Pegasus -while the faaa didn't have the balls to publicly come out and bag the setting up of the LHR base -they did in fact try to scare members from going by threatening to destroy their seniority.

so how are we to treat the 31 flyers heading north now ??
do we boo and hiss them for potentially underminng our conditions -or wish them well as the union was completely ineffective in stopping the off shoring of jobs?

personally I wish them well - some of the immature and juvenile behaviour I have witnessed from SYD based crew handing over to LHR based crew -actually beggars belief
talk about a bunch of sooks - these guys are meant to be adults -back galley legends - never bothered to go beyond R5 -but could run the company if they wanted to......absolutely pathetic - rather than pay out on a bunch of people who have taken up what they see as an opportunity -why don't these heroes vent their spleen on the union that allowed this to transpire -or else have the guts to make their feelings known to Management - the LHR crew (and there are some nice ones amongst them) are just the meat in the sandwich -but as is fast appearing on this post -many appear to be getting pissed off with SYDs attitude -and this sort of soldarity (not) will be helpful in future disputes.

I personally have no idea who signed off on the Thai base. I actually dont think it was any union official the company just did it because they could. I think what the union did from memory was negotiate some sort of cap to limit it.

I think that the FAAA bagged the !!!! out of the london base and arranged the most prolific media campaign ever seen in australia . At the end of the day not only were the public not interested ( all they want is cheap airfares and imported cheap plasma TV's) but there were about 50% of flight attendants, mostly females that were not preparedd to take any form of industrial action whatsoever.


Originally i think that as the FAAA could not regulate the conditions of the London base or stop it legally because the CAP would be gone completely, they tried to discourage crew from going and supporting the establishment of the base by giving them crew who were experienced.

Once again the difficulty arose when the domestic division of the FAAA agreed to give returming crew their seniority. THis once again undermined the position of the LOng Haul division. From memory the dilemma became when those crew return short haul crew would get seniority and long haul crew wouldnt. Once again another group of dissaffected crew within our ranks. Additionally there would be no incentive on return to Rejoin all of us in the FAAA as they would feel that the FAAA and the rest of the division had deserted them. More infighting and more ingredients in the pot of the constant round of divide and conquer.

As far as how would the company set up a union ...lets just look at what happened at AIR NZ. A current senior manager at Qantas said to the CSMS there well FARSA your union is not really looking after you as they should be . YOu as managers should be able to get a better deal out of the Company. Why dont you set up your own association and we will help you and we can negotiate directing with you and bypass your union ( FARSA).

So like selfish naieve little sheep that's what they did they formed their own union and loa and behold after they got a nice contract and fu**** over the other ranks in the process, when the contract expired the divide and conquer had worked and then they turned on the CSMs and screwed them too.

There are CSM's and F/A's in our ranks that will kill their parents to go to the orphans picnic, and think that the FAAA should be doing more for the CSM's. I personally think its a recipe for disaster for us all and i for one will do whatever i can to keep us as united as possible.

There are some extremely challenging things in the new IR laws for us all , and some of the provisions of our current EBA will no longer even be enforceable.

We are in a precarious position right now and think the key to survival is going to be flexibility more than anything else.

I think over the years we have had some good officials who have been on various teams of the union over the years and personally i think its time to stop looking backwards at who did what and aportioning blame and start looking forward and that goes for the current officials as well as past ones.

I believe its about mutual respect for each others ideas. we may not agree with the process or like it, we may not all agree with each others ideas but we have to start at least respecting peoples views as long as they are constructive

just so you know cart exchange, some of the 767s were delivered in the late 90s and the last in early 2000. Whilst their interiors are getting worn and are in need of a refit, they are a fantastic machine, they are built like a brick sh-thouse, and I would rather be on an old 767, than a new bus in terms of safety. (i'd rather the skybed in terms of comfort though).

That is true Blueloo I think the point is well made that the 767 is a strong machine but then so is a DC 3.

However, cartexchange’s point is that they are a pain for the customer

The 767 interior is a tired piece of equipment and unsuitable for modern seating and comfort as well as IFE unless you cut back on seat numbers and it should be put out to rest.

The company is showing it’s contempt towards it’s customers by operating these as well as it’s sardine configured airbus’s .

The company offered the even more tired 300 classic on the NRT flights and now the punters will have to endure 767’s until the 787 is delivered…very poor really..


PEGASUS..my recollection must have been close to the mark then about who ok'ed the Thai base.

