Will Qantas Mainline ever hire another pilot on a permanent contract?
Nunc est bibendum
Of the 400 Australopithecus mentions, 200+ are on LWOP. Many won't return at all and others won't return for at least another 5+ years.
Some of the other 200 mentioned have been 'parked' on the 737 where hours are low but provide a significant surge capacity if things improve.
I'd suggest that the current over capacity of crew currently still in uniform flying for mainline is closer to 60- perhaps a few less. The issue remains still that people are in the wrong categories. Over stocked in some categories and under stocked in others. I wouldn't rule out further RINs although that depends a little on potential aircraft orders.
Some of the other 200 mentioned have been 'parked' on the 737 where hours are low but provide a significant surge capacity if things improve.
I'd suggest that the current over capacity of crew currently still in uniform flying for mainline is closer to 60- perhaps a few less. The issue remains still that people are in the wrong categories. Over stocked in some categories and under stocked in others. I wouldn't rule out further RINs although that depends a little on potential aircraft orders.
Nunc est bibendum
Many, not most.
What percentage have stayed at JQ? Spoken to those on LWOP in EK? Is that 'many'?
I think we're arguing semantics when the go real point is that I don't reckon we're over stocked by 400 in the short term and certainly not in the medium to large Ng term if they order expansions n airframes.
What percentage have stayed at JQ? Spoken to those on LWOP in EK? Is that 'many'?
I think we're arguing semantics when the go real point is that I don't reckon we're over stocked by 400 in the short term and certainly not in the medium to large Ng term if they order expansions n airframes.
Put me down as an optimist. AIPA will do a deal with QF for effectively a B scale for the 789. The pilots will approve it. The first will arrive middle to late 2017. On that basis by the end of next year they will need to recruit the CP mentioned a number to the committee of AIPA a few months ago. The 789 by Joyce's comments is for new routes. Only time will tell if my optimism is misplaced .
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: toontown
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The numbers of MOU that have stayed at JQ after resigning from QF is not that high. After the negativity surrounding the RIN last year a number elected to stay at JQ feeling under considerable pressure. Six months later the percentage staying at JQ is very low. The reality of poor pay & conditions at JQ has left a feeling of regret for some. Most now are returning to QF with happiness. Good luck to everyone. As for EK. There are some rather unhappy lot there and would be surprised to see "many" not return. EK is no longer the greener pasture escape that it once was.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Save my seat on the lifeboat!!!
The numbers of MOU that have stayed at JQ after resigning from QF is not that high. After the negativity surrounding the RIN last year a number elected to stay at JQ feeling under considerable pressure. Six months later the percentage staying at JQ is very low. The reality of poor pay & conditions at JQ has left a feeling of regret for some. Most now are returning to QF with happiness. Good luck to everyone. As for EK. There are some rather unhappy lot there and would be surprised to see "many" not return. EK is no longer the greener pasture escape that it once was.
Most would rather sit calmly and comfortably in the right or back seat on great remuneration and conditions with a balanced life they have the time and money to enjoy in Australia.
Most agree that is not achievable at either JQ or EK.
PG
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Professor
The problem here is not the labor, but the management of said labor.
These surpluses are not created by pilots.
When you have management that hire additional crews to fly existing aircraft due to your ideology's, and thus create surpluses, it's a bit rich to blame the pilots.
Alternatively, you could utilise existing crews. That would require management who are able to work with employees, as opposed to against. Imagine the IR consultant fees you would save, in addition to the extra wages of surplus pilots.
Jetstar wages may seem cheap, however they are expensive to the group when you are effectively paying a QF pilot in surplus.
Qantas is lucky that they have pilots who were willing to go on LWOP & move their families all over the planet to save them having to make pilots redundant. That's the definition of a flexible employee!!
Such is the inflexibility of Australian labor!
These surpluses are not created by pilots.
When you have management that hire additional crews to fly existing aircraft due to your ideology's, and thus create surpluses, it's a bit rich to blame the pilots.
Alternatively, you could utilise existing crews. That would require management who are able to work with employees, as opposed to against. Imagine the IR consultant fees you would save, in addition to the extra wages of surplus pilots.
Jetstar wages may seem cheap, however they are expensive to the group when you are effectively paying a QF pilot in surplus.
Qantas is lucky that they have pilots who were willing to go on LWOP & move their families all over the planet to save them having to make pilots redundant. That's the definition of a flexible employee!!
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Los Angeles - California
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Point 1) "Sell out" is silly -- and loaded -- but otherwise what you wrote is simply rational. Cannot bank the "next generation," whatever that is.
Point 2) Like it or not, Qantas will become competitive -- or will fail.
Its competitiveness will include its getting rid of its anachronistic airplane-plumber (by any other name) stand-over and shakedown racketeers. Probably by relocating overseas.
