QANTAS Discussions

[yellow flag]

hawk eye

you dont have to dignify my response.because your speak is just,with the greatest respect, RUBBISH.
get with the real world and get out there with the REAL flight attendants as i do each week.they are great.
i would love to say that you are an " "but i m not allowed to say that on this site.so you are not an idiot just misinformed

[yellow flag]

cart

time passes,people retire,new aircraft come.
many changes
pacience is a virtue
i managed
can you
or do you not have that strength of character,
that the first 1000 of us did, to create what you have now,
you have a job, take it, love it ,and it will give you what you deserve.

[watch your 6]

What is a "crap" trip?

Is a crap trip one where you don`t get paid and accumulate super?
When they are available I do 6 4 day JoBurgs.It give me on average 30 days off.If I get a low line I am first cab off the rank for anything in open time.My gross salary is above average.
I am a junior CSS...15 from the bottom.
I have a young family and I usually get the days off I want.
Find out what the rules are and make them work for you.
An allocated roster would for me be impossible.

[crew-use-only]

what you propose speedbird makes sense to me.
I support the capping of some trips as this would free up some decent flying.

watch your 6, to me one JNB per roster would not be considered "crap".

I think some of those permanent LAX people should be sharing some of the fun and excitement of 366 pax and 16 hours ita takes to go to JNB and then be rewarded with that $100 allowance!

Or maybe just maybe we can allow then to share in our "best kept secret" and let them do just one BOM per roster, just one though! we dont want them to take all the crap flying, we have to share it around.

[qcc2]

repost one of my earlier thoughts

FLEXIBILITY IS THE KEY
take a procactive stand

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

it seems the time has come for the faaa lh to set an example (the shire fishing club might not agree on that one) and proacticely canvasse alternate options for lh cabincrew before a legal challenge will put them in a corner. it might not be a perfect sytem/ addition but it would certainly improve the current limited options.
my advise would be
1) instant trip swap system online. with set rules which cannot be interfered, like MPT, no interference from operations,etc. this would also give cabin crew flexibility to add extra hours as long as it does not interfere with the above rules. lets face it there are still a number of cabin crew out there who do well in excess of 200 hrs. and they do it by infringing their mpt (yes you too, faaa official)
2) limit the number of trips you can make in one bid period. leets say only 3 lax per bid period. yes , sorry old chaps that would mean you have to explore another bar/burger joint somewhere else.
just kicking the ball along. certainly any changes need fine tuning, but you are better of controlling the ball then someone else.

germany just raise their retirement age for cabin crew to 65. BA is proposing to move it from 55 to 65 as well. the rest of europa will follow. in the US you have already the flying RSL.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Pegasus747]

Legal challenges to the Seniorty based bid system have been canvassed and specualated on for 18 years since the system was introduced in 1988.

The threshold tests for discrimination are very high hurdles to overcome and the AIS case is the better test case for those that are interested. Having said that, given that employment is static in the LH division and that recruitment is a contributing factor in movements in seniority/promotion and a range of other issues, it is appropriate that an intelligent dialogue between flight attendants takes place.

Bear in mind that there are three owners of the Seniorty based system....THE FAAA, QANTAS and the AIRC. Any changes to the system would have to firstly require an amendment to the EBA or a re-write of the clauses potentially. This in itself may open other clauses up for discussion at the same time. Also Qantas would be required to agree to any of the changes too, and they would take cost into consideration as well as a range of other issues.

Having said that, I do not have a concluded view about the current system in its entirety and have always felt its a matter for the majority of crew to determine.

Given that in short haul a ballot was recently held on rotational reserve and it was resoundingly defeated, and clearly there the majority of crew spoke..it is did not stop the intervention by outside bodies looking for potential discrimination aspects.

Personally from some perspective the system we have may seem unfair in a permanenlty static environment, but i personally dont believe it satisfies the legal definition of Discriminatory at law. IF it was then the commision and qantas could not certify that it was non discriminatory.

The law is an evolving thing however and exotic tribunals may have sway over our working conditions. I have no concluded view on capping or limtations or anything and think that it is a matter for crew to determine themselves throught the FAAA, and conceivably the time may well be right to engage crew in a sensible discussion.

[sydney s/h]

Latest from SH FAAA

This is the latest we have received by the SH FAAA re the court case.

