Qantas Fleet Order Speculation
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: AUS
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The vested interests are going to be out in force for this boys and girls... let's watch them blow it for everyone. It will include a few Qrewroom regulars who talk a big industrial game but have never actually negotiated their way out of a paper bag.
Does anyone know of any other airline that pays overtime on scheduled sectors, including triple time on sectors with 8 hours in the crib? Just curious.
Isn't that the idea of a $300/credit/hr (ie >A380 rate) or whatever it is rate with no planned O/T?
Does anyone know of any other airline that pays overtime on scheduled sectors, including triple time on sectors with 8 hours in the crib? Just curious.
Isn't that the idea of a $300/credit/hr (ie >A380 rate) or whatever it is rate with no planned O/T?
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: NDB
Age: 53
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone know of any other airline that pays overtime on scheduled sectors, including triple time on sectors with 8 hours in the crib? Just curious.
Isn't that the idea of a $300/credit/hr (ie >A380 rate) or whatever it is rate with no planned O/T?
The vested interests are going to be out in force for this boys and girls... let's watch them blow it for everyone. It will include a few Qrewroom regulars who talk a big industrial game but have never actually negotiated their way out of a paper bag.
Now an opportunity to align QF and the pilot group with it's competitors is presented and the Golden Children want to squabble about overtime, a fact that a majority of us usually never experienced to any great extent anyway.
The fact that a RIN back to the 787 for senior guys generally won't hold much weight to many of us in the voting process. I for one would have thought that the opportunity for future fleet expansion would alleviate the possibilities of future RIN'S moving forward, standing still or falling behind will guarantee future RIN's and redundancies for all.
It would be a travesty if individual agendas with myopic visions of the future for anything past their own retirement dates caused everyone else behind them in seniority to be put in the position to be forced to experience foreign opportunities on probably what would be a lessor package than maybe what's on offer on Tuesday.
I'm hoping level heads prevail and this is embraced for what it is, a great opportunity to get back into the game for Mainline pilots.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: thelodge
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you honestly believe that the one deciding factor in getting a new type rests solely on Flight Crew pay?
The FACT is that tech crew costs are about 1-4% max of the overall cost base.
Qantas will make a billion dollars this year WITH the LH award.
With the dollar dropping to a sensible level, fuel price falls > 50%, foreign competition retreating, yields increasing, international has turned the corner to profitability. 5000 back office jobs removed helps, as does 150 pilot VRs.
I'm not saying some efficiencies should Not be traded. Personally I think the A380 rate 5% above the 747 is not justified. The 4 eng fleets should have sacrificed so that the twin fleets pay be more acceptable.
Do you think Alan Joyce and the executive will give up pay, share options to get a new type? How about the other unions? Groundstaff, etc?
I understand pilots are spooked after a torrid few years of RINs, VR,accelerated losses,
However as most of us know that was a combination of wrong aircraft types being massively fuel inefficient compared to competitions. It's fuel that's 40% of the cost base, not pilot costs!
Those grim days for Long haul are thankfully over and we are back to profitability. That happens in business cycles. Thankfully the tailwinds are blowing for a change.
What we don't want to do is believe the Alan Joyce spin machine that getting a new type is all down to pilot costs.
Do you honestly believe in a possible downturn, we will get left alone next time because we have taken a 30-40% pay cut to help.
Rather than arguing amoungst fellow crew perhaps keep an eye on the profit announcement this August and the large bonuses paid to the executive.
Perhaps many are happy to fund Alan's bonus?
Someone showed me the other day on the ASX that Alan has been granted $40 MILLION in Qantas options, in addition to his pay.
Interesting times.
The FACT is that tech crew costs are about 1-4% max of the overall cost base.
Qantas will make a billion dollars this year WITH the LH award.
With the dollar dropping to a sensible level, fuel price falls > 50%, foreign competition retreating, yields increasing, international has turned the corner to profitability. 5000 back office jobs removed helps, as does 150 pilot VRs.
I'm not saying some efficiencies should Not be traded. Personally I think the A380 rate 5% above the 747 is not justified. The 4 eng fleets should have sacrificed so that the twin fleets pay be more acceptable.
Do you think Alan Joyce and the executive will give up pay, share options to get a new type? How about the other unions? Groundstaff, etc?
I understand pilots are spooked after a torrid few years of RINs, VR,accelerated losses,
However as most of us know that was a combination of wrong aircraft types being massively fuel inefficient compared to competitions. It's fuel that's 40% of the cost base, not pilot costs!
