QF Short Haul EBA

[pinkpanther1]

So to summarise AIPAs update on the SH EBA for the A321

- Removal of rostering protections
- Removal of geographical limits that SH aircraft can fly
- Ability to backfill reserves
- No pay increase
- sign or the planes go elsewhere

Plenty of other pineapples too.
what happened to the days of negotiations? These are threats, pure and simple.

[Brakerider]

Will be enjoyable watching what happens when both NJS and SH vote 90% NO.

it’s actually not enjoyable though. As a regular line pilot, it’s bloody stressful. At what point can/will regulators intervene to ensure good faith bargaining? What happens in May when we have a Labor government? Will employees ever be empowered again to negotiate or will we allow QF to employ mafia shakedown tactics til our retirement.

[Colonel_Klink]

It’s remarkable that in the current climate of workforce issues that are at the front and centre of public interest, that QF has continued to try it on with the SH group.

QF is asking for concessions from the SH group, with no movement from their end. The first point of call should be an agreement between the Company and the Pilot group that the pilots will not be beholden to the QF Wages Policy of a 2 year pay freeze during the next negotiation.

I hope AIPA are calling out QF on their BS. Has AIPA sought legal advice on whether the threat of giving the aircraft to another entity would be legal given the transfer of business issues in the Fair Work Act that would arise?

With all of the issues that may affect pilot recruitment over the next decade - it is my opinion that the 737 replacement will be flown by SH pilots, even if they give the current offer the response it deserves.

[dr dre]

I hope AIPA are calling out QF on their BS. Has AIPA sought legal advice on whether the threat of giving the aircraft to another entity would be legal given the transfer of business issues in the Fair Work Act that would arise?


All they need to do is announce “Project Winton is cancelled” (to remove the prior stated goal it’s a 737 replacement which would see it fall under the SH EBA). Then the next day announce a brand new subsidiary, “A321 Air” or something that will be set up with A321s and fly new routes initially, but encroach onto mainline routes within time. Perfectly legal. Or not even go that far. Suddenly NA or JQ get those 321s and are flying 10hr mainline routes on an aircraft with business class seats.

Unfortunately mainline pilot options are limited. Unions have been weakened to the point of non-existence, and there 3 existing group subsidiaries (NA, JQ and EFA) already flying the 320/321 who won’t be making the same mistake of voting down a deal to fly dozens of new aircraft.

So despite predictions of “90% No”, which was what was predicted with the 2015 and 2020 LH EBA votes but never eventuated, most pilots will have to look at the deal presented and make a choice re their future.



- Removal of rostering protections

That one will need more explanation, no doubt they want to use the A321 on some international routes but the bulk of flying would be domestic routes similar to current EBA. I think fire on that one should be held until more concrete information regarding what is being proposed is presented.

Removal of geographical limits that SH aircraft can fly

Obvious with the range of the aircraft, no biggie really.

- Ability to backfill reserves

Would have to come with a bit of an incentive I think (a few hours pay was proposed last EBA)

- No pay increase

I think most are happy with current pay. Already some of the highest paid narrowbody pilots in the world, and definitely ahead of local competitors and Award conditions.

Plenty of other pineapples too.

Didn’t see many other points in the email apart from what you listed. One about moving crew from the 737 to the 321 in time was one, but that’s about it.

Will have to wait until more concrete proposals are presented from both the Union and the Company really.

what happened to the days of negotiations?

That’s Industrial Relations 2022. Society has moved further from guaranteed permanent jobs with strict protections and good union representation to a temporary casualised gig style economy where one hours work a week is considered “fully employed”.

We can debate why this happened til the cows come home but it’s where we are.

[davidclarke]

This seems to be a sign of the times at QF.
Recently the negotiations between EFA and the company broke down. The company said this is the first and final offer, take it or leave it. Not a single claim that AIPA or AFAP put in was recognised.

There was no negotiation period! And this is after being below the award for 3 plus years due to an expired agreement!

Common sense prevailed and it was voted down.

[SOPS]

Can I ask please….what is “backfilling a reserve “ mean? Never heard of it in 35 years in aviation.

[dr dre]

I think mainline pilots are in a different boat, longer career stagnation has meant securing new aircraft is a higher priority. Losing the SH replacement aircraft would probably add another 10 years onto wait times for upgrades and promotions and deny a career command to a few hundred pilots.

There’s also a general awareness that they are better off than most of the subsidiary pilots, even after new variations. Whereas the subsidiaries are a lot closer to Award conditions, meaning there’s not much incentive to outsource.

[dr dre]

Can I ask please….what is “backfilling a reserve “ mean? Never heard of it in 35 years in aviation.

Basically assigning a reserve duty after roster release if sickness or call outs have exhausted reserve coverage for that particular day

[What The]

Dr Dre

Thanks for your input Nathan Coull.
And I think you have not read the mood of mainline pilots very well.

[dr dre]

Dr Dre

Thanks for your input Nathan Coull.
And I think you have not read the mood of mainline pilots very well.

I’m not that aforementioned person,

I want the flying too, on decent T&Cs like everyone else, but at the moment the mood seems to be of anger when there really hasn’t been much firm information presented about what the deal will entail.

It will come within time, maybe hold fire until then. See what the difference is between examples of trips on the rostering manual vs FRMS before declaring defeat.

[What The]

I’m not that aforementioned person,

I want the flying too, on decent T&Cs like everyone else, but at the moment the mood seems to be of anger when there really hasn’t been much firm information presented about what the deal will entail.

It will come within time, maybe hold fire until then. See what the difference is between examples of trips on the rostering manual vs FRMS before declaring defeat.

Thank you for your input Qantas Angel then.
If you don’t know the names of people then check Workday.
I cannot wait for “the deal” to show up in my inbox as a fait accompli.
It will be shoved up the pilates flexible coits with gusto.
I am an Army of One.

[Lapon]

The negotiations are probably indicative of the likeness of any aircraft actually being ordered.
Of course there was the intial hype and media frenzy of new aircraft coming, but at the end of the day they still have a reputation of not actually ordering anything to uphold.

The greedy pilots (or even customers nowadays) will be the reason for the projects delay.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

Nearly identical to what NJS have been presented with regards to the A220.

I’m sure the QF IR team are patting themselves on the back thinking they’re doing a great job as they head off for there Zumba class.

Will be enjoyable watching what happens when both NJS and SH vote 90% NO.

Im not sure the vote will go that way at NJS. The company have successfully planted enough seeds of doubt in the minds of the pilots. Many are terrified of the promised outcome should a NO vote happen and most can’t afford to take the risk of the company following through. Threatening the very roof over your head is a sick form of negotiating! Especially after many were brought to their knees during stand down.

I doubt having your pilots feeling the way they are right now is a great way to operate a safe airline.

[What The]

Im not sure the vote will go that way at NJS. The company have successfully planted enough seeds of doubt in the minds of the pilots. Many are terrified of the promised outcome should a NO vote happen and most can’t afford to take the risk of the company following through. Threatening the very roof over your head is a sick form of negotiating!

The Angels are busy tonight.

[morno]

Thank you for your input Qantas Angel then.
If you don’t know the names of people then check Workday.
I cannot wait for “the deal” to show up in my inbox as a fait accompli.
It will be shoved up the pilates flexible coits with gusto.
I am an Army of One.

Calling someone a Qantas angel these days is like the conspiracy theorists calling you a sheep because you got a covid vaccine. Just because they may have a slightly less emotionally charged opinion based on facts, doesn’t make them a Qantas angel.

:ugh:

[cloudsurfng]

Basically assigning a reserve duty after roster release if sickness or call outs have exhausted reserve coverage for that particular day


easily countered with a crew handshake agreement that if you’re dumping a reserve you do it at midnight. One R At a time too.

[What The]

Calling someone a Qantas angel these days is like the conspiracy theorists calling you a sheep because you got a covid vaccine. Just because they may have a slightly less emotionally charged opinion based on facts, doesn’t make them a Qantas angel.

:ugh:

Gee Morno, what are “the facts”?
If you know them, you are close to the action.
The Company position will be thrown back at them with interest.
The reality is no one gives a ****.
Two years of stand down really enables someone to plan.
The facts are Qantas is at a precipice. It is not North Korea or some other dictatorship and Kim Jong Al is not Dear Leader.
The people at the coal face have had enough and do not fear the midget mafia.
Time for some tossing.

One R at a time.

[dr dre]

Gee Morno, what are “the facts”?
If you know them, you are close to the action.
The Company position will be thrown back at them with interest.
The reality is no one gives a ****.
Two years of stand down really enables someone to plan.
The facts are Qantas is at a precipice. It is not North Korea or some other dictatorship and Kim Jong Al is not Dear Leader.
The people at the coal face have had enough and do not fear the midget mafia.
Time for some tossing.

One R at a time.

I think we just all need to calm down a bit, so far we don’t know the actual variations to be sought in order to secure the A321 for mainline.

For the most part it seems the sticking points are two issues, rostering and international ops. For the most part the aircraft will be operating mostly domestic, it is a domestic aircraft replacement. But it does have the range to fly medium haul international routes and no doubt that will form some of it’s operation. That’s something that will have to be sorted out in negotiations (which are continuing).

