Air NZ pilot redundancies
ALPA runs the risk of losing a lot of younger members to the federation over their handling of COVID-19, let alone the Tag & Release cluster. For example, many of our younger colleagues, at ALPA's advise, burned through all their annual leave by waiving the notice period to only then be made redundant.
We get trained on the importance of communication in sims, there's networks for assistance with personal problems, EAP, and even human factors / every fleet refresher... heck the latest FR with the BA 777 crew and piss poor communication by the Capt causing evac with engines running... And here we have the command/dictator & chief of the Air NZ council screwing up the very basics of CRM and communication. I think communication and mental health is extremely important in life. It's particularly difficult in a macho culture particularly when it's predominantly male. John Kirwan lead the charge on this change... But I have heard CM
talking in a group of individuals about how he thinks the "PAN network is bulls**t" and "a waste on time", and that everyone "just needs to harden up". I did not vote for him last time, and I will not vote for him (if I get the chance to vote) next time. Attitudes like that filter down. CEO/Execs/Managers or even Council Heads... that negative, archaic and self-righteous attitude is abhorent.Perhaps in time, once they've down-trained enough C20's to F20 they'll take another swipe off the bottom. But that's not without it's problems. The notional list will require re-writing and the entire process will start again. We all know if there's another 100 Redundancies, those 100 places will come from the 787 Ranks, so that has to filter down and they run the risk of double-training... then re-up training again in 2022 (assuming the 800 day plan works out).
...
This is where I think the company (from a contractual perspective) has stuffed up. They're flogging the 787 crews in breach of section 11 of the CEA and run the risk of triggering the re-hire clause. Not because we're short on Pilots, but because we're all on the wrong fleets due the 777 grounding.
...
This is where I think the company (from a contractual perspective) has stuffed up. They're flogging the 787 crews in breach of section 11 of the CEA and run the risk of triggering the re-hire clause. Not because we're short on Pilots, but because we're all on the wrong fleets due the 777 grounding.
Some clear direction and CONSISTENCY is important during times like this. Jacinda saw the importance of this and kept David Clarke as Health Minister even after his numerous F ups... And the Qantas board has asked Alan Joyce to stick around for consistency of delivery for the recovery also. Took the helm in 2008, and will stay on until at least 2023 now... That's an exceptionally long run for a CEO in aviation.
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: The Couch
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Considering that all we are waiting on is a vaccine, I would say that the end of 2021 is about when everyone sees it all picking back up. After all, it took 20 months to create a SARS vaccine. 7 months for an EBOLA vaccine and less than 6 months for ZIKA.
Covid vaccine trials started just after 65 days. I imagine the world will see worldwide vaccine spread by the end of 2020.
Covid vaccine trials started just after 65 days. I imagine the world will see worldwide vaccine spread by the end of 2020.
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: The Couch
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Zilch, I think in your hypothetical scenario, to separate the two LH fleets is not the intent. They would be the "external" operation for mine, and as long as we have just two 777s, we'll never see that threshold met. (The cynic in me would say - what a great reason to hang on to an otherwise inefficient fleet of 2+1 spare...)
Anyone know what the Bus is doing average roster-wise at the moment? I'd be surprised if that was over 60, if it is, beyond school hols it's not going to be a 3 month thing.
Make no mistake - this is a restructure, there'll be no appetite to be increasing pilot numbers.
Anyone know what the Bus is doing average roster-wise at the moment? I'd be surprised if that was over 60, if it is, beyond school hols it's not going to be a 3 month thing.
Make no mistake - this is a restructure, there'll be no appetite to be increasing pilot numbers.
