Qantas Recruitment
I don't work there so I don't know, but there wasn't alot of talk about the variations being much of a win?
In the Jetstar thread, it was mentioned that Jetstar were going to operate at least 20 A321 XLRs. Are these 20 you refer to in addition to the Jetstar XLRs?
what do you want to know about them?
I presume you’re suggesting that there isn’t many, and that may be true, but QF flys to:
Indonesia (2 destinations)
Singapore
Thailand
India (2 destinations)
Philippines
China HK
China (not yet, but it’s in the schedule)
Japan
South Korea
United Kingdom
Italy
USA (5 different destinations)
Canada
Chile
New Zealand
Tonga, Samoa, PNG, New Caledonia and Fiji (but no one overnights there)
South Africa
and they have stated their desire to add France.
And of course, all over Australia
It may only be 1 destination in most of them, but how many cities in a any country do you need in order to experience a country?
I think that’s pretty good, and I can live in Australia to do it. If you’d rather go elsewhere, go elsewhere.
The biggest problem is the different fleets, so no one goes to all of them, but the A330/350 fleet (if it’s approved by CASA) would touch most of them.
Not a bad spread if you ask me.
I presume you’re suggesting that there isn’t many, and that may be true, but QF flys to:
Indonesia (2 destinations)
Singapore
Thailand
India (2 destinations)
Philippines
China HK
China (not yet, but it’s in the schedule)
Japan
South Korea
United Kingdom
Italy
USA (5 different destinations)
Canada
Chile
New Zealand
Tonga, Samoa, PNG, New Caledonia and Fiji (but no one overnights there)
South Africa
and they have stated their desire to add France.
And of course, all over Australia
It may only be 1 destination in most of them, but how many cities in a any country do you need in order to experience a country?
I think that’s pretty good, and I can live in Australia to do it. If you’d rather go elsewhere, go elsewhere.
The biggest problem is the different fleets, so no one goes to all of them, but the A330/350 fleet (if it’s approved by CASA) would touch most of them.
Not a bad spread if you ask me.
The following users liked this post:
Qantas pilots back pay freeze deal
Pilots agree to 18-mth wage freeze, bringing airline closer to buying Boeing fleet.AAPless than 2 min read
July 30, 2015 - 5:45PM Qantas pilots back pay freeze deal
Qantas long-haul pilots have backed plans for an 18-month pay freeze, putting the airline a step closer to expanding its fleet of hi-tech Dreamliner planes.
The pay freeze was part of a new wages deal which was backed by 82 per cent of 1,165 pilots who voted in an electronic ballot that closed on Thursday.
The deal includes annual three per cent pay increases once the pay freeze lifts
Terry Cook
8 November 2001
The program involves slashing labour costs through a wage freeze, the restructuring of work practices and the shedding of an unspecified number of jobs from its workforce of 33,000. In order to contain the opposition of workers, management is openly relying on the trade unions.
On October 22, 150 officials and delegates representing 11 airline unions were wined and dined by Qantas chief executive Geoff Dixon at the plush Sydney Darling Harbour waterfront Novotel Hotel. By all reports, it was a sumptuous lunch. Dixon informed the gathering that Qantas wanted agreement on an 18-month pay freeze and the abolition of a range of rostering and special allowances.
The following 2 users liked this post by dragon man:
smiling monkey
Qantas & Kuala Lumpur
Others will know if this is true or not ...
I was told a story many years ago by a pilot out of Singapore, that KL ATC had cleared a Qantas aircraft to land on a reciprocal heading to an aircraft cleared for take-off.
This was supposedly one of a number of issues Qantas had encountered.
Qantas supposedly withdrew from KL not long after.
Qantas & Kuala Lumpur
Others will know if this is true or not ...
I was told a story many years ago by a pilot out of Singapore, that KL ATC had cleared a Qantas aircraft to land on a reciprocal heading to an aircraft cleared for take-off.
This was supposedly one of a number of issues Qantas had encountered.
Qantas supposedly withdrew from KL not long after.
Interesting KL yarn above
Because a journalist writes a story about a pay freeze , that does not mean that a pay freeze occured
First one; obviously talking LH not SH, when did this " alleged 18 month pay freeze" actually occur , was it actually implemented. On EBA 8 or 9 , what time
period ? That the previously agreed (& it is ratified by FWC) , not "law" but is approved/stamped by Commission. That these previously binding annual pay rises & written into EBAs did not
actually occur . Interesting - I would need a lot more convincing - than a few lines from a journo
Same for Dixon days , journo writing about talky feast meeting doesn't mean the event occurred
Wakey wakey mate
r
Because a journalist writes a story about a pay freeze , that does not mean that a pay freeze occured
First one; obviously talking LH not SH, when did this " alleged 18 month pay freeze" actually occur , was it actually implemented. On EBA 8 or 9 , what time
period ? That the previously agreed (& it is ratified by FWC) , not "law" but is approved/stamped by Commission. That these previously binding annual pay rises & written into EBAs did not
actually occur . Interesting - I would need a lot more convincing - than a few lines from a journo
Same for Dixon days , journo writing about talky feast meeting doesn't mean the event occurred
Wakey wakey mate
r
The other thing with the 787 deal is, all up, it's incredibly popular. Slots on that aircraft go far more senior than the 330 operated under the "legacy" LH T&Cs.
