PDA

View Full Version : Things at Tulla looking a little grim.


chockchucker
30th Jul 2006, 23:03
1000 Qantas jobs under threat
Email Print Normal font Large font Scott Rochfort
July 31, 2006

NERVOUSNESS among the 1000 Qantas maintenance staff in Melbourne is growing, with one union fearing the national carrier has already decided to close its Boeing 737 heavy repair base in Tullamarine.

Even though Qantas has not yet announced the results of the six-month review of its narrow-body aircraft engineering operations, the Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association fears the airline may have made up its mind to shut the Tullamarine base weeks ago.

"We have grave concerns that the decision has already been made," said ALAEA federal secretary Steve Purvinas.

Qantas, however, has flatly rejected these claims. "No decision has been made," said Qantas's head of engineering and maintenance, David Cox.

"We expect to finalise the review in September," he said.

Yet this has not dispelled suspicions Qantas held off closing the Melbourne base when it announced the closure of its Sydney heavy maintenance base in March - and 340 jobs were lost - for fear of triggering a major revolt from its staff and unions.

The ALAEA has also warned any closure of the Tullamarine base will be in the face of the huge productivity gains made at the facility in recent times.

Over the past 18 months, the union claims, the average number of days to conduct a once-in-five year "D" check on a 737 at the facility has been reduced from 35 to 23 days. It also argues the facility was under budget last year.

"We don't know anywhere that does it quicker and anywhere does it safer than the Tulla facility," Mr Purvinas said.

Despite Qantas's claims the cost of its facilities are 15 to 20 per cent above the cost of doing maintenance work overseas, Mr Purvinas said Tullamarine was just as efficient as any other facility in the world.

The Australian Manufacturing and Workers Union, which has 300 members at the Tullamarine maintenance base, is expected to push Qantas for some feedback on the review of its engineering operations this week.

AMWU assistant national secretary Glenn Thompson has warned that Qantas should consult unions and its workers before making any decision.

"We're not going to cop a situation like Sydney," Mr Thompson said, referring to the way the airline announced the closure of its 747 repair base without talking to unions first.

Tensions between the AMWU and Qantas are also expected to rise this month with the two yet to make any inroads in negotiations for a new enterprise bargaining agreement.

There are fears Qantas could ultimately send all of its heavy maintenance work overseas.



.............Of course the decision was made months ago. I wouldn't trust D. Cox as far as I could throw him. Looks like there is going to be a real glut of engineers on the market again, all clamoring for jobs. All those poor ex-Ansett guys probably thought they were safe after getting a guernsey at Qantas. Think again. Looks like the management that shafted you before are going to do it to you all over again.:(

soldier of fortune
31st Jul 2006, 00:55
be ready -air new zeal christchurch base will take take over the tulla work they are active in recruiting @ the moment + they have just built a dock there for b737/a320- the hanger in question will have VB b737ng on one side and qf b737 cl/ng on the other .
i am not trying to scaremonger - but thats what i belive will happen-
the b737s will not go to avalon because clearly they have no idea about b737 heavy maint/or modifacation work (ie aae b733 freighters) then again that hasn't stoped QF doing something stupid before
(eg H245 closure all b747 work to avv) :yuk: :yuk: :yuk:
i hope i am wrong

Buster Hyman
31st Jul 2006, 02:32
Well, lets hope that Howard finally gets some backbone & lays down the law to QF management. Shift any more jobs OS & it's curtains to your little protected Empire! :mad: They've already gotten away with too much!

jack red
31st Jul 2006, 02:39
...........then again that hasn't stopped QF doing something stupid before

Amen :{

Buster it's not John Howard's position to lay down the law to any Company management in Oz. Legislation must be put in place to stop that rot and I can't see it happening, with the Libs, in the too distant future. :mad:

Buster Hyman
31st Jul 2006, 03:00
Well, I agree about Legislation, but it's the "back room" deals that we all know must go on. For a Govt. that is gung ho about competition, there sure is a lot of protection going on.

