EBA & IR Issues in Australia (Not for those easily offended!)
Registered User **
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guardian1,
Thanks for your reply but I think you have chosen the wrong profession.
You should be in politics,I have never seen anyone answer a question so well without answering the question.
We all know that ProGolfer69 is someone else in the faaa and as for the rest:
I thought I had shown that this is an issue of the company after more than just the JFK shuttle...Just imagine if the company can plan our rosters beyond 14 hours continually....but maybe some of you cannot see beyond the faaa rhetoric
Not just JFK but ...Sin/Drw/Adl/SYD with a MEL between ADL and Syd
The rest of what the company could do if they have the legal right is frightening...
I'm with jettlager this issue must go to a vote...
Thanks for your reply but I think you have chosen the wrong profession.
You should be in politics,I have never seen anyone answer a question so well without answering the question.
We all know that ProGolfer69 is someone else in the faaa and as for the rest:
I thought I had shown that this is an issue of the company after more than just the JFK shuttle...Just imagine if the company can plan our rosters beyond 14 hours continually....but maybe some of you cannot see beyond the faaa rhetoric
Not just JFK but ...Sin/Drw/Adl/SYD with a MEL between ADL and Syd
The rest of what the company could do if they have the legal right is frightening...
I'm with jettlager this issue must go to a vote...
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The abuse directed at those who DARE to post contrary to QF's and the FAAA's wishes is amusing and given our history of safety excellence perhaps more than a little disturbing..................
Once again.
The issue is a multi sector TOD in excess of 15.5 hours and more often than not 16, 17 and 18 hours plus.
FAs are human beings with physical limits to what can be safely endured and expected of them.
We have, as "safety professionals", an obligation to ensure that at all times we are in a fit state to carry out our safety related duties.
The sleep deprivation involved with this sector and the fact that for most, sleep before hand is minimal leaves crew nauseous, disorientated and unable to think clearly.
Recent events ought to remind the clowns who can't see beyond profits, performance bonuses and overtime just how important our actions are, when things go pear shaped.
Three or four hours sleep before a TOD that has [already jetlagged] crew leaving the hotel at 7am and not returning before midnight [with two 1 hour breaks] is excessive , unreasonable, unsafe and inhumane.
dixon and his goons may have lied, bullied and intimidated others into believing the need for QANTAS to operate unsafely.
I'm not convinced and nor will I be for two reasons.
Because I consider myself a safety professional with a LONGTERM stake in QANTAS's success.
In stark contrast to the bastards who run this company.
Jettlager
P.S. Its illegal for the locals for a reason.
Once again.
The issue is a multi sector TOD in excess of 15.5 hours and more often than not 16, 17 and 18 hours plus.
FAs are human beings with physical limits to what can be safely endured and expected of them.
We have, as "safety professionals", an obligation to ensure that at all times we are in a fit state to carry out our safety related duties.
The sleep deprivation involved with this sector and the fact that for most, sleep before hand is minimal leaves crew nauseous, disorientated and unable to think clearly.
Recent events ought to remind the clowns who can't see beyond profits, performance bonuses and overtime just how important our actions are, when things go pear shaped.
Three or four hours sleep before a TOD that has [already jetlagged] crew leaving the hotel at 7am and not returning before midnight [with two 1 hour breaks] is excessive , unreasonable, unsafe and inhumane.
dixon and his goons may have lied, bullied and intimidated others into believing the need for QANTAS to operate unsafely.
I'm not convinced and nor will I be for two reasons.
Because I consider myself a safety professional with a LONGTERM stake in QANTAS's success.
In stark contrast to the bastards who run this company.
Jettlager
P.S. Its illegal for the locals for a reason.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LAX/NYC/NYC
i have heard a few people in here say that this tour of duty is "ILLEGAL"
i would like someone to just show me "where" or in what document its ILLEGAL.
If it's ILLEGAL, and the US goverment knows that we are flying it...Whats the story??
I want the facts not just an opinion from ppl in here ...I have no firm view on the shuttle at all. I am concerned about flow on, but more concerned about Job security....
i have heard a few people in here say that this tour of duty is "ILLEGAL"
i would like someone to just show me "where" or in what document its ILLEGAL.
If it's ILLEGAL, and the US goverment knows that we are flying it...Whats the story??
I want the facts not just an opinion from ppl in here ...I have no firm view on the shuttle at all. I am concerned about flow on, but more concerned about Job security....
