QF Group possible Redundancy Numbers/Packages

[ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE]

Originally Posted by Arctaurus

You've answered your own question. Might be wrong, but I would have thought airlines will be more likely to use stand down provisions rather than redundancies if jobkeeper stays for aviation.

not at all, re-read my first paragraph.

QF announced stand downs about 2 weeks before job keeper was announced by the government. I think they’ll quite happily leave workers with ‘no useful work’ as they say on stand down for 12-18 months if required regardless of Jobkeeper (long haul pilots).

Still much much cheaper than redundancies.

[ozbiggles]

I’m not so sure Jobkeeper will stay, again an unknown unknown. The government just took a lot of heat for taking it off the childcare workers...are they going to want to take the pain for us well to do pilots? I know the logic of the argument, but we are talking politics. The perception of taking money off Anna Lisa 19, struggling single mum of 2, childcare worker up against Capt Buck Rodgers 35 year veteran of flying with a million dollars of super is a fight they might not want.

My feeling is funnily enough the sooner we see the borders fall, the sooner Jobkeeper will be removed (not before September). As a taxpayer I get that, for my pilot allegiance I hope not. The governments response to VA has set the example for all business, they can’t bail one sector out without opening the floodgates.

JP, bloody funny GIF, well played.

[Blueskymine]

Jobkeeper will remain while government restrictions prevent certain industries from operating.

While your example of a captain who earns big dollars on jobkeeper is interesting, there’s plenty of single mums up the back who walk the aisles, checkin staff, rampies, office staff etc etc who need the help.

So while the borders are closed, it should remain for the travel industry.

[ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE]

Originally Posted by ozbiggles

The governments response to VA has set the example for all business, they can’t bail one sector out without opening the floodgates.

On the contrary, the rhetoric from govt regarding Virgin is that they won’t bail out individual businesses and that financial support would be sector based. To quote Mr Frydenberg commenting on Virgin’s request for a bailout. “our focus has been is on providing (aviation) industry-wide support.”

With people returning to the office, the demand for childcare is increasing, hence that industry no longer needs a wage subsidy via jobkeeper. Attendance back to above 70% pre COVID levels according to Mathias Cormann

[ozbiggles]

Like I said, I know the logic but we are talking politics. I know Captain Buck doesn’t represent the vast majority of people in the industry. Who do you think the media and opposition parties will use as their example to pander to their demographic?

[Fujiroll76]

My 2 cents worth

Its clear QF are in discussions with AIPA on how they can manage a potential excess of crew moving forward. Every department and union involved within QF would be doing the exact same.

In the pilot world we are unique in the way you can’t just hire someone off the street Day 1 and start your role Day 2....unlike many middle management roles within QCC who still trump our onload priority...that’s for another day.

A recruitment stream can take from application to checked to line of approx 12 months. QF will be taking this into account when the “R” word gets thrown around.

People think they know what will happen in 12,24,36 months but in reality they can’t. This would worry QF when it comes to having / not having the flexibility that they currently have standing people up and within a few days currency is achieved and flying the line.

Now it’s no secret it’s a $$ game.

As I read on here previously. Every stood down pilot is effectively taking an 86% pay cut when you factor in AL accrual. I’m sure the company will abuse this and will be in discussions with AIPA to have this removed from the stand down provisions and effectively coasting the company $0 but still having the flexibility it currently has. A win win for QF

Retirements are set to skyrocket over the next 5 years, factor in those who will settle for early retirement in lieu of having to train onto a new fleet and those who are looking at an extended stand down and the super implications.

LWOP is already being offered and taken by a selected few. 12 months for SH and 24 months for LH has been granted.

My opinion is that the 747 RIN will occur later in the year. Training will be delayed until a time that allows for demand to reach an adequate level for training sectors.

A combination of LWOP, VR (380), Agreed Flexi line arrangements (Job share) to stand up as many as possible. This will all come after Sept as JK takes up the slack for the time being.

once JK concludes the above will be implemented with those stood down to agree to no AL accrual.

380 to be stood down indefinitely as the EA permits - No training allocations for the foreseeable future.

