Project Sunrise
“Hmm an article written by someone with a character name from Fightclub. Very credible. Here is a quote from Wikipedia about the website”
Zero Hedge is a reasonably credible source of information regarding finance and geo politics.
The name of the author is irrelevant, the articles are simply reposts from other sources and are usually from respected and knowledgable writers.
Simply quoting wikipedia and its CNN quote, as though CNN has ANY credibility at all, is just lazy. I hope you do more diligent research about subjects when they are more important than simply willy waving on pprune.
Zero Hedge is a reasonably credible source of information regarding finance and geo politics.
The name of the author is irrelevant, the articles are simply reposts from other sources and are usually from respected and knowledgable writers.
Simply quoting wikipedia and its CNN quote, as though CNN has ANY credibility at all, is just lazy. I hope you do more diligent research about subjects when they are more important than simply willy waving on pprune.
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You lot of Sanctimonious , pontificating , millennial keyboard ,schoolgirls must be an absolute hoot to fly with !
I would cringe just thinking about having to spend 1 hour , let alone 20+ hours on a flight deck listening to your lecturing ,superior than thou diatribe on how everybody else should be more like you and your vegan tofu toasting ,lotus eating ,wheatgrass swilling , Marxist Millennial crap!
Will be interesting listening to your ilk in a decade or two when you have a few life skill ground into you with this ULR crap.
The most interesting part I found when I flew was the meeting down in the lobby at 5 having a few beers, heading out for a meal and actually getting to know your fellow crew members . There is a novel concept , getting a measure of the person sitting beside you for the next 16 hours .
I must admit I probably learned more through this type of personal interaction both professionally and personally than I would have if all I did was look at myself in the mirror at the gym whilst swiping through grinder that you lot appear to fit the profile for !
Good luck , you’re going to need it .
I would cringe just thinking about having to spend 1 hour , let alone 20+ hours on a flight deck listening to your lecturing ,superior than thou diatribe on how everybody else should be more like you and your vegan tofu toasting ,lotus eating ,wheatgrass swilling , Marxist Millennial crap!
Will be interesting listening to your ilk in a decade or two when you have a few life skill ground into you with this ULR crap.
The most interesting part I found when I flew was the meeting down in the lobby at 5 having a few beers, heading out for a meal and actually getting to know your fellow crew members . There is a novel concept , getting a measure of the person sitting beside you for the next 16 hours .
I must admit I probably learned more through this type of personal interaction both professionally and personally than I would have if all I did was look at myself in the mirror at the gym whilst swiping through grinder that you lot appear to fit the profile for !
Good luck , you’re going to need it .
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That’s if Qantas set up a mechanism for transfer, they may not. There is no transfer mechanism to Jetstar other than an agreed MOU which only covers some pilots. Would people be willing to resign from mainline and go permanently to an new entity? Not many stayed at Jetstar. Also that is if terms and conditions are the same that are on offer now, no guarantees there. They may well offer lower terms to fit the cost of setting up a green fields operation into their business case (or because they can and will still get applicants). Therefor voting NO will probably still not get you a chance to fly the 350 unless you’re willing to resign from mainline (which the company may want to avoid costs of RINs and redundancy a few years down the track).
You're a muppet. If you don't want to do the Sunrise flying, don't opt in for it. They are not forcing you.
Your probably one of those pilots who drop the line "see you down at 5pm for drinks". Despite it being 6am in your local time. Learn how to control your mind and health my friend. Your a pilot for god sake, not a 8am-5pm office worker.
Get a grip
Your probably one of those pilots who drop the line "see you down at 5pm for drinks". Despite it being 6am in your local time. Learn how to control your mind and health my friend. Your a pilot for god sake, not a 8am-5pm office worker.
Get a grip
Anyway, back to the topic at hand. Toughest EA vote I’ve ever been a part of. Still not sure which way I’ll go, I want to see the final document and I suggest others do the same in case either side manages to sneak something in.
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That’s if Qantas set up a mechanism for transfer, they may not. There is no transfer mechanism to Jetstar other than an agreed MOU which only covers some pilots. Would people be willing to resign from mainline and go permanently to an new entity? Not many stayed at Jetstar. Also that is if terms and conditions are the same that are on offer now, no guarantees there. They may well offer lower terms to fit the cost of setting up a green fields operation into their business case (or because they can and will still get applicants). Therefor voting NO will probably still not get you a chance to fly the 350 unless you’re willing to resign from mainline (which the company may want to avoid costs of RINs and redundancy a few years down the track).
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: HKG
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: I prefer to remain north of a direct line BNE-ADL
Age: 48
Posts: 1,286
Likes: 0
Received 33 Likes
on
10 Posts
Considering all the A380’s are about to be grounded and a 60-70% reduction in QF international is on the horizon....
Im not advocating anything but have you looked at the loads lately on QF international flights? They are horrendous and loss making.
