Project Sunrise
Morno, pretty obvious from your posts you are another QF pilot hater, how about..I will be in QF 42 years if I make it to 65 (not likely.). In those 42 years, I will make less than a 1/3rd of what Mr Joyce made last year. $495k a week. QF has the most overbloated and highest page Management in Aviation. Point in case: British Airways CEO; 5 times as large, 500k last year (pound), 1.3mil this year. How many f@@king times does one have to say pilot operating costs are 3% of the overall costs?
Sure some of what is claimed is legitimate, and I hope it gets resolved in a sensible manner (duty times on these flights for example, anything less than a 4 pilot crew that consists of at least 2 Captains is ridiculous in my opinion).
Look at the world around you. Times are changing. If you want QF to be at the forefront of aviation then be realistic.
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wellington
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don’t hate QF pilots Street Garbage. I just think a lot of what you all want is unrealistic and unnecessary. Night credits? Are you kidding? If you’re not happy to be doing these Sunrise flights, then change fleets or get another job that doesn’t involve flying at night.
Sure some of what is claimed is legitimate, and I hope it gets resolved in a sensible manner (duty times on these flights for example, anything less than a 4 pilot crew that consists of at least 2 Captains is ridiculous in my opinion).
Look at the world around you. Times are changing. If you want QF to be at the forefront of aviation then be realistic.
Overtime is gone. What else? Proper crew rest? Correct Crewing Complement?
Times are changing....a throw away line, look at the 30% productivity increase on the B787 Contract and the 80% YES vote to answer that.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Considering you can get to pretty much every other major city on earth from JFK and LHR already, I dont see where these new markets are.
So, other than retaining night credits for 3 pilot ops, what is that we want is unrealistic? Happy to TRADE night credits..if the we can get a win somewhere else..this is supposed to be a negotiation, instead of one side of the table saying no, no, no (as in the SH EBA).
Overtime is gone. What else? Proper crew rest? Correct Crewing Complement?
Times are changing....a throw away line, look at the 30% productivity increase on the B787 Contract and the 80% YES vote to answer that.
Overtime is gone. What else? Proper crew rest? Correct Crewing Complement?
Times are changing....a throw away line, look at the 30% productivity increase on the B787 Contract and the 80% YES vote to answer that.
If you want my opinion from an outsider looking in that can also understand the general public’s opinion that you’re all fat cat pilots who only work 3-4 times a month, maybe best to put your salaries on hold and trade some of it for other benefits, such as increased crewing complements, longer layovers to assist with fatigue management or whatever else you feel necessary. You’re arguing this at a time when wage growth and inflation are at near record lows in Australia. It’d be very very easy for the company to make it look bad for you and then you’ve got zero public support and could end up even worse for you.
Back in the 80’s, the trade unions were pushing more and more for increased pay for their workers. There was pushback from the companies obviously, but Bob Hawke could see both sides of the argument and suggested that maybe the workers would be better off trying to get better social benefits instead of increased pay. Guess what, it worked. So have a think about that.
Maybe management might see the lack of a salary increase as a productivity gain if the cost of things like above are minimal cost to them but big gains in lifestyle and fatigue management for you.
Lets face it, fatigue limits these days are targets for most airlines. Anything that gives you extra downtime is going to be a win.
If you want my opinion from an outsider looking in that can also understand the general public’s opinion that you’re all fat cat pilots who only work 3-4 times a month, maybe best to put your salaries on hold and trade some of it for other benefits, such as increased crewing complements, longer layovers to assist with fatigue management or whatever else you feel necessary.
In rough terms, something like 8 of the 12 pilots (anecdotal, I may be wrong and people 'lie' to protect privacy) on Qantas initial cadet course ALL suffered various forms of rare but severe dementia and were dead around 65. These were the first guys flying long haul (707 Long Haul). Three years after very well respected head of training Captain I.T retired my crew saw him in the terminal in WSSS. He was going to LHR (daughters wedding??) and staff travel being what it was (forget now) he was trying to work out what flights to catch. His wife had written out a list of flights and their departure times and he was told to cross them off as the time passed so he would know what flight to try for next. He was terribly distressed because he crossed the flight numbers off from the bottom of the list first so it didn't make sense anymore. It was desperately sad to watch.
