QANTAS Discussions
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by cart_elevator
QF wont be hiring seniority-holding longhaul crew for years.
This situation is not necessarily for ever.
I know of people, who in the past, were on the bottom for 4 years while there was a lull in employment.
2 years without full time recruitment is too short a time to start spitting the dummy over.
Wait till all of the A380's have arrived and then see where we stand, that would be a far more intelligent thing to do.
Last edited by twiggs; 28th Mar 2006 at 23:33.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: feet on the ground
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
reality check
guys read the statements GD puts out. apart from the A380 (delayed till sept.07 or maybe later) there is nothing for long haul till 2011, then the 787-9 supposedly arrive for lh (787-8 for replacement of 767 sh). and as i mentioned before the 743 was supposed to retire with the arrival of the A380
movement in lh senority, don't think so. i think many of our lh colleagues leave in denial. lets not forget by the end of next year the eba is up again. i personally cant see another recruitment in oz lh for years to come.
my prediction is that by 2008 you have heavenly fushn'chupps accented csm/css online.
movement in lh senority, don't think so. i think many of our lh colleagues leave in denial. lets not forget by the end of next year the eba is up again. i personally cant see another recruitment in oz lh for years to come.
my prediction is that by 2008 you have heavenly fushn'chupps accented csm/css online.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: queensland
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simon,
you forgot
#3.. significant changes to the seniority bidding system that will recognise equality and fairness.
Cart el, we are pi##ing in the wind attempting to talk commonsense with many of the senior people on here (not all) about the seniority subject. They wont even look at compromise. We are better off reminding them why the bid system is now up for grabs. If only SHaul CSMs had compromised.
I think Simon is on the money.
Interesting, not a post yet acknowledging the associated issues with long term flying.
The silence is deafening. If we had a cap on years of flying combined with an age limit i.e like our retirement formula. It could be argued we have a flying health managemt system in place. For those who dont know if you have 20 yrs of service or 45 years of age you can retire without penalising your super and you get the benfits of staff travel. Obviously I'm not suggesting we use the same formula as above just the principle behind it.
While we allow colleagues to fly to 60 plus it leaves us open to outsiders one day determining what might be considered overly harsh formulas.It is something the FAAA needs to take the lead on.Imagine the Company being able to get rid of you at 20 years due to health issues associated with flying. let's create a sensible formula that encompasses good health and creates reasonable and common sense momentum through the ranks.
you forgot
#3.. significant changes to the seniority bidding system that will recognise equality and fairness.
Cart el, we are pi##ing in the wind attempting to talk commonsense with many of the senior people on here (not all) about the seniority subject. They wont even look at compromise. We are better off reminding them why the bid system is now up for grabs. If only SHaul CSMs had compromised.
I think Simon is on the money.
Interesting, not a post yet acknowledging the associated issues with long term flying.
The silence is deafening. If we had a cap on years of flying combined with an age limit i.e like our retirement formula. It could be argued we have a flying health managemt system in place. For those who dont know if you have 20 yrs of service or 45 years of age you can retire without penalising your super and you get the benfits of staff travel. Obviously I'm not suggesting we use the same formula as above just the principle behind it.
While we allow colleagues to fly to 60 plus it leaves us open to outsiders one day determining what might be considered overly harsh formulas.It is something the FAAA needs to take the lead on.Imagine the Company being able to get rid of you at 20 years due to health issues associated with flying. let's create a sensible formula that encompasses good health and creates reasonable and common sense momentum through the ranks.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by qcc2
i personally cant see another recruitment in oz lh for years to come.
Oh sorry you have only been flying 2 minutes, how silly of me.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Twiggs
The other thing you dont factor into your 'wait and see' attitude is the fact that the type of people who want to fly has changed. I personally do not want to be doing this job till I am 60, it is fine and fun, but hey - to be old and bitter like the people I worked with out of SYD? nah, life is too short. So I aint willing to wait ten years for the next permanent recruitment to get some 'goods' out of this job ( neither is anyone my age flying longahul now).
It is a changed job market, I dont see this as a job-for-life. I am at uni (studying law) as well, and will move on, as will most others. I will however do the job to the best of my ability whilst I am here, and will get the most out of it as well.
