QANTAS - Australia IV

[TightSlot]

Let's start again, shall we? This time minus the unpleasantness...

[FrankFoxworth]

It must be getting harder and harder for the spin doctors to keep a straight face ,"gloom ,doom times are tough, it is such a turbulent industry, we must contain costs (etc read screw staff harder )" when stories like this start appearing revealing the truth of the matter.

From SMH
January 15, 2007 - 12:05PM
The plummeting oil price has prompted an upgrade of Qantas' earnings forecast by analysts at Macquarie Bank.
The investment bank happens to be part of a private equity consortium trying to buy Australia's biggest airline, in an $11 billion deal.
On the back of a significant decline in the price of oil over the past month, Macquarie Research Equities has lifted its 2006/07 pre-tax profit forecast for Qantas by $140 million to $1.008 Billion

[qcc2]

it looks like a Mr. MH is not so successfull in BA. majority cabin crew voted for strike:O

[speedbirdhouse]

Yes, 80% return with 96% voting yes.
No ambiguity with how the crew feel.
Wouldn't it be wonderful to see that lying kylie squirm......:E

-----

There was mention on the other thread before it mysteriously disappeared about rumours we may be losing the SIN hotel.

Sad days if it ends up being true as for many years it has felt like home.

[lowerlobe]

Let’s start over again….

I don’t think it would take a neurosurgeon to tell us that the company does not really want full time cabin crew anymore. The only way for the company to achieve that is to either give us all a redundancy package or just annoy us enough that we will want to leave anyway.

To achieve the last part they have…

1:Given traditional L/H flying to S/H

2:Set up overseas bases and employed crew on sub Australian conditions.

This creates resentment on board because different crew are being paid different wages although they are doing the same job.

3:Employed casual crew ( MAM ) allowed through the new IR laws.

4: Created AO in Cairns..Which did not really work cost wise as they had hoped so they then…….

5: Created J* and J* international and others such as Jetconnect.

PS. I am not going to argue the chronological creation of these other airlines.

We all know that for some reason people are falling over themselves to apply for MAM, J* and J* international.

This has created the situation where although L/H still have 744’s to work on there is no career progression and as our EBA expires this year puts us in a position where inevitably the company will want more than just a pound of flesh so to speak.

So what can we do about it and by that I mean L/H as S/H are looking after themselves and I cannot really see us joining together. You only had to read the previous Qantas thread to see the resentment to understand this.

The only way forward and to protect our jobs is to do as the wolfster suggested. Let’s give the company something that appeals to their greed and something that they cannot or will not want to forego.

I also believe that these ideas should be tied to a new EBA and the condition that our traditional flying returns to us .Let S/H do S/H flying as it says on the domestic terminal and let L/H do international flying as we used to.

Here are some ideas..

We let any new crew flying L/H be employed similarly as MAM’s or J* international crew are. This effectively creates a Band A and a Band B. This is nothing more than what is already happening with the AKL, BKK and LHR base except that they will be employed in Australia and based in Australia. This does not mean that the bases in those ports will close but that we are closing off the threat in some way to other cheap sources of crew.

If we don’t then we will lose more flying to S/H and J* international. This is not intended to be antagonistic to S/H but the facts are undeniable that we have lost traditional flying to S/H.

The company may very well be planning to have dedicated fleets such as 744 and the 380 and so on but if we offer a cost inducement to the company we might be able to get our flying back.

We can also look at other sources of revenue for the company that will not impact dramatically on us. For example changing the overtime calculation from 12 hours to 12.5 hours. After the tax is taken out there will be little difference in our net pay but to the company it would be a huge savings.

We could also suggest changes to the way we get our allowances in slip ports. We could use the debit card so that the company does not have to pay the hotel to count and insert allowances into envelopes. This may sound like a small idea but it may add up to $10.00 per crew at each hotel and each day of the week.

These are only a few ideas of mine and I understand the idea of giving in on some of our conditions will be hard to swallow but if we pick ones that will have little impact on our lives and as I said will appeal to the greed that pervades the office and their bonus mentality then we will be able to keep our jobs. This job is not only about the destinations and the money but our enjoyment in the job. If there is no more fun then it is a very short-term prospect.

There are some that post here that have no interest in crew so don’t let them drag this subject down so that tightslot bans the thread or that it degenerates into another bunfight. Lets come up with ideas to keep our jobs and get back our traditional flying.

[speedbirdhouse]

A "B" scale works for me lowerlobe and is something that occured at other airlines decades ago.


A friend of mine had a conversation onboard some time ago with a rather senior [and left leaning] lawyer with QF about the situation and they suggested that the "B" scale was the way to go.......

[qcc2]

agree with B scale, but leave the allowances out. debit cards are a nightmare(just watch BA crews in sin check in and out. it takes for ever. some crew would have to come down 30 minutes earlier ,yeah, right). roster flexiblity for all categories who want to work more, leave a number of trips in open time for an instant trade or extra work. and definately no to 3 star hotels. have look what that means overseas. there are other options. some taxis may be traded etc:ok:

[roamingwolf]

Boys and Girls I'm not rapt in the s/h faaa myself but let's leave the insults to another part of pprune.

i reckon we have to nut out something now and not when the evil empire tells us.

As Stubby said if you want to have a blue then set up another thread this ones for l/h getting back on track

[H_Girl]

Well done Lowerlobe!

I think the B scale pay idea is great.

Doesn't BA have something similar?

[wa.man]

I may have missed something but where does it state that this thread is for long haul only... I thought it was Qantas Australia!!!!

[roamingwolf]

Lowerlobe,

I reckon the idea of a B scale is a win for both sides.A you said boys and girls are tripping over themselves to apply for mam and Jetstar and I reckon if they are ok with that pay and conditions then they might as well fly long haul for the same bucks. qf would be dribbling all over the place at the thought of how much dough they would save.

wa man this is for qantas and we are talking about our next eba but if you want to have a mam or s/h thread you can always start one off.It just got crazy with all the bs that was on the previous thread that dissapeared.

[Pegasus747]

I realise that almost everyone that posts in here is interested in genuine discussion and dialogue.

Discussing what we may be prepared to trade off etc in the current EBA i guess is always an interesting discussion for crew.

Please just bear in mind that management monitor and probably post here too and personally i am reluctant to discuss what might or might not be acceptable to me. or engage in a whats important or not important exercise.

Whilst i realise that its a very small number who actually post in here and the company coould not in fairness view that we would be representative of ALL crew they could form views from it.

I am not so naieve as to believe that crew or not directly having the same convo's with them direct, but my suggestion is that a extensive survey is undertaken of crew by the FAAA and i would be interested in hearing what other crew think of that and any other advice.

Please bear in mind that even if you want to remain confidential you can always emails or send suggestions to the FAAA anonymously. Of course they wouldnt be responded to but i am sure they would be considered and discussed in sue course

[seatedandsecured]

I agree with you WA.Man i didnt realise this was long haul only...................or is it only longhaul who think that what they say is what really matters.............we must remember we are all crew who do work for the same company and who would really like to have job security..............dont have a go at your fellow work mates cause they do not say where they want to fly to that is up to management

[qcc2]

fellow workmates vote for substandard eba's and therefore make it easier for management to shift flying. :{

[lowerlobe]

Pegasus,

Your post lacks it’s usual clarity and in fact I was wondering if you had just come back from a night out.

However in relation to the current topic I agree with you that some who post here are not crew and are in all probability company management or others who’s only intent is to confuse, cause trouble and deflect the course of the topic away from the issue.

I do not believe though that a discussion on pprune will jeopardize any negotiations you…sorry the FAAA will have with the company. We are not talking about any plans or concepts that the FAAA has and in any case anything that you mention at meetings is probably back in the office before the members have left the car park.

I think it is vital that we talk about our next EBA now and not in Nov or Dec and if we use pprune as a method of sharing information it will be of benefit to us. As you said the company does monitor this site and it can only help us if they know we are serious as it makes them react to us for a change instead of the other way around.

The idea of different Bands for example is something that other airlines have used very successfully and if adopted by QF will help both sides. If people looking for jobs are willing to work for MAM or J* conditions then let them join L/H and lets get our flying back. That in turn protects our jobs and is that not what we want after all.

On another subject Qantas is being hurt by all the publicity on it’s fuel surcharges but has not only dropped them by a pathetic 5 cents but only on selected routes as well.

On today’s news a major Australian shoe manufacturer has announced it will move it’s manufacturing to either India or Thailand. They said it was because of the cheaper labour costs in these other countries.

The catch was that when he was asked if the shoes would be cheaper then he said NO. So again we have a case where it is not the competitiveness of the product but the profit that counts and again AUSTRALIAN jobs are going to be lost.

It will be interesting to see if the Gov will do or say anything about this……. WHAT’S YOUR GUESS?

On yet another note the tech crew union believes that a 24 hour slip in JFK is not enough to achieve a decent rest.....

Quote "AIPA’s considered position is to have the layover lengthened to increase the probability for you to ascertain sound sustainable rest. AIPA’s intermediate position is also clear, in that we believe that a Second Officer should be added to these arduous Flight Patterns if the rest is kept at a minimum 24 hours in JFK, due again to reported concerns over incomplete sleep in the slip, tiredness and possible fatigue whilst at work."......

I wonder how rested they would feel if they were to transit JFK instead of a 24 hour slip.They don't know how lucky they have it and our union wanted us to give it away.

[DEFCON4]

Those who are suggesting that Longhaul is heading for the graveyard are both premature and uninformed.
In the fleet there are 30 744s 6 0f which are ERs.
These aircraft service 8 destinations and require approximately 6 crew complements(84) to sustain them.
Frequencies to some of these destinations are increasing(SFO for example).
Money is and has been spent improving the procedures and service on these aircraft and to these destinations.
These aircraft have a great deal of life left in them.
While these aircraft are in service there will AlWAYS be a need for LH CC.
Those that suggest otherwise are both scurrulous and contemptible.
QF management are the enemy....not each other.
Lets move on shall we?

[roamingwolf]

lower,

I reckon your right on the money with different bands and it will give us an argument to use at the next negotiations.

Mate I also reckon we could look at transport to the city as something that we might be able to do without.I reckon it's things like that that the company would love to get their hands on and it will add up to big bucks for the company.To be francis but I reckon the company would sell their own mother if they would save a buck so they should go for these.

[qcc2]

the 747 isn't over the hill yet. LH recently ordered 20 747-800.
Twiggs you can't help yourself, can you. keep stirring the pot.:rolleyes:
just look at the delivery schedule of the A380's and the expected retirement of 743 (at least 2010)and there is no scheduled retirement plans for the 744 yet. so things aren't too bad for QFLH. of course, there is always a possiblity of external influences, like OZ goes to war, nuclear attacks, GD gets a heart attack, SARS and or large corporations decide in their new domestic/ internatonal travel policies J* is the go, yah, right. By the time the 744's retire i will be well and truly travelling CP/EK /SQ in my retirement.;)

[lowerlobe]

We all realise I'm sure that the idea that J* is getting the 744's is ridiculous so let's not let Twiggs distract us from any sensible topics.Her aim was probably to take our attention away from ideas to negotiate on our EBA and keep L/H in the game.

Let's keep our eye on the ball and let the company drop it not the other way around.

What does everyone think of the big and generous move by the company and Darth in particular in cutting the fuel surcharge by a whopping $5.00 on selected flights only of course.

Darth is also quoted as saying that he is taking a bit of a paycut with the takeover but has more to give away.....WTF.

By the way that the fuel company's are showing their reluctance to lower the price of fuel at the pump even with crude dropping by the day you would think that Darth is running them as well.

[speedbirdhouse]

One of the stockbroking firms [the name of which escapes me] has upgrading its profit forecast for Qantas to a record profit, EBIT AUD 1 Billion.

[flytheplanemay]

Has anyone got anything positive to say about working at Qantas? Surely it isnt all doom and gloom.

What is the morale like amongst crew, going by these threads, everyone seems a little bitter, arguing about any decision management makes, LH versus SH etc.

Just an observation.

Happy flying

[surfside6]

When I first stated flying QF was one big happy family.
OPs helped us. we helped them.
Groundstaff and crew got on well.
Some mangement were alittle aloof..we did our job well,
they left us alone.
What happened up the track,stayed up the track.
No snitching,dobbing...nothing petty.
27 years later.....what a bloody mess.
There is a small group of us who fly together....its fantastic...the pax love us.
So much fun and we still work hard.
These people are why I stay..play hard..... work hard.
Then on reserve....I get to see the whingers ...the bludgers...the dobbers.
Thank God I took lots of photographs.
The money was rubbish but wow, what a life.
....and today?
This thread says it all.....crap total crap

[flytheplanemay]

Surfside6

Lets just say that I think you have the right attitude.

Go to work with a positive attitude and hopefully it catches on. Though unfortunately, the negative attitudes catch on just as quickly. And this doesnt change airline to airline.

Isnt it best that we take each day as it comes, or more like each flight as it comes, and enjoy it for what it is. At the very least, make the most of a 'bad' situation.

Why not forget who took which routes, who took whose jobs yadi yadi yada, and enjoy the lifestyle we have at the moment, before it does (if ever) become a memeory.

[surfside6]

Every couple of years "the Flight Stewards" get together.
man..its great..the comraderie,the stories ,the memories.
Qantas has given me the best life.
I will leave before the "rot" gets hold of me.
We baby boomers had the best.
The bonking...the 21 day trips...but that was a different time.

[flytheplanemay]

The good ol' days

I have my days of whinging, but at the end of the day, I wouldnt want to do anything else.

It must have been great flying all those years ago. I guess that's when it was...um...dare I say it.... glamorous?

[lowerlobe]

Quote "Isnt it best that we take each day as it comes, or more like each flight as it comes, and enjoy it for what it is. At the very least, make the most of a 'bad' situation.

Why not forget who took which routes, who took whose jobs yadi yadi yada, and enjoy the lifestyle we have at the moment, before it does (if ever) become a memeory."

Flytheplanemay....It must be great to just take the job one day at a time and not worry about what or who is trying to take our jobs but for a lot of us this is not just a great job but our only way of supporting a wife and children and paying the mortgage etc...

As surfside siad it WAS a great job on those days and we cannot turn back the clock but we can remember them.Unfortunately we cannot just take this job one day at a time and not consider what can happen if we don't plan ahead.So forgive some of us here that appear to be a bit heavy at times but there is a lot at risk here and we do not have the luxury of living in the moment.

[twiggs]

Has anyone got anything positive to say about working at Qantas? Surely it isnt all doom and gloom.
What is the morale like amongst crew, going by these threads, everyone seems a little bitter, arguing about any decision management makes, LH versus SH etc.
Just an observation.
Happy flying

Working at Qantas is nothing like the impression you get from this thread.
Most people are like Surfside6, and go to work and do as best a job as they can with the tools they have.
People do talk about the future with uncertainty, but there is no anger toward others in the airline like that which is displayed on this thread.

[Simon Templar]

The posts on this thread are mostly uninformed and hostile.
The Moderator has a devil of a job keeping the lid on.
Close the bloody thing...everybody is happy.
There are other websites where the misinformed can vent their anger
and frustration

[lowerlobe]

Hi Simon …or is it Simone this time. Can you explain what is misinformed as regards to the report about another takeover that is in the Australian newspaper with the same bank that is involved with the Qantas takeover?

The fact that two people on the board of Alinta have been replaced is irrefutable. The fact that it involves the Macquarie Bank is also incontrovertible. This then is not misinformed in any way.

Tightslot, this forum gives crew the opportunity to express opinions and share information. I find it very interesting that someone would want to close down this avenue of communication.

The question that should be asked is who would want close this thread and who would gain from stopping crew from discussing ideas for their next EBA negotiations.

Simon's statement that everyone is happy is a very curious one.

[Simon Templar]

I rest my case for closure.
The previous user cannot make a post without being insulting.
He/She is typical.
Tightslot,now is your chance...no more angst,no more taking crap,no more sleepless nights.
All you gotta do is push the button...voila, peace and quiet in your time.

[lowerlobe]

There is no insult Simon, you can’t remember whether you are female or male. The last time I remember you making a post Simon , you put your foot in it and I showed your mistake.

You said that you did not work for Qantas yet in other posts you said that you did.

You then replied that your wife who you said works for Qantas sometimes signs in on your password and nickname and posts comments.

So the question is which one are you today…Simon or your wife ?

Tightslot the company invariably has people who post here and that have a vested interest in closing down this thread. I realise that at times things get a bit over heated but when your livelihood is on the line these things will happen. I apologise for the work that creates for you but you have to ask why now does Simon templar or whoever he/she is wants to close down this thread.

The timing in conjunction with imminent takeover of Qantas and the posturing of various interested parties involved makes this request from Simon Templar very curious.

[Shlonghaul]

Mr/Ms Templar..........you have already admitted in the past that you are not a Qantas flight attendant, but your wife is, so lowerlobe was just wanting to know who exactly is online? And what was misinformed about the posts regarding takeovers? As for insulting, hostile & uninformed posts........well just wait till Biggus Dickus hears of this!!?? :E

As for the takeover I feel there should be an investigation into the QF downgraded profit warning of last July which saw the share price drop to under three dollars. Were takeover talks happening then? Or as reported not until October? Seems very suspicious. Some people in the know have made a lot of money over this. Stockbrokers are now advising that another record billion dollar plus profit is on the cards. There appears to be some conflicts of interest as well including a QF director, JP, who is also a major shareholder in Macquarie with a share value around $57 million. Good for some and this is a win win situation!!!

[mach2male]

Quite frankly I agree with Simon/Simone.
This thread has had its day.
Round and round in circles..we hate QF ...we hate the FAAA.
Disagree and you are a company stooge.
Close it and I dont have to resist the temptation to see what rubbish has been posted.
Its a bit like days of our lives or no idea...dont read it for 6 months and it takes 3 seconds to figure out what you have missed .....absolutely nothing
The best thing of all?
The morons who post here will no longer have a voice
CLOSE THE SUCKER.

[Simon Templar]

Quiet as a rat pissin`on cotton.

[seatedandsecured]

why would we want to close a thread that is an open one for qf crew????????????????? I am confused.............................just because you dont agree with what others are saying doesnt mean you need to take them down.......................this is a general discussion not a dictatorship....................all views are welcome

[Pegasus747]

SPECIAL CONFERENCE CALL - Monday 22 January
-------------------------------------------
Talk direct and have your questions answered...

CONFERENCE CALL FOR ONBOARD MANAGERS
Monday 22 January at 2pm (Aust EST)

This special session will focus on the Equity Bid Offer/Qantas
Sale. This is a dedicated session for Onboard Managers only.

The call will be hosted by Alison Webster, General Manager Cabin
Crew and Lesley Grant, Group General Manager Customer Product and
Service.

You can join the call from upline, home or in your base. The toll
free numbers will be available on Friday 19 January. See your BOS
desk for details.

For those based in Sydney the call will be hosted from QCC5.2 and
you are welcome to attend.

Cabin Crew Communications

[mach2male]

I am tired of people on here hovering over the still warm body of QF LH CC like a bunch of gleeful vultures:
Twiggs and a few others.
No wonder people are enraged.
Someone tried to open a LH only thread and that was canned by the Mod.
So what the hell is the point?
These days I spend my time in Dand G..much more civilised.
Yes yes I know..I`m going back
Close it for no other reason than to have the scavengers silenced

[TightSlot]

The thread will not be closed as long as people wish to contribute to it. If you don't wish to contribute to it - then don't: If you don't wish to read it - then don't.

The issue on the QF threads is not, and never has been, what is said - it has always been how it is said.

IMHO the real tragedy of the entire QF situation is not what has happened to you, although the writing was on the wall right from the start for those who chose to read it: The real tragedy is that you have all allowed yourself to be too easily distracted from the real enemy by fighting amongst yourselves - S/H, L/H, Union, Casuals, Government, Jetstar - the list goes on. If just once you had allowed yourselves to stop for a moment, put aside your differences and get organised, you might have stood a chance.

For the record, my UK employer has been going through similar pain levels over the past few years - my job, money & T&C's have deteriorated sharply: There is little or no value placed on experience or ability, and a great deal placed on cheap Eastern European labor and tedious teenage wannabees, both of whom are prepared apparently, to work for virtually nothing. I am not an asset to the company, but a liability - So I've been there, drunk the coffee and bought the Tee-Shirt.

Still, that's just my opinion, and one thing is for sure - my opinion matters not one tiny bit to my employer, or yours or anybody else - the world just keeps turning. The only area where my thoughts matter is in policing the behaviour on this and other threads, and that's what I intend to continue doing.

[captainrats]

Pay Attention Folks,
Tightslot`s right on the money:D :D

[lowerlobe]

Thanks Tightslot...:ok:

It's easy to forget that some other people are or have been in the same boat as we are .

[surfside6]

Now we know where we all stand.:)

[lowerlobe]

There is a very interesting interview with Kell Ryan the co-founder of Ryan air on D & G section....

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=260474

It is interesting because it shows what we are up against and that he honestly thinks that unions are the problem.He mentions that in the US one union wanted a 68% pay rise and that was not on.

What about the pay rises that our board gives themselves..I suppose that is OK

[roamingwolf]

lowerlobe,

Mate,I reckon we might have hit on a nerve there someplace.We talk about ideas for our next eba and to give us a shot at protecting our jobs and a couple of fella's try to close us down.

I mean the bloke does not even work for qf let alone as a f/a and he posts on the qf thread and wants the mod to shut us down.

I reckon this means the office or someone does not want us to talk and do a bit of brainstorming for ideas about our eba.Kinda desparate don'tcha think.

Anway lets keep going with the ideas .

[speedbirdhouse]

Anway lets keep going with the ideas .

Don't you guys think that we would be in a stronger negotiating position for the next EBA having NOT telgraphed all our punches via pprune to the enemy.........?:ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

[twiggs]

You guys still don't get it.
It has nothing to with what you are posting.
It is the way you guys constantly criticize the poster rather than the post.
Not only is it a breach of the forum rules to accuse people of being management or working in the office or whatever, it is a waste of time because it cannot be proved or disproved.
Get over it, people have views that differ from your own and they have a right to express them, and by expressing those views it cannot be inferred that they worship the CEO.
I am constantly being referred to as someone who works in the office or the like.
For what?
I have also recently been accused of supporting the demise of L/H cabin crew.
Why would I want that when I am one myself?
I merely disagree with the old school mentality that is predominant here.

[speedbirdhouse]

Why would I want that when I am one myself?

:rolleyes:

[sydney s/h]

I haven't posted on here for a few days as i appeared to do alittle too much stirring and trouble making.

It appears you dont need a SH'er posting on here to have problems and arguements.
QF LH crew seem to do a fine job of that between themselves.

Goodluck!!
:\

[lowerlobe]

OK here is an invitation to Twiggs and Sydney S/H..

Instead of adding to the angst on this thread here is an opportunity to add a constructive post….up to you!!!!!

Speedbirdhouse,

Apart from the fact that the company knows about our union meetings within minutes of them I don't see that discussing them here will do anything to harm us.All we are doing is talking about ideas.

The FAAA has already signalled that they thought that an early EBA was in our interests and that we are in the unions opinion the most expensive cabin crew in the Qantas group.

The company knows that we are willing to accept various compromises to keep our jobs.

What concerns me is that the FAAA will not tell us what they are doing and at the end of it they will say something like..."We have had a huge win and recommend that you vote YES for this"

I don't see the need for these talks to be confidential and secret.What has the company and the union to hide.If the company wants us to work 300 hours a roster ..etc.... then we should know about that.

[oho]

Fairly new to this site - but have been reading for a bit.

I've some news that all Qantas crew may find useful about the proposed plans that Macquarie Bank have for the near future of cabin crew.

LAX base - definitely happening. Mostly US employee's (more than 70%) and the remaining crew complement will be made up of NZ based crew (who will / are being trained as Onboard Managers). Won't be like the London base as Australians won't be able to transfer up there.

VR - more to come for mostly LongHaul.

JoBurgs - going.

A380 - won't be going to Long Haul as it currently stands, but will be a separate division (if you get to fly on it at all, given the LAX & LHR base will do most of the flying on the longer sectors!).

EBA - Going. They have no interest in keeping the current EBA and thinking of striking? Great - they're spoiling for a fight and are keen to get rid of as many LH'ers as possible. Apparently, they have advice that the current EBA can be terminated with 90 days notice, even though it existed prior to the current legislation being implemented.

Long Haul -v- Short Haul - Nope. Think one division - Mid Haul! 737's are probably going to go to regional.

These are some of the proposals on the drawing board - with most of them having very strong support. Interesting times ahead.

Don't shoot me for the info. You should seriously think about partitioning Mark Vaille, Minister for Transport, who has said on the record that he doesn't want jobs being shipped off shore. He made specific references to Engineering - so maybe you should get his support to make sure cabin crew jobs stay in Australia as well (or at least you get an option to fly out of the other bases).

Good luck :ok:

[GalleyChick]

oho - where did you get this information? Sounds like it's all talk. Has this been confirmed by someone? Topics just to stir are just plain stupid.

If people on here are going to post rumours or facts please write where they got these "facts" from. :rolleyes:

[YONLY]

What do you mean by Joburgs going? Is it not one of, or the most profitable route(s) QF operates?

[speedbirdhouse]

Galleychick,

I suspect prune readers will be bombarded with rumours designed to instill fear, uncertainty, and insecurity into the minds of it's staff given the upcoming EBA negotiations.

The intent behind them is part of a "softening up process" , so don't be fooled by smiley faces and words like, "good luck".

There are any number of permutations, options, plans available to Qantas and I'm surprised our "friends" post stopped short of mentioning the use of robots and vending machine to replace Qantas's "too expensive" longhaul crew.

Much will ride on the outcome of this years federal election and there is no shortage of community AND political opposition to the sale of this Australian icon.

The only thing that CAN be guarranteed is the continued "cluster f@#k" that has become our international operations.

Another performance bonus to the office dwelling moron responsible for the English language movies [with CHINESE subtitles] shown on the main screen of the economy cabin, to and from Seoul.:ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

[GalleyHag]

This joint union statement sort of addresses the issue.

http://www.faaa.net/showfile.asp?id=1122&type=N

[cart_elevator]

from oho's post:

You should seriously think about partitioning Mark Vaille, Minister for Transport

I dont see how partitioning Mr Vaille would help, and I expect it would be quite painful for him !!! :eek:

[indamiddle]

only way qf will give up j'burg is to give it to saa as a codeshare.
way too many $$$$ lost, would only be temporary if moving a/c to
usa run. qf already tried to get base j'burg but couln't accept
political fallout re south african govt law for racial positive employ-
ment policy.
lax crew base still subject to usa aviation laws, usa f/a's cannot operate
lax-jfk-lax due to hour limitations
no way mgt will want to join l/h and s/h. co.policy is divide and conquer,
not amalgamate.

[stubby jumbo]

Fairly new to this site - but have been reading for a bit.

I've some news that all Qantas crew may find useful about the proposed plans that Macquarie Bank have for the near future of cabin crew.


Good luck :ok:

This post has the odour of a Team Manager ?( possibly Fat Boy Slim & the Terminator) .....things must be a tad quiet on QCC/1 at the moment. If you read it carefully -it contains NOTHING NEW .....except for the JNB bit !

WHY THE HELL WOULD THE EQUITY PARTNERS BE THINKING IN DETAIL ABOUT L/H CABIN CREW??

We're talking $11billion........... As if ......!!!!

Look guys .......if you are bored at the moment with your sick leave calls and CSM harranging why not make yourselves useful and cover the see thru briefing room walls with newspaper (preferably my favourite-Sports pages of the 'Tele):8

[seatedandsecured]

hey guys this is only galley gossip so take it as you please....................have heard VR offered to long haul again with 400 slots available..........................numbers of long haul FAs to be reduced to approx 2500...................both unions to merge..................with workforce merging between long haul and short haul within 18 months...............that is with longhaul agreeing to shorthaul wages and conditions or no jobs....................as i said just galley gossip and im sure we have all heard of similar stories...................food for thought

[michaelt_29]

Hi I was just wondering if anyone could please be able to tell me which hotels in LA give QF staff a great discount? Or does anyone know the hotel QF LH stay at? I'd like to contact them and see if there are any special rates for QF Staff.

Thanks so much.

[cartexchange]

The Hotel in LAX does offer a discount at times but its still expensive.
I personally like the hotel and I like where its situated, I don't have a problem with the area and its great as its the centre for all the transit systems.
The area is safe during the day and I haven't had any problems at night.
The only fault is that on Sunday its all closed and you really have to get on the bus.
Quite a few crew complained and whined at first,but they are getting used to it now and a lot like it!
The main complaint came from the girls as they felt isolated from their usual shopping places and there is a lack of supermarket for them.
Like I said before I personally like the place and I have no desire to go back to Pasadena.
If this hotel gets its connecting door issue sorted I cant see any problem.

Personally I dont find the area dodgy!

[michaelt_29]

Sorry to cause an argument, I'm just trying to find somewhere nice to stay in L.A. I'm thinking The Sofitel LA in West Hollywood, but I've never been there so I don't know and thought I'd see where the crew stay. They don't seem to be giving a discount though to airline crew.

And I totally support you lowerlobe, those in the office really have no idea what it's like to live out of a hotel room on bare essentials and out of a suitcase.

Sure they give you allowances, but what's the point when you can't spend them on basic essentials that you need on a day to day basis.

[Pegasus747]

Qantas Entertainent System Fails Thousands Affected

David Richards - Wednesday, 24 January 2007

EXCLUSIVE: Qantas in flight staff claim that the Australian airline is about to dump it's "acclaimed" on demand entertainment system after thousands of customers are being denied access to movies and other programs because of constant technical problems with the award winning entertainment system.



Advertisement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Qantas onboard staff claim that thousands of customers have been affected by the entertainment system failure and that a new system could cost the airline millions. currently Qantas is subject to a buyout by Airline Partners Australia, a consortium led by Macquarie Bank, which has bid $11 billion for the carrier.


The entertainment system problem problem is so bad that in some cases customers on 20 hour flights between New York and Sydney are having to go without any form of entertainment and in some cases even a light to read because the switch for the light is built into the entertainment controller.


For Australians flying out of Australia to the USA return, the problem is compounded by the fact that they are being forced to pay up to $1,000 more than passengers who book their tickets between the USA and Australia.

Currently Qantas is offering US customers a return trip to Australia for $1,099 (A$1,391). This also includes up to 3 domestic stopovers worth at least another $1,000 in value. The discounted price to Australians on the Qantas web site for a Sydney LA return flight without 3 domestic stopovers is $2,388 going up to more than $3,000 per round trip.

