Qantas and the 787-900

[Tony the Tiler]

New grist for the mill. In news just in, Qantas have finally admitted / committed to the orders for the 787-900. For those who watch such things, it was never in doubt as they effectively stole them from Boeing. I mean, it would have been a crime to let the orders go.

Actually, there would be serious grounds to punish the executive team for dereliction of fiduciary duty if the options were let go. But alas, the little Irishman and his team will escape the gaoler in the nick of time. Q1 FY2016 in the parlance of the shinybums, or July this year for mere mortals, is the signing ceremony. Hugs and handshakes all around for the ‘leadership’ team as they tell anyone who’ll listen that they have performed an amazing acrobatic trick and turned international around. With such mastery of the aerial arts, they should be in a circus.

Anyhow, now the spectacle begins. Who is going to fly the 787 and on what contract? Jetstar have set the bar (well more of a tripping hazard) and now AIPA are in deep negotiations to “secure our future.”

One wonders what leverage they have to consummate the marriage. Long haul award and 787, a match made in heaven.

[Mstr Caution]

What's to say an in principle deal hasn't already been done.

Qantas aren't prepared to announce a new type without knowing who was flying the aircraft & at what rate.

From what I've heard the Long Haul award wasn't the sticking point, just some of the ad ons.

[maggotdriver]

In news just in, Qantas have finally admitted / committed to the orders for the 787-900.

Hey, Tony the tiler, from where are you getting this info or is it PPRune at its best?

[Ollie Onion]

Well, the peeps around Jetstar head office have been saying for about 2 years that when the 787-900 comes then Jetstar will be swapping out a few of the 787-800's for the 900's to enable more long routes. So I expect that the first few will go to Jetstar.

[Iron Bar]

Well, the "peeps" around Jetstar head office have all just been sacked or left. Might need to check with the new "peeps".

[Ollie Onion]

We'll see.

[TBM-Legend]

So what is a 787-900?

I can only find the 787-9...

[ghyde]

Boeing is buying some of the recently retired QF B767's.

Maybe this is sweetening the deal for an upcoming Boeing announcement.

[captwawa]

Got a link showing that ghyde?

[Keg]

Well, the peeps around Jetstar head office have been saying for about 2 years that when the 787-900 comes then Jetstar will be swapping out a few of the 787-800's for the 900's to enable more long routes. So I expect that the first few will go to Jetstar.


That was the original plan from back in 2008 or so. By my reckoning there's been at least 312+ new plans since then! :ok:

Dr Dolittle. Yes, until he was announced as the new CEO for QF international. Then it all made sense.

[Kiwiconehead]

The man from #42 is CFO of Qantas International, wouldn't he being signing the cheques for 787s?

[ghyde]

OGJ was purchased by Boeing on 23/01/2015 and the registration has changed to N324BC

[QFBUSBOY]

http://www.smh.com.au/business/aviation/qantas-poised-to-record-1-billion-profit-ubs-20150128-12zr24.html"]http://www.smh.com.au/business/aviation/qantas-poised-to-record-1-billion-profit-ubs-20150128-12zr24.html]Qantas poised to record $1 billion profit: UBS (http://www.smh.com.au/business/aviation/qantas-poised-to-record-1-billion-profit-ubs-20150128-12zr24.html")

Who said Qantas Engineering was dead?

The only problem is that the best Engineers work on the board, and not in the hangar.

What a remarkable turnaround :hmm:

[TWT]

This link works better:

Qantas poised to record $1 billion profit: UBS (http://www.smh.com.au/business/aviation/qantas-poised-to-record-1-billion-profit-ubs-20150128-12zr24.html)

[-438]

You'd have to wonder how large the profit could be if QF hadn't sunk large volumes of cash into -

Various Jetstar entities
Red Q
Locking out employees/customers
Buying then parking A320's for months on end then on selling those airframes to Chinese carriers at discounted prices
etc etc over a period of years

And instead, invested those large sums of money into modern fuel efficient fleet renewal for the mothership.

[captwawa]

Very true but unfortunately -438 we are not the smartest men in the room. If only they read this. However I'm sure they know.

[Beer Baron]

Regarding the 767's registered to Boeing; if I recall correctly the 76's that Qantas sold to West Jet in Canada were being sold through Boeing so that may account for the rego change. Can't be sure though.

[FFRATS]

If theses 787-9 orders for QANTAS are confirmed the question is-

'Has Jetstar International lost its backing from the board?'

The plan for years was 1x787-9 goes to JQ, 1 used 787-8 goes to mainline.

Last year a few 787-8 ordered were cancelled for JQInt and no talk about when 787-9 coming to replace their current aircraft. Only talk about, if QF Int returns to profit new orders will be looked at.

I guess if the same rule was applied to JQ Int it could have been applied last year? Just not announced to the public like every QF profit target :rolleyes:

FFRATS

[toolish]

I think you will find the 3 jetstar 787 deferred not cancelled.
Just because Qantas orders them doesn't mean the are all going to have a red tail.

[mrhooker]

Qantas doesn't need 787's (330 size). It needs a 747 replacement.

[SixDemonBag]

I think you'll find that they need both (an A330 and a 747 replacement). Aren't some of the 330's facing cycle limitations?

[TBM-Legend]

QF has a 747 replacement. It is called the A380...

On another topic, it is amazing to read that some bash QF when they lose money [like most others in the world at the time] and bash them when they turn a handsome profit!

[blueloo]

On another topic, it is amazing to read that some bash QF when they lose money [like most others in the world at the time] and bash them when they turn a handsome profit!

Probably because there may be so much rubbery accounting and possibly some of the most destructive and possibly (ahem) less than truthful management (at least since Enron!) that anyone has seen.

I don't think anyone truthfully knows the true health of the company anymore.

[caneworm]

My guess is that the 789's could very well come to "the Qantas Group"; quite possibly to an all new entity of " the group". Then maybe crewed via an agency offshoot, of the group, conceivably headed up by a former (or not so former) senior management type, maybe offering circa K$300 & K$200 to capt's & f/o's respectively. Just a guess...

If true, don't be caught standing anywhere near the exit doors in the sandpit.

[RU/16]

An external entity called Cobham!

[Jonah Hex]

Read the Intergration Agreement.

[Going Boeing]

QF has a 747 replacement. It is called the A380...

TBM, unfortunately, the A380 hasn't turned out to be a good B747 replacement which is why AJ cancelled the last 8 that were ordered and, consequently, some of the B747 fleet will remain in service longer than originally planned.

The absolute "stand-out" replacement for the B747 & A380 is the B777-9X and I see QF ordering it for entry into service in 2019 with ongoing deliveries replacing the B747's and then the A380's. I expect the B747 to leave the fleet circa 2020 and the A380 circa 2022-2023 by which time, most of the fleet will be more than 12 years old and thus will be written off.

At the same time, the A330's will be replaced by B787-9's so that, by 2025, the QF International fleet will consist of only B777-9X's and B787-9's (with possibly a few B777-8's & B787-10's for select routes). With both types having a common endorsement and some engineering components in common, there will be significant savings compared to the current fleets.

The A350 has been getting good reviews but I believe the B777-9 will have lower seat mile costs and the commonality with the B787 will sway the decision in favour of an all Boeing fleet.

[Keg]

Or......... we go for A350s as a replacement for the 744s, we get A330NEOs as a replacement for the A330s and then pick up A320NEOs to replace the 737s- the oldest of which is now 13 years old! We go to an all Airbus fleet.

Not that I'm pro Airbus now that I'm driving one, just doing a 'maybe'. The big issue with my maybe plan is the price that we got the 789s at. I don't think we can afford to NOT take them!

Did we cancel those 8 A380s or just defer them? The Qantas website says they're deferred but still on order.

[caneworm]

A.Rat,
What I did forget to mention was, that I understand applications will be sought from within, which is a good thing. It could be however that applications will be accepted/invited from elsewhere.
I sincerely hope the former is the case.

...you can wish all you want to get yourself out of the desert...

Oh dear, so far wide of the mark it's embarrassing, in the meantime keep calm and carry on.

[Going Boeing]

Did we cancel those 8 A380s or just defer them? The Qantas website says they're deferred but still on order.

Hi Keg, as one of the launch customers, QF couldn't publicly say that they were cancelling the last eight - Airbus wouldn't sell another one after that. Publicly, they are deferred but in reality they are cancelled. A380 #13 & #14 were already fitted out in the airline specific configuration and the second simulator was complete and about to be shipped so the costs to cancel these would have been huge - you wouldn't take that sort of financial hit unless there was no intention to take the remaining aircraft.

I believe the seat mile costs of the B777-9/B787-9 fleets would be lower than the A350/A330NEO combined fleets. the B777-9 is also larger so would be a better size to replace the A380.

I agree that the A320NEO would be a good replacement for the B738 with its lower fuel burn and immensely greater passenger appeal.

[Boe787]

Going Boeing,

Interested to see you mentioned passenger appeal of the 320NEO, something that the A380 has in spades!!

I have no doubt one of the reasons Qantas is doing so well trans pacific is the passenger appeal of the 380, up against the 777s of Delta, Virgin, Air Canada and United.

If i was flying long haul i would choose a 380 over any 777 everytime!

Qantas cannot afford not to take the 787/9s, and they will be able to take over all the 744/330 flying in time.

[Going Boeing]

Interested to see you mentioned passenger appeal of the 320NEO, something that the A380 has in spades!!

I totally agree however the lower operating costs of newer technology widebody twins have made 4 engine aircraft obsolete.

If i was flying long haul i would choose a 380 over any 777 everytime!

I expect the -9 version of the B777 will be as quiet as the A380 with possibly better standards of comfort as new technology evolves.

Qantas cannot afford not to take the 787/9s, and they will be able to take over all the 744/330 flying in time.

I agree with the first part of that statement, but the B787-9 fitted with an international configuration won't have have the pax numbers to replace the B744 without the cost of increasing the frequency.

[ebt]

I agree with the first part of that statement, but the B787-9 fitted with an international configuration won't have have the pax numbers to replace the B744 without the cost of increasing the frequency.

Looking at it another way though, customers tend to prefer frequency over capacity, especially those that wear the suits and sit up the pointy end. It could be argued that the uplift in yield, coupled with the lower unit costs of the 787 may actually see more in the company's coffers than keeping to the status quo.

In an ideal world, QF would use their 787s to open up new routes. Problem is, I'm not sure that QF knows how to grow a route anymore. Maybe a new 49% shareholder in QF Int'l could mix things up a bit?

[LookinDown]

Whether going the Being route or the Airbus route, airframe consistency with its accompanying cost reductions and efficiency gains in crewing, training, engineering and just about every other area certainly would be a novel idea! Been some time since now.

[benttrees]

Excuse my apparent ignorance, but where, exactly, has it been stated that QF is getting the 787 ?

[qfguy]

Whats the diff between an A330 and A330 Neo?

[Beer Baron]

A New Engine (option).

[Going Boeing]

Cathay is the launch customer and they don't arrive until at least 2021.

You probably know more than me about it. I read that the first flight of the -9X is planned for 2018 so, I assumed that deliveries to airlines would begin in 2019.

Also, the smart launch customers do not take the first aircraft off the production line as they are usually overweight and suffer from technical issues that are not experienced with aircraft that come from a "mature" production line (eg SQ are replacing their first five A380's because of this).

In recent times, new aircraft types have had a number of "launch customers" so CX is probably "a" launch customer - not "the" launch customer.

PS. I just checked the Boeing website and it states that the launch customers are Emirates, Etihad, Lufthansa and Qatar - no mention of CX.

[CamelSquadron]

"777-9X in 2019? You're dreaming.

Cathay is the launch customer and they don't arrive until at least 2021."

Throw in Boeing's recent track record for delivering aircraft development projects on time and it could be 2025 before they arrive:).

[neville_nobody]

Excuse my apparent ignorance, but where, exactly, has it been stated that QF is getting the 787 ?

