Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

QF Short Haul EBA

Old 6th May 2022, 02:05
  #121 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 536
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The NJS pilots know exactly where Qantas are threatening to send the A220ís and it ainít QF Short Haul. So a SH in-principal agreement wonít effect NJS.
Beer Baron is offline  
Old 6th May 2022, 04:24
  #122 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kichin
Posts: 698
Received 3 Likes on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Beer Baron View Post
The NJS pilots know exactly where Qantas are threatening to send the A220ís and it ainít QF Short Haul. So a SH in-principal agreement wonít effect NJS.
Perhaps youíre not privy to the instantaneous effect that another entity appearing to fold had on both the companyís state of mind and that of the pilots. Suffice it to say the company sensed a win over NJS when AIPA made that in-principle agreement. The division widened because one group protected themselves to the detriment of the other.
gordonfvckingramsay is online now  
Old 6th May 2022, 05:58
  #123 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 536
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That is just false. You are trying to draw a connection where one does not exist.

I am very aware of the line Qantas had presented to the NJS negotiators from the very start of the negotiation. They were well aware that if agreement was not reached by a certain date then Qantas may choose to place the aircraft elsewhere in the Group. That date arrived and agreement had not been reached (I entirely blame Qantas as they were presenting a poor deal). Then Qantas did exactly what they said they would do and informed AFAP that they plan to take the aircraft elsewhere. They are not threatening to give the planes to SH and they didnít say, ďwell SH reached an agreement and you didnít so now you lose the jetsĒ.

Qantas did what they said they would from the outset and a SH deal, or not, had no effect.

Even if the SH deal could somehow affected the NJS negotiations, could you imagine a union saying to its members; ďWell we could have done a deal to protect your 700 jobs but we need to look out for pilots who fly for a different entity and are members of a different union, so we told Qantas to shove itĒ?
Beer Baron is offline  
Old 6th May 2022, 06:17
  #124 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 40
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Beer Baron View Post
That is just false. You are trying to draw a connection where one does not exist.
Spoken like someone who has never experienced whipsaw bargaining. SH did indeed screw the pooch for NJS pilots and themselves. Bad deals for one entity encourage bad deals for all entities. Divide and conquer is working so well.

What’s funny is the SH guys agreed to it in principal for only the initial 20x 321s and made zero effort to ensure they get future red tail 321s so they didn’t protect 700 jobs they agreed in principal to protect ~200
Clear_Left is offline  
Old 6th May 2022, 08:27
  #125 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kichin
Posts: 698
Received 3 Likes on 1 Post
Precisely Clear_Left. Why would anyone have to spend 7+ hours debating a signed sealed and delivered in-principle agreement if it was worth agreeing to in the first place? The delay in the NJS guys reaching an in-principle agreement was due to the due diligence done by the reps, something the AIPA president failed to report when he declared the lack of (NJS) agreement. It seems AIPA departed without a flight plan, apparently to get some quick runs on the board but to what end?
gordonfvckingramsay is online now  
Old 6th May 2022, 08:33
  #126 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: NSW
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Clear_Left View Post
Whatís funny is the SH guys agreed to it in principal for only the initial 20x 321s and made zero effort to ensure they get future red tail 321s so they didnít protect 700 jobs they agreed in principal to protect ~200
Where in the proposal are the changes only limited to the first 20 aircraft?
ddrwk is offline  
Old 6th May 2022, 08:55
  #127 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Outofoz
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
An in principle agreement still has to be voted upon by the pilot body, Yes / No ?
hotnhigh is offline  
Old 6th May 2022, 09:30
  #128 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 323
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Securing future A320 (and A220) aircraft, as well as additional A350s would form part of a new negotiation for the relevant BU’s. It’s hardly a revelation. If an entity were able to have a clause saying they would receive all future orders of a particular type I’d be impressed.

When new aircraft are forecast to arrive, you guessed it, it will coincide with EBA renewal. So this convo is all about nothing, and the CP emails are carefully constructed to emphasise it’s a deal for the initial tranche only. It’s not to say further orders won’t arrive.

