Seniority in the Qantas Group
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seniority Qantas Group Style - apologies to Gangnam Style
This needs a thread of its own, not a hijacking of the Qlink thread. Below is the final submission to FWA.
Group seniority is great, as long as you are senior
Pursuant to the orders of the Full Bench, both Qantas and AIPA filed documents setting out proposed Workplace Determinations (the QWD and AWD respectively). The AWD and QWD are documents that contain each parties desired terms in settlement of the matters at issue. They reflect the claims made during bargaining. Each proposal reflects the “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed” approach taken during the negotiations.
Leave without pay has been an important aspect of pilot employment arrangements for many years. It permits pilots to take time away from the company at times of surpluses without losing their relative seniority in the company. It further permits the maintenance of pilot regulatory requirements without additional expense to Qantas and provides opportunities for individuals to accommodate relevant experience which assists Qantas with their promotional criteria. Additionally, it also permits the company a mechanism of reducing pilot numbers at times of surpluses without having to make redundancy payments or losing the relationship with a pilot in whom significant investment has been made.
As discussed elsewhere, the nature of the employment relationship between Qantas and its pilots (like comparable other airlines) is of extraordinarily high levels of retention and employment stability notwithstanding a very cyclical business. Leave without pay has classically been one of the measures employed for this to occur.
An improvement to the leave without pay provisions provides the easiest way for the Full Bench to create savings for Qantas other than by reducing pay, entitlements or conditions for pilots. The company's resistance to such clauses is, ultimately, baffling.
The basis of leave without pay is that for the period of leave without pay the pilot is not paid by Qantas, and is not subject (other than as specifically provided for under the LH Agreement) to the benefits and obligations of the long haul agreement. The pilot is paid at whatever rate is negotiated or required for any employer he/she works for during the period of leave without pay. The pilot has a right to return at the end of the leave without pay period, and retains their relative seniority.
Long haul pilots may seek leave without pay for three reasons:
(a) to work as a pilot for a different employing entity in the Qantas Group;
(b) to work as a pilot for an employing entity that is not in the Qantas Group; or
(c) to not work as a pilot at all.
AIPA does not seek changes for the leave without pay arrangements described in (b) and (c). AIPA's claims concern leave without pay arrangements where the pilot undertakes leave without pay and remains within the Qantas Group.
At present, the only specific process relating to leave without pay for Qantas pilots is the 'Jetstar MOU'. The Jetstar MOU sets out a basis for some Qantas pilots to obtain leave without pay to work at Jetstar Australia on a preferential basis. However, this arrangement is limited as:
(a) it does not assist pilots employed after 03 November 2004;
(b) it is limited to terms of 3 years, with no capacity for shorter or longer periods as may be required by Qantas/Jetstar, and no capacity for extension;
(c) pilots have one opportunity only to work at Jetstar under the MOU.
(d) There is no obligation on Jetstar or on Qantas to advise LHP’s of opportunities for leave without pay vacancies.
The current arrangement is also deficient as:
(a) it only covers Jetstar Australia. There are no processes that facilitate leave without pay to any other Jetstar company, or to the range of other entities within the Qantas group that employ pilots such as Jetconnect, EFA or Qantaslink.
(b) the industrial instrument that gives effect to the Jetstar MOU for long haul pilots is in fact the Jetstar pilots agreement. The relevant provisions are vulnerable to change or removal pursuant to the arrangements between Jetstar and Jetstar pilots.
While limited and deficient, the Jetstar MOU has provided Qantas assistance in relieving the current surplus while avoiding retrenchment, and has provided long haul pilots new opportunities during a period of limited advancement within Qantas.
All of the Workplace Determinations contain provisions that continue the operation of the Jetstar MOU.
