Qantas London base
Join Date: May 2004
Location: all over the shop
Posts: 986
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oicur12 the reason I asked about your position in aviation is because we quite often get people posting in this forum who are not involved in aviation, so therefore have no concept of what its like for those of us who are involved - there was no "schoolboy" tones whatsoever.
At the end of the day, the QF Long Haul flighties (and no I am not one of them) are fighting to keep their pay and their lifestyle, and whats more keeping jobs in australia
I gaurentee you if they were opening a QF pilot base in LHR there would be a totally different song being sung on this forum
At the end of the day, the QF Long Haul flighties (and no I am not one of them) are fighting to keep their pay and their lifestyle, and whats more keeping jobs in australia
I gaurentee you if they were opening a QF pilot base in LHR there would be a totally different song being sung on this forum
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: JMC Mining Ship, Red Dwarf. 3 million years from earth.
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
34R
Many thanks for your opinion. I have no problem with a QF thread and you are very right I don't have to read it. I wasn't feeling aggrivated nor was I trying to aggrivate anyone so don't take it that way. The point I was trying to make was instead of having several threads about QF is there anyway they can be merged? over to the moderators.....
LJ
Many thanks for your opinion. I have no problem with a QF thread and you are very right I don't have to read it. I wasn't feeling aggrivated nor was I trying to aggrivate anyone so don't take it that way. The point I was trying to make was instead of having several threads about QF is there anyway they can be merged? over to the moderators.....
LJ
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Darlings .... anyone who knows me can vouch for the fact that I cant keep silent for long .....
Hello? anyone? sorry fellow QF longhaul crew, you are forgetting the 400 or so of us who are HAPPY to be going to the LHR base !!! Simple as that. There will be no strike for me ..... as even though I have supported all industrial action in the past years, and many years they have been, I WILL happily work on any strike days that are trying to stop the LHR base - there are a growing number of us that want to go there... let us ! You cannot stop the base, at least let those Australian crew who wish to be based there go ..... otherwise there will be useless industrial action, which will result in nothing except the LHR base being crewed only by UK people ... they will cut off the right for Aussies to work there if the FAAA et al kick up enough stink....
Secondly, if anyone is stupid enough to take out a mortgage based on an income INCLUDING allowances - then they have their own self to blame.... the first rule of flying is that you never, never, never, NEVER borrow more than your base salary can pay back ... as allowances and overtime are never guarenteed !!! I have paid off three separate mortgages on my base salary, I would never borrow against salary + allowances .... that is mindless stupidity ....
The FAAA should be wary ... they should be trying to control the conditions in the LHR base, not stop the base ...... there are too many people now willing to fight FOR the LHR base, to call industrial action over it .... the FAAA will self destruct if they arent careful.
The FAAA shouldnt be fighting a lost cause, they should deal with reality , and be trying to control the work conditions of the base. Because those of us (and there are many) wanting to go to LHR, will go regardless...
Hello? anyone? sorry fellow QF longhaul crew, you are forgetting the 400 or so of us who are HAPPY to be going to the LHR base !!! Simple as that. There will be no strike for me ..... as even though I have supported all industrial action in the past years, and many years they have been, I WILL happily work on any strike days that are trying to stop the LHR base - there are a growing number of us that want to go there... let us ! You cannot stop the base, at least let those Australian crew who wish to be based there go ..... otherwise there will be useless industrial action, which will result in nothing except the LHR base being crewed only by UK people ... they will cut off the right for Aussies to work there if the FAAA et al kick up enough stink....
Secondly, if anyone is stupid enough to take out a mortgage based on an income INCLUDING allowances - then they have their own self to blame.... the first rule of flying is that you never, never, never, NEVER borrow more than your base salary can pay back ... as allowances and overtime are never guarenteed !!! I have paid off three separate mortgages on my base salary, I would never borrow against salary + allowances .... that is mindless stupidity ....
