Here is an example of someone very close to Qantas, I'd say he works for them, possibly one of their spokesmen who has the same first name.
Presenting 'Tom of Melbourne"
Tom of Melbourne Posted at 2:59 AM Today Give me $350,000 a year and i'll sleep on the foot path between flights, this is totally wrong, people pay for those benefits, I don't get the benefits my customers get just because I work there, that would send my company broke. Why can't they just be happy with what they have, and if you think and can do better go work for another airline. Thats what Qantas should be saying, stick to your guns, tell them to leave if they think they can get that else where you watch how quick they back off and stay, the grass isn't always greener and some should be forced out to prove that what they think they deserve they really don't, they are paid to do a Job, and are given a lot for that work including family benefits, when will it end!
Comment 3 of 28
Tom of Melbourne permalink
May 10, 2011 10:20 am
It’s all happy news under the new “Fair Work” system.
The aircraft engineers probably represent about 1000 of the 30,000
Qantas employees, but they’ll stop the airline anyway.
How is it that these splinter groups can undermine the viability of a business?
Tom of Melbourne permalink
May 10, 2011 1:11 pm
I just can’t see how it can be called “collective bargaining” when –
• About 3% of the
Qantas workforce is involved in the dispute
• The 3% can undermine the immediate employment security of the other 97% of the workforce.
• The 3% can disrupt the travel plans of many thousands of people.
• They undermine the viability of Australia’s only full service airline, which employs hundreds of apprentices and graduates every year.
The aircraft engineers involved in this dispute live in a cocoon, it’s about time they experienced life in the real world.
Tom of Melbourne, on
February 16, 2009 at 1:19 pm said: Well perhaps the cabin crew are a little up themselves, but
Qantas is a great airline.
We should be proud of it and support it.
Tom of Melbourne, on
November 16, 2008 at 10:20 pm said: Reb – “slashing local jobs”..
Now please let us know exactly how many jobs Dixon has “slashed”.
I think if you examine the employment levels of Qantas over the past decade or so you will find that there it is a bigger employer now.
TB – Perhaps before directing the criticism towards Dixon, we should have a look at that other stalwart of Australian aviation industry, Sir Rod Eddington. Sir Rod is now a trusted advisor to the ALP government, practically running the infrastructure investment.
In the past he has overseen the decline of Ansett, British Airways and was a director of Allco, the company that made the bid for Qantas. Allco has failed.
Now a director of numerous public companies, including Rio Tinto, and set to become the chairman of ANZ Bank. We can only hope that his future is more successful than his past.
In this perspective your criticism of Dixon is fairly misdirected.
Perhaps a post on the appointment of Eddington as a trusted advisor to our government would have a little more to do with public policy.
Tom of Melbourne
permalink
September 26, 2009 10:46 am
I see TB, I bet Qantas shareholders now wish they’d taken the advice of Dixon.
Hindsight proves that he was acting in their interests in recommending the takeover offer.
Hardly the actions of a “robber baron”.
Tom of Melbourne, on
December 3, 2008 at 2:25 pm said: Qantas is a great airline; everyone that works for this Australian icon should feel great pride.
Airlines are capital intensive, the equipment is expensive. Unless the aircraft are utilised to about 110%, the airline looses money. Rationalisation of the airline industry has occurred worldwide. Qantas has courted several suitors, but BA looks the most compatible.
I think it is a great opportunity for Qantas to be one of the senior partners in a great worldwide airline.
Good luck to them
Tom of Melbourne writes…
Qantas is always one of the favourite punching bags for many of the politically correct.
Today the airline reported a profit of less than $120m, down 88% on last year.
Interestingly, the mainline airline lost money – $77m, but thanks to group earnings, including a significant contribution by the low cost Jetstar, it remained in the black.
The actual profit would have been doubled that reported, but an industrial dispute cost the airline about $130m. Great work by a single maintenance union, particularly in the current nightmare that is the aviation industry. This after the wildcat action by the TWU, which remains before the courts.
Yes, Qantas remains one of the few airlines to employ its own aircraft maintenance workforce, thousands of tradespersons.
It maintains a significant commitment to apprenticeship, training and Australian based employment. But one of the maintenance unions cost the airline an amount equivalent to its entire profit.
It ought to be lauded as an example of an outstanding Australian business, instead unions squabble over coverage, and take action to damage its viability.
One would have to wonder how long Qantas can maintain this strong commitment to Australia.
Tom of Melbourne, on
November 18, 2008 at 11:41 am said: Hi Shane
I use Qantas quite a lot, and while I think that service can be a lot better, it is still a lot better than most of the airlines I’ve used here and overseas.
There are now far more people travelling than when it was government owned. I think Qantas itself has about 4 times as many aircraft now as 15 years ago. Airfares are much cheaper.
Overall, Qantas has done a pretty good job, in my opinion. The company deserves a lot more credit for this performance than it seems to get.
In terms of work practices, Qantas is loaded up with about a dozen unions. The one covering the engineers recently involved in the dispute is one of (probably) 8 to10 unions covering the work in the engineering and maintenance department!! About 10 unions all looking for their own role, all trying to find some relevance, all trying to define the work they cover. All sending out officials to pester management, all trying to prove exactly how relevant they are.
Then we have unions covering pilots, cabin crew, check in staff… and not forgetting the highly efficient baggage handlers that look after our luggage with such care.
Unions in Qantas are a handbrake on reform; they impose inefficient work practices only in their own interests, rather than in the interests of workers, shareholders or the travelling public.
There's plenty more out there of him