QF Group possible Redundancy Numbers/Packages
So what is the entire point of the ALAEA’s court action? Do they want the company to stand up all their members when there’s no work for them so the company will go bankrupt 2 months later?
[QUOTE]As I said some time ago, the bankers are worried about Qantas survival without a bail out.[/QUOTE]
As I said on 22 August and before that. Now Qantas itself confirms what I was told.
As I said on 22 August and before that. Now Qantas itself confirms what I was told.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 68
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=Sunfish;10894425]
The problem with open websites it that they allow rather unpleasant individuals who have no dog in the fight except for a teeth-grinding resentment and sense of grievance to express an essentially meaningless opinion that contributes nothing except for a sense of the loathing of the poster.
The question is why do they take such vicarious pleasure in other people’s misfortune ?
Nobody wants your opinion.
Go away.
As I said some time ago, the bankers are worried about Qantas survival without a bail out.[/QUOTE]
As I said on 22 August and before that. Now Qantas itself confirms what I was told.
As I said on 22 August and before that. Now Qantas itself confirms what I was told.
The question is why do they take such vicarious pleasure in other people’s misfortune ?
Nobody wants your opinion.
Go away.
Maybe to stand up and pay those that should be, and right size the operation - ie paying redundancy - not just having people sit around on no pay until it suits the company? Don’t know - just thinking out loud...
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Denmark
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's what I would do, have ppl sit around throw them a roster every 4-5 months get them to resign as opposed to using CR. Eventually stood down pilots will have to earn money.
The argument is that there was work to be carried out (deferred defects, a checks, c checks, storage checks etc), Qantas just chose to not do the work. The precedent set in the past court cases is that a company can't just choose to stand down full time employees when business is slow even if the work isn't considered urgent. If there is work available, you can't stand people down. The ALAEA is arguing that there was work to do from what I understand.
The argument is that there was work to be carried out (deferred defects, a checks, c checks, storage checks etc), Qantas just chose to not do the work. The precedent set in the past court cases is that a company can't just choose to stand down full time employees when business is slow even if the work isn't considered urgent. If there is work available, you can't stand people down. The ALAEA is arguing that there was work to do from what I understand.
I think the right sizing (as far as pilots are concerned at least) is mid 2022-2023 as stated in the recovery plan. That’s what all the VR was about. As explained in the previous post there maybe is a case for some engineers to be stood up in the interim to perform certain engineering checks, although pilots won’t need to be stood up until the recency training is needed, a month or two out from when the aircraft is bought back to service.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes it is essential work. The Aircraft in storage require various checks.
The storage checks required depending on type are 3, 4, 7, 10, 14, 30, 60, 90 and 180 Day checks. Each higher level check requires the lower level checks to be completed as well in most situations.
There is more work now for the Line Stations than there was with all aircraft flying with not enough people on shift. With some aircraft requiring Return to Service checks as well which has an enormous amount of work.
This is the argument from the ALAEA. There has always been useful work for LAME’s.
The storage checks required depending on type are 3, 4, 7, 10, 14, 30, 60, 90 and 180 Day checks. Each higher level check requires the lower level checks to be completed as well in most situations.
There is more work now for the Line Stations than there was with all aircraft flying with not enough people on shift. With some aircraft requiring Return to Service checks as well which has an enormous amount of work.
This is the argument from the ALAEA. There has always been useful work for LAME’s.
Was it essential work though? If certain aircraft are not going to be flying for a while then those checks don’t need to be completed until close to when the aircraft are ready to return. Or maybe not. Perhaps because of the nature of tasks to be performed the ruling may only apply to engineering, which is maybe why other unions don’t seem to have joined the court action.
I think the right sizing (as far as pilots are concerned at least) is mid 2022-2023 as stated in the recovery plan. That’s what all the VR was about. As explained in the previous post there maybe is a case for some engineers to be stood up in the interim to perform certain engineering checks, although pilots won’t need to be stood up until the recency training is needed, a month or two out from when the aircraft is bought back to service.
I think the right sizing (as far as pilots are concerned at least) is mid 2022-2023 as stated in the recovery plan. That’s what all the VR was about. As explained in the previous post there maybe is a case for some engineers to be stood up in the interim to perform certain engineering checks, although pilots won’t need to be stood up until the recency training is needed, a month or two out from when the aircraft is bought back to service.
Doesn't matter if it's essential I believe is the argument. I'm not fully across it but I believe the precedent exists to prevent companies from standing down full time employees as they wish. For example, Qantas engineers could be doing any one of the c checks outstanding on aircraft parked out the front of hangars, or Jetstar engineers could be doing the checks in aircraft that were scheduled to go to Singapore for heavy checks.
Empty except for the belly full of freight, which they should be doing every bloody day!
Yes it is essential work. The Aircraft in storage require various checks.
The storage checks required depending on type are 3, 4, 7, 10, 14, 30, 60, 90 and 180 Day checks. Each higher level check requires the lower level checks to be completed as well in most situations.
There is more work now for the Line Stations than there was with all aircraft flying with not enough people on shift. With some aircraft requiring Return to Service checks as well which has an enormous amount of work.
This is the argument from the ALAEA. There has always been useful work for LAME’s.
The storage checks required depending on type are 3, 4, 7, 10, 14, 30, 60, 90 and 180 Day checks. Each higher level check requires the lower level checks to be completed as well in most situations.
There is more work now for the Line Stations than there was with all aircraft flying with not enough people on shift. With some aircraft requiring Return to Service checks as well which has an enormous amount of work.
This is the argument from the ALAEA. There has always been useful work for LAME’s.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 74
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is this the game plan ?
The great reset ?
Bankruptcy ,massive restructuring and downsizing to suit the post Covid economy ,renegotiation of all contracts with none of the redundancy costs borne due to the impoverished trading conditions ?
Senior management bonus’ all ‘round !
The great reset ?
Bankruptcy ,massive restructuring and downsizing to suit the post Covid economy ,renegotiation of all contracts with none of the redundancy costs borne due to the impoverished trading conditions ?
Senior management bonus’ all ‘round !
Is this the game plan ?
The great reset ?
Bankruptcy ,massive restructuring and downsizing to suit the post Covid economy ,renegotiation of all contracts with none of the redundancy costs borne due to the impoverished trading conditions ?
Senior management bonus’ all ‘round !
The great reset ?
Bankruptcy ,massive restructuring and downsizing to suit the post Covid economy ,renegotiation of all contracts with none of the redundancy costs borne due to the impoverished trading conditions ?
Senior management bonus’ all ‘round !
A company can downsize and restructure without calling in administrators. They aren’t going to exhaust their finances just so they can save a bit of money on pilot EBAs.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SYD
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks like the ALAEA lost this one
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-...neers/12734666
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-...neers/12734666