QF JOB CUTS

[aneedapo]

Just hear on the ABC news, further job cuts for Qf. No info of where or when. Share price up 3c though.:D

[Toluene Diisocyanate]

Bollox.:=
Nothing on any of the ABC news websites.

[lowerlobe]

It was on one of the commercial stations,10 I think and then the share price dropped but then after lunch went up again.As usual the share price has no relevance to actual value of the company and as usual the company is playing games again .

They probably have just heard about the engagement survey results and are having one of their hissy fits.The company has a standard media release when it is after something and it is most always about job cuts...I would be more concerned when they don't have any media releases about job cuts

[rmm]

20% to go from "corporate functions" according to The AFR. You can access the article thru the QF intranet.

[Guppy Driver]

As usual the share price has no relevance to actual value of the company
Ahem -just out of curiosity Lowerlobe (assuming your nickname refers to the thinking bit)- what is the exact method of attributing an ACTUAL value of a publicly listed company, if not by the share price?:confused::confused:

[lowerlobe]

Guppy Driver,

No, actually lowerlobe is from a long time ago in a much friendlier work environment. If you had been around then and flying the classic you would know what I am referring to.

A dozen different economists would probably give you a dozen different ways to measure the net worth or inherent value of a business.What I was referring to was that the share price would seem to be more of a perception rather than reality.

A few months ago ,I think it was another major Australian company announced the largest profit ever and the share price actually went down.The market reacts to whats happening on the board and if everyone else is selling then guess what happens.

[farrari]

20% to go =1000jobs ALL SECTORS with QF mainline wages to be cut. :*

[Shitsu_Tonka]

Ah, the LLG. Fond memories of a friendlier time as you say.

Although I did find out another reason QF might be called the 'rat' on one CS-PHNL leg late one evening (a combi from memory) as a fat vermin stared me down after his/her meal was interrupted.

[numbskull]

Home » Business » Breaking News » Article

Qantas to axe another 1,000 jobs: report

Qantas is to axe another 1,000 white-collar jobs this year as the company faces a looming $1 billion surge in its annual fuel bill.

Chief executive Geoff Dixon informed staff of the latest job cuts in a message on Wednesday, Fairfax reported.

The markets have yet to be given details, Fairfax said.

The cuts should deliver tens of millions of dollars in savings.

Mr Dixon told staff the airline had "reluctantly" decided to cut management, support and administration positions by 20 per cent across the group, resulting in a reduction of about 1,000 positions in the first half of the 2006-07 financial year.

"We have proposed and grown through previous crises in our industry by changing our cost base and this is again necessary," Fairfax quoted Mr Dixon as saying.

The announcement coincides with an annual review this week by the Qantas board of the airline's three-year strategy.

The massive increase in the cost of jet fuel was a key concern in the board's considerations, Mr Dixon said.

© 2006 AAP



This was on "The Sydney Morning Herald" website this morning.

GD is sacking(or disengaging) so many people that he won't have enough people left to adequately run the airline. It's hard to keep your eye on the ball while trying to avoid the axe over your head.

Will the last person left please turn out the lights!!!!!

[lowerlobe]

QF's new theme song.............

"I don't call Australia home"

[Fifthleg]

The damn light bulbs were sold off a couple of weeks ago!:rolleyes:

[YesTAM]

Qantas appears to be setting itself up for a meltdown once there is a blip in traffic volumes caused by economic conditions. "Staff cuts" are not the answer.

Given the number and frequency of the Board's screams about the need for cost cutting and that the mainline is a "Legacy" carrier, plus the cuts to engineering, plus the attacks on pilots and cabin crew's wages and conditions, I believe that anyone who has marketable skills would already have left the company.

Those left in the administrative areas must have reasons for staying that outweigh their perception of the risks involved.

This is not a very good situation for the company to be in, because people who are scared about losing their jobs don't perform very well.

Now we come to what appears to be an "arbitrary" cut of 20% in staff numbers. This is always just plain dumb because the work that needs to be done doen't decrease by 20%, the people who are left are told "work smarter not harder" and left to soldier on, often in a post traumatic state. Of course as will be discovered later, the 'wrong" 20% will have been let go, like Ansett's maintenance planners. This could easily translate into a "missed" AD sometime in the future, but of course all the managers responsible will have gone by then.

