MERGED: Alan's still not happy......
Just curious, i didn't think QF 737 drivers were getting anywhere near 73 stick hours a roster??
And Im not talking about people that work on their days off.
At the end of the day, or should I say at the end of the month, how many hours did you work and how much money did you have deposited into your account. Overly simplistic yes, but a pretty good indication of how 'efficient' you are
And Im not talking about people that work on their days off.
At the end of the day, or should I say at the end of the month, how many hours did you work and how much money did you have deposited into your account. Overly simplistic yes, but a pretty good indication of how 'efficient' you are
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QANTAS A380 super jumbos heading from Dubai to Australia sometimes leave half full as the flying kangaroo struggles to fill the giant planes in quiet travel periods. Figures obtained by The Australian show some 484-seat A380s heading to Melbourne in November and early December had more than 200 of their 406 economy and premium economy seats unfilled a day before departure. In one case, more than half the business class cabin's 64 flat-bed seats were also without paying customers as were eight of its 14 high-yielding first-class seats. The figures do not include staff travel or other subsidised tickets.
GRAPHIC: Flying half empty
The situation was less dire on Dubai-Sydney routes where one plane had 131 unsold economy and premium economy seats and another 111. There were 11 business-class seats spare on one flight and just one on another while six and eight of the first-class suites were registered as available.
The figures back up comments from pilots and flight attendants about empty seats on Qantas A380s, including one report that passengers from two of the big planes were accommodated on one after a breakdown.
The arrival of the Christmas peak season has seen empty seats dwindle rapidly and planes now filling but the November figures raise questions about whether the airline's reliance on A380s gives it sufficient flexibility.
Some industry observers, many of them pilots, believe the airline would have been better served buying the twin-engine Boeing 777s.
The pilots argue a 777 fleet would have afforded the flexibility to do long-range missions such as Sydney-Dallas as well as destinations such as Hong Kong with lower fuel costs. Both aircraft work well when full but the pilots note it is harder to fill a 380 and the big planes need a high load factor to make them pay. There are fears Qantas may axe one of its two flights beyond Dubai.
"I think the future of the industry is going to long-range twins and fuel, as Alan (Joyce) says, is the biggest part of his expense," a senior Qantas pilot said.
While the pilot said the decision to buy the A380s "was probably the right one" at the time, he believed Qantas should have taken options on the 777 so that it was able to bring them into the fleet as the aircraft's capabilities increased.
"I think you don't have to look too much further than Cathay (Pacific) to see what works and it would have made sense for us to do the 777s a long time ago given where we're situated on the planet," he said.
Qantas, which would not confirm the figures obtained by The Australian, said a dip in demand on the traditionally quiet shoulder period did not override the fact that the A380 was also favoured on major routes by partner Emirates, and was the superior aircraft for the Dubai route in terms of product, capacity and cost-efficiency.
The airline ordered the A380s in 2000 before the Boeing 777-300ER, the larger long-range version of the plane, was available, but says it would still not have picked the Boeing plane.
The A380 in its original configuration of 450 seats had a 7 per cent per-seat cost advantage over the B777-300ER. Qantas recently increased its seating density to 484 seats to improve the economics.
It also saw the A380 as more appropriate for "dense" routes with high-passenger loads to destinations such as Heathrow, where airport slots were limited.
"We have considered the B777 at various times, including as a potential B744 replacement and a potential option for Jetstar International," a spokesman said. "However, by the late 2000s the B787 was on the market, offering next generation technology, superior fuel efficiency and a better customer experience.
"With 50 B787 options available, we have more than enough flexibility to support renewal and growth for both Qantas's and Jetstar's international fleets, though clearly that is contingent on the group's financial performance.
"Even if it were commercially viable, it would make no sense to override these options with an order for B777s for Qantas International, given the cost and complexity of introducing a new fleet type."
On the question of the wider partnership with Emirates and whether customers were choosing to fly with the Dubai airline instead of the flying kangaroo, the Qantas spokesman said the partnership was performing "extremely well".
It pointed to Dubai International Airport traffic statistics that showed the alliance had helped drive up passenger traffic between the Gulf destination and Australia by 40 per cent in the first six months.
