Qantas pilots going on strike?

[Langkasuka]

Qantas pilots to take industrial action


1:26 PM Tuesday Jul 19, 2011




Qantas long-haul pilots will take industrial action from Friday, the airline says.
The Australian and International Pilots Association (AIPA) was due to announce its action plans at 11am (2pm NZT).
But Qantas said it had already been told there would be work bans.
"Qantas is assessing the implications of the work bans and will write to the pilots' union to seek clarification," it said in a statement on Tuesday.
"At this stage, we don't expect any flight delays or cancellations."
- AAP

[jandakotcruiser]

Jolly good show! Waiting since '89 to see some " action "...pilots ain't yellow bellied anymore!

[Slasher]

Best of luck to all the QF blokes. Despite my fatalistic opinion
on the matter, I nonetheless hope they do succeed and make
some gains. At least they don't have a fat turd's cigar smoke
permeating the halls of DOT this time (or CASA as its known
now).

[autoflight]

Hope someone told these dudes the most effective way to immediately increase pay and get the airline's attention is working to rules. Just a little bit more than normal would do the trick. A bit more fuel, a few less visual approaches, more time at turbulence penetration speed when it is forecast. Some management pilots and others may not like to participate. No problem! Their incoming aircraft will be late, curfews and duty times plus technical write-ups that could sometimes be verbal, will affect the next flight. Participants will possibly not be requesting shortcuts or pushing so hard for a better level. Finally aircraft will be running so late it will be impossible to recover the lost time. There might be a tiny problem with connections. Everyone will still get paid. Turbo Tie will be so happy he is not running the show.

Most of the 1,600 1989ers probably wish work to rules had been the way to go then.

[kaikohe76]

I have no connection with Qantas or Australian aviation whatsoever.

All I would say on the matter is, remember 1989/90, did this really result in better conditions etc for Aussie Pilots?

I would suggest, that many workers in many other professions would be only too happy to receive the present pay & conditions of the QANTAS Pilots.

This action can & will all end in tears folks & I am rather sure for whom as well.

Stay safe.

[Kalistan]

Good luck and all the best to them! However is this prudent? See this :


Qantas: This is your striking pilot speaking
July 20, 2011, 10:25 amYahoo! New Zealand
Qantas passengers will be greeted by a different kind of in-flight message on Friday as pilots make their point in an ongoing industrial dispute.


http://l.yimg.com/ea/img/-/110720/qantasplane257_172c82u-172c830.jpg?x=120&sig=mqZ6tsqMJTeaxCUdYfHKUQ-- (http://l.yimg.com/ea/img/-/110720/qantasplane257_172c82u-172c830.jpg)
Qantas passengers will be greeted by a different kind of in-flight message on Friday as pilots make their point in an ongoing industrial dispute.
The Australian and International Pilots Association announced yesterday it would make "unauthorised in-flight announcements" on long-haul flights.
AIPA spokesman Nathan Safe says the industrial action will be focused on raising public awareness and will not disrupt passengers.
"We know that the biggest wake-up call we can send the current management team is to blow the whistle on their plans to strip a proud Australian icon down to its bare bones and shift operations to Asia," he said.
"When Australians board a Qantas flight, they expect a Qantas pilot at the controls."
Safe says the messages will be "brief and positive".
Qantas has released a statement saying it is "disappointed that the pilots' union would intentionally disturb customers' in-flight experience to make a point during an industrial dispute".
The airline does not expect any flight delays or cancellations.
The statement says the union is trying to force the company to pay all its subsidiary pilots, including Jetstar, the same rates as Qantas pilots.
"The union is also demanding pay increases and free flights on top of already heavily discounted airfares. The claim, if it were ever conceded, would drive up airfares, cost jobs and make Qantas airlines and routes unprofitable."

[Tankengine]

For those who don't know the history, Qantas was not involved in the 1989 Australian domestic pilot's dispute [although many individuals now in Qantas were]
The last time pilots in Qantas were in dispute was the 1966 pilot's strike which set up the current base agreement.:ok:
We are not in dispute now over pay and conditions but over a "scope" clause.

ie: Qantas aircraft = Qantas pilot :D

[Shaman]

ie: Qantas aircraft = Qantas pilot
Perfectly reasonable. Good luck chaps.

[autoflight]

The PA announcement idea is incredibly stupid. QF will dismiss each offender, rapidly resulting in QF control of progress. See my safe procedure on this thread. I have actually done it both ways. Working to rules quickly had the best possible outcomes. Identifiable breeches of contract or company procedures had the worst possible outcomes.

