QF piot retrenchments
Thread Starter
QF piot retrenchments
At todays AIPA meeting the company has said that 65 SOs will be retrenched unless AIPA (the pilots) can come up with concessions. One idea been that the next pay increase will be halved from 4% to 2%.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At todays AIPA meeting the company has said that 65 SOs will be retrenched unless AIPA (the pilots) can come up with concessions. One idea been that the next pay increase will be halved from 4% to 2%.
Here's an idea - why not enter discussions with Qantas and see if they can up the number of redundancies to 130 so the rise can be reduced to zero.
Do QF pilots across the board have a "return" clause in the EBA. I ask because at my company we are approx 30 pilots overstacked. The only thing stopping redundancies is that any retrenched pilot must be offered their old job back for a period of 5 years before any other newbie is hired. The only reason we haven't seen retrenchments over here is because it would decimate the cadetship. Something that the giant ego's at the top have invested millions in!
What affect would retrenchments at QF have on the QF cadetship? Or don't they care?
Ooops, probably answered my own question on that one!
What affect would retrenchments at QF have on the QF cadetship? Or don't they care?
Ooops, probably answered my own question on that one!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: australia
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I really hope that if these redundancies are unavoidable AIPA can drag it out long enough so that all the SO's have finished probation....otherwise they dont get the 6 months notice...
Fingers crossed....
Fingers crossed....
Why don't Qantas offer transfers to the expanding Jet-star. Aust/NZ/Singas/Nam. even on contracts similar to the visa's offered to foreigners.
Then again if 737's didn't go across the Pond, 767 frieght contracts were kept and 330's were not sent elsewhere there might be jobs for everyone currently employed and no talk redundencies, pay cuts (which are actually back pays to level with the last five years inflation) or significantly reduced hours flying, assignment of all Annual leave and Long service leave.
Rocket science
Then again if 737's didn't go across the Pond, 767 frieght contracts were kept and 330's were not sent elsewhere there might be jobs for everyone currently employed and no talk redundencies, pay cuts (which are actually back pays to level with the last five years inflation) or significantly reduced hours flying, assignment of all Annual leave and Long service leave.
Rocket science
Another concession. A bit like "a seat at the negotiating table." What a way to manage the surplus.
How about give more aircraft to Jetstar and the blokes being made redundant might have a chance at an opportunity there if they choose to pay for their training.
The thin edge of the jetstar wedge is slowly being driven deeper and deeper.
On a slightly brighter note, I see it was reported elsewhere, that Jetstar has seen real improvements in the Japan loads and yields. We all look forward to their continued growth and ultimate movement of the sectors back to qantas mainline services. Who would have thought Jetstar growing such routes so that the qantas product can expand.
"I cannot believe it. It's all over."
How about give more aircraft to Jetstar and the blokes being made redundant might have a chance at an opportunity there if they choose to pay for their training.
The thin edge of the jetstar wedge is slowly being driven deeper and deeper.
On a slightly brighter note, I see it was reported elsewhere, that Jetstar has seen real improvements in the Japan loads and yields. We all look forward to their continued growth and ultimate movement of the sectors back to qantas mainline services. Who would have thought Jetstar growing such routes so that the qantas product can expand.
"I cannot believe it. It's all over."
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Out of the furnace...
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bosses will have to walk a fine line
The ban on adverse actions is a significant part of the Fair Work Act, write Alex Manos and Nick Ruskin
Many aspects of the new industrial relations law have been hotly debated over the last 18 months but some “sleeping giants” have quietly escaped comment. The prohibition on adverse actions and the enforcement of the of the discrimination laws took effect on July 1 and are sure to influence the way decision making is conducted within businesses and organisations.
For employers, an adverse action occurs if an employee is dismissed, discriminated against or suffers from an alteration of position. The action must have occurred because of an employee's right under an industrial instrument, workplace law or because of an inquiry or complaint made about their employment. For a claim to be made out, there must be a link between the adverse action and the workplace right.