On 4 April 2006 a hearing proceeded before the Australian Industrial Relations Commission to deal with arguments by interveners that your Enterprise Agreement 7 should not be certified.

As outlined in newsletter (QF12-06) two short haul flight attendants have engaged representatives to argue that clauses covering rostering arrangements are discriminatory.

While we understand there is considerable discussions on line about the matter, members need to be clear that the commission is not being asked to decided whether your seniority based preferential bid system is fair or other wise. The commission is deciding whether the rostering provisions discriminate illegally against women/family responsibilities.

Therefore it is primarily a technical and legal question that needs to be resolved.

The parties giving evidence before the commission were:

1 -The interveners on behalf of the two flight attendants

2-Qantas Airways

3 -FAAA Domestic Regional

Submissions were heard from the three parties with the interveners arguing their case that the clauses illegally discriminate against their clients. The Association and Qantas mounted a substantial argument against this claim and pressed for certification of your EBA.

The proceedings concluded with the interveners being given until COB next Monday 10 April 2006 to provide a written submission on the evidence.

The Commissioner will review the submissions that were put before the commission and we would hope to have a decision shortly after next Monday.

Members will of course be kept informed on this critically important matter.

[cart_elevator]

Well 'fuzzy-ho' being called selfish would hurt, except that all I (and many others) want is for everything to be shared equally ... that would kind of suggest the opposite of selfish ... all permanent longhaul crew do the same job (in each category) so within each category, the work/days off/destinations/ $$ should be shared equally.
As for those who continually bleat the 'do your time' mantra, to repeat what I have always said:
I would be happy to do my time if it meant I would move up the seniority ranks. QF has NO reason to hire permanent crew anymore (thanks to the last EBA (casuals in LH? more fixed-termers?) and the new [NO] Work Choices legislation. There will be no more progression, until those ancients retire (which they seem to do at a painfully slow pace - much like their walking [joke].
The FAAA can poll the crew till they are blue in the face, all it takes is one successful 'individual' anti-discrimination suit to happen, and the system is gone.
I also have a feeling this shorthaul action will be the first of an ever-increasing number of actions, as the crew who are outside the top 1000 (good for you to be there yellow flag !) realise that what they have is never going to get any better, or at least, take 30 years to get better.
There is already talk amongst the 'juniors' in longhaul mounting a class discrimination action.
I wonder whether preferential treatment based on nothing but years of service is considered fair under our new industrial legislation
I have nothing against those who have 20 + years with the company, good on you for stickin with it for so long. But times have changed, there is no more recruitment, no more people below you, no more redundancies to move people on, and no more 'doing your time' for today's juniors.
And it's certainly not selfish to want everyone to share in 'all that is longhaul', equally.

[hawke eye]

yellow flag,
that post was weeks ago. I do get with the real world, I fly L Haul regularly and you are correct there are lots of great cabin crew out there. So what is it you are referring to exactly??????

[hawke eye]

SENIORITY ISSUE
hey guys....and gals ,
there are two major issues that are causing the seniority work allocation system to become a seriously contentious issue.

1 As stated at least a dozen times by many (including Guardian and Pegasus - FAAA reps I assume), there has been for the past 4 years no new intakes of Long Haul cabin crew and WONT be for the forseeable future. Given everyones doomsday theories there will most likely be a restructure(using new IR legislation) of sorts which could further reduce QF longhaul cabin crew numbers; amounting to less QF aircraft servicing main hubs only.

2 There are very few (if any) Long Haul cabin crew taking voluntary retirement.Many are extending for various reasons.

SO, if there is no movement either way everyone stays where they are.
In terms of selfish seniors or selfish juniors or those in the middle who wait in hope, it will surely be as pegasus suggested. This decision will be up to the Long Haul crew to determine. Regardless, whatever the majority determination it will not stop anyone taking issue and persuing their own legal agenda.
Bring it on and lets stop the bickering on here.We can all put our 2 cents worth on the survey when the FAAA release it. Hopefully soon!!!!

[cartexchange]

Is it the seniority system or the subsidy system!
from what I see the top 20% of people get exactly what they want and when they want it! and have always had it that way.
The rest are doing most of the crap and the hardest work!
A SYD/LAX work wise compared to a SYD/HKG SYD/JNB, BOM/SYDor SYD/BKK, hmmm which is hardest!
SO as long as the bottom 40% do the hardest work then the next 40% have its slightly better the top 20% have it made.
In other words majority of crew subsidise the top 20% work wise.

