Air NZ pilot redundancies

[Anti Skid On]

A minimum of 387 jobs gone just like that. Expect there will be FA jobs to be added to the total in larger numbers; sad day.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12322688

[wheels_down]

Was it Last in, First Out? That’s what one article claims.

Not much in regards to fleet position post Covid, however the -200ER will probably be shelved. Thats 1/3 of widebody capacity.

Sadly thats a lot of Pilots out of work across VA and NZ. Yet to hear about the other two yet.

They also were looking at paths for those to return in the future, but I don’t think we will be at 2019 fleet/pilot numbers until the next decade. Then there will be an issue of so many people walking away from the industry right now, either retiring or switching industries due oversupply, that there will be a lack of bods long term.

[palauisland]

Unfortunately this is just the start for ANZ pilot redundancies. I hope those that are let go keep there seniority number so given a few years they maybe re hired.

[go123]

Sad times indeed.

Doesn’t include regionals yet either.

It’s a shame those that are just starting out, with large student loans and mortgages, many with young families will be impacted the worst. What’s frightening is this is just the beginning.

[Ollie Onion]

So it this just off the jet fleet? How many jet pilots are there?.

[KiwiAvi8er]

So it this just off the jet fleet? How many jet pilots are there?.

1200 odd jet pilots but roughly 100 of those are Link pilots sitting on the seniority list but still employed by Links. It’s around 280 active jet pilots who are facing redundancies.

[73qanda]

Why don’t they give the pilots the option of indefinite LWOP? Wouldn’t that be a win for both parties? Or does the accrual of sick leave make that more expensive than redundancy?

[Ollie Onion]

To be honest, if you can get a redundancy payout and then retain your seniority with future jobs being offered to redundant pilots in order then that would be a better outcome financially for quite a few pilots as opposed to just an endless period of LWOP. I just feel sorry for all of us who through no fault of our own or our companies have potentially seen our flying careers knocked on the head. So many mates who have lost and are losing jobs with many, including myself, just waiting for the axe to fall.

[27/09]

1200 odd jet pilots but roughly 100 of those are Link pilots sitting on the seniority list but still employed by Links. It’s around 280 active jet pilots who are facing redundancies.
Who are they actually employed by Air New Zealand jet or the Links. Are they not on LWOP from Air New Zealand which indicates they are employed by Air NZ?

[Slezy9]

If they actually get rid of 387 then it’s all the way up the list to junior A320 captains. Take a while to replace every single A320 FO.

[continue#1]

If they actually get rid of 387 then it’s all the way up the list to junior A320 captains. Take a while to replace every single A320 FO.

No it isn’t , you have to go a fair way up to get to a bus captain.

[Slezy9]

OK, fair enough, it's very close. Less than 30 A320 FO's.

[HOOROO]

How many years service have these guys/girls had that will be made redundant?

As a pilot of another jet operation based in NZ, it’s extremely saddening to hear and also very close to home. Thoughts going out to all affected.

[go123]

4 1/2 years (2015). So pretty significant service. A large majority are ex link legends too which is bloody sad

[HOOROO]

4 1/2 years (2015). So pretty significant service. A large majority are ex link legends too which is bloody sad

Wow. Literally lost for words.

[pisstin broke]

Are the Link pilots and Jet pilots on separate seniority lists. If not, how will Link pilots be affected by this?

[B772]

Any redundancies forecast at QF ?

[KiwiAvi8er]

Are the Link pilots and Jet pilots on separate seniority lists. If not, how will Link pilots be affected by this?

Yes separate lists. No word on how many Link redundancies yet.

[continue#1]

Does anybody know if any figures are out about Turbo Prop redundancies?

[KiwiAvi8er]

Who are they actually employed by Air New Zealand jet or the Links. Are they not on LWOP from Air New Zealand which indicates they are employed by Air NZ?

They haven’t resigned from their original role, that happens when they’re given a start date.

[HOOROO]

Any redundancies forecast at QF ?

As far as I’m aware and what our chief pilot told us, there are no planned pilot redundancies at QF at this stage. There is enough cashflow to weather this storm for up to a year however things do change so who knows.

[PoppaJo]

QF are more focused on eliminating its competitor at the moment, so when that plan fails then the axe will fall. He will no doubt use whatever bailout Virgin gets as a excuse to lay-off his employees. If Mr Singapore bailed it out then he would say zilch.

As he is on some form of revenge path with Virgin at the moment, he will probably take out revenge on JQ pilots for causing him grief last year and putting his raft of incentive schemes at risk. Step 1 is stab a knife in JB and what he built, Step 2 is going after those pesky JQ pilots. The bloke has no limits.

[AerocatS2A]

Why don’t they give the pilots the option of indefinite LWOP? Wouldn’t that be a win for both parties? Or does the accrual of sick leave make that more expensive than redundancy?
The 387 number is not redundancies off the bottom of the list, it is the reduction in pilot numbers required, so LWOP, part time, voluntary severance, etc, are all yet to come into play. This is an initial number, a starting point for unions to work with.

[crosscutter]

Let Air NZ have this thread. QF have enough threads without hijacking this with speculation. All the best.

[ElZilcho]

To be honest, if you can get a redundancy payout and then retain your seniority with future jobs being offered to redundant pilots in order then that would be a better outcome financially for quite a few pilots as opposed to just an endless period of LWOP. I just feel sorry for all of us who through no fault of our own or our companies have potentially seen our flying careers knocked on the head. So many mates who have lost and are losing jobs with many, including myself, just waiting for the axe to fall.

I'd say the Jury is still out on LWOP vs Redundancy.

To be re-hired after Redundancy you need to be Current (at the moment)... not easily done when there's not going to be any Jobs anytime soon. Would also be extremely difficult to self fund currency after taking a massive drop in pay with whatever Job you can find outside of Flying.
If you are Re-Hired, all your service benefits get reset, including starting back again on Year 1 pay. Some of the more Senior Pilots facing the Axe will be on years 5-6 Pay, so potentially would be on Year 8 (SO/FO Cap) when re-hired if they take LWOP.

Of course, as the Contracts written, LWOP is not a choice. As Redundancy is Last on First off, a Pilot who opts for LWOP could still be made redundant so we're awaiting word from the Unions and the Company if Redundant Pilots will be offered the choice of LWOP instead, and what the conditions of both are in terms of re-employment.

Sadly, one of the biggest consequences are those who hold Jet Positions with Seniority below Regional Pilots on LWOP. A Regional Pilot who is "made redundant" from the Jet Fleet will retain their ATR/Q300 Command due to their high Link Seniority. When it comes to Re-Hiring, however, last off first on applies so Jet Pilots below the 110 or so Tag & Release Pilots could be waiting a very very long time to get their Jobs back. I doubt a Redundancy situation, let alone one of this scale, was considered when Tag & Release was signed off on. Not to be down on the Tag & Release Pilots, it's not their fault things played out this way, but they've at least still got Jobs.

In terms of Raw numbers, 387 off the bottom leaves us with 822 Pilots. A320 Commands start around 750, but there's a lot of Senior SO's between 822 & 750 so there will be very few remaining A320 FO's.
The 387 Number came with a disclaimer that it's the starting point. The Company simply forecast a schedule for next year and said "At Optimal IP (flying hours)" they need 387 less Pilots. Optimal, I believe, is around 75 hour Rosters. Redundancies can only occur when Average hours drop below 60, and can only be applied to bring the average back above 60, not to a 75 "optimum".
Retirements will also factor into the number off the bottom as will Voluntary Severance or other voluntary measures. The more off the top, the less off the bottom.
Lastly, the logistics of re-shuffling the remaining Pilots also needs to be accounted for... that's an awful lot of seat changes filtering from the Top to the Bottom.

So the message is, panic slowly. 387 is simply a number generated by the forecasting models. How that number is practically achieved, and how many are actually let go off the bottom is yet to be determined. All things considered, the number of Redundancies should be less than 387. That's not to say however, there isn't a second wave farther down the track. A lot of assumptions are being made around the future of International travel.

[Anti Skid On]

I'd say the Jury is still out on LWOP vs Redundancy.

To be re-hired after Redundancy you need to be Current (at the moment)... not easily done when there's not going to be any Jobs anytime soon. Would also be extremely difficult to self fund currency after taking a massive drop in pay with whatever Job you can find outside of Flying.
If you are Re-Hired, all your service benefits get reset, including starting back again on Year 1 pay. Some of the more Senior Pilots facing the Axe will be on years 5-6 Pay, so potentially would be on Year 8 (SO/FO Cap) when re-hired if they take LWOP.

Of course, as the Contracts written, LWOP is not a choice. As Redundancy is Last on First off, a Pilot who opts for LWOP could still be made redundant so we're awaiting word from the Unions and the Company if Redundant Pilots will be offered the choice of LWOP instead, and what the conditions of both are in terms of re-employment.

Sadly, one of the biggest consequences are those who hold Jet Positions with Seniority below Regional Pilots on LWOP. A Regional Pilot who is "made redundant" from the Jet Fleet will retain their ATR/Q300 Command due to their high Link Seniority. When it comes to Re-Hiring, however, last off first on applies so Jet Pilots below the 110 or so Tag & Release Pilots could be waiting a very very long time to get their Jobs back. I doubt a Redundancy situation, let alone one of this scale, was considered when Tag & Release was signed off on. Not to be down on the Tag & Release Pilots, it's not their fault things played out this way, but they've at least still got Jobs.

In terms of Raw numbers, 387 off the bottom leaves us with 822 Pilots. A320 Commands start around 750, but there's a lot of Senior SO's between 822 & 750 so there will be very few remaining A320 FO's.
The 387 Number came with a disclaimer that it's the starting point. The Company simply forecast a schedule for next year and said "At Optimal IP (flying hours)" they need 387 less Pilots. Optimal, I believe, is around 75 hour Rosters. Redundancies can only occur when Average hours drop below 60, and can only be applied to bring the average back above 60, not to a 75 "optimum".
Retirements will also factor into the number off the bottom as will Voluntary Severance or other voluntary measures. The more off the top, the less off the bottom.
Lastly, the logistics of re-shuffling the remaining Pilots also needs to be accounted for... that's an awful lot of seat changes filtering from the Top to the Bottom.

So the message is, panic slowly. 387 is simply a number generated by the forecasting models. How that number is practically achieved, and how many are actually let go off the bottom is yet to be determined. All things considered, the number of Redundancies should be less than 387. That's not to say however, there isn't a second wave farther down the track. A lot of assumptions are being made around the future of International travel.

Thank you for your insights. Earlier people had mentioned the possible demise of the 777-200 fleet, and whether or not those crew would be 'low hanging fruit', which would be sad.

As also has been said, these losses are from the jet fleet, so similar numbers could eventuate from the regional side (where I have several friends). I also know a couple of 20 somethings trying to get their first real job. They're pretty stuffed in the short term

[mark247]

Sadly, one of the biggest consequences are those who hold Jet Positions with Seniority below Regional Pilots on LWOP. A Regional Pilot who is "made redundant" from the Jet Fleet will retain their ATR/Q300 Command due to their high Link Seniority. When it comes to Re-Hiring, however, last off first on applies so Jet Pilots below the 110 or so Tag & Release Pilots could be waiting a very very long time to get their Jobs back. I doubt a Redundancy situation, let alone one of this scale, was considered when Tag & Release was signed off on. Not to be down on the Tag & Release Pilots, it's not their fault things played out this way, but they've at least still got Jobs.


Surely a lot of those regional pilots will be reluctant to go to the jets and give up their regional seniority after all this in case it happens again.

[ElZilcho]

Thank you for your insights. Earlier people had mentioned the possible demise of the 777-200 fleet, and whether or not those crew would be 'low hanging fruit', which would be sad.

As also has been said, these losses are from the jet fleet, so similar numbers could eventuate from the regional side (where I have several friends). I also know a couple of 20 somethings trying to get their first real job. They're pretty stuffed in the short term

There's no mechanism in our CEA to make Pilots Redundant by Fleet, only by Seniority. That being said, the -200's days are probably numbered. Prior to COVID, they were due to be replaced from around 2022 with GenX 787's. I'm not privy to lease conditions and how easily they could exit them early so can't say for certain, but the ones we own could possibly be sold to leasing companies for a few bucks. :} Transition between the Boeing Fleets is a short course so it's much easier than down-training to the Airbus.

Honestly, the 20 year olds who haven't started their flying careers are the lucky ones. No kids, no mortgages, young enough to retrain in a new field... don't get me wrong, I love Flying, in many ways it defines me. But having been on the wrong end of 911/Ansett, the GFC and now (potentially) COVID-19, I'm wondering if perhaps I should of taken the hint 20 years ago and done something else.

As for the Regional Guys, I doubt they're going to take too much of a hit from this. To my knowledge, they've been short on crew for years which will give them some breathing space, and with no international flying to worry about, they'll likely resume close to their full schedule by the end of the year, just with less Pax.

Surely a lot of those regional pilots will be reluctant to go to the jets and give up their regional seniority after all this in case it happens again.

Possibly Senior Link Pilots might think twice about it, seeing their mates who resigned from the Regionals 6 months ago lose their jobs, but then again, those who catch the post COVID wave early will likely rise above the next downturn quite quickly.

[f1yhigh]

Honestly, the 20 year olds who haven't started their flying careers are the lucky ones. No kids, no mortgages, young enough to retrain in a new field... don't get me wrong, I love Flying, in many ways it defines me. But having been on the wrong end of 911/Ansett, the GFC and now (potentially) COVID-19, I'm wondering if perhaps I should of taken the hint 20 years ago and done something else.


My heart goes out to you all. You will get through this and come out stronger. Just have to ride it out until it blows over. What options do you guys have?

[RubberDogPoop]

I'd say the Jury is still out on LWOP vs Redundancy.

To be re-hired after Redundancy you need to be Current (at the moment)...

Which clause in the CEA says that?

[RubberDogPoop]

... but I don’t think we will be at 2019 fleet/pilot numbers until the next decade.

Sorry? Say again? You don't think we'll be back here until 2030 - is that your contention?

[ElZilcho]

Which clause in the CEA says that?

19.7.3(C)

Basically, you need a CPL with Current IR.

[Slezy9]

Now that's gonna be expensive!

[Trevor the lover]

Has my old buddy, long time no see, Craig Forster still got a job?

[RubberDogPoop]

19.7.3(C)

Basically, you need a CPL with Current IR.

Given the circumstances, the company help with that...

[ElZilcho]

Given the circumstances, the company help with that...

I would hope so, but that's not how the Contracts written... of course, I doubt the CEA was written with such a large scale redundancy in mind so I would expect a few agreements around Redundancy, LWOP & Re-Employment will be made.

[Derfred]

On my side of the ditch, any re-employment (or re-introduction following extensive non-flying leave such as LWOP or long-term sick leave) would require a few simulator sessions including one which would re-validate the IR.

There is no practical reason for any requirement to maintain IR currency in this situation. There may be ill-founded HR reasons.

I don’t know if it’s different in NZ, or ANZ.

[kangaroota]

How much sim training would be required for a 777 pilot down - grading to a 787?

[Chris2303]

Probably germane to this discussion:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/120926006/air-new-zealand-inside-the-future-domestic-airline

"Air New Zealand has said it is planning to be a domestic airline, with limited international services (https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/120696612/coronavirus-air-new-zealand-tweaks-wording-on-job-losses-reflecting-bleaker-covid19-outlook-union-says) for the foreseeable future. But with potentially a third of the workforce being laid off, and future domestic demand running at 1 per cent — it begs the question: what kind of domestic airline will Air New Zealand be?"

[go123]

I think unless the govt starts subsidising air travel in NZ over the next few years, Air NZ and other local airlines will not survive. This will have to happen in addition to the 2 year loan which was negotiated. It’s essential for the future of New Zealand’s economy

[KiwiAvi8er]

Just being realistic here, with all the forecasts for extremely limited international services in the short and medium term. 387 redundancies won’t be nearly enough and will only be the first wave. I hope I’m wrong however.

[Rabbitwear]

Let’s hope Air NZ can use the spare capacity for Domestic Australia flights , better than an Asian carrier coming in .
Also hope the unions can work a deal for all to go part time so the redundancy is limited.

[markontop]

Rabbitwear why is it better than an Asian carrier?
Sir Selwyn would probably say the same thing twenty years ago and from his cell today

[Slezy9]

Rabbitwear why is it better than an Asian carrier?
Sir Selwyn would probably say the same thing twenty years ago and from his cell today


It’s better for Air NZ!

[Chris2303]

The last thing that the Flying Koru should do is have anything to do with domestic Australia.

It needs to concentrate on getting domestic back up to speed, albeit at a reduced frequency, and possibly flights to RAR, TBU, APW, IUE and NAN but only if FJ fails.

[markontop]

Yes they should have had nothing to do with Australian domestic twenty years ago.

[ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE]

Rabbitwear why is it better than an Asian carrier?

Because there is already an Australia/New Zealand open skies agreement, making it very easy for the government to facilitate Air NZs entry to the Aussie domestic market.

Air New Zealand will have spare airframes for a long time to come. In 6-12 months would they be better served earning revenue in the Aussie market or sitting on the ramp gathering dust. If there is a gap in the market with the collapse of virgin I’m sure there could be a viable business case.