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
‘We all know that ProGolfer69 is someone else in the faaa’
It’s such a stupid comment it’s laughable. It’s quite amusing isn’t it! Everybody who has a view contrary to these morons is automatically someone else in the FAAA.
I’m just a flight attendant who doesn’t need a triple bypass like the rest of you old farts to do a basic days work! As I’ve said if you don’t like the way the flying is going, leave! Bye Bye! Go and work for Sydney cabs, would be about all you’d be qualified for.
Don’t waste your time responding to these old cronies Guardian, there just part of a clueless minority who are quite happy to see more and more flying lost to foreign based crew and Shorthaul. They are stuck in some kind of 70’s time warp when there was no such thing as foreign based cheap labour, low cost carriers and high oil prices. If it wasn’t the current management doing it, it would be just someone else, it’s happening with Australian industry across the board; we must become more efficient and more productive to keep out foreign based cheaper labour. It’s harsh but it’s a reality. It would be handy if the company did come out with a package so we could rid ourselves of these lame old waste of space lazy f**ks, it’s all they really want anyway.
It will be YES all the way for the JFK shuttle. All crew I have spoken to especially junior crew with financial commitments, growing familles and mortgages feel the same way.
Thank God we now have people running the FAAA who know what they are doing. If we left it to these fools we’d all be on the dole queue!
It’s such a stupid comment it’s laughable. It’s quite amusing isn’t it! Everybody who has a view contrary to these morons is automatically someone else in the FAAA.
I’m just a flight attendant who doesn’t need a triple bypass like the rest of you old farts to do a basic days work! As I’ve said if you don’t like the way the flying is going, leave! Bye Bye! Go and work for Sydney cabs, would be about all you’d be qualified for.
Don’t waste your time responding to these old cronies Guardian, there just part of a clueless minority who are quite happy to see more and more flying lost to foreign based crew and Shorthaul. They are stuck in some kind of 70’s time warp when there was no such thing as foreign based cheap labour, low cost carriers and high oil prices. If it wasn’t the current management doing it, it would be just someone else, it’s happening with Australian industry across the board; we must become more efficient and more productive to keep out foreign based cheaper labour. It’s harsh but it’s a reality. It would be handy if the company did come out with a package so we could rid ourselves of these lame old waste of space lazy f**ks, it’s all they really want anyway.
It will be YES all the way for the JFK shuttle. All crew I have spoken to especially junior crew with financial commitments, growing familles and mortgages feel the same way.
Thank God we now have people running the FAAA who know what they are doing. If we left it to these fools we’d all be on the dole queue!
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite a few people here have been mentioning the newer, long-range aircraft, saying that 18 or 19 hour tours of duty are inevitable. Sure, they probably are inevitable, but at the moment, we have protections to prevent us flying so long in planned situations. In order for that to be changed, there had better be some bloody good negotiating from the union. The only reason we currently get transport and long-range pay on sectors over 14 hours is because, at one time in the past, we negotiated hard. This is not something we should now (when the time comes) just hand over to the company. Imagine how difficult that kind of work would be! Most normal people work an 8 hour day. A double shift would be 16 hours for these people, but they get to sleep in their own beds at the end of the day, with their partner/family there. They’re not jetlagged, locked in a tin can, depleted of oxygen, etc.
So could people please stop telling me to “get used to the idea” of working these sectors. When that day comes, I would like to think that I would be suitably compensated/paid.
And, just small note from a post a few days ago:
Freedom of speech? Which country do you live in? Freedom of speech is NOT a part of the Australian Constitution. You have been watching too many American movies. Ref: http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/r...-02/02rn42.htm
So could people please stop telling me to “get used to the idea” of working these sectors. When that day comes, I would like to think that I would be suitably compensated/paid.
And, just small note from a post a few days ago:
Posted by RaverFlaver:
So I'm not allowed to comment on any other airline, because the airline I work for made a loss? Whatever happend to freedom of speech? And since when did you become dictator?
So I'm not allowed to comment on any other airline, because the airline I work for made a loss? Whatever happend to freedom of speech? And since when did you become dictator?
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting that those pushing the spin for QF's dispensation are doing their best to paint those who are opposed as a radical minority out of touch with the present..........................
Lots of radical "out of touchers" at other carriers it would seem.
Make sure to read both pages and check the dates on the original post from Bob Down [under]
http://www.airlinecrew.net/ubbthread...1/fpart/1/vc/1
Jettlager
P.S. Pegasus747.