However, AIPA submits that the Full Bench should incorporate additional measures to facilitate and encourage the taking of leave without pay for Qantas pilots. This is because of the clear benefits that such arrangements have for both Qantas and pilots. Specifically:
(a) it saves Qantas significant amounts of money as they do not need to pay pilots for whom there is no work to be done;
(b) it buys Qantas time to ensure that the amount of flying is appropriate for the number of pilots employed, without having to go to the expense of retrenching pilots and then reemploying them a couple of years later;
(c) it avoids the need for retrenchments;
(d) by providing pilots opportunities to undertake new and different work without leaving the Qantas Group, it minimises the possibility of pilots in whom Qantas has
invested significant resources, resigning their employment to take up work elsewhere;
(e) it provides pilots new and different opportunities at times when there are limited opportunities within Qantas.
The key ways in which a provision may assist leave without pay is by assisting the identification of vacancies, assisting with obtaining endorsements (the licence to operate the aircraft), and providing a mechanism for pilots to access appropriate positions in the other entities. There has been very little leave without pay to entities in the Qantas Group (outside the Jetstar MOU) in part because Qantas pilots would need to enter those entities as the most junior pilots.
The AWD proposal
The AWD seeks to incorporate provisions facilitating leave without pay:
(a) by "requiring Qantas to "distribute, as soon as practicable, advertisements for pilot positions with other members of the Qantas Group."
(b) by ensuring other Qantas Group Members consider long haul pilots applications before considering applications from external applicants. No preference against applicants from other Qantas Group companies is sought.
(c) by requiring Qantas to "supply the subsidiary company with such relevant information on the pilot and the pilot's personnel file as the pilot directs."
(d) "grant any request for leave without pay provided that the request is for a period of 12 months or more, and the request would not create a shortage of pilots in Qantas."
(e) facilitate costs associated with the leave without pay. There would be very limited circumstances where the company would be required to pay such costs. In almost all cases the pilot would pay the cost. Qantas would be prevented from profiting from the endorsement process.
(f) ensure that the Qantas subsidiary company provide the pilot with the appropriate level of seniority commensurate with their service in Qantas. AIPA seeks to generalise and extend the practice that currently exists in the Jetstar MOU. As discussed below the MOU applies to Qantas pilots taking leave without pay to work for Jetstar Airways Pty Limited. The Association seeks to make QAL ensure that where LHPs obtain positions with other Qantas Group entities those pilots are provided seniority in the other group company commensurate with their seniority at QAL.
These proposed obligations would not create any significant additional financial burden on Qantas. It would only be obliged to provide leave without pay to the extent it could do so without causing a shortage of pilots within its own ranks. The endorsement costs (which Qantas may later benefit from) are met by the pilot, albeit at cost.
The current agreement contains a number of provisions that are expressed to continue to apply to pilots while on leave without pay to Jetstar. These provisions (which, for example permit a pilot to remain with their Qantas superannuation fund in the event they make up the difference in contributions) do not impose any cost other than administrative costs on Qantas. These provisions are extended in the AWD to also apply to incidences of leave without pay to other Qantas Group Companies.
Leave without pay has been an important aspect of pilot employment arrangements for many years. It permits pilots to take time away from the company at times of surpluses without losing their relative seniority in the company. It further permits the maintenance of pilot regulatory requirements without additional expense to Qantas and provides opportunities for individuals to accommodate relevant experience which assists Qantas with their promotional criteria. Additionally, it also permits the company a mechanism of reducing pilot numbers at times of surpluses without having to make redundancy payments or losing the relationship with a pilot in whom significant investment has been made.
As discussed elsewhere, the nature of the employment relationship between Qantas and its pilots (like comparable other airlines) is of extraordinarily high levels of retention and employment stability notwithstanding a very cyclical business. Leave without pay has classically been one of the measures employed for this to occur.
An improvement to the leave without pay provisions provides the easiest way for the Full Bench to create savings for Qantas other than by reducing pay, entitlements or conditions for pilots. The company's resistance to such clauses is, ultimately, baffling.
The basis of leave without pay is that for the period of leave without pay the pilot is not paid by Qantas, and is not subject (other than as specifically provided for under the LH Agreement) to the benefits and obligations of the long haul agreement. The pilot is paid at whatever rate is negotiated or required for any employer he/she works for during the period of leave without pay. The pilot has a right to return at the end of the leave without pay period, and retains their relative seniority.
