Qantas terminates long haul cabin crew agreement, demands more flexibility

[unobtanium]

https://www.reuters.com/article/qantas-unions/qantas-raises-stakes-in-battle-over-long-haul-cabin-crew-contract-idINL1N2TZ2W1

If they win this, it may set the tone for other EBA's battle.

[ExtraShot]

Never waste a crisis. :yuk:


Its as much a threat to every other employee group who will be in negotiations soon, as it is to deal with the International Cabin Crew negotiations now.

[aussieflyboy]

Weren’t the EFA folks hoping to get there EA cancelled to get a pay rise?

[gordonfvckingramsay]

Millions of dollars skimmed away by upper managers while many have lost everything (in some cases mates-permanently) and now QF want to screw their staff down some more. Disgraceful! The end of an airline job as a career Australia is upon us.

[Mr Proach]

That is a very disturbing article on a number of levels. That suggests the cabin crew would have to remain emergency procedures proficient across multiple aircraft types for less than the current remuneration. If you are continuously changing aircraft types, to maintain safety margins you would have to be continuously re-familiarising with the emergency equipment layout and procedures for each aircraft type which would leave very little spare time for providing ancillary functions such as aisle service.

[unobtanium]

Is going back to award wages a pay rise for them?

[Tom Sawyer]

That is a very disturbing article on a number of levels. That suggests the cabin crew would have to remain emergency procedures proficient across multiple aircraft types for less than the current remuneration. If you are continuously changing aircraft types, to maintain safety margins you would have to be continuously re-familiarising with the emergency equipment layout and procedures for each aircraft type which would leave very little spare time for providing ancillary functions such as aisle service.

You mean in the way other airlines CC such as BA, Virgin Atlantic and Australia (when they had LH B777 and A330 types), EK, EY, QR and who knows how many others with mixed fleets operate with no significant problems? My partner is CC for an airline and works across multiple types, equipment and layouts with no issues. As an Engineer I am Licensed and work across multiple types, engines, equipment and configs (even within the same type). If the Union were a bit more aware, they should be negotiating a reasonable pay rise on the basis of their members expanded qualifications.

[unobtanium]

Maybe the company can show flexibility too by combining all the groups into one. Imagine the cost savings engineering, ground handling, HR, safety departments, managersssss......

[gordonfvckingramsay]

It’s particularly curios to me that an airline bent on safety would be focused so heavily on cost cutting.

I would never suggest a nation wide airline staff strike, that would be inciteful.

[Chronic Snoozer]

This is laughable. Says EBA that was voted down will allegedly cost (no doubt some pretty loose assumptions being used to bump up the figure) the airline $60m over 4 years. So less than the CEOs salary then?

[regional_flyer]

If you are continuously changing aircraft types, to maintain safety margins you would have to be continuously re-familiarising with the emergency equipment layout and procedures for each aircraft type which would leave very little spare time for providing ancillary functions such as aisle service.

Your entire post reads like it's from someone that has little understanding of what CC do. The simple act of being dual- or triple-endorsed isn't what you're making it out to be. If someone is passing their EPs and checks consistently, and possesses any kind of awareness around their job, they shouldn't have a problem in carrying out their duties properly. Technically, an aircraft shouldn't be boarded let alone departed unless all equipment checks have been carried out - so I'm unsure what kind of aisle service you're thinking people are being deprived of. There's a valid argument to be had around what QF is trying to pull, but the angle you're using isn't really it.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

This is laughable. Says EBA that was voted down will allegedly cost (no doubt some pretty loose assumptions being used to bump up the figure) the airline $60m over 4 years. So less than the CEOs salary then?

One person costing (and I mean costing) more than the entire workforce (and I mean those who do the work). That right there speaks volumes about the regime leading us.

[Chris2303]

Wouldn't it be funny if they couldn't find enough Flight Attendants to crew the flights they want to operate?

[Transition Layer]

Wouldn't it be funny if they couldn't find enough Flight Attendants to crew the flights they want to operate?
Probably why they’re recruiting onto the new leaner contract right now
https://qantas.wd3.myworkdayjobs.com/en-US/Qantas_Careers/job/Sydney/Qantas-International-Cabin-Crew_R77479

[Keg]

If the Union were a bit more aware, they should be negotiating a reasonable pay rise on the basis of their members expanded qualifications.

They tried. They were told ‘no’.



I would never suggest a nation wide airline staff strike, that would be inciteful.

And a strike would likely be illegal. With damages potentially awarded against those who do strike.

[Beer Baron]

Pretty hypocritical of Qantas to say that the current contract’s rostering provisions are inflexible, when they are the ones who put them in place to cut costs.

LH crew used to fly on all LH types (I believe) and then Qantas wanted cheaper crew to fly on the A380. They came up with a very cheap B-scale that all CC on the A380 were covered by. The original LH crew remained on the 767, 330 and 747.
Then the 787 came along and again Qantas only wanted cheaper CC on it.
The 767 and the 747 have been retired so the original crew are now marooned on the A330. But this was all orchestrated by Qantas to drive down CC salaries, yet Qantas have the gall to say the contract needs to be ripped up due to the very rostering practices they forced into place.

Typical disgusting behaviour from Qantas IR.

[tong]

Ex AN CC here. We were endorsed on the 767, 737, 727 & A320 it was no big deal.

But at the same time I agree with what Beer Baron said above. Plenty of mates at QF and they were not allowed to go over to the A380 & 787 unless they were happy to get screwed deluxe and accept a new award.

[Colonel_Klink]

Plenty of pilots out there saying this couldn’t / wouldn’t happen when the opposition’s pilot EA was up for vote the second time around.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

And a strike would likely be illegal. With damages potentially awarded against those who do strike.

Ok, Protected Industrial Action

[theheadmaster]

Ok, Protected Industrial Action

You need to have gone past the expiry date of your enterprise agreement to be able to follow the process to get approval from Fair Work to conduct protected industrial action. Moreover, the action cannot be in support of claims by workers under a different industrial agreement. So, no, there cannot be ‘industry wide‘ protected industrial action.

[SHVC]

What would be the grounds for Fair Work to terminate an agreement? Surely QF can’t use COVID tough times blah blah blah that would start a rolling domino affect in all industry’s when other EAs are open.

[theheadmaster]

What would be the grounds for Fair Work to terminate an agreement? Surely QF can’t use COVID tough times blah blah blah that would start a rolling domino affect in all industry’s when other EAs are open.

An employer, an employee or an employee organisation covered by the agreement can make an application to Fair Work to terminate an agreement once it has expired. Fair Work MUST terminate the agreement if the FWC is satisfied it is not contrary to the public interest to do so, and the FWC considers it is appropriate to do so taking into account all the circumstances.

That Qantas could do this would be no surprise to Mainline pilots, as they were warned of this possible consequence by some of their AIPA representatives during the last round of bargaining for enterprise agreements. Unfortunately some labeled them scaremongers.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

You need to have gone past the expiry date of your enterprise agreement to be able to follow the process to get approval from Fair Work to conduct protected industrial action. Moreover, the action cannot be in support of claims by workers under a different industrial agreement. So, no, there cannot be ‘industry wide‘ protected industrial action.

Plenty of agreements reaching their maturity in the near future and hundreds of staff members with long memories who have been burnt by greed driven airline managers. A career spent being sh!t talked and having our profession destroyed by said managers must have ramifications for the perpetrators. I would never suggest anyone conduct their own unprotected action but I have to say the little extras and goodwill that airlines have enjoyed for decades is not covered by my agreement. At a time when staff are the ONLY way airlines can recover, managers are playing a game of diminishing returns.

[theheadmaster]

Plenty of agreements reaching their maturity in the near future and hundreds of staff members with long memories who have been burnt by greed driven airline managers. A career spent being sh!t talked and having our profession destroyed by said managers must have ramifications for the perpetrators. I would never suggest anyone conduct their own unprotected action but I have to say the little extras and goodwill that airlines have enjoyed for decades is not covered by my agreement. At a time when staff are the ONLY way airlines can recover, managers are playing a game of diminishing returns.

I understand the sentiment, and don't disagree. My comments above are not in any way meant to state that I accept that the industrial laws in this country are fair or balanced, I was just relaying what the legislation contains.

With regard to your statement, be aware that not performing 'the little extras that are not covered by your agreement', may well be considered taking industrial action. The Act, in part, defines industrial action as: 'the performance of work by an employee in a manner different from that in which it is customarily performed, or the adoption of a practice which results in a restriction, or limitation on, or a delay in the performance of work'.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

I understand the sentiment, and don't disagree. My comments above are not in any way meant to state that I accept that the industrial laws in this country are fair or balanced, I was just relaying what the legislation contains.

With regard to your statement, be aware that not performing 'the little extras that are not covered by your agreement', may well be considered taking industrial action. The Act, in part, defines industrial action as: 'the performance of work by an employee in a manner different from that in which it is customarily performed, or the adoption of a practice which results in a restriction, or limitation on, or a delay in the performance of work'.

Odd how that never cuts the other way. The little extras I enjoyed back when I was a valued member of an airline team have been quite openly withdrawn over the years. Anyhoo good on us for showing an interest in what the company is (attempting) to do to our cabin colleagues.

[theheadmaster]

Odd how that never cuts the other way. The little extras I enjoyed back when I was a valued member of an airline team have been quite openly withdrawn over the years. Anyhoo good on us for showing an interest in what the company is (attempting) to do to our cabin colleagues.

Yes, just another example of how the system is rigged against workers. I am always surprised by how many of my workmates support the party that pushes these kinds of industrial laws.

[SHVC]

I hope fairwork do not approve this, for all out of us. Makes me curious if this will be tried on with us.

[theheadmaster]

I hope fairwork do not approve this, for all out of us. Makes me curious if this will be tried on with us.

Unfortunately, it looks like the statements put out by Qantas look eerily similar to the successful arguments used to terminate the Griffin Coal agreement. In that case, the public interest test argument was construed as meeting the objects of the Act of flexibility for business, productivity and economic growth against the protection of the relevant modern award.

[Mr Proach]

You mean in the way other airlines CC such as BA, Virgin Atlantic and Australia (when they had LH B777 and A330 types), EK, EY, QR and who knows how many others with mixed fleets operate with no significant problems? My partner is CC for an airline and works across multiple types, equipment and layouts with no issues. As an Engineer I am Licensed and work across multiple types, engines, equipment and configs (even within the same type). If the Union were a bit more aware, they should be negotiating a reasonable pay rise on the basis of their members expanded qualifications.
I respect your responsibilities however, you don't have to deal with performing infallibly under the extreme stress of a life threatening emergency situation. When faced with a life and death situation in a hostile environment the potential to make a mistake is amplified, factor in a multitude of types and the margin for error increases. It is infinitely easier to adjust to working in a variations of types under normal conditions and if aircraft never crashed that part of human factors would be never be a consideration. What do you consider to be your partner's core responsibility? Do you think that pilots should operate multiple types? The article suggested the result was a reduction in remuneration for an increase in responsibility however, the spreadsheet manipulators don't mention the word responsibility because fundamentally they don't comprehend what it means in the context of safety of human beings. Their extent of the understanding of aviation is limited to seat per mile costs. They are not inherently evil people just oblivious to such matters.

[Mr Proach]

Is going back to award wages a pay rise for them?
This is the weapon by which the ruling class oppress the working class. The award system is deliberately suppressed to keep the remuneration levels (and conditions) abysmally low. This provides the mechanism for employers to strip out conditions for a few extra pennies of wages and remain above the award. The ultimate agenda is for the employer groups to arrive at a situation where there are no conditions left to bargain with and hence Australia will join the nations of the working class poor. Those who think this is not possible in this country need to research history. Why do you think unions came into being? The irrefutable fact is (for the general population) there is a direct correlation between low union membership and diminished wages and employment conditions.

[Chris2303]

And a strike would likely be illegal. With damages potentially awarded against those who do strike.

However there is nothing to stop them all participating in the Great Resignation

https://www.smh.com.au/business/workplace/australia-s-version-of-the-great-resignation-revealed-as-staff-swap-jobs-20211111-p5984f.html

[Keg]

Chris, Gordon was suggesting an industry wide strike. We sure as heck aren’t going to see an industry wide ‘great resignation’.

No doubt some of the F/As will. In fact a number of them have definitely done so already. Having been stood down many discovered alternative careers. They happily built these careers over the last 20 months whilst also pocketing the jobkeeper and other amounts paid (IRP, DRP, etc) and then when the time to be recalled came tendered their resignations. Good on those who did and good on those who also saw the opportunity to take VR.

Those who chose to remain though are now faced with this set of circumstances and as the Headmaster has pointed out, the game is not geared towards favouring the employee.

[No Idea Either]

Methinks QF is preempting a change of Govmint:rolleyes:

[dr dre]

Methinks QF is preempting a change of Govmint:rolleyes:

They've also pre-empted the fact, as with last night's news, that the real money earner, Domestic, is going to have it's full recovery further delayed by months. So minimum cost for labour is priority.

