Qantas boosts international capacity, wet lease Finnair aircraft

[tdimdad]

If we continue to argue about the various employment arrangements and salary levels, it would be healthy compare the conditions and benefits (including salaries) to the local conditions at the base of the said staff. When Finnair contracts for cabin crew in Singapore, Thailand, or wherever, do those staff members get a fair wage and conditions relative to the industry and the living standards at their home base? What if this was a case of AY benefiting the communities in SE Asia through reasonably fair employment opportunities? Just a thought...

Also, @N860CR, why should Finnair seek to hire Australian crew for the wet lease flights? Why would they seek to build a new temporary arrangement outside of their network?

Just as a data point, there is no legislated minimum wage in Finland but they are governed through collective agreements / sector-wide enterprise bargaining mechanisms (with some companies doing their own EBA's). A recent EBA at Finnair (page 73) specifies that the base salary for a new cabin crew member is about $25,000 AUD pa (1222€ /mo) and highest base salary is about $54,000 AUD (2563€ /mo).
How would that compare to what the SE Asian crews earn?

 

[N860CR]

Who do you think will be flying those freighters?

Not qantas pilots, if that’s what you’re inferring.

It's not an Australian aircraft. It's Finnish. I really feel like you're missing that point.

Operating for an Australian airline. When this was first floated, QF claimed that AY had excess capacity (I believe due to the Ukraine war) and they were “helping out their Oneworld brothers”. This has now morphed into AY requiring additional staff, which they’re obtaining through labour hire in south east Asia. I’m certainly not supporting the wet lease agreement to begin with.

 

[Gold Member]

Sure, but if you live your life not accepting this as a fact of life, you would barely be able to buy any product or service.

Who said anything about not accepting the truth about capitalism and airlines? The very fact that I’ve prefaced my argument by suggesting I’m a cynic highlights my understanding and acceptance of this situation.

Any potential savings QF makes on the cabin crew is far offset by the costs of the wet lease. A dry lease is a lot cheaper.

My comment simply asserts the capitalist nature of big business and airlines seeking to maximise profit. It wasn’t a question about the best lease type.

 

[N860CR]

Also, @N860CR, why should Finnair seek to hire Australian crew for the wet lease flights? Why would they seek to build a new temporary arrangement outside of their network?

Because this is a qantas service. It’s already operating outside of Australian EBAs. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t believe the wet lease should be happening at all.

 

[justinbrett]

Who said anything about not accepting the truth about capitalism and airlines? The very fact that I’ve prefaced my argument by suggesting I’m a cynic highlights my understanding and acceptance of this situation. And yet you’ve now made this a personal attack for simply stating the obvious?



My comment simply asserts the capitalist nature of big business and airlines seeking to maximise profit. It wasn’t a question about the best lease type.

I was agreeing with you.

Just making a point others don't accept that fact (which you obviously do accept).

 

[OATEK]

There’s a huge difference between offshore manufacturing and using offshore labour to crew Australian aeroplanes.

The simple fact of the matter is that virtually any country can do an Australians job cheaper. Where do we stop? Qantas has been guilty of this for a long time, this is just another example.

Just to get back to what is really happening here, QF has decided to enter into a wet lease agreement with AY to provide some extra capacity. QF has no role in selecting crew, that is all down to AY, who as I said earlier generally have Finish pilots and Asian cabin crew on their flights to/from Asia. Obviously both airlines think it makes economic sense. But QF is not guilty of recruiting offshore labour in this case. That is down to the operator, namely AY.

Since about 2011 up to Covid I have used AY/CX and I do not consider the crews and I think it has resulted in good products, contrary to your earlier post.

 

[justinbrett]

Not qantas pilots, if that’s what you’re inferring.

What's your source on that? At least one is going to be flying domestically here. The only QF Freight aircraft not flown by QF group pilots is the 747-8F (flown by Atlas).

Operating for an Australian airline. When this was first floated, QF claimed that AY had excess capacity (I believe due to the Ukraine war) and they were “helping out their Oneworld brothers”. This has now morphed into AY requiring additional staff, which they’re obtaining through labour hire in south east Asia. I’m certainly not supporting the wet lease agreement to begin with.

You clearly do not understand how wet leases work so this argument is pointless.

 

[N860CR]

What's your source on that? At least one is going to be flying domestically here. The only QF Freight aircraft not flown by QF group pilots is the 747-8F (flown by Atlas).

I believe it’s going to EFA?

You clearly do not understand how wet leases work so this argument is pointless.

I do, and as I said, I don’t believe the wet lease should be occurring at all.

Just to get back to what is really happening here, QF has decided to enter into a wet lease agreement with AY to provide some extra capacity. QF has no role in selecting crew, that is all down to AY, who as I said earlier generally have Finish pilots and Asian cabin crew on their flights to/from Asia. Obviously both airlines think it makes economic sense. But QF is not guilty of recruiting offshore labour in this case. That is down to the operator, namely AY.

Since about 2011 up to Covid I have used AY/CX and I do not consider the crews and I think it has resulted in good products, contrary to your earlier post.

I believe my point is being missed. This arrangement is circumventing Australian enterprise agreements. It’s certainly not something to be supported. I haven’t flown Finnair for years so I’m unsure as to the standard of their product, however the point I made is that outsourcing of this nature is to save money. The three corporate examples I gave have atrocious service as a result of this.

 

[serfty]

[moderator hat]

Some posts have been edited to remove content that might be considered by some to be aggressive; the content may have been in a quoted post and not directly posted by a member who's post may have been edited.

Please play nice and write your posts in a calm manner without rancour while keeping to the specific topic.​

[/moderator hat]

 

[justinbrett]

I believe it’s going to EFA?

EFA is QF group.

I do, and as I said, I don’t believe the wet lease should be occurring at all.

This wet lease, or wet leases in general? I think most major airlines wet lease from time to time.

 

[anyonebutqantas]

If someone makes a racist statement they should be called out for it. Nothing more needs to be said and reasonable people can reach the obvious conclusions here. Hopefully others will be more tolerant and respectful of other races in future.

Because this is a qantas service. It’s already operating outside of Australian EBAs. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t believe the wet lease should be happening at all.

If you oppose the wet lease in principle in its entirety, what would your alternative solution be?

 

[jase05]

At least one is going to be flying domestically here. The only QF Freight aircraft not flown by QF group pilots is the 747-8F (flown by Atlas).

Yes, one is coming over to APG.
Hopefully a couple more in the coming years to go with the A321 conversions as the poor old BAe’s are on their last legs

 

[CaptJCool]

International and domestic cabin crew Pay rates are listed here in this handy Infographic done by the ACTU
Lowest wage Thailand is $2.16 per hour
Highest wage is $56.48 per hour

https://egp468.p3cdn1.secureserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/ANAPR_QANTAS_Final.pdf

 

[justinbrett]

International and domestic cabin crew Pay rates are listed here in this handy Infographic done by the ACTU
Lowest wage Thailand is $2.16 per hour
Highest wage is $56.48 per hour

https://egp468.p3cdn1.secureserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/ANAPR_QANTAS_Final.pdf

Although doesn't include Singapore which is the one country that's relevant to this discussion.

I'd imagine it would be far closer to Australia than it is to Thailand.

 

[straitman]

Any potential savings QF makes on the cabin crew is far offset by the costs of the wet lease. A dry lease is a lot cheaper.

… and a wet lease can be, in the big picture, cheaper overall. It really depends on how the leases are set up.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

If new cabin crew had to be hired, why not hire them from Australia? Altea or one of the other companies could have hired, trained and contracted the crews to AY.

 

[dajop]

If new cabin crew had to be hired, why not hire them from Australia? Altea or one of the other companies could have hired, trained and contracted the crews to AY.

Because they already have an existing base and arrangements in Singapore. It would seem they are expanding that base to support the QF wet lease, in addition to the daily HEL-SIN return service. It makes complete sense. If they set up a base in Australia it would almost certainly add both time and cost to the wet lease arrangements.

 

[RooFlyer]

1. Are the aircraft to be wetleased operating now?

2. If yes, are the FA crew hired ex Asia (sorry! "From cheaper labour markets" )?

3. If again yes, why do new crew need to be hired?

4. If no to 1) then what happened too the old FA crew?

 

[NM]

If new cabin crew had to be hired, why not hire them from Australia? Altea or one of the other companies could have hired, trained and contracted the crews to AY.

Well, yes, that could be done. Its one option for sure. And there are plenty of arguments to justify it, both ethically and commercially.

But would the cost to Qantas be higher or lower than the option that seems to have been chosen? And how would that cost difference play out in terms of the airfares paid by you and me as the traveling customers? And what other costs would need to be cut to compete with some other airlines when considering the operating cost-base for the competition on the routes?

Many Australians are willing to pay the Qantas "tax" for airfares because of their "loyalty" to the airline, perceived service offered, or Aussie patriotism. But there comes a point where many of us decide the fare cost difference does not warrant the perceived benefits of supporting "our" airline. Many abandoned the loyalty shackles years ago, while some hold strong to the past or to the present religion of FF status or points balances.

One thing is for certain, most business decisions (not just this one from Qantas) are based in financial outcomes. How those outcomes are measured may vary, but overall its financial results that drive most of the decisions for big business.

 

[tdimdad]

It sounds like one implied assertion in some posts is that the AY fleet would be AU-based. If you look at it from the fleet & service provider's viewpoint, they'd probably see it based in Asia and doing loops to AU. In other words, while some here might implicitely assume the AY leases do e.g. QF291/292 cycles, perhaps they actually do QF292/291 cycles and are crewed accordingly.

From that viewpoint, it would be quite artificial to propose that the crew needs to come from an outpost. Besides, it would significantly reduce AY's ability to us the said crew on their other Asian routes, unless the AU-based crew is happy to be assigned to scoot between HEL and SIN/BKK/HKG/other ports in the region (but I'm not certain many of them would be keen).