Qantas Crew (cabin) Topics [Archive]

lowerlobe

7th Sep 2006, 07:30

Ahh the usual rhetoric and twisted propaganda from the faaa in the guise of Guardian1.

If you had read my posts you would have seen that I was responding to a previous post about a rumour and then gave a brief synopsis about the golden girls as sydney s/h asked who they were and how they came about.

Neither was as you suggested a fairtale but maybe that is just because you girls have had a little too much pixie powder in your little ICAN proof bunker.If you guys took off your fairy dresses and moved about in the real world you might get a better idea of what is happening.

Guardian jumped in without checking the facts as usual just as the faaa accuses the company of.

Exactly where guardian did I spout a theory that was wrong.You just admitted that there was an angle on the “golden girls” issue and that the faaa was looking at it.

If you (the faaa) could be accurate and up to date for once it would be refreshing. Even better would be to keep us up to date with newsletters instead of send us advertising for law firms.

The only fairy tale around here is the performance of the faaa and the only ones to believe it are the 3 girls supposedly running the show.

As far as VR goes for myself,I wish as the saying goes,maybe next time when my mortgage is a little smaller…unlike one of you guys.

Guardian is that rumour true, are you prepared to be honest and tell us that one of the 3 stooges has applied for VR.????

Also if MM has enough time to apply for another job why doesn’t he have enough time to do some flying as well just to keep in touch ?

Wed Webbing Woop

7th Sep 2006, 07:41

Gee I was getting worried that there were no telephone boxes around the FAAA bunker for Steven to go in and come "out" as Guardian1.
Phew!..................relief.
He sounds that he really has got the Acting GM's ear ( aka Tarantula ) and that the VR numbers will be announced tomorrow, How many cups of coffee did it take to that bit of info???
..................and as fo MM nominating himself to go on the Super board......WHAT THA !!!!????
Do the 3 Amigo's realise what is on the horizon during the next 12 months, -probably the most important period for an elected official in the FAAA/AICCA/AFAA history.
Oh no , not for MM, he wants to play in the sand pit with Cuisenaire Blocks and talk $$$$ with the "boyz".
Conflict of interest -nah, never .
How about "CONFLICT OF CONSCIENCE"??????
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm-sound familar????
www

Eden99

7th Sep 2006, 10:31

If Guardian1 is Steven Reed or Michael Mijatov or Andrew Smedley or even Santa Claus, 1 thing is certain he/she is spot on,accurate and obviously knowledgeable.

Unlike wed webbing loop and lowerlobe who continue to display their hatred for the FAAA, the vast bulk of crew support the above mentioned people including Santa.

I have been reading this thread and its related threads for quite a while. Invariably, lowerlobe and www (prob the same person) carp and criticise the FAAA . This is indicative of the fact that they are probably non union crew or otherwise part of the hopeless lot we turfed out of the FAAA a couple of years ago.

Unlike the 2 numbskulls( lowerlobe & www), the FAAA has overwhelming support amongst crew. They realise that Geoff Dixon attacks only the L/H FAAA and no other union. This means they are very effective and seen as an obstacle to the Company's plans.

Also, good on MM nominating for the super position. The company is preparing massive changes, including possibly outsourcing super and he wants to protect crew. Undoubtedly he will win the position hands down.

Its amazing that someone like MM who is protecting crew interests against QF, in a continually outspoken manner is criticised by such anonymous, gutless and useless non-descripts as www and lowerlobe.

Geoff Dixon and other senior executives can sit on many boards, but because MM dares to try to protect crews interests in the super field , he is bagged by cretins on here.

PATHETIC!

Guardian1

7th Sep 2006, 11:17

lowerlobe

7th Sep 2006, 11:41

The other third of the 3 stooges has shown up and is as usual blowing the faaa horn. He might find this interesting but I don’t hate the faaa actually believe in collective bargaining and strength through union membership.

It is the current elected officials otherwise known as the 3 stooges that I have a problem with.

I find it interesting though that Darth is telling us that he does not like to deal with the faaa.Considering the extent that the current leadership has gone to to appease the management it is nothing short of amazing and certainly nothing that MM and her gang can boast about. I think this is more of a fairytale that Guardian talks about so much.

It would appear more likely that it is nothing more than a pr campaign by Darth to justify his set up plans for J*international cabin crew. MM and her mates Eden and Guardian continue to tell us how successful they are because of this but there have never been any concrete examples of strategic wins by the faaa over management to justify this claim.

To back MM’s plans for the position vacated by Gary is incredible. Obviously MM has enough spare time on his hands to apply for another job and that begs the question why he needs so much help in the office and why he can never be reached when crew ring the faaa office. If MM wants to be on the super board that’s fine but he should vacate the current job he has now so that he can devote all of his time to the superannuation issue.

Conversely if he wants to stay in his current position with the faaa, he should stick with that job and not look elsewhere for work .I don’t care how many boards Darth and other people are on, MM was elected to run the faaa and not to sit on other committees To compare himself with the corporate club that exists in Australia is truly pathetic

twiggs

7th Sep 2006, 12:21

It is the current elected officials otherwise known as the 3 stooges that I have a problem with.
I find it interesting though that Darth is telling us that he does not like to deal with the faaa.Considering the extent that the current leadership has gone to to appease the management it is nothing short of amazing and certainly nothing that MM and her gang can boast about. I think this is more of a fairytale that Guardian talks about so much.
It would appear more likely that it is nothing more than a pr campaign by Darth to justify his set up plans for J*international cabin crew. MM and her mates Eden and Guardian continue to tell us how successful they are because of this but there have never been any concrete examples of strategic wins by the faaa over management to justify this claim.

It would seem that your dislike of the current FAAA leadership is more a personal one than a dislike of the way they operate.
All of your posts refer to "she" when it is well known that they are male.
If you didn't refer to people you criticize in such a personal way, people might take your criticisms a little more seriously.
Are you a homophobe perhaps mr lowerlobe?
(or should I say MRS lowerlobe)

Machinegun Fellatio

7th Sep 2006, 21:15

A new corporate wardrobe for middle and senior management is nearing design completion.
Dixon had only one requirement.
In order to reflect the current management approach to staff he has insisted that the shirt component be brown.
Dixon also discovered that he and a certain political figure of the 1940s have a great deal in common:height,an innate ability for propaganda, a total disregard for for others and a personality disorder known as narcissism.
When Dixon realised that his 2 IC Borghetti was charaterised as "Il Duce" he was livid.
Not to be outdone he is now growing a small odd looking moustache.
A door plaque is being made.Its all hush hush but inside sources suggest "DF" will be Dixons new salutation in apparent reference to a teutonic term meaning "leader."
History will no doubt draw similar comparisons.

lowerlobe

7th Sep 2006, 21:27

or Mrs Ba ,good to have you back. I could agree with you but then we would both be wrong.

My point is and I realise it is difficult for you to understand theses things that although I support the union and collective bargaining it is the current elected officials that I believe are acting like a bunch of old women when it comes to dealing with the company and no that does not make me homophobic.

However it is good to see that you have taken up psychology and trying to better yourself but I think you have quite a way to go before you are qualified.

I was making the point that although Darth has said he does not like dealing with the current faaa and that MM and his cheer squad ,guardian and Eden boast about not being on Darths Christmas card list there is nothing of substance to back these claims up.

It would seem that Darth was just making these claims so that he can justify using the new IR laws to set up the new cabin crew with J* international.The public reading the newspapers and the faaa might have swallowed the line but there have been no wins that I can remember that would have even raised Darths blood pressure one point.

My other point is that MM was elected by the membership to run the faaa not to run for the board of QF superannuation.I believe that if that is your job then you should stick with that and not be diverted to other matters.In the lead up to our next EBA or rather the expiry of our current EBA it is going to be critical that MM has his eye on the one ball and not be distracted.I am sure there are others with financial expertise that can look after our interests with superannuation.If MM has enough spare time after doing his job with the faaa so that he can contemplate applying for and fulfilling another job then maybe he should consider flying again for a trip a roster so that he can keep in touch with those people who elected him.

surfside6

7th Sep 2006, 21:53

You have so many wonderful ideas.
Such vision.
Such a propensity for original thought.
A wonderful tactical mind.
So articulate.
We are in awe.
Lowerlobe for president!! (of the NSW Geriatric Society)

lowerlobe

7th Sep 2006, 21:57

As I said to Twiggs,I could agree with you but then we would both be wrong..

