed Australian pilots to challenge a rigid system within a comprehensive framework of compulsory arbitration that had existed in various forms since 1901. It would seem the AFAP had achieved what it wanted, Collective Bargaining. Unfortunately for the pilots, events were to prove otherwise.

Airline Management of the day again employed delaying tactics wherever possible when negotiating with the AFAP. Invarably the Domestic operators would reach agreement with their pilots but Qantas under CEO ,C.O..Turner became more and more intransient. The period between 1961 and 1964 saw legal manoeuvres, threats and counter threats from both sides .Gradually the AFAP gained the upper hand through being outside the legal procedures of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act.
The AFAP succeeded in 1965 in having the Secretary of the Department of Labour and National Services, Henry Bland, introduce a neutral, independent, dispute-settling body.
The” Industrial Relationship Procedures Agreement “,was established, as a form of collective bargaining with mediation procedures in the industrial arena. This new agreement was highly successful and became known as the “Bland Procedure”.

By 1965 the domestic pilots of Ansett-ANA and Trans Australia Airlins (TAA) finally negotiated a bidding style contract into place which included provisions for stability throughout their working life. It is because airline pilots are not in a position to freelance their special skills in the same manner as other professional people that they pushed to define specifically their career expectations through hard contractual terms. Qantas management however opposed any form of collective bargaining methods because they were outside the control of the Arbitration Court and stated that they would face additional pressure from other aircrew unions. Eventually through industrial pressures applied by the overseas branch of the AFAP Qantas reluctantly agreed to an 18 moth trial of the Bland Procedures.
Once again because of, the intransient nature of Qantas management and their “management prerogative” ideology, they reneged on the deal and appeared to purposely fan the flames of conflict, the result being the big strike of 1966. Both sides dug in and a long drawn out industrial dispute resulted. However, through the solidarity of the pilots, Qantas management capitulated with a new offer to negotiate on collective bargaining arrangements based on the North American Bidding Style contract that the domestic arm of the AFAP had negotiated into place nearly two years previously for the Ansett-ANA and TAA pilots.

What did the numberous strikes in the late 50’s and early 60’s achieve? What were the benefits of this North American Bidding System (NABS) and why did the pilots of that era go to such lengths to obtain it? Major benefits to evolve from this period were collective bargaining, comparative wage justice,contractual obligations affecting both parties,orderly career progression for pilots airline expansion and stability due mostly to the North American Bidding System (NABS)
The North American Bidding System ensured contractual conditions for pay that departed from a calendar monthly system. NABS was based on a 56 day bid period which, in turn constituted a 28 day pay cycle and 13 pay periods per year and guaranteed duty free periods between flying duties. Pilots had the ability to bid for suitable holiday periods and promotion, based on seniority. Holidays could be delayed or accumulated. Grievance procedures ensured that a fair hearing would be obtained where a pilot could elect to be represented by a Pilot Liason Captain who was a member of the AFAP. Paternalism and nepotism no longer determined promotional opportunities .It basically created a descriptive contract that unscrupulous management could not manoeuvre around.

16th Oct 2009, 14:20

I find it ironic that you sermon the merits of competitive crewing whilst our former CEO walked away with 10 million dollars for 5 months work.

This not long after he would have bankrupted the airline in a 90%!!!! leveraged buyout with a now defunct Allco. A lazy balance sheet or stupid and shortsighted management?

It was never a good idea to load an airline with that amount of debt, however 100 million does tend to cloud ones judgement.
The "institutional imperative" is what Warren Buffett named it.
Greed nearly led our execs down the same path of destruction that felled Allco, Babcock and Brown and Lehman Brothers.

Do you then expect long term employees on significantly lower salaries to be lectured to on working conditions from those that nearly destroyed their livelihoods?

Since Dixon's expensive departure the share price has doubled.

Time for an end of outdated overpaid executives if you really want to talk efficiencies.

Perhaps we should have a low cost executive team??? What a novel idea. Be hard for staff not to follow that one.

Will be interesting to see the shareholder revolt at the AGM. Mainline lost money but we pay our execs 10 Million. Price fixing??? Dixon took the bonus but not the responsibility. Hypocrisy.

Think it is time you let the JQ and Qantas pilots do the job they have been doing well for so long. Next time your overseas maintained Jet blows a hole in the side of it I bet you will be thanking the crews that may one day ultimately save your life.

