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

Project Sunrise

Old 29th Feb 2020, 17:07
  #1401 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: GC Paradise
Posts: 1,096
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
Qantas to go all AIRBUS?

Perhaps we should consider the current offer from a strategic point of view. What would be the driver behind the structure of the offer that would benefit Qantas the most in the longer term by reducing pilot costs?

Consider the possibility that Qantas goes all Airbus, buying types A220, A320, (A330), A350, (A380) to eventually replace all aircraft in their fleets (Qantas, Jetstar, Also-ran's). Is that a possibility or even a probability with the recent selection of the A350 over the B787?

What about the possibility of cheap B737 MAX replacements? Yep, a one-off cost saving. But the cost of an airframe pales significantly when taking into account the running costs of an airframe over the life of type. All things being equal, the B737 MAX price would still be very attractive. But things financial are not equal between an all Airbus fleet and a mixed manufacturer fleet. That costing is being done right now as we speak somewhere deep inside Qantas HQ.

Long term advantages include significantly reduced crew training requirements (Airbus to Airbus) and ongoing costs over the life of Airbus types. Also the enormous flexibility it gives to crewing to have pilots multi-qualified on two or more Airbus types. For, example, when the crew turn up at dispatch, they find the A350 they were expecting to fly has been substituted for an A320 due to low pax load. Happens all the time in other Airbus equipped airlines.

Qantas to go All Airbus?

What is the strategy at Jetstar in selling B787s? Is it because of the ongoing strikes (now solved)? Will they be replaced with B787s from Qantas? Or perhaps it is a part of the long term strategy to turn Jetstar into an all Airbus fleet as well?

Perhaps we should re-look at the offer in terms of becoming all-Airbus airline with all pilots having multi-Airbus ratings to see if the offer stacks up. Effectively, an all Airbus fleet might eventually drag the pilots to a one common jet salary with the consequent loss of hard-fought-for established pay and conditions. That would be a huge win for management and might be their quest for the golden fleece?

I don't know what is in the mind of the folks who are trying to screw you, but it all revolves around power and greed. Look at it from their point of view to seek the answers.
FlexibleResponse is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 18:38
  #1402 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Equatorial
Age: 51
Posts: 1,056
Received 115 Likes on 57 Posts
For, example, when the crew turn up at dispatch, they find the A350 they were expecting to fly has been substituted for an A320 due to low pax load. Happens all the time in other Airbus equipped airlines.

A little confused... In a different world maybe.

Mixed fleet flying is certainly not that simple!

A330/340 (was done?), A330/350, out of the loop a little but we all know the reality.
Global Aviator is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 19:46
  #1403 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 1,086
Received 59 Likes on 29 Posts
Perhaps we should consider the current offer from a strategic point of view. What would be the driver behind the structure of the offer that would benefit Qantas the most in the longer term by reducing pilot costs?
A larger bonus pool for those that aren’t doing the work. The primary beneficiaries of this will be the people who talked anyone in to voting yes.

And the medical profession in 5-10 years time when people start getting really sick with weird ailments.

Mainly bonuses...
V-Jet is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 20:13
  #1404 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Gafa
Posts: 194
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by V-Jet
Mainly bonuses...
The ease of which line workers (not just in Aviation) are convinced/intimidated/deceived to feed our bonus culture has always baffled me.
Maggie Island is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 20:30
  #1405 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 74
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
“ Never in the annals of human conflict have so many , given so much , to so few ! “
Apologies to Winston Churchill.
blow.n.gasket is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 20:31
  #1406 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: moon
Posts: 3,564
Received 89 Likes on 32 Posts
The suggestion that Qantas would decide to use new, cheaper, entities to crew new aircraft unless the pilot body agrees to reduced terms and conditions is logically laughable.

It is laughable because you cannot prove Qantas would not do it - you can’t prove on negative evidence.

Furthermore, given that Qantas management are venal and entirely untrustworthy, no matter what deal you agree to, if there is a buck in it for bonuses, they will do it anyway. So voting “Yes” doesn’t help you either.

On a further, ethical, professional note, it seems to me that browbeating and degrading and otherwise abusing employees (for that is what you are) to whom you then have to entrust your $200 million aircraft, 200+ passengers and with it your business reputation, would not be seen by competent Company Directors to be a winning business strategy.

The value of the Qantas brand is held in the hands of its pilots, cabin crew and engineers. It seems management ignores that simple fact.