"The Dubai route is strong when you'd expect it to be strong and softer when you'd expect it to be softer," a spokesman said. "The European summer was a peak time and the Christmas holiday period is very heavily booked. This route has the highest customer-satisfaction ratings on our international network." Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian
GRAPHIC: Flying half empty
The situation was less dire on Dubai-Sydney routes where one plane had 131 unsold economy and premium economy seats and another 111. There were 11 business-class seats spare on one flight and just one on another while six and eight of the first-class suites were registered as available.
The figures back up comments from pilots and flight attendants about empty seats on Qantas A380s, including one report that passengers from two of the big planes were accommodated on one after a breakdown.
The arrival of the Christmas peak season has seen empty seats dwindle rapidly and planes now filling but the November figures raise questions about whether the airline's reliance on A380s gives it sufficient flexibility.
Some industry observers, many of them pilots, believe the airline would have been better served buying the twin-engine Boeing 777s.
The pilots argue a 777 fleet would have afforded the flexibility to do long-range missions such as Sydney-Dallas as well as destinations such as Hong Kong with lower fuel costs. Both aircraft work well when full but the pilots note it is harder to fill a 380 and the big planes need a high load factor to make them pay. There are fears Qantas may axe one of its two flights beyond Dubai.
"I think the future of the industry is going to long-range twins and fuel, as Alan (Joyce) says, is the biggest part of his expense," a senior Qantas pilot said.
While the pilot said the decision to buy the A380s "was probably the right one" at the time, he believed Qantas should have taken options on the 777 so that it was able to bring them into the fleet as the aircraft's capabilities increased.
"I think you don't have to look too much further than Cathay (Pacific) to see what works and it would have made sense for us to do the 777s a long time ago given where we're situated on the planet," he said.
Qantas, which would not confirm the figures obtained by The Australian, said a dip in demand on the traditionally quiet shoulder period did not override the fact that the A380 was also favoured on major routes by partner Emirates, and was the superior aircraft for the Dubai route in terms of product, capacity and cost-efficiency.
The airline ordered the A380s in 2000 before the Boeing 777-300ER, the larger long-range version of the plane, was available, but says it would still not have picked the Boeing plane.
The A380 in its original configuration of 450 seats had a 7 per cent per-seat cost advantage over the B777-300ER. Qantas recently increased its seating density to 484 seats to improve the economics.
It also saw the A380 as more appropriate for "dense" routes with high-passenger loads to destinations such as Heathrow, where airport slots were limited.
"We have considered the B777 at various times, including as a potential B744 replacement and a potential option for Jetstar International," a spokesman said. "However, by the late 2000s the B787 was on the market, offering next generation technology, superior fuel efficiency and a better customer experience.
"With 50 B787 options available, we have more than enough flexibility to support renewal and growth for both Qantas's and Jetstar's international fleets, though clearly that is contingent on the group's financial performance.
"Even if it were commercially viable, it would make no sense to override these options with an order for B777s for Qantas International, given the cost and complexity of introducing a new fleet type."
On the question of the wider partnership with Emirates and whether customers were choosing to fly with the Dubai airline instead of the flying kangaroo, the Qantas spokesman said the partnership was performing "extremely well".
It pointed to Dubai International Airport traffic statistics that showed the alliance had helped drive up passenger traffic between the Gulf destination and Australia by 40 per cent in the first six months.
"The Dubai route is strong when you'd expect it to be strong and softer when you'd expect it to be softer," a spokesman said. "The European summer was a peak time and the Christmas holiday period is very heavily booked. This route has the highest customer-satisfaction ratings on our international network." Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian
What he doesn't say, the load factors for the A380 via Sin to LHR were much better.... before the EK tie up (sorry don't have access to them, out of the country, can anyone help?) the reason why I was opposed to the deal in the first place.. SOPS, great post, makes a lot of sense.. as I have spent many years working outside of OZ and have watched our business pride slowly but surely evaporate.. similar to the UK. Both sides of government are equally to blame, diving blindly in to the free trade mentality which have never been an equal playing field. So many so called free trade deals have many exemptions for various segments.
