Project Sunrise

[normanton]

That's right. If someone disagrees with you they are a management stooge.

Typical answer for someone who can't give a decent reason to vote NO.

Unbelievable!

[IsDon01]

Is there any way of putting a block on anyone that doesn’t know the difference between “loose” and “lose”?

That would remove a lot of uninformed comment from these forums.

[normanton]

Very mature Don.

Maybe stick to giving decent advice to new people.

If you have something valid and worthy to share, please do let us know.

[jet_pilot00]

The current A330 fleet has 210 Captains. Under the proposed A350 deal the expanded fleet needs about 320 or so. Reckon there aren’t at least 100 737 Captains that won’t jump at the chance to move to the A330/350 even if they have to do a couple of these trips per bid period? Keeping in mind that Qantas won’t need all 100 additional captains straight up. So maybe you’re talking about 50 or so for the first year.

F/O numbers are more interesting given the planned 1+2+1. If they need 50 Captains in the first year they’re going to need 100 F/Os. I still reckon they’ll get takers either from those currently on the fleet or from 737 F/Os looking for more money and less time away than they currently do on the 737.

How do those numbers stack up with the retirement of the rest of the 747’s a few A380s and 330s A-D?

I’d be guessing a gain of circa zero!

Get “expansion” out of your head. 1/2/1 just means that the FOs for aircraft 3-5 will be ready to go in year 2.

[blubak]

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The best thing anyone could have done would have been to avoid any and all webinars. That has allowed the company to gauge interest, assess possible stumbling blocks to a yes vote and has given them the info they need to bypass the union.

This is the start of a new IR playbook in QANTAS and perhaps more broadly in Australian IR.

This is about further weakening unions now and in to the future and will have far more significant long-term strategic consequences than a simple yes/no vote now.

My advice would be do NOT ever deal with company comms/ propaganda on your own time. Any of the hundreds who’ve ‘dialled in’ have done so on their own time - unpaid - either at home or upline. It’s pretty remarkable really and has played in to QANTAS’ hands.

It would have been far better to ignore the dial ins and simply allow YOUR appointed bargaining representatives to do their work. Zero people on a dial in and Dick, Nathan and Tino twiddling their thumbs in the office would have sent a far stronger statement than hundreds of salivating pilots with dreams of shiny big twins waiting on their every word.
Perfect!
Just like the engagement surveys they run,if you participate you are assumed to be engaged,doesnt matter what boxes you tick or what comments you make.
As i have said before,there are obviously a lot of slow learners out there & just dont get it.

[IsDon01]

Very mature Don.

Maybe stick to giving decent advice to new people.

If you have something valid and worthy to share, please do let us know.

People have been trying to give you decent advice for pages upon pages of these forums.

There are none so blind as those that refuse to see.

It’s like teaching calculus to a goat, you waste your time, and annoy the goat.

[normanton]

The advice to ignore the new entity bluff is hardly decent advice. More like a gamble. And I'm not a gambling person, and I especially wont be gambling on my (or others pilots) future on the advice given to "call his bluff" from senior pilots with laughable reasoning.

They have been quite clear communicating through emails, webinars and the press that this is the final deal. Take it or leave it.

I'm glad you got out of your Perth base. Maybe take a second to think about your colleagues below you who will be stuck there when you vote NO. Stuck there for a very long time when the 350 goes to the new entity. Stuck there even longer when the 380 and 330 is retired, and replaced by 350s under the entity. Perhaps you will even be RINd backwards to your Perth base. Have a long hard think about that one before you make yet another useless, content lacking, worthless discussion post to the topic at hand.

[ConfigFull]

You must be fun to sit next to...!

[dragon man]

So Qantas usurp ICAO requirements for 2 Captains and after 1 year go back to one Captain and FO with one of them been on duty for 3/5 hours prior to TOD. Which ever one it is I’m sure they will feel just great and be on top of the game.

[itsnotthatbloodyhard]

There are none so blind as those that refuse to see.



Not true. There are, in fact, none so blind as those that cannot see. :)

I’m with you on the lose/loose thing, though. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to suggest that anyone who can’t use them correctly should be banned not only from professional aviation but also all forms of social media.

[CaptCloudbuster]

Glad I’m watching with interest from the LH seat in SH. No RIN between hauls, learned that gem last time.

Looks like a catch 22 situation. Best of luck to all fellow Crew involved.

[IsDon01]

It’s no mistake that QANTAS have made the decision to take pilots away from the recruiting process.

Over the last few years there has been a concerted effort by HR to employ only those they consider to be industrially compliant. That being that they are naive enough to believe everything that is told to them by the company is the gospel truth. Normanton is clearly the product of that.

It’s not his fault that he was bought up during the “every child gets a prize” generation, where when you’re bullied you just run to the teacher and have a little sook, or get your parents to fight your battles for you. When I went to school, the only way to defeat a bully was to fight back. That’s the situation we have here.

Now, since you mentioned it, there have been a grand total of 7 RIN processes within QANTAS that I have personally been involved in. One of those saw me demoted from F/O to S/O when the 767 was retired. That was 2014. I have still not returned to the position I held before that date. That being a wide body, Sydney based F/O. Don’t you dare presume to lecture me on the RIN process. I am far more aware of that than you will ever be.

[plainmaker]

I have been following the arguments here with some interest. No I am not a Tech crew member, but do have a fair bit of experience on the other side.

The implied threat that the flying will be done by another entity does not stack up. Applying the figures quoted here against the total cost of operation of the aircraft (assuming lease costs, fuel, route service costs and direct labour), the margin that Mr Joyce seems to be driving is a nominal increase of 6% on a labour content that is less than 3% of the total cost of operation. That margin is in fact tiny in the overall scheme of things, and if, as has often been stated, the economics of the Sunrise flights would have to be extremely marginal at best. Board members would need to be VERY diligent about approving such a risky enterprise. But then again we have seen some decisions that would cause me to wonder about the obligations under the Corporations Law.

A statement that I have seen several times is that it is 'new' flying. I do not accept that. The city pairs that are contemplated are already served by QF. The method by which they connect those pairs (route) is the only change. In fact the 'slots' at each of those airports are 'owned' by Qantas (as are the capacity agreements) and they cannot be assigned / novated to other related entities. They can be sold, yes, but if Qantas Airways Limited were to divest themselves of those assets (sold by inter company transfer) then that triggers the phoenixing fundamental that would bring it to the attention of various regulators.

I would suspect that the 'take it or leave it' message is smoke and mirrors. There is a far greater agenda here in terms of future employment terms and conditions. If they were able to have created a new lower cost (Australian based) entity, they would have done it eons ago.

[34R]

Typical answer for someone who can't give a decent reason to vote NO.



People have given plenty of reasons as to why they would vote no..... just because it differs from your logic doesn’t make it any less valid.

Apart from the fact you have made some grossly generalised comments about your ‘esteemed’ colleagues on the 4 engine fleets (funny, I thought we were all on the same team), I have to agree with one of your previous posts that mentioned individuals may vote no to stick it to the company as being ridiculous. Totally agree.

But from what I’ve read, other reasons include the continued dilution of conditions, agreeing to a rule set that is untried, has involved little consultation from those who will operate under it and has many PERCEIVED long term adverse health affects, a desire to retain current conditions (what’s wrong with that?), a pseudo negotiating process high in threats and intimidatory language, a track record of not delivering on statements made subject to voting yes, condemning all new hires to a C scale to help fund Sunrise and highlighting a ridiculous scenario of a business case being used as an excuse to wind back working conditions, in the event of a YES there being nothing to prevent Qantas changing its mind in the three years leading into the operation due to a revised business case under prevailing conditions blah blah blah and trying something else that may or may not involve another ‘entity’........ just to name a few.

You view this logic with dismay and criticise those who are prepared to take a stand and fight for something because it risks too much.
That dismay is probably returned in the manner that you so eagerly believe every word uttered in a webinar and a perceived willingness to roll over because of the risk.

Regardless of whose concerns these are, they are concerns to people and it would seem, pending the actual release of the document we are all squabbling about, are big enough concerns to consider a NO vote, just as they are big enough to you to vote YES.

[normanton]

Don’t you dare presume to lecture me on the RIN process. I am far more aware of that than you will ever be.
And yet at the same time you are completely oblivious and clueless. Gob smacking for someone who's been through it all.

You'll be going through a few more RINs in the not to distant future when you let the 350 go to a new entity.

Just wait until the accountants work out just how efficient it will be. Mainline 380's and 330's replaced by 350's under the new setup entity. We all know it will happen. A new entity setup because you decided to vote NO.

Let us know how RIN #8 works out for you.

[IsDon01]

I’ve been through it, yet I’m the clueless one. Right.

Now, what you just said would actually be illegal.

Replacing current fleet with a new entity, and then making the crew of the old fleet redundant would be a clear case for transfer of business.

Before your time, but when Jetstar was expanding, and QANTAS stagnating, an MOU had to be negotiated to allow QANTAS pilots to take leave without pay to fly for JQ. One of the main reasons for this MOU was to avoid any potential for AIPA taking action on that front. Closer to your time, a comfort letter was provided to the company by AIPA to remove the legal threat to allow the Network A320 operation in PER.

QANTAS knows it’s sailing perilously close to the transfer of business rocks. What you’re seeing in your crystal ball would be so far into the transfer of business abyss they’d be tied up in court for years.

[Ruvap]

I have been following the arguments here with some interest. No I am not a Tech crew member, but do have a fair bit of experience on the other side.

The implied threat that the flying will be done by another entity does not stack up. Applying the figures quoted here against the total cost of operation of the aircraft (assuming lease costs, fuel, route service costs and direct labour), the margin that Mr Joyce seems to be driving is a nominal increase of 6% on a labour content that is less than 3% of the total cost of operation. That margin is in fact tiny in the overall scheme of things, and if, as has often been stated, the economics of the Sunrise flights would have to be extremely marginal at best. Board members would need to be VERY diligent about approving such a risky enterprise. But then again we have seen some decisions that would cause me to wonder about the obligations under the Corporations Law.

A statement that I have seen several times is that it is 'new' flying. I do not accept that. The city pairs that are contemplated are already served by QF. The method by which they connect those pairs (route) is the only change. In fact the 'slots' at each of those airports are 'owned' by Qantas (as are the capacity agreements) and they cannot be assigned / novated to other related entities. They can be sold, yes, but if Qantas Airways Limited were to divest themselves of those assets (sold by inter company transfer) then that triggers the phoenixing fundamental that would bring it to the attention of various regulators.

I would suspect that the 'take it or leave it' message is smoke and mirrors. There is a far greater agenda here in terms of future employment terms and conditions. If they were able to have created a new lower cost (Australian based) entity, they would have done it eons ago.

Listen to plainmaker. His/her logic is 100% correct. Stand strong and vote NO. By doing so empowers yourselves and force them back to the table. This process has been ridiculously rushed for an operation that is uncharted territory and deserves more discussion and less bullying/threats. Any offer by Qantas at this stage has to be much better for them than you because they have already conceded that they have been largely negotiating by themselves. Voting YES is crazy. No need to cave so soon.

[normanton]

People have given plenty of reasons as to why they would vote no..... just because it differs from your logic doesn’t make it any less valid.

Apart from the fact you have made some grossly generalised comments about your ‘esteemed’ colleagues on the 4 engine fleets (funny, I thought we were all on the same team), I have to agree with one of your previous posts that mentioned individuals may vote no to stick it to the company as being ridiculous. Totally agree.

But from what I’ve read, other reasons include the continued dilution of conditions, agreeing to a rule set that is untried, has involved little consultation from those who will operate under it and has many PERCEIVED long term adverse health affects, a desire to retain current conditions (what’s wrong with that?), a pseudo negotiating process high in threats and intimidatory language, a track record of not delivering on statements made subject to voting yes, condemning all new hires to a C scale to help fund Sunrise and highlighting a ridiculous scenario of a business case being used as an excuse to wind back working conditions, in the event of a YES there being nothing to prevent Qantas changing its mind in the three years leading into the operation due to a revised business case under prevailing conditions blah blah blah and trying something else that may or may not involve another ‘entity’........ just to name a few.

You view this logic with dismay and criticise those who are prepared to take a stand and fight for something because it risks too much.
That dismay is probably returned in the manner that you so eagerly believe every word uttered in a webinar and a perceived willingness to roll over because of the risk.

Regardless of whose concerns these are, they are concerns to people and it would seem, pending the actual release of the document we are all squabbling about, are big enough concerns to consider a NO vote, just as they are big enough to you to vote YES.
Thanks for actually making a decent post worth talking about. I would like to discuss further.

PERCEIVED long term adverse health affects
So how do we go about this? The flying is opt in, people aren't being forced to do it if they don't want to.

How do you find out the health affects on a new venture like this? It takes time. It takes reports. It takes feedback.

In order for that to happen, you need to do the flying. Is it worth passing up the opportunity for a new entity, on the basis we don't know the health affects?

It will be an extra 3-4 hours on top of a PER-LHR.

a desire to retain current conditions
What conditions are being withdrawn exactly?

Any insider knowledge of the final document?

a pseudo negotiating process high in threats and intimidatory language
Agreed.

a track record of not delivering on statements made subject to voting yes, condemning all new hires to a C scale to help fund Sunrise and highlighting a ridiculous scenario of a business case being used as an excuse to wind back working conditions
True.

I'm not buying into the C scale argument. They either come into mainline on C scale, or they come into the new entity on a D scale. Pick one. The company will do it.

The 350 will replace the 380, I have no doubt. Management said it in the webinar. The pilots all believe it. If you think we will be paid a 380 wage to fly a 350, its unrealistic and selfish. It's never going to happen.

in the event of a YES there being nothing to prevent Qantas changing its mind in the three years leading into the operation due to a revised business case under prevailing conditions
True. But a scope clause will never be approved. We all know that. Is it worth the risk of missing out on the 350 flying? Is it worth the risk in giving them a valid reason to start a new entity. Is it worth the risk of giving them a viable direction to further erode the LH conditions? It's the one question NO ONE has answered. What happens to the future LH EBA negotiations with a viable and successful entity undercutting us at every chance?

[normanton]

IBefore your time, but when Jetstar was expanding, and QANTAS stagnating, an MOU had to be negotiated to allow QANTAS pilots to take leave without pay to fly for JQ. One of the main reasons for this MOU was to avoid any potential for AIPA taking action on that front. Closer to your time, a comfort letter was provided to the company by AIPA to remove the legal threat to allow the Network A320 operation in PER.

Oh perfect. Just what management want. A MOU to send mainline pilots across to the new entity on different conditions. Shall we call it Jetstar Mach 2?

Why don't you just walk into Tino's office and hand him the silver platter.

[IsDon01]

What are you smoking Normanton? I’m starting to worry you may be a little unhinged.

[Ruvap]

Businesses advertise usually because they need customers. Tino & Co have been giving endless webinars because they also need customers, meaning, they need you to Vote YES so they can bank their “300 million bucks”. Not my words, these were Tino’s words. They say it’s all in the interest of ‘sharing information’ and making ‘informed decisions’. Yeah right, that’s all just BS CRM type words, all designed to fool you. One can see the freight train coming a mile away if you vote YES!

[34R]

True. But a scope clause will never be approved. We all know that. Is it worth the risk of missing out on the 350 flying? Is it worth the risk in giving them a valid reason to start a new entity. Is it worth the risk of giving them a viable direction to further erode the LH conditions? It's the one question NO ONE has answered. What happens to the future LH EBA negotiations with a viable and successful entity undercutting us at every chance?


I’m really glad you made this point because for me it is precisely why I think the NO vote (if warranted) is worth the risk. As long as we don’t have a job security clause that is iron clad, there is nothing to prevent the company going down that road if it wants too. Personally I think the damage to the brand that this would cause, both internally and externally would be significant and I think they know that.
I would bet you every brick in London that at some stage over the next 3 years, especially given current uncertainty with regards to global travel, if we vote yes now another concession will be required to kick this thing off, be it under threat of .....’well we can only commit to 5 x 350’s now.... all of a sudden the rigid business case miraculously becomes quite flexible.
I just can’t see a YES vote precluding any form of current or future management continuing to threaten us with external entities for the sake of meeting a business case. In fact I believe a YES vote will all but guarantee it.

My opinion only.... of which there are many!

[Guitar Joe]

“I just can’t see a YES vote precluding any form of current or future management continuing to threaten us with external entities for the sake of meeting a business case. In fact I believe a YES vote will all but guarantee it.”

