QF Pilots PIA
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Oz
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't J*pilots in particular, and pilots in general, still have a vote of no confidence in Buchanan? What's being done with this? Surely that can still be used in a professional and measured way. Especially if, horror of all horrors, he replaces AJ...
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Sydney
Posts: 817
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
woooo hoo... the employees don't like their boss! NOTHING will happen just because of this!
Framer, time and time again, pilots have been made to pay for the mistakes of management. Time and time again we have been asked to forego pay rises, or increase productivity because, for some reason or another, "it has been a hard year for us".....over the years, and with cumulative/compounding lack of pay rises, this will manifest itself ot MASSIVE loss of $$$$ for pilots. They are NOT asking for anything over the top, or extravagant. they are not holding the company to ransom. As has been proved here just recently, the OVERALL cost to the bottom line is negligible in the big scheme of things. It is just QF management not wanting to "lose face". .... and why should pilots pay for management arrogance, again?
Framer, time and time again, pilots have been made to pay for the mistakes of management. Time and time again we have been asked to forego pay rises, or increase productivity because, for some reason or another, "it has been a hard year for us".....over the years, and with cumulative/compounding lack of pay rises, this will manifest itself ot MASSIVE loss of $$$$ for pilots. They are NOT asking for anything over the top, or extravagant. they are not holding the company to ransom. As has been proved here just recently, the OVERALL cost to the bottom line is negligible in the big scheme of things. It is just QF management not wanting to "lose face". .... and why should pilots pay for management arrogance, again?
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Time to change things?
Got the comment a couple of days ago from a Platinum Frequent Flyer:
"These pilot strike announcements are getting seriously boring,just like your safety announcements"
If they are starting to see it as 'just another announcement' perhaps it's time to change it up guys?
I am with you,= but keep it fresh. Its the punters who need to listen,not us!
"These pilot strike announcements are getting seriously boring,just like your safety announcements"
If they are starting to see it as 'just another announcement' perhaps it's time to change it up guys?
I am with you,= but keep it fresh. Its the punters who need to listen,not us!
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Australian Airline Management - The good the bad & the ugly
Hi all,
This story today in the smh actually got me to sit down and think about where we are all at, it actually reveals two different styles of management, but it didn't hit me until the last paragraph. (which I bolded)
One set of managers are doing all they can to upset their staff and probably a great many of its customers because of what feels like, an aggressive attitude, whilst the other set of managers are quietly sitting down with the very people who deal with this airlines customers, to sort out a positive result for the staff and its customers.
The good, the last paragraph in this smh story, a positive sit down and sort it out approach steered by this airline management team.
The bad, the constant mind numbing negative IR issues the other management team choose to inflict on their staff avoiding at all costs, just sit down and sort it out!
The Ugly, What Captain Anderson and his Son had to endure in Hong Kong that day, he was abandoned by this employer, in my view as well.
Wouldn't it be nice if someone said, "OK guys & gals this negative direction we have been on needs to stop, let's sit down and sort it out for the good of the company its staff and it's customers." Dare I say it.... why do these smartest guys in the room want to complicate everything? Yeah I know, I'm dreaming.
This story today in the smh actually got me to sit down and think about where we are all at, it actually reveals two different styles of management, but it didn't hit me until the last paragraph. (which I bolded)
Pilots union says Qantas breached duty of care
Andrew Heasley
August 4, 2011
QANTAS acted unlawfully, abandoned its duty of care and exposed one of its pilots to a potential breach of Chinese immigration law when it offloaded him and his son in Hong Kong over an industrial matter, the pilots' union says.
The Australian and International Pilots Association accuses Qantas of breaching industrial protections in the Fair Work Act, leaving the pilot to fend for himself under questioning by Hong Kong's immigration officials last Friday.
''Qantas has a fundamental obligation to all its pilots to return them to their home base,'' the union's executive director, Philip van den Heever, wrote to the airline.
On Friday, Qantas stood down one of its pilots, Captain Steven Anderson, from flying duties on the QF30 Hong Kong-Melbourne flight, and his son was erased from the passenger list, leaving them in the Chinese territory.
Qantas removed the pilot from duty after the union gave notice Captain Anderson - also the union's secretary - would ''work to rule'' and not undertake flying hours beyond the normal shift.