The FAAA should be wary ... they should be trying to control the conditions in the LHR base, not stop the base ...... there are too many people now willing to fight FOR the LHR base, to call industrial action over it .... the FAAA will self destruct if they arent careful.
The FAAA shouldnt be fighting a lost cause, they should deal with reality , and be trying to control the work conditions of the base. Because those of us (and there are many) wanting to go to LHR, will go regardless...
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Senior and Selfish
Q Tee
You are typical of the Senior and Selfish who milk the bid system for what it is worth and then have the gall to crow about it.You have scant regard for your colleagues.Here you go again totally motivated by self interest.
I can only hope you wont be eating humble pie when that tired old body of yours starts falling apart after bouncing around between LHR and Asia for a couple of years.
We certainly arent interested in how many properties you have or how you paid for them.
How sad it is you waste your time lecturing people on how to manage their money.
The skies will be a much better,happier place when old crowing boilers like you leave.
A change of government may be the saving grace for the rest of us
You are typical of the Senior and Selfish who milk the bid system for what it is worth and then have the gall to crow about it.You have scant regard for your colleagues.Here you go again totally motivated by self interest.
I can only hope you wont be eating humble pie when that tired old body of yours starts falling apart after bouncing around between LHR and Asia for a couple of years.
We certainly arent interested in how many properties you have or how you paid for them.
How sad it is you waste your time lecturing people on how to manage their money.
The skies will be a much better,happier place when old crowing boilers like you leave.
A change of government may be the saving grace for the rest of us
Join Date: May 2004
Location: all over the shop
Posts: 986
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if anyone is stupid enough to take out a mortgage based on an income INCLUDING allowances - then they have their own self to blame
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A middle road?
First of all, apologies for the long post, but I've tried to keep it all relevant and (hopefully food for thought) for the topic of discussion.
Right off the bat, personally I have grave misgivings about the whole concept of overseas bases as too often they are used to dilute the work conditions of the home based crew, and of course they can also severely curtail the flying on offer to the home based crew. That's not to say I have a blanket hate of of overseas bases, but if one is going to support the concept it should be with several key caveats in place.
The prospect of an International base being set up as a sub-contract seperate company is disgusting... It's not just about saving some $ on some slip allowances, it's about carving off jobs from mainline QF under the contract you've fought long and hard for over the years, and about redeploying these jobs outside of QF to a seperate company with cheaper wages and reduced T&C. What is even more disheartening is how many QF mainline crew are looking at a LHR base as a chance for a juant to Europe, but not realising how this is potentially the start of a serious shift in out sourcing crew to sub contract and subsidiary companies within QF that have significantly lower wages and terms and conditions.
There are other alternatives however.
United Airlines, still one of the largest airlines in the world, has overseas bases in FRA, LHR, CDG, HKG and NRT. The bases in TPE and SCL, and the sub contract bases (more about them later) in SIN and BKK have recently closed.
Here's the thing. At UA, the crew at ALL Intl bases are members of AFA, the union for F/A's at United. Second, all Intl F/A's are employed by UA, and not any quasi-sub-contract outfit. Third, all Intl F/A's work to the same contract, i.e. same pay, terms and conditions etc. Finally, while there are locally hired crew, precedence is given by means of a transfer list for US hired crew to transfer to Intl bases. They can stay there as long as they like (subject to visa regulations), and they continue to accrue seniority, work at same rates of pay, under same contract etc.
So, the Intl bases are to all intents and purposes no different from a US base, with US crew able to work there, transfer in and out, enjoy same contract, etc. Locally hired crew can transfer to other bases, but only if they have sufficient work authorisations/visas.
Flights are usually crewed by a mix of Intl and US based crew. So, on a typical flight LHR-SFO, you'll have a mix of SFO and LHR crew. Some flights e.g LHR-ORD will be all LHR crew, some all ORD crew. US crew are not being denied Intl flying to these places altogether, but some savings and more flexibility in scheduling is acheived by having the Intl bases.