On a recent flight between Los Angeles and Sydney hundreds of Qantas passengers were unable to access the Rockwell Collins developed entertainment system despite repeated attempts by onboard staff to reboot both the hardware and the software. A senior Qantas cabin crew member on the flight told SHN "The problem is that we are at the front line when the entertainment system fails and it is failing a lot so we have to cop the abuse. We have been told that Qantas is about to replace the system because of the high level of failure. This is not a one off. Thousands have been affected on the Pacific route alone." They said.

They added" One of the problems is that Qantas is running full flights across the Pacific and when 300 to 400 passengers suddenly go to switch on the entertainment system the computer system running it fails despite constant rebooting. It failed between New York and LA and it has failed again inbound to Sydney. Qantas know of the problem but have done nothing to make customers aware of the fact that they are boarding an aircraft without a proper functioning entertainment system. ".

Kannyn MacRae Marketing Director at Belkin said "On my flight to the CES show between Sydney and LA I had no entertainment. Luckily I had recorded several movies and shows to my notebook so I watched them in place of the onboard entertainment system".
My Sister who had visited from the USA for Xmas also had problems on another Qantas flight when the Qantas airlines entertainment system failed. I wrote to Qantas about the issue and all they did was write a letter of apology and said I hope we don't lose you as customer".


During my flight between LA and Sydney this week the entertainment system failed 3 times while my wife had no entertainment system at all in her seat. She also had no light to read because of the failure of the entertainment hand piece that included the light switch. When one could access the system ,movie images bitmapped and the Channel Nine News was not available at all. Qantas on board staff offered one days free parking at Sydney Airport as compensation.
Qantas selected the Rockwell Collins' Total Entertainment System 5 years ago to provide passengers with access to in-flight programming selections on their fleet of international long haul Boeing 747-400's. Rockwell Collins said at the time "The Total Entertainment System selected by Qantas offers a diverse range of entertainment options including access to intranet web sites and games, " said Neal Keating, vice president and general manager of Rockwell Collins Passenger Systems.

"These features will be on-demand for all classes and accessed through seatback video screens in economy class, and with larger individual screens for first and business class passengers."
Qantas has ordered the system with provisions for future installation of Audio/Video On Demand, which streams the audio and video directly to individual seats, allowing passengers complete control of video programming, and for installation of passenger email capabilities.
For the last 2 years Qantas has won an award for its dud in-flight entertainment system from the World Airline Entertainment Association (WAEA).

A Qantas spokesperson said "We are not aware of any problems with our entertainment system but we will investigate and get back to you". To-date we have not heard back from them.
In another statement Qantas said of its Entertainment system "The high priority Qantas places on this area of customer satisfaction is reflected in the fact the airline has received the award for Best Overall In-flight Entertainment in four of the last five years," said John Borghetti, executive general manager of the airline.
SHN has also learnt that Qantas is set to test "AeroMobile" a mobile phone connectivity solution that lets passengers send and receive e-mails, SMS (short message service) messages and phone calls in-flight using their GSM mobile phones or personal electronic devices such as Blackberry phones.

If you have experienced problems on board a Qantas flight we would like to hear from you. Send an email to [email protected]

[midsection]

Nothing wrong with our system if you carry your own laptop.:eek:

[speedbirdhouse]

Interesting discussion on one of the FF bulletin boards re the rather abysmal performance of our award winning "AVOD" entertainment system.

An award obviously handed out for the content, not the hardware.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=651873

In FF circles it is known as the "avoid" system, but its getting hard to do so now that just about all 744's have it.

I was informed by a Rockwell Collins engineer that Lufthansa are suing them over it's problematic operation and that QF actually profit from it's unreliability due to penalty payments written into the contract.

CSM's ought to be able to sue as well or at least share in those penalty payments for the stress suffered from dealing with hundreds of angry and abusive passengers..........

But hell. I bet the system was cheap.

[oho]

GalleyChick - I'm not about to reveal my sources, lest they would dry up. I would like to also point out that PPRUNE stands for Professional Pilots Rumour Network - therefore it would be reasonable to assume that sometimes rumours are posted here (things you hear in the corridors as opposed to being told directly).

Anyway, here's an interesting tidbit:

APA MEETS WITH UNIONS Airline Partners Australia (APA) met with representatives of the Transport Workers Union and the Australian & International Pilots Association on Monday. APA reassured the representatives of its support for the existing Qantas management’s strategies and said it would be business as usual for Qantas employees. In particular, APA said its supported: Qantas’ commitment to continue to provide a fair work environment for its employees, offering competitive conditions, jobs growth and career opportunities; Qantas’ substantial training program and its position as one of Australia’s largest employers of apprentices; Qantas’ plans to continue maintenance operations in Australia, consistent with previous public statements by Qantas’ growth plans, including keeping the Qantas and Jetstar brands, and keeping their international, domestic and regional services fully operational; and $10 billion capital investment program over the next five years, which will create new employment opportunities and deliver improved customer service.
APA stated that the acquisition will have no impact on employee
entitlements, employee travel benefits or benefits being received by former employees. APA’s intentions will be formally set out in Airline Partners Australia’s Bidder’s Statement, which will be lodged with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission and Australian Stock Exchange in early February.


Again, you'll note that the APA is silent on whether Cabin Crew will continue to be based mostly in Australia. Start thinking about what's not being said!!!

[speedbirdhouse]

Gremlins give passengers a dose of cabin fever
Asher Moses
January 26, 2007

A serious glitch found in the Qantas in-flight entertainment system is leaving long-haul passengers without access to movies and music for large portions of their flights.

The issue, which affects 27 aircraft in Qantas's 747 400 fleet, is so common that the Flight Attendants' Association of Australia (FAAA) has complained of cabin crew exhibiting "stress related problems" resulting from aggressive passengers.

David Cox, executive general manager of engineering at Qantas, acknowledged there was an issue, following a report on the website Smarthouse.com.au.

"As with any complex system there have been some technical issues," he said.
"The problems usually involve a small number of seats and the passenger can be moved to a different seat in these cases.
"We are dedicating considerable resources to address these reliability issues, including through the supplier Rockwell Collins."

Steve Martin was travelling from Singapore to Sydney in November last year and said the in-flight entertainment system failed three times.
He said the issue appeared to affect the entire plane, and added that other passengers on his flight reported experiencing similar issues previously.

"A female passenger in my row of three seats, who had travelled on the same plane from Europe stated that the entire plane was without in-flight entertainment during the leg from Europe to Singapore," he said.
Marcelo Goncalves travelled from Sydney to Los Angeles on January 13, when the in-flight entertainment system had to be rebooted twice.

"Many passengers could not use their system properly and some could not use it at all," he said.
A Qantas spokesman would not say whether or not the company had identified the issue, but said it was looking to apply a "software patch" as a fix.
However, it is not clear if this patch would be effective. A source said it was highly possible that the system's hardware was not powerful enough to handle the load, causing it to shut down.

Replacing the hardware components would come at a considerable cost to Qantas.
"A Qantas cabin crew [member] told me it takes about one hour to slowly close down and slowly boot up the system one section at a time of the plane, in order not to overload the system," Mr Goncalves said.

Steven Reed of the FAAA said his team had scheduled an "urgent" meeting with Qantas to determine what the airline could do to reduce the amount of stress placed on the cabin crew.

"If you imagine a flight from Sydney to LA that's 14 hours, and 300 people in economy class haven't got any in-flight entertainment, the level of stress that that causes the crew is exponential," he said.
He added that the crew often felt reluctant to report passengers who had become aggressive after repeatedly experiencing the issue.

"When they report something like that, you're talking about someone being arrested on arrival ... the crew feel sorry for the passengers," Mr Reed said.

"We're very frustrated for our members that are still having to deal with this problem after many years."
The Qantas spokesman would not say when he expected the issue would be fixed.
----------------------
The bull**** from QF's corporate spin department is breathtaking.

We are up to software patch 5 or 6 with no apparent improvement in reliability and now it seems we are beginning to see an increasing number of hardware issues.

I can handle the abuse from passengers furious at not recieving what they paid for but many of my collegues don't cope so well.
A friend was screamed at the other day and called a "c@nt". She was devastated.

What upsets me is the family traveling with two kids who has paid $10 000 to fly with us to LA and has had no entertainment on BOTH sectors.

This has been going on for YEARS and still all we get from the company is "we are working on it" and letters sent to our home address with more meaningless platitudes.

[roamingwolf]

oho,

Mate just a couple of questions.

Are you crew with QF L/H ?

Is your source of info inside the company ?

i don't reckon that info will put your source at risk.;)

[klinitco]

How severe as these problems? How likely is it that the IFE on a 747 isn't working? Is the same system used on the A 330 (does it cope better due to fewer pax?)

[cartexchange]

I have only ever been on one flight that the IFE operated correctly.
and from memory the aircraft load was 50%.
QF management are very aware of the problems!
happens on all flights, you usually spend the first 2 hours resetting seats then the situation calms down as PAX give up and fall asleep therefore relieving the pressure off the AVOD hard drives.
Its usually zone "e" that has the problems, however on some aircraft zone c usually goes INOP.
Solution= Apologise and apologise and ask the CSS for vouchers! then they cant use those as the ALPHA sales machine goes US.
Then PAX start yelling and abusing you, and you count down the minutes till TOD.
:ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

[Bolty McBolt]

Is the same system used on the A 330 (does it cope better due to fewer pax?)
Yesterday 16:09


Yes Same supplier Rockwell collins but a little different.
The A330 system often completes flights with NO resets or less than 10.
the bugs seem to worked out on most flights
Same system on the Air NZ 777 works perfectly.

No one knows when they will fix the 744 problems :yuk:

[seatedandsecured]

Bolty incorrect.....the system still goes belly up on the A330 and it seems only when the aircraft has a full load.................seems like the system cant handle too much demand at the same time.................I personally have had collins and rockwell meet the aircraft to acess the probs on the flight and they are at a loss......................it is just not able to cope with a full load of pax.........................this has been the case from day one and they still dont know what to do.......i believe that QF is getting huge compensation for it not working that is why they are onto the CSMs logging each defect

[Eden99]

Qantas staff abused as entertainment falls flat

QANTAS passengers are becoming openly abusive and threatening over failures in the airline's multimillion-dollar entertainment system on long-haul flights.

The problem - which affects 27 aircraft in Qantas's 747-400 fleet and 10 Airbus A330-300 craft - is so common that the Flight Attendants Association of Australia has formally complained of cabin crew exhibiting "stress related problems" caused by aggressive passengers.

Qantas has formed a team to fix problems in the audio and video on demand system, which has left passengers without movies, music and other entertainment for extended periods of their flights.

Overhead reading lights connected to the system have also been rendered useless for hours, staff say.

On January 19 the association wrote to Qantas management about the entertainment system. The association said the airline had a duty of care to better protect cabin crew against angry passengers.

Association president Steven Reed told The Sun-Herald yesterday some cabin crew were becoming so upset by the abuse that they became physically ill.

Last week Mr Reed requested a meeting with Qantas general manager of aviation health services Dr Ion Morrison and Qantas occupational health and safety committee chairman Michael Von Reth to devise a strategy to help staff cope.

Qantas executive general manager of engineering David Cox acknowledged the problems.

"As with any complex system there have been some technical issues," he said.

"The problems usually involve a small number of seats and the passenger can be moved to a different seat in these cases. We are dedicating considerable resources to address these reliability issues, including through the supplier Rockwell Collins."

Smarthouse.com.au, a technology website, has received complaints from its readers, with some seeking to alert others about the problem.

Avron Newstadt, 36, of North Bondi, flew from South Africa with Qantas before Christmas.

"When I got on I realised pretty early into the flight that my TV wouldn't load," Mr Newstadt said yesterday.

"I was fortunate that my neighbour's was working and we swapped for part of the flight while he slept.

"The staff were confused and were doing their best to fix it, albeit unsuccessfully.

"We weren't warned about it happening. We weren't offered any compensation either, although I didn't want to make a fuss. There were blocks of seats that had the same problem."

Source: The Sun-Herald

[stubby jumbo]

last week the Executive General Manager of Qantas Engineering, David Cox said " We have had some issues with our new on demand IFE system. As with any complex system, there have been some technical issues. Although we have had some intermittent problems, the system is generally working well. The problems usually involves a small number of seats and the passenger can moved a different seat in these cases"
.

Based on this quote alone -this buffoon should resign-NOW !:mad: :mad:

This is a total load of horse****e and EVERYONE who flies (pax included) would know that this has been going on for at least 18 months.

I personally have written numerous ICAN's on it, result =ZIP.

I for one and sick and tied of EVERY trip on a 744 having to put up with constant jibes, smart arse cynisism, angst etc fro pax who are OVER IT.I cannot tell you how many pax have walked as a result of this .....because it would be in the 100's!!!

CSS's and CSM's are the ones who should be paid a IFE "breakdown allowance" 'cause they are the poor bunnies who predominately have to put up with the abuse.

Solution.........Scrap the whole system on the 744 and start again.
Rockwell Collins should then be hung out to dry.

But someone needs to tell David COCKs something his daddy would of told him when he was a nipper.

"YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR" :{

[lowerlobe]

Bolty,
I have to go along with seatedandsecured...The flying croissant is no better than the 400.Those screens that are supposed to deploy and I mean SUPPOSED to are a pain and the sytem as a whole I think is worse than the 400.

The company however is at the forefront with it's IFE system.That is Inflight Failure of Entertainment and not a system that actually works.

Stubby is right with the Icans as they just achieve nothing.

The bottom line is the new owners should or will have to bite the bullet and buy a system that works or at the very least has fewer problems and that generally means paying good money and not being the test mule for some other company.

[sydney s/h]

Lowerlobe,

I think you'll find that the screens that deploy are on the -200's. They seem to work pretty good.

The -300's are the issue and they have the seatback video screen, none drop out of the roof on those aircraft.

[lowerlobe]

Sydney S/H,
Admittedly it has been a while since I operated on a 200 but on a few occasions that I have a number of the drop down screens did not deploy.

Maybe they have fixed that problem but the entertainment system was a joke then.

[Bolty McBolt]

Lower lobe and co

You guys speak from your experience with the aircraft IFE systems which is fairly minimal compared. I often liase with CSMs on several A330 and 2 or 3 747-400 per shift and I regularly see severaL A330s (over a quarter of the fleet) in one shift with less than 10 soft resets per flight and quite often with non, zero naught resets with 297 pax on board.
The A330 sys tends to be a bit tempremental after new movies are loaded but settles down after a day or so.
Please do not think I don't symathise with you when the system fails but I see it first hand plus the stats and its getting better. Here was me thinking this would be heartening news for you characters at the front end but instead you prefer to bitch at the messenger..

The 744 is a joke. The one aircraft with the latest vers 4 software has been a disaster and the system components are starting to get old enough now that hardware failures are very much creeping into the equation poor IFE performance.

To quote a choice line from this thread :- "you guys should have a nice lie down and have a bex or becks" which ever you prefer.

[speedbirdhouse]

My experience of the A330 300 is that the system works quite well with minimal resets required during the flight.

You confirm my observations about the 744 Bolty in that now we are seeing ever increasing HARDWARE failures on top of the well known software problems.

If it was a dog, you would tie it to a tree and shoot it.

[lowerlobe]

Bolty,
Sorry if it appeared as though I was bitching with anyone about our esteemed IFE.