They have a order from Dixon's days and the options are up soon, so the speculation is they will go to mainline.

[Keg]

777-9X in 2019? You're dreaming.

Cathay is the launch customer and they don't arrive until at least 2021.

From 2021 Qantas will be looking to replace the last of the 744s.

[dragon man]

This is rumours, but the word I'm getting is the 787-9 is coming in early 2017 and it will be used to launch new routes and the 747 has got a second life with the drop in fuel prices.

[Seriously]

By 2017 the fuel price will be back up. It isn't going to last, not long enough to give the 747 a reprieve.

[Toruk Macto]

Is it just coincidence that the Rumor Qantas are getting 787's has happened at same time as JQ are in EBA talks ?

[Keg]

I don't reckon it is. The 2017 timeframe for their arrival has existed for the last 2-3 years. There's multiple reports going back eons to that fact. It's always been an 18 month to two year lead time on when we needed to finalise the orders. Two years brings them to now.

I reckon they'll be announced as part of the half yearly results. Look what geniuses we are and now we can reinvest and re-equip lingual with fuel efficient, etc, etc, etc.

[MaxFL360]

Cathay pacific is the first Asian customer, don't believe they are the official launch customer

[Wingspar]

Going Boeing is on the money.
The 787-9 was always coming to Qantas but it can't do everything.
There is too big a capacity gap between the 787-9 and the A380 hence why they need something to fill the gap. I heard myself senior QF Exec say the 787-10 was perfect for QF in Asia but no further interest noted. Even still too much of a capacity gap.
They need the new 777 simple! The timeline ex Keg makes sense.

[Ratherbefishintoday]

Rumour has it AIPA have concluded their negotiations for the 787-9. The agreement is apparently a "B scale" agreement to the LH. Advise?

[The Green Goblin]

Yep.

Jetstar.....

[Tuner 2]

Pretty impressive to have "concluded" anything in the whole two weeks since negotiations started.

[Ratherbefishintoday]

Yep.

Jetstar.....

BOOM, BOOM! Never gets old, hey? :ok:

Tuner 2 I have it on pretty good advice this is the case, if you know any different please share.

[Tuner 2]

I'm not an EBA negotiator but I am 99.9% certain that nothing of substance could possibly have been "concluded" since talks began only two weeks ago.

I'm sure the company would be pushing for a new set of terms for a new type. I doubt it will sink to the depths of the jetstar WB terms or the Virgin 777 terms though.

[Mstr Caution]

Tuner 2

Unless of course, "informal talks" have been happening for a while.

I sense a degree of urgency on the companies behalf to get this LH Agreement thru.

[Tuner 2]

Who knows? I'm sure many people have informal talks about many things, but I doubt that anything is concluded. I know several of the negotiators well and I don't get the impression anything has been decided. They're probably still going through the process of listening to the company wish list.

[Mud Skipper]

It's not going to happen, you'd have mass resignations from AIPA if they are walked over for a B scale on the 787.

Qantas has introduced new types before in a mature and sensible fashion.
They have not stockpiled pilots just for fun, they expect mainline to fly whatever future aircraft is chosen and will again be reasonable.

[SandyPalms]

Somebody else may have more info but what I've heard.

Longhaul Award in its entirety, except for no overtime. The A330 hourly rate.

[Capt Basil Brush]

I doubt it will sink to the depths of the jetstar WB terms or the Virgin 777 terms though.

Tuner 2, what are the current terms for the VA777, and J* WB?

[dragon man]

Yes, it's well known they want a B scale for the 787 . It is not concluded, they have produced their wish list which is similar to previous asks they have made. Reduced overtime and night credits been two. IMO anyone who thinks we will fly the 787 on current conditions is living in fantasy world. Interesting enough they don't want to change crewing numbers. Only time will tell what they agree on and then of course the pilots can vote it up or down as they see fit.

[Ollie Onion]

Of course they are in a hurry to agree these new contracts. Once they announce record 1/2 year results it will be much harder for them to cry poor.

[Jetsbest]

No, not that one; The ochre 767s from Cairns!

One rumour is that tha "Cairns" contract may be getting dusted off for comparison. A few pilots found that quite workable at the time...

I wonder.:uhoh:

[Roj approved]

Would it be cynical to say these negotiations went hand in hand with the J* PIA discussion between AJ and AIPA?

[OzSync]

Removal of overtime and night credits, a330ish hourly rate. One can hope.

[HeSaidWhat]

Tuner 2 - "I'm sure the company would be pushing for a new set of terms for a new type. I doubt it will sink to the depths of the jetstar WB terms or the Virgin 777 terms though"

...... and that, in a nutshell, is why QF is in trouble in its current form. Adapt and survive.

If indeed JQ and VA have significantly lower crew costs, as suggested above, then any competitor will need to adapt or face the outcome of higher operating costs in an industry where margins are less than the bank's offer in interest for cash deposits.

[Bone MAJ]

Rotating seniority?

[dr dre]

I heard the company is now paying far, far in excess of the market rate for it's long haul crews? If that's the case, I can see why they are wanting to start afresh with a new type.
Hopefully with a rotating seniority system as well, as the last years with no great movement have caused havoc for those who were unlucky to be at the bottom of the list.

[What The]

I noticed you changed from "11 pilots" to "far in excess". Care to substantiate either claim?

The stuff being thrown around here has Buckley's chance of getting through AIPA's CoM let alone the membership. I suspect there are some lonely people who are attached to the company side of the negotiations spreading this crap in order to attempt to loosen people up. It won't work. $1bn profit makes it hard to sell a pay freeze. Good luck getting anything else.

There are other ways to achieve things without reinventing the wheel. Rotating seniority is not the answer either.

[ruprecht]

Rotating seniority is not the answer either.

Well that depends on what the question is.

[OzSync]

Rotating seniority is awesome. Don't be scared :)

[Keg]

Rotating seniority is not the answer either.

It's a new freaking type. We'd be insane NOT to introduce rotating seniority or whatever equitable rostering system exists whether it's 'fair share' or similar. We put so many stupid restrictions on Carmen when it's ability to share the love around is well beyond many's ability to comprehend.

We were stupid not to do it with the A380. Let's hope we don't make the same mistake again!

As to the T&Cs, I suspect it'll be 'junior' to the A330 so as to avoid A330 crew bidding to it. It'll be a 'bid back' and I think that's at company discretion.

I suspect there will be some overtime component as they want to encourage crew to get the job done when operating close to Flight and Duty time limits and additional $$$ will do that (I'm not arguing whether it's a good idea from a safety perspective, just the reality from a commercial perspective). It probably won't be the same overtime rules as now unless the pay rate is down around the current 767 hourly credit rate. Even if it was between the 767 and A330 and a change of overtime rules I still reckon that's not a bad outcome.

I agree that night credits will probably go or at least be significantly reduced.

Whether the deal is done or not, I guess we wait and see.

[dragon man]

Rotating seniority is the barrow been pushed by people who don't like the present system. Many people do like the present system. No change to the bidding system should be made without a separate vote from the EBA been called for and passed. To anyone who says that the 330 present hourly rate without night credits is ok is kidding themselves. If you flew 800 stick hours at the rate of $265 an hour ( I think that's the approx rate) plus 6 weeks leave gives you just under $240,000. IMO the hourly rate would need to be approx $320 per stick hour with a min guarantee of a about 150 stick hours per eight week bid period. Night credits are there for a bloody reason .

[Keg]

Umm, credit hours still exist! From my understanding of some of the positions put forward, you'd still be looking at a divisor of 160 for an 8 week roster. You'd still be getting 1040 hours per annum as min guarantee. Night credits may be worth 30% but on many trips they don't actually add 30% to the credit of the trip.

Rotating seniority is the barrow been pushed by people who don't like the present system.

Damn straight. Of course it is. That's because the present system is inequitable and in times of stagnation- like we've had for 6 years now- it ensures that those who are trapped on the bottom of the pile suffer a crappy life for considerable amounts of time. We've tolerated it because it's in and it's difficult to change for fleets that have been around. I acknowledge that many people stayed on type in category because they didn't want the disruption of being junior.

A new type changes all that. You bid (or not) knowing that you can get the weekend off that you want (probably) but you don't get that and the best trip and another other six weekends off whilst someone else gets the worst trips and no weekends off.

This isn't a vested interest here either. There are 8 people in Qantas senior to me who are younger than me. I end up very, very senior. I said as a senior S/O on the 744 who only rotated for 1 bid period that it was unfair. I said as a junior and senior F/O on the 767 that it was unfair. I said as a middle level 744 F/O who didn't rotate that it was unfair and I've said the same whilst being 40 of the bottom of the 767 command pile.

(As an aside, I know of some relationships that have gone through some tough times in the last six years because of the lifestyle impacts of the stagnation of the mainline and being trapped junior).


Many people do like the present system.

I bet they're not in the bottom third or have been trapped for the past six years in those numbers. I'd be interested to hear why they think that continuing a system that ensures those senior on fleet- particularly a potential new fleet where everyone knows what they're getting into- get everything they want whilst those junior get nothing of what they want is a system worth continuing. To put it another way, were we to have a fair share system, what justification would there be to move to a pure seniority system?

No change to the bidding system should be made without a separate vote from the EBA been called for and passed.

We've done that a couple of times over the years. The majority at those times have indicated a desire for a fairer system. Why not introduce a new type with that fairer system. You still bid for the aeroplane on seniority. Lifestyle (and pay if there is diversity in O/T between trips) on that fleet would be far more equitable.

[dragon man]

There have been surveys with no results released to the membership. An indication of a fairer system is not an endorsement of rotational seniority it's just what you want. The present system allows the top 2/3ds to have stability under rotational seniority no one has stability. You only have to look at the bull**** of shared blank lines to release that many lies will be told in this debate. I average one every four on the 747. Is that was sold to me ? No it's not. By knowing the rules there are some 747 pilots who are yet to do a blank line. You remove night credits you remove about 30% of your credited hours on the 747 therefore you would have to fly 30% more stick hours for the same money or get a 30% increase in the stick hourly rate to compensate.

[-438]

If there is to be a vote on rotating seniority, it should be made available to all those who may in future be on type (including short haul).
I'm pretty sure if you include short haul in a vote it would be voted up.

[SandyPalms]

While I am as optimistic as I have been in years about the 787 coming to mainline, could I caution people not to get too excited. This deal, if it in fact exists, may be part of an unpleasant "whole package" of an EA. However it does seem that QF are talking to AIPA and that after years bobbing in the water, good ship QF and its pilots may be about to experience a slight breeze.

[dragon man]

It's coming you can bank on it. They want the eba finished before the official announcement . The changes will only effect those that choose to go there the existing types will continue under the current arrangements.

[Keg]

The present system allows the top 2/3ds to have stability under rotational seniority no one has stability.

Lol. I call BS on that one! That's simply not true... both the first part of your sentence as well as the second part.

Significantly, a more equitable rostering system doesn't have to be a rotational one- it's just the one that most people are familiar with. Carmen has so many more capabilities than what our meagre minds have considered. It can do 'fair share' of weekends off. It can do fair share in terms of points awarded for particular things. It can do fair share in terms of night flying, early starts, late finishes, etc, etc.

[dragon man]

And I call your comments bull**** also. The 2/3 rds that would have the change would go from having a good idea of what they will get to all sorts of different things ranging from the top to the worst. It's funny how when some says rotational seniority is crap that you come out and say we can make changes to Carmen to make it more equitable. Why hasn't that been talked about?

[crosscutter]

The only people who complain about fairness and equity are a percentage of those who benefit from the imbalance. Fortunately, this time these people are in the minority.

[mypov]

That's because the present system is inequitable

Why not introduce a new type with that fairer system. .



Keg, big news, you are not the arbiter of what is fair.


Your argument is one used by politicians i.e. what I say is fair or more fair therefore by default what others are saying is not fair. It's an attempt to marginalize an opponent and shutdown debate.


