Project Sunrise
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Businesses advertise usually because they need customers. Tino & Co have been giving endless webinars because they also need customers, meaning, they need you to Vote YES so they can bank their “300 million bucks”. Not my words, these were Tino’s words. They say it’s all in the interest of ‘sharing information’ and making ‘informed decisions’. Yeah right, that’s all just BS CRM type words, all designed to fool you. One can see the freight train coming a mile away if you vote YES!
True. But a scope clause will never be approved. We all know that. Is it worth the risk of missing out on the 350 flying? Is it worth the risk in giving them a valid reason to start a new entity. Is it worth the risk of giving them a viable direction to further erode the LH conditions? It's the one question NO ONE has answered. What happens to the future LH EBA negotiations with a viable and successful entity undercutting us at every chance?
I’m really glad you made this point because for me it is precisely why I think the NO vote (if warranted) is worth the risk. As long as we don’t have a job security clause that is iron clad, there is nothing to prevent the company going down that road if it wants too. Personally I think the damage to the brand that this would cause, both internally and externally would be significant and I think they know that.
I would bet you every brick in London that at some stage over the next 3 years, especially given current uncertainty with regards to global travel, if we vote yes now another concession will be required to kick this thing off, be it under threat of .....’well we can only commit to 5 x 350’s now.... all of a sudden the rigid business case miraculously becomes quite flexible.
I just can’t see a YES vote precluding any form of current or future management continuing to threaten us with external entities for the sake of meeting a business case. In fact I believe a YES vote will all but guarantee it.
My opinion only.... of which there are many!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“I just can’t see a YES vote precluding any form of current or future management continuing to threaten us with external entities for the sake of meeting a business case. In fact I believe a YES vote will all but guarantee it.”
I agree with you on that.
However, I certainly don’t believe that a no-vote will stop them from trying it next time around either. I am certain they will try. This is how the game is played and each EBA vote must be accepted or rejected on it’s own merits, within the industrial environment of the time. Are we in a position to fight to the inevitable end? Is the fight (and risk) worth the potential improvement? In other words, is this the hill to die on?
I agree with you on that.
However, I certainly don’t believe that a no-vote will stop them from trying it next time around either. I am certain they will try. This is how the game is played and each EBA vote must be accepted or rejected on it’s own merits, within the industrial environment of the time. Are we in a position to fight to the inevitable end? Is the fight (and risk) worth the potential improvement? In other words, is this the hill to die on?
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tino just said again that the number 1, 2 and 3 preference is to use Qantas pilots but in the same breath, he had the audacity to say again that there will be no second vote. So, if they will not entertain a second vote, how can we honestly believe him when he says it’s their number 1, 2 and 3 preference to use Qantas pilots. It just can’t be true. It’s all just ‘spin’. IMO NS is the hardest to believe or not believe. He is a future chief pilot for sure!
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tino just said he has been counseled in the past to make sure he speaks frankly and honestly. WTF....In other words, he has been telling a few porkies perhaps!? And he just confirmed that ending up with a lot more A350’s all on these new terms is inevitable. They absolutely want to murder current terms and conditions. Vote NO.
While it’s none of my business, have you thought of covering the A350 and sunrise operations by a side letter to the new EBA? Then you and the company could agree to your latest EBA and to study the health effects of sunrise together and agree to negotiate something later.
You could even spell out the issues to be negotiated, the time frame and the parameters.... Words such as “will not be less than ...” come to mind.
That removes the brinkmanship and sets up for good faith bargaining by removing uncertainty fear and doubt.
‘’Then you both may get a win/win.
You could even spell out the issues to be negotiated, the time frame and the parameters.... Words such as “will not be less than ...” come to mind.
That removes the brinkmanship and sets up for good faith bargaining by removing uncertainty fear and doubt.
‘’Then you both may get a win/win.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Austraila
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tino just said he has been counseled in the past to make sure he speaks frankly and honestly. WTF....In other words, he has been telling a few porkies perhaps!? And he just confirmed that ending up with a lot more A350’s all on these new terms is inevitable. They absolutely want to murder current terms and conditions. Vote NO.
irony eh
I’ve been through it, yet I’m the clueless one. Right.
Now, what you just said would actually be illegal.
Replacing current fleet with a new entity, and then making the crew of the old fleet redundant would be a clear case for transfer of business.
Before your time, but when Jetstar was expanding, and QANTAS stagnating, an MOU had to be negotiated to allow QANTAS pilots to take leave without pay to fly for JQ. One of the main reasons for this MOU was to avoid any potential for AIPA taking action on that front. Closer to your time, a comfort letter was provided to the company by AIPA to remove the legal threat to allow the Network A320 operation in PER.
QANTAS knows it’s sailing perilously close to the transfer of business rocks. What you’re seeing in your crystal ball would be so far into the transfer of business abyss they’d be tied up in court for years.
Now, what you just said would actually be illegal.
Replacing current fleet with a new entity, and then making the crew of the old fleet redundant would be a clear case for transfer of business.
Before your time, but when Jetstar was expanding, and QANTAS stagnating, an MOU had to be negotiated to allow QANTAS pilots to take leave without pay to fly for JQ. One of the main reasons for this MOU was to avoid any potential for AIPA taking action on that front. Closer to your time, a comfort letter was provided to the company by AIPA to remove the legal threat to allow the Network A320 operation in PER.
QANTAS knows it’s sailing perilously close to the transfer of business rocks. What you’re seeing in your crystal ball would be so far into the transfer of business abyss they’d be tied up in court for years.
For a start the MOU came into effect August 2004 and the Fair Work Act in July 2009.
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 41
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tino said again that there will not be a second vote.
Secure the flying for your future. Vote YES.
Nunc est bibendum
What, like the $200+ million lockout caused Joyce to go elsewhere? Here we are 9 years later and he’s still here.
Seriously, vote on whether you think the deal is acceptable. Voting on what you hope Qantas will do to execs in response to a ‘no’ vote is just ludicrous.
Seriously, vote on whether you think the deal is acceptable. Voting on what you hope Qantas will do to execs in response to a ‘no’ vote is just ludicrous.
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It might be ludicrous to you, but that’s just your opinion. There are many out there that don’t share your opinion or mine, so yes, no need to get jumpy! It’s going to be a NO vote for sure.
I think you’ve got your head up your arse mate. It will be YES for sure. When push comes to shove watch all the mouths capitulate.
Nunc est bibendum
Fair enough 34R. Hard to tell these days given some of the trash being thrown around.
Ruvap sounds like one of the G20 who were certain the SHEA was getting voted down. I guess we’ll know how this one is going to go in about three weeks.
Ruvap sounds like one of the G20 who were certain the SHEA was getting voted down. I guess we’ll know how this one is going to go in about three weeks.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 41
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You will be severely mistaken.
34R, make sure you don't throw away those 350's!