What would be the grounds for Fair Work to terminate an agreement? Surely QF can’t use COVID tough times blah blah blah that would start a rolling domino affect in all industry’s when other EAs are open.

As above, looks like those COVID tough times are going to continue.....

[Mr Proach]

They happily built these careers over the last 20 months whilst also pocketing the jobkeeper and other amounts paid (IRP, DRP, etc) and then when the time to be recalled came tendered their resignations. .
I understood jobkeeper payments were made to the employers?

[Keg]

Yes. But if the worker was stood down and wasn’t taking leave the payment flowed straight through to the worker.

[Mr Proach]

Thank-you Keg for that information.

[Gear in transit]

Yes. But if the worker was stood down and wasn’t taking leave the payment flowed straight through to the worker.

Whilst correct, I dont believe for one minute that the entire amount of government support flowed straight through to the worker.
Most people I know (not all) needed to take leave at various times just to keep food on the table, particularly families where both incomes are supplied by the aviation industry. Not too many peeps could just live off jobkeeper, but I’m sure there were some.
The group basically had their leave balances subsidized by jobkeeper during the pandemic.

Also, the entity I work for made the whole process as convoluted as possible. As a result, people missed out of government support via various cutoffs, payroll anomalies, payroll balancing, company policy (fortnight support payments vs monthly pays) etc.

[Keg]

Correct. Jobkeeper was always advertised as a business support. In the early part of the pandemic I took some leave and the jobkeeper money went direct to QF to cover that leave. Later in the pandemic I was stood down, took no leave, and thus I got the full benefit of the jobkeeper amount.

Not only did Jobkeeper subsidise staff burning their leave but it also subsidised every staff member that remained working. That was the exactly as the government intended.

And yes, if one was being paid for meal allowances in arrears when stood down then that also impacted on how much flowed through to the individual. Sadly, that too was as the government intended.

However the crew I was referring to earlier started other jobs/ careers. Thus they weren’t burning leave. The jobkeeper amount went through to them on top of their income in their new job/ career. And when QF asked them to return many of them said ‘yeah, nah’.

[knobbycobby]

So much crap written. Look at how many times Andrew David and Qantas say COVID in offical communication.
Qantas only able to pull this off whilst COVID is such a big issue. Omicron wave will soon end and Qantas will run out of justification.
Don’t waste a crisis. Trying to tie this to other unrelated issues is just misinformation.

[FightDeck]

Agree. Much of the of the prior decision by FWA Australia mentions the effect of Covid. “There is no doubt, and it was accepted by the FAAA, that the COVID-19 Pandemic has had a significant impact on Qantas.” “The devastating impact of the COVID-19 crisis”. “Qantas in a position where it can respond to the uncertainty and challenges of international travel and the COVID-19 Pandemic”. “Ms Yangoyan was subject to cross examination on this aspect and despite some concessions, I accept her evidence regarding Qantas’ position that it requires greater flexibility in EBA11 to respond to the uncertainty of travel due to the Pandemic”.”I accept Qantas has advised its employees that the flexibilities and operational capacity that its key claims would provide is essential to the recommencement of international travel[due to the pandemic]”.
Qantas not wasting the time limited pandemic and that having a critical impact on the judges decision.

[theheadmaster]

So much crap written. Look at how many times Andrew David and Qantas say COVID in offical communication.
Qantas only able to pull this off whilst COVID is such a big issue. Omicron wave will soon end and Qantas will run out of justification.
Don’t waste a crisis. Trying to tie this to other unrelated issues is just misinformation.

Yes and no.

The foundations for this were put in place years ago when the LH flight attendants decided on an industrial strategy of 'pulling up the ladder behind them'. The current legal/industrial framework has been in place for quite a long time, and the FAAA should have known the risks of them being a 'targeted' workforce and that COVID would most likely end up with FWC and courts making 'policy decisions'. They should have taken a different approach to negotiations that acknowledged these risks. Instead, I suspect that they they told members what they wanted to hear, rather than the industrial reality.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

Chris, Gordon was suggesting an industry wide strike

In my defence Keg, I do believe I said I would never suggest it :}

[krismiler]

Keeping current on one Boeing and two Airbus types would be manageable for cabin crew, especially for those already flying the A380 and B787.

Unfortunately the cabin crew are in the same position as most other CC at unionized legacy airlines when these airlines have to compete with low cost and Middle East airlines. Their terms and conditions stand out as being well ahead and are in the firing line when costs need to be cut. The baggage handlers got screwed over last year and it's time for management to move onto the next target.

Personally, I would be more flexible to maintain my income level especially given the current situation.

Realistically, the days of highly paid unionised cabin crew are numbered unless the traveling public is willing to pay higher fares. This is only likely on routes to North America where there is little competition and the US airlines are in the same position. Any route with a ME or Asian airline available will be tough.

[Keg]

In my defence Keg, I do believe I said I would never suggest it :}

:ok: :D :}

[blubak]

So much crap written. Look at how many times Andrew David and Qantas say COVID in offical communication.
Qantas only able to pull this off whilst COVID is such a big issue. Omicron wave will soon end and Qantas will run out of justification.
Don’t waste a crisis. Trying to tie this to other unrelated issues is just misinformation.
He is a miserable little man who has tried his luck at many outfits & is now firmly entrenched under the direction of another miserable little man whose aim is to destroy any union agreement that he can just like his little mate Willie Walsh who went down the same path at BA.
Like somebody else has mentioned,there are plenty of former cabin crew now doing other jobs who will now realise what a wise move it was to seek alternate employment & for many who were hoping to fly again this will help them make the decision to work elsewhere & maybe get appreciated for the effort they put in every day instead of wondering what is next in the continual agenda of trying to screw the workforce by a group of money hungry self indulgent so called executives who try to convince everyone how tough they are doing it.

[cessnapete]

He is a miserable little man who has tried his luck at many outfits & is now firmly entrenched under the direction of another miserable little man whose aim is to destroy any union agreement that he can just like his little mate Willie Walsh who went down the same path at BA.
Like somebody else has mentioned,there are plenty of former cabin crew now doing other jobs who will now realise what a wise move it was to seek alternate employment & for many who were hoping to fly again this will help them make the decision to work elsewhere & maybe get appreciated for the effort they put in every day instead of wondering what is next in the continual agenda of trying to screw the workforce by a group of money hungry self indulgent so called executives who try to convince everyone how tough they are doing it.


What's the problem?
All BA Cabin Crew operate on Long Haul and European rotes. Qualified on A320 A380 777 787. A350. Usually restricted to three types at any one period.
Just a bit more study in the classroom.
Safely rostered for example, Paris and back one day in an A320, and perhaps Las Vegas next trip in a B777.

[Keg]

What's the problem?
All BA Cabin Crew operate on Long Haul and European rotes. Qualified on A320 A380 777 787. Usually restricted to three types at any one period.
Just a bit more study in the classroom.
Safely rostered for example, Paris and back one day in an A320, and perhaps Las Vegas next trip in a B777.

As Qantas F/As used to do in the 90s and 2000s where they operated the 767(238, 338, 336), 747 (400 in Pacific and Kangaroo route configs, and Classic), A330 (200/300).

Their ability to easily train onto the A380 and then the 787 was taken away from them when QF recruited new staff for those operations and prevented those legacy crew from operating those aircraft. This is an issue of Qantas’ making but they’re expecting the F/As to sacrifice everything in solving it.

[unobtanium]

Interesting still no upbeat yammer post with cringy gif response's.

[theheadmaster]

As Qantas F/As used to do in the 90s and 2000s where they operated the 767(238, 338, 336), 747 (400 in Pacific and Kangaroo route configs, and Classic), A330 (200/300).

Their ability to easily train onto the A380 and then the 787 was taken away from them when QF recruited new staff for those operations and prevented those legacy crew from operating those aircraft. This is an issue of Qantas’ making but they’re expecting the F/As to sacrifice everything in solving it.

Not sure if it is completely accurate to describe the situation of being easily trained on other aircraft 'being taken away from them'. I believe it was actually 'given away' by the FAAA, hence my description of the 'pull the ladder up behind you' industrial strategy of keeping your conditions and allowing new-hires to be employed on lower conditions. That decision was always going to end up with them being outnumbered and marginalised at some point in the future.

[aviation_enthus]

So it seems to be a bit of fault on the FA union side but also a lot to do with the obvious strategy being employed by QF.

First off can I say anyone (or union rep) using the argument that it’s “unsafe” to operate across multiple fleets, looses the debate immediately. It’s pretty clear from this thread and doing “the pub test” that most reasonable people can see straight through it. It’s a non issue. The safety risk is negligible.

The real issue seems to result from history. As others have stated a group of FA’s seem to have been slowly isolated through time to the point that they are now restricted to one fleet type. Clearly they are happy to work on multiple types, they seem to have done so in the past. But (it seems to me) the bigger issue is they don’t want to give up their terms and conditions.

This IMHO is where unions can fail sometimes. A continuous focus on the conditions for a single group (senior FA’s or pilots) to the detriment of other staff doing the same job, always seems to end up this way. Isolated and alone. The union may very well have “done their job” and maintained the conditions these FA’s enjoy, but in doing so have made them extremely vulnerable to a drastic change in their EBA. Or being fired.

Qantas is undoubtedly following a deliberate strategy here. But what do you expect? HR departments exist to manage these things, so it would be incredibly naïve of all of us to think there’s is NOT a game being played out.

HOWEVER, we are all subject to various market forces whether we like it or not. Union represented or not, when one airline “innovates” and become more productive, other airlines are forced to respond. Now I’m not saying this is only in relation to pay cuts, it could be fuel savings, IT systems or reduced maintenance requirements on new types. It’s the whole picture. There will always be a continuous process of change as the advantages ebb and flow between competing airlines.

I’m sorry to say but FA’s are relatively unskilled labour. Same with ground staff. Yes training is required. Yes attracting good people is important (salary IS a part of this). Experience on the job can play a part as well. But only to a point. If a reasonable training system exists that produces a consistent skill level for new staff, it’s not as critical to pay more to retain staff. That’s just reality.

The advantage pilots and engineers enjoy is the time it takes to make us “employable”. We get paid more because we have a skill set that is harder to source. Notice I didn’t say “more useful” or “we are better than you” (cause we are all just people trying to make a living), just harder to acquire. It’s no different to other qualified professionals. Do you want to earn more in your chosen career? Upgrade your skills. Invest in yourself!!

It’s also a warning to the rest of us pilots. Yes we should work to “improve our lot”. But we also need to be flexible to the outside reality of the wider industry. If whatever company you work for ends up loosing money and going bankrupt, it doesn’t matter how good your EBA is. To that point though, we also shouldn’t trade everything away in some vain hope we can save a company when the management is clearly incapable or the business model is broken. There’s a balance to be found, all staff in a relevant company play a part. A company is successful when all the staff and managers are able to move forward as a team.

Good luck to this group of FA’s, but I think in all honesty the future is not looking promising. Either way there’ll be a change forced on them.

[pinkpanther1]

So it seems to be a bit of fault on the FA union side but also a lot to do with the obvious strategy being employed by QF.

First off can I say anyone (or union rep) using the argument that it’s “unsafe” to operate across multiple fleets, looses the debate immediately. It’s pretty clear from this thread and doing “the pub test” that most reasonable people can see straight through it. It’s a non issue. The safety risk is negligible.

The real issue seems to result from history. As others have stated a group of FA’s seem to have been slowly isolated through time to the point that they are now restricted to one fleet type. Clearly they are happy to work on multiple types, they seem to have done so in the past. But (it seems to me) the bigger issue is they don’t want to give up their terms and conditions.

This IMHO is where unions can fail sometimes. A continuous focus on the conditions for a single group (senior FA’s or pilots) to the detriment of other staff doing the same job, always seems to end up this way. Isolated and alone. The union may very well have “done their job” and maintained the conditions these FA’s enjoy, but in doing so have made them extremely vulnerable to a drastic change in their EBA. Or being fired.

Qantas is undoubtedly following a deliberate strategy here. But what do you expect? HR departments exist to manage these things, so it would be incredibly naïve of all of us to think there’s is NOT a game being played out.

HOWEVER, we are all subject to various market forces whether we like it or not. Union represented or not, when one airline “innovates” and become more productive, other airlines are forced to respond. Now I’m not saying this is only in relation to pay cuts, it could be fuel savings, IT systems or reduced maintenance requirements on new types. It’s the whole picture. There will always be a continuous process of change as the advantages ebb and flow between competing airlines.

I’m sorry to say but FA’s are relatively unskilled labour. Same with ground staff. Yes training is required. Yes attracting good people is important (salary IS a part of this). Experience on the job can play a part as well. But only to a point. If a reasonable training system exists that produces a consistent skill level for new staff, it’s not as critical to pay more to retain staff. That’s just reality.

The advantage pilots and engineers enjoy is the time it takes to make us “employable”. We get paid more because we have a skill set that is harder to source. Notice I didn’t say “more useful” or “we are better than you” (cause we are all just people trying to make a living), just harder to acquire. It’s no different to other qualified professionals. Do you want to earn more in your chosen career? Upgrade your skills. Invest in yourself!!