A professor of economics you most definitely are not sir. A great fisherman perhaps.

16th Oct 2009, 19:23
Captain Kremin,

That rumour is correct, despite assurances to the contrary there will be "organic" growth based in Asia...The time in the Sun is coming to pass.

For a bunch of executives spruiking the "merits" of so called low cost, they do love their time at the pointy end. If they actually believed any of their oldmeadow inspired and Dixon repeated mantra they would be regularly turning right and heading down the back on J*. The only "cost" being manipulated is the labour.

16th Oct 2009, 22:11
Yes! is well accepted that the APA bid would have bankrupted Qantas by taking it down the same path of destruction that felled Allco, Babcock and Brown and Lehman Brothers.

Nevertheless, Qantas still has to find a way to stump up the cash to purchase its new fleets and right now a number of aviation analysts are becoming increasingly concerned about how an airline that is generating just over $1B in free cash flow is going to do it. (Has to be a good reason why a fund that held on to Qantas shares and didn’t sell them for >$6 after the APA fiasco, is now selling down for <$3 a share- suggests a serious loss of faith in the long run business plan?)

Yes! agree with the view that 'the continuing obsession with tightening conditions, costs and remuneration' is not going to cut it. Also believe that the strategy tabled by Struggling can save both Qantas and its workforce from the fall out generated by cost reduction obsessions, but it will take a major realignment of the relationship between Qantas and its workforce.

Yes! ‘an Employee Buyin can outperform an equivalent Management Buyout by around 20%,’ because of tax concessions offered by governments to encourage employee participation and if the prophets of doom on this website are to be proven wrong, Qantas is going to ditch its 1989 adversarial industrial model, enter into serious collaborative negotiations with all its unions and cut its workforce into the shareholder pie, and the cream execs like Dicko have lapped up.

Obviously the fund selling - doesn’t believe it can/will? :hmm:

16th Oct 2009, 22:52
Maybe the penny has finally dropped at the excessive remuneration end of Qantas.
They've worked out they've given away the ('06/'07 $1billion) golden goose and traded it in on an Orange duck.
The eggs aren't quite as tasty.

Come in spinner
17th Oct 2009, 07:09
that was last weeks news this weeks news says differently I would post my information but next week might be different

my oleo is extended
18th Oct 2009, 07:53
With the present high dollar rate , once the fuel hits around $ 107.00 USD thats when the LCC`s start bleeding and breaking even, anything above that and they hit the red. If it reaches $107.00 thats when Latestar will start scaling back some International services such as Japan (again).
True, but fuel is rising again, closing closer to US$80. Dont know what the benchmark breakeven line is for a LCC and fuel price, but I would assume not much steeper than that.

18th Oct 2009, 08:54

Think you may find Balanced Equity Management bought a fair amount of shares at $1.50 during the last capital Raising.

Agree it will be tough to finance the planned aircraft for Jetstar. Sorry the Qantas Group.

Good call not to pay a dividend methinks.

19th Oct 2009, 01:40
No Oleo u clown. That is when Qanats gets scalled back and Jetstar's tails get painted red.

19th Oct 2009, 10:34
Yes tunedog.One would have to agree that the airline with the lowest costs will bear the brunt of higher fuel prices better than one with higher costs.
Of course that's just raw numbers.The QF - JQ relationship is a tad more complex for many resons none of which are new and will bore the pants off anyone reading anther qf-jq blurb.

The Professor
23rd Oct 2009, 20:56
Blown a gasket,

Your post regarding the history of organized pilot labor in Australia is exactly the problem I am referring to.

The document mentions the year 1946,1959,61…64….65. I am not disputing the validity of this history. But every component of the industry has since changed: customer expectations resulting in reduced service airlines, competition from foreign carriers based in low labor cost regions, transnationalization of capital, removal of the two airline policy.

The game has changed radically and yet your viewpoint about organized labor has not. Like most labor groups, pilots are clinging to a bygone era and are ill prepared to accommodate the changes that are clearly occurring.

As I have said before, will you be a part of change or will you become a victim of it?

25th Oct 2009, 01:14
I'm sorry Professor, but it would appear you patently are oblivious to the facts.
Qantas pilots have long negotiated in good faith and allowed evolutionary changes to their Contract in order to remain competitive with every other International Airline they competed with.

