MERGED: Alan's still not happy......
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Next to Bay 8
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The next move for pilots???
So isn't the LH agreement up towards the end of this year? When will negotiations begin for that? Is it at all possible that the company will be talking to AIPA now to try and get something rolling to tie in with the Feb 27 announcement?
If VR is offered, does the company have to offer it to those at the top of the seniority list first and work their way down? Or can they offer it direct to those that are surplus on certain fleets ie 744/763 and bypass others who may want it?
Everyone has been talking about a "B-Scale" being the only way that Qantas will hire pilots again.
I'm wondering what the more likely scenario is regarding a B-scale:
-Fleet pay for new S/Os, then present conditions?
-A reduced pay scale for S/Os whilst they are S/Os, to return to normal pay whilst on the SH EBA and then normal pay as F/O and Capt at LH?
-A reduced pay scale for new S/Os that is carried on throughout all ranks for the duration of their time at Qantas?
-Some other system?
Does anyone know what AIPAs (and the pilot groups) preference is with regard to this? My opinion is pilots would rather not have ANY B-scale of any description, but it sounds like the only way it's going to happen, and if that's the case I'd say most guys would prefer the first option of fleet pay for new S/Os then present conditions.
If VR is offered, does the company have to offer it to those at the top of the seniority list first and work their way down? Or can they offer it direct to those that are surplus on certain fleets ie 744/763 and bypass others who may want it?
Everyone has been talking about a "B-Scale" being the only way that Qantas will hire pilots again.
I'm wondering what the more likely scenario is regarding a B-scale:
-Fleet pay for new S/Os, then present conditions?
-A reduced pay scale for S/Os whilst they are S/Os, to return to normal pay whilst on the SH EBA and then normal pay as F/O and Capt at LH?
-A reduced pay scale for new S/Os that is carried on throughout all ranks for the duration of their time at Qantas?
-Some other system?
Does anyone know what AIPAs (and the pilot groups) preference is with regard to this? My opinion is pilots would rather not have ANY B-scale of any description, but it sounds like the only way it's going to happen, and if that's the case I'd say most guys would prefer the first option of fleet pay for new S/Os then present conditions.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: toontown
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the rate the over 60's are retiring right now there may not be any VR. These guys have sucked the company for all they can muster and now there is a hint of trouble they are pulling the pin in fear of their superannuation entitlements. I suspect if QF can keep there LWOP guys away for another 3 years it will make a huge difference. Don't think VR is on the cards. If you want out you'll have to retire.
Over 60's to a very large extent built this company and I don't think 'sucked it dry' is the correct expression esp when it was a 40yo who has trashed the place. It's not their fault the company has been rooned. IMHO.
If wishes were horses then beggars would ride.
These guys have sucked the company for all they can muster and now there is a hint of trouble they are pulling the pin in fear of their superannuation entitlements.
Yes, there was a bump in retirements for a time last year. Shared Blank Lines coming in had a lot to do with it, I reckon. Most older guys had done more than their fair share of Blank Lines earlier in their careers. Why do that again! Disenchantment with the direction this once great Company is being steered is another reason. Whether with intent or whether it is just one huge stuff up seems not entirely clear to any of us. Just read the last 120 pages here.
And I think some senior guys have realised the rapid changes lately in cockpit technology [Ipads for everything] have had unintended consequences that they are not comfortable with. With wireless delivery, there just isn't the contact with people anymore in the flight planning process and elsewhere. It is becoming extremely difficult to winkle out any additional information about anything from anyone these days. The communications pathways have become pretty obscure and remote. No longer can you just walk over to the person in the IOC you know has the information and ask him/her.
Well, I'll put my hand up and say I've done over 40 years in QF. 20 as a S/O and F/O then, taking the earliest available Command slot, the remainder as Captain. Every day of that 40+ years, I've done my very best to keep the travelling public in my care safe and secure. No matter which seat I was sitting in at the time. That's not the slightest unusual. Nearly everyone I meet at work is doing just that. I suppose, in the spirit of the principles of free speech, I'll have to defend your right to say "I've sucked the company for all I can muster". I just vigorously disagree with your statement. In fact, I don't pay any attention to my payslips any more. I'm not here for the money. If that's how you think, perhaps you need a reality check.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, so moving to the 380 at age 62.5, costing the company somewhere like $250K for training, then going to 737 training course at 65 and then going sick for nearly a year to burn off sick leave before finally retiring is NOT "sucking it dry"?