If you read the link posted carefully you may learn something of US flight attandant duty hour limitations and in turn have your question answered.
Lots of radical "out of touchers" at other carriers it would seem.
Make sure to read both pages and check the dates on the original post from Bob Down [under]
http://www.airlinecrew.net/ubbthread...1/fpart/1/vc/1
Jettlager
P.S. Pegasus747.
If you read the link posted carefully you may learn something of US flight attandant duty hour limitations and in turn have your question answered.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SYDNEY
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JFK dispensation
JETLAGGER...
As usual you just make baseless comments in here indicating that you have no grip about the JFK issue and more importantly your ostrich head in the sand approach if listened to by the majority of our crew would spell disaster.
JETLAGGER you say you have a long -term stake in QF. What a pity you don't see that your inflexible positions would lead to the wind down of Long Haul. Also your comments about fatigue on this sector are not borne out by research that has been done on this sector.
jUST FOR YOU JETLAGGER I REPEAT THE ACTUAL AVERAGE TIME FOR THE JFK SHUTTLE IS 15' 05", NOT THE 16....17... OR 18 HOURS THAT YOU FALSELY AND CONTINUALLY CLAIM.
RedTBar........
I answered your questions comprehensively i thought. I never evade direct questions and im not going to start evading them in this forum.
The point is you don't like my answers because they are accurate and grounded in reality.
I pointed out to you that the current dispensation does not set any "legal precedent" . Any future request by the Company to go beyond 14 hours on a multi sector would still require FAAA dispensation.
It is time some of you made a basic decision...... do you want to protect our flying and our job security or do you want to adopt a self-destructive approach that says to QF..... go get stuffed..... and we will never make any concession to you, even though you (QF), CAN THEN MAKE ALTERNATE ARRANGEMENTS TO HAVE OUR FLYING DONE BY OTHERS.
THIS IS A SIMPLE CHOICE THAT WILL HAVE TO BE MADE BY OUR CREW SHORTLY, BUT A CHOICE WITH HUGE IMPLICATIONS.
I FOR 1 WILL BE ARGUING TO CREW THAT WE HAVE TO BE PRAGMATIC, SMART AND FLEXIBLE.
I want to continue flying for at least another decade and not be subject to possible compulsory redundancy.
Pro Golfer, i believe you are right. Our crew upon presentation of the full situation to them by the FAAA will choose preservation and not go down a path of extinction.
As usual you just make baseless comments in here indicating that you have no grip about the JFK issue and more importantly your ostrich head in the sand approach if listened to by the majority of our crew would spell disaster.
JETLAGGER you say you have a long -term stake in QF. What a pity you don't see that your inflexible positions would lead to the wind down of Long Haul. Also your comments about fatigue on this sector are not borne out by research that has been done on this sector.
jUST FOR YOU JETLAGGER I REPEAT THE ACTUAL AVERAGE TIME FOR THE JFK SHUTTLE IS 15' 05", NOT THE 16....17... OR 18 HOURS THAT YOU FALSELY AND CONTINUALLY CLAIM.
RedTBar........
I answered your questions comprehensively i thought. I never evade direct questions and im not going to start evading them in this forum.
The point is you don't like my answers because they are accurate and grounded in reality.
I pointed out to you that the current dispensation does not set any "legal precedent" . Any future request by the Company to go beyond 14 hours on a multi sector would still require FAAA dispensation.
It is time some of you made a basic decision...... do you want to protect our flying and our job security or do you want to adopt a self-destructive approach that says to QF..... go get stuffed..... and we will never make any concession to you, even though you (QF), CAN THEN MAKE ALTERNATE ARRANGEMENTS TO HAVE OUR FLYING DONE BY OTHERS.
THIS IS A SIMPLE CHOICE THAT WILL HAVE TO BE MADE BY OUR CREW SHORTLY, BUT A CHOICE WITH HUGE IMPLICATIONS.
I FOR 1 WILL BE ARGUING TO CREW THAT WE HAVE TO BE PRAGMATIC, SMART AND FLEXIBLE.
I want to continue flying for at least another decade and not be subject to possible compulsory redundancy.
Pro Golfer, i believe you are right. Our crew upon presentation of the full situation to them by the FAAA will choose preservation and not go down a path of extinction.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guardian1,
If the sector can't be done under 15 hours and yet has blown out to 16,17,18 and beyond how the hell can you arrive at an "average" of 15.05?
Christer Bergman's 17+Hour TOD last Saturday was just one example and enough to skew the average to WAY beyond what you assert.