Germany for example is a high cost labour country but manages to go from strength to strength maintaining its manufacturing base. Qantas is still Australian owned and operated but the management are going out of their way to throw it all away because they can't or wont own up to their mistakes..
They only know one reaction, cut cut cut, then they agree to reset the personal bonus for doing so... no one holds them accountable until it's way too late, this is Australia now.. For the operational staff at Qantas, it must be like running into a wall with your head down knowing that the company has been infiltrated by suits with calculators locked on to personal wealth numbers rather than using them to buy the right equipment to make the operational side of the business work, greedy bean counters, grubs.
short flights long nights
Thanks mate. I am really starting to think that a whole new direction is needed. Perhaps it's time to go back to looking after us. Forget the rest of the world. We can make things here, and provide for ourselves here. We did it from the start.
The First Fleet arrived with almost nothing....and they made a country that grew.
We provided men for wars, made things, produced things like the Harbour Bridge. In the good old days we had the best aviation system in the world, run by the DCA, with Ansett, TAA and Qantas doing their respective things very well.
And without extreme legal interference. I know times change, but what I see now is things like Ansett gone, Qantas going, Ford and Holden a memory, lets throw in Mitsubishi and Nissan, Kellogs closing this week...the demise of the local shop as the big two force local farmers to ever lower margins. And in this brave new world...the jobs will come from where?
The First Fleet arrived with almost nothing....and they made a country that grew.
We provided men for wars, made things, produced things like the Harbour Bridge. In the good old days we had the best aviation system in the world, run by the DCA, with Ansett, TAA and Qantas doing their respective things very well.
And without extreme legal interference. I know times change, but what I see now is things like Ansett gone, Qantas going, Ford and Holden a memory, lets throw in Mitsubishi and Nissan, Kellogs closing this week...the demise of the local shop as the big two force local farmers to ever lower margins. And in this brave new world...the jobs will come from where?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: moomooland
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The airline ordered the A380s in 2000 before the Boeing 777-300ER, the larger long-range version of the plane, was available…
Boeing launched its 777-X (bigger/longer range) program in Feb 2000…
The first Ten 300ER's were ordered (by Air France) in OCT 2000…
Boeing: The Boeing 777 Program Background
Qantas announced its order for the A3XX on Nov 29th 2000
http://http://www.eads.com/eads/int/en/news/press.818df84f-38b1-4ec2-b189-17a9a9b42d7d.70472f39-dd6f-4428-a792-91d82cb9791b.html
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Stralya
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I think the future of the industry is going to long-range twins and fuel, as Alan (Joyce) says, is the biggest part of his expense," a senior Qantas pilot said.
Qantas announced its order for the A3XX on Nov 29th 2000
Interesting to note:
After EK and SQ, Qantas has the third largest A380 fleet in service.
Qantas has the world's smallest 777 fleet in service.
I think the ramifications of this have been done to death here over the years.
OK - so you're not overpaid and underproductive?
Then why have I heard the same thing again and again from every analyst who covers your sector?
Ahh - of course - they've been brainwashed by Alan and everyone as well?
What percentage of every RPK on domestic and longhaul routes does your pay and Ts and Cs represent?
Probably highly commercially confidential information.
That's not the only problem - granted.
I'll bet if I walked into Mascot I'd find a slew of useless middle management drones that could be axed as well.
And on the failed JQ experiment?
I'd suggest to you that the experiment isn't over yet.
Sure, it might not be profitable now and may possibly be cannabilising QF.
But every long term economic forecast shows South East Asia rising in prosperity over the next 10 - 20 years.
The new middle classes with discretionary income to travel will be in this part of the world, and they will have a highly competitive airline industry to choose from.
They will be flying all sorts of new city pairs on 787s.
A dense network of routes in one of the worlds most aspirational regions sits right on your doorstep.
And you're criticising your Company for trying to adapt and being far-sighted?
Guys (and gals) I'm not trying to troll you.
I'm a pilot (not by occupation) and respect the job.
I just find it incredibly sad that some QF drivers and other trades/professions who post here just cannot see the crystal clear economic reality that you face.
Then why have I heard the same thing again and again from every analyst who covers your sector?
Ahh - of course - they've been brainwashed by Alan and everyone as well?
What percentage of every RPK on domestic and longhaul routes does your pay and Ts and Cs represent?
Probably highly commercially confidential information.
That's not the only problem - granted.
I'll bet if I walked into Mascot I'd find a slew of useless middle management drones that could be axed as well.
And on the failed JQ experiment?
I'd suggest to you that the experiment isn't over yet.
Sure, it might not be profitable now and may possibly be cannabilising QF.
But every long term economic forecast shows South East Asia rising in prosperity over the next 10 - 20 years.
The new middle classes with discretionary income to travel will be in this part of the world, and they will have a highly competitive airline industry to choose from.
They will be flying all sorts of new city pairs on 787s.
A dense network of routes in one of the worlds most aspirational regions sits right on your doorstep.
And you're criticising your Company for trying to adapt and being far-sighted?
Guys (and gals) I'm not trying to troll you.
I'm a pilot (not by occupation) and respect the job.
I just find it incredibly sad that some QF drivers and other trades/professions who post here just cannot see the crystal clear economic reality that you face.
Last edited by tartare; 12th Dec 2013 at 20:51.
True leadership is inspiring your people and fully explaining your vision and bringing them along with this vision...not to lie to them. Simple!
LEADERSHIP...severely lacking in this country and company!
LEADERSHIP...severely lacking in this country and company!
Really.......?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tartare
Whilst I'm not going to explicitly agree with the comment made or implied in these pages recently re Qf flight crew being 'overpaid', I do have to remind all here that a reasonable measure of the salary in relation to others is available.
Prior to the privatisation of Qf, pilot salaries were pretty much on a par with the salaries of those in CASA who were responsible for their oversight.
That is , a CASA inspector on the 737 was paid pretty much the same as the pilot on that aircraft type in the airlines.
Now , moving forward 20 years or so, the disparity is noticeable, and particularly noticeable on the larger aircraft, A380,330, 767, 747 where around $100k is the figure.
This is not a comment on the relative merit/difficulty /value of those who operate in each role, so please don't waste discussion or resort to invective on what everyone thinks of CASA people etc. The point is that even with the public service indexed wages growth , they lag behind the salary growth of the flight crew significantly, whereas once they were much more aligned.
Interestingly, the alignment is probably closer to the Jetsar salaries although even there jetstar are probably a little higher( not sure of the figures with jetstar)
Also I think that the CAA in the US inspectors , are paid relative to the commercial counterparts too.
As I said, not a comment on the relative merits of each profession, although you will probably find that since volatility in the aviation market in the last few years, there has been a significant rise in the experience and quality of many of the staff there due to those who had enough and exited the airlines for one reason or another.
Not being aligned to either side, I am just making an honest and impartial observation re the salary discussion .
Whilst I'm not going to explicitly agree with the comment made or implied in these pages recently re Qf flight crew being 'overpaid', I do have to remind all here that a reasonable measure of the salary in relation to others is available.
Prior to the privatisation of Qf, pilot salaries were pretty much on a par with the salaries of those in CASA who were responsible for their oversight.
That is , a CASA inspector on the 737 was paid pretty much the same as the pilot on that aircraft type in the airlines.
Now , moving forward 20 years or so, the disparity is noticeable, and particularly noticeable on the larger aircraft, A380,330, 767, 747 where around $100k is the figure.
This is not a comment on the relative merit/difficulty /value of those who operate in each role, so please don't waste discussion or resort to invective on what everyone thinks of CASA people etc. The point is that even with the public service indexed wages growth , they lag behind the salary growth of the flight crew significantly, whereas once they were much more aligned.
Interestingly, the alignment is probably closer to the Jetsar salaries although even there jetstar are probably a little higher( not sure of the figures with jetstar)
Also I think that the CAA in the US inspectors , are paid relative to the commercial counterparts too.
As I said, not a comment on the relative merits of each profession, although you will probably find that since volatility in the aviation market in the last few years, there has been a significant rise in the experience and quality of many of the staff there due to those who had enough and exited the airlines for one reason or another.
Not being aligned to either side, I am just making an honest and impartial observation re the salary discussion .