It’s also a warning to the rest of us pilots. Yes we should work to “improve our lot”. But we also need to be flexible to the outside reality of the wider industry. If whatever company you work for ends up loosing money and going bankrupt, it doesn’t matter how good your EBA is. To that point though, we also shouldn’t trade everything away in some vain hope we can save a company when the management is clearly incapable or the business model is broken. There’s a balance to be found, all staff in a relevant company play a part. A company is successful when all the staff and managers are able to move forward as a team.

Good luck to this group of FA’s, but I think in all honesty the future is not looking promising. Either way there’ll be a change forced on them.
Very well said. I think many of us know stories of amazing EBAs that've ended in tears when the respective workforce is eventually sidelined. Sometimes less is more in the long run, whether people like it or not.

[Beer Baron]

This IMHO is where unions can fail sometimes. A continuous focus on the conditions for a single group (senior FA’s or pilots) to the detriment of other staff doing the same job, always seems to end up this way. Isolated and alone.
You make a lot of good points in your post but I do wonder about the part above. Given 97% of the LH cabin crew voted NO then clearly it wasn’t just a single (minority) group who were unhappy with the offer. Clearly the QCCA/World Fleet crew were rather unimpressed with the offer also.

Anyone know what the main sticking point was for those crew, beyond the obvious pay freeze?

[Sparrows.]

Anyone know what the main sticking point was for those crew, beyond the obvious pay freeze?
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/651x1016/287e25b2_a01f_4e1b_9353_94ba7bccbe74_8ef7def8fb5ee1c70fed5d4 9e82f1beec78a8731.jpeg

[piston broke again]

Purely a time based decision by upper management. They know the peak of this crisis isn’t going to last long so they can’t afford to put it to another vote and waste that time. Frustrating for all airlines atm.

[lc_461]

Given that no crew have been recruited since ?2008 to QAL and there have been multiple VR offers in that time, surely there can't be that many left in this pool?
IE they are quite outnumbered by crew on the new contract?

[morno]

Realistically, the days of highly paid unionised cabin crew are numbered unless the traveling public is willing to pay higher fares. This is only likely on routes to North America where there is little competition and the US airlines are in the same position. Any route with a ME or Asian airline available will be tough.

What he said. Being a flight attendant is not a $100k a year job, and it shouldn’t be. If the remaining cabin crew think they can possibly maintain what they get now without any flexibility, they’re dreaming.

[Mr Proach]

What he said. Being a flight attendant is not a $100k a year job, and it shouldn’t be. If the remaining cabin crew think they can possibly maintain what they get now without any flexibility, they’re dreaming.
Why shouldn't being a flight attendant be a 100K a year job?

[Sparrows.]

Given that no crew have been recruited since ?2008 to QAL and there have been multiple VR offers in that time, surely there can't be that many left in this pool?
IE they are quite outnumbered by crew on the new contract?

20% apparently

[StudentInDebt]

Why shouldn't being a flight attendant be a 100K a year job?Because it’s always better to cut people down than honour your commitment to them. These people agreed to the contract they were offered, no-one else can ever join it. They should be allowed to serve out their time, they’re hardly going to be the straw that breaks the kangaroo’s back!

[Potsie Weber]

Why shouldn't being a flight attendant be a 100K a year job?

Exactly. Entry level unskilled FIFO job would easily get that with much better roster stability. Time away from home, long shifts, night shifts, weekends etc, a premium for this job is a given. Just the fact of constantly dealing with moronic passengers, I wouldn’t do it for twice that.

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

That's where I find it amusing when management start bleating about how the terms of an EBA is killing them. Do they not know what the initials stand for. It is an AGREEMENT, usually reached after protracted BARGAINING. It means both sides said yes.They always seem surprised and put out that the other side wants them to stick to their side of the agreement when they decide they now want to say no.

[theheadmaster]

That's where I find it amusing when management start bleating about how the terms of an EBA is killing them. Do they not know what the initials stand for. It is an AGREEMENT, usually reached after protracted BARGAINING. It means both sides said yes.They always seem surprised and put out that the other side wants them to stick to their side of the agreement when they decide they now want to say no.

Agreements are not open ended, they have fixed terms. The maximum term for an agreement is four years. The terms of an agreement continue past the expiry date until the Commission replaces or terminates the agreement. In this case, there was bargaining for a new agreement that has resulted in Qantas applying for the agreement to be terminated. The FAAA legal team should know these provisions in the Act and notified members of the risk of not coming to an agreement.

[blubak]

That's where I find it amusing when management start bleating about how the terms of an EBA is killing them. Do they not know what the initials stand for. It is an AGREEMENT, usually reached after protracted BARGAINING. It means both sides said yes.They always seem surprised and put out that the other side wants them to stick to their side of the agreement when they decide they now want to say no.
Hasnt it always been the same i.e.when it suits,its good but when it doesnt,its a militant union that doesnt want to negotiate!
I personally know a couple of short serving intl flt attendants who havent flown since the pandemic started but have found employment elsewhere & right now,after seeing what is in store for them have decided they will stay in the jobs they have,they just couldnt be bothered being front line workers with a company that thinks they own them & continually want more for less.

[Arthur D]

What he said. Being a flight attendant is not a $100k a year job, and it shouldn’t be. If the remaining cabin crew think they can possibly maintain what they get now without any flexibility, they’re dreaming.

I love these types of comments.

Yet if anyone dared suggest a pilot is not worth $400k+ there would be a Pprune uprising…..

[Chronic Snoozer]

Realistically, the days of highly paid unionised cabin crew are numbered unless the traveling public is willing to pay higher fares.

Yes and the days of highly paid middle management and outsized bonuses should therefore also be numbered unless the travelling public is willing to pay higher fares.

If HR want to terminate an agreement, terminate all salary contracts, bonus entitlements, option awards etc for managers. Make everyone start from scratch, based on the current 'COVID environment'. When the good times return, and they will, guess who'll be 'winning'. It won't be the suckers on an agreement.

[Icarus2001]

Why shouldn't being a flight attendant be a 100K a year job? The salary we receive is an indication of how hard it is to replace us,

Take someone off the street and two weeks later they can be line training as cabin crew on an aircraft. A week later they are checked to line. They may spend some time away from home, for which they will be paid extra. They most certainly will work weekends and public holidays.

Entry level unskilled FIFO job would easily get that with much better roster stability. Time away from home, long shifts, night shifts, weekends etc, a premium for this job is a given

ENTRY level, UNSKILLED earning $100 K a year. Can you post a link?

Mining staff are on site for maybe two weeks, working 12 hour shifts for their swing, not quite like being cabin crew.

[morno]

I love these types of comments.

Yet if anyone dared suggest a pilot is not worth $400k+ there would be a Pprune uprising…..

I certainly don’t think that a pilot is worth $400K+ either.

Why don’t I think a flight attendant should be a $100k a year job? Because it requires very little training in the grand scheme. And it’s very uncompetitive compared to the rest of the world.

[MickG0105]

ENTRY level, UNSKILLED earning $100 K a year. Can you post a link?

https://www.seek.com.au/fifo-no-experience-jobs

Having worked FIFO, albeit many moons ago, I was somewhat surprised that walk-ons could pull down that sort of money.

Mining staff are on site for maybe two weeks, working 12 hour shifts for their swing, not quite like being cabin crew.
That is the crux of any comparison - hours worked. How many hours a year would a cabin crew member clock?

[Potsie Weber]

The salary we receive is an indication of how hard it is to replace us,

Take someone off the street and two weeks later they can be line training as cabin crew on an aircraft. A week later they are checked to line. They may spend some time away from home, for which they will be paid extra. They most certainly will work weekends and public holidays.



ENTRY level, UNSKILLED earning $100 K a year. Can you post a link?

Mining staff are on site for maybe two weeks, working 12 hour shifts for their swing, not quite like being cabin crew.

Green dump truck operator. Easily over $100k, most closer to $150k package. Site admin, offsider etc. Only need to be on more than $35 an hour working 2:1 to earn over $100k. Site/shift allowance for any FIFO is around $25k, so that brings the work rate to about $30 per hour. $30 per hour is an unskilled pay rate and easily achieved across many industries. International cabin crew spend a lot of time away from home, similar to any FIFO role but come and go more frequently. If they spend a chunk of that time away sitting by a pool at a hotel, then that is just a perk of the job to suit an airline schedule. My view is you are at work when you sign on at your base to when you return and sign off.

[Icarus2001]

International cabin crew spend a lot of time away from home, similar to any FIFO role but come and go more frequently. What about domestic or FIFO cabin crew?

I am not sure being away from home staying in a five star hotel, drinking duty free and sitting by the pool compares to two weeks in a mine site donga.

[Potsie Weber]

What about domestic or FIFO cabin crew?

I am not sure being away from home staying in a five star hotel, drinking duty free and sitting by the pool compares to two weeks in a mine site donga.

Mainline domestic QF cabin crew are on around $30 an hour, plus meal allowances overtime, weekend rates etc. Again it’s nothing special. Work max hours, weekends, max overnights etc and they could earn well over $100k.

$100k plus for a basic job that is shift work, very unpleasant at times (cleaning up vomit in an aircraft dunny), odd hours, and significant time away from home is entirely justified. I don’t care whether they are being paid to sit by a pool for days because the way the schedule works or not. Good job for some and many love it, but not me, couldn’t pay me enough to put up with the crap that cabin crew deal with almost every flight, no matter how good the margaritas are at the other end. I’d much rather drive a dump truck.

[extralite]

You forget cabin crew are the coal face of marketing for the airline. I wouldn't call that unskilled. Poor cabin crew mean customers choose other airlines. I know it's a big factor for when I fly.

Qantas used to have great business class cabin crew. Last time I flew Qantas a few years ago one of the crew told me she won't even fly Qantas as she hated management. She was great at her job and very friendly but said this while we were chatting waiting for an airbridge. Sort of put me off. Nowadays all things equal I will choose another airline. Just flew family of 5 here business class to Canada via aircanada over Qantas who parallel the route. The way a company treats its staff is reflected in how well they do their job. To me Qantas just seems mean and nasty but it may be because I read these threads.

[Australopithecus]

Your flight attendant may have been reacting to the moral hypocrisy that we get from management constantly. Endless moaning about EBAs, pay freezes etc, yet taking eye-watering bonuses every year. Boris Johnson is repugnant in the UK for the same reasons that our management is: say one thing-do another.

[73to91]

I hope that QF management thanked and appreciated the effort of cabin crew who flew the repatriation flights, especially the flights ex Covid hot spots such as DEL, Howard Springs, isn't a 5 star hotel.

Then again, did they care? after all it was government that was paying.

[Mr Proach]

Is it fair and reasonable, that the standard of conditions and treatment the flight attendants receive from management sets the standard of service for the company's customers?

[C441]

Last time I flew Qantas a few years ago one of the crew told me she won't even fly Qantas as she hated management. She was great at her job and very friendly but said this while we were chatting waiting for an airbridge.
"Hated" is a strong word but swap that for "have no respect for…." and you start to understand why many Qantas staff are incredibly loyal to the brand but not the management.
When front line staff in a service industry are constantly treated in an adversarial manner, it's a not surprising that they have little time for their managers and it's remarkable that most of them (despite the often derogatory comments) continue to provide a very good service. Real leadership starts from the top and rarely successfully involves an adversarial environment.

[theheadmaster]

"Hated" is a strong word but swap that for "have no respect for…." and you start to understand why many Qantas staff are incredibly loyal to the brand but not the management.
When front line staff in a service industry are constantly treated in an adversarial manner, it's a not surprising that they have little time for their managers and it's remarkable that most of them (despite the often derogatory comments) continue to provide a very good service. Real leadership starts from the top and rarely successfully involves an adversarial environment.

Very true. It is also worth noting that this is a concept that cuts both ways. An employee association that always applies an adversarial approach to industrial relations will most likely not be treated with respect. That is not to say acting in an adversarial way should always be avoided, just that it should not necessarily be the first tool of choice in every situation.

[cLeArIcE]

Not trying to highjack this CC thread, but I'm interested to hear others opinion. At my outfit, 90% Of the guys and girls I fly with ​​​​​are steadfast in there position that they will never ever fly 90+ hours a month as a standard again. I personally agree 100%. Spending time at home with the kid's is so precious and no amount of over time etc is worth losing that. There will be some that see the allure of $$ and will return to chasing over time and working on their day Off etc. but I actually have faith that many won't. The 4 day work week is already being talked about and implemented in other countries outside of aviation, yet we are expected to give up more, give up more flexibility, bend over for this bigger pineapple please.

[Potsie Weber]

Not trying to highjack this CC thread, but I'm interested to hear others opinion. At my outfit, 90% Of the guys and girls I fly with ​​​​​are steadfast in there position that they will never ever fly 90+ hours a month as a standard again. I personally agree 100%. Spending time at home with the kid's is so precious and no amount of over time etc is worth losing that. There will be some that see the allure of $$ and will return to chasing over time and working on their day Off etc. but I actually have faith that many won't. The 4 day work week is already being talked about and implemented in other countries outside of aviation, yet we are expected to give up more, give up more flexibility, bend over for this bigger pineapple please.