I agree with you on that.
However, I certainly don’t believe that a no-vote will stop them from trying it next time around either. I am certain they will try. This is how the game is played and each EBA vote must be accepted or rejected on it’s own merits, within the industrial environment of the time. Are we in a position to fight to the inevitable end? Is the fight (and risk) worth the potential improvement? In other words, is this the hill to die on?

[Ruvap]

Tino just said again that the number 1, 2 and 3 preference is to use Qantas pilots but in the same breath, he had the audacity to say again that there will be no second vote. So, if they will not entertain a second vote, how can we honestly believe him when he says it’s their number 1, 2 and 3 preference to use Qantas pilots. It just can’t be true. It’s all just ‘spin’. IMO NS is the hardest to believe or not believe. He is a future chief pilot for sure!

[Ruvap]

Tino just said he has been counseled in the past to make sure he speaks frankly and honestly. ​​​​​WTF....In other words, he has been telling a few porkies perhaps!? And he just confirmed that ending up with a lot more A350’s all on these new terms is inevitable. They absolutely want to murder current terms and conditions. Vote NO.

[Sunfish]

While it’s none of my business, have you thought of covering the A350 and sunrise operations by a side letter to the new EBA? Then you and the company could agree to your latest EBA and to study the health effects of sunrise together and agree to negotiate something later.

You could even spell out the issues to be negotiated, the time frame and the parameters.... Words such as “will not be less than ...” come to mind.

That removes the brinkmanship and sets up for good faith bargaining by removing uncertainty fear and doubt.


‘’Then you both may get a win/win.

[jet_pilot00]

Tino just said he has been counseled in the past to make sure he speaks frankly and honestly. ​​​​​WTF....In other words, he has been telling a few porkies perhaps!? And he just confirmed that ending up with a lot more A350’s all on these new terms is inevitable. They absolutely want to murder current terms and conditions. Vote NO.

how about the “we won’t let Perth airport tell us what to do and stand over us and screw us..”

irony eh

[LTBC]

I’ve been through it, yet I’m the clueless one. Right.

Now, what you just said would actually be illegal.

Replacing current fleet with a new entity, and then making the crew of the old fleet redundant would be a clear case for transfer of business.

Before your time, but when Jetstar was expanding, and QANTAS stagnating, an MOU had to be negotiated to allow QANTAS pilots to take leave without pay to fly for JQ. One of the main reasons for this MOU was to avoid any potential for AIPA taking action on that front. Closer to your time, a comfort letter was provided to the company by AIPA to remove the legal threat to allow the Network A320 operation in PER.

QANTAS knows it’s sailing perilously close to the transfer of business rocks. What you’re seeing in your crystal ball would be so far into the transfer of business abyss they’d be tied up in court for years.

IsDon01 your understanding of the transfer of business provisions and the genesis of the MOU is incorrect.

For a start the MOU came into effect August 2004 and the Fair Work Act in July 2009.

[Ruvap]

how about the “we won’t let Perth airport tell us what to do and stand over us and screw us..”

irony eh

Yeah, and he just said they intend to by pass AIPA in comms to pilots by way of more webinars on any issues. Sounds like the Trump twitter strategy to by pass so-called ‘fake media’! Dodgy as. Vote NO.

[normanton]

Yeah, and he just said they intend to by pass AIPA in comms to pilots by way of more webinars on any issues. Sounds like the Trump twitter strategy to by pass so-called ‘fake media’! Dodgy as. Vote NO.
A NO vote will result int he 350 going elsewhere. Tino said it again, and again, and again.

Tino said again that there will not be a second vote.

Secure the flying for your future. Vote YES.

[34R]

Maybe a NO vote will result in Tino going elsewhere!........

[Ruvap]

Maybe a NO vote will result in Tino going elsewhere!........

Hit the nail on the head!

[ruprecht]

Secure the flying for your future. Vote YES.

Surely you mean “our” future....

I’m not sure precisely what, but there’s something fishy about you, normanton. :hmm:

[normanton]

No ruprechy, secure the flying for your future! :hmm:

[Keg]

Maybe a NO vote will result in Tino going elsewhere!........

What, like the $200+ million lockout caused Joyce to go elsewhere? Here we are 9 years later and he’s still here.

Seriously, vote on whether you think the deal is acceptable. Voting on what you hope Qantas will do to execs in response to a ‘no’ vote is just ludicrous.

[34R]

Take it easy Keg...... it was a throw away line.

[Ruvap]

What, like the $200+ million lockout caused Joyce to go elsewhere? Here we are 9 years later and he’s still here.

Seriously, vote on whether you think the deal is acceptable. Voting on what you hope Qantas will do to execs in response to a ‘no’ vote is just ludicrous.

It might be ludicrous to you, but that’s just your opinion. There are many out there that don’t share your opinion or mine, so yes, no need to get jumpy! It’s going to be a NO vote for sure.

[Troo believer]

It might be ludicrous to you, but that’s just your opinion. There are many out there that don’t share your opinion or mine, so yes, no need to get jumpy! It’s going to be a NO vote for sure.
I think you’ve got your head up your arse mate. It will be YES for sure. When push comes to shove watch all the mouths capitulate.

[Keg]

Fair enough 34R. Hard to tell these days given some of the trash being thrown around.

Ruvap sounds like one of the G20 who were certain the SHEA was getting voted down. I guess we’ll know how this one is going to go in about three weeks.

[normanton]

It might be ludicrous to you, but that’s just your opinion. There are many out there that don’t share your opinion or mine, so yes, no need to get jumpy! It’s going to be a NO vote for sure.
Make sure you poll the silent majority who voted EBA 9 up. Also, don't forget to ask the 300 recently recruited SO's, with a 30+ year career at play here.

You will be severely mistaken.

Take it easy Keg...... it was a throw away line.
34R, make sure you don't throw away those 350's! :ok:

[ruprecht]

You will be severely mistaken.

If you’re so sure, why are you wasting time on here? :confused:

[normanton]

Well to be honest, I was seeking further information on which way to vote. I reserve the right to change my mind pending AIPA's recommendation, and a fact check of the final document.

It became obvious very early on that the small minority with a short term interest in the result, enjoyed post scaremongering, false statements to further their self interests. Someone has to call them out for it, and I'm more than happy to be that person, and will continue to do so. :ok:

It's also worth mentioning there has been a few posts from the NO camp with very relevant points. At the end of the day, as Keg said, if the offer is acceptable to you, vote accordingly.

[DirectAnywhere]

If you’re so sure, why are you wasting time on here? :confused:

Maybe, like me, they’re just here for the excellent discounts on bras. 🤣
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1532x804/279f2674_fa3f_45d8_8671_2a5bf94333c8_0094d2f11b3a1c11939b66d acdd0453cb120d39a.jpeg

[ruprecht]

Maybe, like me, they’re just here for the excellent discounts on bras. 🤣
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1532x804/279f2674_fa3f_45d8_8671_2a5bf94333c8_0094d2f11b3a1c11939b66d acdd0453cb120d39a.jpeg

You’re too early: 81% off is next EBA... :(

[DirectAnywhere]

Probably, but it doesn’t hurt to smile every now and then. 😊

[Ruvap]

I think you’ve got your head up your arse mate. It will be YES for sure. When push comes to shove watch all the mouths capitulate.

You may be right and time will tell, (on the YES vote I mean) in which case, it will just prove that there are way too many ‘kiss arses’ out there. YES voters better stock up on plenty of rectinol because they will all be high fiving each other up on the street should the YES voters decide to hand over ‘300 million bucks’ to Tino. I hope in the end, the new EBA is worth all that wonderful radiation sitting up there for 20.5 hours stick. It’s bound to be 24 hours door to door. If there was ever a duty that needed proper overtime rates, this proposed flying has got to be it! Vote NO.

[Troo believer]

For everybody’s benefit what rank and which aircraft do you fly?
Me I’m a 787 Captain. I have no skin in the game except for the career progression of my colleagues.

[ruprecht]

For everybody’s benefit what rank and which aircraft do you fly?

Well, that killed the conversation... :p

[V-Jet]

Not surprising really, Their talent for lies notwithstanding, Angels can’t answer that one:)

[Viagra]

. Remember this is a negotiation so negotiable tactics are at play here. I’d suggest try to keep your emotions under control and read the situation analytically. We haven’t seen the final document yet.

Regarding their threat, they probably have the capacity to pull it off, but I don’t think it will benefit the business long term.

1. The qantas business success is heavily reliant on their safety record. This is why passengers fly qantas. Their safety record is thanks to the current long serving loyal pilots. They’re a known quantity with a proven track record. For Qf to put their trust is a whole new group of unknown pilots is very risky for the business long term.

2. Who would they find to fly in the new entity? They’ve mentioned the flood of contract pilots from China. These guys are proven mercenaries. In three years time when the carona virus is history, the past boom in international will have returned plus the back log of delayed travellers. China will be offering eye watering contracts which these mercenaries will find impossible to resist, especially compared to the poor conditions offered by project sunrise.

Don’t focus on the threat. Yes they are capable of pulling the trigger, but it could kill the qantas business long term. It’s an even bigger risk for them in my opinion.


Well said Gazza, is the threat real? sure it has validity, but would they pull that trigger?
The latest 787 Safety video shows how much they want to market and advertise the pilot safety and experience factor.
The entities (that have prob already sent AJ a joint email saying they'll fly the deal) will be long gone once China realises they are short staffed again! Which will probs be early to mid next year, but by then EA10 is well secured forever...

Me? - 777 capt elsewhere with no skin in this game.

[itsnotthatbloodyhard]

Well said Gazza, is the threat real? sure it has validity, but would they pull that trigger?
The latest 787 Safety video shows how much they want to market and advertise the pilot safety and experience factor.

Pretty much the same video they’ll be showing on Jetconnect flights.

[Green.Dot]

Pretty much the same video they’ll be showing on Jetconnect flights.

Lol- nailed it!! Safety pfft, these guys will get someone else in to do the Sunrise flying even if it costs a truck load setting it up. Ask yourself why not?

[bythenumbers]

787 SO

Look I’m more than willing to vote NO, even from my position way down here in the cheap seats, and just for the sake of clarity, those of us down the bottom third of the list have the most to lose here (not loose :hmm:).

No or Yes whatever I decide will be an informed vote.

Now there's plenty of chatter on here about transfer of business and so fourth but where is the actual information from AIPA on what if any legal avenues we may have to protect this flying being outsourced. In order to make an informed vote this is what we need. I personally feel information from AIPA has been very lacking. Maybe that will change after the meeting on the 10th but advice on the EA and what happens next are two different things.

Here’s the problem, evidence.

We now have Jetconnect operating on our AOC as of about 2 years ago, a pilot group based in a different country on a completely different industrial planet, yet the airline is “Qantas” because it’s our AOC. There’s no more operated by xxxx on the boarding passes because it’s operated by Qantas (from a regulatory perspective).

So what’s to stop the company doing the same thing again? This is a serious question if anyone has the answer. Because there are a lot of comments like “oh they will never be able to make it work” and “the public won’t accept it”.

The public already accept it. On the Tasman, they can sell it to the public as Qantas. Christ they can sell car insurance with a Qantas Brand.

So we would still end up with a 23.5 hour rule in our FRMS (although not in our EA) because of course CASA just signs whatever we want. Perhaps even our A330 TRE’s will be doing cyclic’s for these new generation of scabs, just as the 737 TRE’s and TRI’s do for the Jetconnect pilots. Jetconnect pilots sit on induction and initial ground training with our new hires. Same AOC, different contract.

This is what actually happens and it’s happening right now.

Perhaps I can speak on behalf of the some of my similarly junior colleagues that aren’t in fact hell bent on voting YES for the shiny jet at all costs. And that have been through a few rodeos before with other carriers.

Why can’t/ won’t they do it? And what if
anything can we do about it?

This is the part that we are perhaps struggling with the most. And this is how we make an informed decision.

If we can’t do anything about it, this vote really comes down to outsourcing or not outsourcing does it not?

[dr dre]

787 SO

So what’s to stop the company doing the same thing again? This is a serious question if anyone has the answer. Because there are a lot of comments like “oh they will never be able to make it work” and “the public won’t accept it”.

This is what actually happens and it’s happening right now.

Why can’t/ won’t they do it? And what if
anything can we do about it?

If we can’t do anything about it, this vote really comes down to outsourcing or not outsourcing does it not?

Well the company has said they are able to start a separate entity.

The Union (I assume right now) is getting professional advice put together on the legality/likelihood of the operation which should be used in order for them to make their decision as to what guidance they give by early next week.

It’d be best to wait until then, assuming clear guidance is given and not some attempt to wash their hands of this situation.

However the company is quite adamant they can start this operation. That any form of PIA won’t affect it. They surely won’t have a problem attracting Aussie expats back home. The public wouldn’t know/care that the pilot flying them isn’t on the mainline seniority list.

So yes, if the Union come back saying “there’s really nothing we can do”, the vote comes down to doing the flying or outsourcing it.

[ANCDU]

Bythenumbers, all good points and to be honest questions that I hope AIPA will supply answers to as well.

Jetconnect has been around a while, and in answer to some of your questions why didn’t Qantas transfer more flying to this entity previously? It could just as easily started them flying 787’s at a reduced rate but they haven’t. It isn’t out if the kindness of their hearts to current LH pilots. The same to an extent with Network.

The Joyce era has been one of constantly trying to destroy the LH award with threats of outsourcing, but it’s never eventuated. It’s a big bluff to call, especially in the current environment...and unfortunately they know that.

[Guitar Joe]

I am broadly in agreement with you bythenumbers.

There are things I would like to see changed in the offer. I would like LRC to have a bigger value, I would like to see Element 3 stay, I’m not too happy about the increase in training freeze or the inability for me as a 787 FO to bid onto the A350 (which I would absolutely do).
However, none of these things are dire enough to have me gift the flying to another entity, if managements ultimatum were to stay true. Many of our pilots will bid onto the aircraft under the conditions on offer if/when it arrives. I would if I could.
Once again it comes down to the (I believe very real) risk of being sidelined just to have the possibility of these improvements.
I would need to see very strong leadership from AIPA, a unified and engaged Com and most of all, a very well planned, realistically achievable industrial strategy to justify the risk. So far, I don’t think we have this.

I also don’t buy the premise that if we don’t fight now, we will never fight. This is a fallacy. The option to fight or run always remains.
The question is, should we make a last stand and risk it all or should we consolidate now and fight when their is an achievable victory to be won?

[dr dre]

1. The qantas business success is heavily reliant on their safety record. This is why passengers fly qantas. Their safety record is thanks to the current long serving loyal pilots. They’re a known quantity with a proven track record. For Qf to put their trust is a whole new group of unknown pilots is very risky for the business long term.

That hasn’t stopped them from using a myriad of external entities/crewing companies now. For the general public they wouldn’t know/care/understand whether or not the ones sitting in the front are on the mainline seniority list or not. From the companies perspective they will be engaging pilots who are already experienced with Airbus, international and long flying.

2. Who would they find to fly in the new entity? They’ve mentioned the flood of contract pilots from China. These guys are proven mercenaries. In three years time when the carona virus is history, the past boom in international will have returned plus the back log of delayed travellers. China will be offering eye watering contracts which these mercenaries will find impossible to resist, especially compared to the poor conditions offered by project sunrise

At the moment quite a few international widebody expat Captains and FO’s are willing to come back and work on even 787 SO conditions. They’d love the chance to jump at DEC and DEFO positions. There’s more to life than money, but $400k AUD is great money and they’ll almost certainly be flying less fatiguing rosters on the 350 than their current expat contracts. Add to that working under western industrial protections and regulations. And the chance to spend more time at home.

Add to that the great number of Australian Airbus pilots both in and out of the group, plus all the regular sources of crew (regionals, GA, other airlines) who can be trained to fly it? Yeah there will be no problem in finding crew.

There’s very few pilots in the wider industry who would describe the proposed sunrise conditions as “poor”. Maybe compared to 380 legacy, but if anyone thinks every other capable airline pilot in the world would knock back sunrise because it’s slightly worse than the 380 then they’re living in a bubble.

[FlexibleResponse]

“The A350 is a fantastic aircraft and the deal on the table with Airbus gives us the best possible combination of commercial terms, fuel efficiency, operating cost and customer experience,” Joyce said in a statement published by Qantas regarding the Project Sunrise selection.

https://www.aviationtoday.com/2019/12/13/qantas-prefers-airbus-a350-boeing-777x-final-project-sunrise-decision-march-2020/

The Australian airline announced that it is working with Airbus to prepare a contract for up to 12 A350-1000s. However, it is not certain that Qantas will actually begin the flights. In a press release, the airline said it will make a final decision in March 2020 on whether to operate the routes.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/qantas-a350-1000-for-project-sunrise/


So Qantas management said that the A350 order was dependent on an EA being agreed with the pilots. Then they changed their mind and said if no EA signed, then Qantas would employ outside cheaper pilots to fly the Sunrise route (and presumably go ahead with the A350 order anyway).