Your bull**** is getting repetitive as Chriser's 17 + sector [that extracted a 10 hour additional payment to extend] was one of MANY.
If the sector can't be done under 15 hours and yet has blown out to 16,17,18 and beyond how the hell can you arrive at an "average" of 15.05?
Christer Bergman's 17+Hour TOD last Saturday was just one example and enough to skew the average to WAY beyond what you assert.
Your bull**** is getting repetitive as Chriser's 17 + sector [that extracted a 10 hour additional payment to extend] was one of MANY.
Guest
Posts: n/a
REALITY CHECK
pro golfer you are spot on!
I have spoken to heaps of crew about the JFK dispensation. The clear majority will vote to continue the dispensation because they dont want to give up further flying to Short Haul or others.
Most people will support the FAAA position because it makes sense. I have done the shuttles, its tiring like a lot of other flying but it certainly didn't kill me or the other crew, plus you get heaps of money and time off.
I also know friends who were on a recent flight that was going to go over 17 hours. We got extra money from the Company and that certainly compensated for any tiredness.
This crap that the JFK sector is inhumane comes from people who haven't even done it. Pro Golfer you are right... if fools in here cant see the logic to protect our flying they should resign and drive a cab.
I too will be voting YES YES YES like most that i know.
I have spoken to heaps of crew about the JFK dispensation. The clear majority will vote to continue the dispensation because they dont want to give up further flying to Short Haul or others.
Most people will support the FAAA position because it makes sense. I have done the shuttles, its tiring like a lot of other flying but it certainly didn't kill me or the other crew, plus you get heaps of money and time off.
I also know friends who were on a recent flight that was going to go over 17 hours. We got extra money from the Company and that certainly compensated for any tiredness.
This crap that the JFK sector is inhumane comes from people who haven't even done it. Pro Golfer you are right... if fools in here cant see the logic to protect our flying they should resign and drive a cab.
I too will be voting YES YES YES like most that i know.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Intersting that QF's dispensation spin team are out in force.
Just who is going to do it if we dont????
SHORTHAUL! Thats a laugh.
The international flying that they have taken from us is invariably being done by the contractors as those with seniority [having done it once] don't want it.
They must have by now realised how done over they were at their last EBA.
Perhaps they thought they were doing us over and yet at the end of the day they were the losers.
Don't they hate it when you count your allowances in front of them in SIN and HKG.
I mean really. Talk about losers. They must be the ONLY FAs in the world flying internationaly and not collecting an allowance.
I don't think even that lot will be ready to "back up" for another reaming at their next EBA!!!!
I've heard from several sources concerns that the shorthaul FAAA were paid off by QF.
It's about time dixon's bluff was called.
This sector is inhumane.
How is Qantas going to get rid of 3500 of us when they continue to post record profit after record profit.
dixon and gregg were hammered by hostile questioning at the profit announcement.
Call their bluff.
Its not just employees who are fed up with their duplicity.
There are limits to human physiology and this sector IS unsafe.
Jettlager
P.S. I'll post the link again in case it was missed in all the spin.
http://www.airlinecrew.net/ubbthread...1/fpart/1/vc/1
Just who is going to do it if we dont????
SHORTHAUL! Thats a laugh.
The international flying that they have taken from us is invariably being done by the contractors as those with seniority [having done it once] don't want it.
They must have by now realised how done over they were at their last EBA.
Perhaps they thought they were doing us over and yet at the end of the day they were the losers.
Don't they hate it when you count your allowances in front of them in SIN and HKG.
I mean really. Talk about losers. They must be the ONLY FAs in the world flying internationaly and not collecting an allowance.
I don't think even that lot will be ready to "back up" for another reaming at their next EBA!!!!
I've heard from several sources concerns that the shorthaul FAAA were paid off by QF.
It's about time dixon's bluff was called.
This sector is inhumane.
How is Qantas going to get rid of 3500 of us when they continue to post record profit after record profit.
dixon and gregg were hammered by hostile questioning at the profit announcement.
Call their bluff.
Its not just employees who are fed up with their duplicity.
There are limits to human physiology and this sector IS unsafe.
Jettlager
P.S. I'll post the link again in case it was missed in all the spin.
http://www.airlinecrew.net/ubbthread...1/fpart/1/vc/1
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SYDNEY
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JFK SHUTTLE
jetlagger....
Your level of ignorance knows no bounds. Ring Lee Lam who is the FAAA convenor on rostering issues or alternatively ring Suzzanna Holden at QF.