Qantas explained in a written response to the union yesterday that Captain Anderson was removed because the airline ''would not accept partial performance of his duties'' and was removed lawfully under the terms of the Fair Work Act.
''Our priority was to get 307 passengers to Melbourne as quickly as possible,'' Qantas spokesman Luke Enright said yesterday.
How Captain Anderson’s son also lost his flight booking remains contentious: last Friday Qantas told Fairfax Media the son's booking was cancelled at his own request, an assertion that Captain Anderson described as "absolutely a lie".
Qantas has since written to the union denying it had any knowledge of telling a journalist that the pilot’s son requested his booking be cancelled.
The airline now says the son could not fly on QF30 because the staff discount ticket he was booked on required his father to be on duty in the plane.
Captain Anderson said he faced increasingly tense questions from Chinese immigration officials about the uncertainty of his status in Hong Kong, as he tried to leave the country with his son without the correct airline paperwork.
But Qantas said it provided a copy of the necessary paperwork to the pilot.
The airline said yesterday it would not reimburse the pilot, or his son, for "any expenses for their stay in Hong Kong and return to Australia" and would dock the pilot’s pay.
The industrial wrangling comes as Qantas axes its in-flight safety video briefing by Hollywood actor and Qantas "ambassador" John Travolta, where the Hollywood star extolls the virtues of the company’s pilots.
‘‘With Qantas...preparing to announce moves to replace Australian Qantas pilots with outsourced and offshore alternatives on August 24, Travolta’s message has been deemed inappropriate for the times,’’ union vice-president, Captain Richard Woodward, claimed.
Qantas said it had always intended the video would have a limited span.
■Meanwhile the flight attendants union has struck an in-principle workplace agreement with Virgin Australia for the first time, delivering a 16 per cent pay rise over three years to the airline's 500 international cabin crew.
Andrew Heasley
August 4, 2011
QANTAS acted unlawfully, abandoned its duty of care and exposed one of its pilots to a potential breach of Chinese immigration law when it offloaded him and his son in Hong Kong over an industrial matter, the pilots' union says.
The Australian and International Pilots Association accuses Qantas of breaching industrial protections in the Fair Work Act, leaving the pilot to fend for himself under questioning by Hong Kong's immigration officials last Friday.
''Qantas has a fundamental obligation to all its pilots to return them to their home base,'' the union's executive director, Philip van den Heever, wrote to the airline.
On Friday, Qantas stood down one of its pilots, Captain Steven Anderson, from flying duties on the QF30 Hong Kong-Melbourne flight, and his son was erased from the passenger list, leaving them in the Chinese territory.
Qantas removed the pilot from duty after the union gave notice Captain Anderson - also the union's secretary - would ''work to rule'' and not undertake flying hours beyond the normal shift.
Qantas explained in a written response to the union yesterday that Captain Anderson was removed because the airline ''would not accept partial performance of his duties'' and was removed lawfully under the terms of the Fair Work Act.
''Our priority was to get 307 passengers to Melbourne as quickly as possible,'' Qantas spokesman Luke Enright said yesterday.
How Captain Anderson’s son also lost his flight booking remains contentious: last Friday Qantas told Fairfax Media the son's booking was cancelled at his own request, an assertion that Captain Anderson described as "absolutely a lie".
Qantas has since written to the union denying it had any knowledge of telling a journalist that the pilot’s son requested his booking be cancelled.
The airline now says the son could not fly on QF30 because the staff discount ticket he was booked on required his father to be on duty in the plane.
Captain Anderson said he faced increasingly tense questions from Chinese immigration officials about the uncertainty of his status in Hong Kong, as he tried to leave the country with his son without the correct airline paperwork.
But Qantas said it provided a copy of the necessary paperwork to the pilot.
The airline said yesterday it would not reimburse the pilot, or his son, for "any expenses for their stay in Hong Kong and return to Australia" and would dock the pilot’s pay.
The industrial wrangling comes as Qantas axes its in-flight safety video briefing by Hollywood actor and Qantas "ambassador" John Travolta, where the Hollywood star extolls the virtues of the company’s pilots.
