QPC Briefing No 7 2025
LH EA Negotiation Update
It has now been over nine months since the expiry of EA10. Throughout this period, the AFAP has consistently negotiated in good faith, demonstrating a willingness to engage constructively with Qantas’ proposed pay structure and genuinely considering their requested concessions.
However, from the very beginning of bargaining we have made it clear that in addition to acceptable pay rises and offsets, meaningful movement on fatigue credit protections was a non-negotiable part of progressing discussions. We reiterate our fatigue credit claims are not about leveraging additional pay increases; they are about protecting pilot health, well-being, and flight safety.
We must also highlight the significant flaws in Qantas’ arguments against our fatigue credit proposals. Their reliance on anecdotal data, inconsistent mechanisms across fleets, and selective disagreement with independently collected data undermines their position. In contrast, there is clear scientific consensus and industry best practice supporting our fatigue mitigation measures.
We are not opposed to discussions around reducing lost productivity, but fatigue risk management must be addressed first and foremost to protect the short, medium and long-term health of crew and to uphold the highest safety standards in line with Qantas’ reputation.
Qantas’ reasoning for rejecting fatigue credits to this point for the B787 and A350 fleets relies on its claim that 4 crew night flying is not more fatiguing than day flying - a position at odds with accepted scientific research and real-world operational experience.
The Company’s reliance on voluntary 'Crew Alertness Reports' to justify its position that 4 crew night flying is not fatiguing is fundamentally flawed. These reports are sporadically completed, suffer from significant self-selection bias, and are incapable of producing a consistent or scientifically valid data set. Drawing broad fatigue-related conclusions from such unreliable inputs is unscientific and fails to meet even basic standards of evidence-based risk assessment in aviation safety.
Following the Company providing the AFAP a written response rejecting fatigue credits - despite this contradicting key aspects of statements made by Qantas negotiators in the room - the AFAP has advised it cannot support Qantas’ request for 35 separate concessions. Furthermore, we have advised we cannot advance discussions around training efficiency improvements while Qantas refuses to properly engage with our fatigue mitigation proposals.
The list of concessions Qantas has claimed is substantial and includes significant requests such as the forced loss of first class duty travel entitlement, potentially allowing long distance paxing in a recliner seat (A321XLR), changes to categories potentially removing some RIN protections and bidding options for A330 pilots, reduction in those eligible for TAFB training accommodation and allowance protections and significant increases in contactability to name just a few.
Many of the concessions being sought by the Company would have long-term and lasting negative impacts on pilot conditions, career progression, job security, and work-life balance. For this reason, the AFAP cannot and will not concede to changes that are insufficiently mitigated that would compromise the future wellbeing and standards that members have worked hard to build and maintain.
While we understand and share the desire to reach a timely resolution after more than 9 months, we are not prepared to sacrifice meaningful and necessary improvements simply to expedite the process. We reiterate that these negotiations are about both pay and conditions, and achieving a balanced outcome that protects the long-term interests of all pilots.
Project Sunrise, Fatigue Risk, and Pilot Health Considerations
Qantas’ planned Project Sunrise operations, involving the longest scheduled flights in history, will place unprecedented and sustained demands on pilots, far beyond anything previously experienced in regular commercial operations.
Scientific research in the fields of sleep science and occupational health consistently shows that extended periods of wakefulness, circadian rhythm disruption, and chronic exposure to night work have profound consequences for human health. Studies have demonstrated that significant sleep deprivation impairs cognitive performance, reaction times, and decision-making ability — all critical functions for safe aircraft operation. Disturbed sleep, particularly when compounded by multiple time zone transitions and irregular or broken sleep opportunities, dramatically exacerbates fatigue risk.
Current research - including studies by the Sleep Health Foundation and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) - confirms that chronic night shift work and regular sleep disruption are strongly linked to increased rates of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, depression, and certain cancers (Sleep Health Foundation;
IARC Monograph on Night Shift Work).
In the current LH EA (EA10), limited fatigue mitigations exist for 2 and 3 crew back of the clock operations. As you know, these mitigations are predominantly achieved through the application of night credits, duty time restrictions, minimum base turnaround time (MBTT), and mandatory rest periods.
However, critically, no equivalent night credits exist for 4 crew operations on the B787 and A350 fleets. While only the A350 will be performing the planned Project Sunrise ultra-long-haul sectors, the B787 fleet already operates duties of almost comparable length - meaning both fleets expose pilots to significant fatigue risks without the benefit of the structured night-credit mitigation that exist for the other fleets. Importantly, the A350 will likely replace the A380 in the coming years, and on the vast majority of the current routes the A380 currently operates, the A350’s Long Range Credit will have no impact.
Given that the very design of Project Sunrise involves pushing the physiological limits of endurance and circadian stability, the absence of contractual 4 crew fatigue protections represents a material safety and health risk.
Embedding scientifically informed protections into the A350 and broader long-haul operations is not simply a matter of negotiation - it is a necessary step to ensure pilot safety, operational resilience, and the long-term health and well-being of Qantas crew.
Failure to address these scientifically documented risks will not only endanger crew welfare but may expose the Company to serious regulatory, reputational, and operational risks over time.
Qantas Misrepresents Fatigue Protections as a Pay Claim
Following recent public commentary from Qantas’ Chief Pilot, it's important to correct the record. The AFAP’s position on fatigue is not - and has never been - about altering pay structures for financial gain. Our fatigue credit proposal is a safety-driven, evidence-based mitigation tool, aligned with international best practice and already embedded in existing EA protections for 2 and 3 crew operations.
By framing these protections as a “pattern pay” issue, Qantas is attempting to avoid the core concern: their refusal to apply proven, structured fatigue mitigations to 4-crew B787 and A350 operations, including those that will underpin Project Sunrise. The suggestion that Qantas' internal FRMS and FSAG structures alone are sufficient is contradicted by global fatigue science and undermined by their reliance on voluntary, self-reported data of questionable scientific value.
This is not about bonuses or margins. It is about embedding safeguards into a legally enforceable agreement to ensure the long-term health, safety, and operational reliability of the Qantas long-haul network. The Company’s position reflects a clear preference for internal control over fatigue management, rather than transparent, enforceable standards developed in partnership with the workforce and supported by independent science.
Questions
For any enquiries regarding Long Haul bargaining or other matters at Qantas please contact any of the QPC below or the AFAP legal and industrial team of Senior Legal/ Industrial Officer Pat Larkins (
patrick@afap.org.au) or Senior Industrial Officer Deanna Cain (
deanna@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