As for rostering I’ll hold fire until seeing what the difference the FRMS makes to actual rosters.

By the way if these variations are not suitable for you then you can always stay where you are or bid for a Long Haul type. This just allows those who want to fly the 321 on the conditions proposed. Some prioritise having a career over “shoving it up the company’s backside” to take revenge for what’s happened over the last two years.

[What The]

I think we just all need to calm down a bit, so far we don’t know the actual variations to be sought in order to secure the A321 for mainline.

For the most part it seems the sticking points are two issues, rostering and international ops. For the most part the aircraft will be operating mostly domestic, it is a domestic aircraft replacement. But it does have the range to fly medium haul international routes and no doubt that will form some of it’s operation. That’s something that will have to be sorted out in negotiations (which are continuing).

As for rostering I’ll hold fire until seeing what the difference the FRMS makes to actual rosters.

By the way if these variations are not suitable for you then you can always stay where you are or bid for a Long Haul type. This just allows those who want to fly the 321 on the conditions proposed.

Thank you Nathan Coull.
Terrible response. “If you don’t like it, leave”.

[What The]

So Dr Dre and Morno have been exposed as stooges.

Never to be trusted.

[dr dre]

Terrible response. “If you don’t like it, leave”.

Well that’s what happened in LH isn’t it? I hear some were not happy with the deal for the 787 so they’ve declined a promotion into that aircraft, which has seen then stay where they are and that available position given to someone more junior. The same will probably happen to the 350 too.

The changes being sought, in my opinion, are minor with the possible exception of the FRMS issue which I won’t comment on as not enough information has been presented yet.

It’s not like they’re asking for a 30% pay cut for 30% more work, or pay for your own endorsement, or days off in slip ports, or part time conditions or some of the other things that have been sought in various companies in recent years.

So as much as some vocal types really want revenge, I think more people would hope our association and the company will continue negotiations (that’s what was indicated on the email) to find a mutual solution.

[morno]

So Dr Dre and Morno have been exposed as stooges.

Never to be trusted.

Lay off the red big fella

[What The]

Lay off the Koolaid

[morno]

It must be **** to be so angry all the time.

Who cares

[ZebraFlyer]

I think we just all need to calm down a bit, so far we don’t know the actual variations to be sought in order to secure the A321 for mainline.

Is this how everyone actually thinks? That the pilot EBA is the determining factor in whether or not the company "secure" aircraft for mainline?

[gordonfvckingramsay]

I believe the the A220 order was also subject to screwing pilots down as low as possible. The impression I got was that if the NJS guys voted this unilateral agreement down, the order would not be placed. This puts QF in a weird position in a couple of ways. First, the whole green airline thing means they have to renew the fleet. Second, once the 717 is retired, which by current reliability rates is going to be soon, QF won’t have much of a regional jet presence. In a time where green is good and there are regional jet start ups who will gladly take that market share off QF, I think it’s time for the hipsters to put and end to their futile war against the only group of people qualified to save their airline.

[Icarus2001]

You’d have to be quite dull not to realise there is simply no spare pilots available for QF to start new A220 and A321 companies and their only solution is to have NJS and SH operate the ‘yet to be ordered or confirmed’ new aircraft.
Tell me did you see the Qantas - Alliance 18+ aircraft E190 deal coming, or was that a surprise to you?

Second, once the 717 is retired, which by current reliability rates is going to be soon, QF won’t have much of a regional jet presence. You mean other than the 18+ E190 aircraft?

[Lapon]

So the Qantas narrative so far is: agree to our non negotiable strategic imperatives asap and we might order some aircraft at some point in the future. If you don't agree then we might get someone else to operate the aircraft that we might order if or when we do. :rolleyes:

[Icarus2001]

That sounds like an excellent summary Lapon.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

Tell me did you see the Qantas - Alliance 18+ aircraft E190 deal coming, or was that a surprise to you?

You mean other than the 18+ E190 aircraft?

18+ ageing aircraft which don’t meet the green, new fleet imperative. And if you have a look at how well Alliance are doing at retaining pilots, I think you’ll see that they can’t do the job either.

[Transition Layer]

Lay off the red big fella
When did you become a skygod and join QF morno?

Oh that’s right, you didn’t…you’re just here to troll. :hmm:

[morno]

Well I actually came in here to try and knock some sense into you old codgers, but it appears that’s too hard and you all fight with each other anyway and call everyone who has an opposing view a “Qantas angel”.

I genuinely do wish you all luck in your fight, but you’re not going to get anywhere if you can’t look beyond your rage and be constructive in your negotiations. Yes you’re fighting an uphill battle, but so far I’m seeing the company win big time if you have people like those above doing the negotiating.

Play smart and United, not with rage and division.

[Transition Layer]

Well I actually came in here to try and knock some sense into you old codgers, but it appears that’s too hard and you all fight with each other anyway and call everyone who has an opposing view a “Qantas angel”.

I genuinely do wish you all luck in your fight, but you’re not going to get anywhere if you can’t look beyond your rage and be constructive in your negotiations. Yes you’re fighting an uphill battle, but so far I’m seeing the company win big time if you have people like those above doing the negotiating.

Play smart and United, not with rage and division.
Old codger? I wish! If I was then maybe I wouldn’t need to be so concerned with the outcome of these “negotiations”.

As aussieflyboy says, once it becomes a negotiation instead of the Company demanding everything, we might have a chance!

[ZebraFlyer]

For the last 9 weeks NJS pilots have been told exactly this.

”If you don’t meet our ‘SI (embarrassing name for company requirements)’ NJS will not get the A220 and you will be made redundant when the B717 is retired”

Fortunately what I’m hearing is most NJS pilots are not ‘Qantas Angels’ having been rejected by QF many years ago (and hired by NJS/Cobham) and will not bend the knee. ‘Negotiations’ have stalled…

You’d have to be quite dull not to realise there is simply no spare pilots available for QF to start new A220 and A321 companies and their only solution is to have NJS and SH operate the ‘yet to be ordered or confirmed’ new aircraft.

What an absolute crock (not you aussieflyboy, the sentiment). No worries just shut the NJS AOC down that you only recently purchased. Give the flying to a competitor.
I can understand why we, as employees with a typically massively over inflated sense of self importance, could be lead down the garden path into thinking we're the reason for an aircraft order happening or not.. Getting the aircraft either stacks up or it doesn't, the pilot cost is little more than a footnote in the business case. Same applies for shorthaul mainline.

[Don Diego]

Is the AIPA constructing an agreement for an aircraft that is yet to be ordered or is the AFAP out there going it alone???

[Beer Baron]

This has been Qantas’s method of negotiation for a decade. Agree on terms and then we will order the aircraft. It is not to say they won’t order the aircraft without the pilots agreement, but the threat is that another group of pilots will fly them.

The threat was extremely overt with the last LHEA. The CEO was pushing the threat via the media and talking of specific pilots who wanted to do the flying for less.

The threat with the Winton aircraft is a little more subtle but possibly more real because they already have ready trained crew in-house. There are multiple pilot groups in The Group beyond ‘mainline’ already flying the A320 and there are multiple pilot groups flying as QantasLink who’d probably be thrilled to get 20 A220’s.

So no, pilots don’t think the order hinges on themselves but the decision as to who flys them could be effected by the outcome of these negotiations.
That being said, we all have to stand up for our worth and vote no to a bad deal.

[Chronic Snoozer]

This has been Qantas’s method of negotiation for a decade. Agree on terms and then we will order the aircraft. It is not to say they won’t order the aircraft without the pilots agreement, but the threat is that another group of pilots will fly them.


Seems intuitive. Why put in place a ‘deadline’ for negotiations by setting a date the first aircraft arrives? Keeps the pilot bargaining position weak.

[deja vu]

So Dr Dre and Morno have been exposed as stooges.

Never to be trusted.
Not sure about Dr Dre, but Morno is definitely a stooge. Morno already conceded that pilots don't need to earn decent money. These are the sycophants that turned this industry into the bum fight it is today.

[morno]

Not sure about Dr Dre, but Morno is definitely a stooge. Morno already conceded that pilots don't need to earn decent money. These are the sycophants that turned this industry into the bum fight it is today.

Haha, did I just? Would you like to quote that?

If you don’t call $230k+ “decent money”, you are seriously in need of a reality check.

I’m all for good pay, but I believe the context you are looking for, is when someone suggested that we should be earning $460k+ (Double what we earn now I believe were the words used). That’s just unrealistic. Good luck to you trying to get that, but you can take half the jobs in the industry with you.

[t_cas]

(Double what we earn now I believe were the words used). That’s just unrealistic.

About as unrealistic as the corporate greed?

[Australopithecus]

Morno, just a couple of weeks ago you stated that you would grace Alliance with an application if the captain pay was 200K.

In 1987 I was making $80K flying a 36 passenger Dash-8. That’s 35 years ago to fly 1/3 the load half as fast.

I am acquainted with the building industry here in Qld. There are carpenter jobs going right now for $120/hr. That’s what you have to measure yourself against. Secondary school drop out plasterers on $98/hr. Which is $200K.