A couple of interest rate rises will change their minds.

[Ladloy]

Not trying to highjack this CC thread, but I'm interested to hear others opinion. At my outfit, 90% Of the guys and girls I fly with ​​​​​are steadfast in there position that they will never ever fly 90+ hours a month as a standard again. I personally agree 100%. Spending time at home with the kid's is so precious and no amount of over time etc is worth losing that. There will be some that see the allure of $$ and will return to chasing over time and working on their day Off etc. but I actually have faith that many won't. The 4 day work week is already being talked about and implemented in other countries outside of aviation, yet we are expected to give up more, give up more flexibility, bend over for this bigger pineapple please.
Look at the US with the great resignation. Airlines offering ridiculous salaries for pilots because people decided to walk out of the industry. Many other industries having to bolster pay to entice new blood. I hope there is change in Aus but I feel we're too selfish and apathetic to change it.

[Troo believer]

As a pilot with Qantas you have my support. What I find completely disgusting is this moral vacuum pervading management during a time of fractious, difficult human emotional toll. If this company purports to be Australian then it should acknowledge that the last two years have been nothing short of very difficult for most. Only a war would be more confrontational in my view. How is it that the F/As have been singled out by the CEO and made an example of because they had the audacity to oppose a deal that wasn’t in Qantas’ best interest. I’ve sat and listened to those that with me were incarcerated at Howard National Disgrace Springs for several weeks in order to eek out a living worrying about where their lives were headed, whilst the fuc*wits in Sydney were hell bent on how to screw them over given the first opportunity. Corporate arseholes no less.

The face of Qantas is it’s Cabin Crew. Yep the ones that have to kowtow to all sorts of petulant trumped up frequent flyers using points thinking that they’re so special and yet this company in its wisdom chooses to put the boot in at the lowest point. Congratulations Qantas, you bunch of pricks ( my opinion) for illustrating just how low a corporate can go. Whether you believe the T&Cs are justified doesn’t matter. What you should be addressing is the corporate thuggery from Qantas.

Treat people with dignity and intelligence and the company might be rewarded yet here we are back in the 70s engaged in an ideological anti union bashing campaign spear headed by a farmer from NZ ffs.

Ive worked on minimum wage and know what it’s like to have your personal dignity ripped from underneath. If the last two years has taught me anything it’s that personal dignity and self worth are paramount as absolutes that require defending beyond money or a corporate non entity the likes of Qantas. It’s not a person. It doesn’t think. It has no morality or ethics and neither do the people that believe they’re leaders within this bull**** corporate spinning paradigm. End of rant.

[Mr Proach]

Worthy rant Troo B. .. many hits of nails on heads. Sadly, these days, the pool of decent human being managers is very small .

[StudentInDebt]

As a pilot with Qantas you have my support. What I find completely disgusting is this moral vacuum pervading management during a time of fractious, difficult human emotional toll.

corporate non entity which is what Qantas is. It’s not a person. It doesn’t think. It has no morality or ethics and either do the people that believe they’re leaders within this bull**** corporate spinning paradigm. End of rant.Well said, as a group we need everyone to see this and reflect on their engagement with the company.

[extralite]

"The face of Qantas is it’s Cabin Crew. Yep the ones that have to kowtow to all sorts of petulant trumped up frequent flyers using points thinking that they’re so special " Wow True B good thing you aren't part of the cabin crew if that is your attitude to the customers. :) You may not have been down back for a while but here is some news. Almost nobody has been able to use Qantas FF for years and most people had millions of points racked up that eventually time expired. They can be exchanged for a toaster however. Qantas FF points are a net negative for the airline now because the fact that they are plainly designed not to be used just builds more resentment among the demographic it should be targeting. The people you are flying almost always paid for their tickets unless they are public "servants" who I assume are obligated to fly Qantas.

It is incredible i think that to date the cabin crew on Qantas have been so professional under the circumstances. Well done to all of those.

[blubak]

Worthy rant Troo B. .. many hits of nails on heads. Sadly, these days, the pool of decent human being managers is very small .
He is pretty well spot on as you say,there is no respect from so called managers & execs who have clearly forgotten where they have come from whether it be a farm or from 1 of the worst suburbs of a major city in the emerald isle.
I once heard an ex workmate sum it up pretty well by saying 'we love the job we do but we have no respect for the company that employs us'

[das Uber Soldat]

Wow True B good thing you aren't part of the cabin crew if that is your attitude to the customers. :) You may not have been down back for a while but here is some news. Almost nobody has been able to use Qantas FF for years and most people had millions of points racked up that eventually time expired. They can be exchanged for a toaster however. Qantas FF points are a net negative for the airline now because the fact that they are plainly designed not to be used just builds more resentment among the demographic it should be targeting. The people you are flying almost always paid for their tickets unless they are public "servants" who I assume are obligated to fly Qantas.

What the. I don't even know where to start with this.

In other news, I'm enjoying Qantas declaring war on their workers under the auspices of 'COVID', whilst simultaneously giving themselves massive pay rises.

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/655x401/bfqvyug_9f4fc00404ac4590d2336a9519c1235dd744f948.png

I guess this means the 'Qantas 3% wage policy" no longer applies right?! Pop the Champaign everyone, 26.5% pay rises are coming for all of us!

[Mr Proach]

Is that the "Spirit of Australia" ... Would you like to be a soldier at war if these fine upstanding people were the military commanders?

[Ladloy]

What the. I don't even know where to start with this.

In other news, I'm enjoying Qantas declaring war on their workers under the auspices of 'COVID', whilst simultaneously giving themselves massive pay rises.

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/655x401/bfqvyug_9f4fc00404ac4590d2336a9519c1235dd744f948.png

I guess this means the 'Qantas 3% wage policy" no longer applies right?! Pop the Champaign everyone, 26.5% pay rises are coming for all of us!
Rex almost gave the same pay increase to their board. Within 1% of Qantas!

[unobtanium]

What the. I don't even know where to start with this.

In other news, I'm enjoying Qantas declaring war on their workers under the auspices of 'COVID', whilst simultaneously giving themselves massive pay rises.

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/655x401/bfqvyug_9f4fc00404ac4590d2336a9519c1235dd744f948.png

I guess this means the 'Qantas 3% wage policy" no longer applies right?! Pop the Champaign everyone, 26.5% pay rises are coming for all of us!

Absolutely disgusting, while most of the frontline staff have their pays frozen, stood down on job keeper... if there lucky not to get made redundant.

[Chronic Snoozer]

What's a "CEO QANTAS Loyalty"?

[MickG0105]

What's a "CEO QANTAS Loyalty"?
Frequent Flyer program - the only part of the business that consistently turned a profit.

[itsnotthatbloodyhard]

Frequent Flyer program - the only part of the business that consistently turned a profit.

How profitable would it be in the absence of the parts of the business that fly aeroplanes?

[MickG0105]

What the. I don't even know where to start with this.

In other news, I'm enjoying Qantas declaring war on their workers under the auspices of 'COVID', whilst simultaneously giving themselves massive pay rises.

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/655x401/bfqvyug_9f4fc00404ac4590d2336a9519c1235dd744f948.png

I guess this means the 'Qantas 3% wage policy" no longer applies right?! Pop the Champaign everyone, 26.5% pay rises are coming for all of us!

Where you might want to start with the executive remuneration summary is the pre-pandemic report.

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1229x920/screenshot_20220126_111340_adobe_acrobat_9c9e4b9b94bc06aeb42 7ef27aaadd52053cf14b9.jpg

I know that it doesn't fit the "26.5% pay rises" narrative but it clearly shows that none of the executives have had an increase in their remuneration at all; to the contrary they have all taken pay cuts.

[cLeArIcE]

How profitable would it be in the absence of the parts of the business that fly aeroplanes?
Just think how much money they'd make if they didn't have these pesky aircraft, cabin crew and pilot's to pay etc.

[neville_nobody]

I know that it doesn't fit the "26.5% pay rises" narrative but it clearly shows that none of the executives have had an increase in their remuneration at all; to the contrary they have all taken pay cuts.

That's why AJ was out spruiking that QF management needed to increase salary to keep staff in the middle of Billions of losses. They had cut some deal for swapping salary for shares during the pandemic but obviously they are maneuvering for more.

[Keg]

Where you might want to start with the executive remuneration summary is the pre-pandemic report.

I know that it doesn't fit the "26.5% pay rises" narrative but it clearly shows that none of the executives have had an increase in their remuneration at all; to the contrary they have all taken pay cuts.

Pay me 5x my normal salary a couple of years in a row and I’ll happily revert to my normal salary the following year and then take a 26.5% pay rise the year after.

[unobtanium]

I know that it doesn't fit the "26.5% pay rises" narrative but it clearly shows that none of the executives have had an increase in their remuneration at all; to the contrary they have all taken pay cuts.

Well boo friggin hoo, paycut to 1.7million is still $4778 a day, assuming he works 365days a year... while most of the workforce is on $750 a week struggling to put food on the table.

[C441]

I know that it doesn't fit the "26.5% pay rises" narrative but it clearly shows that none of the executives have had an increase in their remuneration at all; to the contrary they have all taken pay cuts.
As have the staff since 2019 and in most cases a significantly greater percentage pay cut than the executive (but you can do anything with statistics).

[gordonfvckingramsay]

As have the staff since 2019 and in most cases a significantly greater percentage pay cut than the executive (but you can do anything with statistics).

You can also do anything on $30k a week!

[Mr Proach]

This could be a segue from the French revolution. A gold coin contribution from every shafted worker should be sufficient to acquire one or more working guillotines, a few spare blades and some chains. Not sure about Popcorn.

[SOPS]

5 grand a day to help run a airline. The same person puts his mother into an aged care home and the person that looks after her gets about $23.00 an hour. Puts a lot into perspective really.

[Maggie Island]

This could be a segue from the French revolution. A gold coin contribution from every shafted worker should be sufficient to acquire one or more working guillotines, a few spare blades and some chains. Not sure about Popcorn..

I think the Hong Konger’s will be taking up supply for the next little while

[Chris2303]

QF agrees to mediation in cabin crew dispute

https://australianaviation.com.au/2022/01/qantas-agrees-to-mediation-in-cabin-crew-pay-row/?fbclid=IwAR3LA8dhRmVpRYlL5hQjhnPY_tDYaPUHUWa0gnYu-xD56zGrYu9_D3n7cVI

[neville_nobody]

5 grand a day to help run a airline. The same person puts his mother into an aged care home and the person that looks after her gets about $23.00 an hour. Puts a lot into perspective really.

However just about anybody could work in aged care. Not everyone can or wants to run an airline.

On saying that though QF never really test the CEO or executive job market. It's all just "jobs for the boys".

[das Uber Soldat]

However just about anybody could work in aged care. Not everyone can or wants to run an airline.
Agreed. Hopefully one day the Qantas group find someone who can.

[blubak]

QF agrees to mediation in cabin crew dispute

https://australianaviation.com.au/2022/01/qantas-agrees-to-mediation-in-cabin-crew-pay-row/?fbclid=IwAR3LA8dhRmVpRYlL5hQjhnPY_tDYaPUHUWa0gnYu-xD56zGrYu9_D3n7cVI
The 1 comment made at the end of this article is so true,he continually wants to provoke his workers & treat them as if they owe him something.
The execs at QF have no idea what respect means & is 1 of the main reasons why the workforce has such a low opinion of their managers who continually try to use every trick in the book to lower conditions & pay whilst at the same time continually tell everyone what a great job they do.

[Ladloy]

However just about anybody could work in aged care. Not everyone can or wants to run an airline.

On saying that though QF never really test the CEO or executive job market. It's all just "jobs for the boys".
I firmly believe not everyone can or wants to work in aged care. It is a brutal industry.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

Not everyone can or wants to run an airline..

Not everyone can fly aeroplanes (tech or cabin crew). It’s a specialised “profession” that these CEOs cannot get rich without. The fact that QF have decided to return to the table is rather telling.

[wombat watcher]

Agreed. Hopefully one day the Qantas group find someone who can.

you have to be joking.
who sent Virgin into administration? Who set up Compass and failed?
Who were the wizards that saw Ansett’s demise?
should I continue?

[morno]

you have to be joking.
who sent Virgin into administration? Who set up Compass and failed?
Who were the wizards that saw Ansett’s demise?
should I continue?

Exactly. A lot of you may not like Alan Joyce, but your airline isn’t exactly about to go into administration is it…..

[gordonfvckingramsay]

Exactly. A lot of you may not like Alan Joyce, but your airline isn’t exactly about to go into administration is it…..

How much of the farm was sold to stay liquid though?

[theheadmaster]

Not everyone can fly aeroplanes (tech or cabin crew). It’s a specialised “profession” that these CEOs cannot get rich without. The fact that QF have decided to return to the table is rather telling.