The core of the problem is that the Board and Mr. Dixon seem to want to adopt a low cost carrier (LCC) work model, but maintain a high cost carrier senior management structure that protects multiple layers of "executive directors" and "group general managers", all of whom are rather magnificently incentivised by the bonus plans spelled out in the annual report.

If Mr. Dixon and the Board were really serious about costs, they would lead by example.

Those examples would include:

- Moving head office to an old warehouse in Silverwater.

- Bringing in McKinsey's to do a hatchet job on senior management numbers.

- removing and downscaling management perks - starting with the 7 series BMW's (?), free flights and so on.

its called "eating your own dog food" in management speak, but it obviously isn't going to happen is it?

[qcc2]

there will be a lot of job cuts in sales and marketing. word has it a redundancy for cabin crew is also on the way. details shortly.:{

[cartexchange]

What about the "visitors" are any of them going to get the chop. There are a few of them that really need to go.

If a shake up is ever needed its with QF Cabin crew management, Never in QF's history have the front line staff been so "disengaged"

Interesting times ahead!

[max autobrakes]

Job cuts at Qantas due high fuel prices according to the company's affordable futures blurb.

Can't wait to read in a few weeks time about expansion at Jetstar.

[willadvise]

Of course as will be discovered later, the 'wrong" 20% will have been let go,
I would like to add that in my experience is when redundancies are handed out, the competent people take them because they know that they will have no trouble getting another job and you are left with the less competent people with obvious consequences.

[qcc2]

anyone cares in qf management. remember they have to make their kpi's otherwise no massive bonuses.:yuk: :yuk: :yuk:

[Tankengine]

If staff cuts of this magnitude are possible then surely that means that QF management has allowed this bloating to happen. In this case all management bonuses for the last 4-5 years should be refunded to the company!:E
This is all about Dixon cooking the books for his departure!:mad:

[B A Lert]

If staff cuts of this magnitude are possible then surely that means that QF management has allowed this bloating to happen. In this case all management bonuses for the last 4-5 years should be refunded to the company!:E


I will second that Tankengine. Some will recall that the original CEO of Australian Airlines was rewarded with a one-off $100,000 bonus for the successful establishment of Australian Airlines in its most recent reincarnation. He has now left the scene but I betcha no one has asked for that money to be returned in view of the failure he created.

[RedTBar]

I would like to see the expense figures for J* and see how much of their running costs are paid by Qantas.In other words if J* was a stand alone carrier what would their real financial position be

[Gordstar]

GD seems to have a one track mind.....
Are we seeing the beginnings of the end for one of Australia's greatest icons?
If GD continues down this track, QF won't have the ware withall to provide a decent airline, and the slide will be self perpetuating.
Someone please stop this crazy man..........................
I hope this is not true.:{

[bilbert]

Fuel prices are the same for every operator, so logically J* should be cut too. I think not. It's fairly obvious that it's only a matter of time until J* is renamed as Qantas.

[BHMvictim]

Bollox.:=
Nothing on any of the ABC news websites.

Bollox huh? Shall I throw you an egg now?

[BHMvictim]

If staff cuts of this magnitude are possible then surely that means that QF management has allowed this bloating to happen.

I posted this in another thread. 1000 staff, equating to 20% are to be axed.

1000 is 20% of 5000. Therefore, there are 5000 staff in "management, support and administration" positions.

QF employs 38,000. 38,000 - 5000 = 33,000 people in non "management, support and administration" positions.

33000:5000 = 6.6:1

Therefore, there is currently 1 manager/suport/admin member of staff member for every 6.6 productive employees.

Top heavy? Bloated....

ABSOLUTELY!:ok:

(sorry, wasn't that word copyrighted by a now defunct other airline???)

[Toluene Diisocyanate]

** Puckers lips in order to suck eggs **

Correct, BHMVictim. However at the time I posted yesterday (0300UTC) there was indeed NOTHING on the ABC websites.
Nevertheless I quite like eggs:E

[wing surfer]

i wonder where they will cut in engineering this time.

i hope it is the managerment this time because the workers are p**sed at the axe always being aimed at this group.