It vexes me mightily when pilots undervalue their skill set, to say the least of the sober dedication this job demands.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

Morno, just a couple of weeks ago you stated that you would grace Alliance with an application if the captain pay was 200K.

In 1987 I was making $80K flying a 36 passenger Dash-8. That’s 35 years ago to fly 1/3 the load half as fast.

I am acquainted with the building industry here in Qld. There are carpenter jobs going right now for $120/hr. That’s what you have to measure yourself against. Secondary school drop out plasterers on $98/hr. Which is $200K.

It vexes me mightily when pilots undervalue their skill set, to say the least of the sober dedication this job demands.

Well said! I know a guy who knows a guy who, in 1990 was earning roughly $200k flying a 100 seat jet domestically in Australia. Plugging that info into the RBA’s own inflation calculator gives a figure today of $416k, I rest my case.

https://www.rba.gov.au/calculator/annualDecimal.html

[gordonfvckingramsay]

The ONLY factor driving our pay and conditions down is not an economic imperative, it’s one driven purely by an industrial revolution style dogma led by a few very sick individuals.

[morno]

There’s no point arguing with the noisy minority. Good luck, I wish you well getting those $416k salaries.

[dr dre]

This talk of salaries is not the main issue, and the above quoted salary is not correct.

For the most part the company are happy with wages, but there is some uncertainty about how proposed rostering limits would work.

Until more is known it’s best to hold fire.

[tossbag]

I am acquainted with the building industry here in Qld. There are carpenter jobs going right now for $120/hr. That’s what you have to measure yourself against. Secondary school drop out plasterers on $98/hr. Which is $200K.

What complete and utter bull****.

[Australopithecus]

What complete and utter bull****.

Yeah champ? The casino project in BNE has hundreds of plasterers on that rate. And a mate was just contacted by a builder looking for 110 carpenters at the quoted rate. Last year's $55/hr for chippies has left the building. Tell you what, pm me and I will give you my address and then you can come and call me a liar to my face. No? That’s what I thought.

[tossbag]

Yeah champ?

Post the job ad 'champ' let's see it.

Some of us pilots do have other quals behind us, including carpenters with building licences.

And how about you wait for a reply you hero, PM me your address, why wait for a PM from me?

[Chronic Snoozer]

Chomp, chomp, chomp....

[Australopithecus]

Post the job ad 'champ' let's see it.

Some of us pilots do have other quals behind us, including carpenters with building licences.

And how about you wait for a reply you hero, PM me your address, why wait for a PM from me?

No ad, I am relying on the word of two trusted (and equally astonished) builders pal. If you guys have all these qualifications but still choose to fly, yet don’t have the nuts to demand better pay and conditions then nothing I say is going to convince you. And nice try to twist my offer.

[Angle of Attack]

Ok well I’m not going to join the whinging contest but what I can tell you is Alliance are losing pilots like dandruff falling off a guys hair who never washes it. Services are being cancelled daily due to lack of crew, because there are far more greener pastures for their pilots. Let QF outsource Winton who cares, I’d take the redundancy and Immediately get another job. Can’t wait actually lol, idiots,

[tossbag]

No ad, I am relying on the word of two trusted (and equally astonished) builders pal. If you guys have all these qualifications but still choose to fly, yet don’t have the nuts to demand better pay and conditions then nothing I say is going to convince you.

Well, your builder pals sound a lot like pilots, exaggerating their earnings. I'm working back in my previous trade. The money mentioned is bull****, especially in QLD. You might pull a pretty good earn in Vic on a union site, but nothing like that rubbish.

And nice try to twist my offer.

Clown.

[Derfred]

Don’t know why this discussion has turned to salary. QF are happy with the salary, they already said that.

The negotiations are about rostering rules.

So most of the above arguments can be disregarded if anyone wants to get the discussion back on track.

[dr dre]

Don’t know why this discussion has turned to salary. QF are happy with the salary, they already said that.

The negotiations are about rostering rules.

So most of the above arguments can be disregarded if anyone wants to get the discussion back on track.

Possibly one of the sticking points would be 2 crew back of the clock night sectors back from Asia. HK, China and Japan are all within the range of the XLR to anywhere in Australia.

Is an alternative of a 3 crew crew operation for the longest sectors with a business seat rest being proposed?

What do competitors like JAL, ANA, the Chinese carriers and Cathay do? I believe all flying from that far north is widebody only at the present time.

It may be argued that if a competitor is doing 2 crew BOC in a widebody what’s the difference to doing it 2 crew in a narrowbody as you won’t need a bunk.

[Derfred]

Possibly one of the sticking points would be 2 crew back of the clock night sectors back from Asia. HK, China and Japan are all within the range of the XLR to anywhere in Australia.

Is an alternative of a 3 crew crew operation for the longest sectors with a business seat rest being proposed?

What do competitors like JAL, ANA, the Chinese carriers and Cathay do? I believe all flying from that far north is widebody only at the present time.

It may be argued that if a competitor is doing 2 crew BOC in a widebody what’s the difference to doing it 2 crew in a narrowbody as you won’t need a bunk.

Not sure what the difference is “widebody vs narrowbody”. It obviously makes a difference to QF because they are currently asking narrowbody pilots to do flying that they wouldn’t dream of asking widebody pilots to do.

[Angle of Attack]

Just shows widebody and narrow body has become defunct, it’s just a bloody jet plane!

[Derfred]

Just shows widebody and narrow body has become defunct, it’s just a bloody jet plane!
Well, historically, one has a crew rest and one doesn't. It was never a problem until some-one manufactured a narrow-body jet with huge fuel tanks and no crew rest, and a collective of accountants decided to capitalise on it.

[C441]

Just shows widebody and narrow body has become defunct, it’s just a bloody jet plane!
Maybe true, but at present Qantas have a separate Enterprise Agreement for each 'type' and an FRMS that at times is contradictory when applying rules to each of the narrow and widebody fleets.

Whilst there is an opportunity for Qantas to use either to their advantage in an adversarial industrial relations environment, you can rest assured they will. A pity, as fatigue mitigation should never be influenced by industrial processes……by either side.

[Ollie Onion]

TBH if I was in charge of Qantas I would be doing the same, the future of Medium Haul are single aisle aircraft point to point with higher frequency, if I purchase those aircraft I want to utilise them to the max allowable under the FRMS, contractural restrictions to that would be top of my lost of things to go….. just remember that once they go they will never come back. Who cares if you get to fly the new ‘jets’, you cant have it all ways, if you want to keep your current agreement then do that but risk Joyce calling his bluff and moving flying elsewhere. What does it matter, these contracts were formed when this type of flying wasn’t even possible and surely it warrants some adjustments to rules that are not fit for purpose any more?

[dr dre]

Ollie, you’re right in a way,

Narrowbody aircraft doing 10/11hr sectors is a very new thing, and previous contracts don’t account for this type of flying. The company is quite determined to fly these thinner long haul routes on the aircraft.

Now if pilots are under the impression they’re going to stop the company from deploying the 321 on 10/11hr sectors, or have it replaced by a LH widebody or have the 321 flown under the LH contract they’re quite mistaken.

If they don’t want the flying then it will go elsewhere. It isn’t even like the A350 EBA where they were looking at forming a new contract company to outsource flying to, they already have 3 existing A320/321 operators in the group. It would be simple and those operators would be flying those 10/11hr routes with fewer protections than if they came to SH under an FRMS.

So firstly you need to accept that this flying is only going to be done on the SH contract, then you need to think about how to do it with suitable rostering. The 737 in recent times, a far less comfortable aircraft, has done 5.5hr back of the clock flights. Are current competitors flying 7-8hr sectors back of the clock from Asia to Australia 2 crew? For sectors 9-10 hrs is a 3rd crew with a business seat rest being proposed? Valid questions on how to formulate a plan to do what is essentially new flying.

And don’t forget these aircraft will be primarily 737 replacements, so the vast majority of it will initially be domestic flying. Even when the full fleet size is reached I would guess international sectors would make up no more than 15% of total flights.

[dr dre]

There are options for a 321XLR pilot rest, basically a curtained off business seat

https://twitter.com/WandrMe/status/1171465982507769856?s=20&t=snjw6ffSDPHPdeoko4ldXw

[morno]

Maybe it’s time to stop calling them short or long haul EBA’s as well. Widebody and narrowbody might be more appropriate.

[dr dre]

When Cathay flew the 330s to Australia the crew rest for pilots was a business class seat.

So it was a 3 crew operation then? I wonder if HK is just close enough for them to squeeze out a 2 pilot crew for the return flight, and anything further north requires a 3rd pilot.

[wombat watcher]

787-8 might be better suited for these sort of routes for mainline making the discussion almost entirely mute.

A320/21s for similar routes for a low cost carrier.

Customers don’t really want this. Only MBA thin pencil people do.


What a naive comment.
Airlines will decide which aircraft and when and what routes they will operate.
Whether they get it right will depend on the success meaning profitability of the route.
Pilots are the participants.

[dr dre]

787-8 might be better suited for these sort of routes for mainline making the discussion almost entirely mute.

A320/21s for similar routes for a low cost carrier.

Customers don’t really want this. Only MBA thin pencil people do.

It’s not just QF.

