Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

So you need a new fleet Leigh?

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

So you need a new fleet Leigh?

Old 21st May 2019, 03:57
  #921 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 93
JQ 787 base pay (base hours 75 per month) capt $228,927 FO $148,843, SO $82,414

As you can see, across all ranks the JQ 787 pilots get paid significantly less than their QF counterparts

Also worth noting that the agreement states that this pay is for Wide Body single deck. So an A350 or 777x could be introduced without the need to renegotiate for a new type
ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 04:21
  #922 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 154
I’m sure the A350’s in Jetstar colours will look as good as any other. Whether the required seat config and premium pricing requirement will suit the Jetstar business model is another question.


crosscutter is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 04:38
  #923 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 93
I think the hypothetical scenario is that they wouldn’t be in JQ colours but JQ crew operating QF flights. You’ve got network operating A320s in QF colours in the west, Jetconnect operating QF 737s on the Tasman... Don’t underestimate QF managements ability to do some dodgy sh#t in the endless pursuit to reduce costs.
ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 04:55
  #924 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,399
Originally Posted by crosscutter View Post
Im sure the A350s in Jetstar colours will look as good as any other. Whether the required seat config and premium pricing requirement will suit the Jetstar business model is another question.


Precisely. It is of course contract season. Insert subsidiary.

At least one JQ CEO was shown the door for a flash of honesty regarding the long haul IR wet dreams of Little Napoleon et al. They failed to accept a reality in the Low Airfare space: It remains low airfares. Stretch the stage length and unit costs rise too. Unless an airline can grow revenues (increase prices) then operating margins decline. That they persist is more about ideology than economics.
There is no yield premium in JQ brand, their market niche is to stimulate leisure travel, thus they are forever demand elastic.

Of course, that won't stop the same old stories surfacing about JQ/ Network/Jetconnect etc taking over the 'flying'.

Qantas has not the slightest bit of interest doing it, execution risk is formidable. This is why they needed a narrative of 'terminal decline' last time to make the execution less risky.
Insiders know that it can't work, but of it they will still dream.
In the mean time.

Qantas need a new fleet.
Rated De is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 04:57
  #925 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 571
Jetstar Aus/NZ Positions

Interestingly in another thread you post:
Originally Posted by ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE View Post


Acording to the latest seniority list:

787 F/O approx 5 years from date of join.

A320 command currently around 6 years in Sydney.

Rough guides only of course as there are many variables, mainly how many extra airframes the A321LRs will result in.
Which brings up a very important point, there aren't any shortcuts in aviation. An East Coast widebody FO is running at 15+ years, a little more for a 737 command in mainline.

Jetstar are able to offer a lesser deal, as the time for promotion is much more rapid. You can go back to the original observation by the father of modern economics, Adam Smith in 1776 in the Wealth Of Nations for some guidance on these matters:

10.1.25 The probability that any particular person shall ever be qualified for
the employment to which he is educated, is very different in different occupations.
In the greater part of mechanic trades, success is almost certain; but very
uncertain in the liberal professions. Put your son apprentice to a shoemaker,
there is little doubt of his learning to make a pair of shoes: But send him
to study the law, it is at least twenty to one if ever he makes such proficiency
as will enable him to live by the business. In a perfectly fair lottery, those
who draw the prizes ought to gain all that is lost by those who draw the blanks.
In a profession where twenty fail for one that succeeds, that one ought to
gain all that should have been gained by the unsuccessful twenty. The
counsellor at law who, perhaps, at near forty years of age, begins to
make something by his profession, ought to receive the retribution, not only
of his own so tedious and expensive education, but of that of more than
twenty others who are never likely to make any thing by it.

How extravagant soever the fees of counsellors at law may sometimes
appear, their real retribution is never equal to this.

Compute in any particular place, what is likely to be annually gained, and what is likely
to be annually spent, by all the different workmen in any common trade, such as that
of shoemakers or weavers, and you will find that the former sum will generally exceed
the latter. But make the same computation with regard to all the counsellors and students
of law, in all the different inns of court, and you will find that their annual gains bear but a
very small proportion to their annual expence, even though you rate the former as high,
and the latter as low, as can well be done. The lottery of the law, therefore, is very far
from being a perfectly fair lottery; and that, as well as many other liberal and honourable
professions, is, in point of pecuniary gain, evidently under-recompenced
.
What Smith is saying is that, all things being equal, the pay matches the circumstances. Many Lawyers train, most don't aren't successful (in his day), those that do are rewarded well. But overall, of all those that study law, there is a net loss of income as a whole. Other jobs are quicker an easier to learn, but the income received is less. In a nutshell, the greater the risk to success, the better the pay.

