QF Group possible Redundancy Numbers/Packages
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 348
Originally Posted by Ragnor
What is the real number of redundancies here? I think 250 is well short. JQ have already threaten of mass lay offs Given a quoted email from the union which will happen even if the new EBA is signed end of July. QF surely will have to make more cuts to its international and domestic 737 crew.
Now that VA have very deep pockets with Bain I would think they will come out smaller but stronger than QF
Now that VA have very deep pockets with Bain I would think they will come out smaller but stronger than QF
So far the JQ pilot redundancies are around half a dozen F/Os from NZ and none from Australia. PER and NTL closing but those aircraft being redeployed to MEL & BNE.
Yes, Virgin will now have deep pockets, but they will likely be a more rational competitor with Bain steering them to a mid market carrier. In the Aus domestic market we already have Tiger gone, VA reducing to 40-50 737s, VA A330s gone.
My reading of the situation is that most of the shrinking of the domestic market will be absorbed by a downsized Virgin, and QF group should return to a similiar capacity of 2019 by mid 2021. But that’s only my opinion, I could be wrong.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: In the Trees
Posts: 159
Originally Posted by ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE
I didn’t see any such email, unless you’re referring to the NZ operation communication regarding stand down provisions being included into their agreement.
So far the JQ pilot redundancies are around half a dozen F/Os from NZ and none from Australia. PER and NTL closing but those aircraft being redeployed to MEL & BNE.
Yes, Virgin will now have deep pockets, but they will likely be a more rational competitor with Bain steering them to a mid market carrier. In the Aus domestic market we already have Tiger gone, VA reducing to 40-50 737s, VA A330s gone.
My reading of the situation is that most of the shrinking of the domestic market will be absorbed by a downsized Virgin, and QF group should return to a similiar capacity of 2019 by mid 2021. But that’s only my opinion, I could be wrong.
So far the JQ pilot redundancies are around half a dozen F/Os from NZ and none from Australia. PER and NTL closing but those aircraft being redeployed to MEL & BNE.
Yes, Virgin will now have deep pockets, but they will likely be a more rational competitor with Bain steering them to a mid market carrier. In the Aus domestic market we already have Tiger gone, VA reducing to 40-50 737s, VA A330s gone.
My reading of the situation is that most of the shrinking of the domestic market will be absorbed by a downsized Virgin, and QF group should return to a similiar capacity of 2019 by mid 2021. But that’s only my opinion, I could be wrong.
Respective unions have a massive job ahead of them to try and keep redundancies down.
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 348
Originally Posted by ANCDU
ECAM I think Jetstar is in line for a big hit too, a lot of aircraft used to do Bali, Tasman and the pacific, and not from NZ. Just by numbers if you say just a fifth of the narrow body fleet was flying internationally that’s a lot of crew that have no work. It’s no use transferring airframes from PER to MEL if their flying doesn’t exist anymore. This is a time when all unions needs to work with management to try and save the careers of those near the bottom of the airlines respective lists. There’s just not enough flying domestically in Australia for the number of pilots, in any of the major airlines.
Respective unions have a massive job ahead of them to try and keep redundancies down.
Respective unions have a massive job ahead of them to try and keep redundancies down.
That leaves about 5 extra NB frames that did the Bali flying, however we were 2 frames short prior to COVID due to the aircraft sent to Network with no decrease in the JQ domestic schedule and about 50 pilots short, about to embark on a big round of recruitment with many guys flying close to 100 hrs a month.
The official word from GE was no pilot redundancies from the Aus operation.
The company hasn’t been shy about letting JQ Asia and JQNZ know about redundancies so if there were plans in the works to let Aussie guys go they would’ve let us know. But of course plans can change.
Also worth noting is that while the broader QF group is having 20% of their workforce slashed, the figure for JQ is 6% (mainly head office).
It seems the biggest threat is closing more smaller bases and transferring the flying to the big 3.
Last edited by ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE; 29th Jun 2020 at 05:31.
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Anywhere
Posts: 15
Who’s going to take LWOP? There’s no jobs to go to this time (except maybe the guys that can get back into the airforce).
