QF Group possible Redundancy Numbers/Packages
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 312
My opinion:
As a matter of construction, 15.10.4 determines notice period of redundancy. 15.10.5 determines minimum entitlements for redundancy. The two items are not the same. If 26 weeks pay was the minimum entitlement, it would be stated in 15.10.5. Moreover, 15.10.4(b) states that by agreement with an individual pilot, a notice of redundancy may be paid out... The word 'may' means that the payment in lieu of notice is discretionary (that is, it is not an entitlement) - so long as the parties agree.
So, a pilot who's minimum redundancy entitlement under 15.10.5 is 4 weeks would have to be given 22 weeks notice (or by agreement be paid 22 weeks notice in lieu). In 'normal' circumstances when the stand down provisions were not in force, that would amount to 26 weeks of pay. If the pilot is stood down, that notice period should attract whatever job keeper minimum payment is in force at the time.
As a matter of construction, 15.10.4 determines notice period of redundancy. 15.10.5 determines minimum entitlements for redundancy. The two items are not the same. If 26 weeks pay was the minimum entitlement, it would be stated in 15.10.5. Moreover, 15.10.4(b) states that by agreement with an individual pilot, a notice of redundancy may be paid out... The word 'may' means that the payment in lieu of notice is discretionary (that is, it is not an entitlement) - so long as the parties agree.
So, a pilot who's minimum redundancy entitlement under 15.10.5 is 4 weeks would have to be given 22 weeks notice (or by agreement be paid 22 weeks notice in lieu). In 'normal' circumstances when the stand down provisions were not in force, that would amount to 26 weeks of pay. If the pilot is stood down, that notice period should attract whatever job keeper minimum payment is in force at the time.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,132
Regarding the last 3 posts,
Guys, VR has met it’s achieved targets. That and retirements will take care of the forecast long term surplus.
It makes no sense to discuss the finer details of CR now. It is not on the table, and there no plans for it to be put on the table. All you are doing by continually mentioning it is inducing more fear into a group that already has enough stress to deal with.
Guys, VR has met it’s achieved targets. That and retirements will take care of the forecast long term surplus.
It makes no sense to discuss the finer details of CR now. It is not on the table, and there no plans for it to be put on the table. All you are doing by continually mentioning it is inducing more fear into a group that already has enough stress to deal with.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 37
Posts: 484
Originally Posted by dr dre
Guys, VR has met it’s achieved targets. That and retirements will take care of the forecast long term surplus.
They wanted 196. They got 188. The VR was under-subscribed.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Lagrangian point 2
Posts: 204
Originally Posted by dr dre
Regarding the last 3 posts,
Guys, VR has met it’s achieved targets. That and retirements will take care of the forecast long term surplus.
It makes no sense to discuss the finer details of CR now. It is not on the table, and there no plans for it to be put on the table. All you are doing by continually mentioning it is inducing more fear into a group that already has enough stress to deal with.
Guys, VR has met it’s achieved targets. That and retirements will take care of the forecast long term surplus.
It makes no sense to discuss the finer details of CR now. It is not on the table, and there no plans for it to be put on the table. All you are doing by continually mentioning it is inducing more fear into a group that already has enough stress to deal with.
Tino said yesterday (purely his opinion), that he would be utterly astonished if CR was needed from here.
That doesnt rule it out, just that even from the out going International CEO it’s very, very unlikely. They seem to sincerely believe there is significant pent up demand, and as markets eventually open back up everyone remaining will eventually be needed in the short to medium term.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,132
Originally Posted by normanton
They wanted 196. They got 188. The VR was under-subscribed.
This year they got to within 4% of the target. Someone will be rewarded for that.
You bringing that point up continuously is like those who mention CR continuously. I’d suggest you take the advice you probably got in your first flying lessons in a Cessna about how to solve a problem - “look at the big picture”. Don't get bogged down in minute detail. From a big picture perspective the issue of surplus crew has been sorted out.
