Qantas

The AFAP Negotiating Team met with Jetstar representatives on 20–21 August to continue discussions on the Enterprise Agreement (EA).

Representing the AFAP were pilot representatives Chris Gibson, Dom Corcoran, Ben Bollen, Paul Hogan, Dan Blakemore and Jake Gainger, supported by Senior Industrial/Legal staff Deanna Cain, Patrick Larkins and Andrew Molnar. Rosie Helbig and Jo Parker also joined the meeting for the discussions around the AFAP claims for improved carer arrangements/provisions.

Jetstar was represented by Tyrone Simes (Chief Pilot), Michael Porch (Senior Manager Flying Operations), Leah Everton (Senior Manager Operational Insights & Strategy), Tim Faulkner (Employee Relations Manager - Flying Operations) and Vera Gorgievski (National Operations Advisor).

Improved Carer’s Provisions

A major focus of this bargaining round was the AFAP claims for improved carer provisions (see AFAP claims). Having pilots with direct experience working under the existing carer arrangements introduced in 2022 (Jo and Rosie) present in the room was invaluable. They provided first-hand insight into the challenges faced by carers and the improvements that would make a meaningful difference.

The AFAP negotiating team is fully supportive of pursuing improvements that recognise the unique challenges carers face in a 24/7, unpredictable, and dynamic operating environment. At the same time, we recognise the need to balance these improvements with the interests of the broader pilot group.

We are also mindful that many of the claims sought by carers (for example, fixed weekend days off) are equally desirable to other pilots. In a collective agreement, we must ensure fair and balanced outcomes for all members.

General Carer’s Claims

• Definition of Limited Overnights (no more than 4 nights out of base per roster, including STB callout)

The company has agreed to include a definition of “Limited Overnights” in the EA (currently, pilots can nominate a preference for limited overnights, but this is not formally defined). This definition would apply at the roster build stage. However, Jetstar is maintaining that it must retain operational flexibility to assign overnights to carers in the live roster – for example, off an STB/RAS day or in the event of disruption or displacement.

The company also insists the definition should be tailored to the size and nature of flying in each base, with larger bases such as SYD and MEL (where more single-day trips are available) having a lower limit than smaller bases.

Some frustration was expressed with this tailored approach, noting that the needs of substantive primary carers are the same regardless of base size, and should not be given lesser weight simply because a pilot is based at a smaller base. Concerns were also raised about carers in smaller bases being rostered on out-of-base multi-day trips to cover shortages elsewhere. This practice runs directly counter to the stated objective of limiting overnights for carers.

Jetstar will continue to explore limits on multi-day trips that can be assigned to carers.

• Day of Ops Disruption Clause for Primary Caregivers – no unscheduled overnights where possible

In the case of unscheduled overnights for primary carers, the company is open to considering EA wording that would require crewing to explore and utilise alternative options. However, Jetstar’s position remains that this must ultimately be subject to operational requirements and cannot be framed as an absolute right. The company also cautioned that then having to include wording such as “best endeavours” or “where possible” may create unrealistic expectations and could lead to further frustration.

The AFAP has undertaken to draft wording that provides clearer guidance and criteria for when crewing should seek to re-crew a flight with another pilot, including using a WDO where appropriate, in order to avoid assigning an unscheduled overnight to a carer.

• Ability to nominate non-consecutive FDOs

Jetstar has rejected this claim on the basis that non-consecutive Fixed Days Off would significantly restrict roster optimisation and reduce the Company’s ability to allocate flying efficiently.

The Company explained that where a pilot nominates non-consecutive FDOs, the Jeppesen optimiser tends to assign mostly day-return duties with few or no multi-day trips. This in turn shifts a greater share of multi-day tours onto the remaining pilots in the cohort, thereby lowering bid satisfaction for those whose preference is day-return flying.

CFL Provisions

At the meeting, there was productive discussion on the CFL framework moving forward. Both parties acknowledged that the current EA provisions do not reflect how CFL is actually being applied in practice. In particular, the majority of pilots on CFL have indicated a preference for more flexible arrangements, rather than the fixed six-month roster pattern (with fixed work and non-work days) that was originally negotiated into the EA.