The sad thing is, you dont see that I am the new flight attendant, one who will do it well, for about 5-7 years, then move on. The company sees that as well. Do you think that QF's 'youthful' image they want to portray is driven by the 60 year olds on the SFO and HNL patterns? Not that I am saying all senior crew are bad ( or even all junior crew a great), but seriously folks, company image is what they are after. Seen a sixty year old in the latest ads recently?
Someone mentioned it would cost QF money to change the bid system, well dont you think they know that if they spend that money to get rid of it, they would automatically make most of most of the seniors resign at the same time?
Those seniors, on the highest pay scales in each level? the ones with all the leave owing? The ones with countless days of sick leave at their disposal? These things are all 'on-paper' liabilities.
How cheap it would be to replace them all with year one level crew
You are harping on about the juniors wanting to get rid of the bid system, the new industrial reforms would allow the company to do it themselves... and they would benefit from it a lot more than me or anyone else of my seniority !
I read on here all the time how the company likes to 'divide and conquer' .... we do it ourselves with the seniority bid system. There are the 'haves' & the 'have nots' ... the company doesnt need to use a strategy that we do to ourselves already !
Compromise, cos the seniority bid system is looking down both barrels
And at this stage, the vast majority of those outside the top 500 will accept a compromise that still allows the seniors to have some say in what they do, but the longer nothing changes, the worse the outcome for the seniors.
Just some thoughts to ponder on the way to SFO
The other thing you dont factor into your 'wait and see' attitude is the fact that the type of people who want to fly has changed. I personally do not want to be doing this job till I am 60, it is fine and fun, but hey - to be old and bitter like the people I worked with out of SYD? nah, life is too short. So I aint willing to wait ten years for the next permanent recruitment to get some 'goods' out of this job ( neither is anyone my age flying longahul now).
It is a changed job market, I dont see this as a job-for-life. I am at uni (studying law) as well, and will move on, as will most others. I will however do the job to the best of my ability whilst I am here, and will get the most out of it as well.
The sad thing is, you dont see that I am the new flight attendant, one who will do it well, for about 5-7 years, then move on. The company sees that as well. Do you think that QF's 'youthful' image they want to portray is driven by the 60 year olds on the SFO and HNL patterns? Not that I am saying all senior crew are bad ( or even all junior crew a great), but seriously folks, company image is what they are after. Seen a sixty year old in the latest ads recently?
Someone mentioned it would cost QF money to change the bid system, well dont you think they know that if they spend that money to get rid of it, they would automatically make most of most of the seniors resign at the same time?
Those seniors, on the highest pay scales in each level? the ones with all the leave owing? The ones with countless days of sick leave at their disposal? These things are all 'on-paper' liabilities.
How cheap it would be to replace them all with year one level crew
You are harping on about the juniors wanting to get rid of the bid system, the new industrial reforms would allow the company to do it themselves... and they would benefit from it a lot more than me or anyone else of my seniority !
I read on here all the time how the company likes to 'divide and conquer' .... we do it ourselves with the seniority bid system. There are the 'haves' & the 'have nots' ... the company doesnt need to use a strategy that we do to ourselves already !
Compromise, cos the seniority bid system is looking down both barrels
And at this stage, the vast majority of those outside the top 500 will accept a compromise that still allows the seniors to have some say in what they do, but the longer nothing changes, the worse the outcome for the seniors.Just some thoughts to ponder on the way to SFO
Join Date: May 2005
Location: feet on the ground
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
twiggs
as i said befoe there havent been any external syd lh recruitment a while, nor can i see any if they can get akl based crew for a third of syd based wages (less super,etc)
. yes i have seen many changes over the years even vagely remember the sp dispute
. if you would run the business what would you do? take one f/a out sydney or 3 f/a's out of auckland. 
given that even the faaa keeps pointing out we at lh are expensive 
(instead of doing their research and find out/publish how cheap we are in comparison to our major overseas competitors), it doen't take a rocket scientist to work out were things are going. 
simon if only you were right
as far as i am concerned give me back the pre-bidding system conditions. i take any trip thrown at me as long as i get 75% stand down.
. yes i have seen many changes over the years even vagely remember the sp dispute . if you would run the business what would you do? take one f/a out sydney or 3 f/a's out of auckland. given that even the faaa keeps pointing out we at lh are expensive (instead of doing their research and find out/publish how cheap we are in comparison to our major overseas competitors), it doen't take a rocket scientist to work out were things are going. simon if only you were right
as far as i am concerned give me back the pre-bidding system conditions. i take any trip thrown at me as long as i get 75% stand down.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Elsinor
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Legalese
The bid system is not fair but it is not discriminatory.