Six years to command at a lower rate of pay, rather than 15 years as an on better conditions as an SO, which would you choose? I don't think it is any big secret that all the Qantas group entities are losing pilots to mainline.

So arguments about differing rates of pay need to be filtered through the lens of time to promotion as an adjunct to pay. Some will choose quick promotion, for age or the ability to fly as a contractor, others better T&C, but accept a slower career path.

One thing that is assured, if QF could wave a magic want tomorrow, and have all mainline new joiners on JQ T&C at the current extended time for promotion, those on the hold file with any experience would reconsider opportunities elsewhere. They need to offer better T&C to attract, the instant they don't they will struggle to crew aircraft just like everyone else.

I had a group general manager boast to me that he was going to pay 1/3rd less for his NZ Turboprop operation prior to startup. I don't believe they had a single application once they put it to the market. As I said, there are no shortcuts in aviation. Airlines have milked there once off screw-over of the industry, now they are paying the price with a big shortage. Qantas mainline is insulated only while it has better T&C with some semblance of delayed career progression. Remove either of those, things will change.
CurtainTwitcher is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 05:16
  #926 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,399
I had a group general manager boast to me that he was going to pay 1/3rd less for his NZ Turboprop operation prior to startup. I don't believe they had a single application once they put it to the market. As I said, there are no shortcuts in aviation. Airlines have milked there once off screw-over of the industry, now they are paying the price with a big shortage. Qantas mainline is insulated only while it has better T&C with some semblance of delayed career progression. Remove either of those, things will change.
Which is why as yet, the much publicised 'academy' has yet to see the 'Stream Lead' turn the first clod of earth while struggling with a shovel.

Jetstar has a role, for a long time, the economics were ignored, bastardised in favour of IR leverage. As the shortage is patently obvious to the entire industry, economics become more important, after all very quickly grounded aircraft generate no operating revenue.

Qantas need focused capital expenditure, vision and strategy.
With Fort Fumble they get plenty of strategy from IR, which is of declining relevance.
Rated De is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 05:18
  #927 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 93
Six years to command at a lower rate of pay, rather than 15 years on better conditions as an SO, which would you choose? I don't think it is any big secret that all the Qantas group entities are losing pilots to mainline.

Ill take the 6 years to command any day of the week!!

There are 1000 pilots at JQ and I can assure you that most have no desire to go to QF and be 15 year SOs.
ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 05:32
  #928 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 34
There are 1000 pilots at JQ and I can assure you that most have no desire to go to QF and be 15 year SOs
With respect, where did you get that from?
To state that time frame sounds a little desperate.
Chad Gates is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 05:40
  #929 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,399
There are 1000 pilots at JQ and I can assure you that most have no desire to go to QF and be 15 year SOs.
Perhaps the accelerated path given JQ pilots was at the expense of the mainline pilots. As you quite rightly assert, there are entities flying Qantas colours too, beyond those routes gifted to JQ.
Nothing to stop QF management pursuing such a policy with contractors flying JQ aircraft, all in search of lower unit cost.

Of course though, that distracts from the present reality that the Qantas group finds itself.
An incessant internal focus, at war with various groups of staff yet the market continues to move beyond them.
Their fleet metrics are horrible.
Their Capital Expenditure requirements, will, in all likelihood, exceed at least six times what they spent buying their own shares back. Additionally, they still have to pay for the $9.5 billion JQ order. Instead, they focus internally, setting work forces all against each other, hoping to save a penny. Picking up a penny in front of a steam roller is not good long term strategy.
Rated De is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 05:43
  #930 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 571
Originally Posted by ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE View Post
Six years to command at a lower rate of pay, rather than 15 years on better conditions as an SO, which would you choose? I don't think it is any big secret that all the Qantas group entities are losing pilots to mainline.

Ill take the 6 years to command any day of the week!!

There are 1000 pilots at JQ and I can assure you that most have no desire to go to QF and be 15 year SOs.
Yes, I have absolutely no issue with that choice, it is fortunate, that, at least there is a choice. If being an SO for 15 years isn't attractive, the 737 RHS 4 leg days are on offer in every East Coast base at better than JQ pay, yours to be had. Yet mysteriously, even 6 month new joiners are able to get these positions at any base they choose, but don't seem to want to take them in the required numbers. The market decides!

The point I was trying to make, is there is a tradeoff, quick promotion, or better T&C, but you can't have both. In order to attract pilots to take the delayed promotional career risk something else has to be on offer. At the moment, that is exactly what is happening, mainline has sufficient applications of experienced pilots. However, If career prospects disappears, they will just be like everyone else scratching for crew.