‘‘With Qantas...preparing to announce moves to replace Australian Qantas pilots with outsourced and offshore alternatives on August 24, Travolta’s message has been deemed inappropriate for the times,’’ union vice-president, Captain Richard Woodward, claimed.
Qantas said it had always intended the video would have a limited span.
■Meanwhile the flight attendants union has struck an in-principle workplace agreement with Virgin Australia for the first time, delivering a 16 per cent pay rise over three years to the airline's 500 international cabin crew.
The good, the last paragraph in this smh story, a positive sit down and sort it out approach steered by this airline management team.
The bad, the constant mind numbing negative IR issues the other management team choose to inflict on their staff avoiding at all costs, just sit down and sort it out!
The Ugly, What Captain Anderson and his Son had to endure in Hong Kong that day, he was abandoned by this employer, in my view as well.
Wouldn't it be nice if someone said, "OK guys & gals this negative direction we have been on needs to stop, let's sit down and sort it out for the good of the company its staff and it's customers." Dare I say it.... why do these smartest guys in the room want to complicate everything? Yeah I know, I'm dreaming.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@cart elevator. Just remember that the big frequent flyers are going either one way or the other - they either support us or they don't. Anecdotal feedback indicates that very many do, while the ones who don't have a pathological hatred of union activity and wouldn't even donate to the Salvos if the tin was held by a union member (in fact they probably wouldn't donate regardless). Continuing the PAs isn't going to change that. I think it's important to get the message out to the non-frequent flyers for a while, but I'm sure this will only run a fixed course.
I agree with Keg. This seems to be getting way more traction than AJ would like, and it must be a very frustrating environment in QCA at the moment. He made an enormous blunder in underestimating pilot unity/sentiment, or was given very bad advice - probably a bit of both. He has senior and middle-level managers trying to impress but running amok and making bad snap decisions (no-one but himself will be surprised at that). Then he has been playing a desperate game of catchup with things like the website.
The other fascinating thing is that he has so badly isolated his workforce that, anecdotally in my experience at least, the pilots are getting support from other ground staff & the likes, who might otherwise not be too sympathetic towards any pilot claims. They just want to see him go down for the count. He seems to be really losing his grip.
I agree with Keg. This seems to be getting way more traction than AJ would like, and it must be a very frustrating environment in QCA at the moment. He made an enormous blunder in underestimating pilot unity/sentiment, or was given very bad advice - probably a bit of both. He has senior and middle-level managers trying to impress but running amok and making bad snap decisions (no-one but himself will be surprised at that). Then he has been playing a desperate game of catchup with things like the website.
The other fascinating thing is that he has so badly isolated his workforce that, anecdotally in my experience at least, the pilots are getting support from other ground staff & the likes, who might otherwise not be too sympathetic towards any pilot claims. They just want to see him go down for the count. He seems to be really losing his grip.
and why should pilots pay for management arrogance, again?
I'm just saying that the plan of attack shouldn't be based on idealogical sentiments like that, but on the practicalities of the situation and if that means taking a short term hit to better long term prospects, then that should be considered.
Framer
short flights long nights
As a vetran from the "war" this is starting to sound so much like 89 but with 2011 tech...it is very very scary...my best to you all.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 66
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to agree SOPS. I clearly remember 89 and no one should underestimate the similarities.
To my QF union mates may I suggest it is time for a cold shower. Without change and innovation the Qantas we all remember (some through rose coloured Ray Bans) simply will not exist in a decade. However you can choose to be a part of the solution for change, or you can choose to get out of aviation!..and it is your choice!
As an interested observer from the sidelines it seems to me that it is not a lack of good faith, but a lack of ideas. Maybe it is time to bring in some fresh blood into the negotiations. If you are smart enough to safely navigate billion of dollars of hardware around the world everyday, surely collectively there is enough smarts to come up with ideas that will make a positive contribution to ensuring QF's future viability.
Something sadly missing from the debate here!
As a platinum frequent flyer I and most others I talk to in the lounge have had enough. We are bored with the debate, we see it as a throw back to the past days of unions out of control, and we also know how hard it is in business. As an ex pilot I sympathise, but as a businessman who spends a lot of money with QF (and SQ, CX, EK) we also sympathise with Alan Joyce who has a huge responsibility to the shareholders, and for that matter a lot of other stakeholders. Love him or hate him, he is the guy in the hot seat, but this battle can't be won the way it is being fought.