Plenty of full service carriers worldwide are moving to the 321XLR. American, United, Air Canada and Aer Lingus all getting the XLR to do transatlantic back of the clocks east coast USA to Europe on thinner routes.

And narrowbody long haul might be new to Australia but not to the rest of the world. The 757 had been doing lots of transatlantic flights through it’s history, and the 321XLR is basically the narrowbody replacement for the 757.

Just because pilots think they should be flying widebodies internationally doesn’t mean that’s what will happen.

[wombat watcher]

Interesting comment obviously talking about Virgin and Cathay

[t_cas]

Longer, international sectors, particularly to the Asian ports to the north that involve back of clock returns, are not crewed by a third pilot for the sector itself. It is for operational integrity.
A simple diversion blows the duty. No longer one sector but two. So FRMS dictates crewing makeup.

[Ken Borough]

And narrowbody long haul might be new to Australia

Erm....what do you think Qantas operated prior to the advent of the B747? :ugh:

[34R]

Erm....what do you think Qantas operated prior to the advent of the B747? :ugh:

Well if you’re referring to the 707, not sure it would be considered ‘long haul’……. Not by today’s standards anyway

[dr dre]

Longer, international sectors, particularly to the Asian ports to the north that involve back of clock returns, are not crewed by a third pilot for the sector itself. It is for operational integrity.
A simple diversion blows the duty. No longer one sector but two. So FRMS dictates crewing makeup.

I think the issue is FRMS is a bit of an unknown, and we all fear the unknown, and something we fear can get turned into a bogeyman. I would wait to see what the FRMS derived rosters will look like.

[Icarus2001]

Well if you’re referring to the 707, not sure it would be considered ‘long haul’……. Not by today’s standards anyway I think London - Singapore is and was long haul. Not to be confused with Ultra LH.

[Street garbage]

I am just waiting for them to actually order new aircraft- remember the last order for Mainline aircraft? November 2005. 16 1/2 years.

[dr dre]

Beware - FRMS is NOT a Lifestyle Management Tool.
It's only purpose is to keep rosters aligned with the regulations or the Company's (not your) Risk Assessment, this by converting your 'life' into algorithmic 1's and 0's.

Reading that excerpt it seems there’s a possibility the FRMS may be more restrictive than current flight and duty limits, depending on a host of variables?

[34R]

I think London - Singapore is and was long haul. Not to be confused with Ultra LH.

fair enough

[mustafagander]

When you're talking about our beloved B707 you need to keep well in mind that the automatics were ****e - 1950s technology. The cabin environment like air con left much to be desired. Then we remember the number of sectors flown between SYD and LHR. My PB was 11 landings in 3 tours of duty SYD-HKG-THR-LHR. The trip back was a repeat. Ah the Good Old Days!!

I call it long haul. No set it and forget it, T/O today and descending tomorrow matey. Overwater nav courtesy of a N/O and overland by NDB and VOR. There was plenty to do managing the old girl too.

[aussieflyboy]

Sounds like AIPA is yet again bending over to management. Give up more hard fought entitlements aye boys. You’ll be a part of the GMC in no time…

[dr dre]

Sounds like AIPA is yet again bending over to management. Give up more hard fought entitlements aye boys. You’ll be a part of the GMC in no time…

Have they? Most pilot concerns seemed to be with rostering practices under an FRMS. It’s still a bit of an unknown how it will work, but the FRMS may actually help pilots with fatigue related concerns. A thread on this forum years back showed other airlines were concerned FRMS related rostering would increase required crew ie more protections for pilots.

FRMS can give more control to pilots, so if consistent reports show a duty is fatiguing, that would have been legal under the CAOs, then there’s more structure for that duty to not be rostered.

If anyone thought the aircraft would be operated under the LH EBA that was never going to happen.

[TimmyTee]

The suggestion a CASA approved airline FRMS would be a "win" for pilots is laughable

[gordonfvckingramsay]

Sounds like AIPA is yet again bending over to management. Give up more hard fought entitlements aye boys. You’ll be a part of the GMC in no time…

If true, it spells the end of NJS and probably the end of QF shorthaul as a viable career.

[The_Equaliser]

Yeah right on Champ. Much rather a job with J* or Bain? Might get some shares in the float! Think I will stick with the best narrow body conditions in Aus. Keep on dreaming.

[morno]

If true, it spells the end of NJS and probably the end of QF shorthaul as a viable career.

Or maybe it’s a necessary change to enable the business to remain competitive and reflects the change in aircraft design and passenger demands (higher frequency and more point to point) compared to when it was first written.

Like I said earlier, perhaps “long haul” or “short haul” is no longer appropriate, rather widebody and narrowbody.

Plenty of Dash 8’s getting around if you don’t like the idea of flights beyond 3hrs.

[ShandywithSugar]

Or maybe it’s a necessary change to enable the business to remain competitive and reflects the change in aircraft design and passenger demands (higher frequency and more point to point) compared to when it was first written.

Just like CAO48e. It's the FRMS with 2 crew 10-11 hours red eye on a SH award thats the issue.

[t_cas]

Just like CAO48e. It's the FRMS with 2 crew 10-11 hours red eye on a SH award thats the issue.

It is only an "issue" when pilots continually accept it and become apathetic to pulling the pin and reporting the fatigue. It is only in trends and numbers that the message is clear.

[cLeArIcE]

Start calling fatigue at out ports and they'll Change it real fast.

[TimmyTee]

Heard from a mate that it’s a two horse race for which operation receives the new buses, if true, who’s it between?

[cloudsurfng]

May be referring to the 220. NJS, and now Network.

[Bull_Shark]

Heard from a mate that it’s a two horse race for which operation receives the new buses, if true, who’s it between?

Can confirm that there’s a lot of excited chatter amongst some newly minted Airbus crews as they wing their way out over the red dust.

With competitive rates on offer and a large order of shiny new jets, Paraburdoo, Pannawonica and Port Hedland won’t be the only destinations served by Network.

Word is that 50 plus aircraft are on their way and the new centre for Qantas domestic will be where the rain don’t fall…

[TimmyTee]

May be referring to the 220. NJS, and now Network.
believe it was both the 32x and 220s

[dr dre]

believe it was both the 32x and 220s

The company and Union have reached an in principle deal for the A321 for mainline, so no. NJS pilots via their union have failed to reach an in principle deal for the A220 operation however.

NA pilots have been spreading rumours they’ve been on the cusp on getting 50 jets forever. If they did get the contract for the A220 it would involve them setting up an operation for an entirely new aircraft primarily flying in entirely new areas (the east coast) and they still have the issue of their airline being a revolving door for crew. Flights canceled daily due lack of crew and heaps of others wanting out.

The other option for the A220 could be Alliance, but as other threads have shown they are a bit of a revolving door for crew too.

The board met yesterday regarding the firm orders of the aircraft, the path for then A321 is more set in stone than the A220 it seems.

[dr dre]

Apparently AFAP has stated that there has been a statement of giving the A220 to NA as NJS pilots couldn’t make a deal with the company.

Now AFAP has surveying members to see if they just want to vote on any deal the company propose rather than have their jobs outsourced, which was a change from their original position of “no deal unless we negotiate it”. So the proposal of potentially outsourcing looks like it will push the pilot group to vote to keep their jobs in this case.

[A320 Flyer]

rather than have their jobs outsourced.

hahahahahahahah…. They are the outsourcing mob

[Icarus2001]

Word is that 50 plus aircraft are on their way and the new centre for Qantas domestic will be where the rain don’t fall… Would make no sense. Aircraft are based where they can make money. Unless you are VB.

DrDre, I believe that QF have no intention of buying A220 aircraft, let’s see.

[dr dre]

DrDre, I believe that QF have no intention of buying A220 aircraft, let’s see.

Well they need to replace the 717, and the A220 gives them capability in the low hundreds seat range. Otherwise there's a big gap between the 94 seat E190 and the 200 plus seat A321XLR.

[Icarus2001]

Not all E jets are 94 seats. B717 is 125 seats?

[Don Diego]

Hey Dr, the 220 I had look in was in the order of 150 ish seats but who cares, as Icarus says they ain’t getting them, this is all just a ruse.

[SandyPalms]

I don't know that it's all a ruse.
Rumours around last week was there was a senior Airbus executive paxing around on QF, Introducing himself to the crews.
Looks like Projest sunrise to be announced tomorrow with an order of 6 A350's and there is an air baltic A220 in Sydney.
Coincidence?

[Zinfandel]

I don't know that it's all a ruse.
Rumours around last week was there was a senior Airbus executive paxing around on QF, Introducing himself to the crews.
Looks like Projest sunrise to be announced tomorrow with an order of 6 A350's and there is an air baltic A220 in Sydney.
Coincidence?
And the A350-1000 demo aircraft with Qantas decals is inbound to Australia as we speak.

[Don Diego]

A350 not in doubt but the 220? They won’t spend the $$$.

[wishiwasupthere]

Dr Dre, I believe that QF have no intention of buying A220 aircraft, let’s see.

This comment has aged well…..and so quickly!

[Icarus2001]

This comment has aged well…..and so quickly Have they placed an order?