That would mean Qantas flying their "feather in their cap" premium Qantas Sunrise route with the new premium aircraft operated by an El Cheapo subsidiary airline with a gaggle of low paid pilots scraped together from around the World? How does anyone think that will go down with the movers and shakers and other big-swinging-dicks of the Qantas Club? Seriously?

But Qantas also report they are drawing up a contract with Airbus for 12 x A350s. Are they planning 6 Sunrise departures every day? No, the extra aircraft will obviously be used on other current Qantas routes.

Two things are very clear from the Qantas statements. Firstly the Airbus A350 is a preferred aircraft over the Boeing B777X. Secondly, the commitment to Airbus as opposed to Boeing, is likely to lead to more Airbus orders rather than Boeing orders. That could include more A350s to eventually replace A330s and B787s. Looking further down the track, Airbus A320s and A220s would then be more likely to replace the B737s .

Based on events to date it is more likely than not, that current Qantas pilots will end up flying the Airbus A350. The A350 is the future for the Qantas fleet.

And that gentlemen is why Qantas management is falling all over themselves trying to tie down a EA on the A350 now (while pretending that it is only destined for the Sunrise route).

There are three issues. An EA to cover the A350. An EA to cover 20+ hours sectors. And eventually, the management coup de grâce, an EA to cover mixed fleet flying.

Their are two sets of experts in this stouch, the management and your union. Who do you think cares more about you, your health, wealth and well being?

Think carefully about the implications and consequences before deciding your vote if you go it solo.

[Capt Colonial]

I think you’ve got your head up your arse mate. It will be YES for sure. When push comes to shove watch all the mouths capitulate.

Not by the recent count off the A380 and B747. Latest straw poll is a absolute NO Majority Vote.
Canvassing the A330 and B787 the rest of this week.

So I would not bet your house on it just yet Troo Believer....

[dr dre]

How does anyone think that will go down with the movers and shakers and other big-swinging-dicks of the Qantas Club? Seriously?

I think the movers and shakers in the club couldn’t care less about whether or not the pilots sitting in the front are on the mainline seniority list or not.

They’re flying an aircraft with the airline’s name on it, that’s the extent of how much they care I think.

Everyone else in society has bigger fish to fry than us.

[dr dre]

Not by the recent count off the A380 and B747. Latest straw poll is a absolute NO Majority Vote.
Canvassing the A330 and B787 the rest of this week.

I think the union’s upcoming statements will be quite influential on the final outcome.

[itsnotthatbloodyhard]

How does anyone think that will go down with the movers and shakers and other big-swinging-dicks of the Qantas Club? Seriously?

Sadly, they’ll just see it as Alan sticking it to the unions. They’ll bloody love it.

[Capt Fathom]

Sadly, they’ll just see it as Alan sticking it to the unions. They’ll bloody love it.
Until there's a bingle!

[ConfigFull]

Personally I still don’t know which way I will vote. I’m relying quite heavily on AIPA and their resources to do all the required due diligence and legal research. Their communication and leadership over them next couple of weeks will probably play a large role in how I vote.

A few things a can’t stomach about the proposal.

New SO pay. Not only are they proposing to limit it to 6 year pay, but they want to replace the current pay scale with an extension of the first 18 months of probation pay. It’s condemning all new SOs to eternal probation pay which is very unfair. “Who cares? Not our problem” is a disappointing view from junior crew who not so long ago were new SOs themselves.

They want the sunrise conditions to extend to all sectors the 350 will do. I understand that for ULR flying, the current overtime rules is probably unrealistic. Why not put a cap on overtime for sunrise flying. But, it’s clear the 350 will also be doing current non sunrise sectors as well eg. Syd-lax, Syd-dfw etc. I don’t see why the conditions need to change for the 350 flying on non sunrise flights. This is pure daylight robbery of our conditions.

On the other hand, I obviously don’t want to see a new scabby entity take our flying. As I mentioned, long term this strategy doesn’t make sense but the airline shut down in 2012 didn’t make sense either, so they are probably capable to doing it.

Personally I would benefit from a yes vote if the company’s promise of growth eventuates but morally, voting yes doesn’t currently sit well.

Well said - couldn't have put it better.

[B772]

1. Does anyone have an estimate of the number of Aust pilots who have been furloughed by overseas carriers.
2. With Virgin Australia shares dropping below 10c is it true VA are looking at dumping their 6 x A330's and adding 1 x B777 to their fleet to reduce losses and costs. This would mean a large number of VA A330 pilots may be offered redundancy and the opportunity to leave a sinking ship and work for a real airline.
2 I do not understand how QF can be seen to operate 2 x B747-8F aircraft using foreign a/c and crews with rumours a third one will be needed soon.

[normanton]

Personally I still don’t know which way I will vote. I’m relying quite heavily on AIPA and their resources to do all the required due diligence and legal research. Their communication and leadership over them next couple of weeks will probably play a large role in how I vote.

A few things a can’t stomach about the proposal.

New SO pay. Not only are they proposing to limit it to 6 year pay, but they want to replace the current pay scale with an extension of the first 18 months of probation pay. It’s condemning all new SOs to eternal probation pay which is very unfair. “Who cares? Not our problem” is a disappointing view from junior crew who not so long ago were new SOs themselves.

They want the sunrise conditions to extend to all sectors the 350 will do. I understand that for ULR flying, the current overtime rules is probably unrealistic. Why not put a cap on overtime for sunrise flying. But, it’s clear the 350 will also be doing current non sunrise sectors as well eg. Syd-lax, Syd-dfw etc. I don’t see why the conditions need to change for the 350 flying on non sunrise flights. This is pure daylight robbery of our conditions.

On the other hand, I obviously don’t want to see a new scabby entity take our flying. As I mentioned, long term this strategy doesn’t make sense but the airline shut down in 2012 didn’t make sense either, so they are probably capable to doing it.

Personally I would benefit from a yes vote if the company’s promise of growth eventuates but morally, voting yes doesn’t currently sit well.
Well put.

I guess it comes down to how credible you think Tino's threat it.

I believe they will do it. For that reason, the SO's are better employed under mainline instead of a new entity.

Eating your young. Throwing SOs under the bus, whatever you want to call it. IMO its the lesser of two evils.

[Global Aviator]

Until there's a bingle!

Ahhh is this the ole sky god attitude of only QF pilots are good enough?

I am sure returning expats more than capable of flying aircraft.

I am not saying that a new entity is a good option, merely questioning the ole attitude.

I apologise if I am barking up the wrong tree as haven’t read all recent posts.

:)

[bythenumbers]

Not by the recent count off the A380 and B747. Latest straw poll is a absolute NO Majority Vote.
Canvassing the A330 and B787 the rest of this week.

So I would not bet your house on it just yet Troo Believer....

So the absolute majority of the crew from these fleets are a NO. Ok that’s fair... although I don’t believe that’s quite accurate. Speaking to several SO’s from both 380 and 747 they’re really just not sure either... but in any case.

What’s the end game? Is it straight 330 rate and conditions to carry over onto the 350, leave all the night credits and AFDP’s as they are? What about 747 rate? What about 380 rate?

Removal of new hire SO rate?
Removal of 4 year training freeze?
Removal of pre allocated training?
Should the 350 just be a completely seperate type to replace the 747 in the rank structure to allow continued bidding between fleets for Captains and Fo’s?
Do we just roll over EBA 9 into EBA 10 and take 3% and say **** your 350?

What would make the Majority vote yes?

I’m just curious as to how far off the mark we are in their mind?

Personally I’d love to see them leave everything as is and see the 350 become the new 747... but I’m not so delusional as to believe we will ever see those terms be renewed for a new aircraft. At best we can hope to equal or slightly surpass 787 pay.

Correct me if my logic is flawed.

[crosscutter]

Ahhh is this the ole sky god attitude of only QF pilots are good enough?

I am sure returning expats more than capable of flying aircraft.

I am not saying that a new entity is a good option, merely questioning the ole attitude.

I apologise if I am barking up the wrong tree as haven’t read all recent posts.

:)

simply an explanation that post transformation there is less knowledge, experience and talent throughout the organisation. Pilots are always the last line of defence, especially the Captain. Now on the doorstep of 23.5hr duties the last line of defence doesn’t appear as solid as it might due to continued cost and legislative transformation. Watch the architects of these transformations scramble following a bingle...as pilots are led to the cell.

[blubak]

1. Does anyone have an estimate of the number of Aust pilots who have been furloughed by overseas carriers.
2. With Virgin Australia shares dropping below 10c is it true VA are looking at dumping their 6 x A330's and adding 1 x B777 to their fleet to reduce losses and costs. This would mean a large number of VA A330 pilots may be offered redundancy and the opportunity to leave a sinking ship and work for a real airline.
2 I do not understand how QF can be seen to operate 2 x B747-8F aircraft using foreign a/c and crews with rumours a third one will be needed soon.
Qantas doesnt operate them,it says on the side of the aircraft'Operated by Atlas Air on behalf of Qantas'

[JPJP]

You seriously think I will be stuck as an SO with a YES vote?


Theeeeere we go. Finally, the truth. And the only real motivation for the long string of manic posts.

“Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn’t” - Mark Twain.

[Poto]

Theeeeere we go. Finally, the truth. And the only real motivation for the long string of manic posts.

“Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn’t” - Mark Twain.

Normanton is right to be concerned. This Vote could be yet another colossal stuff up for Qantas Crew!

The Mark Twain quote is very apt.

[Gazza mate]

No like the berated spouse of an alcoholic, they hope this time is different

Faux outrage assumed

Btw where is Rated De? Last post 1st feb, did they finally silence him? Qf still need a new fleet don’t they Rated De?

[normanton]

Theeeeere we go. Finally, the truth. And the only real motivation for the long string of manic posts.

“Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn’t” - Mark Twain.
OR maybe, just maybe, a YES vote comes 350s and with that ~400 new pilot positions, and ~1000 training positions within mainline.

That's the real truth here.

But please, continue with your scaremongering comments. :ok:

[dragon man]

OR maybe, just maybe, a YES vote comes 350s and with that ~400 new pilot positions, and ~1000 training positions within mainline.

That's the real truth here.

But please, continue with your scaremongering comments. :ok:

Il vote my way you vote your way , to be honest I don’t care much any more but by 2025 if you haven’t gotten 400 new pilot positions over and above retirements and 1000 training positions don’t say you weren’t told and also realise that you are now paying for your training thru the last EBA changes. As for Rated D he has retired due to ill health, personally I miss his comments he is no fool.

[DirectAnywhere]

~400 new pilot positions, and ~1000 training positions within mainline.

That's the real truth here.

BWAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAH!!!!😂😂😂😂

That’s the funniest thing I’ve ever read. Geoff Dixon promised every FO they’d be a Captain within 3 years about 15 years ago.

QF was supposed to get 100 787s. Unicorns and payrises for all.

There are a number of reasons to vote yes (as there are to vote no)but this complete and utter BS is not one of them.

[DirectAnywhere]

Qantas was never getting 100.

Pretty sure you’ve just made my point for me.

[jet_pilot00]

BWAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAH!!!!😂😂😂😂

That’s the funniest thing I’ve ever read. Geoff Dixon promised every FO they’d be a Captain within 3 years about 15 years ago.

QF was supposed to get 100 787s. Unicorns and payrises for all.

There are a number of reasons to vote yes but this utter BS is not one of them.

100%

“But didn’t you hear Tino, he said there would be!” 😆😆😆😆

Normanton we can see you quivering in the corner through the way you’re responding. Settle down a bit mate, you’ll still get an FO gig one day! With either a YES or NO it’s going to be a lot longer than when you’ve been promised by Tino though!

a YES vote doesn’t guarantee PS will even get off the ground nor continue to operate. But those new conditions you’re signing up for will.

a NO vote doesn’t guarantee the company will do what it is threatening. But it might. 🤷‍♂️

Welcome to the world of IR.

Qantas isn’t going to cease flying aircraft around if a NO vote eventuates. Before you jump in with “RIN”, you’re getting one of those either way you vote in the next decade.

If Tino is so sure the project is going ahead then just order the aircraft already. Maybe holding the finalised sale contracts up for the world to see might have a bit more impact on the vote? But all these threats are just that, threats.

Maybe I’d be more inclined to vote YES if Management forewent their bonuses for a couple of years and accept being paid their salary to do the job they were contracted to do. “Help meet the business case”

The COM will have a well informed decision (I bloody hope) for us all next week. This will have a major impact not only on the vote, but also the future of AIPA I suspect?

Until then, stop being so defensive to everyone’s views. Chill out.

[maggotdriver]

Without prejudice, just for hypothetical..

“In breaking news today, the QANTAS share price dropped below $1:50 for the first time in years, wiping millions off the share price. The S and P downgrade followed the departure of the CEO international after the ongoing feud between QANTAS and the AIPA in reaching an agreement with its future ULH operations. The head of AIPA stated, “we still believe we should fly the aircraft on the 787 contract with an added percentage, unfortunately, it was QANTAS who played the outsource card. We have done and will continue to do everything in our power to help our customers get to their destination on time and on schedule. They cannot ground the fleet whilst we are delivering the usual product, albeit a little more expensively. The increase in cost is only due to the existential threat QANTAS imposed on its workforce who feel they own part of the goodwill of the brand.”

It was noted by local share broker and aviation EXPERT Jeffro Thomarse, that there are no share buy backs in a tumbling market, the covid-19 virus is still causing havoc and the recession that Australia has had for the first time in 26 years has lead to increasing pressure on the board to come to a deal with its remaining pilots. When asked for comment QANTAS refused. We await further on the update from the latest talks with Jetstar, over to you Jenny.”

[SecretAngel]

OR maybe, just maybe, a YES vote comes 350s and with that ~400 new pilot positions, and ~1000 training positions within mainline.

That's the real truth here.

But please, continue with your scaremongering comments. :ok:

I reckon we're on a similar-ish page on most issues about this vote, but I'm certainly not counting on that many new positions! For me, it's all about whether I (A380 SO) and other early and mid-career types can be confident of a future in mainline. I'm an optimist about PS being a serious competitive advantage for Qantas, and the B787/A350 combo being able to open up more routes than the B747/A380, which could lead to growth for Qantas and hopefully a promotion for me (subject to all of the things, of course). But that's not the deciding factor for me.

[DirectAnywhere]

So by all means make your point about 53 787s.

My only point is this: never trust a QANTAS manager when they talk about massive pilot job growth and promotional opportunities.

Those promises and predictions have never come true in my experience.

People will make up their own minds when it comes to the package as a whole but to hold up predictions of 400 new jobs and 1000 promotions as a reason to vote yes as Normanton has done is naive, foolish and fanciful, as has been shown repeatedly.

The best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour.

[normanton]

jet_pilot00 your entire post is just laughable. It will be the last time I respond to you. Your posts lack substance. You provide incorrect information. You make scaremongering comments, drop ridiculous theories, and your head is clouded about how this actually plays out.

I joined mainline during a RIN. And I must say, the 747 pilots are quite happy on the 787. The 787 contract has been widely accepted. The Sunrise contract is a pay increase (for more flying) over the 787. It is a pay increase over the 330 (for more flying). If you don't want to do it, don't bid for it! It cannot be any easier than that.


The COM will have a well informed decision (I bloody hope) for us all next week. This will have a major impact not only on the vote, but also the future of AIPA I suspect?

The major impact on the union here is a YES vote when they recommend a NO vote.

If they were smart and could see a YES vote coming, they will recommend a YES vote to ensure they have a future. That's exactly why they sent out a survey asking for your vote in advance.

[dragon man]

That’s funny the 747 pilots I know on the 787 loathe it.

[normanton]

That’s funny the 747 pilots I know on the 787 loathe it.
I said it's been widely accepted. That doesn't indicate they ALL love it. There is a few chronic whingers who just can't let it go. You can find them daily whinging with conspiracy theories and providing legal advice on qrewroom.

And remember, EBA 9 was widely accepted by the majority during the vote.

[dr dre]

That’s funny the 747 pilots I know on the 787 loathe it.

If they loathe it then feel free to quit and let any pilot who’s just been made redundant or told their contract no longer exists take it. I’m sure in the current environment they’ll find something much, much better in no time......