[cartexchange]

1000 ground staff,support admin staff!
Hmmm can they start at QCC
The amount of staff in these offices sitting there on huge salaries doing nothing is quite disturbing.
It will be an interesting cull.
From my observation, all floors on QCC could do with 30%less staff QF could and would probably function a lot better.
There will be a lot less staff(str!kebreakers)for GD and his cronies to draw this time.
We have a long memory! I will never ever forget the queues of ground staff begging to do our jobs in DEC04, they were willing to gorge on us!
I'm trying to sum up some sympathy, but this memory of blacked out curtained buses in the middle of the night is clouding my judgment!
:=

[Keg]

1000 ground staff,support admin staff!
Hmmm can they start at QCC
The amount of staff in these offices sitting there on huge salaries doing nothing is quite disturbing.


I have a friend of mine on QCC2. She's a pretty sharp operator and works bloody long hours- you often find her still in the office well after 1900hrs and she doesn't stop for lunch generally. She worked the Easter weekend to get the job done. There used to be three of them in that area but with a resignation and another off on long term leave, there is now just the one. She doesn't get time in lieu for the weekend work, public holiday or long days that she does. I've told her she should work the 9-5 and then walk out and leave the work incomplete but bless her, she doesn't believe in leaving the job half done and thus screw over the lives of the multitude of crew that she serves. From what i've observed of her colleagues, a lot of them are doing the same thing. :ugh:

Other parts of the organisation though? No doubts at all but some areas are already on the bone and now starting to cut through that! :eek: :(

[B A Lert]

Hey Keg - it is good to be able to agree with you! Miracles do happen. It is refreshing to see some acknowledgement of the contribution made by most ground staff to keep the wheels turning. Most crew would have no idea about what goes on behind the scenes, the hours put in and so on. It is true that it MAY appear staff are under-utilised but wouldn't some wailing and whingeing if there wasn't anyone around to meet the requirements of crew when they happened by QCC to clear their mail or whatever? There will always be fat, as in all large organisations, but so much has been trimmed from Qantas I really don't know what GD and his mob can now achieve without a lot of out-sourcing. Either that or he has presided over a bloated bureaucracy in which case the Board and its Executive team deserve censure.

[Bad Adventures]

So according to you Lert, part of the reason why these people are being made redundant (management and administration staff mind you) is because of the current level of wages and conditions that pilots and cabin crew receive.

My goodness me man, you’ve said some stupid things in your tenure here but you certainly saved the best till last!

:D :D

[B A Lert]

....part of the reason why these people are being made redundant (management and administration staff mind you) is because of the current level of wages and conditions that pilots and cabin crew receive....


Yes, that is one of several reasons. Why are people so blind as to probably the main reason for the agressive development and growth of Jetstar Domestic and Jetstar International? :ugh:

Same old story I guess: there is none so blind (or deaf) as he or she who doesn't want to see (or hear). Corporate overheads are also part of the mix as well as manpower costs all over the airline but the direct labor costs of crew (approx 6,000 people) and their on-costs are significantly higher at Mainline.

[cartexchange]

give it up lert!

[turbinejunkie]

Job Title - Senior Corporate Manager

Duties - Rape. Pillage and plunder.

Salary - Obscene

Methods - Divide and Conquer. Pay peanuts. Who cares about monkeys?

Qualifications Necessary - None. Will accept any candidate with an ability to wield a hatchet well

Heart - None or otherwise made of stone

Profit orientation - Absolute. :eek:

TJ :ok:

[Bad Adventures]

That’s funny, GD didn’t mention cabin crew and pilots as a reason in his announcement for these people losing there jobs, must have slipped his mind! You really have to get over your tall poppy syndrome BA. Just another want a be that wasn’t I guess, poor old sod. :{ By the way what part of the airline did you say you worked in again? :yuk:

[BHMvictim]

Yep! seems if you are not in a management or administrative role, you are paid too much. Be prepared to take a huge cut in your pay so as to allow those in management or administrative rolls to maintain their pay, bonuses and company BMWs. That's only fair, right?