[gordonfvckingramsay]

Now they have won their battle against the pilots at NJS the A220 can be safely ordered 🙄

[davidclarke]

So NJS caved as well hey?

[gordonfvckingramsay]

So NJS caved as well hey?

Not entirely. The lack of an in principle agreement means QF are threatening to withdraw the right to vote. The A220 will be gifted to some other entity where the NJS pilots will be allowed to beg for a job.

Of course a simple yes vote to further (severely) reduced conditions and it could all go away and they would all keep their positions.

[wishiwasupthere]

Have they placed an order?

Yes (10 characters)….

[Icarus2001]

Well in that case, I am probably wrong. Happens every day. Not to say that the order for twenty A220s gets converted into a different type, like more A321s.
Qantas has announced a few things that never happened…Red Q, Jetstar HongKong, Jetstar Vietnam…
Best of luck to all at Qantas with the new types, it is great to see some positive developments in aviation after the last two years.

[TimmyTee]

“with the flexibility to draw down on that order by choosing any variant from the A320 and A220 families.”

[morno]

Well in that case, I am probably wrong. Happens every day. Not to say that the order for twenty A220s gets converted into a different type, like more A321s.
Qantas has announced a few things that never happened…Red Q, Jetstar HongKong, Jetstar Vietnam…
Best of luck to all at Qantas with the new types, it is great to see some positive developments in aviation after the last two years.

Jetstar Vietnam (Jetstar Pacific) did happen though mate. No longer now, but it operated for over 10 years.

[Icarus2001]

It never operated as intended and ended up with QF managers under house arrest in Vietnam. So technically yes, it did happen. Many probably wish it never did.

[morno]

It never operated as intended and ended up with QF managers under house arrest in Vietnam. So technically yes, it did happen. Many probably wish it never did.

Under house arrest because they broke the law.

Still, they did make it happen.

[Ollie Onion]

So now the orders are announced, do we think Joyce will follow through on his threats to farm out the flying to ‘cheaper’ entities?

[gordonfvckingramsay]

So now the orders are announced, do we think Joyce will follow through on his threats to farm out the flying to ‘cheaper’ entities?

I believe so. We have all seen the lengths which will be taken to destroy unions, despite the cost. It’s all about busting the workers rights paradigm.

[Clear_Left]

I believe so. We have all seen the lengths which will be taken to destroy unions, despite the cost. It’s all about busting the workers rights paradigm.

According to the Townsville Refueller the 220s will still go to NJS, with Network being kept around only long enough to be a legitimate threat to ensure a deal largely in the company’s favour.

Bain has approached Network to combine their 320s with VARA and sold off as a package to Spirit to train their soon to be introduced cadets to get around the FAA 1500hr rule. VARAs Fokkers replaced with -700s in an attempt a B scale. Networks Fokkers slowly dissipate to be replaced initially by 737s and eventually NJS 220s.

[Fatguyinalittlecoat]

So, what of the future of Jetconnect as the 737 is retired? Do they transition to the A321 too?

[blubak]

I believe so. We have all seen the lengths which will be taken to destroy unions, despite the cost. It’s all about busting the workers rights paradigm.
U are 100% spot on there & as i have said before there have been many ideas shared between Joyce & his ol mate Willie Walsh.

[inthenightgarden]

So, what of the future of Jetconnect as the 737 is retired? Do they transition to the A321 too?
I think the Jetconnect boys transition to the A350

[Ollie Onion]

I know a guy who has already been employed by Jetconnect (this week just gone) who is going to head up the transition to A321’s.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

It appears AIPA, in their haste, have fvcked up by agreeing to an in-principle **** sandwich without asking for details beforehand. Having effectively thrown NJS pilots to the wolves by “beating” them to this in-principle agreement, they are now reconsidering new information.

“As our members are aware, the Committee of Management (CoM) met today to discuss the proposed in-principle agreement that our Project Winton negotiating team reached with their Qantas counterparts early last week. It included a presentation from our negotiating team on the deal and answered questions pertaining to the in-principle agreement.

CoM debated the issue throughout the afternoon. At 4.15pm, new information came to light which potentially had material impact on the motions that were being considered. Given the meeting had entered its seventh hour, it was determined to adjourn the debate and proposed motions until the scheduled May CoM meeting next Tuesday, May 10.

We will provide an update on the Project Winton discussions following the meeting next week.”

NJS pilots approached AIPA when NJS were purchased by QF asking to be able to join. AIPA dragged their feet somewhat citing the complexities of allowing another business unit to join (not the case with Network), and now it appears we know why. Never would I suggest that it is the case, but a cynic could be forgiven for thinking there was some link between QF industrial relations and current or former AIPA reps.

[Colonel_Klink]

It appears AIPA, in their haste, have fvcked up by agreeing to an in-principle **** sandwich without asking for details beforehand. Having effectively thrown NJS pilots to the wolves by “beating” them to this in-principle agreement, they are now reconsidering new information.

“As our members are aware, the Committee of Management (CoM) met today to discuss the proposed in-principle agreement that our Project Winton negotiating team reached with their Qantas counterparts early last week. It included a presentation from our negotiating team on the deal and answered questions pertaining to the in-principle agreement.

CoM debated the issue throughout the afternoon. At 4.15pm, new information came to light which potentially had material impact on the motions that were being considered. Given the meeting had entered its seventh hour, it was determined to adjourn the debate and proposed motions until the scheduled May CoM meeting next Tuesday, May 10.

We will provide an update on the Project Winton discussions following the meeting next week.”

NJS pilots approached AIPA when NJS were purchased by QF asking to be able to join. AIPA dragged their feet somewhat citing the complexities of allowing another business unit to join (not the case with Network), and now it appears we know why. Never would I suggest that it is the case, but a cynic could be forgiven for thinking there was some link between QF industrial relations and current or former AIPA reps.

Any idea what new info came to light?

[Beer Baron]

It appears AIPA, in their haste, have fvcked up by agreeing to an in-principle **** sandwich without asking for details beforehand. Having effectively thrown NJS pilots to the wolves by “beating” them to this in-principle agreement, they are now reconsidering new information.
What garbage. NJS pilots are negotiating to fly the A220 (717 replacement) whilst AIPA are negotiating to fly the A321 (737 replacement). The company is not offering the other aircraft to the other pilots so there is no interaction between one set of negotiators reaching an agreement and the others not being able to.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

What garbage. NJS pilots are negotiating to fly the A220 (717 replacement) whilst AIPA are negotiating to fly the A321 (737 replacement). The company is not offering the other aircraft to the other pilots so there is no interaction between one set of negotiators reaching an agreement and the others not being able to.

Not so. The interrelationship between what AIPA agreed to and the flow on pressure to other BU’s is very strong. The various BU’s are being played against one another and the various unions are protecting their own interests.

[Beer Baron]

The NJS pilots know exactly where Qantas are threatening to send the A220’s and it ain’t QF Short Haul. So a SH in-principal agreement won’t effect NJS.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

The NJS pilots know exactly where Qantas are threatening to send the A220’s and it ain’t QF Short Haul. So a SH in-principal agreement won’t effect NJS.

Perhaps you’re not privy to the instantaneous effect that another entity appearing to fold had on both the company’s state of mind and that of the pilots. Suffice it to say the company sensed a win over NJS when AIPA made that in-principle agreement. The division widened because one group protected themselves to the detriment of the other.

[Beer Baron]

That is just false. You are trying to draw a connection where one does not exist.

I am very aware of the line Qantas had presented to the NJS negotiators from the very start of the negotiation. They were well aware that if agreement was not reached by a certain date then Qantas may choose to place the aircraft elsewhere in the Group. That date arrived and agreement had not been reached (I entirely blame Qantas as they were presenting a poor deal). Then Qantas did exactly what they said they would do and informed AFAP that they plan to take the aircraft elsewhere. They are not threatening to give the planes to SH and they didn’t say, “well SH reached an agreement and you didn’t so now you lose the jets”.

Qantas did what they said they would from the outset and a SH deal, or not, had no effect.

Even if the SH deal could somehow affected the NJS negotiations, could you imagine a union saying to its members; “Well we could have done a deal to protect your 700 jobs but we need to look out for pilots who fly for a different entity and are members of a different union, so we told Qantas to shove it”?

[Clear_Left]

That is just false. You are trying to draw a connection where one does not exist.

Spoken like someone who has never experienced whipsaw bargaining. SH did indeed screw the pooch for NJS pilots and themselves. Bad deals for one entity encourage bad deals for all entities. Divide and conquer is working so well.

What’s funny is the SH guys agreed to it in principal for only the initial 20x 321s and made zero effort to ensure they get future red tail 321s so they didn’t protect 700 jobs they agreed in principal to protect ~200

[gordonfvckingramsay]

Precisely Clear_Left. Why would anyone have to spend 7+ hours debating a signed sealed and delivered in-principle agreement if it was worth agreeing to in the first place? The delay in the NJS guys reaching an in-principle agreement was due to the due diligence done by the reps, something the AIPA president failed to report when he declared the lack of (NJS) agreement. It seems AIPA departed without a flight plan, apparently to get some quick runs on the board but to what end?