In reality fair is in the eye of the beholder. I prefer to look at what choices different systems give over a career and how that fits in with the rest of life. IMHO the current system offers more and better choices over a career especially for those with long term issues such as sick or disabled family.
Stagnant times are an issue but there are plenty of ways to handle this without throwing out the system.

We already have shared blank lines, shared annual leave and LSL and buckets on trips so your somewhat emotive proclamation that junior gets nothing and senior everything is false. That's another political trick, exaggerate.


Next political trick, ask "do you want a fairer system?" Who could say no, I mean gee "do you want world peace?" It's a loaded question with implications that makes it hard to say no. That's why the question is put this way, it's to get the desired result not to open serious debate.


If you want serious debate about systems and choices good, but please leave the "my system is fairer" argument to the shyster politicians.

[dragon man]

Mypov, take a bow. Beautifully put.

[Angle of Attack]

Regardless of whether it's fair or not a rotating seniority would get voted up because the amount of senior wood is far outnumbered by the rest these days...

[ruprecht]

We already have shared blank lines, shared annual leave and LSL and buckets on trips so your somewhat emotive proclamation that junior gets nothing and senior everything is false. That's another political trick, exaggerate.

All these items indicate a flawed system. If the system was as fair as you make out, why would these things be necessary?

Kings rarely vote for democracy....:hmm:

[2Plus]

Here's an idea...remove overtime, night credits etc and you remove the financial incentive to stick to an inequitable rostering system. :p

To anyone who says that the 330 present hourly rate without night
credits is ok is kidding themselves.

Haha! Really? Well, I guess time will tell exactly who is kidding themselves and who still has their head in the sand.

IMO offer anything similar to the ol' 767 or JQ330 rate, no night credit, no overtime (or overtime paid over a certain threshold per roster) and you just watch 'em trample over each other in the rush to fly the thing. Then again...maybe I'm kidding myself.

Dragon, it has been talked about and continues to be as a work in progress each and every SH roster. But I wouldn't worry too much about it champ. I'm sure the 787-9 conditions won't be acceptable to you so you need not be concerned.

[Metro man]

Is rotating seniority similar to the EK system of bid groups ? Eg Top, middle and bottom and you move through each group on a monthly basis with the top group getting what it wants and the bottom group picking up the rest.

[ruprecht]

Is rotating seniority similar to the EK system of bid groups ? Eg Top, middle and bottom and you move through each group on a monthly basis with the top group getting what it wants and the bottom group picking up the rest.

No, it means human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria! :rolleyes:

[Chad Gates]

You move UP the list 6% per 28 day bid period. The list rotates completely in about 15 months. Works really well. Anyone who knocks it, hasn't used it.

[the hornet]

2 Plus is spot on the money if you think they couldn't crew a new type in this environment on 767/JQ330 rates your delusional. Surely the last 10 years has proven get the Aircraft work on the conditions over time or should we let arrogance drive in the final nail.

[The Green Goblin]

How's that working out for the Jetstar guys the hornet.....

[the hornet]

I'm not suggesting total fold but am pretty sure we won't be flying 787s on 330 conditions. If we took a different direction 10 years ago and agreed to crew the JQ aircraft now we would have an additional 100 aircraft in Qantas 3000 pilots I'm pretty sure we would have a little more bargaining power.

Now let's fast forward 10 years we Secure the aircraft and god forbid recruit would we not be in a better position than if they crew it elsewhere?

Just venting I guess it's been a disappointing Decade

[crosscutter]

Mainline crew were never going to crew what is now Jetstar. Never. No matter how cheaply they sold their soul and professional dignity. They purchased the 320's so a new entity with new pilots could be employed under a different award. So chin up! It's very different this time.

[busdriver007]

Jetstar does not make money! Full Service carriers earn 2 to 2 and one half the revenue of a low cost carrier. Qantas cannot afford to sacrifice it's brand for Jetstar. The current management is only trying to maximise their bonuses. Do not be under any illusion that this is a typical Oldmeadow move to maximise the concessions given. If pilots weren't so self-obsessed they would see the real game here. Patience is the key!

[IsDon]

Ive been told by one of the negotiators that Oldmeadow has been locked out of the long haul negotiations. Apparently he's been bothering other pilots groups instead.

This holds true with a question I put to Andrew David last year before the negotiations began. My question; was this round of negotiations going to be consultants at 10 paces like the last few fiascos. The answer was a definate no. It will be him, Flt Ops management and AIPA reps. That's it.

I remember thinking at the time that I hoped that finally common sense will prevail and this round will be conducted in an environment of mutual respect. Hopefully, if these rumours have some basis in fact maybe we've finally seen some common sense. I sincerely hope so.

[dr dre]

You move UP the list 6% per 28 day bid period. The list rotates completely in about 15 months. Works really well. Anyone who knocks it, hasn't used it.

Yep, absolutely agree. Even senior guys in SH who would benefit from a strict seniority bidding system don't mind it. It keeps all crews regardless of seniority in the same mindset. And I think a lot of people who oppose it are either don't know about it or would be disavantaged by its introduction.

[bdcer]

So, considering the bitching between LH & SH conditions has already begun, could someone verify if the rumour of new aircraft for Q pilots is even true??

I want to believe it too, but aren't we getting ahead of ourselves?

[*Lancer*]

bdcer, not necessarily. The company most likely wants to have the contract sorted before announcing - costs/certainty and all that.

A new deal for a new type would probably be a win for most who would be interested, and nothing wrong with impassioned senior colleagues choosing to remain passionately senior forever.

Might finally manage to secure some growth, rather than just talk about it while it's being auctioned off elsewhere. :ugh:

[Ollie Onion]

Classic, so for all the talk about how management have overstated the dire financial position etc. the majority of people on here now accept the need for a 'b' scale! Seems like management have won this round and we see once again pilots willing to sell themselves short to guarantee getting their hands on the shiny new toys. Alan will be most pleased.

[crosscutter]

I guess we will see if and when there is a vote. That comment seems a bit rich when you're criticising the same group who have built, set and protected Australian pilot conditions. Truth is when you have pilots who jump at sub standard conditions, it forces everyone to rethink their position. Whatever the outcome I suspect we won't be bashing our fists on the table in 10 years time crying "it's not fair".

[Fatguyinalittlecoat]

For many years now on this forum it seems every man, woman and child have been telling Qantas pilots that they need to change.
Your dinosaurs, out of touch, greedy, stolen all the milk and so on.
Now that Qantas pilots have, and most of us have, realised that we do need to adapt (due to actions outside of our control) there seems to be anger from other parts of the group about us selling out. As it seems maybe Qantas pilots will get to fly airplanes with Qantas written on the side.

I'm not sure what everyone expected. Qantas pilots don't live in a bubble.

[Beer Baron]

Ollie, whether the dire financials of mainline international are accurate or not doesn't really matter because management believe them. Management have canceled routes, canceled aircraft orders and sent flying out to other group entities based on their belief in those figures. So the damage is done and that is what we need to react to.
Our strategy for years has indeed preserved our terms and conditions but growth and promotions have gone by the wayside. Perhaps it's time for a new direction??

[Keg]

Over the last 6 1/2 years mainline has shrunk by about 300-350 pilots and we have 150-200 on LWOP. That's based on the seniority list from July last year. I reckon we're looking at another 50ish on top of that for this year given this is the year when most of the VRs take effect. 15%? 20%? Closer to 25% smaller in six years?

100ish pilots have been demoted. Still more have been forcibly RIN'd from a particular fleet to a smaller fleet where they'll be paid significantly less. Whilst 767 F/Os who were RIN'd to S/O A380 will earn more it is cold comfort to many of them given they gave up the extra $$$ to be an F/O 6+ years ago.

Meanwhile, 737 hours have reduced by 10-15% also. Once upon a time, divisors in the high 70s and pilots flying low to mid 80s regularly was the norm. Now the divisor is in the high 60s and extra flying hours difficult to come by as I understand it- perhaps a bit easier now with the recent demise of the 767.

These are the facts of what has occurred recently. This is where our current award has taken us. Whether we think it's right or not or whether we feel it was justified or not we have been dealt out of the game. We can continue to be dealt out or we can find a way to be dealt back in again. How to achieve that is the question.

So here's something really radical. Rather than the new type being a specific fleet pay rate, how about it becomes the new 'fleet pay' rate. Perhaps we can kill a couple of birds in one stone. Not only will it apply to the 787, maybe it will also apply to the A350 and the 777 (CCQ with the 787 anyway? ) and whatever replaces the Dugong in 15 years time.

[Derfred]

A 787 is roughly a replacement of a 767, although it would be likely to be flying more LH routes than the 767 was in it's later years.

You could put the 787 on the 767 contract and no-one would be realistically too upset.

By my back of the envelope calculations, putting a 787 on an A330 pay rate - but without night credits or overtime - would roughly approximate the 767 salary, with the exception that all pilots would be paid about the same instead of the senior creaming the overtime.

You don't need overtime to "persuade" crew to complete the job. Crew will complete the job unless they are too fatigued to do so. No professional pilot would disrupt hundreds of pax unnecessarily.

Overtime has always been the absurd inequity in LH. To be paid so much more for sleeping 8 hours in a bunk has always puzzled those of us who fly 11 hours actually flying 11 hours for less pay. Overtime, if you like, has "killed" the LH contract.

Having equalised the salaries of the crew, rotating seniority could also be a reasonable option. The vast majority of those that have tried it, like it. If you don't think you'll like it, don't bid for it. Should have been done on the A330 - oh, hang on...

The comment above that everybody experiences instability in such a system is rubbish. The reality is that all experience stability most of the time, instead of the few taking it for the team for years on end in stagnant times.

I prefer to work in an environment where everyone "makes the coffee" now and then. The psychological improvements are staggering. It's a much nicer environment. Puts a smile on your face.

[C441]

You don't need overtime to "persuade" crew to complete the job. Crew will complete the job unless they are too fatigued to do so. No professional pilot would disrupt hundreds of pax unnecessarily.

I'd beg to differ. Having spent the last 8 years on the 744 & 380 (and still in the bottom 20%), I can assure you that the overtime is a significant incentive to extend beyond 14 hours and even more so beyond 16 or more. I can think of at least 5 occasions when the overtime was seen as the only reason to extend by at least 2 members of the crew. For me, its it's the "dollars make fatigue go away" thinking that is most worrying.

Yes, most crew will go the extra mile to save the passengers the inconvenience, but with no financial incentive, it only takes one crewmember to reject that option and in most cases that will be it for the whole crew.

Oh....and if I get 8 hours in the bunk, let alone sleep 8 hours, I shouldn't have been there in the first place. There are times, eastbound from Europe where I wish I could have 8 hours in the bunk to compensate for the time zone affected lack of consistent sleep I've had in the last 7 days. Should I get additional pay for that? I do and I'll leave it up to others to determine the merits of that portion of the award. Suffice to say, should it be removed, it will be those even more junior who find themselves with 3 DXB-LHR's a bid period.

[The The]

Suffice to say, should it be removed, it will be those even more junior who find themselves with 3 DXB-LHR's a bid period.

Therein lies the problem when you start chopping chunks out of the award, the result can be much much worse for a significant number of pilots and also the Company with rising fatigue/health/sickness issues.

IMO, the best result for the Company and the pilots under the LH award, would be to have the 787 under the existing award at A330 pay rates (perhaps with rotating seniority if majority vote). Any changes to conditions would be through the normal EBA process.

For some, the 787 would have the attractiveness of some overtime (the A330 has little), with the offset being rotating seniority. The A330 retains seniority for bidding to satisfy those who value seniority over every last dollar.

[Derfred]

Quote: "For me, its it's the "dollars make fatigue go away" thinking that is most worrying."

I didn't want to say that but there's a good reason it shouldn't exist right there.

[The Professor]

Why would QF simply transfer legacy wages and conditions across to a new type when it’s a golden opportunity to start with a clean sheet of paper?

Take a look at the pay gap between mainline 737 crew and Jetconnect 737 crew and you will get some idea where the 787 operation will sit.

