Qf LAME EBA Negotiations Begin
Caution is warranted....
never ever believe we are invincible!
The task in front of us was never, ever going to be a walk in the park, so one step at a time.
That said... never weaken our unity which was the best outcome of the last battle. Far more important than any pay rise!!!
United we stand - divided we fall!
The task in front of us was never, ever going to be a walk in the park, so one step at a time.
That said... never weaken our unity which was the best outcome of the last battle. Far more important than any pay rise!!!
United we stand - divided we fall!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: australia
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
no lame preflt
Gas Bags the no lame preflt has been in the PPM since '03 I think the company may introduce it soon as we start some sort of PIA,what we have to remember is what 1746 stated .....UNITY is the key,it was in the last PIA and it is in the sunstate PIA.......rim
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does that mean you have already traded the LAMEless tarmac for the 3% per annum from the last EBA....Doesnt seem like such a good deal. What do you have left to trade off?
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.
Posts: 1,116
Received 13 Likes
on
8 Posts
gasbags
It was the advent of "New Gen" aircraft and casa rolling over that allowed the LAMEless tarmac.Dont recall the union trading it off.It just happened afaik.fed sec could tell the story I guess.
Those new gen a/c are amazing , never get hit by birds, spring leaks, get hit by vehicles during transit. Pilots always get time to do a detailed check and pick up said defects too , amazing aircraft.
Not overly confident here.If qf want no lames on tarmac they will do it regardless.They'll say they did it over the eba. If they have not carried through by now there must be an ulterior motive or good reason not to.
Those new gen a/c are amazing , never get hit by birds, spring leaks, get hit by vehicles during transit. Pilots always get time to do a detailed check and pick up said defects too , amazing aircraft.
Not overly confident here.If qf want no lames on tarmac they will do it regardless.They'll say they did it over the eba. If they have not carried through by now there must be an ulterior motive or good reason not to.
Was side letter in last eba basically agreeing they would not introduce lameless tarmac during life of eba8. Has always been there as a threat since Bruce Deahm early 2000's. Patience needed. Heed the plans of the executive. If and when (I personally hope it is sorted without strife), expect a buggery campaign more intense than you think possible.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does that mean you have already traded the LAMEless tarmac for the 3% per annum from the last EBA....Doesnt seem like such a good deal. What do you have left to trade off?
Last EBA we signed off on retention of all functions carried out by LAMEs at the time the agreement was signed. This included checks on all transits (except unmanned ports such as Ayers Rock). We haven't rolled on anything and further intend to cement our functions this time around. Company have a different view and have already named the system they want as "maintenance on demand".
I hope this clarifies things.
I like the idea of "maintenance on demand".
All that is then required is to pressure the "demanders" not to demand anything too expensive.
If the "demanders" are pilots, then management has the ultimate cop out.
Pilots are penalised for "demanding" by an informal corporate culture, while retaining formal authority for having to demand maintenance.
What could be sweeter from a management perspective? The responsibility for "demanding" maintenance is shifted to the pilots.
Flying to a very wet destination? Worried about a couple of bald tyres? Want to change them now and cop an "avoidable" delay? Your call!
All that is then required is to pressure the "demanders" not to demand anything too expensive.
If the "demanders" are pilots, then management has the ultimate cop out.
Pilots are penalised for "demanding" by an informal corporate culture, while retaining formal authority for having to demand maintenance.
What could be sweeter from a management perspective? The responsibility for "demanding" maintenance is shifted to the pilots.
Flying to a very wet destination? Worried about a couple of bald tyres? Want to change them now and cop an "avoidable" delay? Your call!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Orstraylia
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maintenance on demand
Well if thats the case then very little would change.
Not for a moment am I abdicating such a notion, however there aren't too many nil/noted transits from both tech and cabin logs and that's without the respective crews looking/trying too hard to find things, pax breaking things, pax spilling drinks etc etc.
Bring it on f wits.
Not for a moment am I abdicating such a notion, however there aren't too many nil/noted transits from both tech and cabin logs and that's without the respective crews looking/trying too hard to find things, pax breaking things, pax spilling drinks etc etc.
Bring it on f wits.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Steve,
Dont get me wrong. I have the utmost respect for you and what you do. It is a thankless job. You come on to this forum not hiding behind the veil of anonimity, like others including myself.
However I would like to point out that sometimes you do tend to obfuscate certain facts or leave specific answers out. One example would be the two hours overtime you said equates to another 10% of the pay packet per annum. I dont dispute that this may exist for some, however I doubt it would for the majority of QF engineers.
That said I appreciate your efforts and genuine belief in the ALAEA cause. I am a member.
I cannot agree with you that the QF pay scale is a good deal when you look at the top level being a total of $156,000 PA (approx) includise of a 38% shift loading, and it not only is capped but could potentially take you 48 years to reach.
