How many SydHM people have not been able to find a satisfactory outcome from the recent closure in Syd?
If you read the Australian Aviation section July7 20.
All the redeployments and redundancies are possibly not satisfactory but no doubt some have found early retirement reduncancy packages or transfere not adverse to their envisaged best/worst case scenario.
The angry will make most noise but the not so angry must also be heard.
With credit to the Previous Executive they spend a great deal of energy in the best interest of the Syd Heavy LAMEs to ensure some form of member satisfaction after a corporate decision to close a formative institution within the Qf group.
Many posters on this site and in other circles appear to apportion the blame for Syd HM closure to the Asn Executive.
The Exec of the Asn have only a limited amount of leverage to sway decisions when to comes to 21st century corporate edits.
The Liberal Federal Government NSW Labor government Qf shareholders and the 30000 plus Qf workers did little or no action to prevent this flawed decision.
What under such onerous circumstances could a Work Choices IR Act Unioin(s) do?
The new Exec faces similar circumstances with Mel heavy but with a longer time frame.
The ACTU are wading in with a Website campaign appealing to the flying public will this work only time will tell.
Decisions are based ultimately by the corporate dollar and in aviation sadly it is lso in the hands of Oil barrons that jack up the cost of travel when a despot in North Korea decides to piss off the West with a poorly engineered missile the presents a threat to gobal stability.
Blame , blame the World we live in.
Maybe Syd heavy was decided in a meeting room at OPEC?