Thanks 'Lert, for enlightening the rest of us!:ugh:

[Ron & Edna Johns]

Fellas - it has to be said. When you see things like:

(a) committees sitting around, deciding on the new, "customer friendly" PA's to be made by crew, including such gems as saying "hello" instead of "good morning", saying "airport" instead of "terminal" and "leave" instead of "disembark" ;

(b) security/OH&S personnel policing crossings, threatening to fine staff for not using them/jay-walking, or OH&S committees deciding that people must walk up and down stairs holding onto the bannister ;

(c) OH&S committees/personnel deciding that MINTIES are not to be permitted in meetings as staff might BREAK A TOOTH :eek:

(d) heavens-knows how many man-hours expended on decorating the joint in gaudy yellow and orange to signify "Safety Week" - whilst basically SFA crew got anything out of aforesaid week (apart from some getting a squishy stress-plane or something, which was subsequently deemed unsafe to be left around small children???!!!)

(e) don't even get me started on the security people touring the globe checking that staff aren't nicking chocolate bars or grog off the jets ;

(e) etc etc etc. You get my drift.

then you KNOW there are still too many staff in the big Q. All the above man-hours just add to the cost base. Yep - staff costs in total at Q are high.

We need to cut the crap: engage the staff and focus on the IMPORTANT things like fixing planes, selling seats, flying the planes efficiently and providing an exceptional service in the cabin. Sadly I just can't see that happening anymore on GD's watch.

[Cactus Jak]

Next time we ring recruiting we'll be talking to someone in Delhi.:ok:

[qcc2]

But, according to Mr Thomas, a shake-out of Qantas middle management is "probably overdue".

"Qantas has had a number of restructures but these have been upper management. I think middle management has blown out," he said.

dont we know it. remove 60 % and you have enough left for the next years restructure:ok:

[B A Lert]

(e) don't even get me started on the security people touring the globe checking that staff aren't nicking chocolate bars or grog off the jets ;

Says a lot about some of our colleagues R&E. If people didn't pinch things, this wouldn't be necessary. Don't think that crew are being picked on, as bags etcc of ground staff are also checked from time to time.

Yes R&E, there is MUCH wrong with the Rat. It's just that most of us from Board level down can't agree how to fix it all just as many of us have difficulty reconciling what others might be doing relative to what we think they should be doing.

By the way what part of the airline did you say you worked in again?

Not as stupid as you think BadAdventures but if you think 'somewhere at Mascot', you won't be far off the money.

[qcc2]

it may slip your mind or maybe you really dont know whats going on in the international arena. let me make it again very clear. QF pilots and cabin crew are CHEAP in comparison to our major international competitors.
QF pilots 1 cpt, 1 f/o, 2 s/o BA/SQ/most others 2 cpt, 2 f/o
QF747 cabin 15 1 csm/1css/13 fa on average 1;53 :{ crew pax ratio
SQ/CP/ anywhere from 17 to 20 average crew/pax ratio 1:32 :D or less ,wages not disimilar, taxes lower, healthcare, other benefits part of package.
and we cetainly dont want to compare to our US and European collegues. they make our package look like third world countries. not that i am complaining about my what i call adequate package but nothing to get too exiting about.its all about doing your homework. so, B Alert next time do your home work::=

[DutchRoll]

(c) OH&S committees/personnel deciding that MINTIES are not to be permitted in meetings as staff might BREAK A TOOTH :eek:
I hadn't heard that one. You are joking aren't you? I mean, I know the OH&S stormtroopers have done some pretty anal things recently, but that has to be a joke, right?
You are quite correct in your last point. Employees going to that extra effort ain't gonna happen on GD's watch. Have even witnessed some displays of the 'I don't give a stuff how much fuel they want me to save' factor already. I'm not saying that is good. It's simply a morale/respect indicator.

Speaking of flogging food, etc, I've got a bit of a confession BALert. The other day, I drank 1/2 of a large bottle of water on the sector. I took the bottle with the remaining water in it (complete I assume with trace amounts of my own spittle etc) with me off the aeroplane to finish in the hotel room, along with the choccie bar from my otherwise inedible crew snack. I think that actually constituted stealing company property (as the remaining water/food had not yet been relocated in my gullet, which I believe is the crossover line when it becomes your property), but I'm not sure who to turn myself in to. Unfortunately I think it would be rather impractical at this stage to return the property to QF.