Last edited by dr dre; 27th Aug 2020 at 03:41.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney
Age: 40
Posts: 78
Each to their own , I would believe that CR was no longer on the table if company put something in writing to AIPA
The risk for me would be when you might return after CR and what you would be paid at that point in time , seems
certain year one & as an SO on a salary scale of $100 to $115 (if QF orders 350). Also LOL complexities for when you are not a QF employee
QF don't tend to telegraph punches for CR , they didn't for 6000 who have been made CR to date
The risk for me would be when you might return after CR and what you would be paid at that point in time , seems
certain year one & as an SO on a salary scale of $100 to $115 (if QF orders 350). Also LOL complexities for when you are not a QF employee
QF don't tend to telegraph punches for CR , they didn't for 6000 who have been made CR to date
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1
Originally Posted by Telfer86
Each to their own , I would believe that CR was no longer on the table if company put something in writing to AIPA
The risk for me would be when you might return after CR and what you would be paid at that point in time , seems
certain year one & as an SO on a salary scale of $100 to $115 (if QF orders 350). Also LOL complexities for when you are not a QF employee
QF don't tend to telegraph punches for CR , they didn't for 6000 who have been made CR to date
The risk for me would be when you might return after CR and what you would be paid at that point in time , seems
certain year one & as an SO on a salary scale of $100 to $115 (if QF orders 350). Also LOL complexities for when you are not a QF employee
QF don't tend to telegraph punches for CR , they didn't for 6000 who have been made CR to date
What's the agenda here? If you want to take LWOP or whatever that's your decision. If you're trying to start a pile on, at least wait for the EBA variations where a majority vote is needed.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,132
Originally Posted by Telfer86
QF don't tend to telegraph punches for CR , they didn't for 6000 who have been made CR to date
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Somewhere on the Australian Coast
Posts: 924
How many of the 188 were pilots the company actually wants to go ie. 747/380? How many were off the 330/787 who would presumably be amongst the first stood up if and when international flying resumes?
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,132
Originally Posted by DirectAnywhere
How many of the 188 were pilots the company actually wants to go ie. 747/380? How many were off the 330/787 who would presumably be amongst the first stood up if and when international flying resumes?
An educated guess would say the majority who said yes to the package would be older and closer to retirement, therefore more likely to be senior, therefore pilots on the senior aircraft, the 380 or 747.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney
Age: 40
Posts: 78
"There will be no CR in the Pilot Group"
Well that might be your opinion I would believe it when I saw it in writing from the company
Pay increments from date of CTL of SO
No agenda here, just the things that I think are important to consider. You have a different view well goodluck to you
I think the fear mongering has been people suggesting people being turned away when they return after a fixed term lwop
CR is indefinite & in my view you will be busted back to year 1 payrates & on the B scale SO table if the A350 is ordered
Enough from me , seems like plenty here know everything have a ability to look into the future & state with certainty what will happen
Well that might be your opinion I would believe it when I saw it in writing from the company
Pay increments from date of CTL of SO
- Nothing in the CR section says you will be re-employed with years of service credited or years of service are credited from the first time you CTL as SO in your first time as a QF employee
- Different to return from Medical termination where it is specifically stated "years of serviced credited"
- Two very different things , CR hasn't been done before so no way to anticipate how company will do it. Do you really think they will say "Welcome back Mate , this is all wonderful to have you back , so just to make you feel better we will credit your years of service all those years ago" - I would believe they will do that if it is put in writing by someone very senior (& I am not talking about a Pilot)
No agenda here, just the things that I think are important to consider. You have a different view well goodluck to you
I think the fear mongering has been people suggesting people being turned away when they return after a fixed term lwop
CR is indefinite & in my view you will be busted back to year 1 payrates & on the B scale SO table if the A350 is ordered
Enough from me , seems like plenty here know everything have a ability to look into the future & state with certainty what will happen
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,132
Originally Posted by Telfer86
"There will be no CR in the Pilot Group"
Well that might be your opinion I would believe it when I saw it in writing from the company
Well that might be your opinion I would believe it when I saw it in writing from the company
We make informed judgements from the information we know at the time, with reasoning to make an educated judgement about the future. Management have announced a 3 year recovery plan with a final pilot number that VR and retirements have reduced the surplus down to that final number. From the information we know today no further redundancies should be necessary.
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: The Swan Downunder
Posts: 567
Originally Posted by Street garbage
The level of FUD from Telfer/ Configfull/ Normanton and especially Xeptu astounds me, reminds me of QF management during LHEA 10 "negotiations"
Anything on here from those four is pure speculation, and at worse, pure bs.
Anything on here from those four is pure speculation, and at worse, pure bs.