"Jetstar does not make money! Full Service carriers earn 2 to 2 and one half the revenue of a low cost carrier."

You may want to do a little more research and see where the majority of capital investment in the airline industry is heading.

[Derfred]

Take a look at the pay gap between mainline 737 crew and Jetconnect 737 crew and you will get some idea where the 787 operation will sit.


Rubbish.

If they were that way inclined they wouldn't be talking to AIPA they would be setting up a Jetconnect 787 operation out of NZ.

[Derfred]

Why would QF simply transfer legacy wages and conditions across to a new type when it’s a golden opportunity to start with a clean sheet of paper?


Why wouldn't they have done that with the A330?

Why wouldn't they have done that with the A380?

Instead they offered a pay rise, on both those types.

Don't get me wrong, there were many QF pilots suggesting a clean sheet of paper with both those types, as they are now with the 787. But a clean sheet of paper doesn't stay very clean once the scribbling starts. And that goes for both sides of the negotiations. What tends to happen is once a muppet like Oldmeadow starts scribbling, the pilots give up and say well, we tried, I guess you'll just have to stick with ye olde LH contract. (EBA 8?)

[Boe787]

Professor,

Irrespective of were the majority of Capital is being invested, the point still stands,
Full Service Carriers yield is better than an LCC!

[busdriver007]

Hey Professor, Read Doganis-Flying off Course, besides in the Qantas Group 2008, revenue 15.2 Billion, 2014, revenue 15.2 Billion. 40% more aircraft! The difference? Anyway where money is invested does not imply more should be thrown at LCCs. Spoken like a typical new age manager, all hype and no substance. Let's remember to grow the revenue and not just cut costs. :ugh:Long-Haul LC is marginal at best. Back to the subject, New Aircraft, New Contract, get on with it!

[blueloo]

Wouldn't it be a C scale? Shorthaul are already on the B scale! :}:}:}

[2Plus]

Other way 'round.

[Angle of Attack]

Nah it will be a Shorthaul type contract but with back of the clock long sectors so in my mind well behind current Shorthaul mainline contract...

[fearcampaign]

Cup of tea a bex and a good lie down gentleman.
Qantas pilots terms and conditions were not the cause of recent tough times nor will they be a saviour in the future.
Look at all the work groups that have accepted AT WORSTan 18 month pay freeze in their respective EBAs. That includes the TWU which has been a thorn in the side of QF for years.
QF will be making around a billion this year and two billion the year after. Alan will do nicely from his sub 80c options!
The Aussie dollar has fallen 30% and the fuel price by more than 50%.
As the fuel hedging unwinds QF will participate in most of this fall post January 2015. As the dollar has dropped, foreign capacity pulls out and yields increase for QF. Add to this QF make higher comparable fares in AUD from overseas.
The cost base in comparable USD terms has dropped 30%.
Strambi banged on about this when it was 1.15 USD. Well it's 77c and falling now so you can't have it both ways champ.
I'm sure AIPA will be patient. With good Feb results coming and the full year results being even better with greater exposure to the dropping fuel price, one must question the rush to get a deal by QF.
Wasn't that long ago they were happy to keep LH EBAs dragging on for years.
Perhaps we may be best to wait for bonus time when the record profits get announced.
Either way if QF offer a bad deal they risk a delay until profits and bonuses soar ever higher.

[qfpaypacket]

With lower fuel prices, wages once again, proportionately, become more attractive to contain.
Anyone who cannot see that the retirement of the 767 well before the 787 is introduced is an industrial manoeuvre to extinguish the long haul award, is living in outer space....
This will allow whoever they want to crew them, at the cheapeast rate possible, without any threat of transfer of business claim. Business 101.....
Prepare to crawl over each other for a spot.

[CamelSquadron]

787 crewed using fixed term contracts.

Opportunity for QF to start afresh and pay market rate for market terms and conditions.

[What The]

Keep dreaming.

With Oldmeadow Consulting now on the outer and excluded from EBA's expect some rubbish to start appearing here and other places in order to attempt to create some tension in Qantas groups. Without tension, Oldmeadow is irrelevant. $2.5m per year contract disappearing before our eyes.

[Troo believer]

CamelSniffer NO it can't be done. A new type operated by Qantas Airways Ltd will be within the bounds of a contact negotiated between QAL and AIPA. Read the Integration Agreement. If you don't know what it is use a Camel to find it.

[busdriver007]

What the: Last time I checked it was over $3 mil. Even Freehills couldn't believe it!

[2Plus]

CamelSniffer NO it can't be done. A new type operated by Qantas Airways Ltd will be within the bounds of a contact negotiated between QAL and AIPA. Read the Integration Agreement. If you don't know what it is use a Camel to find it.


Really? Troo, I think you and Camel are talking about two different scenarios.

Flight: QF140 - "Operated by Jetconnect for Qantas."
Flight: QF1514 - "Operated by Qantaslink - National Jet Systems."
Flight: (Insert your favourite Qantas 787 service here) - Operated by ***** for Qantas."

How's your IA working out for you there? All red tail, all plastered with Qantas on the side to keep it feeling like home. Call me a pessimist but I wouldn't say "it can't be done."

* yes, I know this thread is about mainline getting the flying. I just can't see it happening, or at least not on the rates and conditions that mainline has come to expect.

[The Green Goblin]

Just something to be mindful of.

The training slots have been prebooked since 2013 going forwards to 2019 at the Singapore facility (Boeing training managers mouth). From a rough calculation it equalled about 30 frames from the numbers.

They are coming. It's just a question of who flys them and for how much.

[goodonyamate]

How's your IA working out for you there? All red tail, all plastered with Qantas on the side to keep it feeling like home. Call me a pessimist but I wouldn't say "it can't be done."


Jetconnect - NZ based, outside australian IR law jurisdiction
Qjet - painted as 'Qantaslink' (and if the Q Dom CEO isn't a liar, gone in 2017) - not painted as Qantas


For all the JQ lads thinking that they will be flying QF 787's....

Keep dreaming

[fearcampaign]

Jetconnect only flies routes NZ to AUS return and not domestic.
Had plenty of years to take over domestic or international and it hasn't.
A lot of hearsay on this forum and panic merchants.
QF are dealing with AIPA as others have said without Oldmeadow.
Neither side wants a repeat of 2011. It's a better environment now both industrially and in the airline business. American Airlines flight crew just got a 23% pay rise. 777 skipper with 12 years service now on $280k USD or $360 AUD.
With the price of fuel dropped by more than 50%, AUD perfectly in the 70c and not $1 plus range, things are looking rosy again for QF international after a ****ty few years in a market that was not rational.
Profits be around 900 million this year and 1.8-1.9 billion year after according to analysts. Things should look good for both parties.
If the deal is good it will get across the line, but if it's inferior, QF risks another vote and delays as profits and bonuses skyrocket.
How times change. At least it's for the better.
Time for cool heads. Cycle is a turning.

[Keg]

More talk like that and you'll have to change your handle! :ok:

[swh]

Can QF do another impulse model, key holders employees of QF, line drivers employed by a crewing company ?

[fearcampaign]

SWH.
It would be transmission of business under FWA rules.
Especially a LH jet painted Qantas and based in AUS. The current FWA also now classifies transmission of business with associated entities. Hence why AIPA must agree to a S318 exemption to allow QF pilots to JQ on JQ conditions. Otherwise you take your agreement(determination) with you.
At the time Impulse became JQ it was not then flying QF routes but routes that QF didn't fly to. That was in the Workchoices era as well.
But the Fair Work Act changed all that post 2007. Designed to stop exactly what every company would like to do. Just start up company B doing exactly the same work but with inferior conditions.

[swh]

How is the situation with Jetstar, Jetconnect, Cobham, Express Freighters Sunstate, Eastern, Network etc different ? Heard rumors the 717s are coming back under the QF banner from Cobham.

Seems illogical that QF is constrained by FWA from setting up new subsidiaries, of changing how those subsidiaries operate. One could argue that Eastern, Sunstate, Jetstar, Network etc is "transmission of business" from domestic.

What is stopping another Australian Airlines 767 longhaul with new equipment ?

[cloudsurfng]

Heard rumors the 717s are coming back under the QF banner from Cobham.

Correct :ok: however it won't be the 717's...they are being scrapped as of 2017. An as yet to be decided new type will replace them. Back under the mainline banner, flown by mainline pilots.

What is stopping another Australian Airlines 767 longhaul with new equipment ?

Nothing. It just can't be called 'QANTAS' or painted as a QANTAS aircraft. The only reason Jetconnect get away with it is because NZ falls outside the FWA jurisdiction.

[atlas12]

Cloudsurfing, you are dreaming!

[Chris2303]

The high gross weight version of the A380 would be a major help - especially for DFW-SYD

[Zapatas Blood]

"Full Service Carriers yield is better than an LCC!"

Actually, in 2014 the 3 most profitable airlines in the US by far were low cost carriers. They had double the margin of legacy carriers on average.

In Europe, the most profitable airline is a low cost carrier.

In Canada the most profitable airline is a low cost carrier.

[cloudsurfng]

Cloudsurfing, you are dreaming!

Direct from the Domestic CEO's mouth in a recent company dial in. Not an "I heard from a friend of a friend" type scenario. Heard by everyone on the dial in, first hand.

[Di_Vosh]

Direct from the Domestic CEO's mouth in a recent company dial in. Not an "I heard from a friend of a friend" type scenario. Heard by everyone on the dial in, first hand.

And...?

Can you remember a time when a Qantas manager has said something and something else took place?

IMHO, there is no way that the Cobham 717's are going to be replaced with anything flown by mainline pilots. Most likely whatever replaces them will be flown by Network pilots.

DIVOSH!

[Going Nowhere]

There are very few if any mainline carriers around the world that also crew the Regional Jet side of things.

"Mainline banner by mainline pilots..."

"On Regional (read cheap and flexible) terms..."

[Keg]

Cobham 717s flying SYD-ADL, SYD-MEL, CBR- MEL, etc are hardly 'regional' services. The rest of your point is valid though. Perhaps not gone completely but there are many routes the QJet is flying that are far from 'Link' services.

[cloudsurfng]

At this stage, ill place more weight on what was said rather than your honest opinion DiVosh. So far, this guy seems to do what he says he's going to do.

Re Network, yep, he clearly stated some of the WA stuff would be done by Network. Id rather see the crew of a wholly owned company do the flying than a bunch of contractors. But the routes Keg refers to will be mainline.

[blumoon]

Doesn't Cobham have like 200+ pilots? Thats a lot of capacity and retraining moving back to mainline or a new operator, Network....

Unfortunately can't see it happening..

Anyway i was heard the B717 contract is out to 2018? Maybe network or Link will get a the C-Series... :rolleyes:

[Goat Whisperer]

There are very few if any mainline carriers around the world that also crew the Regional Jet side of things.


Ummm... Virgin's E190 fleet?

[busdriver007]

Zapatas Blood- NONE of them operate longer than 5 hours sectors because there is no yield! And if you want to talk about conditions for pilots then B737 pilots at Southwest are the highest paid B737 pilots in the United States! Another point of difference is they are engaged! And they have shares in the company!:ugh:

[HappyBandit]

Bluemoon:

I can tell you now it won't be Link! (Although apparently the link were pretty darn close in getting the 717s originally). Not sure if Cobham will be bought out by then, however it makes sense to be part of the group. No doubt QF have put an offer to them already.

My guess is Cobham (in whatever entity) will fly the C-series!

[Zapatas Blood]

"Zapatas Blood- NONE of them operate longer than 5 hours sectors because there is no yield! And if you want to talk about conditions for pilots then B737 pilots at Southwest are the highest paid B737 pilots in the United States!"

All interesting and generally incorrect points you make however, bottom line is the day of the legacy carrier is over and capital markets LOVE lower cost or LCC or new entrant or boutique carriers, call them what you will but until QF shows some serious labor reform, they will struggle to move forward.

