If you want to believe it's that easy to simply perform that action go ahead. There's significant training and operational line readiness issues now. You're talking about a group of people who haven't been in the particular aircraft for years and haven't been in an aircraft at all for what will probably be over 12 months. Whilst one pilot in those circumstances, away from aviation for years, could come back on line into an environment where their colleagues have been active on the fleet in the meantime, you're talking about retraining en masse a significant proportion of the fleet, to pilots who have been out of the loop for a long time. Not going to happen, if the company don't say no then CASA surely will.

That one I doubt. In 2014 (when the aviation industry didn't come to a halt and there was ample opportunity for those in the VR interest bracket to remain flying until retirement age, and the VR eligibility was limited to only 2 fleets) they still got around 60 applicants. Today there will be no opportunity at all for those on the 380 for a minimum 3 years, and on the 747 for an indeterminate number of years, to return to flying. They'll probably reach 200 with those two fleets alone, and there'll be a number of 330 and 787 pilots who want it as well. I've heard pilots as young as early to mid 50's from various fleets are seriously considering the package.

Good to see ‘special’ packages still find their way to you despite the Covid restrictions.

This persistent ideology is a fine example of when having some knowledge is far more dangerous than having none. Bush lawyering reaching new heights.

you left out the part where I said it isn't going to change the way you feel you have been or about to be treated

Covid is a disaster for aviation. Flt Ops management I think are doing a good job. If people are not preparing for drastic change now, I don’t know what situation could be more severe that would warrant action. If people want to blame others for the way they feel, that’s their choice. Most people are getting on with life best they can. I’m not busy lawyering with these observations.

It is unfortunate forums like these give a microphone to uninformed, inaccurate and speculative thinking.

Should it turn out you are correct, like picking a hundred bagger penny stock, I’d say a genuine ‘well done’.

My opinion which is born out of personal experience is aimed more at the over 50's and particularly the over 55's
You have to survive covid first.
If you survive as a recovered, you must be restored to pre-covid health.
Then you can think about going back to work in a couple of years.
Be aware, ask any unemployed 55 year old on the street, age discrimination is alive and well.

I agree with your statement about the forums, I don't believe I'm one of them.

In 2015 they failed to get the numbers they wanted, I know because I was called and offered it two weeks after it closed. Personally I don’t think they will get 196 I’m guessing 150/160 but who knows. As I understand it the company is now saying the payment of VR is depended upon the changes they want in the EA getting up. Lastly, thanks to the incompetence of Comrade Andrews in Victoria the companies cash flow projections have been blown up . The 40% domestic flying by July 31 and 80% by xmas I feel are not going to happen. So, I think we are looking at more redundancies through the whole group.

Every Stood down Pilot is that same position. Much retraining required for all. So many Ex SH pilots in LH now with thousands of 737 hours. A considerable amount newly trained to the 787. CASA is not going to ‘Stop this’ hypothetical outcome. I am pointing out that the cost issue TLS proclaims is a fallacy. Cheaper to CR a junior SH than a more senior LH. And the retraining can will be kicked well down the road into another fiscal year.

I sense some here may be under-estimating the scale of this economic shock. We have to go back at least 90 years to find something this big. Some data suggests significantly further back
https://www.ft.com/content/734e604b-...c-19e8b22dad3c

Australia faces extra challenges against this global backdrop
1. In the 1920's, UK dominated Australia's trade. Today, it is China - and China is making it clear that it will bring economic pain to any country that criticises it.
2. Back then we had a diversified economy and were fairly self-reliant. The major parts of our economy today are
a) importing migrants (to keep wages low)
b) overseas "students" (often also with work rights) - gone for the foreseeable future
b) buying and selling houses to each other
c) iron ore - China is looking towards Brazil (building 4 ports for very large ore carriers that are too big for Australia, but the economy of scale will work for Brazil) and Africa
d) agriculture - less than previously, and already some limited export restrictions
e) financial services - which are being hard hit
3. We are living in a geopolitically complex area

Anyone thinking this is going to bounce back quickly is (I believe) seriously mistaken.