You keep telling us that you think we should be flexible and...as well you are now telling us that the faaa did negotiate with the company in regard to the LHR base

Can you tell us then how the faaa will be pro active in dealing with the company instead of reactive 101% of the time

I'm also interested to hear that you think that the faaa mounted an effective media campaign..I'd hate to see what you consider an ineffective campaign

Blue loo
 

Yes they may be a sturdy machine from the pilots point of view but as lower lobe confirmed from a Cabin crew's point of view they are a pain for the crew on long sectors and for the passengers.
It may make it from HNL to SYD but when you have a punter sitting there for 10 hours without lights and sound it wears very thin.
The scare bus is worse, its cramped breaks down and has the worse crew rest seats.
Give me the 747-400 anytime!

That is right about the cabin crew rest on Le Bus ,I did not think you could get worse than the 767 crew rest but they certainly managed it on the Airborne Hyundai.

After what I experienced trying to get some sleep in the cabin crew rest ..what really amazed me was the tech crew rest on the airbus 504...it has to be seen to be believed....the only thing missing is a swimming pool and spa with a sundeck..

767 techies must really be p***** off with their crew rest in comparison..It is like comparing a town house to a garden shed..I wonder what the transfer list from 767 to le Bus is like knowing how tech crew compare what they have to better their own conditions..

"daddy..daddy...the boys and girls on the frog aircraft have a bigger cubbyhouse than us"

it is also probably the reason the company did not order any 777's as the crew rest onboard is supposed to be great for both cabin crew and the drivers and Darth Dixon would hate the idea of anyone actually enjoying their job so he couldn't have that...

Viva Le 747-400 and horizontal crew rest..

stand up for your award!!!!!!!!!!!
 

qf ask the pilots (with the services going to 5 a week)if they agree to reduce their 2 day slip in winter (TOD over 14 hrs)to 1 night as this would save some 1.2 million. aipa told them to go fishing.
can the faaa learn something from it? one would hope so!!!!!!!!!!!!!

thats JFK i meant.
 

well done guys all it takes is a bit of getup and go

Yeah, bunch of geniuses at AIPA.

Got tough and now we have to do a ten day extravaganza!

Thanks alot! Who's interests are you looking after again? Certainly not the people you are elected to represent. Did you think to ask people like me who will have to fly this crap! At least I will finally get to New York, probably three times a roster. If I wanted less than 26 days off in 56 I would have stayed on the 76/73.

90% of pilots want to work hard and have a quality amount of time off at home to enjoy the income that comes with the job. Thanks to these clowns we now lose another valuable day off with family.

QCC/2 be careful what you wish for, you just may get it! BTW we get 24hrs off in JFK.


Days Away: 10

4 QFA0415 PAX SYD/MEL 1:30
4 QFA0025 MEL/AKL 24:10
4 QFA0025 AKL/LAX 44:50
2 QFA0107 LAX/JFK 24:30
2 QFA0108 JFK/LAX 46:00
4 QFA0026 LAX/AKL 24:10
4 QFA0026 AKL/MEL 1:25
4 QFA0422 PAX MEL/SYD

Elapsed Time: 220:50 MPC: 55:00 Applicable Credit: 55:00

Agent Mulder, I think you will find some crew are happy with it, believe it or not some people actually enjoy time off in destinations.

Yeah, the 10%.

If you think that that pattern is time off in slip ports then good on you.

I know that I will be wreaked for days after this trip and certainly all over the place sleep wise whilst on it.

But that's my worry, not yours.

Thanks again, Mr Ed., Messiah and Rat Face.

If Aipa had accepted it, the pattern would have been SYD direct LA to start, and direct SYD on the return. Much better than going via AKL.

Personally I, and most tech crew, want the minimum time away and max time at home.

You guys have to be kidding
 

Agent Mulder and Bazzamundi…

Let me see if I understand you…

You applied for a job as a pilot flying for an overseas airline yet your not happy at being away from home!!(bad career call)

You describe the new JFK trips as a ten day extravaganza and crap as well when they don’t look bad at all ,remember you are paid to fly not to be at home .You leave on the first day and are home on the 10th so in reality you are only gone for 9 nights .If your post was released to the media and people read you describing that 10 day JFK trip as crap you would be laughed out of town.

You are lucky enough to be doing a job that you enjoy (or have you grown bored with flying now) and as you have admitted paid significantly for it as well. A lot of people ..no that’s wrong , 99.9% of people would give their right arm to be paid extremely well to do a job they enjoy and instead put up with mind numbing repetitive boredom to support their families and pay a mortgage.

You complain about getting less than 26 days off a roster yet most people who work 9 to 5 only get 16 days off in 8 weeks and some less than that.

By the sounds of it you are either a junior captain or F/O obviously on the 400 and the trip will not be as popular as the previous JFK’s probably because the overtime involved is less than the traditional direct SYD/LAX or MEL/LAX and that is one of the things that you were looking forward to.

If you are slipping for 24 hours in JFK what was the actual ambit claim or request from the company and what was the response of your new AIPA leadership?
I thought that the previous slip was only 24 hours as well and remember at least you guys are slipping in JFK.

Over the last 30 years I have heard on too many occasions about the hours limitations you guys are on and want yet now you are telling us you want to get the work all over and done with and spend most of the time at home.
One senior 400 driver told me about how great it would be to get the 777 and do 5 day FRA trips!!! “Think of the time off at home” he said…All I could think of is spending 20 hours in an aluminium tube with people complaining about the IFE not working and fights breaking out because of the time entombed in an uncomfortable seat.

Well there is a solution ..you could transfer to shorthaul and fly 737’s or take a pay cut and fly the airborne croissant and you would spend a lot more time at home.Of course it is not as glamorous or well paid but you would see more of your families.

You cannot be serious about going back to the 767’s compared with a 400..short term memory problems here Mulder…remember the hours and 2 pilot operations and tech crew rest next to a baby bassinet..

Think about how lucky you guys have it and at least your new union is not just saying yes to the company verbatim.it could be worse if you were a S/O based in Singapore for years

Lobe,

If you knew what you were talking about this exchange might be useful.

I know what I signed up for. Did I say I didn't want to go away? No.

What I am not happy about is the same amount of work could have been performed in far fewer days, giving me more tme at home.

Release it to the media. I would expect the usual ignorant responses that follow anything to do with any high income earner in Australia. It's called envy and tall poppy syndrome, and the likes of you excel at it.

I love practising my profession, who said I didn't?

I am not a 9 to 5 employee and don't wish to be. 9 to 5 employees are not awake when I am.

Previous slips in JFK were 48 and 72 hours and direct from Oz both ways.

What were the options available?

Extract from flt ops:

"In planning the patterns for the increased services, the Company has considered various options, including one-day and two-day slips in JFK. The most effective result is as follows:

�� Three services a week with a slipping pattern of two days in LAX, one day in JFK and two days in LAX.
�� Two services a week with a slipping pattern of two days in LAX, two days in JFK and two days LAX.

Retaining a minimum of a two-day slip in JFK for every service would add over $1,100,000 per year to our operating costs.

The Certified Agreement, Section 27.2.4 states that any patterns planned with a duty time in excess of 14 hours require approval by AIPA. Accordingly, AIPA’s approval was sought for the above patterns. However, in discussions over several days AIPA would not consent to any pattern with a one-day slip in JFK.

As a result, the three patterns with only one night in JFK had to be replanned with a double slip. This will apply until the commencement of the Northern Summer 2006 schedule (NS06). For the duration of NS06 (from BP243, Week 5), Qantas Networks have advised the scheduled block time for LAX-AKL services will be reduced, and the tour of duty will therefore no longer exceed 14 hours.

As per Certified Agreement, Section 27.2.4, no AIPA approval is required for these patterns. Subsequently, the three JFK services per week have been combined with the AKL-LAX patterns and are now planned with a one-day slip in JFK. This results in a ten day pattern via AKL, with the following slips: one day in AKL, two days in LAX, one day in JFK, two days in LAX and one day in AKL.

AIPA asked for a Consultative meeting, which was held on Wednesday 18 January 2006.

During the meeting, AIPA maintained their position in keeping the two-day slip in JFK on all patterns. The suggestion from the Company to introduce the new patterns involving a one-day slip in JFK, to seek operational feedback, was rejected.

Please understand that the JFK patterns via AKL are not the Company’s preferred option. We would prefer to have all the JFK flying operating via LAX direct. We are fully cognisant of the fact that crewmembers do not like lengthy patterns and would much prefer shorter, high density patterns. However, AIPA has left us with no alternative but to publish the patterns operating via AKL."

Seems pretty black and white to me.

We do operate to limitations, it's called the law. It has nothing to do with this.

I personally would love to see 5 day Londons and 5 day Frankfurts. As would most pilots with a family I suspect.

I suspect that your knowledge of the Terms and Conditions of the Singapore Basing wouldn't cover a postage stamp, so I won't even go there.