MOST western legacy carriers have either been rebuilt with lower operating costs, been recapitalsied by their host government or been taken over by another legacy carrier or gone broke.

[busdriver007]

You are are never going to reform legacy carriers without confronting the issue instead of costing millions in shareholders funds to wage a war against your own staff! 1980s IR in 2015! Air New Zealand has done it and maybe Qantas needs to go broke! They are going the right way about it!

[Transition Layer]

The Cobham 717 OTP is rubbish, particularly on the East Coast, in the very markets where OTP matters most. Why would you then reward Cobham with a new type?

I've also heard the next Regional Jet size aircraft will be crewed "in house". Maybe a bit of wishful thinking on my behalf but you never know :ok:

[Derfred]

A bunch of 737-700's makes sense to me. And on the CBR route have some specially configured with extra rows of J class as per the old 737-400's.

[C441]

Pilot (or any other employee's) salary is not the defining matrix when Qantas or any other company decide to return an operation 'in-house' from a previous outsourced contract. Maybe Cobham's cost vs performance does not produce the desired outcome.

[The Professor]

“You are are never going to reform legacy carriers without confronting the issue”

You mean sitting down with the staff and asking politely for labor reform? 100 years of deeply entrenched inflexibility is difficult to change.

Air New Zealand employees had labor reform forced upon them as a result of the renationalization agreement following the Ansett collapse. There was no “confronting” of the issue at all.

[The Professor]

"Pilot (or any other employee's) salary is not the defining matrix when Qantas or any other company decide to return an operation 'in-house'"

lower labor costs are one of the few ways in which airlines can gain competitve advantage. Pilots alone, maybe not. However QF are saddled with high labor costs in all departments and yes labor costs when viewed as a whole part of the business do drive where resources are allocated.

[Fjholden]

The Professor: Since you are obviously management, how about reducing management costs to those of competitors? No?

[The Green Goblin]

Network will be rebranded Qantas regional and take over the 717 and replacements. The replacements? There's a strong rumour they are getting A319s. There's a big backlog of A320s that need to go somewhere.

I'm also hearing Neos will replace mainline 737s. That way capacity can be spread around the group as required on short notice.


I have heard this from a very reliable source.

[neville_nobody]

lower labor costs are one of the few ways in which airlines can gain competitve advantage. Pilots alone, maybe not. However QF are saddled with high labor costs in all departments and yes labor costs when viewed as a whole part of the business do drive where resources are allocated.

And not duplicating management positions is another. Do airlines in Australia really need numerous AOC's to run one brand with all the multiples of bureaucracy that come with it?

It's funny that airlines of all colours seem to think it's OK to fatten up management with duplicated roles yet are always running around looking for 'savings' from the staff.

[Derfred]

You mean like the 2-dozen "base manager" jobs just announced in QF?

[The Professor]

“The Professor: Since you are obviously management, how about reducing management costs to those of competitors? No?”

Ha, well actually I am way too retired to be “management”. Just a fly fisherman now.

And I have never worked for QF.

But contrary to the opinion of most pilots, the cost of middle to senior level execs is nowhere near as high as you think. MOST execs would love the pay and benefits of an A380 captain and trimming their relatively small numbers or salary would not alter the bottom line much at all.

Placing the remaining 33000 employees of the company on par with the wider industry would achieve a lot though.

[fearcampaign]

Well Professor,

A380 Captains make up about 5% of the mainline pilot group so it's not a good benchmark. Sure it makes a good water cooler discussion with the Jetstar HR staff after comparing their F11 first class staff travel trips.

Most A380 Captains would have to have about 25-40 years of service in Qantas to obtain command there. Doubt many in the upper Echelons of QF management are even that old.

After the QF32 incident the ATSB attributed experience as a major factor that saved the aircraft and its $414 million dollar list price. Wonder how Air Asia would have gone in a similar situation? But of course, "everyone can fly" these days.

Can't wait to see the annual results in February. Analysts are saying a billion dollars profit this year and two billion the year after.

Guessing our CEO's options granted at 80c must be looking good at around $10,000,000-$15,000,000.

Not bad considering the heavy lifting has been done by the sustained fuel price drop, as well as the fall in the AUD from $1.15 to 0.77c.
Competitors are pulling out capacity with the weak dollar and the yields are improving too. Foreigners are increasing their inward travel to Australia as the dollar stays low.
Doom and gloom has passed folks. Looking forward to seeing with time the benefit of the exposure to the plummeting fuel price on the bottom line.

Cant see the rush in signing a new deal unless it is reasonable.

Worst case it's an 18 month freeze(still a pay cut in real terms) like every other work group in Qantas such as the engineers, Short Haul Pilots, Cabin crew, TWU, ASU etc etc etc etc

I wonder what the bonus payments will be this year and the year after?

[Boe787]

Well Professor,

If you want to place the 33,000 Qantas workers wages to on par with "industry standards", I suggest you start with a grossly overpaid CEO by Airline industry standards, and a Miss Wirth, who i believe earns over a million dollars, more than the CEOs of ANA and JAL combined!!!

And this rot is not confined to Qantas, as some of Virgin Australias senior execs, not just Borghetti, got some very nice pay rises last year, some in the vicinity of 200,000 plus!!

[spelling_nazi]

I heard the non-operational staff / airframe ratio in QF was close to double the industry average also. Can anyone confirm this?

[blumoon]

Transition Layer "The Cobham 717 OTP is rubbish, particularly on the East Coast, in the very markets where OTP matters most. Why would you then reward Cobham with a new type? "

Is it!!?? Not what the numbers say... Most delays are from 'outside influences'. From what i've been told...

But never let the truth get in the way of a good bagging!!

[cloudsurfng]

TL is right on. Again, the CEO said it for all to hear!

[Going Nowhere]

It's no secret that the 717 operation on the East coast has horrible OTP. Several days each week see 1 or 2 aircraft u/s resulting in the loss of J class in/out of CBR when they need to sub in an all Y-class 717 or send the Dash/Alliance to GLT/ROK/MKY.

With the continued softening of the QLD market, the 717 will shortly be too much aircraft up there. QLink have been able to sub in Q300's recently to cover for the 717 the loads have been that low. The new schedule sees most of the ROK flying back on the Q400 already.

The punters aren't happy and they're making it known...

i'm sure when you take out the cancelled and recovered flights, the OTP is great Blumoon. But as someone who see it day in and day out, it's far from it.

[Check_Thrust]

How did a thread about a possible "B scale" for Qantas long haul operating the 787-9 turn into a thread about Cobham's contract for operating the 717 under Qantaslink?

Did I miss something or are the two topics not related?

[The Professor]

“Most A380 Captains would have to have about 25-40 years of service in Qantas to obtain command there. Doubt many in the upper Echelons of QF management are even that old.”

The length of service of pilots compared to managers has no relevance in the debate.


“Wonder how Air Asia would have gone in a similar situation? But of course, "everyone can fly" these days.”

Again, not relevant to the debate. Outdated work practices and uncompetitive labor costs at QF have nothing to do with the safety record of poorly managed airlines in the third world.

“ATSB attributed experience as a major factor that saved the aircraft”

Fantastic then that there was such an experienced crew on hand, very fortunate. However, the level of experience of said crew is not related to their pay structure is it? A pilot can still offer experience and expertise while receiving a more competitive salary in line with the wider industry.

“Doom and gloom has passed folks.”

Maybe for this week but the global economy is softening, indicators such as the BDI paint a very gloomy picture and currency markets can and will turn on a dime, so to speak.

“grossly overpaid CEO by Airline industry standards, and a Miss Wirth, who i believe earns over a million dollars, more than the CEOs of ANA and JAL combined!!!”

Unlike legacy pilots, CEO compensation and benefits are subject to market forces, what will the shareholders pay to retain the person in that role. AJ is paid exactly in line with his value to the company, nothing more and nothing less. He is paid more than some in the industry and less than many.

[busdriver007]

He is paid more than everyone in the industry bar no one! $2.2 billion write down that should have begun in 2006 but someone wanted to sell the company! Fixing his own mistakes, costing shareholders $1.6 billion (according to the former CFO)in the Jetstar misadventure! By the way how's JQ Hong Kong going? Australian Shareholders need to do a bit of due diligence. BTW he had a chance he had the chance to fix "outdated work practices and uncompetitive labor costs" and he blew close to $700 million doing it and what happened, nothing! Negotiations is a two way street! :ugh: If Qantas had the Southwest ratio of staff/aircraft then it would employ 17000 people. The thing is operational people fly aircraft and make money. Management in this outfit have lost it!

[Tankengine]

Professor:
Pilots experience not relevant to pay, market forces?
- legacy pilots have saved the day so many times in the last few years, their contracts have been renewed so many times - that IS "market forces":ugh:

The argument re time served is that many of the young wiz kids have NFI!:}

CEO pay is NOT market forces, or QF managers would be on similar pay as airline CEOs, managers in other Airlines: not greatly above them - see pay scales for CEOs for ANY other major airline worthwhile!:ugh:

Our bosses parrot Harvard MBA **** but have little idea of how to run an airline, unfortunately.

Luckily the crews do a good job or a couple of hull losses would put us in a terrible position.:ooh:

(Basically your argument is full of ****):p

[blueloo]

CEO compensation and benefits are subject to market forces

An often sprouted line for media sound bites.

Any basic economics course will teach you about market distortions.

[fearcampaign]

Professor,

The fact remains that QF profits will be approximately one billion dollars this year and increasing to around two billion the next year.
The fall in the AUD and the sustained fuel price falls are why. Both of these elements are forecast to stay low for years. Particularly the AUD, now that commodity prices have corrected from record highs,and the RBA are at record low rates.

The economic reality is that as the dollar falls so does the attraction for foreign tourists to visit Australia. The fares Qantas charge in foreign dollar amounts are worth more in AUD terms so the yield improves. Foreign competitors stop flooding the market with capacity too as the AUD fares they charge are not so valuable.

As the dollar falls 30-40% so does the cost base in USD terms too. Qantas International now has its upswing.

You can bang on all you want throwing around legacy tripe. Like I said. I'll wait to see what the "legacy" profits bring this year and next.
If Alan makes $10-$15 million dollars in bonuses it makes it very hard to cry wolf now things have turned around. Especially as QF start to make record profits.

I don't really care about your industrial ideology. Let's just see what the results/profits are.
Those who work at Qantas should be very pleased that things have improved so dramatically and look set to remain positive for quite some time.
Rapidly rising share prices and profits are good for shareholders, CEO bonuses, and staff.

[Boe787]

"Unlike legacy pilots, CEO compensation and benefits are subject to market forces, what will the shareholders pay to retain the person in that role. AJ is paid exactly in line with his value to the company, nothing more and nothing less. He is paid more than some in the industry and less than many"

Professor, please enlighten us as to which airline Ceos are paid more than Mr Joyce??
Maybe in the land of rampant capitalism, the USA,i believe the CEOs of American/United/Delta paid more, but then again they are managing vastly bigger operations than Qantas!!

Beyond them as mentioned please enlighten us as to any Airline CEO paid more?

[atlas12]

Network taking over 717 operations? Well maybe.... but consider for a second the scale of moving an operation of that size, not to mention NJS currently employs what, 200+ pilots? Network would have to hire a huge chunk of them? Who says QF won't buy out NJS and run the show themselves?

I have to agree with Going Nowhere though, 717 isn't a good fit for QLD ops. A LOT of flying is going back to the Q400 because the loads are so low.... sometimes 20 pax on a MKY....

[maggotdriver]

Speaking of market distortions, narcissist, professor, self appointed MENSA graduate, etc. - how many people actually vote on the remuneration package in most large companies? Oh, I remember now, a handful of fund managers get to (effectively) proxy vote on behalf of the real shareholders. I guarantee most real owners of the shares don't vote in the affirmative or more accurately, wouldn't vote yes for the remuneration packages if they had the chance! Strangely, the little cartel looks after itself...:ugh::yuk:

[oicur12.again]

"sustained fuel price drop, as well as the fall in the AUD from $1.15 to 0.77c"

Both of these contribute to a short term airline windfall but are systemic of greater problems brewing.