Instead of just ridicule how about some substance from the faaa cheer squad or some new policies or plans instead of Adverts for law firms in our newsletters

cartexchange

7th Sep 2006, 22:28

there is No doubt that MM will be suitable to the Super board, but NOT whilst he is on the FAAA as an executive.
It looks like he is feathering his nest, if things get really bad with Long Haul Cabin crew conditions then he doesn't have to come back to flying with our "NEW" wages and conditions.
BY nominating himself on the board and receiving a wage from them and also his wage from the FAAA he will have set himself up very nicely!

A position on the board of directors with our Super and also his position with the FAAA will be perfect.

Should he be voted out at the next FAAA election then he has his board position to rely on or vice versa...........

I just wish he would use this spare time to do some flying to really see what its now like.......sh!t 7 years is a hell of a long time

surfside6

7th Sep 2006, 22:40

First MM is not going a good job with the FAAA.
He should do more flying
Now there is conflict of interest with super board.
Is he allowed to have a personal life?
Is he allowed to make decisions to allow an exit from flying like every other person?
NO!...according to Cartexchange and Lower(Prefrontal)Lobe.
The guy just cant win.
If he leaves will the aforementioned fill the void?...NO!
They prefer to criticize from the sidelines .....its much safer

lowerlobe

7th Sep 2006, 22:50

Surfside ,
Our message like you is simple but you don't seem to understand it.

We have no problem with MM going onto the super board but not with his current job.Our EBA has just over one year to go and we need someone who has their mind on that job and not others.If MM wants to go into finance then that is fine but he should resign from the faaa before that happens.

We could argue all day and we will never agree so lets have a bit of humour....

A newsletter from senior company management to all crew….

As you may be aware our esteemed leader, the prince of darkness, the master of the darkside,Darth has told us that every section of the company must now be it’s own cost center .He means that it will not be satisfactory for the Cabin crew department to be just cost neutral but we must generate our own profit.

To that end we are taking some measures that will revolutionise our cost base.

1: Each year we will be offering a VR package for Australian based crew until each of you is gone or paying for your jobs on individual work place agreements only possible with the help of your friendly neighborhood Liberal party member. The main difference is that each VR package will be sponsored by a major company. This year’s package is as you might have heard sponsored by a major aircraft manufacturer…

2: Continuing this theme, all cabin crew must bring back their old company issued cabin bags and have them replaced with your new ones which are sponsored by a major soft drink manufacturer and will of course have their logo on the bags. Crew are not permitted to have any other stickers or signage on their bags that would detract from this advertising revenue source.

3: All uniform jackets will also have advertising on them and we will be announcing the brand name shortly. If you know of any company that is looking for advertising space can you direct them to our new advertising manager located on QCC1 with the bright neon light decorated office formerly known as Bob the builder .

4: After a successful trial on Darth star, we will have more advertising on the overhead lockers and inside safety cards and toilets on all aircraft and passengers will now have a surcharge on their tickets to pay for the purchase and dry cleaning of blankets and pillows as well as a fuel surcharge and other incidentals.

5: Crew will also now have to wear new uniform shoes and you guessed it sponsored by a major sporting shoe manufacturer... (Starts with an N as Twiggs would put it)

6: Crew will also not be permitted to wear their own watches as these will form part of our ongoing advertising revenue source to please Darth.

Crew will also be charged for crew meals and any drinks that are consumed during the flight not to mention wear and tear on company property such as meal carts that are used in the course of your employment.

Another idea we are looking at is a surcharge on the pax ticket to pay for the cabin crew on their flight. We feel that although there will be initial resentment and resistance of these ideas the public will eventually accept them or forget about them.

These and other revenue sources are being formulated in conjunction with the faaa who have started their own generation of revenue from advertising to replace lost income from the crew who take VR.These measures should ensure my job at the very least even if cabin crew are eventually outsourced completely.

Yours insincerely,

Life’s Good

Pegasus747

7th Sep 2006, 22:59

First can i just say that i have really enjoyed a considerable break whilst on my enforced LSL. Having said that it's pleasing to see that nothing changes here.

The position on the Super Board is not a paid position. There is in fact no salary and furthermore there are no "directors fees".

More importantly the Companies representative on the Super Board is our dear old friend, that loveable old bulldug Kevin "you gotta love me" Brown.

Now for those intellectual rodents in here that dont realise it, dear old Kev's Job is to protect the interests of Qantas on the Super Board.

Ian Woods the President of the Pilots Association is the Director for the pilots, perhaps he should give up his role at AIPA too. Because of Ian's involvement we no longer have to pay a super surcharge tax.

Rene Herbert when he was the Director on the Super FUnd was also the head of the Cabin Crew Union at the time too.

The only reason that we have the Super that we do is wholly and totally because of the Union movement you lot on ininformed bozo's.

I would humbly suggest that you take your homophobic prejudices somewhere else. I would suggest that you take your informed rubbish somewhere else. And more important i would suggest that you run for office and offer some sort of viable alternative rather than the bile, and nonsense based on ignorance and envy that you peddle here and at work

fondest regards from One that actually understands the rather larger issues

cartexchange

7th Sep 2006, 23:08

let clarify this/
So Pegasus are you stating that there is absolutely no renumeration for sitting on the super board, absolutely zilch. Nothing paid in any way.
Its a totally voluntary poistion.

surfside6

7th Sep 2006, 23:23

How about an apology, Cartex and Prefrontal,now that you have some facts?.
You two, to a large extent, have been responsible for the closure of several Cabin crew threads.
Still you come back with the same uninformed nonsense.
You should be banned down to IP address level.
What a pain you 2 must be to work with!
MM is doing a great job for the FAAA.
His dedication and passion are humbling.
I can only hope that commonsense prevails and he is elected to the super board.
If we had more people like MM representing us we would be in much better shape.
So give the uninformed carping a rest and try to provide some support for someone who is doing a damn fine job!!!!

Eden99

7th Sep 2006, 23:23

I'll answer your question cartexchange. Correct, the member -elected positions are purely honourary...they are not paid positions.Furthemore, meetings of the Qantas super board are held about 6 times a year.... not onerous i would have thought.

Some of you FAAA haters can't even get your facts straight. Pity you don't read the Superannuation material that was posted out that makes it clear it is not a paid position for the employee directors as MM would be if he is elected.

But it is not a surprise that those of you who attack MM for trying to defend our super can't even read .

That's why he heads the FAAA, because he can do several things at once , wheras his critics in here are obviously very limited individuals.

As for lowerlobes ridiculous comments about no "wins" by the FAAA, he forgets that EBA7 reversed every failure of EBA6. Very convenient and selective memory indeed.

qcc2

7th Sep 2006, 23:28

i agree with LL, its not personal with the faaa excecs. they now have around 12 month or so before negotiations commence with the new EBA. here are some of the issues need urgent research and planning for the next EBA. compare international wages amongst our major competitors, compare annual flight times between competitors, start negotiating flight duty limitations with casa (l am constantly amazed at some of our thai and kiwis patterns), prepare a pa campaign (if needed),and others. as i said before MM is qualified for the super job,and i would have no objection if he would not be in his current position, but this is not the case. ongoing changes to super annuation laws take many hours of courses, meetings,etc, which would make his job in the faaa a part time one.not good:=

cartexchange

7th Sep 2006, 23:41

surf side, your post is totally out of line and for your information neither one of us has ever been responsible for thread closure, that is usually done by people like you and BA lert.All I did was ask a question and I was interested in an opinion, Eden and Pegasus have answered the questions and so have all the others, your post are the only ones that have vitriol and personal attacks in them.
Eden and Pegasus thanks for your reply, much appreciated.
DO you think that this position on the super board will in no way interfere with MM's duties at the FAAA.
As stated before I do not doubts MM's abilities for this position, I do however see it better that he does a bit of flying as he would be able to get a real idea how people feel about the job and the FAAA.
Surfside in order for you to calm down quickly may I suggest a valium.

lowerlobe

8th Sep 2006, 00:38

To help you guys with your busy work schedule and because just about all of your responses are the same I decided to post a typical faaa response to criticism.