We are now exploring the option of prescribing three different CFL patterns in the EA for pilots to choose from:

• 6-month fixed pattern encompassing 3 FDO p/w which is the current CFL arrangement in the EA and is particularly useful for carers with pre-primary children who require maximum predictability to plan childcare arrangements.
• 0–2 FDO Monthly Pattern which would allow carers to lock in 0, 1, or 2 fixed weekdays off each month and then utilise JBIDs and/or Star Days to secure other preferred days off. The intention is to provide greater flexibility for pilots with school-aged children, where weekday predictability is less critical, by enabling them to use JBIDs to target single weekend days, full weekends off, or ad hoc weekday activities.
• Block of 7 Consecutive DFDs (no fixed FDOs) Monthly pattern which would essentially be the “flexi-line” style CFL arrangement to better cater for carers with older school age children as it would ensure at least one weekend off per month or pilots with shared care or custody arrangements.

Other CFL claims discussed were:

• Increased availability (%) and access to CFL (all school-aged children)

Jetstar has acknowledged that the current 2% floor on CFL needs to be increased if the company is serious about attracting more women pilots and positioning itself as an employer of choice. However, it has not yet committed to a specific number. The final figure will depend on where things land in relation to overall part-time availability, including TTR.

The company is also open to expanding eligibility beyond primary school-aged children but indicated it is unlikely to extend this up to 18 years of age. Instead, Jetstar suggested a more appropriate upper limit would be 15–16 years. Access would remain subject to the existing order of priority, which would be updated to incorporate all older school age children. Both parties acknowledge that an order of priority is essential where access is limited.

• Access for carers returning from parental leave / transitioning to CFL (3 months’ notice)

Jetstar acknowledged that the current annual application process, requiring pilots to apply by September for the following calendar year, can disadvantage those returning from parental leave. For example, a pilot returning from maternity leave in December could be prevented from accessing CFL for over 12 months. The company agreed that there should be a process allowing pilots returning from parental leave to apply outside the annual cycle, provided they give sufficient notice.

• Ability to nominate 1 weekend FDO in CFL pattern

The company has rejected all claims for carers to be granted FDOs on weekend days, citing the impact this would have on other pilots.

However, the AFAP is pursuing a claim for a minimum of one weekend off per month (notwithstanding clause 46.7) for all pilots, which would go some way toward addressing the pain points raised by carers. In addition, consideration is being given to increasing the number of Star Days.

• Ability to remain on CFL until child/children finish primary school.

Given that Jetstar restrict the number of pilots who can access CFL, access will be subject to an order of priority. Jetstar has stated it is necessary to validate the eligibility of all pilots on CFL to ensure they continue to meet the requirement of being a substantive primary carer. For this reason, the company wishes to maintain an annual application process.

We acknowledge that validating eligibility and ensuring ongoing compliance means that some form of annual application or review process is likely to be unavoidable.

Part Time Proposal

Jetstar presented a comprehensive part-time proposal to replace the existing VFL arrangements. The proposal was based on a traditional 75% part-time model with pro-rata entitlements, and also included a separate part-time 50%Transition to Retirement arrangement available on a permanent basis for pilots aged 55 and over.

While Jetstar indicated a willingness to increase part-time availability beyond the current 10%, it has not confirmed to what level. Importantly, the company is proposing that the floor/cap be resource-group specific rather than a percentage of the total pilot group (as per the current agreement). Based on the existing breakdown of VFL pilots, this approach could result in the captain resource groups being oversubscribed and the first officer resource groups undersubscribed, effectively constraining the total number of pilots who can access part-time.

Jetstar also proposed an annualised application process under which priority would be given to pilots with a “right” under the Fair Work Act (section 65) to request a Flexible Working Arrangement (FWA)., including:

• A pregnant pilot
• A pilot who is a carer (within the meaning of the Carer Recognition Act 2010)
• A pilot with a disability
• A pilot experiencing family or domestic violence
• A pilot who is a parent or has responsibility for the care of a school-aged (or younger) child
• A pilot aged 55 years or older

Pilots meeting one of these criteria would be ranked by seniority. Pilots seeking part-time for “lifestyle reasons” would be deprioritised, which is a significant shift away from the current order of application process.