Plus I believe only a very small percentage of 78 pilots came from the 74, almost everyone else there who came from a different fleet loves it I’m told.

[ruprecht]

...For me, it's all about whether I (A380 SO) and other early and mid-career types...

Mate, stay on that jet until they take it out of service! :p

[blow.n.gasket]

The feedback I’m getting from mates still flying is thus :
There is a large ground swell of potential NO voters out there primarily as a result of how the company has handled ramming this negotiation down everyone’s throats and Judas Iscariot , lead Company negotiators betrayal .
The most common feed back is “ I would love to vote NO ,BUT , I am intimidated and scared for my future by the outsourcing threat made by Tino ! “
It appears if AIPA or someone could post a credible legal opinion as to the ability or not for Qantas to outsource pilots on the A350 , this information alone , I believe would change the vote for this EBA from YES to NO !
No legal interpretation dispelling the ability for Qantas to outsource through a pilot labour company = a YES vote as long as my arse points to the ground !
However if elements of AIPA’s fifth columnist executive could be “motivated” to get an eminent legal mind to espouse a decision that the threat of outsourcing is just that , I believe from the feed back I have received , a NO vote would prevail if this information was forth coming and compelling enough !

[SecretAngel]

Mate, stay on that jet until they take it out of service! :p
Ha, it's definitely an option. But, that'll only be a few years in the scheme of things, and I'd like to get my FO at some point.

[Danny104]

Birdie,
That is complete management/ AIPA exec bull**** . Not more money on most routes , not same number of seats, not new flying - same city pairs. Explain how drafting with the company is deliberate attempt to white ant any fair work case in the future. Safe 2.0 is setting up a no win for LH pilots. The AIPA executive are being obstructionist, if they have nothing to hide why haven’t the calls for an SGM been heeded.

[blow.n.gasket]

Sounds like you guys are being led up the slaughterhouse kill ramp by a few
fifth column Judas goats !
Not to mention office staff that are doing their fifth column masters bidding .
Your in-house legal team advice has an extremely STARK defeatist ring to it !
Sounds very much like another HOLTESQUE screwing of the pilots is underway .

[dragon man]

Sounds like you guys are being led up the slaughterhouse kill ramp by a few
fifth column Judas goats !
Not to mention office staff that are doing their fifth column masters bidding .
Your in-house legal team advice has an extremely STARK defeatist ring to it !
Sounds very much like another HOLTESQUE screwing of the pilots is underway .

You got it 👍👍👍👍👏👏👏

[dragon man]

For the non believers check out the AIPA explanatory document. Not my figures but AIPAs, average 14% increase in hours flown for 15% less money.

[blow.n.gasket]

Another circa 30% ? give on top of the 787’s 30% give that was sold to the minions under the pretext :
“ to secure the flying “ !

Let’s all do the Tino Safe limbo dance together .
HOW LOW CAN WE GO ?
Not low enough it would appear .:sad:


https://youtu.be/XSuJ7kX-cH0

[Wingspar]

After ‘89, sorry to bring it up, the company wrote up the contract and said sign it or go somewhere else.
It was only a few pages long. You could read it over a flat white at a Tulla coffee shop.
Come ‘95 the company introduced the ‘B’ scale into it.
Then AIPA got involved.
Look where the document is now!
Yeah people will complain about it but it’s a lot better than it was and no ‘B’ scale.
The point I’m trying to say is don’t cut your nose off to spite your face.
Its best to stay at the table because you have a say.
I don’t like this one bit but what option is there?
Yeah I can hear it now but we can keep negotiating.
We can take it to FW etc.....
Im not interested in opinions.
Show me the reference in law where a Judge can hang his hat?
Whether it’s the company or from AIPA....show me the reference!
Otherwise I’ll deal with what’s in front of me!

[Vindiesel]

The AIPA explanatory document is a load of rubbish based on fixed stick hours. Why did they choose this way to present the data?

Any pilot knows that a SYD PER return is an easier day out for the same duty hours as a double SYD MEL return 4 sector day. The former has 50% more stick hours than the latter for the same
duty period - yet the higher stick day is more popular.

So why has AIPA used this methodology in the document? To try to make the deal look as bad as possible?

[HabuHunter]

After ‘89, sorry to bring it up, the company wrote up the contract and said sign it or go somewhere else.
It was only a few pages long. You could read it over a flat white at a Tulla coffee shop.
Come ‘95 the company introduced the ‘B’ scale into it.
Then AIPA got involved.
Look where the document is now!
Yeah people will complain about it but it’s a lot better than it was and no ‘B’ scale.
The point I’m trying to say is don’t cut your nose off to spite your face.
Its best to stay at the table because you have a say.
I don’t like this one bit but what option is there?
Yeah I can hear it now but we can keep negotiating.
We can take it to FW etc.....
Im not interested in opinions.
Show me the reference in law where a Judge can hang his hat on?
Whether it’s the company or from AIPA....show me the reference!
Otherwise I’ll deal with what’s in front of me!

Sooo... do we have a seat at the table now, they have bypassed AIPA... It’s an ultimatum... take it or leave it. Next eba after a yes vote will be another ultimatum and so on.
With a NO vote, we still have an EBA to thrash out (minus 350 flying) and life goes on.
The company have said we may have access to join the new entity a la Jetstar MOU or some other mechanism. Hopefully AIPA will cover the pilots of the new entity and as you say work to improve the pay and conditions.
This is about supporting collective bargaining and AIPA for future negotiations as much as anything.

[cloudsurfng]

Still the NO camp has offered no plan for what’s next.

think you’ll still get your 3% and back pay? You’ll get nothing. Look around you, the world economy is tanking, pilots out of jobs everywhere, and you are being offered 3% plus backpay. Say NO, It will be gone. Not only will the 350 be gone, so will any other gains in the EA. In fact I would bet that the moment the long haul EA result is known, Alan will be sprouting the pay freeze again. There’s more at risk here than the 350.

[Wingspar]

The company have said we may have access to join the new entity a la Jetstar MOU or some other mechanism.

Well there you go!
May......perhaps...I don’t know.....what if?
Look, go whichever way you want but I’d rather stay at the table rather than look from outside....and hope.....maybe?

[dragon man]

Still the NO camp has offered no plan for what’s next.

think you’ll still get your 3% and back pay? You’ll get nothing. Look around you, the world economy is tanking, pilots out of jobs everywhere, and you are being offered 3% plus backpay. Say NO, It will be gone. Not only will the 350 be gone, so will any other gains in the EA. In fact I would bet that the moment the long haul EA result is known, Alan will be sprouting the pay freeze again. There’s more at risk here than the 350.

I understand where you are coming from however it’s not my job to tell you what plan B is. If you are in AIPA I suggest you email them and ask them, as stated in earlier threads they need the very best SC advise and if it says there is no plan B then I will be voting yes also. The facts are that there are many many very unhappy committee members, I know of one who is seeing a barrister today plus others who have already spoken to the Registered Organisations Commision. Lastly the AFAP is in FWA in April for coverage of Qantas pilots it’s is my opinion only that if AIPA don’t do something then AIPA will split.

[HabuHunter]

Well there you go!
May......perhaps...I don’t know.....what if?
Look, go whichever way you want but I’d rather stay at the table rather than look from outside....and hope.....maybe?


Yet you believe by voting YES you somehow guarantee the sunrise flying ....based on what??? The company mentioned it in a webinar? They will never put that guarantee in writing.

And what good is a seat at the table with a gun to your head? Sign or else.
How is that going to work next eba?

That’s my main point, at some stage you will have to take a stand.
It’s not palatable, it’s not easy but voting YES guarantees NOTHING except what’s written in the eba doc AND more of the same treatment every eba.

[jet_pilot00]

....it’s is my opinion only that if AIPA don’t do something then AIPA will split.

100%. A Yes vote risks us being contractors in no time at all. Slippery slope.

[itsnotthatbloodyhard]

Next eba after a yes vote will be another ultimatum and so on.

This is exactly right. But also, next EBA after a no vote will also be another ultimatum and so on. That’s just the nature of the creatures we’re dealing with.

While there are good reasons to support a no vote, I don’t think that this in itself is one of them.

[Wingspar]

Yet you believe by voting YES you somehow guarantee the sunrise flying ....based on what??? The company mentioned it in a webinar? They will never put that guarantee in writing.

And what good is a seat at the table with a gun to your head? Sign or else.
How is that going to work next eba?

That’s my main point, at some stage you will have to take a stand.
It’s not palatable, it’s not easy but voting YES guarantees NOTHING except what’s written in the eba doc AND more of the same treatment every eba.

A stand for what?
Righteousness?
Solidarity?
What exactly?
What QF are doing now is no different to what they’ve been doing for years.
The difference this time is the threat is blatant! Straight up mainline flying contracted out!
Nothing else has changed.
The law hasn’t changed. The environment is the same. So what makes you think a stand now will change anything? The company won’t guarantee anything because this is their long standing approach.
If you think a no vote will change anything then good luck!
All a no vote will do is accelerate the flying out the window!
How about we all resign?
That’ll show’em!

[normanton]

Yet you believe by voting YES you somehow guarantee the sunrise flying ....based on what??? The company mentioned it in a webinar? They will never put that guarantee in writing.

And what good is a seat at the table with a gun to your head? Sign or else.
How is that going to work next eba?

That’s my main point, at some stage you will have to take a stand.
It’s not palatable, it’s not easy but voting YES guarantees NOTHING except what’s written in the eba doc AND more of the same treatment every eba.
Oh please, take your lack luster conspiracy theories elsewhere. Stop trying to scare people into voting NO. Provide some solid facts or get lost.

[bythenumbers]

This is exactly right. But also, next EBA after a no vote will also be another ultimatum and so on. That’s just the nature of the creatures we’re dealing with.

While there are good reasons to support a no vote, I don’t think that this in itself is one of them.

There will always be an ultimatum with the introduction of a new type and hollow promises of expansion always pop up around EBA time. The true test is sitting in the pointy end of an A350/777X//787/797 in their fantastical time frame, until then we should all remain skeptical.

But don’t let skepticism overcome logic and reasoning because these pricks have already thought of that. Look at the facts, even if you don’t like them.

If our decision becomes emotionally charged they win.

[Ruvap]

For the non believers check out the AIPA explanatory document. Not my figures but AIPAs, average 14% increase in hours flown for 15% less money.

No need to even look that closely at the numbers. Just rely on Tino’s numbers. By voting YES, pilots will be gifting Qantas 300 million bucks. It’s simply not possible for this deal to be in the best interests of pilots because Qantas has negotiated the deal with themselves! Smart money will vote NO for sure.

[HabuHunter]

A stand for what?
Righteousness?
Solidarity?
What exactly?
What QF are doing now is no different to what they’ve been doing for years.
The difference this time is the threat is blatant! Straight up mainline flying contracted out!
Nothing else has changed.
The law hasn’t changed. The environment is the same. So what makes you think a stand now will change anything? The company won’t guarantee anything because this is their long standing approach.
If you think a no vote will change anything then good luck!
All a no vote will do is accelerate the flying out the window!
How about we all resign?
That’ll show’em!

I want to take a stand to stop the erosion of our work conditions. At some stage the pay and conditions dictated by QF management each EBA will be bad enough that even you will say NO... it’s just a matter of time. There will come a time when people WILL resign because the job is just too onerous or unhealthy or both.

[normanton]

I want to take a stand to stop the erosion of our work conditions. At some stage the pay and conditions dictated by QF management each EBA will be bad enough that even you will say NO... it’s just a matter of time. There will come a time when people WILL resign because the job is just too onerous or unhealthy or both.
Please, tell me.

How far do you see the erosion of our conditions once a new entity is setup, and is constantly undercutting us at every EBA renewal?

[HabuHunter]

Oh please, take your lack luster conspiracy theories elsewhere. Stop trying to scare people into voting NO. Provide some solid facts or get lost.

Fact: If you vote YES you only get what is written in the EBA document. If there is NO clause stating that we will do the Sunrise flying then it is NOT guaranteed.
Fact: If you vote NO the EBA negotiation process continues.

I’m not trying to scare anyone, quite the opposite.

[HabuHunter]

Please, tell me.

How far do you see the erosion of our conditions once a new entity is setup, and is constantly undercutting us at every EBA renewal?

So what’s to stop that happening anyway?

[ExtraShot]

And what good is a seat at the table with a gun to your head? Sign or else.
How is that going to work next eba?

Incase you haven’t noticed, there will be a ‘Gun to your head’ again regardless. A NO vote won’t change that one iota. Only there is the Risk of those negotiations being conducted with the realised threat of an actual entity now having been created to fly Qantas Wide bodies. That gun will have become far more powerful.

If I am to vote No,I’d like to see AIPA publish a credible pathway forward, outlined both legally and industrially, assuring me that the LHEA will not be consigned to irrelevance as we have missed our chance at having these new aircraft incorporated into our Agreement.

If they cant/won’t/or simply don’t have an answer for that, in mangaging the presented risk and potential outcomes, there’s only one way I can vote.

[ScepticalOptomist]

Normanton and all the other “definite YES! voters” - Have a read of Post #1657 in LHEA 10 on Qrewroom by WM.

There’s some food for thought.

[Wingspar]

I want to take a stand to stop the erosion of our work conditions. At some stage the pay and conditions dictated by QF management each EBA will be bad enough that even you will say NO... it’s just a matter of time. There will come a time when people WILL resign because the job is just too onerous or unhealthy or both.

Habu I understand your frustration.
I share that with you!
Vote no if you believe that and we will deal with the result.
I've seen the mob mentality before and this looks like it again.
A lot of lies are being thrown around!
Be careful!

[Danny104]

Seat count who knows ?which route? Do think they send a 240 seat jet to replace 500 to DFW. We will know the count when they arrive. I do know 320t take off weight as opposed to 254T. Lots more seats available . Less pay than 787 on all Asian flying, East coast Aus to west coast USA lots of routes there you can work that out for yourself. SIN-LHR . break even on Per-LHR , DFW , ORD? More on direct JFK and LHR . Added all up wouldn’t call that most. We already fly to all those destinations except ORD which starts soon. What happens to existing flying when new route starts? is it really new routes?

[HabuHunter]

Incase you haven’t noticed, there will be a ‘Gun to your head’ again regardless. A NO vote won’t change that one iota. Only there is the Risk of those negotiations being conducted with the realised threat of an actual entity now having been created to fly Qantas Wide bodies. That gun will have become far more powerful.

If I am to vote No,I’d like to see AIPA publish a credible pathway forward, outlined both legally and industrially, assuring me that the LHEA will not be consigned to irrelevance as we have missed our chance at having these new aircraft incorporated into our Agreement.

If they cant/won’t/or simply don’t have an answer for that, in mangaging the presented risk and potential outcomes, there’s only one way I can vote.

I don’t think that’s quite right but you do highlight the diabolical choice we have to make. If we vote NO and a new entity is created they cannot transfer our flying to them without running foul of transmission of business laws. But as you say that won’t stop them from threatening us to do so.

I agree 100% that we need some leadership AND info from AIPA ASAP.

[dragon man]

I don’t think that’s quite right but you do highlight the diabolical choice we have to make. If we vote NO and a new entity is created they cannot transfer our flying to them without running foul of transmission of business laws. But as you say that won’t stop them from threatening us to do so.

I agree 100% that we need some leadership AND info from AIPA ASAP.

AIPA is in the throws of blowing up, the president is looking for any reason he can to not hold a special general meeting as requested by members. When this is over AIPA will never be the same again IMO.

[ruprecht]

When this is over AIPA will never be the same again IMO.

This has to be one of the aims of the company. All led by the AIPA ex-president. Top bloke... :hmm:

[Ruvap]

This has to be one of the aims of the company. All led by the AIPA ex-president. Top bloke... :hmm:

Exactly, so why would one even think about voting YES for a package designed by him, unless the voter is an ar#e licker! Stand up for yourselves and vote NO.

[blow.n.gasket]

Any truth to the rumour that Qantas Managements project name for the selling of this EBA10 to the sheeple is
PROJECT : “ARBEIT MACHT FREI “ ?

[ruprecht]

Any truth to the rumour that Qantas Managements project name for the selling of this EBA10 to the sheeple is
PROJECT : “ARBEIT MACHT FREI “ ?

What was AIPA’s strategy? PROJECT: MAGINOT LINE? :sad:

[Wingspar]

This is for you Habu,

Go to 8:10.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/programs/the-business/2020-02-20/extended-interview-with-alan-joyce/11986236?jwsource=cl

To be sure, to be sure!