This way the faaa can spend more time on important matters although no one is quite sure what they are.

Here goes…

We at the FAAA are fantastic and doing a great job.

We at the FAAA know what we are doing and you have nothing to worry about, in fact we are so good at what we do that we are all applying for other jobs to keep ourselves busy.

Those who criticise us know absolutely nothing and must be former FAAA officials; we just did not know that there were so many of you.

You can have complete confidence in our dedication, committment and ability to look after our …sorry your needs and did I mention that we are dedicated and should be committed.

We do not appreciate comments about us from those that are obviously homogenized, they are just cowardly.

Those of you that post here with nick names are cowardly and not honest because you have not told us your real names and you know less than nothing and tell fairytales.

We only post under our real names ,my real and full name is Pegasus747 (My parents read too many fairytales and had no sense of humour) ,it even says so on my shirt and Steve’s is Guardian1, I’m not sure who Andy is .It all depends who is in the office on the day and sometimes we get confused.

We at the FAAA have the company scared and on the run although we are not sure exactly why.

We at the FAAA are fantastic and know everything and should be re elected because we should be and because we are fantastic and very humble not to mention modest.

Ok guys thats my one ,Guardian or Eden your turn next if someone is cowardly enough to respond to my post

Machinegun Fellatio

8th Sep 2006, 01:01

Lowerlobe
This thread is for QF discussion ..not personal vendettas.
The guys do a great job.
Legislation makes it difficult for any Union or Association to be truly effective.
One can only hope that a change of Government occurs next year.
Dixon would get a better result if he embraced his employees with his vision rather than turning them into the enemy.
Richard Branson does a magnificent job of managing his people.
Morale is excellent.
He is approachable.
Perhaps he should make a bid for QF if ever the QF Sale Act is repealed.

Guardian1

8th Sep 2006, 01:12

Firstly, i don't think surfside is the one who needs to calm down.

Several of you, continually attack the FAAA and mijatov, reed and smedley in particular. You do it on spurious and ill informed grounds.... but the real issue is you do it deliberately and with malice. It's a no brainer that some of you are probably former FAAA people who were turfed out for incompetence.

In relation to your comments cartexchange.... which are more measured and considered..... the answers are these i think:

1) fundamentally you miss a point about super...... it is a basic and hugely important component of conditions of employment and future ability to live properly. I and most people would absolutely think it is right and highly desirable that the head of our union (MM) would want to protect our super arrangements. THIS IS PART OF MM'S DUTIES!!

2) Comments about MM flying are just plain silly and underscore a complete lack of understanding of the complexity of running a modern and effective union. Every day, serious issues come up in the dealings with QF and the FAAA and the head of the FAAA must be there to make snap decisions, to attend important meetings and negotiations with QF, with Australian Airlines and all the other meetings that occur with other bodies ranging from the ACTU, OTHER UNIONS AND OTHER OUTSIDE ORGANISATIONS.

Imagine, MM saying he's off on a 10 day trip.... see ya later ... and all decision making in the FAAA comes to a halt and the business of defending members interests comes to a standstill. Very good state of affairs that would be. And then when he comes back from that 10 day trip...he would have to have a rest like other cabin crew..so further gridlock in the FAAA.

Then people would quite rightly be screaming.

In addition to those considerations above, the FAAA is a multi million dollar concern... it has staff etc which need to be managed and administered too.

I t is easy to sit from the sideline and criticise and offer silly suggestions when you don't actually have a clue about the matters that you comment on.

MM takes his position very seriously, as those that know him only too rightly know. He heads the FAAA at the most critical time in it's history... and he is totally committed to protecting members interests in all fields whether industrial or conditions including super.

Finally, the suggestion that somehow MM needs to fly to understand the issues that matter to crew.....even if it was possible in light of the consideraions i have outlined above... is naive and silly.

My understanding is that MM flew up to his election as head of the FAAA in 2004. He heads a Divisional Council of 12 others who fly continually, he has contact with crew on a daily basis both face to face, by phone, by email and by letter. He knows precisely what the issues are, probably better than anyone else because he is privy to information that cannot be made public at times.

So i would reject the notion that MM should fly whilst he heads the FAAA because that would hurt the interests of crew and i further reject the notion that because he doesn't fly that this somehow means he is out of touch. The fact that MM can get 88% of members to support an EBA and 71% to support the JFK dispensation illustrates he is very much in touch. No other union gets these sorts of huge support levels for their initiatives.

Finally, i speak with a bit of authority on these matters because i know nearly all the FAAA officials and am very familiar with the way the FAAA operates and most of the issues too.

It is sad that a person like MM and some of the others on the FAAA who are in my view the best reps we have ever had. are subjected to abuse and nonsense by some in here. It would be fair enough if those that attack them actually had any knowledge about the issues or had any talent themselves.

Eden99

8th Sep 2006, 01:22

Well said Guardian.

I have spoken to a few of my friends the last 2 days. They thought it was a good idea for MM to stand for the super vacancy and will vote for him hands down. 2 are short haul and they will as well as they consider MM and the LH FAAA are very effective.

twiggs

8th Sep 2006, 02:36

Anyone else got solid info on this one?
This supposedly happened at the hotel in NRT.
A CSS was found with a biscuit from the aircraft.

If it is true, why are people still taking stuff from the aircraft?
There have been so many warnings.

Butterfield8

8th Sep 2006, 03:23

Crew ex MEL l(but Syd Based) arrived at the hotel in NRT.
Instead of checking in downstairs they were asked to do so on the second floor.
Here they were subjected to a search by company security personnel.
The Supervisor was found to have a chocolate (company stores)in his posession.
He has been stood down pending further investigation.
WARNING:
1. Before you leave the aircraft check your pockets.Ensure that you have no panamax,chocolates,biscuits,Unicef envelopes jelly beans.This is stuff that we all carry during the sector to offer pax and their kids.
2.Do NO take milk, water,teabags or anything from your crew tray.These are all considered company stores.
If you are found with anything for which you do not have a receipt you can be subjected to disciplinary action.
This can include dismissal.
You work for a company that uses fear and intimidation to manage.
Do not give them an opportunity to manage you out of the company

qcc2

8th Sep 2006, 03:30

yes it is true, it seems the message has not gotten through to some crew. its not that the security guys want to make an excample out of little things like a biscuit, but they have to follow the follow their rules. and they are very simple. anything not on your crew tray, DON'T TOUCH!!:sad:

twiggs

8th Sep 2006, 04:13

My point is and I realise it is difficult for you to understand theses things that although I support the union and collective bargaining it is the current elected officials that I believe are acting like a bunch of old women when it comes to dealing with the company and no that does not make me homophobic.

Lowerlobe, I think your behaviour is more representative of that analogy

PS. stop sending me PM's, I'm not interested, no means no!

OCCR

8th Sep 2006, 04:22

ssshhhhhh twigs
shhhhhhh ssshhhhhhh
'our illustrious leaders at the FAAA bunker don't want to be sidetracked at the moment they are too busy conducting a propaganda war with the latest super board elections.
anyway there must be more than a chocolate biscuit involved.
Don't call the FAAA though! they are very busy, plus with the amount of chocolate biscuits that are consumed by them you think they would have some sympathy for the NRT guy.

lowerlobe

8th Sep 2006, 04:27

Twiggs…Twiggs…Twiggs….I thought we had changed the subject and now you bring back the insults..Are you trying to get this thread closed down as well…..oh well some people never learn.

If you read my example of an faaa response and then read Steve's ....sorry Guardians response you will see I was right on the money..

We are fantastic ...We know what we are doing

If you don't agree with us you must be silly and ill informed..

Actually if you saw an interview with our illustrious Prime Mincer you would have seen where he does not see the need for a referendum on Water recycling.This is interesting if you remember that is almost the same sentiments that Guardian expressed when asked about whether a vote was necessary.Maybe our PM is going to the same school of thought as the faaa...

We know what we are doing

We don't need to ask what you think

You voted for me and I can do what ever I want

twiggs

8th Sep 2006, 04:49

No Lobe, just highlighting your many insults, and I will continue to do so until you stop.

