Bad Hat Harry

Everyone gets to keep their job
If you dont like working on the jumbo...bid around it.
BTW is the Black Widow still employed?

twiggs

Reducing crew on an aircraft creates an even greater surplus.
It is only being done because of lower than normal forward bookings.
On flights that are full, an extra crew member will be added on a case by case basis.
There is some good news, no more bar services in economy!

Pegasus747

Part time at 50% is available on demand for all ranks all bases as a result of the EBA. 75% rosters are also on offer in all bases including BNE and MEL from next BP.

those crew that dont have LSL plans in place will also be given LSL. Most of the crew that came over from SH will soon be getting their LSL awarded to them as many have months in place and most dont have leave burn plans like the majority of LH crew.

Some crew have suggested that all crew take a reduced divisor however i dont believe that its a suggestion that would be supported by the majority. And it doesnt appear that its necessary at this stage.

I think that the most important thing is that we do what's necessary to reduce the risk of compulsory redundancy. Its last on first off, and despite some of the callousness expressed here from time to time i dont believe any of us want to see the new kids lose their jobs .

I have a lot of faith in the vast majority of crew that they will pull out all stops to work together to avoid CR.

I think middle management have far more to fear with the downturn than LH cabin crew. My experience is that whenever there is a downturn its middle management that tend to have less job security.

CR is something we have not known among crew for 20 years and even then the ones that were put off were employed again within 6 months.

I would suggest that many people are pulling out all stops to avoid CR and if a temporary de-crewing achieves that i think as unpalatable as it is we have to work through it

thousands of people are actually losing their jobs and their livlihoods. We should consider ourselves fortunate that we have never faced that and may yet escape it if we are pragmatic

RedTBar

Pegasus,I don't think reducing the divisor would be a problem with the majority of crew as long as the union publishes these ideas and tells everyone the pro's and cons and not just the points the union likes us to see.

After tax, the take home pay difference would be very little and with the divisor spread over 56 days.I think most crew would see the benefit and if it stops the company from reducing the crew complement then it's far better.Like I said before once the company has taken away the crew member it will almost take an act of God to get them to bring them back.Did the union suggest this or anything else as an alternative to reducing the crew?

I don't care what really happens with management,all I care about is the impact on crew and let's face it,management don't stand up for us when we get conditions reduced.

flyergirl

Interestingly, all my upcoming flights still have 16 crew on them...will they take a crew member off before the flight?? The premium loads are, some ok, some bad, some full....?

flitegirl

some of mine have been changed from 16 to 15 but others have stayed with 16

Bla_Bla

how will they determine 16 or 15 ?
we all know that things happen/change at the drop of a hat

its gonna be a nightmare

anyone knows anything official to clarify that ?

have not found anything

prunezeuss

I have made two posts.
Both deleted.
Why?
If I am to learn form my mistakes I need to know what the mistakes are.

A_B_P

If the pattern is already allocated as 16 crew complement will they replace a crew member if one goes sick or leave it at 15?

flitegirl

Bla Bla and A B P - both good points to bring up. I guess we will see as we get further through the roster. I note now all my pattern codes bar one have changed

"Creation Reason: adjust crew comp. 1cfa removed from pttn" is now stated on all of these patterns

Shazz-zaam

Just wondering about the actual cost saving.
Please someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Since the crewing level has been reduced by one and the rosters are already out, the dropped crew member would therefore be pay protected so regardless they would still have to be paid for the trip that was dropped.
Also,since operations have already got crew allocated on reserve, there is going to be excess crew available, so chances of crew getting a trip on pay protection is going to be less or close to nil.
Besides hotel allowances,since accomodation is already paid for via contracts, the pay protected crew will still be paid PAY PROTECTION.
Any cost savings will not occur until the NEXT bid period.
So why bother taking a crew member off now as there is no cost benefit.
It should start at the next bid period, not now.
Can anyone else see the logic, or is management in panic mode?

jungle juice

Shazz-zaam,The company does tend to act on impulse and then change their minds a few hours later.However,in this case I think they have been very clever.
As TBar said once we have given up the crew member a precedent has been made and they will do it again and again whenever they like."Sorry crew,We know we have made a huge profit but there is the usual slow down in forward bookings after Christmas so we will be reducing the crew by one on selected flights.
They have never replaced the crew they took off last time and given half a chance will keep on doing this latest trick to reduce the crew number.

Did the union explore all possibilities before agreeing to reduce the crew number or did they blink first in the latest game of chicken.

Also what happens if the first sector out of Sydney is light and continues to be for the next one as well but the return flights are full as the proverbial public school.Will they pax a crew member up to Singapore or LAX to make up the numbers?

I think agreeing to a lowering of the divisor during this economic mess would have been a better option but we all know the company has more far reaching objectives.

obira

The company does not do this though. It constructs rosters in the range from the divisor to the Company maximum hours which is only half the range stipulated above. By making us bid to the divisor they have changed the range. You could argue that forcing us to bid for more hours than the EBA says creates a completely unnecessary surplus and this practice should be abandoned. Surely this is a reasonable measure which must be taken before more drastic changes.

obira

Bla_Bla

is that available to QCCA ? or only employees under part 1 ?

flyergirl

part 1 only, who are not on the A380.

ditch handle

Can anyone deny or confirm the rumour that only Australian based crew are operating this aircraft type, one down?

flyergirl

no not true. To clarify (and these are not my words), if the loads are 95% or more in the premium classes then the 16th crew member will be added. BUT this is not written anywhere....interesting....nothing to do with oz based or not.

twiggs

I reckon this rumour could be true, but we will have to wait and see and count how many London based crew are on each 744 flight and whether there are any done out of London with 15.
There was a rumour that when we previously had 15 before premium economy was introduced, that Melbourne base always operated with 16.
Any Melbourne basers care to confirm or deny that one?

indamiddle

QF9/10 MEL/SIN/MEL. think it started early last year, was due to 'service delivery issues'. i have no idea what it/they was/were. don't know if crew numbers on these sectors will be changed.

lowerlobe

Well...If it is true ,it's very sad that the company would think of money before service....

In that regard I would be surprised if the company did it...but then again ....Nah we all know who we're talking about here.

Or is it that Twiggs is developing a sense of humour and irony with her statement?