COVID-19 TEMPORARY VARIATION TO NZALPA AIR NEW ZEALAND LIMITED PILOTS’ COLLECTIVE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
While I agree with the sentiment - the whole world is invested in this vaccine - I've never heard such optimistic numbers around development timeframes. 7 months for Ebola???? Last I heard it was the fastest ever vaccine at Five years! I'd love to see your sources. Despite every other article that you read being a full 180 on the last, I've not seen deviation from the idea that (wrongly) no Corona virus vaccine currently exists (we have of course a 'Flu vaccine of 45% effectiveness), and that developments are measured in years, not months. You are correct that Oxford via their Vietnam lab plan to have most of Europe and the US covered by the end of the year - if their final trial doesn't throw up any issues. If there are, I'm afraid IATA disagree wholeheartedly with you and see in their baseline prediction - 2019 levels at the start of 2023. How many roll-overs should we give without any thought to the consequences?
HARVARD | Ending an Epidemic: The when and how of vaccines
"In fact, from the time of the public release of the SARS-CoV-2 sequence to the injection of a BARDA-supported vaccine “into the first volunteer’s arm…in a phase-1 safety test,” Bloom notes, took just 62 days."
There are three phases of vaccine testing; each phase being months long. But there are numerous companies that are already, or about to start, the third and final phase. Should this be successful, the world should have a mass produced vaccine by the end of the year.
I take it you probably want me to do your research for you on this one also?
XINHUA | China's inactivated COVID-19 vaccine starts phase-3 clinical trial internationally
TIME | Moderna Plans to Start Phase 3 Testing of Its COVID-19 Vaccine Candidate in July
EZ - I am one leaving the business shortly and in catch ups with other mates, I would say about a dozen of us are seriously looking to walk. We all agree that right now is not the time to walk as we have signed furlough contracts with references to ALPA documents etc.. But when it comes back to rehire, I believe I will go to FANZP. IMHO they do not have the stigma they once did attached to their name.
We get trained on the importance of communication in sims, there's networks for assistance with personal problems, EAP, and even human factors / every fleet refresher... heck the latest FR with the BA 777 crew and piss poor communication by the Capt causing evac with engines running... And here we have the command/dictator & chief of the Air NZ council screwing up the very basics of CRM and communication. I think communication and mental health is extremely important in life. It's particularly difficult in a macho culture particularly when it's predominantly male. John Kirwan lead the charge on this change... But I have heard CM talking in a group of individuals about how he thinks the "PAN network is bulls**t" and "a waste on time", and that everyone "just needs to harden up". I did not vote for him last time, and I will not vote for him (if I get the chance to vote) next time. Attitudes like that filter down. CEO/Execs/Managers or even Council Heads... that negative, archaic and self-righteous attitude is abhorent.
Jesus Christ. Dare I say that letting KW or JW walk in the middle of all this process and replacing them with Carrie... might not have been a great move. Gotta feel for the new guy with no pilot knowledge walking straight into the middle of this **** show and trying to get his head around all of the contracts, variations and clauses/protections.
Some clear direction and CONSISTENCY is important during times like this. Jacinda saw the importance of this and kept David Clarke as Health Minister even after his numerous F ups... And the Qantas board has asked Alan Joyce to stick around for consistency of delivery for the recovery also. Took the helm in 2008, and will stay on until at least 2023 now... That's an exceptionally long run for a CEO in aviation.
We get trained on the importance of communication in sims, there's networks for assistance with personal problems, EAP, and even human factors / every fleet refresher... heck the latest FR with the BA 777 crew and piss poor communication by the Capt causing evac with engines running... And here we have the command/dictator & chief of the Air NZ council screwing up the very basics of CRM and communication. I think communication and mental health is extremely important in life. It's particularly difficult in a macho culture particularly when it's predominantly male. John Kirwan lead the charge on this change... But I have heard CM
talking in a group of individuals about how he thinks the "PAN network is bulls**t" and "a waste on time", and that everyone "just needs to harden up". I did not vote for him last time, and I will not vote for him (if I get the chance to vote) next time. Attitudes like that filter down. CEO/Execs/Managers or even Council Heads... that negative, archaic and self-righteous attitude is abhorent.Jesus Christ. Dare I say that letting KW or JW walk in the middle of all this process and replacing them with Carrie... might not have been a great move. Gotta feel for the new guy with no pilot knowledge walking straight into the middle of this **** show and trying to get his head around all of the contracts, variations and clauses/protections.