Significantly, United opened up two 'local' non-union bases in SE Asia. These crew were hired locally under different T&C (much to the chagrin of the union, the AFA). However, the union agreement with the company was clear - these non union flight attendants were on board in addition to the agreed minimum crew complement. Further, in the event of labour reductions, these bases would be closed before any layoffs of union members. As a result of the post Sep. 11 F/A reductions, these bases were closed before any union members were furloughed. It is unlikely that these or any other 'local' bases will ever again be opened even when hiring recommences.
Now, if QF were to open a base, offer precedence to all QF mainline crew, have the base as a QF mainline base and not as a Quasi-Sub-Contract-Seperate-Company, allow you to maintain and continue to accrue seniority, work to same T&C as now, and transfer in and out accordingly, and have a mix of UK and OZ based staff working all legs of the 'Kangaroo' flights.... This would all mean that QF is still enjoying some cost efficiencies by saving on allowances, but that the integrity of the contract currently enjoyed by QF mainline crew is preserved without dilution of 'cheap labour', 'sub contracting', and reduced flying. Any shortfall in positions not made up from transfers from QF mainline would be filled by locally hired personnel. These (UK/EU) crew would be employed by mainline QF on same contract as rest of crew, but could only transfer to other EU bases or OZ bases if they had relevant work authority/visa/residency etc.
A 'win win' compromise worth fighting for if push came to shove?
Right off the bat, personally I have grave misgivings about the whole concept of overseas bases as too often they are used to dilute the work conditions of the home based crew, and of course they can also severely curtail the flying on offer to the home based crew. That's not to say I have a blanket hate of of overseas bases, but if one is going to support the concept it should be with several key caveats in place.
The prospect of an International base being set up as a sub-contract seperate company is disgusting... It's not just about saving some $ on some slip allowances, it's about carving off jobs from mainline QF under the contract you've fought long and hard for over the years, and about redeploying these jobs outside of QF to a seperate company with cheaper wages and reduced T&C. What is even more disheartening is how many QF mainline crew are looking at a LHR base as a chance for a juant to Europe, but not realising how this is potentially the start of a serious shift in out sourcing crew to sub contract and subsidiary companies within QF that have significantly lower wages and terms and conditions.
There are other alternatives however.
United Airlines, still one of the largest airlines in the world, has overseas bases in FRA, LHR, CDG, HKG and NRT. The bases in TPE and SCL, and the sub contract bases (more about them later) in SIN and BKK have recently closed.
Here's the thing. At UA, the crew at ALL Intl bases are members of AFA, the union for F/A's at United. Second, all Intl F/A's are employed by UA, and not any quasi-sub-contract outfit. Third, all Intl F/A's work to the same contract, i.e. same pay, terms and conditions etc. Finally, while there are locally hired crew, precedence is given by means of a transfer list for US hired crew to transfer to Intl bases. They can stay there as long as they like (subject to visa regulations), and they continue to accrue seniority, work at same rates of pay, under same contract etc.
So, the Intl bases are to all intents and purposes no different from a US base, with US crew able to work there, transfer in and out, enjoy same contract, etc. Locally hired crew can transfer to other bases, but only if they have sufficient work authorisations/visas.
Flights are usually crewed by a mix of Intl and US based crew. So, on a typical flight LHR-SFO, you'll have a mix of SFO and LHR crew. Some flights e.g LHR-ORD will be all LHR crew, some all ORD crew. US crew are not being denied Intl flying to these places altogether, but some savings and more flexibility in scheduling is acheived by having the Intl bases.
Significantly, United opened up two 'local' non-union bases in SE Asia. These crew were hired locally under different T&C (much to the chagrin of the union, the AFA). However, the union agreement with the company was clear - these non union flight attendants were on board in addition to the agreed minimum crew complement. Further, in the event of labour reductions, these bases would be closed before any layoffs of union members. As a result of the post Sep. 11 F/A reductions, these bases were closed before any union members were furloughed. It is unlikely that these or any other 'local' bases will ever again be opened even when hiring recommences.
