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 11th Jul 2020, 13:25
  #661 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Lagrangian point 2
Posts: 204
That was addressed recently. LH and SH are separate. CR would only affect LH pilots as that is where the surplus is
That may have been TLSís/managements wish or interpretation, but Iím not sure itís as cut and dry as Ďyouíre in SH, youíre safeí...

See WKís post on Qrewroom.
ExtraShot is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2020, 13:33
  #662 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sincity
Posts: 1,086
Originally Posted by ExtraShot View Post
That may have been TLSís/managements wish or interpretation, but Iím not sure itís as cut and dry as Ďyouíre in SH, youíre safeí...

See WKís post on Qrewroom.
this.
sadly.

but it probably depends on your lawyers bill size
maggot is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2020, 13:38
  #663 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Gladstone
Age: 44
Posts: 104
Originally Posted by Capt Fathom View Post
Fujiroll76

Are you suggesting that someone over 60, who has time off due to the present downturn, is incapable of passing their medical and getting through a new type course?
Not at all

I am simply stating the obvious that any pilot who has a lengthy period away from aviation would struggle.
Ill go out on a limb here and say that the older you get the harder it becomes to keep CASA away and a Class 1 doesnt come as easy as they once did. Incapable? No.......Hurdles? Yes
Fujiroll76 is online now  
Old 11th Jul 2020, 13:43
  #664 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Gladstone
Age: 44
Posts: 104
Originally Posted by Emmit Stussy View Post
Fuji, not sure I understand your hypothesis.
I agree that all SH pilots are ineligible for VR, but as there are no SH pilots in LH where does the 20% come from?
Well the jury is still out on that but yes for this I did not include in the surplus.
The figures used were based on the "65 Graph" issued by AIPA - Im not aware that this graph is solely LH pilots or a mixture of both SH and LH pilots reaching 65.

I assumed it was a mix and (weighted 80/20) This is my own assumption which i believe to be fairly accurate but happy to be advised otherwise.
Fujiroll76 is online now  
Old 11th Jul 2020, 15:44
  #665 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,005
Originally Posted by ExtraShot View Post
That may have been TLSís/managements wish or interpretation, but Iím not sure itís as cut and dry as Ďyouíre in SH, youíre safeí...

See WKís post on Qrewroom.
Thereís only 5 provisions of the Long Haul Agreement that apply to pilots who have transferred to Short Haul operations under 20.4 of the LH agreement. None of them deal with redundancy.

The Integration Agreement only specifies that new hire pilots be retrenched in accordance the Pilots Agreement, LH EBA. It doesnít address those new hire pilots who transferred over to Short Haul. Unless it was one of the 5 provisions of the LH EBA that carried over nothing in the LH EBA will apply to a SH pilot. The SH EBA refers to redundancies if a pilotís ďpositionĒ becomes redundant. As no SH pilot is being offered VR then no SH positions are redundant.

However Iím not an IR lawyer, and Iíll assume no one else is. So itíll probably end up in court anyway if it gets to the point of CR (Iím still fairly sure it wonít however which is the best thing for all).
dr dre is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2020, 21:53
  #666 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 147
Re WK post on qrewroom, he says redundancy will happen in accordance with the pilots agreement, EA10. A SH pilot isnít employed under EA 10.

I really donít think this is going to be a short term issue, however if this shit continues or gets worse it may. The companyís position is that SH is not going to be included if there are CRís now. Iíd believe their IR lawyers been through this in great detail, and that their position is pretty solid. The other side is that if SH shrinks, then any LH pilot will not be included.

Remember there are other mechanisms available before redundancy (ie temporary EA variations).
cloudsurfng is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2020, 22:44
  #667 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: HKG
Posts: 232
As Fuji said they should run the VR first.

If they get the required numbers, great and all of us can take a chill pill.

Problem is letís say they even fall 20 numbers short. How many people in the bottom 100 are going to risk being the one not to take LWOP? And what about the next 100 pilots above them? As SandyPalms said- how far will the crocodile climb?