[HabuHunter]

This is for you Habu,

Go to 8:10.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/programs/the-business/2020-02-20/extended-interview-with-alan-joyce/11986236?jwsource=cl

To be sure, to be sure!

Ta mate,

Nudge nudge wink wink ... trust me I’m Qantas CEO

[crosscutter]

This has to be one of the aims of the company. All led by the AIPA ex-president. Top bloke... :hmm:

Just as an alternate perspective....
I would guess he (NS) played a role in suggesting the savings ideas. The narrative would be from above...’we need these savings or the flying will be outsourced...see what you can do’.
Why anyone would want to work for QF mgmt I struggle with...but NS job in this may not have been desirable. In no way am I defending him but perhaps the job of AIPA and NS was to find a way to keep the flying in house under near impossible saving requirements.

We just don’t know, but either way, he’ll be eating and drinking while the crew are elsewhere for the remainder of his career. That’s the cost of ambition.

[B772]

Danny104 The number of seats in the QF A350-1000 have been quoted as around 300 and up to 375. BA have 331 seats, CX have 334 and VS 335. All have a 3 class cabin. QF will have a 4 class cabin so it could be around 315 seats.

[V-Jet]

Wingspar - I watched three seconds of that from 8:10 and it made me ill. Then I reached for too much scotch and STILL can't get that image out of my head....

CC - I don't think anyone need worry about about NS. The executive bathroom he got keys to must be pretty bloody impressive!

[crosscutter]

Danny104 The number of seats in the QF A350-1000 have been quoted as around 300 and up to 375. BA have 331 seats, CX have 334 and VS 335. All have a 3 class cabin. QF will have a 4 class cabin so it could be around 315 seats.

or around 235

[blow.n.gasket]

/ruprecht;10703403]What was AIPA’s strategy? PROJECT: MAGINOT LINE?




Which AIPA are you referring to ruprecht , the 5th column elements of the executive or the guys on CoM actually trying to advance the interests of the members and the profession ?

[ruprecht]

/ruprecht;10703403]What was AIPA’s strategy? PROJECT: MAGINOT LINE?




Which AIPA are you referring to ruprecht , the 5th column elements of the executive or the guys on CoM actually trying to advance the interests of the members and the profession ?

Well, neither.

The WW2 reference was there and so I drew a parallel to the French who, despite setting up a defensive line, were taken by surprise when the Germans used a tactic that the French hadn’t adequately prepared for.:(

[Ruvap]

Maybe it’s time for a remake?

https://youtu.be/QTCwPlWzZnQ

[ruprecht]

Just as an alternate perspective....
I would guess he (NS) played a role in suggesting the savings ideas. The narrative would be from above...’we need these savings or the flying will be outsourced...see what you can do’.
Why anyone would want to work for QF mgmt I struggle with...but NS job in this may not have been desirable. In no way am I defending him but perhaps the job of AIPA and NS was to find a way to keep the flying in house under near impossible saving requirements.

We just don’t know, but either way, he’ll be eating and drinking while the crew are elsewhere for the remainder of his career. That’s the cost of ambition.

Yes, have pondered a similar line of thinking. Here’s another perspective:

The timing of this coronavirus seems pretty poor and is clearly to the company’s advantage, but I reckon it could be a lot worse. I think this virus has a long way to run yet. Imagine if the virus hit six months ago while “negotiations” were still ongoing - I can imagine the company attempting to gouge a hell of a lot more using the global downturn as an excuse. We haven’t quite dodged a bullet, but it hasn’t hit vital organs.

[Jimothy]

Yes, have pondered a similar line of thinking. Here’s another perspective:

The timing of this coronavirus seems pretty poor and is clearly to the company’s advantage, but I reckon it could be a lot worse. I think this virus has a long way to run yet. Imagine if the virus hit six months ago while “negotiations” were still ongoing - I can imagine the company attempting to gouge a hell of a lot more using the global downturn as an excuse. We haven’t quite dodged a bullet, but it hasn’t hit vital organs.

Agreed, Except if this “offer” / “deal” is voted down. It’s then back to re-negotiating under the cloud of the current Coronavirus crisis. And this clearly has a long way to go before it’s resolved. Pretty sure I can guess the new line the company will then be pushing.
Rumour is more aircraft about to be parked and routes cancelled. Tough times.

[flyingfrenchman]

Do we really believe that under the current economic conditions that a yes vote will lead to 350s and project sunrise flying?? Share price and dollar tanking, Corona getting a toe hold in Aus. I would suggest Sunrise won’t happen regardless of a yes or no vote.

[dr dre]

Do we really believe that under the current economic conditions that a yes vote will lead to 350s and project sunrise flying?? Share price and dollar tanking, Corona getting a toe hold in Aus. I would suggest Sunrise won’t happen regardless of a yes or no vote.

The Coronavirus won’t be affecting the economy then. It’s not the Black Death, life will go on. Any hits to the economy will be short term. Yes some flying will be drawn back but that’ll be a temporary thing.

Now is the time to be looking at fuel efficient aircraft and routes that are a competitive advantage to be implemented when the economy is stronger. Manufacturers will also be desperate to sell aircraft at cheaper prices too.

And you’d be want to ensure current mainline pilots will be flying them. If a deal involving MORE pay ($400k) is knocked back in the current climate with pilots around the world having hours cut and contracts cancelled it will look incredibly stupid.

[Orange future]

“How does anyone think that will go down with the movers and shakers and other big-swinging-dicks of the Qantas Club? Seriously?”
And
“Until there's a bingle!”
Rather striking that there appears to be an under current of belief from several of the QF pilots here that an external crewing source for the A350, were it to happen, would include pilots of lower experience and lesser quality.
I would suggest that exactly the opposite would occur and make no mistake, you will be killed in the rush of experienced and well trained bingle free applicants were QF to proceed with such a plan particularly involving the compensation levels alluded to here.

[Wingspar]

Maybe QF can do an MOU for the JQ787 lads when they sell the remaining 787’s?
Why advertise overseas?
Yes, they’ll have no trouble finding jockeys!
Just like the Chinese.

[dragon man]

I see a train wreck coming. You can’t vary an award at any whim it has to be voted upon. Loads are tanking every where and of course we have to many fleet types and no ability to substitute. Get rid of the 747? Easier said than done then you have a RIN they don’t want more crew on the 380, if they take 380s off any routes what replaces them? My crystal ball sees PTH/LHR stopped, plus MLB and BNE to SFO also with just SYD/SFO maybe with a 747 again if the 747 stopped Tokyo with a 330 doing that. Open to other thoughts please?

[ruprecht]

I think the 380 is already coming off MEL-SIN next month.

[B772]

LH announced 2 days ago the group is going to ground 150 jets due to covid-19.

BA left LHR 2 days ago for SIN with 400 empty seats on the A380. Lots of noshows.

[Troo believer]

LH announced 2 days ago the group is going to ground 150 jets due to covid-19.

BA left LHR 2 days ago for SIN with 400 empty seats on the A380. Lots of noshows.
A strong rumour circulating that the A380 is coming off LONDON. The flight will be flown by 787s through Darwin direct. Possible announcement today.

[dragon man]

A strong rumour circulating that the A380 is coming off LONDON. The flight will be flown by 787s through Darwin direct. Possible announcement today.


Correct I believe. The figure talked about is 6 380s to be grounded, how I don’t know.

[CurtainTwitcher]

ABC Australia Coronavirus COVID-19 is being called a pandemic by insurers, making travel insurance policies void (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-06/coronavirus-covid-19-travel-insurance-exclusion-confusion/12027638)
A yes vote is almost certainly assured by circumstances beyond anyone's control. The world will look very different on the other side of this event horizon.

[dragon man]

Would you vote yes without an iron clad guarantee that those aircraft are coming regardless? I wouldn’t because quite simply you can lose what we have and not even get the 350s.

[B772]

QF shares are now below $5.00. 10 weeks ago they were just shy of $7.50. And this is after a share buy back. Elaine is losing millions.

[dragon man]

Announcement due out shortly

[CurtainTwitcher]

Would you vote yes without an iron clad guarantee that those aircraft are coming regardless? I wouldn’t because quite simply you can lose what we have and not even get the 350s.
Iron clad guarantee? Never going to happen, the days of companies creating future ongoing liabilities are long gone. Everyone is rolling the dice all the time. Risk has been exported from companies to employees. The only guarantee you are going to get is the hours in the logbook in the P1 column to sell skills on the world market.

Pilots who sat back and enjoyed the lifestyle at the expense of professional development will face significantly more risk than those invested in their own development and have their own form of guarantee. You have to make your own luck.

[Wingspar]

Via DRW? That’d be silly. Why not go via PER where you already have people, bases, procedures and processes.

Cheers

Perth Airports would probably screw it up!
Even though it would be a bonanza for WA tourism!

[ruprecht]

380 via Darwin!

:E

[Maggie Island]

380s via Perth!:}

[B772]

A little birdie. I can think of 2 reasons why via DRW. 1. It is shorter. 2. QF do not want to add any frequencies ex PER due to the ongoing dispute re airport charges.

[Wingspar]

With the downturn in air travel you’d think that would be a good carrot to dangle at Perth Airports?
We will increase frequency through Perth if you come to an agreement?
Why not use the situation to your advantage?
They're good at doing that with staff.

[bythenumbers]

Would you vote yes without an iron clad guarantee that those aircraft are coming regardless? I wouldn’t because quite simply you can lose what we have and not even get the 350s.

Have I missed something? If we get no aircraft don’t all the A330 crew remain on the current A330 conditions (AFDP Night Credits etc)? Won’t the new pay scale only apply to crew that are A330/350?
Of course future new hire’s will still go onto the new scale but at this rate we might not be hiring anyone for a while.

Perhaps I have missed some vital piece of information in the comprehensive explanatory document from AIPA. :confused:

[FlexibleResponse]

PARIS, March 5 – European planemaker Airbus failed to win any new aircraft orders in February, it said on Thursday, providing further evidence of disruption across aviation industries from the global coronavirus outbreak.
https://infosurhoy.com/news/airbus-draws-a-blank-in-february-after-boeings/


What are the chances that Qantas will delay ordering A350s, with the announcement to be delayed until after the vote is taken?

[Wingspar]

Have I missed something? If we get no aircraft don’t all the A330 crew remain on the current A330 conditions (AFDP Night Credits etc)? Won’t the new pay scale only apply to crew that are A330/350?
Of course future new hire’s will still go onto the new scale but at this rate we might not be hiring anyone for a while.

Perhaps I have missed some vital piece of information in the comprehensive explanatory document from AIPA. :confused:

No, you’re right. Plus 3%.
Also if they replace the 350 on a 330 route, you get 744 rates.
Night credits and AFDP’s stay the same for 2/3 pilot ops.
Some though want you to believe otherwise!
The company have put their ego on the line with this.
Now it appears others are doing the same!

[dragon man]

No, you’re right. Plus 3%.
Also if they replace the 350 on a 330 route, you get 744 rates.
Night credits and AFDP’s stay the same.
Some though want you to believe otherwise!
The company have put their ego on the line with this.
Now it appears others are doing the same!

Can you please explain to me how that is so, I’m not been a smart arse but would like to know. Thanks

[Wingspar]

Can you please explain to me how that is so, I’m not been a smart arse but would like to know. Thanks

Its all detailed in the literature.
Not being smart either but just have a read.
In fact wait for the final document.
Should be out soon.

[dragon man]

The companies or AIPAs

[Wingspar]

Both.
When the final document comes out have a read for yourself.
I think it’s very soon.
Better be!
Have a look at the sample rosters in the company slideshow.
Look at the pattern credits for a normal 330 trip such as a three day S/E Asian trip.
Pattern credits for MVF are the same as 330 now as night credits are the same.
If you opted in and they replaced same trip with a 350 then your new 744 hourly rate would also apply.

[Wingspar]

Have a look at the bold in page 4 of the company document emailed today.

[dr dre]

Well the latest email from AIPA makes it quite clear.

They’re not happy with how it has happened, but it’s pretty obvious that outsourcing will happen if a No vote occurs. Any external contact is likely to be inferior to what’s being offered at the moment in both pay and conditions.

[B772]

QF to cancel and amend services; equivalent to grounding up to 25 aircraft.

[bythenumbers]

Have a look at the bold in page 4 of the company document emailed today.

Cheers. Ok so that clears that up, 3 pilot up to HKG etc pay is the same as the 747 for CA and FO and SO will be on the new scale but would have those rules applied to their pay rate.

Well the latest email from AIPA makes it quite clear.

They’re not happy with how it has happened, but it’s pretty obvious that outsourcing will happen if a No vote occurs. Any external contact is likely to be inferior to what’s being offered at the moment in both pay and conditions.

Assuming that is consistent with the view of the legal advice that I’m sure they’ve sort at this point. It makes sense as much as I wish it didn’t.

”Fair Work”

[mmmbop]

https://infosurhoy.com/news/airbus-draws-a-blank-in-february-after-boeings/


What are the chances that Qantas will delay ordering A350s, with the announcement to be delayed until after the vote is taken?


Zero. The deal is done, that is plainly clear. This is a hiccup, and will be gone by 2023.

What the pilot body has to realise is that in order to fight the company we actually need to stay in the fight. A No vote 'to stick it to the company' will actually do the opposite. The 350 flying will be offered externally on less money that is currently being offered to us and will be fully subscribed.

Sh1t happens, we grit our teeth and say 'well played' (you slimy pack of #$@%s) and plan our return salvo.

[Ruvap]

Would you vote yes without an iron clad guarantee that those aircraft are coming regardless? I wouldn’t because quite simply you can lose what we have and not even get the 350s.

So true, now more than ever is a reason to sit on our hands. Pilots are unable to see through this virus and make a decision. Either QF delay the vote or as dragon says, guarantee the aircraft (which we know they can’t do in this business) or vote NO. It’s time to call ‘unstable’ so let’s go around Vote NO and have a second go when the WX calms down a bit.

[Maggie Island]

The execs will use this situation to their advantage, they’ve probably already gone back to Airbus (hell, Boeing too) with IATAs latest figures in hand asking for a redeal. If neither parties are willing to budge on price Sunrise could very much be DOA!

[ruprecht]

Nothing is lost if the A350s don’t turn up.

The proposed S/O pay scales only apply if the A350s turn up, and only apply when they start recruiting S/Os for the A350.

Avagoodone.

I thought you were on leave... :p

[A little birdie]

He is. I’m not. Avagoodone.

[Flava Saver]

I’ll say this again. No board of directors WILL sign off on a multi billion dollar order in the current climate with every airline retreating given the Covid 19 BS asking staff to take leave etc etc....

Anyone who thinks otherwise is completely on the Cool Aide!

Stand up to the bully. And let them go...f@@rk they called our bluff. Once you give this YES to them, EVERY EBA is screwed and everyone will thank long haul for screwing it. Even Jetstar guys had the balls to take PIA....

[dr dre]

I’ll say this again. No board of directors WILL sign off on a multi billion dollar order in the current climate with every airline retreating given the Covid 19 BS asking staff to take leave etc etc....

Anyone who thinks otherwise is completely on the Cool Aide!


Vote No, the board doesn’t proceed with sunrise, and in 6 months after winter is over and the Coronavirus has subsided (it won’t last forever you know) the board then makes the decision to approve Sunrise, and they also announce the formation of an external crewing company to crew them, as that’s exactly what they stated prior to the vote.

Don’t say you weren’t warned......

[V-Jet]

Why is anyone considering more work for less money when everyone.knows Alan’s pay will only increase and the bonus pool will only increase?

Despite what you all may think, it IS possible to survive on just $10m a year (ie more than a 50% pay CUT) - without giving away any conditions at all!

ULH flying as well as back of clock 2 man flying is absolutely the worst combination of a working life it’s possible to imagine.

Why would -anyone- want to do that? Aside from taking a pay cut so Alan gets a commensurate pay rise??

[SandyPalms]

Because AJ's pay has got F@#k all to do with our future. And you know that.

[Poto]

Why is anyone considering more work for less money when everyone.knows Alan’s pay will only increase and the bonus pool will only increase?

Despite what you all may think, it IS possible to survive on just $10m a year (ie more than a 50% pay CUT) - without giving away any conditions at all!

ULH flying as well as back of clock 2 man flying is absolutely the worst combination of a working life it’s possible to imagine.

Why would -anyone- want to do that? Aside from taking a pay cut so Alan gets a commensurate pay rise??

will you be forced to do this?

[Flava Saver]

Vote No, the board doesn’t proceed with sunrise, and in 6 months after winter is over and the Coronavirus has subsided (it won’t last forever you know) the board then makes the decision to approve Sunrise, and they also announce the formation of an external crewing company to crew them, as that’s exactly what they stated prior to the vote.