My point was that every time I have operated the flying croissant I was ready to fly to France and personally say G'day to the person who designed it.I would be very happy if I never flew on Le Bus ever again.

I realise that rockwell Collins are US but I prefer Boeing to anything coming out of France anyday.

[Bolty McBolt]

For those of you whom read this site not just the few that post..
Please take note

There has been an introduction of a new Cabin log on the international fleet which is called the combined "Cabin/IFE" log. There are now 2 green folders kept at the CSM station. One book holds a spare Log book and the previous Log book. The other folder has the Cabin/IFE log "In Use" book.
Please write in the "IN USE" book as identified on the front cover.
When writing in the Cabin/IFE log book use capital letters (its not considered shouting) and press as firmly as possible.
A laminated card has been fitted to the green IN USE folder with tips on how to fill out each coupon.
Please do NOT put IFE and Cabin defects on the same coupon. They are actioned by different trades or contractors. Which means when different types of defects are entered on one coupon it is impossible to certify correctly.
You will have no complaints from engineering if you log same defect across several seats on one coupon. E.G. Reaging lights inop at the following seats..... or Soft/hard resets at following seats..... or side wall lights fail to turn off/on at following area, oxygen bottles used at L2 R2 and L3 etc etc

Do not write #4 oven rear galley nil heat and IFE inop at 3A same coupon.

Please make your entries short, to the point and accurate. No need to fill all the lines, its not about creative writing, that is for engineering types in the lower part of the coupon.

The Cabin/IFE log In Use has a list of carried defects in the front. This should consulted before writing up a fault as it may already be a known defect and will save you time.

I realise that QF has probably conduted no training or issued any literature on the subject to cabin crew but some of the entries in this new log defy common sence. Before anyone points the finger at any one group of CC. It is noted the same lack of common has been noted across L/H, LHR base and S/H

What it all boils down to is, If you wish engineering to fix as much as possible during a 70 min transit to make your job easier, the defects need to be recorded in a proper way. And right now they aren't...:ugh:

MBolt

[cartexchange]

I know you will find this hard to believe but QF made an a short entry into the CC news I believe.( I havent seen it)
Thanks for your entry Bolty as I have been filling out coupons for each seat and simply got sick of doing it.

QF visitors will spend countless amounts of money and communications resources to tell us where and how to place our name badge but hardly any news about the new combined CCL?IFE log.

If someone out there knows where the new info appeared can you please direct me.

[lowerlobe]

Bolty,
Thanks for your post and I appreciate your frustrations.The main problem is that cabin crew are hired for a number of reasons but technical ability is not one of them.We feel the same way when someone talks to us with absolutely no idea of what our job entails.

As Cartexchange has said the office goes on and on about the most idiotic of topics but something like this is not looked at and this is probably because the people in the office are not technically minded as well.

This is one of those things that should be brought up when the different departments are talking....whenever that happens.Engineering should show Lusley Grunt a few entries from the log and show her how they should be filled out.

[twiggs]

If someone out there knows where the new info appeared can you please direct me.

The cabin/IFE log was outlined in a recent Cabin Standing Order.
When you sign on you are verifying that you have read these.
There are many copies of these in QCC1 and there is one in the blue folder for when you are on board.
There is also a paragraph in the technical section of the latest cabin crew news which basically says what Bolty has just mentioned.
You can access this from the cabin crew web site if you are not going to be in the office soon.

[stubby jumbo]

Well done Twiggs.

I'm nominating you for eXcel.

You're well ahead of the game.

Thanks for your update:ok:

[sydney s/h]

Unless i'm colour blind the CSO's (Cabin Standing Orders) are in a green folder.

The blue folder is just for documentation eg. ICAN's etc...

[twiggs]

Unless i'm colour blind the CSO's (Cabin Standing Orders) are in a green folder.
The blue folder is just for documentation eg. ICAN's etc...

Thanks sydney s/h, I stand corrected.

[cart_elevator]

Sorry Bolty, this is not against you or those working hard to fix the fleet ... but how many times can you log something before just giving up?

My last sector there was an oven out and two coffee brewers out in the Y/C galley (744). A quick look at the log book and it had gone through SYD twice since the original notification - around about 12 sectors since they were first logged. No fix. It's just not important to the 'gingerbeers'. Was told on my last sector ex SIN 'We don t have the time to fix it, and it isnt gonna worry you that much is it?'

Yup, it gave us grief, as the punters didnt like the instant coffee they were served, and it slowed down the service to no-end.

A 744 that every sector for 8 sectors the area behind the Y/C galley flooded to the point we couldnt have pax sitting there. The engineer said ' Oh it's happened on this aircraft for a while now ... we cant work out why ... its a mystery!' What-the ???:confused:

And as with the IFE, most people dont bother logging it anymore, its just not worth the time to go and write in all the resets. It never gets fixed, so really, why bother?

Would love to see someone really actually fix things, rather than put it back on us. Half the things reported in the LOG you just get a 'tested - ops normal' from the engineers, and then you get the same problem next sector.

Myself, like many others, feel like the engineers dont believe us, or think we dont know how to work something when we log things.

I flew on an aircraft that for 6 sectors the main deck business class chillers were on but showing unusually high temperatures on the gauges .... each log entry about that had 'Tested - Ops Normal' written in the Log by engineers in each port. Thats great. But we have to re-stow all catering out of that area when we notice that the temperatures are outside the 'green band' (part of our procedures) this takes a hell of a lot of time and effort by the crew ...... and these things never get fixed !

I realise parts availability etc are not within the individual engineer's control ... but seriously, why would we bother logging anything when it seems to go on for months and months before (if ever) being fixed? We have already struggled through a 14 hour sector appologising to pax for some defect, that was originally flagged to engineering 12 sectors ago! Why bother :ugh:

But thanks for your tuition on filling out a log book :rolleyes:

[roamingwolf]

you just gotta laugh when you read some of the posts here and then the same person asks why others think that they work in the office..but hey as seinfeld said "but not that there is anything wrong with that".

or maybe the latest cabin crew news is being posted here on pprune and i reckon more people would read it here than the official one.but the cc news is good for one thing i reckon and thats if you are having trouble getting some shut eye in a slip port you can always read one and your out like a flash and there is no need for chems.

see the office does care about us

[cartexchange]

Thanks twiggs
I have been on holidays and it was my first trip back.

Still there was nothing in the blue folder on board.
Crew had no idea!
I know we are supposed to have read the CSO, but who does?
I will definitely read them on board, but I will be dammed if I have to sign on 10 to 15 mins earlier for catch up on documentation.
However if they pay me for it I have no problems.
Please tell me how many people that work in the office come in 15 minutes earlier to catch up on all their procedures.

How are things in the office twiggs? have you got any more scoops for us!

[lowerlobe]

I've just been over at D & G as I find that the topics are more stimulating.

I've come back to see if there is any development with the engineering issue and guess what .........it looks as though nothing has changed here.

Just one question though Twiggs ...Are you related to Sunfish by any chance?
Now don't lose the plot as this is not meant to be divisive or insulting but just an observation.

Now I can see what the others here are saying as you have to admit Sunfish..sorry Twiggs that your post does sound as though it has come straight out of the office especially the bit about you are required to read these before signing on.

I can almost hear the typing of the complaint email to tightslot as I post this..

Now back to the matter at hand...Has anyone else heard the rumour that the company has or is going to install IFE equipment by Panasonic on future aircraft.This is not to be construed in any way as a paid endorsement of any company and I am not gaining financially in any way from this rumour.

[Bolty McBolt]

Has anyone else heard the rumour that the company has or is going to install IFE equipment by Panasonic on future aircraft

Panasonic = Matsu****a latest system is to be fitted to the A380.

One problem, SIA have this system fitted to there latest 777-300ER and has huge reliability issues at the moment but prior to this Matsu****a have been the IFE system of choice.

[Bolty McBolt]

Cart.. Allow me to retort...

A 744 that every sector for 8 sectors the area behind the Y/C galley flooded to the point we couldnt have pax sitting there. The engineer said ' Oh it's happened on this aircraft for a while now ... we cant work out why ... its a mystery!' What-the ?

Answer. The reason any galley floods is due to blocked drains due to someone with the same mentality that was flushing blankets. In recent weeks this kind of event has been increasing. Only CC to blame there.


My last sector there was an oven out and two coffee brewers out in the Y/C galley (744). A quick look at the log book and it had gone through SYD twice since the original notification..Was told on my last sector ex SIN 'We don t have the time to fix it,
This is one of the reasons for the new cabin log as dedicated people will monitor defered/known faults so they get fixed
SIN/BKK/HKG does not have parts or time. Get over it and make sure the defect is written up into a port with ground time and it will be actioned.

but seriously, why would we bother logging anything when it seems to go on for months and months before (if ever) being fixed?

Its your job

Myself, like many others, feel like the engineers dont believe us, or think we dont know how to work something when we log things

I hate to say it but this could easily be attributed to L/H CC personalities.
Many come across as whingers and wow is me types.

[speedbirdhouse]

Be careful who you bag there Bolty.

The person who's post you are refering to is LHR base.......:ok:

I hate to say it, but your posts indicate that you might be just a little bit precious.

[Bolty McBolt]

Dont get me started on the CSMs out of LHR :ok:

I wasn't bagging anyone just passing on a perception. :)

[lowerlobe]

Here's an interesting article on the state of the take over and sme questions that should be answered.

Sell-off deal demands full disclosure
It's time for a public debate on the privatisation of our national airline, writes Glenda Korporaal
February 02, 2007
THE $11 billion private equity bid for Qantas will be a boon for Qantas shareholders and the highly paid investors and advisers on the deal. But as the group of high-powered, private equity players calling itself Airline Partners Australia prepares to release its formal statement to shareholders, and the clock ticks on the deal it hopes to wrap up in April, it's time for a broader public debate about the serious implications of the proposed privatisation of our national airline.
At the moment, the bidders maintain there is no legal reason for them to apply for approval under the Foreign Takeovers Act - and maybe that gives some indication as to how they may approach further deals with government if they succeed in taking Qantas private. Advised by highly paid lobbyists and advisers, they are co-operating behind the scenes, briefing ministers and government departments.
Their affable spokesman, Bob Mansfield, whose resume includes running food company McDonald's, phone company Optus and a short period as chief executive of the Fairfax media group, has been on an almost continuous loop in the media explaining that the consortium can think of nothing better than to back Qantas chief Geoff Dixon and his management team.

But we already have Dixon and his team running Qantas. So how does Mansfield and his private equity backers - the ubiquitous Macquarie Bank, Allco Finance, Allco Equity Partners, the San Francisco-based Texas Pacific Group and Canada's Onex - plan to make a profit by paying $11million for a company that was valued at only $6 billion on the stock market not too long ago? As the chairman of the $10billion Industry Funds Management, Garry Weaven (someone who has been a strong supporter of the positive potential for private equity in some circumstances in the past) has pointed out this week, there must be more to the deal and their plans for Qantas than we know.

One thing is clear. Once the deal is done, there will be no stopping Qantas's new private equity investors and the newly incentivised Qantas management team from putting their heads down and doing their darndest to make the most money out of the airline they can before getting it ready to sell off at an even higher price a few years down the track.

You only have to look at how Macquarie Airports has pushed up charges at Sydney airport and made a host of changes such as making it more difficult to drop off passengers (to force people to pay for parking).

If the Treasurer, other government ministers and federal politicians who go back to work in Canberra next week have any misgivings or need any formal assurances about what is going to happen to Qantas in a brave new world of privatisation, it's time to speak now or forever hold their peace. Politicians, central bankers and union leaders around the world are only just coming to grips with the rising tide of multi-billion dollar private equity deals sweeping the world.

In the US, a similar deal of national consequence would have already prompted a proactivist politician into calling public hearings on the matter, calling on the protagonists to give evidence on the public record.

With Qantas, all we have at the moment - apart from the carefully crafted public relations spiel - are private discussions being held behind closed doors.

There are some companies, such as Myer, which can be shaken up and revitalised under the attention of private equity ownership. But Qantas is no ordinary Australian company. Nor is it a bankrupt or badly run organisation desperately in need of a good shake-up and reorganisation. For those politicians still struggling tocome to terms with private equity, here is a starter list of 10 questions toask:

* 1. Hoes does APA plan to make a profit out of the deal?

* 2. How long does it plan to own Qantas?

* 3. What are its plans for Qantas employees?

* 4. What is the experience of major investor Texas Pacific in the airlines it has invested in?

* 5. What is the structure of the deal? Does it involve use of offshore tax havens? Qantas shareholders will have to pay capital gains tax on the profits they make from selling to APA. Will APA also pay capital gains tax on the profits they make on the sale of Qantas? Politicians should look closely at the present controversies in Korea where it has emerged that private equity firms - including Texas Pacific - have made big profits on buying and selling once-ailing Korean financial organisations.

* 6. How much money will the advisers make on the deal?

* 7. How much money do senior Qantas management stand to make out of the deal? Geoff Dixon has said he will give a possible $60million in compensation he could receive to charity. How much do other senior Qantas executives stand to make?

* 8. What are the potential conflicts between Macquarie Airports owning Sydney airport and having a key stake in Qantas? What safeguards will be in place to stop it working to ensure that Qantas gets the best deal at Sydney airport and its rivals get a raw deal? And what is to stop Qantas favouring Sydney airport over other airports for its services?

* 9. What will happen to the regional routes in Australia that Qantas presently serves?

* 10. What protections are there for Qantas frequent flyer holders?

It may be that the APA deal produces a leaner, slicker, more aggressive Qantas which thrives on doing its own thing, away from the annoying glare of the public spotlight and the scrutiny of being a publicly listed company.

But in the few weeks before the ideal becomes a reality, the Government and our politicians owe it to the Australian public to get some serious, binding, public assurances about what the consortium really plans for Qantas.

Interesting article ,don't you think.

Twiggs and others ,here is another invitation to post a constructive post..what do you think about the takeover and how it is being structured?

[mamslave]

so what about rod eddington teaming up with the labour party.

Isnt rod part of the big take over bid?

how would that sit with people?

[indamiddle]

even onboard managers can't seem to agree what
correct procedure before ife resets are made i.e. logon.
as for filling out ccl i feel it is a waste of time when
fixes are not made when a/c transit sydney what is the
point of documenting them upline.
so i have a poor attitude but i have a feeling i am not
alone and mgnt don't seem to care so why should i.
once the takeover is complete it is extremely unlikely
that conditions of any type will get better. guess all of
us including engineers will continue the downhill slide.

[speedbirdhouse]

The buyout is about nothing more than money.

1.Macquarie Bank gain to milk AUD $400 million in fees for there part in the transaction.

2.Qantas senior executives get to divvy up AUD $110 million dollars amongst themselves for just being there.

3. The shareholders get a fat capital gain on their shares.

In return for this Qantas has to deal with an almost threefold increase in the debt it has to service out of operating profit.

Debt goes from AUD $5 billion to around AUD $13 billion.

I wonder who the new owners are going to come after in an effort to get their 20% return on investment :rolleyes::yuk: :yuk:

johnnies IR laws will see to that..........

[PER210]

i dont get why they're going to buy a company that will be 13 billion in debt... does it make much sence? or am i missing something...:bored:

[speedbirdhouse]

They are going to use the powers granted business by the howard govenment's "work-no-choices" legislation to slash, rip, tear, and destroy the conditions of it's workforce thereby increasing the profitability of the company.

