Yes roster with limited bidding. But I can promise you I've witnessed a 30% difference between two captains final salaries (in order to compare apples with apples, a Jetstar A320 captain & a Qantas B737 captain). Having said this, my Qantas friend has highlighted that his hours have fallen back towards their very low min guarantee (53? hours per 28 days?), whereas the Jetstar guy is flying 75 hours a month.

I think that most of us are sophisticated enough to appreciate that costs extend beyond mere wages. Qantas has made attempts in the past to lessen the administrative burden, but more recently used self-defeating lock-outs and media manipulation instead of dialogue. Which brings us back to Alan Joyce, and the weave of this particular thread.

Bdcer: 737 pilots are all 30% older too!:ugh:

The pathetically low hours worked are the effect of the transfer of flying to Jetstar and Cobham. IE: They are solely by management design.

Rostering practices are bad why? Because other pilots have a comparatively crap roster does not mean that everyone should be likewise abused.

Night credit hours
Transport to and from work
Hour credit for standby's
3rd crew member for >7.5hours
Allowances > jetstars
Overtime for 4 crew flights, where you spend bugger all time IN the flight deck

These examples are in addition to a pay higher than Jetstars.

Face the facts, in this EBA for long haul pilots, expect the company to say, game over, these legacy conditions don't work, its time to be competitive in the real world or we're using other AOC's as a catalyst for Qantas expansion.

717's with Business Class running around on the East Coast. Jetconnect. It is so easily done. So easily.

Give it up guys, games over.

Ha ha, I'm not knocking rostering systems, I was only correcting a minor discrepancy about wage differences.

I'm not clever enough to have the answers. I used to get all excited about these issues, but I've realised it'll send you to an early grave (or at least ruin quality of life).

Try to enjoy the simple things & be thankful that we're still kicking.

So, who are we comparing here? Seems to be a bit selective.

Everyone is talking about inflated wages at qantas.
What about the inflated salaries at qantas?
Does anyone have a comparison of AJ and JBs salaries.
Qantas is well known for it's excessively bloated manager/worker bees ratio
compared to other legacy carriers let alone LCC, wherever Virgin fits in.

I love how people list out various things in our award and how out dated they are without the slightest context, understanding of the history, etc.

Eg: standby credits. We don't do a couple of standbys in a roster around our other flying, we do a full month of standbys. These have credit attached to them so that the company can keep track of who has been working hard and who they need to assign standbys to and it all goes towards total pays. But sure, bag it out as an outdated thing without understanding the differences between our blank lines and other pilot rostering practises. Don't ask me why the company doesn't want 'composite rosters' where standbys are included in your roster. They just keep saying 'no' because they were a disaster in 1995 when they trialled them for a while. So in the mean time, I'll informed posters bag certain aspects of our award and conditions without understanding that it's EXACTLY the way Qantas wants it.

Is there room for efficiencies? Yes. Would many people outside of Qantas know how to get those efficiencies or the impact on rosters as Qantas wants them to be? No.

:ugh:

JQ dont get credit for standby's. They for part of the month's roster .

As part if the new EBA, they can do upto 42 days of standby straight. There us no talk of any credit hours being applied to standby days.

If Qantas don't want it to change, maybe they want it to fail.

42 days of stand-by on a salary=stand-by credit. Does it not?

Like Keg says, no conditions were created in a vacuum. The company has had 94 years of often dud management and has the cumbersome award as a result.

When cowards shy away from the bargaining table and hire labour consultants instead, idiot ideas like the lock-out are concieved. They could have had concessions back then but elected to roll the dice instead. They lost 200 million and all of the things they could have won with some frank discussion.

Lucky you. They're not part of ours as I've previously mentioned. Qantas said they've trialled it and it was too difficult to implement given the longer trips that Qantas pilots tend to fly- 10 plus days away.

I presume JQ have a min guarantee credit or are you suggesting you can do 42 standbys straight for zero pay? If you get a min guarantee then you're effectively getting credit for standbys. Wow. Just the same as Qantas crew. I did a bunch of standbys this month. All of them had credit associated with them. I still got paid min guarantee hours as I suspect a JQ pilot in identical circumstances would.

I'd also be surprised if CASA would allow 42 standbys straight. Well perhaps you can do the standby but won't be able to fly if called out.

Wow. What insight. If only I'd thought about that nearly a decade and a half ago when they first bought Impulse. Oh, wait! :ugh:

Thanks for making my point nicely (again) though. :ok: :E

Pilot A is a first year pilot on X dollars per hour.

Pilot B is a 12th Year Service pilot on X * 1.82 dollars per hour.

Same aircraft, same rank, same airline, same industrial agreement.

Some will say that's not fair !

Both Pilot A & B hold the same qualifications & do exactly the same work.

The reality is, that's the agreement & that's the pay rates.

Compared this to.

Pilot C works for a Legacy Airline & earns X dollars per year.

Pilot D works for a LCC and earns Y dollars per year.

Similar size aircraft, same rank, same airline group, different agreements.

Some will say that's not fair !

Both Pilot C & D hold the same qualifications & do exactly the same work.

The reality is, that's the agreement & that's the pay rates.

MC.

Yeah, some very good points !

I guess I was just putting on here the views of dudes I fly with, and with really bad spelling at the same time.

Im not involved or associated with any of this, just thought id stir the pot.

Well played gentleman!

No they have many of the conditions after QF pilots in the 60's got tired of the BS and went on strike and defeated management. They then got a whole bunch of stuff in their agreement that management have being tried to remove for 40 years. Most of the 'outdated' items are there for a reason. More than likely because someone your grandfathers age got screwed over so they got it into the award.

What you get paid and your conditions are nothing more than what you agree on. Nothing more nothing less. Whether that is fair or reasonable is immaterial.

I take the alternative view.

It's actually game on.

Like NN stated, everything comes at a price.

Let's take home transport. Should it be removed? No, why? Duty of care. Does the definition need to be changed for entitlement, yes? Another reason we had it was when Qantas was expanding many years ago it was cheaper and easier than trying to get more parking for crew at QCC. Many crew would arrive at work 30/40 minutes earlier only to end up on the phone to scheduling saying they would be late because they couldn't get a parking spot.

Come on guys, NO matter what we may think of Qantas Mainline terms and conditions we should all have 100% support for our fellow aviators right to defend their terms and conditions. For the contract to be as it is in its current form there must have been agreement at some point from the Company on those conditions.

Most pilots were 'offered' those conditions when they joined Qantas, they are entitled to think that those will be the conditions for the duration of their employment.

Allowing the 'best' local contract to be undermined and re-written to a lesser contract will impact EVERYONE in the industry. We will find ourselves having pressure put on for across the board reductions as management will always trot out the line 'we are low cost and can't be paid the same as a legacy carrier'. If that legacy carrier finds itself closer to the low cost model in terms of cost the next reduction will be to the low cost carrier.

It is not for me to tell another pilot that he/she needs to take a paycut, If I were on those terms and conditions I would fight tooth and nail to keep them.

Now that there is only one person on tech crew scheduling, you would spend an additional 40 minutes on hold ...


A Seriously dysfunctional company now.

I'll continue to fight to keep my T & C's for as long as I continue to see co. management begrudgingly giving staff travel priority to long serving staff who've earned the privilege, and then turning around and giving higher priority to some pissant junior IT "manager" with 1 year's service and 0 - 1 direct report, just because he has "manager" in his job title, which completely undermines the spirit and intention of granting such privilege to loyal and long serving employees.

I have ranted about this before and I shall continue to do so despite being personally almost beyond this particular fray. Like the monster above, I will not accept any pay cut from the current crowd of looters.

Low cost carriers might try to tell you that their goal is to be a low wage carrier. Try finding the low wage checkout queue at Coles or your kids' school's fee window. You are only worth what you'll accept. There are misguided young pilots actually paying to fly as F/Os in small US regionals. That is the depth to which a free market will go, I guess.

I hear colleagues suggesting a B scale might entice the company to again grow mainline. I hear the argument that we should not waste time negotiating for people who have yet to be hired. That too is a mistake: I joined under good T & Cs because my predecessors fought for them. If you want this industry to continue to provide a middle class income in this very expensive country then you will have to insist upon it, I'm afraid.

When did JQ terms and conditions become the gold standard, by the way? Tiger is the market bottom-feeder, yet even it pays much better than Jetstar. It should not be a race to the bottom, despite what some pimply manager will cheerfully tell you.

First post here, but have read for some time and could not stand back without commenting.

I'm curious, what is the purpose in passing comment on the Qantas pilots contracts? Why is this is a peculiar colloquialism of Australian pilots?

Similarly, why the need to continually denigrate managers? Many of these people are highly qualified individuals who, like the pilots, want the company to grow and prosper. Most managers earn far less than mainline pilots, notwithstanding that there are some at the very top of the organisation whose earnings make headlines. Surely most rational people realise that those earnings are the exception?

Managers do not sit up at midnight posting crap about pilots, the vast majority respect the crew and the job they do. Why is that not reciprocated?

Part 121, the "managers" often denigrated are the top level executive, not middle or line management. And when the pilots start delivering a long history of failure then management may indeed devote some forum time to our collective failings.

There is some angst at junior "managers" leapfrogging our long-held staff travel upload status. This despite the company insisting that we occupy a position analogous to a senior company officer. It is a violation of a previously understood compact between the pilots and the company.

Most of us lack the schooling and foresight to chase an executive position, but our hindsight is pretty good. Our sense of outrage at recent events and continuing executive level denial of what is obvious is shared with commentators world-wide, including The New York Times and Flight Global.

Ken Borough: thanks for that Fox News insight. Once again: everything was on the table three years ago but Joyce elected to lockout the workforce in a bid to get Fair Work to vacate the award. That failed, and the arbitrator kept almost all of the award provisions in place. But somehow that's our fault? Keep banging your emoticon head against the wall. :rolleyes:

Australopithecus or anyone else in the know,

What did AIPA offer the company three years ago?

