Regardless of whether it's fair or not a rotating seniority would get voted up because the amount of senior wood is far outnumbered by the rest these days...

All these items indicate a flawed system. If the system was as fair as you make out, why would these things be necessary?

Kings rarely vote for democracy....:hmm:

Here's an idea...remove overtime, night credits etc and you remove the financial incentive to stick to an inequitable rostering system. :p

Haha! Really? Well, I guess time will tell exactly who is kidding themselves and who still has their head in the sand.

IMO offer anything similar to the ol' 767 or JQ330 rate, no night credit, no overtime (or overtime paid over a certain threshold per roster) and you just watch 'em trample over each other in the rush to fly the thing. Then again...maybe I'm kidding myself.

Dragon, it has been talked about and continues to be as a work in progress each and every SH roster. But I wouldn't worry too much about it champ. I'm sure the 787-9 conditions won't be acceptable to you so you need not be concerned.

Is rotating seniority similar to the EK system of bid groups ? Eg Top, middle and bottom and you move through each group on a monthly basis with the top group getting what it wants and the bottom group picking up the rest.

No, it means human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria! :rolleyes:

You move UP the list 6% per 28 day bid period. The list rotates completely in about 15 months. Works really well. Anyone who knocks it, hasn't used it.

2 Plus is spot on the money if you think they couldn't crew a new type in this environment on 767/JQ330 rates your delusional. Surely the last 10 years has proven get the Aircraft work on the conditions over time or should we let arrogance drive in the final nail.

How's that working out for the Jetstar guys the hornet.....

I'm not suggesting total fold but am pretty sure we won't be flying 787s on 330 conditions. If we took a different direction 10 years ago and agreed to crew the JQ aircraft now we would have an additional 100 aircraft in Qantas 3000 pilots I'm pretty sure we would have a little more bargaining power.

Now let's fast forward 10 years we Secure the aircraft and god forbid recruit would we not be in a better position than if they crew it elsewhere?

Just venting I guess it's been a disappointing Decade

Mainline crew were never going to crew what is now Jetstar. Never. No matter how cheaply they sold their soul and professional dignity. They purchased the 320's so a new entity with new pilots could be employed under a different award. So chin up! It's very different this time.

Jetstar does not make money! Full Service carriers earn 2 to 2 and one half the revenue of a low cost carrier. Qantas cannot afford to sacrifice it's brand for Jetstar. The current management is only trying to maximise their bonuses. Do not be under any illusion that this is a typical Oldmeadow move to maximise the concessions given. If pilots weren't so self-obsessed they would see the real game here. Patience is the key!

Ive been told by one of the negotiators that Oldmeadow has been locked out of the long haul negotiations. Apparently he's been bothering other pilots groups instead.

This holds true with a question I put to Andrew David last year before the negotiations began. My question; was this round of negotiations going to be consultants at 10 paces like the last few fiascos. The answer was a definate no. It will be him, Flt Ops management and AIPA reps. That's it.

I remember thinking at the time that I hoped that finally common sense will prevail and this round will be conducted in an environment of mutual respect. Hopefully, if these rumours have some basis in fact maybe we've finally seen some common sense. I sincerely hope so.

Yep, absolutely agree. Even senior guys in SH who would benefit from a strict seniority bidding system don't mind it. It keeps all crews regardless of seniority in the same mindset. And I think a lot of people who oppose it are either don't know about it or would be disavantaged by its introduction.

So, considering the bitching between LH & SH conditions has already begun, could someone verify if the rumour of new aircraft for Q pilots is even true??

I want to believe it too, but aren't we getting ahead of ourselves?

bdcer, not necessarily. The company most likely wants to have the contract sorted before announcing - costs/certainty and all that.

A new deal for a new type would probably be a win for most who would be interested, and nothing wrong with impassioned senior colleagues choosing to remain passionately senior forever.

Might finally manage to secure some growth, rather than just talk about it while it's being auctioned off elsewhere. :ugh:

Classic, so for all the talk about how management have overstated the dire financial position etc. the majority of people on here now accept the need for a 'b' scale! Seems like management have won this round and we see once again pilots willing to sell themselves short to guarantee getting their hands on the shiny new toys. Alan will be most pleased.

I guess we will see if and when there is a vote. That comment seems a bit rich when you're criticising the same group who have built, set and protected Australian pilot conditions. Truth is when you have pilots who jump at sub standard conditions, it forces everyone to rethink their position. Whatever the outcome I suspect we won't be bashing our fists on the table in 10 years time crying "it's not fair".

For many years now on this forum it seems every man, woman and child have been telling Qantas pilots that they need to change.
Your dinosaurs, out of touch, greedy, stolen all the milk and so on.
Now that Qantas pilots have, and most of us have, realised that we do need to adapt (due to actions outside of our control) there seems to be anger from other parts of the group about us selling out. As it seems maybe Qantas pilots will get to fly airplanes with Qantas written on the side.

I'm not sure what everyone expected. Qantas pilots don't live in a bubble.

