FAAA (merged)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: on skybeds
Age: 43
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
analyst at work/response to the detailed FAAA in-principle agreement
EBA VII put through its paces
1) minimum guarantee of 30% regional flying on the airbus or 767. not bad, when we had until recently around 90%. But if we behave and praise our QF managers highly every time we sign on we might be getting more, depending on resources (I like the word possible 75%).
2) There be 6 A 380 aircraft flying by the time this EBA is finished.
3) Given that the industrial relations commission will be more likely sidelined by the new Howard government it is very hard to ascertain what that really means in our case. My guess is what QF wants QF gets (as pointed out in one afternoon they agreed to the whole deal, even before the official EBA negotiations started).
4) An agreed overseas cap 870 , means an increase of F/A’s of around 135% in foreign bases. In addition we lost a fair share to domestic already that brings it in my books to a fair reduction in flights for longhaul.
5) 5) the pay equalization clause will be deleted. Well, read the following part from the EBA VI.
CLAUSE 22 RESERVE LINE ROTATION AND PAY EQUALISATION
During the term of this EBA the parties will review options to reduce the frequency of reserve line rotation, with the objective of returning reserve line rotation to or below one bid period in ten.
The timetable for this review will be as follows:
• the parties will complete the review by 1 September 2003
• Agreed changes will be implemented by 1 November 2003.
I am by all means no industrial brains but I think its pretty much means what it says.
6) Roster review clause is another one of this now classy statements
Quote from the EBA VI:
CLAUSE 18 REVIEW OF ROSTER SYSTEM
18.1 During the term of this EBA Qantas and the FAAA will undertake a fundamental review of how flying is allocated to crew. The objectives of the review will include but not be limited to:
• A fairer share of flying between crew,
• Improved roster sociability and stability,
• A reduction in costs,
• A reduction in demand days,
• An overall improvement in roster efficiency, and
• Implementation of a trip swap system.
18.2 The timetable for this review will be as follows:
• Qantas will table a draft proposal by 1 October 2003,
• A joint Qantas FAAA working party will then be convened to
complete its deliberations by 1 February 2004, including
negotiations on changes to the certified agreement.
"DURING THE TERM OF THIS EBA..
That means that at the conclusion of the prescribed term (17 December 2004) these clauses are like the CAP, gone, gone and gone.
New Protections and Initiatives
1) 3 year agreement because of the changing industrial climate, hmhmhm. As I mentioned before IR commission will certainly change, when we try to conciliate, negotiate, beg and more begging for more regional flying and possible new aircraft.
2) 3% wage increase over 3 years , CPI 2.3 % , any of the guys in the FAAA office have been shopping lately? Anything to do with kids , insurance etc., stays at 2.3%? I don’t think so.
3) Down from 27 to 7 flights a week. Say no more.
4) For the first time new compulsory redundancy agreement. Now we have to share the burden with overseas. I did think we had a last one, first off somewhere. Now does it mean junior, senior or just a flick of a coin what determines that clause?
5) 3800+ F/A’s in 36 month , that’s a 105+ a month want to go to London during the next EBA.add embargoes and you have to have around 200 trying to go to London every week on their freebee. Maybe QF offers a weekly charterflight for cabin crew. A good laugh isn’t it?try to get on, very funny.
6) Crew to change travel beneficiaries, that’s ok. Doesn’t matter if a large number are married. Not bad.
7) THE ONLY GOOD thing is the promotion of australian based crew. The negative isr its based on a letter from QF, reminds me of the divisional flying agreement.
8) I like the word limiting the need for more overseas bases, QF got what they wanted anyway, now those lovely new f/a’s, which of course they are going to need very soon are clocking up the slotS to Mumbai and Shanghai (possible a couple of more destination in both continents very soon).
9) No sell off or diminution of existing conditions. refresh my memory, from 27 LHR trips down to 7, about 50% of regional flying gone, lost ODTA, STDA, Allowances, etc. sorry guys, I don’t belong to the top 15% in my category.
