I assume Tino has offered something that Alan has spat the dummy over.

Bring back TAA !!!

Poor guy, kiss of death when you start agreeing to things. Read the EA yet? Here's a link.

I wonder how many pages the VA EBA will consist of after Bain get their teeth into it.

What’s consequence of merging international and domestic ?

Why isn't Tino just stood down for a few years, collecting only leave entitlements? Hypocrites, when it comes to deciding where to slash costs.

they were never separated. That was the plan, they set up the CEO structure for them to be separate, but the split never eventuated. So effectively, they’ve always been merged

At the risk of going down a rabbit hole, I recall that the intention was to fully separate them, then some bright spark realised that having two sets of AOCs and officeholders to run them would just add cost and complexity, and there was other low-hanging fruit in terms of cost savings. My recollection was that, with some legislative changes, they could potentially let the domestic operation go past 51% foreign ownership but keep International under that to protect the route rights.

The big question will be if Andrew David at Domestic falls on his sword too, or if he is converted to a group COO role and continues to hold the AOC. Then you have to wonder who is being lined up as Alan's eventual successor - seems Gareth Evans will now be in pole position until somebody else rises up.

My money is on Liv.

The way 2020’s working out so far, there’s every chance. :(

Not trying to alarm anyone but the CR part doesn't state people are returned with years of service preserved (this just isn't mentioned) , just seniority number

Maybe not much attention paid by AIPA as never anticipated it would occur , mistakes happen

Whereas the return after medical medical termination refers specifically to people both returning with seniority number & years of service intact

There is a years of service definition at 35.2 but QF may well just say that is for continuous service not for someone being employed a second time

A major cost of keeping people on stand down who joined from 2016 onwards would be the quite significant pay increases over first 4/5 years

The wages bill for SOs would be up by 30 to 50% by the time things get back to normal in four or five years if all remained on stand down, there is a CR cost paid for
there without even considering various leave accruals(at increasing annual rates), superannuation, the various Govt taxes/charges

Maybe it wasn't all about saving the younger newer joiners , QF have done the numbers & its about saving the bucks

As a matter of interest how many QF pilots have accepted retirement or VR since the 'crash'.

The other possibility is that Joyce will hang aroung for quite a while as he lost a big chunk of his wealth when the QF share price tanked - he has so many shares that he would be keen to do everything possible to elevate the share price before he departs. It has nothing to do with his "love/loyalty" for the airline.

Not certain about retirements.
188 have applied for VR but as yet no-one has been advised if they were successful. I suspect most will be…..
As for 'Early retirement'. Who knows given the fairly inferior offer (relative to the VR offer).

Meh, knock the early retirement offer back. 60 pilots on the LHEA aged north of 63 are still gone by 1 Jul 22. Going to accrue less in leave in that time than what is on offer and pay more in tax. Genius idea! Or cross your fingers and hope that the government largesse means you’ll be better off if Jobkeeper goes beyond September next year.

Xeptu, will Qantas attempt to cancel the award? I don’t know IR law at all so you’re getting a bush lawyer opinion here. I’d be surprised if it were as ‘easy’ as many make it out to be just to CR people out of seniority and so on. Given the lengths that Qantas has gone to in order to demonstrate to the market how well positioned they are to come out the other side of this, it’d take something very significant (like Qantas going into administration) for an EA cancellation to even be on the table. That’s so far into the future (north of 18 months) that I’m not going to invest too much energy in even considering it. Let’s re-visit that issue in 12 months time.

I didn't mean "cancel the award/agreement" I don't even think they'll do that. I mean "set aside", as in not in use on this occasion, for this specific purpose as a consequence of this specific event.

Thanks for that .

188 binding contracts, 150 of which are captains

Yep! Like announcing that their interpretation of CR isn’t last on first off, but can be contained to Long Haul or Short Haul Agreements?

It is cheaper to make the bottom redundant than to let them accrue years of service and leave, in the short term and especially in the long run.

The cost of CR for a new hire is 3 months (~13 weeks) any time in the first 3 years. Notice can be given and served while on stand down (which means the second 3 months of the minimum 26 weeks are virtually free, costing only the leave accrual for that period (1.5 weeks) rather than the PILN at full pay.

The price of CR increases at a rate of 9 weeks per year (6 weeks leave accrual, 3 weeks entitlement). It’s cheaper to do CR sooner rather than later and they will.

so.... how does this occur in your thinking

"yeah so... we're just going to set aside the contract for now"

??