Anyway, back to the NRT incident, the CSS must have had the item in their bag.
I doubt anyone would put a biscuit or chocolate or whatever it was in their pocket.
Hence, there would be little they could do, besides use the old one, "I didn't put it there and my bag has been out of my sight and unlocked for the last 10 hours".

cartexchange

8th Sep 2006, 04:58

twiggs do you really think it was about a chocolate biscuit or even a bottle of water I don't think so!
I have been searched and I had a bottle of water with a receipt of course and they never even bothered to ask me, all they were after was booze.
Anyway choco biscuits are on our tray and we are allowed to remove any item that is on our tray, plus with all the food that crew carry there is no way they can do anything about that.
the item must have had QF stamped all over it.
The amount of salads and other misc items (quarantine permitting) in their bags is incredible.
Guardian et AL have been very quiet on this one, how about some information boys/:confused:

Eden99

8th Sep 2006, 05:24

8th September 2006
ID51-06

Attention all Qantas Long Haul Flight Attendants

REDUNDANCY DETAILS

This afternoon the FAAA was briefed by the Company about Long Haul redundancy.

The Company has decided that ALL applicants for the voluntary redundancy (VR) will be released. The Company will release a statement this afternoon and on Monday it will send letters to the home address of all cabin crew affected.

The letters to crew will contain the release date for each cabin crew member, but essentially for most crew their last day within Qantas will be October 1. Crew with carry over trips into the new roster will be released by 8 October.

Many of you who are leaving have been cabin crew for all of your working lives and you have greatly contributed to the success of Qantas as one of the great Airlines of the world.

Your solidarity and support for each other is demonstrated by your membership of the FAAA. That solidarity has resulted in all of us having enviable conditions of employment. Your contribution and legacy is acknowledged by all of us who remain.

On behalf of the FAAA, the entire membership, the elected officials and the staff of the FAAA, I wish you the very best for your future endeavours.

I also take the opportunity to advise those of you leaving that you need to advise the FAAA in writing that you will be ceasing membership, in order that union deductions can cease. I also wish to advise that associate membership of the FAAA can be maintained by contacting the Office.

Written and authorised by Michael Mijatov – Secretary International Division.

20 Ewan Street Mascot NSW 2020 Tel 61 2 8337 1111 Fax 61 2 8337 1122 Emergency Contact 0414 894 192

qcc2

8th Sep 2006, 05:43

would our faaa reps here enlighten us as to how many crews are taking VR?
thanks:ok:

twiggs

8th Sep 2006, 06:07

twiggs do you really think it was about a chocolate biscuit or even a bottle of water I don't think so!
I have been searched and I had a bottle of water with a receipt of course and they never even bothered to ask me, all they were after was booze.
Anyway choco biscuits are on our tray and we are allowed to remove any item that is on our tray, plus with all the food that crew carry there is no way they can do anything about that.

Cartexchange,
there was no mention of booze being the cause of the CSS being stood down.
I have never found a sweet biscuit on any of my crew trays, I only ever get a dry cracker.
These days we are rarely getting chocolates with our snacks.
I suggest you read the carriage of consumable items policy again as the company have been highlighting lately.

cartexchange

8th Sep 2006, 06:14

i never said that he had booze!

I simply stated that when we were searched that is what they are after.

lowerlobe

8th Sep 2006, 08:29

I think it is time to stop jumping to conclusions regarding the crew member in NRT.In our society and with our legal system you are innocent until you have been proven guilty and as we have seen with both Nick and the unicef incidents things may not be what they seem.

A series of quotes from TWIGGS

“A CSS was found with a biscuit from the aircraft.”

“the CSS must have had the item in their bag.”

“These days we are rarely getting chocolates with our snacks”

It would appear that our resident judge ,jury and exectutioner TWIGGS has already pronounced the crew member concerned guilty with these lines.

TWIGGS on the contrary,most crew snacks have a chocolate bar except for some like Singapore which is usually a muesli bar or similar.

As I said let’s give the crew member a break and benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.

As far as VR is concerned I wish all those taking it the best of luck for the future

speedbirdhouse

8th Sep 2006, 08:51

Given that it now seems QF will let all those who have applied for VR go it will be interesting to see what happens with promotion.

Rumours suggest that 60 odd CSMs had finally had a gutfull and wanted out.

The average years of service for these crew must have been in excess of 20 years each.

20 X 60 =1200 years worth of experience walking out the door.

To be replaced with ............. AKL based FAs?

galleyslag

8th Sep 2006, 09:09

S/H bid packages out - Bombay on the way:* When will the book be closed on Regional flying, thet are still making up as they see fit! Coulld be worsr it could be CBR overnight. Maybe we'll just BOM returns?

Wed Webbing Woop

8th Sep 2006, 09:28

The "conflict of conscience" phrase used by www is very familiar. It was used by the FAAA to refer to those union members who scabbed in february 2003 during the stop work meeting.
Wed webbing loop by using this phrase has identified who he is. He is an ex line manager who worked during the stop work meeting in 2003. No wonder he so detests the FAAA.
CAUGHT OUT BIG TIME !

..........and so it came to pass, that,.... Guardian has "outed" me.

You're way to smart for me.

To think that I gave you the "key phrase" -then you searched for the answer.....just like in COLD CASE.

Guardian, my only wish now is ......could you arrange that my payout figures are changed to reflect the years I spent as a "law abiding Line Manager".
There must be a difference of at least $30K!!!

Muchas Grassi-arse.

www

qcc2

8th Sep 2006, 23:45

speedy, you might find the average years of service of the 60 retiring csm's is averaged at 30 years (if not more,the top 80 in the senority list have 30+service). so thats 1800 years of service/experience walking out with little thank you:{ :{ :{
well done :D to all retiries and lets catch up at the review:ok:

and to our domestic collegues get ready for beijing in november

argus.moon

9th Sep 2006, 01:15

I can see a day in the not too distant future when LH has three destinations...LAX LHR JNB and thats it.Jet* and regional will have the rest....ahhhh 2 years to go

sydney s/h

9th Sep 2006, 10:43

You QF Longhaulers keep refering to shorthaul as "domestic" etc... Does it hurt you to say Shorthaul or something?

Just like the FA who called me a "purser" and not a CSM when i told her what area i was from when she asked me whilst on one of her flights.

Grow up. :mad:

speedbirdhouse

9th Sep 2006, 11:00

You lot have always been domestic and as far as I am concerned always will be.

It explains why your union is called, "domestic".

http://www.faaadomestic.org.au/domestic.htm

Oh BTW, the same applies for "purser".

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

Interesting that at the last group Qantas union meeting at QCC the domestic FAAA were nowhere to be seen despite the fact that just about ALL other QF unions made representations...............

twiggs

9th Sep 2006, 11:02

I think your overreacting a bit, both words are interchangeable really.
Should we call the terminal you operate from the shorthaul terminal instead of the domestic terminal?
You seem a little put out that people call you a purser?
It wasn't long ago that purser was your title.
What's the big deal, over here we still use FSD instead of CSM and no-one minds.

cartexchange

9th Sep 2006, 12:00

twiggs what language was you post in? it simply does not make any sense!

RedTBar

9th Sep 2006, 21:58

I don't know where you are Twiggs but I have not been referred to as a FSD for some time.Maybe he/she is older than I am and likes to remember the good old days.

On another subject,I wonder how many crew actually applied for VR and have any of them taken the money and gone up to the UK base.They apparently need crew...any information anyone

indamiddle

10th Sep 2006, 00:59

if that many go by 8th october when/how are they going to replace them?
how long does it take to train up a replacement csm?
are they training already or do the kiwis require less time in training school?

qcc2

10th Sep 2006, 01:23

qf trained 36+ domestic/shorthaul csm's. that' s why lh looses bombay, beijing, trans tasman etc. what happen to the regional flying agreement?

OCCR

10th Sep 2006, 01:43

you mean 36+ pursers........

sydney s/h

10th Sep 2006, 02:56

You know its not the word "domestic" or shorthaul" or purser/csm that really matters - it's the way in which many of the longhaulers say it with such disgust and malice.

You can't get over the fact the SH is doing some LH flying. I know it sucks for you - WE know the feeling. Jetstar has taken work from us, so has QF NZ but you dont see aggresive posts on here over the time from any SH crew.

You clearly do not have the monopoly on LH flying and its time you just accept it and move on. If you hate the place then i hope you took the package.