Airwork operate ZK registered 737 freighters domestically in Aus and also have bases here Im lead to believe.

[AerocatS2A]

Probably germane to this discussion:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/120926006/air-new-zealand-inside-the-future-domestic-airline

"Air New Zealand has said it is planning to be a domestic airline, with limited international services (https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/120696612/coronavirus-air-new-zealand-tweaks-wording-on-job-losses-reflecting-bleaker-covid19-outlook-union-says) for the foreseeable future. But with potentially a third of the workforce being laid off, and future domestic demand running at 1 per cent — it begs the question: what kind of domestic airline will Air New Zealand be?"
Domestic demand is at 1 per cent because travel is effectively banned for the next two weeks. There is no reason why domestic travel won’t be doing well in 12 months time.

[ElZilcho]

A Domestic Airline with limited International services is obviously what the next 6-12 months look like.. possibly the next 18-24 months if the World really drops the ball with COVID. However, lets get Realistic here for a moment.

Of the 1100(ish) operational Pilots, 650 are on Widebody's and 450 on the Airbus. Wipe 387 off the bottom and there goes 2/3 of the Airbus FO's (and SO's).
Let assume the 777 is never to fly again, that's approximately 250 Captains and FO's who need down training. (We'll ignore the surviving SO's for now)
Lets assume the 787 Workload is halved, that will add another 100 or so Widebody Pilots that need a seat change.

So we have 250 777 Pilots, who are (mostly) Senior to the 787 Pilots, so potentially all 200 787 Pilots will get Down-trained as 250 777 Pilots are allocated the remaining 100 or so 787 Jobs.
Once that's happened, there's now approximately 350 Widebody Pilots to filter down onto the Airbus fleet.. Seniority will be all over the place here due to lifestyle choices and over 65's on the Airbus, but for the most Part, the Widebody Pilots will have seniority and many A320 Pilots will be down-trained.

Of Course, Down-Training is Seniority based but you then need to consider the implications of down-training a Standards Pilot off a Fleet and reducing the training capacity. Then you run into the issue of displacing Queenstown qualified Airbus Pilots, and finally, as Junior Airbus Captains on year 2-3 Pay are replaced by Senior Widebody Pilots on year 12 pay, they wage bill for the Airbus Fleet will increase by $30-$50k per Captain (and similar in the FO Ranks).

Once all of the above has been tidied up and all surviving Pilots have been re-shuffled to their new positions it'll be 2025 and COVID will have either decimated the Planet (in which case the above never happened because everyone lost their jobs), or it'll be well behind us.

The point I'm trying to make, is Logistically, the Airline simply cannot re-shuffle Hundreds of Pilots overnight... and by the time they've finished, COVID will hopefully be behind us.
If they make too many Redundant off the bottom, the Airbus Fleet won't be able to operate. Yes, they can quickly down-train Captains to the RHS, but again, it's Seniority based, meaning any surviving SO's must be appointed first and they require a full course.
Secondly, another Problem with "Last on First off" Redundancies is that the most expensive Pilots (Widebody Captains) are un-touchable yet have very little work if we become a "domestic Airline".

Don't get me wrong, of the 1200 Pilots on the list, I'm in the bottom half and have been polishing up my CV and budgeting on a period of LWOP or Reduced Pay.
This is an extremely complex problem to solve (for all Airlines) due to the Logistics of large scale seat changes.
I expect there's to be a lot of Leave without Pay offers and Part-Time agreements on the table while we navigate COVID.
387 Redundancies might not enough for the April 2021 schedule, but it could well be too many for the April 2022 Schedule.

Anyone got a Crystal Ball?

[go123]

A Domestic Airline with limited International services is obviously what the next 6-12 months look like.. possibly the next 18-24 months if the World really drops the ball with COVID. However, lets get Realistic here for a moment.

Of the 1100(ish) operational Pilots, 650 are on Widebody's and 450 on the Airbus. Wipe 387 off the bottom and there goes 2/3 of the Airbus FO's (and SO's).
Let assume the 777 is never to fly again, that's approximately 250 Captains and FO's who need down training. (We'll ignore the surviving SO's for now)
Lets assume the 787 Workload is halved, that will add another 100 or so Widebody Pilots that need a seat change.

So we have 250 777 Pilots, who are (mostly) Senior to the 787 Pilots, so potentially all 200 787 Pilots will get Down-trained as 250 777 Pilots are allocated the remaining 100 or so 787 Jobs.
Once that's happened, there's now approximately 350 Widebody Pilots to filter down onto the Airbus fleet.. Seniority will be all over the place here due to lifestyle choices and over 65's on the Airbus, but for the most Part, the Widebody Pilots will have seniority and many A320 Pilots will be down-trained.

Of Course, Down-Training is Seniority based but you then need to consider the implications of down-training a Standards Pilot off a Fleet and reducing the training capacity. Then you run into the issue of displacing Queenstown qualified Airbus Pilots, and finally, as Junior Airbus Captains on year 2-3 Pay are replaced by Senior Widebody Pilots on year 12 pay, they wage bill for the Airbus Fleet will increase by $30-$50k per Captain (and similar in the FO Ranks).

Once all of the above has been tidied up and all surviving Pilots have been re-shuffled to their new positions it'll be 2025 and COVID will have either decimated the Planet (in which case the above never happened because everyone lost their jobs), or it'll be well behind us.

The point I'm trying to make, is Logistically, the Airline simply cannot re-shuffle Hundreds of Pilots overnight... and by the time they've finished, COVID will hopefully be behind us.
If they make too many Redundant off the bottom, the Airbus Fleet won't be able to operate. Yes, they can quickly down-train Captains to the RHS, but again, it's Seniority based, meaning any surviving SO's must be appointed first and they require a full course.
Secondly, another Problem with "Last on First off" Redundancies is that the most expensive Pilots (Widebody Captains) are un-touchable yet have very little work if we become a "domestic Airline".

Don't get me wrong, of the 1200 Pilots on the list, I'm in the bottom half and have been polishing up my CV and budgeting on a period of LWOP or Reduced Pay.
This is an extremely complex problem to solve (for all Airlines) due to the Logistics of large scale seat changes.
I expect there's to be a lot of Leave without Pay offers and Part-Time agreements on the table while we navigate COVID.
387 Redundancies might not enough for the April 2021 schedule, but it could well be too many for the April 2022 Schedule.

Anyone got a Crystal Ball?

Is it possible to just leave the top half in the mean time and focus on down training 320 Caps back to FO’s in reverse seniority order as required? The guys at the top just wait it out for the next 12 months? Can you get made to take a 320 command if you’re a 777 SO?

[ElZilcho]

Is it possible to just leave the top half in the mean time and focus on down training 320 Caps back to FO’s in reverse seniority order as required? The guys at the top just wait it out for the next 12 months? Can you get made to take a 320 command if you’re a 777 SO?

If the bottom half lost their Jobs it'd wipe out a lot of A320 Captains along with all the FO's/SO's. In terms of Down-Training Vs Direction, I haven't looked as to how the 2 interact. Direction is from the bottom up, Down-Training is also from the bottom up, but contained within a Fleet/Rank which has a surplus. Honestly, when it comes to Senior Lifestyle SO's who let the Command go below them, I'm not sure who would get directed first.

At the end of the day, International Flying makes up 2/3 of our Schedule.
If we're a Domestic only Airline, then we only need ~300 Pilots resulting in 900 odd redundancies.
If we have 'limited" international sectors, then the borders must be open? If the Borders are open, then slowly people will resume flying again.

In other words, we either need 300 Pilots, or we need 800-900 (still a reduction on current numbers). Anything in between just doesn't add up in my opinion.

[go123]

Mammoth task

[stillgoing]

Let’s hope Air NZ can use the spare capacity for Domestic Australia flights , better than an Asian carrier coming in .
Also hope the unions can work a deal for all to go part time so the redundancy is limited.

That will never happen with the current QF/ANZ codeshare in place.

Because there is already an Australia/New Zealand open skies agreement, making it very easy for the government to facilitate Air NZs entry to the Aussie domestic market.

Not a chance with the codeshare agreement in place. In this environment neither party will be wanting to jeopardise this arrangement.

[ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE]

[QUOTE=
Not a chance with the codeshare agreement in place. In this environment neither party will be wanting to jeopardise this arrangement.[/QUOTE]

Qantas group (Jetstar) operates domestic NZ with this codeshare agreement in place. I don’t see how this would be different

[Chris2303]

Two things:

If, as I suspect, the limited international is to the Pacific Islands, those flights can be operated by the A321 Neo. Other international will be predominately freight to SHA and possibly LAX for which the 773 is a better option as it can carry more freight than the 789.

I wouldn't expect to see JQ back in Godzone any time soon

[waren9]

anyone suggesting that?

i dont see it.

[Ollie Onion]

Two things:

If, as I suspect, the limited international is to the Pacific Islands, those flights can be operated by the A321 Neo. Other international will be predominately freight to SHA and possibly LAX for which the 773 is a better option as it can carry more freight than the 789.

I wouldn't expect to see JQ back in Godzone any time soon


Jetstar is expecting NZ to be the first domestic operation to ramp up again, it will only be two or three aircraft to start with but they want to protect some market share. The advantage JQ has is a very lean cost base so they will still be able to make some money selling $39 fares, I am not so sure Air NZ can compete on a cost basis, yes Air NZ will dominate but I don’t think JQ keeping their 10% market share is going to be Air NZ’s biggest issue.

[kangaroota]

The Link operation should be in a good position to kick start domestic demand. I'm sure under the circumstances punters would tolerate a prop on the WGN - AKL route and even CHC - AKL with the right incentives.

[stillgoing]

Qantas group (Jetstar) operates domestic NZ with this codeshare agreement in place. I don’t see how this would be different

The difference is that the codeshare agreement was negotiated with this already in place. The agreement does not codeshare on JQ.

If AirNZ decided to expand into Domestic AU and undermine the whole codeshare agreement then it would be ripped up overnight.

I don’t think you understand what the codeshare agreement is or how it works.

An ANZ customer can book a flight from Napier to Perth. They “choose” to travel Napier to Auckland on Air NZ. There is no codeshare on the Tasman so they travel on Air NZ to East Coast AU. If they have the right privileges they can access QF lounges in AU and then “Choose” to codeshare on QF to Perth.

Under this existing arrangement would QF be happy for Air NZ to enter the AU domestic market and operate these services. Why would they when QF will do it it for them?

Air NZ could decided to invest a huge amount of capex to do this but in this current environment it won’t happen. In addition now that they are “frenemies” with QF why would they take on an airline they are working closely with.

It makes no sense.

[ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE]

You’re a braver man than I to use such definitive statements. I’m not saying Air NZ will fly domestically in Aus, just that if there was a viable business case, they could.

No one knows what the post COVID 19 economy will look like, never mind the aviation sector. Air NZ might decide that utilising $80 million assets that they’re paying leasing fees on anyway, and getting a foothold in the Aussie market stacks up, even if they have to forfeit a codeshare agreement.

Anything is possible

[pisstin broke]

Air NZ will survive with the Govt pumping nearly $ 1 b into their coffers. The pilots unions need to be realistic and play their part in the future size and shape of the new airline . Is it realistic to expect an airline haemorrhaging money to retrain a huge number of pilots on different types and then pay them WB salaries to fly a domestic A320.
Would it be cheaper to close the airline, make all pilots redundant and then start again, rehiring those that are needed rather than retraining hundreds of pilots to different positions?

[blubak]

Yes they should have had nothing to do with Australian domestic twenty years ago.
100% correct & now the future is looking eerily so alike.
Big egos & not answerable to anyone.

[Chris2303]

Would it be cheaper to close the airline, make all pilots redundant and then start again, rehiring those that are needed rather than retraining hundreds of pilots to different positions?

Politically unacceptable with the Government owning 52% of the airline.

[bn2pigsfly]

19.7.3(C)

Basically, you need a CPL with Current IR.

You’d have to do a TD/PD anyway when you came back, maybe even a type rating, so it seems a pointless requirement to keep your IR current. I don’t actually think the company would care.

[bn2pigsfly]

Air NZ will survive with the Govt pumping nearly $ 1 b into their coffers. The pilots unions need to be realistic and play their part in the future size and shape of the new airline . Is it realistic to expect an airline haemorrhaging money to retrain a huge number of pilots on different types and then pay them WB salaries to fly a domestic A320.

ALPA has said all along there will be redundancies but the goal is to minimise the number.
Nobody will be paid WB salary to fly a 320. A fleet change means a salary change.

[Hudson Hawk]

Would it be cheaper to close the airline, make all pilots redundant and then start again, rehiring those that are needed rather than retraining hundreds of pilots to different positions?

The CEA of the majority of the AirNZ Jet pilots (900 of the 1096 current jet pilots) has a 10yr redundancy re-hire policy in seniority order. So you can't make them all redundant and start again, cherry picking the qualified and current people for the fleets you plan to operate because people need to be rehired in the order they were let go.

Also making someone redundant, and then hiring someone else for the same position in less than 18mths is illegal in NZ if I recall correctly.

You'd have to wind up "AirNZ" and start "Teal2020" or the like and start a fresh with everything and everyone..... something that even Simon Bridges would recognise and give the side eye to.

[Count von Altibar]

Sad to see this happening to such a great airline to fly with. Hopefully we all get through this period and the economy bounces back as soon as. Maybe it is better to take the redundancy payout and then come back hopefully at a later date than LWOP.

[MonsterC01]

Quick question. Under my EBA we can’t be displaced from our Fleet, base or rank by any person who has lost their position as the result of a fleet decommissioning. Regardless of that persons position on the GDOJ list. Is there no similar provision within the AirNZ agreement?

[Slezy9]

Quick question. Under my EBA we can’t be displaced from our Fleet, base or rank by any person who has lost their position as the result of a fleet decommissioning. Regardless of that persons position on the GDOJ list. Is there no similar provision within the AirNZ agreement?

Nope, last on the list, first off. It's going to be expensive to get everyone into their new seat.

[Chris2303]

Also making someone redundant, and then hiring someone else for the same position in less than 18mths is illegal in NZ if I recall correctly.

That is correct

[Pickuptruck]

Was it Last in, First Out? That’s what one article claims.

Not much in regards to fleet position post Covid, however the -200ER will probably be shelved. Thats 1/3 of widebody capacity.

Sadly thats a lot of Pilots out of work across VA and NZ. Yet to hear about the other two yet.

They also were looking at paths for those to return in the future, but I don’t think we will be at 2019 fleet/pilot numbers until the next decade. Then there will be an issue of so many people walking away from the industry right now, either retiring or switching industries due oversupply, that there will be a lack of bods long term.
That leaves a pretty small window, we only have one more cycle of aircraft design before we go single pilot and full automation throughout the narrow body/wide body industry. That’s 25 years tops before we only need half the pilot numbers we currently have.

[Lookleft]

You are assuming that there is going to be the money and the market for a new aircraft design. Then you are assuming that the manufacturers are going to launch a whole new design that will be single pilot. Boeing and Airbus are going to be licking their wounds for a while before embarking on a project that will have the potential to see them go bankrupt if they get it wrong. You only get one chance to recover from an A380 or 737 Max.

[Lapon]

That leaves a pretty small window, we only have one more cycle of aircraft design before we go single pilot and full automation throughout the narrow body/wide body industry. That’s 25 years tops before we only need half the pilot numbers we currently have.

25 years you say? That technology has been avaliable for decades, it's the appetite for it that has and will lack.

[anonfly]

Nope, last on the list, first off. It's going to be expensive to get everyone into their new seat.

Is there a clause that mentions exceptional circumstances or unforeseen event? We have one in ours and in layman’s terms it means.
Company will do as it pleases as we are in a fight for our survival and to hell with your GDOJ LIST. The cost of retraining everyone and downgrading is prohibitive. We will make redundancies as we see fit within the fleets to manage cost.
I can’t see them doing it from the bottom up personally.
It’s going to be a mammoth task for the unions involved but I can’t see what leverage they have over the company when it’s receiving a bailout to the tune of $1B and owned 52% by the government. They will want results. That may mean some seniors pilots end up on the chopping block.
I would be looking at it as no one is safe.
Myself personally am stood down, not expecting a bright future so am dusting off the steel cap boots and getting my hands dirty. Nothing else for it.
I wish you all luck. Have a lot of friends at AirNz and it’s an absolute shambles what is happening worldwide to our industry.
Take care of one another and hopefully in a couple years time we all hear each other in the air again!
Best Wishes

[AerocatS2A]

They've already stated publicly they won't be using "exceptional circumstances" clauses.

[dr dre]

Company will do as it pleases as we are in a fight for our survival and to hell with your GDOJ LIST. The cost of retraining everyone and downgrading is prohibitive. We will make redundancies as we see fit within the fleets to manage cost.
.

Wouldn't LIFO dis-proportionally affect the most needed pilots? For example I'd assume the 320's pilots are junior to the 777s, but the 320 may be in more demand. Wouldn't both the cost and complexity of retraining the most senior pilots onto the needed fleets due to making the most junior pilots redundant be prohibitive?

[Lapon]

Wouldn't LIFO dis-proportionally affect the most needed pilots? For example I'd assume the 320's pilots are junior to the 777s, but the 320 may be in more demand. Wouldn't both the cost and complexity of retraining the most senior pilots onto the needed fleets due to making the most junior pilots redundant be prohibitive?

