Attention:Qantas Longhaul Flight Attendants Accommodation

[twiggs]

Originally Posted by QFLHFA

The only thing the FAAA was concerned about was QFA, QCCA were quite happy having seniority taken from under QFA's feet in order to have an equal chance of workplace allocation.

The change that the company implemented had no effect on work position allocation for QAL crew, seniority was always going to be used.
The people that are going to be inconvenienced by the change to compliance sheet order are BKK, AKL and QCCA.
I think you will find the main reason the FAAA are contending this issue is to protect the right for those groups to choose work position on seniority, not QAL crew.

The lists provided to hotels was the only change that would affect all crew, and the only part of this dispute that affects QAL crew.

Therefore I would suggest that the FAAA are fighting for all crew in this dispute.

[Pegasus747]

The FAAA intervened because they felt that Alphabetical lists were certainly not fair share, and certainly breached the EBA for the work position selection for part 1 flight attendants and would have disadvantaged any QCCA member whose name was at the ass end of the alphabet.

The FAAA was inundated with calls from QCCA and QAL crew all wanting to get rid of the alphabetical approach.

All including QCCA members wanting recognition of their start date without exception, but QCCA were happy to have something other than alphabetical if they couldnt have seniority.

A380 is the place to go if you want no seniority. All crew will be treated exactly the same and have the same work rules.

All work positions will be pre-allocated. for the QCCA crew that are happy with that there will be hundreds of positions for them to apply for on A380.

All crew will be equal there so there shouldnt been any complaining over there. Sounds like utopia doesnt it lol

[QFLHFA]

Twigg, who said that it wasn't for the worksheet? ReRead the email headline.

What is the final outcome anyway?

[Pegasus747]

the company's irrational decision to play with worksheets and compliance sheets,. hotel allocation and the chain of command was as a result of "dogma" read the FAAA newsletter.

[veronica]

I hate to tell you all that I told you so, but "I told you so!".

Friction between QF Crew and QCCA crew was always going to occur because of the introduction of the B Scale and inferior conditions by the LHCC as a result of agreeing to a poor EBA.

Now very soon after the introduction of the QCCA crew (who I love flying with because they're all fresh and keen, unlike others!), the %#* is beginning to hit the fan. Alphabetical lists, hotel rooms, crew taking others rooms. All minor stuff. Can you imagine what a bunfight between the two groups there will be when something serious actually arises (if this is anything to go by)

The beginning of the end for unity and all one group.

Playing right into QF's hands: and you guys weren't able to see it when they delivered the EBA up to you. Take the money and run, and now the consequences are beginning to bite.

[roamingwolf]

veronica.so for the millionth time what do you reckon the union should have triedto get in the eba?

This bunfight started with the kiwi crew getting upset about rooms they get and the company jumping on it to get rid of seniority.The company have always wanted to get rid of seniority and would use and reason to do that.

Its easy to have a go at someone when they decide something.So why don't you tell us what you reckon the union should have done?

[Bla_Bla]

dear VERONICA
in regards to ur comment: "
"Playing right into QF's hands: and you guys weren't able to see it when they delivered the EBA up to you. Take the money and run, and now the consequences are beginning to bite."
COULDNT AGREE MORE ! ITS JUST THE BEGINING!!!

and ROAMINGWOLF
the answer to ur question"
"So why don't you tell us what you reckon the union should have done?"
".
my answer to that is that they should have fought for all new crew to be employed under the same conditions as u r. AT ALL COSTS. they keep on telling us ( management and FAAA ) that we dont want to create the culture of us and them. what a joke. when i heard michael saying that right in fronnt of us i couldnt help myself but laugh. out loud in fact. he looked at me as if he wanted to shoot me. am sure he didnt like but so what ? we all new this was going to happen.and i tell u what, and i have posted that before... not sure if i will be around till the next EBA. coping with 130hrs of SH flying per mth easy as... but 120hrs of LH flying per mth? not sure how long i will last. and not only that. most of these kids are not here for the long run. thats y most of us them do not care about seniority and how high up ur room is. just ask around.
those senior ladies with 20, 25 and 30 + years with a beautiful career are nothing but a species sooon to be extinct.... gonne were the days that once u got a job as a FA u would hang on to it. gonne.
so as veronica said take the money and run.
it makes me laugh when is hear QAL crew questioning if what u have on ur roster is right and fair? r u serious ? didnt u vote for this ? how hypocritical!

and one last thing;
when QFLHFA says:
"Seriously, if the union wants to keep QCCA members I suggest they think of something very fast."

agree 110% as per my threads #21 #24 #31.
union officials should be taking a very close look at all this. otherwise like those senior ladies mentioned above, the FAAA will also be at the berge of extinction.