To put that another way, would Qantas even exist today if the A380 had gone in off Singapore and the cause was found to be pilot incompetence despite the fact of all that extra talent in the cockpit?
Sunfish is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 21:08
  #1407 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 751
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
On a further, ethical, professional note, it seems to me that browbeating and degrading and otherwise abusing employees (for that is what you are) to whom you then have to entrust your $200 million aircraft, 200+ passengers and with it your business reputation, would not be seen by competent Company Directors to be a winning business strategy.
You’ve hit the nail on the head there!
I’ve never understood this QANTAS management mentality (il dolce brought it to Virgin with him as well) of bullying and threatening your staff, and then turn around and expect them to be loyal willing obedient servants.
All you end up with is an entire workforce that is just going through the motions and turning up for the money while they are looking for alternative employment.
The Bullwinkle is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 21:12
  #1408 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 40
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sunfish
The suggestion that Qantas would decide to use new, cheaper, entities to crew new aircraft unless the pilot body agrees to reduced terms and conditions is logically laughable.
Lets at least try and keep it in context Sunfish.

The 350 pay scale as depicted in the webinars is a slight pay increase over the 330 and 787 as discussed above.

Your comment is accurate when compared to the 380 conditions. Thats assuming the 350 replaces the 380, which I believe it will do so eventually.

Don't for a second believe the company will pay you the same amount of money to fly a 350, as you are a 380. Thats ridiculous and will never happen. It's a legacy contract. A dying legacy contract, on a dying aircraft. The 4 engines jets are done. Over. Finished. Welcome to the reality of aviation economics.

Answer this question for me. What replaces the 380 at mainline when you vote NO, and the 350 contract is setup at the new entity?
normanton is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 21:16
  #1409 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: canada
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by A little birdie
1. Not an A380 senior check Captain.
2. I know how to read data and information.
3. I know how to use excel and create the my own spreadsheets.
4. The information that goes into my spreadsheets has been presented at webinar after webinar.

All the information is readily available. You only need to pay attention. Knowing how to use excel (or even just a pencil, paper and a calculator) is a distinct advantage.

Or keep on shooting the messenger. That always works well.
Shooting the messenger or avoiding the point?

It's great that your asserting your opinion.

The problem is I don't believe that your portrayal of the information is accurate and your regular posts appear to portray them as such ("If you want to tell me what fleet you're on currently, what MVF base you're looking at, and whether you intend on doing MVF or 787 flying I can do the numbers more accurately").

You don't have to be a forensic linguist to know who you are as you post similarly elsewhere....are you saying that your not a Senior Check Captain at Qantas.
brodle is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 21:41
  #1410 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 1,086
Received 59 Likes on 29 Posts
Your comment is accurate when compared to the 380 conditions. Thats assuming the 350 replaces the 380, which I believe it will do so eventually.

Don't for a second believe the company will pay you the same amount of money to fly a 350, as you are a 380. Thats ridiculous and will never happen. It's a legacy contract. A dying legacy contract, on a dying aircraft. The 4 engines jets are done. Over. Finished. Welcome to the reality of aviation economics.
But the flying is back of clock 2 pilot, with ULH thrown in as well. It’s -laughable- (if not insulting) to suggest the flying won’t be anything but extremely fatiguing - and, you’re doing FAR more of it!

Focusing on cherry picked money is disingenuous at (very) best, if you fall for that one you deserve everything you get.

The pay will remain exactly the same - it’s just the pilots doing the work won’t be getting it.
V-Jet is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 21:51
  #1411 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kichin
Posts: 1,024
Received 657 Likes on 182 Posts
Normanton, most of what you assert is either pure rhetoric or unfounded assumptions.

We expect the rhetoric is an IR tactic as it exploits the workers own, deep seated fears....ops normal.

I’m sure the unfounded assumptions could do with some in depth explanation. You seem to be well versed in the economic realities of running an airline, could you elaborate...elaborately if you please?

But before you do, know this:

QANTAS is a legacy airline with hundreds of mangers, sub-managers, board members, heads of etc. enjoying well above legacy conditions. All you need to do is look at the signage, lanyards and all manner of advertising material to see that QANTAS in-fact are celebrating their legacy status with all the fervour of a true, original, century old, legacy airline.

gordonfvckingramsay is online now  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 21:59
  #1412 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 40
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by gordonfvckingramsay
Normanton, most of what you assert is either pure rhetoric or unfounded assumptions.
And what assumptions are they gordonfvckingramsay? Using common sense?

I'm not the one running around saying VOTE NO because the 350 is a 380 replacement.

The facts here is that a NO vote will result in the 350s going to a new entity. So for everyone saying "the 350 will replace the 380", what do YOU think will happen to the mainline fleet once the 380's are eventually retired? Dejavu the 767 retirement. I hope you enjoy your RIN.

I’m sure the unfounded assumptions could do with some in depth explanation. You seem to be well versed in the economic realities of running an airline, could you elaborate...elaborately if you please?

The 380 is at the end of its production line. The world is moving away from 4 engine jets. They are not fuel efficient compared to twin engines. They are a dying breed. The 380 legacy conditions will die also.