Correct, but thats how the agreement is written.

I wouldnt be susprised if in the shorter term the widebody fleet picked up some of the shorthaul work with a drastically reduced frequency vs that offered with the narrow body fleet operating. One AKL/SYD or two AKL/CHC a day anyone? Strange times ahead.

[Anti Skid On]

Correct, but thats how the agreement is written.

I wouldnt be susprised if in the shorter term the widebody fleet picked up some of the shorthaul work with a drastically reduced frequency vs that offered with the narrow body fleet operating. One AKL/SYD or two AKL/CHC a day anyone? Strange times ahead.
The 777 and 787 are already used on trans Tasman, and QF use the A330. Everything will depend on volumes. If Jetstar and VA drop off trans Tasman then the legacy carriers can pick up their seats and it would make sense to use existing assets rather than having the aircraft sat on the ground, especially if the LH market is slower to pick up

[kangaroota]

[QUOTE=Lapon;10746314]Correct, but thats how the agreement is written.


Irrespective of what is written into the agreement, I'm not sure there is enough goodwill among the taxpaying public at large, many of whom a doing it very hard right now, to subsidise a lifestyle to which a senior WB pilot has come to expect.

[Lapon]

Irrespective of what is written into the agreement, I'm not sure there is enough goodwill among the taxpaying public at large

That may be true, however the contract overrides public sentiment.

[Pickuptruck]

25 years you say? That technology has been avaliable for decades, it's the appetite for it that has and will lack.
Spoken like a flight engineer. The first tests of auto take off at Airbus were in 2020, it’s downhill from here. Every facet of transportation is getting automated. Line haul automated trucks are less than a decade away. The cost savings of halving your pilot numbers are huge. The whole idea that airlines will want to hold onto pilots is much like the idea they wanted to hold onto flight engineers.
Ain’t going to happen, watch the current fight in the trucking industry if you want to know how this will all play out.

[Pickuptruck]

25 years you say? That technology has been avaliable for decades, it's the appetite for it that has and will lack.
Spoken like a flight engineer. The first tests of auto take off at Airbus were in 2020, it’s downhill from here. Every facet of transportation is getting automated. Line haul automated trucks are less than a decade away. The cost savings of halving your pilot numbers are huge. The whole idea that airlines will want to hold onto pilots is much like the idea they wanted to hold onto flight engineers.
Ain’t going to happen, watch the current fight in the trucking industry if you want to know how this will all play out.
Apologies for thread drift.

[KiwiAvi8er]

That may be true, however the contract overrides public sentiment.

Should the business burn all their cash and require full Govt rescuing/ownership then the public sentiment will exert a lot more influence.

[Lapon]

The cost savings of halving your pilot numbers are huge.

Except in the big sceme of things they're not. And then there are the non financial considerations which will be the greatest hurdle anyway.

[Lapon]

Should the business burn all their cash and require full Govt rescuing/ownership then the public sentiment will exert a lot more influence.

If the company was to collapse it is all academic anyway, the best they can do for now is negotiate some variations with the pilot group.
I dont think for a second the company will merely be able to put the entire problem in the too hard or too expensive basket and just do as they please.

[Icarus2001]

The first tests of auto take off at Airbus were in 2020, it’s downhill from here. Every facet of transportation is getting automated. Line haul automated trucks are less than a decade away. The cost savings of halving your pilot numbers are huge...The easiest form of transport to automate is trains. How many driver-less trains with passengers operate in Australia, or the US or Europe? Next easiest is shipping. Heck they already "need" pilots to bring them into harbour after the ocean crossing. When I see mostly driverless trains and a few automatic ships, then I will know that single pilot aircraft are coming, because if you NEED one pilot then you NEED a second one just in case.
By the way, crew costs are between 10-15% of aircraft running cost. That is ALL crew. maybe the cabin crew will be first to go? No cabin attendants on trains or buses. Find your own exit.:hmm:

When in 2020 did these tests occur?

[kangaroota]

Politically unacceptable with the Government owning 52% of the airline.
I think there will be a debate soon about how long Air New Zealand should be kept on life support.
As an airline it has only ever existed courtesy of protectionist policies (until Richard Prebble deregulated the industry) and taxpayer funding,
It has been baled out twice now in the last twenty years.
Most of the people I know who have traveled to Britain and Europe in the last five years have cast the often referred to 'pride' and 'sentiment' in our national carrier aside and opted for better and cheaper options travelling west with one of the Asian or Middle Eastern carriers.

[Chris2303]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/120838713/air-new-zealand-and-the-black-swan-event-that-brought-air-travel-to-its-knees

[KiwiAvi8er]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/120838713/air-new-zealand-and-the-black-swan-event-that-brought-air-travel-to-its-knees

Uhh they’ve trotted out “aviation consultant” Irene King :ugh: About as insightful as Trump vs Viruses.

[mark247]

Uhh they’ve trotted out “aviation consultant” Irene King :ugh: About as insightful as Trump vs Viruses.

That's 'Aviation Consultant and Grey Lynn Florist' Irene King I'll have you know

[mangatete]

OPINION: Qantas and Air New Zealand are setting very different paths. Time will tell who was right.

[crosscutter]

OPINION: Qantas and Air New Zealand are setting very different paths. Time will tell who was right.

Perhaps legislation differences and liquidity have allowed QF to kick the can down the road to wait and see how the dust settles first, before making structural decisions. The paths taken may well turn out to be very similar.

[Anti Skid On]

Spoken like a flight engineer. The first tests of auto take off at Airbus were in 2020, it’s downhill from here. Every facet of transportation is getting automated. Line haul automated trucks are less than a decade away. The cost savings of halving your pilot numbers are huge. The whole idea that airlines will want to hold onto pilots is much like the idea they wanted to hold onto flight engineers.
Ain’t going to happen, watch the current fight in the trucking industry if you want to know how this will all play out.
Apologies for thread drift.
The truck thing exists, but authorities won't let it happen without bodies in the cab. Scania has a system were up to 10 truck and trailer units are connected via some network. Truck one drives and the others follow, literally a few meters apart. Travelling in a convoy of 10 saves 10% fuel per truck, so 10 trucks and one practically goes for free. They are allowed to operate the system on German Autobahns, but only at night.

[Anti Skid On]

OPINION: Qantas and Air New Zealand are setting very different paths. Time will tell who was right.
Local media are talking up a Trans-Tasman travel bubble, watch this space

[Des Dimona]

Local media are talking up a Trans-Tasman travel bubble, watch this space

Not as silly as it might sound. If the COVID thing is proved to be contained at an acceptable level in both countries (and it's rapidly approaching that point), then that sounds like a great idea.

At least it would get some traffic and employment happening again.

[go123]

Local media are talking up a Trans-Tasman travel bubble, watch this space

Would be nice, but Jacinda shut the idea down today and said borders will be closed indefinitely to non-residents or who aren’t citizens. She also stated herself and Morrison haven’t talked or aren’t considering the idea at the moment.

[Chris2303]

Uhh they’ve trotted out “aviation consultant” Irene King :ugh: About as insightful as Trump vs Viruses.

Congratulations: You passed the test.

Denigrate anybody who doesn't have LHS time, and totally ignore the opinions expressed. And the article wasn't all about Irene King either, others put their take on the AIr NZ situation.

My personal feeling is that if Air NZ is to become a domestic airline it should be renamed NAC and the airplanes painted orange with the godwit on the tail

[arse]

My personal feeling is that if Air NZ is to become a domestic airline it should be renamed NAC and the airplanes painted orange with the godwit on the tail

Hard to find humor in all this, but this comment did bring a smile to my face.

Good luck to everyone.

[mattyj]

Man Ardern and Foran really are a pair of misery guts..anytime anyone comes up with an idea or a proposal they shoot it down in flames..one wants to shrink the national economy and the other one wants to shrink the company he’s only just taken over by 30%..come hell or high water the two of them

[Chris2303]

Man Ardern and Foran really are a pair of misery guts..anytime anyone comes up with an idea or a proposal they shoot it down in flames..one wants to shrink the national economy and the other one wants to shrink the company he’s only just taken over by 30%..come hell or high water the two of them

A Simon Bridges voter eh?

[kiwi grey]

Local media are talking up a Trans-Tasman travel bubble, watch this space

Actually, the CEO of Auckland Airport was "talking up", actually I would have said "pleading for a Trans-Tasman travel bubble".
You can understand why: it would potentially provide a significant number of flights though his empty infrastructure, income from the car parking and taxi concessions, rental from the shops, etc. etc.

A.T.M. he's looking at a dozen half-empty flights a day, almost all the costs of running an international airport and almost no income.

[RubberDogPoop]

A Simon Bridges voter eh?

Not much of a rebuttal is it? Got anything cogent?

[ElZilcho]

There's no harm in ironing out the details of a possible Trans-Tasman bubble sometime in the future. As they say, Piss Poor Planning Promotes Piss Poor Performance.
But I can't blame them for not jumping on the idea at the request of the Airport Company. There's bigger fish to fry at the moment.

[Ollie Onion]

I heard 300 pilots is the final number, those 300 to be offered redundancy payout with option to return at bottom of list or furlough with no payment but to retain seniority and pay on return. Those that remain will be on a reduced roster in return for a 14% pay cut.

[AerocatS2A]

Not a final number. The number is still being worked on. Other details are yet to be voted on.

[Chris2303]

Not much of a rebuttal is it? Got anything cogent?

Ardern, unlike most countries on the planet, wants to keep people alive at all costs...

So far Foran is making the right moves to keep the airline alive. If he succeeds then obviously he was the right choice for the position. If he fails it won't be for the want of trying.

[waren9]

I heard 300 pilots is the final number, those 300 to be offered redundancy payout with option to return at bottom of list or furlough with no payment but to retain seniority and pay on return. Those that remain will be on a reduced roster in return for a 14% pay cut.

then you heard wrong.

[ElZilcho]

Furlough you forfeit your Redundancy Payout to retain service benefits and remain an employee on the Seniority list while effectively on LWOP. Your pay step is frozen while on Furlough but service benefits continue to accrue.
Redundancy you get paid out and your Seniority number is reserved. When/If re-employed all service benefits are reset and you're effectively a new hire Pilot.

Regardless of which option a Pilot chooses, it's last off first on so assuming all Pilots are re-hired, no one gains or loses Seniority by choosing one over the other.
Furlough cannot be forced by the Company. Once redundancy notices have been issued each Pilot will be given the choice.
A Pilot who chooses Furlough however, has 3 years to change their mind and take the Redundancy Payout so the Company must account for the debt,

The numbers are not finalized and nothing has been ratified yet.

[hownowbrowncow]

then you heard wrong.

It looks like it’ll be closer to 200, less if some old guys pull the pin early.

[mangatete]

Will voluntary redundancy be offered?

[myturn]

How can it possibly be only 200 cuts when they are talking an airline thats only 30% the size of pre Covid? Wishful thinking................

[ElZilcho]

It depends on how you look at the numbers.

The number published of 387 is the total reduction off today's Seniority list they want in 12 months time. Based on a predicted schedule.
There are about 110 Regional Pilots who, while on the Jet Seniority list, are still employed in the Regionals and are thus on "LWOP" from the Jets. So the actual reduction is ~280 Flying Pilots, this is before Retirements and other measures such as Early exits or LWOP are counted, so the actual number of Redundancies could be 200 or less (active Jet Pilots). The 110 Regional Pilots will also be "made redundant" if their number falls within the final number (most of them probably will), but it's mostly administrative as they'll retain their Regional Commands and will added back onto the Jet List in Seniority order.

A 30% reduction in the Airline does not necessarily equate to a 30% reduction in Pilots. Partly because we were short on Pilots to begin with, but also due to the logistical issues of downtraining. Add in some of the Manpower planning requirements the company has agreed to (still to be ratified by the Pilots), redundancies should be a lot less than 30% under the current forecasts.

[myturn]

Some good points but they are not talking a 30% reduction in the airline, that was the initial estimated of workforce reduction. Keeping in mind that was some time ago and things have worsened a heap since then. The forecast is a 70% reduction of the airline, so a 10-20% reduction of pilot resource does not match a 70% reduction of the airline overall. That is my point making the 200 number way off the mark?

[Massey058]

That is my point making the 200 number way off the mark?

I think by every metric it is way off the mark based on all the communications. For all sorts of reasons 200 is on the mark, for Jet, at this stage.

I don't think anyone is under the illusion that in a situation that is out of our control there will only ever be one wave of redundancies. Certainly I think everyone hopes there are the absolute minimum.

But Air New Zealand isn't planning to be 70% smaller in 12 months time.

​​

[myturn]

Not suggesting thats the plan at all. It will be what it is but lets not think that 200 will cut it.

[ElZilcho]

We'll be back to 100% Capacity in 6 months... or was it 12 months? I could of sworn someone said 18 months... but then the last guy said 5 years, except his mate told him he was dreaming and we'll be a state owned Airline by years end?

No one knows, and anyone who claims otherwise is likely postulating for their own reasons. Many seem to relish in the doom and gloom of mass redundancies.

Personally, I prefer to deal with the facts as we have them today. I can't change tomorrow so why waste time arguing about it. Hope for the best, plan for the worst. Those are the numbers we have been given for the Jet Pilots only, the exact percentage of jobs lost in each department will vary. Sadly, those in less skilled areas will see greater cuts as with unemployment forecast to exceed 20% the company can replace them overnight when the time comes.
For Pilots, if Foran cuts too deep he'll ground the A320 fleet in the short term, then be forced to re-train all the Pilots he down-trained back to the 787 when COVID is behind us. Which it will be....eventually.

The Annual Wage bill for Jet pilots is ~$230mil. Obviously the company want to reduce it, but even if they halved it, that wouldn't save the Airline if things don't improve (and the logistics of doing so would be crippling). They're simply planning for the Airline they want to be when this is over. How long they'll carry some fat in the ranks is anyone's guess.

Make no mistake however, if things don't improve, when the share price bottoms out and we're on the verge of bankruptcy, that's when they Government will re-acquire the Airline, not before. Until then, I'd say we're stuck with the current terms of the agreed Loan. If the decision is made to revert the loan to $900mil Capital investment, the Government will want to do it when the share price has tanked, as it did in 2001/2.

[mattyj]

Well the government holds all the cards..they own a controlling interest of 52% of the company and they have total control of the border and domestic travel..on the one hand they’re peeling mega dollars off the value of their investment, on the other hand they’re making it easier when the time comes, to renationalize the shell of the remaining company

incidently, the Auckland City Council is seeing their fat interest in Auckland International Airport dissolve in front of their eyes

[RubberDogPoop]

How can it possibly be only 200 cuts when they are talking an airline thats only 30% the size of pre Covid? Wishful thinking................

Where is this BS coming from? The quote from Foran on the multiple livestreams I have watched is that "we will be 30% SMALLER post-Covid". (Note that is post-Covid - not "by Xmas", "in a years time", or "in 18 months". THAT is what the manpower plan is based on, at the moment.) That is an airline that is SEVENTY % of its original size. At Xmas they have suggested we could be 20%-50% of the airline we were in January 2020. Not one of these total guesses relates to an airline that is only 30% the size.
Where on earth is this 70% figure generated from myturn - you must be privy to figures no one in the company has heard....

[mattyj]

Well 30% is as good a guess as 70%..or closed down and asset stripped (or 100% government owned large scale employment program like the old NZ Rail)

[Flash Blackman]

Whats the story with the ex-RNZAF driver creating waves against the regional drivers on tag/release? isn't that why the industry has contracts & seniority? So we cant just bend things to suit our own agenda? Could be wrong though!

[ElZilcho]

Whats the story with the ex-RNZAF driver creating waves against the regional drivers on tag/release? isn't that why the industry has contracts & seniority? So we cant just bend things to suit our own agenda? Could be wrong though!

Prior to the Regional Pilots being added to the list, word was getting around that it was going to happen. A few guys from the RNZAF questioned it before starting and were told so long as they could accept a start before a certain date they would not be effected.
Those pilots subsequently joined Company and were given Seniority numbers.
Not long after, they had their numbers revoked and re-issued behind 40 or so Regionals on Tag & Release.
Apparently it was an administrative error made by the person who manages the list, but that still doesn't explain why those Pilots were told they would be ahead of the Regionals before starting. I have my suspicions it's because people were declining interviews and even starts due the effect it would have on Career Progressions but can't say for certain.

The Regional Pilots don't deserve the vitriol coming at them over this, it's not their fault. But I can also see it from the other perspective. 110 Pilots on the list ahead of you is 3-4 years retirements, so if you're a current Jet Pilot about to lose your job behind all the Regionals, your wait for re-employment will be significantly longer while they get to continue in their current job on the Q300/ATR as if nothing happened.

It's a mess.

[mattyj]

It’s easily fixed if the union are willing. No change needs to be made to the CEA..simply make a statement that if you get made redundant/furloughed as a current jet pilot you will be rehired at the appropriate time as a jet pilot, but if you were on LWOP when you were made redundant then you will be on LWOP when you are rehired in the same order.

