Alan's next war. Approaching a terminal near you.
 

Lets have a crisis shall we? Or is that " we'll show them."
So it seems despite agreed EBA's, Alan is positioning the troops for another all out assault on the front line "team members"
The 787 introduction is the battle ground, with arguments being created to bring on the next manufactured crisis.
The engineers and pilots collectively in their sights for daring to press for eba agreed terms and conditions.
A new entity is the threat and rumour. Although Jetstar is keen to step up to the plate.
The only question is why?:ugh::ugh::ugh::ouch:

The only "assault" on the 787 conditions presently seems to be the issue regarding the tech crew rest area config? Is that what you're alluding to?

The word from the "front line troops" at least in SH is we hope the change back to old guard leadership in AIPA doesn't f@ck things up for the majority.

Don't be so prescious AIPA and create a war over perceived lack of "consultation". Do we really expect the Company to pay for a non standard rest area when, if the extra Pilot wants to sit, a curtained off option in the cabin is already available?

Apologies in advance if this is not what you are starting this thread about.

What ,the cabin crew seat in the galley you mean Capt?
Don't BA pilots get a Business class seat in the cabin for ULR ops?
Not everyone will want to sleep in the ceiling coffins on time off ,especially during daylight ops.
The seat in the crew rest area has limitations as well ,hence the push for a business class seat.
Even the business class seat if agreed to , so I'm led to believe , isn't contractualy compliant , yet the much maligned AIPA appear to be willing to negotiate, so I'm told.
Seems the company is very good at forcing and ignoring contractual obligations as it deems fit. The direction of their choice appears to revolve around how costs affect management bonus's !

Yet from what I hear the AIPA reps are anything but combative.
How often do you just "roll over " so as not to "rock the boat".
I say go ahead and employ outside Long Haul. Can't wait to see the resultant redundancy costs!
Didn't the last EA also contain a clause that stated that B787's in Qantas colours would be flown by Qantas mainline pilots?

Wasn't it old scrotum face who also said "you only get what you bargain for".
Have you seen what's on offer for crew rest?
For an ULR aircraft in conjunction with FRMS , I believe this issue is very important and well worth the elbow grease expended by these "old guard AIPA" ( wasn't it only the new President the only change to the AIPA Executive lineup?, hardly a wholesale sell out to the Old Guard) to get the best possible outcome for the crew who will be operating this equipment for many, many years to come.

Is this what AIPA is getting upset about Blown?.....:rolleyes:

From the Company

That's it, a glorified cabin crew jumpseat near the galley.
Not even remotely compliant with contractualy agreed to conditions.
Have a look at what other airlines are operating ULR ops with.

He [Alan] is gloating over the EBA deal...
AFR magazine

The company is trying to set a new precedent with the 787 and this will be the ground work for any new aircraft fleet type to be introduced in the future.

Chill - No cause for alarm at this stage. The right people are sitting on hands for the time being and watching to see what happens next with FWC. It's not as simple as it might appear. SCC training continues and allocations are allocating. Good faith negotiations continue.

Just for clarification on most ULR ops they generally have to have business style seat(s) somewhere, so that was indeed a Business class seat in the cabin on the likes of the 744. However nowadays on some types (e.g. The 773) that requirement is met by the vaguely business style seats in the crew rest area.

In any event I know this is an increasingly important issue so good luck.

Hotnhigh said:

News to me, just saw about twenty of my colleagues today at the Pub and nobody else mentioned it either, sounds like a wind up.

If you are of the rank and file, I expect you'd be the last to find out.

CaptainCloudBuster,

Do you speak for all of SH?
Would you be offended if someone told you the 787 was a LH aeroplane?
Most front line LH pilots are happy that AIPA are attempting what is best for an ultra long range aircraft that will do 19 hour tours of duty.
Not panicking like a frightened child without a pair. You'll still get your shiny toy so please don't cry. Perhaps you could look at the company pictures of the procedures trainer to comfort your anxiety?

I would rather trust AIPA to obtain what was agreed upon in the Long Haul EA.
It's sad that Fair Work is now involved however pilots have been there before. You'd always be welcome to volunteer your time to have a better say if you felt discontent.

As Alan stated publicly the pilots have to work 30% harder to fly the 787. Best of luck to the engineers dealing with the Qantas 787 scare campaign, sorry EA.

As you well know, Qantas built a business case for the 787 that the LH EA HAD to meet. The EA included the provision of 2 class 1 rest facilities. Why on earth should we accept anything less when we are upholding our end of the EA 100%?

QF said we'd get the shiny toy if we signed up to the new terms. We did our part and now they don't want to abide by what was written. I'm in short haul and I don't hear anyone saying we should roll over and let Qantas weasel out of a commitment they made and we paid for.

Upon reflection, my initial post was an immediate over reaction to the aggressive scare mongering tone set in post 1.

I've spent some time this morning looking through the LH EA and make the following observations with regards to Beer Baron and Knobby's assertions that the Company is not providing what has been agreed to.

I believe Iron Bar and MEA332 are right on the money.

I'm assuming QF excercised their right under Clause 42.1 to establish a conference to consider changes to rules and working conditions for new aircraft?

Studying the EA RM 20.3 shows that nothing has been agreed as yet regarding Crew rest provisions for TOD's expected for the B787?

Happy to be corrected Knobby / BB.

I think my observation that a return to FWC coincides with a change in AIPA Leadership is a pertinent one and hopefully not a return to the past.

He can gloat all he likes however the 30% is the total pay saved IMO to the pilots on a sector, most of that comes from the SOs. However when you add up the total pilots cost on the 787,747 and 380 per sector then divide it by the number of seats on each aircraft there is no 30% saving. I've done the numbers it is about 1%.

The first route the 787 will fly MEL-LAX is less than 18 hours ToD (if I recall correctly). That is precisely covered by RM20.3. It spells out the need for 2 class 1 rests and what a class 1 rest is. The company don't want to provide it.

The HCAS (High Comfort Attendant Seat) being offered is a cabin crew jump seat with and additional footrest. The company left out the "Attendant" part of the name when they emailed us about it. I'm sure it was no accident.

You guys are seriously missing the point. Do you all honestly think money grows on trees?


We need to make cuts, and that means we all must make sacrifices. There are important costs that must be paid for all these important things.... like designing funny white hats, and changing the font on a brand, or painting letters different colours.


All these things are very important and cost money you know, more important than who flies or fixes these things. Ask any of the coffee sippers in the QVB building at Mascot. Thousands of them will tell you that.


You should all just grow up.

DragonMan,

What Alan is alluding to is that 787 pilots will have to fly 30% more without the night credits on 4 pilot sectors. Which are the current routes for the 787 namely MEL-LAX, PER-LHR.
Also receiving no overtime on ultra long haul routes removes the pay premium for the company. So the higher hourly rate(with no overtime) is still cheaper for QF than a lower hourly rate that includes overtime.
It's only if the 787 flies to Asia or short sectors(2/3 pilot) that the balance returns to the pilots favour.
Alan knew the 787 was an ultra long haul aeroplane and hence he made those facts known to the ASX(After the EA) which the financial review reported. It's considerably more than a 1% saving.
As others have stated, considerable pay and work sacrifices were made in the 787 EA.
As I see it AIPA are just ensuring that the crew rest meets the requirements of the agreed EA.
Pilots flying a 19 hour TOD through the night are going to need it to be satisfactory!
Regardless If your SH, LH, or a pilot who's yet to join Qantas, you want it to be acceptable if/when you or others fly it or not.