Those grim days for Long haul are thankfully over and we are back to profitability. That happens in business cycles. Thankfully the tailwinds are blowing for a change.
What we don't want to do is believe the Alan Joyce spin machine that getting a new type is all down to pilot costs.
Do you honestly believe in a possible downturn, we will get left alone next time because we have taken a 30-40% pay cut to help.
Rather than arguing amoungst fellow crew perhaps keep an eye on the profit announcement this August and the large bonuses paid to the executive.
Perhaps many are happy to fund Alan's bonus?
Someone showed me the other day on the ASX that Alan has been granted $40 MILLION in Qantas options, in addition to his pay.
Interesting times.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: AUS
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Do you honestly believe that the one deciding factor in getting a new type rests solely on Flight Crew pay? "
Yes, it will be one of several deciding factors. They already have their cabin crew cost base sorted since the early 2000s with F/As on $40k base with their massive B scale. Talk to someone who has worked in strategy/networks (as opposed to just group thinking with fellow pilots) at a large airline and ask them about route profitability. I know pilots don't like to entertain the fact their terms and conditions (=cost base) influence routes opening and closing but the FACT is that they can and do. Especially the long 'tripe time' routes.
"The FACT is that tech crew costs are about 1-4% max of the overall cost base."
That's a big range you've given there. What's your source? Let's see your maths. When was the last time tech crew costs were 1% of the overall cost base? 1920? On individual route analysis the pilots costs can be over 10% - massive by world standards.
"Qantas will make a billion dollars this year WITH the LH award. "
The Qantas Group will, yes, and by logical extension it would make more with a lower cost base. But what about Qantas international - the entity that needs to justify a $billion+ (or whatever) worth of 787s? Pilots don't get to decide what planes are bought.
"Do you think Alan Joyce and the executive will give up pay, share options to get a new type? How about the other unions? Groundstaff, etc? "
Other unions now have casuals/part timers/B and C scales in just about every single other employee group. Joyce took a 30% pay cut in fixed salary and you said yourself that '5000 back office jobs removed helps'. That's where the other groups have copped it.
"Someone showed me the other day on the ASX that Alan has been granted $40 MILLION in Qantas options, in addition to his pay." Even if this is correct (again let's see your maths), you need to be less fixated on evil bonuses and more focused on reality and how airlines make decisions to buy airplanes or not.
Yes, it will be one of several deciding factors. They already have their cabin crew cost base sorted since the early 2000s with F/As on $40k base with their massive B scale. Talk to someone who has worked in strategy/networks (as opposed to just group thinking with fellow pilots) at a large airline and ask them about route profitability. I know pilots don't like to entertain the fact their terms and conditions (=cost base) influence routes opening and closing but the FACT is that they can and do. Especially the long 'tripe time' routes.
"The FACT is that tech crew costs are about 1-4% max of the overall cost base."
That's a big range you've given there. What's your source? Let's see your maths. When was the last time tech crew costs were 1% of the overall cost base? 1920? On individual route analysis the pilots costs can be over 10% - massive by world standards.
"Qantas will make a billion dollars this year WITH the LH award. "
The Qantas Group will, yes, and by logical extension it would make more with a lower cost base. But what about Qantas international - the entity that needs to justify a $billion+ (or whatever) worth of 787s? Pilots don't get to decide what planes are bought.
"Do you think Alan Joyce and the executive will give up pay, share options to get a new type? How about the other unions? Groundstaff, etc? "
Other unions now have casuals/part timers/B and C scales in just about every single other employee group. Joyce took a 30% pay cut in fixed salary and you said yourself that '5000 back office jobs removed helps'. That's where the other groups have copped it.
"Someone showed me the other day on the ASX that Alan has been granted $40 MILLION in Qantas options, in addition to his pay." Even if this is correct (again let's see your maths), you need to be less fixated on evil bonuses and more focused on reality and how airlines make decisions to buy airplanes or not.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: thelodge
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the ASX website. Appendix 3Y. Directors interest notification.
Alan Joeseph Joyce has 7,974,000 million QAN options.
At $3.55 that's $28,307,700 worth of options alone vesting next year. It's not $40 million but close to $30 million at the current price. Perhaps we can top up Alan's salary to make up the shortfall.
FACT
The cost base figures are from IATA. The 1-4% range factors in the lowest cost airlines to the highest cost and from LCCs to Full service airlines globally.
FACT.
There are other reputable economic papers available on line.