This increased profitability comes at the expense of it's workforce.

It's what corporate raiders do, silly.

[PER210]

ahh.. makes sence now.

[speedbirdhouse]

Good for you.

Now, back to idol.:ok:

[PER210]

ha!... there is nothing wrong with idol thank you... depends which country your in... but some (i.e. 2 in the whole world?) have made a career out of it. and good on them.

What did idol have to do with me asking why a company would buy another company for $11b and then going into $13b debt anyway?

[speedbirdhouse]

Nothing PER210, just ignore me.

Appologies for my mistake in a previous post re the AUD $110 million dollar figure that I quoted would be "creamed" by Qantas senior executives upon the sale.

It seems the figure is AUD $160 million. :yuk: :yuk: :yuk:

www.smh.com.au/news/business/qantas-chiefs-offered-160m-sweetener/2007/02/02/1169919530064.html

[lowerlobe]

Speedbird...

The part that I thought was interesting was that APA is happy with the current management.

However as the article said we ALREADY have Darth and Co so why do we need the new owners and their debt level?

Banks and Equity funds do not buy a company because they want to play with planes ,they do it because they can see a profit in it.

The only question is HOW?

The fact that the company will be de registered gives us a clue.
You only have to look at how Mac bank runs Sydney airport and the increased charges to have an idea of what they are thinking.

The article also points out that equity groups focus on company's that are poorly run and losing money.the takeover group comes in with a broom and revitalises it .They then set about making a good turn over and then sell it for a huge profit compared to the investment .

The only flaw with this is that QF is not making a loss and in fact is making a huge profit.BA was rapt when they made around $1,3 billion but we are making close to that with a lot smaller fleet.

These are some of the points that I believe that a public hearing should be asked as well as why the board is entitled to anything let alone 160 million just to say YES.The board is paid well enough and some would say excessively already and I don't see why they are entitled to anything more than their normal packages.

I have rung my local Federal rep and after 3 weeks has not returned my call.

This is without a doubt the most momentus event in our careers and some who post here don't have anything to say.

This is like rotting fish at low tide ,it smells !

[lowerlobe]

There are a number of VERY interesting articles in todays AUSTRALIAN newspaper (Sat). Most of which will not please APA,Darth or our illustrious PM.

The momentum is building....

Does anyone know if the FAAA has held meetings with either the new would -be owners or the company lately ?

[stubby jumbo]

What I don't get in all this Equity bit is why the TOP 36 EXEC'S get special mention /treatment , then can potentially make a motza after we are refloated in 5 years or so ???

What have this ramshackle gaggle done to contribute to the success of the Rat ?

Only last week we had 2 TOP EXEC'S ( yeah right !! ) on board going up to HKG.

They both sat in their seats in P/C like zombies. Made no eye contact with the crew, did not speak to the crew and when the CSM had the audacity to ENGAGE on e of them as he exited the Loo , his reply was:

"I do not want to talk about it ( the Equity buy out ) on board.

WHY THE HELL NOT ???? YOU ARE PROBABLY GOING TO PAY OFF MORE THAN YOUR MORTGAGE AFTER THIS ........YOU CLOWN !!!
Thats what really sticks in my craw in this and other assorted "changes" that we've been subjected to over the years.

"You the worker do your menial tasks ( serve tea /coffee and clean toilets ) and leave the big issues to us" ( Management) !!!!!

Well , we've got news for you. The vast majority of organisations with "engaged" profitable workforces ( eg HP, Bendigo Bank, Cisco) all have flat management structures that are INCLUSIVE of the worker NOT "divide & conquer" based on some feudal system in the 18th Century.

The classic recent example is ( dare I bore you all ) the IFE.

We told "management" at least 18 months ago that it is just not good enough to load up 300/400 pax on an AC for 14 hours after they have paid for the IFE only for it to lurch and whine and collapse leaving the mess to us to clean up.( This is in breach of Trade Practices legislation)

"Oh no , we'll just put in a new patch" said management.

............FOR F--KS SAKE !!!!:ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

These are the same people who are part of the "gang of 36".

Go figure.?


Rant over.

Time to put $50 each way on the 5th at Rosehill:sad: :sad:

As for the FAAA, haven't heard much from them on this BIG issue.

oh./............ but the cart tops are fixed:D

[lowerlobe]

Stubby ,

I could not agree more and as usual it is a case of “do as we say not as we do” .

However there is a growing concern regarding not only the amount but the fact that management is being paid to say yes.

As one article said if this was the US there would be a call from congress or similar to have a public hearing so that the consortium would have to answer questions and not behind closed doors.

Not to worry about the FAAA though because it appears as though they are right on the ball as you can read with the latest newsletter ….

“Muffin Morning Is Back! (QF) (AO) (JQ)”

I wonder whether Bob Mansfield would prefer a muffin or a Krispy Kreme Donut....I can imagine Darth is sweating over this latest tactical move by the FAAA.

[stubby jumbo]

After reading the papers today, I get the feeling that this is not a

DONE DEAL.

Parliament is back in session next week and like all good pollies they can sense that Johnnie is feeling a tad stressed with Big Kev in the saddle.

What better than to have a Senate inquiry into Qantas?

What with the Freight scam this week, the ALLCO bully show yesterday, who knows

.....it ain't over 'till the fat lady sings:uhoh:

Speaking of FAT. I'll be requesting that the FAAA supply (paid from our Union fees) low-fat Muffins for the morning teas........not the usuals from the Pie Shop up the road from their bunker.:yuk:

By the way Lobe I have heard that Darth loves MUFF ins with his beverage of choice.:hmm:

[lowerlobe]

The company apparently has a new PR company in Mascot...

Today was a very interesting afternoon as guess who was on 2UE?

None other than our fearless FAAA official Sven Reeder.

The funny thing was that old sven put the image across that as crew we deal with a number of issues but not too many problems with the IFE.....WTF

Steve are you really that scared of the company and did not want to upset them too much.....YOU had a golden opportunity and not only blew it but confirmed my suspicions of the FAAA.

The last trip I did the IFE failed on 3 out of 4 sectors and our friend Steve tells everyone their is not much really wrong with it....

We had a perfect opportunity to put pressure on the company and what happens......The FAAA caves in and bends over once again?

With a union like this we really don't need the company to stuff us up.

How many dispensations are you guys planning on giving away this year boy's...

The FAAA have MUFFIN MORNINGS though...That will fix them ;)

NICE ONE STEVE :rolleyes:

[stubby jumbo]

I didn't hear the interview on 2UE,,,,,,.......

But really, Saturday afternoon radio is not a ratings bonanza.

Demographic=60+ pensioners who shuttle between 2KY and their medicine cupboard!!!

Must of been a really absorbing interview;)

[speedbirdhouse]

www.smh.com.au/news/national/qantas-staff-abused-as-entertainment-falls-flat/2007/01/27/1169788739705.html

www.smarthouse.com.au/Content_And_Services/Video_Downloads?Article=/Content%20And%20Services/Video%20Downloads/H7S7G3B2

www.etravelblackboard.com/index.asp?id=60911&nav=2

www.news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=170480

www.smarthouse.com.au/?Article=/_Home%20Page%20Feature/T5A3H7J3

http://www.smarthouse.com.au/Content_And_Services/Video_Downloads?print=1&Article=/Content%20And%20Services/Video%20Downloads/T5A3H7J3

[speedbirdhouse]

It seems the pigs running Qantas stand to make far more than AUD $160 million if the sale goes ahead.

More like AUD $364 million. :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk:

www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21161418-16942,00.html

[stubby jumbo]

This is getting worse by the minute.

Time to fire off yet another e-mail to my local member:hmm:

[speedbirdhouse]

www.news.com.au/sundayheraldsun/story/0,21985,21161556-661,00.html

[Pegasus747]

Air rage prompts Qantas action
February 4, 2007

A CRISIS meeting between Qantas managers and air crews will be held tomorrow after breakdowns in the airline's multimillion-dollar entertainment system sparked a passenger backlash.

The Flight Attendants Association of Australia has formally complained of cabin crew exhibiting "stress related problems" caused by aggressive passengers.

The entertainment system failure is affecting 27 aircraft in Qantas's Boeing 747-400 fleet and 10 Airbus A330-300 planes, prompting the airline to form a team to fix problems in the audio- and video-on-demand system, which has left passengers without movies, music and other entertainment for extended periods of their flights.

The airline has agreed to a request by FAA president Steven Reed for a meeting with Qantas general manager of aviation health services Ion Morrison and Qantas occupational health and safety committee chairman Michael Von Reth to devise a strategy to help staff cope with the air rage incidents.

A spokesman for Qantas said the airline had dedicated additional people, components and technical expertise to fix the problem.

"We are confident it will be fixed soon. [System supplier] Rockwell Collins is fully aware of the importance of this issue to Qantas," he said.

"We take any concerns raised by crew seriously. This meeting reaffirms the support services we have available."

He said the airline was not contemplating replacing the troubled system.

Passenger Ray Stephens, who lives in Sydney's south, said the entertainment system was down in his section for the entire return Qantas flight from Honolulu last weekend.

Rockwell Collins declined to comment, saying it was seeking legal advice.

Source: The Sun-Herald

[stubby jumbo]

For once its nice to see the MEL legal fraternity seeking pax input for a possible class action against the Rat for the IFE debacle.

They are not stupid , they can see BIG $$$$$$$$$ in this class action.

As I've said before they only need to use one reference document., ie the Trade Practices Act. Every flight that does not deliver the advertised product ( namely IFE ) -technically they are in breach !!:= :=

Some of those SENIOR MANAGER types( involved in this mess) better get some savvy legal advice asap otherwise the APA may punt them before this sorry saga begins.:D

They are going to need to have a substantial paper trail to dodge the wrath of the law.

How does the song go:

"From little things big things grow" ( Paul Kelly )

[stubby jumbo]

Source: AAP
Labor seeks more scrutiny of Qantas bid


February 04, 2007
FEDERAL Labor has called on the private equity consortium seeking to buy Qantas to submit details of its bid to foreign investment and competition watchdog scrutiny.

Labor's treasury spokesman Wayne Swan also called on Treasurer Peter Costello to encourage the consortium to seek such a referral.

Mr Swan acknowledged that Airline Partners Australia's (APA) bid for Qantas had been structured to fall within the requirements of the Qantas Sale Act, the Airports Act and the Foreign Acquisition Takeovers Act.
“(But) Federal Labor calls on the buyers to seek from the Treasurer a referral of the bid to the Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB) and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC),” he said.
Mr Swan said Qantas was a critical economic asset as well as a national icon.
“This buyout bid must be judged on whether it is in the “national interest” and the “public interest” in accordance with foreign investment and competition principles,” he said.
“The definition of the national interest and the “public interest” is a legitimate debate for Australia to have and it's about time we had it to guarantee Australia's security when it comes to strategic national assets and essential services like those Qantas provides.”

[Pegasus747]

THE consortium looking to buy Qantas says any parliamentary inquiry into the sale of the airline would "be most unfortunate".

The comment comes as politicians returned to Canberra today for the year's first sitting of parliament tomorrow, with the proposed sale of the airline becoming an increasing concern among government backbenchers.

Airline Partners Australia (APA) director Bob Mansfield says the consortium is happy to consider any conditions put on the sale by the Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB).

But Mr Mansfield offered no guarantees.

"I think this independent process (from the FIRB) ... will turn it into a form of approval we can live with," Mr Mansfield told ABC radio.

"The reality is, it's not a normal company. Additional scrutiny was something we expected."

Australia's Macquarie Bank is the lead partner in APA. The consortium also includes Australian financial services company Allco Finance Group, which is involved in long-term aircraft leasing, and Allco Equity Partners, a listed large-scale private equity company.

US private equity giant Texas Pacific Group and Canadian equity investor ONEX Partners are also partners.

APA on Friday released its formal bidder's statement for Qantas.

Ninety per cent of Qantas shareholders must agree to the $5.60 per share offer, which opens today, for a takeover to proceed.

Mr Mansfield said the consortium's voluntary decision to subject its Qantas offer to the FIRB was designed to "try and put some calmness in this situation".

However, Liberal backbencher Bruce Baird says only guarantees from the consortium will satisfy him and a growing number of Government backbenchers.

"If they want ... Government support, then I think it cuts both ways," Mr Baird told ABC radio.

While he backed away from demanding a full Senate inquiry into the sale, Mr Baird did say the Government should require more than the "broad assurances" already offered by APA.

"We need guarantees," he said.

The increasing pressure on the sale process came as a poll commissioned by the ACTU showed almost 80 per cent of voters in Government-held marginal seats opposed the sale of the flying kangaroo.

The poll of 400 people in eight marginal seats held by the coalition, conducted by Melbourne social market research company Auspoll, found 79 per cent of those questioned were opposed to the sale.

[Pegasus747]

No Qantas jobs promise given


By Belinda Tasker and Sandra O'Malley
February 05, 2007 05:03pm

THE consortium trying to take over Qantas today refused to rule out job cuts as the Federal Government tried to allay fears about the airline falling into foreign hands.

The Federal Government is under pressure from its own backbenchers, unions and Labor to impose strict conditions to help protect 38,000 Qantas workers whose jobs may be affected by the $11 billion deal.

But Treasurer Peter Costello and the Airline Partners Australia (APA) consortium say they are unable to give any guarantees when it comes to jobs.

APA director Bob Mansfield said while the consortium was willing to consider some conditions, including a commitment to regional services, jobs could not be guaranteed.

"On staffing, what we're putting on that, is we can't guarantee jobs, because I don't think any employer can," Mr Mansfield said to Southern Cross Radio.

"Our single focus on this whole exercise ... is to grow the organisation with 70 more planes and a 40 per cent bigger network at the end of the five to six years.

"If that happens, jobs will grow."

Mr Mansfield also flagged Qantas could sell "non-airline core businesses", but insisted it would maintain its current levels of maintenance work in Australia.

The ACTU, New South Wales Premier Morris Iemma and Coalition backbenchers demanded the Government set conditions on the deal to ensure no jobs are lost.

ACTU secretary Greg Combet said a new poll, sponsored by the union, showing almost 80 per cent of 400 voters in eight marginal coalition-held seats are opposed to the sale, highlighted the need for strict conditions.

"What is necessary ... are guarantees and strictly enforceable conditions, and these things are within the jurisdiction and power of the Commonwealth Government to impose on a sale such as this," he said to ABC Radio.

But Mr Costello rejected the calls and said job cuts were an issue for Qantas management.

"The fact that this application comes along doesn't change the fact that the board and the management are responsible for jobs," he said.

The latest concerns over Qantas's workforce came as the APA bowed to Government pressure and asked the Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB) to examine its takeover offer.

Mr Costello said the bid would be rigorously examined by the FIRB, which has 30 days to determine whether the deal goes against the national interest.

The treasurer also hosed down fears about whether the iconic airline could end up being foreign owned, and dismissed calls for a parliamentary inquiry.

The APA is a mix of foreign and locally-based companies, including Australia's Macquarie Bank and US private equity giant Texas Pacific Group.

Mr Costello said existing laws prevented foreign investors owning more than 49 per cent of Qantas.

"If anybody tries to lift the foreign ownership in Qantas above 49 per cent they will be stopped," he said.

"The Government will require that Qantas have majority Australian ownership, that it be under Australian control, that it be located in Australia and that the airline continue to serve important domestic and regional routes."