Almost overnight we have the liberal Party in cahoots with big business coming up with WorkChoices.
Why? because big business could see the writing on the wall with regards to ageing populations in the Western world verses the shrinking proportion
of working age people. Simple supply and demand delemma not in their best interests.
Thow into the mix that most big business labour forces are unionised and better able to improve their lot on a collective basis and you have the Answer that was derived in the form of workChoices.

One only has to dig a little deeper to see the correlation between Australian Business Council, Dixon, Qantas and the Liberal Government and I would say no doubt that the little APA deal Dixon had cooking also drove his detirmination to quell any opposition to his pot of gold.

Net result a Management team that had no intention of ever bargaining in good faith because they believed they didn't have to thanks to Workchoices. They believed they could just dictate terms and treat their staff with contempt as a result.
It's funny if one digs even deeper ,how one finds a lot of similarities with that era in the 50's-60's when all that industrial argy bargy happened.

Qantas' then CEO, C.O.Turner ,very much of the same mold as Dixon. Menzies and his little clone Howard, WorkChoices almost reminiscent of the industrial laws of the land during that era .Is it any wonder pilots now are upset as they were back then when so many factors are repeating themselves.

How can someone negotiate in good faith in such a toxic environment as this? A negotiated settlement is all that pilots can hope for.
To boot how can any Industrial Organisation who's charter is "to advance the interests of it's member's and the profession" do so in a revolutionary way that's been bought about due to a quantum change in the industrial laws of the land? That's exactly what was and still is confronting Qantas Mainline Pilots every day thanks to manifold changes instigated by the liberal Party to facilitate the whims of big business and their headlong leap of faith regarding the latest economic concept of the Globalisation and corporatization of the world's economy.
You specifically mention the impact of cheap overseas labour, how will this facet of the Globalised World Economy cope when Cheap fuel runs out?
The Globalised Market concept relys on cheap fuel to facilitate a globalised integrated economy.

Let me ask Professor , just how much change would you be willing to accept if your livelyhood was threatened by influences beyond your immediate control.
The problem is not an unwillingness to accept change. AIPA has proven it's bona fides in this area time and time again. The Question revolves around the management of peoples expectations. A very tricky thing to do when the very people you are dealing with are one step up from snake oil merchants.

25th Oct 2009, 10:33
Single seat layout all economy getting more punters per flight If the 738s were single layout they would have 174 seats so hardly a compelling argument
Higher crew productivity ( and very simple training pipeline) due single type
Simplified work rules allowing higher overall labour productivity The short haul award is one of the most efficient awards going around

Shorter turn times and much higher aircraft utilization Based on what information? Where is it written?

Handling innovations such as the power push back with a single person Virgin were the innovators

“B” scale labour rules without union interference Just drivel

Use of second-tier airports Avalon and Maroochy yes, but every other port Jetstar go to they use aerobridges and often at the expense of mainline

I could go on, but you should stop quoting from the "how to run an airline" book because it the same spin that makes you really think you made over $100million ths year :cool:

stubby jumbo
26th Oct 2009, 01:58
'just had the "pleasure" of flying JQ to DPS return as we had a wedding up there. We went commercial as -Staff Travel ain't worth the stress to Bali !:{

Anyway, on the way up -flight was delayed 3 hours ( "late arrival on incoming service") Oh yeah - I can deal with that.....it happens .
On board-packed in like Clams. Service ...or lack of- didn't appear for 1.5 hours due to a crew illness on board. OK-it happens. I can deal with that as well. So arrived 2.5 hours late. No apology-nothing.

Coming back..............'another delay. Guess what-due to late arrival on inbound Aircraft. This time only 1.5 hours. Service on the way back-woeful:rolleyes:

Before the JQ apologists say " you get what you pay for". I don't think its that cheap! We went commercial about 4 years back on QF for the same fare.
I refuse to fly Garuda and DJ were full.

I'm not advocating a return to DPS by QF.I do understand its a leisure port etc etc. BUT- don't bang on about being #1 and happy and aren't we great when all I ever experience is mediocity .

Anyway -rant over. Who at the QCA bunker will give a rats rissole?. We don't do feedback at Jetstar. Its "take it or leave it!"

