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

Project Sunrise

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 27th Feb 2020, 09:54
  #1301 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 449
Received 39 Likes on 14 Posts
I guess this boils down to whether or not you believe the threat.

I’m guessing Normanton, Kiwi and co. were external hires and haven’t dealt with a QF Group EBA process before. I could be wrong but that’s the impression I’m getting. It’s understandable to be spooked by the stance the company have taken if you’ve never done the dance before and it’s obviously your right to vote whatever way you want.

I’m also a newer mainline addition and ultimately will wait to see the offer, but at this stage I will be voting no if they’re not willing to budge on anything. I think some are underestimating how difficult it would be to set up a new operation for the flying they want to do and they would rather avoid it if possible. Yes they’ve said they will only be having one vote and then outsourcing, but these people will do whatever they want so long as it’s in their interest. What happens if it’s hypothetically a 49% yes vote? You think they’ll just move on? I don’t. Also imagine the utter s**t show the eba negotiations would turn into if the 350 was outsourced. It would potentially ruin Allan’s 100 year party.

Some people are also of the opinion that the company want us to vote no just so they can go ahead and outsource the flying. Rubbish. If they wanted to outsource any new flying they would have done so from the get go.

Don’t forget how much money the company has made since the last EBA, and the exorbitant bonuses being paid to management. Just two weeks ago Delta paid all of its staff about two months worth of salary as a bonus.


Bastian was initially worried about paying out such large bonuses. He feared that Wall Street and investors would prefer paying his employees less money and use the funds for other revenue-generating opportunities. The chief executive said, "For years, I would get beaten up by Wall Street. They thought the profits were theirs, and ‘Why are you giving the profits away to the employees?’” Bastian added, "Wall Street has actually come full circle, and they realize that Delta is the most awarded airline in the world because of its employees." For the third year in a row, Delta has been anointed the No. 1-ranked U.S. airline by the Wall Street Journal.

It is a wise business decision for the company to invest in its employees. When people are paid well, respected and appreciated, they tend to work harder and produce better results. They’re happier and it shows in their work and in their interactions with customers. The extra bonus compensation instills employee loyalty and will help retain employees in a tight job market. It will also make Delta more competitive in attracting top talent to join the company.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkel.../#4c52338c1f72

Last edited by Fonz121; 27th Feb 2020 at 10:03. Reason: Link added
Fonz121 is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2020, 16:09
  #1302 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kichin
Posts: 1,054
Received 709 Likes on 193 Posts
Originally Posted by Asturias56
I'd guess they (and any other airline) will offshore when it makes economic sense - the business changes constantly and, as an earlier poster said, legacy conditions are on the way out - and I'd add "worldwide".
Yet legacy (and then some) conditions are most definitely in for those in the ruling class. I don’t buy it, if it makes economic sense to offshore international after an EBA that doesn’t even keep up with the rise in the cost of living, it will be making sense already. The decision has been made and now they’re seeing if they can spook us into doing it for less...and it seems to be working.

Last edited by gordonfvckingramsay; 27th Feb 2020 at 17:06.
gordonfvckingramsay is online now  
Old 27th Feb 2020, 18:36
  #1303 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: GC Paradise
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by gordonfvckingramsay
The decision has been made and now they’re seeing if they can spook us into doing it for less...and it seems to be working.
Spot on that man!





FlexibleResponse is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2020, 19:17
  #1304 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Fonz121
I guess this boils down to whether or not you believe the threat.

I’m guessing Normanton, Kiwi and co. were external hires and haven’t dealt with a QF Group EBA process before.
Ah....no....I’ve been in mainline for the last 17 years. We all wore red ties and made PAs a decade ago to “secure our flying”......isn’t that what we are trying to achieve here? I’ve been through a RIN and subsequent demotion.

Secure the flying.....isn’t that really the big picture? What’s the point of legacy conditions if there is no expansion? Where have we seen that before?

