QANTAS - WHERE TO NOW?
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Formerly Australia
Age: 61
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The ALAEA put 61 questions together...........and didnt get a response.
Maybe if they had asked 2 or 3 pointed questions it may have worked. 2 or 3 may have stayed in the publics mind, or played better in the media. But 61? Jeez
Maybe if they had asked 2 or 3 pointed questions it may have worked. 2 or 3 may have stayed in the publics mind, or played better in the media. But 61? Jeez
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Formerly Australia
Age: 61
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come on Keg, no battles have been won by any of the Unions. They have been played, or ignored.
Have any of the Unions' tactics actually advanced the members cause? It may have made them feel better, but has it actually reinforced their job security?
Have any of the Unions' tactics actually advanced the members cause? It may have made them feel better, but has it actually reinforced their job security?
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Formerly Australia
Age: 61
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I assume thats Steve, do you think it would really look a lot different? Honest question, no vitriol please.
Looking at Qantas from afar, the ties, and left-handed working and PA's don't seem to have much efect.
Looking at Qantas from afar, the ties, and left-handed working and PA's don't seem to have much efect.
The practices to which Tallest Poppy has referred were very effective in that they demonstrated how futile and childish was the thinking of the Union 'leadership',,a term very loosely used.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A union is not just about one campaign. Its the ongoing stuff that most people never see. I could list dozens of examples but one comes to mind immediately.
Cabin crew ratios. Would be 50-1 right now if not for FAAA shorthaul and their lobbying.
It was after our last dispute that A330 maint was brought back onshore. There is a reason we may be quiet at the moment.
Cabin crew ratios. Would be 50-1 right now if not for FAAA shorthaul and their lobbying.
It was after our last dispute that A330 maint was brought back onshore. There is a reason we may be quiet at the moment.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
787 maintenance
One of Boeing's big selling points for the 787--its maintenance plan that promises lower operating costs because of fewer trips to the maintenance shop--has received FAA approval.
The FAA Maintenance Review Board has accepted Boeing's premise that the wide use of corrosion and fatigue resistant composites in the airframe and the new airplane's highly integrated systems architecture will require fewer of the time-consuming inspections and less maintenance than current generation aircraft, such as the 767.
In all, Boeing expects the 787 to save 30% in direct cash operating expenses over 767-era airplanes. In many cases, maintenance schedule intervals are twice as long for the 787.
For instance, the first external structural inspection for a 787 is set at six years of normal service rather than just three years for the 767. Similarly, the first internal structural inspection is planned at 12 years, rather than six on the 767.
The Maintenance Review Board's approval is part of the aircraft certification process. First flight is expected in the second quarter of 2009 and first 787 deliveries in 2010. Both are about two years behind the original schedule.
Photo: Boeing
This is what FAA said so Boeing can sell this aircraft but the reality is that there will be more smaller checks that has to be conducted which will require more additional manpower and more training,now itself Boeing has found problems and once aircraft in service more problems are anticipated,so if the engineering think they can reduce manpower good luck to them,
The FAA Maintenance Review Board has accepted Boeing's premise that the wide use of corrosion and fatigue resistant composites in the airframe and the new airplane's highly integrated systems architecture will require fewer of the time-consuming inspections and less maintenance than current generation aircraft, such as the 767.
In all, Boeing expects the 787 to save 30% in direct cash operating expenses over 767-era airplanes. In many cases, maintenance schedule intervals are twice as long for the 787.
For instance, the first external structural inspection for a 787 is set at six years of normal service rather than just three years for the 767. Similarly, the first internal structural inspection is planned at 12 years, rather than six on the 767.
The Maintenance Review Board's approval is part of the aircraft certification process. First flight is expected in the second quarter of 2009 and first 787 deliveries in 2010. Both are about two years behind the original schedule.
Photo: Boeing
This is what FAA said so Boeing can sell this aircraft but the reality is that there will be more smaller checks that has to be conducted which will require more additional manpower and more training,now itself Boeing has found problems and once aircraft in service more problems are anticipated,so if the engineering think they can reduce manpower good luck to them,
Fed Sec,
You have my total support. And the support of everyone I fly with. Engineers and Pilots were (in the circumstances) the picture of measured response to an overwhelmingly aggressive and irrational lying media and propaganda machine.
If not you, then someone of your ilk, along with a Pilot, F/A and ground staff member should have a board seat with considerable voting power. For it is they who care.