RedTBar

10th Sep 2006, 03:21

Regardless how many s/h csm's or fsd's or whatever you want to call them have been trained for s/h's needs ,it will not replace 50 or 60 or 80 or however many csm's are taking vr in l/h unless of course QF is planning to reduce our flying substantially.When do those LHR based crew get back and are we sure that the company cannot use the crew made up to CSS and CSM when they are back home ???

It sounds as though we will have the usual cluster f@#* when it comes to crewing over the Christmas period.Crew will be called out of category ,so I suppose there will be some money to be made but eventually there will have to be some promotions if that many csm's and css's have taken the package.

The company has just told us that there is a surplus of crew and hence the vr offer.They also said that if they did not get enough crew to take up the offer ,they would offer it to s/h to get the required numbers.

Well,they got enough and in fact it was in excess of the 325 crew required and they still offered it to s/h as well...go figure.

QCC is a little like Alice in Wonderland..where nothing is as it seems..

If there are shortages of certain crew categories and they have stuffed up in their calculations it will be interesting to see how long it will be before the adverts for cabin crew appear in the paper and the company spends a great deal of money on training and promoting existing crew to the on board managers position just after they have spent a considerable amount of money on paying crew in those positions to leave......or will something tricky happen..time will tell....

qcc2

10th Sep 2006, 05:36

syd s/h, no one is saying that lh has a monopoly on lh flying.:* the company has stated when they put out vr that they don't intend to promote anyone in lh.:{ in the meantime ccm lh in syd have ask some csm's who they think which css would make a good csm. in akl the kiwis have been ask if they want the css/csm job (i thinkf its nz$ 2500.- extra for a css, not sure about a csm):ugh: . our domestic collegues have had a big increase in csm's. lh looses bom/bej/ nrt out of mel.i feel sorry for all those lh guys who have put in the time/effort trying to get ready for a promotion and nothing happens.:=
as for the future csm training most likely online or a cd in the mail:ugh: .

surfside6

10th Sep 2006, 06:10

Lets get this straight:
A purser domestic does not equate to a longhaul CSM...never has, never will
It is not clever for domestic to do longhaul flying for less pay.
It is even worse to be proud of it!!!

sydney s/h

10th Sep 2006, 06:40

Surfside - Lets get something straight.

In times past i would agree that a SH CSM has not had the experiances or whatever you want to call it that a LH CSM has had. Not anymore.

We are doing Hong Kong, Singapore, Narita, Manila, Jakarta, Auckland, Denpasar, Christchurch, Shanghai's (awhile ago) and soon Bejing and Bombay.

I think that the SH CSM's have earnt their stripes.

And dont tell me that a 747 is a huge aircraft etc. An A330 holds 300 pax.

And regarding allowances that we do (or dont get), i agree - it is stupid that SH accepted to do it under these conditions.

At what point did i say i was proud of it???:confused:

surfside6

10th Sep 2006, 07:36

When you have ten years international flying under your belt may be then you have earnt your stripes.
To be frank you can do all the longhaul stuff you like.
You guys had virtually all the family friendly flying....now you dont.
Jetlag ,fatigue back of the clock flying for less bucks.
When Jetstar gets going you will lose a lot of destinations.
You are nothing more than a stopgap.
The only people who work for less than what is acceptable are those who are underqualified.They realise they are underqualified and are prepared to take the pay cut.
Qantas will do you no favours....you are nothing more than a number..if even that.
You are naive....you'll learn:cool: :cool:

RedTBar

10th Sep 2006, 08:40

Instead of getting into a p#$$#*@ contest which serves no purpose at all except to get this thread closed again let's be constructive.

To those who post here that appear to be connected with the faaa(one of whom successfully predicted that the VR decision was imminent and likely to be Friday) tell us how many crew recieved VR.If you can do that can you tell us or even hint at how many were CSM's or CSS's.You were tripping over each other to defend MM's move onto the QF superboard so we know you watch this board and respond to criticism.How about posting some constructive information that does not jeopardise any confidentiality.

This will give us an idea of the shortfall in crewing there will be come the 2nd of October or so.

We all know that the company loves playing one section against another but we don't have to help them by doing it here.

ditzyboy

10th Sep 2006, 09:33

surfside -
I totally empathise and agree with you in many aspects. However you needn't get so emotional as it only dilutes your arguement. I worked with a SH CSM today who was 30 + years ex-TAA chick (fairy dust coming from the engines - you know the type...) on a SIN-PER sector and she was EVERY bit as competent and wordly as any LH CSM/FSD I have ever met both at work and outside of work. There is no need to over-generalise. Infact there are many SH CSMs of varying levels of experience who should be commended for stepping up to the plate and working as hard as they do.

I agree with redTbar in that the pissing contest is needless and only benefits the company.

Personally I feel the situation is only going to escalate as long as our union is split into two divisions. What happened to the 'union' in our union? We all work for the same company and are lining the same pockets. What happened to the support we are supposed to show toward each other?

sydney s/h

10th Sep 2006, 09:45

Hey Surfside,

one thing puzzles me. Do you think that shorthaul flying is easy??

Do you think that doing 4 sectors up and down to melbourne on a 767-300 with 48mins to do services 4 times a day with full loads is easy??

Working a 10hr20min day without the chance to sit down and have something to eat?

Having the same pax problems but without ANY time to sort it out to appease our problem pax?

And whats with the "underqualified" rubbish. You can pour tea/coffee better or something? Your a joke.

You have no idea sunshine.

Pull your head in and stop with the attacks on SH.

One thing that is very interesting on this website pprune is the consistant whinging from QF LH crew. Some of you think that your the only hard done by people. You NEVER see QF SH carry on like some of you clowns do.

When LH took "our" Cairns returns and Perth returns where was the comments from QF SH crew? Nothing.
I see a jumbo parked at "our" terminal in Sydney everyday. Comments from us...?? Nothing.

Get over yourself. Naive? Maybe. We'll see.

sebby

10th Sep 2006, 09:54

I have to agree with Sydney S/H here. Ive been reading this thread for a bit now and I cant believe the way some people carry on. At Qantas the short haul division is a group of flight attendants on different contracts.

They learn basically the same aircraft and operate similar sectors. There are reasons beyond the money saving that the jobs are being allocated elsewhere and its because LH Aussie crew are a bunch of lazy overpaid whingers.

Yerp I will agree LH is totally different to SH, at least with long haul when 7 hours have passed you're still on your first sector deteriorating with the pax and not having to brush your teeth again for the next lot of demanding travel royalty.

Ive done both sorts of flying and I know which one was harder and it certainly wasnt the one where i got a cheese platter during my briefing or a secluded rest area onboard.....

sebby

10th Sep 2006, 09:56

Oh and before you all dump **** on me for being a kiwi, im an aussie who is based in nz now and has been for 6 months as i moved with my partner so im not a kiwi who bashes aussies either.

Im ashamed of some of the things ive seen onboard! :mad: :rolleyes:

mostie

10th Sep 2006, 10:21

syd/domestic,

the fact that you can't seem to understand the resentment Longhaul crew feel for your lot indicates that you are either disengenuous or stupid.

In case you are the later I will explain it to you.

We resent the fact that our flying is being leeched to you BECAUSE YOU NEGOTIATED WITH QANTAS TO DO IT FOR LESS MONEY.

It is the ONLY reason you are doing it.

We have hundreds and hundreds of Mandarin, Tagalog, Hindi, Cantonese, Indonesian, Japanese etc language speakers WHO WERE EMPLOYED SPECIFICALLY TO SERVICE THE PASSENGERS TO AND FROM THE DESTINATIONS THAT YOU NOW FLY TO.

You quite simply undercut us and no amount of weasel words on your behalf will EVER change the fact.

Maintaining decent terms and conditions in this industry under the onslaught of dixon and his henchmen has been made all the more difficult FOR US because of these actions.

As for your argument re 743/744s at the DOMESTIC terminal.
They are used for CAPACITY reasons AND NOT because we agreed with Qantas to do it for less.

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

Sebby,

so AKL based FA's are now the new role models?
Riiiiiiiight............:D

sebby

10th Sep 2006, 10:30

Well how would you know mostie?... you were probably sitting down the back reading your womens day while any service was going on.

Look, i agree, jobs offshore makes me :yuk: ,and placing people who get paid "less" in more demanding positions is (the way of the future) poor and in this industry the $$ are so precious so terms and conditions are just going to keep going down the gutter. Standing up for yourself doesnt go anywhere.

