Whilst this so-called "airline rating" website is very likely nothing other than "pay for comment" (which is not much different from employing celebrities such as Travolta or Kerr to promote the airline, or any of the other techniques that many large companies use for marketing to the masses), I have to say that from my experience as a pilot employee for many many years, QF mainline does have an incredibly good safety culture, and safety systems - from front line staff through to management.
Note that I'm not talking about "past record" or "history", because that's the past - good for marketing but not much else. I'm talking safety culture and safety systems - because that is what will shape how safe the airline is now and into the future, and that is what really counts. True?
Yes, QF has had to fight costs in recent years. Without doing so they would not be in business today. No point being excellent if you're out of business. But these are fights they've had to have, and to their credit, they've put off the fights as long as possible. Some will say they could have done it better but that's now history.
So, I've mentioned safety culture and safety systems. What's the difference? Well a safety system, at it's minimum, is largely a management construct or a regulatory hurdle which can be invented overnight, whilst a safety culture cannot. CASA grounded Tiger on the basis of an inadequate safety system. CASA cannot, arguably, easily assess a safety culture. What is a safety culture? That is what a "good" safety system creates, over time. Complex, and not easy to achieve when money is the bottom line. A memo to staff with the headline "toughen up princess" is a pretty good example of what not to do when trying create a safety culture.
A safety culture cannot be invented by a manager with an MBA, it requires investment. For example. A safety incident occurs, it is subsequently either handled well or badly by management. The ability of management to deal with it well depends on their experience, training, and (I hate to say it) paranoia. The word gets out, and future events will either be honestly reported or hidden accordingly. As time goes on, the safety culture (or lack therof) develops. An airliine management cannot "pretend" to have a good safety culture. Staff talk to each other. The only way to appear to have a good safety culture is to actually have one.
Now, the difficulty with a strong safety policy is that it can be very expensive. How do you do it without going out of business? How do you do it when the mob down the road isn't doing it, but to date they haven't crashed?
Very difficult question for a CEO of a financially struggling publicly listed company. But nevertheless, throughout all of this, from my front line perspective, the safety culture in QF has not changed one bit. Even when it costs serious dollars. I do not need to explain myself in the office if I cancel a flight due safety concerns. Nor if I ring up in the morning and say I'm too fatigued for work. Nor if there is an issue with my family. If an F/A is upset about something and causes a delay: no repercussions. I've never had to fight with engineering about defects. Potential threats such as security, terrorism, volcanic ash and weather are always addressed very conservatively by head office before I even get to work. QF pays for it's own weather and security assessment departments. If ever I have an issue with anything, there is a team of people on the end of my mobile falling over each other to help. If there is a grey area in a new policy, QF takes the conservative route until it's resolved. Cost invariably ceases to be an issue when there is a safety aspect involved. Every manager I've ever dealt with, or heard of being involved in anything, is totally supportive of front line staff decisions or concerns that involve safety.
Somehow, during all of the QF shakeups, safety appears to have been quarantined. I've criticised QF management over many things on this forum over the years, but I have to concede on this point.
When in comes to the crunch, in day to day operations, there is a big difference between publicly saying that safety is the first priority, and actually paying the money to make it so.
I was taught as a young pilot that it's always better to be on the ground wishing you were in the air than in the air wishing you were on the ground. I'm happy to report that my employer continues to feel the same way.
I have a lot of friends in other airlines and they do not boast the same.