So you need a new fleet Leigh?
Folk,
Back to the fleet planning, you are all missing the big picture. The accountants and other Xperts have "done their numbers", and the answer is fly the 787 for 29.5 hours per day. QED, why haven't other airlines woken up??
If lawyers and accountants can bill 36 hours per day, what's the problem.
Tootle pip!!
Back to the fleet planning, you are all missing the big picture. The accountants and other Xperts have "done their numbers", and the answer is fly the 787 for 29.5 hours per day. QED, why haven't other airlines woken up??
If lawyers and accountants can bill 36 hours per day, what's the problem.
Tootle pip!!
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Earth
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry for the ignorance, but just curious as to why a reduction in numbers is being talked about, when there are supposed to be more aircraft and more pilots recruited at QF (going through the application process myself). Wouldn’t QF just give the 747 pilots the new spots on the 787 and vacant spots on the other fleets?
Oh if It were only so simple
True! But the thing that gets my goat every time this prospect arises is the ‘experts’ who opine about the inefficiencies in QF’s RIN process. (I know Maggot is not saying this!)
Such opinion overlooks the fact that the QF Longhaul EBA is an agreement between the parties. It is inappropriate that anyone should ‘cherry-pick’ what is no longer convenient in that agreement; every clause has been bought & paid for by one side or the other over a long period of time, and the typical blame game against the pilots seems to come from either the uninformed or the disingenuous.
What will be, will be. It’s not fun, but neither was it a ‘thought-bubble’ imposed on a poor helpless IR/HR team.
Such opinion overlooks the fact that the QF Longhaul EBA is an agreement between the parties. It is inappropriate that anyone should ‘cherry-pick’ what is no longer convenient in that agreement; every clause has been bought & paid for by one side or the other over a long period of time, and the typical blame game against the pilots seems to come from either the uninformed or the disingenuous.
What will be, will be. It’s not fun, but neither was it a ‘thought-bubble’ imposed on a poor helpless IR/HR team.
Wouldn’t QF just give the 747 pilots the new spots on the 787 and vacant spots on the other fleets?
A move from the 744 to the 787 would be a reasonable pay cut and thus most 744 pilots will be looking to minimise their pay hit when the move eventually has to be made.
The RIN process in some ways, allows this to happen; certainly for the more senior.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: nsw
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry for the ignorance, but just curious as to why a reduction in numbers is being talked about, when there are supposed to be more aircraft and more pilots recruited at QF (going through the application process myself). Wouldn’t QF just give the 747 pilots the new spots on the 787 and vacant spots on the other fleets?
Nunc est bibendum
Sorry for the ignorance, but just curious as to why a reduction in numbers is being talked about, when there are supposed to be more aircraft and more pilots recruited at QF (going through the application process myself). Wouldn’t QF just give the 747 pilots the new spots on the 787 and vacant spots on the other fleets?
There are a number of nuances as to how this plays out as alluded to by both Jetsbest and maggot. Not least of these is that you need crew trained for when a 787 arrives but you still need crew flying the 744 until the day the 787 arrives. So those 744 crew can’t be released to fly that new aeroplane straight away. It’s a three to four month course to convert. One month ground School, one month sim, one to two months line training- takes a full 8 Weeks to clock up ten sectors when the sector length is north of 14 hours.
Hence maggot’s comment about it not being simple!
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wellington
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No excuses for ignorance needed. 747 pilots have only ever been for 747 pilots. They ignore the facts as you rightly point out that recruiting is going gangbusters. Many are wishing for RIN for the $$$. Many are worried about going to a new type and therefore moving out of their comfort zone and most are thinking about the loss of $$$ for overtime going to a smaller aircraft.
Sorry for the ignorance, but just curious as to why a reduction in numbers is being talked about, when there are supposed to be more aircraft and more pilots recruited at QF (going through the application process myself). Wouldn’t QF just give the 747 pilots the new spots on the 787 and vacant spots on the other fleets?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So Leigh at your April board meeting what has been obvious for a decade to the industry finally hit home: Qantas need a new fleet.
Whilst of course 'commercial in confidence' is the standard line pitched to all, what would 6 787 aircraft cost?
Prudent management would have seen these aircraft purchased years ago, protecting fuel included CASK, growing operating profit margin, but self enrichment of insiders is a powerful drug. With share buy back and capital returns totaling AUD$2 billion, you could have paid for these aircraft out of cash flow surplus, such was the cheap fuel it was self interest all the way!
With WTI crude nudging USD$70.05 jet fuel forward hedging, given contango, becomes a lot more expensive. Maybe you need a few more?
Reality Czech whereabouts unknown. We await with interest the return from the Campus with a quantitative analysis as to the 'value of JQ'
Whilst of course 'commercial in confidence' is the standard line pitched to all, what would 6 787 aircraft cost?
Prudent management would have seen these aircraft purchased years ago, protecting fuel included CASK, growing operating profit margin, but self enrichment of insiders is a powerful drug. With share buy back and capital returns totaling AUD$2 billion, you could have paid for these aircraft out of cash flow surplus, such was the cheap fuel it was self interest all the way!
With WTI crude nudging USD$70.05 jet fuel forward hedging, given contango, becomes a lot more expensive. Maybe you need a few more?
Reality Czech whereabouts unknown. We await with interest the return from the Campus with a quantitative analysis as to the 'value of JQ'
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Earth
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cheers for the insights, but wouldn’t displacing more pilots when recruitment is going gang busters be very expensive (eg. a 747 captain could potentially displace 3 or 4 other captains and so on), and like Keg said, make a lot of pilots sit around in training courses not actually flying planes?
I totally understand about pilots wanting to go to a plane that keeps their pay drop to a minimum (I would too), however, wouldn’t QF just turn around and say there’s is an increase in pilots required hence no reductions of numbers? So they only need to convert the 747 guys? As it seems a very expensive and inefficient way of doing business.
I totally understand about pilots wanting to go to a plane that keeps their pay drop to a minimum (I would too), however, wouldn’t QF just turn around and say there’s is an increase in pilots required hence no reductions of numbers? So they only need to convert the 747 guys? As it seems a very expensive and inefficient way of doing business.
What a complicated pay scheme QF seem to have which stifles Pilots movement and recruitment.
My airline pays by Company Seniority not by type.
ie A 2 year seniority F/O on an A 320 gets the same basic as a 2 year A380 F/O. A 20 year A320 Capt the same as a 20 year 787/744/777 etc. (We don’t do the S/O partially trained Cruise Pilot thing, all joiners on all fleets fully trained as P2 for 2 pilot Ops)
Flying pay and allowances tend to favour the LH fleets but not by much.
This scheme means guys who want the SH European lifestyle don’t have to go LH just for the money, and obviating the need for double conversions to replace him.
Also saves a bunch on Type Ratings and conversion courses for the Company as you can recruit direct onto the Fleets with the pilot requirements. Pilots recruited direct onto wide body types obviously need previous jet or large turbo prop experience, ex Military or previous airline.
Saves all the hassle and bickering on who goes where, with for instance B744 fleet retirement, which seems to happen in QF?
My airline pays by Company Seniority not by type.
ie A 2 year seniority F/O on an A 320 gets the same basic as a 2 year A380 F/O. A 20 year A320 Capt the same as a 20 year 787/744/777 etc. (We don’t do the S/O partially trained Cruise Pilot thing, all joiners on all fleets fully trained as P2 for 2 pilot Ops)
Flying pay and allowances tend to favour the LH fleets but not by much.
This scheme means guys who want the SH European lifestyle don’t have to go LH just for the money, and obviating the need for double conversions to replace him.
Also saves a bunch on Type Ratings and conversion courses for the Company as you can recruit direct onto the Fleets with the pilot requirements. Pilots recruited direct onto wide body types obviously need previous jet or large turbo prop experience, ex Military or previous airline.
Saves all the hassle and bickering on who goes where, with for instance B744 fleet retirement, which seems to happen in QF?
Last edited by cessnapete; 8th May 2018 at 06:40.
Cessnapete,
The SO role is probably easier to justify in this part of the world than most. Other than a few exceptions on one fleet, every wide body is going to be operating with an augmented crew so why pay for a third or fourth FO when an SO will do.
I agree that seniority pay generally makes sence, I remeber the idea being mooted some years ago in the lower echelons of one carrier I was involved with, but the counter argument at the time was that all the large pay steps over the decades had a occured when new and larger types had arrived. Im sure that was party attributed to being the 'good old days' but there was little appetite for change going foward. Anecdotaly, most of the senior guys where happier with long haul life anyway and I doubt many would have embraced the multi sector short haul life even if the base pay was the same.
Im sure it would work for the company, but as inefficent as it is in its current form I think it still works for the majority of the current pilot group most of the time.
The SO role is probably easier to justify in this part of the world than most. Other than a few exceptions on one fleet, every wide body is going to be operating with an augmented crew so why pay for a third or fourth FO when an SO will do.
I agree that seniority pay generally makes sence, I remeber the idea being mooted some years ago in the lower echelons of one carrier I was involved with, but the counter argument at the time was that all the large pay steps over the decades had a occured when new and larger types had arrived. Im sure that was party attributed to being the 'good old days' but there was little appetite for change going foward. Anecdotaly, most of the senior guys where happier with long haul life anyway and I doubt many would have embraced the multi sector short haul life even if the base pay was the same.
Im sure it would work for the company, but as inefficent as it is in its current form I think it still works for the majority of the current pilot group most of the time.
Thanks for the reply Lapon. I am surprised you get enough pilots recruits who will never fly the airplane! We had a short period on our last recruitment phase when due to lack of training route sectors some new F/Os on 380/777 etc had to wait a few months as Cruise Only, I think they could only sit up front above 20000ft. Thy hated it ,bored out of their tree after a month or two as a third pilot on a two crew airplane..
Still its better than no job.
Still its better than no job.
I reckon two of the company's claims for the LH EA this time around will be for fleet pay and longer type freezes post training. If the LH and SH EAs were negotiated together in some respects such that the SH contract was better in parts and the pay differential reduced between types, there are potential savings for the company in the tens of millions if not hundredish million p/a in reduced training costs.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, of course they can claim whatever they like. I would like to think that after the considerable concessions in the last EBA’s, and the subsequent record profits and exhorbitant executive remuneration, the pilots would be unlikely to accept anything less than a good pay deal in the next negotiation. QF IR know that, of course, they aren’t stupid. Which is of course why they are currently attempting to muddy the negotiating waters with Jetconnect and and Network (and 787 orders, please save me).