Long haul pilots may seek leave without pay for three reasons:
(a) to work as a pilot for a different employing entity in the Qantas Group;
(b) to work as a pilot for an employing entity that is not in the Qantas Group; or
(c) to not work as a pilot at all.
AIPA does not seek changes for the leave without pay arrangements described in (b) and (c). AIPA's claims concern leave without pay arrangements where the pilot undertakes leave without pay and remains within the Qantas Group.
At present, the only specific process relating to leave without pay for Qantas pilots is the 'Jetstar MOU'. The Jetstar MOU sets out a basis for some Qantas pilots to obtain leave without pay to work at Jetstar Australia on a preferential basis. However, this arrangement is limited as:
(a) it does not assist pilots employed after 03 November 2004;
(b) it is limited to terms of 3 years, with no capacity for shorter or longer periods as may be required by Qantas/Jetstar, and no capacity for extension;
(c) pilots have one opportunity only to work at Jetstar under the MOU.
(d) There is no obligation on Jetstar or on Qantas to advise LHP’s of opportunities for leave without pay vacancies.
The current arrangement is also deficient as:
(a) it only covers Jetstar Australia. There are no processes that facilitate leave without pay to any other Jetstar company, or to the range of other entities within the Qantas group that employ pilots such as Jetconnect, EFA or Qantaslink.
(b) the industrial instrument that gives effect to the Jetstar MOU for long haul pilots is in fact the Jetstar pilots agreement. The relevant provisions are vulnerable to change or removal pursuant to the arrangements between Jetstar and Jetstar pilots.
While limited and deficient, the Jetstar MOU has provided Qantas assistance in relieving the current surplus while avoiding retrenchment, and has provided long haul pilots new opportunities during a period of limited advancement within Qantas.
All of the Workplace Determinations contain provisions that continue the operation of the Jetstar MOU.
However, AIPA submits that the Full Bench should incorporate additional measures to facilitate and encourage the taking of leave without pay for Qantas pilots. This is because of the clear benefits that such arrangements have for both Qantas and pilots. Specifically:
(a) it saves Qantas significant amounts of money as they do not need to pay pilots for whom there is no work to be done;
(b) it buys Qantas time to ensure that the amount of flying is appropriate for the number of pilots employed, without having to go to the expense of retrenching pilots and then reemploying them a couple of years later;
(c) it avoids the need for retrenchments;
(d) by providing pilots opportunities to undertake new and different work without leaving the Qantas Group, it minimises the possibility of pilots in whom Qantas has
invested significant resources, resigning their employment to take up work elsewhere;
(e) it provides pilots new and different opportunities at times when there are limited opportunities within Qantas.
The key ways in which a provision may assist leave without pay is by assisting the identification of vacancies, assisting with obtaining endorsements (the licence to operate the aircraft), and providing a mechanism for pilots to access appropriate positions in the other entities. There has been very little leave without pay to entities in the Qantas Group (outside the Jetstar MOU) in part because Qantas pilots would need to enter those entities as the most junior pilots.
The AWD proposal
The AWD seeks to incorporate provisions facilitating leave without pay:
(a) by "requiring Qantas to "distribute, as soon as practicable, advertisements for pilot positions with other members of the Qantas Group."
(b) by ensuring other Qantas Group Members consider long haul pilots applications before considering applications from external applicants. No preference against applicants from other Qantas Group companies is sought.
(c) by requiring Qantas to "supply the subsidiary company with such relevant information on the pilot and the pilot's personnel file as the pilot directs."
(d) "grant any request for leave without pay provided that the request is for a period of 12 months or more, and the request would not create a shortage of pilots in Qantas."
(e) facilitate costs associated with the leave without pay. There would be very limited circumstances where the company would be required to pay such costs. In almost all cases the pilot would pay the cost. Qantas would be prevented from profiting from the endorsement process.
(f) ensure that the Qantas subsidiary company provide the pilot with the appropriate level of seniority commensurate with their service in Qantas. AIPA seeks to generalise and extend the practice that currently exists in the Jetstar MOU. As discussed below the MOU applies to Qantas pilots taking leave without pay to work for Jetstar Airways Pty Limited. The Association seeks to make QAL ensure that where LHPs obtain positions with other Qantas Group entities those pilots are provided seniority in the other group company commensurate with their seniority at QAL.
