Project Sunrise
While we are putting left field ideas out there, here’s mine;
We are asking people to do something that is very physically demanding, in a professional environment, yet we are not giving them the training, nutritional support, coaching and mental skills training that is widely used and available to even non-professionals who undertake physically demanding tasks.
I suggest that ULH pilots be given access to personal trainers, physiotherapists, and mental skills coaches. That they be rostered sessions with each of the above monthly and provided with weekly nutrition packs delivered to their front doors by ‘Hello Fresh’ or a similar provider.
If we want people to be able to perform extraordinary feats of endurance ( calmly managing complex rapidly developing emergencies with high consequences after being airborne/awake for extended periods of time) then why not treat them like we treat our sports teams? We know that our sports teams would be soundly beaten if we didn’t provide them with these things, let’s hope our ULH pilots aren’t soundly beaten when it really counts.
( If all that sounds too expensive then just gas up in Singapore and do a crew swap. That works.)
We are asking people to do something that is very physically demanding, in a professional environment, yet we are not giving them the training, nutritional support, coaching and mental skills training that is widely used and available to even non-professionals who undertake physically demanding tasks.
I suggest that ULH pilots be given access to personal trainers, physiotherapists, and mental skills coaches. That they be rostered sessions with each of the above monthly and provided with weekly nutrition packs delivered to their front doors by ‘Hello Fresh’ or a similar provider.
If we want people to be able to perform extraordinary feats of endurance ( calmly managing complex rapidly developing emergencies with high consequences after being airborne/awake for extended periods of time) then why not treat them like we treat our sports teams? We know that our sports teams would be soundly beaten if we didn’t provide them with these things, let’s hope our ULH pilots aren’t soundly beaten when it really counts.
( If all that sounds too expensive then just gas up in Singapore and do a crew swap. That works.)
Nutrition and exercise is a wonderful thing, small things you think wouldn’t make any difference can make huge differences long term. Maybe time for more research in these areas concerning long haul flying.
How about only accepting a decent contract, one that protects the health and safety of all crews and pax due to the extreme nature of the flying and the fatigue?
Then it won’t discriminate between different age groups that will fly it regardless of seniority.
Long term health should not be traded away regardless of age. I’m sure the recent LH pilots that have died from cancer or heart attacks would agree.
Then it won’t discriminate between different age groups that will fly it regardless of seniority.
Long term health should not be traded away regardless of age. I’m sure the recent LH pilots that have died from cancer or heart attacks would agree.
Either QF are getting the jets and someone will fly them, or they’ve decided the business case doesn’t stack up.
As for negotiations,
- the NEW COM will have to agree to put any proposal to a vote
- selling it will take at least 2 weeks
- minimum one week to vote
The weeks are running out if you took the process seriously.
The self imposed (industrial) timeline is a joke. No confirmed type. Fatigue data on one or two flights to guide negotiations.
The decision has been made.
If only someone actually cared.
As for negotiations,
- the NEW COM will have to agree to put any proposal to a vote
- selling it will take at least 2 weeks
- minimum one week to vote
The weeks are running out if you took the process seriously.
The self imposed (industrial) timeline is a joke. No confirmed type. Fatigue data on one or two flights to guide negotiations.
The decision has been made.
If only someone actually cared.
Either QF are getting the jets and someone will fly them, or they’ve decided the business case doesn’t stack up.
As for negotiations,
- the NEW COM will have to agree to put any proposal to a vote
- selling it will take at least 2 weeks
- minimum one week to vote
The weeks are running out if you took the process seriously.
The self imposed (industrial) timeline is a joke. No confirmed type. Fatigue data on one or two flights to guide negotiations.
The decision has been made.
If only someone actually cared.
As for negotiations,
- the NEW COM will have to agree to put any proposal to a vote
- selling it will take at least 2 weeks
- minimum one week to vote
The weeks are running out if you took the process seriously.
The self imposed (industrial) timeline is a joke. No confirmed type. Fatigue data on one or two flights to guide negotiations.
The decision has been made.
If only someone actually cared.
But what about the sacred scroll? Won’t someone think of the Scroll?
