Qantas agrees to Same-Work Same-Pay
Thread Starter

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 615
Likes: 182
From: Melbourne
Qantas agrees to Same-Work Same-Pay
As well as announcing its financial results today, QAN has announced it will not contest Same-Work Same-Pay claim by short-haul cabin crew. Estimated cost in FY25 is $60M.
ASX Announcement
ASX Announcement

Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,259
Likes: 1,169
From: Kichin
Yes, well done to the cabin crew, good to see! It seems to be an admission by QF that the law was going to be applied that way in due course, otherwise they would have spent more time and money trying to have it shot down.
The precedent will have wide ranging effects to the SH agreement and those who follow I think.
The precedent will have wide ranging effects to the SH agreement and those who follow I think.
Joined: Jul 2024
Posts: 352
Likes: 424
From: The Bin
This will have a major impact on some QantasLink Jet subsidiaries as well. I believe Network Aviation only have 1 group of Cabin Crew operating on their aircraft but NJS have 3 groups all on different pay structures.
Other then perhaps Business Continuity what’s the point of having multiple subsidiaries if they are not cheaper then Mainline.
Other then perhaps Business Continuity what’s the point of having multiple subsidiaries if they are not cheaper then Mainline.

Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,714
Likes: 602
From: Dark Side of the Moon
With the C/Crew you have the same F/As working on the same aircraft under the same AOC in the same employee structures with multiple permanent (QAL and QD) and casual (MAM and Altara) contracts.
With pilots there is more separation, so SJSP doesn’t apply. A EFA A321 pilot wouldn’t be classified as “same job” as a mainline 321 pilot for example. If there was a situation where a labour hire entity was working alongside a permanent employee getting paid less then it would but the separation within the group is enough for that not to apply,
I believe this has already been looked at by the union lawyers and confirmed to not apply to pilots.
With pilots there is more separation, so SJSP doesn’t apply. A EFA A321 pilot wouldn’t be classified as “same job” as a mainline 321 pilot for example. If there was a situation where a labour hire entity was working alongside a permanent employee getting paid less then it would but the separation within the group is enough for that not to apply,
I believe this has already been looked at by the union lawyers and confirmed to not apply to pilots.

Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 176
Likes: 146
From: Australia
What about Jetstar NZ, same AOC, same Aircraft, same Check and Training and the ability to fly together with Jetstar Australia pilots? Jetstar NZ pilots are employed by a contracting company registered in NZ with the sole purpose of cutting costs out of the Employed by Jetstar EBA pilots.
Then Aus pilots in NZ, then the difference between NA and Jetstar and everyone else and Mainline - Whatever happens it's going to be interesting and hopefully transparent.
On the bright side, that $500 travel voucher is "MUCH" appreciated.
Joined: Jul 2024
Posts: 198
Likes: 206
From: Mosman
and this clown turns up again 🙄.
Go post on an engineering forum.
pilots in a very strong position industrially, they just don’t seem to understand that.
IT’S TIME.
Schedule all the management stooges now to down ramp this and sow doubt.
Go post on an engineering forum.
pilots in a very strong position industrially, they just don’t seem to understand that.
IT’S TIME.
Schedule all the management stooges now to down ramp this and sow doubt.

Joined: Sep 2008
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 3,435
Likes: 1,202
From: 41S174E
Where exactly do you think it would apply to pilots?