And old hands will share cockpits with folk in pilot costumes who, a few decades ago, in America, were called: "low bidders." (Nowadays: "Computer Gamers," maybe?)
Zed!
Point 2) Like it or not, Qantas will become competitive -- or will fail.
Its competitiveness will include its getting rid of its anachronistic airplane-plumber (by any other name) stand-over and shakedown racketeers. Probably by relocating overseas.
And old hands will share cockpits with folk in pilot costumes who, a few decades ago, in America, were called: "low bidders." (Nowadays: "Computer Gamers," maybe?)
Zed!
[QUOTE=Zed-Air;8942864]Point 1) "Sell out" is silly -- and loaded -- but otherwise what you wrote is simply rational. Cannot bank the "next generation," whatever that is.
Point 2) Like it or not, Qantas will become competitive -- or will fail.
Its competitiveness will include its getting rid of its anachronistic airplane-plumber (by any other name) stand-over and shakedown racketeers. Probably by relocating overseas.
And old hands will share cockpits with folk in pilot costumes who, a few decades ago, in America, were called: "low bidders." (Nowadays: "Computer Gamers," maybe?)
Zed
The question uppermost (I would suspect) in the minds of those on LWOP is whether the exemplary Management Team at the Coward Street HQ of Qantas Airways Ltd is actually worth working for. And how much further will the 'World Famous Australian Flag Carrier, Qantas - The Flying Kangaroo' to the 'Codesharing/Webjet with Free Bottle Of Wine at any Partner Restaurant' type operation 'push' have gone in say 10 years? Will there actually be a better window seat available in that time at a much reduced Qantas or where the LWOP guy is now? If something sensible is done with 787's then my guess is possibly. If not, then the desire to work for a 'World's Worst Practice' Management Team with it's endless appalling decisions, ever shrinking network and the abject negativity that permeates the place because of those reasons would really make you question the 'need' to live in Aus or return to QF if you are anything approaching happy elsewhere.
What is REALLY pertinent here is that this question is actually being debated. Even ten years ago people would have looked at you like a space alien if you even mentioned leaving flying for anyone other than QF. Now it is not only discussed but is actually very open to debate as to how many will even come back. And that once great Airline gives every indication it really doesn't want any of them back unless it has no choice.
What is REALLY pertinent here is that this question is actually being debated. Even ten years ago people would have looked at you like a space alien if you even mentioned leaving flying for anyone other than QF. Now it is not only discussed but is actually very open to debate as to how many will even come back. And that once great Airline gives every indication it really doesn't want any of them back unless it has no choice.
Nunc est bibendum
Lol. It's like Mohikan's gone and changed his/ her handle or finally found a friend.
Next sentence
Later
Is what you have said radically different from what I've posted? Is your allegation of zero evidence against me any different to the 'evidence' you bring to the table?
I appreciate that you've brought far more context to the discussion than what I did previously and particularly WRT proposed time frames of 3-5 years (whereas I was alluding to crew who still have 12 months to go and will probably be able to get another 3-4 years taking them close to or over to the 5+ range) but as I pointed out previously, we're really arguing semantics. Perhaps in the future I should ensure that I have 30 minutes available to provide the full context and rationale behind my comments rather than the quick 15 second post. Then I guess I'd be accused of trying to speak on behalf of all Qantas pilots. Oh, wait....
The main point from my previous post- we're not 400+ over stocked. Many (somewhere between 10-30%) of those on LWOP may not come back immediately they're finished or at all and many may do exactly what you say they'll do in terms of coming back when it's 'right' for them in up to 5+ years.
Lol. Never have I done anything except provide my personal opinion. That opinion is informed by taking in evidence from multiple sources. That includes discussions with those on LWOP (as you also have done but apparently when I share the intent of those discussions (as you have also done) it's wrong and 'speaking for all QF pilots' 
) and reading company communications. Note that as recently as a couple of days ago (after I'd written my first burst about not being as much in surplus as many thought) the HOBO communicated 'minimal surplus remaining'.
Anyway, it's always good to see people playing the man instead of discussing the issue. Makes everyone feel much better about themselves.
(See, I even changed the 'lightbulb' for you too! )
And I won't come on here and make sweeping statements claiming to.
What I do know among the sizeable number that I communicate with is that they are watching and waiting for the best time to return to QF in a position commensurate with their career choice and life goals.
The point is, the people I communicate with are all looking for a return to QF for a position in line with the experience they have gained while on LWOP. That's right, a return to QF. Not a permanent departure. Now my 'sample' of QF LWOP pilots isn't 100%. But I'm tipping it's a very good representation. And 'many' are certainly not planning on leaving for good.