Another one worth a read up on is Qantas Captain Graeme Wylie. Very similar but with tragic results. This is what happens when you spend 20++ years of your life flying long (and longer) haul.
Crews do NOT make these stories up. It's serious and real.
And that is EXACTLY what has happened over the last 30 years. Qf pilots would be at least 70% more efficient than they were 20 years ago - though I cannot believe this was given away, the 787 is 30% for start. It is impossible to explain to someone who doesn't fly long haul regularly (as crew) just how tiring it is. Two years is fun, easy stuff. 5 years you get the picture. 10 years you will be suffering major sleep problems and 20 years+ your health is simply suffering.
In rough terms, something like 8 of the 12 pilots (anecdotal, I may be wrong and people 'lie' to protect privacy) on Qantas initial cadet course ALL suffered various forms of rare but severe dementia and were dead around 65. These were the first guys flying long haul (707 Long Haul). Three years after very well respected head of training Captain I.T retired my crew saw him in the terminal in WSSS. He was going to LHR (daughters wedding??) and staff travel being what it was (forget now) he was trying to work out what flights to catch. His wife had written out a list of flights and their departure times and he was told to cross them off as the time passed so he would know what flight to try for next. He was terribly distressed because he crossed the flight numbers off from the bottom of the list first so it didn't make sense anymore. It was desperately sad to watch.
Another one worth a read up on is Qantas Captain Graeme Wylie. Very similar but with tragic results. This is what happens when you spend 20++ years of your life flying long (and longer) haul.
Crews do NOT make these stories up. It's serious and real.
In rough terms, something like 8 of the 12 pilots (anecdotal, I may be wrong and people 'lie' to protect privacy) on Qantas initial cadet course ALL suffered various forms of rare but severe dementia and were dead around 65. These were the first guys flying long haul (707 Long Haul). Three years after very well respected head of training Captain I.T retired my crew saw him in the terminal in WSSS. He was going to LHR (daughters wedding??) and staff travel being what it was (forget now) he was trying to work out what flights to catch. His wife had written out a list of flights and their departure times and he was told to cross them off as the time passed so he would know what flight to try for next. He was terribly distressed because he crossed the flight numbers off from the bottom of the list first so it didn't make sense anymore. It was desperately sad to watch.
Another one worth a read up on is Qantas Captain Graeme Wylie. Very similar but with tragic results. This is what happens when you spend 20++ years of your life flying long (and longer) haul.
Crews do NOT make these stories up. It's serious and real.
I do short haul flying at the rate of around 90+hrs most months. Do you think there’s no health effects from that either? So what makes you so much different that you’re worth more than me?
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is accepted in some jurisdictions that there are negative impacts on crew health (both pilot and cabin)
In these jurisdictions there is no requirement to PROVE causal link between disease (be it some forms of tissue and blood illness) and the employment; it is accepted.
Companies in these jurisdictions compensate for illness and indeed recognise the impact of circadian rhythm disturbance. Shift workers including pilots have worse health outcomes.
Mix in jet lag and the results are likely worse..
Ever wonder why Little Napoleon wants "science" on proving flights (with a sample size n=3) ??
If pilots and cabin crew ever worked together collectively QF and other airlines would be very exposed to litigation...
In these jurisdictions there is no requirement to PROVE causal link between disease (be it some forms of tissue and blood illness) and the employment; it is accepted.
Companies in these jurisdictions compensate for illness and indeed recognise the impact of circadian rhythm disturbance. Shift workers including pilots have worse health outcomes.
Mix in jet lag and the results are likely worse..
Ever wonder why Little Napoleon wants "science" on proving flights (with a sample size n=3) ??
If pilots and cabin crew ever worked together collectively QF and other airlines would be very exposed to litigation...