Now, if QF were to open a base, offer precedence to all QF mainline crew, have the base as a QF mainline base and not as a Quasi-Sub-Contract-Seperate-Company, allow you to maintain and continue to accrue seniority, work to same T&C as now, and transfer in and out accordingly, and have a mix of UK and OZ based staff working all legs of the 'Kangaroo' flights.... This would all mean that QF is still enjoying some cost efficiencies by saving on allowances, but that the integrity of the contract currently enjoyed by QF mainline crew is preserved without dilution of 'cheap labour', 'sub contracting', and reduced flying. Any shortfall in positions not made up from transfers from QF mainline would be filled by locally hired personnel. These (UK/EU) crew would be employed by mainline QF on same contract as rest of crew, but could only transfer to other EU bases or OZ bases if they had relevant work authority/visa/residency etc.
A 'win win' compromise worth fighting for if push came to shove?
Join Date: May 2004
Location: all over the shop
Posts: 986
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
YYC F/A
I applaud your common sense. Your idea makes sense and does seem to be a win-win situation. It would be great that, if the base does go ahead, it went ahead in a similar fashion to the United overseas bases.
Does anyone know of any reason why QF could/would reject such an offer? And I am asking that from a factual point of view (we all know the common sentiments amongst crew towards QF at the moment)...
I applaud your common sense. Your idea makes sense and does seem to be a win-win situation. It would be great that, if the base does go ahead, it went ahead in a similar fashion to the United overseas bases.
Does anyone know of any reason why QF could/would reject such an offer? And I am asking that from a factual point of view (we all know the common sentiments amongst crew towards QF at the moment)...
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jetjockey ..... what an amusing post, glad to see your 'go-team-lets-fight-this-together' bravado does not extend to senior crew 
And yes - I do find your post amusing, childish, but amusing none-the-less
Just one note: who on earth do you think fought years ago to get the current conditions? Do you think QF just handed out the current conditions for longhaul crew out of kindness? Myself and others have fought many battles over many years to get to the current levels. Just because I am making the best of the inevitable changes coming does not mean that I haven fought for conditions in the past.
The people you have to thank for current QF longhaul conditions are the same 'old crowing boilers' that you think should not be in the skies ....
my, my , my the youth of today
And yes - I do find your post amusing, childish, but amusing none-the-less
Just one note: who on earth do you think fought years ago to get the current conditions? Do you think QF just handed out the current conditions for longhaul crew out of kindness? Myself and others have fought many battles over many years to get to the current levels. Just because I am making the best of the inevitable changes coming does not mean that I haven fought for conditions in the past.
The people you have to thank for current QF longhaul conditions are the same 'old crowing boilers' that you think should not be in the skies ....
my, my , my the youth of today
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are You Kidding?
Q Tee,
My father was a "steward"with QF from 1967 to 1984.If you have been around for so long you would remember the SP dispute in 1981.It was people like you who didnt support your colleagues then.The current bid system was introduced in 1988 when people like you did a behind the scenes deal with management.Dont bleat to me about current conditions being attributable to you.If nothing else you are consistent:motivated purely by self interest
Oh and there is nothing wrong with being young,but a lot wrong with being old selfish and churlish.
My father was a "steward"with QF from 1967 to 1984.If you have been around for so long you would remember the SP dispute in 1981.It was people like you who didnt support your colleagues then.The current bid system was introduced in 1988 when people like you did a behind the scenes deal with management.Dont bleat to me about current conditions being attributable to you.If nothing else you are consistent:motivated purely by self interest
Oh and there is nothing wrong with being young,but a lot wrong with being old selfish and churlish.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sinala 1,
"At the end of the day, the QF Long Haul flighties (and no I am not one of them) are fighting to keep their pay and their lifestyle, and whats more keeping jobs in australia"
Sorry - I must have missed the announcement from QF that they were about to reduce QF FA pay. When did that happen.