Of interest, I wonder when QF (and AIPA) knew about the XLR delays. It turns out this recent process was probably not required, as with the delay, normal EBA negotiation would suffice but now QF get two bites at the cherry.

ps. If someone wanted to PM me with the material info added by the negotiators at the last minute…
crosscutter is offline  
Old 6th May 2022, 09:38
  #129 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: NSW
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by crosscutter View Post
Itís hardly a revelation. If an entity were able to have a clause saying they would receive all future orders of a particular type Iíd be impressed.
Would it even be a permitted matter?
ddrwk is offline  
Old 6th May 2022, 10:05
  #130 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 285
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
It was the NJS HOFO in the jump seat of the A220 scenic the other day, not the ĎMainlineí/Network/Alliance/Air Frontier HOFOÖ
aussieflyboy is online now  
Old 6th May 2022, 11:53
  #131 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 536
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Clear_Left View Post
Spoken like someone who has never experienced whipsaw bargaining. SH did indeed screw the pooch for NJS pilots and themselves. Bad deals for one entity encourage bad deals for all entities. Divide and conquer is working so well.
Wrong again. The AFAP negotiation for NJS wrapped the week BEFORE the SH negotiators made their in-principal deal. At that time, as is published in their dispatches, the SH negotiators had been told to continue negotiating as the deal Ďstill fell short of expectationsí.

The delay in the NJS guys reaching an in-principle agreement was due to the due diligence done by the reps,
Also wrong. There wasnít a delay reaching an in-principle agreement, there IS NO in-principle agreement. Negotiations had finished before the SH agreement was even reached.

How on earth could the SH deal that was struck the following week possibly have tainted NJS negotiations that concluded the week prior?!?

The answer is clear, they didnít, it had nothing to do with SH. Given Qantas mainline T&Cís are superior to NJS it is again impossible to see how a different pilot group agreeing to better conditions, a week later, could drag down another entity.

A deal wasnít struck as Qantas IR made utterly unfair demands of the NJS pilots and the union couldnít accept them. I applaud AFAP for standing up for their members under such pressure from Qantas.
However, I understand that the pilots themselves have now voiced a desire to vote on a deal that the negotiators deemed unacceptable.
Beer Baron is offline  
Old 6th May 2022, 23:21
  #132 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Straya
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by gordonfvckingramsay View Post
It appears AIPA, in their haste, have fvcked up by agreeing to an in-principle shit sandwich without asking for details beforehand. Having effectively thrown NJS pilots to the wolves by ďbeatingĒ them to this in-principle agreement, they are now reconsidering new information.
Can I ask how you know what the full details of the SH in-principle agreement are and what makes it a ďshit sandwichĒ in your opinion? Iím just an average SH line pilot so apart from seeing a few headline dot points, I still have not seen the full details. Obviously Iíll reserve my opinion until I have all the information and will vote accordingly.


Gazza mate is offline  
Old 7th May 2022, 00:35
  #133 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sincity
Posts: 1,144
Received 3 Likes on 1 Post
Originally Posted by gordonfvckingramsay View Post
Precisely Clear_Left. Why would anyone have to spend 7+ hours debating a signed sealed and delivered in-principle agreement if it was worth agreeing to in the first place?
Well as long as we vote for senior 380 capts and SOs it'll happen like that.
Tbh it's fine by me to have scrutiny.


Beware the political hyperbole...
maggot is offline  
Old 7th May 2022, 01:37
  #134 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kichin
Posts: 698
Received 3 Likes on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Gazza mate View Post
Can I ask how you know what the full details of the SH in-principle agreement are and what makes it a ďshit sandwichĒ in your opinion? Iím just an average SH line pilot so apart from seeing a few headline dot points, I still have not seen the full details. Obviously Iíll reserve my opinion until I have all the information and will vote accordingly.
Good question! I donít believe anyone has seen the full details of what the AIPA reps, agreed to in-principle. Other than the Strategic imperatives and some dot points issued in an AIPA communique. A small inner circle made the call, then some information somehow came to light that made the in-principle agreement seem unattractive. Someone jumped the gun without the support of the wider pilot group.