What has happened in the entire Western world is that technology has replaced manual and now even technical labour. WHat that means is that the price of labour must come down and with it its political influence and also its standard of living.
The existence of "career" politicians, know nothing parachute managers, "change managers" and similar classes of parasites is predicated on your labour being virtually worthless, so you can't make meaningful objections and turf the buggers out. Unless you can organise to do that (which you most likely cannot, considering that the Australian labor party, the natural leader of such a push, is awash with corrupt career politicians) then you are going to become peasants like most of the rest of the world and your children are going to be poorer than you.
This is just simple economics, and everything the Abbot Government does is designed to grind you deeper into the mud.
I doubt that any of you understand what is going to happen to the Australian community in the next few years as a result of the destruction of the car industry. Folks you aint seen nothing yet. The tensions between the eastern and Western states and North and South has some very ugly potential. Agriculture and mining dont need many people these days and those sectors are already trialling robot driven mining trucks, trains and combine harvesters to drive labor costs even lower. The only thing that will protect the iron ore industry by direct takeover and closure by disgruntled workers is their geography.
At the same time more wealth is going to be concentrated in the hands of fewer and fewer people, while the rest get poorer, much poorer. That was why Gillard tried the mining tax to start redistributing wealth if that isn't done then the result is going to be civil unrest.
to put that another way, try explaining to a retrenched Altona car worker how its really OK that miners have exported his iron ore and cost him his job as a result of the higher dollar, but the money earned by the miner is all "private" and he sees nothing from it.
I've just done a road trip from Melbourne to Darwin and back and you should see how country towns are hurting through fly in fly out mining practices.
Luckily my Son chose to work in law enforcement - which is going to be the big growth area as the car industry collapse bites in Victoria and South Australia.
The existence of "career" politicians, know nothing parachute managers, "change managers" and similar classes of parasites is predicated on your labour being virtually worthless, so you can't make meaningful objections and turf the buggers out. Unless you can organise to do that (which you most likely cannot, considering that the Australian labor party, the natural leader of such a push, is awash with corrupt career politicians) then you are going to become peasants like most of the rest of the world and your children are going to be poorer than you.
This is just simple economics, and everything the Abbot Government does is designed to grind you deeper into the mud.
I doubt that any of you understand what is going to happen to the Australian community in the next few years as a result of the destruction of the car industry. Folks you aint seen nothing yet. The tensions between the eastern and Western states and North and South has some very ugly potential. Agriculture and mining dont need many people these days and those sectors are already trialling robot driven mining trucks, trains and combine harvesters to drive labor costs even lower. The only thing that will protect the iron ore industry by direct takeover and closure by disgruntled workers is their geography.
At the same time more wealth is going to be concentrated in the hands of fewer and fewer people, while the rest get poorer, much poorer. That was why Gillard tried the mining tax to start redistributing wealth if that isn't done then the result is going to be civil unrest.
to put that another way, try explaining to a retrenched Altona car worker how its really OK that miners have exported his iron ore and cost him his job as a result of the higher dollar, but the money earned by the miner is all "private" and he sees nothing from it.
I've just done a road trip from Melbourne to Darwin and back and you should see how country towns are hurting through fly in fly out mining practices.
Luckily my Son chose to work in law enforcement - which is going to be the big growth area as the car industry collapse bites in Victoria and South Australia.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Western Pacific
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oakape needs to rethink his sums! His arithmetic is probably correct but he's omitted many factors from his equation such as Annual Leave, Long Service Leave, Superannuation, Payroll Tax, assorted allowances and other on-costs.
As for Super & payroll tax, allowances, etc, that is the same for every employer out there. Sure the amounts change, as some are a percentage, but I did say "broad brush"! Always the nit-picker, eh?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunfish
Wow a depressing dose of reality to take on so early in the day. You make some salient points!
Depending on your ideological alignment, you will either see vast private wealth as a positive or negative for the larger economy.( probably also depending on which one you see yourself heading towards).
Nevertheless, the world is changing, and a dose of reality is needed, especially for those who have existed in a somewhat protected environment for a long time.