10) Didn’t the guys say NO SENORITY will be recognized upon return from London. How quick they forget.
IS THERE A DEAL SOMEWHERE BEHIND CLOSED DOORS?
As for defcon’s remark. I did have businesses prior to joining and consulted in between flying. That’s why I understand this is a “dudd deal” for cabin crew. Geoff must be sitting in the toaster sipping away on the 95 bubble toasting his next massive bonus and wagerise.
1) minimum guarantee of 30% regional flying on the airbus or 767. not bad, when we had until recently around 90%. But if we behave and praise our QF managers highly every time we sign on we might be getting more, depending on resources (I like the word possible 75%).
2) There be 6 A 380 aircraft flying by the time this EBA is finished.
3) Given that the industrial relations commission will be more likely sidelined by the new Howard government it is very hard to ascertain what that really means in our case. My guess is what QF wants QF gets (as pointed out in one afternoon they agreed to the whole deal, even before the official EBA negotiations started).
4) An agreed overseas cap 870 , means an increase of F/A’s of around 135% in foreign bases. In addition we lost a fair share to domestic already that brings it in my books to a fair reduction in flights for longhaul.
5) 5) the pay equalization clause will be deleted. Well, read the following part from the EBA VI.
CLAUSE 22 RESERVE LINE ROTATION AND PAY EQUALISATION
During the term of this EBA the parties will review options to reduce the frequency of reserve line rotation, with the objective of returning reserve line rotation to or below one bid period in ten.
The timetable for this review will be as follows:
• the parties will complete the review by 1 September 2003
• Agreed changes will be implemented by 1 November 2003.
I am by all means no industrial brains but I think its pretty much means what it says.
6) Roster review clause is another one of this now classy statements
Quote from the EBA VI:
CLAUSE 18 REVIEW OF ROSTER SYSTEM
18.1 During the term of this EBA Qantas and the FAAA will undertake a fundamental review of how flying is allocated to crew. The objectives of the review will include but not be limited to:
• A fairer share of flying between crew,
• Improved roster sociability and stability,
• A reduction in costs,
• A reduction in demand days,
• An overall improvement in roster efficiency, and
• Implementation of a trip swap system.
18.2 The timetable for this review will be as follows:
• Qantas will table a draft proposal by 1 October 2003,
• A joint Qantas FAAA working party will then be convened to
complete its deliberations by 1 February 2004, including
negotiations on changes to the certified agreement.
"DURING THE TERM OF THIS EBA..
That means that at the conclusion of the prescribed term (17 December 2004) these clauses are like the CAP, gone, gone and gone.
New Protections and Initiatives
1) 3 year agreement because of the changing industrial climate, hmhmhm. As I mentioned before IR commission will certainly change, when we try to conciliate, negotiate, beg and more begging for more regional flying and possible new aircraft.
2) 3% wage increase over 3 years , CPI 2.3 % , any of the guys in the FAAA office have been shopping lately? Anything to do with kids , insurance etc., stays at 2.3%? I don’t think so.
3) Down from 27 to 7 flights a week. Say no more.
4) For the first time new compulsory redundancy agreement. Now we have to share the burden with overseas. I did think we had a last one, first off somewhere. Now does it mean junior, senior or just a flick of a coin what determines that clause?
5) 3800+ F/A’s in 36 month , that’s a 105+ a month want to go to London during the next EBA.add embargoes and you have to have around 200 trying to go to London every week on their freebee. Maybe QF offers a weekly charterflight for cabin crew. A good laugh isn’t it?try to get on, very funny.
6) Crew to change travel beneficiaries, that’s ok. Doesn’t matter if a large number are married. Not bad.
7) THE ONLY GOOD thing is the promotion of australian based crew. The negative isr its based on a letter from QF, reminds me of the divisional flying agreement.
8) I like the word limiting the need for more overseas bases, QF got what they wanted anyway, now those lovely new f/a’s, which of course they are going to need very soon are clocking up the slotS to Mumbai and Shanghai (possible a couple of more destination in both continents very soon).
9) No sell off or diminution of existing conditions. refresh my memory, from 27 LHR trips down to 7, about 50% of regional flying gone, lost ODTA, STDA, Allowances, etc. sorry guys, I don’t belong to the top 15% in my category.
10) Didn’t the guys say NO SENORITY will be recognized upon return from London. How quick they forget.
IS THERE A DEAL SOMEWHERE BEHIND CLOSED DOORS?
As for defcon’s remark. I did have businesses prior to joining and consulted in between flying. That’s why I understand this is a “dudd deal” for cabin crew. Geoff must be sitting in the toaster sipping away on the 95 bubble toasting his next massive bonus and wagerise.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sydney
Age: 64
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think DEFCON4 stands for DEAF CONSPIRATOR.
I have been here more than 15 but less than 25. I think that's quite an innings.
And being junior means I'm in the bottom 25%.
Based on remarks from DEAFCON re "my emotion/anger clouding perception" I think likens the pot calling the kettle black.
Anyhow I started this topic and if you go back to the beginning the question still stands: WHY?
Actually I'm tired of this see-saw. Think I'll just go tell it to my crew on every trip.
Fact is the FAAA will never come clean and answer this question and we will all just go on our merry way...
Thanks for the support skybed!
I have been here more than 15 but less than 25. I think that's quite an innings.
And being junior means I'm in the bottom 25%.
Based on remarks from DEAFCON re "my emotion/anger clouding perception" I think likens the pot calling the kettle black.
Anyhow I started this topic and if you go back to the beginning the question still stands: WHY?
Actually I'm tired of this see-saw. Think I'll just go tell it to my crew on every trip.
Fact is the FAAA will never come clean and answer this question and we will all just go on our merry way...
Thanks for the support skybed!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
my remarks
skybed , defcon4 meant me by thinking i was a pencilpusher. sorry defcon4 cant help you as i was previousley employed by an private enterprise.(no ,not in the airlines). but agree with the overall assessment from skybed. agree with qfcsm the best way to go now is clarify the deal with crew on trips, and definatly NOT LISTENING TO ANY MORE B**LS**T from either the company of the faaa. back galley chat yeah baby thats us.
Qantas
By Pemberton Strong
Aviation correspondent
10 November 2004
It seems Geoff Dixon, the $6 million man and his management team have very sneakily and very quietly introduced a form of offshore outsourcing. India would be too inflammatory, so what about some cheap sheep?
We hear from Qantas staff that Qantas in Auckland are handling Australian passengers who call Qantas from Australia.
The calls are diverted to Auckland, and the staff in Australia are sitting waiting for calls to drop in, and the staff in NZ are holding calls
for over seven minutes. So what\'s going on? Someone has to be accountable for doing this devious thing and giving away Australian jobs.
Staff are asking what\'s happening, but the usual collection of bonus-collecting managers have not replied. Is this some sort of ploy to lower staff numbers in Qantas’ Australian call centres?
That Qantas would do this so close after concluding the controversial deal on a London foreign base for long haul cabin crew, is verging on the inflammatory.
Especially as that deal was part of the new Enterprise Bargaining Agreement that has not gone down well among staff.
As it is being explained there is an increasingly feeling of unhappiness among staff.
And I cannot understand how Australian staff think they are going to survive in London on lower wages. If Qantas has an $18 million saving from the agreement, then that saving has got to come from somewhere. A lot of it will be travel costs, but a significant amount will be the allowances and other amounts paid to staff working out of Australia on long haul flights.
The other interesting thing about the Auckland call centre is that the second foreign crew base (after Bangkok) is based there in a building in Queen Street, Auckland. It is run by the international labour hire firm, Adecco.
Is this Auckland call centre an Adecco, Qantas invention, staffed by contractors and not Qantas employees? And is it being run in tandem with the foreign crew base?
