QANTAS AIPA 7.30 report
Without going into the details :
AIPA have asked for a 2.5% headline rate (less than CPI) in order to trade that money for longer term job security. There is more to it than that though, as AIPA have also asked for a change in travel entitlements and job security.
Due to the management "cutbacks" that were made a few years ago and the associated package renegotiation, people who have been in the company as little as 1 year can now boot a 25 yr pilot (and his family) off a flight under the staff travel scheme. Being a job where pilots spend a lot of time away from family, and sometimes try to offset this "lost time" by taking family members away with them, the situation has now reached the point where they can no longer take family away for fear of leaving an 8 yr old daughter or 11 yr old son in Bangkok alone, because they can no longer get a seat in the cabin (or a jumpseat - but thats another issue).
So AIPA have asked for one firm economy seat (upgradable space avail) each year per crew member in order to guarantee that their family will not be left behind under these circumstances. QF have 'interpreted' this at the FULL FARE cost of a first / business seat for each crew member once per year. I guess this is their worst case scenario, but this is a large part of their 26% pay increase claims.
The fact is that in terms on money, AIPA have asked for 2.5%, and are yet to negotiate any increased efficiencies by us which will lead to savings for QF.
The second part of the claim is for job security. AIPA have said that if QF want to take a QF service and replace it with a JQ service the next day, then they have to pay QF rates to the crew or negotiate with AIPA. There is nothing to stop them from starting up JQ/other entity flying a route 12 months later. This also applies to code sharing.
In addition, if QF want to start up an overseas QF basing using overseas crew (a la Jetconnect), then they have to pay QF rates to these pilots to lessen the incentive to start the base. Legally, AIPA cannot stop QF from starting these basings, but they can ask that they are paid no less than QF rates.
QF have simply gone and costed the entire QF group getting a pay increase to QF mainline wages and placed this in the costings of AIPAs claim.
QF mainline pilots are quite happy to fly to more efficient rostering rules, and to only have a 2.5% pay increase in the current EA (EBA), but this will need job security provisions to be inserted into the contract in order to preserve the jobs long term.
It is dodgy accounting no matter which way you look at it. But then again, QF are pretty good at that...
AIPA have asked for a 2.5% headline rate (less than CPI) in order to trade that money for longer term job security. There is more to it than that though, as AIPA have also asked for a change in travel entitlements and job security.
Due to the management "cutbacks" that were made a few years ago and the associated package renegotiation, people who have been in the company as little as 1 year can now boot a 25 yr pilot (and his family) off a flight under the staff travel scheme. Being a job where pilots spend a lot of time away from family, and sometimes try to offset this "lost time" by taking family members away with them, the situation has now reached the point where they can no longer take family away for fear of leaving an 8 yr old daughter or 11 yr old son in Bangkok alone, because they can no longer get a seat in the cabin (or a jumpseat - but thats another issue).
So AIPA have asked for one firm economy seat (upgradable space avail) each year per crew member in order to guarantee that their family will not be left behind under these circumstances. QF have 'interpreted' this at the FULL FARE cost of a first / business seat for each crew member once per year. I guess this is their worst case scenario, but this is a large part of their 26% pay increase claims.
The fact is that in terms on money, AIPA have asked for 2.5%, and are yet to negotiate any increased efficiencies by us which will lead to savings for QF.
The second part of the claim is for job security. AIPA have said that if QF want to take a QF service and replace it with a JQ service the next day, then they have to pay QF rates to the crew or negotiate with AIPA. There is nothing to stop them from starting up JQ/other entity flying a route 12 months later. This also applies to code sharing.
In addition, if QF want to start up an overseas QF basing using overseas crew (a la Jetconnect), then they have to pay QF rates to these pilots to lessen the incentive to start the base. Legally, AIPA cannot stop QF from starting these basings, but they can ask that they are paid no less than QF rates.
QF have simply gone and costed the entire QF group getting a pay increase to QF mainline wages and placed this in the costings of AIPAs claim.
QF mainline pilots are quite happy to fly to more efficient rostering rules, and to only have a 2.5% pay increase in the current EA (EBA), but this will need job security provisions to be inserted into the contract in order to preserve the jobs long term.