Its not that anyone wants anyone 'dragged down ' its just that recognition of business drivers is important. As a salaried employee, you are a number, Sad but true.
Wow a depressing dose of reality to take on so early in the day. You make some salient points!
Depending on your ideological alignment, you will either see vast private wealth as a positive or negative for the larger economy.( probably also depending on which one you see yourself heading towards).
Nevertheless, the world is changing, and a dose of reality is needed, especially for those who have existed in a somewhat protected environment for a long time.
Its not that anyone wants anyone 'dragged down ' its just that recognition of business drivers is important. As a salaried employee, you are a number, Sad but true.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oakape
Sorry but the reason the hourly cost is not used by the unions in public discourse, is because hardly anyone else earns that sort of money. That information would only further entrench the 'silvertail' perception of pilots.
As a five year trained university graduate with two degrees, which I completed while working full time, I earn $95 an hour working both for myself and as a contractor to the Government on occasion. My services are in demand and I can't accommodate everyone I would like to, but even so that is the going rate.
Sorry but the reason the hourly cost is not used by the unions in public discourse, is because hardly anyone else earns that sort of money. That information would only further entrench the 'silvertail' perception of pilots.
As a five year trained university graduate with two degrees, which I completed while working full time, I earn $95 an hour working both for myself and as a contractor to the Government on occasion. My services are in demand and I can't accommodate everyone I would like to, but even so that is the going rate.
Sunfish's view is unnecessarily apocalyptic.
The facts show that when people in industries like car manufacturing lose their jobs, they find others.
In many cases - better paying and more sustainable ones.
Same with airlines.
This is a highly educated country, with relatively low levels of violence and income disparity, and still comparatively low levels of unemployment.
We all enjoy living standards our parents and grandparents could have only dreamed of.
The future for Australia is incredibly bright.
In the sector I work in - this nation will be the world's No1. exporter of LNG by 2017 - it will outpace Qatar.
Just think of the economic multiplier that will provide for everyone in the economy.
Back to aviation.
I'd bet that 20 years from now there still will be a Qantas, but it will be a very different beast.
Much as we might have all loved them, the days of `full service', high cost structure carriers are gone.
The facts show that when people in industries like car manufacturing lose their jobs, they find others.
In many cases - better paying and more sustainable ones.
Same with airlines.
This is a highly educated country, with relatively low levels of violence and income disparity, and still comparatively low levels of unemployment.
We all enjoy living standards our parents and grandparents could have only dreamed of.
The future for Australia is incredibly bright.
In the sector I work in - this nation will be the world's No1. exporter of LNG by 2017 - it will outpace Qatar.
Just think of the economic multiplier that will provide for everyone in the economy.
Back to aviation.
I'd bet that 20 years from now there still will be a Qantas, but it will be a very different beast.
Much as we might have all loved them, the days of `full service', high cost structure carriers are gone.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Western Pacific
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand your point spellcheck. I was advocating the cost per seat (or ticket if you like) on an average flight, to try to keep it in some perspective. The numbers are huge in the aviation business & they can be manipulated (as all numbers can) to present a specific perspective. People see an annual salary (the biggest number management can reasonably bring up) & then multiply it by the number of pilots they feel the company has & freak out at the resulting figure. From there it is easy to develop the belief that the annual salary number is too high & agree with management that it is unreasonable & should be lower.
You say you earn $95 per hour. I would imagine that that is $95 for every single hour you are on the job. Pilots hourly rate is for the time from when the aircraft is pushed back for departure till the time the aircraft pulls up at the gate. It does not cover the minimum 1 hour before the first flight that the pilot has to be at work, the time taken between each flight, if the duty involves a series of flights & the minimum 30 minutes after the last flight. It often does not cover any other ground duties the pilot is required to attend, nor any time at home for any work related duties, such as doing amendments to documentation etc.
Also, if we are comparing wages, what is the hourly rate for a surgeon? They do a highly complex job as well, but only have the life of one person at a time in his/her hands. I really don't want to start a 'my job is more important than yours' argument, but perhaps a bigger picture view would be helpful in understanding our position.
Cheers.