CurtainTwitcher is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 05:59
  #931 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 93
Hey Chad, I am aware of the rough numbers who have gone across from JQ to QF in recent years and the number on the hold file for QF currently and I would say that around 5% of the 1000 JQ pilots are going or have gone across. The numbers and just general chat with my colleagues leads me with that conclusion that most don’t have the desire to go across.

The 15 years was stated by an earlier poster (curtain twitcher). I understand that 737 F/O is available to the guys that want to take it substantially earlier than this and with retirements and more aircraft orders on the way this time frame will continue to decrease.

The beautiful thing about the current landscape for QF group pilots at the moment is that if they want to go to mainline, that opportunity is available to them, and if they want to stay at their respective subsidiary for faster upgrade times or whatever their motivation may be, then they can obviously do that as well.

ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 06:32
  #932 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: NDB
Age: 48
Posts: 102
I am aware of the rough numbers who have gone across from JQ to QF in recent years and the number on the hold file for QF currently and I would say that around 5% of the 1000 JQ pilots are going or have gone across.
That's 5% more JQ crew applying to QF than QF crew applying to JQ.

Doesn't that tell you something?
OnceBitten is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 06:36
  #933 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 93
Originally Posted by OnceBitten View Post
That's 5% more JQ crew applying to QF than QF crew applying to JQ.

Doesn't that tell you something?
plenty of MOU captains have resigned from QF and are staying at JQ. And the 95% of pilots who didn’t apply tells a story too.
ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 06:47
  #934 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SYD
Posts: 24
Originally Posted by ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE View Post
I would say that around 5% of the 1000 JQ pilots are going or have gone across.
Think you'd find your 5% is more like 10-15%.
Vindiesel is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 06:57
  #935 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,399
Originally Posted by Vindiesel View Post
Think you'd find your 5% is more like 10-15%.
And the trickle down continues...

What is the probability that the DHC operations in more expensive cities are struggling to attract sufficient 'talent'?

Qantas has made a lot out of tying aircraft to pilot concessions.
Fundamentally, as Curtain Twitcher surprisingly pointed out, 737 jobs are in plentiful supply with limited uptake. One might posit has IR been so successful that the pilots have in fact accepted the lower terms and conditions achieved to be worth the effort?

The fleet problem is symptomatic of the broader malaise: Lack of strategic vision.
Fleet and strategy are hand in glove. Qantas lost the hand picking up pennies in front of the steam roller.


Rated De is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 07:00
  #936 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 93
Originally Posted by Vindiesel View Post
Think you'd find your 5% is more like 10-15%.
Perhaps! I havent gone through the seniority list and counted them. More of an educated estimate.

All I am trying to do is balance the discussion that there are many of us at JQ who have looked at our lifestyle, remuneration and career progression and decided that were happy where we are. Many of my colleagues who have gone across to QF that I have spoken to are happy with their move but have realised that working at QF has its fair share of issues too.


ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 07:07
  #937 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 34
That’s fair enough ECAM. If your lifestyle would be better served from JQ, all the power to you. I was asking where the 15 year figure came from.

Chad Gates is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 07:17
  #938 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Unfortunately not the Orient
Posts: 195
plenty of MOU captains have resigned from QF and are staying at JQ
Im curious of when those decisions were made, and if the same decision would be made today. Other than the the bloke from Qrewroom who stated once, hed like to be able to roll back the clock, are there any others?
SandyPalms is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 07:19
  #939 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 571
Originally Posted by Chad Gates View Post
That’s fair enough ECAM. If your lifestyle would be better served from JQ, all the power to you. I was asking where the 15 year figure came from.







Just to be clear, that is 15 years as an SO to a widebody FO position. Narrowbody FO, 6 months to any base. Of course there are many that choose to do a combination of the 15 years between SO and 737 FO.

They tell me you haven't really lived until you have done 3 or 4 days in a row of 11:00+ hours, consisting of multiple aircraft changes & 4 legs on the East Coast. Once someone takes a 737 slot, they cannot go back to being an SO, so the reality is new joiners who take this option will do 15 years of these days in the RHS.
CurtainTwitcher is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 07:23
  #940 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 571
Originally Posted by SandyPalms View Post


I’m curious of when those decisions were made, and if the same decision would be made today. Other than the the bloke from Qrewroom who stated once, he’d like to be able to roll back the clock, are there any others?
Yep, talked to one on the weekend who probably wished he had not resigned to stay at JQ. He sees the prospect of a widebody command receding for him. He also viewed with trepidation the new software optimiser that is coming that will start to throw aircraft changes into the mix for his days.
CurtainTwitcher is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.