AFAP QPC Briefing #4
Happy Friday everyone,
Fear of loss of flying
Threats, fear and conditioning are a recognised and common strategy utilised by companies during EA negotiations.
We have all become accustomed to the regular use of Company positions that could be perceived as threats and conditioning to influence EA negotiations. Data from our SHEA survey overwhelmingly demonstrates that this has worn thin. Such positions appear to have been utilised by the Company with the ‘business case’ for 787s, Project Sunrise, and most recently with the SH variation.
It is abundantly clear that regardless of the Company's past representations to ‘secure flying’ in return for ‘efficiencies’, very little is binding, and the business continues on its trajectory despite representations made.
It is also clear that the ideology of ‘secure the flying, then improve the pay and conditions’ is an exercise in hope at best. Despite enormous ‘efficiency gains’ negotiated by the Company (read pilot sacrifices), subsidiary flying continues to expand at what could appear to be the expense of mainline flying.
Conditioning
Just as the use of threats during any negotiation is predictable, so to is the use of conditioning. The two often go hand in hand.
Conditioning, in the context of a negotiation, is a method of manipulation utilised to manage the other party's expectations, and manufacture a psychological limit to the negotiated outcome (the desired outcome). Often a party will signal a warning, threat or condition, combined with types of reinforcement to evoke a desired response or outcome.
In past EA negotiations, the Company has:
- Signalled a potential loss of flying.
- Reinforced such a signal with a position such as poor economic conditions, high fuel prices, strong competition etc.
- Offset the signal by making representations such as access to more flying if ‘efficiencies’ associated with a business case are met (the desired outcome).
We believe such negotiation methods have artificially conditioned pilots to accept EA sacrifices and/or limit or set low expectations for improvements to EA terms and conditions, and evoked a collective sense of devaluation.
We believe it is important to remember actual business conditions, real world economic realities such as the current high inflation environment, the current recognised global pilot supply issues, and applicable global colleagues salaries if the Company utilises fear and conditioning as a strategy in the current EA negotiations.
In any negotiation, the predictability of manufacturing fear and associated conditioning highlights its very nature, and we encourage our members to make decisions without the influence of such distractions if they are too eventuate. We believe that any EA offer should be analysed calmly and methodically just as we do on the flight deck, remembering that wise decisions are rarely made under duress or out of fear. The facts and Company's position must be assessed realistically.
As we’ve reiterated time and again, the QPC are committed to providing you with as much information as possible, to enable you to make informed, sensible decisions.
PIA
There has been a lot of discussion about the use of PIA. It goes without saying that protected industrial action is an absolute last resort measure, reserved for situations where the Company refuses to bargain in good faith, and all other negotiation strategies and methods have been exhausted.
Nevertheless, it is important to remember that when PIA is approved by the Fair Work Commission, it is your legal right under Australian law. We believe that PIA should never be off the table, given the decisions made by the Company in recent years that demonstrate their willingness to exercise the extent of their legal rights as an employer.
It is the QPC’s position that mutual respect between pilots and employer is important for balance.
Industry context
Industry context is paramount to understanding a negotiating position.
In previous briefs we have provided some data about offers other airline employers have already made to their pilots. We will continue to provide this data so you can make informed decisions when the time comes.
There is a recognised global pilot shortage, and there has never been a better time in opportunity terms for the limited pool of Australian pilots. More and more Australian pilots are taking up flying jobs overseas where pay and conditions are much more favourable. Employers in Australia are slowly coming to realise that failing to address pain points in agreements, and letting salaries fall well behind inflation has resulted in poor engagement and in some cases, exodus.
Supporting data
In the most recent American Airlines contract, Pilots will receive immediate raises of 21%, increasing to more than 46% over the duration of their four-year contract.
Meanwhile Delta Airlines’ most recent pay deal resulted in a 34% pay increase. Emirates also implemented an immediate 5% pay rise company wide in June this year in response to the rising cost of living.
These are airlines from countries with similar inflation trajectories, that have recognised the global pilot supply issues and wish to remain competitive employers to enable them to retain and attract the best pilot candidates.
For any general inquiries regarding this update or other matters at Qantas please contact 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