Jetconnect ZK aircraft to now be VH registered

[Hold_Short]

A recent email today being sent to all employees at the QF subsidiary Jetconnect regarding the change over of all ZK registered aircraft to QF mainline Australian VH registered. This also includes the JC Long Haul cabin crew who will cease operating on B737 fleet. Where will this go from here, I'm not sure, however will Jetconnect slowly reduce in size to then be picked up by QF mainline but with an Auckland and Wellington Base? Jetconnect pilots operating Australian domestic sectors??

If there is any insight as to how Jetconnect can exist when the crew are operating VH tails under Australian QF AOC yet on different contracts with a different company? It happens with Cobham and Network here in Australia however they are different AOC's. I'm unsure how the Australian Pilots union will allow this to happen?

Extract from John Gissing's email:

Last month we announced that Emirates was withdrawing a large part of its Trans-Tasman flying and that Qantas would respond with additional A330 services. We’ve been working with Jetconnect, to manage the subsequent capacity and schedule changes. Today Qantas has advised Jetconnect of our preferred option to transition the seven New Zealand registered 737s onto the Qantas Air Operators Certificate (AOC). The proposal would see Jetconnect Flight and Cabin Crew continue to operate on the Tasman as they do today, however, flying the VH tail. This would allow us to improve the overall 737 fleet’s utilisation and efficiency. Consultation with Jetconnect’s affected employees has begun today and we will continue to keep you updated.

The 737s freed up by the above would enable more flying to new and existing destinations. Details are being confirmed but we’ll keep you informed over the coming weeks.

[Airbus A320321]

Perhaps they will adopt the Jetstar model of having aircraft all VH registered on the same AOC but with different contracts in Australia and New Zealand.

[Average Joe]

That’s a slippery slope if they’re allowed to fly VH tails.

Qantas planes, Qantas pilots.

[SandyPalms]

My thoughts are that the JC guys and gals have just had a huge win. The email this morning says that AIPA are involved, and I believe they will have to be put onto the SH award if the aircraft are flown under he QF AOC.

[ciport]

That would be the ideal outcome for the JC pilots, and they can only keep their fingers crossed. But if it's going to cost QF money it's probably wishful thinking. If that were to happen, how would they fit into the QF seniority list or would they?
Is this just the thin edge of the wedge along with talk of A320's going to NW as the SH eba expires next year?

[TBM-Legend]

So Jitconnect now becomes Jetconnect.

One thing for sure in the airline business for the past 90 years is that change is always inevitable..

[Icarus2001]

That’s a slippery slope if they’re allowed to fly VH tails.

Qantas planes, Qantas pilots.

What, like the 717?

[nefarious1]

Yeah.... Qantas planes, Contract pilots...

[crosscutter]

Just another step closer to foreign pilots being able to fly domestic RPT. That's how it should be viewed.
It's possible this is another sign Jetconnect might be wound up...but hey...with Network flying a bunch of 320's around QF will have their low cost labour sorted. The Network announcement is the biggie and one which may have large ramifications for all. Jetconnect is now the side show, the new Jetstar has arrived. As they have done in the past, the company will do what it likes. This management and the next. Being an ar*ehole is no longer an EBA negotiating tool...because ar*eholes are ar*eholes. I'm starting to feel so stressed it must be time for long term sick leave. Wait.....where are all the pilots going to come from?

[Rated De]

Being an ar*ehole is no longer an EBA negotiating tool...because ar*eholes are ar*eholes. I'm starting to feel so stressed it must be time for long term sick leave.

Like any magician, the key is to not watch where he says, watch elsewhere. Network was the distraction. Jetconnect is the issue and foreign pilots in VH registered the key.

They never finished the war on the pilots, only the pilots surrendered. it is a never ending game to lower unit cost.

Qantas has big execution risk in this strategy against declining supply.

Wait.....where are all the pilots going to come from?

The pilot union will be rendered impotent again. They play checkers and management play chess... Jetconnect is an expired concept, its worth nothing as the 'tax and arbitrage benefits' of its existence are long expired.

A short term fix to self induced pilot shortage on fleet problems is the wedge they want, circumventing the Fair Work Act under the pretext of manufactured impending crisis.

Wash rinse and repeat

[MELKBQF]

Virgin have been doing it for a couple of years now, trans tasman and flights to the pacific islands are all operated VANZ crew on VH registered 737s.

[mince]

That’s a slippery slope if they’re allowed to fly VH tails.

Qantas planes, Qantas pilots.

Get on the slippery dip!

The average Joe Traveller doesn't know (nor care) what the rego is. It's the logo on the tail that they are interested in....

Fascinating times ahead.

[Average Joe]

“AIPA has long been concerned about the operation of Jetconnect. In 2010 we took action in the Fair Work Commission alleging that the Jetconnect pilots were not New Zealand employees, but rather Australian employees and entitled to the protections of the Fair Work Act.”

Surely they’d be considered Australian employees flying VH planes on an Aussie AOC. Would expect to see all JC pilots brought in at the bottom of the mainline seniority list.

[goodonyamate]

I would say jetconnect is finished, and they will be using the crew to fly until mainline have enough to crew it themselves.

[NGsim]

Like any magician, the key is to not watch where he says, watch elsewhere. Network was the distraction. Jetconnect is the issue and foreign pilots in VH registered the key.


if you had any clue as to the jetconnect pilot make up you'd realise they were far more Australian than your deputy prime minister.....

[Rated De]

if you had any clue as to the jetconnect pilot make up you'd realise they were far more Australian than your deputy prime minister..... I would presume dear sir that a New Zealand registered aircraft is required to have a New Zealand licensed pilot fly it. I assume you are familiar with ICAO license rules?:

Any pilot who wishes to fly on an aircraft registered in a State other than the one that has issued the licence, needs to obtain an authorization from the State of Registry.(my italics) This authorization is generally given by the State of Registry through a validation or a conversion of the foreign licence. In general, the validation process is used for short-term authorization while the conversion process is used for longer-term authorization.

So the issue is more to do with license issue than nationality. Qantas are pushing in trade circles for free movement of labour rather like the Schengen area we have in Europe, perhaps this is exactly what they use a crew shortage of their own making to lever.

[Troo believer]

There is or was an inter country licensing agreement between NZ and Aus which allowed either licensed pilot to fly the others aircraft. Certainly that was the case about 8 years ago from memory. Every month there are between 10-20 sim sessions for Jetconnect in MEL plus Tiger yet not enough Sim time for mainline. Go figure. There is no way that we AIPA should entertain some sort of amalgamation. Let Air New Zealand take them all or go and join ME 3, China or some other contract mob. If you want a job with QF mainline jump through the hoops and join at the bottom of the seniority like everyone else. Don’t forget the Integration Agreement. I can’t see any scope for this to be considered as some sort of Tasman LOA. And what’s it to do with Gissing?

[Steve Zissou]

My thoughts are that the JC guys and gals have just had a huge win.

My thoughts are ... they most definitely haven't. Just my thoughts though.

[NGsim]

So the issue is more to do with license issue than nationality. Qantas are pushing in trade circles for free movement of labour rather like the Schengen area we have in Europe, perhaps this is exactly what they use a crew shortage of their own making to lever.[/QUOTE]


You couldn't be more correct. The last flight I got between Auckland and Christchurch was conducted by a VH airplane with a captain from Melbourne and an FO from bumf@ck NSW. And yet I still didn't fear my job was under threat or that Kim Jong was about to invade....

[ComradeRoo]

If I get this idea right - they will only need to push for activation of Civil Aviation Convention article 83bis protocol. Same way as it is done in other parts of the world, it will allow CASA to rubberstamp NZ (or any other country) licenses as valid for a certain NZ operator using VH registered aircraft.

The good example of where it is all going is an abundance of VQ/VP (Bermuda) registered aircraft in Europe. Unties the hands of employers in terms of sourcing the workforce.

[Rated De]

The good example of where it is all going is an abundance of VQ/VP (Bermuda) registered aircraft in Europe. Unties the hands of employers in terms of sourcing the workforce.
Spot on, think of commercial shipping and flags of convenience...



There is or was an inter country licensing agreement between NZ and Aus which allowed either licensed pilot to fly the others aircraftOne can but hope for Qantas, Jetconnect and other pilots , the pilot union is burning the midnight oil! Very Oldmeadow

[Di_Vosh]

And what’s it to do with Gissing?

JG is the Group Executive of AA&S (Associated Airlines and Services).

This includes Eastern, Sunstate, Network, Jetconnect, and Cobham.

So announcements regarding Network and Jetconnect have everything to do with him.


DIVOSH!

[Deano969]

So where are all the 330s coming from to fly trans Tazman?

[Transition Layer]

So where are all the 330s coming from to fly trans Tazman?

One daily MEL-SIN and one daily SYD-SIN previously operated by A330 will be A380 from March next year.

As for Jetconnect Pilots, they should go to the bottom of the Q list as of today, they are then quarantined to their current position and base, and if they want to move elsewhere it’s only in accordance with seniority.

[Brakerider]

As for Jetconnect Pilots, they should go to the bottom of the Q list as of today, they are then quarantined to their current position and base, and if they want to move elsewhere it’s only in accordance with seniority.


And therefore so should Qlink/JQ/Network/EFA Pilots? Or no, because these are "mainline routes"?

[Derfred]

This has been coming for a while now, it's been no secret that the whole Jetconnect arrangement was on the chopping block. The inefficiency of the ZK 737 airframe utilisation is the main driver, I think. They want the airframes to fly domestically after a Tasman sector. Under current arrangements, they can't do it. Reason: Fair Work Act. The minute a Jetconnect pilot flies a domestic sector, they must be employed under Australian conditions (SHWA). It's taken them time to work it out because of it's legal and industrial complexity.

If I recall correctly, some years ago mainline pilots were flying ZK 737's for a period of 6 months or so. They were all issued validation letters to allow this (as required, as Rated De pointed out). This was only allowed as a short term arrangement. I'm sure the same could be arranged to allow NZ crew to do the opposite, but in the long term I would predict they would need an AUS licence and be employed under the SHWA with an NZ basing or whatever other deal is negotiated with AIPA.

Whether the current pilots can be absorbed into QF mainline would also be dependent upon a deal with AIPA. It's been done before, after the Ansett demise. Rated 737 pilots worked under contract on QF 737's for a fixed period then had the option to be employed full time and added into the seniority list. However, I don't think any of them were contracted or employed as Captains, only F/O.

So, I would assume that the status quo will continue (under letters of validation), and the long term solution will be the result of an industrial negotiation/agreement.

The good thing about this for pilots in general is that QF have realised that the dodgy arrangement that was introduced to save on unit pilot costs and increase industrial pressure is not actually saving anything on the bottom line. Hopefully that will be a long term industrial lesson for QF.

Here's hoping this only improves the pay and conditions for the NZ pilots, and also offers them good prospects for the future.

Pure speculation here, but the worst case scenario that I can predict for current NZ Captains, is that they might lose a stripe at some point if they wish to continue. For F/O's I don't predict any downside other than longer time to command, perhaps mitigated by the opportunity to fly mainline widebody while they wait.

[Steve Zissou]

Interesting post Derfred. Unfortunately Jetconnect pilots have been told since the original announcement today that there will be no change to terms/conditions & pay and no joining QF mainline seniority.

It'll be status quo but flying with VH registered aircraft. Be interesting to see if AIPA do have any influence in this. Spare a thought also for some of the other JC staff who may not survive these changes.

[73qanda]

I would have thought it would mirror what Virgin did a few years ago ie Maintain the advantage of having crew based in NZ but lose the overheads of a separate AOC.
How did that work out for the NZ based Virgin pilots?

[Irritable_Bowel]

No thoughts are to be spared for anybody unless they are a mainline pilot.

Serves every other non mainline pilot right for not having the patience to stay in GA earning nothing until qantas opened the employment door every few years or more. Shame on anyone that had no other choice than to take the only jobs that were on offer.

[Wing Root]

All this talk of Jetconnect pilots finding themselves on a Qantas seniority list on Australian T&Cs is a pipe dream. The preferred model already exists in the form of VH registered A320's and Dash 8s with orange stars on the tail flying around New Zealand now. The people flying these machines in NZ are operating under Australian AOCs. They are paid under local NZ conditions with no hope of easy transfer to their Australian based equivalent because the NZ operation is desperate enough for crew as it is. Surely the Jetconnect model will simply move to a version of this set up?

[Snakecharma]

There is no connection between an aoc and an eba.

It has the potential to get untidy but there is no barrier to qf paying the nz guys exactly what they are paying them now to fly the vh tailed 73’s.