According to the Brookings institute "oil prices have been in a free fall, with demand dropping across Europe, Japan, India, China, Brazil"

The major contributer to a drop in oil prices is the significant drop in demand as a result of a global slowdown. Dancing a jig over cheap oil is false economy.

"Professor, please enlighten us as to which airline Ceos are paid more than Mr Joyce??"

About 30 seconds of research found that the CEO of DL for example was paid in total about 15m for one year. Probably more out there but I think you will find the several million Joyce is paid is not that high compared to many.

[Boe787]

Oicur,

You obviously did not read my post, i already acknowledged that the CEOs of the big 3 USA Airlines,including Delta would be on more than Joyce, and given the size of those Airlines, some what understandable!

However i beleive he is over paid compared to most Airline CEOs running airlines of a comparable size to Qantas!

[blueloo]

However i beleive he is over paid compared to most Airline CEOs running airlines of a comparable size to Qantas!

Let alone by the comparison to the success of the airline, or in this case the complete lack of success!!!!!!

[fearcampaign]

You are incorrect in why oil prices have declined.

THe US producers have been adding 4 million barrels per day from shale oil into the market!

This is a significant supply increase. You must look at the supply side of the equation too and not focus simply on demand.

Whilst it is true that demand tapered off slightly in China and the poorer parts of Europe, OPEC has maintained supply, as has the USA.

This is an attempt by OPEC to hurt the Shale oil producers in the USA as they attempt to be oil self sufficient in the next few years.It also affects Russia and Venezuela.

The Weighted price of oil needed by US companies to remain profitable is US $60-62 per barrel.

Hence why OPEC must make a sustained effort over many years to affect the US oil market and keep the price low.

Sub $90 fuel and possibly sub $60 fuel is here to stay for a long time yet.The US shale oil boom won't be going anytime soon.Many are forecasting sub $40 oil for the next ten years.

Airlines benefit the most.
For Qantas the fuel bill for International is approximately $4.8 billion. You can see what a greater than 50% drop in fuel prices does to QF profits.
Combine that with a weaker AUD and less foreign competition and things are very rosy indeed for QF.
The Feb half year results and June full year results will be the proof in the pudding.
I'm happy Alan will get a $10-$15 million dollar bonus even if the 5000 sackings, VR did not do the heavy lifting.
He certainly did not waste a crisis.
That crisis has well and truly passed, as has his pay freeze.
The executive bonuses will be very plump this financial year.

[Australopithecus]

Oicur and the Professor appeared a few months back on threads like this one, coincidentally about the same time Wirth revealed her master stroke to bomb social media and fora (why do you twiter tho, thenturiun?) such as this.

I am late for a guided tour of the local third world debauchery or I would spend more energy on a refutation of their disinformation campaign. In the meantime, as an exercise for the student, look up "agitprop" and see if it doesn't match exactly the contributions made by the aforenamed.

Finally, can we all stipulate that the CEO is grossly over paid by any rational measure? And that Gareth (no, I am not lisping again, honest) mentioned in public a 1.6 Billion loss to date on all of the various JQ brain farts? And that AJ will be magically awarded a hefty windfall >$10 million because the exchange rate is reverting to the mean and that OPEC has issued a bitch slap to the over-leveraged US shale oil guys?

(and as a bonus screw Russia, Venuzuela and those fun boys and girls in Iran?)

"Nice work if you can get it" sums up my feelings on that. I guess this CEO caper is more about having absent oversight that anything else. A normally constituted board (ie: without <insert scathing pejorative character assasination here>) would have given him the old "heave-ho" a couple of billion ago*

Anyway...i hear the siren song of the equatorial night. Over and out.

[Derfred]

I am no economist, and I openly admit that - unlike some of my fellow pilots and PPRuNers who think they are.

But I will add a contrarian viewpoint on oil prices.

This is based on pure common sense and mathematics that a 12yo should understand (does it have to be more complicated?)

Sure, a reduction in oil prices will improve every airline's bottom line in the short term.

But if those oil prices remain low, the market price for tickets will adjust accordingly, with the lower priced airlines reducing ticket prices and forcing the higher priced airlines to do likewise. In other words, the supply/demand equation for airline tickets will conspire to reduce all airlines to tiny margins again in time. What this will also do is increase the market for airline travel in general, as more people can afford to fly, so Boeing and Airbus will sell more aircraft, more airlines will pop up, and capacity will generally increase, also impacting on the bottom line of existing airlines.

Now, what happens with an increase in oil prices? All airlines suffer greatly in the short term (as we have witnessed). It takes a long time for the industry to adjust to higher oil prices and generate profits at the new oil level because it's a lot harder to downsize capacity than to upsize it. You have to sell aircraft to an industry that isn't buying aircraft. Sacking staff is a lot harder and more expensive than employing staff (in Western countries at least). It's impossible to sell half an airport terminal that you have just spent $50M building. The $500M IT/communications infrastructure you just invested in won't cost you less if you start using it less. Many other fixed costs were fixed at the existing capacity and won't reduce if you sell or park 20% of your fleet. This is why the LC/AJ strategy of cutting routes and reducing fleet was absurd. Many of the fixed costs remain, and your unit cost of operating your remaining aircraft/routes increase accordingly. Hence the huge operating losses in the course of reducing capacity.

Anyone who thinks that they can maintain profitability in a shrinking airline had better have a damn good long term plan in place. Did LC/AJ have one? Here's a clue: "We will not re-invest in QF international until it returns a profit." First prize. Are any of their KPI's based on having a damn good long term plan in place? And by long term, airline investment needs a 10-20 year outlook at least. Are any of their KPI's based on a 10-20 year outlook? Big problem right there from the top down.

The irony is that a high oil price benefits most the premium carriers. It is the LCC's that suffer most with a high oil price. The reason is that the price of fuel becomes a far greater percentage of operating costs, and that the unit staff cost becomes a far lower percentage. And it is the unit staff cost that makes LCC's competitive against the premium carriers. Also, as the ticket prices rise with fuel prices, the bottom end of the ticket market vanishes. You can't sell a $50 ticket for $100, because the folks that pay $50 won't pay $100. Whereas the folks that pay $400 will still pay $450.

So I am interested to see what happens if the oil prices do stay low - this should benefit the LCC's more than the premium carriers. It will also benefit the airlines operating out of low wage countries more than the high wage countries. Neither of these two observations are good for the future of QF mainline.

My only hope is that the short term gain QF will experience from the drop in fuel prices will provide the cash to actually order some new aircraft and get the airline back on it's feet. LC/AJ will take the bonuses to a tax haven and retire on luxury yachts. It won't be a result of any of their expert management, they were just bloody lucky that the US shale oil producers jumped into the market just in time to save their arses. They will be awarded full credit, of course, and I know you and I will see right through that and remain forever disheartened. The journalists will herald them as heroes, because we don't have journalists in Australia anymore, apart from Ben). But hopefully the next round of management will be employed to actually run an airline instead of grounding one (or selling one, as per the previous Chair/CEO) and we will all look forward to a new Qantas that isn't solely focussed on busting unions (which haven't been busted), disengaging its staff, and pissing off it's loyal passengers.

[oicur12.again]

Australogrumpikiss

Sorry mate, didnt realise you were such a grumpy old bastard.

"can we all stipulate"

always scares me when someone tries to encourage group think. Can we all . . . no we cant mate, sorry.

[spelling_nazi]

Rumour confirmed

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/150x100q90/673/yP7rMR.jpg (http://imageshack.com/f/ipyP7rMRj)

[EXEK1996]

Yes they are all going to Jetstar

[cloudsurfng]

Yes they are all going to Jetstar

You're kidding yourself.

[caneworm]

MOST execs would love the pay and benefits of an A380 captain

And therein lies the problem. Far too many office wonks who have been in the industry for 5 minutes are wielding their curling irons over what other people are earning instead of just doing their job and getting on with the effective running of the airline.
The executive bonus system is a cancer eating away at the core business. Decisions are being made based on the anticipated bonus, not necessarily for the ongoing good of the business.
Here's a thought, do a good job and the bonus is, you can keep your job.

[fearcampaign]

Caneworm,

I would not get too troubled by a few people fishing for a bite on the forum.

There will always be water cooler discussions about what the highest paid A380 SCC/Manager is paid and incorrectly assume all 2500 mainline pilots get paid that!

You hear lots of ideology, but very little in the way of facts or statistics.

Today's good news from the Financial Review is that Virgin profits are up due to fuel price drops and yield improvements. Virgin only benefit 25% from fuel price drops and Qantas benefit in 75% EXPOSURE to the drops!!!!! Well done QF Treasury!!!
With only a 25% exposure Virgin go from a $3 million benefit 1Half to a $50 million benefit second half::ooh::ooh:

Qantas fuel burn international alone is $4.5-$4.8 billion. Work out at least a 50-60% fall, and at 75% of that its still a huge number :ooh::ooh::ooh::ooh:
Won't see a great deal of that in the first half year but the full year will be massive.

Article also says that Australians' insatiable appetite for travel is NOT being weakened by the lower dollar either with Webjet reporting a 38% rise in INTERNATIONAL bookings despite the lower dollar.

Did someone say BIG BONUS time!!!!

With Qantas shares soaring to $2.70, I wonder what Alan's options are worth that were issued at around 0.80cents

[MTBUR]

Half year announcements tomorrow, and announcement of all these things on the back of an expected profit would be good.

[goodonyamate]

My tip....nuthin.

just more of the same 'the sky is falling, tighten the belts, lower costs, transformation yadda yadda yadda'

Probably some mention of the dwindling mining flying etc etc.


I hope I'm pleasantly surprised

[Keg]

Change from my previous. No new jet announcement tomorrow is my guess.

They won't want the market distracted from what an awesome job they've done turning things around. I suspect the announcement of new jets at a time when the market is a bit quieter or perhaps when VOZ have just made a decent announcement about something. I don't reckon they'll want any distractions again for the full year results either.

[goodonyamate]

Oh no keg, what have you heard :uhoh:

[Potsie Weber]

Keg is correct, no announcement on new type tomorrow.

New type proposal will go to board second half of this year. Don't get too excited though, the numbers are disappointing and no more than replacements or even less.

[Keg]

Haven't heard anything specific goodonyamate. Just nutting it through from e messaging point of view. They'll want the market to bask in the full glow of their success at 'turning it around' whilst still keeping up the mantra of 'more to do'. New aeroplanes tomorrow don't fit into that narrative. They will fit into the narrative later on in the year though.

Besides which, I suspect they've got Airbus sharpening their pencils on the A350. It's no secret that we have the 789s at a bargain basement price and so any counter offer from Airbus needs to be in that context.

I suspect that these will be expansion airframes- at least in part. The 789s are not a 744 replacement- though I suspect a number of them will eventually be A330 replacements given the oldest of those will be 15 or so once we get the first 787 deliver. Expect to see 787s on routes such as SYD-SFO and perhaps even MEL-SFO, BNE-LAX, PER- DBX- Europe (perhaps a couple of ports if it does BNE-DXB as well), maybe MEL-DFW if it has the legs.

Anyway, it's going to be a few months yet until we hear the news. The question is when the time comes whether they just announce the 789s or get ahead of the game and announce a 744 replacement for delivery (777X or A350-1000) from 2020 or thereabouts. Maybe that's where Airbus can get a win and avoid us taking 789s if they come up with the right deal for 70+ aeroplanes in the medium to long term.

[SUP guy]

I asked Alan a direct question about the 787's in late December. His response was that his priority was to pay down debt.
I don't expect any announcement on a new type soon.

[swh]

Interesting Keg, if they went the A350 route, every long haul pilot could fly each aircraft, A350/A380 CCQ/MFF, and common type rating for those already A330 endorsed.