Some clear direction and CONSISTENCY is important during times like this. Jacinda saw the importance of this and kept David Clarke as Health Minister even after his numerous F ups... And the Qantas board has asked Alan Joyce to stick around for consistency of delivery for the recovery also. Took the helm in 2008, and will stay on until at least 2023 now... That's an exceptionally long run for a CEO in aviation.
The old guard is unfortunately also part of the problem. I recall a Captain telling me "not to worry young fella" (I'm into my Forties and about as grey as he is) because the Government will never let Air NZ go under. We'll just be a smaller Airline with 4-500 Pilots. Of course, he's in the top 200 and just wants a Salary for next 18 months. Couldn't give 2 ****s about the 700 Pilots in total who would lose their jobs if we down-sized to 500.
I fear Air NZ is becoming rudderless. They've lost a lot of good people during this, and replaced some average people with even worse ones. Pretty sure we all know what job Carrie was brought in to do.. but with Pilots, CC and Engineers under her, she's in the perfect position to absolutely destroy the Airline.
Ouch! Thats a hell of a leap. I for one won't be rubber-stamping it without a lot of personal due diligence. Creating a variation to an existing CEA every time there is an "unprecedented" situation, to "help out" ends up diluting the original document. It'll need to be weighed up carefully against the significant downward pressure coming in May on our T&Cs. "New-normal" has an expiry date. GF will have to change the record at some point, as will ALPA.
In the Manual of the various Aircraft we fly/have flown, there's almost always a statement that says (in so many words) "While extensive, these procedure are not exhaustive and cannot cover every possible Scenario". QF32 is a good example of this.
The CEA is not an all-inclusive document, and has been shaped by historical events. Ever heard an American say you cannot change the Second Amendment? Why's it called an Amendment then? Every single negotiation round we push for changes/tweaks to the CEA and yet when a pandemic rolls around, suddenly it's written in stone handed down to moses by the almighty himself.
Perhaps adding a Pandemic section (since we're probably going to get one every decade or so) isn't such a silly idea.
Zilch, I think in your hypothetical scenario, to separate the two LH fleets is not the intent. They would be the "external" operation for mine, and as long as we have just two 777s, we'll never see that threshold met. (The cynic in me would say - what a great reason to hang on to an otherwise inefficient fleet of 2+1 spare...)
Anyone know what the Bus is doing average roster-wise at the moment? I'd be surprised if that was over 60, if it is, beyond school hols it's not going to be a 3 month thing.
Make no mistake - this is a restructure, there'll be no appetite to be increasing pilot numbers.
Anyone know what the Bus is doing average roster-wise at the moment? I'd be surprised if that was over 60, if it is, beyond school hols it's not going to be a 3 month thing.
Make no mistake - this is a restructure, there'll be no appetite to be increasing pilot numbers.
I haven't seen the latest Bus roster. Is it out yet? Probably wont be over 60 no... need the Regional flying for that. A 50 hour domestic roster can still feel like a flogging some days.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fear Air NZ is becoming rudderless. They've lost a lot of good people during this, and replaced some average people with even worse ones. Pretty sure we all know what job Carrie was brought in to do.. but with Pilots, CC and Engineers under her, she's in the perfect position to absolutely destroy the Airline.
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: The Couch
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How many roll-overs of a temporary variation are needed for it to no longer be temporary?
How many variations of an existing CEA are needed before the original is no longer relevant?
Are you happy that CEA protections around leave notice periods were waived, in order to "help out" - and in return you were sent down the road sooner than you needed to be? (To help with your perception problem - that little question mark means it's an actual question. Like the ones in the original post. It's an invitation for you to answer, not for you to decide what I think - because so far, you've largely been wrong on that score).
By your own admission, you feel let down by your union and you're thinking about jumping ship. Which is it?