It’s easy to shave the bottom 300-400 pilots but carrying a small surplus will be the only way forward. Let alone having to recruit again once things pick up.

Anyway that’s my thoughts.

Have we heard what’s happening to the CEO’s pay after June 30???? Hmmm

AJ pay alone last year would cover the the entire SO 787 fleet..go figure.

Fuji

[dragon man]

The only thing I would add to that is VR for anyone over 60 regardless of fleet.

[Fujiroll76]

Originally Posted by dragon man

The only thing I would add to that is VR for anyone over 60 regardless of fleet.

I would agree - this would be a very smart move for the company moving forward over the next generation of pilots.

[JPJP]

Originally Posted by MickG0105

That's complete and utter nonsense. Furloughs in the US under the Fair Labor Standards Act is essentially the same thing as stand-downs in Australia under the Fair Work Act. You are most assuredly not made redundant when you are furloughed.

​​​​​https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fac...flsa-furloughs

Fail. Airlines are governed under the RLA (Railway Labor Act). That web page you produced may as well have been a McDonalds menu. Give ALPA a call and quote the DOL page. Should be amusing. Research the NLRB in relation to labor law and the RLA.

Originally Posted by MickG0105

Uhhhh? Yes.
Air New Zealand announces 3500 job losses due to Covid-19 pandemic
WED, MAY 20 • SOURCE: 1 NEWS
https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-...id-19-pandemic

Air New Zealand are sacking 3500 employees out of a workforce of about 10,500 - that's a third. Do you think they're getting rid of everyone other than pilots?

Ouff ! This is getting ugly to watch Mick. You stated that “a third of Air NZ pilots have been sacked”. Nothing of the sort has happened. Nor did your TV NZ webpage link mention it. You could always ask an Air NZ pilot eh ? No ? Thought not.

[Green.Dot]

Originally Posted by JPJP

Ouff ! This is getting ugly to watch Mick. You stated that “a third of Air NZ pilots have been sacked”. Nothing of the sort has happened. Nor did your TV NZ webpage link mention it. You could always ask an Air NZ pilot eh ? No ? Thought not.

Sorry I’ll take the hit, I said “a third of ANZ pilots have been sacked”. It’s closer to 25%

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/trave...t-pay-cut.html

[MickG0105]

Originally Posted by JPJP

A furlough means you have been made redundant.

You can dress it up however you like but a pilot being furloughed in the US is most assuredly not the same as a pilot being made redundant in Australia. There is no obligation to rehire someone who has been made redundant. To the contrary, in Australia, there are specific measures that restrict the practice of rehiring employees that have been made redundant.

[ozbiggles]

I’m sure the 200 hundred Tiger pilots made redundant at Virgin would like to hear your take on not being re-employed after being made redundant...

[dr dre]

Originally Posted by Fujiroll76

My opinion is that the 747 RIN will occur later in the year. Training will be delayed until a time that allows for demand to reach an adequate level for training sectors..

It’s easy to shave the bottom 300-400 pilots but carrying a small surplus will be the only way forward. Let alone having to recruit again once things pick up.

I agree with most of what you’ve written Fuji, good work.

I would say that in regards to a RIN there isn’t really anything specified anywhere that once a pilot is RIN’d to somewhere that their training has to begin within a specified time. Potentially a 747 pilot RIN’d to another fleet may be stood down waiting until all existing pilots from that fleet have been stood back up fully until their training commences.

I also wouldn’t say it’s “easy” to shave the bottom pilots off, almost all of the pilots at the bottom are on fleets that are going to be back up and running first so they will need replacements to be trained into their positions at a cost of money and time.

[ElZilcho]

Originally Posted by Green.Dot

Sorry I’ll take the hit, I said “a third of ANZ pilots have been sacked”. It’s closer to 25%

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/trave...t-pay-cut.html

We went from a list with 1209 names to one with 851, so that’s about 30% however it’s a bit more complicated than that.

Of the 300 Redundancies, ~200 were operational and ~100 were Regional Pilots on reserved numbers. They’re still with the Regionals but had to be taken off the Jet list due to Last on First off.
We also have a decent number of Pilots over 65, mostly on LWOP (some flying the A320). They’ve all been given notional Airbus Commands but we’re yet to see how many take them.