[YesTAM]

The old phrase "The Floggings will continue until morale improves." comes to mind.

Assuming that Qantas operates with its usual ineptitude, I make the following predictions:

1) The cost of the redundancies will exceed expectations.

2) Within eighteen months there will be even more middle managers than there are now.

3) Efficency will decline even further for two reasons.

(a) Scared people make poor decisions, now that this move has been announced, little or no work will take place until those people involved have been given their marching orders. As usual, you can expect this will take a considerable time, thus maximising the pain and minimising any gain.

(b) Those that leave will be the wrong people. In large organisations, especialy ossified ones such as Qantas, it is not usual for a person's declared job function to be completely different from their actual function. Thus a person's function may look trivial but be vital or vice versa.

But try telling this to a management consultant to justify your existence and see what happens.

All I can say is "you poor bastards". Nobody deserves to be put through the wringer like this.

[Keg]

Mr Gregg warned that labour and fuel now accounted for 60 per cent of Qantas's expenses and the higher fuel bill meant responses other than cost-cutting were limited.

What I want to know is why doesn't any journo EVER ask what percentage of that is fuel and what is labour; what are the changes in the last 12 months; what percentages of that 'labour' are the costs of the 'executive' level team; etc, etc. Is it because they're all too busy just re-hashing the QF media release?

Steve Creedy and Geoff Thomas, I thought you guys were better than this. Why don't you ask the tough questions? Why do you keep allowing the wool to be pulled over your eyes? Do QF fly you somewhere and you feel that 'access' may be in jeopardy if you do go tough? :* :ugh: :mad:

[TineeTim]

Heard from a management type that 'at least' one more announcement was expected out of this board meeting. He was coy when pressed for specifics but I think it's fair to say it won't be good. Possibilities?

1) Decision to keep 744 maint. in Oz revisited?

2) Final nail in the 74Classic coffin?

3) Classic 73s?

4) LH CC redundancies? (To be replaced by SH casuals)

Others???????

[Swingwing]

I know that this is a pilot forum, not a management one, but these arguments do get a bit repetitive. The mantra seems to be that everything wrong with the company is the fault of senior management, who are, to a man, grossly overpaid and incompetent. The other overriding theme is that management numbers and salaries must be cut, but at the same time, crew salaries and working conditions should be essentially inviolate. Some posters seem to think that a pilot's job at QANTAS should be a highly paid sinecure until retirement. There are claims that pilots are cheap when compared to their counterparts in the US (although what this has to do with anything at all in an Australian business context is not clear - particularly given the percentage of US majors in Chapter 11 protection).

All this is, with the greatest of respect, largely irrelevant. QANTAS is a private company, whose obligations are to the people who provide the capital to run the business - that is, the debt and equity holders. It is not an employment service for pilots, managers or anyone else. As I pointed out on another thread, the world's airlines collectively lost $6bn last year. Even those that made a profit (such as QANTAS) fell well short of providing an adequate return on equity to the people who invested the money to operate the business. To increase that return, profits must also be increased - which means either more revenue or less costs. So sure, cut management positions and salaries (after all, weren't those very cuts what started this thread?) but please - get your heads out of the sand.

The widely quoted 5000 "management" positions are, as was pointed out above, around 15% of the total workforce. Although all of the top salary earners are in that 15%, are people here seriously suggesting that the other 85% should be untouchable? In an ever more commoditised market, yields are down, costs are up and shareholders aren't getting the return they expect - meaning that they will eventually stop putting money into the business. In the light of all this, to suggest that radical change is not going to be required is simply fantasy.

Oh - any new CEO that might be recruited to replace the current one knows all this too, so I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for anything to change soon. In my respectful submission, too many of you are shooting the messenger here...Your real problem is with the economics of the airline business in 2006, not with the individuals on the QANTAS executive team who will come and go like any senior management.

just my opinion - after all, everyone's got one!