Since you like internet reading, go have a look at what IFALPA think is the next train coming down the line - it aint Covid...
See also: "full pay 'till the last day" - an american view of what happens to T&Cs when you "help out" "temporarily" in the aftermath of 9/11...
(sorry, I'm not going to give you links - get a balanced view).
Have you looked into this at all? There are numerous sources quoting this information. Will a Harvard article suffice?
HARVARD | Ending an Epidemic: The when and how of vaccines
"In fact, from the time of the public release of the SARS-CoV-2 sequence to the injection of a BARDA-supported vaccine “into the first volunteer’s arm…in a phase-1 safety test,” Bloom notes, took just 62 days."
There are three phases of vaccine testing; each phase being months long. But there are numerous companies that are already, or about to start, the third and final phase. Should this be successful, the world should have a mass produced vaccine by the end of the year.
I take it you probably want me to do your research for you on this one also?
XINHUA | China's inactivated COVID-19 vaccine starts phase-3 clinical trial internationally
TIME | Moderna Plans to Start Phase 3 Testing of Its COVID-19 Vaccine Candidate in July
HARVARD | Ending an Epidemic: The when and how of vaccines
"In fact, from the time of the public release of the SARS-CoV-2 sequence to the injection of a BARDA-supported vaccine “into the first volunteer’s arm…in a phase-1 safety test,” Bloom notes, took just 62 days."
There are three phases of vaccine testing; each phase being months long. But there are numerous companies that are already, or about to start, the third and final phase. Should this be successful, the world should have a mass produced vaccine by the end of the year.
I take it you probably want me to do your research for you on this one also?
XINHUA | China's inactivated COVID-19 vaccine starts phase-3 clinical trial internationally
TIME | Moderna Plans to Start Phase 3 Testing of Its COVID-19 Vaccine Candidate in July
You are correct that Oxford via their Vietnam lab plan to have most of Europe and the US covered by the end of the year - if their final trial doesn't throw up any issues.
The bolding is the elephant in the room don't you think? Given that the latest from Oxford is that their September timeframe for rollout of the vaccine in Europe has slipped (ironically because so few of the 10000+ volunteers will "catch" Covid with the dropping daily infections in the UK), and those very same articles that you so dutifully linked quote "4 years" for Mumps (the fastest yet), and that the Moderna and Oxford trials have a "20%" chance of successfully navigating the phase 3 trials - I really can't see why you're so p!ssy at what was said. And try not to seem so pleased with yourself that you could shout "will a Harvard article suffice" - appeals to authority on the internet are beginner level. I can see why I walked away from prune 20 years ago....
Because it seems I need to be less nuanced in my replies, I'll say again - I agree, a vaccine is more likely than not, and in record time.
Last edited by RubberDogPoop; 28th Jun 2020 at 01:36.
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: The Couch
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We're not helping the Airline. We're helping ourselves and our mates/colleagues. I wish more Pilots would see it this way. Management will always pay themselves bonuses, and share options, and celebrate each other in media. Capitalism at its finest. We need to ensure however, that all sacrifices are in deed made to help the collective and not the Exec.
...so waiving the rights of our colleagues to 42 and 60 day notice periods of leave allocation, prior to their 3 months redundancy notice was not helping the airline? Don't make the mistake of the young fella above and conflate my discussion points as my personally held views. I totally agree that a pay cut was appropriate - socially, and strategically - but that did not in, and of itself "save" jobs. The part-time job arguably did that - though given the rhetoric from Walmart HQ, would you bet the house on it? This is a restructure. There is no need to carry hundreds of extra, expensive employees if your aim is "a smaller airline". BTW that's my bolding up there...
In the Manual of the various Aircraft we fly/have flown, there's almost always a statement that says (in so many words) "While extensive, these procedure are not exhaustive and cannot cover every possible Scenario". QF32 is a good example of this.