It’s pretty simple. I don’t believe the company are bluffing. I don’t think this is an idle threat. I think AJ and Tino’s ambition and ego are at play here and AJ has form. This is a bold move on their part and it is unprecedented. But that is what makes it even more likely that they intend to follow through with their threat.. Maybe I’m wrong but quite simply I’m not prepared to take the risk. Vote NO and the flying gets done by a new company....on T&C that are less favourable than the companies existing offer. All recruitment in mainline will slow or stop and all expansion, recruitment and promotion will be with the new entity. Call me selfish if you want, that does not bother me in the slightest but I will be thinking for myself, looking after myself and my family and voting against giving the company an excuse to do that.

If AIPA have info that they believe show the company are bluffing or are legally restricted from following through on their threat (even though the precedent has been set many times) then they need to start educating the pilot group once negotiations are over ASAP.

Last edited by PPRuNeUser0184; 27th Feb 2020 at 19:42.
PPRuNeUser0184 is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2020, 20:27
  #1305 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Okinawa
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
KZ Kiwi said : Vote NO and the flying gets done by a new company....


I don’t see any guarantees that voting YES will secure the flying... just motherhood statements. Will you still vote yes if the agreement does NOT include assurances of future flying? Or will you just take it on good faith?
HabuHunter is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2020, 20:34
  #1306 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 41
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If you think this is my first EBA renewal within the group, you are severely mistaken.

AJ stands in front of the media and says "our 1st, 2nd, and 3rd choice is to do a deal with out pilots".

TS blurts out his politician speech on the webinars and says "our 1st, 2nd, and 3rd choice is to do a deal with out pilots".

And you ACTUALLY believe there will be a 2nd and 3rd choice?

This is nothing more than a pre-rehearsed speech to make you think there is a 2nd, and 3rd deal on the table. IT DOESN'T EXIST. You are dancing with the devil. They want you to vote NO. They want to setup a cheap entity to hire cheap pilots. They want to destroy the mainline conditions. The conditions will take a hit either way, but there will be better conditions if the new pilots are hired under mainline! They want another LH entity doing LH flying, wedging itself right under the mainline conditions. Then when they actually start the new entity, and the legal battles ensure, the company's lawyers can stand up in court and say WE TRIED TO DO A DEAL WITH OUR PILOTS. They voted down the offer, so we went elsewhere.

normanton is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2020, 20:35
  #1307 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,627
Received 601 Likes on 171 Posts
Wait until you see the companies final offer that goes to committee today, it’s so bad I’m told that even the bulk of the yes votes will now vote no. It will be put to the pilots next week.
dragon man is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2020, 20:35
  #1308 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Given the choice of a EBA with A350 rates and ULH T&C vs a EBA with no A350 rates and conditions then it’s pretty obvious which way I’ll vote.
PPRuNeUser0184 is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2020, 20:41
  #1309 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by HabuHunter
KZ Kiwi said : Vote NO and the flying gets done by a new company....


I don’t see any guarantees that voting YES will secure the flying... just motherhood statements. Will you still vote yes if the agreement does NOT include assurances of future flying? Or will you just take it on good faith?
If you mean a scope clause then that will never happen... we all know that.
An EBA with A350 T&C has to be better than an EBA without.

Anyway enough is enough. I’ll just wait for the vote, hope that my colleagues think for themselves and read and apply the proposed deal, whichever is presented, according to their own situation and hope that a future is voted up.



PPRuNeUser0184 is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2020, 20:44
  #1310 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,627
Received 601 Likes on 171 Posts
The hourly rate is less than the 787.
dragon man is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2020, 20:50
  #1311 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by dragon man
The hourly rate is less than the 787.
So what’s your point? That means nothing without reading the rest of the deal.

On the current EBA A380 Captain rates are less than Captain B787 rates . Does that make the A380 deal bad?
PPRuNeUser0184 is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2020, 21:22
  #1312 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 41
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by dragon man
The hourly rate is less than the 787.
Oh please, that means absolutely nothing.

Again, a scaremongering comment made completely out of context.