But by all means, continue to stand up for your legacy conditions. Make sure you wave to the new entity as they taxi out the 350 past you. Don't wave for too long tho, because within the decade they will be waving and laughing at you as your 380 is retired, and you have nothing to replace it with. THAT is the reality.
normanton is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 22:05
  #1413 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 642
Received 19 Likes on 5 Posts
...and yet, QF is making near record profits with the current fleet and current contract.

Bat flu notwithstanding, times are pretty good.
ruprecht is online now  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 22:09
  #1414 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 1,086
Received 59 Likes on 29 Posts
The facts here is that a NO vote will result in the 350s going to a new entity.
As Sunfish underlined above, prove they won’t do it if you vote ‘yes’. A ‘Yes’ vote will only highlight the genius of their ‘do this or else’ approach.

‘You have to do this for 40% less’

’Would you say nicer things about me if I offer to do it for 50%?’
V-Jet is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 22:19
  #1415 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kichin
Posts: 1,024
Received 657 Likes on 182 Posts
The only fact is QANTAS have threatened its staff.

The assumption is that a yes vote will save us from the “other” entity. No evidence of that, just assumptions.
gordonfvckingramsay is online now  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 22:22
  #1416 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 40
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by V-Jet
As Sunfish underlined above, prove they won’t do it if you vote ‘yes’. A ‘Yes’ vote will only highlight the genius of their ‘do this or else’ approach.
Ok, so the 350s never come. So give us a detailed explanation of what actually changes in LH10 if the 350's never show up.

The proposed SO pay scales never come into play, because as you said they still create the entity. No new SO's are hired into mainline, and are instead sent to the new entity.

The new 330/350 pay scale never comes into play. That is until the 350 eventually replaces the 380 (gonna happen anyway), but again it doesn't matter because those 350's will also go to the new entity.

Originally Posted by gordonfvckingramsay
The only fact is QANTAS have threatened its staff.

The assumption is that a yes vote will save us from the “other” entity. No evidence of that, just assumptions.
No mate, answer the questions.

The lack of responses from people in the NO basket is quite frankly unbelievable.

It's one thing to post scaremongering comments on here, at least back it up with some reliable and or common sense facts.

Please, provide more information, as to what EXACTLY will change in LH 10 with a YES vote, and no 350's coming.
normanton is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 22:36
  #1417 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 1,086
Received 59 Likes on 29 Posts
There is nothing to answer for ‘No’! Nothing changes. Why answer nothing?

If you’re selling a car for $20k and someone rings you up and offers $12k, do you immediately counter with $10k, or maybe even just wait and see?

I wish I was buying something from some of you guys!! - can you PM me when you list something eBay please?

Highest bid = $100. ‘

But I’m only going to pay you $70!’

‘Would $60 be Ok?’

Its like teaching haggling in ‘Life of Brian’!
V-Jet is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 22:47
  #1418 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kichin
Posts: 1,024
Received 657 Likes on 182 Posts
It's one thing to post scaremongering comments on here, at least back it up with some reliable and or common sense facts.
No scaremongering here.

Fact: QF threatened their staff, via the media no less.

Assumption 1: The A350 will be outsourced with a no vote.
Assumption 2: The A350 won’t be outsourced with a yes vote.
Assumption 3: QANTAS must reduce these (so called) legacy conditions in order to survive.
Assumption 4: That another entity will be a success. (The success to failure rate of this sort of thing does not suggest it will be)

Please, provide more information, as to what EXACTLY will change in LH 10 with a YES vote, and no 350's coming.
Is that what’s going to happen if we vote yes? Are you saying the A350s aren’t coming anyway?


To be clear, I’m saying don’t fall for the threat, a yes vote merely gives them what they want at a lower cost. Whatever happens to the fleet will happen, we’re now haggling over the price and guys who are being spooked are haggling our value down.

gordonfvckingramsay is online now  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 22:52
  #1419 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Cloud cuckoo land
Posts: 107
Received 3 Likes on 1 Post
“Legacy conditions” are not old, actually they are current and were set by an independent government appointed arbiter in a Workplace Determination. Stop trying to push your agenda by attempting to control the narrative. That is their specialty. Just argue the facts as they stand and what you wish to accept, we get enough of this spin crap from them!
maggotdriver is offline  
Old 29th Feb 2020, 22:53
  #1420 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 1,086
Received 59 Likes on 29 Posts
The major cost to Qantas is fuel, NOT pilots, crew or engineers.

The fuel savings are the winning ingredient in this equation.

And what has everyone been telling them for the last 20 years about that?

Theyve dictated the argument around nonsense principles. It’s like buying a half million dollar car and complaining about the heated seats being a $5k option....
V-Jet is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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.