[twiggs]

Originally Posted by Bla_Bla

my answer to that is that they should have fought for all new crew to be employed under the same conditions as u r. AT ALL COSTS.

You don't seem to understand that for the past 5 or so years, NO new long haul crew have been employed because they would have been employed on the same conditions as us.

The only way new crew would be employed on the same conditions as us is if we agreed to reduce our conditions to QCCA level.

Is this the "AT ALL COSTS" that you are talking about?

[roamingwolf]

my answer to that is that they should have fought for all new crew to be employed under the same conditions as u r. AT ALL COSTS.

Bla_Bla,mate thats easy to say but getting it is something else.
You say "at all costs" so what if the company did not offer any cabin crew jobs in Australia and gave them all to people from OS.
Jetstar have just done that and are bringing pilots in from OS and you reckon the company would not do any different with cabin crew?
veronica has said time and time that we should not have done it but the real problem is not what we should have done but how weshould have got anything different.
how do you know the company would budge,look at the probs the ginger beers are having.
Do you think the company would hire more crew on Aust l/h pay when they have mam crew flying s/h for a lot less and l/h bases in akl and bkk earning a lot less.
Dixon threw the dice a long time ago and we had bu$$#@ all choice because others had already accepted the deal.
I reckon the union should look at a deal for new crew paying less than we do for union rep.I don't reckon you guys should pay what we are cause you earn a lot less and thats fair.But I reckon if we are going to have a shot at stopping the company from steam rolling all of us then mate we have to work together.

But thinking about this what would you new guys and girls do if at the next eba the company said they wanted a 'C' pay which is lower than what 'B' pay is?
the trickis that the company tells you that if you don't go along with the deal they will start up bases all over the place and you guys will end up loosing a lot of your flying.

Would you fight it at all costs Bla_Bla and risk your job?

I can see the company chucking a hissy fit to the government over the price of fuel and how tough they are having it with sia and emirates .
Then the government let them bring cabin crew in on 457 visa's just like Jetstar are going to do with pilots.
If you don't think Dixon would try then you must believe in the tooth fairy too.

[Bla_Bla]

dear roamingwolf

valid points guys. my suggestion is now deal with the consequences.
and to answer ur question:
"Would you fight it at all costs Bla_Bla and risk your job?"

I would. The company had it too easy if u ask me. and im sorry u guys sold yourselves very cheap. ( my opinion !!! ).
if i could turn back time i would have stayed as a MAM casual. unfortunatelly i cant go back. was making far more money back than. yeah no staff travel. and so what ? waisting my precious holiday time around airports, getting bumped off flights and begging ground staff for a seat ? sorry. not for me. much rather pay for a confimred seat. and for not having holiday pay. i always had enough saved up for it.
I would love to find out the percentage of QCCA that wil last till the next EBA.
Most of us are not here for the long run. thast y we dont take up expensive FAAA membership fees and we dont care whats gonna happen in 5 years time.
just ask out online what those 18, 19 and 20 yo are gonna be doing in 4 years time ?
u guys got what may have seen at the time a good deal. time will tell.
thats how i c it. some may say its a pessimistic view i say its realistic.
A crew member told me the other day: " they wont pay me enough so i will just lazy around i wont be here for ever. "
19yo fresh out of school. do u think he will pay expensive union fees to fight for something that he doesnt care ? do u think he cares if he is on the 11th or the 45th floor? all he cares is where hes gonna get drunk tonight.

[Pegasus747]

You see thats the problem. If they dont joing the union then the union will not fight to improve conditions. THey will certainly fight to keep the conditions and improve the conditions of members.

so if the QCCA crew decide not to be members then they will have no say whatsoever in negotiations as the company only deal with the FAAA. You can only vote for FAAA officials or run for office if you are a member.

So if you want to keep things the way they currently are at QCCA then dont join the FAAA. Its that simple.

And if you think that by not being members that somehow Qantas will negotiate with you seperately from the FAAA you are kidding yourself. It has never happened and will never happen.

My advice join the FAAA voice your concerns advice your elected officials what you want, attend meetings and be prepared to act when called upon to do so.

Otherwise just post your whinges on hear where it falls on the ears of those that can do nothing to help you except agree or disagree with you.

