Teresa, I agree that Qantas is an icon, with an iconic symbol that most Australians and many foreigners would recognise.
However, the world has changed. I don't know how long it is since you were in the TAA, and then, Australian Airlines crew room, for me its around 24 years (calm down, I left prior to 89). The airline business has evolved since then. New players have arrived, and old ones, such as Pan Am have disappeared. Others are still in the throes of change, eg Air France KLM (US$ 1 Billion loss for 2011), British Airways and Iberia (IAG) (US 651 Million profit for 2011).
Change is painfull, but change can sometimes result in a good outcome. I would like Fletcher Jones still to be going strong, and Blundstone's still to be made only in Oz, and for there to be Skipping Girl vinegar (not the band) and Nylex hoses, but competition is a real factor in business, and always has been.
For Qantas to exist without change taking place, without its costs changing would require taxpayer subsidy. I do agree that the CEO needs to drive chnge, and ideally with his employees support, but if need be without.
But if it is a taxpayer subsidy that QF needs, which Government programs do you want money taken from so that Qantas can do its business without actually being competitive?
Last edited by TallestPoppy; 11th Apr 2012 at 16:23.
Reason: Spullung