Mr Costello is expected to be grilled about the deal by backbenchers at a party-room meeting tomorrow.

NSW Liberal Bruce Baird, whose electorate of Cook is near Sydney airport, wants a guarantee that jobs won't be lost, that customers won't lose out if the takeover succeeds and backroom operations won't be based in Asia.

"I would like to see guarantees in terms that they won't be sending the maintenance offshore, that we won't be seeing regional services cut," he said.

[GPS72]

Danny John
February 7, 2007
MACQUARIE Bank is set to mount a near-$40 billion assault on assets around the world with plans to raise more equity and debt to support its expansion overseas.
Fresh from its participation in the still-to-be-consummated $11 billion private equity bid for Qantas, the bank flagged a new round of financing in its drive to snap up infrastructure operations and parcel them in unlisted funds.
Analysts yesterday anticipated that Macquarie, whose interests range across airports, toll roads, water companies, real estate and car parks to name but a few, could well raise between $12 and $14 billion in equity alone in the coming year. This would allow it to attract a further two to three times the same amount of debt.
However, the bank is becoming a victim of its own success with market expectations of a profit upgrade failing to appear on the back of a trading update. That saw Macquarie's shares fall $2.48 to $81.40 yesterday as traders dumped the stock.
While chief executive Allan Moss said the bank was on track for a strong second-half performance for the year ending March, analysts had been expecting indications of a figure higher than $600 million. That would produce a full year figure of well over $1.2 billion.
But with no extra clues to the final outcome, yesterday's sell-off was the first setback for the stock after a 10 per cent rise alone in the share price over the last four weeks, fuelled by market talk of the number of corporate deals under way.
Goldman Sachs JBWere said that having run up from $60 since September to a recent high of $88, the shares could now drop back to as low as $75 in coming weeks due to a "touch of disappointing news".
Macquarie is looking to bolster its second-half profits by selling a number of businesses before its March year-end, which would help to ease the $1.5 billion pressure on its own balance sheet and clear the way for a new buying spree.
The bank has suffered delays over the last year in offloading some of the companies because it was not clear at the time whether it should spin them off into unlisted funds or float them.
"Now we're focusing on unlisted and that clearly reflects the investment preference pretty much globally," Mr Moss said.
He said yesterday that there was "huge interest" in the businesses concerned and that talks were under way with several parties. He would not list which assets were on the block because of the negotiations.
"It might not work to our commercial advantage to comment at this stage," he said.
The bank has expanded both its focus on international deals and its overseas operations.
It has taken on an extra 15 per cent in staff since last March, employing a total of 9400 people, of whom 3200 are based overseas. International numbers have jumped by more than a quarter in 10 months.
Macquarie also revealed that it had disposed of around $1.3 billion of businesses since last September but at the same time bought a further $900 million. The next round of sales is likely to raise under $1 billion.
I fear that as all good fairytales, this one must also come to an abrupt end. All this buying by MacBank shows an aggressive approach to business, which leaves little room for a more "human" approach to companies. Qantas will be no different. If you end up paying too much for something, the first thing you will try to do is to recoup some of that money. It should be clear that both Qantas management and MacBank know exactly how to do that, and that will be through its employees and its operations. I believe that what the travelling public need to hear, and this will put pressure on the government, is how their air safety could be compromised if more maintenance and flight attendant jobs go overseas, or if cheaper labour is brought in. These are the issues our unions need to focus on, together with highlighting the obscene amounts of money a few individuals will be making at the expense of thousands of others.

[Pegasus747]

February 7, 2007

THE Federal Treasurer, Peter Costello, came under concerted pressure from Government backbenchers yesterday to impose strict conditions on the Macquarie Bank-led takeover of Qantas.

About five Liberal and National MPs used the Coalition's joint party room meeting in Canberra to raise concerns about the impact of the takeover on the airline's 38,000 employees.

Backbenchers also told the meeting they were worried about the amount of debt Qantas would take on under the planned $11 billion private equity buyout, saying it would expose Australia's main airline to greater financial risks.

MPs speaking about the Qantas takeover included the Sydney Liberal MP and former state tourism minister, Bruce Baird, who has been a strong supporter of Qantas in the past.

Mr Baird said he was worried that if the takeover went ahead the new owners would put more pressure on the company to cut costs by relocating jobs overseas.

"It is critical to have guarantees against offshoring of jobs," Mr Baird said. "It is hard to get guarantees of actual job numbers being preserved but the issue is in terms of where they deliberately decide to shift jobs offshore, including jobs of flight attendants, back room accounting functions and particularly maintenance jobs."

The Victorian Liberal MP Sophie Mirabella also voiced concerns about the takeover.

It is understood she suggested the Government should reconsider its policies of restricting competition against Qantas on international aviation routes unless the new owners accepted stringent conditions to protect local jobs and air services.

Other MPs speaking on Qantas included the Queensland Nationals Senator Barnaby Joyce, Western Australian Liberal Senator Ross Lightfoot and Sydney Liberal MP Bronwyn Bishop.

Mr Costello told the party room meeting that the deal would be closely examined by the Foreign Investment Review Board.

Later he told Parliament that in addition to scrutinising the proposed buyout under foreign investment law, the Government would ensure that the Qantas Sale Act was "strictly enforced".

The Qantas Sale Act, which was the vehicle for the former Labor Government's privatisation of the airline, imposes requirements on Qantas including majority Australian ownership, Australian incorporation, keeping its head office and main operations centre in Australia and having Australians make up two thirds of its directors.

"I want to make it absolutely clear that all of those conditions will be enforced strictly and in full," Mr Costello said.

Senior executives from the consortium bidding for Qantas, Airline Partners Australia, continued meeting federal MPs in Canberra yesterday to explain their takeover proposal. But airline unions will bring a delegation of around 15 Qantas employees to Canberra today to lobby for conditions to be imposed on the takeover.

The Transport Workers Union and other airline unions have prepared a list of sale conditions including:

■ No reduction in employment in Australia in Qantas airline functions or any related Qantas company as a result of deliberate management strategies.

■ No reduction in pay or employment entitlements.

■ No reduction in regional airline employment as a result of changes to regional networks.

■ No loss of air services to regional destinations currently served by Qantas or its subsidiaries.

[DEFCON4]

Seniority has just gone up 50 slots..domestic VR.
LWOP being offered to both longhaul and the domestics.
Accelerated leave still happening.
NRT still in standing bids(Some Good News)
MAM language speakers and casuals making bigger inroads....
All this and the APA bid.
Good God I hope the Australian Electorate wakes up and votes little Johnny Turkey out.

[Shlonghaul]

And the half yearly result is out tomorrow........should make for interesting reading....more bonus on top of a bonus for our esteemed executives?? :E

[sydney s/h]

Defcon4,

"domestics" - are you refering to Shorthaul?

Or are you refering to Qantaslink?

[DEFCON4]

By "domestic"I refer to those individuals whose pedigree is TAA...Qantas by default only.
This exchange is redundant.
The answer to the question was known before it was asked.
Lets move on to more serious issues shall we ?
I will not be responding to anymore questions in regard to this subject.

[grahamm]

I am in a long term relationship with a Qantas S/H CSM who is an ex TAA "hostess" who has a global seniority in the mid 200's and is WAY too young to retire, age wise .

What is the problems with all of you junior guys and ladies who were still at school when she was doing midnight horrors from Perth etc?

You must be a junior if your seniority went up by a whole 50 numbers.

You all work for the same company and need to look out for each other and keep all of your hard earned conditions, as my union says.......you inherit an award and need to hand it over to the next generation in a better condition than you got it.

The enemy is management.........not L/H and S/H infighting.

P.S, having done many L/H flights we are both in awe of how you deliver a service for up to nearly 12 hours eg SYD-PEK (we were in Y class) and still smiled and we met the Captain in the Silk market the next day he said that you all kicked on till 3 am he said, we paxed and were snoring by midnight.

Please, no infighting.

[DEFCON4]

I am under 50(just) and have been flying 27 years.
My seniority is in the 400s
Your girlfriend is either lying about her age or you are looking at the wrong seniority list ie.the purser list only.

[grahamm]

47 yo, global seniority as per CIS seniority in mid 200's and joined in late 1977 (according to her ATSIC)

[DEFCON4]

As you can see I am NOT junior and my seniority jumped by 50 so your assertion about junior people complaining is incorrect.
So what exactly is the point you are trying to make?

[grahamm]

Stop the L/H and S/H division and look after each other, and remember a CSM is a CSM not the Naval term of Purser.

Look out for all FAAA members and utilise your seniority to ensure all new members join the Union.

The olive branch is thrown out, please unify all QF cabin crew for the long term.

[DEFCON4]

It has been tried several times over the last 10 years and failed miserably each time.
So as much as I sympathise with your sentiment, events(bastardry) over the last 3 years have meant that unity is and always will be a fiction.
If you are interested in the events to which I refer they can be read in other threads which were ultimately closed because these events are provocative.
Now....where were we? aaah yes.....the current sadness

[stubby jumbo]

Have just heard a rumour from a S/H colleague that there is a fairly large SURPLUS of shorthaul crew (particularly in SYD ) and guess what??

What does Qantas usually do when they stuff up their crewing levels !

DIRECT LEAVE.

Get ready for it guys , we had to put up with this disgraceful act ( LSL burn)

Now its your turn.

Apparently ,there is scope in your EBA7 to direct if you have OVER 28 A/L days.

Happy Holidays;)

[surfside6]

No wonder DW resigned.
The domestics are now paying the price for the Deal Done with the Devil
Its doing to be high price too....oblivion.... just like the rest of us

[Le 3rd Homme]

If your girlfriend is 47 now she was born in 1960.
If she started with TAA in 1977 she must have been 17.
A little young to be a flight hostess?

[lowerlobe]

This argument is a redundant one as we have been over it time and time again..

It does not matter whether this person is real or not or 47 or 107.

I don't really care if s/h disappear from the face of the earth.S/H don't care about us and we have to look after ourselves but not fight with them because thats exactly what the company want.

The real enemy is the company and the divide and conquer tactics they use.

A perfect example of this is FRA.The other day we arrived and the company has stiffed us on a lunch allowance.The tech crew still got it but not the cabin crew.They did a similar stunt the other day in NRT as well.

The FAAA email said that the cabin crew department and ops had nothing to do with it but if you believe that you probably still believe in Santa.

Notice how little we hear from Lusly Grunt theses days , it seems as though someone else is pulling the strings.

The company love to divide and conquer and we have to take the fight to them and be proactive and not react to them all the time.If we have a chance on radio or any media we have to put the boot in and not wait for them to put us on awa's.

[Spitty42]

According to her "ATSIC" card????

She's a Torres Straight Islander as well?

[lowerlobe]

It would be great to get our hands on those cards ...We'd never have to work again

[grahamm]

Oops, too many wines last night,
She joined TAA at 19 in 1977, born in 1958 and I believe the card is an ASIC card which I wish I had so as to be able to grab the jump seat when plane is full.

I hope the sale doesn't go through and AWA's get thrown out

[lowerlobe]

QANTAS must maintain its travel routes in the event of being sold, Business Council of Australia president Michael Chaney warned yesterday.

His call came as speculation mounted that a part-owned Qantas subsidiary, Jetstar Asia, which flies to Asian cities from Singapore, was in financial strife.

And for the moment Qantas does not face the headache of a Senate inquiry into its sale, after National Barnaby Joyce voted against one last night, saying the Foreign Investment Review Board review should do.

The business intervention came as unions said they received commitments from 90 per cent of Government backbenchers to lobby for the protection of Qantas jobs and services.

Private equity consortium Airline Partners Australia has made an $11 billion takeover bid for Qantas.

Mr Chaney said the new owners should retain regional and international services — as Australia, being so isolated, depends on them.

Mr Chaney also feared the surge of private equity takeovers could unravel if there was an economic downturn.

His comments came as delegates from the Transport Workers Union, Australian Services Union and Australian Manufacturing Workers Union met Coalition MPs in Canberra.

TWU national airlines co-ordinator Scott Connolly said 90 per cent of about 30 backbenchers canvassed had promised to write to Treasurer Peter Costello, asking for conditions on the sale. The delegates will see about 15 more MPs today and are seeking protection for workers' jobs and entitlements, onshore maintenance and frequent flyer points.

Jetstar Asia, meanwhile, has racked up more than $100 million in losses since its start-up two years ago, with the airline having apparently failed to take on Qantas arch-rival Singapore Airlines on its home turf.

The airline cancelled 30 per cent of its scheduled flights yesterday and its other subsidiary, Valuair, cancelled 50 per cent of its services out of Singapore, amid talk in the aviation industry that the airline is looking to jettison some unprofitable routes.

Jetstar Asia spokesman Ai Ling Ng denied there were any problems. Qantas head of corporate affairs Belinda de Rome said the carrier had no plans to quit its 44.5 per cent investment in Jetstar Asia-Valuair. A spokesman for the Airline Partners consortium bidding for Qantas rejected talk that it would scuttle Jetstar Asia.
--------------------------------------------


Interesting that Darth and his apprentices believe that they are entitled to a bonus when their idea has cost the group more than $100 million....I wonder if the new owners will be as forgiving with that sort of management performance.At the moment Darth may be numero uno but if APA take over he has to answer to a new boss who wants a (fast) return on $11 billion

[GalleyHag]

stubby jumbo

The yearly number crunching surplus for short haul was announced in early Jan from memory (after we were advised in early Dec that we were so short staffed that the FAAA was holding urgent meetings with the company to address the shortage) and was also in cabin crew news, so this is not anything new.

Unlike long haul crew enough short haul crew traditionally take up the options which are LOWP 6 months, Temp part time 6 months, adhoc LS and Holiday leave to cover the surplus without being forced onto directed leave but if that was possible so be it, not much anyone can do about it. However crew are already being knocked back for adhoc leave requests and generally when the "surplus" occurs it means more drafting etc for crew.

The difference is short haul are a lot more flexible and are willing to work with the company to manage the surplus that occurs from time to time throughout the year. Furthermore our casual crew somewhat protect permanent crew when a surplus occurs.

So I wouldnt get to excited about exacting your petty revenge just yet!

