Its true or at the very least a concept that is being entertained in a very serious manner.

If they retrain the tech crew which fleet has room to accept these displaced guys? 767 perhaps???

Depends on their seniority and where they bid to go. Senior crew would presumably go the -400, midrange crew to the Airbus and junior crew inevitably to the 767. I'd be very surprised - for now - if the Classics go due to capacity constraints ie. they haven't got enough aeroplanes as it is.

I'd like to know what Mulder's rumour is but his post is so cryptic it's really of no value.

Look deeper and you will find the answers.

It is naive in the extreme to believe that there will be a massive retraining program in the event of redundancies. If the downturn is on a "senior type", I believe no one on a "junior type" will allow themselves to be demoted but will make arrangements to keep their current position.

The new laws state that people employed by companies with more than 100 staff keep right to claim unfair dismissal, but workers in large companies are not safe either. Employees will not be regarded as unfairly dismissed if employers state their sacking was for "operational reasons."

"Operational reasons" is quite a broad term an IMHO would include massive retraining costs at a time of financial difficulty for a business.

Could he be insinuating there may be redundancies on the Airbus fleet? That would make a mockery of the recently released pilot employment figures.

Read the Certified Agreement . . .
 

There won't be redundancies on the Airbus fleet. Sure, a surplus may be declared, but in that instance guys will either move up onto the -400 or A380 if they have the seniority, otherwise they will be accommodated on the 737 or 767.

The only place redundancies could/may occur would be to push guys/girls out the bottom of the seniority list. Obviously that is confined to S/Os . . .

More than likely though they would be offered leave of absence instead of outright redundancy.

Don't know all the details, but could any potential excess SO's be offered a transfer to Jetstar eg: under the new ir laws. I know all this is rumour, but this is just a thought.

Rammel,
Sounds feasible, but I can see a couple of obstacles. . .
Firstly, not all S/Os (cadets, for example) would meet the experience criteria for Jetstar. Admittedly though, Impulse had a handful of cadets, some of whom are still flying for Jetstar. Obviously the experience requirements can be waived at company's discretion. :hmm:
Secondly, the whole buy-your-own-endorsement thingy, requiring the affected Pilots to buy their own endorsement and take a 50 percent paycut for the privilege. :sad:

Why is it that the pilots cannot be made redundant for operational reasons? :ugh:

If a type is retired eg 747 classic would it not be perfect grounds for CR...

Brought forward to 22nd May.

Interesting situation with possible redundancies and the new "Age 65" FSO. Again, you will now see what the "senior members" will do for you.

Bolty,

You can now be dismissed for "operational reasons" not made redundant. Big difference!

Simple answer is that VR or CR must be offered in order of seniority or assigned from the bottom. That is not type specific, that is the whole pilot list.

So to offer VR on the classic, QF would have to offer it to senior -400 captains (who are not in surplus) first, then train their replacements. OR assign it to the most junior S/O's (who are also not in surplus) and then fund a massive retraining effort for all displaced aircrew.

You can see why it would be the option of last choice.

Are you sure?

Mulder...You are correct about being dismissed for ops reasons but I think (hope) QF will do the right thing and pay redundancies

Borg I think you may be very aware of what is stated in your EBA but did you not notice what has happened in engineering. They "retired/closed" a hangar and all the staff in it are now redundant. EBA or not these guys are gone
Many LAMEs have applied for the redundancy from other sections but are denied because of specific qualifications they have which cannot be replaced without training a replacement. Training = time and cost..VR denied.
What do the pilots have stop this sort of routing??
Solidarity? Looks like this is to be tested

Another point...is there anything stopping QF from employing new pilots on a different conditions via an AWA?

Another point...is there anything stopping QF from employing new pilots on a different conditions via an AWA?

As of Mar 27, nothing.

I'd watch closely; you may find AWA's closer than you think.

The phone calls to overseas pilots who have applied are starting. I wonder how many will accept the interview after listening to the conditions offered!

Gliderboy

The Senior Guys will no doubt look after one thing and one thing only...........themselves,so don't expect any sympathy from the greedy tools!! :eek:

maybe -maybe not
 

M, you might be right - but it wont take a rocket scientist to realise if they have 100 aircraft coming that there will be slots for every one anyway.