I'm not arguing that the deal won't be acceptable, nor that efficiencies should not be strived for. As I've said the A380/744 rates should be lowered to bring twin engine rates of pay up without seperate conditions or a B scale.
You can spin it as hard as you like Tuner however you have provided no data other than a narrative.
Can you tell me what other reputable airlines have had to accept B scales to introduce new types recently?
We will watch with interest at this years profit/bonus announcement.
Whilst your on the topic, how does the rate of pay for the CEO/executive compare to its peers?
Alan Joeseph Joyce has 7,974,000 million QAN options.
At $3.55 that's $28,307,700 worth of options alone vesting next year. It's not $40 million but close to $30 million at the current price. Perhaps we can top up Alan's salary to make up the shortfall.
FACT
The cost base figures are from IATA. The 1-4% range factors in the lowest cost airlines to the highest cost and from LCCs to Full service airlines globally.
FACT.
There are other reputable economic papers available on line.
I'm not arguing that the deal won't be acceptable, nor that efficiencies should not be strived for. As I've said the A380/744 rates should be lowered to bring twin engine rates of pay up without seperate conditions or a B scale.
You can spin it as hard as you like Tuner however you have provided no data other than a narrative.
Can you tell me what other reputable airlines have had to accept B scales to introduce new types recently?
We will watch with interest at this years profit/bonus announcement.
Whilst your on the topic, how does the rate of pay for the CEO/executive compare to its peers?
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: AUS
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
May I have a link to the IATA 1-4% paper please? Even if that captures Qantas, do you reckon we are closer to 1 or 4%? Which full service airline has a tech crew cost of only 1%? The problem for Qantas is that on Dallas to SYD type sectors, the tech crew costs on those sectors go WAY above 4% and sometimes above 10% - that's presumably why they want to do away with planned O/T but agree to a rate higher than the A380 for a plane half the size. Making those routes profitable is in all of our interests and getting paid more than 744 pilots when it does shorter sectors is a good bonus to boot. I do know that in terms of manpower costs (remembering that fuel costs are hard to differentiate between airlines), pilots are approx 25% of Qantas' total.
"Can you tell me what other reputable airlines have had to accept B scales to introduce new types recently? "
I can tell you that dozens or airlines have either gone through chapter 11, bankruptcy, furloughs and forced redundancy. See the USA, Japan, Cathay A to C sclae, BA restructure and many many more. Personally I would rather reached a sensible negotiated outcome to the structural problems in international airlines versus having a bankruptcy court decide my terms and having no say at all like many of these pilots at those airlines went through. Look at what is happening at MAS right now - they are effectively tearing up their contracts and making everyone reapply for jobs. Who would have predicted that only 18 months ago.
The CEO pay is just an emotional distraction and largely irrelevant. Don't let it raise your blood pressure. Lyell and Hickey were well paid while they were there but you can see how quickly they get shown the door - it's about 100 times harder to get ride of a LH pilot. Especially a senior one.
"Can you tell me what other reputable airlines have had to accept B scales to introduce new types recently? "
I can tell you that dozens or airlines have either gone through chapter 11, bankruptcy, furloughs and forced redundancy. See the USA, Japan, Cathay A to C sclae, BA restructure and many many more. Personally I would rather reached a sensible negotiated outcome to the structural problems in international airlines versus having a bankruptcy court decide my terms and having no say at all like many of these pilots at those airlines went through. Look at what is happening at MAS right now - they are effectively tearing up their contracts and making everyone reapply for jobs. Who would have predicted that only 18 months ago.
The CEO pay is just an emotional distraction and largely irrelevant. Don't let it raise your blood pressure. Lyell and Hickey were well paid while they were there but you can see how quickly they get shown the door - it's about 100 times harder to get ride of a LH pilot. Especially a senior one.
The reality is you cannot compare apples with apples on international pilot pay.
For example the REAL cost of pilots in the Middle East would be nowhere near what is quoted. Additional to that those airlines carry two captains on long haul flights.
Same with US airlines. Legacy captains are super senior on big bucks generally and they are carrying two of those on long haul as well.
So you can claim any figure you like as a comparison the reality is you are never comparing it against a real figure of another airline.
For example the REAL cost of pilots in the Middle East would be nowhere near what is quoted. Additional to that those airlines carry two captains on long haul flights.
Same with US airlines. Legacy captains are super senior on big bucks generally and they are carrying two of those on long haul as well.
So you can claim any figure you like as a comparison the reality is you are never comparing it against a real figure of another airline.