Any new system of work allocation would have to take into account any negative impact on those with family.
So there are both negative and positive discrimination issues to be considered.
Considering those with children and other family commitments(in LH) any change to the seniority or bid system would provide little if any improvement for those who are close to the bottom.
Those who are sceptical of these points I suggest you contact your nearest barrister/solicitor for an infomed opinion.
I have done so and had these points veified.
Any new system of work allocation would have to take into account any negative impact on those with family.
So there are both negative and positive discrimination issues to be considered.
Considering those with children and other family commitments(in LH) any change to the seniority or bid system would provide little if any improvement for those who are close to the bottom.
Those who are sceptical of these points I suggest you contact your nearest barrister/solicitor for an infomed opinion.
I have done so and had these points veified.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don’t know who your solicitor is but I hope you haven’t paid him/her yet because that’s the biggest load of sh*t I’ve ever heard. The current system does not consider those who have a family and those who don’t. It simply works on years of service. News Flash! You don’t have to be senior to have a family! Any new system which is introduced to be family friendly would in itself be discriminatory as it would discriminate against those that don’t! (have a family). Also there are already various types of leave available for people with families, if those types of leave were abolished, then there would be a serious case of discrimination against those with families!
Last edited by Bad Adventures; 29th Mar 2006 at 10:28.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: MELBOURNE
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BID SYSTEM
Had to laugh at your last posts.... Bad Adventures and Hawk eye 
You are both right about travel thicknesses post. He does assume only senior crew with family responsibilities should and would be protected.... an interesting assertion, but incorrect.
Junior people have family too. It's good a debate has been initiated in this forum as suggested by Guardian1. It's interesting to see people's arguments.
Not far from anyones arguments is the fact that self interest plays a huge factor, and this is natural from both sides of the argument.
There is one factor, that cannot be dismissed and that is the operation of the bid system in the current situation of no recruitment (and twiggs its been 4 years now not 2 years since there was recruitment in L/H and similarly in S/H recruitment is basically casuals only) is highly unfair towards a significant and what now is a majority of crew.
There will be official FAAA reaction following the outcome of the challenge against the rostering provisions of the S/H EBA certification.
Nothing will be said officially for the moment so as to not prejudice in any way the proceeedings in the Commission.
For those interested, the hearing of the S/H EBA certification will be 9.30 AM,Tuesday 4th April in the Commission at 80 Williams St in Sydney.
The hearing will be a public hearing and any interested person from cabin crew ranks in either S/H or L/H can attend or from the general public can attend to witness the proceedings.
You are both right about travel thicknesses post. He does assume only senior crew with family responsibilities should and would be protected.... an interesting assertion, but incorrect.
Junior people have family too. It's good a debate has been initiated in this forum as suggested by Guardian1. It's interesting to see people's arguments.
Not far from anyones arguments is the fact that self interest plays a huge factor, and this is natural from both sides of the argument.
There is one factor, that cannot be dismissed and that is the operation of the bid system in the current situation of no recruitment (and twiggs its been 4 years now not 2 years since there was recruitment in L/H and similarly in S/H recruitment is basically casuals only) is highly unfair towards a significant and what now is a majority of crew.
There will be official FAAA reaction following the outcome of the challenge against the rostering provisions of the S/H EBA certification.
Nothing will be said officially for the moment so as to not prejudice in any way the proceeedings in the Commission.
For those interested, the hearing of the S/H EBA certification will be 9.30 AM,Tuesday 4th April in the Commission at 80 Williams St in Sydney.
The hearing will be a public hearing and any interested person from cabin crew ranks in either S/H or L/H can attend or from the general public can attend to witness the proceedings.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: feet on the ground
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
interested in the outcome
i used to be a strong supporter of the bidding system. no longer. i do have family commitments, stuck somewhere around the middle in my category and cant see any way forward as we are continuously getting marginalised in Syd lh.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by qcc2
i used to be a strong supporter of the bidding system. no longer. i do have family commitments, stuck somewhere around the middle in my category and cant see any way forward as we are continuously getting marginalised in Syd lh.
So maybe you would care to explain as you should certainly be able to get certain trips easily, giving you a much greater certainty in what you will end up getting on your roster.
Is language hindering you?
Are you aiming to high?