These proposed obligations would not create any significant additional financial burden on Qantas. It would only be obliged to provide leave without pay to the extent it could do so without causing a shortage of pilots within its own ranks. The endorsement costs (which Qantas may later benefit from) are met by the pilot, albeit at cost.
The current agreement contains a number of provisions that are expressed to continue to apply to pilots while on leave without pay to Jetstar. These provisions (which, for example permit a pilot to remain with their Qantas superannuation fund in the event they make up the difference in contributions) do not impose any cost other than administrative costs on Qantas. These provisions are extended in the AWD to also apply to incidences of leave without pay to other Qantas Group Companies.
Last edited by Marcellus; 16th Nov 2012 at 04:35.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Aus
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ph@rk Me Rhonda, how many QF pilots are ther with seniority that predates 2007. I don't think that there is a single FO in Jetstar or QLINK that could outbid a QF pilot on LWOP under this idiocy.
When was this submission made?
(f) ensure that the Qantas subsidiary company provide the pilot with the appropriate level of seniority commensurate with their service in Qantas. AIPA seeks to generalise and extend the practice that currently exists in the Jetstar MOU. As discussed below the MOU applies to Qantas pilots taking leave without pay to work for Jetstar Airways Pty Limited. The Association seeks to make QAL ensure that where LHPs obtain positions with other Qantas Group entities those pilots are provided seniority in the other group company commensurate with their seniority at QAL.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: herethereandeverywhere
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clear benefits. What was that about there not being a sense of entitlement?...
2. Group Members and pilots covered by the GMS
2.1 The following pilots are covered by the GMS:
(a) pilots employed by New Qantas Group Members;
(b) pilots employed by a Current Qantas Group Member who are covered by a collective agreement that contains a term that facilitates the GMS;
(c) pilots employed by a Current Qantas Group Member who are not covered by a collective agreement.
2.2 The primary and secondary employer of pilots covered by the GMS are also covered by the GMS.
4.1 Pursuant to clause 2.1(b) of this framework document, a collective agreement will facilitate the GMS if it:
(a) provides that pilots covered by the collective agreement will be covered by the GMS; or
(b) contains no provision that would prevent pilots covered by the GMS but not covered by that collective agreement, accessing vacancies and/or assuming seniority in a secondary employer pursuant to the GMS.
2.1 The following pilots are covered by the GMS:
(a) pilots employed by New Qantas Group Members;
(b) pilots employed by a Current Qantas Group Member who are covered by a collective agreement that contains a term that facilitates the GMS;
(c) pilots employed by a Current Qantas Group Member who are not covered by a collective agreement.
2.2 The primary and secondary employer of pilots covered by the GMS are also covered by the GMS.
4.1 Pursuant to clause 2.1(b) of this framework document, a collective agreement will facilitate the GMS if it:
(a) provides that pilots covered by the collective agreement will be covered by the GMS; or
(b) contains no provision that would prevent pilots covered by the GMS but not covered by that collective agreement, accessing vacancies and/or assuming seniority in a secondary employer pursuant to the GMS.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Aus
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WTF is going on here. I have just had a very informative read of our own internal pilots’ website. It looks like AIPA were trying to pineapple us for 9 months. Either our AIPA subcommittee was asleep at the wheel, or they are incompetent and don’t what due diligence is, or BOTH.
What I find amazing is that AIPA tell us that the GMS is opt in. Then I read this:
Well Ph@rk Me Rhonda AGAIN. Our CURRENT agreement, the Jetstar 2008 EBA, contains no provision that would prevent pilots covered by the GMS (Qantas Pilots) accessing vacancies and/or assuming seniority in a secondary employer (Jetstar). SO IT LOOKS LIKE OUR AGREEMENT, BY ITS VERY NATURE OF NOT EXCLUDING A GMS, ACTUALLY FACILITATES IT!!!
Who drafts this sh*t.