[Troo believer]

A colleague asked Joyce a few weeks ago about the 789. His words" we can't afford not to get them". Perth Europe is possible and being looked at.

[mohikan]

If QF gets a new type, maybe Keg will get his wish and A380 S/O's will get a pay cut as part of the 'offset' package to secure the flying.

I have to say I was surprised to see him taking on the S/O's on Qrewroom recently, but a friend advised that Keg is now gunning for a management job (base manager SIT or SDT I believe) and so any calls for pay / condition cuts need to be understood in that context.

Back to the thread theme, news from the middle east is that QF has been canvassing options for returnees to crew the new type. Multiple sources in EK have confirmed this.

[The Green Goblin]

It'll be announced tomorrow.

The training slots are already booked with Boeing in singapore. The only question is who, where and how much.

[Tuner 2]

"It'll be announced tomorrow"

Are you ready to come back here in 12 hours or so and admit you were wrong?

[CaptCloudbuster]

I have to say I was surprised to see him taking on the S/O's on Qrewroom recently, but a friend advised that Keg is now gunning for a management job (base manager SIT or SDT I believe) and so any calls for pay / condition cuts need to be understood in that context.

I'm sure Keg can speak up for himself but as a long time reader on Qrewroom I have seen him discuss / argue consistently on various issues over many years. In my opinion he has demonstrated integrity.

The SIT / SDT base manager positions were announced over a week ago....

[Keg]

If QF gets a new type, maybe Keg will get his wish and A380 S/O's will get a pay cut as part of the 'offset' package to secure the flying.

I have to say I was surprised to see him taking on the S/O's on Qrewroom recently.......

If you saw my burst on qrewroom 'recently' in the last week then you'll know how false both of those statements are.

The question is why would you yet again peddle a falsehood Mohikan? This is becoming a bit of a habit for you to grossly misrepresent state,ents that I've put my name to. Given your form it doesn't surprise me but it is irritating having yo continually correct your falsehoods. Your attempts to bully people are pitiful.


....a friend advised that Keg is now gunning for a management job (base manager SIT or SDT I believe).....


Your' friend' is out of touch. Was gunning is the term and it was no real secret from November when I first threw my hat in the ring. As Cloudbuster points out the positions were announced a couple of weeks back. Whilst I don't feel the need to justify the decision to apply, personally I saw an opportunity to make a positive contribution to the Qantas pilot community. I didn't get it. Ce la vie.

....and so any calls for pay / condition cuts need to be understood in that context.

Puh-leese. :ugh: :rolleyes: I've already taken a pay/ condition cut in the last few months under the current award as have a number of my colleagues. You'll need to come armed with more than that if you want to score some points.

What's this make it now Mohikan? None for three? Four? Your obsession is unhealthy. Get help.

Anyway, back to the thread. I guess we'll know in the next 15 minutes.

[Tankengine]

Yeah,
How did Jetstar Hong Kong go?:E

[Bahama Breeze]

Goblin was wrong.

[The Green Goblin]

Yes, I was wrong, but I'll be right at some point in the near future.

[Tuner 2]

And a broken clock is right two times a day...

[Shark Patrol]

personally I saw an opportunity to make a positive contribution to the Qantas pilot community.

Keg, this statement probably explains why you didn't get the job.

[C441]

The training slots are already booked with Boeing in singapore. The only question is who, where and how much.

Seems thats a bit presumptuous.

Hot rumour doing the rounds is 8 X 789's to replace 3 X 747's & 3 X 330's or equivalent capacity but it hasn't been run past the board yet so an announcement is someway off yet.

.....its might be just a just a rumour though....or it might not.:)


....and while we're at it...
Keg said:
Whilst I don't feel the need to justify the decision to apply, personally I saw an opportunity to make a positive contribution to the Qantas pilot community.

The base management positions are an attempt at resurrecting or replacing that oh-so successful 'Connections' campaign. Keg, in my opinion, would be a worthy applicant for such a role as I suspect he is well respected by his colleagues. I'm just saddened that it's even necessary.

[OneDotLow]

8 is too few airframes to be financially viable. Even when you take into accounts the orange ones, you're still borderline on costs I imagine.

[indamiddle]

And my favourite line in the financial statements is
" The positive impact of reduced depreciation expense".
Creative accounting rears its ugly head as predicted considering how this expense was loaded up on last years P&L

[Transition Layer]

Only 8 B789s for Mainline? :{

Say it ain't so! :\

[Bug Smasher Smasher]

It ain't so.

[Reflex10]

Reduced depreciation expense because it was written off with the $2.5B write-down last year!

[Derfred]

I asked Alan a direct question about the 787's in late December. His response was that his priority was to pay down debt.
I don't expect any announcement on a new type soon.

A colleague asked Joyce a few weeks ago about the 789. His words" we can't afford not to get them".

I personally asked AJ recently: "Can you please tell me how many 787's you are ordering so I can post it on PPRuNe?"

To my surprise, he told me exactly how many airframes, when they'll be delivered, what routes they will fly, by whom and on what contract.

But I've changed my mind, I'm not going to post it here. So you'll just have to wait... :}

[IsDon]

It wouldn't matter if you did Fred.

This is PPRuNe, nobody will believe you anyway.

[The_Cutest_of_Borg]

The business case for 787-9s to mainline will be put to the Board in August, pending sign-off of the LH EBA before that time.

This was stated unequivocally by Andrew David to a direct question put to him by pilots at a meeting about two weeks ago.

AIPA is now in heavy negotiations with the Company regarding the EBA.

[Break Right]

And you believe everything that AD says? Good luck. :ugh:

[The_Cutest_of_Borg]

No, but the activity and the deadline around the EBA is real. This hasn't happened in recent times. The deadline will mean that agreement with the AIPA negotiators will have to be reached by May.

So we will know soon.

[Keg]

Welcome back Borg. Haven't seen you for yonks. Still got the good goss I see!

He didn't happen to mention when that business case might suggest the airframes are set to arrive did he?

[busdriver007]

Decision already made(proposals taken to the Board June & July and approved August last year! Just need an agreement to make the announcement!

[IsDon]

A few weeks ago The Prince of Darkness echoed the same plan.

EBA sign off is the last hurdle as the other two (International profitable and pay down of $1B in debt) appear to be over the line if things continue as they appear they will.

According to him, the plan is for 7 aircraft arriving 2017 and these will be the first of many more over subsequent years.

This also agrees with what AJ said when I quizzed him on why the EBA could possibly be the make or break as to whether or not the 789s would be bought. His response was that the bean counters hate variables. At the moment, the pilot pay is a variable that can't be neatly accounted for on a spreadsheet. Once this is known, regardless of what the figure is, then the nice neat spreadsheet can be presented to the board.

[bdcer]

Sounds like they're simply delaying the announcement of the order to create a bit of leverage on the EBAs (New acft coming anyway, but let's get something more out of it).

I for one am sick of the constant, "it's coming!"

[Nigel747]

Well, if our bean counters are that anal about their neat spreadsheets then that explains part of the reason as to the poor performance over the last ten years. Re pilot wages as a variable, how do they account for fuel price fluctuations. I call BS on the last few threads. Sign off the EBA so that we are unable to take PI A is my call.

[IsDon]

Well, if our bean counters are that anal about their neat spreadsheets then that explains part of the reason as to the poor performance over the last ten years. Re pilot wages as a variable, how do they account for fuel price fluctuations. I call BS on the last few threads. Sign off the EBA so that we are unable to take PI A is my call.

I agree with your sentiments. I'm just the messenger passing on comments made by those in a position to know the truth.

I personally believe as you do. Either the aircraft have already been ordered. Or the matter will be put to the board in August and pilot rate of pay is irrelevant.

Either way we're not being told so as to keep some advantage for the EA negotiations.

[DirectAnywhere]

There are plenty of rumours doing the rounds about a former management pilot - now management stooge - setting up a third party crewing company.

Could be the same rumour being passed around or different rumours from different sources.

Make of it what you will.

[Derfred]

Yawn... read the integration award.

[redkite1]

Integration award....? Where was the integration award when Qantas started Jitconnect and Jetstar? Management run the airline not the union.

[Keg]

If you've read the integration award recently you'll know where it was with those operations and how/ when/ where it applies.

[Transition Layer]

From today's Sydney Morning Herald:


Qantas puts ambitious deadline on flagship pay deal for pilots
March 16, 2015 - 12:15AM


Matt O'Sullivan
Business Reporter


Qantas has presented an ambitious time-frame of just four months to seal a deal with its long-haul pilots for a new four-year wage agreement that will include pay and conditions for those flying Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner aircraft.

The airline wants productivity gains from the pilots who will eventually fly the yet-to-be purchased aircraft, to be included in the new enterprise agreement, which covers about 1700 staff. The company is also seeking an 18-month wage freeze to be part of what is one of its flagship labour deals.

In an unusual move, negotiators from the Australian and International Pilots' Association have signed a confidentiality agreement that prevents them from talking about the commercially sensitive aspects of a business case for new aircraft such as the next-generation 787-9.

The proposed productivity increases from pilots who would fly the new aircraft involves restructuring the way their pay is calculated. It would differ from the highly complex formulas used to determine the pay of pilots who fly other long-haul Qantas aircraft such as its A380s and Boeing 747 jumbos.

If adopted, it would result in pilots who fly new aircraft such as the 787-9 clocking up more so-called stick hours – the time when a plane is airborne – for about the same amount of money as they would gain if they were flying fewer hours on other planes in the Qantas international fleet. The proposed formula would be more similar to that used by airlines such as Emirates and Qantas's budget offshoot Jetstar.

However, the time-frame for reaching a deal covering one of the most influential parts of the Qantas workforce is considered highly ambitious, particularly given negotiations began just over a month ago.

"They want to try to wrap things up by the middle of the year," the pilots union president, Nathan Safe, said.

"But it is their timetable, not ours. Everyone wants to have an airline that is successful and profitable but we are not going to be rushed into selling away terms and conditions that we have built up over decades."

A Qantas spokesman described the negotiations with the pilots union as constructive and a "detailed process".

"As with other groups, we've been clear about the need for an 18-month wage freeze as part of the agreement," he said.

Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce made clear last month that reaching a deal with the pilots that allowed the "business case to work for us" was one of several conditions that needed to be met before the airline would commit to buying a batch of 787-9 aircraft. The other is to pay down $1 billion of debt this financial year.

Helping the case for the new jets, the airline's international flying operations swung to a pre-tax profit of $59 million in the first half, from a $262 million loss a year earlier, aided by a depreciation benefit following a large write- down in the value of its fleet late last year.

The long-haul pilots remain one of the last parts of Qantas's unionised workforce yet to agree to an 18-month wage freeze as part of management's plans to slash $2 billion in costs during three years and axe 5000 jobs.

While Jetstar's domestic pilots are yet to vote on a new enterprise agreement that includes an 18-month pay freeze, AIPA and the Australian Federation of Air Pilots believe their members are likely to accept the revised deal because it includes provisions that allow them to opt for changes to work practices in exchange for extra hourly pay.

The unions reached a new in-principle agreement last month with Jetstar management after its pilots overwhelmingly rejected a proposed deal late last year.

The prospect of Jetstar pilots settling will take the total number of Qantas Group staff to have accepted a wage freeze to about 8000. They include short-haul pilots and licensed aircraft engineers.

Jetstar pilots will vote on the deal later this month, and the outcome will be known on March 30.

Shares in Qantas broke through the $3 mark last week for the first time since October 2009. They closed up 4¢ at $3.06 on Friday.

[Angle of Attack]

Fat chance any agreement in 4 months, that's my prediction....

[Wasi Wasamadroota]

I’ve read the integration award, so I won’t be accepting a “B” scale for the 787 in what any moron can see will replace my current fleet through endless RIN’s. Beware the ides of March, while we may be late, the night of the long knives isn’t far away for any D#*khead who wants to ram a B scale down my throat. While you’ve signed your confidentiality agreement, any CoM member who supports a LH award with a B scale is finished. We are getting 787s and the rate needs to be commensurate with the current types flown under the LH award.