Who said it would fly short routes? It's for ultra long haul operations? Three man crew night credits are reduced therefore you won't get as much as a 747 crew on the same pattern two man crew is not mentioned so I don't know what their night credits will be.
"Do you honestly believe that the one deciding factor in getting a new type rests solely on Flight Crew pay? "
No. The new type is coming. What our negotiation will determine is if we fly it. There were 3 other 'pilot groups' who approached Qantas to crew a new type and IR didn't actually believe that negotiations could reach an agreement with AIPA until a just a few weeks ago. The frightening reality is that if we are unable to get the EA up, the 789 will still come, but QF will apply to Fair Work for negotiation will move to the next group.
We need to let the COM do due diligence tomorrow (in COM we trust?) and hopefully we will be given a chance to vote on it if it meets their expectations.
Now as for the old argument that 'we can't possibly do it for less than a 744 crew would do it' lest 'you younger people miss out on the career opportunities I've had', I call buII****! You are simply protecting your patch (that's your right to do so, but don't expect me to listen while you pontificate). Being busted back to SO after over a decade I the RHS of a 767 has given me a different perspective than yours. I suspect the SO on your flight deck may also differ in opinion from yours.
This is a new type and the changes in the landscape have determined that we need to do things differently (luckily you've been given an opportunity to stay where you are for a while).
I look forward to seeing the detail and working out if it is acceptable to me.
Good luck to all.
No. The new type is coming. What our negotiation will determine is if we fly it. There were 3 other 'pilot groups' who approached Qantas to crew a new type and IR didn't actually believe that negotiations could reach an agreement with AIPA until a just a few weeks ago. The frightening reality is that if we are unable to get the EA up, the 789 will still come, but QF will apply to Fair Work for negotiation will move to the next group.
We need to let the COM do due diligence tomorrow (in COM we trust?) and hopefully we will be given a chance to vote on it if it meets their expectations.
Now as for the old argument that 'we can't possibly do it for less than a 744 crew would do it' lest 'you younger people miss out on the career opportunities I've had', I call buII****! You are simply protecting your patch (that's your right to do so, but don't expect me to listen while you pontificate). Being busted back to SO after over a decade I the RHS of a 767 has given me a different perspective than yours. I suspect the SO on your flight deck may also differ in opinion from yours.
This is a new type and the changes in the landscape have determined that we need to do things differently (luckily you've been given an opportunity to stay where you are for a while).
I look forward to seeing the detail and working out if it is acceptable to me.
Good luck to all.
Agree they are coming. No guarantees Qantas pilots will fly them - if they screw the deal up. Yes, they will and can find a work around if they desire, history has already shown that. Remember, we are dealing with the bloke who woke up one day and grounded an entire airline! How much are you prepared to gamble your future on? I believe the deal negotiated is quite reasonable - we will find out soon...
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: thelodge
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree its worth waiting to see what is in the deal.
I agree with Tuner that at least the two sides are actually negotiating now. Im suspicious of a change of heart by Qantas however. I think they are only doing so as they failed in arbitration.
You simply cannot compare it to American Airlines. They went into bankruptcy and got sent to binding arbitration.The chapter 11 provisions in the USA are brutal.
Joyce grounded the airline and sent us to FWA at a cost of hundreds of millions. That was his chapter 11 style play.
The full bench of Fair Work "determined" our current award(with concessions) as FAIR.
Qantas are not bunkrupt. Check any analyst report or Qantas information and it has forecast approximately one billion dollar profit this year and two the year after.
The real saving/efficiencies come from the aircraft and not the pilots.
Fuel is by far the biggest cost at 40-50%. if the 787 burns half that of a 747 that is why Qantas will get them. Not to mention they don't need D checks at $30 million per jet.
Hopefully AIPA won't sell the farm in boom times. If they do it will get voted down.
The points made by others are very relevant regarding other airlines carrying two Captains and two F/O's. British Airways, all the European, Middle East and Asian airlines do.
Disagree that executive pay has nothing to do with it. If pilots must make sacrifices to get the 787, why are the executives immune? You cannot cherry pick the savings.
Good leadership manages a business by setting an example, not making exceptions for themselves.
I agree with Tuner that at least the two sides are actually negotiating now. Im suspicious of a change of heart by Qantas however. I think they are only doing so as they failed in arbitration.
You simply cannot compare it to American Airlines. They went into bankruptcy and got sent to binding arbitration.The chapter 11 provisions in the USA are brutal.
Joyce grounded the airline and sent us to FWA at a cost of hundreds of millions. That was his chapter 11 style play.