[Sackofspuds]

It’s easily fixed if the union are willing. No change needs to be made to the CEA..simply make a statement that if you get made redundant/furloughed as a current jet pilot you will be rehired at the appropriate time as a jet pilot, but if you were on LWOP when you were made redundant then you will be on LWOP when you are rehired in the same order.

The union will never support such a view. Seniority is the fundamental rule our industry exists on.
What some if you seem to forget is that the regional pilots on tag and release are not there by choice. They are there because they wanted to go to jet but the company could not release them due to manpower issues.

If you held lwop pilots from starting their jet career at the appropriate time within seniority what then happens to the regional pilots made redundant at the bottom of the regional list? Is one group of pilots more important then the other?

The amount of hysteria over an issue that effects the bottom 50 on the jet list is laughable. What these guys fail to see is that in 10 years time (when the airline gets down to the lwop pilots) the majority of those pilots will not go to jet anyway. They will either be retired or not interested in the bottom of a seniority list.

There are far bigger things to worry about then the bottom of the jet seniority list at the moment.

[Flash Blackman]

From both sides of the table it doesnt look like a great position to be in but if you then make the T/R guys stay put wont you be just be moving the unemployment from a jet pilot to a regional pilot? I dont think regional pilots have been made redundant but if they do then having the T/R guys stay put will just delay the regional re-hires. Somewhere someone looses.

[ElZilcho]

From both sides of the table it doesnt look like a great position to be in but if you then make the T/R guys stay put wont you be just be moving the unemployment from a jet pilot to a regional pilot? I dont think regional pilots have been made redundant but if they do then having the T/R guys stay put will just delay the regional re-hires. Somewhere someone looses.

Redundancy is in last on first off and that includes the Regional Pilots (or anyone else on LWOP) who holds an effected Seniority number.
For the Jet Pilot, that means unemployment.
T&R Pilots however, are on both Seniority lists. While Junior on the Jet List they're all quite Senior on the Regional list. So Rendancy from Jet effectively means nothing changes for them. Their Jet Seniority number is still "reserved", same as any Redundant Pilot, but their Regional Seniority numbers are senior enough to eliminate any risk of actually being made Redundant. They'll all hold onto their Commands on the Q300 or ATR.

So when it comes to re-employment, the current Jet Pilot is stacking shelves at Pak'n'save waiting to be called back, while the T&R Pilot is still comfortable in the LHS of a T-Prop.
The argument being put forward is that those Regional Pilots should hold onto their Seniority numbers in Jet, but remain on "LWOP" to their T-Prop Command until all current Jet Pilots are re-hired.

Again, the whole things a mess.

[Sackofspuds]

What about the lack of movement on the regional list which is the idea you are proposing by insisting regional pilots that are tagged stay on lwop.
That will have a direct effect on redundant turboprop pilots on the bottom of the regional list stacking shelves as you put it.
Or have I forgotten that a jet pilot is more important than a mere turboprop pilot?

[Flash Blackman]

I totally get what you're saying. Regional guys havent been made redundant yet but it will likely happen. T/R guys get the best outcome of this. Yes, your T/R guy stays employed while the jet guys are made redundant. When they go down the list and either recall the jet guy packing the supermarket shelves or the move the T/R guy across to the jet someone looses out. Its just whether its John at the bottom of the jet list or Paul at the bottom of the regional list. Someone who was made redundant (noting this hasnt happened in the prop world YET) will lose a chair to sit on when the music stops. I'm not affected by either outcome but it seems like most people are more focused on John.

[ElZilcho]

I totally get what you're saying. Regional guys havent been made redundant yet but it will likely happen. T/R guys get the best outcome of this. Yes, your T/R guy stays employed while the jet guys are made redundant. When they go down the list and either recall the jet guy packing the supermarket shelves or the move the T/R guy across to the jet someone looses out. Its just whether its John at the bottom of the jet list or Paul at the bottom of the regional list. Someone who was made redundant (noting this hasnt happened in the prop world YET) will lose a chair to sit on when the music stops. I'm not affected by either outcome but it seems like most people are more focused on John.

Sorry, seems I misunderstood your original post. In other words, a T&R guy not moving onto the Jet will prevent a Junior Link Pilot who was made redundant from getting re-hired. I thought your reference to redundant Regional Pilots was the T&R guys, who will retain their jobs.
Admittedly, I never thought about it from that perspective and it does add yet another complication to the utter mess T&R has created.

On one hand, I want to say the young Regional Pilot probably doesn't have a wife, kids and mortgage budgeted on a 6 figure salary but that's not a fair approach. We can't assume anyones position based on their age/seniority.
Optimistically, I'd like to think the Regionals will be least affected by COVID once Domestic travel ramps up... then again, it's looking possible they might some routes entirely.
There's not going to be any winners here.

[Massey058]

Sorry, seems I misunderstood your original post. In other words, a T&R guy not moving onto the Jet will prevent a Junior Link Pilot who was made redundant from getting re-hired. I thought your reference to redundant Regional Pilots was the T&R guys, who will retain their jobs.
Admittedly, I never thought about it from that perspective and it does add yet another complication to the utter mess T&R has created.

On one hand, I want to say the young Regional Pilot probably doesn't have a wife, kids and mortgage budgeted on a 6 figure salary but that's not a fair approach. We can't assume anyones position based on their age/seniority.
Optimistically, I'd like to think the Regionals will be least affected by COVID once Domestic travel ramps up... then again, it's looking possible they might some routes entirely.
There's not going to be any winners here.

Your last point nails it. Whatever way things are cut, whatever the variation or workaround or interpretation there will be loss.

Any of us in the middle of the seniority lists and above are likely to be less harmed and have been fortunate to enjoy what has been possibly the greatest aviation boom period outside of post-WW2. The effect on those at the bottom of the regional seniority list could well be quite harsh given until fairly recently a command could be happily expected within 2 years of joining. Many have partners, children, mortgages and have large student loans. We all have our biases but I really hope they don't lose too much out of this.

[Anti Skid On]

Sorry, seems I misunderstood your original post. In other words, a T&R guy not moving onto the Jet will prevent a Junior Link Pilot who was made redundant from getting re-hired. I thought your reference to redundant Regional Pilots was the T&R guys, who will retain their jobs.
Admittedly, I never thought about it from that perspective and it does add yet another complication to the utter mess T&R has created.

On one hand, I want to say the young Regional Pilot probably doesn't have a wife, kids and mortgage budgeted on a 6 figure salary but that's not a fair approach. We can't assume anyones position based on their age/seniority.
Optimistically, I'd like to think the Regionals will be least affected by COVID once Domestic travel ramps up... then again, it's looking possible they might some routes entirely.
There's not going to be any winners here.
Surely the trunk routes will recover faster than the regionals? My feeling is the regional centres will have a fairly limited timetable

[Flash Blackman]

Do the 777 drivers become 787 drivers who become airbus drivers? Seems like a heck of a lot of training and sim time.
maybe you’ll see a prop doing the Auckland Christchurch run?

[ElZilcho]

Surely the trunk routes will recover faster than the regionals? My feeling is the regional centres will have a fairly limited timetable

Trunk routes definitely, but the A320 fleet which serves those trunks also operates internationally.
In other words, 2/3 of Jet Operations revenue comes from International which will be the slowest to recover. While this will feed into the Regionals due to less tourism, their operation is 100% internal so not quite as hamstrung by international border closures.
If we assume the Regionals retain all routes, they might lose some frequency and pax numbers will be down, but the A320 will still have many destinations closed due to international restrictions.

Do the 777 drivers become 787 drivers who become airbus drivers? Seems like a heck of a lot of training and sim time.
maybe you’ll see a prop doing the Auckland Christchurch run?

We don't know at this stage.
If Redundancies are 387, the Airbus fleet will lose a lot of FO's but should still be able to operate until Capacity ramps us. At that point, if they deem there's a surplus in the A320 Command ranks, a group of Junior Captains could lose their extra stripe to more balance the numbers and leave everyone else where they are. Seat changes are far easier to facilitate than fleet changes.
Air NZ runs the risk, that if they down-train too many from the top, they might have to re-train them back up again when things start to rebound.
I'd say the conservative approach, for now anyway, is to keep the Airbus flying with minimal seat changes and not rush into any long term changes.

[Flash Blackman]

Interesting. So even though the lads at the top aren’t flying they potentially sit on pay? Do the regionals have the same downgrade facility to even the ranks? Are they essentially grounding the 777?

[ElZilcho]

Interesting. So even though the lads at the top aren’t flying they potentially sit on pay? Do the regionals have the same downgrade facility to even the ranks? Are they essentially grounding the 777?

There's currently enough flying for maybe 200 Pilots... at the most. So there's going to be a lot of us sitting around doing nothing and getting paid for it. This is where QF has a distinct advantage in terms of cash-flow as it's illegal in NZ to forcibly stand your workers down on LWOP as AJ did. So it's either pay them to stay home or pay them redundancy... which still requires 3 months notice (or 3 months pay) & the Redundancy pay. For the 387 (280 Jet Pilots as T&R don't get redundancy pay), their Redundancy will range from 6 weeks to ~ 3 months pay. The farther up the List they go, the more redundancy costs up to a maximum of 54 weeks. Assuming the pilots don't opt for Furlough that is.

So what's the alternative?

Obviously redundancies based on today's flying (Domestic is running at 1% capacity I believe) is simply out of question.
If they decided to make half of us redundant, that would cost a fortune in redundancy payouts, ground the A320 fleet, and it takes around 3 months to transition from the Widebody to line check on the A320 under normal circumstances.
So really, they have no choice but accept a cash burn in wages. Make Pilots Redundant based on predicted future numbers without grounding the only fleet doing any work and then down-train ahead of the rebound as required.

777 Pilots are slowly going uncurrent. They've got a few freight charters to LAX at the moment (3 a week I believe) and are on call for any rescue charters that come up. Most of the flying is going to the Standards Pilots to keep the current.
Once we come out of level 4 lockdown, potentially the SIMs will open up again and we'll rotate through to keep current and then go on call. But hard to say.

Not sure what the Regionals contracts say, but I believe a lot of clauses around redundancy and down-training are similar to ours.

[Flash Blackman]

Interesting, thanks for answering all that. What a crazy economy. Shows how no one can afford to feel invincible. I would assume regional pilots will be in less of a rush to change seniority lists in the future.

[ElZilcho]

With the redundancy clauses in place, where all redundant must be re-hired first, I doubt anyone not currently on the list will need to make that decision for several years. But it does call into the question the risks associated with changing Airlines and going to the bottom of the list. Ironically, a lot of external hires left their previous Airlines for better job security. Only time will tell how that plays out.

[Corkey McFuz]

Ironically, a lot of external hires left their previous Airlines for better job security. Only time will tell how that plays out.

Oh the irony screams there ! Certainly plenty who went off to get trained up on the bus at JQ and snaked em to ANZ might be regretting their morals right about now.

That said, no one is safe really. I'm sure the industry will return to normal in a few years and as often happens in these situations not all the pilots return - many opting to change to more stable and secure career paths

[ElZilcho]

Oh the irony screams there ! Certainly plenty who went off to get trained up on the bus at JQ and snaked em to ANZ might be regretting their morals right about now.

That said, no one is safe really. I'm sure the industry will return to normal in a few years and as often happens in these situations not all the pilots return - many opting to change to more stable and secure career paths

I've heard that attitude floating around, seems some regional Pilots are getting their jollies on the knowledge their former colleagues might be losing their jobs with no where to go. Pretty disgusting if you ask me and I'd suggest those particular individuals are the ones who should be questioning their own morals.

And for what it's worth, the majority of externals looking at losing their jobs are not necessarily former regional pilots who "jumped the queue".

[Massey058]

I've heard that attitude floating around, seems some regional Pilots are getting their jollies on the knowledge their former colleagues might be losing their jobs with no where to go. Pretty disgusting if you ask me and I'd suggest those particular individuals are the ones who should be questioning their own morals.

​​​​​​When it gets to that point no one starts looking good.
Given I've not heard that sentiment I'd say "some regional pilots" is a microscopic number in the same way I'd hope some other relayed attitudes are.

[Ollie Onion]

It is yet to be seen if the ex JQ people would have been any more secure still in JQ. The only advantage that JQ possible has is that Qantas is saving a lot of money at the moment due to their ability to stand down 2/3 of staff on LWOP meaning cashflow is severely helped as opposed to Air NZ who is still paying full wages and facing millions in redundancy payments and restructuring. Having said that though Qantas may just shut the whole JQ operation or they may try and be nimble an Knick some market share in the aftermath, no one knows. I was chatting to a mate at Air NZ last week and she said the company had asked her to move her leave forward and she had refused as she thought that with the risk of redundancy she was going to get as much pay out of the company as possible, this is fair enough on an individual basis but if the majority of staff are doing that then the outgoings at Air NZ must be eye watering.

[Flash Blackman]

I've heard that attitude floating around, seems some regional Pilots are getting their jollies on the knowledge their former colleagues might be losing their jobs with no where to go. Pretty disgusting if you ask me and I'd suggest those particular individuals are the ones who should be questioning their own morals.

And for what it's worth, the majority of externals looking at losing their jobs are not necessarily former regional pilots who "jumped the queue".

Whilst I'd like to think that isnt happening, it might be. I would suggest it might be in small numbers and I would also suggest (having worked in similar companies) there are rumours on both sides which ends up fueling the negative culture and relationship in a vicious circular logic. On the jet side we have "the prop guys are smirking at our losses and clapping hands - they're always being disrespectful!" and on the prop side we have "the jet guys are trying to rewrite the contract and take our jobs. They're always trying to take from us!".
Why does it have to be like this? We're all pilots and most of us are adults too. I find it interesting that blokes in identical roles and in this case the same uniform can stare at each other across the board room or planning room with such contempt. For what reason? Both jobs have their individual challenges. "I'd like to see them try fly this aircraft" is an entirely pointless statement as are the empty rumours of what the other side is apparently saying. So much unnecessary competition.
/rant

[kiwiabroad]

Whilst I'd like to think that isnt happening, it might be. I would suggest it might be in small numbers and I would also suggest (having worked in similar companies) there are rumours on both sides which ends up fueling the negative culture and relationship in a vicious circular logic. On the jet side we have "the prop guys are smirking at our losses and clapping hands - they're always being disrespectful!" and on the prop side we have "the jet guys are trying to rewrite the contract and take our jobs. They're always trying to take from us!".
Why does it have to be like this? We're all pilots and most of us are adults too. I find it interesting that blokes in identical roles and in this case the same uniform can stare at each other across the board room or planning room with such contempt. For what reason? Both jobs have their individual challenges. "I'd like to see them try fly this aircraft" is an entirely pointless statement as are the empty rumours of what the other side is apparently saying. So much unnecessary competition.
/rant

Well said Flash, I think a lot of crew could take something from that.

Would now be the perfect time to do a complete reset regarding seniority/fleet lists, tag and release etc? Certainly would make it easier in times like this (hopefully we wouldn't see this type of pandemic in our careers again) for union/company decisions. How about a group date of joining list? It would also share the losses among the troops. I think it's pretty stink for a 10-20 year regional pilot whose been loyal to AirNZ throughout his/her career, and now who has recently joined the bottom of the jet list are potentially looking down the barrel of furlough/redundancy.

Let's face it, we had the opportunity to put the RSL on the bottom of the jet list 18 months ago but shut that down because of the cadetship attached to it and apparently to help our mates in the middle east and asian carriers a route back home. Now that there won't be any external hiring for many years to come, how about we look out for our colleagues and create a group list? I know not everyone would be comfortable with this, but now should be the time for us all to unite and look for one another.

Stay safe everyone

[KiwiAvi8er]

Whilst I'd like to think that isnt happening, it might be. I would suggest it might be in small numbers and I would also suggest (having worked in similar companies) there are rumours on both sides which ends up fueling the negative culture and relationship in a vicious circular logic. On the jet side we have "the prop guys are smirking at our losses and clapping hands - they're always being disrespectful!" and on the prop side we have "the jet guys are trying to rewrite the contract and take our jobs. They're always trying to take from us!".
Why does it have to be like this? We're all pilots and most of us are adults too. I find it interesting that blokes in identical roles and in this case the same uniform can stare at each other across the board room or planning room with such contempt. For what reason? Both jobs have their individual challenges. "I'd like to see them try fly this aircraft" is an entirely pointless statement as are the empty rumours of what the other side is apparently saying. So much unnecessary competition.
/rant

Great points :ok: I think any prop drivers laughing at the jet fleets losses (if any are) are in for a rude awakening. Whilst no numbers have been put forward for regional cuts, they are proposing to cut 50% from the cabin crew ranks (ATR,Q300). Definitely not getting off scot-free.

[Ollie Onion]

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/travel/2020/04/coronavirus-air-new-zealand-plans-to-axe-all-boeing-777-cabin-crew-as-part-of-company-downsizing.html?fbclid=IwAR0TRV7PhxDyiqDXa5qkzB75cg66sfMNSS4 mVVvoIJaIZ9boIxFGo_XApcQ

So I am guessing the entire 777 fleet is going to be grounded in the short/medium term.

[Slezy9]

How about a group date of joining list?

Over my (and many others) cold dead body.

I think it's pretty stink for a 10-20 year regional pilot whose been loyal to AirNZ throughout his/her career, and now who has recently joined the bottom of the jet list are potentially looking down the barrel of furlough/redundancy.