[Bla_Bla]

will say here once again for the last time.
i have always been pro union but i can not justify $625 per year. half of that i would certainly consider. its a money issue here. im getting paid far less than QAL crew so y should I b slashed with such a high membership fee? its a lot of food in my ever empty pantry.
sorry. and trust me. I AM NOT ALONE ON THAT ONE. JUST ASK OUT ONLINE AND FIND OUT YOURSELF.
FAAA should come up with a good deal for QCCA FA's otherwise they wont have any members . simple as that.
im not saying its eveybody but certainly the vast majority. and we know that numbers do count. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[veronica]

roaming, you know what I have suggested we do.

But now look to the future, the EBA has been signed. Let the %#*#fight begin now. People are inherently greedy. The QCCA people will fight. The honeymoon period where the world is all nice and fluffy, is over. The first few months of QCCA crew coming in was great. Now reality will start to bite. B Scales have and will make a difference, so don't bitch and moan when things like alphabetical lists and hotel rooms etc start to happen. QCCA crew will not lie down (nor should they), and we want what we have had for the last million years. The Company try to fracture us and they are succeeding. They love it.

Like I said previously, I told you so. This EBA was designed to fracture and cause disunity. They knew we would sign it because we're greedy. Now the chickens are coming home to roost. I agree with Bla.

These are only minor issues that are causing division. Can you imagine when something major comes up in the future. God, help us all.

Unity, yeah right.

[Bla_Bla]

very well said veronica

it really is just the begning.
just the begning.
and when u say:
"They knew we would sign it because we're greedy."

how accurate!

[Pegasus747]

My health insurance is the same cost per annum and Kerry Stokes who is a multi millionaire.

If QCCA crew want lower fees however i think thats a good point to consider and they should raise it directly with the FAAA and put a case rather than on here

[roamingwolf]

posted by veronica:roaming, you know what I have suggested we do.

No veronica you never hve.You have said we should not have voted yes to the eba but you have never told us how we could have got anything better.Thats the difference,you complain all the time but you have not told us HOW we could have got the company to offer any more.

But thinking about it now I reckon we should have voted No because then:
Veronica and the rest of s/h would not be upset because they were out manouvered.
new crew like bla bla and other qcca could not complain because they would not have a job in l/h to complain about on any pay scale.
The company could have set up bases in Mumbai,singapore,HKG and anywhere else where the crew would be cheap as chips.
We could just keep flying and not listen to veronica and bla bla go on about how greedy we are.

but that wouldn't happen because Dixon would be bringing foreign crew in on 457 visa's and they would be complaining about how little they get.

I have to admit I'm laughing about the fact that some s/h crew voted to take our flying by agreeing to be cheaper.
Then they want to join l/h as qcca crew and are upset that they don't get as much as us.
face it guys you started it by accepting mam conditions and now the whole thing is like a snow ball and getting bigger by the day but you have to remember that you started it and you reckon we are greedy

listening to veronica and others is like listening to my kids in the car complaining and asking 'are we there yet' 'were bored' 'were not having any fun'

But I don't go along with Pegasus because kerry stokes and Peg do not do the same job but for different pay.
if the newbies do the same job but for less then they shouldn't have to pay the same union fees.
Thats fair and I have no problem with that but guys how many times do we have to tell you if we didn't vote for a b scale you guys wouldn't have jobs to complain about.

[jet.jackson]

Trolls..Zeronica et al

Why respond to these goof ups?
They are not very bright,have no imagination,are bitter and are poorly educated

[Qantart]

Peg,

Other union memberships are based on income of the employee groups.... Therefore the FAAA has the ability to create a union membership fee based on pay scales......

As for QCCA crew approaching the FAAA to inform them of this, give me a break... The FAAA reps ALL read this forum and totally aware how crew feel about this.... Perhaps you and your other FAAA reps can raise it as a topic for discussion.

[mrpaxing]

here is the scenario

next time i get a clause 11 i will ask the union to get me a QC. if the same thing happens to a QCCA union member i want him to get a fresh lawyer out of school as they would be a lot cheaper. what a stupid argument to have 2 sets of union fees. As has been said it is tax deductable so around 325.- is too much? thats less then 1% of your income? thats a glass of wine in the local pub per week. get real,get a life or leave!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[cartexchange]

you are so right Mr Paxing, if they want to pay less for fees then they also get less for representation.
After all i'm sure they have heard the saying " you get what you pay for"