On a JNB last week the most junior was 6 or 7 years and all she got was JNB back to back or BOM, year after year, with no hope for advancement.

I would love to see the shire lax boys do a few BOM and JNB per roster they wouldnt know what hit them!

[qcc2]

lets start somewhere

on step at a time. i keep on pressing with my view.

1) instant trip swap system online. with set rules which cannot be interfered, like MPT, no interference from operations,etc. this would also give cabin crew flexibility to add extra hours as long as it does not interfere with the above rules. lets face it there are still a number of cabin crew out there who do well in excess of 200 hrs.

better to control and provide flexibility then have it forced upon you

[cart_elevator]

qcc2
Why start one step at a time? Why not fix the whole thing?
Give everyone fair and even trip lenths/ destinations/ days off. THEN allow instant trip swaps. Most will change to what suits them, those who dont want to will get a fair roster.
Tell me, which of the seniors is gonna give up a HNL for a JNB ?? computer says NO - ["cough"]
Everyone should start off with a roster of equal time off, equal trip lengths and equal destinations.
Yes, the destinations such as HNL and SFO are not around enough for everyone to have one every roster, but if you rotate them around so that everone gets equal share of them, at least you know you aint gettin shat on by the few with the seniority to get them (those who never had to start from the bottom).
All crew should have to go to all destinations, no mattter how popular or otherwise they are, just as all crew should have to work public hols, no matter their circumstances. You cant work xmas due to 'family circumstances'? Trade your trip or quit, as they say this is a 24/7 job.
Everything should be equal for roster building purposes, trade and swap away after that, but we should all start off equal - after all we all do the same job, and are employed under the same contract.
And much like the 'screw-the-roo' campaign (which consisted mainly of senior crew not wanting to do what they are paid to do) there is another email group circulating amongst the more junior of us, intent on 'screwing-seniority', and its gaining momentum, with a submission due shortly. Sorry, only those outside the top 1000 allowed (ie the majority of us)

[cartexchange]

cart elevator/
I know where you're coming from, but I think your plan may be too radical.
I think a capping on trips and instant swapping would be a start.
rotating Xmas wouldn't be a bad idea either.
and get rid of that corrupt "open time" as well.
I do think that we should still maintain a seniority system but not as selfish as the current one.

[qcc2]

on step at the time

agree with your comments cart exchange. elevator your ideas are a bit too advanced and maybe not visible. there will never be a "real equality" in the system.
"and get rid of that corrupt "open time" as well." that is the biggest joke in qf.
i put in for many dozends of trip swaps but was never successfull.
ususal excuses, but when you check who gets the trips there are many "dodgy explanations".

[cartexchange]

Yes QCC2 that open time is the biggest joke within the whole of QF operations, buy them some duty free and its yours to play with.

here is something that sticks in my mind........
The biggest rort I have seen in there was a few years(2)back on a Africa trip the CSS was called out to operate as an extra because his girlfriend at the time was called out on standby, when he saw this he called his friend in operations and asked for the huge favour and they did it for him, our complement was 15 people and all of a sudden there was 16 crew.
When I had a look at the compliance sheet, sure enough he had his own pattern created and he and his wife/girlfriend had a nice week at Bongani together........what a faaarking joke.........

[Jet_Black_Monaro]

Who will be the first QF cabin crew to take Qantas to court and challenge the legally unenforceable and discrimantory seniority system?

[lowerlobe]

I think I have a new name for Peagasus and that is tautology 747 or maybe Rex 747 after a well known football commentator…Peggy your last post is a bit different, are you trying to change your image?

Basically in about 350 words you told us that we should talk about the seniority system and come to an agreement however those who don’t like it can blow all that out of the water!!!!!

You should be in politics as that would have made the YES Prime Minister script writers proud to read. This sort of linguistic redundancy takes skill and forethought, are you getting help or are you seeking to improve your self? Perhaps the ACTU could use you as a scriptwriter .

It is time as qcc2 said for the Long Haul FAAA to show some leadership and call for some meetings or at the very least to make their position known. When there is a vacuum in information, rumors abound and more so in our situation because we don’t work in one building and cannot meet at lunch time out in the park to find out what is happening.