SW

[lambsie]

Careful there Dutchy, the FAM specifically excludes removing bottles of anything from the aeroplane. See 10.15.1

[Elroy Jettson]

Swingwing, we agreed with you right up until they gave themselves 60% payrises for as you put it, for running an under performing company, and then in the next breath, advocating the tightening of belts for the rough weather ahead, and heads will have to roll for the blow out in the fuel price.

Do building companies sack builders when the price of bricks go up? Or do they put the price of the houses they build up? Do bakers get sacked when the price of wheat goes up? Or does the price of a loaf rise? (Pardon the pun). :confused:

I seem to remember the justification for the CEOs 60% pay rise was based on what other CEOs in a similar position got, so why shouldn't we compare our salaries with what other pilots get? Whats good for the goose....

They keep telling us "Its all about supply and demand, and market forces", well, so is the supply and demand of skilled labour, and the cost of keeping it or losing it.

We are an essential commodity to the operation of aircraft. As essential as fuel. We are expensive to replace, and impossible to operate without. It would be remiss of us not to keep an eye on the current market value of this commodity. :) (JPC pilots exempted from this current market value evaluation of course). :}

[Chimbu chuckles]

Agree with Elroy...and to add that airlines have essentially never returned on capital the way other businesses have, banks for instance...never.

I cannot work out why airlines seem the only business that cannot raise prices inline with rising costs...perhaps an indication of the quality of airline management or perhaps there are too many of them...managers and airlines?

As GD says it's a world market...you cannot have your cake and eat it too.

[BHMvictim]

QANTAS is a private company, whose obligations are to the people who provide the capital to run the business - that is, the debt and equity holders.

I would have thought that Qantas has an obligation FIRST AND FOREMOST to the traveling public, to provide a safe means of getting from A-B.

This is the BIGGEST problem with Qantas. Obligations to investors. Management are forgetting that they also have an obligation to provide safety for those traveling on its planes.

Cut, cut, cut. Where does it end? How much cutting can an airline perform before safety is compromised?

It seems to be getting to this stage now. Sending aircraft to cheap facilities in asia who do a nice spit and polish job, (just dont look behind the panels), employing poorly/inappropriately trained staff in a facility that uses dodgey scaffolding around the aircraft in heavy maintenance, (yes, that's right. Shut down Sydney and transfer to a second rate facility that cannot handle the work.... let's see them claim in a year or so that they cannot support 747 maintenance in Australia, and are forced to send it overseas). Questionable LAME:AME ratios in some facilities, online maintenance manuals that print to paper incomplete instructions...

These are just a few examples in engineering. What about amongst cabin crew? I am sure that there are exaples of cost cutting that could have the potential errode safety standards. Pilots? is the company trying to impliment cost cutting exercises that have the potential to errode safety standards?

The primary obligation of an airline is the safety of its passengers, not to making money for it's shareholders.

It's about time Dicko and his gophers thought about that.

[Turbo 5B]

Well after reading swingwings opinion i think ill go and offer my services for free, as i am a share holder as well i should make up the loss of wages and conditions in increased dividends and a higher share price. I urge all others that own shares to do likewise.

[rescue 1]

Do building companies sack builders when the price of bricks go up?
Yeah...they do because just like a rise in interest rates building approvals decline.

The market is very sensitive to movement, and all airlines are trying to ratchet up the price, while maintaining a market let alone market share.

[Taildragger67]

I would have thought that Qantas has an obligation FIRST AND FOREMOST to the traveling public, to provide a safe means of getting from A-B.

This is the BIGGEST problem with Qantas. Obligations to investors. Management are forgetting that they also have an obligation to provide safety for those traveling on its planes.

The primary obligation of an airline is the safety of its passengers, not to making money for it's shareholders.


Unfortunately, legally Swingy is correct. A company's directors' first responsibility is to the shareholders; any derogation from this can land them in the Long Bay beach resort.

Then, there will be various laws which they have to adhere to on an operational basis.

Safety is one of those; but it only hits the directors in terms of: "If we don't comply with this safety rule, either a) we'll get fined, and/or b) there'll be a smoking hole in the ground, either or both of which outcomes will detract from our duties to our shareholders".