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Beyond the wall
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For your consideration;
A decision already inked. The manufacturer in question has been having a rough time of late.
Their annual financial year reporting is Jan-Dec. What would be better than some good news? An order... any order also required by their own reporting laws hence the protracted negotiation time line before said reporting. After manufacturer reporting/ announcements the cats out of the bag and industrial leverage is lost!
Sit back and bide a little time. No need to rush especially as it’s not even legal yet!
A decision already inked. The manufacturer in question has been having a rough time of late.
Their annual financial year reporting is Jan-Dec. What would be better than some good news? An order... any order also required by their own reporting laws hence the protracted negotiation time line before said reporting. After manufacturer reporting/ announcements the cats out of the bag and industrial leverage is lost!
Sit back and bide a little time. No need to rush especially as it’s not even legal yet!
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If so perforating the pages would have given it a little more tangible value..
Pilot costs are but a thimble when compared to the capital to buy the aircraft, the maintenance and infrastructure required to support it, the fuel to fly it and the charges to land it..
If Fort Fumble maintain that it is pilot costs are the "business case" determinant then they are simply incompetent.
Last edited by Rated De; 15th Oct 2019 at 07:53. Reason: readability...
The CEO was recently crowing that his long haul crew costs were 50% of our American competitors. So rather than give any thought to a 10% less fever dream perhaps the pilots should be countering with an aggressive campaign for much more, or two full crews. But since money doesn’t fix chronic health problems, perhaps the whole idea should be rejected out of hand?
Just because a thing may be technically possible doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.
Just because a thing may be technically possible doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The CEO was recently crowing that his long haul crew costs were 50% of our American competitors. So rather than give any thought to a 10% less fever dream perhaps the pilots should be countering with an aggressive campaign for much more, or two full crews. But since money doesn’t fix chronic health problems, perhaps the whole idea should be rejected out of hand?
Just because a thing may be technically possible doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.
Just because a thing may be technically possible doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.
Time to quote a bit of George W Bush...
There's an old saying in Tennessee—I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee—that says, 'Fool me once, shame on...shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: DeShire
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The CEO was recently crowing that his long haul crew costs were 50% of our American competitors. So rather than give any thought to a 10% less fever dream perhaps the pilots should be countering with an aggressive campaign for much more, or two full crews. But since money doesn’t fix chronic health problems, perhaps the whole idea should be rejected out of hand?
Just because a thing may be technically possible doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.
Just because a thing may be technically possible doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.
Exactly. Can not agree more. Imagine 20 of these in row. For years. No thanks.
That is not an impossibility if this comes off and for those that bid for one the promotions Tino has said will give them a pay rise might find them selves stuck there for many many years .
A group of Qantas pilots frustrated by the handling of negoti*ations for new workplace agreements have gained control of a powerful union committee as tensions with their airline employer rise.
Fifteen of the 20 pilots recently elected to the Australian and International Pilots Association committee of management, openly opposed the current union executive.
Under AIPA rules, executive decisions must be signed off by the CoM, which will meet for the first time next month.
“There’s a sense they’ve become a little too close to the company,” the pilot said.
He said short-haul operations were the profit centre of Qantas, yet the airline would not agree to $2m worth of measures to fix pilots’ sick leave and rostering concerns.
An increase in cancellation rates within Qantas was also adding to frustrations, with short-haul pilots turning up to work to find their flights had been scrapped, which meant they were not paid.
More than two-thirds of members (68 per cent) voted down the proposed new short-haul agreement, sending negotiations back to square one.
On Project Sunrise, which is Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce’s plan to operate ultra-long haul flights between the Australian east coast and cities such as New York and London, pilots made it clear they would not fly longer for less.
Mr Joyce has said he wants the same sort of concessions from *pilots as they made for the introduction of Boeing 787-9s, which amounted to a 30 per cent increase in productivity.
The pilot said they now *realised they gave away too much in that deal and would not make the same mistake again.
“We’re not interested in that type of negotiation. Qantas thinks pilots will do anything to get shiny new toys but those concessions have had a long-reaching effect and I’m sure it will be a different vote this time around,” he said.