Consider this example. An employee is appointed as harassment officer under an enterprise agreement. The employee is later terminated and told her role has been made redundant. The employee believes one of the reasons for her termination is the appointment as harassment officer. The employee would be able to bring a claim in the Federal Court under the new adverse action laws and seek compensation and potentially, reinstatement.
The adverse action laws are broad in many ways. They enable employees to bring claims even where the alleged action has not yet occurred and is merely organised or being threatened. If the matter proceeds to a court hearing, the onus of proof is shifted to the employer to prove the reason for the claimed action was a lawful one.
Interim injunctions may be issued preventing the employer proceeding with its actions pending a full hearing of the claim.
Consider another example. An employee makes an inquiry to his or her employer about overtime rates. Several months later, the employer begins organising a transfer of the employee to an alterate location permitted under the employee's contract. The employee believes a reason for the transfer is because of the overtime enquiry If the employee is able to satisfy a court, among other things, that he or she has a serious case to be tried and the balance of conveniences favours the the orders sought then the court may issue and interim injunction preventing the transfer until the matter can be determined at a final hearing. The adverse action in this case would be a threat or organisation of the transfer to the alternative location and the workplace rights would be the inquiry about the terms of employment as they affect overtime.
This protection represents a drastic change to the scope of workplace protection and the type and timing of applications brought. Employers will need to ensure they can justify any decision even before it has been implemented, should this be required. Breaches of these provisions may result in reinstatement, uncapped compensation and penalties of up to $33,000 a breach. Any person, regardless of remuneration level, is eligible to use the protections.
Many businesses and organisations will be unaware that actions of discrimination under the Fair Work Act 2009 may now attract a civil penalty. While the prohibitions in the act closely reflect the equal opportunity laws in each state, preventing discrimination for prohibited reasons, they will allow the Fair Work Ombudsman to initiate prosecutions against those who engage in discrimination.
This will allow the Fair Work Ombudsman to initiate civil prosecution against an employer. A Finding of discrimination may require an employer to reinstate the employee, pay uncapped compensation and pay a civil penalty of up to $33,000 a contravention. The workplace Ombudsman (the Fair Work Ombudsman's predecessor) has demonstrated its capacity to enforce workplace laws effectively.
The new general protection have been overshadowed by public focus on other aspects of the act but they have not been lost on the unions, which have indicated a readiness to use these new rights with full effectiveness. The general protection are sure to leave their mark on the industrial landscape.
Alex Manon is a senior associate and Nick Ruskin a partner at DLA Philips Fox
Source: Australian Financial Review, July 8, 2009
The ban on adverse actions is a significant part of the Fair Work Act, write Alex Manos and Nick Ruskin
Many aspects of the new industrial relations law have been hotly debated over the last 18 months but some “sleeping giants” have quietly escaped comment. The prohibition on adverse actions and the enforcement of the of the discrimination laws took effect on July 1 and are sure to influence the way decision making is conducted within businesses and organisations.
For employers, an adverse action occurs if an employee is dismissed, discriminated against or suffers from an alteration of position. The action must have occurred because of an employee's right under an industrial instrument, workplace law or because of an inquiry or complaint made about their employment. For a claim to be made out, there must be a link between the adverse action and the workplace right.
Consider this example. An employee is appointed as harassment officer under an enterprise agreement. The employee is later terminated and told her role has been made redundant. The employee believes one of the reasons for her termination is the appointment as harassment officer. The employee would be able to bring a claim in the Federal Court under the new adverse action laws and seek compensation and potentially, reinstatement.
The adverse action laws are broad in many ways. They enable employees to bring claims even where the alleged action has not yet occurred and is merely organised or being threatened. If the matter proceeds to a court hearing, the onus of proof is shifted to the employer to prove the reason for the claimed action was a lawful one.
Interim injunctions may be issued preventing the employer proceeding with its actions pending a full hearing of the claim.