This is a very dirty tactic, but itís in the EBA.
Green.Dot is online now  
Old 11th Jul 2020, 22:59
  #668 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 353
I think everyone’s barking at shadows here.
The company don’t want CR because it might start a fight.
All the options they’re providing will achieve their goals. Infact they will probably turn people down.
It is a bit naughty to offer the LWOP to protect ones position. They know the bottom few hundred will jump at it though.
That I don’t like but they’re not friends. It’s business to them. Pure and simple.
By the way when will they advise the results?
All I saw was that the binding commitment was valid for up to three months?
Wingspar is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2020, 23:00
  #669 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 340
Jobkeeper definitely applies to lwop as it stands. If any continuation of JK is the same then lwop is a bit of a no-brainer for junior guys imo. But who’s to say how junior will be junior once everyone at the bottom absconds to secure their jobs.

If any new jobkeeper doesn’t include lwop then the company are essentially forcing us to choose between job security and a minimal wage which for a lot of us is the difference between scraping by or not. This would be a bit of a dick move by the company. I would prefer to stay stood down with no leave accrual to keep JK.

Also how does it work if a LH pilot is made redundant (compulsory) and there are say 50 SH pilots below them. Does that pilot then get rehired at the bottom of the list losing 50 spots?
Fonz121 is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2020, 23:11
  #670 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: M.I.A.
Posts: 176
Originally Posted by Fonz121 View Post
Also how does it work if a LH pilot is made redundant (compulsory) and there are say 50 SH pilots below them. Does that pilot then get rehired at the bottom of the list losing 50 spots?
No.

From the Agreement:

A pilot re-employed will resume the relative position on the pilot seniority list that he or she occupied as at the time of termination of employment due to redundancy.
Bug Smasher Smasher is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2020, 00:09
  #671 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: centre of my universe
Posts: 289
Originally Posted by cloudsurfng View Post
Re WK post on qrewroom, he says redundancy will happen in accordance with the pilots agreement, EA10. A SH pilot isnít employed under EA 10.

I really donít think this is going to be a short term issue, however if this shit continues or gets worse it may. The companyís position is that SH is not going to be included if there are CRís now. Iíd believe their IR lawyers been through this in great detail, and that their position is pretty solid. The other side is that if SH shrinks, then any LH pilot will not be included.

Remember there are other mechanisms available before redundancy (ie temporary EA variations).
The Integration Agreement sits above both the LH & SH award. Itís the mechanism that allows crew to move between awards. No one signs a new employment contract when they move between awards because the IA puts you under the same umbrella. The Last on first off redundancy rules come from this agreement.
Poto is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2020, 00:11
  #672 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 82
Apologies if I've missed something, but how (even leaving SH pilots out of the argument) does being on LWOP allow the company to circumvent LH seniority regarding possible CRs?


Last edited by Koizi; 12th Jul 2020 at 00:18. Reason: Remove SH pilots from question
Koizi is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2020, 00:14
  #673 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Unfortunately not the Orient
Posts: 296
If it comes to CR, it seems QF will try and Silo both sides. This is their desire, as the 737 pilots are the ones they will need soon. It will end up in court, and I think the IA will win. It will be straight seniority.

Great point Koizi. I don’t think that legal either.

so much of this is still so dependent on whether the SH and LH lists can be separated when it comes to CR. WK (who is the bloke who wrote the IA) thinks it’s not possible. It needs to be tested in court, and that could be a long process.

Last edited by SandyPalms; 12th Jul 2020 at 00:51.
SandyPalms is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2020, 00:53
  #674 (permalink)  
Keg

Nunc est bibendum
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 5,339
There are about 200 LH pilots over the age of 60.

The top 40 are over 63.5 and will get an Ďearly retirementí offer. Itís still likely to pay more than being Ďstood downí.

The next 40 are between 62.5 and 63.5. Itís a relative no brainer that they will be far better off financially taking the deal on offer. Even 61.5 (another 50) is probably better off to take it if they have more than a couple of months leave up their sleeve.

The remaining 70? Line ball call as to whether the flying picks up enough for them to make more than the VR offer on the table. Give the impact that a lump sum payment can have into your bank account I suspect the offer will be enough for at least half of them to take it. 165 in total. There may be some crew under the age of 60 who have a look at the deal too so perhaps another 5-10 there.