[Shlonghaul]

QANTAS RESULTS - FOR THE HALF-YEAR ENDED 31 DECEMBER 2006
HIGHLIGHTS
§ Profit before tax of $523 million
§ Net profit after tax of $359 million
§ Revenue of $7.7 billion
§ Earnings per share of 18.2 cents
§ Operating cashflow over $1.0 billion
§ Special dividend of 15.0 cents per share fully franked
QANTAS REPORTS HALF-YEAR PROFIT OF $523 MILLION
SYDNEY, 8 February 2007: Qantas today announced a profit before tax (PBT)
of $523 million for the half-year ended 31 December 2006, an 8.3 per cent
increase on the prior comparative half-year to 31 December 2005.
Net profit after tax increased only 1.7 per cent to $359 million as a
result of a favourable tax charge in the prior corresponding half.
The Chairman of Qantas, Ms Margaret Jackson, said that in December 2006,
under the terms of the Airline Partners Australia (APA) takeover offer for
Qantas, it was stated that the interim dividend that would otherwise have
been payable in April 2007 would not be available. It was further stated
that the Board would evaluate whether a fully franked Special Dividend
could be paid during the bid period and, if this were possible, the offer
consideration would be reduced by the dividend amount.
“We have established that a fully franked dividend can be paid and,
accordingly, the Directors have today declared a fully franked Special
Dividend of 15 cents per share, payable whether the APA offer succeeds or
not. This Special Dividend will fully utilise all Qantas available
franking credits,” Ms Jackson said.
The Special Dividend will be paid to all Qantas shareholders who are
recorded on the register at 5.00 pm (Sydney time) on 19 February 2007.
Payment will be made on the earlier of 19 March 2007 and 10 business days
after the APA offer is unconditional.
Ms Jackson said that in accordance with the APA offer terms, if the APA
offer succeeded, Qantas shareholders would receive a total of $5.60,
comprising the fully franked Special Dividend of 15 cents per share and the
balance of the $5.60 offer price by way of cash payment from APA.
She said Qantas had also decided to suspend the Dividend Reinvestment Plan
(DRP), a decision that had been contemplated prior to the takeover offer
from APA.
“This move is in line with the continued strength of the company’s balance
sheet.”
Ms Jackson said Qantas Directors believed the APA offer was the best
opportunity for shareholders to realise significant value for their
investment in Qantas.
She said the half-year result reflected buoyant consumer demand and
efficiency improvements throughout the airline over the past
three-and-a-half years.
“Like other Australian companies, we have benefited from the continued
strength in the Australian economy,” Ms Jackson said.
The Chief Executive Officer of Qantas, Mr Geoff Dixon, said crude oil
prices had remained volatile during the six months – peaking at US$77 a
barrel in July 2006.
“This has resulted in a total fuel bill $388 million higher than the
comparative half year, after hedging.
Mr Dixon said the volatility in price remained, with prices only a few
weeks ago reaching US$50 a barrel, before moving up to the current price of
around US$60.
“On current forecasts, we expect our full year fuel costs to be around $3.5
billion, over $660 million higher than the prior full year.
“At these levels it is imperative we continue to seek efficiencies across
all sections of our business.”
Mr Dixon said Qantas’ Sustainable Future Program had achieved benefits of
$319 million during the half-year.
“Business transformation under the Program enabled an underlying
improvement in unit costs of 0.9 per cent.
“We need to accelerate this unit cost reduction in the second half of the
year if we are to achieve our target of $750 million.”
Mr Dixon said other contributing factors to the half-year result were:
§ capacity growth of 3.7 per cent, particularly within the leisure
market segments as Jetstar consolidated its position domestically following
delivery of its A320 fleet in the prior year and commenced long haul
international operations in November 2006;
§ a four-fold improvement in Jetstar’s profit for the half year from
$10 million to $51 million (excluding start-up costs for Jetstar
International’s operations);
§ an improvement in yield of 7.2 per cent (including the favourable
impact of foreign exchange rate movements) and a 2.8 percentage point
improvement in seat factor to 80.3 per cent, principally in Qantas
Airlines where there had been an improvement in international operations;
§ cashflow from operations of over $1.0 billion which, after capital
investments and other financing costs, saw the airline’s cash position
improve by $151 million to over $3.0 billion.
Mr Dixon said Qantas needed to continue to adjust its business to meet
ongoing intense international competition, potential new costs from changed
environmental regulations, and an expected new low cost airline in the
Australian domestic market.
“However, despite these challenges we have and will continue to expand and
invest in existing and growing markets.
“To this end, Jetstar International operations will expand to six A330-200
aircraft and Qantas will acquire four A330-200s over the next two years.
“Also, in late 2008 the Qantas Group will commence the introduction of the
world’s newest aircraft, the Airbus A380 and the Boeing 787.”
He said Qantas had:
§ increased Qantaslink capacity by over 20 per cent as it expanded
regional flying with new Q400 aircraft;
§ successfully launched Jetstar international operations in November
2006, which had added six new destinations to the Qantas Group network and
created 500 new jobs;
§ opened a new QantasLink pilot and cabin crew base in Canberra in
September 2006, creating 30 jobs;
§ announced increased services to San Francisco from March 2007;
§ increased trans-continental capacity with the addition of wide body
aircraft to these routes; and
§ launched a range of product enhancements, including online check-in,
with refreshed international menus and amenities on board from next month
and state-of-the-art international First lounges opening in Melbourne and
Sydney in April 2007.
Mr Dixon said the Qantas Group intended to build on its track record of
growth and service excellence.
“I would like to take this opportunity to thank our staff for their
unwavering professionalism during a period of difficult operating
conditions and – more recently – relentless public speculation about the
future of Qantas.”
Outlook
We believe that the full year result will be around 30 to 40 per cent
higher than last year’s result subject to fuel costs not increasing
significantly, demand continuing to grow and cost reductions not achieved
in the first half being realised in the second half.
Group Revenue
Total revenue for the half-year was $7.7 billion, an increase of $870
million or 12.7 per cent on the prior half-year compared to capacity
growth, measured in Available Seat Kilometres (ASK), of 3.7 per cent.
Excluding the favourable impact of foreign exchange rate movements, total
revenue increased by 12.5 per cent.
Net passenger revenue including fuel surcharge recoveries increased $717
million or 13.6 per cent to $6.0 billion. Traffic, measured in Revenue
Passenger Kilometres (RPK), increased by 7.4 per cent while yield improved
by 7.2 per cent. Excluding favourable foreign exchange rate movements, net
passenger revenue was up 13.4 per cent, with yield improving 7.0 per cent.
Other revenue categories increased by $153 million or 9.7 per cent
including a 6.7 per cent improvement in freight revenue from additional
wet-leased freighter capacity and stronger yields.
Expenditure
Total operating expenditure increased by 10.7 per cent or $684 million to
$7.1 billion, excluding borrowing costs and future ineffectiveness on open
hedge instruments.
Total fuel costs increased by $388 million to $1.7 billion. The increase
included $379 million due to fuel price rises after hedging, reflecting an
average into-plane fuel price rise of 27.1 per cent. A 2.0 per cent
increase in consumption from activity growth increased costs by $17 million
while favourable foreign exchange rate movements reduced fuel costs by $8
million.
Manpower and staff related costs increased by $22 million or 1.3 per cent.
Capacity growth, Enterprise Bargaining Agreement (EBA) wages and salary
increases were offset by cost saving initiatives and productivity
improvements of $114 million. Business restructuring costs increased by
$61 million to a total of $111 million, including $100 million in
redundancy costs with a total of 986 managed redundancies effected or
announced during the period. Full-time equivalent employees (FTEs)
decreased by 4.1 per cent on the prior comparative period.
Aircraft operating variable costs increased $16 million or 1.2 per cent to
$1.3 billion, reflecting activity and price related increases, particularly
domestic airport charges, offset by cost saving initiatives and capitalised
maintenance costs as required under Australian International Financial
Reporting Standards (A-IFRS).
Financing charges including depreciation, non-cancellable operating lease
rentals and net interest increased by 19.7 per cent or $155 million.
Depreciation expense included $19 million on new aircraft deliveries, $14
million from a change in aircraft modification depreciation policy and $41
million in depreciation on capitalised maintenance costs as required under
A-IFRS. The increase in operating lease charges largely reflects the
full-period effect of Jetstar’s A320 aircraft. Net interest costs
decreased $3 million due to higher average cash balances.
Total expenditure also included an unfavourable impact of $99 million from
the accounting recognition of open hedging instruments (hedge
ineffectiveness) as required under A-IFRS. This compares to a favourable
impact of $49 million in the comparative results.
Net Impact of Foreign Exchange Rate Movements
The net effect of foreign exchange rate movements on overall profit before
tax was an unfavourable impact of $8 million.
Sustainable Future Program
Benefits delivered across the Group under the Sustainable Future Program
totalled $319 million in the half-year. Savings comprised labour savings
of $111 million, distribution savings of $61 million and $147 million in
fleet, product and overhead initiatives.
Restructuring costs associated with the Sustainable Future Program totalled
$132 million, including $100 million in redundancy payments and provisions.
Group Unit Costs
Net expenditure cost per ASK increased by 11.6 per cent, driven by fuel
cost movements, restructuring expenses and ineffectiveness from open hedge
positions. After adjusting for those factors, unit costs decreased by 0.9
per cent despite wages and inflationary price increases.
Qantas Mainline
PBT for Qantas Mainline operations (including QantasLink and Australian
Airlines) totalled $424 million, an increase of $9 million or 2.2 per cent
on the comparative half-year.
Passenger revenue increased by 12.3 per cent, including fuel surcharge
recoveries, reflecting an 8.3 per cent improvement in yield (excluding
favourable foreign exchange rate movements) and a 2.8 point increase in
seat factor to 80.4 per cent.
Constant capacity reflected the conversion of some Pacific Islands
codeshare operations from block-space to free-sale, the transfer of some
domestic flying to Jetstar and the new Q400 turboprop aircraft within
QantasLink.
Net expenditure increased by 13.3 per cent, predominantly due to the impact
of fuel price increases. Mainline net expenditure also includes the $132
million in restructuring costs and the $99 million from the accounting
recognition of open hedging instruments.
Jetstar
Jetstar A320 operations, which include domestic Australia, Trans-Tasman and
short-haul international, achieved a PBT of $51 million or a four-fold
increase on the comparative half-year of $10 million.
Passenger revenue increased by $161 million or 55.2 per cent on a 50.7 per
cent increase in capacity reflecting the expansion of the Jetstar domestic
network, a full six months of Trans-Tasman flying and the transition to an
all A320 fleet.
Net operating expenditure increased by $92 million or 39.0 per cent which
was significantly below the capacity increase of 50.7 per cent and includes
the impact of higher fuel prices.
Total expenditure per ASK was 7.75 cents, a reduction of 5.8 per cent on
the comparative half-year and industry leading in Australia.
Jetstar International commenced operations with an interim fleet of
A330-200s on 23 November 2006 with the inaugural flight from Melbourne to
Bangkok followed by services to Phuket commencing on 24 November 2006 andSydney - Ho Chi Minh City operations from 30 November. In December2006,Jetstar International commenced flying to Bali and Honolulu and achieved a break-even operating result for its first full month of operations. Start-up costs expensed in the period prior to commencement of operations totalled $26 million.
Market Share
Total Qantas Group international market share was 31.3 per cent based on
the latest Bureau of Transport and Regional Economics (BTRE) statistics for
the four months ended October 2006, a 0.2 point increase on the comparative
period.
Total Qantas Group domestic market-share for the five months to November
2006 as reported by the BTRE was 67.5 per cent, a 1.5 point increase on the
comparative period.
Qantas Holidays
Qantas Holidays reported a half-year PBT of $26 million, which was in line
with the comparative half-year. The continued trend of consumers to
unbundle domestic and point-to-point international travel resulted in lower
passenger volumes, although these were offset by improved margin management and stronger inbound and reseller activity.
As an outbound destination, Bali continues to be impacted by the October
2005 bombings, with bookings down 46 per cent on the former level of
activity, although this has been partially offset by substantial growth to
Thailand.
Bookings through the Ready Rooms on-line channel have also seen substantial
growth, increasing over 60 per cent on the comparative period.
Qantas Flight Catering Group
Qantas Flight Catering (QFC) achieved a PBT of $15 million, 5.1 per cent
down on the comparative half-year. This reflected lower client volumes,
including the cessation of services on behalf of Malaysian Airlines, and
lower Qantas volumes from the transfer of some domestic services to
Jetstar. The decline in revenue was largely offset by lower material costs
and labour savings.
QFC has begun a change management program at its Sydney facilities, which is expected to take up to two years, that will see the establishment of a ‘client only’ facility at Caterair Sydney with ‘Qantas only’ volumes being
delivered from the existing QFCL facility.
Cash Flow and Balance Sheet
Net cash held at 31 December 2006 was over $3.0 billion, an increase of
$151 million compared to 30 June 2006.
Cash flow from operations totalled $1,050 million, an increase of $65
million or 6.6 per cent compared to the profit after tax improvement of 1.7
per cent.
Net capital expenditure totalled $661 million and included the purchase of
three new Q400 aircraft, progress payments on A380, A330, B738 and B787 aircraft, modifications, spares and related equipment.
Net cash outflows from financing activities totalled $238 million, and
included $116 million in dividend payments net of reinvestment under the
DRP and net debt repayments of $122 million.
The book debt to equity ratio (including off Balance Sheet debt) at 31
December 2006 was 42:58 compared to 45:55 at 30 June 2006.
Earnings per share (EPS) was 18.2 cents per share.
Special Dividend
The Special Dividend of 15 cents per share is a fully franked Special
Dividend payable on the earlier of 19 March 2007 and 10 business days after
the APA offer is unconditional, with a record date (books close) of Monday,
19 February 2007.

[hawke eye]

L Haul & S Haul working together.

This is to everyone L Haul and S Haul.Particularly reps of the FAAA.

It is understandable that SHaul felt threatened by J* and agreed to start regional flying. What is sad is that it was not done in FULL consultation with the LHaul FAAA prior to the divisional flying agreement being signed.

If it had been LHaul would have supported S Haul crew receiving the same entitlements that are received by L Haul crew and were designed for regional - L Haul flying. This would have ensured that we arent undercutting each other and the continued maintenance of reasonable conditions that exist for anyone who flys regional/ L Haul for QF.

It is an outrage that the company can look its S Haul crew in the eye knowing they signed them up without conditions necessary to make regional flying bearable - ie slipping formulas/ hours limitations.

It is another outrage that officials of SHaul FAAA signed their members up without ensuring proper and equitable conditions( equitable with L Haul) were in place.

It would have been a smart move for S Haul to insist on the same conditions that L Haul receive.

Its History now and what is important is that I think everyone in both camps now recognises the need for unity between the two unions.

Someone suggested on the aircraft the other day that our EBAs both L Haul and SHaul should be heard and negotiated with reps from both Short and Long FAAA in attendance & working together.
Can you imagine the look on the Companies face when officials from both L Haul and S Haul turn up for the EBA of Short Haul and vice versa?

This would create a united front. very difficult to divide and conquer then.

Everone on the crew including myself thought it was an outstanding suggestion. So are you listening FAAA reps.

Lets stop the infighting, lets join together as people who all do the same great job that has contributed to the great reputation and is the real spirit behind one of the best airlines in the world.

Lets show a bit of this spirit with each other, not just the passengers.

FAAA your membership has had just about enough of the excuses of why both sides cant get it together.

Heres a solution ! Its time to be brave enough to put the past behind and start a new beginning, its called working together for everyone in the FAAA.:ok: As Elvis said "Its now or never".

[NZKID]

Agree Agree Agree Lets start working together so that we may both gain.
Thank you for your input
NZKID

[Pegasus747]

Couldnt agree more with the sentiments expressed about the FAAA getting back together. It's certainly the best way forward.

What needs to be ensured though is that any new structure does not create an environment where the futures of 3000 LH crew are in the hands of SH/MAM Casuals/Jetstar and Virgin all voting as a block.

Thats where the problems arose last time when LH FAAA officials could not live with a situation where their members were contributing half the assets of the union and had no control over the spending of that money or industrial autonomy.

To be honest it would be fair to say that no FAAA officials in the past have covered themselves in glory demonstrating a willingness to put the needs of the whole membership ahead of their own ambitions. And thats SH and LH.

I for one am in favour of a united FAAA on an industrial front working collectively. But remember around the same table will be virgin crew, Jet star Crew , Long Haul, Short Haul and MAM casuals.

Not a recipe for consensus with competing interests :)

But we live in hope :)

[roamingwolf]

This should be good boys and girls.