I appreciate that you've brought far more context to the discussion than what I did previously and particularly WRT proposed time frames of 3-5 years (whereas I was alluding to crew who still have 12 months to go and will probably be able to get another 3-4 years taking them close to or over to the 5+ range) but as I pointed out previously, we're really arguing semantics. Perhaps in the future I should ensure that I have 30 minutes available to provide the full context and rationale behind my comments rather than the quick 15 second post. Then I guess I'd be accused of trying to speak on behalf of all Qantas pilots. Oh, wait....
The main point from my previous post- we're not 400+ over stocked. Many (somewhere between 10-30%) of those on LWOP may not come back immediately they're finished or at all and many may do exactly what you say they'll do in terms of coming back when it's 'right' for them in up to 5+ years.
Stop pretending you speak for all QF pilots, and stop pretending you know what everyone is planning.
) and reading company communications. Note that as recently as a couple of days ago (after I'd written my first burst about not being as much in surplus as many thought) the HOBO communicated 'minimal surplus remaining'. Anyway, it's always good to see people playing the man instead of discussing the issue. Makes everyone feel much better about themselves.
(See, I even changed the 'lightbulb' for you too!
)
Last edited by Keg; 16th Apr 2015 at 23:49. Reason: Had to change the lightbulb lest it raise someone's blood pressure too much!
Nunc est bibendum
I have read through the 7 pages, and 121 posts on this thread and found the 'lightbulb' icon appears 5 times. All by the same person. What arrogance.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Mars
Age: 20
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surplus
Keg,
QF may not be '400 overstocked', but the idea that the surplus is 'minimal' is total bullsh*t.
Shorthaul- Beer coaster numbers of 60 A/C and 6 crew per A/C gives 360 crew or 720 pilots. Those guys are 10 hours (at least) short every month. That's 7200 hours available per month. Easily 100 guys over on the 737.
Longhaul- Bit harder to get a handle on but divisors aren't high and there's still demotion training going on. I can easily see 100 guys too many.
LWOP- How many? I recall a memo, blog, Friday update, something, saying there were over 250 gone. That was a while ago and I'm sure we've had more go, but if we take that as the number, let's say 50% come back that's over 100 guys.
Total surplus is at least, at least, 300.
Retirements- I remember you posting you had worked out on bidbook about 50 guys a year hitting 65. How many will extend? Let's say none do. 200 guys will go in the next four years. Nice.
787- How many and when. Million $$ question.
The surplus is real and significant- regardless of what some management w*nker writes in his blog, memo, email, smoke-signal. QF won't be 'right-sized' in pilot terms until 2017 or 2018 at the earliest and that's only if the 787 becomes a reality. Remember, you read it here first: QF to hire pilots........ in 2019. Get your yr 12 maths and physics done now kiddies!!!!
QF may not be '400 overstocked', but the idea that the surplus is 'minimal' is total bullsh*t.
Shorthaul- Beer coaster numbers of 60 A/C and 6 crew per A/C gives 360 crew or 720 pilots. Those guys are 10 hours (at least) short every month. That's 7200 hours available per month. Easily 100 guys over on the 737.
Longhaul- Bit harder to get a handle on but divisors aren't high and there's still demotion training going on. I can easily see 100 guys too many.
LWOP- How many? I recall a memo, blog, Friday update, something, saying there were over 250 gone. That was a while ago and I'm sure we've had more go, but if we take that as the number, let's say 50% come back that's over 100 guys.
Total surplus is at least, at least, 300.
Retirements- I remember you posting you had worked out on bidbook about 50 guys a year hitting 65. How many will extend? Let's say none do. 200 guys will go in the next four years. Nice.
787- How many and when. Million $$ question.
The surplus is real and significant- regardless of what some management w*nker writes in his blog, memo, email, smoke-signal. QF won't be 'right-sized' in pilot terms until 2017 or 2018 at the earliest and that's only if the 787 becomes a reality. Remember, you read it here first: QF to hire pilots........ in 2019. Get your yr 12 maths and physics done now kiddies!!!!
Nunc est bibendum
Yes. I acknowledged that point re 737 hours on a previous page. 737 crew are 10-15% hours short of where they were in the mid 2000s. That said, it's not a 'surplus' per se and as I said previously, it allows Qantas some surge capacity. Do we have enough airframes to surge though? That I'm less sure about. Perhaps not?
I suspect the LH numbers aren't quite at 100. There are still a number of crew to leave on VR before 1 Jul. Wrong categories for sure and perhaps a future RIN to get people into the right categories. Still on minimum divisors though. Perhaps 100 is the right number with divisors at 170+.
I think the 2019 number for new recruits is close to the mark. The 21 year old that gets in on that first intake is going to be numero Uno for 10ish years from when they are 55! Lucky them.
The retirement calculation is back of the envelope stuff. The VRs of the last 18 months will distort it a bit. More this year, perhaps less next year. Hard to call that one.