There is nothing from a (casa) regulatory perspective, once everyone is checked into the qf system (under the qf aoc), stopping a jetconnect first officer for example jumping into a jet with a qf skipper and doing a perth return (or vice versa).

The thing stopping that “operationally convenient” but industrially untidy behaviour is the eba.

Not saying it wont cause a huge ****fight because once the nz guys/gals are checked into the qf training and checking system they are for all intents and purposes qf pilots (from a licencing/regulatory perspective, not industrially)

[goodonyamate]

I think there’s still a lot of things to fall into place before anything happens. Note the email said ‘our preferred option’...this is far from set in stone.

The scenario you refer to is covered by ‘transfer of business’ legislation

Perhaps this adds weight to the argument that Jetconnect is here purely to avoid paying Australian terms and conditions, and maybe this could be revisited.

[Daylight Robbery]

You can look to Jetstar to see how this may pan out.

All Jetstar Aust/ NZ flying are VH tails. Pilots are EBA or NZ CEA. The Tasman and NZ flying is done by a mix of both contracts, but NZ CEA pilots are not allowed to fly (or even train) domestically in Australia. At the moment this is by agreement only.

See no reason why the QF situation would not use this as a template

[Captain Fun]

The difference here between the Jetstar NZ model is that JQ NZ crew also do domestic NZ flying not just the Tasman.

With JetConnect crew flying only a very limited trans Tasman network surely there will be huge efficiency gains if those crew can do domestic sectors or wider international ops too?

[help me jebus]

1111111111¹¹11

[Troo believer]

I hope both Jetconnect and Qantas Pilots are viewing this as a time to Unite and work to securing better conditions for everyone involved,rather then being divided and conquered.

You have got to be joking. Jetconnect pilots are contractors which applied knowing that they had a fast path to command wearing a Qantas uniform. If they want mainline T&C apply to mainline meeting the minimum standards. Ask a Jetstar, QLink or Cobham pilot how they got into mainline?
The company can’t crew the 737 fleet properly at the moment. Any talk of some sort of shonky seniority list and watch what happens to engagement once again. Talking about what 80 pilots at best. My heart bleeds.
And in case you’ve all forgotten
https://youtu.be/68f_JdPmvlM

[travelator]

You have got to be joking. Jetconnect pilots are contractors which applied knowing that they had a fast path to command wearing a Qantas uniform. If they want mainline T&C apply to mainline meeting the minimum standards. Ask a Jetstar, QLink or Cobham pilot how they got into mainline?
The company can’t crew the 737 fleet properly at the moment. Any talk of some sort of shonky seniority list and watch what happens to engagement once again. Talking about what 80 pilots at best. My heart bleeds.
And in case you’ve all forgotten
https://youtu.be/68f_JdPmvlM

I hope you are not representative of the Qantas pilots attitude to their peers. Why do you deserve to be a Qantas pilot and not them? Does anybody choose to work for a contractor over legacy options? Did they choose to work for JC because they wanted to wear a Qantas uniform? Was Qantas even employing at the time?

The reality that seems to get lost on people like you, is that Qantas has created many competing streams of employment that employ sporadically and rarely open the door to the mothership. Pilots have had to be content with what is on offer at the time in order to provide for their families. What a wonderful world it would be if it was only Qantas and Virgin and we could work for either one as opposed to (insert ****ty shell/contractor/b scale).

It's your attitude towards your peers, yes peers, that makes the adversarial IR strategies work.

[neville_nobody]

Why do you deserve to be a Qantas pilot and not them?

Maybe because he passed the Pysch Test/Screening/Sim Ride/Interview and they didn't.

[travelator]

Maybe because he passed the Pysch Test/Screening/Sim Ride/Interview and they didn't.

And you know that do you? How many times has mainline recruited in the last 15 years? How many other group pilots have had the opportunity to even attempt that amazing process? Flying around in the exact same aircraft as you gods isn't enough to prove that they can actually do the job that you were screened for?

This is the point that I am making, people don't choose to go to the ****ty jobs, they take the opportunities that are available. The difference between the real Qantas pilots and the other scum is that the real pilots were given an opportunity to attempt and pass that process.

[ElZilcho]

Maybe because he passed the Pysch Test/Screening/Sim Ride/Interview and they didn't.

You mean all that BS that the self licking HR departments have been forcing on us for past 2 decades that Pilots vocally moan about having nothing to do with the job?

Seriously, some legacy pilots have their heads stuffed so far up their asses that they’ve lost sight of the real world of Aviation outside their own little bubbles... some of them never knew to begin with.

If you can fly a Jet for Jetconnect, Virgin, J* etc you can fly one for QANTAS, Air New Zealand or any other Legacy carrier... all that stands in the way is the red tape.

As pilots, we have no control over who hires when, and after several redundancies I’ll be damned if I was going to sit in the LHS of a turbo-prop in NZ for $50k any longer than I had too when the Aussies in NZ were offering nearly double that to fly a jet while I waited for Air NZ to hire.

Bitch and moan all you like, but it wasn’t your wife and kids being asked to put their lives on hold while daddy “stood on his morals” and turned down promotional opportunities because it might offend someone on the other side of the ditch.

I left Jetconnect a number of years ago, but regardless of the outcome here, none of their pilots deserve some of the vitriol that gets spewed at them on these forums.

Don’t hate the players, hate the game.

[puff]

Totally agree Daylight Robbery - interesting that everyone runs to all sorts of conclusions - when as mentioned by others VA does this, and has been doing it for years, as is JQ.

Quite simply the NZ crews just don't mix and fly with the AU crew. Works at the other end of the terminal...

NZ vs VH tails will be the only difference you will notice - allows better utilisation of the fleet, and cycling the a/c - the current ZK ones would have a lot more hours vs cycles than an VH aircraft.

[ElZilcho]

I hope you can see the irony of that statement Rep, factual as it maybe. With few exceptions, the travelling public does not distinguish between JC (or any subsidiary) and QF mainline. Same uniforms, same livery, same product.

If something unfortunate were to happen, a courtroom might absolve QF of some liability but the Public would not.

As such, I highly doubt the QF brand would be happy with sub-standard Pilots operating under their banner and thus the reason for their failures to move into Mainline lie elsewhere.

Honest question, was the failure rate from JC Pilots any higher than other entities in the Group? Are they not simply paying lip service to give the illusion of internal career opportunities while hiring externally?

[neville_nobody]

Problem for QF is they are saying on one hand people are not suitable but are happy for them to fly their aircraft because their labour is cheap.

So which is it? Are people suitable for QF or not?

[BewareOfTheSharklets]

I hope both Jetconnect and Qantas Pilots are viewing this as a time to Unite and work to securing better conditions for everyone involved,rather then being divided and conquered.
Agreed. Some of the attacks on JC pilots elsewhere in this thread are very disappointing.

[ElZilcho]

Sub-standard is your words, not mine. I said 'unsuccessful/unsuitable'.

Agree, wrong choice of words on my part.

However, are the JC (or any Group) Pilots unsuitable because of stiff competition or because it's best to keep them where they are and hire externally?

I wonder how many Group Pilots might have been successful had they worked for Virgin/Tiger?

This isn't exclusive to QF of course, Air NZ have gone through it recently favoring external Pilots over internals purely because the numbers required would have grounded the Links if they didn't. Commercially it makes perfect sense, poach talent from the competition while avoiding the double training of hiring internally.

[morno]

Ahhh deary me, the 1960's are still alive and well.....

[73qanda]

the harsh reality is that the vast majority of Jetconnect pilots, were deemed unsuccessful in the recent mainline assessment (fact).
Fact?
Perhaps you meant the harsh reality is that the vast majority of Jetconnect pilots who applied to QF were deemed unsuccessful in the recent mainline assessment (fact).

[Lowly FO]

The irony is that Mainline has been in a pincer move by JC and J* for years.

Actually it's ironic that you complain about the Jetconnect "pincer" move, but in the next breath whinge and moan about the one thing that would actually eliminate the pincer... JC pilots being paid the same as QF pilots. If you mainline guys were half as clever as you think you are you'd be pushing as hard as possible to have the SH EBA applied to Jetconnect.

[crosscutter]

If you mainline guys were half as clever as you think you are you'd be pushing as hard as possible to have the SH EBA applied to Jetconnect.

I think there was, in fact, quite a considerable court case a few years back funded by AIPA. All the way to the Supreme Court it went. I'll let one more knowledgable fill in the gaps. But the premis of your insult is misfounded, uninformed and ignorant of history.

[Lowly FO]

Or JC not existing and if QF still want a NZ base it's on the QF SH EBA.

That horse has well and truly bolted.

As stated, your suggestion has already been tried when they were NZ registered.

I'm aware.

Now they are VH registered the case maybe successful.

Exactly.

[Steve Zissou]

"Unfortunately travelator, the harsh reality is that the vast majority of Jetconnect pilots, were deemed unsuccessful in the recent mainline assessment (fact). Why would Qantas deem them unsuitable then decide to put them on the seniority list for movement within the mainline group".

What mainline assessment? Are you talking about recent interviews? Of maybe 115 total Jetconnect pilots, maybe 5 had interviews. (Just a guesstimate) At least 3 were successful. Was there some Qantas audit that no one knows about. Definitely not in the the last 18 months so how can your statement have any truth to it?

[kellykelpie]

The good news is that the NZ head of Jetconnect has agreed to operate as CEO of Qantas and will bring her management team across to help the Executive Managers at Qantas as they are very busy. Mr Clifford said there are no plans to replace the Qantas management team, but thanked them for their effort saying it had not gone unnoticed.

[73qanda]

Hmmm, doesn't look good for the QF management team then. apparently the JC team will wear QF management uniform but be paid NZ salaries. I imagine the board has a plan and the JC management team will be all that's left in QF HQ in a few years. If I was a senior exec at mainline I'd be worried.Good news is the annual profits should top $3B.

[Derfred]

Now they are VH registered the case maybe successful.

Why? If I recall correctly the court case did not proceed once it was determined the Fair Work Act has no jurisdiction over an NZ employer, which Jetconnect technically is, albeit a sham employer of convenience.

Changing the aircraft registration won't change that. Fair Work doesn't give a toss about aircraft registration - that's CASA's concern. As has already been noted on this thread, VA NZ and JQ NZ already fly VH tails. They just need an Aus licence to do so.

So I'm thinking, Jetconnect can either:

1. continue to exist as normal and fly VH tails, in which case the airframes will be more flexible but the pilots will not; or

2. cease to exist with the pilots somehow absorbed into mainline under SHWA conditions with a NZ base, in which case both airframes and pilots will be more flexible to fly domestic routes.

Option 2 is more flexible, and more complex, but might help with a mainline 737 pilot shortage - so it could be attractive to the Company.

From previous posts it appears option 1 is the "advertised" preferred option, but they haven't commited to it yet. Possibly because option 2 is still under negotiation. Option 2 might actually be the preferred long term goal, pending the outcome of industrial negotiation.

I have no connection to any sources, so this is again, pure speculation. However, the CP has emailed mainline pilots indicating that AIPA talks are underway.

[Derfred]

You have got to be joking. Jetconnect pilots are contractors which applied knowing that they had a fast path to command wearing a Qantas uniform. If they want mainline T&C apply to mainline meeting the minimum standards. Ask a Jetstar, QLink or Cobham pilot how they got into mainline?
The company can’t crew the 737 fleet properly at the moment. Any talk of some sort of shonky seniority list and watch what happens to engagement once again. Talking about what 80 pilots at best. My heart bleeds.
And in case you’ve all forgotten
https://youtu.be/68f_JdPmvlM

For what it's worth, Troo believer does not speak for the majority of QF pilots, and people like him embarrass most of us. I hope this works out well for Jetconnect pilots.

[ExtraShot]

For what it's worth, Troo believer does not speak for the majority of QF pilots, and people like him embarrass most of us. I hope this works out well for Jetconnect pilots.


Same here. The Pilot group as a whole can only benefit from the lower of the Pay and Conditions in the group being improved. I hope it happens.
The industry has changed over the past few years, barring a new Global Financial downturn of some kind, the Pilots now hold the upper hand. Don’t lose sight of that.

[Troo believer]

On reflection yes I was out of line posting that response. I apologise to the Jetconnect pilots and my fellow Qf pilots. Defred is correct. Let’s get everyone under the same banner and put this divisive wedge to bed once and for all. Once bitten twice shy. Sorry.

[pylonracer]

Hi,

Just a side jab! For my money, the best the QF union will be able to negotiate will be an opportunity to "bid" for NZ based commands. I'm guessing such commands will be less financially rewarding that AU commands but equally there will be enough within QF ranks that will take them. The take up of these "opportunities" will be mentioned during EBA negotiations and viowala! new deal.