Yep it sucks. But it’s not like it sucks more or less for anyone. People gave up a lot to come into Air NZ from an external career.


Now that there won't be any external hiring for many years to come, how about we look out for our colleagues and create a group list?

Go nuts. As long as the regionals are bolted to the bottom of the jet list. And everyone who is made redundant comes back and displaces the regional guys. Wouldn’t mind being bumped down to ATR captain. Better than being made redundant.

[kiwiabroad]

Over my (and many others) cold dead body.

Comments like that only add to the us vs them mentality

[kiwiabroad]

Go nuts. As long as the regionals are bolted to the bottom of the jet list. And everyone who is made redundant comes back and displaces the regional guys. Wouldn’t mind being bumped down to ATR captain. Better than being made redundant.


Well under a group list (not RSL under Jet), this would occur, just like what is likely to happen in the jet fleets (Boeing to Bus etc.)

[kiwipilot1]

Interesting. So even though the lads at the top aren’t flying they potentially sit on pay? Do the regionals have the same downgrade facility to even the ranks? Are they essentially grounding the 777?

The Regional CEA says you can't take a pay cut for a drop in rank, so if they downtrain the Regional skippers they will essentially have to pay them their old command salary to sit in the right hand seat. Will they do this? Hard to say, it will make for expensive F/O's, however this could still reduce costs overall by having Junior F/O's made redundant off the bottom of the list.

Still no word on Regional numbers yet though.

[mattyj]

The AirNZ jet seniority list IS date of joining!? The difference since the middle of 2018 is that if you’re an external hire - for every 3 of you the company hires they have to attach the same joining date to 7 regional pilots notionally on LWOP awaiting release from the links. This was to address the unfairness of being overlooked because they couldn’t be spared off of the link fleet. The trouble arises when you have a big group hired on the same start date, you arrange the list according to Pilot total time for that start date. So some guys have been with the jet fleet for nearly 2 years and still have 30 or 40 link pilots ahead of them on the seniority list who have never started. People who were involved in the pathways development warned the designers that the system was a pit of vipers in the case of mass redundancy on multiple occasions but they were ignored.

[ElZilcho]

Some good points raised.

Yes, people who make certain remarks throughout the business are a tiny minority. My comment about "some pilots" was in direct response to Corkey McFuz comment which I quoted. Secondly, I was (un)fortunate enough to be forwarded a disgusting txt message one of my junior colleagues received shortly after the 387 was announced. They're a former Regional Pilot who joined the Jet as an external. Enough said?

As we're seeing with Tag & Release, the GOP list (Joining the lists) does not come without unintended consequences.
The Cadetship being attached certainly didn't help, nor did the Regional Pilots (again, a small minority) threatening to make legal challenges to get higher Jet Seniority numbers based on their 10-015 years in the Links.
Merging the lists based on date on joining would be an industrial disaster and Slezy9 was correct in their comments about doing so.

A joint list has it's problems, and a lot of people supporting it have everything to gain by it and/or nothing to lose. What does it matter to me if 600 Regional Pilots get bolted onto this list 4-500 odd places below me?
Firstly, I'm going to state a painful truth. Many former Regional Pilots got their Air NZ Jet jobs at the times they did because those before them failed interviews... infact, that's true for most Pilots who joined any Airline in the latter stages of wave.
Many Regional Pilots got their job in the first place, because Pilots (such as myself) left and took external Jobs creating a vacancy... especially during the years where Air NZ weren't hiring.
Nothing exists in a vacuum.

I've moved an average of 20 Seniority places a year since joining Air NZ Jet. Only recently has that increased to around 30 a year. 600 Pilots on the RSL equates to 20-30 years of Jet Retirements. Those of you currently in the Regionals, who want the GOP list, take a look at your current Seniority and consider the implications of where you might be instead if the GOP list was created 10 years ago.
Whittakers goal with the GOP (with or without Cadets) was to hire young Pilots in the Regionals and keep them there, ending (or least heavily reducing) the bleed to external Jet Operators by dangling the Air NZ carrott.
If the GOP was created now, many Pilots can see the advantage of it to them. But if it was created 10 years ago, and successfully reduced the regional bleeding of Pilots, you wouldn't of been hired when you were due to less attrition. Some of you wouldn't of been hired at all, and all of you could potentially have 3-400 Jet Pilots about to displace you.
Again, nothing exists in a Vacuum, there are far reaching implications of joining the lists.

Movement in our industry is a good thing, don't be so quick to get locked into Seniority from day one and sit on the treadmill. We're often too quick to form an opinion based on our own little bubbles. Air NZ Pilots (many years ago) sold the Retirement leave for future generations because they were allowed to hold onto theirs. I viewed the GOP list in the same manner. A group of Senior Pilots selling the juniors a turd because it benefits them.

Lastly, with the GOP list, there was the problem of externals. Again, if the GOP list existed 10 years ago, how would Air NZ of expanded so rapidly? The GOP list doesn't change the Regionals ability to release Pilots so they still would of been forced to look externally but I guarantee they would of had a very poor response. With 600 Regionals Pilot ahead of you, any external would be facing 20 years as an A320 FO or SO and no one would sign up for that.

To be clear, I've always supported the Pathways project of protecting jobs for Regional Pilots who should otherwise have been on a Jet if not for being held back by their managers. But neither the GOP nor T&R are the answers in my opinion. All they needed to do, was keep everything exactly how it was, interview Regional Pilots in the same 70:30 ratio, and those who were successful but unable to be released get a Jet Number.

[Corkey McFuz]

Yes, people who make certain remarks throughout the business are a tiny minority. My comment about "some pilots" was in direct response to Corkey McFuz comment which I quoted. Secondly, I was (un)fortunate enough to be forwarded a disgusting txt message one of my junior colleagues received shortly after the 387 was announced. They're a former Regional Pilot who joined the Jet as an external. Enough said?


Settle down mate and don't take my comments out of context. I'm not a regional pilot you're talking about, I've never worked for the Air NZ group so haven't experienced the particular attitudes/people you're talking about, in fact I never mentioned regional at all.
I was agreeing with your comment on the irony in that a number of people gapped it from really good jet jobs perhaps on the assumption of job security. Had they stayed (at two operators) they would likely still be employed. Many of these pilots had only been at said operators for 5 minutes having barely been checked to line, some not paying bonds but in general fu*king over the hand that feeds them. That is not a good way to do life and may well have effected their career severely because they sure won't be able to return to either of the two remaining other jet operators in NZ. If I was them and had the opportunity to fly a good job again I would be reassessing some of those practices/attitudes because in cases like this, it may well have ruined their chances of reviving their jet career in this part of the world.
It's bloody sad, I feel for them and I'm in no competition or poking fun, my fate has all ready been decided, my career is down the tubes.

If you've got a problem with my comments or the group you think I'm with then take it up with me via PM :*

[ElZilcho]

Settle down mate and don't take my comments out of context. I'm not a regional pilot you're talking about, I've never worked for the Air NZ group so haven't experienced the particular attitudes/people you're talking about, in fact I never mentioned regional at all.
I was agreeing with your comment on the irony in that a number of people gapped it from really good jet jobs perhaps on the assumption of job security. Had they stayed (at two operators) they would likely still be employed. Many of these pilots had only been at said operators for 5 minutes having barely been checked to line, some not paying bonds but in general fu*king over the hand that feeds them. That is not a good way to do life and may well have effected their career severely because they sure won't be able to return to either of the two remaining other jet operators in NZ. If I was them and had the opportunity to fly a good job again I would be reassessing some of those practices/attitudes because in cases like this, it may well have ruined their chances of reviving their jet career in this part of the world.
It's bloody sad, I feel for them and I'm in no competition or poking fun, my fate has all ready been decided, my career is down the tubes.

If you've got a problem with my comments or the group you think I'm with then take it up with me via PM :*

No point in using PM's, disabled them years ago.

There have been a lot of back and forths in this thread, so as you said, lets not take individual posts out of context. My original post which you first quoted referred to external Pilots coming to Air NZ for more Job security. That referred to all externals. The 387 is made up of Pilots from all backgrounds, including those returning home after years in Asia or ME. We also have former Captains (some were Check and Training) from JQ, JC & Virgin who all did significantly longer than 5 minutes with those carriers as did many of the FO's who came across after 3-5 years with their respective Airlines. All are facing redundancy, including former Regional Pilots who "did everything right".

Appreciate you didn't mention Regionals, but who else went to JQ (etc) for 5 minutes and subsequently joined Air NZ?
Anyway, wasn't having a go at you, but what you said because unfortunately, you aren't the first one to say it as I mentioned in a subsequent post about a txt message I was shown directed at an ex Regional Pilot.

-edited-

[Rabbitwear]

I think they will be able to get Pilot jobs in Australia , Qantas Group will have many jobs in the Future and I’m sure will accept many KiWIs back to the ranks , by this stage though Air NZ may be at full capacity again , especially as the PM is a fan of Immigration.

[Corkey McFuz]

No point in using PM's, disabled them years ago.

There have been a lot of back and forths in this thread, so as you said, lets not take individual posts out of context. My original post which you first quoted referred to external Pilots coming to Air NZ for more Job security. That referred to all externals. The 387 is made up of Pilots from all backgrounds, including those returning home after years in Asia or ME. We also have former Captains (some were Check and Training) from JQ, JC & Virgin who all did significantly longer than 5 minutes with those carriers as did many of the FO's who came across after 3-5 years with their respective Airlines. All are facing redundancy, including former Regional Pilots who "did everything right".

Appreciate you didn't mention Regionals, but who else went to JQ (etc) for 5 minutes and subsequently joined Air NZ?
Anyway, wasn't having a go at you, but what you said because unfortunately, you aren't the first one to say it as I mentioned in a subsequent post about a txt message I was shown directed at an ex Regional Pilot.

-edited-

There were many externals who had been at their previous jet company for a short period of time. I'm talking JQ JC VA in nz and oz, cathay, the freight operators etc etc. Prior to that, sure there were many GA, air ambos, Jetstar regional, ozzy, probably many others and of course the links. The point I was making re the morals was about going to these jet operators, irrespective of where they came from, and being there for such a short period of time before going to Air NZ. Yip I appreciate there were many who did their time and provided a great return of service, but there were many who didn't and its those who I was thinking about. You will have to admit, the pilot movements in NZ for the last 3 years were extraordinary and I get the argument that if the opportunity is there etc etc. I also get that a great many people view these middle operators at stepping stones, which is fine. But there is using them as stepping stones and there is taking the piss. A lot of taking the piss occurred in the last 3 years.
JQ in particular got smashed because of the type rating and they were bloody desperate for pilots due the massive turnover, they almost became a training ground for air nz. I had heard of a whole course at JQ that never made it to their first cyclic because they were out the door to air nz. Others already had a yes letter before completing the line training courtesy of these middle airlines. Oh and there's the "forgetting to sign the bond" thing,- thanks for the type rating, ill catch you later.

It's just my humble opinion that this behavior is not cool and if a company has pumped the time and money into them then they should at least give a some years (plural) return of service because these places don't exist for the purpose of providing a leg up into air nz for aspiring young pilots.

Personally, if at all possible, I wouldn't leave a company in a way that wouldn't allow me a welcome return in the future. For many of these people I'm talking about, this is now an issue. This industry, especially in this part of the world, is far far to small to go burning bridges.

Again, I'm not anything to do with nz regional, never have been. I'm not poking fun or being a smart arse. I find it despicable that people would be doing that at a time like this and I'm quite intrigued to know the contents of this text message.
All I was saying was that for some people the doors to previous operators and those in their group will remain closed to them. That could be links, qantas group, virgin group (if they survive) cathay, m/e whatever, doesn't matter. That's a really **** situation and I'm sorry to those guys and girls. But if they DO get a shot at another good jet job, hows about re thinking tactics and don't use and abuse the fortunate position.

[ElZilcho]

All fair points Corkey, I wasn't aware Pilots were transiting JQ so quickly. The only Pilots I know personally who came from JQ did so early in the piece when Air NZ were running short courses for them and all had done at least 2-3 years if not more. I have heard that some ex-regional Pilots had done 1-2 years with an external Carrier before getting called to Air NZ but understood they were mostly ex-Eagle who left just prior to the shutdown.

"Forgetting" to sign bonds is quite underhanded and ruins it for the guys after you. It's attitudes like that which see operators demand you self fund your type rating upfront, something I strongly oppose.

As for that txt, well for the sake of retaining some anonymity for those involved I wont repeat it here, but it basically told an ex-regional Pilot they (and everyone else in similar circumstances) are getting what they deserve.

Unfortunately, emotions are running high at the moment and it's bringing out the worst in people. Within the Jet Fleet there's been some equally toxic communications circulating, diving young and old, junior and senior, ALPA or FED. As I said in the QF thread about Seniority, there's going to be a few guys buying their own beers once this is all over.

<edited - don't want to add fuel to the flames around regional vs external hires>

[kangaroota]

There were many externals who had been at their previous jet company for a short period of time. I'm talking JQ JC VA in nz and oz, cathay, the freight operators etc etc. Prior to that, sure there were many GA, air ambos, Jetstar regional, ozzy, probably many others and of course the links. The point I was making re the morals was about going to these jet operators, irrespective of where they came from, and being there for such a short period of time before going to Air NZ. Yip I appreciate there were many who did their time and provided a great return of service, but there were many who didn't and its those who I was thinking about. You will have to admit, the pilot movements in NZ for the last 3 years were extraordinary and I get the argument that if the opportunity is there etc etc. I also get that a great many people view these middle operators at stepping stones, which is fine. But there is using them as stepping stones and there is taking the piss. A lot of taking the piss occurred in the last 3 years.
JQ in particular got smashed because of the type rating and they were bloody desperate for pilots due the massive turnover, they almost became a training ground for air nz. I had heard of a whole course at JQ that never made it to their first cyclic because they were out the door to air nz. Others already had a yes letter before completing the line training courtesy of these middle airlines. Oh and there's the "forgetting to sign the bond" thing,- thanks for the type rating, ill catch you later.

It's just my humble opinion that this behavior is not cool and if a company has pumped the time and money into them then they should at least give a some years (plural) return of service because these places don't exist for the purpose of providing a leg up into air nz for aspiring young pilots.

Personally, if at all possible, I wouldn't leave a company in a way that wouldn't allow me a welcome return in the future. For many of these people I'm talking about, this is now an issue. This industry, especially in this part of the world, is far far to small to go burning bridges.

Again, I'm not anything to do with nz regional, never have been. I'm not poking fun or being a smart arse. I find it despicable that people would be doing that at a time like this and I'm quite intrigued to know the contents of this text message.
All I was saying was that for some people the doors to previous operators and those in their group will remain closed to them. That could be links, qantas group, virgin group (if they survive) cathay, m/e whatever, doesn't matter. That's a really **** situation and I'm sorry to those guys and girls. But if they DO get a shot at another good jet job, hows about re thinking tactics and don't use and abuse the fortunate position.
Some good points. You can get away with such behavior when things are going good, but now that jobs are going to be hard to come by, the employment histories on some cv's are going to count against some candidates big time.

[Ollie Onion]

Yep, there are a few who would never be welcomed back to JQ due to their behaviour. Having said that it only numbers a handful who left only months into their employment and refused to pay bonds etc, most ex JQ guys left on very good terms. And of course the other point is...... will there even be a JQ to try and go back to?

[Lookleft]

There will be a JQ just not any new positions to be filled.

[Mach E Avelli]

I think they will be able to get Pilot jobs in Australia , Qantas Group will have many jobs in the Future and I’m sure will accept many KiWIs back to the ranks , by this stage though Air NZ may be at full capacity again , especially as the PM is a fan of Immigration.
It is unlikely that Qantas Group will return to its former size for a while yet, and when it does they will have local pilots displaced from Tiger and a smaller Virgin (if it survives) to choose from first, plus plenty of applicants from lesser regionals around the country.

[27/09]

Why would any operator take an Air NZ pilot knowing they all hold a reserved seniority spot and will most likely bail when their number is called. I think you'd find that "Reserved Seniority Spot" only exists while working for a Koru turbo prop operation. The minute you leave the Koru that spot no longer exists. Therefore no extra risk to the external operator.

Someone better placed than I can confirm or deny what I have said.

[go123]

I think you'd find that "Reserved Seniority Spot" only exists while working for a Koru turbo prop operation. The minute you leave the Koru that spot no longer exists. Therefore no extra risk to the external operator.

Someone better placed than I can confirm or deny what I have said.

That’s what is supposed to happen, but there is some ex Air Force jet pilot who is trying to gather support to bypass the regional T&R pilots. That’s why we have seniority lists and contracts mate

[KiwiAvi8er]

That’s what is supposed to happen, but there is some ex Air Force jet pilot who is trying to gather support to bypass the regional T&R pilots. That’s why we have seniority lists and contracts mate

Yep. Goose needs to re-enlist and wait his turn. All this talk about lawyering up, he’s watching too much Suits :D

[Inverted Flat Spin]

I think you'd find that "Reserved Seniority Spot" only exists while working for a Koru turbo prop operation. The minute you leave the Koru that spot no longer exists. Therefore no extra risk to the external operator.

Someone better placed than I can confirm or deny what I have said.