I suspect the LH numbers aren't quite at 100. There are still a number of crew to leave on VR before 1 Jul. Wrong categories for sure and perhaps a future RIN to get people into the right categories. Still on minimum divisors though. Perhaps 100 is the right number with divisors at 170+.
I think the 2019 number for new recruits is close to the mark. The 21 year old that gets in on that first intake is going to be numero Uno for 10ish years from when they are 55! Lucky them.
The retirement calculation is back of the envelope stuff. The VRs of the last 18 months will distort it a bit. More this year, perhaps less next year. Hard to call that one.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: NDB
Age: 53
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey V-Jet, When you guys are "debating" the pro's and cons of leave without pay and returning back to QF just cast your mind back to a Little movie called the Wizard of Oz and Dorothy's little Ruby shoes.
And that's what LWOP means to most of us.
And that's what LWOP means to most of us.
Last edited by OnceBitten; 17th Apr 2015 at 13:04.
Kansas:
Don't ever come to Kansas.
That headline might be the most obvious statement ever written. But that doesn’t keep it from being true.
I used to defend my home state to outsiders. Who are they to talk smack on the prairie? It’s like I can say horrible things about my family, but you can’t say anything bad about my family. That’s a privilege you have to earn.
But now? Now I’m done. There is nothing left to defend.
You see, I’m convinced that the state of Kansas wants nothing more than to be the most reality-denying state in the Union. And, boy howdy, is it on its way.
I can't quote the above because Windows 8.1 won't let me on this site, but I could have almost written that about QF
And two further points on that excellent analogy:
1) I would LOVE to throw water on Elaine - she is also Irish green and might just melt!
2) The snow scene is actually asbestos powder which was used extensively as Christmas decorations way back in the day. Just like Qf's Glorious Five Year Plans - Looks great but might just kill you in 10 years....
The death, appallingly evil cartoon characters and the Wizard eventually being revealed as a charade - that movie could be a QF documentary but I do get what you are saying and totally understand. I just hope the Yellow Brick Road does go somewhere for all those on LWOP and not just peter out into a smoke and mirrors falsehood.
I saw a very sad looking 787 parked at the end of 16 the other day. Wrong colours, wrong plan and a tragically wrong place for an aircraft with fantastic potential to be parked. How much are ANZ making out of theirs compared to Jetstar?
Don't ever come to Kansas.
That headline might be the most obvious statement ever written. But that doesn’t keep it from being true.
I used to defend my home state to outsiders. Who are they to talk smack on the prairie? It’s like I can say horrible things about my family, but you can’t say anything bad about my family. That’s a privilege you have to earn.
But now? Now I’m done. There is nothing left to defend.
You see, I’m convinced that the state of Kansas wants nothing more than to be the most reality-denying state in the Union. And, boy howdy, is it on its way.
I can't quote the above because Windows 8.1 won't let me on this site, but I could have almost written that about QF
And two further points on that excellent analogy:
1) I would LOVE to throw water on Elaine - she is also Irish green and might just melt!
2) The snow scene is actually asbestos powder which was used extensively as Christmas decorations way back in the day. Just like Qf's Glorious Five Year Plans - Looks great but might just kill you in 10 years....
The death, appallingly evil cartoon characters and the Wizard eventually being revealed as a charade - that movie could be a QF documentary but I do get what you are saying and totally understand. I just hope the Yellow Brick Road does go somewhere for all those on LWOP and not just peter out into a smoke and mirrors falsehood.
I saw a very sad looking 787 parked at the end of 16 the other day. Wrong colours, wrong plan and a tragically wrong place for an aircraft with fantastic potential to be parked. How much are ANZ making out of theirs compared to Jetstar?
Where did 400 come from?
I pulled from my extravagant arse, with not even enough analysis to fill the back of a beer coaster.
But, since 737 average utilisation is less than 220 hrs month, even five crews per plane is probably stretching it. So assume around 160 surplus there by any rational measure of eficient utilisation. (Not by cost though as their min divisor is so low. )
We must be under 100 surplus on the international side, and if the 250 number on LWOP is correct, then you get over 400. Which is enough to crew twenty 787s. Or one standing out in front of every Flight Centre in the country.
Anyway, at least we are all getting new brand enhancing uniforms. I do hope it has a sash, and a lanyard. If you are going to enhance the brand it calls for more than half measures, after all.
But, since 737 average utilisation is less than 220 hrs month, even five crews per plane is probably stretching it. So assume around 160 surplus there by any rational measure of eficient utilisation. (Not by cost though as their min divisor is so low. )
We must be under 100 surplus on the international side, and if the 250 number on LWOP is correct, then you get over 400. Which is enough to crew twenty 787s. Or one standing out in front of every Flight Centre in the country.
Anyway, at least we are all getting new brand enhancing uniforms. I do hope it has a sash, and a lanyard. If you are going to enhance the brand it calls for more than half measures, after all.