The redundancies were also reduced by 91 due to us agreeing to a temporary pay cut and others voluntarily opting for LWOP or 50% for 12+ months.

So in total we’ve lost about 30% but I’d say the actual redundancies of Pilots on the Payroll was between 15 & 20%.

[MickG0105]

Originally Posted by JPJP

You stated that “a third of Air NZ pilots have been sacked”.

No, I did not.

Originally Posted by JPJP

Nothing of the sort has happened.

Between almost 300 and 387 Air New Zealand pilots have been made redundant. That's pretty close to vaguely resembling something of the sort. It's most assuredly not 'nothing of the sort'.

Originally Posted by JPJP

You could always ask an Air NZ pilot eh ? No ? Thought not.

Or you could check with NZALPA, eh ...
https://www.nzalpa.org.nz/Media-Cent...ciation-nzalpa

Or the news, eh ...
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/business/...ose-their-jobs
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/121...-300-lose-jobs

Or you could take ElZilcho's outline of events as posted above.
​​​​​​​

[MickG0105]

Originally Posted by ozbiggles

I’m sure the 200 hundred Tiger pilots made redundant at Virgin would like to hear your take on not being re-employed after being made redundant...

The only way that they could be re-employed by Tiger or Virgin is if they repay their redundancy payouts or sit on the sidelines for a defined period or are employed into an entirely different role. Nothing to stop them being employed by a different employer other than current market conditions.

[Keg]

Originally Posted by dr dre

I agree with most of what you’ve written Fuji, good work.

I would say that in regards to a RIN there isn’t really anything specified anywhere that once a pilot is RIN’d to somewhere that their training has to begin within a specified time. Potentially a 747 pilot RIN’d to another fleet may be stood down waiting until all existing pilots from that fleet have been stood back up fully until their training commences.

I disagree.

The nominal retirement date of the 747 fleet was March next year. The RIN process should be completed prior to 31 March (in fact prior to the end of February given the notice period required for new training courses).

When the 767 RIN occurred there were a number of pilots who waited 2-4 months for their new type course. They were not stood down due to ‘no useful work’ as the training bottleneck is not of their making. The same principle applies to 747 crew from 1 April next year onward. Now a senior 747 pilot may elect to displace to the A380. If there is no ‘useful flying’ (IE, any flying) on that fleet then I agree they remained stood down.

However, if they take redeployment (or displace) to a fleet that actually is doing some flying then they should NOT remain stood down. They’ve elected to displace under the rules in place to a fleet that actually has some ‘useful work’ so should be stood up to train and then fly. Once checked out they should rotate in with the rest of the crew who are doing whatever ‘useful work’ exists.

I’d hope AIPA would take a similar stance and argue as such as strenuously as possible.

Originally Posted by dr dre

I also wouldn’t say it’s “easy” to shave the bottom pilots off, almost all of the pilots at the bottom are on fleets that are going to be back up and running first so they will need replacements to be trained into their positions at a cost of money and time.

Actually, it’s far easier than many realise. Qantas could get rid of most S/Os on the 787 and A330 and heavy crew with Captains and F/Os for the next 12-18 months. The cost? CR only as you already have enough Captains and F/Os on those fleets to cover the reduced flying and even some of the ramp up. More expensive than S/Os? Yep? Short term pain compared to multiple RINs.

I know they don’t want to do that and I hope it doesn’t come to it but let’s not pretend that it is either difficult or expensive (in the scheme of things).

[ShandywithSugar]

Delete every JQ MoU number from the Mainline list and tell the market. Done.

[hotnhigh]

Any truth that Jetconnect will be operating the Tasman services for Qf first?
If so, I’d hope every politician of every persuasion was all over “the spirit of Australia” and what it means to Australians and the Australian tax payer in light of jobkeeper payments.

[Ollie Onion]

Thats what they said at the webinar today. Paraphrasing, but along the lines of 'yes Jetconnect will be operating the Tasman' 'Groups who were previously carrying out work will likely get that work back as there is a potential increase in cost to try and transfer the work'.