The CEA is not an all-inclusive document, and has been shaped by historical events. Ever heard an American say you cannot change the Second Amendment? Why's it called an Amendment then? Every single negotiation round we push for changes/tweaks to the CEA and yet when a pandemic rolls around, suddenly it's written in stone handed down to moses by the almighty himself.
2.) I see you're a fan of Jim Jefferies...
3.) True, nice turn of phrase. Did we not have a clause that related to "redundancy" that would have worked already? Does/did the modality of redundancy require an alteration to the wording - a variation? Maybe. As you rightly point out there are myriad scenarios that may drive a redundancy scenario. Should we rush to a variation every time? Should we waive built-in protections for those most vulnerable? If you believe genuine job cuts are coming your way - absolutely, self-interest trumps critical thought every time. I'm sure that never crossed the company mind...
Do we not have a clause that relates to "seniority", and "direction"? Are/were they not fit for purpose? (I'll give you that one is a difference in interpretation of different clauses though..).
Back to the original though experiment - when do multiple variations alter the original intent of the CEA?
To assist those prone to attributing their perception of my thoughts, to my thoughts:
I agree the pay cut was appropriate.
I agree this is an "unprecedented" situation - in the near term.
I agree "out-of-the-box thinking was/is required.
I acknowledge that this was no negotiation - we have no leverage, we could have simply have been told what was going to happen. (Funnily enough, that's exactly where we'll be in May next year - confident in our "strategic partnership" with Gollum and Carrie aboard are you?)
I like the method of achieving the pay cut - it's not one, we just agreed to work part-time. A better solution than a flat 25% actual pay cut as proposed by FANZ IMHO.
I think it likely that a roll-over of the variation after 9 months will be appropriate - in the absence of a effective treatment, or vaccine. But not necessarily if the company follows-through on another round of cuts. (yes, I acknowledge your thoughts around the realities of actually making them). Because that will be taking the p!ss, and not "good faith". And let's remember, despite InZed's smartar$e protestations to the contrary, I have read the variation - there is a review every THREE MONTHS isn't there? 9 months is a poorly understood misnomer.
I will not do anything without thinking about it first. I understand InZeds self-interest in promoting a roll-over as a fait accompli, and that a vaccine is right around the corner, we all have that - should we suspend critical thought because of it?
Let's just make sure we are "helping ourselves and our mates/collegues". That was the point. Nothing more, nothing less. I wish more pilots would see this....(hopefully, if you're comprehending this post in its entirety instead of red-misting your response half-cocked, and halfway through, you'll see I'm actually largely in agreement with both of you).
As someone said in another forum "trust but verify". (props to SR there
)
We seem to agree on most things RubberDogPoop. Wile your post was the one I quoted, a lot of what I said wasn't directed specifically at you and more at some of the attitudes I've seen floating around.
Waiving the rights on notice periods was a monumental f
k up, no argument there.
Forans done his re-structure to the 70% Airline. Yes, we're carrying extra due to the AFFA and 50%/LWOP agreements, so if he turns around and sacks them he'll probably never get another agreement signed by the Pilot group as long as he's CEO. Rough math suggests the AFFA is worth about $30M P.A while 100 redundancies would be worth around $12-$15M, after 3 months notice. I'm going to assume, further redundancies will be used as the threat to extend the AFFA and/or increase the cut (although 787 Pilots could not fit their current hours into a 75% roster). My only comment here is it's easy to act "tough" and "stick it to the company" when it's not your (not you specifically) job you're gambling with. I just hope whatever the next hurdle is, we don't play hardball just for the sake of it.
Over the last few weeks I've caught up with a few who lost their jobs. Some have already left due to 6 weeks notice, most are about to complete their 3 months. One thing I can say for all of them (who I've spoken to), is that they're incredibly relieved to have the re-employment clauses strengthened. Particularly waiving the currency requirements and the change of wording around "preference" of re-employment. Some took Furlough, but will re-evaluate before 3 years to decide if they'll take redundancy or not. Again, it appeared those most against amending that section of the CEA were so far above the Redundancy zone they couldn't hear the pleas from their distraught colleagues at the bottom.
I mentioned QF32 because there was no procedure for the specific event they encountered. There are various opinions as to how that event was handled, just like there are various opinions as to how ALPA and the Company are dealing with COVID... my point is, we're going off script here. It's even been acknowledged that the notional process wasn't really designed for a company wide retrenchment, but more for fleet retirements... there's a great thread on the ALPA forums which discusses "Perceived" Seniority Violations of the notional process after we were told Seniority is Sacrosent multiple times during the Zoom meetings.
Jim Jefferies is one of the better things to come out of Australia yes
We definitely should not make a habit of amending the CEA everytime we (the company) are faced with the unforeseen. But I also don't think we should outright dismiss it. I'd argue a global pandemic is a good exception. Even if the AFFA were extended for the entirety of Forans 800 day plan, it's still temporary, thus far more valuable than making permanent concessions. I do agree that a line needs to be drawn eventually.
The AFFA automatically rolls over every 3 rosters if the external operation is still projecting <60 IP for the nest 3 rosters, it isn't specifically reviewed, just has self extending/termination clauses. Once we get to 9 rosters however, it requires another Ballot to extend.
Absolutely. Unfortunately, there are some members (a minority I hope) who hold such blind hatred for the company that they don't want to think about it. They want to dismiss everything right from the onset because of some grievance that happened 30 years ago under entirely different circumstances... that was made painfully apparent from some of the accusations during zoom meetings. Clearly, several colleagues had not even read the documents, and/or have gone their whole careers without understanding how IP is prorated when not working a full roster.
Anyway, panic slowly, trust but verify (I'd argue Verify then trust!)
Waiving the rights on notice periods was a monumental f
k up, no argument there.Forans done his re-structure to the 70% Airline. Yes, we're carrying extra due to the AFFA and 50%/LWOP agreements, so if he turns around and sacks them he'll probably never get another agreement signed by the Pilot group as long as he's CEO. Rough math suggests the AFFA is worth about $30M P.A while 100 redundancies would be worth around $12-$15M, after 3 months notice. I'm going to assume, further redundancies will be used as the threat to extend the AFFA and/or increase the cut (although 787 Pilots could not fit their current hours into a 75% roster). My only comment here is it's easy to act "tough" and "stick it to the company" when it's not your (not you specifically) job you're gambling with. I just hope whatever the next hurdle is, we don't play hardball just for the sake of it.
Over the last few weeks I've caught up with a few who lost their jobs. Some have already left due to 6 weeks notice, most are about to complete their 3 months. One thing I can say for all of them (who I've spoken to), is that they're incredibly relieved to have the re-employment clauses strengthened. Particularly waiving the currency requirements and the change of wording around "preference" of re-employment. Some took Furlough, but will re-evaluate before 3 years to decide if they'll take redundancy or not. Again, it appeared those most against amending that section of the CEA were so far above the Redundancy zone they couldn't hear the pleas from their distraught colleagues at the bottom.
I mentioned QF32 because there was no procedure for the specific event they encountered. There are various opinions as to how that event was handled, just like there are various opinions as to how ALPA and the Company are dealing with COVID... my point is, we're going off script here. It's even been acknowledged that the notional process wasn't really designed for a company wide retrenchment, but more for fleet retirements... there's a great thread on the ALPA forums which discusses "Perceived" Seniority Violations of the notional process after we were told Seniority is Sacrosent multiple times during the Zoom meetings.
Jim Jefferies is one of the better things to come out of Australia yes
We definitely should not make a habit of amending the CEA everytime we (the company) are faced with the unforeseen. But I also don't think we should outright dismiss it. I'd argue a global pandemic is a good exception. Even if the AFFA were extended for the entirety of Forans 800 day plan, it's still temporary, thus far more valuable than making permanent concessions. I do agree that a line needs to be drawn eventually.