S.180 (1) of the Corporations Act 2001 requires that directors "... must exercise their powers and discharge their duties with [a] degree of care and diligence... "; s.181 then specifies that directors must act in good faith in the best interests of the corporation. The duty of 'care' which thus arises out of s.180 is therefore one of care towards the interests of the members of the company - ie. the shareholders.

Safety requirements are then mandated in an operational context.

Interesting paper at http://www.law.unimelb.edu.au/cclsr/research-papers/directors-duties.pdf

As a result, the director's duty is to strip safety to the bone, such that aircraft won't fall out of the sky and by doing so, cost the company money. They're cheating their shareholders if the 'over-engineer'.

Scary, perhaps, but true.

[Bad Adventures]

Publication: Sydney Morning Herald (33,Sat 20 May 2006)
Author: Adele Horin

THE survivors of mass retrenchments are not necessarily the lucky ones any more. At Qantas, the staff left behind once the broom sweeps out 1000 managers and support workers over coming months deserve commiseration, not congratulation. If they are not already fully paid-up members of the overworked, overstressed and time-poor brigade, they soon will be.

The latest decision by Qantas to slash labour costs was prompted not by falling demand, or lazy and unproductive managers, but by rising fuel costs and their effect on the bottom line. (All airlines have been hit by the fuel price rise so you have to wonder why Qantas believes it is at some unique competitive disadvantage.) There is not less work to do - but there will be fewer people to do it. And the surviving managers, predictably, will pay a huge personal toll trying to get it all done.

It is yet another example of rhetoric at odds with reality. For most workers, the flexible, family-friendly workplace much trumpeted by government and big business is a mirage. As Australia gets richer, its citizens have more money but less time. In many cases, the choice between the dollar and leisure is not theirs to make. A new survey released this week by Families Australia, a Federal Government-sponsored organisation, shows that most parents and children, given the choice, would opt for more time over money. Time is the missing ingredient in modern life - time for family, friends, community and even sex.

Talk of family-friendly and flexible work has revved up considerably in the recent years of prosperity. But the reality for the "lucky" survivors of the Qantas surgery will be longer work hours, more stress and less time.

[Wed Webbing Woop]

Walking around the Blue Buildings yesterday bound for the Credit Union, the pall of gloom and despair was everywhere.
The above article in the SMH is very poignant indeed.
This is the time for REAL LEADERSHIP.
Someone ( ? ) needs to rally the troops. Qantas is an ICON , however , it has been gradually belted into submission by the greed of the Financial Institutions and salivating shareholders.
Announcement of eminent job cuts=share price goes up.
Really gives you a warm glow inside.
So, all those Managers( including Darth ), come out of the shadows of your work stations and orifices. Get us together, tell us how it is and at least give us some sort of insight as to how the RAT will look in 5 years time-NOT the usual spin and psychobabble that we are subjected to via the QANTAS NEWS.
www

[YesTAM]

A few predictions:

1. The cost of the redundancies and retrenchments will exceed budget.

2. Within 18 months, there will be more managers then there are now.

3. No work will occur in middle management circles while this policy is afoot. Frightened people don't do much work.

4. The "wrong" people will go, as usual, leaving a traumatised group to pick up the pieces after being told "work smarter not harder'.

As for Swingy's idea that the Board has every right to pursue this policy in the name of shareholder value, I respectfully suggest that this is bassackwards.

The share price reflects the amount of dividend and a premium for future growth. If the return on shareholderrs funds doesn't meet shareholder expectations then the share price falls until it does.

ie: 5% expectation, $10,00 shareprice = $0.50 dividend

!0% expectation $5.00 share price = $0.50 dividend

All other things being equal, the share price follows the dividend not the other way around. I will not explain the capital asset pricing model here.

Qantas also has some stakeholders that Qantas (and its shareholders) ignore at their peril. These include:

- The travelling public, who have, through Government, given Qf a licence to operate safe, timely RPT.

_ The general public, who have granted Qantas an effective monopoly position by keeping out other airlines "In the public interest".

Furthermore, Qantas has an effect on the general economy through the tourism industry, not to mention an effect on the balance of payments through its purchase of aircraft.

- Then there is the Defence case.

- The of course there are the employees, many of whom have given their lives to acquiring highly specific aviation related skills that are marketable to Qantas and not much else.