These 3 podcasts are well worth listening to.
https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/202...y-disposition/

Under NZ Law, AirNZ is not a SOE, an SOE requires 100% government ownership and would not be listed on the NZX or ASX. Yes the government did own 75% until the mid 2010s, until the government sold down its shareholding to around 50%. An SOE will require a Government minister to appoint the board and would report solely to the government, not to the public.

The main difference is that under NZ employment law, there is no stand down provisions, so any LWOP must be negotiated by the company and employees, otherwise employees must remain on full pay. The only stand down provisions are for factory workers who may have an annual stand down to cover maintenance periods, however such time periods of the stand down must be in the employment agreement and the pay rate applicability during that time is also stated, annual leave is not permitted to be used to cover the stand down, and stand downs are not permitted to be unpaid.

When it came to this stand down the QF group basically told its NZ based staff to take LWOP, or be made redundant. They weren’t the only Australian based company to try and pull that trick in NZ during the Covid situation. The courts have already decided for one company the agreement for LWOP with a threat of redundancy is illegal and full back pay must be paid with an extra harm payment of $12,000 per affected employee handed down.

Since the precedent has been made in the court, and MBIE have also fined that company just over $1.2M on top of the court directed costs, it will be interesting to see how the unions deal with the QF group. I understand that MBIE are taking a very hard line with companies who fail to comply with NZ employment law during this time.

Fantastic recommendation. Thanks!

One of the problems with any group is confirmation bias. Everyone in the group sees things the same way and confirms each other’s perspective.

Airline pilots are young (with lots of productive years ahead of them) or older (on well above median incomes). This means the opinions of the group may not be generalisable to wider society.

This is an overview of what is happening (and therefore what is likely to happen next). It’s not pretty.

https://digitalfinanceanalytics.com/...-soup-to-nuts/

Even after we get the virus under control, the economy will be very subdued for a long time.

In my mid-50’s, I am now re-evaluating the last 10 years of my career. Lots of thinking to do.

If that's from 'official' sources then it's probably because most are still evaluating the estimate with their accountants and the like. Two weeks is not a long time to evaluate the package if your professional help can't fit you in until this week due to their workload. Many are probably leaving the final decision until late this week when they have digested all of the many ramifications of accepting or rejecting the offer.
If it's from anecdotal sources, I'm hearing the opposite.

was that 196 before Vic hard lock down and before QLD shut for an undetermined time? I would think QF and JQ will be crunching some numbers now and it will not be pretty. Even Domestic will struggle now into the new year as unemployment sky rockets in Victoria.

The timeline for the fleet requirements and employment numbers, as announced openly to the ASX in which you’re all free to read, is for a 3 year recovery plan, with the surplus numbers based on the predicted network in mid 2022, a full 2 years away. So unless they’re changing plans on what’s happening beyond 2/3 years the current numbers apply. If there’s any interim change in requirements domestically then stand downs will manage that problem, and no further surplus is forecast. I don’t think anyone expects domestic travel restrictions to exist in 2 years.

4-6 months after full lockdowns other nations have resumed quite substantial parts of domestic networks, it will follow suit in Australia too.

Well said!!

I like your optimism. International we already know they won’t be going for a long time. My concern is these latest restriction into QLD with no known easing how will that affect the 3yr plan on domestic crew number.

At least with the latest out of Victoria they have given a date wether they can stick to it remains to be seen.

All 196 are from LongHaul anyway, so I’m not sure a slowdown in the domestic ramp up will effect it much.

Worth a read.
Embrace change, or it will embrace you

The structural changes of COVID-19
https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/202...s-of-covid-19/

Almost all nations that had lockdowns in March eased them June/July. 3-4 months.

Our ongoing list of how countries are reopening, and which ones remain under lockdown

So whilst we may not know the exact date life will return to normal in Victoria and when something resembling a familiar domestic network will resume, I’m fairly confident that the time interval will be measured in months, not years.

Thank you Slats, that was terrific. Appreciate the heads up.

You need to improve your sources. More than halfway after a week. A lot of crew still sorting out the financial advice. I reckon this will be a bit like letters of preference at close of bidding. A lot of activity in the last couple of days prior to it closing on Friday night.