Further concerns included:

• Pro-rata entitlements rounded down in favour of Jetstar
• The ability for the company to roster up to three STB duties onto part-time pilots
• The risk that resource group-specific limits could, in practice, reduce the overall number of pilots able to access part-time

Given these factors, the AFAP rejected Jetstar’s proposal, noting that it was not demonstrably better than the current VFL and therefore did not justify moving away from what is arguably one of the most beneficial provisions Jetstar pilots currently enjoy compared with Virgin and Qantas pilots.

DDO Claims

Increased DDOs

The AFAP is seeking an increase in Designated Days Off (DDOs) to bring Jetstar pilots into alignment with Virgin. As outlined previously, when factoring in six weeks of annual leave, Virgin pilots receive 174 days off per year, compared to 162 for Jetstar pilots.

To close this gap, Jetstar’s costing has been based on an increase to 144 DDOs annually (up from 132). This would achieve parity in total days off when combined with annual leave.

Jetstar has acknowledged that increased DDOs represent a critical lifestyle issue that must be addressed for any new agreement to be successful, and is in principle supportive of this claim. However, the company has not yet confirmed what number it is prepared to agree to and has identified three areas where it would require movement in order to progress the claim:

• Additional STB Day below 75 hours
• Restructuring WDO payments and decoupling them from annual salary
• Reintroduction of the NOFF* (prior to 2015 EA) to better manage the annual DDO requirement (currently 132) when blocks of leave are taken at the end of the calendar year.

*Note: The NOFF was previously rostered every second Friday during a two-week block of leave when Jetstar pilots could only bid for leave in two-week blocks. It was counted as a Leave Day, a Designated Day Off, and also attracted 3.6 credit hours. In 2015, the AFAP successfully negotiated a new annual leave system which allowed one-week leave allocations and removal of the NOFF.

While further discussion will be required, the AFAP does not consider any of these issues to be insurmountable obstacles to achieving an increase in days off.

Minimum of 1 weekend off per month

There was further discussion around the AFAP’s claim for a minimum of one weekend off per month. Jetstar continues to resist this claim, arguing that it would have undesirable knock-on effects for rostering, including:

• More single days off instead of blocks
• STB duties rostered at less desirable times
• Increased frequency of late-night to early-morning transitions
• Shorter rest periods between STB and subsequent duties

Jetstar also explained that in some of the smaller bases, its modelling showed that to achieve this requirement, flying would need to be shifted into other bases, resulting in increased paxing and more trips.

The company emphasised the work already done over the past 18 months through the Roster Improvement Project, warning that introducing a guaranteed weekend off each month could risk undoing those gains and see rostering “go backwards.”

As an alternative, Jetstar is currently modelling the impact of providing one weekend off in every six weeks.

Upcoming Meeting

The next bargaining meeting is scheduled for the week commencing 1 September.

This follows the release of the Qantas Group Annual Financial Results on 28 August, where Qantas is forecast to announce a significant underlying profit in the billions. We expect Jetstar will be a strong contributor to this result, in addition to its strategic role within the Group.

Armed with this information, the AFAP will be well positioned to table our base salary claim at the next meeting.

We have already had conceptual discussions with Jetstar about a remuneration structure that will enable us to reach the benchmarking expectations we set out at the beginning of bargaining (see here), from which we have not deviated. While we do not agree with Qantas’ arbitrary and unwritten wages policy that it applies across the Group, the AFAP takes a mature and strategic approach to navigating Qantas' “industrial playbook”. We are not naïve to the fact that Qantas expects productivity offsets in return. However, we are equally clear that Jetstar pilots are already highly productive, with little additional productivity to give.

It is therefore inevitable, based on our discussions, that some structural reform of existing base salaries will be required to deliver desirable remuneration outcomes for Jetstar pilots in this EA, just as has occurred in other Qantas Group companies.

The AFAP has done considerable work in the background to formulate a salary structure that extracts the most value for Jetstar pilots, both now and into the future, while avoiding the risk of it being dismissed as an ambit claim.

We will continue to keep members updated as progress is made.

If you have any questions, your pilot representatives and AFAP industrial officers Deanna Cain, Pat Larkins or Andrew Molnar are available to assist via jetstar@afap.org.au or call (03) 9928 5737.

Regards,

AFAP Jetstar Negotiating Team
Chris Gibson, Dominic Corcoran, Daniel Blakemore, Ben Bollen, Jake Gainger and Paul Hogan