Both will confirm that the average for the JFK shuttle is 15'05".
You can then post an apology on here, which of course you won't because you are that type of person who does not hesitate to spread nonsense but once you are caught out you refuse to apologise.
We all know your type very well.
There have been 2 instances so far since the dispensation of where the TOD went beyond 17 hours. In both instances crew VOLUNTARILY voted to continue.
Your level of ignorance knows no bounds. Ring Lee Lam who is the FAAA convenor on rostering issues or alternatively ring Suzzanna Holden at QF.
Both will confirm that the average for the JFK shuttle is 15'05".
You can then post an apology on here, which of course you won't because you are that type of person who does not hesitate to spread nonsense but once you are caught out you refuse to apologise.
We all know your type very well.
There have been 2 instances so far since the dispensation of where the TOD went beyond 17 hours. In both instances crew VOLUNTARILY voted to continue.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I am forced to do such long sectors, then I will do them, but I hope I am not also expected to give the same level of service as if I did an 8 or 9 hour sector. F()ck all the "safety professional" crap - I'd probably cope with an emergency while my adreneline was pumping, but from a customer service point of view, I would be useless.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SYDNEY
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jettlager
jettlager states "I've heard from several sources concerns that the shorthaul FAAA were paid off by QF."
Mate that comment finally demonstrates that you don't have any credibility at all. Not only are your arguments flawed and silly but in desperation you resort to making defammatory statements without the slightest evidence or concern to the reputation of others.
Anyone who pays any attention to you or gives any credence to anything you say is as ill-informed, ignorant and extreme as you are.
Instead of making such statements under the protection of anonymity why dont you attach your name?
You should also be aware that there are avenues for identifying who you are. If i was a senior FAAA Short Haul official i'd look closely at identifying you and taking action against you.
Mate that comment finally demonstrates that you don't have any credibility at all. Not only are your arguments flawed and silly but in desperation you resort to making defammatory statements without the slightest evidence or concern to the reputation of others.
Anyone who pays any attention to you or gives any credence to anything you say is as ill-informed, ignorant and extreme as you are.
Instead of making such statements under the protection of anonymity why dont you attach your name?
You should also be aware that there are avenues for identifying who you are. If i was a senior FAAA Short Haul official i'd look closely at identifying you and taking action against you.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guardian1,
the bull**** never stops from you does it.
Quote-
"I've heard from several sources concerns that the shorthaul FAAA were paid off by QF."
Read my statement VERY carefully and then do some reading on defamation laws.
I am free to express the opinions of others as communicated to me.
Get it.
------------
Flugbegleiter,
yes, adrenaline will drive you to perform in highly stressful situations however normal thought processes and judgement ARE impared when a person is severely sleep deprived.
The fact that you can't be expected to provide SERVICE under these situations says as much.................
the bull**** never stops from you does it.
Quote-
"I've heard from several sources concerns that the shorthaul FAAA were paid off by QF."
Read my statement VERY carefully and then do some reading on defamation laws.
I am free to express the opinions of others as communicated to me.
Get it.
------------
Flugbegleiter,
yes, adrenaline will drive you to perform in highly stressful situations however normal thought processes and judgement ARE impared when a person is severely sleep deprived.
The fact that you can't be expected to provide SERVICE under these situations says as much.................
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 3,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is an anonymous forum - and everyone has the right to remain so if they wish. The rumours as to how easy it is to identify individuals are, as a rule, grossly over stated.
Guardian1 & jettlager - You seem to have stalled on arguing the facts and are now simply throwing rocks at each other. Please step back, take a deep breath, and then see if you can either come up with specific evidence to support your points of view, or else, having made your points and stated your case, agree to disagree.
Guardian1 & jettlager - You seem to have stalled on arguing the facts and are now simply throwing rocks at each other. Please step back, take a deep breath, and then see if you can either come up with specific evidence to support your points of view, or else, having made your points and stated your case, agree to disagree.
Guest
Posts: n/a
WHAT US CREW THINK OF THE SO CALLED INHUMANE SECTOR
Go away jettlager, you are tiring and you just sprout continual crap.
I looked at jettlagers link to the US website. Its clear from below that US crew dont think the JFK sector is difficult.
"Trainee
Reged: Thu
Posts: 5
QANTAS cabin crew to operate LAX-JFK-LAX
#159158 - Thu Apr 07 2005 06:05 AM Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
High Guys,
I'm a Qantas crew member and brand new to this site.
