Originally Posted by
veryoldchinahand
Who ever it was it seems a very sensible move and at a nominal cost .
After all it is the strong embargo on any frivolous spending that has made the airline nominaly profitable again and averted the dire financial straits that have befallen Qantas for no reason other than inept financial and operational management ..
It is the principle of treating your staff with respect and as an asset, rather than with contempt and as a revenue stream. Whilst the locker charges are small, I believe my employer should provide secure storage to crew who would like to use it.
Other examples of contempt are:
Cutting allowances at out ports, claiming the hotels have special aircrew menus. The then CEO caught in a blatant lie on this one.
Another example, applying fuel surcharges to staff tickets, claiming they had no choice. AOA produced a letter from CAD showing it was at company discretion how the surcharge was applied. Caught again in a blatant lie.
Then there is the HK$280,000 'training cost' to be paid back over 36 months by direct entry FOs. Looks like a bond, walks like a bond, talks like a bond, but isn't a bond because bonds are illegal in HKG.