VACC scheduling update

Summer 2026 BTRT

With the March roster publication, we now have trips rostered that will be governed by the summer BTRT data. We also have an open bidding window for April for LHR, MAN closed on the 12 February. How VAA expects pilots to be able to bid effectively without publication of the BTRT and the subsequent rulesets is a mystery. There is simply no reason why these tables should not have been published months ago.

With new routes that aren’t contained within the tables, a notional BTRT needs to be agreed through the CLA review group. This did not happen in the January CLARG as the data was not shared with the VACC until the 10 February. This is now scheduled for the 17 February meeting and we will update following the meeting.

A330 variation

We have formally requested the review. The company has not committed to a date yet and have asked to discuss this next week.

We believe there is an urgent requirement for the A330 variation to be reviewed in a sensible, fair and reasonable way. A330 pilots already have to wait an additional 30 minutes for respite and often at times this is then having a detrimental impact to other rulesets. For example, Seattle when the second night was added, it not only removed the third RDO as contained within the FRM manual, but then invalidated the 2-2-3 rule, with subsequent rosters showing trip – 2 RDOs on repeat.

The reality is we are flying long two pilot trips on aircraft that are equipped with crew rest facilities, VAA are just choosing not to utilise them.

ET days

The disagreement over ET continues. The change in practice to utilise these days goes against the agreement that was made when they were introduced, which was they can be changed on a voluntarily basis. However, the new practices include:

• changing ET days that are placed before a trip to a standby. This then effectively removes the block window protection and throws what was a stable pattern into the unknown. If there is no standby coverage on the day, then requests should be made through the additional framework for cover. It should not come at the expense of roster stability or double dipping on time that members have already spent at the Company’s behest completing necessary and mandated courses.
• changing the last day of a standby/reserve block to an ET day. This entirely removes the value of an ET day and allows VAA to in effect have two duties contained within one day.

There are broader issues too with the number of ET days that are awarded and their placement within the year. As part of regular dialogue with the CAA we know their position is if the courses are spread through the year then so too must the ET days.

We have submitted a proposal to resolve this disagreement and expect to have a response in the February collective labour agreement review group (CLARG).

BLR

For some time, we have been focused on this double WOCL, one night rotation as it is one of the most fatiguing on the 787. Due to the rulesets in the CLA this trip rotates between being a 24-hour nightstop or a 72-hour nightstop (to meet the definition of two local nights) beginning this summer. Having been advised it can’t be re-timed due to connectivity, we had proposed making it a two night trip all year around. We continued discussions with VAA and almost reached agreement, however, the time period from when this agreement would have taken place meant we would have in effect been giving up more than we were gaining so to speak.

Therefore, without a re-timing this trip would have been a 72-hour nightstop for Summer 2026. VAA has now changed the schedule and it is now a single WOCL trip with a 48-hour nightstop.

Failure to agree (FTA): MBTR following disruption down-route

We have held a Stage 2 meeting on Monday 9 February and both sides remain far apart. Our position hasn’t changed in that:

• The company’s ability to extend pilots on a trip without permission and MBTR following such an event are two entirely separate sections in the CLA.
• The longer someone is held downroute, the more acclimatised they become and they require more rest not less.
• Putting the onus on the pilot to call fatigued is unacceptable, given often at times individuals who are fatigued are compromised in their ability to recognise it.

The only movement from the company has been they will review this on a case by case basis. Given the individual decisions that have been made from the initiation of this FTA to ones made as recently as the past few days, this is not an acceptable resolution for our members.

We are awaiting the company’s position in writing and we will proceed from there.

Survey

The survey is still open until Sunday 15 February 22:00. Please click here to fill it in, we can’t represent your views if we don’t know them. Uptake has been good but we would like to see participation almost 100% as it strengthens our hand at the negotiating table. It only takes a short time to fill in and will be key in developing our next agreement.