Someone could start with QF today, holding ratings on half the fleet, and be on somewhere around $95,000. Then wait 16+ years to get anywhere near a liveable wage.
It is a simple fact that for some reason the QF pay scale has taken a serious second place to the other main players in Australia. What can be done I dont know. Time will tell. I would imagine in the future market forces will be the only thing that will convince QF management to close the gap with the others.
To attract suitable external LAE's something has to be done to address the non recognition of experience as an LAE outside of Qantas. You have stated that the 20 year LAE will be able to diagnose and troubleshoot at a higher standard than a first year LAE. I agree whole heartedly with you. If I started with QF today my 20+ years is disregarded and I am treated, monetarily, as a first year LAE.
I know quite a few people who do not apply for advertised positions with Qantas, purely for this fact. If you dont start with them at 21 years of age you are at a major fiscal disadvantage. Most of these people are valuable assetts in their current workplace and would indeed be as well for Qantas.
We had a similar structure at Ansett, and it was voted in by the longer serving members to the detriment of the shorter serving members.
I think you should be considering the view of some of your members who are proposing an equalisation of payscales that will make the system a little more fair across the whole spectrum of employees.
GB
Dont get me wrong. I have the utmost respect for you and what you do. It is a thankless job. You come on to this forum not hiding behind the veil of anonimity, like others including myself.
However I would like to point out that sometimes you do tend to obfuscate certain facts or leave specific answers out. One example would be the two hours overtime you said equates to another 10% of the pay packet per annum. I dont dispute that this may exist for some, however I doubt it would for the majority of QF engineers.
That said I appreciate your efforts and genuine belief in the ALAEA cause. I am a member.
I cannot agree with you that the QF pay scale is a good deal when you look at the top level being a total of $156,000 PA (approx) includise of a 38% shift loading, and it not only is capped but could potentially take you 48 years to reach.
Someone could start with QF today, holding ratings on half the fleet, and be on somewhere around $95,000. Then wait 16+ years to get anywhere near a liveable wage.
It is a simple fact that for some reason the QF pay scale has taken a serious second place to the other main players in Australia. What can be done I dont know. Time will tell. I would imagine in the future market forces will be the only thing that will convince QF management to close the gap with the others.
To attract suitable external LAE's something has to be done to address the non recognition of experience as an LAE outside of Qantas. You have stated that the 20 year LAE will be able to diagnose and troubleshoot at a higher standard than a first year LAE. I agree whole heartedly with you. If I started with QF today my 20+ years is disregarded and I am treated, monetarily, as a first year LAE.
I know quite a few people who do not apply for advertised positions with Qantas, purely for this fact. If you dont start with them at 21 years of age you are at a major fiscal disadvantage. Most of these people are valuable assetts in their current workplace and would indeed be as well for Qantas.
We had a similar structure at Ansett, and it was voted in by the longer serving members to the detriment of the shorter serving members.
I think you should be considering the view of some of your members who are proposing an equalisation of payscales that will make the system a little more fair across the whole spectrum of employees.
GB
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Haveaguess
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you should be considering the view of some of your members who are proposing an equalisation of payscales that will make the system a little more fair across the whole spectrum of employees.
Gas Bags,I believe the equalisation of payscales at ANSETT was called "Fast Tracking" for lower paid LAMES and "Slow Tracking" for those Higher paid LAMES.
Gas Bags,I believe the equalisation of payscales at ANSETT was called "Fast Tracking" for lower paid LAMES and "Slow Tracking" for those Higher paid LAMES.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EWAN,
First I would like to clarify once again I do not work for QF, however I have been around and seen quite a few different companys, countries, and industrial arenas.
The fast tracking at Ansett again favoured the older guys with more time with the company as they were invarioubly the ones who were fast tracked through the system with a grade jump every 12 months.
I was referring to comments like this:
Obviously there are merits and pitfalls in any type of pay system. I saw them in the system at Ansett as I honestly thought I would retire there. In that system you were benefited by being there at the age of 21 and staying for the rest of your life, the same as the QF system. But we are talking about a system that would now be about 15 years old, and the environment has changed in Australia. Maybe it is time to change with it.
Perhaps as Steve has suggested there may be merit in having a parrallel pay scale running which will benefit the younger members working there.
GB
First I would like to clarify once again I do not work for QF, however I have been around and seen quite a few different companys, countries, and industrial arenas.
The fast tracking at Ansett again favoured the older guys with more time with the company as they were invarioubly the ones who were fast tracked through the system with a grade jump every 12 months.
I was referring to comments like this:
Steve, even 12 or 16 years is ridiculous. I think this needs to be spelled out to QF lames and they will see that mathematically being on the virgin system is much fairer and rewarding. Of course i think guys above the level will disagree.