Obviously the company loves the idea because it gets people off the books for a few years without having a cough up the cash for redundancy. Having your cake and eating it too.
Obviously the company loves the idea because it gets people off the books for a few years without having a cough up the cash for redundancy. Having your cake and eating it too.
Nunc est bibendum
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 5,425
Any 747 or A380 pilot over the age of 63 should be wishing for a VR offer. Even if the company offered just the leave they would accrue over the next 12-24 months whilst stood down and to cash out their current leave balance, with the tax rates applied for redundancy the crew member would be well in front of what they’d get otherwise just sticking it out on stand down.
Anything above that number that AIPA can negotiate is a win for those crew.
Of course it depends on whether one thinks those crew can be kept stood down beyond March next year, whether the international borders are open and so on. So still a bit of a mess to work through.
One thing for sure. There are no winners in all of this. Everyone loses. Some will just lose less than others.
Anything above that number that AIPA can negotiate is a win for those crew.
Of course it depends on whether one thinks those crew can be kept stood down beyond March next year, whether the international borders are open and so on. So still a bit of a mess to work through.
One thing for sure. There are no winners in all of this. Everyone loses. Some will just lose less than others.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: BNE
Posts: 0
QF to resume TT 20 July 2020
Qantas plans to resume Trans-Tasman services from July 20, 2020 with the following:
Brisbane – Auckland 14 weekly
Brisbane – Christchurch 7 weekly
Brisbane – Queenstown 3 weekly
Melbourne – Auckland 27 weekly
Melbourne – Christchurch 5 weekly
Melbourne – Queenstown 3 weekly
Melbourne – Wellington 7 weekly
Sydney – Auckland 34 weekly
Sydney – Christchurch 7 weekly
Sydney – Queenstown 14 weekly
Sydney – Wellington 14 weekly
from routesonline
Brisbane – Auckland 14 weekly
Brisbane – Christchurch 7 weekly
Brisbane – Queenstown 3 weekly
Melbourne – Auckland 27 weekly
Melbourne – Christchurch 5 weekly
Melbourne – Queenstown 3 weekly
Melbourne – Wellington 7 weekly
Sydney – Auckland 34 weekly
Sydney – Christchurch 7 weekly
Sydney – Queenstown 14 weekly
Sydney – Wellington 14 weekly
from routesonline
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Brisbane
Age: 49
Posts: 230
Originally Posted by Keg
Any 747 or A380 pilot over the age of 63 should be wishing for a VR offer.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,268
Originally Posted by Overspeed1
Who’s going to take LWOP? There’s no jobs to go to this time.
Obviously there won’t be as many taking up the offer as those who took up other airline pilot positions in previous eras of LWOP. But I think a few will.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 120
Why offer VR to those over (say 62) on the 744 and 380 when they can probably leave them stood-down indefinitely at almost no cost? VR will almost certainly be used to offset training costs, so anyone that won't have to be trained through extended stand-downs won't get a look at VR.
Those under 60 would be able to see out the time until the 380 is returned to service or scrapped and still be valuable/productive in 2 to 3 years. Offer the 58-62 year olds (or whatever makes up 190) a VR and the training cost vs return value is significantly reduced.
Those under 60 would be able to see out the time until the 380 is returned to service or scrapped and still be valuable/productive in 2 to 3 years. Offer the 58-62 year olds (or whatever makes up 190) a VR and the training cost vs return value is significantly reduced.
Last edited by C441; 29th Jun 2020 at 06:42.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,200
There is a belief that the 747 pilots now have to be dealt with as they can’t be stood down as they don’t have any work as their aircraft is retired, therefore they need to either VR them or RIN them to another aircraft and then stand them down again.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,268
Originally Posted by Wingspar
Isn’t there also the Super consideration for those in Division one?
A calculation of the average last three years of income?
A calculation of the average last three years of income?
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: SE QLD
Posts: 255
Originally Posted by C441
Why offer VR to those over (say 62) on the 744 and 380 when they can probably leave them stood-down indefinitely at almost no cost?
Then the company have a choice - pay you MGH to sit around and do nothing - or follow the provisions in the EBA regarding reduction in numbers. That becomes their choice - it will be interesting to see how they “get the numbers right”.