Maybe you just don't know how to bid? (not really your fault but just another thing the company could remedy easily)
Another point I would like to raise in regards to being patient.
Rumour has it that there has been some talk between the FAAA and the company regarding introducing a B-payscale for new employees.
Whether this is true or not, this type of situation would certainly make it more feasible to employ Australian based full time crew.
If this was to occur in the next EBA, there is no reason to think that the seniority list would not start moving again.
It is just another variable to suggest that doing away with seniority bidding at this stage is premature.
Last edited by twiggs; 30th Mar 2006 at 03:24.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: sydney
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cart el, we are pi##ing in the wind attempting to talk commonsense with many of the senior people on here (not all) about the seniority subject. They wont even look at compromise. We are better off reminding them why the bid system is now up for grabs. If only SHaul CSMs had compromised.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: feet on the ground
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
twiggs
know the bidding system very well. know my limits in the system.
language is the only stability i get in my roster . tell me what kind of trips i should be getting easily (only one position the aircraft). fact is i get lumped with lots and lots of demand days.
like the word "rumor has it". do you think the faaa would agree to employ oz based crew at A$ 20000.- pa(compairing to kiwis at NZ$ 23000.- pa., no super, easy contracts,etc). wake up, you are in denial !!!!!
know my limits in the system.language is the only stability i get in my roster
. tell me what kind of trips i should be getting easily (only one position the aircraft). fact is i get lumped with lots and lots of demand days. like the word "rumor has it". do you think the faaa would agree to employ oz based crew at A$ 20000.- pa(compairing to kiwis at NZ$ 23000.- pa., no super, easy contracts,etc). wake up, you are in denial !!!!!
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: REAL WORLD
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
from the sideline
it is hard to go past facts. qcc2 has some very valid points. qf management has to justify their bonuses (lets not forget geoff's billion dollars savings target), so the race to the bottom continuous.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by qcc2
know the bidding system very well. know my limits in the system.
language is the only stability i get in my roster . tell me what kind of trips i should be getting easily (only one position the aircraft). fact is i get lumped with lots and lots of demand days.
like the word "rumor has it". do you think the faaa would agree to employ oz based crew at A$ 20000.- pa(compairing to kiwis at NZ$ 23000.- pa., no super, easy contracts,etc). wake up, you are in denial !!!!!
know my limits in the system.language is the only stability i get in my roster
. tell me what kind of trips i should be getting easily (only one position the aircraft). fact is i get lumped with lots and lots of demand days. like the word "rumor has it". do you think the faaa would agree to employ oz based crew at A$ 20000.- pa(compairing to kiwis at NZ$ 23000.- pa., no super, easy contracts,etc). wake up, you are in denial !!!!!
you need to relax.
I am just offering possible scenarios which may or may not happen but are worth waiting for the next EBA to decide on.
The fact is there is a limit on foreign based crew and as the company expands, there will be a need for more Australian based crew.
If there was a B-payscale for new full time crew it might be just as efficient as employing temporarys or casuals.
As far as bidding goes, you are either a CSM or CSS ( you mentioned "only one position the aircraft").
You are a language speaker, (so half of your roster you get ahead of all non-language speakers)
This also means you end up with more demand days, but if you were to bid smart and bid for trips that have a lower daily average, you would have a much better chance of satisfying your demand days.
Also if you are a CSM or CSS and bidding is such a problem, drop back!
I'm sorry but you don't have my sympathy as your situation is clearly recoverable.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Bronte
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE LHR
I repeat - is the FAAA EXEC going to do anything to ensure the 200 jobs in LHR remain in Aust. crew hands - or are they going to just wash their hands of the whole enterprise?
Its 200 FULL TIME QANTAS L/H F/A JOBS W'RE TALKING ABOUT - can you boys think outside the square? The Company can't let the whole base go Pom if they are to keep the Spirit of Aust. Spin going - I'm sure they'd be prepared to negotiate - this is an example where we have to get off our industrial arses and commence negotiations rather than just reacting chidishly to the latest press release from Management.
Its 200 FULL TIME QANTAS L/H F/A JOBS W'RE TALKING ABOUT - can you boys think outside the square? The Company can't let the whole base go Pom if they are to keep the Spirit of Aust. Spin going - I'm sure they'd be prepared to negotiate - this is an example where we have to get off our industrial arses and commence negotiations rather than just reacting chidishly to the latest press release from Management.