Interesting to see qlink dash 8s flying in NZ with VH rego and painted Jet*.......

[73qanda]

Troo B,
It is easy to say ( or write) something that you later regret. Eventually everyone does it. ( Lord knows I have)
It is not so easy to do what you have done and own it. I think it says a lot about a persons character.
The industry appears to me to be changing. I've been in it full time for 23 years now and T's and C's have been declining the entire time up until about 18months ago when experienced pilots started to be harder to come by. Most Airlines have gone down the road of contracting out work to more productive 'labour units' in order to stay solvent/competitive but now simply having someone flying the plane is becoming an issue that is talked about. Contracts around the world are improving significantly. It's not beyond my imagination that QF Mainline might decide that creating security around pilot numbers is a sound strategy that will provide a competitive advantage in the future.
Interesting times.

[Derfred]

Once bitten twice shy.

I echo the above post. Thanks for coming back to the table, Troo.

Mainline pilots have been bitten (more than once) and it becomes natural to blame the false enemy (pilots taking jobs where they are available) rather than the true enemy (the architects of divide and conquer).

It's time pilots united themselves against these architects, rather than attempting to defend their own turf. Uniting across the Tasman isn't easy, given the mix of regulatory and industrial boundaries. But taking another losing case to the courts over changing aircraft tails isn't going to help anyone.

As I said earlier, apparently AIPA is in "talks" with QF on the subject. They wouldn't be if QF didn't want some pilot flexibility. I have no idea what will come from these "talks". I have no knowledge of union matters. But AIPA has a pretty strong history of defending seniority, so I would doubt they would agree to anything that would cost mainline pilot career advancement.

I predict that what comes out of this will come down to the attitudes and ideologies of those at the negotiating table (on all sides). It's not beyond my imagination that a solution could be found that would benefit all parties (mainline pilots, Jetconnect pilots, and Qantas). Whether that solution can be identified and agreed upon remains to be seen. If not, we might just be left with the status quo.

[Rated De]

Mainline pilots have been bitten (more than once) and it becomes natural to blame the false enemy (pilots taking jobs where they are available) rather than the true enemy (the architects of divide and conquer).


Thank you Derfred for helping me organise my thoughts..

[Derfred]

An interesting question to consider is this:

Two A320's moving from JQ to Network, to be painted "QantasLink", in the same week as Jetconnect moving to VH tails.

Is this "distraction management", or a pure coincidence?

Qantas knows they have more money and more laywers than AIPA. If I worked for QF IR, I'd make sure AIPA had more than one problem to deal with if I was seeking a certain outcome...

What can we do about this, as pilots? Well, we are pilots. There is one thing we're good at, and that's prioritising, and sitting on our hands when necessary.

[Rated De]

Is this "distraction management", or a pure coincidence?


That Sir is something I would give serious consideration to.
With the apparatus set up against them and union accounts of funds held on deposit common knowledge, being out gunned is commonplace.

'Justice system' is a middle class construct; the poor know it doesn't exist and so do the rich. That is why it never pays a dividend to play their game.

There is a big EBA coming up for Qantas domestic pilots. Like all magicians a distraction is necessary and may I suggest they do watch these forums.

Sadly for Qantas pilots they are not led by insightful and forward thinking people, they are line pilots. It is my guess from afar that most pilots are sufficiently scared of 2011 lockouts, (which Qantas can ill afford) to consider anything collective. Of course were pilots to do it they may realise the company is aware of a shortage and wants to lock down substandard outcomes: five year contract anyone?

Unions collectively play checkers, the IR game is chess...

Even now despite shortage of pilots being prevalent here (Europe) as they are in the USA, there are plenty of pilots in Australia convinced of Australian exceptionalism and mistakenly believe it is different in Australia.

What may be interesting is whether or not a courageous approach is taken whereby individuals quietly go about withdrawing their co-operation. It is a big chasm to leap identifying and prosecute actions of 'unprotected industrial action'

[Tankengine]

That Sir is something I would give serious consideration to.
With the apparatus set up against them and union accounts of funds held on deposit common knowledge, being out gunned is commonplace.

'Justice system' is a middle class construct; the poor know it doesn't exist and so do the rich. That is why it never pays a dividend to play their game.

There is a big EBA coming up for Qantas domestic pilots. Like all magicians a distraction is necessary and may I suggest they do watch these forums.
Sadly for Qantas pilots they are not led by insightful and forward thinking people, they are line pilots. It is my guess from afar that most pilots are sufficiently scared of 2011 lockouts, (which Qantas can ill afford) to consider anything collective. Of course were pilots to do it they may realise the company is aware of a shortage and wants to lock down substandard outcomes: five year contract anyone?

Unions collectively play checkers, the IR game is chess...

Even now despite shortage of pilots being prevalent here (Europe) as they are in the USA, there are plenty of pilots in Australia convinced of Australian exceptionalism and mistakenly believe it is different in Australia.

What may be interesting is whether or not a courageous approach is taken whereby individuals quietly go about withdrawing their co-operation. It is a big chasm to leap identifying and prosecute actions of 'unprotected industrial action'

I think at the current max hours most QF pilots would be happy for a lockout to have a nice rest!
At max training and recruiting pilots are more powerful than usual.

[Rated De]

I think at the current max hours most QF pilots would be happy for a lockout to have a nice rest!
At max training and recruiting pilots are more powerful than usual.

That was our thinking as it was stated here by several, presumably Qantas pilots, they were flat out! Strategically it looks like someone pushing a bit of weight around.

As always look for the misdirection, but to our thinking with the festive season approaching and not much room to move with crewing this thrust is ill timed!

Maybe Winnie the pooh and the hunny (sic) pot is relevant: One too many times!

[whatever6719]

Noticed last nights QF151 mel/akl was a VH registered machine but upon further investigation, it looks like jetconnect crew was used
Has that been agreed upon already ??

[Keg]

What mainline assessment? Are you talking about recent interviews? Of maybe 115 total Jetconnect pilots, maybe 5 had interviews. (Just a guesstimate)


A poor guesstimate of the number who had interviews. Keep in mind that 1300 applied and only 550ish got to the assessment centre.

[goodonyamate]

...........

[Rated De]

a certain managers bonusThis is the genesis; self interest

there aren’t enough mainline crew to fly it, so as a result, 1 vh registered aircraft was leased back to JC under a previously used agreement on a temporary basis. If the union representing the pilots was forward thinking and strategic in their posture, they would have observed the BALPA positioning for open skies crewing under Walsh when CEO of BA, the road block would be already in place.

The magic eight indicates that the union will paint a 'temporary' agreement has been made, the company ashamed of their position and promise not to do it again and the 'temporary agreement' fades from the pilot consciousness and precedent becomes well established..

From this observer's position the union position appears completely reactive and not forward thinking; merely responding to company driven agenda ensures one thing: out played and out maneuvered, works this time and every time.

[itsnotthatbloodyhard]

Let's not forget that the company's going to make everything right by offering a Letter of Assurance. Hopefully it'll be soft, absorbent, and have little seashell patterns on it.

[Chris2303]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/world/99657312/qantas-pilots-fume-over-move-to-fly-australian-planes-with-kiwi-crew

Qantas pilots fume over move to fly Australian planes with Kiwi crew

[hotnhigh]

Another self created crisis is whats required for the illustrious leader. It's such a difficult job.
The thing to remember though, from the grounding, there are no friends in canberra on any side of the fence, The one who saw through it all, has now left.
The chairmans lounge on a friday night dictates how this plays out.

[Rated De]

The thing to remember though, from the grounding, there are no friends in canberra on any side of the fence, The one who saw through it all, has now left.
The chairmans lounge on a friday night dictates how this plays out.

A succinct post.
Can Mr Joyce now claim the business is 'un-transformed' as those greedy pilots again jeapordise the continuity of the business?

[Angle of Attack]

The only fact is QF are in dire need of pilots and it may seem they have missed the boat, Virgin have snapped up a cadet scheme with the last spots out of Adelaide, Rex and Jetstars is ongoing. It seems almost half the applicants to QF in the last couple of months didn’t even show up for interviews. HR looks good on paper but absolutely cactus when it comes to real results in a tight market, i find it hilarious in fact! I’m hearing big sounds when the open skies agreement starts with China shortly there could be some massive paid contracts for 737/A320 pilots 2 weeks on 2 weeks off based in OZ at double the typical pay offered here. Bring it on!

[73qanda]

I have heard of similar Chinese contracts coming and also reverse rostering out of Sydney on 787 on big bucks.

[Rated De]

The only fact is QF are in dire need of pilots and it may seem they have missed the boatQantas has a well developed adversarial IR posture. There are other ways to do things, but there is a lot of infrastructure supporting the status quo.

HR control of recruiting and IR structures predicated on unlimited pilot supply

It is highly likely that the obvious signals of a real sustained structural shortage were never even heard and if they were they were buried for reasons of self interest.

Disassembling the IR teams, processes and posture would take a big brave person.

[knobbycobby]

Talk is that there are a multitude of Jetconnect pilot resignation letters.
Going to greener pastures as It has leaked they are planning to shut down Jetconnect anyway.
Unlikely they will be able to crew Jetconnect for much longer.
Plenty of good commuting contacts with China Southern etc paying mega bucks.
The large retirements all coinciding globally at a similar time is putting big pressure on the poorer paid subsidiaries.
Or enough willing entrants to match the cashed up boomers on the way out.
The subsidiary companies with lesser T and C are going to struggle going forward.

[Hold_Short]

From the mouth of upper Jetconnect Management.

‘Given this decision, we will now work with Qantas and CASA to understand the specific details of the transition plan. This will include Flight and Cabin Crew conversion training paths, specific CASA regulatory requirements for Flight Crew licenses and medicals, and the timeline for the transition of our aircraft and Flight and Cabin Crew to Qantas AOC operations.
To enable us to focus on the transition plan, as well as business as usual and Jetconnect AOC activities, we will be establishing a dedicated project team. This team will be responsible for working with Qantas and CASA to facilitate the transition of Jetconnect from a New Zealand AOC to becoming a service provider to Qantas.
We will be advising all affected Employees in our team of the impact to their respective position and the choices available to them. For the vast majority, there will be a position available for them. However, for a small number of our team, the decision means at the conclusion of our AOC they will no longer have a position at Jetconnect. The Jetconnect leadership team will be supporting impacted Employees as they consider their next steps. I would ask that during this time you continue to offer your support to your colleagues whilst also respecting their privacy as they work through the next steps.
Once all Employees have been advised of the impacts on their position, I will then share our new organisation and regulatory structure, which will come into effect once the Jetconnect AOC is transitioned.
I appreciate and understand that with change comes uncertainty for us all, however, this change provides Jetconnect with a new opportunity to continue to demonstrate our value, capability and ongoing relevancy to the Qantas Group. It heralds a new era for Jetconnect and it is important throughout the phases of the transition period we continue to demonstrate all those attributes that have made us successful to date - our professionalism, commitment to operational and customer service excellence, and the safety and integrity of the Jetconnect AOC.’

This entire Jeconnect reshuffle is good for the business. That company has been controlled for way too long by incompetent managers whose only job is screw the little guy even further. This is evident in the prolonged pilot negotiations coming up 2 years in March, the demise of conditions to work under and the lack of support the company does to better their employees.

Bring on the change.

[Derfred]

That company has been controlled for way too long by incompetent managers whose only job is screw the little guy even further. This is evident in the prolonged pilot negotiations coming up 2 years in March, the demise of conditions to work under and the lack of support the company does to better their employees.

Is there any evidence that will change? So far the only thing that is changing is the AOC and the Regos.

[Rated De]

Paul Daff wasn't too sure of the other directors of Jetconnect. He didn't have access to the bank account and all pilots were paid for by Qantas.


upper Jetconnect Management.

Sits in Coward Street Mascot, where right now teams of people work on the 'transition' plan, an 'Operational Mission Statement' and a fancy project title.

Once IR and HR get smashed by union stakeholders led by;

https://s17-us2.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ft0.gstatic.com%2Fimages%3Fq%3Dtb n%3AANd9GcQaS5iUz2KJj3q1QaL0vaaEaPv_bOgou0FlpHuqFiVSnR2LTbOv&sp=b7083bec0ce904fcd75e85908bea6aec&anticache=184714


I will then share our new organisation and regulatory structure

When Qantas tells me...

[ElZilcho]

With the number of resignations from JC over the past 2 years (before this even started), that email, to me, comes across as a dangling carrot to keep flights crewed. But I'm a glass half empty kinda guy. Hope for the best, plan for the worst.