Qantas International chief executive Tino La Spina said the company was not expecting something for nothing. “These are growth aircraft, not replacement for older ones, so that means a significant increase in pilot numbers,” Mr La Spina said.
“Our estimate is around 400 more. That translates into more command positions, more promotions and ultimately more pay increases.”
AIPA president Mark Sedgwick confirmed that there had been a change in the make-up of the CoM but declined to comment further.
In a recent note to members, Mr Sedgwick said AIPA was comfortable with the possibility Project Sunrise discussions “may or may not lead to an agreement”.
“We believe this would be an unfortunate outcome for the Qantas International business but could represent the reality of operating an airline in a competitive aviation market,” he wrote.
The Qantas Group, including Jetstar, employs more than 3500 pilots, of whom more than 2200 are AIPA members.
A pilot who spoke to The Australianon the condition of anonymity said the “clean-out” was fuelled by concern about the direction the executive was taking with regard to a new short-haul agreement, and Project Sunrise negotiations.
Fifteen of the 20 pilots recently elected to the Australian and International Pilots Association committee of management, openly opposed the current union executive.
Under AIPA rules, executive decisions must be signed off by the CoM, which will meet for the first time next month.
“There’s a sense they’ve become a little too close to the company,” the pilot said.
He said short-haul operations were the profit centre of Qantas, yet the airline would not agree to $2m worth of measures to fix pilots’ sick leave and rostering concerns.
An increase in cancellation rates within Qantas was also adding to frustrations, with short-haul pilots turning up to work to find their flights had been scrapped, which meant they were not paid.
More than two-thirds of members (68 per cent) voted down the proposed new short-haul agreement, sending negotiations back to square one.
On Project Sunrise, which is Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce’s plan to operate ultra-long haul flights between the Australian east coast and cities such as New York and London, pilots made it clear they would not fly longer for less.
Mr Joyce has said he wants the same sort of concessions from *pilots as they made for the introduction of Boeing 787-9s, which amounted to a 30 per cent increase in productivity.
The pilot said they now *realised they gave away too much in that deal and would not make the same mistake again.
“We’re not interested in that type of negotiation. Qantas thinks pilots will do anything to get shiny new toys but those concessions have had a long-reaching effect and I’m sure it will be a different vote this time around,” he said.
Qantas International chief executive Tino La Spina said the company was not expecting something for nothing. “These are growth aircraft, not replacement for older ones, so that means a significant increase in pilot numbers,” Mr La Spina said.
“Our estimate is around 400 more. That translates into more command positions, more promotions and ultimately more pay increases.”
AIPA president Mark Sedgwick confirmed that there had been a change in the make-up of the CoM but declined to comment further.
In a recent note to members, Mr Sedgwick said AIPA was comfortable with the possibility Project Sunrise discussions “may or may not lead to an agreement”.
“We believe this would be an unfortunate outcome for the Qantas International business but could represent the reality of operating an airline in a competitive aviation market,” he wrote.
The Qantas Group, including Jetstar, employs more than 3500 pilots, of whom more than 2200 are AIPA members.
A pilot who spoke to The Australianon the condition of anonymity said the “clean-out” was fuelled by concern about the direction the executive was taking with regard to a new short-haul agreement, and Project Sunrise negotiations.
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“We believe this would be an unfortunate outcome for the Qantas International business but could represent the reality of operating an airline in a competitive aviation market,” he wrote.
The aircraft does not exist, the science does not exist to support long term health and pilot costs were never the determinant of a "business case"
Qantas International chief executive Tino La Spina said the company was not expecting something for nothing. “These are growth aircraft, not replacement for older ones, so that means a significant increase in pilot numbers,” Mr La Spina said.
What is the net air frame gain since the introduction of the B787?
Without science to support it and a manufacturer to build it, this project is like Red Q, JQ Hong Kong, a terminal decline yet transformation and a hub re-location and back again from Dubai..
JFK-SYD 18th Oct.
https://australianaviation.com.au/20...c0223e68310bb1
Naturally the CEO and other Qantas staff and invited media will fly the same pattern up from Oz to LAX and over to JFK. Will they be woken mid flight and told rest period is over, now back to work on both legs?
https://australianaviation.com.au/20...c0223e68310bb1
There were only 40 people expected to be on board QF7879, comprising researchers from Monash and Sydney universities, as well as chief executive Alan Joyce and other Qantas staff alongside invited media.
Will there be interruptions from the cabin? A screaming baby at random times? Passengers slamming the toilet door closed near the rest area. Will the crew be fed standard ****ty crew meals full of salt, or will it be like a press junket where they get meals we would never see. Will they depart on time or be delayed due slow boarding, a missing pax, a bag search etc.
or is it just a PR opportunity where Joyce and the yes men and women will travel for 24 hours, in their PJ’s, tucked up in a business class bed watching movies, sleeping whenever they feel like it it, only to arrive in Sydney wondering what the big deal is.
oh, and will they be doing the reverse 5 or so days later?
or is it just a PR opportunity where Joyce and the yes men and women will travel for 24 hours, in their PJ’s, tucked up in a business class bed watching movies, sleeping whenever they feel like it it, only to arrive in Sydney wondering what the big deal is.
oh, and will they be doing the reverse 5 or so days later?
Not only reverse 5 days later but 2 per month after months after month.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Sydney Australia
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“These are growth aircraft, not replacement for older ones, so that means a significant increase in pilot numbers,” Mr La Spina said.
Our estimate is around 400 more. That translates into more command positions, more promotions and ultimately more pay increases.
If Qantas wants to run these ULR flights as mooted with four crew where do we get the growth of 400 Pilots from?
If we cut back;
SYD-LAX-JFK as we will be operating direct from SYD, we cut back the Crew Numbers (No crews in LAX) required for that operation. And for SYD-SIN-LON as we will be operating direct from SYD – (No crews through Singapore) so that would be a decline in crew numbers.
O.K. it is not clear, and I may be missing the maths here, however, I certainly would want to see the spreadsheet and crewing equations and how this translates to growth. I feel there is a lot of “spin” here!
Our estimate is around 400 more. That translates into more command positions, more promotions and ultimately more pay increases.
If Qantas wants to run these ULR flights as mooted with four crew where do we get the growth of 400 Pilots from?
If we cut back;
SYD-LAX-JFK as we will be operating direct from SYD, we cut back the Crew Numbers (No crews in LAX) required for that operation. And for SYD-SIN-LON as we will be operating direct from SYD – (No crews through Singapore) so that would be a decline in crew numbers.
O.K. it is not clear, and I may be missing the maths here, however, I certainly would want to see the spreadsheet and crewing equations and how this translates to growth. I feel there is a lot of “spin” here!
I’m thinking that with this unproven ULH flying we should be wanting loss of license payout reduction going from 55 to 60 to 60 to 65. If Qantas are confident there are no long term health effects of this sort of flying then they shouldn’t object.
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The "research" is not peer reviewed meaning its "findings" carry ZERO relevance, will be "commercial in confidence" and tightly controlled so it never sees the light of day, unless a duplicitous CASA buy the fumant des tas de merde
I also loved the bit about ‘we don’t expect to get something for nothing’. In return for whatever he can screw out of the pilots, Tino’s magnanimous quid pro quo is that, er, someone will fly the aeroplanes which the company will be using to generate revenue. Sounds like a helluva deal - where do I sign?
INTBH: Finally a Company Man we can all relate to. Someone who isn't selfish and thinks of Alan before himself. ThankQ Award and Bar nomination on Tino's desk at 0800 tomorrow! Maybe even a $250 Domestic Voucher (space available of course) might be coming your way??
As for signing. If you would just sign and date this blank piece of paper somewhere at the bottom, I'll witness it and we can have HR fill in the rest* later!
* Possible inappropriate use of the the term 'rest' there. Please do not be confused, I didn't mean 'rest' as in 'sleep'....
As for signing. If you would just sign and date this blank piece of paper somewhere at the bottom, I'll witness it and we can have HR fill in the rest* later!
* Possible inappropriate use of the the term 'rest' there. Please do not be confused, I didn't mean 'rest' as in 'sleep'....