Perhaps the FAAA could outline alternative rostering systems and their various benefits and shortcomings. If the majority do want to remain within the current system then we have to address the problems that exist such as the reserve system that s/h csm’s operate under so as to eliminate any discrimination perceived or real.

If the majority of us want to have any system whether it is seniority based or not then individuals should not be able to remove that system .If individuals can start this sort of action to dismantle current systems then we will have anarchy. The seniority system may not be perfect but it is a system to base our work lives on and the majority do have some say in it. If we allow this to fall and the company can introduce a 100% allocated bid line then we have no say what so ever in anything we do.

Let’s fine tune this system to try and remove the points that are creating problems for some crew

[radiation junkie]

bidding system trauma

No.1 problem. Q L/H flying is "shrinking". As J*Int. takes hold, it will only get worse. No.2 No more new L/H crew. As flying gets taken over by J*, they don't need any new Qantas L/H crew. I feel in the few years Qantas L/H will slowly shrink away. That's the way GD wants it as that's the way they get their big fat bonus' every year, cutting costs. But the current strategy is not only a passing fad . It is a long term "Next Generation" plan that even writes the current junior L/H crew out of the picture. Within 10 years, Qantas will cease to exist as an airline. Just a holding company running a series of "other " airlines.
Yes, I have 25+ years, yes, I do get what I bid for. Yes, I will be gone in 5 - 6 years. I would be happy to share flying on a capped number of trip types per roster basis. Open time should also be looked at, even with my seniority , I don't understand some of the outcomes after requesting open time trips to make up duty hours. Throwing the bid system out the door is not a solution. A FAAA and crew driven change, adding flexibility for less senior crew is the "way to go". In a few years, it will all be gone !

[lowerlobe]

O H & S Elections

Re-Printed from the FAAA web site with some interesting points...


10 April 2006
Attention all Qantas Long Haul Flight Attendants

OH&S COMMITTEE ELECTION 2006

In the next few weeks nominations and elections will be held for the Occupational Health and Safety Employee Representative Positions for the next two years.

There will be (4) four positions in Sydney, (3) three positions in Melbourne and (3) positions in Brisbane.

Currently the OH&S committee is examining some changes to the Terms of Reference that form the rules of operation of the committee that will facilitate the election.

The FAAA has traditionally remained neutral in employee OH&S elections, however because the new Work choices Industrial Laws severely hamper employees in a range of areas we have decided to take a more active role in OH&S following advice from ACTU and State Labour organisations.

The FAAA is assisting our OH&S representatives to obtain re-election. The current OH&S representatives have done an outstanding job and it is our desire that they continue in the role. All of your current OH&S representatives have completed relevant training required under the Act and certified by the relevant state authority. To assist the reps we have organized some additional training in Risk Assessment which will further enhance their existing skills.

Flight Attendants should be aware of the limitations of the OH&S Committee as it is essentially an advisory body, and one that can only make recommendations. It does not have enforcement capacity. Having said that, authorised officers of the FAAA under the legislation can bring matters directly to WorkCover for example, as well as the Committee having the same capacity through the various safety committees within Qantas.

It is our belief that an active FAAA working with the employee representatives can bring about some meaningful analysis of issues facing flight attendants. One pressing example is fatigue management which is currently the subject of Pilot studies but has not yet involved flight attendants to any extent.

When the nominations close for OH&S Reps, the FAAA will issue a newsletter outlining those candidates that have completed the training required to work on the Committee and also those that have an intrinsic understanding and commitment to the role of the committee.



Are the terms of reference changing the way in which the various OH&S committees can operate or is it as the faaa has said that it is the way in which the election can be carried out and who carries them out.

We all know the feelings of the faaa towards elections and who should handle them!


The faaa is helping those that they chose to run the OH&S departments,why did the faaa give the green light to the new Y/C procedure of walking around in the dark with trays of drinks???

The last one is my favouite when SR tells us that fatigue management is an upcoming issue especially as the tech crew have been involved in fatigue studies but not cabin crew crew any extent......

You can say that again Steve,what happened to the so called fatigue study on the JFK issue?

Tells us (for the first time) how it was carried out and what data resulted in the finding that there was not sufficient fatigue on the JFK shuttle