Project Sunrise
So by all means make your point about 53 787s.
Those promises and predictions have never come true in my experience.
People will make up their own minds when it comes to the package as a whole but to hold up predictions of 400 new jobs and 1000 promotions as a reason to vote yes as Normanton has done is naive, foolish and fanciful, as has been shown repeatedly.
The best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 41
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jet_pilot00 your entire post is just laughable. It will be the last time I respond to you. Your posts lack substance. You provide incorrect information. You make scaremongering comments, drop ridiculous theories, and your head is clouded about how this actually plays out.
I joined mainline during a RIN. And I must say, the 747 pilots are quite happy on the 787. The 787 contract has been widely accepted. The Sunrise contract is a pay increase (for more flying) over the 787. It is a pay increase over the 330 (for more flying). If you don't want to do it, don't bid for it! It cannot be any easier than that.
The major impact on the union here is a YES vote when they recommend a NO vote.
If they were smart and could see a YES vote coming, they will recommend a YES vote to ensure they have a future. That's exactly why they sent out a survey asking for your vote in advance.
I joined mainline during a RIN. And I must say, the 747 pilots are quite happy on the 787. The 787 contract has been widely accepted. The Sunrise contract is a pay increase (for more flying) over the 787. It is a pay increase over the 330 (for more flying). If you don't want to do it, don't bid for it! It cannot be any easier than that.
If they were smart and could see a YES vote coming, they will recommend a YES vote to ensure they have a future. That's exactly why they sent out a survey asking for your vote in advance.
That’s funny the 747 pilots I know on the 787 loathe it.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 41
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I said it's been widely accepted. That doesn't indicate they ALL love it. There is a few chronic whingers who just can't let it go. You can find them daily whinging with conspiracy theories and providing legal advice on qrewroom.
And remember, EBA 9 was widely accepted by the majority during the vote.
And remember, EBA 9 was widely accepted by the majority during the vote.
If they loathe it then feel free to quit and let any pilot who’s just been made redundant or told their contract no longer exists take it. I’m sure in the current environment they’ll find something much, much better in no time......
Plus I believe only a very small percentage of 78 pilots came from the 74, almost everyone else there who came from a different fleet loves it I’m told.
Plus I believe only a very small percentage of 78 pilots came from the 74, almost everyone else there who came from a different fleet loves it I’m told.
Last edited by dr dre; 4th Mar 2020 at 11:30.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 74
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The feedback I’m getting from mates still flying is thus :
There is a large ground swell of potential NO voters out there primarily as a result of how the company has handled ramming this negotiation down everyone’s throats and Judas Iscariot , lead Company negotiators betrayal .
The most common feed back is “ I would love to vote NO ,BUT , I am intimidated and scared for my future by the outsourcing threat made by Tino ! “
It appears if AIPA or someone could post a credible legal opinion as to the ability or not for Qantas to outsource pilots on the A350 , this information alone , I believe would change the vote for this EBA from YES to NO !
No legal interpretation dispelling the ability for Qantas to outsource through a pilot labour company = a YES vote as long as my arse points to the ground !
However if elements of AIPA’s fifth columnist executive could be “motivated” to get an eminent legal mind to espouse a decision that the threat of outsourcing is just that , I believe from the feed back I have received , a NO vote would prevail if this information was forth coming and compelling enough !
There is a large ground swell of potential NO voters out there primarily as a result of how the company has handled ramming this negotiation down everyone’s throats and Judas Iscariot , lead Company negotiators betrayal .
The most common feed back is “ I would love to vote NO ,BUT , I am intimidated and scared for my future by the outsourcing threat made by Tino ! “
It appears if AIPA or someone could post a credible legal opinion as to the ability or not for Qantas to outsource pilots on the A350 , this information alone , I believe would change the vote for this EBA from YES to NO !
No legal interpretation dispelling the ability for Qantas to outsource through a pilot labour company = a YES vote as long as my arse points to the ground !
However if elements of AIPA’s fifth columnist executive could be “motivated” to get an eminent legal mind to espouse a decision that the threat of outsourcing is just that , I believe from the feed back I have received , a NO vote would prevail if this information was forth coming and compelling enough !