Bring back Compass Mark 3 :E

26th Oct 2009, 03:34
blow.n gasket
Qantas pilots have long negotiated in good faith and allowed evolutionary changes to their Contract in order to remain competitive with every other International Airline they competed with.

What planet are you on.Name one carrier in 2009 that has a 655+ EBA.
Name one carrier that QF pilots are cost competitive with[except JAL which just lost another billion.
The Proffessor is right.Join the rest of the world or become more of a victim than you are now.
Joyce's article stated that QF will reduce by 5% and Jetstar will increase by 24%.You guys call this a win.I would like to know your definition of a loss.:ugh:

26th Oct 2009, 04:53
Jetsworst what is a 655+EBA????
If you are refering to the number of pages in said contract then you had better re-read the piece I wrote before.
The reason the contract is so long is because it is a descriptive contract that has been written and rewritten in order to protect pilots because of intransient and sometimes unscrupulous management types not working to the spirit said contract was written.That after all is the purpous of industrial organisations, to look after their members and improve their members lot in life. Yes as you so rightly point out a contract that evolved from previous times and until recently was competitive, but alas no longer thanks to the new LCC concept . However there has been a seismic shift in the airline scene thanks to Management scrambling to reinvent the Airline model so as to remain workable going forward into uncertain times.As has been discussed at length on other forums the one area management have some cost controls over are pay and conditions of it's workforce.Let's see what evolutionary change occurs with the Jetstar award as we move forward and pilot's wants and desires evolve as well. Do you really mean to tell me that there has been no improvement with your EBA since inception?

Before you come off so smug I'd suggest you have a look at the number of
Jetstar pilots who are approaching and joining AIPA (over60%) who are sick and tired of being sick and tired of similar Management antics that led to Pilots back in the 60's saying enough is enough.I bet you pounds to peanuts that there would be plenty of Jetstar pilots out there would dearly love a more descriptive contract to protect their lifestyle from overzealous management types! One only has to look at the number of grievences that Jetstar pilots are pursuing to see that not all is rosey in your little low wage nirvana. As I've pointed out time and time again people are naturally adverse to change. It's human nature. The only reason Jetstar managed such a cost difference with their contract was thanks to changes in Legislature that allowed them to take advantage of conditions at the time. I'd dare you to accept a 20-30% pay cut without warning when you find out all your future flying is shipped off-shore because of up coming Legislative change. .Do you really think you're going to get to fly a 787? Do you really think they're going to be based in Australia? Let's see who the victims are then sunshine, when everyone is in the same leaky boat!

Have a look at some of the contracts going at the moment ,Qantas doesn't look too bad in comparison.
No The Qantas Contract is no longer as competitive as the Jetstar contract thanks to a change of Laws that allowed such a dilution of conditions to occur.
Unfortunately as I've said previously a change from present Qantas conditions to be more competitive with the Jetstar contract is a revolutionary change whereas most people need evolutionary change in order to get their heads around that need for change as markets evolve and those market forces change, sometimes quicker than most people can accept.
You do seem to like comparing the cost difference between Jetstar and Qantas as a badge of honour, fair enough.
Don't forget ,the only reason Jetstar exists is because of changes to the Corporations Act that allowed "Green Field" entities to sprout.
Do you really think that when push comes to shove, which I'm sure it will, that Qantas Pilots when confronted with a take it or leave it choice, they won't take the opportunity ?
Then when there is no cost difference who's going to win? If you call that a win!
Until the fat lady sings though I can't see any problem doing as Geoff Dixon said : "You get what you bargain for!"

26th Oct 2009, 09:12
that "Jetbest", who joined PPRUNE on 10Dec07, is NOT "Jetsbest", who joined on 08Jun00, and whose opinions differ greatly. :suspect:

Mods; is there any remedy to this all-too-similarly named late arrival? :hmm:

27th Oct 2009, 08:29
please answer the question, not call people silly names. As i said please name one company[Just 1] that you claim you are cost competive with. As for court cases, you guys with your contract [with all its bells and whistles] have run up a fairly large legal bill !!!
Jetsbest,maybe it was some kind of Karma that you chose your callsign back before Jetstar started!!! It might be time to jump ship and see how the rest of the world operate:ok:

27th Oct 2009, 08:51

I look forward to hearing you whinge when the Jetstar 330's are operated out of Singapore with Jetstar Asia or similar crew, and the 787's are crewed out of Hochiminh.