The peak of COVID 19 will be August here so horrendous economic pain will endure to at a minimum early next year. In some ways a vote NO will be safer if the forecast of redundancy is true as I’m hearing, are the redundancy provisions the same in the new contract? Don’t shoot the messenger I have heard there may be a 400-500 million loss first half next financial year if this COVID19 persists until then. Sunrise may be binned or delayed if this keeps up.
Im not advocating anything but have you looked at the loads lately on QF international flights? They are horrendous and loss making.
The peak of COVID 19 will be August here so horrendous economic pain will endure to at a minimum early next year. In some ways a vote NO will be safer if the forecast of redundancy is true as I’m hearing, are the redundancy provisions the same in the new contract? Don’t shoot the messenger I have heard there may be a 400-500 million loss first half next financial year if this COVID19 persists until then. Sunrise may be binned or delayed if this keeps up.
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Considering all the A380’s are about to be grounded and a 60-70% reduction in QF international is on the horizon....
Im not advocating anything but have you looked at the loads lately on QF international flights? They are horrendous and loss making.
The peak of COVID 19 will be August here so horrendous economic pain will endure to at a minimum early next year. In some ways a vote NO will be safer if the forecast of redundancy is true as I’m hearing, are the redundancy provisions the same in the new contract? Don’t shoot the messenger I have heard there may be a 400-500 million loss first half next financial year if this COVID19 persists until then. Sunrise may be binned or delayed if this keeps up.
Im not advocating anything but have you looked at the loads lately on QF international flights? They are horrendous and loss making.
The peak of COVID 19 will be August here so horrendous economic pain will endure to at a minimum early next year. In some ways a vote NO will be safer if the forecast of redundancy is true as I’m hearing, are the redundancy provisions the same in the new contract? Don’t shoot the messenger I have heard there may be a 400-500 million loss first half next financial year if this COVID19 persists until then. Sunrise may be binned or delayed if this keeps up.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: I prefer to remain north of a direct line BNE-ADL
Age: 48
Posts: 1,286
Likes: 0
Received 33 Likes
on
10 Posts
Thanks Ruvap and Birdie, no I’m not in the game to vote but was just curious, I could see a forced pay freeze become a condition with the current economic conditions, with a NO vote. I can also see the merit of a YES vote to keep the flying, but I’m not sure if it will happen regardless. Good luck and I hope it all works out well! 👍
Ruvap et al....
So if no gets through what are you going to give up for the company’s 3%?
Because at the moment everyone gets 3% without doing anything and back pay.
All the gives are on the 350 and new hires, which you already set the precedent for in EA 9!
As has been mentioned with Coronavirus, AJ will insist most probably upon another pay freeze for all current EA negotiations. And also no back pay.
Secondly if you allow another entity to be set up, he will play both off against each other for ever and a day.
And enough about this ‘may’ let us transfer over or maybe AIPA can put in a clause.....it will be all over!
Negotiations finished!
Do you get it!
So if no gets through what are you going to give up for the company’s 3%?
Because at the moment everyone gets 3% without doing anything and back pay.
All the gives are on the 350 and new hires, which you already set the precedent for in EA 9!
As has been mentioned with Coronavirus, AJ will insist most probably upon another pay freeze for all current EA negotiations. And also no back pay.
Secondly if you allow another entity to be set up, he will play both off against each other for ever and a day.
And enough about this ‘may’ let us transfer over or maybe AIPA can put in a clause.....it will be all over!
Negotiations finished!
Do you get it!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This one is a bloody hard vote. I was a firm no voter until recently, now I’m on the fence.
The context of this vote has completely changed in the last week. The seriousness of Covid-19 and it’s effects on airlines has changed the playing field. Airlines are grounding half their fleets and asking staff to take LWOP. From an IR point of view, this has been a complete god send, the timing could not have been more perfect. If the no vote gets up, this could give the company time to bring the current climate into their strategy to possibly offer an even more sub standard offer- pay freezes and no 350. That would be the new offer, take it or leave it. They would have the sympathy of the public and share holders.
Interestingly, this new environment also changes the meaning of a yes vote. Now a yes vote does not represent a capitulation to the company’s thuggery and bastardised style of negotiating. It is simply an acknowledgment that the big picture has changed completely, which was not orchestrated by the company. Covid-19 is the game changer. Secure the 350 and the 3% pay rises for now. In 3 years time, Covid-19 is history, there might be a different management team and Qf May finally start seeing the effects of the pilot shortage. That’s a better environment to negotiate in.
Food for thought.
The context of this vote has completely changed in the last week. The seriousness of Covid-19 and it’s effects on airlines has changed the playing field. Airlines are grounding half their fleets and asking staff to take LWOP. From an IR point of view, this has been a complete god send, the timing could not have been more perfect. If the no vote gets up, this could give the company time to bring the current climate into their strategy to possibly offer an even more sub standard offer- pay freezes and no 350. That would be the new offer, take it or leave it. They would have the sympathy of the public and share holders.