Don’t say you weren’t warned......

Oh dear! Another person addicted...

[Asturias56]

"ULH flying as well as back of clock 2 man flying is absolutely the worst combination of a working life it’s possible to imagine."

So let's get this straight - you won't fly ULH whatever the money? Or is it (just) possible that enough $$$ will lead to an adjustment in your life/work balance??

[V-Jet]

2 crew back of clock PLUS ULH is the problem I have! Either is bad enough, combined it’s atrocious.

I keep going back to the point that for all intents and purposes pay will remain the same - just that the people doing the work (pilots) won’t be getting it.

[dragon man]

I would suggest that anyone who thinks the corona virus will be over in a few months is naive.

https://www.zerohedge.com/health/worst-yet-come-nomura-now-sees-many-15-million-coronavirus-cases-june

[Climb150]

I would suggest that anyone who thinks the corona virus will be over in a few months is naive.

https://www.zerohedge.com/health/worst-yet-come-nomura-now-sees-many-15-million-coronavirus-cases-june

Hmm an artical written by someone with a character name from Fightclub. Very credible. Here is a quote from Wikipedia about the website

Over time, Zero Hedge expanded into non-financial analysis,[c] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Hedge#cite_note-13) advocating what CNN Business (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNN_Business) called an anti-establishment (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-establishment) and conspiratorial (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory) worldview, and which has been associated with alt-right (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right) views,[4] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Hedge#cite_note-WPO4-6)[11] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Hedge#cite_note-BFN1-14) and a pro-Russian bias.

[dragon man]

[QUOTE=dragon man;10705236]Rather than play the man play the ball, it’s factual with numbers please refute the numbers. The numbers quoted were from the Japanese Bank Nomura.If you think it’s crap have a look at this and the increases especially in Europe. If you chose to bury your head in the sand that’s not my problem

[Poto]

2 crew back of clock PLUS ULH is the problem I have! Either is bad enough, combined it’s atrocious.

I keep going back to the point that for all intents and purposes pay will remain the same - just that the people doing the work (pilots) won’t be getting it.

will you be forced to do this flying?

[dragon man]

[QUOTE=dragon man;10705236]Rather than play the man play the ball, it’s factual with numbers please refute the numbers. The numbers quoted were from the Japanese Bank Nomura.If you think it’s crap have a look at this and the increases especially in Europe. If you chose to bury your head in the sand that’s not my problem
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

[normanton]

Would you vote yes without an iron clad guarantee that those aircraft are coming regardless? I wouldn’t because quite simply you can lose what we have and not even get the 350s.
dragon_man its pretty abysmal that you are still claiming the 350's won't come with a YES vote. It's been confirmed multiple times in webinars, emails, and media correspondence. Even Allan confirms it in the interview someone linked above. If you are after a guaranteed scope clause - forget it. Even someone with your distinguish knows that won't ever happen in a Qantas EBA.

The virus will be short-term. Sunrise is 3 years away. Stop with your ridiculous reasoning for a no vote when it can't be any further from the truth.

It's great you will be retiring soon. But don't post scaremongering and false facts on here in the hopes to scare other pilots into your delusional reasons for voting NO!

[normanton]

So true, now more than ever is a reason to sit on our hands. Pilots are unable to see through this virus and make a decision. Either QF delay the vote or as dragon says, guarantee the aircraft (which we know they can’t do in this business) or vote NO. It’s time to call ‘unstable’ so let’s go around Vote NO and have a second go when the WX calms down a bit.
Except on the return to land, the 350s are GONE. Finished. Over.

Good lucking negotiating the LH EBA 10 renewal with whats happening in the world now. Pay freezes for everyone. I can just see it coming.

When you're playing poker, it can be a winning move to fold when appropriate. Your comments recommend an all in. Unfortunately an all in on this occasion will destroy mainlines future.

Why is anyone considering more work for less money when everyone.knows Alan’s pay will only increase and the bonus pool will only increase?

Despite what you all may think, it IS possible to survive on just $10m a year (ie more than a 50% pay CUT) - without giving away any conditions at all!

ULH flying as well as back of clock 2 man flying is absolutely the worst combination of a working life it’s possible to imagine.

Why would -anyone- want to do that? Aside from taking a pay cut so Alan gets a commensurate pay rise??
False statements.

You will be paid more to work more flight hours.

Don't want to do the flying? DON'T OPT IN! :ugh:​​​​​​​

[dragon man]

Where did I say they are not coming ? What I said is I would like a guarantee they are coming or else we keep what we have. If you think the virus is a short term hiccup you are even stupider than I thought. Look at the numbers. Watch what happens in Qantas in the next few weeks it will be very ugly.

[Poto]

Where did I say they are not coming ? What I said is I would like a guarantee they are coming or else we keep what we have. If you think the virus is a short term hiccup you are even stupider than I thought. Look at the numbers. Watch what happens in Qantas in the next few weeks it will be very ugly.
if they don’t come not much has changed to the rest of LH

[normanton]

Where did I say they are not coming ?
Your comments clearly aim to trick people into thinking that a YES vote doesn't guarantee the 350s will come. That cannot be any further from the truth.

STOP using scare tactics to trick pilots into voting for your personal agenda. Thats disgraceful.

What I said is I would like a guarantee they are coming or else we keep what we have.
That will NEVER happen at Qantas. You know it more than anyone! You have heard it all before. Was there an ironclad guarantee the 787's would come with EBA 9? Stop reaching for the stars at something that's never going to happen.

If they don't come, nothing changes. SO's on reduced pay scales are never hired. 350 flying never happens. You go back to your delusional world thinking everything is OK.

If you think the virus is a short term hiccup you are even stupider than I thought. Look at the numbers. Watch what happens in Qantas in the next few weeks it will be very ugly.
I think it's time you put your hat onto the hook for good. You simply cannot look forward into the future. You have lost the plot. Maybe go to your local supermarket and buy some toilet paper. :rolleyes:

Perhaps you should read and take the advice offered from the President and VP of AIPA.

[V-Jet]

will you be forced to do this flying

No! Initially that could be achieved through judicious use of the medical profession, after a few years of ULH and back of clock 2 crew work I would suggest almost everyone who hasn’t wangled their way into an office/training position (NS might know a thing or two!) will be on extremely good terms with numerous medical professions.

Bat flu is a different and nasty thing for travel and hospitality the world over. Unavoidable, unpredictable and quite disturbing. My sympathy on that front distributes to everyone involved for different reasons.

[Chad Gates]

I’m actually appalled that some of the blokes I looked up to for guidance as a young SO/FO seem to have completely lost their minds.

Vote YES.

and if this goes down, We all have long memories. We will remember who threw us under the bus.

[normanton]

I’m actually appalled that some of the blokes I looked up to for guidance as a young SO/FO seem to have completely lost their minds.

Vote YES.

and if this goes down, We all have long memories. We will remember who threw us under the bus.
Couldn’t agree more. It’s actually embarrassing the reasoning some have for a NO vote. Short sighted, ego protecting advice.

I would say the company have thrown us under bus, but at least we will be thrown under the 350 bus :cool:. Must be a great feeling “sticking it to the company” from the left seat of a 380.

As the AIPA leadership has said, secure the flying for our pilots, and live to fight another day!

Vote YES for our future!

[dragon man]

Read it and weep. From a delta Captain , the direct competition that operates two Captains and FOs add 50% for $aus.
Here at DL most A350and 777 Captains makes $400,000 to $650,000 per year depending on much you want to work
This is assuming 9-12 days of work per month
Plus 6 weeks of paid vacation

We are paid about $400 per hour and then 16-18% on top of that depending on how much profit the airline makes

We also have something called “ Green slips”. When the airline is out of pilots ( frequently) they call a pilot in seniority order to see you if you want to do one of these trips . I get one every other month or so
They pay double ($800 per hour) plus the 16%... so are very desirable
Eg idid a 4 day trip LAX SYD LAX
As a Green Slip. That’s 29 hours x $800 plus the 16% $23,000 plus 16%.
But again it’s hard to get the Green slips

[SandyPalms]

Read it and weep. From a delta Captain , the direct competition that operates two Captains and FOs add 50% for $aus.
Here at DL most A350and 777 Captains makes $400,000 to $650,000 per year depending on much you want to work
This is assuming 9-12 days of work per month
Plus 6 weeks of paid vacation

We are paid about $400 per hour and then 16-18% on top of that depending on how much profit the airline makes

We also have something called “ Green slips”. When the airline is out of pilots ( frequently) they call a pilot in seniority order to see you if you want to do one of these trips . I get one every other month or so
They pay double ($800 per hour) plus the 16%... so are very desirable
Eg idid a 4 day trip LAX SYD LAX
As a Green Slip. That’s 29 hours x $800 plus the 16% $23,000 plus 16%.
But again it’s hard to get the Green slips

Ummmmmmm, yeah, who cares

off you go dragon

[Guitar Joe]

Read it and weep. From a delta Captain , the direct competition that operates two Captains and FOs add 50% for $aus.
Here at DL most A350and 777 Captains makes $400,000 to $650,000 per year depending on much you want to work
This is assuming 9-12 days of work per month
Plus 6 weeks of paid vacation

We are paid about $400 per hour and then 16-18% on top of that depending on how much profit the airline makes

We also have something called “ Green slips”. When the airline is out of pilots ( frequently) they call a pilot in seniority order to see you if you want to do one of these trips . I get one every other month or so
They pay double ($800 per hour) plus the 16%... so are very desirable
Eg idid a 4 day trip LAX SYD LAX
As a Green Slip. That’s 29 hours x $800 plus the 16% $23,000 plus 16%.
But again it’s hard to get the Green slips

Good for them. If we were a US airline, operating under US employment laws, it may be relevant. But we are not.

[normanton]

And as per usual dragon_man completely ignores the facts and questions presented to him.

I rate your advice from a delta captain right up there with those on Qrewroom offering legal advice and posting memes to distract you from the real facts at play here. You need to compare apples and oranges my friend. Do Delta fly the 350 with ~200 odd seats in a heavy premium confirguation, for over 21 hours around the world?

Funnily enough that legal advice so many NO voters provided on Qrewroom has now been confirmed false information from the AIPA leadership. Back into your scaremongering tents please.

[TimmyTee]

Vote YES for our future!

Lol, it’s been a relatively peacefull 24 hours without this clown, and BAM! He’s back with slogans and all.
Will anyone on here admit he has changed their vote? If not, mate, please stop with the constant FUD and campaigning..

That or the angels are recruiting straight from high school these days..

[normanton]

Lol, it’s been a relatively peacefull 24 hours without this clown, and BAM! He’s back with slogans and all.
Will anyone on here admit he has changed their vote? If not, mate, please stop with the constant FUD and campaigning..

That or the angels are recruiting straight from high school these days..
I will gladly change my vote.

Please, provide us all with your valid NO argument.

A slogan is a good idea. How about "Make Mainline Great Again". Would you buy a cap for $50? :8

[dragon man]

You goose it’s not the seats it’s the yield, like the 30% more they charge Perth London on the 787.

[Chad Gates]

Which footy team do you have on your socks dragon?

[Green.Dot]

Read it and weep. From a delta Captain , the direct competition that operates two Captains and FOs add 50% for $aus.
Here at DL most A350and 777 Captains makes $400,000 to $650,000 per year depending on much you want to work

That is great Dragon. I’ll happily live in Oz over the States. Why do so many people always have to go searching for greener pastures? Man I bet Air Asia pilots would love a QF wage too

[SecretAngel]

Read it and weep. From a delta Captain , the direct competition that operates two Captains and FOs add 50% for $aus.
Here at DL most A350and 777 Captains makes $400,000 to $650,000 per year depending on much you want to work
This is assuming 9-12 days of work per month
Plus 6 weeks of paid vacation

We are paid about $400 per hour and then 16-18% on top of that depending on how much profit the airline makes

We also have something called “ Green slips”. When the airline is out of pilots ( frequently) they call a pilot in seniority order to see you if you want to do one of these trips . I get one every other month or so
They pay double ($800 per hour) plus the 16%... so are very desirable
Eg idid a 4 day trip LAX SYD LAX
As a Green Slip. That’s 29 hours x $800 plus the 16% $23,000 plus 16%.
But again it’s hard to get the Green slips

The pay is good - but the US3 have tiny international operations relative to their size. Qantas dominates the AUS-US market, for example. It's similar, but not as stark on Trans-Atlantic routes - Delta is the largest, but not by much. Airlines that are a fraction of the size and that can only connect one European country with the US, like BA and Air France, come pretty close in terms of overall TA market share.

I'm sure pilot pay isn't the only part of the equation, but I've always felt that the QF v Delta comparison is a bit incomplete, without factoring in that Delta pretty obviously can't compete with Qantas (or other full service airlines) head to head.
​​​

[FlexibleResponse]

SecretAngel I'm sure pilot pay isn't the only part of the equation, but I've always felt that the QF v Delta comparison is a bit incomplete, without factoring in that Delta pretty obviously can't compete with Qantas (or other full service airlines) head to head.​


Hello! Pilot Pay is exactly the part of the equation we are discussing here!

Even Delta (which apparently, you say, can't compete with Qantas head to head) can still pay their pilots a decent wage that far exceeds Qantas.

[CurtainTwitcher]

Be very careful cherry picking data points! You might be willing to take the Delta pay, but are you willing to accept the layoffs too?

NEW YORK (CNNmoney) - The Air Line Pilots Association filed a grievance Thursday challenging Delta Air Lines' decision to furlough 1,700 pilots as part of the airlines' plans to cut staff by about 13,000 jobs.

"Our contract has a no-furlough clause that covers all pilots on the seniority list on July 1, 2001," said a statement from Capt. William Buergey, chairman of the union's Delta unit. "Nearly all of the pilots targeted for layoff are protected by that provision."

A representative of Delta, the nation's No. 3 airline, said that management believes the grievance is without merit.

2001 article Delta pilots fight job cuts Union seeks to block furloughs of 1,700 pilots at nation's No. 3 airline. (https://money.cnn.com/2001/11/01/news/delta_pilots/)



It won't take very many google searches to see the US industry moves from boom to bust and back to boom. The big increases come with much higher probabilities of layoffs when the industry tanks. The industry relations between management and pilots could be described as a knock-down, bare knuckle, no holes barred brawl.
To wit
Hero pilot Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger, who safely splash landed a US Airways jet into the Hudson River last month, said today that he had his pay and benefits slashed over the past few years.

In his testimony before a House aviation subcommittee in Washington, Sullenberger said that his pay had been cut a whopping 40 percent and that his pension had been slashed and replaced with a promise “worth pennies on the dollar” from the federally-created Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp.

It was those cuts — followed by a wave of airline bankruptcies after the 9/11 terror attacks and the current recession — that hurt how much pilots are currently paid.

“The bankruptcies were used to by some as a fishing expedition to get what they could not get in normal times,” Sullenberger said of the cash-strapped airline industry.

“I do not know a single, professional airline pilot who wants his or her children to follow in their footsteps,” he added.
NY Times: SULLY TOOK BIG PAY CUT (https://nypost.com/2009/02/24/sully-took-big-pay-cut/) By Clemente Lisi (https://nypost.com/author/clemente-lisi/) February 24, 2009

The founder of one of the largest hedge funds (160 billion under management), Ray Dalio of Bridgewater Associates came out this week, describing the COVID-19 virus as likely a one in one hundred year event. He is an avid student of history & debt cycles, and is up there in the elite of returns, so he has a point of view worth considering.

Additionally, it seems to me that this is one of those once in 100 years catastrophic events that annihilates those who provide insurance against it and those who don’t take insurance to protect themselves against it because they treat it as the exposed bet that they can take because it virtually never happens.
My Thoughts About the Coronavirus (https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/my-thoughts-coronavirus-ray-dalio/) Published on March 4, 2020

I would be extremely surprised if Qantas did not have buyers remorse about what they are about to offer.

What is going to be on the table soon is an insurance policy. Have the odds shifted in favour of the pilots to bet the farm on a single vote? That is the question everyone needs to ask themselves.

Between now and the beginning of the vote opening we are all likely to get a much better insight into the validity of Dalio's assessment of the severity of this virus. This could potentially cripple Aviation for a very long time. It took a decade in the US before the industry recovered after 9/11.

[Tony the Tiler]

So we now have the President of AIPA, Neville Chamberlin, advocating for appeasement of the corporate bully. When has that ever worked? It would appear on here that he is aptly assisted by many sycophantic vassals.