The full bench of Fair Work "determined" our current award(with concessions) as FAIR.
Qantas are not bunkrupt. Check any analyst report or Qantas information and it has forecast approximately one billion dollar profit this year and two the year after.
The real saving/efficiencies come from the aircraft and not the pilots.
Fuel is by far the biggest cost at 40-50%. if the 787 burns half that of a 747 that is why Qantas will get them. Not to mention they don't need D checks at $30 million per jet.
Hopefully AIPA won't sell the farm in boom times. If they do it will get voted down.
The points made by others are very relevant regarding other airlines carrying two Captains and two F/O's. British Airways, all the European, Middle East and Asian airlines do.
Disagree that executive pay has nothing to do with it. If pilots must make sacrifices to get the 787, why are the executives immune? You cannot cherry pick the savings.
Good leadership manages a business by setting an example, not making exceptions for themselves.
The points made by others are very relevant regarding other airlines carrying two Captains and two F/O's. British Airways, all the European, Middle East and Asian airlines do.
At the end of the day, the law of supply and demand will rule. If there are enough pilots willing to work for the given conditions, then those conditions will stand.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: AUS
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fearcampaign (such an apposite handle),
The execs are not "immune". They just chopped a few hundred of them in the 5000 cuts (I know about a dozen personally) and they've also had their own pay freeze for around 4-5 years. They also don't have a seniority based EBA to decide WHO get shown the door. Yes they do get 41Y, I know, but they also have worse duty travel entitlements that we do. No one ever likes to present the FULL picture, most of us just like to scream "bonus! bonus!". Most execs (apart from the level 3 and above) are also paid a base slary less than what many of our S/Os make.
The QF international business is still very marginal. I wish it wasn't, but it is and the people who actually make the decisions (not pilots, not pprune pundits, but the shareholders and the board) know that very well.
The execs are not "immune". They just chopped a few hundred of them in the 5000 cuts (I know about a dozen personally) and they've also had their own pay freeze for around 4-5 years. They also don't have a seniority based EBA to decide WHO get shown the door. Yes they do get 41Y, I know, but they also have worse duty travel entitlements that we do. No one ever likes to present the FULL picture, most of us just like to scream "bonus! bonus!". Most execs (apart from the level 3 and above) are also paid a base slary less than what many of our S/Os make.
The QF international business is still very marginal. I wish it wasn't, but it is and the people who actually make the decisions (not pilots, not pprune pundits, but the shareholders and the board) know that very well.
Off-topic, but the link to the crew costs - I can't find my IATA link, but this should help, and it's closer to the 7.5-8% mark for tech crew, including training which can be amortised also for direct operating costs.
Doganis, Rigas 2012, Flying Off Course: The Economics of International Airlines, 3rd edn, Taylor and Francis, Hoboken, ebook:ISBN 9780203995266, pp64-144
ICAO 2000, Base-line Aircraft Operating Costs,<http://www.icao.int/Meetings/AMC/MA/2001/Allpirg4/wp28app.pdf>
The latter is quite outdated.
Doganis, Rigas 2012, Flying Off Course: The Economics of International Airlines, 3rd edn, Taylor and Francis, Hoboken, ebook:ISBN 9780203995266, pp64-144
ICAO 2000, Base-line Aircraft Operating Costs,<http://www.icao.int/Meetings/AMC/MA/2001/Allpirg4/wp28app.pdf>
The latter is quite outdated.
Last edited by romeocharlie; 1st Jun 2015 at 03:56. Reason: More info..
The points made by others are very relevant regarding other airlines carrying two Captains and two F/O's. British Airways, all the European, Middle East and Asian airlines do.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: NDB
Age: 53
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How is this relevant if our SO's are paid more than a large number of their (and our) FO's?
Fact.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: thelodge
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tuner,
I do agree. I think I should change my handle to billion dollar profit,
or perhaps $30 million dollar options, or maybe two billion dollar profit.
What about AlansBigBonusForaBscale?
100 + pilots took VR, I'm sure some executives got the axe, however that's expected as we removed so many hulls from the fleet.
The majority of the efficiencies come from the new type. 50% less Fuel burn, no maintenance,new product etc.
Strambi went on about the new type being introduced on 767 rates on the LH award when the dollar was at $1.15. That was acceptable to him then and Qantas was in a worse macroeconomic period than now.
The 787 certainly can't be on A380/747 rates, no argument there. But neither should it be on a separate B scale.
What I'm advocating is a reduction/freeze on the A380/744 rates to get the 787 on the 767 rate under the LH award.