If JC "management" had any desire to retain staff they would have ratified the contract 2 years ago. If QANTAS had any burning concerns over the rate of resignations at JC, they would have intervened by now.

But instead of resolving the turnover, rumor has it they're hiring DEC's on temporary contracts instead....

[Hold_Short]

Is there any evidence that will change? So far the only thing that is changing is the AOC and the Regos.

The whole management pyramid is changing from the top down. Even down to the operations department based at Auckland Airport.

[Hold_Short]

Is there anyone within Qantas mainline, especially the 737, who can shed some insider understanding of how QF plan to make this work? There has been countless discussions of what 'might'happen but from where I am sitting this is the start of some fairly substantial changes for Jetconnect.

[Angle of Attack]

No one knows how it will work, all I can say is everyone is up in arms about it. QF will have their plan but it won’t work, that’s a given. The best outcome is JC pilots get a seniority number in QF mainline with mainline terms and conditions, but have a contract to the 737 short term until they are replaced by training then slot in the seniority position available. Similar to when ansett went under and pilots were contracted to the 737.

[Chris2303]

Preparatory to having the Tasman operated only by the Koru perhaps?

[27/09]

Preparatory to having the Tasman operated only by the Koru perhaps?

I very much doubt that.

[knobbycobby]

Feel for the Jetconnect guys and gals.
So management send a cheer up message which pretty much says your jobs will go.
As others have said plenty of mega bucks contracts out of AKL with China Southern etc. Commuter friendly. More than double the dollars,more time off. Job security.
Be a brave person to look a secure gift horse in the mouth.
Or just keep getting treated like s$&@ with the job insecurity.
Word on the street is that the fortunate ones have or are planning to run for the hills before it's too late.

[Rated De]

Or just keep getting treated like s$&@ with the job insecurity. To be a door mat it is necessary to first lay down.

What we are probably witnessing is the wind down of a strategy that was central to a pilot versus pilot mantra. Sadly for aviation this has proved the winning formula for decades.

Establishing the precedent of foreign crews in VH registered aircraft is the target, despite protests to the contrary, the company knows resistance will be a dollar short and a day late.

For the people caught up in it, just because the narrative of management changes for time being, they aren't changing for any other reason than necessity. Your family, your career and stability the least of their concerns. The model knows no other way.

One can either accept their value of your 'worth' as pilots or realise that the market for your services places far more value on it than they do..

[Anti Skid On]

You have got to be joking. Jetconnect pilots are contractors which applied knowing that they had a fast path to command wearing a Qantas uniform. If they want mainline T&C apply to mainline meeting the minimum standards. Ask a Jetstar, QLink or Cobham pilot how they got into mainline?
The company can’t crew the 737 fleet properly at the moment. Any talk of some sort of shonky seniority list and watch what happens to engagement once again. Talking about what 80 pilots at best. My heart bleeds.
And in case you’ve all forgotten
https://youtu.be/68f_JdPmvlM

To refresh your memory, once upon at time JC did NZ domestic, then this thing called Jetstar was created.... None of that were decisions made by JC pilots

[Keg]

When Jetstar was created in Australia, Qantas shrunk. As a result many pilots were demoted. Redundancies were very close and if not for the couple of hundred pilots that took LWOP there would have been redundancies. None of that were the decisions made by QF pilots but they wore the consequences.

When Jetstar was created in NZ, trans Tasman flying previously operated by mainline crews was transferred to the newly nil flying and defunct NZ domestic Jetconnect. Once again QF pilots wore the consequences.

Now that Jetconnect is unable to operate their airframes efficiently, why are Qantas pilots once again the ones who have to wear the consequences.... including an admitted possibility that future managements may use the proposed structure for reasons beyond originally intended?

[ClearanceClarence1]

Keg you are a legend.

I also feel for the blokes at JC, psychologically the threat of losing your job is harder than losing your job. I know what it feels like after spending 10 years at the bottom of the QF seniority list.

At least Alan was paid 24 million last year.

Hopefully you all come and join the QF seniority list. My hot tip is avoid the sandpit. It’s a crap place with crap weather and full of crap people.

[Rated De]

including an admitted possibility that future managements may use the proposed structure for reasons beyond originally intended? We are in furious agreement, however it is not possibility, it is their target.

Now that Jetconnect is unable to operate their airframes efficiently,

If that is the management position, Bruce testified JC efficiency came from 'Having the aircraft in New Zealand allows an early morning departure' or words to that effect. Unfortunately neither the Senators nor Bruce knew of hotels. To maintain accounts, auditors, and all such complexities rose from the ashes of Ansett New Zealand and seemed a 'better' option for Qantas, wonder why?


In 2003 Jetconnect's principal activity was;

Is the employment and on-hire of leasing of cabin crew to operate domestic commercial aircraft flights within New Zealand.


to;


'Operation and management of aircraft in order to fulfill an operating schedule of trans Tasman commercial passenger flights'


Put the JC pilots on converted licences into the seniority system, pay them accordingly. My bet is Qantas will balk at doing something that reasonable because they are always many steps ahead and people are the least of their consideration. This is another precedent that they want set they care zero for the people, their careers or any damage done. It is anyone's guess how labour representatives will spin it to the pilot body.

[Keg]

Hi Rated De. My understanding is that with the changes to the EK schedule, the issue Jetconnect faces is the inability to roster their ZK airframes. I don't think they any issues with rostering their crews efficiently if they have access to a wider number of airframes.

So it's possible to roster the Jetconnect crews, they'd just get appalling airframe utilisation. Solution? Let them fly VH airframes where QF is able to integrate and schedule them more efficiently across the wider network.

I should point out that I bear no ill will toward Jetconnect crew. Having been through similar times of uncertainty in 23 years in QF I understand completely the way that these sorts of issues impact on family, work, etc.

The issue though is that having had 'lack of efficiency' used against me and my colleagues a number of times over the years as the reason to do us over you'll pardon my cycnicism and frustration when I see Jetconnect structural problems being used as a reason for QF to move heaven and earth to retain the cheaper business unit.

I have colleagues and friends who have been waiting for 16 years and are still 5ish years away from a 737 command where they live on the east coast. What is the time to command in Jetconnect? Two years? Speaks volumes.

[busdriver007]

Rated
The Company could easily integrate these pilots within the Qantas Pilot Group and make them more efficient flying in the Australian Domestic market on Australian Terms and Conditions. Hell they would even save money for the Shareholders. But it is NOT about saving money for the Shareholders, it is holding a hammer over the various pilot groups. They spent $1.6 billion on Jetstar they will waste some more money in a blink of a eye!

[Chris2303]

NZ and VA announced today that they will be doing extra flying AKL-BNE

[bythenumbers]

I remember back at Qlink walking through an empty Melbourne terminal when the fleet was grounded feeling sick and angry inside about what was happening to my QF group colleagues. The ground staff looked soul destroyed wondering how the event would unfold and what it meant for them... it wasn’t a nice day.

Now as an Aussie sitting here at JC I once again feel the same sense of anger.

I myself didn’t come here as a back door into mainline. Mainline wasn’t recruiting when I came here; to me this was just an opportunity, a steping stone to contract flying elsewhere in the world.

Just as at Qlink no one else here at JC has any illusions that they work for QFA or that it’s a way to get in. Fact is most of the Kiwi guys have no interest in heading across the ditch or being integrated on the bottom of the list because they’re happy here; this is their home after all and many of them have been here from the domestic days.

But JC is no longer a domestic airline in NZ and shortly we will cease to be an airline at all; instead becoming a true labour hire company. For me as an Aussie whether we end up integrated onto the bottom of the list or not is second to protecting the contract and reputation that you guys at mainline have fought to protect over many many years. The way that happens is that Jetconnnect guys need to stop undervaluing themselves as professional aviators. In the current climate if we can’t achieve that then there is something seriously wrong. For the good of the industry as a whole we need to unite and put a stop to this race to the bottom.

[morno]

To me, it appears as though unless you work for Qantas, Qantas pilots couldn’t give two ****s about you.

What a nice industry it is downunder!

[Keg]

To me, it appears as though unless you work for Qantas, Qantas pilots couldn’t give two ****s about you.

What a nice industry it is downunder!

Easy morno. I hope to see Jetconnect crew offered full employment in Qantas. That would likely result in a pay rise and significantly better future options than they have currently. Of course that may not be on their current fleet or base but hey, that applies equally to hundreds of current Qantas pilots too.

[Transition Layer]

To me, it appears as though unless you work for Qantas, Qantas pilots couldn’t give two ****s about you.

What a nice industry it is downunder!
Jog on Champ!
If you despise Qantas as much as it seems you do, then this doesn’t concern you!

[73qanda]

Genuine questions;
Was there similar angst from VA pilots when Pac Blue Pilots started flying VH tails?
What has been the IR impact of Pac Blue Pilots flying VH?
Doesn’t Jetstar NZ fly VH and was there similar reaction from Jetstar Australia Pilots?
I ask because I’m unsure how JC Pilots flying VH on the Tasman impacts the QF short haul contract if they are unable to fly domestic ops.
Cheers

[morno]

Jog on Champ!
If you despise Qantas as much as it seems you do, then this doesn’t concern you!

I don’t despise Qantas, I actually enjoy flying them, sometimes.

I just don’t get Qantas pilots. Still stuck with your 1960’s seniority system and a lot (I won’t say all, there are some really down to earth guys there) think they are above everyone else in aviation in the country.

What would be wrong with promoting based upon merit, rather than purely who’s been there the longest?

As for the Jetconnect thing, if you’re apparently that short of pilots, then is the integration of some pilots from NZ in their current positions really going to create that much of a drama? It’s not like those guys went and applied for those jobs thinking “this is all going to fall over in 4 years time and I’m going to find myself in Qantas”. This would just be a bonus for them.

With the projected number of retirements coming up in Qantas I’m surprised at the fuss. You’re all going to get your commands, and if you’re smart about it, you’d be welcoming your Jetconnect cousins onboard and saying “here’s your number on the bottom of the pile, but you’re frozen in your current rank and fleet until you’re number is eligible to move”. Then they can keep their FO or Captain positions, and you can all move around them. There, problem solved!

Keg, I hope you all do integrate them into Qantas somehow. But I think I could be forgiven for seeing more of a “f*** off this is our airline and you’re in my job” attitude through some of the posts here.

[ClearanceClarence1]

United we stand, divided we fall. Easier than the 3 times table.

Collectively across Mainline, Jetstar, all the QantasLinks, JC, Network and Qantas Freight. We can win the fight for job security in a profitable company.

Mainline guys want their commands after 50 years of service, JC guys want to feed their families, QantasLink guys don’t want to have to go to the desert and pretend it’s okay. If you want to see Europe book a ticket, don’t move the family to Dubai. You will end up going to Africa and India at midnight.

Egos aside we all do the same job to a high standard. The greedy criminals fear us being united. We happen to have power at the moment because some greedy people didn’t hire pilots when they should have.

We just need a leader. Is Richie McCaw available? He likes flying.

United we don’t get screwed any more.

[CurtainTwitcher]

What would be wrong with promoting based upon merit, rather than purely who’s been there the longest?

Absolutely nothing wrong with the theory of merit, in the same way as the theory of Communism "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need (or needs)" from Marx's writings is so seductive. It and required about 100 million to die to demonstrate the practice was flawed from inception as it lacked an understanding of Human Nature.

"Merit" gives the boss almost unlimited power to play Machiavelli. The seniority system is just the least worst system to curb the excesses of the psychopathic employer.

Bottom line is people in positions of power, ultimately end up abusing it, often despite their own best intentions & beliefs. There needs to be a system of tension between the employer & employee to curb the worst of either sides nature. There is no perfect system, and the seniority system is just one method of maintaining that tension.

The system also benefits the employer as he always has the perpetual "promotion" carrot for those stuck at the bottom as a way to make the employee sticky & SUPPRESS T&C "You give up something NOW to be rewarded LATER". No carrot = less suppression of delayed gratification.

If the demographics & airline expansions in Asia Pacific pan out the way it looks, a group seniority system is exactly what a smart long term thinker in an airline would plan. But alas management appears to have a "rip the guts out of it now" mentality. The phenomenal cost of delayed recruitment & training is truely eye-watering by sending people all around the world. The $$ numbers I have heard are enormous.

[maggot]

How'd this get to seniority for upgrades? Crikey we don't want the boys club lookin after its own - see the Jetstar mates upgrade mess a few years back as a recent example.
Don't be so naive morno

[CurtainTwitcher]

How'd this get to seniority for upgrades?

