Qantas Short Haul EBA 2014
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Strayer
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"It's Stockholm Syndrome, all of us should be aware of it and I genuinely believe they are putting out these complete crap proposals initially with an expected NO vote to make the next one seem better. We should be aware of it and I believe because of this strategy all pilots should immediately prepare for PIA instead of playing there game, or at least 4 consecutive NO votes.....come on if you use the grade process this is exactly what they are doing. 3% per year! no pay freeze! plus minimum guarantee increase as a minimum. A few offsets as well. That is OUR line in the sand fools...."
Scary stuff. Workers united will never be defeated!
What are you going to do when it gets voted down and they remove the backpay and pay rises? Will an increase in Minimum Hours make up for that even if you get it? What next? PIA? Is that going to work? Are you sure?
Lots of noise but not much planning. Hope you guys aren't setting yourselves up for embarrassment later on.
Scary stuff. Workers united will never be defeated!
What are you going to do when it gets voted down and they remove the backpay and pay rises? Will an increase in Minimum Hours make up for that even if you get it? What next? PIA? Is that going to work? Are you sure?
Lots of noise but not much planning. Hope you guys aren't setting yourselves up for embarrassment later on.
If short-haul pilots votes this up prepare for more flying to disappear! This will take years and with the long-haul expiry at the end of this month it is time to stand up to these dead#$@%s. The only thing that brought a good deal for the American Airline pilots was a mass attack on OTP and it took three months for the company to see reason. Of course this took 7 years to get to this. Dixon, Oldmeadow, Clifford are getting Old as is this 1970s IR policy.
To be honest, the offsets aren't much:
Reserve allocations moves from a fixed number to a ratio (may actually decrease the number of reserves)
The requirement for a day off after a late finish changes from 2200 to 2230 (It'll only affect a tiny number of flights and come on do you really need a whole day off for a sign off half an hour later?)
No sick leave for calling in sick on a Sim, Ep's or open time flying until you've actually done it (I feel this upsets some because it'd put an end to a rort they have currently going on)
Losing a day off when volunteering to work on a day off (probably the only offset that actually is a real offset, it'll mean less people will volunteer for extra work, but at the end of the day all it will mean is you don't get a D/O placed over a reserve or a AV day, again, really is it a big enough thing to forgo all that backpay or threaten PIA over? I know were all pissed off at AJ and Co, but come on don't lose sight of the big picture, there are some sections of this company that have real grievances that need to be sorted out in industrial agreements, but SH isn't one of them
Reserve allocations moves from a fixed number to a ratio (may actually decrease the number of reserves)
The requirement for a day off after a late finish changes from 2200 to 2230 (It'll only affect a tiny number of flights and come on do you really need a whole day off for a sign off half an hour later?)
No sick leave for calling in sick on a Sim, Ep's or open time flying until you've actually done it (I feel this upsets some because it'd put an end to a rort they have currently going on)
Losing a day off when volunteering to work on a day off (probably the only offset that actually is a real offset, it'll mean less people will volunteer for extra work, but at the end of the day all it will mean is you don't get a D/O placed over a reserve or a AV day, again, really is it a big enough thing to forgo all that backpay or threaten PIA over? I know were all pissed off at AJ and Co, but come on don't lose sight of the big picture, there are some sections of this company that have real grievances that need to be sorted out in industrial agreements, but SH isn't one of them
Last edited by dr dre; 11th Dec 2014 at 23:42.
And where do I hang my hat on for the future again?
Once again, they play the low ball offer, give slightly more and think its the best they can do, and lots believe it is and they will look out for your futures.
Unfortunately not. Previous long haul eba's and now this short haul one have been delivered with the 'promise' of something to look forward to in the future.
This one is about trust. Simply, if it's not in the document, about future types or the type of flying, well do you trust their word?
The moment its signed off, they will be working behind the scenes on how they can outsource, reduce and dilute the relevant pilot bodies, and screw everyones collective futures. After all that's all they can do to justify their existence. They produce nothing for the company, revenue wise.
So I'm not concerned about the pay rise, the pay freeze, the offsets, nor the price of Alan's latest failed strategy into Asia, but I'm concerned with what happens to all pilots beyond the life of this currently negotiated eba process.
Once again, they play the low ball offer, give slightly more and think its the best they can do, and lots believe it is and they will look out for your futures.
Unfortunately not. Previous long haul eba's and now this short haul one have been delivered with the 'promise' of something to look forward to in the future.
This one is about trust. Simply, if it's not in the document, about future types or the type of flying, well do you trust their word?
The moment its signed off, they will be working behind the scenes on how they can outsource, reduce and dilute the relevant pilot bodies, and screw everyones collective futures. After all that's all they can do to justify their existence. They produce nothing for the company, revenue wise.
So I'm not concerned about the pay rise, the pay freeze, the offsets, nor the price of Alan's latest failed strategy into Asia, but I'm concerned with what happens to all pilots beyond the life of this currently negotiated eba process.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: AUS
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To the guys like hotnhigh and busdriver007, I understand where you're coming from completely. But what exactly would satisfy your trust concerns and is it actually going to happen? Not being a smart ass just genuinely interested. Getting scope clauses for free out of Joyce and Clifford is an effort in futility imho.