The AFFA automatically rolls over every 3 rosters if the external operation is still projecting <60 IP for the nest 3 rosters, it isn't specifically reviewed, just has self extending/termination clauses. Once we get to 9 rosters however, it requires another Ballot to extend.
I will not do anything without thinking about it first.
Anyway, panic slowly, trust but verify
(I'd argue Verify then trust!)
a - 75% roster,
b - 50% pay with no work required for 24 months but return to whatever fleet needs you in 2 years,
c - ‘early exit’, retire/leave early for up to a years pay.
Seems like a good set of choices to me.
b - 50% pay with no work required for 24 months but return to whatever fleet needs you in 2 years,
c - ‘early exit’, retire/leave early for up to a years pay.
Seems like a good set of choices to me.
A.) The 75% Roster is a Flexi-Flying/Part-time agreement which also includes a 50% option. I believe the Company are also open to all offers outside of the the normal 50/75. Flexi-Flying, like LWOP, are not specifically linked to COVID and have been Lifestyle options for a few years. While Pilots who sign up for these due to COVID will be accounted for in the cost savings, it's not a new offering.
B.) There's actually 2 options here. Leave with Pay for 2 years on 50% with Recall, or 30% with limited Recall. On 50%, you can be recalled with 2 months notice, must keep your Medical Current and must attend annual refresher courses. If you opt for 30%, you can be recalled with 3 months notice after the 50%'s have been recalled but are not required to attend annual refreshers (still required to maintain your Medical).
The 30% option also includes the ability to convert to LWOP if recalled. You can also take LWOP up to 5 years or a combination 2 years 30% + LWOP to a maximum of 5 years,
C.) There are 2 options here. Early Retirement for Widebody Pilots or Early exit for anyone else. Early Retirement is a larger offering than the Severance pay in our CEA, but paid over 2 years instead of in a Lump sum. Early exit, (aimed at over 65 Airbus Captains I assume), is basically the equivalent of Severance pay, but also paid over 2 years. Given Severance pay (as per the CEA) is not payable to Pilots over 65, this might be a decent Carrot to get them to retire.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting! They sound like pretty great options to be honest. Surely there’ll be some punters who are keen. Not great for those who already took voluntary in the first round
Just to expand on this.
A.) The 75% Roster is a Flexi-Flying/Part-time agreement which also includes a 50% option. I believe the Company are also open to all offers outside of the the normal 50/75. Flexi-Flying, like LWOP, are not specifically linked to COVID and have been Lifestyle options for a few years. While Pilots who sign up for these due to COVID will be accounted for in the cost savings, it's not a new offering.
B.) There's actually 2 options here. Leave with Pay for 2 years on 50% with Recall, or 30% with limited Recall. On 50%, you can be recalled with 2 months notice, must keep your Medical Current and must attend annual refresher courses. If you opt for 30%, you can be recalled with 3 months notice after the 50%'s have been recalled but are not required to attend annual refreshers (still required to maintain your Medical).
The 30% option also includes the ability to convert to LWOP if recalled. You can also take LWOP up to 5 years or a combination 2 years 30% + LWOP to a maximum of 5 years,
C.) There are 2 options here. Early Retirement for Widebody Pilots or Early exit for anyone else. Early Retirement is a larger offering than the Severance pay in our CEA, but paid over 2 years instead of in a Lump sum. Early exit, (aimed at over 65 Airbus Captains I assume), is basically the equivalent of Severance pay, but also paid over 2 years. Given Severance pay (as per the CEA) is not payable to Pilots over 65, this might be a decent Carrot to get them to retire.
A.) The 75% Roster is a Flexi-Flying/Part-time agreement which also includes a 50% option. I believe the Company are also open to all offers outside of the the normal 50/75. Flexi-Flying, like LWOP, are not specifically linked to COVID and have been Lifestyle options for a few years. While Pilots who sign up for these due to COVID will be accounted for in the cost savings, it's not a new offering.