I ask this Question; Is the responsibility any different for a lame signing with 1 month experience to one with 20 years?
I ask this Question; Is the responsibility any different for a lame signing with 1 month experience to one with 20 years?
An annualised salary at QF would go a long way to bridging the gap too.
Especially for the younger blokes that are trying to buy houses etc. Most banks won't consider your shift penalties under the QF system when it comes down to how much they will lend you.
It'd also be nice to be able to have the day off when I'm sick rather than draging myself in to save losing my penalties...
Especially for the younger blokes that are trying to buy houses etc. Most banks won't consider your shift penalties under the QF system when it comes down to how much they will lend you.
It'd also be nice to be able to have the day off when I'm sick rather than draging myself in to save losing my penalties...
Perhaps as Steve has suggested there may be merit in having a parrallel pay scale running which will benefit the younger members working there.
GB
Last edited by Gas Bags; 3rd Feb 2011 at 03:46.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is cut from one of my previous posts...
Not only do you have the approx. $350,000 difference over the 20 years before the pay scales basically line up, but then look at it this way...It will take approx. the same length of time again progressing through the 4 year grade jumps before somebody will have made back the $350,000 that the Virgin guy was in front by.
So after approx. 40 years at QF you are then actually better off financially than the guy working at Virgin.
GB
If I join Virgin today with a 737NG licence I will get paid a base rate of $117,572 a year.
If I join QF today with a 737NG licence I will get paid a base rate of $87,595 a year. With no training by either company it would take me 5 grade jumps, or twenty years at QF, for the salaries to equalise.
That is a difference of $29,977 a year for the first 4 year period = $119,908.
And a difference of $23,854 a year for the second four year period = $95,416.
And a difference of $17,750 a year for the third four year period = $71,000.
And a difference of $11,655 a year for the fourth four year period = $46,620.
And a difference of $5,532 a year for the fifth four year period = $22,128.
That brings the earning capacity difference over the twenty year period to $355,072.
If I join QF today with a 737NG licence I will get paid a base rate of $87,595 a year. With no training by either company it would take me 5 grade jumps, or twenty years at QF, for the salaries to equalise.
That is a difference of $29,977 a year for the first 4 year period = $119,908.
And a difference of $23,854 a year for the second four year period = $95,416.
And a difference of $17,750 a year for the third four year period = $71,000.
And a difference of $11,655 a year for the fourth four year period = $46,620.
And a difference of $5,532 a year for the fifth four year period = $22,128.
That brings the earning capacity difference over the twenty year period to $355,072.
So after approx. 40 years at QF you are then actually better off financially than the guy working at Virgin.
GB
And what are people prepared to "pay" for an annualised salary?
What are they willing to give the company because the company will want some form of "payment", be it NIL change for the individual (problematic due to increased costs with sick leave and LSL etc) or the individuals take a pay cut to help lower the "cost burden" for the company.
Make no mistake, the company wants productivity or cash payments for every consession achieved by the Association.
The current pay system is not fair for all players, but explain to me a pay system that is.
Harden up and work with what you have.
What are they willing to give the company because the company will want some form of "payment", be it NIL change for the individual (problematic due to increased costs with sick leave and LSL etc) or the individuals take a pay cut to help lower the "cost burden" for the company.
Make no mistake, the company wants productivity or cash payments for every consession achieved by the Association.
The current pay system is not fair for all players, but explain to me a pay system that is.
Harden up and work with what you have.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GB
The figures you are using are based on the Virgin 40 hour week and the Qantas 38 hour week. Try it again with 2 hours overtime a Qantas LAME would get paid if he worked the same amount of hours. It puts a sizeable dint in your figures and would be more accurate.
I'm not going to go into detail over a number of further inaccuracies in your last few postings. I know you are pro ALAEA and just pressing a matter that concerns you. I will just highlight one. I never said that the QF "pay scale" was a good deal and never will. It is devisive and designed to cause tension and scope for management to drip feed us with minor changes each time we negotiate. I spoke out when it first came in, was disadvantaged myself and have done all I can to fix a problem our Exec was lumped with when we first came in in 2006.
The figures you are using are based on the Virgin 40 hour week and the Qantas 38 hour week. Try it again with 2 hours overtime a Qantas LAME would get paid if he worked the same amount of hours. It puts a sizeable dint in your figures and would be more accurate.
I'm not going to go into detail over a number of further inaccuracies in your last few postings. I know you are pro ALAEA and just pressing a matter that concerns you. I will just highlight one. I never said that the QF "pay scale" was a good deal and never will. It is devisive and designed to cause tension and scope for management to drip feed us with minor changes each time we negotiate. I spoke out when it first came in, was disadvantaged myself and have done all I can to fix a problem our Exec was lumped with when we first came in in 2006.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Steve for the response,
Can you clarify for me the bases and actual workplaces that exist within Qantas that attract the 2 hours OT per week.
I am pretty sure that a number of them dont, by either working an 11.4 hour shift length or a 4 on 5 off shift pattern.
I am more than happy to be corrected, but that is my understanding as is evidenced by me previous post which included this point
Thanks for understanding I am not attacking you or the ALAEA, merely pointing out an alternative viewpoint.
The "harden up" philosophy espoused by LAME2 does not cut it with a large number of the membership at Qantas. I would suggest with a callsign like LAME2 that poster is on one of the higher levels and benefiting from same.
Why not change with the times and look at developing an alternative system to what is available that will benefit not only the younger members at Qantas but also future employees who are members also?
GB
Can you clarify for me the bases and actual workplaces that exist within Qantas that attract the 2 hours OT per week.
I am pretty sure that a number of them dont, by either working an 11.4 hour shift length or a 4 on 5 off shift pattern.
I am more than happy to be corrected, but that is my understanding as is evidenced by me previous post which included this point
One example would be the two hours overtime you said equates to another 10% of the pay packet per annum. I dont dispute that this may exist for some, however I doubt it would for the majority of QF engineers.
The "harden up" philosophy espoused by LAME2 does not cut it with a large number of the membership at Qantas. I would suggest with a callsign like LAME2 that poster is on one of the higher levels and benefiting from same.
Why not change with the times and look at developing an alternative system to what is available that will benefit not only the younger members at Qantas but also future employees who are members also?
GB
The "harden up" philosophy espoused by LAME2 does not cut it with a large number of the membership at Qantas. I would suggest with a callsign like LAME2 that poster is on one of the higher levels and benefiting from same
Understand frustration with AN pay scales, was done over with that system so much I left.
Understand frustration with previous pay scales including redundant licences. Was done over with that also but didn't leave at the time (see above).
Only thing that remains true for all pay systems, whatever company, is no pay system is fair for everyone all the time. (A good friend of mine told me that years ago and I agree). If you feel disadvantaged, do as I did. Otherwise put forward a proposal for consideration but first, see previous post of mine.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GB
It matters not which sections in Qantas are working a 38, 40 or 42 hour week. It is about comparing apples with apples. FYI the Qf 40 hour weeks (that include 2 hours overtime) are worked Syd, Mel and Bne domestic and I am sure some others as well.
At Virgin it is 40 hour everywhere and the wage is based on that. Qantas is all over the place so we need to take the base amounts in the pay agreement as you have, add the 38% penalty as you have (this is based on the Virgin and Qantas 4 on 4 off) and then add 2 hours overtime which has been omitted. Then you are comparing apples with apples.
If this makes it clear you may want to adjust your figures. Please don't open up a debate about regular overtime, inbuilt overtime and adhoc overtime. Its all paid the same and I estimate that 90% of LAMEs in this country have an average working week of around 44 hours.
It matters not which sections in Qantas are working a 38, 40 or 42 hour week. It is about comparing apples with apples. FYI the Qf 40 hour weeks (that include 2 hours overtime) are worked Syd, Mel and Bne domestic and I am sure some others as well.
At Virgin it is 40 hour everywhere and the wage is based on that. Qantas is all over the place so we need to take the base amounts in the pay agreement as you have, add the 38% penalty as you have (this is based on the Virgin and Qantas 4 on 4 off) and then add 2 hours overtime which has been omitted. Then you are comparing apples with apples.
If this makes it clear you may want to adjust your figures. Please don't open up a debate about regular overtime, inbuilt overtime and adhoc overtime. Its all paid the same and I estimate that 90% of LAMEs in this country have an average working week of around 44 hours.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fed Sec,
Once again obfuscation.
To not mention inbuilt overtime is an oxymoron however I will disregard this and err on the side of caution.
Lets take 2 grade jumps off the 20 years I posted as the wage equalisation time between VB and QF. That is eight years, leaving a total of 12 years for the wages to equalise. Add the approx 12 years in grade jumps at QF for the difference to be made up and that still takes 24 years.
I have removed 16 years to err on your side of caution, which should well and truly take out the 2 hrs of overtime per week.
Something is wrong here if the premier carrier in this country is that far behind the other players.
GB
Once again obfuscation.
To not mention inbuilt overtime is an oxymoron however I will disregard this and err on the side of caution.
Lets take 2 grade jumps off the 20 years I posted as the wage equalisation time between VB and QF. That is eight years, leaving a total of 12 years for the wages to equalise. Add the approx 12 years in grade jumps at QF for the difference to be made up and that still takes 24 years.
I have removed 16 years to err on your side of caution, which should well and truly take out the 2 hrs of overtime per week.
Something is wrong here if the premier carrier in this country is that far behind the other players.
GB