Originally Posted by
angryrat
One other thing I wanted to address from the meeting was the comment by AD about bonuses. He said that we were welcome to bonuses if we wanted to put our salary at risk.
I ask the question, why would we have to put our salary at risk? Do management put any of their salary at risk? No they don’t. They get paid their salary and then get a bonus on top of their salary for performance. It’s a fallacy that is peddled out by those that are paid a bonus but don’t want another group of employees to partake in bonuses.
AD also went on to say and I’m paraphrasing here, he could lose his job tomorrow and that’s also why he gets a bonus. Well I suggest that if he was to lose his job tomorrow it will be because he isn’t doing his job effectively. Now I’m not suggesting this is the case, I’m just suggesting it’s another fallacy that is put out by those that are paid bonuses.
I also can lose my job tomorrow if I have a disaster of a day or I have a medical issue that precludes me from holding a class 1 medical. I’m not getting a bonus though. I would suggest that I’m remunerated well and have some protections in place in the case of a medical issue but in the case of those who are on the executive bonuses they are very well remunerated too.
Finally AD also mentioned that our customers distinguish between Qantas and Qantaslink by there being no business class and also no service. Well I put it out there then, why are we operating 717’s with business class and full service on the golden triangle? Do those passengers get onboard in Melbourne and not expect to get a meal? Do those in the business class seats pay only for economy?
It just goes to show the more they talk the more they believe in what they are saying even if it’s not factually true. I honestly believe that AD means well but at the end of the day they really have no way of justifying Jetconnect and the Network 320’s won’t harm mainline careers.
Anything over MGH is at risk...