[ddrwk]

What’s funny is the SH guys agreed to it in principal for only the initial 20x 321s and made zero effort to ensure they get future red tail 321s so they didn’t protect 700 jobs they agreed in principal to protect ~200

Where in the proposal are the changes only limited to the first 20 aircraft?

[hotnhigh]

An in principle agreement still has to be voted upon by the pilot body, Yes / No ?

[crosscutter]

Securing future A320 (and A220) aircraft, as well as additional A350s would form part of a new negotiation for the relevant BU’s. It’s hardly a revelation. If an entity were able to have a clause saying they would receive all future orders of a particular type I’d be impressed.

When new aircraft are forecast to arrive, you guessed it, it will coincide with EBA renewal. So this convo is all about nothing, and the CP emails are carefully constructed to emphasise it’s a deal for the initial tranche only. It’s not to say further orders won’t arrive.

Of interest, I wonder when QF (and AIPA) knew about the XLR delays. It turns out this recent process was probably not required, as with the delay, normal EBA negotiation would suffice but now QF get two bites at the cherry.

ps. If someone wanted to PM me with the material info added by the negotiators at the last minute…

[ddrwk]

It’s hardly a revelation. If an entity were able to have a clause saying they would receive all future orders of a particular type I’d be impressed.


Would it even be a permitted matter?

[aussieflyboy]

It was the NJS HOFO in the jump seat of the A220 scenic the other day, not the ‘Mainline’/Network/Alliance/Air Frontier HOFO…

[Beer Baron]

Spoken like someone who has never experienced whipsaw bargaining. SH did indeed screw the pooch for NJS pilots and themselves. Bad deals for one entity encourage bad deals for all entities. Divide and conquer is working so well.
Wrong again. The AFAP negotiation for NJS wrapped the week BEFORE the SH negotiators made their in-principal deal. At that time, as is published in their dispatches, the SH negotiators had been told to continue negotiating as the deal ‘still fell short of expectations’.

The delay in the NJS guys reaching an in-principle agreement was due to the due diligence done by the reps,
Also wrong. There wasn’t a delay reaching an in-principle agreement, there IS NO in-principle agreement. Negotiations had finished before the SH agreement was even reached.

How on earth could the SH deal that was struck the following week possibly have tainted NJS negotiations that concluded the week prior?!?

The answer is clear, they didn’t, it had nothing to do with SH. Given Qantas mainline T&C’s are superior to NJS it is again impossible to see how a different pilot group agreeing to better conditions, a week later, could drag down another entity.

A deal wasn’t struck as Qantas IR made utterly unfair demands of the NJS pilots and the union couldn’t accept them. I applaud AFAP for standing up for their members under such pressure from Qantas.
However, I understand that the pilots themselves have now voiced a desire to vote on a deal that the negotiators deemed unacceptable.

[maggot]

Precisely Clear_Left. Why would anyone have to spend 7+ hours debating a signed sealed and delivered in-principle agreement if it was worth agreeing to in the first place?

Well as long as we vote for senior 380 capts and SOs it'll happen like that.
Tbh it's fine by me to have scrutiny.


Beware the political hyperbole...

[gordonfvckingramsay]

Can I ask how you know what the full details of the SH in-principle agreement are and what makes it a “**** sandwich” in your opinion? I’m just an average SH line pilot so apart from seeing a few headline dot points, I still have not seen the full details. Obviously I’ll reserve my opinion until I have all the information and will vote accordingly.Good question! I don’t believe anyone has seen the full details of what the AIPA reps, agreed to in-principle. Other than the Strategic imperatives and some dot points issued in an AIPA communique. A small inner circle made the call, then some information somehow came to light that made the in-principle agreement seem unattractive. Someone jumped the gun without the support of the wider pilot group.

Was there any attempt to canvass the pilots? I didn’t see any.

As far as NJS, I refuse to be used as a wedge to undermine other group pilots. Disagree with that notion all you like but it is the outcome from this poorly conceived in-principle mess.

[2020Balance]

It was the NJS HOFO in the jump seat of the A220 scenic the other day, not the ‘Mainline’/Network/Alliance/Air Frontier HOFO…

Good old DJ

[FlareHighLandLong]

Good question! I don’t believe anyone has seen the full details of what the AIPA reps, agreed to in-principle. Other than the Strategic imperatives and some dot points issued in an AIPA communique. A small inner circle made the call, then some information somehow came to light that made the in-principle agreement seem unattractive. Someone jumped the gun without the support of the wider pilot group.

Was there any attempt to canvass the pilots? I didn’t see any.

As far as NJS, I refuse to be used as a wedge to undermine other group pilots. Disagree with that notion all you like but it is the outcome from this poorly conceived in-principle mess.

Something pilots everywhere need to be clear about is that we aren’t all negotiating. That’s why we have a union. We vote for a COM, who in turn appoint a negotiating team. It’s their job to understand the wishes of the pilot group and negotiate in accordance with our intent. It’s not useful, realistic or helpful to expect them keep the wider group informed during the process.

IF the negotiating team think an acceptable offer is on the table and IF the COM agree, then they need to inform of what the offer is and why they think we should accept it when it’s time to vote.

Until that happens let’s let them do their job.

[Cesspool182]

Something pilots everywhere need to be clear about is that we aren’t all negotiating. That’s why we have a union. We vote for a COM, who in turn appoint a negotiating team. It’s their job to understand the wishes of the pilot group and negotiate in accordance with our intent. It’s not useful, realistic or helpful to expect them keep the wider group informed during the process.

IF the negotiating team think an acceptable offer is on the table and IF the COM agree, then they need to inform of what the offer is and why they think we should accept it when it’s time to vote.

Until that happens let’s let them do their job.

The problem is key information was withheld from the CoM. Firstly, the vote to endorse the Project Winton In Principal Agreement FAILED by 1 vote. Then

"At 4.15pm, new information came to light which potentially had material impact on the motions that were being considered."

That information was threats by QF to cancel various letters of agreement if Project Winton failed to be endorsed.

The material question is WHY was the information withheld by the Project Winton team? If the CoM are to make a decision, key information cannot be withheld. Wile some may cave to threats, others don't respond too well.

[wf747]

Something pilots everywhere need to be clear about is that we aren’t all negotiating. That’s why we have a union. We vote for a COM, who in turn appoint a negotiating team. It’s their job to understand the wishes of the pilot group and negotiate in accordance with our intent. It’s not useful, realistic or helpful to expect them keep the wider group informed during the process.

IF the negotiating team think an acceptable offer is on the table and IF the COM agree, then they need to inform of what the offer is and why they think we should accept it when it’s time to vote.

Until that happens let’s let them do their job.

“It’s their job to understand the wishes of the pilot group and negotiate in accordance with our intent.“

Bingo! Did they?!

[cloudsurfng]

Good to see the spineless authors of text messages are at it again. Everyone always ‘got it from a mate who got it from a mate’, a bit like an STD. I’m sure the WhatsApp group of about 5 people who think they represent the views of the majority are high fiving thinking they’ve got some political runs on the board.

the last COM election spoke volumes as to what the majority actually think. Let them do their job.

[wombat watcher]

Who are the “spineless five”?

[cloudsurfng]

Who are the “spineless five”?

no idea. Might be more than 5, might be less. My point was those most vocal who seem intent on bringing down any COM that doesn’t align with their personal agendas should find another way. Anonymous personal attacks on hard working volunteer COM members, regardless of which side of the G20 fence they sit on, don’t do anyone any favours. How can we have any hope of achieving anything when everytime something happens that someone doesn’t agree with, COM are wasting time sending emails defending themselves and addressing social media/ texts rather than getting on with the job we elected them for. It’s been a pattern over the last 5-10, and frankly, it makes us all look like mugs.

[drshmoo]

Air Frontier HOFO on board 😂

[Ollie Onion]

Having spent a fair amount of time in and around the Qantas IR department I can assure you the individual unions are pretty powerless. They have an entire floor of strategists who have planned how too play one off against the other and what timeframes they are willing to settle each group to maximise the pressure on the rest. Qantas already knows by whom and how these aircraft will be operated and what time they will be introduced. The negotiations are just window dressing.

[crosscutter]

Haha Ollie, you’re hilarious. First you know someone in JC heading up the 321 project, now you know the IR department and their ‘floor of strategists’. Just stop…you’re giving me stitches…it’s too much for a Sunday.

[Mr Proach]

it’s actually not enjoyable though. As a regular line pilot, it’s bloody stressful. At what point can/will regulators intervene to ensure good faith bargaining? What happens in May when we have a Labor government? Will employees ever be empowered again to negotiate or will we allow QF to employ mafia shakedown tactics til our retirement.
Once upon a time in the industrial landscape, the bench of commissioners was "balanced" in that the number of commissioners who previously represented employees was equal to those who previously represented employers. Our masters have manipulated the "fair" work system so that in today's world the vast of majority of those on the bench were previously employer advocates. In my view, historically there has been two ways to overcome this oppression of the workers. One involves ruling class blood flowing in the streets, the other is for the people to band into groups (commonly referred to as unions) and take (industrial) action. Until that happens nothing will change, the idea that a political party will deliver high wages and good working conditions is a myth, no government has or ever will do such a thing. The only improvement to wages & conditions will only come from a strong union (solid membership). Do you think that low union membership and declining wages and employment conditions is a coincidence? For me, It is a no brainer.