Interestingly, this new environment also changes the meaning of a yes vote. Now a yes vote does not represent a capitulation to the company’s thuggery and bastardised style of negotiating. It is simply an acknowledgment that the big picture has changed completely, which was not orchestrated by the company. Covid-19 is the game changer. Secure the 350 and the 3% pay rises for now. In 3 years time, Covid-19 is history, there might be a different management team and Qf May finally start seeing the effects of the pilot shortage. That’s a better environment to negotiate in.
Food for thought.
This one is a bloody hard vote. I was a firm no voter until recently, now I’m on the fence.
Secure the 350 and the 3% pay rises for now. In 3 years time, Covid-19 is history, there might be a different management team and Qf May finally start seeing the effects of the pilot shortage. That’s a better environment to negotiate in.
Food for thought.
Secure the 350 and the 3% pay rises for now. In 3 years time, Covid-19 is history, there might be a different management team and Qf May finally start seeing the effects of the pilot shortage. That’s a better environment to negotiate in.
Food for thought.
This one is a bloody hard vote. I was a firm no voter until recently, now I’m on the fence.
The context of this vote has completely changed in the last week. The seriousness of Covid-19 and it’s effects on airlines has changed the playing field. Airlines are grounding half their fleets and asking staff to take LWOP. From an IR point of view, this has been a complete god send, the timing could not have been more perfect. If the no vote gets up, this could give the company time to bring the current climate into their strategy to possibly offer an even more sub standard offer- pay freezes and no 350. That would be the new offer, take it or leave it. They would have the sympathy of the public and share holders.
Interestingly, this new environment also changes the meaning of a yes vote. Now a yes vote does not represent a capitulation to the company’s thuggery and bastardised style of negotiating. It is simply an acknowledgment that the big picture has changed completely, which was not orchestrated by the company. Covid-19 is the game changer. Secure the 350 and the 3% pay rises for now. In 3 years time, Covid-19 is history, there might be a different management team and Qf May finally start seeing the effects of the pilot shortage. That’s a better environment to negotiate in.
Food for thought.
The context of this vote has completely changed in the last week. The seriousness of Covid-19 and it’s effects on airlines has changed the playing field. Airlines are grounding half their fleets and asking staff to take LWOP. From an IR point of view, this has been a complete god send, the timing could not have been more perfect. If the no vote gets up, this could give the company time to bring the current climate into their strategy to possibly offer an even more sub standard offer- pay freezes and no 350. That would be the new offer, take it or leave it. They would have the sympathy of the public and share holders.
Interestingly, this new environment also changes the meaning of a yes vote. Now a yes vote does not represent a capitulation to the company’s thuggery and bastardised style of negotiating. It is simply an acknowledgment that the big picture has changed completely, which was not orchestrated by the company. Covid-19 is the game changer. Secure the 350 and the 3% pay rises for now. In 3 years time, Covid-19 is history, there might be a different management team and Qf May finally start seeing the effects of the pilot shortage. That’s a better environment to negotiate in.
Food for thought.
I understand and appreciate your opinion on which way to vote. I guess I am more about bringing awareness to this clause which I think will have one of the biggest effects on our careers over the next 20 years. It’s something that is very valuable and we are giving it up with no questions asked. We will go down to two a/c types in the near future yet we have no leverage with this clause. It’s very frustrating how valuable this is yet it’s not getting much traction. I know there is nothing we can do about it now (except vote no but that seems extreme for just one clause) but I see this as being the longest lasting negative from this proposal.
I can also see the company using this as leverage in future negotiations.
On the other hand manufacturers will be desperate to make sales too. Offer 350s/787/MAXs at a heavily discounted rate and with closer delivery slots. By the time they arrive in 18 months the virus panic should’ve abated.
It was because of the cancellation of AA’s 738 order after Sept 11 that caused them to be picked up quickly at a cheap rate while everyone was tightening belts. A weakened domestic competitor doesn’t hurt the plan either.
It was because of the cancellation of AA’s 738 order after Sept 11 that caused them to be picked up quickly at a cheap rate while everyone was tightening belts. A weakened domestic competitor doesn’t hurt the plan either.
They specifically state there is no guarantee that mainline pilots will be allowed to transfer to the new entity. Mainline pilots will still be needed to fly current aircraft for the foreseeable future.
Even if they are allowed over it may not be in rank, it may only be offered to limited numbers, the selection process being controlled by the new entity means they have complete control over who gets a job. And I’ll guarantee you a contract at a new entity will
be nowhere near as good as the money offered with the current deal and with none of the LH EBA protections included.
Vote Yes to the deal offered now under the LH contract, keep it all in house under the EBA and if you don’t wish to do the new flying, it’s simple - Don’t Bid to Fly the 350! But don’t deny others who want to fly it (there are plenty who would) the chance to do it.