Exactly....
More LH pilots about to be RIN'd to SH
more flying for other entites...
Possibly A320's for Qlink?
Our hours go down to MGH.... then...we get made redundant...
Virgin has a clause saying they wont give flying to other entites ..why can't we?
No from me .. The rest is noise... The real concern is the future.
More LH pilots about to be RIN'd to SH
more flying for other entites...
Possibly A320's for Qlink?
Our hours go down to MGH.... then...we get made redundant...
Virgin has a clause saying they wont give flying to other entites ..why can't we?
No from me .. The rest is noise... The real concern is the future.
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Strayer
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some would say unreasonable demands about job security and scope clauses will ironically have the opposite effect and only make management seek to maximise outsourcing to pilot groups that don't have their heads in the clouds.
dr dre
You say the offsets aren't much, but why are there any at all?
If they want the 18 month pay freeze, which is already a massive give from us, why should we give anything extra in return? That IS the offset. The pay freeze looks more and more ridiculous every day that goes by. You really think other unions negotiating their agreements next year following a $1bn profit announcement are going to agree to a pay freeze?
If they are willing to drop their ideologically driven Pay Freeze mantra, then we can discuss offsets.
That's my line in the sand. Another NO from me.
You say the offsets aren't much, but why are there any at all?
If they want the 18 month pay freeze, which is already a massive give from us, why should we give anything extra in return? That IS the offset. The pay freeze looks more and more ridiculous every day that goes by. You really think other unions negotiating their agreements next year following a $1bn profit announcement are going to agree to a pay freeze?
If they are willing to drop their ideologically driven Pay Freeze mantra, then we can discuss offsets.
That's my line in the sand. Another NO from me.
Transition Layer,
Fair point, but other employee groups are taking the 18 month freeze. Sure the engineers had theirs offset by the re employment of 65 of their colleagues, but a lot of other employee groups will be subject to the 18 month freeze with very few if, any offsets. And they will vote theirs up and get on with the job. We can't say we should be exempt from it just because we're pilots. So I'll say it again, the offsets are incredibly minor, aren't worth getting worked up about and certainly aren't worth risking PIA or further outsourcing of flying for.
Voting NO and NO over again could have unintended consequences......
Fair point, but other employee groups are taking the 18 month freeze. Sure the engineers had theirs offset by the re employment of 65 of their colleagues, but a lot of other employee groups will be subject to the 18 month freeze with very few if, any offsets. And they will vote theirs up and get on with the job. We can't say we should be exempt from it just because we're pilots. So I'll say it again, the offsets are incredibly minor, aren't worth getting worked up about and certainly aren't worth risking PIA or further outsourcing of flying for.
Some would say unreasonable demands about job security and scope clauses will ironically have the opposite effect and only make management seek to maximise outsourcing to pilot groups that don't have their heads in the clouds
I see that some are comparing the offsets the engineers got for their 18 month pay freeze. However, when making that comparison, don't forget the context under which that agreement was made. That is, there had been massive redundancies in the engineering ranks. No pilots have been made redundant through this downturn and restructure.
And for those of you wanting a scope clause like Virgin's,
did that stop the Virgin Perth Ejet base from closing?
Did that stop VARA F100 aircraft from taking some of Virgin Mainline's flying?
Will it stop redundancies if Etihad/Singapore/Air NZ decide to stop bankrolling JB's loss making operation?
did that stop the Virgin Perth Ejet base from closing?
Did that stop VARA F100 aircraft from taking some of Virgin Mainline's flying?
Will it stop redundancies if Etihad/Singapore/Air NZ decide to stop bankrolling JB's loss making operation?
So wait.... We don't make noise about farming work out and just trust them to stop doing it?
I'm afraid that approach has time and time again just encouraged them to do it more and more.
And since when did enterprise bargaining mean " we give up conditions and you pay us less"
Stockholm syndrome is alive and well!
I'm afraid that approach has time and time again just encouraged them to do it more and more.
And since when did enterprise bargaining mean " we give up conditions and you pay us less"
Stockholm syndrome is alive and well!
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Strayer
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You misunderstand reality. It's ok to get noisy about things. But the key is to understand what you can influence and what you can't. Sadly most pilots think that PIA and other actions will make management give in to major job security claims. It will absolutely not, because that would mean every single other union would demand the same. Your only hope is to be at least semi relevant and have a good working relationship with them. Otherwise it's world war 3 and you will come off second best every single time. They have blown $100 million for this before and will absolutely do it again.
Last edited by lotsta; 12th Dec 2014 at 02:42.
Tuner 2, The pilots are getting a pay freeze anyway and all reports points to a profit(first half better than the second half traditionally) and record bonuses for the multiple CEO/COO that the airline has. The company has no strategy that has no been seen before and as suggested by Fender that have blown "$100 million", well they have blown more than double that and include obtaining AOCs everywhere, Jetstar failures etc, they would be well over $500 million($1.6 billion according to CEO Domestic) and that is not including the $130 million in half creating a division called Qantas International and then ditching the idea. Time is running out and why not just sit back and do the job and watch the profit run out of puff because the airline still hasn't sorted out the mainline replacement for the the B747s. Remember a B787-9 can do a 14 hour flight carrying 268 pax and only burn 72 tonnes according to Boeing. The future of this airline is getting these aircraft on line sooner than later(that is of course if they truly want the airline to grow and be profitable). There is NO RUSH! Sit on your hands!
lotsa, I actually don't think they will be happy to blow $100M against PIA. They are looking to the market to finance their investment in new fleet (or if they are not, they should be). Having said that, any PIA makes this a 'high stakes' game. If PIA and thre associated response action triggers a Fair Work determination, we have already seen that will not give a job security clause. If Fair Work will not give you job security, why would Qantas give it to you? Moreover, Fair Work is unlikely to give conditions (back pay and pay increases) that are out of line with what Qantas has given to other worker groups.
So, when SH pilots vote, be informed about what is likely and what is possible to be acheived should a majority vote 'no'. Is the deal on the table that bad, that you would risk the advantages it holds for the uncertainty of a hard battle?
I am not trying to influence the vote (I am not a QF SH pilot), just give some advice to help make that decision an informed one.
So, when SH pilots vote, be informed about what is likely and what is possible to be acheived should a majority vote 'no'. Is the deal on the table that bad, that you would risk the advantages it holds for the uncertainty of a hard battle?
I am not trying to influence the vote (I am not a QF SH pilot), just give some advice to help make that decision an informed one.
Angryrat, there have been no mainline pilot redundancies and there was NO reduction in numbers or demotions for the pilots under THIS SH agreement.
I do understand the emotions, problems, issues with the RIN. However, I stand by my statement above that compares the context of the pilot's situation compared to that of the engineers. A large proportion of them were made redundant and lost their jobs. They managed some concessions regarding recent job losses, but have not been able to completely protect the jobs of their members. Yes, a pay freeze sucks, but it is not the same as being made redundant.
I do understand the emotions, problems, issues with the RIN. However, I stand by my statement above that compares the context of the pilot's situation compared to that of the engineers. A large proportion of them were made redundant and lost their jobs. They managed some concessions regarding recent job losses, but have not been able to completely protect the jobs of their members. Yes, a pay freeze sucks, but it is not the same as being made redundant.
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Strayer
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's one thing to be angry, distrusting, whatever. That's the easy part and no one really cares about that. What matters is how you think you can get a better result. That's it. The rest is irrelevant. Anger does not equal better results unless you know how to make it so. And frankly I doubt any of the angry loudmouths on here have a clue. Say no all you want. But you'd better know how to turn that attitude into a superior offer or you're just urinating in the breeze........
Angryrat,
We can argue semantics - yes mainline pilots took voluntary redundancy. The point, however, is nobody was forced out of the door. I am in a location that does not allow access to many internet sites such as Google, so the following is off the top of my head - the trade off for the pay freeze was the engineers gained re-employment for 60 odd engineers that had been made redundant. I believe there is a provision for no further redundancies until all excess leave expended? My understanding was that the redundancy of the last 60 odd engineers was legally questionable, so the reinstatement may not have been the 'give' some may think. Anyway, this is after hundreds of engineers have already lost their jobs. Short haul are not in that situation. There was no reduction of numbers for SH. No demotions for SH. Long haul pilots going to short haul are doing so on the basis of bidding for and being allocated a vacancy. While some moved from long haul to short haul to prevent a demotion, there were some pilots on the reducing fleets that gained promotion slots in short haul.
While I think that other posters here may be management stooges, or wannabe management stooges, I am actually on your side of the fence. It is easy to to get angry with all that has happened in Qantas, but the decisions being made now by pilots should be done in a logical and calculated manner. I am just trying to add a bit of balance and perspective to the discussion.
We can argue semantics - yes mainline pilots took voluntary redundancy. The point, however, is nobody was forced out of the door. I am in a location that does not allow access to many internet sites such as Google, so the following is off the top of my head - the trade off for the pay freeze was the engineers gained re-employment for 60 odd engineers that had been made redundant. I believe there is a provision for no further redundancies until all excess leave expended? My understanding was that the redundancy of the last 60 odd engineers was legally questionable, so the reinstatement may not have been the 'give' some may think. Anyway, this is after hundreds of engineers have already lost their jobs. Short haul are not in that situation. There was no reduction of numbers for SH. No demotions for SH. Long haul pilots going to short haul are doing so on the basis of bidding for and being allocated a vacancy. While some moved from long haul to short haul to prevent a demotion, there were some pilots on the reducing fleets that gained promotion slots in short haul.
While I think that other posters here may be management stooges, or wannabe management stooges, I am actually on your side of the fence. It is easy to to get angry with all that has happened in Qantas, but the decisions being made now by pilots should be done in a logical and calculated manner. I am just trying to add a bit of balance and perspective to the discussion.