Dont you think it is inevitable that QF would move to base crews in LH destinations such as Europe.
"At the end of the day, the QF Long Haul flighties (and no I am not one of them) are fighting to keep their pay and their lifestyle, and whats more keeping jobs in australia"
Sorry - I must have missed the announcement from QF that they were about to reduce QF FA pay. When did that happen.
Dont you think it is inevitable that QF would move to base crews in LH destinations such as Europe.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Bundeena(AUSTRALIA)
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reduction in Wages
OICUR12
Sinala is right to a degree.The wages offered in LHR by QF are a reduction in wages(in real terms)compared to Australian Based crew.Particularly when you take into account the increased density of their flying.These wages could also provide leverage to maintain Australian based wages at current levels ie a reduction in real terms when taking into account CPI increases.
As far as the base itself is concerned,I am surprised QF didnt introduce them earlier(In Europe)The BKK base has not produced the desired efficiencies since the withdrawal of FCO and FRA services.(through BKK)The arduous nature of the flying has also meant that sick leave has been comparatively high.
The national identity argument is today irrelevant.The travelling public are today more motivated by price and schedule rather than the identity of their crew.
I would imagine that AKL BKK and LHR bases are just the beginning.Look for the bases with the highest room night requirement and thats where the next base will be.LAX would most certainly fit the criteria
Sinala is right to a degree.The wages offered in LHR by QF are a reduction in wages(in real terms)compared to Australian Based crew.Particularly when you take into account the increased density of their flying.These wages could also provide leverage to maintain Australian based wages at current levels ie a reduction in real terms when taking into account CPI increases.
As far as the base itself is concerned,I am surprised QF didnt introduce them earlier(In Europe)The BKK base has not produced the desired efficiencies since the withdrawal of FCO and FRA services.(through BKK)The arduous nature of the flying has also meant that sick leave has been comparatively high.
The national identity argument is today irrelevant.The travelling public are today more motivated by price and schedule rather than the identity of their crew.
I would imagine that AKL BKK and LHR bases are just the beginning.Look for the bases with the highest room night requirement and thats where the next base will be.LAX would most certainly fit the criteria
Last edited by captainrats; 10th Jul 2004 at 10:35.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
oichater - you typify the old fashioned dinosaur attitude that is so common in unions - the FAAA is a shining example.
The conditions enjoyed by QF flight attendants will go the way of the dodo- extinct.
The industry has changed - globally and domestically. Australia is playing catchup but the pace is gathering - just take a look at jetstar.
Pontificating about how unfare it all is will achieve nothing.
Are you going to manage change or be a victim of it.
I think i know the answer.
The conditions enjoyed by QF flight attendants will go the way of the dodo- extinct.
The industry has changed - globally and domestically. Australia is playing catchup but the pace is gathering - just take a look at jetstar.
Pontificating about how unfare it all is will achieve nothing.
Are you going to manage change or be a victim of it.
I think i know the answer.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: syd/aust
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many of my MAM work colleagues have been on the short list and sent 10 mth contracts or others an application for Qantas by express post for any job that may arise over the next year wed be interested in.Surprise surprise Qantas could offer for us to apply straight off the mark 10th long haul contracts. I filled out the form and ticked permanent.The people who are doing and applying for the contract think they are getting a 10 month probation for long haul.Seems to me its to cover short fall in staff between set up of base/bases as per press leak and or,cover labor in any industrial action.DOES any long haul guys know of this or, your opinion would be appriciated and,does the union know? /What do you think Qantas shall do with them on termination of their term.... THANKS...
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gigs,
someone i know who was on the waitlist for 18 months before being told thanks, but no thanks, was told by QF HR that QF will not hire fulltime longhaul FA's in AUSTRALIA for 5 years.
