Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

QF Group possible Redundancy Numbers/Packages

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

QF Group possible Redundancy Numbers/Packages

Old 7th Jun 2020, 12:28
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 861
I don’t want to see it but I think you you would have to say AirNZ is probably a good guide to the future of the red rat, The only saviour would be the collapse of VA. I think that is the only thing delaying the inbound management emails of consultation, right sizing, facing the future etc,etc. I just can’t see any substantial International travel for 12 months minimum. It might get worse too now if all the self serving protestors who are above all law abiding citizens kick this thing off again. I’m not sure how the state premiers can keep the borders shut now when they turn a blind eye to 20000 in the streets holding hands. That may help get airlines back in a more meaningful way conversely, the next two weeks will see.
.
ozbiggles is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2020, 12:37
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 147
Originally Posted by dolphi View Post
If you believe that redundancies aren't on the way across the board within the Qantas group, you’re living in an alternate reality. The increasing cost in accruing annual leave without any flying across some fleets is a cost Qantas can do without. The only question is whether it will be done on seniority or fleet. With the get out of jail free card, and the importance of reducing expenditure, my guess is it will be done by fleet to save in training cost.
get out of jail free card?
cloudsurfng is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2020, 12:46
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Location: USA
Posts: 3
Originally Posted by cloudsurfng View Post
get out of jail free card?
I think we’ve all seen examples of EBA’s been totally disregarded due to the Covid-19 economic downturn.
dolphi is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2020, 14:00
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Land of Oz
Posts: 153
The pandemic Surfer........QF will take it to the IR courts and plead for the companys survival, and then they will get the legal permission they need to do whatever they want...
No Idea Either is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2020, 15:09
  #25 (permalink)  
Keg

Nunc est bibendum
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 5,367
To which I hope the response from the court is ‘why did you proceed to put these terms to a vote when COVID was already a known thing?’
Keg is online now  
Old 7th Jun 2020, 22:32
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2020
Location: Village
Posts: 52
The Group itself, stands to gain 7--10% market share after the fall of VA.
didrechambers77 is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2020, 22:38
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 105
My take. Redundancies are expensive for the senior crew. A380 crew to be kept on stand down for a long while. Quite a few 747 crew (Cpt's and FO's) will retire. Others handled via a small RIN. I can't see Qf doing a Rin from top to bottom under the contract as it's too expensive and they will go to FW to say it could potentially risk the company and its finances so better to do things another way rather than risk 30000 jobs. I think they would win that. My guess and the cheapest way, make the bottom 300 (or whatever the surplus is) LH pilots redundant at little cost and heavy crew the B787's and A330's in the short to medium term. As flying picks up and pilot numbers are needed again, redundant pilots would be brought back on in seniority order. Yes heavy crewing is more expensive but a hellava lot cheaper than redundancies at the top end by fleet or a Rin from top to bottom. Just my 2c.
Autobrakes4 is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2020, 22:59
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 348
Originally Posted by didrechambers77 View Post
The Group itself, stands to gain 7--10% market share after the fall of VA.
Absolutely, the smaller Virgin is after administration, the fewer job loses will be required from QF group (on the domestic fleets).
ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2020, 23:43
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 310
I suspect SH Mainline pilots might be safe. Flexible MGH (only need 70% of flying back to stand all pilots up) and Jetconnect might face the axe. I’m sure JetStar domestic has similar flexibility?

I agree with many of Autobrakes4 points. I think though the final number will be far less. I guess that depends on us.
crosscutter is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2020, 23:46
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 375
Originally Posted by Keg View Post
To which I hope the response from the court is ‘why did you proceed to put these terms to a vote when COVID was already a known thing?’
Kegs spot on!
FW to QF,”Why did you push for this EA vote, against some pilots wishes, at a time when you basically shut down the airline in the depths of a pandemic?”
QF were totally aware of the provisions of the EA including CR, RIN etc!
Also QF have clearly stated that the company can run as is ‘til the end of next year?
Where’s the dire need to run outside the EA?
VA probably have that ability through administration but not QF.
QF might be ticked off they’ve run it so well over the years.
As they tell everyone!
As has been mentioned, selected VR to some. Most probably to 380 and 744 crews but not for a while.
This stand down facility is a godsend to the company.
Crew on those aircraft will probably start, quite rightly, to jump up and down as their leave runs out and be insisting the company make a decision.
No doubt hoping for some VR because the alternative is very costly for the company.

Last edited by Wingspar; 7th Jun 2020 at 23:57.
Wingspar is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2020, 00:26
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 352
Why make pilots redundant when they could be offered LWOP?
Fonz121 is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2020, 00:51
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 102
Will QF even need to go to FW? AIPA and the pilots are in a difficult position. Agree to the demands of QF (assuming they want to make people redundant by fleet) or risk going to FW to defend the LIFO Or even the seniority principles in total. QF wouldn’t go to FW for a temporary exemption to these provisions, they would try to have them removed entirely. Would seniority be in jeopardy? And what would be the odds of success for AIPA based on the timeframe of the LH vote (very slim I would think)? It’s a different bench than that of 2012.
My bet is AIPA will agree to some temporary measure to allow a redundancy out of seniority (with the right of return in seniority) by aircraft type under very strict conditions, along with a VR package by aircraft type. Sad, but that’s what I see.
Chad Gates is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2020, 00:52
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,122
Originally Posted by Keg View Post
To which I hope the response from the court is ‘why did you proceed to put these terms to a vote when COVID was already a known thing?’
It could probably be argued that when the vote took place the expected period of the stand down was only short term and things were expected to be back to normal within a short period of time. Any long term reduction in passenger numbers only became apparent well after the vote took place, so the extent of any retraining was not foreseen at the time.