[LAME2]

Originally Posted by Brakerider
it’s actually not enjoyable though. As a regular line pilot, it’s bloody stressful. At what point can/will regulators intervene to ensure good faith bargaining?

In my opinion your desire for a strong unbiased regulator looking at safety risks won’t happen. I approached the regulator during a particular period of very stressful IR disharmony. I presented their own research and words with evidence linking their words to the companies words/actions. Best I can say is they heard what I said, read what I presented, then went to lunch leaving me with the words “it’s an IR issue not safety”. A more realistic view is they just didn’t care.

You’ll eventually have to do as I did to maintain your sanity, leave. Start looking to where your next adventure will be and start preparing for it.

[Ollie Onion]

Haha Ollie, you’re hilarious. First you know someone in JC heading up the 321 project, now you know the IR department and their ‘floor of strategists’. Just stop…you’re giving me stitches…it’s too much for a Sunday.


Not my fault I am so well connected :-). Believe it or not, just passing on information.

[DirectAnywhere]

In my opinion your desire for a strong unbiased regulator looking at safety risks won’t happen. I approached the regulator during a particular period of very stressful IR disharmony. I presented their own research and words with evidence linking their words to the companies words/actions. Best I can say is they heard what I said, read what I presented, then went to lunch leaving me with the words “it’s an IR issue not safety”. A more realistic view is they just didn’t care.

You’ll eventually have to do as I did to maintain your sanity, leave. Start looking to where your next adventure will be and start preparing for it.

All it takes is, during the negotiating/voting period, a large number of pilots to go sick due “unfit to operate” leading to cancelled services, to draw attention at senior levels. The one thing that has improved over the years is sick leave. If you feel worried about your future, and it’s playing on your mind, use it at the time things are most difficult for you. Ensure your own well-being, that of your passengers and, ultimately, the company.

[v1bang]

According to the Townsville Refueller the 220s will still go to NJS, with Network being kept around only long enough to be a legitimate threat to ensure a deal largely in the company’s favour.

Bain has approached Network to combine their 320s with VARA and sold off as a package to Spirit to train their soon to be introduced cadets to get around the FAA 1500hr rule. VARAs Fokkers replaced with -700s in an attempt a B scale. Networks Fokkers slowly dissipate to be replaced initially by 737s and eventually NJS 220s.

i would assume that Bain rumour is a little far fetched. Is there any info to backup that claim? Bain getting Qantas to work with Vara?

[Mr Proach]

In my opinion your desire for a strong unbiased regulator looking at safety risks won’t happen. I approached the regulator during a particular period of very stressful IR disharmony. I presented their own research and words with evidence linking their words to the companies words/actions. Best I can say is they heard what I said, read what I presented, then went to lunch leaving me with the words “it’s an IR issue not safety”. A more realistic view is they just didn’t care.

You’ll eventually have to do as I did to maintain your sanity, leave. Start looking to where your next adventure will be and start preparing for it.
I believe the regulator Brakerider was referring to was not of the aviation variety. The regulator will not touch IR issues. You could argue that pilots who work under a a regime of fear or favour is in itself a threat to safety but the regulator will not go anywhere near a topic where IR connotations are involved. For example, many in the GA sector will have been subjected to some sort of intimidation or threat for not turning a blind eye to some aspect of an operation (writing defects in the maintenance log springs to mind) this is prevalent in organisations where pilots have little or no industrial protection. There was a story about a group of pilots who raised like concerns with a representative of the regulator, what transpired was what some may describe as disturbing.

[neville_nobody]

The regulator will not touch IR issues.

Well that's a bit of a myth. What do they call FRMS? What about work rules? They're regulated by CASA and are part of a EA. So CASA are right in the thick of it whether they like to believe that or not.

If I recall correctly REX lobbied the Government over the first iteration of the FRMS which according to them would have caused problems for their operation. So CASA kindly went all out to accommodated them and ignored their own research. So if CASA think they are not involved in IR matters they are delusional.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

Where do CASA stand if they are made aware of a looming safety problem and then fail to act? Is “we don’t dabble in that type of safety issue” really a valid defence? Would that stand up to legal scrutiny? I thought knowledge of a threat to life, and failure to act on that knowledge would present a problem at every hurdle if you were fronting a coronial inquiry.

[KABOY]

Where do CASA stand if they are made aware of a looming safety problem and then fail to act? Is “we don’t dabble in that type of safety issue” really a valid defence? Would that stand up to legal scrutiny? I thought knowledge of a threat to life, and failure to act on that knowledge would present a problem at every hurdle if you were fronting a coronial inquiry.


I want to know where a safety problem occurs with an industrial issue?

if an incident occurs due to industrial problems creating stresses on an individual, that problem lands in the lap of the individual.

Mental health has become a major issue with all regulators, the regulator will target the individual not the business. Blurring the line between safety and industrial is a long bow to draw.

I have been involved with airlines where individuals knew they were shortly to be unemployed, yet the airline continued to its demise. Should CASA have grounded them before this?

The Australian airline industry has become so insular to global events thanks to government bailouts, it’s time to wake up.

Joyce said QF was screwed if it wasn’t for a bailout.

[t_cas]

The Australian airline industry has become so insular to global events thanks to government bailouts, it’s time to wake up.

Joyce said QF was screwed if it wasn’t for a bailout.

Yet. As soon as they start seeing cash flow again, they go out and acquire more leverage for the next downturn. An operation that was doing ok in the niche. Now proposed to be swallowed by this corporate animal.

[A320 Flyer]

this is the standard increase we should be hunting for

https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/southwest-pilots-accept-50-percent-pay-hike/?MailingID=FLY240123003&utm_campaign=avwebflash&utm_medium=newsletter&oly_enc_id=0806E7461078A7U

[aussieflyboy]

NJS Pilots received a 0% increase to fly an aircraft 30% bigger less than 18 months ago, why do you think Qantas will offer more to you?

NAA Pilots have voted no 3 times now and have received no increase to what is effectively the award rate, why do you think Qantas will offer more to you?

Do you think Qantas management considers 737 Pilots to be more important and thus deserve a significant pay rise? I’ll be assuming they come to the table with absolutely nothing and threaten to outsource.

[A320 Flyer]

Sorry, this is definitely not a we’re better than anyone situation…. I should have qualified that….. all pilots should be hunting for that type of increase

[morno]

NJS Pilots received a 0% increase to fly an aircraft 30% bigger less than 18 months ago, why do you think Qantas will offer more to you?

NAA Pilots have voted no 3 times now and have received no increase to what is effectively the award rate, why do you think Qantas will offer more to you?

Do you think Qantas management considers 737 Pilots to be more important and thus deserve a significant pay rise? I’ll be assuming they come to the table with absolutely nothing and threaten to outsource.

Mate they can threaten to outsource all they want, but they’ve called that bluff before and given the labour market, I highly doubt anyone is going to even contemplate accepting that.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

NJS Pilots received a 0% increase to fly an aircraft 30% bigger less than 18 months ago, why do you think Qantas will offer more to you?

NAA Pilots have voted no 3 times now and have received no increase to what is effectively the award rate, why do you think Qantas will offer more to you?

Do you think Qantas management considers 737 Pilots to be more important and thus deserve a significant pay rise? I’ll be assuming they come to the table with absolutely nothing and threaten to outsource.

Isn’t dividing us the company’s job?

The point is, we should all be going hard for increases of this magnitude or more.

[framer]

why do you think Qantas will offer more to you?
It seems to me that the SH 737 group have more leverage than other narrow body pilot groups within the QF group. They have a bigger lever, they also have experience using that lever. Hopefully they remember their successes , and have learned from their mistakes.
I am not in SH but will be strongly supporting every pilot group that negotiates over the next 12 months because I feel like we’re at either a negative or positive turning point and it could go either way.

[cLeArIcE]

QF can threaten to outsource all they want. Or Start QF rainbow or whatever they come up with. The difference being, this time it's a rather hollow threat. Where are they going to get crew??! NJS, alliance, network etc can barely crew the flights they have now.
I'd say for once ,QF SH are in a strong position. It's also not Just about $$. It MUST come with lifestyle change. I'm clearly not the only one that thinks so. Maybe it's a generational thing... JQ can shove their 4 sector, 12 hour days and 80+ hour months no matter what they pay me. I hope QF go hard.

[framer]

I get where you’re coming from Clearice.
At the moment pilots who feel like you have two choices, A) work flat- out and deal with the health and lifestyle issues, or B) Retire asap.
Maybe you guys and gals could negotiate for an option C where you can ease out of the industry over your last working decade? It would benefit the company in that long term sickness would decline and pilots would work on an extra couple of years. It would also be nice to hold onto the experience for a bit longer although I doubt the company would see that as a benefit.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

I get where you’re coming from Clearice.
At the moment pilots who feel like you have two choices, A) work flat- out and deal with the health and lifestyle issues, or B) Retire asap.
Maybe you guys and gals could negotiate for an option C where you can ease out of the industry over your last working decade? It would benefit the company in that long term sickness would decline and pilots would work on an extra couple of years. It would also be nice to hold onto the experience for a bit longer although I doubt the company would see that as a benefit.