QANTAS, THE WORLDS GREEDIEST AIRLINE
L2P
someone i know who was on the waitlist for 18 months before being told thanks, but no thanks, was told by QF HR that QF will not hire fulltime longhaul FA's in AUSTRALIA for 5 years.
QANTAS, THE WORLDS GREEDIEST AIRLINE
L2P
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Sydney
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To all those QF F/A's getting hot and bothered by oicur12's posts I just want to point out that he/she is very well known scab sympathiser from the pilot forums. He/she may even be an 89 dispute pilot scab.
Bearing this in mind my suggestion is to just ignore the offending posts.
Bearing this in mind my suggestion is to just ignore the offending posts.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bonvol,
once again I would suggest that my position in the airline industry is totally irrelevent.
But no, I have never been involved in a dispute.
You have referred to me as a scab sympathiser - an odd term. I have sympathy for many groups of people - those in detention centres in woomera for example. Or perhaps people with incurable disease. I dont have sympathy for people simply based on thier industrial persausion though.
You have suggested that the FA's on this thread ignore my comments as they may cause people to get "hot and bothered."
Thankyou, you have just inferred that my comments have some relevence.
It is my belief that to take on city hall - in the guise of Howard and Dixon - is to sign the FAAA's death warrant. Dixon is even hinting as such (for quite some time too). I suspect he is rellishing the opportunity.
I dont work for QF or its regionals (or jetstar) so I have little interest in how this latest confrontation pans out but I wouldnt want to stake my mortgage on the FAAA'a ability to make savvy industrial moves. Unfortunately, the weight of precedence is becoming more irrelevent as the Oz airline scene plays catchup. The rules are changing but the old fashioned attitudes are not.
Bonvol. Your post here and on other threads indicates you are extremely bitter about the outcome of 89. Why on earth should the FA's here take any notice of what you are saying?
once again I would suggest that my position in the airline industry is totally irrelevent.
But no, I have never been involved in a dispute.
You have referred to me as a scab sympathiser - an odd term. I have sympathy for many groups of people - those in detention centres in woomera for example. Or perhaps people with incurable disease. I dont have sympathy for people simply based on thier industrial persausion though.
You have suggested that the FA's on this thread ignore my comments as they may cause people to get "hot and bothered."
Thankyou, you have just inferred that my comments have some relevence.
It is my belief that to take on city hall - in the guise of Howard and Dixon - is to sign the FAAA's death warrant. Dixon is even hinting as such (for quite some time too). I suspect he is rellishing the opportunity.
I dont work for QF or its regionals (or jetstar) so I have little interest in how this latest confrontation pans out but I wouldnt want to stake my mortgage on the FAAA'a ability to make savvy industrial moves. Unfortunately, the weight of precedence is becoming more irrelevent as the Oz airline scene plays catchup. The rules are changing but the old fashioned attitudes are not.
Bonvol. Your post here and on other threads indicates you are extremely bitter about the outcome of 89. Why on earth should the FA's here take any notice of what you are saying?
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A quote from a press release from Uncy Geoff to his minions.
"...Qantas will take whatever action is neccessary to the keep the airline running. Should the threatened industrial action go ahead, we have contingency plans to ensure that our international passengers are not disrupted."
..Strike breakers..
B.C. How long do you reckon they could survive with strike breakers if we are on strike for a prolonged period?
Did you attend any of the FAAA meetings?
Leemo
"...Qantas will take whatever action is neccessary to the keep the airline running. Should the threatened industrial action go ahead, we have contingency plans to ensure that our international passengers are not disrupted."
..Strike breakers..
B.C. How long do you reckon they could survive with strike breakers if we are on strike for a prolonged period?
Did you attend any of the FAAA meetings?
Leemo
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bonvol, thanks for the hot tip. We'll take it all with a pinch of salt, but I had to laugh at this one, tho........
Yeah, righto Merlin 
I have sympathy for many groups of people - those in detention centres in woomera for example.