I'm sorry to be blunt, but you asked for it.
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Unfortunately not the Orient
Posts: 299
So what, Xeptu? You don’t think we know that? What’s your point, and why do you need to keep repeating it? It sucks at the moment. I’m concerned for the future for both me and my 3 kids, but I don’t understand why you are even posting here. At least Normanton has a purpose, people may not like his opinion, but at least he actually says something. You on the other hand, well, f#$ked if I know. Go away, please.
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: The Swan Downunder
Posts: 567
And I feel your pain, I mean that. I'll step out, goodluck to you.
P.S our very own sitting health minister made reference to the Industrial Court tonight on telly, so I'm not alone in being a bit behind the times. At least I'm retired and been away from it in a while.
P.S our very own sitting health minister made reference to the Industrial Court tonight on telly, so I'm not alone in being a bit behind the times. At least I'm retired and been away from it in a while.
Last edited by Xeptu; 27th Aug 2020 at 13:26.
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: The great country of QLD
Posts: 4
Originally Posted by Xeptu
With LH at 20% of precovid and SH at 50% at best, blind freddy can see that 180 redundancies isn't going to do it. Management can do what ever they want.
Where did you pull these numbers from? Reference? Nope? Log off.
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wellington
Posts: 219
Originally Posted by Cirressna
I feel like my responsibility on this thread is now the Xeptu fact checker, kind of like facebook and twitter are doing now.
Where did you pull these numbers from? Reference? Nope? Log off.
Where did you pull these numbers from? Reference? Nope? Log off.
Yep. Xeptu, International is less 5%, Domestic at 18%. You are not even close. All you have is FUD. Go away, you are just embarrasing yourself with your lies, inaccuracies and scaremongering. Go and find a hobby.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 378
Originally Posted by ExtraShot
+1 for this.
Tino said yesterday (purely his opinion), that he would be utterly astonished if CR was needed from here.
That doesnt rule it out, just that even from the out going International CEO it’s very, very unlikely. They seem to sincerely believe there is significant pent up demand, and as markets eventually open back up everyone remaining will eventually be needed in the short to medium term.
Tino said yesterday (purely his opinion), that he would be utterly astonished if CR was needed from here.
That doesnt rule it out, just that even from the out going International CEO it’s very, very unlikely. They seem to sincerely believe there is significant pent up demand, and as markets eventually open back up everyone remaining will eventually be needed in the short to medium term.
They don't think fed up pilots will begin to take legal action to determine exactly when it moves from a restriction of supply to one of demand and hence stand down provisions can't be applied. Is it when quarantine restrictions are completely removed, is it when there is a vaccine, a travel vaccine certificate?
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: The Swan Downunder
Posts: 567
Originally Posted by Street garbage
Plus one.
Yep. Xeptu, International is less 5%, Domestic at 18%. You are not even close. All you have is FUD. Go away, you are just embarrasing yourself with your lies, inaccuracies and scaremongering. Go and find a hobby.
Yep. Xeptu, International is less 5%, Domestic at 18%. You are not even close. All you have is FUD. Go away, you are just embarrasing yourself with your lies, inaccuracies and scaremongering. Go and find a hobby.
Feb 20 AJ's statement regarding forecast expectation. For which the redundancy forecast is predicated.
Jun 04 AJ's statement revised forecast expectation. None of which happened.
Where you're supposed to be end July verses where you are now. It appears my lies and inaccuracies are less frightening than yours.
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wellington
Posts: 219
Originally Posted by Xeptu
Since your post is directed to me personally.
Feb 20 AJ's statement regarding forecast expectation. For which the redundancy forecast is predicated.
Jun 04 AJ's statement revised forecast expectation. None of which happened.
Where you're supposed to be end July verses where you are now. It appears my lies and inaccuracies are less frightening than yours.
Feb 20 AJ's statement regarding forecast expectation. For which the redundancy forecast is predicated.
Jun 04 AJ's statement revised forecast expectation. None of which happened.
Where you're supposed to be end July verses where you are now. It appears my lies and inaccuracies are less frightening than yours.
Why are you coming on here with your doom and gloom? Do you thing junior QF crew are under enormous stress, and then people like you come on here and spread your lies is going to do any good?
You are as bad as QF Management during EA negotiations.