Because waiting (literally) 20 years for an East Coast command is why there is so much anger. Almost 25 years for a wide body to be AT THE BOTTOM of the command list working every weekend and last of choice of leave. Those that have supported they system feel they are about to be screwed big time. I believe this would be the slowest upgrade path in the world, can anyone can show me an airline with a slower moving promotion system?

The subversion of this system is threatening to destroy those not already in the LHS.

[bobbelmore]

Qantas has never to my knowledge employed direct entry

How about circa 1965-66? They were called "instant captains". Most of them were a disaster. Some of them didn't make it to captain and became permanent F/Os and some left the company to get a job as captain elsewhere.

Seniority is not a really good way to select who gets promoted but it sure as hell beats all the other alternatives.

[27/09]

Easy morno. I hope to see Jetconnect crew offered full employment in Qantas. That would likely result in a pay rise and significantly better future options than they have currently. Of course that may not be on their current fleet or base but hey, that applies equally to hundreds of current Qantas pilots too.

I'd hazard a guess most guys and gals at Jetconnect are at Jetconnect because of their current base. Moving bases for many will not be an option for family and other reasons.

I can't see some (probably most) of them wanting to live in Aussie, which it would appear to be the only other option.

Pay rises and better future options won't even come into it. Take that from someone who has been there.

For Australian based Qantas pilots there is always the possibility to return to a base given time but for the Jetconnect guys and girls if there is no New Zealand basing then there is never going to be that option.

[27/09]

Seniority is not a really good way to select who gets promoted but it sure as hell beats all the other alternatives.

.......To paraphrase Winston Churchills quote "Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…"

[Aussie Fo]

What’s the difference between Mainline and Jetconnect crew pay?

Surely the savings in reducing overhead costs are more than just paying the guys and girls the money?

[Lowly FO]

What’s the difference between Mainline and Jetconnect crew pay?

Also, Jetconnect has 120 pilots for 7-8 aircraft... which is around 16 pilots per plane. How many pilots per VH tailed 737 do mainline have?

[CurtainTwitcher]

Also, Jetconnect has 120 pilots for 7-8 aircraft... which is around 16 pilots per plane. How many pilots per VH tailed 737 do mainline have?
Half, just over 8 pilots (not crews), possibly even less at this point in time. Sources indicate starting the calendar month on 85+ hours before reserve and available day callouts.

[help me jebus]

Post edited

[help me jebus]

Post edited

[73qanda]

$180 NZD = $164 AUD at the moment, so basically $164k AUD + 10k allowance for a Captain....bout the same as a QLink Captain?

[RealityCzech]

Rated
The Company could easily integrate these pilots within the Qantas Pilot Group and make them more efficient flying in the Australian Domestic market on Australian Terms and Conditions. Hell they would even save money for the Shareholders. But it is NOT about saving money for the Shareholders, it is holding a hammer over the various pilot groups. They spent $1.6 billion on Jetstar they will waste some more money in a blink of a eye!

Except that Qantas wouldn't save money. They want to keep their NZ labour cost base so long as VA and ANZ also have one! The Tasman is one of the toughest markets in the world to make money on. One of the main reasons that Emirates pulled out of it.

[maggot]

Because waiting (literally) 20 years for an East Coast command is why there is so much anger. Almost 25 years for a wide body to be AT THE BOTTOM of the command list working every weekend and last of choice of leave. Those that have supported they system feel they are about to be screwed big time. I believe this would be the slowest upgrade path in the world, can anyone can show me an airline with a slower moving promotion system?

The subversion of this system is threatening to destroy those not already in the LHS.

Well aware and also 'waiting'!

[framer]

For those of you waiting for your Mainline command, is this not an opportunity?
JC is taking direct entry commands at the moment, they simply don’t have the requirements amongst their FO ranks.
Why not push JC pilots onto the the bottom of the seniority list,no bidding in or out unless.....if the requirements for DEC are met then instead of it going to Jo Public, mainline FO’s apply through seniority. I imagine there would be plenty of FO’s with no kids or pre school aged kids who would pop over the dutch for a couple of years until their number came up for a home town command. That way the problem ( JC slowing progression for mainline pilots) will slowly disappear rather than fester and potentially get worse. In addition, the company can run the JC pilots domestically once they touch down in Sydney and have locked in 50 Captains overnight.
Over the next decade crewing the left hand seat of jets is most likely going to be expensive for Airlines worldwide. Holding onto LHS experience at the start of this ‘experience shortage’ would be a wise tactical move.
The alternative sees the continuation of high turnover and training costs on the Tasman, or, greater stress on the already stressed resource of Mainline SH crew hours.

[Rated De]

Holding onto LHS experience at the start of this ‘experience shortage’ would be a wise tactical move.

Of course it would.
It made little operational sense to establish JC in the first place. There were two criteria:



Industrial wedging
Utilise remnants of Ansett New Zealand, including accumulated tax losses

The cost of setting up, auditing and running 'a business' offshore is substantial. The model was designed to achieve its original criteria (which it did) It was never about the smart thing to do. Spare no expense to save crew costs...
Thus although I agree with you, dilution of pilot opportunities has been a foundation of all 'tactical thinking within the group'



Driving down labour unit cost the sole objective.

[framer]

Shifting the pilots straight into short haul commands? Ok, let's take it a step further. What if the company thought that the 787's flown by Jetstar would be better utilised in Qantas? Hmmmm, now we have the company expecting it to be ok to shift 8 aircraft worth of Jetstar crews onto the longhaul award bypassing seniority.
I’m not sure your argument makes sense but I’m ready to be corrected.
If JC pilots were incorporated onto the SH award and into the seniority list, they would be both quarantined and at the bottom. Ie the most senior JC Captain would be below the last Second Officer who joined.
Let’s say that the most senior JC pilot was a couple of years from retirement and really liked the idea of being an SO for a couple of years and seeing how a LH crew operated. After a year or so ( whatever quarantine was agreed on) he could apply for any NEW SO slots that had been created since the integration. If he tootled off to that new role then a command position would be available, JC is meeting its internal requirements for DE commands at the moment so that command would go to any Mainline FO who wanted to make the move. That is a command that isn’t available at the moment and hasn’t been for years. As time rolls on and the quarantine lifts it will simply be an Auckland or Wellington base available to any Mainline pilot who has the seniority.
As for the Jetstar 787 analogy, they too would be on the bottom of the seniority list. Right now those 787 F/O and Capt positions aren’t available to QF crew but down the track they would be. You mention the pilots of the future, to me it seems that a short term messy integration of seniority greatly benefits the ten year old at Mascott dreaming of being a Qantas pilot.
Happy to try and see it from a different angle.
Cheers

[*Lancer*]

Framer,

Personally I think it’s a very workable and fair idea. It preserves the status quo, no pilot in either organisation is disadvantaged, and longer term opens up more opportunities for all.

The sort of misplaced protectionism some have with regard to Mainline is exactly the circumstance that locked AIPA out when Qantas bought Impulse. Had those pilots been brought into Mainline at the time, flying their 717s at the bottom of the seniority list, well, ...

[crosscutter]

The company will do what it wants. They have shown that. Generation after generation. AIPA will convey their concerns. In both the JC and Network situation it would probably be better for Mainline Pilots to start thinking about ‘what actions are you going to take?’

I’m not talking industrial action. But there are numerous options to back up AIPA’s concerns. Especially in the current environment. For example, perhaps stop checking open time first thing in the morning and get your name out of the book.

The loss of trust is the company’s fault. It is their problem. It’s time for a proactive approach whilst respecting our profession and the passengers. The ivory tower are our common enemy and they don’t deserve trust in this instance. So what are you going to do? The members are AIPA after all. There is nothing wrong with belligerence in the face of a smiling assasin.

[Brakerider]

Why can't the aircraft just continue to operate as they do, and the pilots continue to work for Jetconnect and be paid under the NZ CEA? Just like VANZ and JQNZ...Still VH registered planes.

[Rated De]

The company will do what it wants. They have shown that. Generation after generation. AIPA will convey their concerns. In both the JC and Network situation it would probably be better for Mainline Pilots to start thinking about ‘what actions are you going to take?’

'consultation' is a comfort term.

There is a patter that responsible office holders stick to
It is the same at most airlines where the structure is set up to be adversarial and industrial. Qantas posture is not unlike many airlines, the ONLY reason they even bother talking is that the statute necessitates it. They prefer to avoid.

When an Andrew David talks to AIPA he will:



Gauge the mood
Tell the 'commercial story' of why JC must be done as it is.
Offer some softeners. (B777X, new routes promotions, whatever)

Am informed, the consultation is irrelevant. Am told:





Jetconnect pilots are being trained
Network aircraft and registrations are known.
Structures are already operating



Qantas pilots must decide what it is this precedent is being rolled out now for?
Where is the labour organisation?
Are the crews already being trained?

If this is already happening, you have already lost the initiative.

[JamieMaree]

Why can't the aircraft just continue to operate as they do, and the pilots continue to work for Jetconnect and be paid under the NZ CEA? Just like VANZ and JQNZ...Still VH registered planes.

They can actually, but the pilots on this thread seem to think that they are in a position to dictate that something else should happen.:ugh::ugh:

[Troo believer]

That’s probably what will happen but be rest assured that the QF pilot group is not as accommodating as it once was. There are hundreds of F/Os on the 737 with more than 10 years on type that will be agitating to ensure their voice is heard. If there is one thing that’s been learnt over the lost decade it is that management do not have your interests at heart. They only care about fulfilling and maximising the profitability of the business. We are the suckers with some sort of emotional attachment to the airline and our profession. They don’t care. It’s not measurable and even when it sort of is through engagement surveys it’s manipulated to suit the end goal. At the moment and it looks like for the foreseeable future the ball is in our court. The pilot shortage is only just starting to bite. The 65 year extension kicked the retirement tin along the road but it’s now at a dead end. Let the Jetconnect folly continue and for those joining use it to your advantage. Don’t be loyal, leave that for your partner. Take the Training and experience and move on to greener pastures but don’t think it’s going to be a back door into mainline. I for one will tolerate the current situation as it stands but that’s all. I bear no malice towards the pilots at Jetconnect but am extremely wary of any ulterior nefarious machinations from the company. History reveals their true hand.

[Rated De]

The fingerprints of IR are all over it.

It is only the naive pilot who believed that their war was over. They were just re-grouping.

In the shadow of Christmas wind down (for administration only) roll it out, labour representatives 'consulted'
Start the New Year (refreshed in the offices) with this thing done.

Effective opposition impossible as no one there to consult with..

You are being played!

[JamieMaree]

That’s probably what will happen but be rest assured that the QF pilot group is not as accommodating as it once was. There are hundreds of F/Os on the 737 with more than 10 years on type that will be agitating to ensure their voice is heard. If there is one thing that’s been learnt over the lost decade it is that management do not have your interests at heart. They only care about fulfilling and maximising the profitability of the business. We are the suckers with some sort of emotional attachment to the airline and our profession. They don’t care. It’s not measurable and even when it sort of is through engagement surveys it’s manipulated to suit the end goal. At the moment and it looks like for the foreseeable future the ball is in our court. The pilot shortage is only just starting to bite. The 65 year extension kicked the retirement tin along the road but it’s now at a dead end. Let the Jetconnect folly continue and for those joining use it to your advantage. Don’t be loyal, leave that for your partner. Take the Training and experience and move on to greener pastures but don’t think it’s going to be a back door into mainline. I for one will tolerate the current situation as it stands but that’s all. I bear no malice towards the pilots at Jetconnect but am extremely wary of any ulterior nefarious machinations from the company. History reveals their true hand.

https://youtu.be/ssRxkl5rm9Y

[bythenumbers]

They are the consequences if we don't stop this right now. Kiss the long haul award goodbye for every Australian pilot and the downward pressure moves onto the next award, whether it be Qantas, Virgin or Jetstar. This doesn't just effect Qantas pilots it effects every future airline pilot in Australia. Think, if Qantas hires only foreign pilots in the future that means there are more Australian pilots for less Australian jobs. You do the math on how that works out for pay and conditions.

This is exactly the point I was making; for those of us at Jetconnect, protecting (not further undercutting to be correct) the Mainline contract is not only in our interest but in the interest of the future of Australian and NZ aviation. How we as a pilot group are even considering looking at a contract that is worse off than VANZ or Jetstar NZ is beyond me.

Watch this space as our draft CEA gets put on the table, we will hopefully see it thrown back into the company’s lap. Captains and FO’s alike have been voting with their feet for the last couple of years.