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Sydney
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Sydney
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Birdie,
That is complete management/ AIPA exec bull**** . Not more money on most routes , not same number of seats, not new flying - same city pairs. Explain how drafting with the company is deliberate attempt to white ant any fair work case in the future. Safe 2.0 is setting up a no win for LH pilots. The AIPA executive are being obstructionist, if they have nothing to hide why haven’t the calls for an SGM been heeded.
That is complete management/ AIPA exec bull**** . Not more money on most routes , not same number of seats, not new flying - same city pairs. Explain how drafting with the company is deliberate attempt to white ant any fair work case in the future. Safe 2.0 is setting up a no win for LH pilots. The AIPA executive are being obstructionist, if they have nothing to hide why haven’t the calls for an SGM been heeded.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 74
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds like you guys are being led up the slaughterhouse kill ramp by a few
fifth column Judas goats !
Not to mention office staff that are doing their fifth column masters bidding .
Your in-house legal team advice has an extremely STARK defeatist ring to it !
Sounds very much like another HOLTESQUE screwing of the pilots is underway .
fifth column Judas goats !
Not to mention office staff that are doing their fifth column masters bidding .
Your in-house legal team advice has an extremely STARK defeatist ring to it !
Sounds very much like another HOLTESQUE screwing of the pilots is underway .
Sounds like you guys are being led up the slaughterhouse kill ramp by a few
fifth column Judas goats !
Not to mention office staff that are doing their fifth column masters bidding .
Your in-house legal team advice has an extremely STARK defeatist ring to it !
Sounds very much like another HOLTESQUE screwing of the pilots is underway .
fifth column Judas goats !
Not to mention office staff that are doing their fifth column masters bidding .
Your in-house legal team advice has an extremely STARK defeatist ring to it !
Sounds very much like another HOLTESQUE screwing of the pilots is underway .
For the non believers check out the AIPA explanatory document. Not my figures but AIPAs, average 14% increase in hours flown for 15% less money.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 74
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another circa 30% ? give on top of the 787’s 30% give that was sold to the minions under the pretext :
“ to secure the flying “ !
Let’s all do the Tino Safe limbo dance together .
HOW LOW CAN WE GO ?
Not low enough it would appear .
“ to secure the flying “ !
Let’s all do the Tino Safe limbo dance together .
HOW LOW CAN WE GO ?
Not low enough it would appear .
After ‘89, sorry to bring it up, the company wrote up the contract and said sign it or go somewhere else.
It was only a few pages long. You could read it over a flat white at a Tulla coffee shop.
Come ‘95 the company introduced the ‘B’ scale into it.
Then AIPA got involved.
Look where the document is now!
Yeah people will complain about it but it’s a lot better than it was and no ‘B’ scale.
The point I’m trying to say is don’t cut your nose off to spite your face.
Its best to stay at the table because you have a say.
I don’t like this one bit but what option is there?
Yeah I can hear it now but we can keep negotiating.
We can take it to FW etc.....
Im not interested in opinions.
Show me the reference in law where a Judge can hang his hat?
Whether it’s the company or from AIPA....show me the reference!
Otherwise I’ll deal with what’s in front of me!
It was only a few pages long. You could read it over a flat white at a Tulla coffee shop.
Come ‘95 the company introduced the ‘B’ scale into it.
Then AIPA got involved.
Look where the document is now!
Yeah people will complain about it but it’s a lot better than it was and no ‘B’ scale.
The point I’m trying to say is don’t cut your nose off to spite your face.
Its best to stay at the table because you have a say.
I don’t like this one bit but what option is there?
Yeah I can hear it now but we can keep negotiating.
We can take it to FW etc.....
Im not interested in opinions.
Show me the reference in law where a Judge can hang his hat?
Whether it’s the company or from AIPA....show me the reference!
Otherwise I’ll deal with what’s in front of me!
Last edited by Wingspar; 4th Mar 2020 at 22:37.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SYD
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The AIPA explanatory document is a load of rubbish based on fixed stick hours. Why did they choose this way to present the data?
Any pilot knows that a SYD PER return is an easier day out for the same duty hours as a double SYD MEL return 4 sector day. The former has 50% more stick hours than the latter for the same
duty period - yet the higher stick day is more popular.
So why has AIPA used this methodology in the document? To try to make the deal look as bad as possible?
Any pilot knows that a SYD PER return is an easier day out for the same duty hours as a double SYD MEL return 4 sector day. The former has 50% more stick hours than the latter for the same
duty period - yet the higher stick day is more popular.