Redundant pilots will be re-employed in seniority order.
It’s proposed that no one will be removed from the list. Just annotated as redundant/furloughed.

[cloudsurfng]

It is unlikely that Qantas Group will return to its former size for a while yet, and when it does they will have local pilots displaced from Tiger and a smaller Virgin (if it survives) to choose from first, plus plenty of applicants from lesser regionals around the country.

why would ‘local’ pilots have first preference over our kiwi brothers and sisters who have full working rights. Answer...they wouldn’t.

[ElZilcho]

I think you'd find that "Reserved Seniority Spot" only exists while working for a Koru turbo prop operation. The minute you leave the Koru that spot no longer exists. Therefore no extra risk to the external operator.

Someone better placed than I can confirm or deny what I have said.

All Pilots who are made Redundant or take Furlough will retain a Seniority number for re-employment. A Furlough Pilot still holds an employment agreement so their name remains on the list with no Rank. A Redundant Pilot will have their seniority number annotated as "Reserved for XYZ".

The goal was to allow Pilots to decide between a Redundancy Payout or retaining service benefits without giving one a distinct advantage over the other in terms of re-employment. Last off first on.

[Flash Blackman]

All Pilots who are made Redundant or take Furlough will retain a Seniority number for re-employment. A Furlough Pilot still holds an employment agreement so their name remains on the list with no Rank. A Redundant Pilot will have their seniority number annotated as "Reserved for XYZ".

The goal was to allow Pilots to decide between a Redundancy Payout or retaining service benefits without giving one a distinct advantage over the other in terms of re-employment. Last off first on.

What do you think the success of this air force blokes rule change will be? What's the feeling amongst the pilot group?

[27/09]

Nope, I meant why would any operator hire a redundant or furloughed Air NZ driver when they hold a reserved spot in the air nz seniority and will be offered their jobs back when the times comes. Not talking about Cook or Nelson here.

Ok, Understand where you're coming from now. Agreed.

I guess the ex Air NZ pilot if they really wanted the other job could resign and thus relinquish any claim to a seniority spot. After all for some pilots there will be better opportunities outside of the Koru, depending on personal circumstances (age, family, location etc), and the progression opportunities etc at the new employer relative to the Koru job.

[AerocatS2A]

Ok, Understand where you're coming from now. Agreed.

I guess the ex Air NZ pilot if they really wanted the other job could resign and thus relinquish any claim to a seniority spot. After all for some pilots there will be better opportunities outside of the Koru, depending on personal circumstances (age, family, location etc), and the progression opportunities etc at the new employer relative to the Koru job.
You can’t resign from a position you don’t have. A pilot made redundant from Air NZ has the right of recall in order of seniority. The best they could do is relinquish that right and ask Air NZ for a letter saying this had happened. But why would you? No one else will be hiring for ages and once they start you’d probably be close to going back to Air NZ anyway.

[ElZilcho]

What do you think the success of this air force blokes rule change will be? What's the feeling amongst the pilot group?

Not being a Lawyer I honestly cant say what their chance of success is. I understand it's predicated on the argument that re-employment in our contract is for "redundant" Pilots, so how can someone be made redundant from a job they never actually started. I don't believe they're challenging the T&R Pilots position in Seniority, merely their position in the pecking order for re-employment.

With such little work on at the moment, it's hard to gauge what the greater community feeling towards it is. Certainly mixed opinions from those I've spoken to about it, most of us are sympathetic to both parties recognizing the problem without a solution. Time will tell I suppose.

Unfortunately, Tag & Release has caused a lot of problems for those affected and I've got one cheek firmly planted on each side of the fence. Regional Pilots have been given a raw deal in recent years due to the simultaneous expansion of both Jet & Prop Fleets, but Air NZ have overcompensated by dumping a whole lot of them onto our Seniority list en-masse. To make matters worse, it's not only the RNZAF/External Pilots getting bitten by this, former Regional Pilots, even those who were on Tag & Release are facing the same problem as they can't go back.

Air NZ have told us they plan to be at least 30% smaller for the foreseeable future. 387 Redundancies is based on that longer term view, ~280 are active Jet Pilots the rest are Regional T&R (Last on First off means T&R Pilots need to come off the list to make those senior to them redundant). ALPA have told us Retirements are ~200 over the next 5 years. If Air NZ only re-hire to cover Retirements, that could be a long wait for our most Junior Colleagues. I can sympathise with their position that they should be 280 in-line to come back and not 387 although not sure I entirely agree with it.

[Mach E Avelli]

why would ‘local’ pilots have first preference over our kiwi brothers and sisters who have full working rights. Answer...they wouldn’t.
As Air NZ and Qantas (and hopefully Virgin) slowly recover, part of their strategy will have to be the "boning" of non-revenue producing departments.
It would be a very courageous HR Manager or CEO who allowed recruitment of pilots from across the ditch while several hundred qualified locals remained on the dole at home.
Trans Tasman agreements cut both ways, but neither side will risk too much taxpayer or government scrutiny while simultaneously seeking financial assistance.

[mangatete]

The majority if not all of the T&R pilots will stay in their current positions rather than jumping onto the bottom of a new seniority list when re hiring starts again in case something similar happens again, the pilots below the T&R pilots will therefore get back on the the jets before the T&R pilots.

[kangaroota]

The majority if not all of the T&R pilots will stay in their current positions rather than jumping onto the bottom of a new seniority list when re hiring starts again in case something similar happens again, the pilots below the T&R pilots will therefore get back on the the jets before the T&R pilots.
I very much doubt it. If and when your slot comes up, why would you wait any longer than you need to accept it.
It could be five years down the track.

[bad bear]

I like the idea one American carrier had. they offered the pilots over 62 roughly half pay till retirement date as a redundancy but they are not allowed to work, this means a junior pilot can be kept on and the cost is the same, except it saves massively on retraining costs.

[AerocatS2A]

I very much doubt it. If and when your slot comes up, why would you wait any longer than you need to accept it.
It could be five years down the track.
A large number of T&R pilots have already been on the jet seniority list for one and a half years or more without taking a position. I think a fair portion have no intention of taking one ever.

[Flash Blackman]

A large number of T&R pilots have already been on the jet seniority list for one and a half years or more without taking a position. I think a fair portion have no intention of taking one ever.

what are they waiting for?

[Slezy9]

what are they waiting for?

Straight to the left seat??

[AerocatS2A]

what are they waiting for?
Well, this is speculation only, I don’t know any of them, but the T&R pilots who have been on the jet list the longest will be the most senior on the regional list. So if they’ve been in the Links for a long time, why weren’t they already flying the jets? Either they don’t want to, or they’ve tried and failed the interview process back before T&R was introduced. Those who didn’t want to before, aren’t going to want to now or any time in the future. Those who previously failed the interview might be a bit gun shy about having a go at the jet seeing as they lose all of their rights to a Link job; if they fail the jet training they are out, no going back, at least not back to their Dash 8 or ATR command.

[AerocatS2A]

Straight to the left seat??
They’ll be waiting a long time now.

[ElZilcho]

T&R Pilots, unlike external hires, effectively get to choose between Long Haul SO (777 / 787) or A320 FO. The Company will offer them the first course that comes up (usually A320) and they were allowed to decline and wait for their preference. If however they turned down the second offer they were to be removed from the Jet Seniority list. Whilst not expressly written anywhere, they cannot sit in the Regionals and wait for the LHS of a Jet, nor would they meet the Requirements for a Command anyway.

Unfortunately, it's recently come to light that a few have been abusing the system with the help of their managers who were "incorrectly not applying the 2 offers rule". Along with "being unable to release certain Pilots".

Any Pilot sitting on T&R who has no intention of taking a Job should be removed. All they're doing is blocking their Junior Colleagues who actually do want it.

[Flash Blackman]

How would you feel if you rocked up to Air NZ and there were 100 spots reserved above you, yet you were told nothing about this? That's an easy 5 years of seniority that you lost because someone neglected to mention that to you.

Wait his turn? By that logic the most senior T&R pilot has been waiting 18 years to get into Air NZ? Now that is some Group Loyalty™

Perhaps he should get used to the fact that in history there have been a lot of changes. What one gets told before they sign up for a job and what happens after are two different things. Thats civil aviation life for you! Maybe he will stay in his new chopper job and give up his seniority spot to those unemployed pilots he was so worried about, now hes gainfully employed. From what I know about the group both the jet and regional fleets have been "shafted" from numerous changes after the fact.

My advice to him: Sorry princess, thats life :)

edit: this character is also wanting to change the terms of an agreement. That’s changing the landscape for those affected which could be put in the same basket as “no one told me this was going to happen”.

[MCDU2]

How would you feel if you rocked up to Air NZ and there were 100 spots reserved above you, yet you were told nothing about this? That's an easy 5 years of seniority that you lost because someone neglected to mention that to you.

Wait his turn? By that logic the most senior T&R pilot has been waiting 18 years to get into Air NZ? Now that is some Group Loyalty™

It's pretty standard in a unionised airline with seniority agreements. My European airline has the same. We also have the ability to avail of special leave at present. Any length of time will be considered by our employer. China is planning to rehire contract pilots in the next few months so I know some of my colleagues are seriously looking to avail of this. On their return they will slot back into the respective fleet/rank based on seniority as if they had stayed.

[ElZilcho]

I don't think it's exclusively a Seniority problem. There was a group of RNZAF Pilot who were told Tag & Release would not effect them... actually I believe all those interviewed during a certain window were told Tag & Release would be coming into effect on XYZ Date so anyone starting before that date would be ahead of them. Unfortunately that's not what happened.

[Lucifer786]

I personally know a pilot who’s been a colleague of mine for years now and who was categorically informed that Tag n Release would be coming into force post his interview process.
However we now sadly know that wasn’t true.

[KiwiAvi8er]

I personally know a pilot who’s been a colleague of mine for years now and who was categorically informed that Tag n Release would be coming into force post his interview process.
However we now sadly know that wasn’t true.

Does he have that in writing? I have no doubt that’s true, but that’s HR saying whatever it takes to get someone in the door. Once he joins, job done from their perspective.

I have friends who were on the hold-file for jets being told by HR “we should be able to get you on a ground course shortly” whilst internal emails sent to company staff stated that all jet recruiting would be from props for the foreseeable future. One hand not talking to the other.

[here_we_go_again]

I don't think it's exclusively a Seniority problem. There was a group of RNZAF Pilot who were told Tag & Release would not effect them... actually I believe all those interviewed during a certain window were told Tag & Release would be coming into effect on XYZ Date so anyone starting before that date would be ahead of them. Unfortunately that's not what happened.
That's not quite what HR told us. To quote from their email.

"The Career Pathways group understands that applicants to Air New Zealand would like to understand any potential impact on them. The group has confirmed that anyone who attends the Air New Zealand Jet Recruitment Assessment Centre in July, August and September 2018, is successful and accepts a position offered, will be added to the Jet Seniority List prior to the addition of the Regional Seniority List."

The bolding is mine.

As we know, the RSL DID NOT ever get added to the bottom of the Jet list. Sure, some link pilots did join under their programme but is that really that much of an issue? Are we actually suggesting that, for example, in the ol' Us of A, people get prissy because a class for 25 started half a month before them and "I didn't know about that" and "I'm lower down the list now and that's unfair."

Let's talk facts, not supposition.

[AerocatS2A]

Yeah, that's what I was told. I don't think I got an email though. I think some people might have misunderstood the message.

[AerocatS2A]

Are we actually suggesting that, for example, in the ol' Us of A, people get prissy because a class for 25 started half a month before them and "I didn't know about that" and "I'm lower down the list now and that's unfair."

Let's talk facts, not supposition.
There were a group who were on the published seniority list and then it was amended with a bunch of T&R names added above them. As the union says, the seniority list is sacrosanct, except when it's not.

[ka_pai]

The AirNZ jet seniority list IS date of joining!? The difference since the middle of 2018 is that if you’re an external hire - for every 3 of you the company hires they have to attach the same joining date to 7 regional pilots notionally on LWOP awaiting release from the links. This was to address the unfairness of being overlooked because they couldn’t be spared off of the link fleet. The trouble arises when you have a big group hired on the same start date, you arrange the list according to Pilot total time for that start date. So some guys have been with the jet fleet for nearly 2 years and still have 30 or 40 link pilots ahead of them on the seniority list who have never started. People who were involved in the pathways development warned the designers that the system was a pit of vipers in the case of mass redundancy on multiple occasions but they were ignored.
to be more specific it was the Fed guys that warned the company that Pathways was flawed and brought up the problem faced if there was mass downtraining. This fell on deaf ears. They were warned.

[Corkey McFuz]

I heard a whole lot of regional pilots have been made redundant also. Anyone able to share the details on that ?

[KiwiAvi8er]

I heard a whole lot of regional pilots have been made redundant also. Anyone able to share the details on that ?

100 is the initial number

[Flash Blackman]

100 is the initial number

pretty similar percentages to the jet guys... around 20%

[viatheairporthold]

Initially the company wanted 150 but it seems the union got it down to 100

[Flash Blackman]

Not really.
387/1213 = 32%
100/621 = 16%
I took the tag and release guys out of my calc to avoid counting twice.

[Flash Blackman]

Yea but why? They are air nz employees and are getting made redundant, getting a pay out etc.
Because those were the figures I was interested in. The chaps on the RSL arent getting any pay out. They are on LWOP from the jet fleet having never done any jet training so I dont count them in my calculations. Those guys stay with the regional fleet on commands so I have counted them in my regional numbers. Why would they get a redundancy pay out from the jet fleet and then remain employed on the regional fleet? Doesnt make sense and has also been clarified by the company as something that will not happen.

[ka_pai]

100 is the initial number
Of course there is the option to save 40 pilots jobs by doing what the jet fleet are voting on right now with a 14% pay reduction for 9 months. ALPA regional reps don’t want to support this, much to a lot of pilots disgust (especially those that could be saved). I heard the feds support this action and may vote on it anyway even though the arrogance of the ALPA reps said the feds will fall into line and follow their lead. Seems pretty clear who values pilots jobs and who doesn’t.

[Flash Blackman]

Because the union and company are putting an MOU together. It does not make sense to give a regional pilot a payout for a position they havent started and while they still work within the group, CA aside. thats one thing both the company and union have agreed on from what I'm told.

[Massey058]

Of course there is the option to save 40 pilots jobs by doing what the jet fleet are voting on right now with a 14% pay reduction for 9 months. ALPA regional reps don’t want to support this, much to a lot of pilots disgust (especially those that could be saved). I heard the feds support this action and may vote on it anyway even though the arrogance of the ALPA reps said the feds will fall into line and follow their lead. Seems pretty clear who values pilots jobs and who doesn’t.

I hadn't heard this and very keen to disucss. I can't understand why when people have genuine concerns they don't use the multitude of forums that aren't public and available to us.

The last update mentioned at the end they continue to work on useful options. But in the meantime if people are concerned why not flag some issues up for discussion in a more secure environment?

[Flash Blackman]

100 is not the initial number, we were given false information. It was 155 pilots as per yesterday’s live stream video
what live stream was that?

[KiwiAvi8er]

Of course there is the option to save 40 pilots jobs by doing what the jet fleet are voting on right now with a 14% pay reduction for 9 months. ALPA regional reps don’t want to support this, much to a lot of pilots disgust (especially those that could be saved). I heard the feds support this action and may vote on it anyway even though the arrogance of the ALPA reps said the feds will fall into line and follow their lead. Seems pretty clear who values pilots jobs and who doesn’t.

The feds. Didn’t they vote to give themselves a 25% pay cut about a week in to this and once they saw all the work ALPA did to save jobs, with the 14% reduction on a flexi scheme, thought that looks good we’ll take that.

The issue I see is these surplus numbers are for April next year. 100 pilot excess. Let’s say everyone does a flexi scheme and shaves 14% off for 9 months. We get to April and the model is bang on, still 40 pilots in excess (if that’s how many jobs are saved) then how long does the group sacrifice the conditions? Realistically there are going to multiple waves of job cuts here.

[go123]

what live stream was that?

Yesterday we had a livestream with the company. I thought everyone was invited but found out later it was only for the 100 affected. We were told during it that the number will 100 minus a few with VE and the union has chosen not to save 40 jobs by taking a 14% FFA

[KiwiAvi8er]

what live stream was that?

So 155 jobs are being cut? Or 155 were proposed to be cut and now its down to 100?

[go123]

So 155 jobs are being cut? Or 155 were proposed to be cut and now its down to 100?

It’s now at 100. But could go to 60 if we take the 14% flexi

[ElZilcho]

Thanks for clearing up the Seniority issue here_we_go_again, as always the gossip train can distort the truth. I was unaware anything was put in writing such as the email you mentioned. The few guys I've spoken to about it who were effected simply said they were told no Regional Pilots will be added ahead of them if they started before a certain date. But again, what was said vs what was heard I guess we can only speculate. Some new hires did have their Seniority numbers revoked and re-issued below T&R Pilots however.

Anyway, if the Regional ALPA reps aren't willing to make any changes that could save jobs then that's disgusting. But, to separate fact from fiction, the Jet Pilots are not saving Jobs directly due to the proposed 14% Paycut, there's more to it than that and a lot wont apply to the Regionals so cannot be copy pasted for the same effect.