Turbo 5B
31st Jul 2006, 05:27
QF had to listen to little johnny when it announced the demise of sydney. They had to abandon the advice given to them by the seabury consultants group that they should move all heavy maintenance offshore.
If it turns out that geoff and co have just rearranged the timing of events to cover up qf's real intentions little johnny might just remove that protection and open up to singapore.
Be prepared for a very public stoush.
But also be aware that it's not just the rest of heavy in the firing line, ACS has been told to reduce head counts and that will happen across the company.
It's like watching a cowardly matador jamming lances into a noble bull, one at a time to kill it slowly, whilst inflicting maximum pain on the bull.
RIP QANTAS Engineering, you served the flying public well, but your skill and expertise are no longer welcome in the land of maximum profits.

Buster Hyman
31st Jul 2006, 07:39
Now...hypothetically...if the Govt. did open up the market, I imagine that QF management have a contingency for this as well. I bet they would announce cuts to pretty much the rest of the group to "compensate" for the anticipated revenue losses...:suspect: We all know who would take up the slack.

Turbo 5B
31st Jul 2006, 09:12
Not many places left for the axe to swing is there?
They'll have to send in a stump grinder to finish the job.

Sunfish
31st Jul 2006, 21:23
Of course the decision is already made! Margaret Jackson went to the same businesss school as I did. You are taught in strategy 101 that you do your reorganisations quick and dirty or long and clean.

That means you either say to a whole group of people on Friday: "don't come Monday" then on Monday say to whats left "Well thats all behind us, lets move on". The long and clean method involves months of consultation, big redundancy payouts Vr schemes etc. etc. and work continues as usual while this occurs.

The "slow and dirty" method is by definition sub optimal.

Now QF management are not fools. The have made their decision, at least in principle, they have told everyone about the "review" deliberately to generate fear, uncertainty, and doubt in employees minds. There is no other reason for announcing the review. Their purpose is to ensure that when the axe swings, the employees react by saying the equivalent of "phew! He is only going to chop of my legs, I was worried he was going to take my arms as well!".

As for Government - Commercial liason, this takes place in a number of ways that include:

1. Outright bribery, for example "upgrades".

2. Paid lobbyists.

3. Media manipulation.

4. Boardroom lunches.

5, Free political free kicks.

The intent is to get your "message" absorbed by the government so that it gets into policy by the back door (the ministers office door) rather than through rational analysis by public servants.

Qantas has delivered a very effective series of main messages over time. these include:

a) There is only room for one Australian International airline. (meaning Ansett's fledgling international service was not in Australias national interest)

b) There is only room for two major domestic airlines. (meaning the government shouldn't bail out Ansett when it went under, because it wasn't in the national interest to do otherwise)

These arguments are always self serving and in the interests of the firm concerned. The economic name for them is "special pleading". The lobbying is especially effective if you can coerce the public servants to support your lobbying in the interests of advancing their own careers. Thats why we only have four (five?) major banks in Australia, and zero competition amongst members of the cartel - where do you think treasury economists go after their career plateaus in the public service?

If public servants intercept the lobbyists before they can get to the Minister, the letter you write (and I've written a few) says something like

a) "We understand that if you elect to close xxxxxxx it will result in the loss of YYY jobs, but of course this is a purely commercial decision that is yours to make." Translation: "We don't care, there is no political downside, your factory is crap anyway, so bugger off"

b) "We understand that your decision to close xxxxxxx will result in the loss of yyy jobs, but we understand this is a purely commercial decision. We are concerned that this may have an impact on the community and we wish to work with you to develop a transition arrangements to minimise the consequences." Translation: "Your factory is in a marginal electorate."

c) "we understand that your company on the cusp of securing a major business opportunity that could result in the retention of xxx jobs now under threat, an increase in employment and increased economic activity in the region. We wish to work with you to secure this opportunity for NSW."
Transaltion: "Bugger! Marginal electorate, our majority is only two. How much do you want?"

Qantas would no doubt brief the Federal government on its proposed actions. It may also brief the Victorian Government. I would be extremely surprised if either of them would give an assistance package.

The letters to Qantas will say something like "we understand that tough commercial decisions are necessary to maintain your company's viability"

soldier of fortune
4th Aug 2006, 01:30
of topic a little bit.
with boeing annoucing that SR TECHNICS to be the prefered gold care maintenance provider for the b787s -one wonders if qantas/jq will send their b787s to zurich for heavy or SR technics will buy out bris heavy maint in partnership with boeing and qantas and maintain them there. :confused: