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

Air NZ pilot redundancies

Old 27th Apr 2020, 00:40
  #241 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Nz
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 5 Posts
AU laws are different. I'm sure GF is looking enviously across the ditch. I've heard there are A380 captains on the checkout at woolies.
Thanks for the info.
So the pilot group can not legally ratify an amendment allowing for all pilots to remain on 60% salary under NZ law? That is a real shame.
73qanda is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2020, 00:52
  #242 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: At Home
Posts: 397
Received 13 Likes on 12 Posts
Originally Posted by kangaroota
I'm not privy to pay scales but maybe someone can answer this question. If a 14% pay cut across the board saves 74 jobs, what sort of pay cut would be required to save 279 jobs?
It doesn't work that way.

14% is simply one part of the package. In that package, the company has agreed to base Pilot numbers on 60 hour rosters and not the optimum of ~75 hours. It's that reduction in efficiency which has saved 74 Jobs.
I gave a more detailed account of this in a previous post, but as per the CEA, the Redundancy trigger is less than 60 hours average for 3 rosters or more (predicted or actual). There is no re-hire trigger in the CEA. The company is free to fly everyone at 90 hour rosters if they wish without re-hiring anyone back.

Clearly, the 387 is not based on today's schedule, but what they envisage in the long term. At which point, we'll no longer be on 86% Pay.
We could of taken a 25% cut but the result would be the same unless we modified the contract even more. The more Pilots the company carry, the lower the average hours, and if they're below 60, that's the redundancy trigger.

Now, the Company have also said those willing to take a 50% Cut can save Job on a 2:1 basis or 1:1 if they take LWOP. These options must be taken up for a minimum of 12 months however to save jobs.
With ratification of the AFFA the company have agreed to 896 "Full-time Pilots" (ignoring the ~40 or so 65+ guys on LWOP). By taking LWOP or 50%, we can increase the number of Pilots while keeping the FTE number the same. We find out today how many have offered to take those options.
ElZilcho is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2020, 00:56
  #243 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: NOYB
Posts: 84
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by 73qanda
Thanks for the info.
So the pilot group can not legally ratify an amendment allowing for all pilots to remain on 60% salary under NZ law? That is a real shame.
What's even worse is that the smaller Air NZ union (FANZP aka 'Feds') have under their contract's redundancies clauses, that there is the ability to negotiate redundancy packages. But NZALPA does not, and being the conservative option, the Company elected to apply that clause across the entire pilot group.

Which is a real shame, because with almost 50 senior jet pilots (approx. half being 777) having put their hand up for a voluntary redundancy package, the Company and unions had a bloody great opportunity to put their heads together and work out a semi-decent option for the company to get rid of some of the guys and girls off the top of the list, that they don't need right now. American Airlines as an example, offered anyone 62yo+ the ability to reduce to 60% pay, and retire immediately.

One of multiple sources online about the AA deal:
https://onemileatatime.com/american-...fer-to-pilots/

This would solve the unprecedented down training issues that the Company now has to tackle. And it WILL NOT BE pretty. I imagine they will be trying to keep pilots 'on fleet' to reduce cross training costs. So a C20, could be eligible for F7 but will instead be forced into F20, and given bypass pay. Much like some F7s that will be down trained into S8 but entitled to C20... So they will effectively get a pay rise to be a SO...

The seats and pay scales are going to be a mess! Happy to be proven wrong on this one... But I have heard from a Senior Fleet Manager before this started and said that "if we end up in a redundancies, it is going to turn into a complete and utter mess"... So even management know it. And what's more, I do not see this saving the Company as much money as they think with the amount of bypass pay that is going to be occuring.
InZed is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2020, 01:00
  #244 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Enzed
Posts: 2,289
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 73qanda
Thanks for the info.
So the pilot group can not legally ratify an amendment allowing for all pilots to remain on 60% salary under NZ law? That is a real shame.
I might be wrong but I think the looking across the ditch comment was more about the LWOP option, so far as I'm aware that cannot be arbitrarily applied by a company over here.

I'm sure the pilots would be allowed to have a vote on taking 60% of their current salary. So far as i know there's nothing stopping that, in fact they could also have a vote on taking LWOP.
27/09 is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2020, 01:07
  #245 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Enzed
Posts: 2,289
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by InZed
What's even worse is that the smaller Air NZ union (FANZP aka 'Feds') have under their contract's redundancies clauses, that there is the ability to negotiate redundancy packages. But NZALPA does not, and being the conservative option, the Company elected to apply that clause across the entire pilot group.

Which is a real shame, because with almost 50 senior jet pilots (approx. half being 777) having put their hand up for a voluntary redundancy package, the Company and unions had a bloody great opportunity to put their heads together and work out a semi-decent option for the company to get rid of some of the guys and girls off the top of the list, that they don't need right now.
You have to wonder why the company elected to take the conservative route rather than try and get agreement to negotiate redundancy packages, especially in these times of HPE and all. Another agenda perhaps?
27/09 is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2020, 01:23
  #246 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: At Home
Posts: 397
Received 13 Likes on 12 Posts
Originally Posted by 27/09
I might be wrong but I think the looking across the ditch comment was more about the LWOP option, so far as I'm aware that cannot be arbitrarily applied by a company over here.

I'm sure the pilots would be allowed to have a vote on taking 60% of their current salary. So far as i know there's nothing stopping that, in fact they could also have a vote on taking LWOP.
We could vote on a 90% Pay Cut... of course it likely wouldn't pass, but we can vote on it!
What the company cannot do is force it on us, or forcefully stand us down.

I cannot understand why the Severance was turned down, and Forans explanation made zero sense. The company have stated anyone whose severance is greater than 20 weeks would have it paid fortnightly. Those 40+ 777 Captains could either be sitting at home getting their severance paid fortnightly and be off the payroll in 6-12 months, or sitting at home doing nothing, also getting paid fortnightly (-14%), but remaining on the payroll until retirement and subject to down-training + super + licence/medical costs etc
The package offered by the Company was woefully inadequate.

As InZed said, massive down-training will be a nightmare. Especially because everyone to be down-trained is required to be offered both a Longual and Short Haul position. It's only the most Junior Pilots who wont get a choice and be directed to whats left. So there is definitely potential for a lot of Pilots to be on bypass pay so the company can keep them on a Boeing (or Airbus) for minimal training. SIM training is easy, it's the line-training with minimal flying that will cause the problems. The number of sectors required for a seat change on your current fleet is minimal compared to swapping types... especially between Boeing and Airbus.

Pilot costs, especially after the loss of IP, Allowances, Hotels, Crew Transport, Redundancies and the 14% cut are such a small component of the total bill, I suspect their attention will be turned to offloading assets such as property (as they've already mentioned) before they come after us again. I could be wrong, but we could all work for free and it wouldn't really make a difference.
ElZilcho is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2020, 01:28
  #247 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Nz
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 5 Posts
I'm sure the pilots would be allowed to have a vote on taking 60% of their current salary. So far as i know there's nothing stopping that, in fact they could also have a vote on taking LWOP.
Well....If I was at Air NZ ( I’m not) I would be leaning heavily on my Union reps to put forward an amendment to the contract whereby every pilot stays in their same seat but goes onto 50% pay until 1st October where it is reverts to the current situation pending review ( ie if flying is picking up it could be raised to 70% pay for 3 months.)
The reason I’d want that even if I was senior is for the longevity and health of the company and the 205 about to lose their jobs.
73qanda is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2020, 01:34
  #248 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: At Home
Posts: 397
Received 13 Likes on 12 Posts
Originally Posted by 73qanda
Well....If I was at Air NZ ( I’m not) I would be leaning heavily on my Union reps to put forward an amendment to the contract whereby every pilot stays in their same seat but goes onto 50% pay until 1st October where it is reverts to the current situation pending review ( ie if flying is picking up it could be raised to 70% pay for 3 months.)
The reason I’d want that even if I was senior is for the longevity and health of the company and the 205 about to lose their jobs.
They actually used that as an "extreme" example in one of the Zoom meetings. Basically saying it might of worked but it would of never ratified... they did say however, it does nothing to address the surplus when we all come off the 50%. Even the most optimistic projections have us being a smaller Airline for years to come.

