MERGED: Alan's still not happy......

[Impress to inflate]

Would someone pls get rid of this little Irish ****

[Condition 1]

Originally Posted by spelling_nazi

There is the burning issue of transmission of business and jetstar re the retrenchment of mainline pilots.

and the existence of Jet Connect and EFA.

[Keg]

I've been told by a Q skipper that they are carrying the equivalent of roughly 500 surplus pilots with the reduction in flying and retired aircraft.?

Nope. Not that many. Maybe 250. 300 max. Of that we have a couple of hundred on LWOP. That's based on the known forecasts. End of this month may change the numbers and perhaps the 500 may well be right.

If so, is it because Q cant afford to make them redundant or some other left field reason?

Given its last on, first off, redundancy is relatively cheap. The retraining costs on the other hand..... As one of our managers said not so long ago, our total crew numbers are close to right- or a manageable surplus at least. The issue we have is that we have bodies in the wrong places and wrong ranks. Not enough S/Os on the dugong, too many F/Os on the 767, etc.

Not sure there's ever been an airline that cut back its way to profitability so I can't see that further cuts is going to do anything significant.

[redkite1]

Regarding transmission of business case vs mainline pilot redundancies: doesn't the company now have the trump card of "we are saving the airline because otherwise we will go broke" line? Also likely to get support from federal government in the current climate.

[AEROMEDIC]

Given its last on, first off, redundancy is relatively cheap

Not necessarily, just ask the ALAEA about how that works in reality. Qanas management will use every trick in the book to keep those that they want and discard those that they don't, and it will have to fit their economic model.
Think that it means what it says...... Think again.

[dr dre]

Given its last on, first off, redundancy is relatively cheap

With pilots of all ranks and fleets spread out all over the seniority list, the retraining and redundancy costs would be through the roof if Last on, First Off occurred, and after all the reduction in numbers processes that would happen.
Far cheaper for more leave without pay, so you'd except QF to start pushing it's excess pilots to EK, JQ and the like with negotiated LWOP deals.
Aren't EK screaming for airbus rated pilots?

[Keg]

Yes. Wouldn't surprise me if QF start looking a lot harder at agreements similar to what they did in the '70s where they actively sought opportunities rather than simply letting pilots have LWOP if the pilot sought the opportunity.

Heck, they could probably supply crew to China Southern for about the same as China Southern is paying and as long as still australian based they'd probably get a number of crew take that I lieu of demotion.

[Romulus]

Originally Posted by ampclamp

In the end it will be operational requirements.

Redundancy very specifically excludes LOFO, it is always requirements based specifically to prevent discrimination other than the business requirements.

FWA Definition

[V-Jet]

LOFO - In Pilot terms at QF, would there be anyone who has been employed for shorter than the odious leper echaun?

Pilots get 'offered' positions at China Southern (and no offence to them) LWOP etc etc but the group of INCOMPETENTS, sycophants and thieves that cause and continue the problem get multi million $$ 'payments of gratitude' for the extraordinary services and sacrifices they have made over the last ..... let me count ..... in some cases as much as 7 months???...

OK so I exaggerate, but it MAKES ME SICK!!!

[Devil Dog]

Sooo ...no government financial assistance, no government guarantee for aircraft purchases, no support for changes to QSA , sale of everything not nailed down...can't be long now !!

[ohallen]

lets not forget gifting and abandonment of valuable routes, cancellation of aircraft orders, lack of coherent strategy beyond fire sale, avoidance of necessary asset maintenance and no friends left except EK.

Lets hope it is not long before someone asks what the hell are these guys doing.

[SOPS]

I have been saying for a while, why is no one asking just what is going on?

[Mstr Caution]

I'd gladly pay a "one off" levy to my union/professional association to take a two page spread in The Australian.

Outlining the failures of Qantas management and calling for them to step down.

Why wait for a late February announcement to allow them to determine our collective futures. Time to turn up the heat.

The levy would probably be less than a case of beer

MC

[Airbets2040]

Totally agree, Caution.

Would also be happy to contribute. Things need to be made more clear for the general public, so that everyone can be aware the mad destruction going on.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

I am in! Where do I sign up?

[Silverado]

Redundancy very specifically excludes LOFO, it is always requirements based specifically to prevent discrimination other than the business requirements.

Are you sure about that Romulus?

From the Long Haul Pilots Determination 2013

"The Company may make pilots compulsorily redundant, which will occur in reverse order of seniority – that is, on a last on first off basis except that the Company may ‘pass over’ a pilot who is on LWOP and that period of leave commenced prior to the issuing of the notice of compulsory redundancy and was approved for a period of more than 12 months. Where a pilot is on LWOP that was not approved prior to the issuing of notices of redundancy and that period of LWOP was approved for a period of less than 12 months then:

(i) the Company may extend the minimum period of notice to the day on which the pilot returns from LWOP; and
(ii) the Company will not be required to make the pilot redundant if on the date of redundancy the pilot, if made redundant, would be eligible for an offer of re-employment under clause 15.10.19."

Aeromedic I dont think the ALAEA / Qantas eba states categorically LOFO.
In the end it will be operational requirements.

From the Licenced Aircraft Engineers Determination 2012

"The redundancy program shall have regard to:

55.7.1 Retaining an age, skill and experience balance within areas of employment in each employment category;
55.7.2 No discrimination against employees;
55.7.3 Special efforts to minimise retrenchment of apprentices or trainees; and 55.7.4 service with the Company.
55.7.5 Qantas will consult with the employees affected and if requested by an employee their representative including an accredited representative of the Association on the process to be adopted on a case by case basis."

[Workers Perspective]

ALAEA had a survey a while back on the redundancy issue, around the time the company came out with the "Matrix".

Majority of members voted for LOFO as the preferred option for selection.

[Bootstrap1]

WP last on first off in engineering would leave the place devoid of many new gen licenses and would keep the dinosaurs on 35-40 years earning $200K whilst not actually doing any hands on work. Then to add insult to injury the buddy system the puts 2 ancient DMMs on 330 training. All that will do is fluff up their super, their is no way the company would get a return on investment for the cost of the training.

LOFO great in theory, but in practice it would be a different story.

[Workers Perspective]

I don't think getting rid of the $200k dinosaurs that don't do any hands on work will be a realistic outcome either nor should be. Not their fault they are on the gravy train.

"Nastyswine" has already mentioned LOFO is the least complex method to be used if required, I assume from a legal standpoint anyways.

[Transition Layer]

If they sack 250 pilots, just think of all the spare time we'd have to play cricket matches against each other.

Mitch and Clarkey watch out!