Part 121.

True, Executive's do not denigrate their Pilots on a private forum.

They chose to do so in a public forum.

"Pilots living in cloud cuckoo land"

"kamikaze pilots"

"Pilots wanting facials & massages before flight"

"pilots earning a higher hourly rate than the a CEO"

These public outbursts gave reason for pilots to hold Executives responsible for their comments.

Pilots also hold these same executives responsible for the current financial state of the airline.

After all. AJ did declare the international business was in "terminal decline"

Well, blow me down. Because the same Long Haul pilots Agreement still exists & although new fuel efficient aircraft have failed to materialise. Management are now seeing the " greenshoots" of a recovery.

The list is long Part 121.

Should I mention, take a pay freeze now & we promise to negotiate a deal on new aircraft types. Jetstar will never be bigger than 12 aircraft. Or all FO's will be QF Captains within X years.

They have lost the trust of their crew.

MC.

Configfull

The AIPA president offered the company a LH pay freeze prior to the 2011 lockout.

Priceless AJ comment on ABC TV 'Mad as Hell'.


'But Qantas needs all the help it can get. You've all heard Alan Joyce say he's not going anywhere - that means the planes aren't going anywhere either!'


Too good not to share......

Why would he go anywhere he is not being called to account by anyone over anything, so may as well keep taking the bucks until the gig is over and then he is set for life providing he avoids the regulators which is highly likely.

QF has been manipulated by the leprechaun into an "us and them" culture, divide and conquer if you will. Even as the airline crumbles around them there are more than a few on both sides that are maintaining a professional deportment, living in hope for a turnaround.

QF should have continued being a success story as it had many things going in its favour, but the stupid ones at the helm appeared to have steered a very good ship onto the rocks.

Part 121.

To add to what Master Caution supplied:

"Engineers are just glorified car mechanics"

"Modern aircraft need less maintenance" So... where are mainlines modern aircraft? You know, the ones that need less maintenance? Would that be the A330s and 737-800s, the oldest of which are now over 12 years old? If modern aircraft need less maintenance, why have I received about a dozen calls for overtime in the last few weeks? Why is it that 65 LAMEs who were just a few weeks ago "exiting the business" now being reinstated? Could it have something to do with the possibility that someone quite senior in Engineering management has perhaps "miscalculated"? That's a technical term for "****** up".

Over the years I have seen many managers come and go. Many have tried hard, done a good job, maintained their personal integrity, and have earned my respect by doing their best within the confines of a toxic and nepotistic culture governed by an archaic managerial mindset that belongs in the 19th century. The culture eventually wears them down and they move on to greener pastures. To lose one good leader is an accident: to lose many is incompetence. They are not recognised and they are not groomed. When these good people walk, it is a grievous loss to the company. Sadly I have also seen over the years a disproportionate number who have been useless, clock-punching snakes that I wouldn't trust to manage a pissup in a brewery. Sadly, the culture seems to select and prefer these creatures.

It always bothered me when people complained about the conditions/pay that they signed up for. Likewise, I don't understand why same types want to denigrate those earning more than they. You can't ask someone to sell their house and get a smaller car - they signed up to that!!

The Short Haul pilots will in all probability vote the EA offer down when it comes to the vote soon. It's not the money, it's the lack of respect. The total denigration of a reasonable career path and blatant industrial wedging using Jetconnect and Cobham. When you look back over the years and the lies of pacification it's obvious that the future will repeat the past. If both EAs are in negotiation concurrently it will ruffle the feathers of Joyce et al. The last thing they will want for his swan song term is another bout of turmoil and share price volatility.

Check out the Air France pilots strike, there is a similarity with what is happening to Qantas.

Is this the actual facts? or is this BS. If it is BS why is there not some legal action taken???
Or in fact, is this the facts???

Arnold E

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

From The Australian article -

Seems that valuable lessons are soon forgotten! Unless of course, he doesn't feel he has "f..Ked up" anything since that time, back in 2003.

Unlike certain elements of the media, which are grateful for any opportunity to pass on the great man's utterances without actually checking the veracity thereof, I did the maths once and found that it's completely true, provided Alan's working about 46 hours a day, 7 days a week. That's using our senior captain's actual hours on duty, not 'credit hours' or hours away from home 'at work'.

Otherwise, it might be a tiny bit of a fib. But legal action? I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure you can't sue a CEO just for spouting BS - more's the pity.

Just as well, there'd be a shortage of lawyers.:eek:

I'm no lawyer either - but I actually think there are a couple of options. Firstly, in the age of continuous disclosure, the CEO breaks a lot of ASIC laws if they give misleading information to the public which could materially affect the share price. No action available to staff unless there is a class action from shareholders.

The interesting one is the Trade Practices Act - it could be argued that the CEO, in publicly uttering rubbish, is in breach of the act in the form of deceptive and misleading conduct. It's a reasonably easy case to win and you don't need to be a customer or anything - just an aggrieved party.

No spare seats on QF into/outa DXB for the past two weeks. Would be hard for even QF management to say your not printing money at the moment.


The Don