Now this is just getting silly or is the word interesting? Divide and conquer?
No one is forcing you to be a pilot it is choice, likewise no one is forcing you to fly long haul if you think it’s detrimental to your health. Rosters have definitely changed for maximum flight and duty time, FRMS is a crock of ****e in my opinion. It is is as pilots that has let this happen.
You have a powerful union use it or accept what is voted in or leave.....
There is no doubt that back of the clock work be it flying, mining or stacking shelves is detrimental to your health, hmmm but we do it anyway.
If I was a QF pirate and senior enough I’d be voting for project Tequila Sunrise and pushing to do that flying only. Repeat how many times a block would you work?
No one is forcing you to be a pilot it is choice, likewise no one is forcing you to fly long haul if you think it’s detrimental to your health. Rosters have definitely changed for maximum flight and duty time, FRMS is a crock of ****e in my opinion. It is is as pilots that has let this happen.
You have a powerful union use it or accept what is voted in or leave.....
There is no doubt that back of the clock work be it flying, mining or stacking shelves is detrimental to your health, hmmm but we do it anyway.
If I was a QF pirate and senior enough I’d be voting for project Tequila Sunrise and pushing to do that flying only. Repeat how many times a block would you work?
Morno. There are two separate issues here.
The first is producing appropriate rosters to minimise the fatigue associated with any duty, in this case, particularly long tours.
The second is receiving appropriate monetary/lifestyle compensation for such duties.
In the case of the first, it needs to be the regulator and employer (with some input from the pilot body) that determine what are appropriate and acceptable patterns of duty for this type of flying; hence we have CAO's and FRMS manuals and rule sets. This includes crew complement, rest time both on and off the aircraft, nutrition, satisfactory crew rests and so on. This aspect of the flying should never be driven industrially and as such it is not up to the pilots to "maybe best to put your salaries on hold and trade some of it for other benefits, such as increased crewing complements, longer layovers to assist with fatigue management" Fatigue management is not an industrial issue, it's a regulatory issue.
What is an industrial issue is negotiating recompense for any aspect of commercial flying. In the distant past AIPA negotiated night credits - possibly in lieu of other salary compensation. I don't know I wasn't employed back then. In the last EBA this was partially traded, some may say given, away to fly the 787. Arguably that's what you do in a negotiation. Whether one person thinks night credits are relevant or right doesn't matter. They'd been negotiated and were then traded to achieve another goal.
I have a particular interest in Fatigue Management among pilots and what I won't condone is the relieving of the regulator and the airlines of their duty, in order to achieve an industrial gain.
The first is producing appropriate rosters to minimise the fatigue associated with any duty, in this case, particularly long tours.
The second is receiving appropriate monetary/lifestyle compensation for such duties.
In the case of the first, it needs to be the regulator and employer (with some input from the pilot body) that determine what are appropriate and acceptable patterns of duty for this type of flying; hence we have CAO's and FRMS manuals and rule sets. This includes crew complement, rest time both on and off the aircraft, nutrition, satisfactory crew rests and so on. This aspect of the flying should never be driven industrially and as such it is not up to the pilots to "maybe best to put your salaries on hold and trade some of it for other benefits, such as increased crewing complements, longer layovers to assist with fatigue management" Fatigue management is not an industrial issue, it's a regulatory issue.
What is an industrial issue is negotiating recompense for any aspect of commercial flying. In the distant past AIPA negotiated night credits - possibly in lieu of other salary compensation. I don't know I wasn't employed back then. In the last EBA this was partially traded, some may say given, away to fly the 787. Arguably that's what you do in a negotiation. Whether one person thinks night credits are relevant or right doesn't matter. They'd been negotiated and were then traded to achieve another goal.
I have a particular interest in Fatigue Management among pilots and what I won't condone is the relieving of the regulator and the airlines of their duty, in order to achieve an industrial gain.
Last edited by C441; 8th Oct 2019 at 06:29.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I gave away a flying career after going deep on the scientific literature and discovering the life shortening exposures flying personnel are subject to. The realities are that as pilots, you will likely live a shorter life, age more rapidly, and suffer an increase risk to disease and illness, much earlier in your life. DNA damage; telomere shortening; high levels of brain beta-amyloid… The list goes on.
Last edited by ruprecht; 8th Oct 2019 at 08:57.
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wellington
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now this is just getting silly or is the word interesting? Divide and conquer?
No one is forcing you to be a pilot it is choice, likewise no one is forcing you to fly long haul if you think it’s detrimental to your health. Rosters have definitely changed for maximum flight and duty time, FRMS is a crock of ****e in my opinion. It is is as pilots that has let this happen.
You have a powerful union use it or accept what is voted in or leave.....
There is no doubt that back of the clock work be it flying, mining or stacking shelves is detrimental to your health, hmmm but we do it anyway.
If I was a QF pirate and senior enough I’d be voting for project Tequila Sunrise and pushing to do that flying only. Repeat how many times a block would you work?
No one is forcing you to be a pilot it is choice, likewise no one is forcing you to fly long haul if you think it’s detrimental to your health. Rosters have definitely changed for maximum flight and duty time, FRMS is a crock of ****e in my opinion. It is is as pilots that has let this happen.
You have a powerful union use it or accept what is voted in or leave.....
There is no doubt that back of the clock work be it flying, mining or stacking shelves is detrimental to your health, hmmm but we do it anyway.
If I was a QF pirate and senior enough I’d be voting for project Tequila Sunrise and pushing to do that flying only. Repeat how many times a block would you work?
Morno, I've been back in SH 3 years after 12 years in LH. 90hrs a month is a different tired to LH tired, where you didn't realise how tired you were until on 4 weeks annual leave. Both suck. Both have long term health implications. LH is worse because of jet lag/ broken sleep.
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I gave away a flying career after going deep on the scientific literature and discovering the life shortening exposures flying personnel are subject to. The realities are that as pilots, you will likely live a shorter life, age more rapidly, and suffer an increase risk to disease and illness, much earlier in your life. DNA damage; telomere shortening; high levels of brain beta-amyloid… The list goes on.
You have a powerful union use it or accept what is voted in or leave..... There is no doubt that back of the clock work be it flying, mining or stacking shelves is detrimental to your health, hmmm but we do it anyway.
Three "proving" flights, crewed by selected pilots, with passengers like former AIPA President now IR negotiator, Mr Safe and excluding the FAAA is hardly scientific. Statistically, it is worthless. It provides nothing other than spin and perhaps some column inches in otherwise struggling daily rags. Given that they are actually delivery flights show how little "investment" the company has made in the "science"
- A sample size of three is not sufficient for anything statistically relevant.
- A passenger load of 40 is not representative, considering the likes of Stream Lead Safe
- No long term repeat observations
It actually relates to workplace safety.
It is not hard to imagine what QF pilot's forebears were attempting to circumvent when "Night Credits" were devised; Protecting the crew that came after them from a management which regards regulatory limits as targets. When those limits no longer suit the management, they get new ones, with a duplicitous regulator and union hierarchy towing the line.
Giving up protections to one's health can never be adequately compensated with money, just ask the late Mr Packer or Steve Jobs.
Well that’s up to you. Whether you want to live longer with still very comfortable pay or die earlier but with more money in your pocket, only you can decide where the priority lies.
Morno. There are two separate issues here.
The first is producing appropriate rosters to minimise the fatigue associated with any duty, in this case, particularly long tours.
The second is receiving appropriate monetary/lifestyle compensation for such duties.
In the case of the first, it needs to be the regulator and employer (with some input from the pilot body) that determine what are appropriate and acceptable patterns of duty for this type of flying; hence we have CAO's and FRMS manuals and rule sets. This includes crew complement, rest time both on and off the aircraft, nutrition, satisfactory crew rests and so on. This aspect of the flying should never be driven industrially and as such it is not up to the pilots to "maybe best to put your salaries on hold and trade some of it for other benefits, such as increased crewing complements, longer layovers to assist with fatigue management" Fatigue management is not an industrial issue, it's a regulatory issue.
What is an industrial issue is negotiating recompense for any aspect of commercial flying. In the distant past AIPA negotiated night credits - possibly in lieu of other salary compensation. I don't know I wasn't employed back then. In the last EBA this was partially traded, some may say given, away to fly the 787. Arguably that's what you do in a negotiation. Whether one person thinks night credits are relevant or right doesn't matter. They'd been negotiated and were then traded to achieve another goal.
I have a particular interest in Fatigue Management among pilots and what I won't condone is the relieving of the regulator and the airlines of their duty, in order to achieve an industrial gain.
The first is producing appropriate rosters to minimise the fatigue associated with any duty, in this case, particularly long tours.
The second is receiving appropriate monetary/lifestyle compensation for such duties.
In the case of the first, it needs to be the regulator and employer (with some input from the pilot body) that determine what are appropriate and acceptable patterns of duty for this type of flying; hence we have CAO's and FRMS manuals and rule sets. This includes crew complement, rest time both on and off the aircraft, nutrition, satisfactory crew rests and so on. This aspect of the flying should never be driven industrially and as such it is not up to the pilots to "maybe best to put your salaries on hold and trade some of it for other benefits, such as increased crewing complements, longer layovers to assist with fatigue management" Fatigue management is not an industrial issue, it's a regulatory issue.
What is an industrial issue is negotiating recompense for any aspect of commercial flying. In the distant past AIPA negotiated night credits - possibly in lieu of other salary compensation. I don't know I wasn't employed back then. In the last EBA this was partially traded, some may say given, away to fly the 787. Arguably that's what you do in a negotiation. Whether one person thinks night credits are relevant or right doesn't matter. They'd been negotiated and were then traded to achieve another goal.
I have a particular interest in Fatigue Management among pilots and what I won't condone is the relieving of the regulator and the airlines of their duty, in order to achieve an industrial gain.
In a past company, we had the CAO’s, but we also had more stringent company requirements again, which were better than the CAO’s. This is what you need to be targeting. And you full well know that the company is going to be pushing for the CASA fatigue management to be the target.
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: HKG
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It might be a small order but I think Boeing very much cares about scoring this one with QF even if it has little financial gain. What it will be is big PR. Qantas has traditionally been a strong Boeing supporter and right now Boeing needs SUPPORTERS. Airbus on the other hand might have a little less care factor since they have literally had most of the market handed to them through an unfortunate run of events.
Back in 1951, my father's log book shows this for a Qantas Constellation:
July 14, Sy-DN 7hrs 50 night
15 DN- POB (still haven't worked out where that one is) 6hr 15
POB-Singapore 2hr 20
16 Sing-Calcutta 7hr
Calcutta - Karachi 5hr 05 day, 2 hr night
17 Karachi - Cairo 8hr 45
18 Cairo-Rome 6hr
Rome- Heefro 4hr 20
Time off till the 24th, then drone back home again.
Away for 16 days and 62 hr day flight and 24 night, Rinse and repeat next month.
July 14, Sy-DN 7hrs 50 night
15 DN- POB (still haven't worked out where that one is) 6hr 15
POB-Singapore 2hr 20
16 Sing-Calcutta 7hr
Calcutta - Karachi 5hr 05 day, 2 hr night
17 Karachi - Cairo 8hr 45
18 Cairo-Rome 6hr
Rome- Heefro 4hr 20
Time off till the 24th, then drone back home again.
Away for 16 days and 62 hr day flight and 24 night, Rinse and repeat next month.
And that is EXACTLY what has happened over the last 30 years. Qf pilots would be at least 70% more efficient than they were 20 years ago - though I cannot believe this was given away, the 787 is 30% for start. It is impossible to explain to someone who doesn't fly long haul regularly (as crew) just how tiring it is. Two years is fun, easy stuff. 5 years you get the picture. 10 years you will be suffering major sleep problems and 20 years+ your health is simply suffering.
In rough terms, something like 8 of the 12 pilots (anecdotal, I may be wrong and people 'lie' to protect privacy) on Qantas initial cadet course ALL suffered various forms of rare but severe dementia and were dead around 65. These were the first guys flying long haul (707 Long Haul). Three years after very well respected head of training Captain I.T retired my crew saw him in the terminal in WSSS. He was going to LHR (daughters wedding??) and staff travel being what it was (forget now) he was trying to work out what flights to catch. His wife had written out a list of flights and their departure times and he was told to cross them off as the time passed so he would know what flight to try for next. He was terribly distressed because he crossed the flight numbers off from the bottom of the list first so it didn't make sense anymore. It was desperately sad to watch.
Another one worth a read up on is Qantas Captain Graeme Wylie. Very similar but with tragic results. This is what happens when you spend 20++ years of your life flying long (and longer) haul.
Crews do NOT make these stories up. It's serious and real.
In rough terms, something like 8 of the 12 pilots (anecdotal, I may be wrong and people 'lie' to protect privacy) on Qantas initial cadet course ALL suffered various forms of rare but severe dementia and were dead around 65. These were the first guys flying long haul (707 Long Haul). Three years after very well respected head of training Captain I.T retired my crew saw him in the terminal in WSSS. He was going to LHR (daughters wedding??) and staff travel being what it was (forget now) he was trying to work out what flights to catch. His wife had written out a list of flights and their departure times and he was told to cross them off as the time passed so he would know what flight to try for next. He was terribly distressed because he crossed the flight numbers off from the bottom of the list first so it didn't make sense anymore. It was desperately sad to watch.
Another one worth a read up on is Qantas Captain Graeme Wylie. Very similar but with tragic results. This is what happens when you spend 20++ years of your life flying long (and longer) haul.
Crews do NOT make these stories up. It's serious and real.
IT and GW certainly had their problems but they were the only ones.
To base your case on that is absolute bullsh* t.
There is a memorial service tomorrow for long retired captain DO who died of old age at 94.
What is your evidence that the QF pilot population is any different to the community.
Divorces maybe, bad investments yes, premature death bullsh*t.
Last edited by JamieMaree; 8th Oct 2019 at 09:08.
You really an Qantas Angel, aren't you? You obviously haven't done any back of the clock flying and seen the long term health affects have you? How many of your mates have been taken away early? How many weekends have you worked lately? Comparing stacking shelves to flying- or mining-you really don't get it, do you?
Morno, I've been back in SH 3 years after 12 years in LH. 90hrs a month is a different tired to LH tired, where you didn't realise how tired you were until on 4 weeks annual leave. Both suck. Both have long term health implications. LH is worse because of jet lag/ broken sleep.
Morno, I've been back in SH 3 years after 12 years in LH. 90hrs a month is a different tired to LH tired, where you didn't realise how tired you were until on 4 weeks annual leave. Both suck. Both have long term health implications. LH is worse because of jet lag/ broken sleep.
No QF Angel, just a realist. Your delusional if you are not prepared to at least consider other back of the clock industries. I’m merely pointing out that sky gods are not the only ones suffering.
I have said many times I have not done airline LH and it doesn’t really float my boat. I have done ****e roster flying with double back of the clocks, earlies to lates to earlies to ****es. Agree it sucks but it is the industry WE chose.
The biggest problem is that flight and duty or FRMS now pushes limits that in the past would not have been dreamt of operating.
So what you have is the negotiating skills of your union, if that doesn’t work then? Find another job? I still ascertain if like the SQ days of old all you did was the ULH sectors it would be a pretty cruisey life. How many days would you work in a block? Try and convince Joe Public you work hard!!!
Everything in life changes, you just have to change with the times and get with it to make it work for you.
Oh and yes I have lost several friends along the way, industry related?