If you are clearly for the NO vote, give us a detailed explanation as to WHY. I've asked for it multiple times, and yet you just ignore the question.
normanton is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2020, 21:41
  #1313 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 642
Received 19 Likes on 5 Posts
I wonder how many of the new hire SOs are going to join AIPA.
ruprecht is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2020, 21:54
  #1314 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 619
Received 157 Likes on 50 Posts
If you are clearly for the NO vote, give us a detailed explanation as to WHY. I've asked for it multiple times, and yet you just ignore the question.
Well you won’t listen to me or the numerous other posters so why don’t you listen to this wise chap...
Originally Posted by normanton
At the end of the day I'm not voting for a SO B scale.
It looks like we’ve got to the end of the day, how are you voting??
Beer Baron is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2020, 22:00
  #1315 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 41
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Beer Baron
It looks like we’ve got to the end of the day, how are you voting??
Unfortunately since then the seperate entity became a very valid threat. Allowing the company to do that will result in even worse conditions for the new hire SO’s. Can you not see that?

As I have said since then, the company has the upper hand here.
normanton is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2020, 22:01
  #1316 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Earth
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
Hey guys/girls.
I have been following this thread with interest. Not a Qf pilot.

One of the take away I get is regardless of where you work. The company is about maximising profits and screwing you.
CASA just signed off your FMRS without consultation with the union bodies. They want to set up different pay scales and screw the pilots coming up through the system. The only positive I can say about that is how did that work out for Cathay? There is already a pilot shortage, in 10yrs time with cost and time involved in being a pilot. Why bother. Far more lifestyle and lucrative jobs out there without the BS pilots put up with. Hopefully airline companies get their own back with the continuous eroding of conditions.

My only worry for you is that currently the performance of your direct competition isn’t exactly flash hot. Talk of redundancies for mainly 320/330 pilots. Cathay Dragon is about to most likely make redundancies in a few months. Suddenly even with a “pilot shortage” in the next year there is about to be a bunch of pilots out looking for work and the Corona virus has given Qantas the perfect storm of events to create a new entity with pilots who have plenty of bus time. But setting up said new entity sure is easier said than done. It’s not just pilots you require, think of all the support staff you need to safely get a plane from A-B.
I wish you all well in the coming months. If I was there it would be a No from me.
I would be thinking of the future pilots coming through. And the legacy you want to leave behind.
Good luck either way and safe flying
anonfly is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2020, 22:13
  #1317 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Australia
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As a colleague once said to me in response to my reasoning for a no vote, "who cares about some person who I don't know who hasn't even joined the company yet? I care about me and the current employees who have done the time here". I am not a pilot, but I can't help wonder if some QF pilots hold that same reasoning.
f1yhigh is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2020, 22:25
  #1318 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,627
Received 601 Likes on 171 Posts
Originally Posted by normanton
Oh please, that means absolutely nothing.

Again, a scaremongering comment made completely out of context.

If you are clearly for the NO vote, give us a detailed explanation as to WHY. I've asked for it multiple times, and yet you just ignore the question.
I won’t bother any more, IMO you have made your mind up and best of luck to you. The rate is less than the 787 with .5 overtime over 12 hours and 1/3 extra credits for stick hours over 18. 23 hour TOD plus some other stuff that effects SOs.
dragon man is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2020, 22:43
  #1319 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 2,300
Received 357 Likes on 196 Posts
Unfortunately timing is everything. It looks as if the reaction to the Coronavirus has changed markedly in the last 24 hours. Biggest one day drop in the Dow Jones in history yesterday. Airlines world wide laying off staff and freezing hiring. Government implements pandemic measures. Domestic competitor weakened. Future not too rosy at home too with cancellation of flights upcoming. Outlook for the next 6 months at least looks bleak.

Yeah the timing sucks but rejecting a proposal within the next month which has been given the go ahead from CASA on the fatigue side and on the money they’re offering isn’t going to gain any sympathy.



dr dre is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2020, 22:44
  #1320 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 41
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by dragon man
I won’t bother any more, IMO you have made your mind up and best of luck to you. The rate is less than the 787 with .5 overtime over 12 hours and 1/3 extra credits for stick hours over 18. 23 hour TOD plus some other stuff that effects SOs.
Well I actually haven’t.

But so far the reasons I have heard for a NO vote are:

1) Wait for the 2nd and 3rd offers.
2) The company won’t make a seperate entity, they are bluffing.
3) The 350s won’t come even with a YES vote.
4) Stick it to the company.
5) Anything not endorsed by AIPA is a NO vote.

Pretty appalling reasons really. Especially considering our profession successfully resolves around solid decision making skills. GRADE anyone?
normanton is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.