[Tankengine]

So, when is the shorthaul award up for renewal? ;)
You know, when you can change ties! :)

[help me jebus]

Post edited

[framer]

The precedence has been set when Qantas A330's were transferred into Jetstar. The Qantas crew weren't allowed to transfer with the aircraft into Jetstar and were assigned all their long service leave and annual leave away. Low hours resulted with lower pay and extra training costs were taken on by the company to train Jetstar crews onto the A330
AngryRat, it is difficult to tell what exactly you are arguing for. What you say above may well be true but that doesn’t mean it has to be done twice. Was it a good thing? No? Ok let’s push for something else.
Now these 737's are being transferred into Qantas you think the Jetconnect crew should be transferred with the aircraft contradictory to how the Qantas crew were treated? How a Group was treated Industrially in the past is not a blueprint for how all groups must be treated in the future. When I was young my father would give me the strap if I was too slow to do as I was told, shall I do that to my young daughter? If it’s useful yes, if it’s not helpful, no.
Putting JC pilots on the bottom of the list may be contradictory to how the QF A330 pilots were treated ( they didn’t get the option of joining the bottom of the Jetstar list?) but that doesn’t mean it is a bad option. The global pilot body needs to start making decisions that work well in the long term, and stop looking back with anger and suggesting tit for tat.
Ironically those commands that you say aren't currently available to Qantas pilots were the commands of Qantas pilots operating the Tasman until Jetconnect took over the flying at 35-50% cheaper.
Correct, but again, that’s looking back in anger. That ship sailed nine years ago, it is well over the horizon. Right now there may be an opportunity to bring those command opportunities back to the QF mainline pilots in the near future. Pretty much instantly a few commands would become available to mainline FO’s, and within five years a regular flow of commands ( and FO slots for mainline SO’s)would be available to mainline fo’s who had both the seniority and the inclination to move to NZ for a few years.
Also of note is that by not transferring with the aircraft the Jetconnect pilots would still get to keep or increase their pay and conditions by taking a position elsewhere in the group. Don’t worry about them too much, the world is short of pilots at the moment. Think of the whole QF pilot group as a unit, it can get healthier, or sicker. A partisan approach right now (2017/18) and it gets sicker. ( Isn’t that what divide and concour IR is all about) . A broad strategic approach and it gets healthier.
I get it it's not the fault of the Jetconnect pilots but nor is it the fault of the Qantas pilots. I noted that you didn't answer whether a Jetstar NZ command on similar pay and conditions would be acceptable?
Sorry. I didn’t have any feelings about it one way or another so it slipped my mind. I imagine that some would like it and others would bail for China or Australia or take early retirement from the industry. I worked for JC when they flew -300’s and -400’s domestically so although I am interested I’m not losing sleep over it.
Is that because you don't work for Jetconnect? If it's not your fight then I can only see it as an opportunistic campaign, in case it were to happen to your entity within the group you would get a Qantas command out of seniority bypassing every pilot who came through the front door at Qantas.
Man alive, if that is all you can see then you must be fairly anxious/ wound up. Not everyone is scheming and conniving to bring you down. A less defensive mindset might allow you to see that the past doesn’t necessarily have to repeat and new opportunities do present every now and again. Don’t be blind to them.I am completely happy with my current command and if you offered me a QF 737 Command tomorrow I would not take it because wife and kids are very happy and the money is only slightly less where I am.
Your ten year old would benefit from a group seniority list but I can't see that happening until every union was onboard to push it.
Again, you can’t see something positive happening. What about one step at a time in the right direction ( ie JC going on the bottom of the list) Aipa would be pretty happy in that their membership would increase and their position become a fraction stronger. The only roadblock is QF management and they may well be onboard in order to lock in 50 737 crews that they can deploy on domestic Ops.
If the pilots strategy is to slowly get stronger and more unified, ( think Ryan Air) then it is a logical step. If the pilots strategy is non existent then we can look forward to more of the same in the next two decades.
You said yourself that it would be good for future pilots ( the ten year old) , well, there comes a time ( usually around 45 or 50 years of age) when most people start looking at the big picture and want to look after those that follow in their footsteps. Now is our chance.

[teggun]

If JC get placed on the bottom of the QF seniority list I dare say it will set up a very good precedent for Qantaslink and Network to follow the same path.

[framer]

I agree Teggun.
One step at a time making sure that each step is in the right direction. Each step needs to reduce the number of pilot ‘camps’, not increase the ill will between existing camps.

[Rated De]

If JC get placed on the bottom of the QF seniority list I dare say it will set up a very good precedent for Qantaslink and Network to follow the same path.

The mistake being made is that the permutations being made by the company are rational: I suspect you would be sorely disappointed.

Don’t worry about them too much, the world is short of pilots at the moment. Think of the whole QF pilot group as a unit, it can get healthier, or sicker.

The world is demographically short of pilots. They well know this. Keeping division helps downward pressure on labour unit cost. They will not give that up. The whole model of IR at Qantas group, is adversarial.

The labour representatives will maintain 'consultation continues', perhaps they even believe it.



Qantas will not integrate the pilots, those pilots will remain on existing terms.
It is already well underway, AOC, simulator training and all the rest.
By the time the 'business leaders' and 'labour union leaders' return from annual Christmas leave, it will be already rolling. There is likely a team working 'project whatever'
Qantas pilots will get a nice email from the company and the union.

Got a fork? This one's done!

[blow.n.gasket]

The following article is an interesting read in light of what’s going on with Jetconnect.
It appears that unless specific guarantees are made by management then whatever platitudes are offered are just that !






Transfer of employment

The Fair Work Act (s311) provides that there is a transfer of business if each of the conditions in ss311(1)(a)–(d) are satisfied, which are:
one or more employees is terminated from the first employer
the employee(s) become(s) employed by the second business within 3 months doing substantially similar work
the work that the employee performs for the new employer is substantially the same as that performed for the old employer
there is a connection between the two employers.
Associated entities

The Corporations Act 2001 [Cth] (s50AAA) defines an ‘associated entity’ of another entity (the principal) in the following circumstances:
the associate and principal are related bodies corporate
the principal controls the associate
the associate controls the principal and the operations, resources or affairs of the principal are material to the associate
the associate has a qualifying investment in the principal, has significant influence over the principal and the interest is material to the associate
the principal has a qualifying investment in the associate, has significant influence over the associate and the interest is material to the principal
a third entity controls both the principal and the associate and the operations, resources or affairs of the principal and the associate are both material to the third entity.
Control

The word ‘control’ is defined in the Corporations Act 2001 [Cth] (s50AA) to mean when one entity controls another when the first entity can make decisions that determine the financial and operating policies of the second entity.


Transfer between non-associated entities

Service with one employer (first or old employer) will count as service with another employer (second or new employer) that is not an associated entity of the first employer, if the employee is a transferring employee in relation to a transfer of business from the first employer to the second employer.

The following would be considered a connection between the two employers in a transfer of business situation:
there is a transfer of some assets from one employer to another
there is an outsourcing of work from one employer to another, which can occur regardless of whether any assets change hands
there is an ‘insourcing’ of work from one employer to another
there is a transfer of employment between associated entities as defined in the Corporations Act 2001 [Cth].
The Fair Work Act (s311(3)(b)) states that there is a connection between the old employer and the new employer if the new employer or associated entity owns or has the beneficial use of some or all of the assets (whether tangible or intangible) that the old employer or associated entity owned or had the beneficial use of; and that relate to, or are used in connection with, the transferring work.


Transfer of assets

Arrangement

The Fair Work Act (s311(3)) provides one of the conditions of a transfer of business that must be satisfied is there is a connection between the old and new employer as described in any of ss311(3)–(6) of the Fair Work Act. That is, there must be an arrangement between the new and old employer for ‘the beneficial use of assets’ of the old employer ‘that relate to, or are used in connection with the transferring work’. The word ‘arrangement’ is not defined in the Fair Work Act, while the Explanatory Memorandum to the Fair Work Bill 2009 states that the word ‘arrangement’ is intended to be interpreted broadly.’

The relevant authorities on determining the meaning of the word ‘arrangement’ propose that, whilst not legally enforceable, requires:
that there be communication between the parties to the arrangement; and
that the parties must reach some understanding; and
that there is some expectation that each of the parties will behave in a particular way.
An arrangement is not an expectation that a party will behave in a particular way and it cannot be contrived. It requires some substance. See Australian Consumer & Competition Commission v CC (NSW) Pty Ltd [1999] FCA 954; Trade Practices Commission v Nicholas Enterprises Pty Ltd (No.2) [1979] FCA 51; The Commissioner of Taxation of the Commonwealth of Australia v K. Porter & Co Pty Ltd [1974] 22 FLR 344.

Non-associated entities — transfer of assets

In a matter heard before the FWC, the employee worked for the old employer in a café. The business was purchased by the new employer. The employee worked three shifts for the new employer doing the same work before he was dismissed.

It was held that there was a transfer of employment, because there was a transfer of business between the old employer and the new employer. There was a connection between the old employer and the new employer as the transfer of business involved a transfer of assets.

Further, as the new employer had not informed the employee in writing that his previous service would not be recognised, the employee’s service with the old employer counted as service with the new employer. See Hill v Sahir t/a Café Moderno at Fountain Gate [2013] FWCA 668.

New employer ceased to outsource work to old employer

In a matter heard before FWA, the employee worked for the old employer, which provided labour to the new employer. After two years, the new employer ceased to outsource work to the old employer. The old employer terminated the employee’s employment, and she was employed by the new employer, but dismissed after about 3 weeks.

The employer was found to be a transferring employee in relation to a transfer of business. There was a connection between the old employer and the new employer because the new employer had ceased outsourcing work to the old employer. The employee was not informed in writing by the new employer that previous service with the old employer would not count as service with the new employer, and therefore it did not count. See Thorne v Jura Australia Espresso Pty Ltd [2012] FWA 4954.

No relevant connection between employers

In a matter heard before FWA, the employee worked as a security guard for the old employer, which provided site security under contract. A tender process resulted in the new employer being awarded the contract. The employee was offered employment with the new employer but was dismissed the following month. It was held that there was no connection between the employers, and therefore no transfer of business. As such, service with the old employer did not count as service with the new employer. See Szybkowski v Monjon Australia Pty Ltd [2010] FWA 7321.

In another matter heard before the FWC, the employee had been employed by the old employer to work at a hotel. The old employer operated the hotel under a lease with the owners. The old employer abandoned the lease, and the owners leased it to the new employer. The new employer employed the employee to perform the same duties, but later dismissed her. On appeal, it was found there was no connection between the old employer and the new employer, because there was no evidence of a transfer of assets in accordance with any arrangement between the employers. See John Lucas Hotel Management v Hillie [2013] FWCFB 1198.

Intangible assets

Intangible assets are defined as identifiable non-monetary assets that cannot be seen, touched or physically measured, which are created through time and/or effort and that are identifiable as a separate asset. There are two primary forms of intangibles — legal intangibles, eg trade secrets (customer lists), copyrights, patents, and trademarks, and competitive intangibles such as knowledge activities, eg know-how, collaboration activities, leverage activities and structural activities. Legal intangibles are known under the generic term intellectual property and generate legal property rights defensible in a court of law.

No beneficial use of assets — no transfer of business

In a matter before FWA involving a jurisdictional point regarding the employee’s period of employment, it was determined that the leaving of some electrical appliances and a procedures manual does not satisfy the requirements that the arrangement entered into by the employers was not a beneficial use of assets, so no transfer of business occurred. See Zabrdac v Transclean Facilities Pty Ltd [2011] FWA 4492.

Work performed

Under the Fair Work Act (s311(1)(c)), the transferring employee must perform the same, or substantially the same, work for the new employer as he or she performed for the old employer. It is intended this provision not be construed in a technical manner. It recognises that, in a transfer of business situation, there may well be some minor differences between the work performed for the respective employers. However, the requirement is satisfied where, overall, the work is the same or substantially the same — even if the precise duties of the employees, or the manner in which they are performed, have changed.

This section of the Fair Work Act relates in the similarity in the actual work performed by the transferring employee. Whilst the work of the companies, the employee’s title and precise duties may have changed, if the overall work performed for both employers is substantially the same, a transfer of business occurs. See Farrugia v Building Technology Integrators Pty Ltd [2011] FWA 1285.

Recognition of service with the first employer does not apply with respect to redundancy pay under the NES where the transfer is between non-associated entities and if the second employer decides not to recognise the employee’s service with the first employer. Where a transfer of employment occurs, a transferring employee is not entitled to redundancy pay at the time of the transfer of employment where employment with the second employer is ongoing.