Apparently enough on the hold file to fill courses for at least 12 months or so. Wouldn't expect another round of applications to open until at least late this year or early next year.
The following users liked this post:
[QUOTE=Makiko;11456486]Interesting KL yarn above
Because a journalist writes a story about a pay freeze , that does not mean that a pay freeze occured
First one; obviously talking LH not SH, when did this " alleged 18 month pay freeze" actually occur , was it actually implemented. On EBA 8 or 9 , what time
period ? That the previously agreed (& it is ratified by FWC) , not "law" but is approved/stamped by Commission. That these previously binding annual pay rises & written into EBAs did not
actually occur . Interesting - I would need a lot more convincing - than a few lines from a journo
Same for Dixon days , journo writing about talky feast meeting doesn't mean the event occurred
Wakey wakey mate
r
You are living proof that you don’t need a long neck and feathers to be a goose. I was there they are real they happened the total was about 10% allowing for compounding.
Because a journalist writes a story about a pay freeze , that does not mean that a pay freeze occured
First one; obviously talking LH not SH, when did this " alleged 18 month pay freeze" actually occur , was it actually implemented. On EBA 8 or 9 , what time
period ? That the previously agreed (& it is ratified by FWC) , not "law" but is approved/stamped by Commission. That these previously binding annual pay rises & written into EBAs did not
actually occur . Interesting - I would need a lot more convincing - than a few lines from a journo
Same for Dixon days , journo writing about talky feast meeting doesn't mean the event occurred
Wakey wakey mate
r
You are living proof that you don’t need a long neck and feathers to be a goose. I was there they are real they happened the total was about 10% allowing for compounding.
The following 3 users liked this post by dragon man:
Because a journalist writes a story about a pay freeze , that does not mean that a pay freeze occured
First one; obviously talking LH not SH, when did this " alleged 18 month pay freeze" actually occur , was it actually implemented. On EBA 8 or 9 , what time
period ? That the previously agreed (& it is ratified by FWC) , not "law" but is approved/stamped by Commission. That these previously binding annual pay rises & written into EBAs did not
actually occur . Interesting - I would need a lot more convincing - than a few lines from a journo
First one; obviously talking LH not SH, when did this " alleged 18 month pay freeze" actually occur , was it actually implemented. On EBA 8 or 9 , what time
period ? That the previously agreed (& it is ratified by FWC) , not "law" but is approved/stamped by Commission. That these previously binding annual pay rises & written into EBAs did not
actually occur . Interesting - I would need a lot more convincing - than a few lines from a journo
- 1st January 2014
- 1st July 2016
- 1st July 2017
- 1st July 2018
With a 2 year 6 month gap between the first two pay rates I'd say that would be an 18 month pay freeze.
As it does not affect me I haven't delved into the finer details of the agreement so maybe I'm overlooking something that would negate my above statement.
The following 3 users liked this post by Check_Thrust:
Print article
Save
ShareThe Australian International Pilots Association has told the Federal Court that Qantas should have to pay its pilots if it bypasses them to hire from outside the company to fly its biggest planes, saying the pilots “reasonably” considered the airline’s request before declining it.
In May, Qantas took its case to the Federal Court after failing to reach agreement with AIPA in the Fair Work Commission over a request to hire 20 new pilots to train as second officers on its A380s, which fly long-haul international routes.
Qantas has taken its pilots to court saying they acted unreasonably in withholding agreement. Steven Siewert Under the enterprise agreement, Qantas pilots sought to be promoted to the bigger aircraft from smaller Boeing 737s, A330s, and A350s and to enter a queue, from which they should be selected. But the agreement says Qantas can ask to directly allocate pilots and this “should not be unreasonably withheld” if requested for operational reasons.
Qantas asked AIPA for permission to allocate externally hired pilots directly to the A380s, saying its training pipeline was broken because of COVID-19 and because of the significant impact of “restarting an airline from a global pandemic”.
In court on Tuesday, barrister Matthew Follett said: “COVID had a dramatic effect on the operations of Qantas, in particular the international operations and effectively through the best part of two years there were almost no international flights.
“Regular passenger transport function was largely, if not entirely, not being performed. The consequence of that was very large numbers of the international pilots were stood down, without pay, for considerable periods of time.
“When would it ever be unreasonable if not now? In what possible scenario?”
But Ian Neil SC said AIPA would argue over the coming days that Qantas had contributed to its own operational issues.
“Put bluntly, AIPA was not persuaded that the bypassed pilots should pay to resolve such operational problems as Qantas may have had, rather than Qantas – or bear the cost,” Mr Neil told the court.
The association also wants the airline to compensate pilots under the “bypass” provision in its enterprise agreement.
