Or the ex-76 or the 737 people,
or guys on LWOP or JQ MoU guys.
or junior LH pilots
or any pilot in Mainline who is realistic about the future.

IsDon,

Please stop trying to ruin pprune by posting accurate and factual information. Didn't you know that it's cool to be seen to be 'in the know', even when you aren't?

I'm sorry mate, i don't know what came over me.:O

I stick by what I said. It's not scaremongering. By AIPAs own admission it won't effect existing fleets.

You stand by "The offer is the present 330 hourly rate no night credits no overtime." ?


Interesting, because I'm told by a good source that the company hasn't actually made any specific offers. The package might end up somewhere around that amount once converted to annual take home pay, but that offer hasn't been made, because they say no offer has been made.

Not too sure what that has to do with the possibility to "effect" (sic) existing fleets.

This is apparently true, but obviously may change. It appears, from what I've heard, from various sources, the company aren't actively seeking to change major parts of existing fleet contracts. The focus is very much on a new type.

Very early days yet people. Most of this is just supposition.

This is just voter maths. If the company wants someone to vote for a reduction in T&C's, the only way it can be done is by doing it to somebody else.

To get the 50% +1 vote required to take a significant reduction in existing T&C for themselves, would be almost impossible, unless there were extenuating circumstances. Why would anyone ever agree to reduce his T&C? Existing T&C's can only ever be maintained or on a ratchet up under a majority voting system.

This is the trick, the bait & switch. Maintain existing T&C for those who believe they won't have to ever face those conditions themselves.

Within a relatively short time existing fleets will shrink & be replaced. Then majority of those who voted to the lesser T&C's for someone else will find themselves without a choice. There simply won't be enough seats on the lifeboat. Some will make it, but not many.

I had a discussion with an AIPA negotiator about A380 pay rates a couple of years back. He argued you always want to get the best conditions possible for a new type because it's going to be around a while.

I share you concerns Curtains.

I'm sure the smart people within AIPA are aware of this and just because the company may not want to change the conditions of existing fleets, doesn't mean AIPA won't suggest productivity improvements for the betterment of new type conditions.

I hear ya Crosscutter...
 

I believe that if efficiencies are to be sought/given, then pilots should consider that such measures will apply to all.

I believe that most L/H pilots are globally competitive in total cost to QF but there are, without doubt, some 'stand-out' aberrations on certain fleets. I've heard from a former pilot manager that QF detests what it now views to be the onerous cost of administering the L/H award; too many staff required to oversee the many 'tweaks' above a basic stick hour pay system; hence the 'simplification' mantra.

Regardless of what used to be 'normal' in QF, many contract components are arguably no longer relevant, or are even absurd, compared to what the bigger competitors have set as a sort of new and undeniable benchmark. I just regret that QF management seem either unwilling or incapable of describing, with real incontrovertible facts, where they want to get to in order to 'move forward' with the pilots.

To me everything, even now with all the urgency, sounds like spin, posturing, scare-mongering and disingenuous contrivance because, evidently, the truth cannot sustain the assertions being inferred.

Sad really.:\

Awesome.... COST INDEX 500000!! We can shave hours off the flight time! No point being up in the air longer than necessary!!!!


Oops fuel bill might go up though....


Sorry just having some irrational musings out loud! :}:}

Sounds like Short Haul 😜

Jetsbest, you are spot on the money!
All the support functions of the award(WD) are excessive.
Add to that what happens when QF stuff up.
You fill out a form, send it in, gets scrutinised then sent back to you rejected.
Why?
Because there is so much grey in the award(WD) they have taken a different view.
So now you called up admin staff wasting their time and yours only to be frustrated by what seems a ridiculous decision.
Then you call AIPA who then calls up a series of admin staff with no progress.
The matter is then taken up with Flt Ops management who consider the risk in continuing with this stance of the admin staff/industrial manager.
Then a decision is made maybe to your benefit or not, irrelevant really because it is a waste of resources for everyone.
After all your a pilot and are employed to fly planes.
This whole process has taken up the time of half a dozen people.
How many times has this happened to you in your time at QF?
And why?
The award.
It's so complex and grey it's not funny.
It has protections yes, but smarts will keep those while clearing up the messy bits!

Spot on Curtains ! , thay is exactly what they did to the Cabin Crew.

It would not surprise me if the LH fleet of 2018 comprised of 787's and
A330's.......Only.

Also, sorry but I'm on a a rant.
The company knowing this will frustrate your efforts in the hope you will give up by creating processes that are tedious and time consuming.
People connect anyone?
Sorry People Services!
I bet the title change required a business case, risk analysis by God knows how many people?
OK, rant over.
Almost 9am for therapy session!

Geez, you people.... In a tizz about terms and conditions.
It's a simple fix, lets just have another flight ops reorganisation along with another few power points to highlight the changes.
After all, the 38 we've had this last twelve months have worked wonders.