Originally Posted by dragon man View Post
It was alluded to last week by the CP that we would be hearing news shortly we do not want to hear. AIPA are meeting Qantas on Wednesday to discuss VR or CR I don’t know which. Three months notice from the end of this month is the end September when jobkeeper finishes. As Green.Dot says above if you do want to think about it don’t read this forum.
No that was not said. In fact TLS has often said he does not see the need to make anyone redundant, if the network you had in 2019 is the one you want in a few years when demand returns time why would you go about redundancies and RINs in the meantime if you need same crew in a few years?

They would be seeking “flexibilities” - which could be things like not accruing leave whilst stood down, lower divisors to bring more people back to work, possibility training more onto the 737 to absorb excess crew, they’re doing absolutely everything to ensure the most people can remain employed in the long run. This would be done in conjunction with the union so I guess that’s why they are meeting.

Originally Posted by Wingspar View Post
As has been mentioned, selected VR to some. Most probably to 380 and 744 crews but not for a while.
This stand down facility is a godsend to the company.
Crew on those aircraft will probably start, quite rightly, to jump up and down as their leave runs out and be insisting the company make a decision.
The company has been quite clear they can keep pilots on stand down indefinitely, and even some suggest until the network is back at 100% of the original one. It could be said if there are any COVID-19 related international travel restrictions then at least until they are all removed, which going off government statements at least 12 months, or maybe until a vaccine is found.

Even if they are RIN’d somewhere they’ll just be kept on stand down for the foreseeable future anyway as there is little international flying available to do any training.

So I believe there will be no CR (I hope so as well) and possibly some VR, but not much.
dr dre is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2020, 00:54
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Dunda
Posts: 136
Originally Posted by Wingspar View Post

This stand down facility is a godsend to the company.
.
Godsend for staff too really, find something else to do for a while and at least you will come back to the same EBA while still accruing all your leave.

The layoff numbers around the world are breathtaking. Plenty will be rehired eventually but no doubt on worse conditions.
20000 finishing up with Air Canada.
patty50 is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2020, 01:15
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 102
Originally Posted by patty50 View Post
Godsend for staff too really, find something else to do for a while and at least you will come back to the same EBA while still accruing all your leave.

The layoff numbers around the world are breathtaking. Plenty will be rehired eventually but no doubt on worse conditions.
20000 finishing up with Air Canada.
Considering the words of TLS in the last webinar, that particular provision seems to be the problem.
Chad Gates is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2020, 01:30
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: In a house
Posts: 387
Originally Posted by Chad Gates View Post
Considering the words of TLS in the last webinar, that particular provision seems to be the problem.
It may be,

but that’s the price QF have got to pay for the flexibility of having the crew there for a fast ramp up.

It takes a year to run a recruitment campaign and have a pilot in the seat at the end of it......
Blueskymine is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2020, 01:44
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 102
Originally Posted by Blueskymine View Post
It may be,

but that’s the price QF have got to pay for the flexibility of having the crew there for a fast ramp up.

It takes a year to run a recruitment campaign and have a pilot in the seat at the end of it......
fair enough, and if TLS used the word “flexibility” less than 50 times, I’d be surprised.
I don’t think they would need to recruit, and really, having them (I’m meaning very junior S/O’s) return from redundancy in seniority order, would serve exactly the same purpose as a stand down. Pilots made redundant could of course seek other employment, but they can do that while stood down also.

Last edited by Chad Gates; 8th Jun 2020 at 03:26. Reason: Clarification
Chad Gates is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2020, 02:34
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: NDB
Age: 50
Posts: 144
Provisions are written into the awards to deal with downturns, unforeseen circumstances and times of financial hardships, that is why they are included in agreements. If every time one of the mentioned occurred and Qantas ran to FW the question would have to be asked why do you continually agree to these provisions that you are a signatory to if you have no intentions of following them? Qantas in the past has followed the reduction in numbers process over the last 15 years but we continue to see many still jumping at shadows and screaming from the roof tops that the world will cave in and we are all screwed, this hasn't happened. In the grand scheme of things a RIN is not expensive, we have over 30,000 people employed in Qantas on various pay scales and conditions so for about 100 pilots to be absorbed throughout the network isn't the great financial burden that we are convincing ourselves it is. From what I've heard I certainly do not believe the company will go rouge but I do believe there will be tough times for all of us, things are certainly not going to happen as fast as we would like, flexible working arrangements will be required for the interim and there probably will be a few that have flown their last sectors for QF. But the intentions of the award will be followed.

Keep well.
OnceBitten is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2020, 02:41
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: M.I.A.
Posts: 177
Consider the cost of redundancy payments for crew with 20, 30, 40 years of service and then allowing them to return to work, with the associated training costs; compared to a RIN and trickle down training costs; and compare that too to keeping people stood down.
Bug Smasher Smasher is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2020, 03:25
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,122
Originally Posted by OnceBitten View Post
In the grand scheme of things a RIN is not expensive, we have over 30,000 people employed in Qantas on various pay scales and conditions so for about 100 pilots to be absorbed throughout the network isn't the great financial burden that we are convincing ourselves it is.
There’s probably only 100-150 ish 747 pilots remaining anyway. From what I’m led to believe a lot of them were planning on retiring when the fleet retired so they were going anyway. Add to that the retirements that probably would’ve been occurring on other fleets in the next 12 months and that’ll sort out the remaining 747 numbers. Don’t forget the 150 pilots who won’t be recruited into mainline to replace those retiring 747 (and other) pilots over the next 12 months are sort of job losses in a way.

If there is a permanent reduction in any other fleets (not just shorter term stand downs) then there’ll be the need to talk of surpluses, but it doesn’t look like they’re proceeding on that path from anything which has been said at the moment.
dr dre is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.