So why has AIPA used this methodology in the document? To try to make the deal look as bad as possible?
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Okinawa
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After ‘89, sorry to bring it up, the company wrote up the contract and said sign it or go somewhere else.
It was only a few pages long. You could read it over a flat white at a Tulla coffee shop.
Come ‘95 the company introduced the ‘B’ scale into it.
Then AIPA got involved.
Look where the document is now!
Yeah people will complain about it but it’s a lot better than it was and no ‘B’ scale.
The point I’m trying to say is don’t cut your nose off to spite your face.
Its best to stay at the table because you have a say.
I don’t like this one bit but what option is there?
Yeah I can hear it now but we can keep negotiating.
We can take it to FW etc.....
Im not interested in opinions.
Show me the reference in law where a Judge can hang his hat on?
Whether it’s the company or from AIPA....show me the reference!
Otherwise I’ll deal with what’s in front of me!
It was only a few pages long. You could read it over a flat white at a Tulla coffee shop.
Come ‘95 the company introduced the ‘B’ scale into it.
Then AIPA got involved.
Look where the document is now!
Yeah people will complain about it but it’s a lot better than it was and no ‘B’ scale.
The point I’m trying to say is don’t cut your nose off to spite your face.
Its best to stay at the table because you have a say.
I don’t like this one bit but what option is there?
Yeah I can hear it now but we can keep negotiating.
We can take it to FW etc.....
Im not interested in opinions.
Show me the reference in law where a Judge can hang his hat on?
Whether it’s the company or from AIPA....show me the reference!
Otherwise I’ll deal with what’s in front of me!
With a NO vote, we still have an EBA to thrash out (minus 350 flying) and life goes on.
The company have said we may have access to join the new entity a la Jetstar MOU or some other mechanism. Hopefully AIPA will cover the pilots of the new entity and as you say work to improve the pay and conditions.
This is about supporting collective bargaining and AIPA for future negotiations as much as anything.
Still the NO camp has offered no plan for what’s next.
think you’ll still get your 3% and back pay? You’ll get nothing. Look around you, the world economy is tanking, pilots out of jobs everywhere, and you are being offered 3% plus backpay. Say NO, It will be gone. Not only will the 350 be gone, so will any other gains in the EA. In fact I would bet that the moment the long haul EA result is known, Alan will be sprouting the pay freeze again. There’s more at risk here than the 350.
think you’ll still get your 3% and back pay? You’ll get nothing. Look around you, the world economy is tanking, pilots out of jobs everywhere, and you are being offered 3% plus backpay. Say NO, It will be gone. Not only will the 350 be gone, so will any other gains in the EA. In fact I would bet that the moment the long haul EA result is known, Alan will be sprouting the pay freeze again. There’s more at risk here than the 350.
The company have said we may have access to join the new entity a la Jetstar MOU or some other mechanism.
May......perhaps...I don’t know.....what if?
Look, go whichever way you want but I’d rather stay at the table rather than look from outside....and hope.....maybe?
Still the NO camp has offered no plan for what’s next.
think you’ll still get your 3% and back pay? You’ll get nothing. Look around you, the world economy is tanking, pilots out of jobs everywhere, and you are being offered 3% plus backpay. Say NO, It will be gone. Not only will the 350 be gone, so will any other gains in the EA. In fact I would bet that the moment the long haul EA result is known, Alan will be sprouting the pay freeze again. There’s more at risk here than the 350.
think you’ll still get your 3% and back pay? You’ll get nothing. Look around you, the world economy is tanking, pilots out of jobs everywhere, and you are being offered 3% plus backpay. Say NO, It will be gone. Not only will the 350 be gone, so will any other gains in the EA. In fact I would bet that the moment the long haul EA result is known, Alan will be sprouting the pay freeze again. There’s more at risk here than the 350.
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Okinawa
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yet you believe by voting YES you somehow guarantee the sunrise flying ....based on what??? The company mentioned it in a webinar? They will never put that guarantee in writing.
And what good is a seat at the table with a gun to your head? Sign or else.
How is that going to work next eba?
That’s my main point, at some stage you will have to take a stand.
It’s not palatable, it’s not easy but voting YES guarantees NOTHING except what’s written in the eba doc AND more of the same treatment every eba.