However placing blame on the people who have no control over these decisions is poor judgement.

mostie

10th Sep 2006, 10:36

Sebby,

I just read your post but only after seeing your age did it make any sense.
Heaven help your generation............

sebby

10th Sep 2006, 10:42

Pfft..... im not even going to get into it. Your days of glamour are over, about time someone put a stop to the mockery QF long haul crew had in the industry... enjoy your VR, its the only way you'll be paying your bills from now on.

Oh and by the way im not 21, like you, I wish i still was :mad:

mostie

10th Sep 2006, 10:47

Charming..........

cartexchange

10th Sep 2006, 12:33

Sebby.
When you lose your job to Jet* because they undercut you, you will then understand what we at LH AUS based crew feel about Aussies that go to AKL and do the job for less and are willing to accept 3rd world conditions.

Believe me it will happen that Jet* will undercut the AKL base........it will happen............

sebby

10th Sep 2006, 12:44

Cartxchange - I never left AUS to work for less or lesser conditions, i merely took the job to keep me employed whilst i found something else to support my partner and his new (very wel paid :hmm: ) role.

I have now found that and get paid more than I was in Australia. (Flying and all!).

I agree with you and it was my motivating factor for getting out, the QF group disgusts me, but who is anyone else to point the finger at anyone else but the management for these issues. The SH crew dont deserve to be slandered for signing a contract, QF should be for putting that offer to them.

As for Jetstar.. well :yuk: dont even get me started! As far as I am concerned, all aussie crew were my colleagues whether they be link, sh or lh... we all assist the same people along the way to get them to where they need to go, and i respect each person in their role.

cartexchange

10th Sep 2006, 12:50

thats better.............

shame we dont all stick together.

on another note,does anyone know the details about that flasher crew member on the NRT flight.......the story sounds hilarious.

Eden99

10th Sep 2006, 14:32

since you asked nicely- approx390 are going.

The split is approx 60 CSM's and 60 CSS's.

There will be no shortage of crew and furthermore there will be no promotions occurring either.

Hope that helps you T-BAR

sydney s/h

10th Sep 2006, 18:36

Mostie,

If we werent doing "your" flying someone else would be.

Do you seriously think for one moment that things would stay the same and you would keep all the flying the same?

LHR base is an example of things that have changed.

Atleast if QF SH are doing "your" flying then you still have the opportunity to do it. You can transfer. If it goes to Jetstar or whoever else then its gone forever.

Slanging match over. (from my side atleast).

cartexchange

10th Sep 2006, 22:01

sydney s/h give it a break will you!

No one will ever agree with each other on this one.

Eden are you sure that there will be NO promotions.

Anyway why would anyone ever want to be a CSM these days.

Eden99

10th Sep 2006, 22:20

Yes i'm sure. There will be no promotions.Up to now there has been large scale direction of crew on long service leave. This will be reduced after the VR and therefore will release CSS and CSM positions and no promotions will be necessary.

cartexchange

10th Sep 2006, 22:25

ok thanks for that.

I am aware that in our current EBA CSM and CSS cannot be trained in the AKL base, have the company found a loophole with this one or is it typical bullsh!t

Eden99

11th Sep 2006, 00:33

With to regard to the issue about promotions in overseas bases...... there is no actual EBA restriction that would prevent that from occurring. However, in Dec 2004 an exchange of letters occurred between the FAAA and Qantas that says apart from the London base there would be no promotions in overseas bases.

So there is an expectation that no promotions will occur on NZ for example until at least the expiration of the current LH EBA7.

Restrictions on labour hire arrangements of course are illegal ( most probably) under the new Howard legislation., so like the cap on o/s bases , any restrictions on promotions in relation to overseas bases will also probably be prohibited once the current EBA expires.

Thanks Mr Howard!

I'm reliably informed the FAAA will issue something shortly about the activities secretly being undertaken by the Company in NZ.

Also people need to be aware that the FAAA keeps things of a confidential nature secure...... for a whole host of valid reasons, so that crew interests are not damaged. However, expect something soon regarding NZ from the FAAA.

argus.moon

11th Sep 2006, 06:06

475 applied for and were accepted for VR.
The most junior to be accepted was 8 years seniority
Approx 60 CSMs
Approx 60 CSSs
If you are on reserve next BP expect to do la lotta work
Christmas will be a nightmare.
If you are on vacation expect a "please help us phone call"
Also expect a lot of new crew...mainly MAM casuals.:eek:
I think the 390 Eden quoted related to Sydney only.
Sources at QF tell me that there will be promotion...but now I am not so sure.
Eden is usually well informed.
As more flying is handed to domestic and Jet* there is less requirement for LH CC

Eden99

11th Sep 2006, 06:17

The info that i posted about the numbers who took VR are correct. The 390 figure is the rounded figure but is the TOTAL figure COVERING ALL BASES.

Also there will be no promotion for the reason i explained earlier. I hope that clears up any confusion argus.moon.:)

icanot

11th Sep 2006, 06:26

your quote eden

Also people need to be aware that the FAAA keeps things of a confidential nature secure...... for a whole host of valid reasons, so that crew interests are not damaged. However, expect something soon regarding NZ from the FAAA.

come on eden, just a little hint.

argus.moon

11th Sep 2006, 06:44

I wonder why my manager asked me to put forward names of suitable CSS for promotion?
Like most things with QF ...time will tell

RedTBar

11th Sep 2006, 07:18

Until QF crew both L/H & S/H can join forces without one group trying to undercut the other and play politics we are all at risk.

If we do not come up with a strategy for lowering the cost of full service crew compared to J* and it's sibling J* international we are shot ducks.

We may not exactly become extinct but our work area will be reduced significantly.It sounds as though the AKL base is going to be used as reducing agent by the company fairly soon if not at the end of 2007 which is not that far off.

Any ideas people????

argus.moon

11th Sep 2006, 07:26

Not many ideas unfortunately.
Some include:
Vote out the libs
Find another job
Enjoy the rest of the ride
Corporate assassination :{

qcc2

11th Sep 2006, 08:10

:yuk: Dixon, Qantas Chief Executive, Took 19% Pay Cut in Fiscal 2006

Sept. 11 (Bloomberg) -- Geoff Dixon, the chief executive officer of Qantas Airways Ltd., received 19 percent less pay from Australia's biggest airline last year.

Dixon earned A$5.3 million ($4 million) in the 12 months ended June 30 compared with A$6.5 million a year earlier, the Sydney-based company said in its annual report filed to the Australian Stock Exchange today.

He received A$2.02 million in salary plus a A$1.01 million bonus and the rest in stock and retirement benefits, according to the document. Chief Financial Officer Peter Gregg was the next highest paid executive with total remuneration of A$3.66 million, little changed from the previous year.

Dixon is leading a five-year cost-cutting program to trim A$3 billion in spending by fiscal 2008. He's cut jobs and moved discount carrier Jetstar, which is as much as 50 percent cheaper to run, onto international routes to help recover earnings from an estimated 40 percent rise in fuel costs this year.

dont you like accurate info:yuk:

RedTBar

11th Sep 2006, 08:36

After reading the post by qcc2 I am feeling incredibly sorry for our boss and feel as though we should pass the hat around to see if we can make up the difference for him.

It must be tough to try and live on only $5.3 million and I can only try to understand the burden he is facing.

I only wish I had his tax problem....

sebby

11th Sep 2006, 09:06

AKL base is wanting to be 350 by next june i was told by a friend the other day who is a part of the akl recruitment team. The biggest problem they are facing is the people coming through are just awful... over 50% of the applicants dont turn up on the day and the ones that do wouldnt have a clue of the difference between jetconnect and qantas mainline.

29K plus a few overnight allowances is a lot better than these people can do elsewhere so why wouldnt they take it. :eek:

Most NZ employers dont even pay super... these people getto work for a respected brand, wear a nice uniform and have nice stopovers in places they havent been before. Sad I know.. but dont shoot the messenger :hmm:

Lurker@L5

11th Sep 2006, 09:44

So has Management announced where the Big Oct 1 VR party is to be held yet?
How do you start to do justice in saying "thank you" for over 8,000 years of loyal service to a company?
Will Geoff be donating part of his $1m bonus to buy a few rounds??.....
Maybe a couple of party pies and sausage rolls? Perhaps a few bottles of red from Lindsay's cellar?
Pigs Arse! Qantas Senior Management wouldn't fart in a f/a's general direction.