Not sure what you mean by 'The fact that QF have decided to return to the table is rather telling'.

Pretty smart tactic by QF if they are playing hardball. Look at what the alternatives are for each party. Qantas has nothing to lose at mediation as they don't have to agree to anything. FAAA has their back to the wall as the termination process is still in place. If they don't agree with what QF has to offer there is a risk they may lose everything and end up with the modern award, which is a win for Qantas. If they come to a mediated outcome, it will probably be the outcome Qantas wants as there is no reason for Qantas to agree with anything less. If they don't come to agreement, it will give strength to the Qantas application for termination. It would be a risky strategy for the FAAA to be betting the farm on the application to terminate being dismissed and then reverting to the existing agreement that would still need to be negotiated.

There are some hard lessons to be learned here about IR strategy. Hopefully pilots can look to these lessons when having to make important industrial decisions rather than conflating the issues with the moral arguments around executive remuneration.

[Colonel_Klink]

Not sure what you mean by 'The fact that QF have decided to return to the table is rather telling'.

There are some hard lessons to be learned here about IR strategy. Hopefully pilots can look to these lessons when having to make important industrial decisions rather than conflating the issues with the moral arguments around executive remuneration.

And hopefully VA pilots are taking special note about just exactly what could have happened. A lot of ill informed opinions were going around during the last EA vote about how a Company couldn’t / wouldn’t terminate.

The industrial landscape is as brutal as ever for airline employees in Australia with Industrial Laws stacked against employees and a pretty ‘employer friendly’ Commission.

I hope this current crop of airline management reap what they sow. This played out over Christmas at VA when cabin crew, and to a lesser extent pilots, refused to work on days off, which when combined with significant sick leave led to massive issues in crewing the flying. How long until this starts to happen at QF and then JQ?

[Shark Patrol]

The IR laws in this country are a joke.

[Keg]

They are certainly heavily geared towards the employer. The irony is that the Coalition government has left them virtually untouched since they came to power in 2013. They’re virtually the same as they were when Labor got rid of Workchoices in 2008 and introduced the Fairwork Commission.

And lets not forget that the lockout in QF happened under a Labor government and their laws also.

No, definitely not employee friendly.

Of course the question is how should a union respond to that point? I’ll leave that little hand grenade just lying in the dirt for a bit! :ok:

[Chronic Snoozer]

Pretty smart tactic by QF if they are playing hardball.

It certainly is and highlights that the balance of favour is firmly with employers as far as the Act is concerned. Terminate the agreement, get done over OR agree to mediation, and get done over. I feel for the FAAA. I presume termination has a good chance given the COVID situation. Unlucky cards.

[hillbillybob]

They are certainly heavily geared towards the employer. The irony is that the Coalition government has left them virtually untouched since they came to power in 2013. They’re virtually the same as they were when Labor got rid of Workchoices in 2008 and introduced the Fairwork Commission.

And lets not forget that the lockout in QF happened under a Labor government and their laws also.

No, definitely not employee friendly.

Of course the question is how should a union respond to that point? I’ll leave that little hand grenade just lying in the dirt for a bit! :ok:

they didn't need to change the laws, they just stacked the bench of umpires

[Ladloy]

they didn't need to change the laws, they just stacked the bench of umpires
Less publicity if you don't need to change laws.

[CamelSquadron]

They are certainly heavily geared towards the employer.
No, definitely not employee friendly.


Not sure what planet your living on.

Australia has one of the most employee friendly IR arrangements in the World.

[blubak]

Not sure what planet your living on.

Australia has one of the most employee friendly IR arrangements in the World.
I guess that gives any company the right then to seek to cancel an agreement when suddenly it doesnt suit them any more?

[Keg]

Not sure what planet your living on.

Australia has one of the most employee friendly IR arrangements in the World.

Mate, Qantas pilots wore a red tie and made a PA and were locked out of their work place. Do you really want to pursue that line of argument?

Yes, Australia’s IR regime may be better than most other places in the world. That does not change the fact that they’re still heavily geared towards the employer in most circumstances.

[Colonel_Klink]

Mate, Qantas pilots wore a red tie and made a PA and were locked out of their work place. Do you really want to pursue that line of argument?

Yes, Australia’s IR regime may be better than most other places in the world. That does not change the fact that they’re still heavily geared towards the employer in most circumstances.

And further to this - not too many Western Democracies limit the time when employees can take their fundamental right of removing their labour (ie take strike action) as Australia does.

Not too many other countries allow the Stand Down of employees as Australia has experienced either. I have friends who work in different industries overseas, and they can’t seem to grasp the concept that the Company I work for can simply stop paying me completely at the drop of a hat.

[hotnhigh]

This case could quickly become one of the bigger issues in the up coming election. It could be a gift for Albo if he played it right. Unfortunately, I’m not sure if his team is smart enough to exploit it to their advantage.

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/860x573/4e9b2bdf_3cf0_4678_b4c7_06e4568c603b_84491fc884db06bf7750cda e0d2a98d683a5b584.jpeg
Happier times…

[sumtingwong]

What a rogues gallery of puckered ar*$holes.

[wombat watcher]

Mate, Qantas pilots wore a red tie and made a PA and were locked out of their work place. Do you really want to pursue that line of argument?

Yes, Australia’s IR regime may be better than most other places in the world. That does not change the fact that they’re still heavily geared towards the employer in most circumstances.


just never forget that whatever regime we’ve got, it was designed by Labor’s Julia Gillard while in office.

[theheadmaster]

just never forget that whatever regime we’ve got, it was designed by Labor’s Julia Gillard while in office.

And the political alternative brought you 'Work Choices'.

[Shark Patrol]

And the political alternative brought you 'Work Choices'.

Aaaaah “Work Choices” - take what you’re given or quit. That was the only choice involved. The naming of it would have done “Yes, Minister” proud, and the incessant ads in the election lead-up saying how great it was just convinced everybody how really rotten it must be! Cost Howard his job and his seat. God knows what Work Choices Phase 2 would have involved.

[unobtanium]

Not sure what planet your living on.

Australia has one of the most employee friendly IR arrangements in the World.

Of course it is, look how well it worked for the local manufacturing and car industry.

[neville_nobody]

Australia has one of the most employee friendly IR arrangements in the World.

The problem for both sides of politics is that Australian salaries are to high on a global scale.We are just never going to compete globally in manufacturing or in a service industry with such a high minimum salary. However the government is just as culpable with such high levels of taxation and a vast array of government services. This argument goes back and forth over a few issues so it is not very definitive but we won't survive economically if we keep paying unskilled labour such high salaries. The reason the federal government makes business friendly arbitration is they know that salaries are to high already and if the labour are already on a high salary this drives other salaries and the cost of everything up.

As an aside it is an interesting to see on other public forums the amount of vitriol spewed out at the general cost of tradesmen/childcare/service industry. People who (I'm guessing are from Asian Heritage with the associated migrant work/study ethic) were told to work hard and study so that you don't end up in a manual labour job, end up paying a disproportionate amount of their hard earned salary to uneducated labour whilst the educated population gets hammered down with taxes, high cost of living, inflation and no real way forward whilst trying to compete with some guy from New Delhi with 3 degrees who costs 10% of your salary.

[Australopithecus]

CamelSquadron is a paid shill…one of the “angels”. He or she only ever pipes up when the troops get restless and start voicing dissatisfaction with the EBA or Qantas executive remuneration.

As for Australian labour costs…what do you expect in one of the highest cost countries in the world? Its hard to pay those pesky ingrates less money when they insist on such luxuries as food and shelter.

[Keg]

just never forget that whatever regime we’ve got, it was designed by Labor’s Julia Gillard while in office.

Yes. That irony is not lost on me!

[theheadmaster]

Yes. That irony is not lost on me!

Yes, she replaced Work Choices with the Fair Work Bill when she was Deputy leader. Not great for workers, particularly since Sophie Mirabella, a vocal advocate for Work Choices, stacked the Commission (and has now been appointed to the job herself), but definitely better than what it replaced.

[blubak]

CamelSquadron is a paid shill…one of the “angels”. He or she only ever pipes up when the troops get restless and start voicing dissatisfaction with the EBA or Qantas executive remuneration.

As for Australian labour costs…what do you expect in one of the highest cost countries in the world? Its hard to pay those pesky ingrates less money when they insist on such luxuries as food and shelter.
Ha,thought exactly the same when i saw that name pop up after many months of silence. A company stooge or a paid shill as you say is almost a given but considering who we are talking about,why should we be surprised with the re-appearance at such an opportune time.

[wombat watcher]

Yes, she replaced Work Choices with the Fair Work Bill when she was Deputy leader. Not great for workers, particularly since Sophie Mirabella, a vocal advocate for Work Choices, stacked the Commission (and has now been appointed to the job herself), but definitely better than what it replaced.

She could have gone further but didn’t.
Her Marquis of Queensberry rules for IR produced the Qf lockout in 2011 amongst other unpleasant occurrences.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

The problem for both sides of politics is that Australian salaries are to high on a global scale.We are just never going to compete globally in manufacturing or in a service industry with such a high minimum salary.

The problem is there are examples of countries around the world where the standard of living is both high and the population is paid well. The true problem is the great Australian political sport of taxing anyone who has the audacity to get off their arse and make something of themselves. The cost of running a business is not found in the cost of its workforce, it’s found in the minefield of BS and multiple layers of government imposed costs.

[krismiler]

Mediation by an independent third party tasked with finding a solution which is fair to both sides is probably the way to go. QF want to screw their employees into the ground and the unions expect T&Cs which are unrealistic in the current environment, so something in between will have to do.

Australia needs to decide if it wants a Scandanavian system which tries to equalize everyone with high wages but sky high prices and taxes. At present, certain groups do well but many are on the margins, whilst taxes and prices are lower than the Nordic countries but still relatively high.

[theheadmaster]

Mediation by an independent third party tasked with finding a solution which is fair to both sides is probably the way to go.

That process is in place and is being pursued now. Unfortunately, mediation cannot force an outcome or change the power or options available to the participants.

[Derfred]

Of course it is, look how well it worked for the local manufacturing and car industry.

The demise of the Australian car industry is commonly blamed on Unions and Australian wages in general.

That is not particularly true.

This guy (https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/travel/a33490605/0052-0056-how-australias-auto-industry-fell-apart-september-2020/) sums it up pretty well when he notes the early 2000’s mining boom and it’s impact on doubling the value of the Australian Dollar:

…the fact that the [Australian] dollar went sky-high and made manufacturing uncompetitive across a range of things, not just the car industry,” says Dr. Lansbury. That currency boom, he argues, played a much larger part in the demise of Australian automaking than the role of organized labor.

He goes on to say:

Australian wage rates in the auto sector were not unusually high,” says Dr. Katz. “The unions as well were not particularly militantly adversarial. They were tough… but you didn’t hear, ‘we have about a zillion disciplines going on’ or ‘we have walkout strikes’ or ‘we have union leaders we can’t even talk to.’

The reality for automotive production in Australia was that the domestic market was too small to be efficient. The only way to make it efficient was to produce more vehicles, and the only way to do that was to have a large export market - and the resources boom caused the dollar to rise which made exports unviable.

We had our moments in a potential export market. I knew a few people involved in Holden - in the early 2000’s, the Monaro, for example, was exported and was becoming a bit of a hit overseas (in various names - I think it was a Vauxhall in the UK, a Pontiac in the USA, and a Chevy in the ME, but it was an Aussie Monaro, and it was well liked. The Top Gear guys loved it.)

When you compete in a highly competitive industry in which you don’t have the advantage of low cost labour, you must compete in other ways, such as producing an awesome vehicle, like the Monaro was. The Germans obviously learned that trick early - don’t be the cheapest, just be the best. That exact argument translates to Qantas. They can’t compete internationally on cost, so don’t try. They need another selling point. High quality cabin service, particularly in the premium cabin, is something they should be prepared to pay for. That goes a little bit further than training an 18yo to ask “do you want fries with that?”.

Government subsidies are also a red-herring for the car industry arguments. This (https://theconversation.com/factcheck-do-other-countries-subsidise-their-car-industry-more-than-we-do-16308) article from 2013 compared Australian subsidies to other countries. Germany subsidised at the time about 67% of our rate, and the USA about 150%. But the key metric is number of vehicles produced (and, I guess, exported - subsidies make more sense when they support national exports, that’s why we don’t even blink when subsidising mining). Germany had 3 times our population but manufactured 25 times the number of vehicles - obviously a net exporter of vehicles. German automotive employees are well paid, and their government continues to be happy to subsidise their industry.

The total Australian car industry government subsidy was around $400M/year during the decade prior to its demise. (If you had asked the average punter on the street at the time they would often have thought it was a lot more than that). We were producing about 200,000 vehicles per year, so about $2000 per car. They took most of that straight back in stamp duty at point of sale anyway. We were recently outlaying more than that per week just by doubling the dole during COVID (1.6M Jobseekers at an extra $250 odd per week). That alone over a year would have paid for 50 years of car industry support. Qantas spends nearly half that annually in it’s “marketing” budget.