It is people like yourself who have the interests of this company at heart. Not the money grabbing and delusional financial alchemists who have been raping the company for years. The tragedy of the Craig Thomsons of the world is they gave perfect ammunition to the weasels buried deep in the Goebbels Dept at QCA to assist trash your sensible words.
In this 'dispute' the tragedy is that roles are completely reversed. Management is the wrecking ball, it is the 'workers' who care. The media is generally completely oblivious to the subtlety at work.
Bagus above:
Your post goes to the heart of the problem. No single person with any understanding of anything as complicated as a simple 'on/off' switch would believe that experienced Engineers are not required. On the '44, no Engineer would have ever recommended the half baked IFE we (or our pax) have suffered under for years. Nor be a 'launch' (or near launch) customer for any 'new' aircraft. It would take a 2-bit inexperienced 3rd rate management/board to make such stupid decisions again and again. As soon as an aircraft has no moving parts, hydraulic or electrical systems I will be happy to reconsider my position. Instinctively I will never believe an accountant or sales brochure. That type of thinking should be Swiss Cheese Modelling 101 for management.
As airline executives, credit where credit is due. QF board/management make outstanding room renovators. Their skill would easily see them to the finals of 'Renovation Rescue' or similar program. Unfortunately, the technological skill involved in putting vertical gardens on lounge walls is not quite the leadership and expertise that running an airline requires.
You have my total support. And the support of everyone I fly with. Engineers and Pilots were (in the circumstances) the picture of measured response to an overwhelmingly aggressive and irrational lying media and propaganda machine.
If not you, then someone of your ilk, along with a Pilot, F/A and ground staff member should have a board seat with considerable voting power. For it is they who care.
It is people like yourself who have the interests of this company at heart. Not the money grabbing and delusional financial alchemists who have been raping the company for years. The tragedy of the Craig Thomsons of the world is they gave perfect ammunition to the weasels buried deep in the Goebbels Dept at QCA to assist trash your sensible words.
In this 'dispute' the tragedy is that roles are completely reversed. Management is the wrecking ball, it is the 'workers' who care. The media is generally completely oblivious to the subtlety at work.
Bagus above:
Your post goes to the heart of the problem. No single person with any understanding of anything as complicated as a simple 'on/off' switch would believe that experienced Engineers are not required. On the '44, no Engineer would have ever recommended the half baked IFE we (or our pax) have suffered under for years. Nor be a 'launch' (or near launch) customer for any 'new' aircraft. It would take a 2-bit inexperienced 3rd rate management/board to make such stupid decisions again and again. As soon as an aircraft has no moving parts, hydraulic or electrical systems I will be happy to reconsider my position. Instinctively I will never believe an accountant or sales brochure. That type of thinking should be Swiss Cheese Modelling 101 for management.
As airline executives, credit where credit is due. QF board/management make outstanding room renovators. Their skill would easily see them to the finals of 'Renovation Rescue' or similar program. Unfortunately, the technological skill involved in putting vertical gardens on lounge walls is not quite the leadership and expertise that running an airline requires.
Last edited by V-Jet; 10th Apr 2012 at 01:35. Reason: Bagus point comments
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://m.heraldsun.com.au/business/q...7C+Business%29
Meanwhile at Qantas Head office. AJ & the executives focus on Jetstar & Asia has allowed Virgin to continue to chip away at the domestic premium market.
Surely more bonuses are in order.
Meanwhile at Qantas Head office. AJ & the executives focus on Jetstar & Asia has allowed Virgin to continue to chip away at the domestic premium market.
Surely more bonuses are in order.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 61
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ships ahoy
Meanwhile at Qantas Head office. AJ & the executives focus on Jetstar & Asia has allowed Virgin to continue to chip away at the domestic premium market.
For example I am not only industry and a former employee but have always been an avid QF supporter, FF points being the main draw and business class. But in the past 18 months I have gradually started flying VA regularly. Less delays, better international service and better aircraft from where I live, better pricing and so forth. All I want is FF points from them in a similar fashion to what QF offers and I will be a customer for life. My patience with QF from a customers perspective has run out. Sadly, the road ahead looks even worse with QF as there are no positive changes or corrections in sight so why should I remain with them? No reason whatsoever. No incentive whatsoever. No value whatsoever. No loyalty (thanks for grounding the airline Alan) whatsoever.
Mr Borghetti - Technicaly you have the easiest job in the world in this country, just sit back and receive. Team Rat are an uncontrolled wrecking ball. The damage their management are doing is something an opposition CEO's dreams are made from!
