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 24th Aug 2020, 09:03
  #1581 (permalink)  
Keg

Nunc est bibendum
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 5,340
Meh, knock the early retirement offer back. 60 pilots on the LHEA aged north of 63 are still gone by 1 Jul 22. Going to accrue less in leave in that time than what is on offer and pay more in tax. Genius idea! Or cross your fingers and hope that the government largesse means youíll be better off if Jobkeeper goes beyond September next year.

Xeptu, will Qantas attempt to cancel the award? I donít know IR law at all so youíre getting a bush lawyer opinion here. Iíd be surprised if it were as Ďeasyí as many make it out to be just to CR people out of seniority and so on. Given the lengths that Qantas has gone to in order to demonstrate to the market how well positioned they are to come out the other side of this, itíd take something very significant (like Qantas going into administration) for an EA cancellation to even be on the table. Thatís so far into the future (north of 18 months) that Iím not going to invest too much energy in even considering it. Letís re-visit that issue in 12 months time.
Keg is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2020, 09:18
  #1582 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: The Swan Downunder
Posts: 565
I didn't mean "cancel the award/agreement" I don't even think they'll do that. I mean "set aside", as in not in use on this occasion, for this specific purpose as a consequence of this specific event.
Xeptu is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2020, 09:35
  #1583 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eagles Nest
Posts: 486
Originally Posted by goodonyamate View Post
they were never separated. That was the plan, they set up the CEO structure for them to be separate, but the split never eventuated. So effectively, theyíve always been merged
Thanks for that .
Toruk Macto is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2020, 10:16
  #1584 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sydney,Australia
Age: 58
Posts: 23
188 binding contracts, 150 of which are captains
MacTrim is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2020, 10:31
  #1585 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Australia
Posts: 10
Originally Posted by Xeptu View Post
I didn't mean "cancel the award/agreement" I don't even think they'll do that. I mean "set aside", as in not in use on this occasion, for this specific purpose as a consequence of this specific event.
Yep! Like announcing that their interpretation of CR isnít last on first off, but can be contained to Long Haul or Short Haul Agreements?

It is cheaper to make the bottom redundant than to let them accrue years of service and leave, in the short term and especially in the long run.

The cost of CR for a new hire is 3 months (~13 weeks) any time in the first 3 years. Notice can be given and served while on stand down (which means the second 3 months of the minimum 26 weeks are virtually free, costing only the leave accrual for that period (1.5 weeks) rather than the PILN at full pay.

The price of CR increases at a rate of 9 weeks per year (6 weeks leave accrual, 3 weeks entitlement). Itís cheaper to do CR sooner rather than later and they will.
Tucknroll is online now  
Old 24th Aug 2020, 11:03
  #1586 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sincity
Posts: 1,086
Originally Posted by Xeptu View Post
I didn't mean "cancel the award/agreement" I don't even think they'll do that. I mean "set aside", as in not in use on this occasion, for this specific purpose as a consequence of this specific event.
so.... how does this occur in your thinking

"yeah so... we're just going to set aside the contract for now"

??

maggot is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2020, 11:06
  #1587 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sincity
Posts: 1,086
Originally Posted by Telfer86 View Post
Not trying to alarm anyone

..yet here you are, again.

Originally Posted by Telfer86 View Post
QF have done the numbers & its about saving the bucks
finally some reality. Of course it is. Dollars today,tomorrow and the near future.
maggot is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2020, 11:12
  #1588 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: The Swan Downunder
Posts: 565
Originally Posted by maggot View Post
so.... how does this occur in your thinking

"yeah so... we're just going to set aside the contract for now"

??

Not in its entirety, but there are provisions in it that can be set aside. For example all matters pertaining to seniority since these are not allowable matters in law and haven't been for about 20 years. There would be no argument there even from the union other than an expression of displeasure.
Xeptu is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2020, 11:52
  #1589 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,011
Originally Posted by Tucknroll View Post
Itís cheaper to do CR sooner rather than later and they will.
Another fearmonger here to post baseless nonsense for no reason other than get a reaction out of people.

They had the chance to do CR right from the start, they didnít. They couldíve done CR instead of paying out substantially more in VR to more senior pilots, but it they didnít. Theyíve already announced any short term surplus within 2/3 years will be managed via stand downs, which they can do and are doing. The long term surplus beyond 3 years has been taken care of via the VR and early retirement or natural retirement.

They are looking toward the long term future and planning on keeping the most junior within the group seeing as they will around for the longest.
dr dre is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2020, 11:59
  #1590 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: The Swan Downunder
Posts: 565
Originally Posted by dr dre View Post
Another fearmonger here to post baseless nonsense for no reason other than get a reaction out of people.

They had the chance to do CR right from the start, they didnít. They couldíve done CR instead of paying out substantially more in VR to more senior pilots, but it they didnít. Theyíve already announced any short term surplus within 2/3 years will be managed via stand downs, which they can do and are doing. The long term surplus beyond 3 years has been taken care of via the VR and early retirement or natural retirement.

They are looking toward the long term future and planning on keeping the most junior within the group seeing as they will around for the longest.
Except that nobody could have imagined the magnitude of what was happening at the time, nor for how long this would go for. I presume they are paying entitlements in lieu of wages whilst on stand down, in which case there's nothing left to do until it runs out.
Xeptu is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2020, 11:59
  #1591 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: The great country of QLD
Posts: 4
Originally Posted by Xeptu View Post
For example all matters pertaining to seniority since these are not allowable matters in law and haven't been for about 20 years.
Got a legal reference for that? What does it even mean?
Cirressna is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2020, 12:02
  #1592 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sincity
Posts: 1,086
Originally Posted by Xeptu View Post
Not in its entirety, but there are provisions in it that can be set aside. For example all matters pertaining to seniority since these are not allowable matters in law and haven't been for about 20 years. There would be no argument there even from the union other than an expression of displeasure.
quit making shit up
maggot is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2020, 12:02
  #1593 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Australia
Posts: 10
Originally Posted by dr dre View Post
Another fearmonger here to post baseless nonsense for no reason other than get a reaction out of people.

They had the chance to do CR right from the start, they didnít. They couldíve done CR instead of paying out substantially more in VR to more senior pilots, but it they didnít. Theyíve already announced any short term surplus within 2/3 years will be managed via stand downs, which they can do and are doing. The long term surplus beyond 3 years has been taken care of via the VR and early retirement or natural retirement.

They are looking toward the long term future and planning on keeping the most junior within the group seeing as they will around for the longest.
Baseless? No I donít think so.

They offered VR because they have to itís in the agreement, just like offering LWOP (which they have too). We all know it VR was a bad deal, the only ones who took it are either jack of the politics or were going to leave anyway. Early retirement even more so.

All the 747s have gone, 6 A380s wonít fly again, a bunch of A330s reaching end of life and no orders for the foreseeable future (Iím fact 787s not being delivered) and what, 190 pilots gone with VR?

Come on. Weíve got guys over 65 on stand down accruing leave. No one is leaving unless they get a payout. Hell I wouldnít.

Have a look at the seniority list, how long are they going to carry the excess. Itís not fear mongering, CR is a better option than long term stand down for pilots. If you donít want CR then do what the company want and take LWOP, a bunch already have. Iím a middle seniority S/O and Iíd prefer to be paid out if theyíre going to leave me hanging for years, at least then Iíve got money to stay afloat and do other things.
Tucknroll is online now  
Old 24th Aug 2020, 12:07
  #1594 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: The Swan Downunder
Posts: 565
Originally Posted by maggot View Post
quit making shit up
just what is made up. you need to understand, here in PPRuNe land we are seasoned, been there done that heard it all before. If you have a problem with that take it back to your webinars
Xeptu is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2020, 12:15
  #1595 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Unfortunately not the Orient
Posts: 296
Xeptu. WTFAYOA? You’re a pest. PFO.
SandyPalms is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2020, 12:21
  #1596 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: The Swan Downunder
Posts: 565
Originally Posted by SandyPalms View Post
Xeptu. WTFAYOA? Youíre a pest. PFO.
so are you with, feel free to take your own advice
Xeptu is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2020, 12:46
  #1597 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1
The FAs took QF to Fair Work over a seniority issue about a year ago - and won. Anything else left to make up?
ConfigFull is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2020, 12:58
  #1598 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: The Swan Downunder
Posts: 565
Originally Posted by ConfigFull View Post
The FAs took QF to Fair Work over a seniority issue about a year ago - and won. Anything else left to make up?
Are you sure it was a seniority matter, I'll take that onboard and check.

P.S Fair work is not the Industrial Court which has the same powers as the Supreme Court
Xeptu is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2020, 13:20
  #1599 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1
Originally Posted by Xeptu View Post
P.S Fair work is not the Industrial Court which has the same powers as the Supreme Court
Anyone want to help me out with this one...?
ConfigFull is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2020, 14:02
  #1600 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: The Swan Downunder
Posts: 565
Originally Posted by ConfigFull View Post
Anyone want to help me out with this one...?
Apparently not ! look my motives here are misunderstood, if I can stop just one person from throwing thousands of dollars at a legal argument that I know cannot be won, despite their firm solemn belief, supported by legal advice that they will because it's written in their agreement/contract, then I would consider my objectives achieved.
Xeptu 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.