Lets hope only a minority do that.
Lets hope only a minority do that.
OK, so moving to the 380 at age 62.5, costing the company somewhere like $250K for training, then going to 737 training course at 65 and then going sick for nearly a year to burn off sick leave before finally retiring is NOT "sucking it dry"?
Abbott and Hockey went off about SPC and Toyota workers. Perhaps they should look at Qantas pilots!
Easy there folks... (TE)
A. It's a bold assertion to make without knowing the pilots/doctors etc,
B. the company sets the criteria for A380 'return on investment',
C. The company has discretion in allowing 'demotion training',
D. It's disingenuous to infer that it's more than very few questionable instances, and (KB)
E. given the perceptions of company integrity & openness over the last few year it's ironic that, if a few "play the same game", the concept of integrity or lack thereof gets bandied around about pilots in general. This sort of thing happened even at the incomparable Southwest Airlines in the USA, so it's not new; it's just new to QF in the last few years. Anyone want to write a treatise on human nature?
I'm not defending it if its real, but reaping & sowing come to mind.
B. the company sets the criteria for A380 'return on investment',
C. The company has discretion in allowing 'demotion training',
D. It's disingenuous to infer that it's more than very few questionable instances, and (KB)
E. given the perceptions of company integrity & openness over the last few year it's ironic that, if a few "play the same game", the concept of integrity or lack thereof gets bandied around about pilots in general. This sort of thing happened even at the incomparable Southwest Airlines in the USA, so it's not new; it's just new to QF in the last few years. Anyone want to write a treatise on human nature?
I'm not defending it if its real, but reaping & sowing come to mind.
JB
Nothing ingenuous! If there's just one instance as quoted, then that's one too many. 99.9% of Qantas employees do the right thing, day in, day out in a most dedicated way. I have seen it. One does not criticize any individual, but one can look critically at a group's Terms and Conditions. My bad for not being so clear.
Nothing ingenuous! If there's just one instance as quoted, then that's one too many. 99.9% of Qantas employees do the right thing, day in, day out in a most dedicated way. I have seen it. One does not criticize any individual, but one can look critically at a group's Terms and Conditions. My bad for not being so clear.
I have heard noises that the 767s will be retired very quickly after next week.
We don't want the new domestic owners to have to deal with all that old technology do we.
We don't want the new domestic owners to have to deal with all that old technology do we.
I have heard noises that the 767s will be retired very quickly after next week
Nunc est bibendum
The Company may, at its discretion, offer voluntary redundancies prior to making pilots compulsorily redundant.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Next to Bay 8
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess the question is, whilst CR is supposed to be LOFO, can VR be offered to whomever they like within the pilot group or do they have to offer it to the top first???
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its a difficult situation when you have a group of older employees that are paid well above market rate and have a sense of entitlement to historical terms and conditions that are no longer relevant in the modern workplace.
I am sure they are all very good people and very competent at their jobs.
I am sure they are all very good people and very competent at their jobs.
GG,
The older people aren't the only ones with that sense of entitlement etc. All Longhaul pilots enjoy 'historical terms and conditions that are no longer relevant in the modern workplace'. When will the obvious sink in?
The older people aren't the only ones with that sense of entitlement etc. All Longhaul pilots enjoy 'historical terms and conditions that are no longer relevant in the modern workplace'. When will the obvious sink in?
It would seem that the only people that think QF pilots are above the market rate are those that accepted lesser working conditions. Once T and Cs start falling at national carriers, it is not long before they tumble everywhere else. These conditions are the conditions that company agreed were fair at the last EBA. If they didn't, the EBA would not have been ratified. If it was ok for the company I can't see why anyone else should disagree.
If there is to be redundancies, and I really hope there isn't, shouldn't these also be considered with a QF group view as some here think remuneration should be? Last on first off should protect all QF pilots and provide them with some career progression into JQ. Pilot surplus taken care of.
Before I left Oz I never heard another pilot complain that others were paid too much, nor did they have to pay for a type rating. Where will it stop? It is sometimes good to be away.
The only person paid above market rate is that small Irish fella.