Jet Pilots earn their base pay for 60 hrs flying per roster. Above 60 hours we get IP (incentive pay) per flying hour. Some view it as overtime, but really, it's productivity pay. Our schedules can be very seasonal so when we get flogged we get paid for it. 777 Pilots were flying 85-90+ hour rosters covering for the 787 in recent year.
Average IP across all Fleet/Ranks was calculated at 15%, Obviously, no one's doing 60+ hrs anytime soon, so 15% IP + 14% Paycut + delaying the annual pay increase (roughly 2%), the total reduction in Jet Salaries is ~31% (more for 777 Pilots less for Airbus Pilots, but that's the nature of IP).
This aligns with the Exec 15% Paycut, as they also wont be getting bonuses etc, so told us it works out to be a 30% cut for them also.

By agreeing to the Package (which includes the 14% Paycut among other things) the company have agreed to calculate Redundancies on 60 hr Rosters and not the "optimum" which is ~75 hrs. This is what will save Jobs.

Unfortunately, I don't believe the Regionals have IP? And, similar to the A320 fleet, it's incredibly difficult to fly massive hours on domestic where your turn-arounds can be longer then the actual flight. Most of the Jet IP comes from International Flying, especially Long Haul.

I do hope the Regionals can come up with solutions to keep their Junior Colleagues employed, but due to the contractual differences between Jet & Regional, they each demand a unique solution.

[go123]

Why does it not makes sense? Those pilots are on LWOP and employed by Air New Zealand? Or so everyone says.
What difference does it make if they are on LWOP flying for Link or an airline in the US, or doing something outside aviation altogether. Why is NZALPA changing the CEA to exclude them from getting a payout that they deserve.

Fair point

[go123]

Why does it not makes sense? Those pilots are on LWOP and employed by Air New Zealand? Or so everyone says.
What difference does it make if they are on LWOP flying for Link or an airline in the US, or doing something outside aviation altogether. Why is NZALPA changing the CEA to exclude them from getting a payout that they deserve.

I guess they’ve been missing out on a higher salary by staying at the regionals

[ElZilcho]

I guess they’ve been missing out on a higher salary by staying at the regionals

The flip side is they're also missing out on zero salary by staying at Regionals.

Tag & Release is a mess, and unfortunately, I feel the ego's of some of the "masterminds" behind it are getting in the way of a resolution. Because to solve a problem, you're admitting the problem exists in the first place....

As dctPub has already said, if the Tag & Release Pilots are indeed the same as any other Jet Pilot on LWOP then they should be paid Redundancy. Any other Jet Pilot on LWOP would be paid it regardless of their employment status so why are T&R Pilots any different?
If however, they are not the same as a Jet Pilot on LWOP and thus not entitled to the Redundancy Payout, then they were not made redundant and should not have preferential right to re-employment over current Jet Pilots.

I'd say a certain Air NZ exec who was pushing for this is quietly crapping his pants at how much his wet dream might end up costing the company if they're forced to pay Redundancy to 108 Pilots they aren't actually making Redundant. Which is exactly what will happen (according to the CEA) if the Ratification Ballot fails. (The amendment to Redundancy pay for T&R Pilots is part of the package out for ratification. We cannot pick and choose which clauses we want and which we don't).

I don't know about that. I would have thought the highest pay step in the Links is more than years 1-4 in Air NZ. Maybe that's why some haven't come across sooner? Take a pay cut to come live in one of the most expensive cities in the world?

Yes and no. Lots of variables. ATR Command base I believe is higher than SO, lower then F20 (year 4) but I don't think they get IP.

[go123]

I don't know about that. I would have thought the highest pay step in the Links is more than years 1-4 in Air NZ. Maybe that's why some haven't come across sooner? Take a pay cut to come live in one of the most expensive cities in the world?

Yeah that’s true

[AerocatS2A]

Yea but why? They are air nz employees and are getting made redundant, getting a pay out etc.
No, they’re not.

[ka_pai]

The feds. Didn’t they vote to give themselves a 25% pay cut about a week in to this and once they saw all the work ALPA did to save jobs, with the 14% reduction on a flexi scheme, thought that looks good we’ll take that.

The issue I see is these surplus numbers are for April next year. 100 pilot excess. Let’s say everyone does a flexi scheme and shaves 14% off for 9 months. We get to April and the model is bang on, still 40 pilots in excess (if that’s how many jobs are saved) then how long does the group sacrifice the conditions? Realistically there are going to multiple waves of job cuts here.
Some misinformation there.... The Feds voted for a mandate to allow up to a maximum of 25% reduction which at the time was in line with the FFA that was available. What it did was remove the need for individual EOI’s for the FFA and instead provide a bulk order. ALPA wanted to stick to the CEA and rightly so as a vote to match would never have got past the top 400 pilots. So the EOI went out and had a favourable enough response that it looked possible a ratification of a flexi deal could work. The Feds worked on their own version of an FFA but with less complications and easier to implement. The end results were the same but for ease of application the AFFA was decided best across the board. The suggestion that the feds decided to jump on the bandwagon and take it is incorrect. There was good cooperation between unions developing this however the furlough section was definitely ALPA driven. And let’s be clear, the Feds had already produced the bulk of their proposal and issued several member updates while ALPA were still floundering and the silence was deafening.
The 25% vote by the Feds showed unity to want to save jobs and to start the momentum towards a pilot wide solution. The exec had not expected that and were not prepared for such a show of support. They were straight into thinking about following the CEA. Once this train started ALPA had to get on board. Imagine the backlash if your union leaders had the chance to try and save your job and said, sorry we will just to stick to the CEA and lose some pilots as our jobs are safe and we don’t need a pay cut thanks. A little simplistic I know but this move was not political, it was moralistic. It was to save jobs of colleagues, real people with families, mortgages etc, which is awesome. The days of us and them should be long gone. Maybe not yet but they will be. I’m certainly not trying to start any union debate here and the unions have worked together probably better than ever on this one it would seem. There are awesome younger guys in both camps that can lead the way forward and leave the past where it is. I do however feel the need to give credit where credit is due and don’t like to see the negative attitudes and misinformed throwaway comments that we see so often.

[kangaroota]

How recently was the last Link pilot moved to the jets? Is there any way they can move back to the Link operation?

[AerocatS2A]

How recently was the last Link pilot moved to the jets? Is there any way they can move back to the Link operation?
March this year and no, not unless they get hired back as a new start at the bottom of the list.

[ElZilcho]

I've been with ALPA for over 15 years through various jobs and have no plans of changing that, however, someone made a comment in one of the Livestreams that I cannot fault:

"If this doesn't ratify the Feds might find themselves with another 400+ members once this is over" (Or words to that effect).

I'm expecting the agreement before us will ratify. Despite the protesting of a vocal minority I believe they are just that, a minority. However, if it doesn't ratify, it has the potential to tear ALPA apart.

Certain ALPA Pilots need to accept many of our Junior Colleagues were barely out of nappies in 1990 when the 747 dispute gave birth to the Federation... while some of the original signers are still with us, for the most part, it's ancient history. Focus on what ALPA stands for today instead of bitching about what the Feds did yesterday.

[747-419]

I've been with ALPA for over 15 years through various jobs and have no plans of changing that, however, someone made a comment in one of the Livestreams that I cannot fault:

"If this doesn't ratify the Feds might find themselves with another 400+ members once this is over" (Or words to that effect).

I'm expecting the agreement before us will ratify. Despite the protesting of a vocal minority I believe they are just that, a minority. However, if it doesn't ratify, it has the potential to tear ALPA apart.

Certain ALPA Pilots need to accept many of our Junior Colleagues were barely out of nappies in 1990 when the 747 dispute gave birth to the Federation... while some of the original signers are still with us, for the most part, it's ancient history. Focus on what ALPA stands for today instead of bitching about what the Feds did yesterday.

Don't tell me the Feds will have another name change!!.

In 1989 along with about 170 other pilots we formed the Air New Zealand Pilots Society. We felt alpa wasn't looking after the interests of ANZ pilots.
A few years later another bunch of pilots were disenchanted with alpa and decided to leave but couldn't bring themselves to join ANZPS because of the stigma attached so were going to form their own group. Discussions took place and FANZP was formed and both groups united.
If there is a possibility of another 400 pilots joining it is inevitable a name change will occur so as to avoid any sigma from the past.

Right from inception this group have been proactive at it is pleasing to see in this thread that they still are.

Good luck and hope the Feds are able to save some of their members livelihoods as they have shown they can conduct constructive meaningful negotiations.

[InZed]

I have been a NZALPA member since I joined the airline industry. But the way that the union and CM has dealt with this has been terrible. FANZP have stood out to not just myself, but all of my colleagues I have spoken with, due to their continued communications and openness to doing a deal for the WHOLE pilot group. Redundancy packages for the most senior pilots would have been a bloody great start, and has worked well in the USA saving junior pilots jobs.

I hear that there was a large email chain going around with around 150 ALPA pilots on it last week, and I heard that the Regional pilots have a similar thread. There is a LARGE number (hundreds) of pilots that are not happy with the way that ALPA have handled this. And an even larger number of people that don't like the leadership of CM.

I will be a Fed this time next week if the NZALPA Ballot gets voted down. But even then, I might be a Fed by then anyway. Save my money on fees and belong to a union that seems to actually care about their members. The days of the Feds being called Scabs are long gone (30 years ago)!

[oldm8ey]

How do I get in on said email chain?

[ElZilcho]

CM appears too proud to admit how much of a **** up T&R has become... he was very quick to shut it down on the Livestreams.

If the Federation did indeed warn ALPA & the Company about T&R in a Redundancy situation then that will be even harder for him and JW to admit their failures. I have heard there is work going on in that area at the moment however. I'm not planning to leave ALPA for the same reason I didn't leave NZ when we let Winnie elect the Coalition of losers. I don't expect CM to to retain his position at the next election simply due to his attitude towards members.

As it stands today, we have 108 T&R Pilots voting on the agreement.

Furlough allows you to retain your years of service - not applicable for T&R as they still have a Regional Job and will retain Service that way.
Furlough allows you to retain your employment contract - not applicable for T&R as they still have a Regional Job.
Furlough freezes your pay steps for you return - T&R Pilots mostly joined the Jet list from late 2018 so would gain very little here.
Redundancy is based on your "Group Service" - Most T&R Pilots have 8+ years service, some 10-15+ so would be entitled to a healthy redundancy payment.
Redundancy still preserves your Seniority number for 10 years - So a T&R Pilot loses nothing, they effectively remain T&R while retaining their Regional Commands
Redundancy in the proposed CEA Varion will exclude T&R Pilots from a payment - Suggesting they're currently entitled to one under the existing CEA.

So, remind me why any of those 108 Pilots will vote Yes to this agreement? Furlough and Redundancy are effectively no different for a T&R Pilot under the proposed agreement, yet the existing CEA entitles them to a Redundancy Payment for a Job they never started. Anecdotally I've heard many T&R Pilots are not planning on taking a Jet Position anyway, so why on earth would they vote themselves out of a Redundancy Payment?

Again, this is a mess. I hope Forans paying attention and looking at the Muppets who didn't filter this through the Lawyers before actioning it. The Company could be facing Millions in Redundancy Payments to Pilots who aren't actually Redundant - according to CM they're all the same as Jet Pilots on LWOP and have the exact same entitlements...

[InZed]

How do I get in on said email chain?

Post your email here and someone might send it to you.


I'm not planning to leave ALPA for the same reason I didn't leave NZ when we let Winnie elect the Coalition of losers. I don't expect CM to to retain his position at the next election simply due to his attitude towards members.

Are you saying that the ongoing issues found within ALPA are solely due to CM? I have no issue with his minions on the council. It is not a good leader when EVERY SINGLE PILOT you speak to has at least one example of them being yelled at down the phone by him. He is a dicktator, and not a leader. And the fact that he will be getting a PAY RISE from his own down training (C7-14% vs. C8) is awfully convenient. All my group of friends are of the opinion that the Council, under the CM dicktatorship, has resulted in a situations not benefiting the general pilot group, but more protecting the top 10%.

The other **** up is with the pathways; all those prop pilots at the bottom of the jet list are staying on full pay on the left seat on a turboprop. And their new contract means that even if they are down trained into the right seat, they remain on full pay! And they are all looking at getting their jobs back ahead of some experienced jet pilots at the bottom of the list, with nothing else to fall back on.

Pathways is and always will be a complete failure. They need to get rid of it. Especially now: there is NO pilot shortage (so no need for pathways anymore), and there is HUNDREDS of redundant (experienced) jet pilots (check and training captains presumably too) from VA NZ sitting around. I am sure in a few years there will be a majority of them that won't find flying work, and will happily jump onto the bottom of the jet list! Better to hire them than some regional pilot that has failed jet interviews, failed jet type ratings and have no jet/international experience.

[ElZilcho]

Are you saying that the ongoing issues found within ALPA are solely due to CM? I have no issue with his minions on the council. It is not a good leader when EVERY SINGLE PILOT you speak to has at least one example of them being yelled at down the phone by him. He is a dicktator, and not a leader. And the fact that he will be getting a PAY RISE from his own down training (C7-14% vs. C8) is awfully convenient. All my group of friends are of the opinion that the Council, under the CM dicktatorship, has resulted in a situations not benefiting the general pilot group, but more protecting the top 10%.

The other **** up is with the pathways; all those prop pilots at the bottom of the jet list are staying on full pay on the left seat on a turboprop. And their new contract means that even if they are down trained into the right seat, they remain on full pay! And they are all looking at getting their jobs back ahead of some experienced jet pilots at the bottom of the list, with nothing else to fall back on.

Pathways is and always will be a complete failure. They need to get rid of it. Especially now: there is NO pilot shortage (so no need for pathways anymore), and there is HUNDREDS of redundant (experienced) jet pilots (check and training captains presumably too) from VA NZ sitting around. I am sure in a few years there will be a majority of them that won't find flying work, and will happily jump onto the bottom of the jet list! Better to hire them than some regional pilot that has failed jet interviews, failed jet type ratings and have no jet/international experience.

Agree with everything you've said except for what I've bolded. There is nothing in this agreement for the top 10%.

Outside of a few mail runs and charters, the 777 is effectively grounded and, based a on a few leaked documents floating around, will only have ~20 Pilots in each seat post COVID. It's a safe bet to say the 772's will be getting an early exit. Doesn't matter if we ratify this agreement or not, downtraining is coming for the majority of 777 Pilots which will cascade all the way down the list.

I'd say the Council was well aware that we have a large number of Pilots, well protected by Seniority, who would of voted no to this agreement without blinking if they were faced with the 14% pay-cut along with down-training and no IP. By having that exemption, they're effectively asking those Pilots to take a 14% Cut while they sit at home waiting for their 787/A320 Course.

As AM (or maybe JH) said in the Zoom meeting, they could of presented a 50% AFFA document in an attempt to save everyone's job... but would it of ratified? Think we all know the answer to that one.

ALPA has always had a problem with certain Ego's getting their heads in the door, but they don't usually last. If the Federation grow larger to be comparable with ALPA, they'll eventually have the same problem. However, in terms of the actual agreement, I strongly suspect it is what is it because they had to present something they thought would ratify.

CM is just one person. If this fails, it's not a problem with the ALPA Council, it's a problem with the membership. Honestly, some of the questions the Council have had to answer make me question how some of our members can hold an ATPL when they clearly can't read...

[Out there]

Honestly, some of the questions the Council have had to answer make me question how some of our members can hold an ATPL when they clearly can't read...[/QUOTE]

couldn’t agree more. Nearly spat my wine out laughing.

[27/09]

Whatever happened to to the big push towards Collaborative Decision Making that was was all the rage about 5 years ago. ALPA, Feds, and the company all around the table together sorting things out. Apparently it worked very well for another event that occurred in 2016, or so I was told.

[InZed]

Whatever happened to to the big push towards Collaborative Decision Making that was was all the rage about 5 years ago. ALPA, Feds, and the company all around the table together sorting things out. Apparently it worked very well for another event that occurred in 2016, or so I was told.

Do you mean HPE? That is still the industry standard for all meetings, where each party put all of their cards, and end goals on the table. No hidden agendas and they all work together to get towards everyone’s goals.

[kiwipilot1]

An email came through from the Regional Council yesterday and they are looking to implement a CA change for furlough and FFA just like the jets are voting on now, they just need more time to discuss the finer points. Seems like a bit of mis-information being biffed around here at times.

[27/09]

Do you mean HPE? That is still the industry standard for all meetings, where each party put all of their cards, and end goals on the table. No hidden agendas and they all work together to get towards everyone’s goals.
Yep, that sounds like it. Is it happening?

[ElZilcho]

ALPA, the Federation and the Company have been working together yes.

[ka_pai]

An email came through from the Regional Council yesterday and they are looking to implement a CA change for furlough and FFA just like the jets are voting on now, they just need more time to discuss the finer points. Seems like a bit of mis-information being biffed around here at times.
Their hand was forced by the Feds and probably had a smack in the hand from the top too to change their stance. No misinformation.

[Flash Blackman]

An email came through from the Regional Council yesterday and they are looking to implement a CA change for furlough and FFA just like the jets are voting on now, they just need more time to discuss the finer points. Seems like a bit of mis-information being biffed around here at times.

heard it also mentioned they can’t downgrade anyone!!

[KiwiAvi8er]

heard it also mentioned they can’t downgrade anyone!!

They can downgrade a Capt to an FO. You just remain on a Capt salary.

[InZed]

An email came through from the Regional Council yesterday and they are looking to implement a CA change for furlough and FFA just like the jets are voting on now, they just need more time to discuss the finer points. Seems like a bit of mis-information being biffed around here at times.

No misinformation at all. Regional ALPA council weren’t interested in AFFA or Furlough, and said so during their most recent livestream. But Feds said they were going to do it and could save “40 jobs”.

The uprising with over 100 regional pilots wrote a letter to their ALPA council and encouraged them to look into it.

They are now looking at it.

[Flash Blackman]

This idea of down training is wildly naive. 600 pilots changing seat/type within 12 months? Someone please tell me how that will happen. Literally, how does that sim plan work? How does the line training occur? It just doesn’t.

We are looking at a complete restructure of the company, or at best an offer of something like a 50% or more pay cut to stay in our current roles and save the training cost.

I’m sure plenty will scoff at this. Will anyone be able to give a realistic explanation of down training working?

just get pilot instructors to fly with line captains as FOs. Problem solved.

[ElZilcho]

Within reason, I'll vote in favor of almost any temporary concessions to our CEA to avoid permanent concessions as the result of a legal challenge... the result of the AFFA vote was encouraging. It shows we are prepared to work with the Company to get through this. Yes there's more the come, but it might not be in the form of more redundancies.

200 Redundancies is around ~$25-$30M saved in Wages, give or take based on Fleet/Seniority. 14% AFFA across all Pilots is ~$25-$30M saved.
We have the option to extend the AFFA beyond 9 rosters via another Ballot. If that vote failed because the company chopped another 200 Pilots, the effective savings could be zero (give or take).
I'd say, before there's another Redundancy round, we'll be asked to take a larger cut. Or, quite possibly, there'll be calls for certain fleets to take a larger cut with little to no flying.

I cannot see a large scale down-training scenario where almost all Airbus Pilots get displaced by those off the Widebodies. It would probably take 2 years to facilitate and by then we might be bouncing back requiring everyone to get up-trained back to where they where.
Again, I reckon phase 2 will be asking for more pay concessions minimizing seat changes.

[kev2002]

Simple solution is the company leaves everyone where they are, pay them 25% (or more) less and wait for retirements and a recovery to take care of the rest. Probably take 3-4 years. The sooner pilots come to terms with the fact that a 9 month band aid won’t fix this, the better.

[Ollie Onion]

So how many redundancies are the company proposing, it was 387, is it now 200 or is that 200 not including the LWOP pilots? Seems to be a positive result for the 14% concession.

[myturn]

I got smashed earlier for suggesting that the airline may ultimately end up being 30% of its current size and that the redundancy expectations might be a little optimistic. Right or wrong I stand by that and frankly it may be coming to fruition given the actual reality of the situation (as much as we all like to ignore that). But Im just wondering could the company take the opportunity to place itself in voluntary liquidation and simply set aside existing creditors and more importantly unfavourable union agreements etc? Genuine question and I dont know the answer, Lets face it there is more at stake here than just the pilots who will ultimately become one of the the biggest cost going forward if this doesn't get this sorted.

[RevMan2]

There's also NPV to consider - redundancies come with cashouts and a period of notice. Voluntary salary reductions kick in immediately and have a direct positive and ongoing impact on cash flow.

[73qanda]

Location: Dunnunda
Posts: 73
Simple solution is the company leaves everyone where they are, pay them 25% (or more) less and wait for retirements and a recovery to take care of the rest.
Hasn’t Qantas basically done that? Put most of its workforce on LWOP indefinitely? It seems like a sensible way to avoid redundancies. Imagine the $ they are saving. Even if Air NZ pilots all went a 30% pay reduction surely that’s better than redundancies and the cost of shifting everyone around?

[oldm8ey]

Hasn’t Qantas basically done that? Put most of its workforce on LWOP indefinitely? It seems like a sensible way to avoid redundancies. Imagine the $ they are saving. Even if Air NZ pilots all went a 30% pay reduction surely that’s better than redundancies and the cost of shifting everyone around?
Yep. AU laws are different. I'm sure GF is looking enviously across the ditch. I've heard there are A380 captains on the checkout at woolies.

[BOOMERwatch]

I got smashed earlier for suggesting that the airline may ultimately end up being 30% of its current size and that the redundancy expectations might be a little optimistic. Right or wrong I stand by that and frankly it may be coming to fruition given the actual reality of the situation (as much as we all like to ignore that). But Im just wondering could the company take the opportunity to place itself in voluntary liquidation and simply set aside existing creditors and more importantly unfavourable union agreements etc? Genuine question and I dont know the answer, Lets face it there is more at stake here than just the pilots who will ultimately become one of the the biggest cost going forward if this doesn't get this sorted.

A scary but very real possibility. Nothing will be off the table in this massive cash burn mess.

[ElZilcho]

I got smashed earlier for suggesting that the airline may ultimately end up being 30% of its current size and that the redundancy expectations might be a little optimistic. Right or wrong I stand by that and frankly it may be coming to fruition given the actual reality of the situation (as much as we all like to ignore that). But Im just wondering could the company take the opportunity to place itself in voluntary liquidation and simply set aside existing creditors and more importantly unfavourable union agreements etc? Genuine question and I dont know the answer, Lets face it there is more at stake here than just the pilots who will ultimately become one of the the biggest cost going forward if this doesn't get this sorted.

Well that's the thing, the only way I can see Air NZ becoming 30% size is if we do go into liquidation... but if that happens we'll become an SOE and I'm sure the Government will want to be larger than 30% for international freight (the borders will open eventually).

Don't get me wrong, this could end up snowballing, but if it does, I can't see anyone being able to put the brakes on at 30%, we'll be in terminal freefall if things get that bad (which they could). Staff are easily gotten rid of (sadly), but the Aircraft and infrastructure required to operate at our pre-COVID Capacity cannot be so easily disposed of in the current climate. Half of the 777's we own and are currently worth nothing... couldn't give them away. The others are leased which will require maintenance for the exit lease conditions.

My crystal ball says, we'll either be ~70% of the size in the post COVID recovery (the current plan) or we won't exist.... Air New Zealand 2.0 will be an SOE after the fire sale and burning of contracts. Neither option is ideal.

[InZed]

So how many redundancies are the company proposing, it was 387, is it now 200 or is that 200 not including the LWOP pilots? Seems to be a positive result for the 14% concession.

The numbers are being confirmed today since the ballot ratified last night. But it is as follows:

387 total number from jet list to go
108 are propeller pilots (tag and release) on LWOP
= 279 jet pilots to go

74 jobs are supposedly being saved by the ballot ratification (and everyone taking a 14% pay cut)
= 205 jet pilots to go

Jet Seniority List
Considering the jet list currently has 1209 pilots.
Pilot to go = 205 (jet pilots) + 108 (prop pilots on LWOP) = 313
So the new seniority list will have just 896 pilots on it remaining.

[kangaroota]

The numbers are being confirmed today since the ballot ratified last night. But it is as follows:

387 total number from jet list to go
108 are propeller pilots (tag and release) on LWOP
= 279 jet pilots to go

74 jobs are supposedly being saved by the ballot ratification (and everyone taking a 14% pay cut)
= 205 jet pilots to go

Jet Seniority List
Considering the jet list currently has 1209 pilots.
Pilot to go = 205 (jet pilots) + 108 (prop pilots on LWOP) = 313
So the new seniority list will have just 896 pilots on it remaining.
I'm not privy to pay scales but maybe someone can answer this question. If a 14% pay cut across the board saves 74 jobs, what sort of pay cut would be required to save 279 jobs?

[73qanda]

AU laws are different. I'm sure GF is looking enviously across the ditch. I've heard there are A380 captains on the checkout at woolies.
Thanks for the info.
So the pilot group can not legally ratify an amendment allowing for all pilots to remain on 60% salary under NZ law? That is a real shame.

[ElZilcho]

I'm not privy to pay scales but maybe someone can answer this question. If a 14% pay cut across the board saves 74 jobs, what sort of pay cut would be required to save 279 jobs?

It doesn't work that way.

14% is simply one part of the package. In that package, the company has agreed to base Pilot numbers on 60 hour rosters and not the optimum of ~75 hours. It's that reduction in efficiency which has saved 74 Jobs.
I gave a more detailed account of this in a previous post, but as per the CEA, the Redundancy trigger is less than 60 hours average for 3 rosters or more (predicted or actual). There is no re-hire trigger in the CEA. The company is free to fly everyone at 90 hour rosters if they wish without re-hiring anyone back.

Clearly, the 387 is not based on today's schedule, but what they envisage in the long term. At which point, we'll no longer be on 86% Pay.
We could of taken a 25% cut but the result would be the same unless we modified the contract even more. The more Pilots the company carry, the lower the average hours, and if they're below 60, that's the redundancy trigger.

Now, the Company have also said those willing to take a 50% Cut can save Job on a 2:1 basis or 1:1 if they take LWOP. These options must be taken up for a minimum of 12 months however to save jobs.
With ratification of the AFFA the company have agreed to 896 "Full-time Pilots" (ignoring the ~40 or so 65+ guys on LWOP). By taking LWOP or 50%, we can increase the number of Pilots while keeping the FTE number the same. We find out today how many have offered to take those options.

[InZed]

Thanks for the info.
So the pilot group can not legally ratify an amendment allowing for all pilots to remain on 60% salary under NZ law? That is a real shame.

What's even worse is that the smaller Air NZ union (FANZP aka 'Feds') have under their contract's redundancies clauses, that there is the ability to negotiate redundancy packages. But NZALPA does not, and being the conservative option, the Company elected to apply that clause across the entire pilot group.

Which is a real shame, because with almost 50 senior jet pilots (approx. half being 777) having put their hand up for a voluntary redundancy package, the Company and unions had a bloody great opportunity to put their heads together and work out a semi-decent option for the company to get rid of some of the guys and girls off the top of the list, that they don't need right now. American Airlines as an example, offered anyone 62yo+ the ability to reduce to 60% pay, and retire immediately.

One of multiple sources online about the AA deal:
https://onemileatatime.com/american-airlines-offer-to-pilots/

This would solve the unprecedented down training issues that the Company now has to tackle. And it WILL NOT BE pretty. I imagine they will be trying to keep pilots 'on fleet' to reduce cross training costs. So a C20, could be eligible for F7 but will instead be forced into F20, and given bypass pay. Much like some F7s that will be down trained into S8 but entitled to C20... So they will effectively get a pay rise to be a SO...

The seats and pay scales are going to be a mess! Happy to be proven wrong on this one... But I have heard from a Senior Fleet Manager before this started and said that "if we end up in a redundancies, it is going to turn into a complete and utter mess"... So even management know it. And what's more, I do not see this saving the Company as much money as they think with the amount of bypass pay that is going to be occuring.

[27/09]

Thanks for the info.
So the pilot group can not legally ratify an amendment allowing for all pilots to remain on 60% salary under NZ law? That is a real shame.

I might be wrong but I think the looking across the ditch comment was more about the LWOP option, so far as I'm aware that cannot be arbitrarily applied by a company over here.

I'm sure the pilots would be allowed to have a vote on taking 60% of their current salary. So far as i know there's nothing stopping that, in fact they could also have a vote on taking LWOP.

[27/09]

What's even worse is that the smaller Air NZ union (FANZP aka 'Feds') have under their contract's redundancies clauses, that there is the ability to negotiate redundancy packages. But NZALPA does not, and being the conservative option, the Company elected to apply that clause across the entire pilot group.

Which is a real shame, because with almost 50 senior jet pilots (approx. half being 777) having put their hand up for a voluntary redundancy package, the Company and unions had a bloody great opportunity to put their heads together and work out a semi-decent option for the company to get rid of some of the guys and girls off the top of the list, that they don't need right now.

You have to wonder why the company elected to take the conservative route rather than try and get agreement to negotiate redundancy packages, especially in these times of HPE and all. Another agenda perhaps?

[ElZilcho]

I might be wrong but I think the looking across the ditch comment was more about the LWOP option, so far as I'm aware that cannot be arbitrarily applied by a company over here.

I'm sure the pilots would be allowed to have a vote on taking 60% of their current salary. So far as i know there's nothing stopping that, in fact they could also have a vote on taking LWOP.

We could vote on a 90% Pay Cut... of course it likely wouldn't pass, but we can vote on it!
What the company cannot do is force it on us, or forcefully stand us down.

I cannot understand why the Severance was turned down, and Forans explanation made zero sense. The company have stated anyone whose severance is greater than 20 weeks would have it paid fortnightly. Those 40+ 777 Captains could either be sitting at home getting their severance paid fortnightly and be off the payroll in 6-12 months, or sitting at home doing nothing, also getting paid fortnightly (-14%), but remaining on the payroll until retirement and subject to down-training + super + licence/medical costs etc
The package offered by the Company was woefully inadequate.

As InZed said, massive down-training will be a nightmare. Especially because everyone to be down-trained is required to be offered both a Longual and Short Haul position. It's only the most Junior Pilots who wont get a choice and be directed to whats left. So there is definitely potential for a lot of Pilots to be on bypass pay so the company can keep them on a Boeing (or Airbus) for minimal training. SIM training is easy, it's the line-training with minimal flying that will cause the problems. The number of sectors required for a seat change on your current fleet is minimal compared to swapping types... especially between Boeing and Airbus.

Pilot costs, especially after the loss of IP, Allowances, Hotels, Crew Transport, Redundancies and the 14% cut are such a small component of the total bill, I suspect their attention will be turned to offloading assets such as property (as they've already mentioned) before they come after us again. I could be wrong, but we could all work for free and it wouldn't really make a difference.

[73qanda]

I'm sure the pilots would be allowed to have a vote on taking 60% of their current salary. So far as i know there's nothing stopping that, in fact they could also have a vote on taking LWOP.
Well....If I was at Air NZ ( I’m not) I would be leaning heavily on my Union reps to put forward an amendment to the contract whereby every pilot stays in their same seat but goes onto 50% pay until 1st October where it is reverts to the current situation pending review ( ie if flying is picking up it could be raised to 70% pay for 3 months.)
The reason I’d want that even if I was senior is for the longevity and health of the company and the 205 about to lose their jobs.

[ElZilcho]

Well....If I was at Air NZ ( I’m not) I would be leaning heavily on my Union reps to put forward an amendment to the contract whereby every pilot stays in their same seat but goes onto 50% pay until 1st October where it is reverts to the current situation pending review ( ie if flying is picking up it could be raised to 70% pay for 3 months.)
The reason I’d want that even if I was senior is for the longevity and health of the company and the 205 about to lose their jobs.

They actually used that as an "extreme" example in one of the Zoom meetings. Basically saying it might of worked but it would of never ratified... they did say however, it does nothing to address the surplus when we all come off the 50%. Even the most optimistic projections have us being a smaller Airline for years to come.

Seniority, while I'd never have it any other way, certainly has it's faults. If everyone's job was equally on the line I'd say it's fair to say a lot more would be willing to accept 50%.
Of course, everyone job might be on the line if the Airline were to not survive, so it's possible a 50% vote might pass as more Pilots realise how much skin they have in the game.

[73qanda]

I could be wrong, but we could all work for free and it wouldn't really make a difference.
I think you might be wrong but I don’t know for sure. Staff costs p/a will be only a bit less than fuel bill if Air NZ is anything like my last Airline. (Annual report will tell you.)
A big part of everyone taking a greater % cut is that it impacts greatly on the lives of the 205 and their sons and daughters and husbands and wives.
The other big incentive is to save your company the massive headache and cost of everyone swapping seats and the risk to the company ( jobs) that brings.
Is it too late for you guys to organise a variation like this?

[ElZilcho]

I think you might be wrong but I don’t know for sure. Staff costs p/a will be only a bit less than fuel bill if Air NZ is anything like my last Airline. (Annual report will tell you.)
A big part of everyone taking a greater % cut is that it impacts greatly on the lives of the 205 and their sons and daughters and husbands and wives.
The other big incentive is to save your company the massive headache and cost of everyone swapping seats and the risk to the company ( jobs) that brings.
Is it too late for you guys to organise a variation like this?

The company have told us beyond the the 14% cut, those who agree voluntarily to 12+ months LWOP or 50% Pay will reduce the number of compulsory redundancies. We'll find out today how many have applied.
My comment about working for free was more in relation to after the "first wave" which is being finalized as we speak. If the Company is still bleeding cash, taking another cut from the Pilots (or staff in general) will have minimal impact. There are larger infasctruce cuts that will need to be explored.
The Annual wage bill is (was) ~$1.3B of the total ~$4.6B Operating expense, fuel was also ~$1.3B. Jet Pilot wages accounted for approx. $230M of the total. Fuel is obviously down right now, and wages should be ~30% less after Redundancies. The next fous will need to be on the other $2.0B of expenses before taking another cut from the staff.... I would expect.

https://p-airnz.com/cms/assets/PDFs/airnz-2019-financial-results.pdf

https://indd.adobe.com/view/39f87018-039a-44d5-8893-fa2201033a84