I'm sorry - and I hear you about the average jobs out there - but that is the worst possible take in this situation.

Even pre Covid they were getting applications from some ex widebody Captains, lots of jet FOs and a flood of turboprop/GA pilots. All of whom knew the 787 rates and obviously were happy with them.

Some may think 747/380 SO rates with overtime should be the standard for a cruise relief position, the market thinks differently. There’ll only ever again be a small handful of SOs getting those legacy rates when a number of 380s return for a while, and then eventually none.

At the end of the day the job can be done by pilots with 250 hours and a bare CPL. It’s a lot of money for an entry level position. Those old school 747/380 rates aren’t ever coming back, regardless of how some wish for a career as a permanent SO.

I think you missed my point. Is the issue with the name and salary or is it related to the qualifications of the cruise-relief role? FWIW, my former operator, where additional pilots have been CP/SFO/FO and natural crew for 4 pilot ops, prior to COVID was looking at using cruise-relief type-ratings to reduce the training burden. They would have been new entrant FOs, not SOs. Hence my question to Rex as to whether this would be safer rather than cheaper.

Well then surely we can drop the rate of first officers and captains too? Let’s put the whole lot out to tender and see what the lowest possible salary is when someone will take the job.

It’s been demonstrated that people will actually pay for a job flying a jet. Perhaps we could have an eBay style auction to see just how much someone will pay to get in the flight deck of a wide body jet?

And so now we have a sprint to the bottom. There is always someone who will do your job cheaper. It’s easy to argue market dynamics, until it’s about your job.

if you’re replying to me, I am not advocating a lower salary for anyone. In the scenario I outlined, the new-entrant FOs would have been on the FO salary scale but would only have been type-rated as cruise-relief pilots. Are they safer because they are called FOs and paid the same?

Captain and FO conditions for the 787 and 350 are fine. The new contracts for those aircraft were more about correcting SO pay. When you have conditions that were encouraging SOs to remain in that position for a career, declining upgrades to widebody FO slots, and making more than SH Captains base pay then you know the position has morphed into something it was never intended to be.

Student in Debt,

It is not about a name change. EK only had FOs- no SOs. Yes there is a higher training cost in using FOs as augmenting pilots, but you get a safer operation. In three pilot ops, EK went to TWO Captains and 1 FO, as certain states demanded that you always had a captain in a seat. So in summary FO is safer than an SO but is also more expensive, which is why Qantas et al went down the SO track.

it’s always nice to be told what my job is worth by a random on the internet. Thanks

Argue all you like about money but it isn't a entry level position. Plenty of people with FO jet time and/or regional airline commands have taken SO positions.

On paper it’s an entry level position.

Plenty of 25 years olds with a couple hundred hours on a Seminole also get the gig.

So, the industry is facing the biggest crisis in living memory, and the discussion is SO pay.

Tackling the big issues here.

It's actually kind of refreshing to see at least some things are getting back to normal. (Sore point I know. Sorry.)

Maybe I need to amend this further to include S/O pay also! :(

not sure that’s correct. What states mandate that a Captain must be in a seat at all times? I think EK only did it as they had a shortage of FOs, like BA do from time to time too.

It is an entry level position. The minimum requirements also reflect that. You could have been a space shuttle commander and HR will still be comparing you to a 500 hour CPL for the job.

Doesn’t matter what experience you had prior, that’s your own choice (and plenty make it) to leave another job to join Qantas. Some even leave Jet commands because of the allure of a red tail!

Want to join QF in a position that’s befitting your prior experience? Get rid of seniority

Of course it is an entry level position, it should be paid as such. The fact of the matter is, the previous A380/747 SO Contract was too bloated and overpaid for the position, good on those who were on it but ultimately you should never have a contract that allows you to stay in that position forever as getting a 'promotion' may cost you money. All airlines have learned this, in BA the pay scales were re-done and FO pay scales were capped as they were in the situation that senior FO's would be turning down shortfall commands as it was a pay drop. It doesn't matter that highly experienced people apply for the job, they are doing so as things like lifestyle, location etc are overriding the conditions. Hell, during the last 18 months I worked in a post sorting office with a Check Captain, an ex Emirates A380 Captain and numerous Uni Graduates, the qualifications of the applicants don't change what the role is. In Qantas Mainline the SO position is the entry level position and $100k plus is good pay for such a position. If you were lucky enough to have been on previous gold plated contracts with Qantas, Cathay, BA etc then good for you and defend those conditions aggressively but the market has changed.

3 Greens - I think China mandated it after a few incidents in their FIR with FOs in the flight deck. So that affected South Korea, and Japan Flights as well.

Must be an EK only rule then. I flew into Shanghai last week and the S/O was sitting in the LHS while the Captain was snoozing in the bunk.

I'm not sure that's safer than 2 captains, 1 FO....., But I'm CERTAIN its cheaper .....

I’m not debating the safety of having a different crew complement but simply pointing out that it’s hard to believe China has a ‘Captain on the flight deck at all times’ policy.