Consider another example. An employee makes an inquiry to his or her employer about overtime rates. Several months later, the employer begins organising a transfer of the employee to an alterate location permitted under the employee's contract. The employee believes a reason for the transfer is because of the overtime enquiry If the employee is able to satisfy a court, among other things, that he or she has a serious case to be tried and the balance of conveniences favours the the orders sought then the court may issue and interim injunction preventing the transfer until the matter can be determined at a final hearing. The adverse action in this case would be a threat or organisation of the transfer to the alternative location and the workplace rights would be the inquiry about the terms of employment as they affect overtime.
This protection represents a drastic change to the scope of workplace protection and the type and timing of applications brought. Employers will need to ensure they can justify any decision even before it has been implemented, should this be required. Breaches of these provisions may result in reinstatement, uncapped compensation and penalties of up to $33,000 a breach. Any person, regardless of remuneration level, is eligible to use the protections.
Many businesses and organisations will be unaware that actions of discrimination under the Fair Work Act 2009 may now attract a civil penalty. While the prohibitions in the act closely reflect the equal opportunity laws in each state, preventing discrimination for prohibited reasons, they will allow the Fair Work Ombudsman to initiate prosecutions against those who engage in discrimination.
This will allow the Fair Work Ombudsman to initiate civil prosecution against an employer. A Finding of discrimination may require an employer to reinstate the employee, pay uncapped compensation and pay a civil penalty of up to $33,000 a contravention. The workplace Ombudsman (the Fair Work Ombudsman's predecessor) has demonstrated its capacity to enforce workplace laws effectively.
The new general protection have been overshadowed by public focus on other aspects of the act but they have not been lost on the unions, which have indicated a readiness to use these new rights with full effectiveness. The general protection are sure to leave their mark on the industrial landscape.
Alex Manon is a senior associate and Nick Ruskin a partner at DLA Philips Fox
Source: Australian Financial Review, July 8, 2009
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dragon man,
It's a long way before any retrenchment ocurrs in mainline.
One departments intent (read forward planning) takes some time to filter thru to that of another.
What some departments forward planning contingencies shall be would also result from what concessions are available from AIPA at the present time.
Best explained as "what concessions we get will, determine the way forward".
Or, if we (read they) don't get the concessions we seek, we may just have to activate the the J* / Mainline MOU.
It's a long way before any retrenchment ocurrs in mainline.
One departments intent (read forward planning) takes some time to filter thru to that of another.
What some departments forward planning contingencies shall be would also result from what concessions are available from AIPA at the present time.
Best explained as "what concessions we get will, determine the way forward".
Or, if we (read they) don't get the concessions we seek, we may just have to activate the the J* / Mainline MOU.
Thread Starter
Mstr Caution, those numbers were from Flight Ops to AIPA. They are not a figment of my imagination. It was discussed at yesterdays com meeting and will be further discussed at the road shows.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This entire affair reeks of Ian Oldmeadow yet again.
There have been many downturns in QF's history, why suddenly does this one require 160 S/O's to be sacked ?
I am wondering if this is the beginning of the process to thin out the ranks to prepare for the massive surplus that will occur when the B787 arrives and is not flown by mainline pilots
There have been many downturns in QF's history, why suddenly does this one require 160 S/O's to be sacked ?
I am wondering if this is the beginning of the process to thin out the ranks to prepare for the massive surplus that will occur when the B787 arrives and is not flown by mainline pilots
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dragon Man,
I am not questioning your statement. I have no doubt these figures were presented by managament.
However, the J* / Mainline MOU is "dormant". The company has not yet indicated activating the transfer of mainline to J*.
I would expect an activation of the MOU to J* whilst "they" continune to recruit prior to any redundancies in Mainline. There are redundancy protection clauses inserted in the MOU.
The most recent SO's to join mainline are not covered by the MOU as they were not employed at the time the MOU was signed. However those with more seniority in mainline could utilise the MOU transfer to protect those more junior.
Already highlighted in another thread is the fact "preserved" seniority positions in Jetstar would allow mainliners to transfer to A330 Captain positions.
