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 29th Jun 2020, 06:30
  #561 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 27
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.

Last edited by C441; 29th Jun 2020 at 06:42.
C441 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 06:45
  #562 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,178
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.
dragon man is online now  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 06:45
  #563 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 319
Isnít there also the Super consideration for those in Division one?
A calculation of the average last three years of income?
Wingspar is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 07:14
  #564 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 817
Originally Posted by Wingspar View Post
Isnít there also the Super consideration for those in Division one?
A calculation of the average last three years of income?
Highest earning 3 of the last 10 years. But very doubtful thereíll be many more prosperous than the last 3 in the near future for most
dr dre is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 07:21
  #565 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 319

Thanks!
Wingspar is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 07:48
  #566 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: SE QLD
Posts: 169
Originally Posted by C441 View Post
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?
Because stand down canít be indefinite. At some point it becomes a commercial decision and the clause of stand down wonít apply. Ie When the government no longer has a travel ban / border closure in place.

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 ďget the numbers rightĒ.
ScepticalOptomist is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 08:02
  #567 (permalink)  
Keg

Nunc est bibendum
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 5,264
Originally Posted by C441 View Post
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?
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.
Keg is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 08:27
  #568 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 27
Originally Posted by ScepticalOptomist View Post
Because stand down can’t be indefinite.
As one of those staring at conceivably 3 years of stand-down I hope you're right, but one thing I am sure of is that Qantas demonstrated during the EA negotiations that they are far from a benevolent society. They will endeavour to keep us stood down as long as they can - by fair means or foul.
C441 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 08:32
  #569 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 37
Posts: 444
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.
normanton is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 08:45
  #570 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: In a house
Posts: 353
Iím not sure if Iíd be up to it at 61 to have a couple of years off and get back into it at a reasonable standard. Itís hard enough now after a few months.

If I were over 60 Iíd be using this as a rehearsal for the big retirement.

Itís also probably adding years to your life, or if not years, those years in retirement will be in better health.


Originally Posted by Keg View Post
Why keep them when for the same cost to the business of keeping them stood down when you can show the market that youíre Ďdoing somethingí about the crewing numbers? Win/win for both parties. Doesnít 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 itíd be immoral if Qantas didnít 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 Iíd hope the offer would be a bit better than just the 7.3 weeks per annum until 65. Certainly youíll need to offer a bit more to (say) a 60 or 61 year old if you wanted them to bail out earlier given theyíre likely to do some flying in a few years. I guess it depends on demand and so on.
Blueskymine is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 09:23
  #571 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 319
Itís all bluff!
Qantas will try it but I canít see hundreds of crew blindly accepting that they can be stood down indefinitely!
To me the EA and FWA are quite clear. They canít 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 Iím even seeing it now in one example. QF will try to pull the wool over your eyes.
If that wonít work theyíll 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.
Wingspar is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 10:02
  #572 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 896
Fair work will judge based on what is best for the greater good, that means the best way of keeping some jobs (not all) and the company functioning in a world of Covid and health restrictions FW a will not save you as an individual if you are just dragging the Tribe down with you. It is the new world order. Adapt and overcome. (Gunnery Sergeant Highway).
ozbiggles is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 11:02
  #573 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: SE QLD
Posts: 169
Originally Posted by normanton View Post
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.
Itís not based on whether you agree, or whether they intend to keep the fleet. The EBA is quite clear on when stand down can occur. FWA are pretty clear that in the case of an EBA covering a situation, they wonít interfere with it.

Union wonít need to do much, if anything. The EBA that was recently voted upon during this pandemic, stands.

Normanton, what QF would like to do, and what they can do, are very different things.

Wonít stop them trying to cut a deal to pull the wool over your eyes where they can though!

LH and SH EBAs are pretty tight - and not in QFs favour. Canít speak for the other EBAs in the group.
ScepticalOptomist is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 22:03
  #574 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 7
Originally Posted by ScepticalOptomist View Post
Itís not based on whether you agree, or whether they intend to keep the fleet. The EBA is quite clear on when stand down can occur. FWA are pretty clear that in the case of an EBA covering a situation, they wonít interfere with it.

Union wonít need to do much, if anything. The EBA that was recently voted upon during this pandemic, stands.

Normanton, what QF would like to do, and what they can do, are very different things.

Wonít stop them trying to cut a deal to pull the wool over your eyes where they can though!

LH and SH EBAs are pretty tight - and not in QFs favour. Canít speak for the other EBAs in the group.
Qantas initially announced they were grounding the A380 for 6 months based on the collapse of forward bookings. That was before the international borders were closed. The borders closed very soon after this announcement which left Qantas with no choice but to ground the fleet. Once the borders open, if there is still not sufficient forward bookings, Qantas will leave crew stood down as they were going to originally, due to lack of demand - not the closure of the borders. Unfortunately the EA does not address how long crew can remain stood down so arbitration will eventually be needed to determine when the stand down no longer applies.
aviones is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 22:24
  #575 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 38
Originally Posted by C441 View Post
As one of those staring at conceivably 3 years of stand-down I hope you're right, but one thing I am sure of is that Qantas demonstrated during the EA negotiations that they are far from a benevolent society. They will endeavour to keep us stood down as long as they can - by fair means or foul.

Thats because some of those ego driven sky gods amongst your A380 lot are total wank#rs and deserve whatís coming. Sadly, they might take the good guys down with them. Surely the government wonít keep giving these half a million dollar guys jobkeeper when there are so many others out there who are really finding it tough going and need the help. The gravy train is done and dusted!
Ruvap is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 22:52
  #576 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: oz
Posts: 282
+1 for Ruvap on job keeper, means test on the way?

Anyone who thinks there will be some magic trigger or commercial epiphany forcing Qantas away from stand down provisions, is dreaminí. Covid effects will last for a long time and as was mentioned earlier by Ozbiggles, the greater good will trump the interests of the senior pilot cadre.

Fat guy in coat, 100% correct. I doubt that will go to far. Industrially difficult and potentially a very negative outcome.



Last edited by Iron Bar; 30th Jun 2020 at 07:12.
Iron Bar is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 22:58
  #577 (permalink)  
34R
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Brisbane
Age: 49
Posts: 227
Originally Posted by Ruvap View Post
Thats because some of those ego driven sky gods amongst your A380 lot are total wank#rs and deserve whatís coming.
What an imbecilic comment.
Every fleet in every airline has wankers among them, but nobody deserves ďwhatís comingĒ....

I've been through it before and I wouldnít wish it on anybody.


34R is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 22:59
  #578 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 973
Disgraceful attitude guys. Those 'wank#rs' on the 380 gave you the conditions you now enjoy. I can scarcely believe such tripe comes from supposedly educated people.
V-Jet is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 23:23
  #579 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever I can log on.
Posts: 1,740
Very poor comments from Ruvap & Iron Bar. It’s times like this that we should be supporting each other, not insulting & denigrating your peers.
Going Boeing is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 23:25
  #580 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 817
Originally Posted by Fatguyinalittlecoat View Post
I do find it amusing how, after spending the last 30 years denigrating SH pilots, and telling all and sundry how crap the 737 is, there are now demands (both privately and even publicly, Iím told) from A380 crew to be given the right to displace a 737 position.
Well thatís not going to happen.

For one, itís not legal (canít displace someone working under another agreement), this was established and settled during the 2014 RIN.

Secondly itíd be a massive expense to retrain all of your domestic pilots, and management have made it quite clear they want absolutely zero unnecessary expense.

It will never happen.
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.