The Don
If there is to be redundancies, and I really hope there isn't, shouldn't these also be considered with a QF group view as some here think remuneration should be? Last on first off should protect all QF pilots and provide them with some career progression into JQ. Pilot surplus taken care of.
Before I left Oz I never heard another pilot complain that others were paid too much, nor did they have to pay for a type rating. Where will it stop? It is sometimes good to be away.
The only person paid above market rate is that small Irish fella.
The Don
What's about to happen has not been an overnight plan. Joyce was dropped into the position to perform the task he is about to do.
Yes the last EBAs for pilots and engineers were better than expected, all it has done is lulled everyone into a false sense of security.
At the end of the day there are people who would love to earn a Jetstar pilot or engineers salary and if they can't get it to happen internally they will go elsewhere.
Yes the last EBAs for pilots and engineers were better than expected, all it has done is lulled everyone into a false sense of security.
At the end of the day there are people who would love to earn a Jetstar pilot or engineers salary and if they can't get it to happen internally they will go elsewhere.
Borghetti Cracks It.
We now see Qantas in all its glory, doing what it does best: licking the arse of whichever Government is in power to get what it wants and Borghetti of Virgin is calling them on it.
It's realy amazing: the absolutely stratospheric return on investment Qantas can achieve from chairmans lounge memberships.
Taking a leaf from the Qantas book, If Borghetti truly wants to compete, he needs to invest in say a "Presidents lounge" and take it further up market than the Qantas product.
To put that another way, it is disgusting that Qantas is getting sympathetic treatment from the Government while they are shafting every manufacturing business and every worker in Australia.
It is disgusting that Qantas plans to take all of its maintenance and overhaul offshore while still arguing it is an authentic Australian national carrier.
It is disgusting that with alll of its market power, it still wants even more.
It is disgusting how it beats its staff over the head telllng them that they need to be "internationally competitive" in terms of labour costs, while simaltaneaously acting like lickspittle cowards themselves when faced with real competition.
I guess we are about to be treated to a series of Qantas advertisements full of kangaroos, claiming how authentically Australian it is, while at the same time shafting its engineers and giving their work to a bunch of overseas coolies who couldnt care less about their work quality...as long as they don't get caught.
But I guess Qantas is just following American management strategy like Sol Trujillo at Testra did; if you can't make a quid, lobby Government to change the rules.
Qantas should change its name to "Koala" Airlines - another protected species.
Let Qantas shrivel and die, it has leached off the Australian public for decades. Enough is enough. Open the skies.
Read more: Qantas chasing ?free ride? from government, says Virgin chief John Borghetti
It's realy amazing: the absolutely stratospheric return on investment Qantas can achieve from chairmans lounge memberships.
Taking a leaf from the Qantas book, If Borghetti truly wants to compete, he needs to invest in say a "Presidents lounge" and take it further up market than the Qantas product.
To put that another way, it is disgusting that Qantas is getting sympathetic treatment from the Government while they are shafting every manufacturing business and every worker in Australia.
It is disgusting that Qantas plans to take all of its maintenance and overhaul offshore while still arguing it is an authentic Australian national carrier.
It is disgusting that with alll of its market power, it still wants even more.
It is disgusting how it beats its staff over the head telllng them that they need to be "internationally competitive" in terms of labour costs, while simaltaneaously acting like lickspittle cowards themselves when faced with real competition.
I guess we are about to be treated to a series of Qantas advertisements full of kangaroos, claiming how authentically Australian it is, while at the same time shafting its engineers and giving their work to a bunch of overseas coolies who couldnt care less about their work quality...as long as they don't get caught.
But I guess Qantas is just following American management strategy like Sol Trujillo at Testra did; if you can't make a quid, lobby Government to change the rules.
Qantas should change its name to "Koala" Airlines - another protected species.
Let Qantas shrivel and die, it has leached off the Australian public for decades. Enough is enough. Open the skies.
Virgin Australia Holdings chief executive John Borghetti has accused Qantas of trying to get a “free ride” on government aid to allow it to maintain its 65 per cent share of the domestic aviation market.
On Tuesday, The Australian Financial Review reported the federal government is likely to provide Qantas with a standby debt facility backed by a government guarantee in the short term and a push to repeal foreign ownership restrictions over the longer term.