Meanwhile Qantas IS more than a seat for one friend of Crikey. This friend is a big time heavy duty traveller, averaging one and a bit flights to Melbourne a week at the moment (and to Perth, Brisbane, Hobart and Darwin in the past six weeks, not to mention Canberra and Adelaide.)
To this friends it\'s also big shiny planes, terminals, plastic food and slightly surly and disgruntled staff, not to mention a growing number of business passengers who fell used and abused.
Take a friend of Crikey, a Platinum member of the Qantas Club and half way to qualifying for another year at this level, after only three and a bit months. This friend cops a letter from Qantas advising that their Platinum membership is being reviewed.
For upgrade, to where this friend thought. Nope, they were going to downgrade her. A call to Qantas elicited an embarrassing background, profuse apologies and the line, "You shouldn\'t have got that letter" But no explanation as to how or why it was sent to a member of such good standing.
Yes, Qantas is more than just a seat!
But with the prospects of a Christmas replay of the 1998 Docks dispute over the Qantas EBA(and with Qantas hiring several hundred strike breakers), I\'m a little disappointed.
You see I\'d always be served coffee by an Alsatian on short leash, wearing a Qantas attendant\'s gear on a City Flyer dash to Melbourne.
Or a nice Shiraz on a longer flight to Perth or Los Angeles by a nice, well dressed Doberman.
Of course their trainers, sorry supervisors would have been wearing face masks or balaclavas and dressed in \'Darlo\' black. No name tags or numbers.
But that particular dream courtesy of Chris Corrigan at Patrick and Virgin Blue, is no more
But there is a great deal of unhappiness, as this email shows
Consultation meetings have been taking place though out Qantas ASU ranks.
Meetings are not yet over, they finish next week. But so far the strong feeling is that staff are very disappointed at what has been offered to them in the latest rounds of EBA.
Considering that they have in principal achieved an agreement with the FAAA, which is very nice thank you very much. Other staff who are trying to secure a better deal in the EBA, feel totally neglected and forgotten.
Qantas
By Pemberton Strong
Aviation correspondent
10 November 2004
It seems Geoff Dixon, the $6 million man and his management team have very sneakily and very quietly introduced a form of offshore outsourcing. India would be too inflammatory, so what about some cheap sheep?
We hear from Qantas staff that Qantas in Auckland are handling Australian passengers who call Qantas from Australia.
The calls are diverted to Auckland, and the staff in Australia are sitting waiting for calls to drop in, and the staff in NZ are holding calls
for over seven minutes. So what\'s going on? Someone has to be accountable for doing this devious thing and giving away Australian jobs.
Staff are asking what\'s happening, but the usual collection of bonus-collecting managers have not replied. Is this some sort of ploy to lower staff numbers in Qantas’ Australian call centres?
That Qantas would do this so close after concluding the controversial deal on a London foreign base for long haul cabin crew, is verging on the inflammatory.
Especially as that deal was part of the new Enterprise Bargaining Agreement that has not gone down well among staff.
As it is being explained there is an increasingly feeling of unhappiness among staff.
And I cannot understand how Australian staff think they are going to survive in London on lower wages. If Qantas has an $18 million saving from the agreement, then that saving has got to come from somewhere. A lot of it will be travel costs, but a significant amount will be the allowances and other amounts paid to staff working out of Australia on long haul flights.
The other interesting thing about the Auckland call centre is that the second foreign crew base (after Bangkok) is based there in a building in Queen Street, Auckland. It is run by the international labour hire firm, Adecco.
Is this Auckland call centre an Adecco, Qantas invention, staffed by contractors and not Qantas employees? And is it being run in tandem with the foreign crew base?
Meanwhile Qantas IS more than a seat for one friend of Crikey. This friend is a big time heavy duty traveller, averaging one and a bit flights to Melbourne a week at the moment (and to Perth, Brisbane, Hobart and Darwin in the past six weeks, not to mention Canberra and Adelaide.)