I think that there is uncertainty as to whether or not this would apply to some groups of pilots.
If Commissioners believe the legislation is indeed about ‘closing loopholes’ then their individual interpretations of what constitutes ‘the same job’ and what is or isn’t a labour hire company could go either way.
When determining what is ‘the same job’ they might well ask if QF121 on Friday and QF121 on Saturday are part of the same ‘bundle of work’ ?
If pilot B is expected to deliver the exact same ‘bundle of rights’ on Saturday as pilot A delivered on Friday, in the same machine, to the same exacting standards, after receiving the same training, in the same building, delivered by the same instructor, is pilot B not doing the same job as pilot A?
It will come down to the judicious contemplation of several humans and who knows how that unfolds? Did the commissioner have a satisfying breakfast in the Chairman’s Lounge? or were they delayed 24 hours on their last skiing trip to Queenstown? Are they concerned for the future prospects of their grandchild? or are they disgusted by the lack of moral fibre in todays youth?
Nobody knows just yet, but it sure is interesting.
Joined: Jul 2024
Posts: 198
Likes: 206
From: Mosman
Simple. It applies to EVERY subsidiary that has been setup to actively reduce our pay/conditions and divide and conquer.
The legislation was enacted to fight this EXACT behaviour.
Time for AIPA/AFAP to lodge some claims.
JOYCE directly used this **** to threaten us on multiple EBAs, then denied ever doing it.
Directly threatened our careers.
Joyce in a dress proved today nothing has changed.
Time to fix this mess.
The legislation was enacted to fight this EXACT behaviour.
Time for AIPA/AFAP to lodge some claims.
JOYCE directly used this **** to threaten us on multiple EBAs, then denied ever doing it.
Directly threatened our careers.
Joyce in a dress proved today nothing has changed.
Time to fix this mess.

Joined: Nov 2014
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 312
Likes: 324
From: Timbuktoo
Joyce in a dress proved today nothing has changed.
Joined: Dec 2023
Posts: 1,159
Likes: 899
From: Oz
Further proves that the sky high margin targets that Joyce put on each business in 22/23 was only going to be achieved by screwing its employee base over, again and again. Now that is somewhat being unwound, those targets won’t be met, and so they shouldn’t be.
VH dodged questions today and carefully worded those from analysts when asked about those margin targets that so much emphasis was put on in the last two FYs. The reality is, only Jetstar has hit those targets, and you could say that business is still somewhat underinvested in, with sub par wage agreements also in place.
I think it also leans into the point, that Joyce’s whole financial strategy was somewhat unrealistic. It was all about squeeze squeeze squeeze. Hudson is now stuck dealing with the aftermath, not that anyone has any sympathy for her. The margin forecasts he placed on the business might be achievable in loyalty, but the rest was a fantasy, and was only going to be possible with Joyce at the helm doing what he did best, negotiating bottom dollar contracts with suppliers and employees. Zero financial discipline in this business.
VH dodged questions today and carefully worded those from analysts when asked about those margin targets that so much emphasis was put on in the last two FYs. The reality is, only Jetstar has hit those targets, and you could say that business is still somewhat underinvested in, with sub par wage agreements also in place.
I think it also leans into the point, that Joyce’s whole financial strategy was somewhat unrealistic. It was all about squeeze squeeze squeeze. Hudson is now stuck dealing with the aftermath, not that anyone has any sympathy for her. The margin forecasts he placed on the business might be achievable in loyalty, but the rest was a fantasy, and was only going to be possible with Joyce at the helm doing what he did best, negotiating bottom dollar contracts with suppliers and employees. Zero financial discipline in this business.
Last edited by nomess; 29th August 2024 at 07:49.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 261
Likes: 83
From: Australia
Simple. It applies to EVERY subsidiary that has been setup to actively reduce our pay/conditions and divide and conquer.
The legislation was enacted to fight this EXACT behaviour.
Time for AIPA/AFAP to lodge some claims.
JOYCE directly used this **** to threaten us on multiple EBAs, then denied ever doing it.
Directly threatened our careers.
Joyce in a dress proved today nothing has changed.
Time to fix this mess.
The legislation was enacted to fight this EXACT behaviour.
Time for AIPA/AFAP to lodge some claims.
JOYCE directly used this **** to threaten us on multiple EBAs, then denied ever doing it.
Directly threatened our careers.
Joyce in a dress proved today nothing has changed.
Time to fix this mess.

Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 185
Likes: 255
From: Dubbo

Joined: May 2014
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 279
Likes: 47
From: Richmond
Positive comment not.
I think you are GasChamber in drag