That kind of puts Australia’s attitude towards car manufacturing into perspective.

It wasn’t killing the taxpayer to support the car industry, it was just that the Government decided in its wisdom that it didn’t want to do it any more. Pulling the $400M was enough to make the remaining automotive players in Australia pull out, with devastating effects on all the support and small parts manufacturing in the country.

That move apparently cost about 20,000 Australian jobs across the industry. $400M divided by 20,000 jobs is $20K per job. Given that, on average, each of those workers would probably have been paying $20K tax, they killed an industry for close to zero gain/loss on the books for the Nation.

The high ranking Government employees love it, because whilst they previously had to be chauffeured around in $70K Holdens by Government decree, now they get $400K Mercs and BMW’s because they no longer have to “buy Australian”. Even the coppers are now chasing me down the freeway in a BMW rather than a Holden, although, quite frankly, I think most of them would still prefer a Holden. Please allow me a gratuitous Blues Brothers quote: ‘It's got a cop motor, a 440 cubic inch plant, it's got cop tires, cop suspension, cop shocks. It's a model made before catalytic converters so it'll run good on regular gas.”

Regardless, our Government has done its sums on manufacturing in general and decided that we are not the country for that.

We only really have 2 export industries that we do well:

1. Digging holes and sending the ore-rich diggings off-shore on foreign-owned ships;
2. Food production (planting seeds and grazing animals).

Our secondary export industries that we do well are:

3. Tourism - which we destroyed during COVID by not letting them come here; and
4. Tertiary Education - which we destroyed during COVID by not letting them come here.

(Ironically, Scomo pretty much ignored both those industries while he was writing cheques during COVID. For example, University staff were deliberately disqualified from JobKeeper because sometimes they go on to become ABC journalists).

But, the automotive industry, along with any other manufacturing we dabbled with, was never on the above list. And reducing minimum wage would not change that. What it would do, is destroy the local economy, as many punters would no longer have expendable cash to keep the local economy pumping. Be careful what you wish for.

[krismiler]

The answer lies in finding something you can do well at and specializing in it, also knowing when to move on to something else is important.

Japan in the 1960s was a low cost manufacturing center that moved onto higher quality and prices. China is having to go upmarket as wages are increasing and countries such a Vietnam and Bangladesh are undercutting it at the lower level of the manufacturing spectrum.

QF will never be a major hub airline due to it's location and cost base, they need a selling point to persuade people to pay a little more than the lowest price they can find on Skyscanner. Safety, reliability, punctuality, good cabin fit out etc might make someone willing to pay an extra $150 for a return flight to London over which ever airline is currently having a special fare.

Being better if you can't be cheaper and cheaper if you can't be better is the way to go.

[lucille]

Thing is, the passenger experience as a saleable commodity is a global product. The cost cost of delivering a quality product is dependant on many things, salaries being one of them.
As result, Ts&Cs can only go on a downward trajectory as QF seeks to compete on costs and uses the Asian airlines as the benchmark.
The premium Asian and Middle East airlines certainly deliver an equal or even superior cabin services product than their western counterparts and they can do this with a far lesser cost base.

The future is not rosy. One of the unfortunate outcomes of globalism.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

The BIG problem for an airline who’s major selling point is safety but who is hell bent on chasing the dollar and who is brutally driving down pay and conditions is that the end result of that cost reduction is usually an accident. Coffin corner is a good analogy for such a business model and when your only selling point is safety you have nowhere to go but down.

[FightDeck]

The 18 hour maximum duty limit for international operations in the Minimum Cabin crew award will be interesting in the unlikely event Fair Work terminates their current agreement.

[theheadmaster]

The 18 hour maximum duty limit for international operations in the Minimum Cabin crew award will be interesting in the unlikely event Fair Work terminates their current agreement.

Do you think termination is unlikely because the cabin crew have a weak bargaining position and will agree to what Qantas wants during mediation, or do you think Qantas does not have a strong case for termination? If the EA is terminated, what do you think the interesting outcome will be? An application for Fair Work to make a determination to vary the Award, use of foreign based crew, or a change to schedules to accomodate any limiting crew duty limits?

[knobbycobby]

Do you think termination is unlikely because the cabin crew have a weak bargaining position and will agree to what Qantas wants during mediation, or do you think Qantas does not have a strong case for termination? If the EA is terminated, what do you think the interesting outcome will be? An application for Fair Work to make a determination to vary the Award, use of foreign based crew, or a change to schedules to accomodate any limiting crew duty limits?

What risks do Qantas face? Who says Qantas will be successful in termination of the agreement? What ramifications does any decision Fair work make have for multitudes of other employee groups across multiple industries, if Qantas can just show up to negotiate with a bunch of demands, and not compromise with the sole aim of termination being the desired end result? What risk does a decision have on clogging the courts with every other employer trying the same thing should the Qantas tactic prove to be successful?
Who says that Fair Work accepts Qantas position as the only correct and just one? What happens if Qantas are unsuccessful in terminating the cabin crew agreement? Who is to say that this is not just a last ditch negotiation strategy by Qantas?

[theheadmaster]

What risks do Qantas face? Who says Qantas will be successful in termination of the agreement? What ramifications does any decision Fair work make have for multitudes of other employee groups across multiple industries, if Qantas can just show up to negotiate with a bunch of demands, and not compromise with the sole aim of termination being the desired end result? What risk does a decision have on clogging the courts with every other employer trying the same thing should the Qantas tactic prove to be successful?
Who says that Fair Work accepts Qantas position as the only correct and just one? What happens if Qantas are unsuccessful in terminating the cabin crew agreement? Who is to say that this is not just a last ditch negotiation strategy by Qantas?

What risk does Qantas face? Given that the terms of an EA remain in place until replaced or terminated, I would say that the risk for Qantas is little to none either way. Who says Qantas will be successful? There is no guarantee they will be successful, but if you look to the situation the Virgin cabin crew found themselves in early last year, this is what the Commissioner's Recommendation stated:
In my view, if this vote is unsuccessful, realistically, limited options will remain. It should be understood, that against the Commission’s tests, if the Company is faced with a second failed vote was then to make an application to terminate the Agreement and return to the Award; the circumstances would then meet the Commission’s tests for termination of the Agreement. Importantly, the majority of terms in this, in principle Agreement, are significantly more favourable to employees, than many provisions in the Award.


Not sure if this link will work, but you can search Fair Work Commission Virgin Australia Airlines Pty Ltd T/A Virgin Australia (B2021/72) Commissioner Spencer https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiP44a7gOr1AhW1zjgGHazUA1MQFnoECAQQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.twu.com.au%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2021%2F04%2Fcommissioner-recommendations.docx&usg=AOvVaw0Ie29zCKYnBEYipn9c_dG-

It is worth noting that the Fair Work Act states that an Agreement MUST be terminated on application if it meets the test mentioned by the Commissioner.

In response, this is what the TWU recommended: https://www.twu.com.au/companies/virgin/virgincabincrewyesvote/

What are the ramifications of termination? My view is it is a reminder of what is at risk. When negotiating you need to understand what the costs and risks are for both parties. If you try to press for outcome that is more cost and/or risk than the other party's alternatives, you have pretty much forced them to take the alternate course of action.

I think your other questions are variations of the same theme.

Don't think I like any of this. This is where we are with the current industrial relations laws and decisions made by the current Commissioners. I just want pilots to be fully aware of what is actually happening so that when it comes time to assessing the risks involved with EA negotiations they are dealing with facts versus being in an echo chamber only hearing what we want to hear.

[Talkwrench]

What risk does Qantas face? Given that the terms of an EA remain in place until replaced or terminated, I would say that the risk for Qantas is little to none either way. Who says Qantas will be successful? There is no guarantee they will be successful, but if you look to the situation the Virgin cabin crew found themselves in early last year, this is what the Commissioner's Recommendation stated:
In my view, if this vote is unsuccessful, realistically, limited options will remain. It should be understood, that against the Commission’s tests, if the Company is faced with a second failed vote was then to make an application to terminate the Agreement and return to the Award; the circumstances would then meet the Commission’s tests for termination of the Agreement. Importantly, the majority of terms in this, in principle Agreement, are significantly more favourable to employees, than many provisions in the Award.


Not sure if this link will work, but you can search Fair Work Commission Virgin Australia Airlines Pty Ltd T/A Virgin Australia (B2021/72) Commissioner Spencer https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiP44a7gOr1AhW1zjgGHazUA1MQFnoECAQQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.twu.com.au%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2021%2F04%2Fcommissioner-recommendations.docx&usg=AOvVaw0Ie29zCKYnBEYipn9c_dG-

It is worth noting that the Fair Work Act states that an Agreement MUST be terminated on application if it meets the test mentioned by the Commissioner.

In response, this is what the TWU recommended: https://www.twu.com.au/companies/virgin/virgincabincrewyesvote/

What are the ramifications of termination? My view is it is a reminder of what is at risk. When negotiating you need to understand what the costs and risks are for both parties. If you try to press for outcome that is more cost and/or risk than the other party's alternatives, you have pretty much forced them to take the alternate course of action.

I think your other questions are variations of the same theme.

Don't think I like any of this. This is where we are with the current industrial relations laws and decisions made by the current Commissioners. I just want pilots to be fully aware of what is actually happening so that when it comes time to assessing the risks involved with EA negotiations they are dealing with facts versus being in an echo chamber only hearing what we want to hear.

.Would it be a good idea for the union/employees to just continue to "bargain in good faith" during meditation until the FWC makes it decision in April or whenever it is?

Then regardless of the outcome, be it EA termination and reversion to Award or no EA termination, then just continue to "bargain in good faith" just like Qantas always "bargains in good faith" until the outcome of the federal election is known in mid May?

Then maybe further decisions about what might be achievable can be made depending on whether it is Scotty or Albo in charge?

I wonder if much will change in the FWC if Albo wins...

[SHVC]

Let’s hope Albo doesn’t win!

[wombat watcher]

Let’s hope Albo doesn’t win!


Just remember that it was Labor’s Bob Hawke and Bill Kelty’s ACTU that took the flamethrower to the AFAP in 1989.

[Talkwrench]

Let’s hope Albo doesn’t win!

Or let's hope he does win!

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Hi all,

I noticed the thread on this subject but wished to post a link to a petition everyone in aviation should be signing.

https://www.megaphone.org.au/petitions/protect-qantas-cabin-crew-pay-safety?fbclid=IwAR0eicePrqLm-a-9G8XOS2RNBTK8EpxU6pL-hOXmzXteW5A3Q_7dIdSe8wY

Qantas FAs are under fire from the Qantas legal juggernaut. This not a case of 'lucky it is not me'. Engineers and Pilots should be standing by them primarliy because they are our workmates. If that is not enough, the consequences will touch all of us. Qantas are trying to cancel their agreement because they do not like the rostering clauses. If they can do it to them, they can do it to us too. It does not matter what company you work for.

The consequences are dire. If your EA is cancelled, you go back to Award wages. For many FAs, this means about half of their already ordinary wages. I don't even want to look at what a LAME on Award wages would earn. Pilot Award wages would also be a pittance. Awards are not updated and wage rates are often those of 20 years ago.

Hoping as many as possible can support this cause.
cheers
Steve Purvinas - ALAEA Federal Secretary

[non_state_actor]

What I discovered last year was that the award does not include the award work rules. Not sure if it applies in this case however we were staring down award wages with negotiated work rules, not the weekends off, 8 hour work day of the award. I still do not fully understand how you can apply one and not the other however we were given advice from the union that’s how it worked.

[kimbobimbo]

Cancelling EBA’s isn’t a new idea, it’s always been a part of the EBA process. A simple search of EBA’s will show the options each party has when presented with certain circumstances. PIA is one of them.

When an EBA is under negotiation it can, and always could, be cancelled. Mostly this would not happen as it would have dire consequences for the companies work force. Ie, the theory is that the company would loose many employees.

I’m not at all a fan of what Qantas is doing but it is their right under the legislation. All we can do as employees is react. What will be interesting to see is whether peeps will do the maths and realise they can do way better elsewhere in the workforce! Plenty of people I know have flourished during covid starting up their own businesses when presented with stand downs ect. It’s honestly amazed me, I feel like when the airlines start asking stood down people to come back they may be surprised!

But of course I hope a more mutually beneficial solution can be found.

[SHVC]

This should be posted on one of those QF work sites.

[blubak]

Cancelling EBA’s isn’t a new idea, it’s always been a part of the EBA process. A simple search of EBA’s will show the options each party has when presented with certain circumstances. PIA is one of them.

When an EBA is under negotiation it can, and always could, be cancelled. Mostly this would not happen as it would have dire consequences for the companies work force. Ie, the theory is that the company would loose many employees.

I’m not at all a fan of what Qantas is doing but it is their right under the legislation. All we can do as employees is react. What will be interesting to see is whether peeps will do the maths and realise they can do way better elsewhere in the workforce! Plenty of people I know have flourished during covid starting up their own businesses when presented with stand downs ect. It’s honestly amazed me, I feel like when the airlines start asking stood down people to come back they may be surprised!

But of course I hope a more mutually beneficial solution can be found.
I have a relative who is 1 of those flight attendants who have found other employment whilst being stood down. She has told me that she will not be going back to her flying job under the conditions that are being proposed & the same is being said by those she still has contact with in the industry.
As you say,the answer the airlines will get may surprise them.

[Roj approved]

I have a relative who is 1 of those flight attendants who have found other employment whilst being stood down. She has told me that she will not be going back to her flying job under the conditions that are being proposed & the same is being said by those she still has contact with in the industry.
As you say,the answer the airlines will get may surprise them.

The way I see it, this is the answer Qantas wants.

This is the "legacy" agreement, with lots of clauses the company doesn't like. Pay, Fleet, etc. So if they can get 2500 FA's to choose a different path, then that has saved them a bunch of money. Sure, they may be a little under crewed for a while and lose "a lot of experienced crew", but they don't care, the remaining FA's are all on less money and "more flexible" agreements.

It also has fair reaching repercussions for ALL workers on EA's across Australia, not just Aviation. There are plenty of links below to the various "Awards", but just imagine if every worker in the country took a 15% paycut due to being forced back onto their relevant Award. The knock on affect on the housing market, retail spending, the car market, Hospitality etc. would be devastating to an already struggling post Covid economy. Add rising interest rates as flagged last week by the Reserve Bank. Inflation has already risen to above 3% and QF is only offering 2%.

So things are going to get more expensive and we all will be earning less.

P.S. I was speaking to a guy the other day (upper manager in IT), he said "I didn't know we could do this, what a great way to save a bunch on wages"

[tossbag]

She has told me that she will not be going back to her flying job under the conditions that are being proposed & the same is being said by those she still has contact with in the industry.
As you say, the answer the airlines will get may surprise them.

I'd be guessing that this is exactly what qantas wants.

[hotnhigh]

Two year wage freeze seems fair.

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/862x485/621e822a_204f_4685_8ed9_4871eadadcae_ad670fcf589dec885f73c13 e9910ff263194d640.jpeg

[SHVC]

Imagine paying 28.9% more for fuel in 2022 on 2017 wages that were already below others, with no new EA in sight. Good luck to the FA I say. QF do not care if they all resign in mass in fact now is the perfect opportunity with international flying so low.

[blubak]

Imagine paying 28.9% more for fuel in 2022 on 2017 wages that were already below others, with no new EA in sight. Good luck to the FA I say. QF do not care if they all resign in mass in fact now is the perfect opportunity with international flying so low.
Their outlook on the international travel front may have just changed after today's announcement,maybe some back tracking or 'hoping to negotiate in good faith' announcement on the horizon??

[SHVC]

Touché. Post was 60 minutes to early.
Still my previous stands, AJ will not be seen to give an inch at any cost. We are still on an expired EA because they didn’t give an inch in fact now they’re making way more off us than any reduction in terms they sought. The FA have a fight and best be prepared to look for alternate employment or just get on with it.

[krismiler]

Unfortunately for them, flight attendants are relatively easy to replace. The time from off the street to operational isn't that long and the training isn't that expensive, particularly when compared to pilots and engineers. There is no shortage of applicants for what is still seen as an exciting and glamorous job which will be fun for a few years until moving onto something else.

[cloudsurfng]

They won’t be easy to replace if a large number leave at once, just as the ramp up begins.

let’s not understate how much easier an operation is with well trained and experienced crew, particularly when you have ex nurses/paramedics/police etc in the cabin crew role.

[altocu]

They won’t be easy to replace if a large number leave at once, just as the ramp up begins.

let’s not understate how much easier an operation is with well trained and experienced crew, particularly when you have ex nurses/paramedics/police etc in the cabin crew role.

I absolutely appreciate how much easier a day out it makes with those kind of folk down the back - nothing better than having a a former nurse or police officer back there! Unfortunately however, the company doesn't value that kind of experience.

[PoppaJo]

They couldn’t care less. Look what they did with Jetstar 787 CC over the years. If you think all the local crews who have all been recently trained on the 787 are staying put, forget it.

They will probably bring in those contractors like Altera and so on in the QF case.

[Roj approved]

On around the 11th Jan they advertised for Cabin crew positions on one of the new lower paid contracts, not 10 days later they are applying to Fair Work to have this EA cancelled.

Hmm, sounds like a bit of a plan in place?

[Icarus2001]

let’s not understate how much easier an operation is with well trained and experienced crew, particularly when you have ex nurses/paramedics/police etc in the cabin crew role.

I don’t think any PILOTS would disagree with that statement but the people in air conditioned offices who work Mon - Fri 9-5 and have their public holidays at home only manage what they can measure. They cannot measure how “easy” the day goes. Perhaps delay codes would be visible but that is all.
This seems to me to be a well timed play for a sea change in cabin crew conditions. They seem happy to roll the dice figuring that they can have new cabin crew trained and on line in about a month.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

This is all fine but the industry as a whole needs to stop pushing the safety first barrow when it is clear the focus is purely on cost. I’d love to be proven wrong but everything I can remember of late has been cost focused regardless of the negative effect on safety. Low morale is a killer and this has obviously not been factored into the war on staff.

[blubak]

On around the 11th Jan they advertised for Cabin crew positions on one of the new lower paid contracts, not 10 days later they are applying to Fair Work to have this EA cancelled.

Hmm, sounds like a bit of a plan in place?
Somebody in the know so to speak may be able to verify if this is true but i have been told that FA's on some of the latest contracts or EA's earn about $30/hour,the push by the company wants that reduced to around $22/hour.
If this is correct why would anybody even consider becoming an FA? There are so many positions in cafes/restaurants right now paying more than that & w/end work attracts penalties & there are no jetlag issues or phone calls telling u to show up for work the next morning at 5am or whatever time they suddenly dream up.

[BravoSierraLima]

I have a friend on the 717 at Cobham/Airlink/NJS/whatever they call themselves these days, tells me that their cabin crew hired in the last 5 years are Altara full time employees (not QF group employees). Their 5 week ground school is unpaid, where they share a hotel room with a stranger. They make about $47k base and a tiny hourly allowance while on duty. In the Canberra 717 base, parking isn't provided for cabin crew, they have to pay $100+/month, unsure about the other cabin crew bases.

So now that most of their operation is based in SYD/MEL/CBR, the three highest cost of living cities in the country the FAs are resigning and at last count, had a roughly equal number of tech crew and cabin crew, on an aircraft that crews 2 pilots/3 cabin crew. Altara has won the contract to supply 737 casuals now apparently, taking over the old MAM contract? Just in case anyone was wondering about where conditions could go.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

I have a friend on the 717 at Cobham/Airlink/NJS/whatever they call themselves these days, tells me that their cabin crew hired in the last 5 years are Altara full time employees (not QF group employees). Their 5 week ground school is unpaid, where they share a hotel room with a stranger. They make about $47k base and a tiny hourly allowance while on duty. In the Canberra 717 base, parking isn't provided for cabin crew, they have to pay $100+/month, unsure about the other cabin crew bases.

So now that most of their operation is based in SYD/MEL/CBR, the three highest cost of living cities in the country the FAs are resigning and at last count, had a roughly equal number of tech crew and cabin crew, on an aircraft that crews 2 pilots/3 cabin crew. Altara has won the contract to supply 737 casuals now apparently, taking over the old MAM contract? Just in case anyone was wondering about where conditions could go.

They are NJS now, thank god Cobham are out of the picture according to most. As for Altara, anecdotally they are not a good employer, cabin crew exist under terrible employment conditions with virtually no rights, a pathetic salary and no support. DO NOT let these conditions in, go and stack shelves at Coles! Better still do a job that society needs and is not subject to constant erosion.

[aussieflyboy]

They are NJS now, thank god Cobham are out of the picture according to most. As for Altara, anecdotally they are not a good employer, cabin crew exist under terrible employment conditions with virtually no rights, a pathetic salary and no support. DO NOT let these conditions in, go and stack shelves at Coles! Better still do a job that society needs and is not subject to constant erosion.

It was always NJS. Cobham owned NJS, now Qantas does.

Apparently Qantas have been slowing getting rid of the expensive NJS cabin crew by closing the bases that had the most of them and only employing Altara crew at the new bases. Darwin, Perth and Cairns had cabin crew who were working for NJS flying Qantas (Airlink) domestic services before Qantas had a domestic arm. 30+ years flying the same passengers to Alice Springs/Paraburdoo/Broome ect. Greeting the regular pax by name like they’re old friends. Very few relocated when the bases were closed as they had deep roots. Now the pax get to enjoy a 21 year old talking about how their friends got Covid from licking the floor at Monsoons…

[FightDeck]

If you look at Virgin Cabin Crew EA

They started bargaining in 2018
Virgin was in dire financial peril losing $380m in one year
Virgin went insolvent and into administration.
thousands made redundant at Virgin including all of Tiger
hundreds of meetings took place with Virgin and union with no result over many many years

Both Virgin and the TWU etc asked for mediation from FWA Australia. Yes Virgin have said they may apply to terminate if an agreement can’t be reached however:

The Judge has recommended a negotiated agreement that is far ahead of the minimum award
The TWU has recommended voting on the agreement that is far ahead of the Minimum award
the commissioner complimented both parties on the conduct of subsequent negotiations

Qantas isn’t insolvent as was the case with Virgin. The redundancy issue is also different. Termination is not the only option. FWA, Virgin and the TWU have all recommended a newly negotiated package which is far superior to the minimum award.
Qantas position is not the same to that at Virgin. It will also be interesting to see how it unfolds as the Omicron wanes, the borders open up, and the economy starts surging ahead. Not to mention the political pressure.
​​​​​​

[73to91]

And at the ports, https://www.actu.org.au/actu-media/media-releases/2022/patrick-moves-to-cut-dock-wages-in-halfPatrick Terminals have applied to the Fair Work Commission to terminate its existing enterprise agreement, a move which would cut the pay, conditions and job security of dock workers. If the company succeeds, workers face a staggering 50 per cent wage cut.

Dock workers have been working rolling shifts, 24 hours a day, seven days a week through the pandemic, and recent data from NSW Ports showed an 18.37 per cent increase in containers put through the port in the 12 months to September 2021.

Over the last year, profit margins in the shipping industry as a whole have increased by 11 percentage points to 20.8 per cent, and Patricks have increased their Terminal Access Charges by an average of 55 per cent across their four Australian ports. At the same time Patrick workers have seen an effective wage freeze for 2 years.

Qube – which owns Patricks, has enjoyed a steady 3.3 per cent increase in revenue every year for the five years leading to 2021.

This company – which has the vocal support of the Morrison Government – is using the pandemic as cover to attempt to slash the wages and conditions of workers

Then, https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/02/08/patr-f08.html

The Maritime Union of Australia (MUA) yesterday announced it had reached an “in-principle agreement” with Patrick Terminals, which Patrick workers should reject.

The “11th-hour” union-management deal was brokered ahead of a Fair Work Commission (FWC) hearing on Patrick’s bid to terminate the existing enterprise agreement (EA) covering the company’s more than 1,000 workers in the ports of Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Fremantle.

[Icarus2001]

The Maritime Union of Australia (MUA) yesterday announced it had reached an “in-principle agreement” with Patrick Terminals, which Patrick workers should reject. Interesting.

[Slugga]

Qantas terminates long haul cabin crew agreement, demands more flexibility

I'm guessing they would like 56 day trips like NZ crew can do, or the fact that they can call crew on last day of standby and go right through their designated days off without mutual agreement........ What kind of life could anyone possibly plan with such 'rules'. So much for "Fairwork". Without any resemblance of 'fair', this will only go one way and she ain't pretty. Time the journalists starting exposing the 'Spirit of Australia' that Joyce really exhibits

[teiemka]

Don’t know if this has been posted elsewhere, but have not seen this laundry list discussed within this thread.

As an outsider QF communications have always struck me as disingenuous, often contorting and slaloming to conveniently skirt components that don’t fit their narrative.

If anyone has the knowledge and can be bothered to review to dissect and rebut it would be greatly appreciated. Publicly accessible parts of FAAA and TWU do not make any reference to this QF communication.

[CamelSquadron]

CamelSquadron is a paid shill…one of the “angels”. He or she only ever pipes up when the troops get restless and start voicing dissatisfaction with the EBA or Qantas executive remuneration.

As for Australian labour costs…what do you expect in one of the highest cost countries in the world? Its hard to pay those pesky ingrates less money when they insist on such luxuries as food and shelter.

Its the standard accusation whenever somone posts a dose of reality that the spoilt whiners dont like.

As for costs, it is circular. Wages go up, so costs go up. Australia is one of the highest cost countries because we have amongst the highest wages.

Its a big generalistion but with the current industrial relations system, if one group gets X%, everyone else expects X%. So costs go up across the board. The way to get ahead is to be more efficient and share the benefis of that increased efficiency. But staff dont want to be more efficient and QF doesnt want to share any efficiency gains with staff - creating little goodwill between both sides.

You are working in an industry that is very mature, low margin and highly competitive for an employer that has no protection from lower cost international competitors. You cannot ignore this reality.

[CamelSquadron]

The demise of the Australian car industry is commonly blamed on Unions and Australian wages in general.

That is not particularly true.

This guy (https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/travel/a33490605/0052-0056-how-australias-auto-industry-fell-apart-september-2020/) sums it up pretty well when he notes the early 2000’s mining boom and it’s impact on doubling the value of the Australian Dollar:



He goes on to say:



The reality for automotive production in Australia was that the domestic market was too small to be efficient. The only way to make it efficient was to produce more vehicles, and the only way to do that was to have a large export market - and the resources boom caused the dollar to rise which made exports unviable.

We had our moments in a potential export market. I knew a few people involved in Holden - in the early 2000’s, the Monaro, for example, was exported and was becoming a bit of a hit overseas (in various names - I think it was a Vauxhall in the UK, a Pontiac in the USA, and a Chevy in the ME, but it was an Aussie Monaro, and it was well liked. The Top Gear guys loved it.)

When you compete in a highly competitive industry in which you don’t have the advantage of low cost labour, you must compete in other ways, such as producing an awesome vehicle, like the Monaro was. The Germans obviously learned that trick early - don’t be the cheapest, just be the best. That exact argument translates to Qantas. They can’t compete internationally on cost, so don’t try. They need another selling point. High quality cabin service, particularly in the premium cabin, is something they should be prepared to pay for. That goes a little bit further than training an 18yo to ask “do you want fries with that?”.

Government subsidies are also a red-herring for the car industry arguments. This (https://theconversation.com/factcheck-do-other-countries-subsidise-their-car-industry-more-than-we-do-16308) article from 2013 compared Australian subsidies to other countries. Germany subsidised at the time about 67% of our rate, and the USA about 150%. But the key metric is number of vehicles produced (and, I guess, exported - subsidies make more sense when they support national exports, that’s why we don’t even blink when subsidising mining). Germany had 3 times our population but manufactured 25 times the number of vehicles - obviously a net exporter of vehicles. German automotive employees are well paid, and their government continues to be happy to subsidise their industry.

The total Australian car industry government subsidy was around $400M/year during the decade prior to its demise. (If you had asked the average punter on the street at the time they would often have thought it was a lot more than that). We were producing about 200,000 vehicles per year, so about $2000 per car. They took most of that straight back in stamp duty at point of sale anyway. We were recently outlaying more than that per week just by doubling the dole during COVID (1.6M Jobseekers at an extra $250 odd per week). That alone over a year would have paid for 50 years of car industry support. Qantas spends nearly half that annually in it’s “marketing” budget.

That kind of puts Australia’s attitude towards car manufacturing into perspective.

It wasn’t killing the taxpayer to support the car industry, it was just that the Government decided in its wisdom that it didn’t want to do it any more. Pulling the $400M was enough to make the remaining automotive players in Australia pull out, with devastating effects on all the support and small parts manufacturing in the country.

That move apparently cost about 20,000 Australian jobs across the industry. $400M divided by 20,000 jobs is $20K per job. Given that, on average, each of those workers would probably have been paying $20K tax, they killed an industry for close to zero gain/loss on the books for the Nation.

The high ranking Government employees love it, because whilst they previously had to be chauffeured around in $70K Holdens by Government decree, now they get $400K Mercs and BMW’s because they no longer have to “buy Australian”. Even the coppers are now chasing me down the freeway in a BMW rather than a Holden, although, quite frankly, I think most of them would still prefer a Holden. Please allow me a gratuitous Blues Brothers quote: ‘It's got a cop motor, a 440 cubic inch plant, it's got cop tires, cop suspension, cop shocks. It's a model made before catalytic converters so it'll run good on regular gas.”

Regardless, our Government has done its sums on manufacturing in general and decided that we are not the country for that.

We only really have 2 export industries that we do well:

1. Digging holes and sending the ore-rich diggings off-shore on foreign-owned ships;
2. Food production (planting seeds and grazing animals).

Our secondary export industries that we do well are:

3. Tourism - which we destroyed during COVID by not letting them come here; and
4. Tertiary Education - which we destroyed during COVID by not letting them come here.

(Ironically, Scomo pretty much ignored both those industries while he was writing cheques during COVID. For example, University staff were deliberately disqualified from JobKeeper because sometimes they go on to become ABC journalists).

But, the automotive industry, along with any other manufacturing we dabbled with, was never on the above list. And reducing minimum wage would not change that. What it would do, is destroy the local economy, as many punters would no longer have expendable cash to keep the local economy pumping. Be careful what you wish for.

Not to mention that both Holden and Ford had been building poor quality products for quite some time - with engineering shortcuts being taken and a global parts procurement process that prioritised lowest cost ahead of quality and ahead of correctly fitting parts. Add that they were building products that customers no longer wanted. Their customers had moved away from sedans to SUV's and Utes. No competitive business will survive if it doesnt build what its customers want. Another important factor is they were all foreign owned and there was little appetite from the owners to invest in completely new products to be built in Australia or to be innovative in Australia for many reasons. The writing was on the wall for the car industry.

We now have ultra low 4% unemployment with a shortage of staff in many industries. This is a weakness in QF's position. If it pushes too hard, it will lose its best staff to other industries/competitors leaving only the deadwood behind and it may even face a staff shortage. This can bring companies undone - losing the undervalued high performing staff whilst retaining the underperforming deadwood - but this doesnt happen overnight.

[KRviator]

We now have ultra low 4% unemployment with a shortage of staff in many industries. This is a weakness in QF's position. If it pushes too hard, it will lose its best staff to other industries/competitors leaving only the deadwood behind and it may even face a staff shortage. This can bring companies undone - losing the undervalued high performing staff whilst retaining the underperforming deadwood - but this doesnt happen overnight.This is precisely what has happened on the Sydney rail network over the last few years.

Sydney Trains is one of the lowest-paying rail operators in the country, whose employees live in one of the most expensive cities in the country so a great many of them get a start there, get their qualifications and then move on, either to regional freight, or to the Pilbara operators doing a 2/2 roster on nearly double the salary. ST don't like recruiting for new Driver's as it leaves them exposed to the question "Why are you always recruiting? Why can't you retain staff?" In turn, ST becomes reliant on the remaining crew doing OT to cover the roster, and when those crew decide they don't want to do that OT anymore, the network collapses. The same thing happened in 2004, it just goes to show management never learn from their mistakes.

QF would do well to learn from the mistakes of others and offer a carrot to entice crew to become cross-qualified rather than taking a massive stick to their workforce.

[Roj approved]

This is precisely what has happened on the Sydney rail network over the last few years.

Sydney Trains is one of the lowest-paying rail operators in the country, whose employees live in one of the most expensive cities in the country so a great many of them get a start there, get their qualifications and then move on, either to regional freight, or to the Pilbara operators doing a 2/2 roster on nearly double the salary. ST don't like recruiting for new Driver's as it leaves them exposed to the question "Why are you always recruiting? Why can't you retain staff?" In turn, ST becomes reliant on the remaining crew doing OT to cover the roster, and when those crew decide they don't want to do that OT anymore, the network collapses. .

Insert Qantas, Jetstar, Virgin, or any of the operators into the beginning of this statement. Modern MBA theories ruining business across the globe

[gordonfvckingramsay]

This is precisely what has happened on the Sydney rail network over the last few years.

Sydney Trains is one of the lowest-paying rail operators in the country, whose employees live in one of the most expensive cities in the country so a great many of them get a start there, get their qualifications and then move on, either to regional freight, or to the Pilbara operators doing a 2/2 roster on nearly double the salary. ST don't like recruiting for new Driver's as it leaves them exposed to the question "Why are you always recruiting? Why can't you retain staff?" In turn, ST becomes reliant on the remaining crew doing OT to cover the roster, and when those crew decide they don't want to do that OT anymore, the network collapses. The same thing happened in 2004, it just goes to show management never learn from their mistakes.

QF would do well to learn from the mistakes of others and offer a carrot to entice crew to become cross-qualified rather than taking a massive stick to their workforce.

Is this not where the little envelopes with, er, um, birthday cards in them, start being handed to certain members of government in order to get skilled immigration kicking off again?

[Icarus2001]

Ukrainian refugees, fleeing persecution perhaps?

[blubak]

I'm guessing they would like 56 day trips like NZ crew can do, or the fact that they can call crew on last day of standby and go right through their designated days off without mutual agreement........ What kind of life could anyone possibly plan with such 'rules'. So much for "Fairwork". Without any resemblance of 'fair', this will only go one way and she ain't pretty. Time the journalists starting exposing the 'Spirit of Australia' that Joyce really exhibits
Theres a report in the WA newspaper that a new deal has been struck for long haul cabin crew which will allow the per-lhr service to operate again,can anyone elaborate further?

[gordonfvckingramsay]

Was it the agreement that stopped the sector or was it the WA border rules?

[Transition Layer]

Theres a report in the WA newspaper that a new deal has been struck for long haul cabin crew which will allow the per-lhr service to operate again,can anyone elaborate further?
That’s a complete load of nonsense - more drivel from GT perhaps?

This new deal is for Australian based crew, and the Perth-London flights are crewed exclusively by London based crew on a separate contract.

The recent removal of the WA hard border is the reason flights are returning to Perth.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

And so the precedent is set for the rest of the group. Who’s next in the firing line then?

[gordonfvckingramsay]

NJS Pilots have been told ‘we are retiring your aircraft soon. We will be ordering a replacement however we are yet to decide who will operate it. Oh btw we have started your EA negotiations, if you don’t agree/we don’t meet our ‘INSERT BS ‘MBA Graduate name’ for company goals’, these negotiations will only cover the soon to be gone B717 and you will all be redundant”

Gosh! Was the fair work act repealed at some point? Surely they aren’t negotiating in such a way.

[Colonel_Klink]

Gosh! Was the fair work act repealed at some point? Surely they aren’t negotiating in such a way.

I am not sure how these negotiations have been going, but I would be hopeful the pilot group wouldn’t fall for such BS. QF are not going to buy NJS from Cobham, to then 3 years later shut down the entire operation only then to have to recruit 150 odd pilots to cover the A220.

And Gordon has a point as well - if QF did do that, there would certainly be a case for the unions to argue that this would not be a genuine redundancy.

At some point, the workers are going to have to stand up to the garbage that is continually put out by QF IR. A realignment of the Fair Work Act by a Labor government would certainly assist that!

[neville_nobody]

I am not sure how these negotiations have been going, but I would be hopeful the pilot group wouldn’t fall for such BS. QF are not going to buy NJS from Cobham, to then 3 years later shut down the entire operation only then to have to recruit 150 odd pilots to cover the A220.

And Gordon has a point as well - if QF did do that, there would certainly be a case for the unions to argue that this would not be a genuine redundancy.


Given the amount of duplication that goes on in QF in management roles just by the sheer number of AOCs they hold I would imagine they would do exactly that just to simply send a message. It’s not about actually running an efficient cost effective airline it’s about keeping the pilots all in ‘check’ and making sure there is downward pressure on wages, regardless of how expensive that saving turns out to be.

[aussieflyboy]

I am not sure how these negotiations have been going, but I would be hopeful the pilot group wouldn’t fall for such BS. QF are not going to buy NJS from Cobham, to then 3 years later shut down the entire operation only then to have to recruit 150 odd pilots to cover the A220.

Would be closer to 300 pilots. NJS have roughly 200 pilots now on the 717 which operate around 8 hours a day. A220 will operate 10-15 hours a day so will need more crew.

[Icarus2001]

If they ever order the A220.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

I have been informed that the aircraft has not been ordered and that the order will only be made following the expected, possibly coerced capitulation of the pilots.

[JoeTripodi]

The Cabin Crew EBA was just the beginning of the new Qantas tactic to destroy all the terms and conditions for the remaining workgroups post Covid. The corporate bullies at Coward St have their sights set on the NJS EBA that is currently being “negotiated” in a take all, give nothing swift movement which “‘must be finalised quickly”. The staff have seen it all before and aren’t worried however there isn’t a drop of morale left and the sick calls are snowballing to the point of numerous cancelled flights.

[Icarus2001]

I have been informed that the aircraft has not been ordered and that… The whole world has been informed that they have not been ordered, by Qantas themselves, The announcement was a possible order late 2022.

[knobbycobby]

The Cabin crew agreement started to be negotiated just as COVID hit. It also came to loggerheads during COVID and border closures. Terrible timing for the cabin crew.
Qantas had a time limited advantage and exploited it. As COVID becomes less of an issue, borders opened etc then I doubt this will work as COVID was cited as the reason Qantas needed the relief about 1000 times. That’s not going to last forever. With regards to A220 etc then Qantas just try and see if pilots will take the lowest offer and fall for the scare.