Ollie, whether the dire financials of mainline international are accurate or not doesn't really matter because management believe them. Management have canceled routes, canceled aircraft orders and sent flying out to other group entities based on their belief in those figures. So the damage is done and that is what we need to react to.
Our strategy for years has indeed preserved our terms and conditions but growth and promotions have gone by the wayside. Perhaps it's time for a new direction??

Over the last 6 1/2 years mainline has shrunk by about 300-350 pilots and we have 150-200 on LWOP. That's based on the seniority list from July last year. I reckon we're looking at another 50ish on top of that for this year given this is the year when most of the VRs take effect. 15%? 20%? Closer to 25% smaller in six years?

100ish pilots have been demoted. Still more have been forcibly RIN'd from a particular fleet to a smaller fleet where they'll be paid significantly less. Whilst 767 F/Os who were RIN'd to S/O A380 will earn more it is cold comfort to many of them given they gave up the extra $$$ to be an F/O 6+ years ago.

Meanwhile, 737 hours have reduced by 10-15% also. Once upon a time, divisors in the high 70s and pilots flying low to mid 80s regularly was the norm. Now the divisor is in the high 60s and extra flying hours difficult to come by as I understand it- perhaps a bit easier now with the recent demise of the 767.

These are the facts of what has occurred recently. This is where our current award has taken us. Whether we think it's right or not or whether we feel it was justified or not we have been dealt out of the game. We can continue to be dealt out or we can find a way to be dealt back in again. How to achieve that is the question.

So here's something really radical. Rather than the new type being a specific fleet pay rate, how about it becomes the new 'fleet pay' rate. Perhaps we can kill a couple of birds in one stone. Not only will it apply to the 787, maybe it will also apply to the A350 and the 777 (CCQ with the 787 anyway? ) and whatever replaces the Dugong in 15 years time.

A 787 is roughly a replacement of a 767, although it would be likely to be flying more LH routes than the 767 was in it's later years.

You could put the 787 on the 767 contract and no-one would be realistically too upset.

By my back of the envelope calculations, putting a 787 on an A330 pay rate - but without night credits or overtime - would roughly approximate the 767 salary, with the exception that all pilots would be paid about the same instead of the senior creaming the overtime.

You don't need overtime to "persuade" crew to complete the job. Crew will complete the job unless they are too fatigued to do so. No professional pilot would disrupt hundreds of pax unnecessarily.

Overtime has always been the absurd inequity in LH. To be paid so much more for sleeping 8 hours in a bunk has always puzzled those of us who fly 11 hours actually flying 11 hours for less pay. Overtime, if you like, has "killed" the LH contract.

Having equalised the salaries of the crew, rotating seniority could also be a reasonable option. The vast majority of those that have tried it, like it. If you don't think you'll like it, don't bid for it. Should have been done on the A330 - oh, hang on...

The comment above that everybody experiences instability in such a system is rubbish. The reality is that all experience stability most of the time, instead of the few taking it for the team for years on end in stagnant times.

I prefer to work in an environment where everyone "makes the coffee" now and then. The psychological improvements are staggering. It's a much nicer environment. Puts a smile on your face.

I'd beg to differ. Having spent the last 8 years on the 744 & 380 (and still in the bottom 20%), I can assure you that the overtime is a significant incentive to extend beyond 14 hours and even more so beyond 16 or more. I can think of at least 5 occasions when the overtime was seen as the only reason to extend by at least 2 members of the crew. For me, its it's the "dollars make fatigue go away" thinking that is most worrying.

Yes, most crew will go the extra mile to save the passengers the inconvenience, but with no financial incentive, it only takes one crewmember to reject that option and in most cases that will be it for the whole crew.

Oh....and if I get 8 hours in the bunk, let alone sleep 8 hours, I shouldn't have been there in the first place. There are times, eastbound from Europe where I wish I could have 8 hours in the bunk to compensate for the time zone affected lack of consistent sleep I've had in the last 7 days. Should I get additional pay for that? I do and I'll leave it up to others to determine the merits of that portion of the award. Suffice to say, should it be removed, it will be those even more junior who find themselves with 3 DXB-LHR's a bid period.

Therein lies the problem when you start chopping chunks out of the award, the result can be much much worse for a significant number of pilots and also the Company with rising fatigue/health/sickness issues.

IMO, the best result for the Company and the pilots under the LH award, would be to have the 787 under the existing award at A330 pay rates (perhaps with rotating seniority if majority vote). Any changes to conditions would be through the normal EBA process.

For some, the 787 would have the attractiveness of some overtime (the A330 has little), with the offset being rotating seniority. The A330 retains seniority for bidding to satisfy those who value seniority over every last dollar.

B Scale for Qantas Long Haul (787-9)
 

Quote: "For me, its it's the "dollars make fatigue go away" thinking that is most worrying."

I didn't want to say that but there's a good reason it shouldn't exist right there.

Why would QF simply transfer legacy wages and conditions across to a new type when it’s a golden opportunity to start with a clean sheet of paper?