27th Oct 2009, 10:35
Had a look at the Cathay contract lately?
Had a look at the numberous contracts going in China of late?
Had a look at the Emirates contract of late?

Flight Deck Opportunities- First Officers

Job Reference: FO/SN/13423
Department: Flight Deck Crew
Company: Emirates Airlinehttp://ekgrpapplications.emirates.com/CareersOnlineApps/images/icon-bullet.gif
Location: Dubai, United Arab Emirates

The Emirates Group comprises of Dnata, the successful Airport Ground Services and Travel Industry division, and Emirates, the Group's rapidly expanding and award winning international Airline. At Emirates, our fleet growth matches our vision.

As a global airline we operate the latest Airbus A340, A330, A380 and Boeing 777 aircraft, serving all five continents and flying to over 100 destinations around the world. In addition we have over US$60 billion of new aircraft on order, which will take the Emirates fleet from our current 138 to 200 by 2012 and to around 300 by 2016.

To operate our expanding fleet we are now recruiting for the best pilots globally to work within our multi-cultural team of over 150 nationalities. Besides career growth, Dubai is a tourism centre and modern cosmopolitan city with high standards of healthcare, education and leisure pursuits for residents. It also is one of the most desirable lifestyle locations in the world for families and individuals.

The Position: We offer technically proficient First Officers challenging career opportunities, which include world-class training, the chance to fly an extensive international route network and good prospects for upgrade to Captain.

Salary & Benefits: For information on our recently updated terms and conditions for Flight Crew positions, please visit www.emiratesgroupcareers.com (http://www.emiratesgroupcareers.com/). Our website also has a wealth of information on the airline, employee benefits and living in Dubai.

Requirements: For the position of First Officer (prior to joining):

A minimum of 4,000 hours total flying time.
A minimum of 2,000 hours flown in multi-crew, multi-engine jet aircraft. Preference will be given to pilots with > 2000 hours on medium to heavy sized jets.
Applicants must hold a current ICAO ATPL.
English language fluency is essential (minimum to ICAO ELP Level4).
All applicants must be current within the last 12 months prior to the date of joining.To Apply: To express your interest in a flying career with Emirates, please apply on-line by clicking below, and complete our application form. Our Flight Operations Recruitment team will review your application and make contact with you should there be interest in further evaluating your application. Thank you for your interest in a career with Emirates Airline and Group.

http://ekgrpapplications.emirates.com/CareersOnlineApps/images/btn-applay.gif (http://ekgrpapplications.emirates.com/CareersOnlineApps/JOB_VACANCIES/JobDetails.aspx?from=ADV&advno=3BF10CD1BD5A883B)

Air China Cargo (China) Minimum Qualifications / Hours:üValid ICAO ATPL (no limitations on B744)üB747-400 PIC type ratingüTotal time: Minimum 5,000 hoursüTotal B744 PIC time: Minimum 500 hoursüHave flown B744 within 6 months, the last Proficiency Test is still within the term of validityüAt least 1 year experience flying international routes as PIC and minimum 500 flight hoursüAge under 56 years old at start of contractüICAO English level 4 or above or English Proficiency endorsementKey benefits:Payment: US$13,200* net per month; *note: a. ground & flight training period - first 4 weeks US$6,000 netb. route flight under supervision - second 4 weeks US$9,600 netc. from 3rd month onwards, work as a junior captain US$12,000 net/per monthd. from upgrading to PIC, US$13,200 net per month

Yangtze River Express (China)B744 CaptainsMinimum requirements:

Total time: Minimum of 5,000 hours
Total B747-400 PIC time: Minimum of 500 hours
Have flown B747-400 & have Sim Check within the last 6 months
Current license and B747-400 type rating.
Age under 56 years at start of contract (may be negotiable). B744 First OfficersMinimum requirements:

Total time: Minimum of 3,000 hours
Total B747-400 FO time: Minimum of 500 hours
Have flown B747-400 & have Sim Check within the last 6 months
Current license and B747-400 type rating.
Age under 56 years at start of contract (may be negotiable). Please find attached the Yangtze River Express brief. If you are interested in applying for this contract please contact [email protected] ([email protected]) for further information.