AT the HR office - Big Kev with pencil behind ear..
"35 years service eh? CSM? (yawn) Right -uniform? Tick
Manuals? Tick ID Tick. Well that's about it ! Security -escort this redundant piece of **** from the premises immediately! Next!"

To paraphrase TS Eliot, methinks the ending of a glorious career with Qantas now ends not so much with a BANG , but rather a whimper.........

Perhaps Pathfinders could earn an honest quid by organising a fitting Farewell Party for the Soon to be Departed - a great chance for all of us to say good-bye and do a bit of reminiscing. (Management will understand if they are not invited. This is the esprit de corp of Qantas circa 2006)

speedbirdhouse

11th Sep 2006, 13:34

Lurker@L5

11th Sep 2006, 19:01

Qantas executives still doing nicely

Email (http://www.smh.com.au/cgi-bin/common/popupEmailArticle.pl?path=/articles/2006/09/11/1157826874773.html)
Print (http://www.smh.com.au/news/business/qantas-executives-still-doing-nicely/2006/09/11/1157826874773.html#)
Normal font (http://www.smh.com.au/news/business/qantas-executives-still-doing-nicely/2006/09/11/1157826874773.html#)
Large font (http://www.smh.com.au/news/business/qantas-executives-still-doing-nicely/2006/09/11/1157826874773.html#)Scott Rochfort
September 12, 2006

QANTAS chief executive Geoff Dixon has taken a haircut on his annual bonus and incentive package.
But this has failed to appease unions, angered that the airline which is seeking sacrifices from its 34,000 workers still has managed to pay bonuses, massive contract renewal payments and pay rises to its senior executives.
The airline's annual report reveals Mr Dixon's total package for 2005-06 fell from $6.5 million to $5.3 million, largely thanks to his incentive payments being trimmed by the airline's 27 per cent dip in annual profits.
In all, Mr Dixon's incentives, post-employment benefit and share-based payments fell from around $4.5 million to $3.1 million. The package of the chief financial officer, Peter Gregg, rose marginally to $3.7 million.
But both Mr Dixon and Mr Gregg did well when their contracts - due to expire in mid-2007 - were renewed last month.
Mr Dixon was put on an "ongoing" contract, where he was paid a $7.7 million "benefit" in the form of a superannuation contribution. Mr Gregg was paid $4.5 million in cash for renewing his contract.
The hefty pay rise for senior executives such as Qantas's executive general manager John Borghetti, whose remuneration jumped from $1.8 million to $3.2 million, also infuriated unions.
"It leaves a sour taste in my mouth when these same people are reminding us to tighten our belts," said federal secretary of the Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association Stephen Purvinas. "We would expect the generosity to be reciprocated when we enter into our next round of enterprise bargaining negotiations next month," Mr Purvinas said.
Unions also were angered by Qantas chairwoman Margaret Jackson's package, which rose 6 per cent to $534,000. The rest of the board also enjoyed pay rises, some of up to 76 per cent.
"Everybody knows that Qantas has one rule for the top and one rule for the bottom," Australian Services Union assistant national secretary Linda White said.
However, Qantas calmed nerves on another industrial front yesterday after a breakthrough in its long-stalled wage talks with maintenance unions.
"Qantas is pleased with the negotiations. We had productive meetings with them," the airline's head of people, Kevin Brown, said yesterday.
"We are optimistic we can reach agreement," he said, without specifying what breakthrough had been made.
The Australian Manufacturers Workers Union is expected to update its members on the talks - and possibly seek a vote - by next Monday.

When news happens: (http://www.smh.com.au/participate/) send photos, videos & tip-offs to 0424 SMS SMH (+61 424 767 764), or email ([email protected]) us.

Email (http://www.smh.com.au/cgi-bin/common/popupEmailArticle.pl?path=/articles/2006/09/11/1157826874773.html)
Print (http://www.smh.com.au/news/business/qantas-executives-still-doing-nicely/2006/09/11/1157826874773.html#)
Normal font (http://www.smh.com.au/news/business/qantas-executives-still-doing-nicely/2006/09/11/1157826874773.html#)
Large font (http://www.smh.com.au/news/business/qantas-executives-still-doing-nicely/2006/09/11/1157826874773.html#)BORGHETTI A $1.5 MILLION SALARY INCREASE WHEN OUR JOBS ARE GOING TO THE THAIS & KIWIS???
TRULY MORALLY OBSCENE. THESE SALARY FIGURES MUST BE RAISED AT EVERY FUTURE PUBLIC MEETING WHERE STAFF ARE TOLD TO TIGHTEN THEIR BELTS DUE TO INCREASED OIL PRICES ETC, ETC...
MANAGEMENT SHOULD BE "BOO-ED" AT EVERY MEETING HENCE FORTH
SAVE 33% on home delivery of the Herald - subscribe today (https://subscribe.fairfax.com.au/cgi-bin/smh.cgi?s_cid=fd:storybot:smh)

RedTBar

11th Sep 2006, 23:37

It warms my heart to know that our corporate management are looking after themselves.We certainly don't want people that have financial worries on their minds when they are trying to run the company in these difficult times.I think it is important that we do not seek any pay increases so that we will not be a burden on them in ensuring a return to our shareholders.

I certainly hope that J* is the success that the board hopes so that once again they can recieve the bonuses that they aspire to...............

excuse me while I throw up..............

Eden .........Thanks for the info,I did not realise how many crew were on directed LSL.It sounds as though the only way to become a CSM or a CSS is to take the LHR or AKL base.So much for aviation careers in Australia......Thanks Johnny

By the way apparently there will be a farewell party organized by "Life's Good'.....she say's to bring a plate and your own refreshments....water is available.

Shlonghaul

12th Sep 2006, 00:56

Yes water will be available at the farewell party.......at three dollars a bottle......and after the party please do not take any chocolate biscuits home with you without the one dollar receipt as security will be posted at all doors to check these. Shame they don't arrest Borghetti for the theft of $1.4 million dollars :E

In Memoriam.......would also like to take this opportunity to remember those cabin & flight crews who lost their lives doing their job on September 11, 2001

peanut pusher

12th Sep 2006, 01:27

It good to see things havn't changed.

By the way London is going well and maybe we will go through to Aus. next year.

Regards
LHR Peanut

peanut pusher

12th Sep 2006, 02:09

We lost Imperial Queens Park hotel because they could sell our rooms to JTB etc etc for 3 times the crappy rate we were paying.
Fact, I'm on the accomadation commitee and we found it hard to get any BKK hotel with the QF budget.
No Chav's only westie second officers get pools drained cobber.:eek: :ok:

surfside6

12th Sep 2006, 03:00

Where there is smoke there is fire.
LHR crew dont have a halo...they have been naughty...you know it and the Company knows it.
Arrests have been made dear boy(girl) :cool:

icanot

12th Sep 2006, 04:11

well well peanut is back!
So peanut what is happening with you guys when you come back to SYD, it will be bloody hard to slot into being a F/A again.
That is if you have a job to come back to, I hear that MEL willl be the only place you can return to, No slots available in SYD.

Eden99

12th Sep 2006, 04:18

11th September 2006 ID52-06

Attention all Qantas Long Haul and Australian Airlines Flight Attendants

SUPERANNUATION BOARD ELECTION

Michael Mijatov wrote to you last week and advised you that he was nominating for the vacant position on the Qantas Superannuation Board vacated by Gary Wilson.

Firstly, can I say that both Gary Wilson and his predecessor Rene Herbert did an outstanding job for Cabin Crew during their time in office.

As many of you would remember Rene was elected to the position when he was the Federal Secretary of the Union and continued in the Directors role until his retirement. Rene was the longest serving member- elected Director in the history of the Superannuation Plan

For those that are unaware, Superannuation is one of the most significant achievements of the Union Movement and as such Qantas Flight Attendant enjoyed a Superannuation Scheme long before it became compulsory in the 1990’s.

For most workers in Australia, Superannuation arose through Award based occupational superannuation. The provision of a minimum entitlement by legislation further assisted the position of those workers, particularly women and the lower paid, who previously did not have access to any superannuation benefit.