Take a look at the pay gap between mainline 737 crew and Jetconnect 737 crew and you will get some idea where the 787 operation will sit.

"Jetstar does not make money! Full Service carriers earn 2 to 2 and one half the revenue of a low cost carrier."

You may want to do a little more research and see where the majority of capital investment in the airline industry is heading.

Rubbish.

If they were that way inclined they wouldn't be talking to AIPA they would be setting up a Jetconnect 787 operation out of NZ.

Why wouldn't they have done that with the A330?

Why wouldn't they have done that with the A380?

Instead they offered a pay rise, on both those types.

Don't get me wrong, there were many QF pilots suggesting a clean sheet of paper with both those types, as they are now with the 787. But a clean sheet of paper doesn't stay very clean once the scribbling starts. And that goes for both sides of the negotiations. What tends to happen is once a muppet like Oldmeadow starts scribbling, the pilots give up and say well, we tried, I guess you'll just have to stick with ye olde LH contract. (EBA 8?)

Professor,

Irrespective of were the majority of Capital is being invested, the point still stands,
Full Service Carriers yield is better than an LCC!

Hey Professor, Read Doganis-Flying off Course, besides in the Qantas Group 2008, revenue 15.2 Billion, 2014, revenue 15.2 Billion. 40% more aircraft! The difference? Anyway where money is invested does not imply more should be thrown at LCCs. Spoken like a typical new age manager, all hype and no substance. Let's remember to grow the revenue and not just cut costs. :ugh:Long-Haul LC is marginal at best. Back to the subject, New Aircraft, New Contract, get on with it!

Wouldn't it be a C scale? Shorthaul are already on the B scale! :}:}:}

Other way 'round.

Nah it will be a Shorthaul type contract but with back of the clock long sectors so in my mind well behind current Shorthaul mainline contract...

Patience
 

Cup of tea a bex and a good lie down gentleman.
Qantas pilots terms and conditions were not the cause of recent tough times nor will they be a saviour in the future.
Look at all the work groups that have accepted AT WORSTan 18 month pay freeze in their respective EBAs. That includes the TWU which has been a thorn in the side of QF for years.
QF will be making around a billion this year and two billion the year after. Alan will do nicely from his sub 80c options!
The Aussie dollar has fallen 30% and the fuel price by more than 50%.
As the fuel hedging unwinds QF will participate in most of this fall post January 2015. As the dollar has dropped, foreign capacity pulls out and yields increase for QF. Add to this QF make higher comparable fares in AUD from overseas.
The cost base in comparable USD terms has dropped 30%.
Strambi banged on about this when it was 1.15 USD. Well it's 77c and falling now so you can't have it both ways champ.
I'm sure AIPA will be patient. With good Feb results coming and the full year results being even better with greater exposure to the dropping fuel price, one must question the rush to get a deal by QF.
Wasn't that long ago they were happy to keep LH EBAs dragging on for years.
Perhaps we may be best to wait for bonus time when the record profits get announced.
Either way if QF offer a bad deal they risk a delay until profits and bonuses soar ever higher.

With lower fuel prices, wages once again, proportionately, become more attractive to contain.
Anyone who cannot see that the retirement of the 767 well before the 787 is introduced is an industrial manoeuvre to extinguish the long haul award, is living in outer space....
This will allow whoever they want to crew them, at the cheapeast rate possible, without any threat of transfer of business claim. Business 101.....
Prepare to crawl over each other for a spot.

787 crewed using fixed term contracts.

Opportunity for QF to start afresh and pay market rate for market terms and conditions.

Keep dreaming.

With Oldmeadow Consulting now on the outer and excluded from EBA's expect some rubbish to start appearing here and other places in order to attempt to create some tension in Qantas groups. Without tension, Oldmeadow is irrelevant. $2.5m per year contract disappearing before our eyes.

CamelSniffer NO it can't be done. A new type operated by Qantas Airways Ltd will be within the bounds of a contact negotiated between QAL and AIPA. Read the Integration Agreement. If you don't know what it is use a Camel to find it.

What the: Last time I checked it was over $3 mil. Even Freehills couldn't believe it!

Really? Troo, I think you and Camel are talking about two different scenarios.

Flight: QF140 - "Operated by Jetconnect for Qantas."
Flight: QF1514 - "Operated by Qantaslink - National Jet Systems."
Flight: (Insert your favourite Qantas 787 service here) - Operated by ***** for Qantas."

How's your IA working out for you there? All red tail, all plastered with Qantas on the side to keep it feeling like home. Call me a pessimist but I wouldn't say "it can't be done."

* yes, I know this thread is about mainline getting the flying. I just can't see it happening, or at least not on the rates and conditions that mainline has come to expect.

Just something to be mindful of.

The training slots have been prebooked since 2013 going forwards to 2019 at the Singapore facility (Boeing training managers mouth). From a rough calculation it equalled about 30 frames from the numbers.

They are coming. It's just a question of who flys them and for how much.