That's a good start, should keep you going for awhile.:eek:
Don't believe everything Jetstar management tells you Jetsbest!
Life must be just peachy in your low wage nirvana!:ooh:
As the slogan should say, "ALL DAY, EVERY DAY ,LOW PAY"
What a great future, 'suppose that's progress for you!:{

FFG 02
28th Oct 2009, 09:45
Apologies as it is a bit of a thread drift but with regards the above listed jobs;

I had often thought of Emirates or Etihad as somethign to aspire too...just had a look at the posts in the Middle East Forums.

Holy cow doesn't seem like a nice place to be at all!

29th Oct 2009, 02:09
Hi All,

Anyone got any info about flight crew terms and conditions for Jetstar International with the new asian base.

Not sure if it will be in Singapore, KL or Ho Chi Minh.

The Qantas group own two holding companies called Orangestar and Newstar holdings.

Talk is that a pilot base with different contracts will be established in Asia to fly the A330-200's then the 787's.

Not great for the JQ guys and gals on Aus agreements but it will lower the cost base not having to overnight crews in Asia en-route to southern Europe.

It would be sad if it happened but look at JQ NZ compared to JQ AUS.

Metro man
29th Oct 2009, 07:48
In future there are likely to be two kinds of airlines;

1. Low costs operating on thin margins with low fares and minimal service.
2. Premium carriers catering to those prepared to pay more and located in places where those people can be found in sufficient numbers to make it viable.

Australia is a relatively small market located at the end of the line. Unlike Dubai, Singapore, Hong Kong, Bangkok, Abu Dhabi and increasingly Qatar it's not a natural hub and doesn't have access to cheap labour. Airlines located in these places can target the premium traffic between most points in the world. Cathay can target Paris - Sydney via Hong Kong, Emirates can target India - New York via Dubai, Singapore Airlines can target Johannesburg - Bali via Singapore.

Labour laws in the above mention places don't exactly favour the employee. If EK want to hire Thai flight attendents at half price of European ones there's nothing to stop them.

These carriers are either relatively new and not carrying the baggage of how things used to be done (EK/EY) or efficiently run anyway (CX/SQ).

If QF can support its overheads and still be profitable then fair enough. Unfortunately it may be too expensive for the bongans when compared to a lean low cost operating from a portacabin in the car park and not good enough for the higher end when compared to CX or SQ.

The fancy offices, mega $$$ executive pay, high staff costs and unionised working practices contributed significantly to Ansetts downfall. Everyone at QF needs to be realistic about what it can deliver for them with the competition it faces, otherwise it may end up with a General Motors style bail out and restructuring.

Dropt McGutz
29th Oct 2009, 08:28
I do believe that government policy in the form of open skies and the taxation treatment of Qantas isn't exactly favourable either.

11th Nov 2009, 18:57
This is just the beginning Jetstar people..

All "growth" will be offshore..
The quick command seen as the panacea of the Jetstar pilot is fast drying up...

Jetstar Asia applies for Singapore-Tokyo Haneda rights (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/11/11/334665/jetstar-asia-applies-for-singapore-tokyo-haneda-rights.html)

11th Nov 2009, 19:33
Which would explain why (hypocrites that they are) JQ pilots are joining AIPA now in droves.

Having successfully $hit on the rest of the industry they now want a union to come and bail them out of their own mess !

Rick Heaton where are you now ??????????


11th Nov 2009, 21:05
Rick Heaton where are you now ??????????

Last seen joining the boys club and becoming a C&T Capt, as reward for 'smoothing things over with the boys'...

Nice one! :ugh:

Will be interesting to see if the JQ boys 'defend their flying' in any way whatsoever. It wouldn't seem right if they did! After all, they have priced themselves out of further expansion with 'years of inefficiency and their overcomplicated contract'.

If you chisel the crack yourself, don't be surprised when you fall into it!

11th Nov 2009, 21:26

Its actually AIPA thats chasing JQ membership. Not a hard job considering Buchanan has been a big help.

Maybe they have more foresight than you, where it might just be better to work with them rather than face having to compete with them.

Which do you think Joyce/Buchanan would prefer?

