"lets see - we're not making enough profit to trigger my bonus... we need to cut costs- cheaper 'planes? Thought not.... Fuel?? Whoops ......... Landing fees???? Oh....... SO.......... HOW do I show people I'm the very model of modern manager? Be Ruthless?? Fire the cleaners!! OK but that doesn't make much difference ... and no-one notices (for a while anyway... let's see....... those mouthy, arrogant, uniform wearing snobs who only put in a few days a month.......... hand me the list...."
Yes, that is precisely how they think.
Underneath much of the "corporate administration" of airlines is envy.
Having said that, labour unit cost is low hanging fruit. Rather easy.
It actually takes vision and strategy, to plan for, and purchase a fleet.
Unfortunately for Fort Fumble, the low hanging fruit is all picked. The regulatory limits are their targets. The targets reached they look for ways to squeeze their operating cost.
Rather like Interest rates being cut to generate more consumption; when it doesn't work do it again.
In the interim, real airline management have decided, funded and taken delivery of fuel efficient fleets.
Crew costs matter little when the Capital Generating Unit is in excess of UDS$300 million and has an expected service life of 20 years.
Fort Fumble prefers social discourse, endless media spin and not much else. Their CASK per RPK shows it clearly and no amount of Chairman's lounge memberships will hide it.
Qantas like most airline spend a lot on staff, that is total Full Time Equivalent and a lot of contractors. That includes floors of administration. That is carried in the true seat cost.
It is not their crew costs that need to be tackled.
Fix their fleet metrics and they fix the biggest item of cost (fuel), tackle the back office overhead and they will reform another, they have neither the ability nor desire to do either.