If this threat works, when will you actually stand up to the bully? What will it take before you stand up and say enough?

If you don’t stand up now, despite your protestations, you never will.

[SandyPalms]

How many posters in this thread, arguing for a NO vote, do you think are provocateurs from other airlines hoping to swoop in when the "New entity" is created? Can we be sure the neigh sayers are actually in QF? After all, they would have a lot to gain from a NO vote.

[Troo believer]

So we now have the President of AIPA, Neville Chamberlin, advocating for appeasement of the corporate bully. When has that ever worked? It would appear on here that he is aptly assisted by many sycophantic vassals.

If this threat works, when will you actually stand up to the bully? What will it take before you stand up and say enough?

If you don’t stand up now, despite your protestations, you never will.

From Hong Kong eh. Says it all.

[oicur12.again]

"Here at DL most A350and 777 Captains makes $400,000 to $650,000 per year depending on much you want to work"

These numbers are WAY off, someone is playing with you.

And what makes you think QF in Australia should benchmark DL in the US when formulating pay and conditions.

[V-Jet]

From Hong Kong eh. Says it all.

Seen it all before I would suggest. Looks like TtT made fair points to me.

[Gazza mate]

How many posters in this thread, arguing for a NO vote, do you think are provocateurs from other airlines hoping to swoop in when the "New entity" is created? Can we be sure the neigh sayers are actually in QF? After all, they would have a lot to gain from a NO vote.

haha my thoughts exactly. Tony the Tiler in Hong Kong would love to come home is seems.

[Verbal Kint]

Was chatting to an ex-QF 767 FO the other day - now an A330/A350 Captain here in HK. As he described QF vs CX:

“Same sh!t, different airline. Cathay continuously undermines T&Cs by unilaterally introducing new contracts for future hires ..... QANTAS just sets up a new airline [Jetstar Intl. Or A350 green fields op]. The end result is reduction in pay & loss of career progression for the incumbents. Australia just gives you the illusion of industrial protections.”

[normanton]

So we now have the President of AIPA, Neville Chamberlin, advocating for appeasement of the corporate bully. When has that ever worked? It would appear on here that he is aptly assisted by many sycophantic vassals.

If this threat works, when will you actually stand up to the bully? What will it take before you stand up and say enough?

If you don’t stand up now, despite your protestations, you never will.
Or maybe he's just following the rules AIPA have always followed.

1) Protect jobs
2) Protect conditions
3) Protect pay

Securing the 350 is protecting OUR jobs. Very wise judgement displayed by the president. If you don't agree perhaps you should resign your AIPA membership. Maybe you can try and get AFAP to support you.

[mustafagander]

Just standing on the sidelines - I retired a few years back after 46 years flying with QF - it seems to me that AIPA needs to seek legal advice from Ron Bartch. Ron is the leading aviation lawyer in Oz so he has clout in any court given that he wrote the text book.
This whole thing makes me glad to be out. Would I really take such a big punt and fly these crazy TOD like 22+ hours?? Maybe when I was young and keen but no way after I grew up. What if it causes massive problems in 10 years? Who knows? I'm not immune to the lure of something new, I loved the long haul flying to BA over Antarctica and the operational problems needing to be solved. Actually I love flying, silly old me!!

[Ruvap]

Except on the return to land, the 350s are GONE. Finished. Over.

Good lucking negotiating the LH EBA 10 renewal with whats happening in the world now. Pay freezes for everyone. I can just see it coming.

When you're playing poker, it can be a winning move to fold when appropriate. Your comments recommend an all in. Unfortunately an all in on this occasion will destroy mainlines future.


False statements.

You will be paid more to work more flight hours.

Don't want to do the flying? DON'T OPT IN! :ugh:

The very worst thing you can do to your brain is work when you are tired, work back of clock, shift work, fry your brain for 20.5 hours at FL390, end up in a **** hotel, drink on your layover, only to expose your body to it all again on the return leg and to create all this carnage to one’s mind/body AND give away 300 million bucks for the privilege is absolutely crazy in the extreme. What’s your health worth? When you die, they wipe you off Workday in a heart beat and you will be forgotten. They don’t give a sh#t about you. This is a no brainer NO vote if you value your health. If there was ever an operation that deserves premium pay, 20.5 hours of ULH stick is it!! But maybe Normanton is right, it now appears the ar#e lickers could get up. Time will tell but the email from AIPA president was very disappointing. Is that what it takes to get a seat in QF pilot management??

[The Banjo]

If there was ever an operation that deserves premium pay, 20.5 hours of ULH stick is it!!

And how much of that 20.5 hours will be spent in the bunk watching movies and sleeping?

[OhSpareMe]

If there was ever an operation that deserves premium pay, 20.5 hours of ULH stick is it!!

And how much of that 20.5 hours will be spent in the bunk watching movies and sleeping?

probably about 9.5 hours. Not easy to sleep/rest when:

a. It’s the middle of the day body clock time, or
b. It’s turbulent.

I might be ‘in the bunk’ but I’m still at work and should be duly compensated for being so.

[bythenumbers]

This is a no brainer NO vote if you value your health. If there was ever an operation that deserves premium pay, 20.5 hours of ULH stick is it!!

So what is it Ruvap? Is it about your health or about the pay? How is getting paid more going to help you physically cope with ULR flying? Or any back of the clock flying for that matter. And how much more, what is the gross dollar figure you want to see at the EOFY on your payment summary?

If you don’t like working back of the clock bugger off and find a new career. And if you’re motivated by large money and that offsets the brain frying fatigue then bugger off to China once the flu is over and collect your tax free $400k.

I don’t like how this deal was presented, it’s ****ed. I don’t like that it wasn’t a negotiation at all. I would like to see more dollars on the table, I would like to see the training freeze apply to movements from
CA/FO 787 to CA/FO 350 to maintain an ability to change things up once in a while. I absolutely agree with previous comments that Joyce’s bonus is mental and this $300mil may well end up in management’s pockets if we vote yes.

But where do you think that $300mil is going if we loose this “opportunity” to expand. I can tell you it’s certainly not going in our pockets.

You ever think that management actually want us to vote NO? We would play right into their hands. The perfect excuse to set up a new entity with a roo on the tail gifted by the pilots who couldn’t accept that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

[Green.Dot]

The amount of people saying think about your health and vote NO, blah blah blah! Yes 22 hour flights are bad for you. Hell 14 hour flights are bad for aircrew. I personally find 3 pilot 10 hour sectors the worst nodding off on descent in to some sh$thole. Or what about the poor Low Cost jet pilots taking off at 9pm (2 pilot, 2 sectors) and landing back where they started from at 6-7am and having to drive home trying not to nod off and die in a car crash.

One positive I see though is pilots are smarter with their lifestyle. Don’t get maggot drunk when you do a layover, stay close to Australia time if you can, exercise when away. Frankly nobody out there gives a f@:k if you aren’t social even if you want to be, it’s about providing and being a good person for your family.

Lots of Qantas pilots who started in the jet age in the 60s lost their mind a couple years after they retired and died before they got to use their 500k wage and they didn’t even do ULH. I dare say it was more long term alcohol induced. That was what we used to do.

Airline flying is bad for your health FULL STOP but we either accept the future (If ULH doesn’t happen now it will one day) or you just QUIT the industry and find a nice 9-5 job you will hate. Another upside is you won’t waste your time on PPRUNE 😉

[Wingspar]

The amount of people saying think about your health and vote NO, blah blah blah! Yes 22 hour flights are bad for you. Hell 14 hour flights are bad for aircrew. I personally find 3 pilot 10 hour sectors the worst nodding off on descent in to some sh$thole. Or what about the poor Low Cost jet pilots taking off at 9pm (2 pilot, 2 sectors) and landing back where they started from at 6-7am and having to drive home trying not to nod off and die in a car crash.

One positive I see though is pilots are smarter with their lifestyle. Don’t get maggot drunk when you do a layover, stay close to Australia time if you can, exercise when away. Frankly nobody out there gives a f@:k if you aren’t social even if you want to be, it’s about providing and being a good person for your family.

Lots of Qantas pilots who started in the jet age in the 60s lost their mind a couple years after they retired and died before they got to use their 500k wage and they didn’t even do ULH. I dare say it was more long term alcohol induced. That was what we used to do.

Airline flying is bad for your health FULL STOP but we either accept the future (If ULH doesn’t happen now it will one day) or you just QUIT the industry and find a nice 9-5 job you will hate. Another upside is you won’t waste your time on PPRUNE 😉

Spot on Green Dot!
Its all about how you manage it. Do some exercise and eat well and all the above.
The days of getting hammered are over. Enjoy your vino alfresco down at Chelsea but don’t write yourself off.
Maybe those mortality stats for pilots will improve with a bit of the above?
Also the EA has many protections if your not fit to fly.
Use them!

[normanton]

The very worst thing you can do to your brain is work when you are tired, work back of clock, shift work, fry your brain for 20.5 hours at FL390, end up in a **** hotel, drink on your layover, only to expose your body to it all again on the return leg and to create all this carnage to one’s mind/body AND give away 300 million bucks for the privilege is absolutely crazy in the extreme. What’s your health worth? When you die, they wipe you off Workday in a heart beat and you will be forgotten. They don’t give a sh#t about you. This is a no brainer NO vote if you value your health. If there was ever an operation that deserves premium pay, 20.5 hours of ULH stick is it!! But maybe Normanton is right, it now appears the ar#e lickers could get up. Time will tell but the email from AIPA president was very disappointing. Is that what it takes to get a seat in QF pilot management??
You're a muppet. If you don't want to do the Sunrise flying, don't opt in for it. They are not forcing you.

Your probably one of those pilots who drop the line "see you down at 5pm for drinks". Despite it being 6am in your local time. Learn how to control your mind and health my friend. Your a pilot for god sake, not a 8am-5pm office worker.

Get a grip :ugh:

[Green.Dot]

The very worst thing you can do to your brain is work when you are tired, work back of clock, shift work, fry your brain for 20.5 hours at FL390, end up in a **** hotel, drink on your layover

Don’t bid for 350. Take your RIN to the 330 only or 787 with 17 hour flights since it’s so much better for your health.

Try skipping the grog on the next layover or drink less!

[Green.Dot]

You watch the same people who bid for overtime flights on the Jumbo/380 to make more coin will do the same on 350 despite them knowing it’s “bad” for your health

[V-Jet]

Nice article on NBC just out warning about daylight saving on Sunday.

An hour lost may not seem like much, but it’s just enough change to be potentially disruptive and possibly even pose health risks (https://apple.news/ALsCecqK_SzO4q0hxZAF1Aw). Studies have found that fatal accidents are slightly more likely to occur on the Monday after DST (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1389945700000320) goes into effect, as is the chance of heart attack (https://openheart.bmj.com/content/1/1/e000019) and that of ischemic stroke (https://www.aan.com/PressRoom/Home/PressRelease/1440).

The most common problem associated with DST though, is fatigue and just feeling off. This, as Beth Malow (https://vkc.mc.vanderbilt.edu/people/malow-beth), MD, professor and director of Sleep Disorders Division at Vanderbilt Kennedy Center, explains, comes down to the fact that “our circadian clock (https://apple.news/AWwxBId5eTRulUZgeRmrVXA) gets dysregulated. Some people are more sensitive than others based on genetics, age (younger people usually adapt better), morning versus evening types (https://www.nbcnews.com/better/better/i-tried-become-morning-person-what-happened-ncna769391) “

There are also a list of handy hints to help
deal with the problem.

[blow.n.gasket]

You lot of Sanctimonious , pontificating , millennial keyboard ,schoolgirls must be an absolute hoot to fly with !
I would cringe just thinking about having to spend 1 hour , let alone 20+ hours on a flight deck listening to your lecturing ,superior than thou diatribe on how everybody else should be more like you and your vegan tofu toasting ,lotus eating ,wheatgrass swilling , Marxist Millennial crap!
Will be interesting listening to your ilk in a decade or two when you have a few life skill ground into you with this ULR crap.
The most interesting part I found when I flew was the meeting down in the lobby at 5 having a few beers, heading out for a meal and actually getting to know your fellow crew members . There is a novel concept , getting a measure of the person sitting beside you for the next 16 hours .
I must admit I probably learned more through this type of personal interaction both professionally and personally than I would have if all I did was look at myself in the mirror at the gym whilst swiping through grinder that you lot appear to fit the profile for !
Good luck , you’re going to need it .

[normanton]

You lot of Sanctimonious , pontificating , millennial keyboard ,schoolgirls must be an absolute hoot to fly with !
I would cringe just thinking about having to spend 1 hour , let alone 20+ hours on a flight deck listening to your lecturing ,superior than thou diatribe on how everybody else should be more like you and your vegan tofu toasting ,lotus eating ,wheatgrass swilling , Marxist Millennial crap!
Will be interesting listening to your ilk in a decade or two when you have a few life skill ground into you with this ULR crap.
The most interesting part I found when I flew was the meeting down in the lobby at 5 having a few beers, heading out for a meal and actually getting to know your fellow crew members . There is a novel concept , getting a measure of the person sitting beside you for the next 16 hours .
I must admit I probably learned more through this type of personal interaction both professionally and personally than I would have if all I did was look at myself in the mirror at the gym whilst swiping through grinder that you lot appear to fit the profile for !
Good luck , you’re going to need it .
Mate you have lost the plot. I'm not gay. I don't use grinder. I'm not vegan. I do like a nice big sausage. But I'm not gay. I'm not a fan of tofu. I don't eat lotus. I've maybe had a few shots of wheatgrass in a juice over the years.

Let me ask you this. Have you bought enough toilet paper yet?

Your not one of those LHS pilots who whinge about needing to push on a few more years because your 3rd X wife took your super are you?

Isn't it funny how the NO voters turn this discussion into something really personal. They can't give you a solid answer to your questions. Thats because they know the reasoning doesn't stand up to the facts. Keep the personal attacks coming. It's hilarious.

Perhaps you should heed the warnings of the AIPA President & VP.

[Chad Gates]

Name calling. Terrific. Can we get any lower? I’m disgusted in the blokes I used to see as hero’s.

[normanton]

Name calling. Terrific. Can we get any lower? I’m disgusted in the blokes I used to see as hero’s.
It's pretty bad. When they can't offer a solid argument they try and distract and weave their way out of it.

I'm going to add his reasoning to the list for voting NO:

So far I have got:

1) Wait for the 2nd and 3rd offers.
2) The company won’t make a seperate entity, they are bluffing.
3) The 350s won’t come even with a YES vote.
4) Stick it to the company.
5) Anything not endorsed by AIPA is a NO vote.
6) **** you Nathan
7) The 350 contract (which is OPT in only) will destroy your health.
8) Millennials who are gay, use grinder, and love eating tofu, wheatgrass, and lotus.

[Wingspar]

You lot of Sanctimonious , pontificating , millennial keyboard ,schoolgirls must be an absolute hoot to fly with !
I would cringe just thinking about having to spend 1 hour , let alone 20+ hours on a flight deck listening to your lecturing ,superior than thou diatribe on how everybody else should be more like you and your vegan tofu toasting ,lotus eating ,wheatgrass swilling , Marxist Millennial crap!
Will be interesting listening to your ilk in a decade or two when you have a few life skill ground into you with this ULR crap.
The most interesting part I found when I flew was the meeting down in the lobby at 5 having a few beers, heading out for a meal and actually getting to know your fellow crew members . There is a novel concept , getting a measure of the person sitting beside you for the next 16 hours .
I must admit I probably learned more through this type of personal interaction both professionally and personally than I would have if all I did was look at myself in the mirror at the gym whilst swiping through grinder that you lot appear to fit the profile for !
Good luck , you’re going to need it .

Thanks for the good laugh blowbag!😂😂😂

The only sanctimonious, pontificating came from the Captain every overnight after meeting in the lobby at 6!
Having to listen about the rules of life, not just aviation, for hours on end was a real hoot as you put it.
The others couldn’t wait for him to call it quits so we could chase the girls and have some fun!
Ah, you’ve made me laugh!😂

[stillcallozhome]

So based on this sneaky clause they’re throwing in, does this mean all current 787 FOs cannot bid to the 350 until eligible for promotion?? And all current 787 captains are ineligible to bid over??

[dr dre]

I would cringe just thinking about having to spend 1 hour , let alone 20+ hours on a flight deck listening to you.

So that’s confirmation you are happy with the conditions and you are planning to go to the 350 blow.n.gasket? ;)

[normanton]

So based on this sneaky clause they’re throwing in, does this mean all current 787 FOs cannot bid to the 350 until eligible for promotion?? And all current 787 captains are ineligible to bid over??
It's by far a sneaky clause. It's been said multiple times in the webinars by the company.

Yes they are looking to make 787 and 330/350 an equal category. Which means the only way to move across is with an upgrade. However I believe the company agreed to AIPAs recommendation to allow you to use your one bid back to move sideways to 330/350 if required.

What I wasn't sure about is if you were a 787 FO, can you then bid across to 330 FO category? It would involve a training freeze, but I'm not sure if it would count as your sideways/one bid back move.

[stillcallozhome]

It's by far a sneaky clause. It's been said multiple times in the webinars by the company.

Yes they are looking to make 787 and 330/350 an equal category. Which means the only way to move across is with an upgrade. However I believe the company agreed to AIPAs recommendation to allow you to use your one bid back to move sideways to 330/350 if required.

What I wasn't sure about is if you were a 787 FO, can you then bid across to 330 FO category? It would involve a training freeze, but I'm not sure if it would count as your sideways/one bid back move.

Im not sure what you mean by “its by far a sneaky clause”?

it doesn’t seem to be in anyone’s discussions on here but it’s going to be a huge QOL changer. If it’s 10-20 years before a command, that’s a long time on the one a/c and a lot can change in your circumstances in that time. There might also be changes in the rosters and types of flying on a particular fleet which would give someone the desire to switch fleets. Aside from SH, once the 380 is gone, you’ll be stuck.

[blow.n.gasket]

Pot to kettle , pot to kettle , come in please , over !
Listen to your skinny insipid whining selves , the very thing which I did and you accused me of , your cadre responded in kind with exactly the same. Where does that put your self serving over bloated sense of super salesman superiority ?
Mate (that’s an angel collective address) I have no skin in the game any longer.
As for a step by step post NO vote exit plan ,which you collectively harp on about as proof of your super superior moral pontificating for a YES vote that’s what your union should have put forward .
Get AIPA to use your collective wealth and expertise to task a response for both outcomes .
Something that really hasn’t been done , except in a half arsed , half hearted way .
One can only wonder why ?
What I would be waiting for is the final document to paw over before making a definitive decision .
I would also be demanding unequivocal industrial/legal opinion on what a NO vs a YES vote could produce .
As for your precious YES vote , nothing is written in blood and a sure thing with Qantas except Alan’s bonus ,good luck with what you think you’re going to get with your precious YES vote too , ‘cos Qantas have a habit of being nasty , something you lot might learn eventually , no doubt the hard way .
Can only imagine the sanctimonious whining then !
So until there is unequivocal learned legal opinions presented , for and against , unlike your super hard ,scare tactics YES sell ,then a vote ,any vote is questionable !
Thanks for all your concerns , me and the missus are off to golf , will have a nice lunch , washed down with a good wine and then plan what else we are going to do in our leisure , good luck catching up on your sleep deprivation !

[normanton]

Im not sure what you mean by “its by far a sneaky clause”?
Well when you said sneaky, I assumed you thought the company was trying to be sneaky and put it on the contract without having an open dialogue of it.

I'm just saying that hasn't happened at all. They have been very open about it.

If it’s 10-20 years before a command, that’s a long time on the one a/c and a lot can change in your circumstances in that time. There might also be changes in the rosters and types of flying on a particular fleet which would give someone the desire to switch fleets. Aside from SH, once the 380 is gone, you’ll be stuck.

Well I would argue if it's 10-20 years before command, it will be even longer if the 350 doesn't come to mainline.

Yes I agree rosters could change / fleets could change / RINs will happen / destinations will change. There is just so much hypotheticals at play here. You need to vote with facts.

For me personally, I think we will be better off as a group with more variety of flying available, and so far I haven't been convinced that a NO vote is better for the the mainline pilots. Remember, the 350 flying is opt in only. If you don't want to do it you don't have to.

[itsnotthatbloodyhard]

Normanton, you’ve called someone a muppet and then, 8 posts later, sympathised with Chad’s complaints about name-calling. Seems to me that the name-calling is going both ways, and I can’t see how it helps anyone. It’d be great if we could discuss this rationally without getting personal.

[normanton]

Pot to kettle , pot to kettle , come in please , over !
Listen to your skinny insipid whining selves , the very thing which I did and you accused me of , your cadre responded in kind with exactly the same. Where does that put your self serving over bloated sense of super salesman superiority ?
Mate (that’s an angel collective address) I have no skin in the game any longer.
As for a step by step post NO vote exit plan ,which you collectively harp on about as proof of your super superior moral pontificating for a YES vote that’s what your union should have put forward .
Get AIPA to use your collective wealth and expertise to task a response for both outcomes .
Something that really hasn’t been done , except in a half arsed , half hearted way .
One can only wonder why ?
What I would be waiting for is the final document to paw over before making a definitive decision .
I would also be demanding unequivocal industrial/legal opinion on what a NO vs a YES vote could produce .
As for your precious YES vote , nothing is written in blood and a sure thing with Qantas except Alan’s bonus ,good luck with what you think you’re going to get with your precious YES vote too , ‘cos Qantas have a habit of being nasty , something you lot might learn eventually , no doubt the hard way .
Can only imagine the sanctimonious whining then !
So until there is unequivocal learned legal opinions presented , for and against , unlike your super hard ,scare tactics YES sell ,then a vote ,any vote is questionable !
Thanks for all your concerns , me and the missus are off to golf , will have a nice lunch , washed down with a good wine and then plan what else we are going to do in our leisure , good luck catching up on your sleep deprivation !
Well thank christ for everyone with a career at play here that you don't get a vote.

Let me clear something up for you.

Both the AIPA President, and Vice President have recommended a YES vote.

We are still waiting for the COM.

The AIPA president has confirmed that everything the company is doing is legal. He has also stated that should a NO vote get up, the union will NOT be pursuing legal action under his leadership.

Normanton, you’ve called someone a muppet and then, 8 posts later, sympathised with Chad’s complaints about name-calling. Seems to me that the name-calling is going both ways, and I can’t see how it helps anyone. It’d be great if we could discuss this rationally without getting personal.
Apologies.

[stillcallozhome]

Well when you said sneaky, I assumed you thought the company was trying to be sneaky and put it on the contract without having an open dialogue of it.

I'm just saying that hasn't happened at all. They have been very open about it.



Well I would argue if it's 10-20 years before command, it will be even longer if the 350 doesn't come to mainline.

Yes I agree rosters could change / fleets could change / RINs will happen / destinations will change. There is just so much hypotheticals at play here. You need to vote with facts.

For me personally, I think we will be better off as a group with more variety of flying available, and so far I haven't been convinced that a NO vote is better for the the mainline pilots. Remember, the 350 flying is opt in only. If you don't want to do it you don't have to.

I understand and appreciate your opinion on which way to vote. I guess I am more about bringing awareness to this clause which I think will have one of the biggest effects on our careers over the next 20 years. It’s something that is very valuable and we are giving it up with no questions asked. We will go down to two a/c types in the near future yet we have no leverage with this clause. It’s very frustrating how valuable this is yet it’s not getting much traction. I know there is nothing we can do about it now (except vote no but that seems extreme for just one clause) but I see this as being the longest lasting negative from this proposal.

I can also see the company using this as leverage in future negotiations.

[normanton]

Yes thats true.

The other thing to consider, which was also mentioned in the webinars was that one of the fleet had a higher take home pay and lower super contributions. The other had a smaller take home pay but higher super contributions. I can't remember off the top of my head which option belonged to which fleet. Suffice to say that was another option to consider when picking a fleet.

If anyone could confirm the following that would be great. 787 FO to 330 FO under the proposed new training requirements. Is this allowed? I know you can't go from 787 FO to 330/350 FO.

[blow.n.gasket]

NORM
I still keep my finger on the pulse , whilst I still have one .
AIPA isn’t just the President and the Executive ,it’s CoM too.
There are plenty of CoM members seething at the bias showing from this Executive.
I’ve read his and Brad’s “personal “opinions !

The AIPA president has confirmed that everything the company is doing his(sic) legal. He has also stated that should a NO vote get up, the union will NOT be pursuing legal action under his leadership.

Isn’t there an SGM on Friday coming up ,on the 13th , might get unlucky for some ? Beware the Ides of March ?

[bythenumbers]

I’m sure we will have plenty of opportunity to discuss the consequences of a vote either way at the SGM on Friday. I for one will be seated in a low key area with a family sized popcorn if anyone is keen on joining me.

[normanton]

NORM
I still keep my finger on the pulse , whilst I still have one .
AIPA isn’t just the President and the Executive ,it’s CoM too.
There are plenty of CoM members seething at the bias showing from this Executive.
I’ve read his and Brad’s “personal “opinions !

Just in case you can't read, I did say we are still waiting for the COM.

Enjoy the lunch with your wife. Make sure you don't order any tofu.

[Wingspar]

NORM
I still keep my finger on the pulse , whilst I still have one .
AIPA isn’t just the President and the Executive ,it’s CoM too.
There are plenty of CoM members seething at the bias showing from this Executive.
I’ve read his and Brad’s “personal “opinions !



Isn’t there an SGM on Friday coming up ,on the 13th , might get unlucky for some ? Beware the Ides of March ?

I think the CP should be a candidate?
Allowing this ‘gun to the head’ behaviour on his watch is unacceptable.
Vote of no confidence from the pilot group?

[Poto]

[QUOTEIf anyone could confirm the following that would be great. 787 FO to 330 FO under the proposed new training requirements. Is this allowed? I know you can't go from 787 FO to 330/350 FO.[/QUOTE]
No change to current rules. It’s a back bid and therefore the company have to agree to it.

[mince]

If the ULR is opt in only, why not everyone vote NO, let Joycey set up his new operation, then if you want to fly the 350 move across to the new entity.

then everyone is happy

[cloudsurfng]

I think the CP should be a candidate?
Allowing this ‘gun to the head’ behaviour on his watch is unacceptable.
Vote of no confidence from the pilot group?

THIS. Be good if it could make it to the news.

[oicur12.again]

“Hmm an article written by someone with a character name from Fightclub. Very credible. Here is a quote from Wikipedia about the website”

Zero Hedge is a reasonably credible source of information regarding finance and geo politics.

The name of the author is irrelevant, the articles are simply reposts from other sources and are usually from respected and knowledgable writers.

Simply quoting wikipedia and its CNN quote, as though CNN has ANY credibility at all, is just lazy. I hope you do more diligent research about subjects when they are more important than simply willy waving on pprune.

[Ruvap]

You lot of Sanctimonious , pontificating , millennial keyboard ,schoolgirls must be an absolute hoot to fly with !
I would cringe just thinking about having to spend 1 hour , let alone 20+ hours on a flight deck listening to your lecturing ,superior than thou diatribe on how everybody else should be more like you and your vegan tofu toasting ,lotus eating ,wheatgrass swilling , Marxist Millennial crap!
Will be interesting listening to your ilk in a decade or two when you have a few life skill ground into you with this ULR crap.
The most interesting part I found when I flew was the meeting down in the lobby at 5 having a few beers, heading out for a meal and actually getting to know your fellow crew members . There is a novel concept , getting a measure of the person sitting beside you for the next 16 hours .
I must admit I probably learned more through this type of personal interaction both professionally and personally than I would have if all I did was look at myself in the mirror at the gym whilst swiping through grinder that you lot appear to fit the profile for !
Good luck , you’re going to need it .

I agree with the above advice, especially the ‘good luck’ bit cause you are gonna need lots of it. Or you could grow some kahunas and vote NO and save money by not needing to buy any rectinol.

[Ruvap]

If the ULR is opt in only, why not everyone vote NO, let Joycey set up his new operation, then if you want to fly the 350 move across to the new entity.

then everyone is happy

Tino has already conceded in a webinar that if a seperate entity were to be setup, he expects some current mainline pilots would bid across and this is exactly how we all should be thinking about it. Obviously they plan to allow such a mechanism. It could actually mean a quicker promotion by voting NO for some pilots. Maybe AIPA should get a clause put into the deal which leaves existing pilots with first rights to new positions in the new entity if in fact they proceed down that path in the event of a NO vote. I think a win/win is achieved by voting NO and gives AIPA another chance at renegotiating an new EBA ex the A350 ops. VOTE NO.

[engine out]

That’s if Qantas set up a mechanism for transfer, they may not. There is no transfer mechanism to Jetstar other than an agreed MOU which only covers some pilots. Would people be willing to resign from mainline and go permanently to an new entity? Not many stayed at Jetstar. Also that is if terms and conditions are the same that are on offer now, no guarantees there. They may well offer lower terms to fit the cost of setting up a green fields operation into their business case (or because they can and will still get applicants). Therefor voting NO will probably still not get you a chance to fly the 350 unless you’re willing to resign from mainline (which the company may want to avoid costs of RINs and redundancy a few years down the track).

[Transition Layer]

You're a muppet. If you don't want to do the Sunrise flying, don't opt in for it. They are not forcing you.

Your probably one of those pilots who drop the line "see you down at 5pm for drinks". Despite it being 6am in your local time. Learn how to control your mind and health my friend. Your a pilot for god sake, not a 8am-5pm office worker.

Get a grip :ugh:

After recently returning to LH it was refreshing to see the “downstairs at 6pm” routine is pretty much gone. Still getting through a few pints, just starting earlier in the day and earlier to bed :}

Anyway, back to the topic at hand. Toughest EA vote I’ve ever been a part of. Still not sure which way I’ll go, I want to see the final document and I suggest others do the same in case either side manages to sneak something in.

[Ruvap]

That’s if Qantas set up a mechanism for transfer, they may not. There is no transfer mechanism to Jetstar other than an agreed MOU which only covers some pilots. Would people be willing to resign from mainline and go permanently to an new entity? Not many stayed at Jetstar. Also that is if terms and conditions are the same that are on offer now, no guarantees there. They may well offer lower terms to fit the cost of setting up a green fields operation into their business case (or because they can and will still get applicants). Therefor voting NO will probably still not get you a chance to fly the 350 unless you’re willing to resign from mainline (which the company may want to avoid costs of RINs and redundancy a few years down the track).

Having the A350 ops housed in a seperate entity is not such a bad thing. If it fails, it may not affect pilots who chose to stay in traditional mainline flying roles and it will be by choice if you want to go there. If we are going to submit to setting up some kind of B scale, then it should be an entity disconnected from current mainline ops so that we can get em back to the table and renegotiate a new EBA for existing flying, provided we get first rights to A350 ops whether that requires a resignation from mainline or not.

[Green.Dot]

Or you could grow some kahunas and vote NO and save money by not needing to buy any rectinol.

Is that the great advice everyone got in ‘89 when it turned out so well?

[Angle of Attack]

Considering all the A380’s are about to be grounded and a 60-70% reduction in QF international is on the horizon....
Im not advocating anything but have you looked at the loads lately on QF international flights? They are horrendous and loss making.
The peak of COVID 19 will be August here so horrendous economic pain will endure to at a minimum early next year. In some ways a vote NO will be safer if the forecast of redundancy is true as I’m hearing, are the redundancy provisions the same in the new contract? Don’t shoot the messenger I have heard there may be a 400-500 million loss first half next financial year if this COVID19 persists until then. Sunrise may be binned or delayed if this keeps up.

[Ruvap]

Considering all the A380’s are about to be grounded and a 60-70% reduction in QF international is on the horizon....
Im not advocating anything but have you looked at the loads lately on QF international flights? They are horrendous and loss making.
The peak of COVID 19 will be August here so horrendous economic pain will endure to at a minimum early next year. In some ways a vote NO will be safer if the forecast of redundancy is true as I’m hearing, are the redundancy provisions the same in the new contract? Don’t shoot the messenger I have heard there may be a 400-500 million loss first half next financial year if this COVID19 persists until then. Sunrise may be binned or delayed if this keeps up.

This is yet another reason why we should resist any temptation to do anything and sit on our hands. Only way to do that is vote NO. Tino conceded that they are looking ‘through’ the virus situation but is that even possible? I don’t think so and given their already announced restructuring, this will inevitably get worse so yes, redundancy is entirely feasible and having Qantas make a decision on such a huge A350 order whilst parking A380’s seems not feasible to me. I think Tino was not telling you the whole story when he said they are looking through the virus. Watch this space! Voting NO is cheap insurance.

[Angle of Attack]

Thanks Ruvap and Birdie, no I’m not in the game to vote but was just curious, I could see a forced pay freeze become a condition with the current economic conditions, with a NO vote. I can also see the merit of a YES vote to keep the flying, but I’m not sure if it will happen regardless. Good luck and I hope it all works out well! 👍