As the President of the FAAA, it is my pleasure to endorse Michael as a candidate for the Qantas Superannuation Board. Most of you would know that Michael and I have been personal friends since 1989 when Michael commenced flying with Qantas. Rarely does one meet a person with more personal integrity and courage than Michael. I can think of no other person who I would trust more to look after my Superannuation Benefits than Michael.

Michael is being supported and endorsed by both previous Cabin Crew Directors as well as Captain Ian Woods the President of AIPA (the pilots union) and current Director on the Superannuation board for Pilots.

Below are the personal endorsements aforementioned.

“It is well known throughout the financial services industry that the independence of Superannuation Trustee Directors is vital to the integrity of Australia's retirement savings industry. Your participation in the election of your chosen representative is your opportunity to help ensure that QSL provides its members with the management oversight all superannuation funds require. The willingness of corporate superannuation funds like QSL to provide not only sound investments and good administration, but also high levels of member service is often dependent on the willingness of the fund's member elected trustees to vote with courage and conviction on problematic issues that sometimes confront the Trustee.

As the President of the Australian and International Pilots Association (AIPA) I have got to know a number of Association and Union leaders who make up the Qantas Group of Unions and have worked with Michael Mijatov in his capacity as FAAA Secretary to help progress and resolve concerns that affect both cabin crew and flight crew. In my dealings with Michael, I have always found him to be open, honest and frank. Whilst such personal qualities may be thought to be wide spread, my experience is that they are not - people with courage and conviction are not easy to find. Whilst financial knowledge may be acquired, personal integrity can not, and without it, difficult and complex oversight issues may not get the scrutiny they require.

All Trustee Directors are required to be diligent, vigilant and to act in the best interests of the superannuants who have entrusted their retirement savings to their employer’s superannuation fund. In my experience, Michael has demonstrated the necessary personal qualities to be considered by you as a Superannuation Trustee Director. He clearly has what it takes to be an effective Trustee and I have no hesitation in recommending Michael to you for your consideration. Personally, I would be delighted to have Michael involved in the oversight of my Qantas Superannuation.

No matter whom you decide to support, your participation in the election process is vital. Please be sure to vote”. Capt Ian Woods Director Qantas Superannuation.

“Michael Mijatov has shown a keen interest in superannuation matters over the past 4 years and has always made himself available to discuss relevant issues.

His FAAA experience and familiarity with superannuation matters will be valuable when stepping into the trustee role.

Michael has always displayed to me a commitment to act in the best interests of all members and I am happy to endorse him as a candidate in this election.” - Gary Wilson BFA Flight Attendant (Former Director Qantas Superannuation).

“I write to recommend Michael Mijatov for the position of Member Elected Director of the Qantas Superannuation Plan.

This position requires someone who is prepared to work without reward for the benefit of all members. Michael has demonstrated his ability to do that.

It also requires a certain amount of financial nous. Michael has an Economics Degree.

A strong degree of fairness and equity is required. Michael has always demonstrated this skill.

It is vital to have a close relationship with the electorate and with the relevant Union. Michael is a Flight Attendant and is the Secretary of the International Division of the FAAA. He also works closely with the executive of the Domestic/Regional Division of the FAAA and understands the working conditions of Short Haul members.

Both before and after my retirement I have worked closely with Michael in the interest of the FAAA and this has given me the opportunity to know him well. In short, I consider that Michael has all the attributes necessary to fulfil this role. I recommend him to you wholeheartedly.” Rene Herbert former Federal Secretary AICCA and Director Qantas Superannuation.

Ballot papers will be issued shortly for the Superannuation election and it is my hope that you will endorse Michael Mijatov as our next Director of the Qantas Superannuation board to protect our retirement incomes into the future.

Written and authorised by Steven Reed – President International Division

20 Ewan Street Mascot NSW 2020 Tel 61 2 8337 1111 Fax 61 2 8337 1122 Emergency Contact 0414 894 192

Transition Layer

12th Sep 2006, 08:35

peanut pusher,
No Chav's only westie second officers get pools drained cobber
One of the afore mentioned S/Os returning from a shopping expedition in HKG.
http://piggydidit.com/blog/mullet.jpg
TL :ok:

GalleyChick

12th Sep 2006, 09:53

It's always funny to read that when something goes wrong it's ALWAYS the london base's fault. Give it a rest - don't tell me that Aussie crew are angels and have NEVER done anything wrong, god forbid. There's a rumour going around about changing HKG hotels and now everyone in AUS are jumping down LHR crew's throats thinking it's their fault, remember that a lot of the LHR crew are fellow AUS crew, could it be for another reason? Has anyone got confirmation yet? Do we know EXACTLY why we are leaving? Could it BE cost reasons? Think before you attack, it's not nice.

speedbirdhouse

12th Sep 2006, 10:24

Peanut Puncher,

that was quick !
Here's me thinking we had lost you.

Thanks for confirming to all and sundry why we were kicked out of the Queens Park BKK.

You obviously DO have your finger on the pulse. "Second Officers" were they ? Riiight.........

Well if they were they definately weren't drinking with us now were they???:E

The truth of the matter was that the hotel was so sick of the antics [house arrest, multiple pool glass etc] that they upped the rate charged to drive us out. I know staff who work at the hotel.

Anyone interested in hearing the story re the HKG hotel ought to have a chat to "filthy Phill" when the see him.

It involves Rec. club DVD's, a request to see a club card, crying hotel staff and chavs. Just one incident from cretins who are seeing us kicked out of the second pub.

Pretty impressive when you consider that they only have three and all inside two years.

When I joined it was made VERY plain to me in training AND up the track that Qantas flight attendants are ambassadors for Qantas AND Australia and to behave accordingly.

Now? The only stipulation is that you come cheap.

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

Looking foward to slotting back into the QANTAS Group PP ???

Lets fly Jetscar....................:ok:

ozskipper

12th Sep 2006, 12:04

Cant verify the rumour but it seems we are going to be kicked out of the HKG hotel.
First the Queens Park and now Hong Kong, which must be one of the best pubs since the Mark Hopkins [well nearly]
It seems the Chavs [who had us kicked out of the BKK hotel for causing the hotel to empty the pool 3 times due to smashed glass] have upset the management of the hotel in HKG so much that we are now persona non grata.......
What next......Singapore?:mad: :mad: :mad:

LOL actually this rumour has some legs.... But it has nothing to do with the "chavs".... We pay bugger all for the rooms and the LPH business is booming, so they're not keen for our business anymore. It's quite likely we'll be moving at the end of the contract.

As for BKK - much the same thing really. The room rate was negotiated after SARS, so we got a very good rate. Times got better, we didn't want to pay anymore Baht, so off we went to new premises.

speedbirdhouse

12th Sep 2006, 13:14

Nice try "spin team" but no dice :ok:

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

Just in case anybody [as if?] believed the spin that our "leaders" are suffering in these tough times whilst they send more and more of our jobs offshore here is confirmation that the pigs just keep swimming in it.

Cut and paste from Crikey.com

Date: Tuesday, 12 September 2006
Michael Pascoe writes:

The Oz headline paints a picture of Qantas's CEO sharing the pain of his shareholders and workers with a 20% pay cut. You have to read well down in the body copy of the Smage version to find that’s not quite the case.

Advertisement

And that means the area in which Qantas runs at its biggest comparative disadvantage against its main competitors is the pay packets of its top few executives.

Geoff Dixon’s pay for the past year fell from $4.5 million to $3.1 million, but his CFO and heir apparent, Peter Gregg, still managed a slight rise to $3.7 million. Hang on, that means the CFO was paid more than the CEO? No.

The kicker is that Dixon and Gregg both received very handsome benefits for signing up to new contracts last month – more than compensating for Geoff’s salary dip last year. As Scott Rochfort reports: "Mr Dixon was put on an 'ongoing' contract, where he was paid a $7.7 million 'benefit' in the form of a superannuation contribution. Mr Gregg was paid $4.5 million in cash for renewing his contract."

And Qantas’s number three man John Borghetti also did nicely, his remuneration jumping from only $1.8 million to $3.2 million.

No, those at the top are not sharing the pain of customers, shareholders and mere workers during these harder times of high fuel costs. Nothing changes.