Again the baseless arrogance of some tech crew rears it’s ugly head…I loved the one of Qrew room a few years ago when some drivers wanted to equate their pay to that of a neuro-surgeon…as I said unfounded conceit

The company is not some charity or travel agency to be used for your purposes and arranging a few trips away so you can be at home as much as you want..It is an airline and a business.

Tall poppy syndrome and envy you say…..Nothing could be further from the truth.
Firstly, who said I don’t earn more than you?
Secondly, I could not stand to sit on the flight deck as you do for hours on end with little to do other than bolster each others ego

When I said 9 to 5 ’s it was not meant literally, there is an enormous amount of people who work in an office or whatever at different times of the day that are awake when you are and that only get 16 days off or less in an 8 week period and would be absolutely stoked to get anywhere near 26 days off but then your tech crew.

The main point of my post was that while you are spitting the dummy over such a horrendous 10 day trip all employees within QF are heading towards a precipice with a momentum that is gaining and we have to look at the bigger picture. In 5 years time you will probably look at these patterns and wish they were still around.

If (when) Darth Dixon undercuts you guys again as he did with J* then you might want to try and understand the rest of the deal

To do this however requires a certain degree of astuteness and foresight but then you are tech crew so I’ll forget that approach and by the way, I think you would be surprised as to what I know about the S/O base in Singapore...

""The company is not some charity or travel agency to be used for your purposes and arranging a few trips away so you can be at home as much as you want..It is an airline and a business."" Lowerlobe 2006


This cant be the same Lowerlobe that spent all of 2005 expecting the company not to run the airline as a travel agency or charity for some cabin crew, when attempting to overturn some 1974 style industrial practices???

No clearly its a different Lowerlobe .......

Geez Lobey,

Not much of a debater are you?

Your reaction is not unexpected nor uncommon from your ilk either.

You appear to contradict yourself at every turn, so when you decide what position you should take get back to me.

AIPA's demand for 48 hours slips has caused this issue.

Quote

Retaining a minimum of a two-day slip in JFK for every service would add over $1,100,000 per year to our operating costs.

Unquote

I do not agree with AIPA's position on this issue, and the patterns now constructed in accordance with their (Mr. Ed, Messiah, and Rat Face's) requirements.

I do not agree with costing the Company in excess of $1,000,000 per annum because of some ideology.

I don't care how much you earn.

I don't want your job either.

My initial response was to one of your colleagues suggesting that your FAAA should stand up like AIPA did. I offered a contrary view. All you have offered is diatribe and ignorant rubbish.

I don't care how much you know about a singapore basing, but I still bet it's not a lot.

If you are using time in the office to type your crap, GET BACK TO WORK! I hate office slackers!

PEGASUS747 …..You are being a tad obtuse here with an oversimplification..


“Not much of a debater are you?

Your reaction is not unexpected nor uncommon from your ilk either.

You appear to contradict yourself at every turn, so when you decide what position you should take get back to me.”

Mulder ..I had more of a challenge back in 3rd form debating than you could ever provide me with…your initials are not WK are they???

With the exception of 'The Agent Mulder and Lowerlobe' show...

COULD WE ALL JUST BLOODY WELL MOVE ONTO NEW AND BETTER TOPICS?

I'm sick to death of reading this thread in the vain hope that something, anything, has progressed.

"The FAAA didn't do this..."
"The company wanted us to do this..."

ALL of it related to overseas bases (again!), EBA's, etc...

ALL OF WHICH HAVE BEEN COVERED AD NAUSEAM TIME AND TIME AGAIN!

Nothing - overseas base caps, EBA, dispensations voted up, etc - ARE GOING TO CHANGE IN THE SHORT TERM! MOVE ON PEOPLE!

You don't have to like it, but denial isn't a nice place to live for the rest of your careers. I don't advocate any of what the company has done to you, as they undoubtedly are doing to the rest of us (such as maintenance).

BUT FOR PETE'S SAKE - The repetition in here, and in the last thread, is becoming MIND NUMINGLY BORING!

If you're expecting Margaret Jackson or Il Duce to read PPRUNE and take your feelings to heart, then you're mistaken.

PLEASE just MOVE ON AND TALK ABOUT OTHER THINGS. For christ sake, the 'SYD vs LHR base' diatribe was put to bed in the last locked thread...why oh why are we bringing it up again?

End of rant.

As expected, lacks substance.

Judging by the short quick response, I suspect you are watching the clock to make sure you disappear on the dot of five o'clock.

Stop using your time at work on Pprune and try doing some productive work!

Just like we do.