The NES also provides that an employee is not entitled to redundancy pay if:
the employee rejects an offer of employment made by another employer that is on terms and conditions substantially similar to, and, considered on an overall basis, no less favourable than the terms and conditions of employment with the first employer immediately before the termination, and recognises the employee’s service with the first employer; and
had the employee accepted the offer, his/her employment would have been transferred.
The Fair Work Commission may order the first employer to pay an amount of redundancy pay if it is satisfied the offer of employment with the second employer operates unfairly to the employee.

A transfer of business does not automatically trigger an entitlement to redundancy pay. In the TCR case, the (then) AIRC said ‘we would make it clear that we do not envisage severance payments being made in cases of succession, assignment or transmission’. See Termination, Change and Redundancy Case 8 IR 34; Amcor Limited v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union and Ors [2005] HCA 10; Stones & CEPU v Simplot Australia Pty Ltd [1997] IRCA 175; Svitzer Australia Pty Ltd v Maritime Union of Australia, The Northern NSW Branch [2011] FWAFB 7947.

National Employment Standards (NES)

Section 312 of the Fair Work Act requires that an enterprise agreement, workplace determination or a named employer award (a transferable instrument) will bind a new employer who is a successor, assignee or transmittee of the whole or a part of the business of a former employer.
Back to top

Other acceptable employment

Under s120 of the Fair Work Act, the amount of redundancy pay may be reduced (which may be to nil) by the FWC where the employer arranges other acceptable employment, and the terms and conditions offered with respect to the other employment are deemed to be fair.

Industrial courts and tribunals have considered several factors when determining the suitability of an employer's offer of alternative employment to an employee whose position has become redundant. The test that is usually applied in this instance is an objective one, and should take into account each individual employee's circumstance. This test should be applied when an employer is either trying to organise alternate employment with another employer or trying to arrange other employment within the organisation. Such factors include:
Pay levels — if the salary offered for an alternate job is similar or the same as the redundant position, this could be viewed as suitable to the acceptability of the offer. Where there is a drop in salary, the tribunal would determine the reasonableness, or otherwise, of the lower salary.
Hours of work — where the offer involves a change of starting and finishing times, a change from shift work to day work, or vice-versa, or work on different days of the week, this may be deemed unsuitable, depending on the circumstances of the individual employee. The tribunal may take into account such factors as the employee's family responsibilities when determining the suitability of the offer.
Nature of employment — the offer of part-time or casual employment to a current full-time employee may be deemed unsuitable. This may also fail on the basis of a lower salary level associated with these types of employment.
Employment status/seniority — the offer of a non-managerial position to a manager may be unsuitable as there is a certain 'status' associated with the current position. Such an offer could be viewed by a tribunal as a demotion.
Skills and qualifications — does the offer involve a position that the employee has the necessary skills and/or qualifications to perform? If not, the employer must have offered to provide the necessary training for the employee to acquire the necessary skills and/or qualifications.
Location of new offered position — where there is a relocation of the position, a tribunal will consider such factors as: the similarity of the job at the new location, the notice given to an employee(s) of the new location, whether the new location offers similar transport facilities, and the amount of additional time, if any, travelled by the employees to the new location.
Loss of fringe benefits — a tribunal, where relevant, may look at the overall impact of the offer of alternate employment on the employee's contract of employment. The loss of benefits such as the provision of a company motor vehicle, share option plan, shift or penalty rates, bonus and commission payments, or regular overtime payments, may make the offer unsuitable despite the base salary remaining the same.
Job security — this can be a factor in the offer of casual work to an employee because, with casual employment, there is no guarantee of permanent employment. Also, if the new position offered is of a temporary nature, this could be viewed as unsuitable.
The factors to be considered in a particular matter regarding an offer of acceptable alternate employment by an employer to an employee in relation to redundancy has been the subject of considerable precedent case law. See Clothing & Allied Industries of Australia v Hot Tuna Pty Ltd [1988] AIRC 483; Clothing & Allied Industries of Australia v Algray Pty Ltd [1989] AIRC 135; Derole Nominees Pty Ltd v Australian Chamber of Manufactures [1990] AIRC 980; Feltex Australia Pty Ltd v Textile, Clothing & Footwear Union of Australia [2006] AIRC 737; National Union of Workers v Linfox Australia Pty Ltd [2008] AIRC 647; Timbercraft Pty Ltd [2011] FWA 6283.

Adjustment to amount of redundancy pay

Section 120 of the Fair Work Act allows the FWC to make an adjustment to the total amount of redundancy pay (down to nil) under the NES where the employer arranges acceptable alternative employment. In doing so, the FWC takes into account the efforts of an employer who arranges (say) a successful job interview for an employee being retrenched and so, applies to reduce the amount of redundancy pay that would otherwise have applied. In Baywood Products Pty Ltd v Inall [2010] FWA 9303 (21 December 2010) the employer was successful in obtaining a 50% reduction in the appropriate redundancy payment because he arranged an interview for an employee who was retrenched. In Spano Enterprises Pty Ltd [2011] FWA 3672, Fair Work Australia issued an order that the amount of redundancy pay be reduced to nil.

Refusing other suitable employment

The FWC has stated that it will not tolerate a situation where an employee who is faced with redundancy and is offered comparable alternative employment, but refuses it because he/she would rather take a redundancy payout. Accordingly, an employee who refuses the offer of suitable alternative employment in this circumstance will not be entitled to receive any redundancy pay under the Fair Work Act (s120). See Mantra Hospitality (Admin) Pty Ltd [2013] FWC 1063.



Redeployment

Under s389(2) of the Fair Work Act, a redundancy is not genuine if it would have been reasonable in all the circumstances for the person to be redeployed within:
the employer's enterprise; or
the enterprise of an associated entity of the employer.
The factors taken into account about the reasonableness of any proposed redeployment in relation to a redundancy are the same is with other acceptable employment.

Fair Work Australia has determined that it is an essential part of the concept of redeployment under this section that a redundant employee be placed in another job in the employer's enterprise as an alternative to termination of employment. The job must be suitable, in the sense that the employee has the skills and competence required to perform it to the required standard either immediately or with a reasonable period of retraining. Other considerations may be relevant such as the location of the job and the remuneration attaching to it. See Ulan Coal Mines Ltd v Honeysett & Ors v Ulan Coal Mines Ltd [2010] FWAFB 7578 (12 November 2010).



Re-employment after redundancy

The redundancy provisions of the National Employment Standards do not prevent the re-employment of an employee previously made redundant, nor is there a provision disqualifying redundancy pay if the employee is re-employed within a particular period after the original redundancy occurred. An employee re-employed at any future time would not be required to forfeit their redundancy pay.

It is common for an employer to have a company policy that prohibits the re-employment of an employee whose position was made redundant. The existence of such a policy may be a response to existing taxation law.

For tax purposes, the redundancy pay must relate to a ‘bona fide’ redundancy. This determines whether the payment receives a concessional taxation rate compared to other eligible termination payments. Any arrangement entered into with the employee prior to termination of an employee’s employment regarding future re-employment would not be considered a ‘bona fide’ redundancy for the purposes of tax law.


Selection criteria

An area of potential disputation relates to selecting which employees are to be made redundant where a reduction in the overall numbers of employees has been decided upon. This decision may be influenced by a number of factors, including union pressure, award obligations, or anti-discrimination legislation.

Even in the case of genuine redundancy, the termination of employment may be harsh, unjust or unreasonable. See Quality Bakers of Australia Limited v Goulding (1995) IRCA 305; Needham v Shepparton Preserving Company Limited (1991) AILR 395; Cheesman v Kinhill Engineers Pty Ltd 59 SAIR 168; Corkery v General Motors Holden Limited (1986) AILR 429; Hemmings v CPS Credit Union (1991) 58 SAIR 421.

The factors determining which positions are to be redundant should be based on objective criteria and should be known by employees in advance, such as through a company policy. The employer should select who is to be made redundant, referring to the skills, experience, training and performance of individuals compared to the current and future needs of the organisation. If, after such an assessment, employees are found to be comparatively equal, the period of service would be an appropriate factor unless some other pressing domestic issue is raised by the individuals concerned.

Subjective criteria are open to abuse and open to be used to target particular workers. Referring to factors such as ‘teamwork’, ‘know how’, ‘initiative’, ‘integrity’, ‘trust', ‘credibility’, etc should be avoided. It seems the problem about subjective criteria is not so much the fact of their adoption, but the burden they impose on those that have to apply them. See Kenefick v Australian Submarine Corporation (1995) IRCA 193; Ralph v Fortis Australia Limited, AIRC Smith C. Print T4482.

A company that used its employees’ workers compensation status as a factor in determining which employees should be selected for redundancy was unsuccessful on appeal in an unfair dismissal matter taken by former employees. See Smith & Kimball v Moore Paragon Australia Limited PR942856 [2004] AIRC 57 (20 January 2004).


Ordinary and customary turnover of labour

The termination of employment due to the ordinary and customary turnover of labour does not attract redundancy payments. Section 119 of the Fair Work Act provides that an entitlement to redundancy occurs when the employee’s employment is terminated at the employer's initiative because the employer no longer requires the job to be done by anyone, except where this is due to the ordinary and customary turnover of labour, or because of bankruptcy or insolvency. The term ‘ordinary and customary turnover of labour’ is not defined by the Fair Work Act, although the meaning of the term has been determined by various courts and industrial tribunals.

Generally, this describes a situation where it has been customary for employees’ services to be dispensed with because it is the view of management that they are in some way less than satisfactory employees, not appropriately skilled, not appropriately motivated, unreliable, or exhibiting other forms of unhelpful conduct, but not amounting to misconduct. This term also covers the coming and going of employees whose employment has come to an end by resignation, the effluxion of time, or the casual or temporary nature of an engagement.

The (then) AIRC, in its principal decisions on redundancy, made it clear that ‘it was not our intention that the redundancy provisions should apply to the “ordinary and customary turnover of labour”; an expression used by Justice Fisher in his decision related to the Employment Protection Act in NSW’.

Promise of job until retirement — damages claim

An automotive engineer, who alleged his employer promised he would have a job until retirement, failed in a bid for damages after being made redundant during the global financial crisis. The employee left a well-paid job in India to take up a position in Sydney, however, he was made redundant (along with 100 other workers) some months later when the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) hit. The engineer claimed the company had breached s53(b) of the (then) Trade Practices Act 1974 [Cth], by making him redundant after promising him a job until retirement during his contract negotiations.

The claim by the engineer for damages was unsuccessful because the company gave assurances during the negotiations, but not a guarantee of a job until retirement, while the company also had every intention of continuing the employment of the engineer, except for the intervention of the GFC. See Robertson v Knott Investments Pty Ltd [2010] FMCA 142 (8 March 2010).

[CurtainTwitcher]

An open question is do the transmission of business sections even apply to another jurisdiction?

Given the impending shortage, an adversarial play is to open the channel to offshoring as a method of control for any AU based group pilots (offshore to onshore type model). This looks like the "angle" to me. Get everything up and running, EBA signed off and then make NZ as a pseudo base with AU overnights.

Of course, under this model, generously LWOP would be offered to those who wished to take a JC command, by way of being a "suitable applicant" [read management prerogative playing Machiavelli]. Would there ever be another AU command offered again?

If this scenario actually did occur, the same thing could done to other agreements within the group, including LH.


Just musing...

[help me jebus]

Post edited

[Lowly FO]

Seems odd that the NZ Union would be trying to lock their members into a CEA at this time.

You’ve made the mistake of assuming that NZALPA is a semi-competent union. The company said “jump” and NZALPA said “how high?”

[ElZilcho]

Haven't JC Pilots been "negotiating" their CEA for 2 years now? With the Company stalling them at every opportunity?

The timing is impeccable... almost as if it were planned from the beginning.

You’ve made the mistake of assuming that NZALPA is a semi-competent union. The company said “jump” and NZALPA said “how high?”

Receiving a Draft CEA after 2 years of failed negotiations is very different to signing it. Although I suspect they'll use the threat of redundancy to get it ratified.

[Hold_Short]

Draft CA released yesterday. Quite a number of changes in the draft however a lot of rumors associated with the acceptance of it. All the pilots need further information to decide whethere these changes are pro Jetconnect or pro the ease of AOC shutdown. 10 days off/ month and a definition of a day off to now read 0001 to 2400. The rest 'cost neutral' for Qantas and Jetconnect. Still a well and truely far off a contract that is fair and comparable to others in today's market. Good luck to the pilots for fighting for a better contract and putting up a good negotiation fight during what is going to be a fairly messy AOC shutdown and amalgamation. Can others shed some light on how this has been accepted by the Qantas mainline folks and their respective unions alike?