[Handbrake]

Autoflight maybe the rules have changed since you took action. The PA's have been approved by FWA and the Company cannot intervene.

[parabellum]

I would suggest, that many workers in many other professions would be only too happy to receive the present pay & conditions of the QANTAS Pilots.



Well of course they bloody would Kaikohe76, just one small point, are they suitably qualified and experienced? No? Thought not.:rolleyes:

[3 Holer]

All I would say on the matter is, remember 1989/90, did this really result in better conditions etc for Aussie Pilots?


'89 was never about "conditions". That was a straight out pay dispute. After the dust settled, Australian domestic and foreign pilots were being paid nearly double the original pay claim. :E

[autoflight]

I am a long time pprune poster and have the interests of pilots in mind.

It is drawing a very long bow to assume that an FWA ruling is comprehensive enough to withstand scruitiny re industrial type PAs. QF can dismiss the concerned pilots summarily and they then have to fight for their jobs. If the union encouraged the PAs and the result is unfavourable, the union is in trouble also.

My opinion is that QF will be satisfied with what they can achieve. Outcome for pilots can be disasterous when it is not necessary to take this risk. Just like in 1989, union executive are getting the support of members. Executive led industrial choices need to be much safer for members.

QF most fears subtle work to rules. Those that refuse to consider this excellent possibility are digging a deep hole. No QF pilot deliberatley flys into a Cb, accepts a high sink rate on final, accepts an obvious unservicable aircraft, fronts up for sim without previewing the planned exercises, or acts impulsively landing at high speed half way down a wet runway. When these things are accepted, there can be difficulties as we all know.

So when it comes to industrial matters, they do not apply the general principles of safe flight operation learnt over decades. Beats me why QF pilots decide to engage in risky behaviour that has a better chance of benefitting management

Unbelievable! No excuse for risky action. Like there is no other choice?

In 1989 our executive refused to consider work to rules.. Only God knows why. Don't let your executive lead you down that same path.

[3 Holer]

autoflight are you seriously suggesting ......... deliberatley flys into a Cb, accepts a high sink rate on final, accepts an obvious unservicable aircraft, fronts up for sim without previewing the planned exercises, or acts impulsively landing at high speed half way down a wet runway. are the norm for aircrew not working to rule? :confused:

[autoflight]

We don't deliberately do those things, so why do stupid industrial acts. RTFQ

[Max Tow]

The union ad's message is "When you board a Qantas flight..you expect a Qantas pilot". As far as I'm aware, the only QF prefixed flights that one would board without a Qantas pilot are the codeshares (op by BA etc) and franchises (such as the domestic B717 ops), and I'm not aware that these are meant to be the target of any protest? Jetstar flights on aircraft owned by the Qantas group don't use QF prefixes except for a few codeshares. I assume the in-flight announcements referring to "Qantas aircraft...Qantas pilot" convey what is really meant, but the lack of precision won't help to get the message across to a public who might not consider Jetstar flights to be Qantas flights.

[fireflybob]

Recall in the 1960s that BOAC pilots had a "restriction of cooperation" - a/c not accepted for service with any defects at all (even if ok in MEL), no discretion to FTL, full instrument approach everywhere (ie no visuals), etc.

ok they did eventually go on strike (I think the first pilot's strike ever) but their actions in "working to rule" certainly had an effect!

BOAC Pilots Strike (http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1968/jun/17/boac-pilots-strike)

[kiwi grey]

Max,

A QF-labelled flight in a 737 series aircraft between Australia and NZ is almost certainly going to be "QANTAS operated by JetConnect", in a ZK-registered aircarft with Kiwi flight crew and Kiwi cabin crew paid Kiwi wages - up to 40% lower than Australian ones. The aircraft has the QANTAS kangaroo, the big writing on the fuselage is "QANTAS", and the crew uniforms are identical to QANTAS ones. JetConnect is a shell company 100% owned by QANTAS, it doesn't even have NZ bank accounts, the crew are paid from the QANTAS bank account in Australia (in NZ dollars, of course). QANTAS management are so impressed with the "success" of this concept that they are planning to do the same with a Singapore-based subsidiary. :{

Perhaps now you can begin to understand why the QANTAS pilots are getting so grumpy?

No, I'm not a pilot, just SLF - Kiwi SLF at that, but JetConnect stinks from the ethical point of view. Not that QANTAS' management would recognise that as a consideration.

[Lookleft]

If the PAs that the pilots were making were one millimetre outside what was legal under the current industrial rules then QF would not be saying they are disappointed they would be saying that the pilots will be disciplined. This is a very different dispute to 89 so don't try and draw parallels. AIPA is well aware what is legal and what is not. They have also been clear on what is not industrial action. Turning up to work at sign-on, having a thorough understanding of the weather and notams and ensuring that every aspect of an MEL is understood before commencing pushback are just some of the aspects of the job that are not work to rule but legally required. If that results in a late departure its not industrial action but simply doing the job in the time made available.

[Max Tow]

Kiwi Grey
Yes, I'm aware of that. My point (perhaps in the light of the recent BA Cabin staff fiasco) was more to do with the effectiveness of the current campaign in winning the hearts & minds of the public, since that is where these initial in-flight announcements & advertising seem directed.
I'd suggest that the travelling public is already thoroughly confused by codeshares, franchises etc (yet haven't revolted against them) and that whilst most people don't much like outsourcing, their employers almost all practise it, and as consumers they like low prices and so in the end don't much care if their Holden car or their Bonds underwear is made in China. I'd suggest that the image of an aircraft as described by you as operated by "Kiwi flight crew and Kiwi cabin crew paid Kiwi wages" isn't going to strike terror into the minds of those down the back, particularly if those wages aren't much different from those of Air NZ.

The public (and hopefully the regulators upon whom they rely) would of course have a massive interest if a link could be established between outsourcing,low costs and low safety standards, however to convey that message obviously involves just a few difficulties. As mentioned, my observations have nothing to do with the rights & wrongs of the case, merely the public campaign - I guess the pilots can draw some comfort from QF's recent poor PR performance on various issues!

[tightcircuit]

Kiwi Grey,

That sort of arrangement has been common in the UK for many years. There are a lot of pilots around wearing BA uniforms and flying a/c in BA livery who are not on BA mainline terms and conditions. It's not a recent thing either, its been happening for a very long time.

3 Holer,

The pay of Aussie pilots may have increased significantly in the years subsequent to the 89 dispute but the Aus domestic pilot workforce had been devastated. As I remember it there were hundreds of pilots, forever bitter, who had to to roam the world seeking work. Many spent years away.

Strike action really is an act of desparation and rarely works well for the workforce.

TC

[ShockWave]

There is only one main similarity between the 89 dispute and the current situation, and that is the fact that both pilot groups were/are being forced into taking action by the companies involved. They are being "played" and maneuvered into this, they have very little option and yes it is going to be fraught with danger.

Sticking purely to work to rule will only bolster the little Irishman's claim that QF is nothing but a drain on the group share holders profits. It is all about profits and his salary, Pilots salaries and conditions only have a tiny fractional impact on an airfare.

This dispute should have every Australian working person very concerned.
Forget about the misrepresented press reports, about what you may think pilots get paid and what great conditions they have, it is irrelevant unless you fully understand the profession, including the stresses, risks, and work involved.
Simply put this in context with your current job, what ever that may be.
Your employer comes to you and says he is not making enough money because you are to expensive, he has plans to employ a bunch of Indonesians to do your job. It has been approved by the government because there will be direct cost savings to all Australians who use or buy his products.
Out of the goodness of his heart, he now promises to let you stay on and continue working for him, but you will have to accept the new Indonesian terms and conditions of employment!

What can you do? and how do you feel about this now? Your employer also has almost unlimited resources and media access to make you look like the bad guy when you complain.

Good luck and be smart guys. :ugh:

[4PW's]

Shockwave has it in a nutshell.

Sadly, it's a no-win situation.

I guess the 94% or so of Qantas' pilots have decided they must fight.

There is no alternative.

Work to rule?

Maybe.

I wish you were right, but that's moot.

Qantas' union have decided.

Good luck, colleagues.

[need a job]

The pilots, engineers, cabin crew and even the warehouse people will all lose their jobs by "off shoring"; the Qantas employees have nothing to lose anymore as their jobs will be gone eventually.
Fight the fight and come out victorious.
The dreadfull alternative is to take the airline down with you.
After all joyce did call you kamikaze's.
good luck and god speed.

[1a sound asleep]

I tell you it's scary. For those that dont know about 1989 take a read 1989 Australian pilots' dispute - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Australian_pilots'_dispute)

The entire Australian domestic airline industry ground to a halt. The Government was using military planes for domestic airlines. They brought in USA pilots and US registered planes. Many pilots never flew again.

Nobody ever conceived that would happen. The union says this is different. Last time was a labour Government, so is the current one.

I am personally scared that the little Irish **** running Qantas will happily ground the Qantas fleet, keep Jetstar running and then take back those that grovel.

Some have mortgages, ex-wives, kids and bills to pay. The whole fiasco could be a loss either way