B.) There's actually 2 options here. Leave with Pay for 2 years on 50% with Recall, or 30% with limited Recall. On 50%, you can be recalled with 2 months notice, must keep your Medical Current and must attend annual refresher courses. If you opt for 30%, you can be recalled with 3 months notice after the 50%'s have been recalled but are not required to attend annual refreshers (still required to maintain your Medical).
The 30% option also includes the ability to convert to LWOP if recalled. You can also take LWOP up to 5 years or a combination 2 years 30% + LWOP to a maximum of 5 years,
C.) There are 2 options here. Early Retirement for Widebody Pilots or Early exit for anyone else. Early Retirement is a larger offering than the Severance pay in our CEA, but paid over 2 years instead of in a Lump sum. Early exit, (aimed at over 65 Airbus Captains I assume), is basically the equivalent of Severance pay, but also paid over 2 years. Given Severance pay (as per the CEA) is not payable to Pilots over 65, this might be a decent Carrot to get them to retire.
Emailing Council (in my experience) has always resulted in a rather quick, concise response, so it baffles me as to why they'd rather have to field questions individually opposed to simply sending out more comms.
None of the above is "Fleet specific" aside from perhaps limiting the number of slots available on a per fleet/rank basis.
Anyone who takes 50% LWP will require re-training on their return, regardless of Fleet.
It's all about preserving Cash for the next 2 years (at this stage). Many of us will require a full TR anyway as we're being directed, so the cost is the cost be it today or in 2 years.
Specifically to the 777, as the fleets effectively grounded, I'd say anyone who applies for any of the above will have it approved and their direction course delayed (or cancelled if they're retiring). 787/A320 Fleets however, still have some work on, so depending on how many EOI's are submitted, they might be forced to limit how many are accepted.
If it wasn't for the MBF I'd not be a member of ALPA anymore. Despite the repeated requests for more regular updates nothing has changed... I rely on the FEDs emails that are forwarded to me.
If you have any questions feel free to email [email protected]
FANZP insurances are structured slightly differently but the net effect is exactly the same. The process from going on sick leave through to losing a medical and receiving the loss of licence payment results in the same amount of money. Everyone I’ve spoken to who has used the system has been very happy with the support.
If you have any questions feel free to email [email protected]
If you have any questions feel free to email [email protected]
I sincerely hope there’s a name change away from a federation for FANZP. Remove the stigma for many decades ago. It’s already glaringly obvious that they’re superior in terms of support and communications in a time of crisis (the most important time for a union to be good at the basics). A lot of ALPA members are already aware that they have got their cart attached to the wrong horse.
IMO a name change, more public information (particularly around the similarities between the two unions) and a more user friendly website. Voila. There will be no reason not to move.
From my conversations, I understand a large number of furloughed ALPA members will be returning as FANZP. They’ve been let down, left hung out to dry, no replies to emails to the council, no communications, no representation of many pilot groups (particularly newer members) and over support of ARPs. Their dictator in chief (DIC) has shown a level of corruption on multiple levels - as has been discussed in detail on ‘other’ forums.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I’ve seen the FANZP comms and to be honest there was nothing in them I didn’t already know. They seem to contain a lot of pontificating, opinion, and graphs, that add nothing to what is already out there.
Can someone elaborate exactly how to the furloughed pilots feel let down? Do they think union membership would have affected wether or not they got furloughed or made redundant?
I have also read the “other” forums, and whilst there’s been the odd goood point made, it struck me that most of the posters hadn’t read their CEA, or the comms from the company and their union.
And no, I’m not an elected union offical or council member for either NZALPA or FANZP.
Can someone elaborate exactly how to the furloughed pilots feel let down? Do they think union membership would have affected wether or not they got furloughed or made redundant?
I have also read the “other” forums, and whilst there’s been the odd goood point made, it struck me that most of the posters hadn’t read their CEA, or the comms from the company and their union.
And no, I’m not an elected union offical or council member for either NZALPA or FANZP.