To this friends it\'s also big shiny planes, terminals, plastic food and slightly surly and disgruntled staff, not to mention a growing number of business passengers who fell used and abused.
Take a friend of Crikey, a Platinum member of the Qantas Club and half way to qualifying for another year at this level, after only three and a bit months. This friend cops a letter from Qantas advising that their Platinum membership is being reviewed.
For upgrade, to where this friend thought. Nope, they were going to downgrade her. A call to Qantas elicited an embarrassing background, profuse apologies and the line, "You shouldn\'t have got that letter" But no explanation as to how or why it was sent to a member of such good standing.
Yes, Qantas is more than just a seat!
But with the prospects of a Christmas replay of the 1998 Docks dispute over the Qantas EBA(and with Qantas hiring several hundred strike breakers), I\'m a little disappointed.
You see I\'d always be served coffee by an Alsatian on short leash, wearing a Qantas attendant\'s gear on a City Flyer dash to Melbourne.
Or a nice Shiraz on a longer flight to Perth or Los Angeles by a nice, well dressed Doberman.
Of course their trainers, sorry supervisors would have been wearing face masks or balaclavas and dressed in \'Darlo\' black. No name tags or numbers.
But that particular dream courtesy of Chris Corrigan at Patrick and Virgin Blue, is no more
But there is a great deal of unhappiness, as this email shows
Consultation meetings have been taking place though out Qantas ASU ranks.
Meetings are not yet over, they finish next week. But so far the strong feeling is that staff are very disappointed at what has been offered to them in the latest rounds of EBA.
Considering that they have in principal achieved an agreement with the FAAA, which is very nice thank you very much. Other staff who are trying to secure a better deal in the EBA, feel totally neglected and forgotten.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Bundeena(AUSTRALIA)
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Future Changes
Eventually,shorthaul and longhaul will cease to exist as entities.While this may be difficult for some to come to terms with it will actually be a benefit to most by allowing family friendly flying to be shared more equitably.As priorities in life change so does the type of flying required to reflect that change.
The idea of being locked into ultra long flying(back to back PER/LHR`s)would not be appealing to most.The damage to a crew member`s wellbeing doing this type of flying should not be underestimated.
In 1988 when the bid system was introduced emotions,as now ran high...one crewmember had their family dog poisoned and vehicles were vandalised in the car park.As it turned out the company had done flight attendants a favour...Pay increased,destination choice,opentime,tripswapping were all a benefit.When all the emotion subsides EBA7 will be viewed in a similar fashion.
Having said that, I am surprised that better maternity leave conditions were not negotiated...70% of all crew are female(both long and shorthaul)
Life has changed,there is no going back.EBA7 will be voted up and everyone`s lives will benefit.Only time will prove this to be correct
The idea of being locked into ultra long flying(back to back PER/LHR`s)would not be appealing to most.The damage to a crew member`s wellbeing doing this type of flying should not be underestimated.
In 1988 when the bid system was introduced emotions,as now ran high...one crewmember had their family dog poisoned and vehicles were vandalised in the car park.As it turned out the company had done flight attendants a favour...Pay increased,destination choice,opentime,tripswapping were all a benefit.When all the emotion subsides EBA7 will be viewed in a similar fashion.