So yes, if Qantas decides that its only responsibility is to its shareholders, then the Government and the Australian public can rightly conclude that they have no responsibility for Qantas and open the skies to Emirates, Singapore Airlines, and anyone else who wants to come.

You can't have it both ways.

[Ron & Edna Johns]

Darth has absolutely no interest in "coming out of the shadows" and engaging or communicating with staff. Had him on board a flight recently down to Melbourne - apparently. Didn't find out until after we were at the gate in Melbourne and all pax were off. Nobody told us, nor did he even bother to stick his head in at the end to say "how's it going, boys?" or "nice flight, guys".

That tells me something about our leader.

Very disappointed.

[Turbo 5B]

Had you have known would you have paid the ultimate sacrifice and nose dived into Avalon airfield?

[speedbirdhouse]

Quote- "That tells me something about our leader."

-------------

By definition, a "leader" provides leadership.

It isn't funny, especially for those of us at the rat, to suggest that there could be a possible link between the words "dixon" , "leadership" and "Qantas"........

[Ron & Edna Johns]

Cmon Speedbirdhouse, look carefully and you just might detect my sarcasm in my use of the word "leader". And I work the rat too - Dixon doesn't fly DJ as far as I know. Never intended anyone find my post funny. On the contraire.

Turbo5B - hmmm, interesting idea, I guess. But surely you're not thinking I fly A320's into AVV do you? That'd be implying that out leader flies Y-Class and scrambles for his seat!

No, 737's, my friend, out of Brisvegas.

[speedbirdhouse]

Sorry, I see dixon's name and more often than not lose my sense of humour.

[cartexchange]

hey guys you don't expect any of our mismanagement to greet us do you!
Al thought our expectations from our mismanagement are low, its time to lower them even further then we will never be disappointed.
Anyway why in the farrk would you want that ^%$^%$ to say hello.
He hates all crew both tech and cabin with an absolute passion.
Its something for us to be proud of.
There will be a day when he will depart QF, Do you think he will have the balls to travel with the remnants of what was QF?

[Agent Mulder]

Expect an announcement this Monday that will cause enormous pain for a lot of QF employees.

The drive to put all staff (not management) on JQ T&C's is about to start in earnest.

[Wed Webbing Woop]

"what you shall sow...............
...................................................you shall reap !"
www

[LucyLou]

So where is this announcement you talk about Agent Mulder ??? :hmm:

[hotnhigh]

Wednesday evening. Just before the origin.

[DutchRoll]

No need to quote the FAM lambsie, it was unintentional (in principle) after a bloody long day. I'm aware of the rules, even the asinine ones. Pity you have to be so constantly on your guard these days though. ;)

Speaking of the drive to put all QF employees on JQ conditions, that's a foregone conclusion. Blind Freddy can see why JQ get the first batch of 787s. I have a gut feeling though for a number of reasons, that much of this posturing - or more to the point, the way the company is going about it - might come back to bite someone. Time will tell.

[Dropt McGutz]

Word out on the street is that the company wants to offer 744 pus 10% for the A380 but no overtime.

[domo]

is that a pilot offer dropz

[Dropt McGutz]

Yes it was, sorry.

[captaindejavu]

A little-publicised fact.....
When the A380 was being number-crunched several years ago by the Rat, the amount allowed in the pilot pay budget was for B744 PLUS 18%, and with existing overtime rules! :eek: Can anyone explain why, with such obscene QF Executive Bonuses and company-wide contempt for Management, we should accept an insulting offer of 10% with no overtime? AIPA - don't you DARE even THINK about doing that !:=

[Sonny Hammond]

The company will pay a fair rate for the 380 because:

a. The baby boomer flight ops managers have always looked after no1. Why would that change?

b. Cause this aint a lcc plane and the rat won't afford guys getting endorsed and leaving.

Its not super long haul so the company will pay O/T and they'll pay a premium on the 744 rate too.

Mind you, I am sure the J* boys are clamouring to get an angle on this ship....

[Turbo 5B]

It's wednesday evening...........has anyone heard?

[Dagger]

Wednesday evening. Just before the origin.

The silence is deafening.:confused:

[Turbo 5B]

What?
I can't hear you over the silence.