You say you earn $95 per hour. I would imagine that that is $95 for every single hour you are on the job. Pilots hourly rate is for the time from when the aircraft is pushed back for departure till the time the aircraft pulls up at the gate. It does not cover the minimum 1 hour before the first flight that the pilot has to be at work, the time taken between each flight, if the duty involves a series of flights & the minimum 30 minutes after the last flight. It often does not cover any other ground duties the pilot is required to attend, nor any time at home for any work related duties, such as doing amendments to documentation etc.
Also, if we are comparing wages, what is the hourly rate for a surgeon? They do a highly complex job as well, but only have the life of one person at a time in his/her hands. I really don't want to start a 'my job is more important than yours' argument, but perhaps a bigger picture view would be helpful in understanding our position.
Cheers.
Thread Starter
The facts show that when people in industries like car manufacturing lose their jobs, they find others.
In many cases - better paying and more sustainable ones.
Same with airlines.
In many cases - better paying and more sustainable ones.
Same with airlines.
If you don't go overseas you basically have to retrain in a new industry. Given that it takes around 10 years to get into a decent paying jet job we aren't talking about people in their 20's who can just pack up and move the other side of the country. You can't just go back to uni full time and train in a 'proper' education in your 40's with wife and kids hanging on. And even if you do by then you will have a degree and spent 4 years out of the workforce and are now competing for entry level jobs against 22 year olds.
Whilst all that can be done I wouldn't say that a pilot could be retrenched and 'easily move to another industry'. You would have to sell your house, move your family and spend your savings and house capital on a degree in a new venture. And then start again in a new industry and hope the bottom doesn't fall out of that one!
Just think of the economic multiplier that will provide for everyone in the economy.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qakape,
My job also entails substantial non paid time, meetings, weekends which are considered part of the obligation and after hours work preparing for presentations/meetings . Like flight crew, I am able to benefit from more than the usual four weeks per year. To be frank, the pilots I know are horrified at the amount of work I put in for the money and have said they would never do my job.
Its my choice, as is everything in life I guess .
But its not just about the $$ its about value for the $$ and whatever other's perception of that is.
Pilots should be well paid and they do have a very responsible and at times extremely demanding job. Many in the community admire and respect them and when an incident occurs , everyone will agree they are worth their pay and more on that day.
But they're not surgeons. The comparison is not really valid.
Cheers,
S.
My job also entails substantial non paid time, meetings, weekends which are considered part of the obligation and after hours work preparing for presentations/meetings . Like flight crew, I am able to benefit from more than the usual four weeks per year. To be frank, the pilots I know are horrified at the amount of work I put in for the money and have said they would never do my job.
Its my choice, as is everything in life I guess .
But its not just about the $$ its about value for the $$ and whatever other's perception of that is.
Pilots should be well paid and they do have a very responsible and at times extremely demanding job. Many in the community admire and respect them and when an incident occurs , everyone will agree they are worth their pay and more on that day.
But they're not surgeons. The comparison is not really valid.
Cheers,
S.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The difference between a JQ & QF A330 two crew (if the 30% is correct) accounts to about $0.55 per hour per passenger seat.
A Qantas CP once stated that this was acceptable as the QF brand could command a higher yield.
I appreciate there is a pressure on mainline yields, but on the scheme of things the big money is getting squandered on the joint ventures in Asia.
When is AJ going to be held to account?
Consider the Darwin JQ base.
On announcing the base AJ & Co proudly announced the "First Mover Advantage" in setting up the Darwin base as a platform to launch into Asia.
JQ Darwin have been skinned by the likes of Air Asia, Silkair & Phillipine Airlines. JQ is now retreating to Adelaide with their tails between their legs.
A Qantas CP once stated that this was acceptable as the QF brand could command a higher yield.
I appreciate there is a pressure on mainline yields, but on the scheme of things the big money is getting squandered on the joint ventures in Asia.
When is AJ going to be held to account?
Consider the Darwin JQ base.
On announcing the base AJ & Co proudly announced the "First Mover Advantage" in setting up the Darwin base as a platform to launch into Asia.
JQ Darwin have been skinned by the likes of Air Asia, Silkair & Phillipine Airlines. JQ is now retreating to Adelaide with their tails between their legs.