Nunc est bibendum
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 5,425
Originally Posted by C441
Why offer VR to those over (say 62) on the 744 and 380 when they can probably leave them stood-down indefinitely at almost no cost?
I actually think it’d be immoral if Qantas didn’t immediately (or very soon) offer VR to anyone who turns 65 prior to April next year so that they can use the better redundancy tax rates for their accrued leave.
Personally I’d hope the offer would be a bit better than just the 7.3 weeks per annum until 65. Certainly you’ll need to offer a bit more to (say) a 60 or 61 year old if you wanted them to bail out earlier given they’re likely to do some flying in a few years. I guess it depends on demand and so on.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 120
Originally Posted by ScepticalOptomist
Because stand down can’t be indefinite.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 38
Posts: 484
Of course they will. They will argue there is no work for the 380 and thus you can remain stood down. Just because the borders are open, in the eyes of Qantas, changes nothing. If there is no useful work for the 380, and they intend to keep the fleet, then you can remain stood down.
Not saying I agree with it, but it will require the union taking the matter to FWA. You would assume Qantas has already done the homework on this.
Not saying I agree with it, but it will require the union taking the matter to FWA. You would assume Qantas has already done the homework on this.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: In a house
Posts: 395
I’m not sure if I’d be up to it at 61 to have a couple of years off and get back into it at a reasonable standard. It’s hard enough now after a few months.
If I were over 60 I’d be using this as a rehearsal for the big retirement.
It’s also probably adding years to your life, or if not years, those years in retirement will be in better health.
If I were over 60 I’d be using this as a rehearsal for the big retirement.
It’s also probably adding years to your life, or if not years, those years in retirement will be in better health.
Originally Posted by Keg
Why keep them when for the same cost to the business of keeping them stood down when you can show the market that you’re ‘doing something’ about the crewing numbers? Win/win for both parties. Doesn’t cost Qantas anything additional beyond what they were going to pay anyway, pilot clears more than they would had they remained stood down burning their 7 weeks and 2 days accrued leave each year. Plus the crew member gets better tax treatment of their accrued leave up their sleeve now.
I actually think it’d be immoral if Qantas didn’t immediately (or very soon) offer VR to anyone who turns 65 prior to April next year so that they can use the better redundancy tax rates for their accrued leave.
Personally I’d hope the offer would be a bit better than just the 7.3 weeks per annum until 65. Certainly you’ll need to offer a bit more to (say) a 60 or 61 year old if you wanted them to bail out earlier given they’re likely to do some flying in a few years. I guess it depends on demand and so on.
I actually think it’d be immoral if Qantas didn’t immediately (or very soon) offer VR to anyone who turns 65 prior to April next year so that they can use the better redundancy tax rates for their accrued leave.
Personally I’d hope the offer would be a bit better than just the 7.3 weeks per annum until 65. Certainly you’ll need to offer a bit more to (say) a 60 or 61 year old if you wanted them to bail out earlier given they’re likely to do some flying in a few years. I guess it depends on demand and so on.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 387
It’s all bluff!
Qantas will try it but I can’t see hundreds of crew blindly accepting that they can be stood down indefinitely!
To me the EA and FWA are quite clear. They can’t be stood down indefinitely if there are no limitations to international travel.
Qantas are trying it now because the other option is too expensive.
Ive seen it before and I’m even seeing it now in one example. QF will try to pull the wool over your eyes.
If that won’t work they’ll try cut a deal with AIPA.
What someone should do is lodge a grievance and then go to FW.
That is the only way to get something done.
Qantas will try it but I can’t see hundreds of crew blindly accepting that they can be stood down indefinitely!
To me the EA and FWA are quite clear. They can’t be stood down indefinitely if there are no limitations to international travel.
Qantas are trying it now because the other option is too expensive.
Ive seen it before and I’m even seeing it now in one example. QF will try to pull the wool over your eyes.
If that won’t work they’ll try cut a deal with AIPA.
What someone should do is lodge a grievance and then go to FW.
That is the only way to get something done.