My employer is asking our Union for dispensation to operate the above mentioned sector.
They [Qantas] say it can be planned at 14.35 and yet we know it will blow out to 16-17 in winter.
As it stands our trip would be as follows.
Syd-Lax [14.5 Tour of duty] and layover for 36 hours.
Lax-JFK-LAX [Tour of duty 14.35-17?] and layover 36 hours.
Lax-Syd [14.5 Tour of duty]
Cabin crew at QF consider this proposal to be inhumane and yet QF are moving ahead with its introduction.
Do U.S. carriers operate their Cabin Crew in this fashion?
I'd be very grateful for details of other US carriers that my be presently operating this or other similar sectors.
Thanks, Bob Down.[Under]
Post Extras:
SFOFlyboy
AirlineCrew.net Moderator
Reged: Fri
Posts: 1380
Loc: SEA Re: QANTAS cabin crew to operate LAX-JFK-LAX [Re: Bob Down]
#159188 - Thu Apr 07 2005 10:04 AM Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Forgive me but long work days separated by 36 hour layover is inhumane? We do days like that on minimum rest. I regularly do duty days of 10-12 hours (not 14 admittedly) but I'll be looking at 11-14 hours of layover time. Sometimes we get longer layovers but have never seen the likes of 36 hours...
What does your contract state as far as max time you can be scheduled and what provisions for rescheduling maximum? Is this being done with one crew?
--------------------
Member: National Association of Children with Attention Def... Hey, Crayons!!!
I looked at jettlagers link to the US website. Its clear from below that US crew dont think the JFK sector is difficult.
"Trainee
Reged: Thu
Posts: 5
QANTAS cabin crew to operate LAX-JFK-LAX
#159158 - Thu Apr 07 2005 06:05 AM Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
High Guys,
I'm a Qantas crew member and brand new to this site.
My employer is asking our Union for dispensation to operate the above mentioned sector.
They [Qantas] say it can be planned at 14.35 and yet we know it will blow out to 16-17 in winter.
As it stands our trip would be as follows.
Syd-Lax [14.5 Tour of duty] and layover for 36 hours.
Lax-JFK-LAX [Tour of duty 14.35-17?] and layover 36 hours.
Lax-Syd [14.5 Tour of duty]
Cabin crew at QF consider this proposal to be inhumane and yet QF are moving ahead with its introduction.
Do U.S. carriers operate their Cabin Crew in this fashion?
I'd be very grateful for details of other US carriers that my be presently operating this or other similar sectors.
Thanks, Bob Down.[Under]
Post Extras:
SFOFlyboy
AirlineCrew.net Moderator
Reged: Fri
Posts: 1380
Loc: SEA Re: QANTAS cabin crew to operate LAX-JFK-LAX [Re: Bob Down]
#159188 - Thu Apr 07 2005 10:04 AM Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Forgive me but long work days separated by 36 hour layover is inhumane? We do days like that on minimum rest. I regularly do duty days of 10-12 hours (not 14 admittedly) but I'll be looking at 11-14 hours of layover time. Sometimes we get longer layovers but have never seen the likes of 36 hours...
What does your contract state as far as max time you can be scheduled and what provisions for rescheduling maximum? Is this being done with one crew?
--------------------
Member: National Association of Children with Attention Def... Hey, Crayons!!!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Warp57,
do you think that people are soooooooo stupid as to not read the WHOLE thread?
I guess you do.
How does that make you feel, people?
Jettlager
P.S. If I just post crap why not just ignore me?
do you think that people are soooooooo stupid as to not read the WHOLE thread?
I guess you do.
How does that make you feel, people?
Jettlager
P.S. If I just post crap why not just ignore me?
Registered User **
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guardian1,
We could go around in circles like this for years and not achieve anything..
The main point is when are you going to send out the vote cards in the mail,so we can finish this
We could go around in circles like this for years and not achieve anything..
The main point is when are you going to send out the vote cards in the mail,so we can finish this
Guest
Posts: n/a
RedTBar
Red, ive enjoyed the tango with you. Sensible debate is good. Your opposing viewpoint is appeciated because at least you have some basis to your stance.
I assume the FAAA will send out its recommendation to crew about the JFK issue after the series of membership meetings are over and when a newsletter is issued advising crew of a possible new dispensation.
I assume the FAAA will send out its recommendation to crew about the JFK issue after the series of membership meetings are over and when a newsletter is issued advising crew of a possible new dispensation.