So my statement, reduncies are a way off yet. Is with reference to contigencies such as MOU transfer, reduction to incremental pay increases or any other contingency yet to be announced or negotiated.
I am not questioning your statement. I have no doubt these figures were presented by managament.
However, the J* / Mainline MOU is "dormant". The company has not yet indicated activating the transfer of mainline to J*.
I would expect an activation of the MOU to J* whilst "they" continune to recruit prior to any redundancies in Mainline. There are redundancy protection clauses inserted in the MOU.
The most recent SO's to join mainline are not covered by the MOU as they were not employed at the time the MOU was signed. However those with more seniority in mainline could utilise the MOU transfer to protect those more junior.
Already highlighted in another thread is the fact "preserved" seniority positions in Jetstar would allow mainliners to transfer to A330 Captain positions.
So my statement, reduncies are a way off yet. Is with reference to contigencies such as MOU transfer, reduction to incremental pay increases or any other contingency yet to be announced or negotiated.
Unfortunately, redundancies are an unfortunate fact of life in the economic cycle. Perhaps mainline is no longer the holy grail of aviation that some thought it once was.
Why not consider applying for a job (on your own merits) and stop trying to hide the skirt of an MOU. What makes you think that just because you are a QF pilot it automatically entitles you yo a seat with a separate organisation? Get on with it and leave the sheltered workshop.
That is how 90 percent of the general population live.
Why not consider applying for a job (on your own merits) and stop trying to hide the skirt of an MOU. What makes you think that just because you are a QF pilot it automatically entitles you yo a seat with a separate organisation? Get on with it and leave the sheltered workshop.
That is how 90 percent of the general population live.
Why not consider applying for a job (on your own merits) and stop trying to hide the skirt of an MOU. What makes you think that just because you are a QF pilot it automatically entitles you yo a seat with a separate organisation? Get on with it and leave the sheltered workshop.
separate It's all an Illusion- Illusion
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Casablanca
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I feel sorry fo the QF guys as a matter of fact illusion...the question as to whether QF is the last bastion of good pay and conditions is superflous to the underlying issue...that being flying is being given away and transferred to other flying cost centers in the QF business to the detriment of those jobs in the core business..
How is it fair that pilots in New Zealand ( Jetconnect and Jetstar NZ) reap the rewards at the expense of Australian Qantas jobs?
As for Jetstar..well there wouldn't be a Jetstar without QF. I dont wish to turn this into a QF versus Jetstar slanging match, however I'd be pretty p!ssed off if someone came in and undercut me by 40% and then I had to put up with management rubbing my nose in it....constantly....
How is it fair that pilots in New Zealand ( Jetconnect and Jetstar NZ) reap the rewards at the expense of Australian Qantas jobs?
As for Jetstar..well there wouldn't be a Jetstar without QF. I dont wish to turn this into a QF versus Jetstar slanging match, however I'd be pretty p!ssed off if someone came in and undercut me by 40% and then I had to put up with management rubbing my nose in it....constantly....
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Illusion -
The opposite is also true. Should redundancies ocurr at any time in J*, then the MOU affords transfer to mainline to the reserved seniority positions.
Persons with a little more foresight sought these protections when the MOU was formulated years ago in profitable times to protect the interests of those in times like these.
You obviously have no idea what conditions would cause mainline management to trigger the clause in the said MOU.
As for a "separate organisation", your joking right?
The opposite is also true. Should redundancies ocurr at any time in J*, then the MOU affords transfer to mainline to the reserved seniority positions.
Persons with a little more foresight sought these protections when the MOU was formulated years ago in profitable times to protect the interests of those in times like these.
You obviously have no idea what conditions would cause mainline management to trigger the clause in the said MOU.
As for a "separate organisation", your joking right?
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Off track, again
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How is it fair that pilots in New Zealand ( Jetconnect and Jetstar NZ) reap the rewards at the expense of Australian Qantas jobs?
Last edited by aerostatic; 15th Jul 2009 at 05:11.