Remember the EBA expires about the time the 787 is due for introduction so I am sure the guys that come as DECs will have input into the new one (and will probably be in management by then too if selection is experienced and qualification based). There is also a clause that says they can promote out of seniority to managment positions - easy to create jobs to keep the DECs if they so choose.Thats what I would do if I was running the company.

I met a QF 76 captain the other day who earnt 290k AUD last year compared to my xxxK AUD (tax free of course!) I am one of the 780?? Ozzies coming for a look and I reckon the package is do-able (and having 7 years of tax credits helps!).Pilots (especially QF!)are a costly commodity- just like oil and fuel -which they try (and we approve of) reduce costs by hedging. This is no different. To delude ourselves that managers consider us anything more - or less is overstating our importance to the organisation. Cheers:ok:

290K for a 767 Captain?!!?

He must be a SCC because the line pilots don't get anything near that.

"I met a QF 76 captain the other day who earnt 290k AUD last year"

What a load of horse sh*t, that is about 1550 credit hours which is not possible on the 767. Even a SCC would be at least 40K short of that.

The Classic: The aircraft that will not die!!!
 

Haven't QF been trying to kill the Classic for the last 15 years? This thing must have more lives than Jason from Friday the 13th. 460 pax to Narita last week would suggest that it's an awful lot of capacity to lose without a replacement.

ruprecht.

Woodja ....."but it won't take a rocket scientist to realise if they have 100 aircraft coming that there will be slots for every one anyway." 100 aircraft coming , where did that figure come from?

You may be happy with the pay, however, hope you have considered the rest of the conditions eg. days off per roster period.

Afraid I don't share your enthusiasm that because you are experienced and qualified they will be handing out management postions to keep you on as DEC's. Pretty sure any management roles are a closed shop.

Last time I checked an AO B767 average Captain made AUD235000 (all up)

That $235K would include all meal allowances and superanuation.

The figures some of you people claim that QF pilots earn is ridiculous. It seems they must take the most senior management pilot figures for a particular rank, add a multiple of at least 10%, and claim that is what all Qantas pilots earn.

Line 767 Captains are not on $290 P/A. Why do you think a lot of people stay as F/O's on the 400? Because they will not get much of a pay rise by jumping through all the hoops to become a Captain on the 767 or 737. And 400 F/O's are not earning $290K. Only Captains who are permanant pattern are. There are still plenty of Captains in Qantas earning less than 200K.

Aviation in Australia would be done a favour if people would not justify arguing for lower conditions based on the fact QF pilots are overpaid because Joe Blow has invented a figure of how much they earn.

Bazza, it is the politics of envy. I think there are some posters who like to post there assumptions, for that is all they are, in the hope that the media picks up on it as they know the media troll PPRUNE.
Who gives a stuff? So what if you didn't get into Qantas or dislike the company? You wouldn't be the first. I missed out but certainly don't harbour a big chip on my shoulder. So what? It is rather apparent that some people who contibute to this forum have personality defects and one can only assume that the QF psych test pick up these defincies.
Good luck to the Qantas blokes for having such enviable conditions.

EBD, I agree with you 100%. Seems it is mainly people trying to make the QF mainline drivers seem like they are solely responsible for the downwards spiral in conditions due to excessive greed. In order to justify the argument, they are dreaming up arguments and pay figures. It all comes back to people missing out, and people getting to speak to the vocal minority of egotistical tosser QF pilots who seem to think they are a cut above the rest (and probably tell people they earn more than what they really do to feel more important). What people don't understand is that these people are in a minority (like in any group of people - no airline is exempt from employing wankers), and the majority of us QF drivers would fit in anywhere and are dare I say it, are probably decent blokes. Just don't judge us all on the expressions of a few.

QF pilots are among the cheapest and most productive in the Western world. Compare our wages to BA, United, Cathay, etc., and you find we are very competitive. However, I think this country should be pushing for Jetstar and Virgin to be given a pay rise up to current QF levels, not the other way around. To get this to happen, the childish minority on both sides of the fence need to stop hurling insults and stones back and forth and actually try and do something to stop us all being driven eventually from the industry.

Anyhow, enough from me. It is perhaps time this thread died a natural death. I am sure we would all be better off for it. It certainly isn't helping the current situation at all, especially given the amount of crap and misinformation being peddled.

Two very good posts.

I agree...and on that basis let's end on this 'high' point.:D