If you don't want foreign pilots in QF aircraft, then make yourselves indispensable. The way this argument is going it will only hasten making Aussie pilots irrelevant.
Get with the program and be part of the solution... Remember 89!
To my QF union mates may I suggest it is time for a cold shower. Without change and innovation the Qantas we all remember (some through rose coloured Ray Bans) simply will not exist in a decade. However you can choose to be a part of the solution for change, or you can choose to get out of aviation!..and it is your choice!
As an interested observer from the sidelines it seems to me that it is not a lack of good faith, but a lack of ideas. Maybe it is time to bring in some fresh blood into the negotiations. If you are smart enough to safely navigate billion of dollars of hardware around the world everyday, surely collectively there is enough smarts to come up with ideas that will make a positive contribution to ensuring QF's future viability.
Something sadly missing from the debate here!
As a platinum frequent flyer I and most others I talk to in the lounge have had enough. We are bored with the debate, we see it as a throw back to the past days of unions out of control, and we also know how hard it is in business. As an ex pilot I sympathise, but as a businessman who spends a lot of money with QF (and SQ, CX, EK) we also sympathise with Alan Joyce who has a huge responsibility to the shareholders, and for that matter a lot of other stakeholders. Love him or hate him, he is the guy in the hot seat, but this battle can't be won the way it is being fought.
If you don't want foreign pilots in QF aircraft, then make yourselves indispensable. The way this argument is going it will only hasten making Aussie pilots irrelevant.
Get with the program and be part of the solution... Remember 89!
Nunc est bibendum
@cart elevator. I agree that for some the message will be getting old and I agree with Dutchroll's point about those that support us and those that don't. I actually had a punter say to me yesterday as he was getting off that he never tires of hearing that PA so there is a demographic that is understanding and supportive of it. I'd like to see us have a 'change up' of about 3 similar PAs.
On every sector I've flown over the last 4 days I've had no less than a dozen or so positive to very positive comments on every flight when I've been standing at the door. Interestingly, the fleet manager said nothing when he got off on one of them. His F/O on the other hand....
The PA has had one unintended consequence at the moment. I suspect that it's united us a bit more as well as connecting us with the public more effectively. I've always regularly farewelled the passengers and depending on the flight/ destination/ time of day the greetings from the pax as they get off vary from non existent and no eye contact to a mumbled 'thank you' or 'goodbye'. Now however, more people are making eye contact and saying goodbye and as mentioned above, on every sector a number of people will be very supportive in their comments.
On every sector I've flown over the last 4 days I've had no less than a dozen or so positive to very positive comments on every flight when I've been standing at the door. Interestingly, the fleet manager said nothing when he got off on one of them. His F/O on the other hand....
The PA has had one unintended consequence at the moment. I suspect that it's united us a bit more as well as connecting us with the public more effectively. I've always regularly farewelled the passengers and depending on the flight/ destination/ time of day the greetings from the pax as they get off vary from non existent and no eye contact to a mumbled 'thank you' or 'goodbye'. Now however, more people are making eye contact and saying goodbye and as mentioned above, on every sector a number of people will be very supportive in their comments.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
5 Posts
I think you'll find that AIPA won't be ramping anything up until after the 24th.
In the mean time maybe some change to the PA would be desirable.
Hiwaytohell, your opinion is noted about the similarities between today and 89. This may come back to bite me, but I believe they are tenuous at best.
In the mean time maybe some change to the PA would be desirable.
Hiwaytohell, your opinion is noted about the similarities between today and 89. This may come back to bite me, but I believe they are tenuous at best.
Highway-You post one sentence but you manage to contradict yourself by the time you have entered the fullstop! First you say that Keg is dreaming when he states that an unintended consequence of the PA's is the connection to the passengers then you say its good to see the pilots more often. Are you going to be happy to see the pilot when you know its someone based off-shore whose only interest in the airline is the once a month bank account input? I think the public is starting to get a sense of what is going on at the 'Roo and are uncomfortable with it.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Melbourne, ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Age: 74
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You made the ATW daily news
SLF FF here. You have my support (signed the petition).