I Just had a mate check, and the above from Marcellus is from AIPA’s FINAL SUBMISSION on October 29. He has said that both positions are in that submission, the desired position (aka Operation RODGER ALL SUBSIDIARY PILOTS) and the Julia Gillard BACKFLIP position – the GMS.
What I find amazing is that AIPA tell us that the GMS is opt in. Then I read this:
2.1 The following pilots are covered by the GMS:
(b) pilots employed by a Current Qantas Group Member who are covered by a collective agreement that contains a term that facilitates the GMS;
4.1 Pursuant to clause 2.1(b) of this framework document, a collective agreement will facilitate the GMS if it:
(a) provides that pilots covered by the collective agreement will be covered by the GMS; or
(b) contains no provision that would prevent pilots covered by the GMS but not covered by that collective agreement, accessing vacancies and/or assuming seniority in a secondary employer pursuant to the GMS.
(b) pilots employed by a Current Qantas Group Member who are covered by a collective agreement that contains a term that facilitates the GMS;
4.1 Pursuant to clause 2.1(b) of this framework document, a collective agreement will facilitate the GMS if it:
(a) provides that pilots covered by the collective agreement will be covered by the GMS; or
(b) contains no provision that would prevent pilots covered by the GMS but not covered by that collective agreement, accessing vacancies and/or assuming seniority in a secondary employer pursuant to the GMS.
Who drafts this sh*t.
I Just had a mate check, and the above from Marcellus is from AIPA’s FINAL SUBMISSION on October 29. He has said that both positions are in that submission, the desired position (aka Operation RODGER ALL SUBSIDIARY PILOTS) and the Julia Gillard BACKFLIP position – the GMS.
Last edited by leakyboats; 16th Nov 2012 at 08:04.
Nunc est bibendum
Never mind all that, Marcellus called it 'THE' Qantas group. Quick, someone call scam sniffer and let him know that yet again someone used 'THE' word in front of THE word Qantas. 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Darwin
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AFAP JPC et al.
How sad you are relegated to this having been shown to "Fire, Ready, Aim" on your own JQ Pilot website.
You are sad little men.
How sad you are relegated to this having been shown to "Fire, Ready, Aim" on your own JQ Pilot website.
You are sad little men.
Last edited by What The; 16th Nov 2012 at 19:19.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: under a rock
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess Qantaslink pilots can start using the slogans of
"Secure our flying...from Qantas pilots"
"When you board a Qantaslink flight, you expect a Qantaslink pilot"
"Secure our flying...from Qantas pilots"
"When you board a Qantaslink flight, you expect a Qantaslink pilot"
Last edited by bubble.head; 16th Nov 2012 at 11:32.
Ben Bollen et al.
How sad you are relegated to this having been shown to "Fire, Ready, Aim" on your own JQ Pilot website.
You are sad little men.
How sad you are relegated to this having been shown to "Fire, Ready, Aim" on your own JQ Pilot website.
You are sad little men.
Qlink pilots....ask yourselves who is going to fly the A318s/A319s/A320s? Not you that's for sure.....Where would I get experienced Airbus pilots in Australia? Wake up to what is happening here and remember we are all in this together and it is not all about me. I afraid we will never change that attitude in pilots and Oldmeadow knows it.
Last edited by busdriver007; 16th Nov 2012 at 17:36.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: south pacific vagrant
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can you explain your childish attack?
it didnt go down well and the conpsiracy theorists have obviously decided to come on here to continue the campaign against aipa
afap would rather throw grenades than pick up the phone.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know it's arguments like Waren9 that truly amazes me.
No one cares that the facts are out of date or the proposal has been changed because it would have never gotten up in the first place.
What we do care about is that AIPA would try to slip in under the radar in the first place
.
In reality thou no one should really be surprised as it's certainly not the first time they have gone out of their way to shaft a particular group for the benefit of mainline.
The only interests AIPA have is for mainline pilots. They can do their song and dance that their in it for everyone but at the end of the day the prove is in there actions.
Case in Point.
No one cares that the facts are out of date or the proposal has been changed because it would have never gotten up in the first place.
What we do care about is that AIPA would try to slip in under the radar in the first place
.In reality thou no one should really be surprised as it's certainly not the first time they have gone out of their way to shaft a particular group for the benefit of mainline.
The only interests AIPA have is for mainline pilots. They can do their song and dance that their in it for everyone but at the end of the day the prove is in there actions.
Case in Point.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qlink pilots....ask yourselves who is going to fly the A318s/A319s/A320s? Not you that's for sure.....
The reality is that if an Qlink driver wants to ever fly a Jet in Qlink colors then they will need to support such a clause, take the pineapple they are dealt and sit next to an MOU driver for the next 10 years.
Last edited by Holding at; 16th Nov 2012 at 20:57.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regional pilots beware,anything AIPA does will be for the benefit of LH QF pilots,they will shaft you in an instant to save themselves. Stick with the 400's and they will leave you be.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eagles Nest
Posts: 485
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about we start a thread on what AIPA have done for the group over the last 20 years and I think you may be able to draw your own conclusions as to what they may do for the group in future .
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This submission is a tactic by AIPA in relation to the very significant redundancies that will occur after the new contract is arbitrated next year - it has nothing to do with the reality or otherwise of the group seniority list.
Such a list will never exist as Qantas is ideologically opposed to it. I will bet that no mainline pilot is ever able to join JQ or QLINK under such a mechanism, not now. Not ever.
Let me explain.
With airframe and flying program reductions the mainline pilot group will be somewhere between 500-700 pilots overmanned by the end of 2014. Wildcards are the 280 or so currently on leave of absence and the 280 or so over 60's.
In any other company such a surplus of personnel would be managed by redundancies, but Qantas is ideologically opposed to paying pilots out. This has been stated time and time again by senior company IR and management figures.
So Qantas has wedged itself - it won't pay for surplus employees to leave, and it also won't ever agree to a mechanism where said employees might be assigned elsewhere in the parts of the group that are still rapidly expanding.
I understand the "if you don't like it just resign from QF mainline and apply for JQ / QLINK ect ect like everyone else", but why should an existing mainline pilot make it easy for QF to get rid of them ?
If they want us gone they can pay like every other business has to.
The endgame with this is about redundancy payouts and nothing else. Its about AIPA being able to present an argument to FWA that it has proposed a fair and reasonable way of managing the surplus pilot numbers, and Qantas will not agree to this due to its pig-headedness.
Once you view this issue through that lens, then it takes the heat out of the lies and disinformation spread on other fora such as aircrew.net
Such a list will never exist as Qantas is ideologically opposed to it. I will bet that no mainline pilot is ever able to join JQ or QLINK under such a mechanism, not now. Not ever.
Let me explain.
With airframe and flying program reductions the mainline pilot group will be somewhere between 500-700 pilots overmanned by the end of 2014. Wildcards are the 280 or so currently on leave of absence and the 280 or so over 60's.
In any other company such a surplus of personnel would be managed by redundancies, but Qantas is ideologically opposed to paying pilots out. This has been stated time and time again by senior company IR and management figures.
So Qantas has wedged itself - it won't pay for surplus employees to leave, and it also won't ever agree to a mechanism where said employees might be assigned elsewhere in the parts of the group that are still rapidly expanding.
I understand the "if you don't like it just resign from QF mainline and apply for JQ / QLINK ect ect like everyone else", but why should an existing mainline pilot make it easy for QF to get rid of them ?
If they want us gone they can pay like every other business has to.
The endgame with this is about redundancy payouts and nothing else. Its about AIPA being able to present an argument to FWA that it has proposed a fair and reasonable way of managing the surplus pilot numbers, and Qantas will not agree to this due to its pig-headedness.
Once you view this issue through that lens, then it takes the heat out of the lies and disinformation spread on other fora such as aircrew.net
Or to put it in a nutshell:
Qantas does not want such a list as it will make it more difficult to screw pilots.
Pilots do not want such a list as it will make it more difficult to screw each other.
Qantas does not want such a list as it will make it more difficult to screw pilots.
Pilots do not want such a list as it will make it more difficult to screw each other.