Having said that, I am surprised that better maternity leave conditions were not negotiated...70% of all crew are female(both long and shorthaul)
Life has changed,there is no going back.EBA7 will be voted up and everyone`s lives will benefit.Only time will prove this to be correct
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Land Down Under
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Allowances/Wages
Wages are comprised of a base hourly rate and appropriate ODTA ADTA,some overtime and long range pay.Allowances received overseas are considered(for tax purposes) to be fully expended.As a result they do incur a less than 1%tax penalty...They are not wages.When applying for a mortgage they cannot be taken into account nor are they superannuable.You cannot consider them to be part of your salary.If you do you should pay the appropriate rate of tax.You cannot have it both ways.By highlighting the amount of allowance received in forums such as this puts them under scrutiny and perhaps a revision of applicable tax will occur.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: on skybeds
Age: 43
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
adding to the debate
Captainrats has a very good point. If the union excexs had any brains (or less egos, instead more common sense) they would already work on a joint award. So far the only winner is qf in playing longhaul vs. shorthaul. And yes paternity leave, part time for f/a’s (more) and csm/css , flexible working hours etc.as in shorthaul are also shortcomings of this eba. It will also impact on your income as argusmoon points out ( unless you are in the top 25%). And shorthaul did not have to fight in keeping there 737, 767 and airbus flying (funny that). As we pondered point by point over this in the aft galley last night I wouldn’t be so sure this gets up.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Heaven
Posts: 584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
????????
And the alternatives are......uncertainty,a withdrawal of the agreement,unlimited overseas bases,a loss of all airbus flying.
What are you guys thinking??The world has changed ,deal with it you dinosaurs
What are you guys thinking??The world has changed ,deal with it you dinosaurs
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont think Qantas would ever merge the two divisions purely because of the industrial nature of such a merge.
Now if one division threatens or takes industrial action they can cope to a cetain extent and this wouldnt shut the airline down but a merge and one EBA would do that.
Now if one division threatens or takes industrial action they can cope to a cetain extent and this wouldnt shut the airline down but a merge and one EBA would do that.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
defcon4 take it easy
sky bed has a valid point even it does get knocked back we send the faaa back for another round (unless the are too scared of GD). i think it was two or three eba's ago we send them back and it was a different outcome in the end. as for your scaremongering, defcon4 take it easy there are still plenty of options out there. as was mentioned before to get rid of 4000 crew is not that easy. btw anyone seen that latest faaa newsletter? seems to me the faaa does the companies job of trying to scare f/a's. begs the questions again WHY and WHAT is the DEAL and why aren't they telling us?
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This just keeps going round and round in circles 
Reality check:
United airlines are still flying under chapter 11 Bankruptcy. Cabin Crew are facing paycuts and loss of benefits.
Delta Airlines: 10% pay cut and the loss of 8000 jobs.. They may soon also file for chapter 11 protection.
The list goes on, just get it and realise that what we have really isnt that bad. How would you feel if you worked for United or Delta now? Pretty bad I reckon.
Not only that.. I have a couple of friends in Europe who fly and are regulars on this site. Let me tell you what Europe thinks of us.. They are tired of the endless Qantas bashing threads appearing on here and think we are all spoilt Brats.
Time to put this one to bed
Reality check:
United airlines are still flying under chapter 11 Bankruptcy. Cabin Crew are facing paycuts and loss of benefits.
Delta Airlines: 10% pay cut and the loss of 8000 jobs.. They may soon also file for chapter 11 protection.
The list goes on, just get it and realise that what we have really isnt that bad. How would you feel if you worked for United or Delta now? Pretty bad I reckon.
Not only that.. I have a couple of friends in Europe who fly and are regulars on this site. Let me tell you what Europe thinks of us.. They are tired of the endless Qantas bashing threads appearing on here and think we are all spoilt Brats.
Time to put this one to bed
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Heaven
Posts: 584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its about time
BODUM,
Agree with you 1000%.
BUNKMASTER
what ARE the options you keep raving on about?
GALLEY HAG
Both divisions are doing more of each other`s flying now than ever before....they are merging,slowly,but they are merging.Cross crewing between divisions is not far away.60% of Sydney based shorthaul are ex longhaul.Get with the programme!!!
Agree with you 1000%.
BUNKMASTER
what ARE the options you keep raving on about?
GALLEY HAG
Both divisions are doing more of each other`s flying now than ever before....they are merging,slowly,but they are merging.Cross crewing between divisions is not far away.60% of Sydney based shorthaul are ex longhaul.Get with the programme!!!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DEFCON4
Your an agressive piece of work and your comments prove what little business sense you have.