What a complete disaster this all is for crew , & for the travelling public alike

Guys from mid 50s onwards having to consider taking VR , and missing out on the most lucrative years of their careers , and best lifestyle
given high places on on the list etc. Junior crew taking lwop to protect a position , possibly years down the track

If QF didn't recruit for nearly 8 years post GFC , likely you are looking at 2030 before external recruitment at QF. Imagine flight crew HR have
had to dust off their CVs

Interested in what some crew might be doing in terms of study, career transition , return to previous profession/vocation or getting into something new

You could almost complete a medical degree (4 year grad degree) if you wanted to - hard to jag a place but some might have the academics & motivation to pull it off

At the start of Covid I imagine many were looking at "temp" jobs ie: maybe things like protective service officers etc

Has that changed now it is clear the likely duration of this downturn

Let's hear some of the success stories about what people have done or aim to do

It has been inferred WRT the 190 excess as quoted from the boss office that it appears they only have half that VR number on file as of 6th August, however I know there are a ****e load of fingers hovering over the TOGA button and come 2359EST tonight , QF will have an absolute cascade of VRs flooding into the mainframe. I can only hope that a young bloke like me won’t miss out, I pressed TOGA last week 🤞

Only a personal opinion but I think they will take all comers. Also as I understand it there is no guarantee the VR will go ahead unless the pilots vote up the changes the company want to the EA to effectively pay for the VR.

as stated and restated by Flt Ops Exec Management, the current VR packages as published prior to this date in your VR non-binding EoI , is a stand alone offer and totally separate from any future EA amendments... ie, if you want to GO on That deal, you have just over 3.5hrs to press the button 🚨

Could be worse but not a great time for it to happen if you were counting on a decade of high wages to fill the retirement pot now that the kids have left home and the house is nearly paid off. Too late for a career change and to establish in the new line of work at a decent income level. I wouldn't even want to have to learn a new airlines SOPs let alone study and pass exams in a completely different field.

Network a bit and see what's available, maybe snag a government desk job with good benefits. Options are limited once you've passed 50, unless you're really fit much of the physical stuff is out and the brain probably isn't up to too much new technology. No employer wants to invest much in training someone who's only a few years off retirement anyway.

We're probably going to have to tighten our belts, do our best to preserve what payout we get and try to find something with reasonable pay until we retire.

Dragonman is talking about how the VR offers are part of the overall package including LWOP and EA variations. IE if the EA variations and LWOP applications don’t deliver the required savings there may be less money available for VR offers.

So whist the VR offers are accurate and binding in terms of $$$, it isn’t encumber on the company to accept them. They could choose to only accept the 747 crew, or 747 and 787 crew, or any variation they like.

The number of EOIs was supposedly north of halfway on Monday. I also agree with dragonman’s assessment that they’ll take all comers.... even if it’s a few more than the 196 previously mentioned.

There is something I’m not understanding here.

Are you saying that the Company is “threatening” not to accept the VR applications if the pilot body votes “no” to an as yet completely unknown variation proposal to the LHEA?

If so, that makes no sense. How could a pilot vote on a LHEA variation possibly be influenced by a threat to VR for a couple of hundred (or less) senior pilots?

I know this Company has form with thinly veiled IR threats, but this one doesn’t seem to make sense.

No, there is no threat. The way it was explained there is an amount of money set aside for this flight ops business case of reducing head count and costs, etc. If there is no LWOP and no changes to the EA, that changes (decreases) the amount of money available for VR. Qantas can respond to this in a number of ways. They may choose to limit the VR to specific categories- or more correctly change which offers they accept- and then go down a different road of dealing with the head count.

This has been explained on a couple of different webinars now. I didn’t get it the first time I heard it. Took me about three goes to understand what they were getting at. I don’t have a full understanding of what options would be considered.

I still reckon they’ll VR everyone who asks for it up to about 196 people (if that many ask for it). I suspect the 747 crew are the lay down misere. Beyond that will depend on aircraft type and so on and as has been confirmed a coupe of times, would require a re-evaluation of the business case to see if the additional numbers ‘fit’ into the case.