Seniority, while I'd never have it any other way, certainly has it's faults. If everyone's job was equally on the line I'd say it's fair to say a lot more would be willing to accept 50%.
Of course, everyone job might be on the line if the Airline were to not survive, so it's possible a 50% vote might pass as more Pilots realise how much skin they have in the game.
ElZilcho is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2020, 01:39
  #249 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Nz
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 5 Posts
I could be wrong, but we could all work for free and it wouldn't really make a difference.
I think you might be wrong but I don’t know for sure. Staff costs p/a will be only a bit less than fuel bill if Air NZ is anything like my last Airline. (Annual report will tell you.)
A big part of everyone taking a greater % cut is that it impacts greatly on the lives of the 205 and their sons and daughters and husbands and wives.
The other big incentive is to save your company the massive headache and cost of everyone swapping seats and the risk to the company ( jobs) that brings.
Is it too late for you guys to organise a variation like this?
73qanda is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2020, 02:09
  #250 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: At Home
Posts: 397
Received 13 Likes on 12 Posts
Originally Posted by 73qanda
I think you might be wrong but I don’t know for sure. Staff costs p/a will be only a bit less than fuel bill if Air NZ is anything like my last Airline. (Annual report will tell you.)
A big part of everyone taking a greater % cut is that it impacts greatly on the lives of the 205 and their sons and daughters and husbands and wives.
The other big incentive is to save your company the massive headache and cost of everyone swapping seats and the risk to the company ( jobs) that brings.
Is it too late for you guys to organise a variation like this?
The company have told us beyond the the 14% cut, those who agree voluntarily to 12+ months LWOP or 50% Pay will reduce the number of compulsory redundancies. We'll find out today how many have applied.
My comment about working for free was more in relation to after the "first wave" which is being finalized as we speak. If the Company is still bleeding cash, taking another cut from the Pilots (or staff in general) will have minimal impact. There are larger infasctruce cuts that will need to be explored.
The Annual wage bill is (was) ~$1.3B of the total ~$4.6B Operating expense, fuel was also ~$1.3B. Jet Pilot wages accounted for approx. $230M of the total. Fuel is obviously down right now, and wages should be ~30% less after Redundancies. The next fous will need to be on the other $2.0B of expenses before taking another cut from the staff.... I would expect.

https://p-airnz.com/cms/assets/PDFs/...al-results.pdf

https://indd.adobe.com/view/39f87018...3-fa2201033a84
ElZilcho is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2020, 02:13
  #251 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Oceania
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 73qanda
I think you might be wrong but I don’t know for sure. Staff costs p/a will be only a bit less than fuel bill if Air NZ is anything like my last Airline. (Annual report will tell you.)
A big part of everyone taking a greater % cut is that it impacts greatly on the lives of the 205 and their sons and daughters and husbands and wives.
The other big incentive is to save your company the massive headache and cost of everyone swapping seats and the risk to the company ( jobs) that brings.
Is it too late for you guys to organise a variation like this?
Given the variation ratified with 95% I suspect there may be more support out there for bigger cuts than anyone appreciated.
oldm8ey is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2020, 02:17
  #252 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: At Home
Posts: 397
Received 13 Likes on 12 Posts
Originally Posted by oldm8ey
Given the variation ratified with 95% I suspect there may be more support out there for bigger cuts than anyone appreciated.
I sincerely hope so. If the company make good on their promise to save jobs I'll be on 50% in the coming weeks. I'd like to think I wont be alone.
ElZilcho is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2020, 02:40
  #253 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Nz
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 5 Posts
Thanks for the explanations. I hope it works out as well as it can for all of you at Air NZ.
73qanda is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2020, 02:54
  #254 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
These 'job savings'. Are they permanent or long term or is it just delaying a redundancy? If the variations are 9 months or 12 months etc... and after that everything goes back to the status quo aernt the numbers still in surplus for where the airline needs staffing levels to be?