[maggot]

s and the rate needs to be commensurate with the current types flown under the LH award.

So, being of 767ish size... 767ish rates?

[PPRuNeUser0184]

Hopefully the B scale equals squirrel cage for the flying and leave/days off.

[theheadmaster]

So, being of 767ish size... 767ish rates?

A common misconception.

The 787-9 is slightly shorter than an A330-300 and longer than an A330-200.
The 787-9 has a wider fuselage than an A330 allowing an extra seat per row.
Fuselage cabin area is about 5% larger than an A330-300.

Payload capability is close to a 747.

Range: Perth-London.

The 797-9 is no 767 size aircraft by any metric.

[dragon man]

What the company wants will equate to a cut of about 30% from the present pay of a 747 pilot with average overtime. Personally I think there are bigger problems than worrying about a squirrel cage.

[OverRun]

The 797-9 is no 767 size aircraft by any metric.

Looking at "Fuel burn & operating performance of the 787-8, 787-9 & competitors" recently, Aircraft Commerce bracketed the 787-8 with the 767-300ER and A330-200, and bracketed the 787-9 with the A330-300 and A340-300.

[Wingspar]

I don't think pay rates are the issue.
The real issue is the overtime.
If QF use the 789 to its full capability then current overtime rules would mean substantial increased gross payments.
Pity the poor sods who are junior and get domestic, eventually!
I don't think they'll sell it a 'B' scale.
You'll get a commensurate hourly pay rate but changes to overtime.
Are you happy with that?
I don't think any negotiators over the years envisaged duty periods extending to twenty hours. The company would never have agreed to the overtime component.
I don't think they are prepared to do it now.
No news really...makes sense what their trying to do.
Having said that QF pilots have paid for these overtime provisions.
Silly to agree to give them up. A slap in the face to those who worked hard to get them in the first place.

[Capt Kremin]

The other side of that coin is that these sorts of ULH TODs are done by other airlines using two captains and two FOs.

Seems to rarely rate a mention these days.

That said I think you are correct Wingspar

[OzSync]

In any case, it is pretty sad that we are all left guessing about this, with a newspaper article being our only real source of information.

It is also sad that the Company willingly dragged the SH negotiations out for more than two years, used back pay as a threat and bargaining tool yet suddenly want to push this through in half a year.

[dragon man]

IMO what we need to realise is that in ten years Qantas international will probably have 12/20 A380s and the 330s and 747s will be gone replaced by 787/777x/A350s. The present wage bill for pilots is approx $800 million per year. If 20% of the pilots remain on current wages and conditions (A380) but the other 80% go on to a different system with no overtime or night credits (a pay cut of approx 30%) then the wage bill of $800 million is reduced by approx $180 million per year. A huge win for management if it gets up.

[Wingspar]

If you have a look at the fleet it's old, old and old.
DM has a point that either way you look at it the fleet in ten years times will be completely different.
Smarts would negotiate an outcome that would cover that and not what we have now.
CK is right in the saving QF have with the use of S/O's as well even though I know some will argue their pay. Again this is something QF pilots have paid for.
If the company is looking for cheap offsets then they should consider fixing up the staff travel for a start.
The lads would like it but won't pay for it..nor should they.

[Keg]

In any case, it is pretty sad that we are all left guessing about this, with a newspaper article being our only real source of information.

There's nothing to know...... yet. The company position has been clear for yonks now as to what they're asking for. Increased efficiency. There are multiple ways of achieving that. Those efficiencies are being negotiated by AIPA who are having to balance a fine line between securing the flying and securing the best deal for the pilot group by holding onto as many T&CS as possible. No easy task.

Funny though how in the past we've (rightfully) complained about negotiations dragging on and taking forever and now that we're negotiating regularly and consistently (with the company deferring the training of one of the AIPA negotiators so he can be available) there are concerns being voiced of it being rushed.

If the company is looking for cheap offsets then they should consider fixing up the staff travel for a start.

Agreed. Some outside the square thinking is required on a multitude of issues.

[The_Cutest_of_Borg]

Dragon Man, no-one has seen what the offer is yet apart from the AIPA negotiators. It is a bit early to be jumping at shadows.

If the new type deal includes a realistic hourly rate (commensurate with other types )and a more linear OT regime, then I believe that with fixes to some of the festering sores such as staff travel, sick leave and home transport, that the majority of pilots would support it.

As far as it being a replacement for other types:

A380: Can't see this in the short/medium term. Qantas needs a high capacity aircraft.

747: This is going anyway and these pilots would be most affected. Perhaps some transitional pay deal for RIN pilots can be worked out although that hasn't happened in the RIN achieved so far.

A330: Would eventually be replaced by 787. More in the medium term I would suggest. This is where the realistic hourly rate comes in. A330 drivers don't score much in OT and will see any extra as a win.

[PPRuNeUser0184]

Dragonman,
Everyone will have their own measure on what's important.

For me having rotating seniority and a fair way of crewing the aircraft is as equally important as the money paid to fly it.

[dragon man]

The offer is the present 330 hourly rate no night credits no overtime. If we don't like it Jetstar or Freighters Australia will do it.

[Capt Kremin]

The offer is the present 330 hourly rate no night credits no overtime. If we don't like it Jetstar or Freighters Australia will do it.


Sounds about right for a first offer. The negotiations are ongoing.

Jetstar can fly them, but not branded as Qantas. Same with EFA.

[-438]

Whilst the thought of increased efficiency for the senior crew who may already be on four engined fleets at the expense of income and lifestyle may seem quite unpalatable.

The thoughts of some sort of future for those more junior, who may have needed to move to less appealing regions of the planet on LWOP, or faced a future of stagnation or demotion or worse, makes accepting a deal that may not be as gold plated seem a lot more palatable.

I am not suggesting we throw the baby out with the bath water, however I do believe we need to try a different tactic as the current award has done nothing for career protection for those more junior.

I am reminded of a colleague from the 737 who a couple of years ago, was thanked by an A380 Captain for keeping him comfortable in the lifestyle he had become accustomed to after another result where domestic had kept international afloat.

If those more senior find a more efficient award unpalatable, there are plenty of offshore 'opportunities' available, as experienced recently by many junior QF crew.

[Capt Kremin]

for keeping him comfortable in the lifestyle he had become accustomed to after another result where domestic had kept international afloat.

To be fair, the domestic result was just as due to 767 and A330 ops as the 737.

[-438]

Capt K, I think you missed the point of my anecdote, it could have been just as relevant if A380 pilot had said to a B767 pilot.

I am not saying we should dismiss the long haul award, I think we should aim for some sensible efficiencies that will help secure the future of mainline and the QF employees.

However, the talk of efficiency for a 787 award appears, reading between the lines, to be focusing on overtime & night credits. Of which not a lot is earned on domestic ops.

I am also fully aware that pilot salaries are relatively insignificant when it comes to profitability of various parts of the business. Much of the forthcoming discussion will be for the purpose of outside perceptions and how management can espouse their transformation program and the efficiencies they have created.

In saying the above, if we lose some hard earned conditions for any new 787 award, I believe they should be somewhat offset by returning some incentive in the form of share rights/executive bonus scheme, in good years as a result.

Just my opinion.

[IsDon]

The offer is the present 330 hourly rate no night credits no overtime. If we don't like it Jetstar or Freighters Australia will do it.


Wild arsed stabs in the dark dressed up as fact are not helping one bit.

I've been advised personally, and very recently, from someone in a position to know that there are numerous scenarios being looked at. Your scenario may be one of them, but wasn't specifically mentioned. What was mentioned was the inclusion of the 787 on the long haul award just like any other aircraft currently in the fleet, complete with night credits, overtime and every other add on untouched. Only the hourly rate had to be decided upon.

Others options being considered by both parties weren't elaborated upon. What was indicated very strongly is that there are MANY different options being considered by both parties. Suffice to say we are still a long way from nailing down a short listed option.

To come out and portray a take it or leave it rate is not only far from the truth, it is portraying a particularly confrontationist negotiation process which, I'm told, is not the case. There is no implied threat to send the flying to another entity, even if it were possible.

So please keep your scare mongering to yourself.

[dr dre]

The offer is the present 330 hourly rate no night credits no overtime. If we don't like it Jetstar or Freighters Australia will do it.

Or the ex-76 or the 737 people,
or guys on LWOP or JQ MoU guys.
or junior LH pilots
or any pilot in Mainline who is realistic about the future.

[Tuner 2]

IsDon,

Please stop trying to ruin pprune by posting accurate and factual information. Didn't you know that it's cool to be seen to be 'in the know', even when you aren't?

[IsDon]

IsDon,

Please stop trying to ruin PPRuNe by posting accurate and factual information. Didn't you know that it's cool to be seen to be 'in the know', even when you aren't?

I'm sorry mate, i don't know what came over me.:O

[dragon man]

I stick by what I said. It's not scaremongering. By AIPAs own admission it won't effect existing fleets.

[Tuner 2]

You stand by "The offer is the present 330 hourly rate no night credits no overtime." ?


Interesting, because I'm told by a good source that the company hasn't actually made any specific offers. The package might end up somewhere around that amount once converted to annual take home pay, but that offer hasn't been made, because they say no offer has been made.

Not too sure what that has to do with the possibility to "effect" (sic) existing fleets.

[IsDon]

By AIPAs own admission it won't effect existing fleets.

This is apparently true, but obviously may change. It appears, from what I've heard, from various sources, the company aren't actively seeking to change major parts of existing fleet contracts. The focus is very much on a new type.

Very early days yet people. Most of this is just supposition.

[CurtainTwitcher]

By AIPAs own admission it won't effect existing fleets.
This is just voter maths. If the company wants someone to vote for a reduction in T&C's, the only way it can be done is by doing it to somebody else.

To get the 50% +1 vote required to take a significant reduction in existing T&C for themselves, would be almost impossible, unless there were extenuating circumstances. Why would anyone ever agree to reduce his T&C? Existing T&C's can only ever be maintained or on a ratchet up under a majority voting system.

This is the trick, the bait & switch. Maintain existing T&C for those who believe they won't have to ever face those conditions themselves.

Within a relatively short time existing fleets will shrink & be replaced. Then majority of those who voted to the lesser T&C's for someone else will find themselves without a choice. There simply won't be enough seats on the lifeboat. Some will make it, but not many.

[crosscutter]

I had a discussion with an AIPA negotiator about A380 pay rates a couple of years back. He argued you always want to get the best conditions possible for a new type because it's going to be around a while.

I share you concerns Curtains.

I'm sure the smart people within AIPA are aware of this and just because the company may not want to change the conditions of existing fleets, doesn't mean AIPA won't suggest productivity improvements for the betterment of new type conditions.

[Jetsbest]

I believe that if efficiencies are to be sought/given, then pilots should consider that such measures will apply to all.

I believe that most L/H pilots are globally competitive in total cost to QF but there are, without doubt, some 'stand-out' aberrations on certain fleets. I've heard from a former pilot manager that QF detests what it now views to be the onerous cost of administering the L/H award; too many staff required to oversee the many 'tweaks' above a basic stick hour pay system; hence the 'simplification' mantra.

Regardless of what used to be 'normal' in QF, many contract components are arguably no longer relevant, or are even absurd, compared to what the bigger competitors have set as a sort of new and undeniable benchmark. I just regret that QF management seem either unwilling or incapable of describing, with real incontrovertible facts, where they want to get to in order to 'move forward' with the pilots.

To me everything, even now with all the urgency, sounds like spin, posturing, scare-mongering and disingenuous contrivance because, evidently, the truth cannot sustain the assertions being inferred.

Sad really.:\

[blueloo]

You stand by "The offer is the present 330 hourly rate no night credits no overtime." ?



Awesome.... COST INDEX 500000!! We can shave hours off the flight time! No point being up in the air longer than necessary!!!!


Oops fuel bill might go up though....


Sorry just having some irrational musings out loud! :}:}