I totally agree.

Ozbiggles I wasn’t talking about companies taking on debt, it was the government! QF and VA can’t get interest rates close to 0.5%, but the government can. VA would have been hard pressed to get any loan under around 5 % and also who the hell is going to offer them the loan? no one!
Because they were a basketcase to start with!

I was talking about both...there is no such thing as free money (or close to free). Unless you win powerball..
The taxpayer still has to pay it back long after the politicians who spent it have gone.

Agreed. Being stood down doesn’t permit QF to act carte blanche with our awards.

The EA covers this scenario very well. As mentioned, notice periods, CR payments and re employment when the time comes.
Let it be.
Very lucky to have it there.
They certainly had no qualms when it came time to cut off negotiations and put a ‘take it or leave it’ vote to the pilots earlier in the year.
Chances are they will have Buckley’s chance of a variation vote getting up.
It’s opportunistic to clear the ‘leave’ decks and pay no one at this time.
Just leave it at that.

Ah yes, throw 300+ colleagues under the bus + all those that will be demoted because of your vendetta against the company. You must be a joy to fly with

Well that is certainly one view. What is fiat money? If the US government can simply print whatever they like.The Australian government has done exactly the same thing. Creating funds out of nothing.
Quantitative Easing is essentially making money appear from nowhere.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_money

https://www.afr.com/policy/economy/q...0200323-p54cvr

https://www.investopedia.com/article...ates-money.asp

So you are advocating we should do what Zimbabwe does?

from one of your sources.

Loss of backing[edit]

A fiat-money currency greatly loses its value should the issuing government or central bank either lose the ability to, or refuse to, further guarantee its value. The usual consequence is hyperinflation. Some examples where this has occurred are the Zimbabwean dollar, China in 1945 and the mark in the Weimar Republic in 1923.

So again there is no such thing as a free ride. Unless you consider hyperinflation a fun thing.

I made no such advocacy. I asked a question and pointed out that the USA and Australia have already done this and are doing it. I make no value judgement. This is the reality, not my opinion.

The key words in that quote however are either lose the ability to, or refuse to, further guarantee its value.

It always astounds me people expecting to hear anything new and exciting on these town halls when the first thing that happens after is people do pay for comment to the media. Interesting times ahead. No forced job losses would be a nirvana but here’s hoping.

Headline should really read ‘Airlines use COVID as reason to tear up existing agreements’.

“Please help us avoid redundancies by accepting a pay cut”. ​​​
Six months later...
“Really sorry but that didn’t work, we’re going to need to lay people off. By the way, your redundancy payout is based on the reduced T&C’s you agreed to six months ago”.


I’m unaware of an airline manager anywhere who wouldn’t sell his/her mother’s pacemaker.

As opposed to pilots??

I guess we're about to find out.

There’s no way the Qantas pilot group is going to agree to things like lower divisors and other means to protect jobs AND in the case of redundancy see the payout tied to those lower hours.

I’d prefer to see it the other way around. If we vote on a variation to the agreement to share the pain and preserve as many jobs as possible through things like flexible divisors I’d like to see greater CR redundancy provisions.

I could not agree more Keg.

However, the problem becomes short haul will be asked to make the majority of the concessions to share the pain. If the “4 holers” (sorry for the stupid reference, but this is how some w@nker referred to himself in a webinar) want to start flying again anytime soon, it has to be in short haul. Any change to MGH in short haul to bring in surplus long haul crew will in my opinion fail. Of interest, if the change was to bring all short haul crew back, I think that would be a different story.

Short haul has already taken a circa 34% pay drop to MGH (72 hrs vs 53.54). Long haul fleets when they were flying were still cruising along on 160/145 (B787 - at a high hourly rate) a little while ago - a reduction of a whopping 9% from their usual divisor of 175, even if it was only for 4 week rosters. Didn’t see too much talk about reducing divisors then.... If these guys/girls want to fly on the B737 when there is not enough flying for the current crews, they may need start making some sacrifices themselves.

International cabin crew managers stood up from Friday for 30 days. Redundancies to be announced on Friday.

Stood up to handle the redundancies?

I would assume so.