Ahh... Now I get it.

You mean like outsourcing the A350 wasn't a threat, it was merely a business case of a certain amount of money being set aside to crew the A350.

Also they’ve scared the junior ones witless so they’ll get a hell of LWOP from the bottom up.
They'll get their numbers.
Having said that I’m absolutely sure they’ll over do it and be short in the medium term.

Spot on Wingspar.
I also believe they will overcook it, but no real downside for the company with that approach.

Alright....... so VR has closed. Monday has been and gone..


And the VR number is??

Do we expect to hear anything this week?

Tighter than a fishers arsehole swimming backwards. Not a whisper

Qantas pilots in much days, preparing for the second Project Sunrise test flight from London to Sydney in November 2019.

• EXCLUSIVE

  ROBYN IRONSIDE

  
  AVIATION WRITER
  https://i1.wp.com/pixel.tcog.cp1.new..._location=none
• 2 HOURS AGO AUGUST 10, 2020
• NO COMMENTS

Qantas is under fire from its most senior pilots over what they perceive to be unequal treatment under a redundancy scheme to shrink the airline’s workforce by 6000 staff.

Pilots approaching 65 have been told they do not qualify for redundancy payouts because they would be retiring before long-haul international travel resumes.

It means about 60 *pilots will leave with an “early *retirement” package of three to four months’ pay, while others who take redundancy will *receive up to 12 months’ pay.

READ NEXT

• https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/...a8a9?width=320
  SUPER NETBALL 2020
  Bassett milestone a giant reason to win
  MARCO MONTEVERDE

A Qantas pilot who spoke to The Australian on the condition of anonymity said it seemed a shabby way to treat people who had worked for the airline for 35 years or more.

“We’ve been told if you turn 65 prior to July 1, 2022, you don’t qualify for redundancy,” the pilot said. “Our legal advice is that it is not age discrimination, but it certainly feels that way.”

He said the only alternative was to remain stood down on the JobKeeper allowance of $1500 a fortnight, and have their leave entitlements continue to accrue until they reached 65, the age at which all international pilots are required to retire.

The expressions-of-interest period for voluntary redundancies closed on Friday but Qantas would not say if it had reached its target of about 200 pilots.

Pilots have been among the hardest hit by the COVID crisis due to the massive reduction in flying and the uncertainty surrounding the resumption of international routes.

Qantas does not expect long-haul flights to return to pre-COVID levels until 2023-24, and has taken the decision to park its A380s in the California desert until that time. Many of the airline’s newest aircraft, Boeing 787s, are also heading to Victorville in the US to be stored for up to 12 months in a sign of the gloomy short-term outlook for overseas travel.

A Qantas spokesman said the 787s, all of which were under three years old, were among about 100 aircraft identified as surplus to needs for the next year.

“We’ll keep some in Australia as contingency aircraft,” he said of the 11 787s in the Qantas fleet. “We expect the 787s to be the first aircraft to return to service when long-haul inter*national travel returns, so the rest will come back to Australia when the time is right.”

He said conditions in California were better suited to the long-term storage of aircraft than Australia’s Red Centre where many Southeast Asian airlines were parking their planes.

“The humidity in California is much lower than in Australia,” he said. “All of the aircraft will be looked after by our Los Angeles-based engineering team.”

Meteorological data showed the average humidity in the *Mojave Desert was between 10 and 30 per cent, compared to 24 per cent in Alice Springs.

One cannot be required to retire. If the job no longer exists you are made redundant. The chances of anyone being awarded VR is extremely unlikely given the magnitude of those numbers.

It’s pretty clear 196 at a minimum will be offered VR as that was the forecast surplus.

correct, you can’t be forced to retire but as an incentive take 4 months pay to leave OR remain stood down for the next 12-24 months and be shown the door with 0 pay.

JK can’t last forever..

Sure, but on what basis would you discriminate and offer a couple of hundred VR's, followed by a couple of thousand CR's

When jobkeeper finishes you will still be stood down but then only accumulating annual and long service leave plus for those still in division 3 super years of service towards your final payout.