Ken, as usual you post the same company tripe. Is your name Leigh Clifford by any chance?
Lets break down your verbal diareah.
For example, unions are apparently seeking security of tenure.
Nope. They are seeking that jobs be kept Australian, not outsourced to cheap overseas labour, with no superannuation, no OHS, lesser laws with respect to training and standards. There is a significant difference to your pathetic attempt at spin.
Same applies to improved travel conditions
Hang on fella. Why is this a problem? Managers were given significantly improved travel benefits in their remuneration packages. Why is it a problem for the staff? Two sets of rules mate? And before you start the "we can't compete with overseas carriers crap, you should remember that overseas carriers give their staff WAAAAAAYY better staf travel than this cheap and nasty mob.
Yeah, you probably do mate, and with the spin that you and your filthy mates go on with I'm sure you will. But I'm just as sure you will be wrong.
Action hurts the Company, not just directly with delays etc but goodwill. If a traveller feels that the unions are going to bugger-up his or her travel, he or she will travel with another airline. It's that simple. That is the result of industrial action.
Yup, it does. But this bizarre mob are actually trying to bring it on, because it is covering up their woeful ineptitude. They can spin to blame the unions for the hurt to the company.
The simple fact of the matter is this. The unions can take the action that they are, and die. Or they can sit back and let the greedy filth (aka Qantas management) kill the airline anyway. Either way, the end is nigh. But at least if they fight, there might be some chance. I would rather take that chance.
And in any case Ken, I'm very surprised you keep popping up here. You really are a glutton for punishment, aren't you?