AFAP Qantas Pilot Council Briefing No.19
A friendly reminder, if you are not yet a member but would like to receive our briefs, please email: membership@afap.org.au with the subject line “Please add me to the QPC mailing list”.
SH EA Negotiations
A few weeks ago we wrote to Vanessa Hudson and Catherine Walsh to outline what we view as questionable IR tactics in the lead-up to the SH EA vote that are potential obstacles for an EA resolution.
We highlighted with particular concern Nathan Safe’s letter to the AFAP inferring the Company would no longer negotiate in the event of a no vote, and the repeated misrepresentations of the last SH EA meeting the Company and the AFAP held.
Catherine replied, indicating her broad support of the Company IR team’s strategy but also affirming the Company were in fact willing to negotiate in good faith, and shortly after her reply the next SH EA meeting with the AFAP was scheduled. We appreciate Catherine’s response and involvement, and we remain as committed as ever to a negotiated outcome. Our negotiation team remains in place, ready to continue negotiations, with a clear objective outlined by our members in our latest SH EA survey.
Our focus for these continued negotiations following the no vote, remains on guaranteeing the remuneration functions used to offset the unanimously unpopular Company wages policy. Guaranteeing promised gains should be cost-neutral for the Company if their remuneration estimations are genuine. As we have outlined previously, the survey of members and non-members shows you are also cautiously open to some concessions if they are appropriately offset and unintended consequences have been sufficiently accounted for.
We have conveyed this information to the Company both in the lead-up to the ballot and after the no vote. Our message has been consistent throughout, and we believe we have taken a very reasonable position, cognisant of the positive financial position the Company is in.
In the lead up to the SH EA ballot we presented the Company with important suggested amendments to the proposed EA that we believe would ensure a yes vote. This alternative offer was based on the survey results from our second SH EA survey conducted immediately prior to the ballot. A summary of the changes contained in this alternative offer can be found in a previous briefing here.
As stated above, the primary focus of the AFAP’s proposed amendments contained within our alternative offer is to guarantee remuneration promises made by the Company while maintaining the proposed structure and positive aspects of the Company’s EA offer.
LH EA Negotiations
Our LH EA survey has closed, and we thank all pilots that participated for the overwhelming response, particularly the many hundreds of non-members who participated.
The survey results are substantial, as we had scope for significant free text inputs. These results capture very up-to-date sentiment, and will form the basis of our log of claims. We have already collated the data for the LH EA negotiating team who are meeting with the Company next week.
While our LH negotiation team was only announced officially some weeks ago, it should be noted that all members of the team have been in a LH EA working group since the start of this year.
As with SH, it is timely to remind pilots that AFAP negotiations are driven transparently by you, the members. It is for this reason we stress the importance of participating in the surveys. It is also for this reason we have only recently conducted our survey. Timely and up-to-date survey results are incredibly important in ensuring our negotiations are conducted with the most relevant data.
Over the coming months we will talk about various aspects of the LH EA and the related concerns as expressed through the survey data.
EA concern: structure of 787 and 350SFF pay and consequences of network changes
You will be aware by now that Qantas has made changes to its network for 2025. One of these is the return of the 787 on BNE-LAX, and the subsequent reduction in A330s on the same route.
This will be disappointing news for our A330 colleagues given the density, allowances and AFDPs the LAX patterns generate. However, the impact on pilots varies greatly as a consequence of these fleet changes. The A330s are operating ~13.5hr flights to LAX, not at all dissimilar to the B787 or A380 on MEL-LAX currently (~14hr). There is essentially no difference in flying (4-crew, similar FTI, etc.) but there are large differences in density and take-home pay to the individual pilot as a result of the different pay structures based on fleet. The disparity becomes most evident when the EA10 A350SFF is included in the comparison.
LAX routes offer a good comparison as all LH fleets fly to that destination from the east coast. For what is essentially the exact same flying, the difference in workload and AFDPs is clearly visible:
While the 787’s lower MGH broadly makes up for the fewer trip credits (due to the removal of one-third night credits 4-crew), the same cannot be said for the A350. An important reminder here is that night credits are not a take-home pay function, rather a function that affects how often a pilot goes to work to compensate against the negative consequences of night shift work (8pm to 8am).
The AFAP survey data clearly shows pilots’ requirement that down-side (“worst case”) rostering scenarios be mitigated when it comes to pilot pay and conditions. There is no doubt that the 787 pay structure is better financially for pilots on medium-haul flying (less than 10 hour), compared to, for example, the A330. However, a quick perusal of the 787 patterns shows: AKL-JFK, CDG, DFW, HNL, LAX, LHR, SCL and SFO. These are not medium-haul routes. Indeed, they are some of the longest routes in the world, but unlike the A330 and A380, they attract no premium pay.