It is dodgy accounting no matter which way you look at it. But then again, QF are pretty good at that...
hcmcmcclown,
FWIW, Nathan is actually an F/O on the 737. Hard to believe, but journos occasionally get the facts wrong! 
Nathan Safe you must have the patience of an oyster......8 years and still a second officer...And that is supposed to be a career path!!
Nunc est bibendum
Professional amateur, Qantas have refused repeated requests to provide that list of items to crew. The question I asked on the forum provided by Qantas has been denied twice- and argued away with the normal QF spin- and ignored the second time.
The QF log of claims was made available by AIPA on the proviso that it not be released more widely than employees. So whilst we can talk in generalities of such things like QF's desire to make redundant pilots on a decreasing fleet- and thus getting rid of a lot of very experienced F/Os and Captains on the 767 in a few years despite that QF supposedly 'value' experience according to the new posters around the place- instead of doing what is currently in the award, the reality is that QF pilots simply can't provide the minutiae on PPRUNE.
Onedotlow has provided a good summary. What he's neglected was that the QF summary was that the 'seat' that Qantas costed was a London return even though the reality is that most 767 drivers would use the seat for a Perth return, most A330 drivers would use it for somewhere in SE Asia or perhaps to the US.
The QF log of claims was made available by AIPA on the proviso that it not be released more widely than employees. So whilst we can talk in generalities of such things like QF's desire to make redundant pilots on a decreasing fleet- and thus getting rid of a lot of very experienced F/Os and Captains on the 767 in a few years despite that QF supposedly 'value' experience according to the new posters around the place- instead of doing what is currently in the award, the reality is that QF pilots simply can't provide the minutiae on PPRUNE.
Onedotlow has provided a good summary. What he's neglected was that the QF summary was that the 'seat' that Qantas costed was a London return even though the reality is that most 767 drivers would use the seat for a Perth return, most A330 drivers would use it for somewhere in SE Asia or perhaps to the US.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Melbourne
Age: 54
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am guessing that he will have a long and rewarding career in the RH seat of the 737 after publicly denigrating the company he works for....A brave young man with no concept of consequences.
McClown
McClown
Last edited by hcmcmcclown; 8th Mar 2011 at 23:16.
I am guessing that he will have a long and rewarding career in the RH seat of the 737 after publicly denigrating the company he works for....A brave young man with no concept of consequences.
Good on him for having the balls to do what is right and be a LEADER. Surely will make a good captain one day!
I believe the 26% comes from AIPAs claim for 2 pay types 767/330 and 747/380. Both would be on the higher of the present pay rates of each category. Because AIPA hasnt said how long it would be for this to be phased in Qantas has said it would be immediate and therefore a 26% pay rise.
Nunc est bibendum
dragon man. Nope, even if the pay rates were brought in immediately (which is not part of AIPA's claim) I think it's something like 14% over three years. The additional 12% QF are using is by misrepresenting the travel claims. QF has admitted to using the travel claims to come up with their 26% figure when answering questions from crew on QF's question and answer forum.
The base line pay claim is for 2.6% per annum and a readjustment of some of the scales that would see some crew get a bit more than that.
The base line pay claim is for 2.6% per annum and a readjustment of some of the scales that would see some crew get a bit more than that.
Last edited by Keg; 8th Mar 2011 at 23:38.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As much as I don't like to admit it, the Rat spin doctors have tied you guys into knots on the pr re the pay issue if we cannot get consensus here.
It needs to be rapidly fixed if you are to keep them to the main game rather than diversions/waffle.
Surely some PR guru can fix this easily?
It needs to be rapidly fixed if you are to keep them to the main game rather than diversions/waffle.
Surely some PR guru can fix this easily?
Nunc est bibendum
The biggest issue is the dispute isn't about pay- although even here that's all many outside of the dispute can focus on. The issue is job security.
The other lie told by Olivia Wirth was her comment about pilots coming back to the negotiating table. The pilots have never left the negotiating table. We continue to negotiate with the most recent meetings being within the last fortnight and another previously scheduled meeting happening today. It's typical of the Qantas 'spin' though. If she's prepared to lie about whether we are still talking to them do you reckon she's prepared to lie about the pay claim too?