Or option D, which should and seems to be option A currently, and that’s pilots realising their worth, empowering their unions and each other to push for liveable T&C’s.

[DirectAnywhere]

With the apparent failure of stage 3 tax cuts to survive, it’s obvious that being a “highly” paid PAYG earner isn’t worth it in this country.

Let’s be honest, we squeeze a 10k pay rise out of the company, the government takes half of it anyway. Is it worth giving away any of the few lifestyle protections in shorthaul for that?

I need more days off, so that I’m spending several days less than 18 days per roster at work. Now THAT will make a difference to my life. I need dense flying that doesn’t have me sitting around in ports on 3 day trips, unpaid, spending 24 hours upline so I can do a red eye while subsidiaries come and go multiple times.

I need some recompense for sitting around terminals for 2 hours waiting, unpaid.

I need the company to be forced to build efficient patterns, that don’t have me paxing somewhere for 1/2 pay, or paxing for an unpaid overnight to pick up flying that should have been built out of another port during pattern planning. If I’m at work, they should pay me, 100%, no half pay. That’s just BS. They need to build efficient patterns. If I’m not at home, I should be getting paid 100%, not 50%. That’s MY time you’re taking and wasting.

You know, you spend 12 hours at work for 6 hrs credit which comes down to 3 hrs post tax. You look at the net hourly rate for that and wonder what the hell you’re actually doing there.

What I really want is more days off and more efficiency when I’m at work - dense days and fewer of them (and then not getting screwed on the resultant AV days for 2 hours pay to pax MEL/SYD to operate one sector).

[Chronic Snoozer]

If I’m at work, they should pay me, 100%, no half pay. That’s just BS. They need to build efficient patterns. If I’m not at home, I should be getting paid 100%, not 50%. That’s MY time you’re taking and wasting.

Amen. If it’s good enough for the C-suite to be paid 100% for business lunches and travel then it’s good enough for everyone.

[C441]

I need the company to be forced to build efficient patterns……..
What I really want is more days off and more efficiency when I’m at work - dense days and fewer of them (and then not getting screwed on the resultant AV days for 2 hours pay to pax MEL/SYD to operate one sector).
This exact scenario saw the development of a 'minimum daily credit' when the 767 first started doing domestic flying. Amazingly :rolleyes:, once MDC was introduced, the patterns became more efficient and it was the norm to be exceeding the MDC even on day trips.

[ShandywithSugar]

Dear Association and Federation ,

Please see DirectAnywhere post #163 as an initial log of claims with no offsets to be given, as these were given in the Winton Variation.

Regards,

SH.

Let’s be honest, we squeeze a 10k pay rise out of the company, the government takes half of it anyway. Is it worth giving away any of the few lifestyle protections in shorthaul for that?

I need more days off, several less than 18 days per roster at work. Now THAT will make a difference to my life. I need dense flying that doesn’t have me sitting around in ports on 3 day trips, unpaid, spending 24 hours upline so I can do a red eye while subsidiaries come and go multiple times.

I need some recompense for sitting around terminals for 2 hours waiting, unpaid.

I need the company to be forced to build efficient patterns, that don’t have me paxing somewhere for 1/2 pay, or paxing for an unpaid overnight to pick up flying that should have been built out of another port during pattern planning. If I’m at work, they should pay me, 100%, no half pay. That’s just BS. They need to build efficient patterns. If I’m not at home, I should be getting paid 100%, not 50%. That’s MY time you’re taking and wasting.

You know, you spend 12 hours at work for 6 hrs credit which comes down to 3 hrs post tax. You look at the net hourly rate for that and wonder what the hell you’re actually doing there.

What I really want is more days off and more efficiency when I’m at work - dense days and fewer of them (and then not getting screwed on the resultant AV days for 2 hours pay to pax MEL/SYD to operate one sector).
​​​​​​​

[Slezy9]

Something that made Air NZ 320 rosters significantly better was Duty minus three for domestic duties. Came in around 2017ish.

i.e. work 10 hours then you get paid for 7 no matter how long you twiddled your thumbs in WLG.

The amount of time just sitting around reduced to almost zero overnight. If you worked a 10 hour day you were now guaranteed 7 hours (or more if you flew more) of pay. Made a big difference.

No more AKL-WLG sit around for 5 hours then fly home and only get paid 2:10 for an 8:30 duty.

[cLeArIcE]

I get where you’re coming from Clearice.
At the moment pilots who feel like you have two choices, A) work flat- out and deal with the health and lifestyle issues, or B) Retire asap.
Maybe you guys and gals could negotiate for an option C where you can ease out of the industry over your last working decade? It would benefit the company in that long term sickness would decline and pilots would work on an extra couple of years. It would also be nice to hold onto the experience for a bit longer although I doubt the company would see that as a benefit.
Lol... I'm not even 40 yet. No plans to retire. I just have no interest in doing 80+ hours every month with minimum days off. I'll give em a free pass at Christmas/ Easter but otherwise....they Can shove it. I just won't turn up. As someone Said,. If you get $10k out of a new EBA but give protections away does it justify the cost? You get an extra $100ish a week after tax. Big deal. Did you get to see your kids footy game? Date night with the other half? See your elderly parents? BBQ with friends? No, your doing a Mel Syd for 3 hours of pay and 8 hours+ of duty. Will you think about that 10k when your kids forget you exist, The Mrs hates you, your parents are no longer around and your friends have their BBQs without you?
What we need to achieve as an industry is fair pay gains to offset inflation, appropriate fatigue rules especially around roster builds etc AND an appropriate work life balance.
Even the office minions are moving towards a 4 day working week.

​​​​

[DirectAnywhere]

One more point, and I don’t want to turn this to into a discussion on tax, but it’s relevant today.

Even if you do squeeze an extra 10k from your employer in your next EA, the government has just ensured you won’t see a single cent of that increase if you’re a typical pilot, compared to their stated tax policy yesterday. You’re already 5k p/a in the hole thanks to changes to stage 3.

Lifestyle improvements will cost the company far more than a few bucks in extra pay too. They will fight those tooth and nail.

if they had any sense, they’d roll over the new EA on exisiting terms on a 3%x 4 year deal. I don’t think they’re that smart.

[Slippery_Pete]

One more point, and I don’t want to turn this to into a discussion on tax, but it’s relevant today.

Even if you do squeeze an extra 10k from your employer in your next EA, the government has just ensured you won’t see a single cent of that increase if you’re a typical pilot, compared to their stated tax policy yesterday. You’re already 5k p/a in the hole thanks to changes to stage 3.

Lifestyle improvements will cost the company far more than a few bucks in extra pay too. They will fight those tooth and nail.

if they had any sense, they’d roll over the new EA on exisiting terms on a 3%x 4 year deal. I don’t think they’re that smart.

From what my mates say, 12% over four years is half of what is required.

Your proposal would get laughed out of the room.

Southwest just got 30% overnight plus another 20% over five years. Cathay publically admitting they stuffed up pilot numbers during COVID and the shortage is killing them - they’re parking frames!

12%? Yeah, nah.

[DirectAnywhere]

From what my mates say, 12% over four years is half of what is required.

Your proposal would get laughed out of the room.

Southwest just got 30% overnight plus another 20% over five years. Cathay publically admitting they stuffed up pilot numbers during COVID and the shortage is killing them - they’re parking frames!

12%? Yeah, nah.

You need to read my last post in context of my previous one.

Basically, pure $$ isn’t going to cut it - the tax system is making sure of that.

They can keep their $$ but I want an extra 3 days off a month, minimum….and I don’t want to be at work for 3 days for 9 hrs credit….and I don’t want to be sitting in a crew room waiting two hours for an aeroplane for zero $$…and I don’t want to be paxing somewhere for 50% credit…and I don’t want to be at work for a day for one hour pay if I’m paxing to pick up flying that’s been built out of my base when it shouldn’t have etc.

I can guarantee those changes I want would cost them far more than 3%. That’s the point I was trying to make, albeit poorly perhaps.

[morno]

You need to read my last post in context of my previous one.

Basically, pure $$ isn’t going to cut it - the tax system is making sure of that.

They can keep their $$ but I want an extra 3 days off a month, minimum….and I don’t want to be at work for 3 days for 9 hrs credit….and I don’t want to be sitting in a crew room waiting two hours for an aeroplane for zero $$…and I don’t want to be paxing somewhere for 50% credit…and I don’t want to be at work for a day for one hour pay if I’m paxing to pick up flying that’s been built out of my base when it shouldn’t have etc.

I can guarantee those changes I want would cost them far more than 3%. That’s the point I was trying to make, albeit poorly perhaps.

I’d want all that, PLUS 24-30% in a payrise. You’re so underpaid for what you’re doing already, anything less than 24-30% is unacceptable.

[Thumb War]

All valid points and excellent posts! I fully support all Australian pilot groups in getting pay increases and lifestyle improvements.

I hope that pilots as a group are able to stand up behind what Network have started and make meaningful gains.

It might take time but if everyone just keeps voting no to the unacceptable offers that management will no doubt put forward time and again, perhaps the message will get through?

Good luck all!