Im not disputing that we now share a great deal of each other's flying, however I highly doubt all Qantas cabin crew will be one division with one EBA it would be industrial suicide for Qantas management.
However, they may find ways where cross crewing is able to occur but that would mean our two unions would have to agree and I dont like your chances of that ever happening.
What has the percentage of long haul crew now at short haul have to do with anything? Maybe you should think about what you say before flying off your keyboard!!
Your an agressive piece of work and your comments prove what little business sense you have.
Im not disputing that we now share a great deal of each other's flying, however I highly doubt all Qantas cabin crew will be one division with one EBA it would be industrial suicide for Qantas management.
However, they may find ways where cross crewing is able to occur but that would mean our two unions would have to agree and I dont like your chances of that ever happening.
What has the percentage of long haul crew now at short haul have to do with anything? Maybe you should think about what you say before flying off your keyboard!!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Land Down Under
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EBAs
EBA 6 got up by a small majority,and it was a disgrace.
EBA 7 addresses most of the inequities in EBA6 and it will sh*t in ,since the majority of crew are more pragmatic than the salacious miscreants that inhabit this particular forum.
No wonder most people have the impression that CC are imbeciles.Just reading most of the vacuous rubbish in this forum would be enough to convince any one.
I have to fly with you idiots and I am here to say you are not an FA`s bootlace...you stain the rest of us.
EBA 7 addresses most of the inequities in EBA6 and it will sh*t in ,since the majority of crew are more pragmatic than the salacious miscreants that inhabit this particular forum.
No wonder most people have the impression that CC are imbeciles.Just reading most of the vacuous rubbish in this forum would be enough to convince any one.
I have to fly with you idiots and I am here to say you are not an FA`s bootlace...you stain the rest of us.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just heard that there will be only 1 slot for Aussie crew on each daily flight we have ACCESS to, to LHR.
I knew that was coming. Apparently the FAAA aren't happy about this turn up of events from the company. But they should have seen it coming. Nothing in EBA 7 guaranteeing 15 slots for Aussie crew.
Another reason to vote NO.
I knew that was coming. Apparently the FAAA aren't happy about this turn up of events from the company. But they should have seen it coming. Nothing in EBA 7 guaranteeing 15 slots for Aussie crew.
Another reason to vote NO.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi STR,
I'll be voting NO too as I strongly feel that the "in principle agreement" is a dud deal.
Geoff Dixon gets all he wants and in return we cop a pay cut via loss of access to the London route.
The word upline suggests many others will be voting no.
Jettlager
I'll be voting NO too as I strongly feel that the "in principle agreement" is a dud deal.
Geoff Dixon gets all he wants and in return we cop a pay cut via loss of access to the London route.
The word upline suggests many others will be voting no.
Jettlager
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The nearest white sandy beach
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
qfcsm,
I am of the understanding that the answer to your question of "WHY?" is that QF and the FAAA went to the AIRC in an attempt to resolve their differences.
The AIRC most likely told them both to pull their finger out (though they probably said it a little more eloquently than I did) and come to an agreement expeditiously (sp?).
Therefore, it is no wonder that after much angst and chagrin that the FAAA came out with an agreement that they suddenly endorsed. Basically, because they HAD to.
With the government re-elected, the industrial laws are going to go through a significant change. Unions will have even less power than they do now, which means that striking will become a thing of the past.
My thoughts.
SG
I am of the understanding that the answer to your question of "WHY?" is that QF and the FAAA went to the AIRC in an attempt to resolve their differences.
The AIRC most likely told them both to pull their finger out (though they probably said it a little more eloquently than I did) and come to an agreement expeditiously (sp?).
Therefore, it is no wonder that after much angst and chagrin that the FAAA came out with an agreement that they suddenly endorsed. Basically, because they HAD to.
With the government re-elected, the industrial laws are going to go through a significant change. Unions will have even less power than they do now, which means that striking will become a thing of the past.
My thoughts.
SG