[FYSTI]

Can others shed some light on how this has been accepted by the Qantas mainline folks and their respective unions alike?
Be more specific, the draft CEA or the Jetconnect flying VH registered aircraft?

If you are asking about the VH being flown by JC, there is a large body of outright hostility. The guys who have been sitting in the RHS waiting for 6,8,10 & 12 years on the 737, not a widebody for their shot are incandescent with rage. Can you blame them? The noises from the union have been muted thus far, as I believe they have the thinest of details about how this is proposal is to work.

[Hold_Short]

For those in JC the way the company choses to disregard and have nothing to do with JC is no surprise. They operate QF oainted aircraft but are far removed from the brand its not funny. They are Jetconnecr aircraft, operating JC SOPs under a NZ AOC. Nothing says Qantas. They guys and gals would like to be included in QF one way or the other, with plenty of Australian's working within JC because QF were not recruiting at the time and wait to gain experience. Now we all know what the deal is with the start up of JC and it comes down to the $$, but what do the employees do about it. Its same with Network being set up, as well as Cobham as well as QFlink. All subsidiaries albeit in another country. (Just remember there at QF Cabin Crew based in London).

The JC folks would surely embrace anyone who would want to go to NZ to gain a command on the 737 but people choose not to. Why don't guys apply to JC and get the command time on LWOP mainline? There were a number of guys in LWOP there a number of years ago doing exactly that. It would be fantastic if QF embraced the guys and gals over there and brought them in under their wing as that would not only optimise their aircraft but also their crew.

[Rated De]

They are Jetconnecr aircraft, operating JC SOPs under a NZ AOC. Nothing says Qantas. I would beg to differ.

Jetconnect CEO Paul Daff under cross examination stated:


(FWA) BOLTON Who pays the staff?
DAFF Qantas effectively

[maggot]

For those in JC the way the company choses to disregard and have nothing to do with JC is no surprise. They operate QF oainted aircraft but are far removed from the brand its not funny. They are Jetconnecr aircraft, operating JC SOPs under a NZ AOC. Nothing says Qantas. They guys and gals would like to be included in QF one way or the other, with plenty of Australian's working within JC because QF were not recruiting at the time and wait to gain experience. Now we all know what the deal is with the start up of JC and it comes down to the $$, but what do the employees do about it. Its same with Network being set up, as well as Cobham as well as QFlink. All subsidiaries albeit in another country. (Just remember there at QF Cabin Crew based in London).

The JC folks would surely embrace anyone who would want to go to NZ to gain a command on the 737 but people choose not to. Why don't guys apply to JC and get the command time on LWOP mainline? There were a number of guys in LWOP there a number of years ago doing exactly that. It would be fantastic if QF embraced the guys and gals over there and brought them in under their wing as that would not only optimise their aircraft but also their crew.

I appreciate the sincerity of your post. However, now getting toward 20 years in I'm getting a sniff of a 737 command on the east coast in my base and I should move to Auckland to do the same job I should have a shot at at home for what?

[V-Jet]

I appreciate the sincerity of your post. However, now getting toward 20 years in I'm getting a sniff of a 737 command on the east coast in my base and I should move to Auckland to do the same job I should have a shot at at home for what?

Someone has to provide a reason for Alan and his team of incompetents to have their bonuses paid. How else can they achieve constant cost cutting? You’re clearly a team player Maggot - Thankq award and bars for you this Christmas. Maybe even a photo with the Great Man in a casual ‘Street’ meeting that may get published in Pravda - or even Yammer!! Qf needs people like you!!

[Rated De]

If Mr Joyce did not play the insider's game, he would be outside.

JC was always industrial. Whether or not they actually can crew the flights the establishment of precedent is the only play here.

[CurtainTwitcher]

B737NG Non Type Rated First Officers Jetconnect New Zealand


Jetconnect is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Qantas Group which operates trans-Tasman services on behalf of Qantas. Their flight Crew are based in New Zealand and operate NZ registered Boeing 737-800 aircraft.

Jetconnect pilots are an integral part of the team ensuring operational excellence within a safety conscious culture. Their pilots have a variety of flying backgrounds, each offering a unique combination of experience.

At Jetconnect they are currently recruiting First Officers to join their team who are professional, hardworking, safety conscious and have good interpersonal skills.

Minimum requirements
Hold a NZAirline Transport Pilot Licence (ATPL)*, or
NZ Commercial Pilot Licence (CPL)* with passes in all written NZATPL exams, and
250 hours PIC
Current Class 1 Medical Certificate
Hold a Multi-Engine Instrument Rating
Level 6 English Language Proficiency Demonstration
Hold New Zealand residency or the legal right to work in NZ
Be able to swim 50 metres fully clothed then tread water for 3 minutes
*An Australian Licence can be converted to a New Zealand Licence via the TTMRA process
2000 hours total flight time
1000 hours total Multi-Engine flight time
Total instrument time - 100 hours
Total night flight time - 25 hours
Total time on Air Operations- 100 hours
Boeing 737-800 Type Rating*

*A Boeing 737-800 Type Rating is required; however if you do not hold this rating Jetconnect will arrange a Type Rating course.

If you are interested in this job APPLY HERE

As a proof of your professionalism, apply only when you comply with all the requirements and if you have or can obtain a work permit that allows you to be employed in this country.

You'll also be interested in other B737NG Non Type Rated Jobs
Aviationjobs.me B737NG Non Type Rated First Officers Jetconnect New Zealand (http://www.aviationjobs.me/2017/12/pilot-recruitment-jetconnect-new-zealand.html)

Archived Copy (https://web.archive.org/web/20171228231328/http://www.aviationjobs.me/2017/12/pilot-recruitment-jetconnect-new-zealand.html)

[Tom/PER]

ZK-ZQB appears be in BNE presumably undergoing maintenance, is it being 'VH-d' at the same time?

Been quite a few XZ* international B738's operating NZ services the past few days.

[Ollie Onion]

Such a shame, I had the displeasure of traveling on a VH registered 737 on the Tasman last week with an OZ based crew. The level of service was shocking and crew seemed to be going out of their way to wind customers up.

[Maxmotor]

ZK-ZQB appears be in BNE presumably undergoing maintenance, is it being 'VH-d' at the same time?

Been quite a few XZ* international B738's operating NZ services the past few days.

It will be VH-VZG.

[Rated De]

As a proof of your professionalism, apply only when you comply with all the requirements and if you have or can obtain a work permit that allows you to be employed in this country.


If Jetconnect are writing this in their 'advertisement' for pilot recruitment then perhaps it is simply that those 'applications' they receive fail to meet minimum criteria

[mattyj]

This is an excellent idea. It worked exceptionally well and was very popular amongst VANZ/PAC Blue staff :E

[Daylight Robbery]

Could you enlighten us?
Why specifically did NZ get the rough end?

[Hold_Short]

Are there any AIPA members who can shed some light into how this process is going? There have been quite a few flight crew operating on VH tails from Jetconnect on QF AOC, however both unions across the ditch have done nothing but facilitate it. 🧐

[Hold_Short]

New contract was ratified by the NZALPA members on a Friday afternoon. After 2.5 years negotiating the company finally gave in on a number of demands and minimum industry standards. Well done to the negotiators and all those who stood proud and represented the body of pilots in getting this new contract across the line. Brilliant job!

[ConfigFull]

New contract was ratified by the NZALPA members on a Friday afternoon. After 2.5 years negotiating the company finally gave in on a number of demands and minimum industry standards. Well done to the negotiators and all those who proud and represented the body of pilots in getting this new contract across the line. Brilliant job!

What did you squeeze out of them Hold_Short?

[Low Pass]

I would say the contract is just average. My thoughts are it will fall behind the market after the 3 years is up.
Still no protection of NZ flying...and no group senrioty number both of which Virgin NZ guys have.

[Hold_Short]

The company will always be behind the 8 ball when it comes to contract negotiations as they continue to compare us to low cost carriers and even below Jetstar. However, in saying that its is a remarkable improvement for such a 'young' airline in New Zealand which is soon be no longer an airline but simply a labor hire company of pilots and cabin crew for Qantas.

improvements include:
10 days off per month from 8
2hrs call out uo from 60 minutes
Singlw day off to be 36hrs
day off defined to 0000 to 2359
Incentives for paxing %50 flight time
Working on a day off payment huge improvement
Base slary increases of 3%, 2.5% then 2.5%
DTA increase
Qantas club access for pilots
Business Class for paxing International (previous contract limited it to upgrade space available)
MBF increase
Rest and Meal Break annual payments
Red days
Partime
DIL for working or being on RES on a P/Hol
FOs employed from day 1 of type rating
2 year contract not 3.
The list continues...

Let it be known that all Jetconnect ALPA memeber have been striving for a more respectable contract which reflect industry minimums for such profession.

[blow.n.gasket]

Hold Short wrote :
However, in saying that its is a remarkable improvement for such a 'young' airline in New Zealand which is soon be no longer an airline but simply a labor hire company of pilots and cabin crew for Qantas.

According to data discovered during the Transmission of Business case run by
the AIPA ,that’s exactly what this Company has been from inception , n’est-ce pas ?






Low Pass wrote :
Still no protection of NZ flying...

Sorry to sound facetious, but , really.

Reminds me of the chorus from one of Midnight Oils hits :
Short memory , must have a , short memory

[Keg]

I heard a rumour that Jetconnect pilots aren’t flying too many hours at the moment and with increased A330 services on the Tasman there’s lots on inefficient patterns and lots of paxing? Anyone confirm?

[*Lancer*]

Inefficiency compounded by no ZK/VH aircraft cross-crewing by Jetconnect crews. One or the other depending on whether they’ve ticked those boxes for CASA :rolleyes:

[Low Pass]

Low Pass wrote :


Sorry to sound facetious, but , really.

Reminds me of the chorus from one of Midnight Oils hits :
[/QUOTE]

Well PB/ Virgin NZ and AirNZ have full protection of the NZ based flying. I dunno but maybe JC union should have secured that years ago

[who_cares]

I heard a rumour that Jetconnect pilots aren’t flying too many hours at the moment and with increased A330 services on the Tasman there’s lots on inefficient patterns and lots of paxing? Anyone confirm?
Yes the crew that have gone across onto the QF AOC are paxing more then operating. With flight hours as low as 25-30hours for the roster.

[fullnoise]

I heard a rumour that Jetconnect pilots aren’t flying too many hours at the moment and with increased A330 services on the Tasman there’s lots on inefficient patterns and lots of paxing? Anyone confirm?

Confirmed, although the paxing is expected to decrease once everyone's over to the QF side of the fence. 50/50 split between ZK and VH crew, and you can't fly both. Should be 100% by mid November, when the JC AOC will cease to be.

[Captain Fun]

So how long until jetconnect crew are doing more than just the tasman?

[Keg]

At least until they comply with Australian workplace law. They may be permitted to operate domestically within Australia under CASA regs but I suspect the FWC would take a very dim view of them operating domestically whilst on different terms and conditions to that which applies to Australian crew.

Of course were they to be subject to the Qantas SH EA then there’d be no restrictions on them operating domestically. I’m sure the JC crew would love the pay rise and better conditions. Of course there’d be knock on effects that they may not like also.

[ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE]

So how long until jetconnect crew are doing more than just the tasman?

Capt Fun,

The AIPA should be looking at the Jetstar model. Both the Australian and the New Zealand operations are run on the same AOC, but with 2 seperate EBAs, as the QF mainline and Jetconnect operation will run. JQ New Zealand tech crew cannot operate domestically in Australia. Australian Pilots can operate on the Tasman and domestically in New Zealand. Some New Zealand Pilots flew in Australia as part of their command upgrade training a little while ago, however they had to be temporarily employed on the JQ Aus EBA. I believe that this caused more trouble than it was worth for the company and that the training captains are now sent to NZ instead.

If the Jetstar unions can protect Aus domestic flying, surely the AIPA can protect QANTAS’.

[help me jebus]

Post edited

[LeadSled]

How about circa 1965-66? They were called "instant captains". Most of them were a disaster. Some of them didn't make it to captain and became permanent F/Os and some left the company to get a job as captain elsewhere.

Seniority is not a really good way to select who gets promoted but it sure as hell beats all the other alternatives.

Disaster it certainly was --- with some honourable exceptions, Qantas got the rest of the industry's misfits, floaters and "strange" Captains.
As for the "theory" that created the "need" ( it was not a pilot shortage or lack of experienced F/Os) -- the less said the better.
At least it resulted in a revolution in Flight Training, a complete turnover of "management".
Tootle pip!!

PS: Prior to "seniority" in the old QF, promotion was determined by "which Squadron/Ship/Golf Club/Sailing Club" was on your CV.