Capt Kremin
11th Nov 2009, 22:20
AIPA is being pragmatic here. Jetstar isn't going to go away so they can either fight the Jetstar/AFAP or work with them as members.
Mainline pilot who wish Jetstar would dissolve in a puff of smoke should check themselves into Hotel Reality.

11th Nov 2009, 23:22

No one, for a minute believes that JQ will disappear. For the good of the group, it has to exist domestically! Internationally however, the case still needs to be proven.

The irony of this whole situation does not lie in the existence of JQ, but the situation that developed when JQ drivers undercut the industry, and now those very JQ drivers will be undercut themselves.

A shame for anyone involved in this once fine industry...

12th Nov 2009, 01:26
It’s time to ‘bloke up’ and act like the professionals we often claim to be. It’s no use stroking on about who did what to whom. We need to look forward rather than dwelling on a past that is now effectively irrelevant if we want to maintain decent, long term conditions for any of us here at home. You don’t have to particularly like the Captain/FO you’re flying with to get the job done properly. Treat this the same if you need to. GET OVER IT!

Capt Kremin
12th Nov 2009, 03:18
Hmmmm, maybe its not going to be as easy as J* think!

From Crikey:

by Ben Sandilands (http://www.crikey.com.au/author/bensandilands/)
Jetstar’s ambitions to fly wide-bodied Airbus A332s twice daily between Singapore and Tokyo’s Haneda airport were shafted this morning by the sudden granting of the requested capacity to Singapore Airlines.

The battle of the low-cost trans-border franchises of Singapore Airlines-controlled Tiger and Qantas-directed Jetstar Asia based in Singapore is definitely turning nasty.

Until this morning Jetstar Asia seemed optimistic that Singapore’s Air Traffic Rights Commission would grant it twice daily flights on the route with new jets Qantas will take delivery of next October.

It was to have been a strong move by Jetstar to expand its Changi operations through Jetstar Asia into destinations such as Tokyo, which are too far from Singapore to be served by single aisle A320s.

However, Singapore Airlines, which controls Tiger Airways and that is under severe pressure from Jetstar Asia, will fly the route twice daily from next October instead.

The Tokyo-Haneda route was to have been the first material development in the Qantas strategy of creating a large offshore base for Jetstar’s long-haul international services.

Qantas is serious about shifting some of its planned expansion of low-fare, long-haul flights by the Jetstar brand on the kangaroo routes to Europe to lower cost centres.

Jetstar Asia in Singapore is the front runner for this, especially given the ideological challenges (http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/11/11/jetstar-creates-a-jet-stir-in-vietnam/) to the continued operation of its Hanoi-based Jetstar Pacific franchise.

However, the Jetstar plan clearly threatened the interests of Singapore Airlines and its insistence until now that Tiger would confine itself to single aisle, shorter range A320s.

The problem is that A320s are useless for low-cost flights as far from Singapore as Seoul or Shanghai or Dubai or Abu Dhabi, all cities with untapped potential for a low-cost Singapore-flagged carrier such as J

Jetstar Asia, which is 51% locally owned by Westbrook Investments.
By showing its hand on its wide-body ambitions Jetstar Asia also follows the other Tiger rival, Air Asia, in moving to a two-type fleet allowing it to operate long-haul routes as well as shorter regional Asian routes.

12th Nov 2009, 04:07
awesome. Love it when the SQ people play dirty, just shows how amateurish buchanan and dal pra really are.

Good luck with the QF board bruce. Bang.

13th Nov 2009, 00:50
Thats awesome news - good to see that another opportunity for Australian pilots to undercut each other in a 'heroic' fashion has been body slammed by Singapore Inc.

The QF board wont call Buchannan to account though. It is a pillar of QF group corporate culture that when something goes right it is because of the execs, but when something goes wrong its not their fault and they are never held accountable or to blame.

13th Nov 2009, 21:10
There were a number of airlines applying for these slots, not just JQ and SQ.

Am I reading this correctly - some QF group pilots would rather see SQ gain capacity than JQ?

13th Nov 2009, 23:02
See post #82 above :ugh:

Muff Hunter
14th Nov 2009, 05:42
long john,

i think the point is here that we all would like to see the flying given to aus based pilots, rather than further lowering our t&c's with cheap overseas labour buy your mates in HQ!

jq/qf management are determined to drive our profession into the ground, so when they are prevented from doing this i think we all enjoy it...