Perhaps a few gives on the max multiplier overtime if that is annoying some.
But zero O/Time and zero night credits is a different matter.
Still I wait the deal proposed from AIPA. They are not morons and despite the big bad wolf stories I'm sure they are aware that we are well and truly back to profitability and you don't sell the farm in boom times.
QF have written off the value of the fleet,VR, CR etc, the fuel price has more than halved, we've got rid of 100 + pilots, multiple cabin crew and thousands of other staff. No more crying wolf. Alan certainly did not waste a crisis as business commentators suggested.
However there is NOT a crisis now.
If level 3 staff are so worried about S/O pay then they should spend $150,000 do all the aptitude/skill/psych tests, go fly in GA for 4-5 years or longer on 30-40k a year and perhaps one day make it into Qantas. No one is stopping them.
I think all your executive buddies might have you well and truly hoodwinked.
Sure the ones left will do very handsomely come the billion dollar profit announcement.Possibly even better when it is forecast to be two billion the next financial year.
I do agree. I think I should change my handle to billion dollar profit,
or perhaps $30 million dollar options, or maybe two billion dollar profit.
What about AlansBigBonusForaBscale?
100 + pilots took VR, I'm sure some executives got the axe, however that's expected as we removed so many hulls from the fleet.
The majority of the efficiencies come from the new type. 50% less Fuel burn, no maintenance,new product etc.
Strambi went on about the new type being introduced on 767 rates on the LH award when the dollar was at $1.15. That was acceptable to him then and Qantas was in a worse macroeconomic period than now.
The 787 certainly can't be on A380/747 rates, no argument there. But neither should it be on a separate B scale.
What I'm advocating is a reduction/freeze on the A380/744 rates to get the 787 on the 767 rate under the LH award.
Perhaps a few gives on the max multiplier overtime if that is annoying some.
But zero O/Time and zero night credits is a different matter.
Still I wait the deal proposed from AIPA. They are not morons and despite the big bad wolf stories I'm sure they are aware that we are well and truly back to profitability and you don't sell the farm in boom times.
QF have written off the value of the fleet,VR, CR etc, the fuel price has more than halved, we've got rid of 100 + pilots, multiple cabin crew and thousands of other staff. No more crying wolf. Alan certainly did not waste a crisis as business commentators suggested.
However there is NOT a crisis now.
If level 3 staff are so worried about S/O pay then they should spend $150,000 do all the aptitude/skill/psych tests, go fly in GA for 4-5 years or longer on 30-40k a year and perhaps one day make it into Qantas. No one is stopping them.
I think all your executive buddies might have you well and truly hoodwinked.
Sure the ones left will do very handsomely come the billion dollar profit announcement.Possibly even better when it is forecast to be two billion the next financial year.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: AUS
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fearcampaign
If you want to be an exec then apply to be one and lose your EBA protections and have 50% of your pay at risk. I bet you don't. You aren't Alan Joyce nor are you doing his job. Whether the 767 rate had been locked in for the 787 does not mean they would have bought them or would not have presented AIPA and the pilots with the exact same business case as they now have.
If you want to be an exec then apply to be one and lose your EBA protections and have 50% of your pay at risk. I bet you don't. You aren't Alan Joyce nor are you doing his job. Whether the 767 rate had been locked in for the 787 does not mean they would have bought them or would not have presented AIPA and the pilots with the exact same business case as they now have.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: thelodge
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Romeocharlie,
Thanks for the reference. Say worst case 8% is flight crew costs.
A 20% B scale saving on 8% of flight crew costs is 1.6%.
If fuel is 50% of the cost base(largest expense) and the 787 burns 40-50% less fuel, then that is a 25% cost base reduction on fuel alone in getting the 787.
So lets get this straight. The 787 cannot make sense unless Qantas get a 1.6% reduction in flight crew costs via a new type B scale agreement.
So the fuel burn saving is 13.88 times the flight crew savings but No new shiny 787s without a pilot B scale.
Thanks for the reference. Say worst case 8% is flight crew costs.
A 20% B scale saving on 8% of flight crew costs is 1.6%.
If fuel is 50% of the cost base(largest expense) and the 787 burns 40-50% less fuel, then that is a 25% cost base reduction on fuel alone in getting the 787.
So lets get this straight. The 787 cannot make sense unless Qantas get a 1.6% reduction in flight crew costs via a new type B scale agreement.
So the fuel burn saving is 13.88 times the flight crew savings but No new shiny 787s without a pilot B scale.