I think Q PR have shot themselves in the foot pulling the Travolta intro. Whilst it was a bit tacky I think the message was very strong. So their timing to pull it is telling.
This is reported in the ATW daily news. Good job guys.
Qantas pulls Travolta safety video amid pilot dispute | ATWOnline?
I think Q PR have shot themselves in the foot pulling the Travolta intro. Whilst it was a bit tacky I think the message was very strong. So their timing to pull it is telling.
This is reported in the ATW daily news. Good job guys.
Qantas pulls Travolta safety video amid pilot dispute | ATWOnline?
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by highwaytohell
.....we also sympathise with Alan Joyce who has a huge responsibility to the shareholders
Schedules will magically become accurate to the minute?
Serviceability on clapped out old fleets will skyrocket?
Engines will stop failing on the B744?
In-seat IFEs will appear out of nowhere and start working 24/7?
Enough meals will be loaded so Platinum FFs actually get a choice?
Bags won't ever be left behind again?
Here's my 4 week roster, highwaytohell:
Trip 1: Duty period (excludes time off) 31 hrs 55 min. Pay 22 hrs.
Trip 2: Duty period 32 hrs. Pay 22 hrs.
Trip 3: Duty period 9 hrs 50 min. Pay 6 hrs 35 min.
Trip 4: Duty period 29 hrs 35 min. Pay 22 hrs.
Trip 5: Duty period 11 hrs 55 min. Pay 7 hrs 39 min.
Trip 6: Duty period 30 hrs 25 min. Pay 23 hrs 2 min.
And in a stroke of genius, none of the above involves overtime pay.
You see, I perform all my mandatory preflight and postflight checklists and duties, which during domestic days I am often performing flat-strap without even getting out of the seat, for free! That's how much I love the company. But if you want to fly a sector at the end of a long day through bad weather with Captain Hung Foh, a 325 hour veteran of the Chinese People's Liberation Pilot Academy Factory just outside of Guangzhou, who has been flying the last 15 days in a row because he's not covered by Australian regulations, then you are most welcome.
I apologise on behalf of all Qantas longhaul pilots for being such an inefficient dinosaur.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: canberra
Age: 77
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DutchRoll,
With all due respect, that works out at 36 hours and 25 minutes per week for your 4 week roster which puts you 1 hour and 35 minutes ahead of most award workers in Australia. As for your pay hours, from what I understand from my friends in the industry most pilots world over get paid by the flying hour or some variant on it.
They tell me that you get paid artificial extra hours by flying at night or when there are not a enough flying hours available in a days work. They call it MCD or MDC or something. They give the example of you getting paid for 130 pay hours when in reality you would only fly 100 flying hours. Are my friends not telling me the truth?
With all due respect, that works out at 36 hours and 25 minutes per week for your 4 week roster which puts you 1 hour and 35 minutes ahead of most award workers in Australia. As for your pay hours, from what I understand from my friends in the industry most pilots world over get paid by the flying hour or some variant on it.
They tell me that you get paid artificial extra hours by flying at night or when there are not a enough flying hours available in a days work. They call it MCD or MDC or something. They give the example of you getting paid for 130 pay hours when in reality you would only fly 100 flying hours. Are my friends not telling me the truth?
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
5 Posts
Clotted, the 767 operates on the Long haul Award which is based on going to London and back every few weeks. Therefore it uses credited hours instead of stick hours. Min of 5.5 credited hours per day.
Credited hours are paid at a lower rate than the stick hours that the 737 drivers are paid by. No one get paid more for night hours, you work less days if you fly a lot of night hours.... It is a protection built in for long haul flying.
No pilot in the world flies 40 hours per week (2000 hours per year) ..... the reference to it is redundant.
Credited hours are paid at a lower rate than the stick hours that the 737 drivers are paid by. No one get paid more for night hours, you work less days if you fly a lot of night hours.... It is a protection built in for long haul flying.
No pilot in the world flies 40 hours per week (2000 hours per year) ..... the reference to it is redundant.
To put some of this into perspective,is anyone prepared to compare and post block hours MEL-LAX-MEL (using current Qantas schedule) and explain the make-up of the credited hours?