Again, this is not about money.
The other lie told by Olivia Wirth was her comment about pilots coming back to the negotiating table. The pilots have never left the negotiating table. We continue to negotiate with the most recent meetings being within the last fortnight and another previously scheduled meeting happening today. It's typical of the Qantas 'spin' though. If she's prepared to lie about whether we are still talking to them do you reckon she's prepared to lie about the pay claim too?
Again, this is not about money.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You will not pick up any public support over the "job security" provisions you are seeking.
I can't think of any corporation that offers any kind of guaranteed "job security".
It is just not possible for any corporation to offer job security. Only if they were a charity would such provisions be possible - but even then, there could still be no guarantees.
To ask for "job security" is to ask the impossible. Such an ask will help the PR machine to identify you with the "greedy" 89'ers.
Just a suggestion.
I can't think of any corporation that offers any kind of guaranteed "job security".
It is just not possible for any corporation to offer job security. Only if they were a charity would such provisions be possible - but even then, there could still be no guarantees.
To ask for "job security" is to ask the impossible. Such an ask will help the PR machine to identify you with the "greedy" 89'ers.
Just a suggestion.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Down Under
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Job Security' is not implying a guarantee to keep pilots employed no matter what; it's about putting a stop to the blatant offshoring of Australian jobs and the undermining of an established/experienced workforce which helps contribute to the overall strength of the company!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Job Security' is not implying a guarantee to keep pilots employed no matter what; it's about putting a stop to the blatant offshoring
The PR machine will push the view that by demanding job security, the Qantas pilots are demanding something that no other worker in Australia enjoys.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas have made the pay issue the public battleground because that is where they want to fight,to avoid the other issues in the public domain.
I say again, kill their oxygen and bring it back to the REAL issues.
This battle has two fronts in the meeting room and in the media.
Both are equally important if it cannot be solved behind closed doors.
For the life of me I cannot understand why these Execs constantly want to fight with everyone. They have so many fronts they must be wondering when they can get back (accept a leap of faith with that assumption) to actually running the business provided they can walk out after the next Senate hearing.
Borghetti must be loving this.
I say again, kill their oxygen and bring it back to the REAL issues.
This battle has two fronts in the meeting room and in the media.
Both are equally important if it cannot be solved behind closed doors.
For the life of me I cannot understand why these Execs constantly want to fight with everyone. They have so many fronts they must be wondering when they can get back (accept a leap of faith with that assumption) to actually running the business provided they can walk out after the next Senate hearing.
Borghetti must be loving this.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The PR machine will push the view that by demanding job security, the Qantas pilots are demanding something that no other worker in Australia enjoys.
Well a good journo might put to the PR ..... girl what the pay claim without the staff travel is. I would love to see her spin on that.
But how disgusting that someone who a few weeks ago was singing the praise of the companies pilots would stoop so low as to this.
I guess thats her job......I hope she is proud of herself.
But how disgusting that someone who a few weeks ago was singing the praise of the companies pilots would stoop so low as to this.
I guess thats her job......I hope she is proud of herself.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Borghetti must be loving this.
Retard Vehicle will get more hours this year
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spokepersons need to have credibility, Wirth has none. Qantas needs to have its act together regarding PR, operational aspects need to be addressed by a senior pilot (with grey hair), commercial issues by a senior manager. Having a Gen whatever with no airline experience as your spokesperson doesn't go down well in the media.
As for timing for any action, it couldn't be better. Virgin launcing its business class in a new aircraft, Qantas bleeding passeneger because of industrial action. Surely its time for management to realise that engaging with your employees and actually negoitating a win-win outcome is better than the style of management that has existed in the Dixon & Joyce days.
As for timing for any action, it couldn't be better. Virgin launcing its business class in a new aircraft, Qantas bleeding passeneger because of industrial action. Surely its time for management to realise that engaging with your employees and actually negoitating a win-win outcome is better than the style of management that has existed in the Dixon & Joyce days.