While QF lose sight of what is happenning in their own backyard, JB sneaks around QF's backyard pinching all their toys. It is too good to be true. How does Borghetti hold strategy meetings with his execs without pissing himself laughing? What would the minutes from Borghetti's strategy meeting consist of? I know, only one point - (1) Sit back and let Alan keep doing what he is doing to Qantas!!
Too easy!! Money for Jam! ANd at this rate Team Borghetti may even make more money for the next 12 months than QF, another good reason for not only passengers but investors to considering jumping ship!
Elaine is remarkably similar to the Titanic's Captain E.J Smith. Full of ego and pride, easily influenced by others, over confident in his own abilities and went full steam ahead without considering the risks or consequences.
We all know how Smith's ship ended up 100 years ago, how will Elaine's ship fare?
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: rangaville
Posts: 2,280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Borghetti - Technicaly you have the easiest job in the world in this country, just sit back and receive.
All with the respect of his staff, people he obviously values. Good stuff Mr Borghetti
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Doing a pre flight inspection
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas really is in a sad state of affairs, I look across at the International terminal at Melbourne airport and see three JQ A330's and a Jetconnect B737-800 I feel for the QF employees that work so hard to uphold the Qantas name, it truely is a national tradegey what management are doing to this proud airline.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Support alaea
I am sure alaea are doing everything in their power to maintain aircraft onshore,all we need to do is to put pressure, write to the PM to stop qantas of selling Australia hard working and experience workers offshore,All Aircraft maint should be done in Australia,qantas loosing money is all due to bad marketing and management giving bad news,when was the last time you saw qantas ad on tv,u only see jetstar and Garuda
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see old mate Ken has found a friend.
I don't understand how those of you on the outside can throw stones at our various Unions and their leaders.
If you are a member of any of the Unions involved you have a vote and a chance to have your say.
If you are not a member of the union or an employee of Qantas whose job is being threatened then why do you care. The vast majority of members supported the Unions and thats what counts. Members of the peanut gallery are just that.
As Steve points out above it is the work the various Unions do on a day to day basis that those on the outside don't see.
Edit I should say that there are many many supporters of QF Pilots Engineers Grond Staff Cabin Crew who I thank for ongoing support. My Peanut gallery comments refer to the usual suspects on Pprune who take great delight in watching Qantas fail and people lose their jobs. I don't need to name them I'm sure we all know them.
I don't understand how those of you on the outside can throw stones at our various Unions and their leaders.
If you are a member of any of the Unions involved you have a vote and a chance to have your say.
If you are not a member of the union or an employee of Qantas whose job is being threatened then why do you care. The vast majority of members supported the Unions and thats what counts. Members of the peanut gallery are just that.
As Steve points out above it is the work the various Unions do on a day to day basis that those on the outside don't see.
Edit I should say that there are many many supporters of QF Pilots Engineers Grond Staff Cabin Crew who I thank for ongoing support. My Peanut gallery comments refer to the usual suspects on Pprune who take great delight in watching Qantas fail and people lose their jobs. I don't need to name them I'm sure we all know them.
Last edited by adsyj; 10th Apr 2012 at 05:02. Reason: Added thanks
Flew today on a 737-800 with the new interior. That's where to now. The seats were comfortable (but took up less space so I assume fit at least an extra row in), we all had personal IFE, the bins were large yet took up less space, the cabin (thanks mostly to the lighting and pleasing curves) looked modern, the business class seats were business class seats. Whether I just lucked out on a great crew or it was due to an aircraft they can be proud of giving them a lift I don't know (suspect a combination of both), but the CC were top notch.
Compared to the 737-400 I flew on to go away before Easter.
If there was an investment gradually over the years to get the Qantas fleet at that standard (which is doable, ANZ, SQ and others have done it and VA/VB are doing it much quicker) Virgin wouldn't be having such an easy time of it, as the standard of product I had today was as good as you could expect anywhere. The issue is, in 6 flights on QF in the past 12 months, this is the only time I've had it this good. The A330 does come very close, but the old 737-400s and 767s are embarrassing.
Compared to the 737-400 I flew on to go away before Easter.
If there was an investment gradually over the years to get the Qantas fleet at that standard (which is doable, ANZ, SQ and others have done it and VA/VB are doing it much quicker) Virgin wouldn't be having such an easy time of it, as the standard of product I had today was as good as you could expect anywhere. The issue is, in 6 flights on QF in the past 12 months, this is the only time I've had it this good. The A330 does come very close, but the old 737-400s and 767s are embarrassing.
considering the risks or consequences.