Did someone mention process simplification?:D:D:D

"Every battle is won or lost before it's ever fought."
-- Sun Tzu, The Art of War

“The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.”
-- Sun Tzu, The Art of War

The companies leverage is not as strong as many believe it to be. Belief in the opponents strength or weakness will be a very important factor in the minds of those who will vote on the next agreement. The company needs to convince the you that you weak & defeated before the vote.

The company has carried a very large surplus of pilots across the entire group for an extended period of time. This occurred for a variety of reasons, age extensions, delayed deliveries, duplicated flying by new entities etc. Some of this was foreseeable, some not. However, the more intriguing observation is the way management have responded to the surplus. There have been some MOU transfers, VR & LWOP, but for the most part the surplus it appears to simply have been accepted. Why?

If pilots were to be made redundant due to a surplus, surely it would have been done at the start of this process, not the end? It has cost hundreds of millions of dollars over the last decade or so to carry surplus pilots on the books.

There are other possibilities. One is the company has a legal advise safely buried under lock and key that says it cannot be make mainline pilots redundant given the way it has handed flying to other internal group entities employing outside the group. They would not be required to disclose this advice, even if it did exists.

Another one is they anticipated using the pilots but delivery delays were longer than they anticipated.

I am simply looking at the actions of management, and attempting to infer motives & agenda's, whilst also being cognisant of Hanlon's razor.

The company is clearly playing the rumour-mongering game about "other entities". That is their job F.U.D - Fear Uncertainty & Doubt.

However, stop and consider what would happen the day after the 787 flying is given away (assuming it were even possible under the integration agreement)? How would management deal with the continuing surplus? Could they make a large number of pilots redundant under these circumstances? And if they could, why haven't they already done it?

As the Sun Tzu quotes illustrate, the Art of war is to not fighting at all. It is to convince your opponent they are defeated before the fight, to surrender & submit peacefully.

The company needs to convince you, it needs to control your decision, for to believe in your heart-of-hearts, to your very core that acquiescence is your only choice. It is to convince you that at NO vote to a crap deal is a career destroying move.

Consider any deal for a new type carefully, and how it may affect you for a very long time, no matter how remote that possibility may appear now. You don't need to take a crap first offer to "secure the flying" & hope to improve T&C's later (see the Jetstar EBA - it won't happen). The next agreement will be a watershed, a pivot point in history. Given the likely changes in fleet, there is no "B Scaling" someone else. Pilots will get to live with the full consequences of their own choices. This is the biggie.


History says you have more leverage than management would have you believe, if for no other reason than your continued employment.

There was strong rumours about JQ internationals' A330's (QF's actually...) being flown by external contract company, South African pilots etc when the 'Wide Body' was added to the JQ EBA?

All turned out to be crap and just helped Oldmeadow get the lowest rate for the company.

FFRATS

Wingspar..
 

You've focused on a relatively small part of what I wrote. I also said;

The pilots did not write the L/H award in a vacuum. Every clause & provision is there because the company wanted AND/or agreed to it over many years of negotiation. I lament my doubts that the company can ever honestly state the whole truth but if they want pilots to "buy into" an understanding of;
a) what management see as the most important problems to be addressed,
b) the benchmarks being aspired-to,
c) the fixes imagined to achieve what they think is necessary, and then
d) clear plans for the future once success is reached,
they will have to do much better at explaining themselves.

To repeat myself;

:rolleyes:

Sad really.

Want to think long and hard about selling the farm in boom times.

Whilst it's an easy one liner to say it won't affect other types or I'm alright Jack it won't affect me, is so naive.

Especially as the 787 will replace both the 747 and probably most of the A330 fleet in time.

What happens if you get RINed off any other QF type to the 787? Think you'll keep your Terms and Conditions.

Extremely dangerous.

If we were losing 2.6 billion then perhaps a different story.

Qantas are trying to rush a deal before the full year results and profit upgrades as we profit from the full effects of a 50% plus fuel price plunge.
5000 people sacked, yields up, dollars down. Hardly crisis times. What's the share price now? 90cents?

Funny as for years they dragged EBAs on and on and on.

But perhaps they have seen the follies of the past, and just want to sign up their beloved and treasured pilots ASAP to make you all feel warm and fuzzy.

Alan loved you all along. He just wanted to see you commit self harm first.

Who's going to be the highest bidder in the race to the bottom.

:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

Mate, anyone with at least half a brain can see that there are obvious issues with different T&Cs and the consequences of a RIN or otherwise ending up involuntarily on a new type and this is being discussed with the company.

The company is keeping the $40-50m cost of each 747 D-check up its sleeve as the excuse to blame the pilots if the deal doesn't come off in time. The other issue is that oil is freakishly low and if (when) it goes back to $110 per barrel then we (international) will likely be losing money again. I reckon most guys are more than open minded to restructuring the agreement to avoid the massive spikes in unit costs on long sectors, provided that the overall take home pay is reasonably maintained. The traditional overtime sectors may end up being the junior trips!