The provision says Qantas can hire externally if it pays the pilots it skips over the wages they would have earned if they had been promoted for a period of up to two years. At the end of the two years, they would have to be upskilled and retrained as second officers on the larger aircraft.
Mr Neil said that if Qantas chose to invoke its right to hire directly, the pilots would not receive certain economic benefits, and that “by withholding agreement [to Qantas’ request to allocate external pilots], AIPA was not seeking to extract a benefit to which the pilots were not entitled or something extraneous to the nature and subject matter of the enterprise agreement”.
A Qantas spokeswoman said the airline had a record amount of training under way as it hired and brought back pilots from COVID. “Given the training constraints, we want to train 20 new recruits on the A380 as second officers, which means we don’t need to retrain a further 20 pilots on a new aircraft type,” she said.
“We have a record amount of training under way as we bring more pilots back after COVID, hire hundreds of new pilots and promote existing pilots to more senior positions.
Self inflicted from both side I would say.
Pilots say Qantas should pay to bypass them
Ayesha de KretserSenior reporterJul 11, 2023 – 6.00pmSave
ShareThe Australian International Pilots Association has told the Federal Court that Qantas should have to pay its pilots if it bypasses them to hire from outside the company to fly its biggest planes, saying the pilots “reasonably” considered the airline’s request before declining it.
In May, Qantas took its case to the Federal Court after failing to reach agreement with AIPA in the Fair Work Commission over a request to hire 20 new pilots to train as second officers on its A380s, which fly long-haul international routes.
Qantas has taken its pilots to court saying they acted unreasonably in withholding agreement. Steven Siewert Under the enterprise agreement, Qantas pilots sought to be promoted to the bigger aircraft from smaller Boeing 737s, A330s, and A350s and to enter a queue, from which they should be selected. But the agreement says Qantas can ask to directly allocate pilots and this “should not be unreasonably withheld” if requested for operational reasons.Qantas asked AIPA for permission to allocate externally hired pilots directly to the A380s, saying its training pipeline was broken because of COVID-19 and because of the significant impact of “restarting an airline from a global pandemic”.
In court on Tuesday, barrister Matthew Follett said: “COVID had a dramatic effect on the operations of Qantas, in particular the international operations and effectively through the best part of two years there were almost no international flights.
“Regular passenger transport function was largely, if not entirely, not being performed. The consequence of that was very large numbers of the international pilots were stood down, without pay, for considerable periods of time.
“When would it ever be unreasonable if not now? In what possible scenario?”
But Ian Neil SC said AIPA would argue over the coming days that Qantas had contributed to its own operational issues.
“Put bluntly, AIPA was not persuaded that the bypassed pilots should pay to resolve such operational problems as Qantas may have had, rather than Qantas – or bear the cost,” Mr Neil told the court.
The association also wants the airline to compensate pilots under the “bypass” provision in its enterprise agreement.
The provision says Qantas can hire externally if it pays the pilots it skips over the wages they would have earned if they had been promoted for a period of up to two years. At the end of the two years, they would have to be upskilled and retrained as second officers on the larger aircraft.
Mr Neil said that if Qantas chose to invoke its right to hire directly, the pilots would not receive certain economic benefits, and that “by withholding agreement [to Qantas’ request to allocate external pilots], AIPA was not seeking to extract a benefit to which the pilots were not entitled or something extraneous to the nature and subject matter of the enterprise agreement”.
A Qantas spokeswoman said the airline had a record amount of training under way as it hired and brought back pilots from COVID. “Given the training constraints, we want to train 20 new recruits on the A380 as second officers, which means we don’t need to retrain a further 20 pilots on a new aircraft type,” she said.
“We have a record amount of training under way as we bring more pilots back after COVID, hire hundreds of new pilots and promote existing pilots to more senior positions.
Self inflicted from both side I would say.
The following users liked this post:
Different strategy is needed
Yes the EBA has the statement “agreement should not be unreasonably withheld”
however Qantas wants to ignore the provisions in the EBA that says any bypassed pilot should be compensated for being bypassed.
Qantas’ main argument for doing this is they have operational and training constraints. However they don’t say currently 787 pilots are being forced onto leave due to a surplus. They don’t say the backlog for training onto the a380 is 6+months. They don’t say they have a financial motive for their decision as these new SOs are on the Bscale conditions. And will only achieve 60% of the salary of their colleagues.
IMO this whole argument can now be shut down by the new same job same pay laws. Why should 2 SO with the same experience be paid vastly different rates.
however Qantas wants to ignore the provisions in the EBA that says any bypassed pilot should be compensated for being bypassed.
Qantas’ main argument for doing this is they have operational and training constraints. However they don’t say currently 787 pilots are being forced onto leave due to a surplus. They don’t say the backlog for training onto the a380 is 6+months. They don’t say they have a financial motive for their decision as these new SOs are on the Bscale conditions. And will only achieve 60% of the salary of their colleagues.
IMO this whole argument can now be shut down by the new same job same pay laws. Why should 2 SO with the same experience be paid vastly different rates.
The following 6 users liked this post by DashTrash.: