Qantas in Talks to Move Up to 1,000 Jobs Offshore as AI Push Accelerates

Qantas' Project iQ: A Plan That Could Move 1,000 Jobs Offshore

Qantas is weighing whether to move up to 1,000 back-office jobs offshore to India or cut them outright, as it accelerates the use of artificial intelligence across its operations. The airline is in early-stage discussions with consulting firm Accenture on the program, dubbed "Project iQ," with a decision on roles in marketing, finance, human resources and other back-office functions expected later this year.

In a statement, a Qantas spokesperson said the airline was "looking at ways to accelerate the use of technology and AI to help us modernise the way we work," stressing that the talks with Accenture remain exploratory — no formal agreement is in place and no decisions have been made.

The discussions follow a flat first-half result announced in February, with statutory profit after tax of $925m, up just $2m on the prior year. Qantas reports full-year earnings in late August, and has pointed to recent hiring — thousands of operational roles in Australia and a new technology hub in Adelaide that will add 400 roles — as evidence it remains a major domestic employer.

The Australian Services Union (ASU) has responded with alarm. Assistant national secretary Scott Cowan said reports of the plan were "of huge concern" and demanded an urgent meeting with chief executive Vanessa Hudson. The union says Qantas has assured it there is no plan to offshore Australian jobs and wants that commitment kept, warning that a broken promise would be "a deep breach of trust" with the Australian public. The ASU is also invoking Qantas's history: the airline was fined $90m after Australian courts ruled its Covid-era outsourcing of ground handling illegal, a move that cost 1,800–2,000 workers their jobs.

Inside Qantas' AI Push: Accenture, the ASU and the Shadow of a $90m Penalty

What Accenture's Role Reveals About Project iQ

Qantas's confirmation that it is consulting Accenture — one of the world's largest outsourcing and transformation firms — is itself a strong signal about where Project iQ is heading. Consulting engagements of this type typically map processes, assess AI-readiness and cost out which functions can be standardised, consolidated or moved. India, reported but not confirmed by Qantas, is the standard destination for Australian back-office offshoring. The company's caveat that no decisions have been made is accurate, but it is also the standard line at this stage of a transformation cycle — the analysis driving the decision is already underway.

Why the ASU Paints This as Déjà Vu

The union's reference to the ground-handling case is not rhetoric without substance. Australian courts ruled that Qantas's decision to outsource ground handling during the pandemic was unlawful, in substantial part because it was designed to avoid enterprise-agreement obligations toward workers, and the airline was penalised $90m. That precedent means a back-office offshoring plan motivated by a desire to sidestep industrial obligations could expose Qantas to adverse-action claims and further penalties. The ASU also notes this is not the first time it has sought assurances from Qantas over AI being used to justify job cuts — a pattern the union is framing as a "hi-tech smokescreen." Whether the new plan is genuinely about augmenting the workforce or replacing it is, for now, the central unresolved question.

The Financial Logic Squeezing Qantas's Back Office

The timing is telling. Qantas's February half-year result was effectively flat — $925m statutory profit after tax, up just $2m — and full-year numbers arrive in late August. Back-office AI adoption is one of the few levers that can shift the margin without touching customer-facing operations. That is interpretation, not fact: Qantas has not quantified expected savings. What is factual is the company's counter-narrative — thousands of operational roles added in Australia and a 400-role Adelaide tech hub — which frames the shift as workforce rebalancing rather than job cuts. The ASU is already contesting that framing, which suggests the August results will be as much a political moment as a financial one.

Who Gains and Who Loses If the Plan Goes Ahead

If the offshoring proceeds, Qantas would gain a lower and more flexible back-office cost base, and Accenture would gain a major transformation contract. The clearest potential losers are the affected Australian employees in marketing, finance and HR, along with the ASU, which has made this fight a test of its relevance and bargaining power. Customers would feel the impact only indirectly: Qantas says AI will deliver better outcomes, while the ASU warns of a reduced customer experience. These are scenarios, not decisions — Qantas has confirmed only that talks are underway — but the stakes on each side are now explicit.

What to Watch Before Qantas' Full-Year Results in Late August

For Qantas employees and the ASU

• The decision window is "later this year" and Qantas says no formal Accenture agreement exists — the union's push for an urgent meeting with CEO Vanessa Hudson is the live mechanism for securing written commitments before a decision lands.
• Treat the late-August full-year results as the moment of truth: if Qantas discloses Project iQ's scope and savings targets there, staff will learn whether the 1,000-role figure is a ceiling or a starting point.
• The ASU's strongest leverage is the $90m ground-handling penalty — any plan structured to dodge enterprise-agreement obligations follows the exact pattern courts have already ruled illegal.

For investors

• Half-year statutory profit was flat at $925m (up just $2m), so the market case for Project iQ is structural cost reduction — but no savings figures have been quantified, and the precedent of a $90m penalty plus legal costs is a real offset.
• Weigh Qantas's counter-narrative — thousands of operational hires and the 400-role Adelaide hub — against the 1,000-role offshoring report: the August results should clarify whether this is genuine workforce rebalancing or a shift of the cost base offshore.