So I suspect Qantas will go pretty close to getting the 190-200 theyíre after.

Unless they have a job contract to go to, any junior pilot should sit on their hands until the VR process plays out and avoid taking LWOP. Under CR Qantas pays a minimum of 6 months (this would apply to anyone hired since 2016) and you have a right of return as per the EA. Take LWOP and you get no accrued leave, no credited years towards LSL, a future CR wonít include any credit for time taken LWOP, etc. Until AIPA is able to have input into this LWOP and get a few quid pro quoís for helping the company out youíd be nuts to just jump in the hope that itíd save your job.

Of course if you have a 2, 3, 5 year contract on the table and want some certainty for the next few years then go for it! Little to lose in that situation. Though if you really wanted to Ďplay the systemí you could hold off applying for LWOP and continue to accrue leave and years of service and then take the LWOP a little further down the track. A strategy not without risk!
Keg is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2020, 00:57
  #675 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: melbourne
Posts: 38
Koizi/Sandy Palms, it is legal. Have a read of 15.10 of the EA, it’s all spelt out there. It also addresses re-employment after CR etc. Might I suggest to all at QF having to navigate through this time that a good read of that section of the award is worth a lot more than trawling through all the assumptions and opinions put forward on PPRuNe.
pig dog is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2020, 00:57
  #676 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Gladstone
Age: 44
Posts: 104
Originally Posted by Koizi View Post
Apologies if I've missed something, but how (even leaving SH pilots out of the argument) does being on LWOP allow the company to circumvent LH seniority regarding possible CRs?
Its absolutely ridiculous.

Yes some crew may have other options outside Qantas who will explore the LWOP option and get their golden ticket. BUT the vast majority don't. So its either hand up your entitlements and get a ticket too or stay stood down and accrue your leave BUT you may be made CR......but we can't tell you until its too late.

Dirty tactics
Fujiroll76 is online now  
Old 12th Jul 2020, 01:03
  #677 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 147
Originally Posted by Poto View Post
The Integration Agreement sits above both the LH & SH award. Itís the mechanism that allows crew to move between awards. No one signs a new employment contract when they move between awards because the IA puts you under the same umbrella. The Last on first off redundancy rules come from this agreement.
that is not the opinion of the company. Believe me, they have explored this in great detail. Hopefully we wonít have to find out.
cloudsurfng is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2020, 01:21
  #678 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 37
Posts: 484
I think the argument of not getting your entitlement accrual while on LWOP is a wish washy point as we all know the company will be going after that anyway with temporary EBA amendments.

To be clear to everyone, the company's view is that CR will come from LH only.

AIPA really needs to provide more information.
normanton is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2020, 01:38
  #679 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: centre of my universe
Posts: 289
The Company has had ĎIts positioní changed quite a few times during this pandemic. I would expect this one will be no different if they commence CR.
Poto is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2020, 01:40
  #680 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,005
The integration award was the award that allowed seamless transfer between two seperate agreements. It is very specific on how existing pilots (at the time the IA was written) will be treated in respect of redundancy, but it only provides pilots hired after itís implementation with a brief sentence saying they are to be retrenched first. It doesnít provide any specifics on what order those new hire pilots will be retrenched.

One could argue in court that the provisions between Q and A pilots in the IA should be applied to new hire pilots as well, which would mean all CR is quarantined to LH. One could also argue SH pilots cannot be bound by provisions of a LH EBA that they cannot vote on, unless itís written those provisions specifically apply to them.

A court could determine that it is a grey area and the company and AIPA have to sort it out amongst themselves with something definitive.

IMO the overarching statement is the one saying ďa pilots position becomes redundantĒ in the applicable EBA. As no SH pilots have been offered VR, then no SH pilotís position has become redundant.

Agreement discussions notwithstanding donít forget thereís also legal precedent in Australia for not applying seniority in redundancy (Kendell).

Last edited by dr dre; 12th Jul 2020 at 02:52.
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.