If we have to give up leave accrual while stood down to prevent CR. Its a no brainer.

Is it?
2000+ pilots go to zero income to prevent (who knows) 2-300 pilots from going to zero income. It’s something we will all need to consider the merits of but I don’t think it is a ‘no brainer’.

Are the most junior pilots served well by being stood down with no leave for an indefinite period vs being made redundant and paid out accordingly?
I’d have though that a guarantee of re-employment, in seniority order, at the earliest possible moment in reply to a temporary reduction in MGH (as an example) would provide a greater total benefit to the pilot body.

The big advantage to keeping everyone one stood down, is that you are still an employee. You are still in the system, so when some flying slowly comes back it can be shared around for all at lower divisors and all can have a regular income (albeit less than before). Being an employee means the company has legal obligations to you, and should look out for your welfare as well.

Being made redundant means you are on your own. There is the redundancy list, but it means running the HR gauntlet again and having them approve more recruitment, which won't happen for a while I guess. HR may be happy to keep a lower number of pilots on higher hours than re-employ those made redundant? Not to mention the psychological effect of being made redundant. Anyone made redundant isn't going to be finding employment as a pilot very easily.

A lot of those at the bottom are in their first stable airline job, and at an age where they have taken out a home loan, just gotten married, had their first child etc. They are at a vulnerable stage of life and throwing them out on the street with a few weeks redundancy payout into an environment where airline employment is near on impossible is something I cannot do in good conscience.

A lot of great points. Well put.

Didn’t blueskymine refer to leave accrual while stood down? Not sure how that equates to zero income. JobKeeper might continue post Sept for certain industries/companies (like Qantas) but the company might say “collect your govt money, burn some leave (if you have some) to supplement it, but your leave balance won’t grow while stood down on Jobkeeper”. I think that’s what they were referring to.

Well said Dr Dre, for exactly that.

A no brainer.

Sorry to disagree here. If the viability of the company is dependant on whether or not they are accruing leave entitlements for those stood down, we are all doomed.

I am all for reduced MGH once we are all stood up to avoid redundancies - as per Dr Dre’s reasoning, but the company can’t have half its workforce stood down indefinitely because it suits them at zero cost to them.

There has to be some give and take - the company get massive flexibility when it’s time to be ramping up by having everyone still on the books, the least they can do is dribble in your entitlements, and the least we can do is be flexible around MGH once we are all stood back up.

It is great to see people with a positive outlook. It can’t get much worse than what it is, one would hope! I to am a believer that things will get better sooner than expected. Of course for airlines that means they have to be ready when a ramp up comes.

Making huge redundancies, LWOP, etc, will there be enough trainers and sims?

Will it be a case of QF Int parked up whilst the likes of QR, EK, SQ, etc who are possibly in a more ready position take the work?

I guarantee that almost, if not every pilot on the bottom of the list would very much prefer no leave accrual whilst stood down (lwop pretty much) over redundancy. Keeping the connection is key.

Concur, I would say a huge difference in most people’s mental health between taking LWOP over redundancy, don’t underestimate the importance of that right now.

The 6 380s that are not refurbished are been sent to the Mojave next month to reduce parking fees. I don’t know if they are coming back.

True that redundancy has a terrible effect on someone’s mental health.

It’s happened to me twice before, once in 90s and another time as a knock-on from Ansett.

Both times it was just myself (no dependents or mortgage etc). Both times still terrible; as were the empty promises from the regional operator to rehire us when the time came.

Sadly, in our volatile industry, it can be cyclical feast or famine. If you haven’t already, It’s likely that most will be touched by some form of this in a pilot career.

For the newer pilots, perhaps those who just landed an airline job and thought they’d made it (took out the mortgage, bought the car, had the kids etc), I do feel for you. Sometimes you’re just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Could just as easily have been me.

Lessons learned the hard way. The only thing for sure is that persistence and determination will ensure you’re back flying when the time comes.

Honestly I think QF Long Haul will need everybody by sometime next year . you would think that with a strong balance sheet QF will exploit the market where other Airlines cannot , they surely must be looking at new routes as country's open up .
Qf has probably a once in a lifetime chance to establish new markets and encourage Australians to fly with them, the FF scheme certainly helps with loyalty. The other unknown is Virgin , if they dont come back who will carry the 20 million pax per year they once had .
There is a real possibility in the future that QF group will need to expand in size rather than contract. play the waiting game and all will be revealed .

Also I would expect a lot of point to point travel.
That way would minimise risks that hubs would otherwise present.
Perhaps something for the 787 crew to be positive about.

For those advocating that being redundant and then re-employed will be a simple process, just need to go ask the third of the bloke cadets who got scrapped for pretty dodgy reasons (if any). While they weren't on the seniority list, they did have to go through the whole HR gauntlet all over again. Effectively you could be in a similar position they found themselves in years after passing all the hurdles.
If you're a male near the bottom of the list, I'd be cautious of any "offer" like this..

I must have missed the part of the EBA that says they'll only fire males in reverse seniority

but if they lay off the bottom 200 pilots, when it comes time to re-hire, HR have diversity quotas to fill...

F##k HR and the horse they rode in on.