Was there any attempt to canvass the pilots? I didnít see any.

As far as NJS, I refuse to be used as a wedge to undermine other group pilots. Disagree with that notion all you like but it is the outcome from this poorly conceived in-principle mess.

gordonfvckingramsay is online now  
Old 7th May 2022, 05:21
  #135 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: 1alpha
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by aussieflyboy View Post
It was the NJS HOFO in the jump seat of the A220 scenic the other day, not the ĎMainlineí/Network/Alliance/Air Frontier HOFOÖ
Good old DJ
2020Balance is offline  
Old 7th May 2022, 06:55
  #136 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The crew room
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by gordonfvckingramsay View Post
Good question! I donít believe anyone has seen the full details of what the AIPA reps, agreed to in-principle. Other than the Strategic imperatives and some dot points issued in an AIPA communique. A small inner circle made the call, then some information somehow came to light that made the in-principle agreement seem unattractive. Someone jumped the gun without the support of the wider pilot group.

Was there any attempt to canvass the pilots? I didnít see any.

As far as NJS, I refuse to be used as a wedge to undermine other group pilots. Disagree with that notion all you like but it is the outcome from this poorly conceived in-principle mess.
Something pilots everywhere need to be clear about is that we arenít all negotiating. Thatís why we have a union. We vote for a COM, who in turn appoint a negotiating team. Itís their job to understand the wishes of the pilot group and negotiate in accordance with our intent. Itís not useful, realistic or helpful to expect them keep the wider group informed during the process.

IF the negotiating team think an acceptable offer is on the table and IF the COM agree, then they need to inform of what the offer is and why they think we should accept it when itís time to vote.

Until that happens letís let them do their job.
FlareHighLandLong is offline  
Old 7th May 2022, 08:12
  #137 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by FlareHighLandLong View Post
Something pilots everywhere need to be clear about is that we arenít all negotiating. Thatís why we have a union. We vote for a COM, who in turn appoint a negotiating team. Itís their job to understand the wishes of the pilot group and negotiate in accordance with our intent. Itís not useful, realistic or helpful to expect them keep the wider group informed during the process.

IF the negotiating team think an acceptable offer is on the table and IF the COM agree, then they need to inform of what the offer is and why they think we should accept it when itís time to vote.

Until that happens letís let them do their job.
The problem is key information was withheld from the CoM. Firstly, the vote to endorse the Project Winton In Principal Agreement FAILED by 1 vote. Then

"At 4.15pm, new information came to light which potentially had material impact on the motions that were being considered."

That information was threats by QF to cancel various letters of agreement if Project Winton failed to be endorsed.

The material question is WHY was the information withheld by the Project Winton team? If the CoM are to make a decision, key information cannot be withheld. Wile some may cave to threats, others don't respond too well.


Cesspool182 is offline  
Old 7th May 2022, 09:26
  #138 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hell
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by FlareHighLandLong View Post
Something pilots everywhere need to be clear about is that we arenít all negotiating. Thatís why we have a union. We vote for a COM, who in turn appoint a negotiating team. Itís their job to understand the wishes of the pilot group and negotiate in accordance with our intent. Itís not useful, realistic or helpful to expect them keep the wider group informed during the process.

IF the negotiating team think an acceptable offer is on the table and IF the COM agree, then they need to inform of what the offer is and why they think we should accept it when itís time to vote.

Until that happens letís let them do their job.
ďItís their job to understand the wishes of the pilot group and negotiate in accordance with our intent.ď

Bingo! Did they?!
wf747 is offline  
Old 7th May 2022, 09:53
  #139 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Good to see the spineless authors of text messages are at it again. Everyone always Ďgot it from a mate who got it from a mateí, a bit like an STD. Iím sure the WhatsApp group of about 5 people who think they represent the views of the majority are high fiving thinking theyíve got some political runs on the board.

the last COM election spoke volumes as to what the majority actually think. Let them do their job.
cloudsurfng is offline  
Old 7th May 2022, 10:17
  #140 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: australia
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Who are the “spineless five”?
wombat watcher is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.