Reviewing the LAX comparison, you will see pilots do not share equivalent remuneration when flying essentially the same routes on similarly sized aircraft. The causes of this are the vastly different pay structures that made their way into the EA in EA9 and EA10. This has been a topic of discussion in the context of the “same job, same pay” legislation, which unfortunately is not available to LH pilots in this example as the EA9 and 10 changes were made within our EA and are based on employees with the same employing entity. The resolution of these issues is therefore achieved through negotiating changes in a new EA.
The 787 changes in EA9 (2015) were beneficial for 3-crew medium-haul flying but failed to “protect” long-haul and ultra-long-haul flying (the vast majority of the 787 flying). The A350 changes in EA10 in 2020 further failed to mitigate for fatiguing long-haul and ultra-long-haul flying. Indeed, as you can see from the table above, an A350 pilot will have to work 18% harder than an A330 pilot on the same (or similar) route to achieve MGH/divisor. This makes little sense given the advertised range of both the 787 (at the time) and the A350 now. AFAP survey data shows pilots support several different ways to address these issues.
Disappointingly, new SOs have fared the worst from EA9 and EA10. Since 2015, all new 787 SOs had their pay lowered against the long-standing fixed percentage of Captain pay as a result of changes voted up in EA9. This was then further degraded when the pilots endorsed EA10 in 2020 as the following table shows:
All-in-all, pilots now find themselves in a situation where other pilots under the “same” agreement, flying essentially the same routes (indeed, often sitting next to each other on the same flight-deck and in the same rank) are on vastly different conditions for the same work (in this example, east coast Australia to LAX). The survey results demonstrate pilots almost unanimously do not support these B and C scales. This is certainly worth keeping in mind as we continue our LH EA discussions with Qantas.
Union collaboration
We have noted some commentary within the pilot group suggesting that the AFAP and AIPA should work together in some format. The QPC are already collaborating with AIPA on non-industrial issues such as safety and technical (S&T) through AUSALPA (https://www.ausalpa.org.au/) and welfare. We are also not opposed to future dialogue in relation to EA negotiations regarding matters that will benefit the broader mainline pilot group.
The AFAP remains strongly committed to a transparent negotiation process, with none of the team or the QPC signing NDAs, and the team employing the industry standard ‘log of claims’ approach to negotiations. This allows for visibility by you, the membership, on what is being negotiated and where any Company proposed offsets are being suggested. The QPC have also made commitments to not take up management roles or new training roles within a significant period of time following their elected tenure.
The QPC aims to keep our focus on dispute resolution with the Company, and representing your interests in dealing with the Company. We believe in the services and the depth of experience and dedication of our staff and we will always promote the benefits of AFAP membership. We will continue to keep our energy and focus on our members and their interests, as we believe that friction between your chosen representative bodies does not serve the broader pilots best interests.
AFAP Welfare
AFAP has operated a successful welfare program for many decades, helping countless pilots across the entire Australian aviation industry. We are very proud of the significant and important work carried out by our welfare team and their long-standing and proven practices. Our member assistance program (MAP) provides access to professional assistance from psychologists covering a range of issues. Confidential sessions can be by phone, online or, depending on your location, in person. Four free sessions are available per issue. If required, there may be provision for additional sessions.
This service can help to resolve problems or issues causing you or your family concern, including:
- Stress and anxiety
- Relationship difficulties and family issues
- Grief and loss
- Change in career/retirement
- Trauma
- Interpersonal conflict
- Alcohol and drug issues
- Gambling worries
- Financial or legal pressures
How do I access the AFAP MAP?
To speak to a qualified psychologist, free call 1300 307 912 (Australia) or +618 9388 9000 (from outside Australia).
For any enquiries regarding matters at Qantas please contact any of us or the AFAP legal and industrial team of Senior Legal/ Industrial Officer Pat Larkins (patrick@afap.org.au), Senior Industrial Officer Chris Aikens (chris@afap.org.au), or Executive Director Simon Lutton (simon@afap.org.au).
Regards,
AFAP Qantas Pilot Council
Michael Egan - Chair
Mark Gilmour - Vice- Chair
Daniel Kobeleff - Secretary
Michael Armessen - Committee Member
David LaPorte - Committee Member
Josh Chalmers - Committee Member
Rob Close - Committee Member