So just to be sure that I have this correct. At present there has not been a single pilot within the Qantas Group who has been issued with any redundancy notice. This might change in a very dynamic situation but for now all pilots are still employed as pilots albeit most not actually flying. I think all this angst over RIN/ redunancy/ down training is just causing a lot of people a lot of unnecessary anxiety. Just be grateful that you are employed by an airline that stands a very good chance of coming out of this situation in a much stronger position than its contemporaries. Certainly in a much better position than any domestic competitor. If you are so concerned about where you stand in terms of having a job in QF then can I suggest you start focusing your energy on obtaining a different qualification otherwise just take things one roster period at a time to paraphrase the footy coaches.

"Hiring and training pilots can be so limiting to expansion as it has a considerable lag time."

true but you're assuming the rebound will be very fast - in fact , like after 911, it'll be 2-3 years. there will be a load of pilots out there , many in Australia, and they don't need training from scratch when you need them. I suspect it'll be a slow, but steady expansion - but from a very low base.

You have to admire the optimism considering Qantas are still led by the CEO who locked everyone out in 2011.

With the current PC climate that we find ourselves in, you're highly optimistic if you don't think there will be a 50/50 gender "equality" quota installed when all this turns around..

Without drifting from the thread too far - from all accounts of pilots who were involved in recruitment in late 2016, the 1/3 of "bloke cadets" that you mentioned earlier who "got scrapped for pretty dodgy reasons" arrived on interview day feeling rather self-important and underprepared.

Let's hope no one needs to be made redundant on the list. Re your earlier post, suggesting taking LWOP (or some variation of) to be recalled in seniority would be a disadvantage to males only is drawing a longbow. However, I do agree 50/50 gender targets will be back on HR's menu once the hiring wave begins down the track, as it was pre CV19.

You are dreaming . as someone once said, RTFA. (Read the fuc*king Agreement)

Love all this pie in the sky BS you guys are going on about.

Redundancy and re-employment are all VERY well covered in the EBA. As is LWOP, stand down, and all the good things that go with it.

As fun as it is to poke fun at QF - the pilots EBA spells out what can and can not happen.

Deep breath and relax folks - the sky isn’t falling.

What I admittedly don't understand is how someone can be assured that they are covered by an agreement if they are not employed by the company.
In other words, what stops a company coming out and saying "in line with gender equality criteria, we will be employing at 50/50"?

Amen to that ! Best post here

Amen to that ! Best post here

Better be careful, HR hold a pretty good hand in this scenario.

The EA has pretty comprehensive guidance around re-employment. If a pilot has complied with the EA requirements it’d take a pretty significant argument by the company to suggest that re-employment should be by different means.

I wouldn't be too worried about any gender targets re: hiring because the QF group won't be hiring for a long long time

Remember mainline didn't hire for 8 years post GFC , & this is a tad worse , international business now at zero and will stay there for
the foreseeable future

Wouldn't the only hiring be reshuffling those already within the group ?

Agree with Keg that CR is clear how re-employment occurs . On that point why would any ML person take a VR ? , the payout will be lesser than CR and there
is no right of return, and no other flying jobs out there

The return to work following a stand down is clear as mud , no details , nothing prescriptive at all , ie" by seniority , by type , by base , by % of normal workload
No details there

You should just unite as a group and make QF make you CR if that is what it comes to , payouts maximised & a guaranteed right of return first

The only other element you might be able to add is preference for employment with other group airlines , in Australia & OS while you wait , or other employment
in the group

For anyone that may not know Keg, he has been around a long,long time and his view is always worth listening to!

We will just have to settle for reading it here, at least until pprune comes with an audio function on e day.

I’d need to get someone to do the audio. My Aussie strine would be torture to listen to!

I think it’s also worth looking at this from the company’s perspective- isn’t that a Sun Tzu thing to consider your predicament from the opposition’s view point?

Do you think they’d prefer to pay 6 months to someone at the start of their career and run the risk of not getting them back or find the ‘sweet spot’ amount of money (perhaps a similar amount of money or perhaps less depending on who they’re offering) to get people to leave at the end of their careers and still retain the investment on those newer crew.

If the A380 is a chance to remain stood down beyond March next year and/ or reduced capacity when it comes back, would an A380 Captain consider taking a package worth (say) $150K in March next year or potentially work 50% (or less) divisors for the next 12 months until they get to retirement?

I’m also pretty confident that the company can put an individual offer to specific crew so I’m sure there would be a bit of a ‘sliding scale’ as to how much a particular pilot may be offered depending on their time to retirement.

Anyway, it’s going to be a rough couple of years. Very few winners anywhere.

Keg FM....I’d tune in.

Not legal.

But it is amusing watching pilots soil their strides at the thought of losing almost exclusivity in the workplace.

Losing exclusivity in the workplace? You mean their own individual jobs?

But why would you accept a VR ?

The money will be less than CR and you forfeit guaranteed right of return

Think Keg is incorrect in thinking that a sliding scale can be offered which targets those who are older

Don't VRs just apply for years of service , not years remaining , why for example would a 55 year old leave - they will not get another job

Just stick together and maximize the payout to any who get CR , make AJ pay the full amount as prescribed by EA

"If" there is a CR it would have to be done in seniority , so a % of those at the bottom go & are all reemployed within 5 years - all works out

The Kiwis acted promptly and set the example - just follow it and try to get provisions in any deal for those made redundant to have preference for employment at other QF group airlines (obviously after their own for example
Qlink come back)

The only variable is if you have to CR across each division of mainline - are SH FOs who have been around for short time protected by the fact they went to SH

Some people will always gloat at other's misfortune.
What a low life comment.

What a low life comment, gloating at other's misfortune. Are you looking for a job in management? Or just trying to climb the greasy pole?