I'm not being a smart ar$€. Just asking. It seems no one can clarify the intent of it. I understand that its a fluid situation and things change etc... but I'm wondering for example if the 74 jobs are saved only for the duration of the FFA or if its permanent based on the calculation of 387.
ZKSUJ is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2020, 02:55
  #255 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: NOYB
Posts: 84
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by 27/09
You have to wonder why the company elected to take the conservative route rather than try and get agreement to negotiate redundancy packages, especially in these times of HPE and all. Another agenda perhaps?
I agree 100%. I think the thoughts on everyone's lips is that there will be another round of redundancies shortly. So they want to get rid of people, rather than pay large exit packages.
InZed is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2020, 03:02
  #256 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: NOYB
Posts: 84
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by oldm8ey
Given the variation ratified with 95% I suspect there may be more support out there for bigger cuts than anyone appreciated.
Then why the f*** was the % pay cut not a vote. I half way up the list but would still have voted for 50% pay for my same seat, rather than 100% of the seat I will end up in!!
InZed is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2020, 03:11
  #257 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: At Home
Posts: 397
Received 13 Likes on 12 Posts
The whole thing was rushed.
If the AFFA was voted down we wouldn't of been given a second chance and the Axe would of fallen. I agree, it would of been better to run a member survey to determine how much of a cut we were prepared to take, but we were given the deadline of Roster 5 to get an agreement. I suspect however, one of the reasons for the 95% in favor was because we matched the Exec cut. That was a very popular opinion right from the beginning, and if we were to take 25% the Exec should match it.

I believe this agreement will certainly delay a 2nd wave for now. Yes, the saved jobs might only be temporary but we have the option to extend the AFFA at the completion of 9 rosters. I don't doubt the company will threaten the Axe if we don't agree, but they'll also force a No vote by swinging the axe again before then.

Until COVID is over, everything we agree on is "temporary". Right now, we're working to a predicted schedule in 12 months. If/when that changes, the process will start again. However, I suspect what will change is the timing not the Schedule.. that is, it might not be April 2021 we're back to 70% but April 2022, however 70% seems to be the long term goal.

ElZilcho is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2020, 06:15
  #258 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by InZed
Then why the f*** was the % pay cut not a vote. I half way up the list but would still have voted for 50% pay for my same seat, rather than 100% of the seat I will end up in!!
Yep. C20 here. I’d rather stay where I am on 50% for years than take 100% F20 pay.
Inverted Flat Spin is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2020, 06:33
  #259 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: bkk
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's now a matter of who can salvage what out of this fiasco. For some it will be the difference between buying their fifth rental property or not.
And for some it will be a question of whether or not they can keep their first home.
One thing is for sure, the current model of seniority is gone.
Once the carcass of Air New Zealand has been picked over and the post mortem is complete, no financial backer is going down that road again.
Seniority if it exists will be on a fleet by fleet and / or base by base basis.
To be honest, if you were investing in an airline, would you buy into Air New Zealand,s redundancy model?
kangaroota is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2020, 06:52
  #260 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Here and there
Posts: 3,089
Received 14 Likes on 11 Posts
Yeah, like investors pore over the CEAs (which can be changed periodically) and vet the seniority system.

I am certain the seniority system in Air NZ will largely stay the same.
AerocatS2A 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.