Speaking to the ABC’s Radio National on Tuesday, Mr Borghetti said the true reason Qantas wanted aid was that it was finding it difficult to compete in a market where there was a strong competitor for the first time since the collapse of Ansett.
“This is all about Qantas trying to get a free ride, there is no doubt about that, in order to continue their 65 per cent line in the sand strategy which is determined to knock out the competition domestically in this country,” he said.
Mr Borghetti noted Qantas is three to four times as large as Virgin and has $3 billion of cash and available credit facilities, a higher credit rating than Virgin, and a dominant position in every sector of the domestic aviation market.
“It is hell-bent – and by their own words by the way – of adding two aircraft for every aircraft we add, irrespective of the financial outcome,” he said.
Virgin is 77 per cent owned by a group of four foreign shareholders including Air New Zealand, Singapore Airlines, Etihad Airways and Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group. In contrast, Qantas is limited to 49 per cent total foreign ownership including 25 per cent by a single airline and 35 per cent by a group of airlines under the Qantas Sale Act legislation.
Mr Branson, whose Virgin Group owns 10 per cent of Virgin Australia, took out newspaper advertisements on Sunday with similar arguments against aid to Qantas as those put forward by Mr Borghetti.
Treasurer Joe Hockey on Tuesday rejected the arguments.
“Richard Branson is motivated by his own interest, I’m motivated by the national interest,” he said.
Mr Borghetti said the foreign ownership restrictions on Qantas should be lifted to level the playing field but that the government should not take other action to prop up the national carrier.
“Quite frankly two wrongs don’t make a right,” he said. “What you have here is the Qantas Sale Act imposed on Qantas which is clearly wrong by the way and we agree with that. If the government provides a debt guarantee or any financial assistance of any description all we are doing is making two wrongs and that won’t make a right.”
Mr Borghetti said Virgin’s position was that the government should not be providing any form of assistance to Qantas, but if it did so, it should offer the same aid to Virgin and other Australian airlines, including Regional Express.
Read more: Qantas chasing ?free ride? from government, says Virgin chief John Borghetti
On Tuesday, The Australian Financial Review reported the federal government is likely to provide Qantas with a standby debt facility backed by a government guarantee in the short term and a push to repeal foreign ownership restrictions over the longer term.
Speaking to the ABC’s Radio National on Tuesday, Mr Borghetti said the true reason Qantas wanted aid was that it was finding it difficult to compete in a market where there was a strong competitor for the first time since the collapse of Ansett.
“This is all about Qantas trying to get a free ride, there is no doubt about that, in order to continue their 65 per cent line in the sand strategy which is determined to knock out the competition domestically in this country,” he said.
Mr Borghetti noted Qantas is three to four times as large as Virgin and has $3 billion of cash and available credit facilities, a higher credit rating than Virgin, and a dominant position in every sector of the domestic aviation market.
“It is hell-bent – and by their own words by the way – of adding two aircraft for every aircraft we add, irrespective of the financial outcome,” he said.
Virgin is 77 per cent owned by a group of four foreign shareholders including Air New Zealand, Singapore Airlines, Etihad Airways and Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group. In contrast, Qantas is limited to 49 per cent total foreign ownership including 25 per cent by a single airline and 35 per cent by a group of airlines under the Qantas Sale Act legislation.
Mr Branson, whose Virgin Group owns 10 per cent of Virgin Australia, took out newspaper advertisements on Sunday with similar arguments against aid to Qantas as those put forward by Mr Borghetti.
Treasurer Joe Hockey on Tuesday rejected the arguments.
“Richard Branson is motivated by his own interest, I’m motivated by the national interest,” he said.
Mr Borghetti said the foreign ownership restrictions on Qantas should be lifted to level the playing field but that the government should not take other action to prop up the national carrier.
“Quite frankly two wrongs don’t make a right,” he said. “What you have here is the Qantas Sale Act imposed on Qantas which is clearly wrong by the way and we agree with that. If the government provides a debt guarantee or any financial assistance of any description all we are doing is making two wrongs and that won’t make a right.”
Mr Borghetti said Virgin’s position was that the government should not be providing any form of assistance to Qantas, but if it did so, it should offer the same aid to Virgin and other Australian airlines, including Regional Express.
Read more: Qantas chasing ?free ride? from government, says Virgin chief John Borghetti
Last edited by Sunfish; 18th Feb 2014 at 18:04.