After blondies radio gig the other day it'll be fun to see the unions response to this idea.

NZKid , mate i could not agree more BUT

The problem is power and politics which go hand in hand and the only way to get this to work would be to sack both unions leadership teams and elect a new team with new people so that we can start on a fresh page.

and mate that is a big call

[hawke eye]

Well said Pegasus.

I dont see the issue in getting consensus from J*, virgin and mam. provided the officials who represent a united front, have an agreed approach prior to the EBA and dont undermine any current workers without their members agreement, we might finally offer a chess move that QF mgmt finds it difficult to get around.
I hasten to explain some of those you represent Australian, j* may agree to a b scale to enter QF mainline that is what i mean by requiring the members consent. That then affects them not the current LHaul/Shaul cabin crew.
To negotiate in the short term for a long term advantage. I think you get my point.

Bottom line is the FAAA both sides turn up collectively to represent all of us equally - in that I refer to LHaul and S Haul specifically.

Question Pegasus are virgin and J* represented by FAAA if so how many are members - stupid question Im sure abuse accepted:rolleyes:

Roamingwolf it is a while off yet before there are scheduled union elections. You can vote them out then if you dont like the next EBA or their behaviour between now and then, till then I suggest you make known your issues you feel they should be aware of:ok:

[sydney s/h]

With regards to the whole united front with both LH and SH unions....

please correct me if i'm wrong (and i know you lot will!)...

didn't the SH FAAA contact the LH FAAA just recently regarding some sort of getting together thing and it was knocked on the head by the LH'ers?

[samford]

sydney s/h,

You are correct, the SH FAAA approached LH FAAA afew years back, and it was declined - this was leading upto our EBA negotiations.

SH FAAA have approached them again (Sept 06), but I have never heard what the response was.

For the record, I am SH myself..... (before someone wants to start attacking me :) )

[roamingwolf]

hawk eye Mate I think you misunderstood me.

I believe that if the 2 unions were to join then there would have to be one leadership team and not the 2 combined.
I also reckon there is to much history and ego problems for the 2 current unions leadership to be able to work together.

If this is to work we could disolve both leadership teams and have a fresh election for one team to represent all parties.That means L/H,S/H,MAM etc...with reps from each area.

i reckon it would not work if you asked the current elcted officials of both sides to work together.There is simply to much history,memory,ego,power etc...to be working with.

There would be a lot of things to work out and it is a big call but it is possible

[stubby jumbo]

Galley Hag said:
"The difference is short haul are a lot more flexible and are willing to work with the company to manage the surplus that occurs from time to time throughout the year. Furthermore our casual crew somewhat protect permanent crew when a surplus occurs.

So I wouldnt get to excited about exacting your petty revenge just yet!"

Chill out Galley Hag !!!

There was no "petty revenge" in my post.

Do yourself a favour and Google JOHARI WINDOW.......you may find the answer to your hypersensitivity.

I agree with the sentiments of the last few posters.- Strength in Unity:ok:

[Pegasus747]

8 December 2006

Attention all Qantas Long Haul and Australian Airlines Flight Attendants
FAAA INTERNATIONAL DIVISION PUTS FORWARD PLAN FOR FAAA INTEGRATION
I wish to advise members that the International Division yesterday formally responded to the Domestic/Regional Division with a plan to form the basis for integration of the current two Divisions of the FAAA.

I take this opportunity to publicly inform our membership that in late 2003, I (Michael Mijatov) initiated confidential discussions between senior officials of the International Division and our senior counterparts in the Domestic/Regional Division of the FAAA.

Once I became the Secretary of the International Division in March 2004, the discussions had the formal imprimatur of this Division and it has been the policy of this Division to attempt to reverse the Divisionalisation of the FAAA that occurred in 2000.

It is self evident that an integrated FAAA structure would have benefits for all FAAA members both in industrial terms and in terms of a more effective, efficient and more financially secure FAAA.

However, I above all current elected officials in both Divisions of the FAAA witnessed the debilitating instability, arguments and resentment that ultimately caused the de-facto split of the FAAA in 2000.

Therefore, we in this Division of the FAAA, believe that it is both prudent and essential that certain matters have to be agreed to, before there can be a full “union” between the two FAAA Divisions. The most important of these are as follows:-

The FAAA must be structured in a way that the legitimate interests of members in each airline grouping are acknowledged in the Rules of the FAAA.


Industrial decisions made by each airline grouping must not be able to be thwarted, blocked or overridden by a coalition of officials from other airline groupings.


Election to and voting on, elective bodies in the FAAA must be on the basis of proportional representation (for example it would be unacceptable that almost 3000 Qantas Long Haul members have the same representation on a newly constituted FAAA as would another group of flight attendants with say 600 members).
Many of these issues are complex, but must be properly addressed, to ensure that if we do restructure the FAAA, we do it on a proper basis, to prevent the chaos of pre- 2000 recurring.

We have also indicated to the Domestic/Regional Division that if full re-integration is not possible we are keen to adopt a whole raft of other practical measures which would have the effect of closer industrial co-ordination. We also indicated that sharing of premises would also be possible as far as our Division is concerned, even if full integration is not practical or possible.

We will advise you of developments in due course.

Written and authorised by Michael Mijatov – Secretary International Division.

[hawke eye]

Pegasus,

When it seems like there might be some light at the end of the tunnel(amalgamation of FAAA), I hear the strong adversarial overtones coming through in Mr Mijs letter.
While it is obvious that no industrial agreement should be blocked or thwarted does it have to be stated in such aggressive language.

Whilst we are aware of the need to state industrial niceties and protocols It would have been nice to see the words included that this agreement / merger gives the FAAA the opportunity to come to an agreed concensus prior and during industrial negotiations. Perhaps he might have run with the suggestion the new look FAAA is a united body in that when EBAs are negotiated officials representing both LHaul and Shaul are present and there are no discussions held with the company without all of the EBA negotiating body present.

To be honest it sounded a bit like our politicians and the water debate. They want to be seen to be supportive but no one is prepared to take the leap required and make the commitment.

I hope Im wrong Pegasus and could someone give mr Mijatov a new speach writer his letters smacks of aggressive undertones and arrogance. Imprimatuer really :ugh:

[galleyslag]

About a year or so ago, the galley gossip was a group of short haulers were going to move for a vote of no confidence against the union. This had nothing to do with the eba challenge.

Many casuals are not members, reasons being ex AN (no confidence), poor out come of EBA2, lack of knowledge.

The best thing for cabin crew(whom at this stage have the safest jobs, goodbye middle management!) is to join the unions, make casuals a less attractive option and cap the % allowed and watch how the numbers grow. With out a doubt in my mind short haul membership would increase.

At the moment casual are doormats for the company in hope for full time. Some work up to 160hrs in a month, working 25 days. Casual hours need to be capped!

Join the two union, increase short haul membership, get the casual on board and fighting all together.

this is my personal opinion.

[hostie w t mostie]

So Lowerlobe, if someone has an ATSIC card they never have to work again??? Geez, I will have to tell my idigenous family and friends who have been working all their lives that they can retire NOW!
Thanks for that :mad:

[GalleyHag]

I personally would like to see a more unified LH and SH. Somehow after reading the posts by Defcon4 I highly doubt this will happen if that is the general feeling in LH.

[sydney s/h]

Well it seems the latest Sydney SH blocks are out and so much for the rumour the BOM's were going. They are still there, as is PVG, PEK and yeap...NRT are now ours.
Are MEL SH short of crew? It seems not only are the Sydney base doing the NRT's but also we are doing the MEL-NRT's as well. 2 a day ex Sydney.

If you are CC and want a mixture of flying apparently Sydney SH base is the place to be.

March overnights are at max 16 and overnighting in...

ADL, AKL, BNE, BOM, CBR, CGK, CNS, DRW, HBR, HKG, MEL, NRT, OOL, PEK, PVG, SIN, TSV.

And a bunch of day trip locations.

Wow...who would have thought a few years ago a big international location was AKL!

[samford]

I may as well go back to long haul :confused:

[twiggs]

Just saw a note on the CIS saying that for L/H from BP 250, you will have to do 29 days of reserve or more for it to be counted as being done.

[stubby jumbo]

Sounds fair to me Twiggs,

This rort in the EBA has been abused since 1988!!!

Bring it on I say.:D :D

[cokecropduster]

Quote: Manpower and staff related costs increased by $22 million or 1.3 per cent.
Capacity growth, Enterprise Bargaining Agreement (EBA) wages and salary
increases were offset by cost saving initiatives and productivity
improvements of $114 million.


Interesting that they included this in the profit results!:ugh:

MAM hours should be capped at 140 hours but why would management want to do that??:ugh:

[surfside6]

.....and yes NRTs are ours...says it all really.
While ever this type of poster persists there will never be a united front.

[samford]

I don't think pointing out a post stating "NRT is now ours" was gloating. Infact, most of us are not really interested in flying there anyway.

Singling one poster out and incinuating that is the reason for a lack of united front is certainly not productive either.

In terms of the MAM casuals - yeah, I agree there should be a cap. The company now knows they can fill SH flying with casuals who will bow to their every whim.
Let me just point out, the majority of casuals I fly with (which seem to out number the rest of us these days) are good, switched on crew. There is good and bad everywhere, but lets not take it out the individuals. Afterall, who made the decision to employ outsourced casuals in the first place? Thats where the energy should be directed.

[Wonderworld]

http://www.news.com.au/sundaytelegraph/story/0,22049,21205269-5001021,00.html
A QANTAS flight attendant faces the sack after being accused of having sex with British actor Ralph Fiennes in an aircraft toilet while flying from Australia to India.
Sydney-based Lisa Robertson, 38, met the star of The English Patient while working in the business-class cabin on flight QF 123 from Darwin to Mumbai on January 24.
In a confidential report to Qantas management obtained by The Sunday Telegraph, Ms Robertson is accused of chatting to Fiennes during the flight and being seen exiting the same toilet moments apart.
She claims Fiennes, 44, became "amorous'' towards her in the toilet.
Ms Robertson declined to comment when contacted by The Sunday Telegraph.
Qantas staff who were aware of the incident said last night the couple were caught after crew members waited outside the toilet.
In a statement lodged with her employer, Ms Robertson denied the allegations.
The statement was presented at a meeting on Thursday between Ms Robertson, the Flight Attendants' Association, Qantas and airline services contractor Morris Alexander Management.
At the meeting Qantas representatives accused Ms Robertson of having sex with Fiennes.
Ms Robertson has been suspended without pay.
Fiennes had been in Australia to perform at the Sydney Festival before travelling to India.
Details of Ms Robertson's alleged encounter with Fiennes are contained in her statement to Qantas management.
It shows she has been accused of two breaches of the company's corporate and cabin-crew policies.
The first breach relates to Fiennes allegedly sitting in a crew jump seat while chatting to Ms Robertson during her rest break.
The second relates to Ms Robertson and the actor being seen leaving the same toilet.
They were allegedly spotted by two crew members, who told the flight's customer-services manager.
"While conversing with Mr Fiennes during my break, I expressed a need to go to the toilet,'' Ms Robertson said in her statement.
"I went to the nearby toilet and entered it, he followed me and entered the same toilet.
"I explained to him that this was inappropriate and asked him to leave. Mr Fiennes became amorous towards me and, after a short period of time, I convinced him to leave the toilet, which he did.
"I left the toilet a short time later. At no time did any crew member come to my assistance.
"At no time were any other customers aware of this incident. At no time did I put the Qantas name or reputation in jeopardy.''
In her statement, Ms Robertson admitted that Fiennes had visited her in the crew rest area during her break to chat.
She also admitted having several conversations with the actor throughout the flight, but said she was simply doing her job.
"This is common practice on long flights to build a rapport with passengers and converse with them during the flight,'' Ms Robertson said in her statement.
According to her statement, Ms Robertson was a police officer for 14 years before joining Qantas in September, 2004.
She said she had been repeatedly commended for her service as a flight attendant.
The Flight Attendants' Association of Australia did not return calls.
A Qantas spokesman said: "All we can do is confirm that a flight attendant was stood down following an onboard incident.''
He refused to comment on whether this incident involved Fiennes, citing passenger privacy.
A copy of the flight manifest obtained by The Sunday Telegraph confirmed Fiennes was on board the flight on January 24. He occupied seat 2K in business class.

[Shlonghaul]

Have just seen on the webcentral site that Sydney based LH CSS, BFA & FAs are being offered a trial in BP250 of doing a 75 per cent roster. If you're interested check it out but you'll need to be quick as applications have to be in by 5pm Monday 12 Feb.....nice of the Tarantula to give us so much time to consider it!!! :E :ok:

PS.....check Schindlers List for Ms. Robertsons phone number

[roamingwolf]

Hey Twiggs ,I saw you post the news about standby's so what do you think about the idea of doing at least 29 days of standby's and not using leave to get out of them?

I can't believe on todays news about the mam/sh cabin crew and the lengths they will go to so they get our flying.I reckon that if she was helping out down the back she would not have had time to go to the brasco let alone sit down with ralph or whatever.

whatever but it does sound as like the good old days doesn't it and the sportsmans bar.Maybe we can get the company to put one in every new aircraft and we can go back to the old days of customer service.

They were a lot of fun anyway does anyone remember dropping the silver salva or a can of soda water down there and lifting up the escape hatch in the ailse in the middle of the night and asking some old lady if this was the qf 1.

[Shlonghaul]

Ahhhh........good one wolfman!! There's a great story from the GODs of an FSD & FA geeing up a lovely old lady sitting opposite the hatch and enjoying a cup of tea. As she was finishing her cup the FSD asked if she'd like another, after receiving a yes he stamped on the floor twice and up came the hatch with the palm of a hand holding a fresh cup of tea, "Thank you Thing" said the FSD before passing the cup onto a startled but thoroughy amused lady!!!........sure were the good old days............. before the fun police arrived :( :* :ugh:

[lowerlobe]

11 February 2007

Attention All Sydney Based Long Haul Cabin Crew who live very very very and I mean VERY close to the Jetbase or know someone.

75% rostering trial in BP250

In our effort to investigate alternatives to provide flexibility for Long Haul Cabin Crew, the Association has agreed in principle and with no bias or prejudice ,or benefit to the union with the Company to trial a 75% roster in BP250 for Sydney based Flight Attendants, Business First FA and CSS.

Members wishing to participate in this trial for BP250 will need to submit an expression of interest form to the Company by 7.30 am Sunday 11 February EST that is the same day as this is posted.

This means that unless you live within 5 km’s of the jetbase or are an elected official of the FAAA or got home from a trip early on Sunday morning and had a laptop with wireless on the crew bus or knew about this in advance because you suck up….sorry work sometimes in the office …you basically have no chance of applying .

In real terms this concept is so good that the company and the FAAA have decided to limit the number of crew that can apply.Basically that means that 99.99% of crew have no chance and oh well suck eggs then….

This was deliberately done on a Sunday...The FAAA in conjuction with the company will continue to bring you innovations in your work place that will enable you to more enjoy your career...if you find out about them in time ...

Crew can download pdf files here…
Temporary 75% Roster initial idea from Tarantula
Temporary 75% Roster revised idea from Tarantula and Lurch both trying to impress Lusley Grunt.
Temporary 75% Roster revised revision from anyone else in QCC who does not like cabin crew
Temporary 75% Roster partial revision completely overhauled by Darth so as to make sure cabin crew are done over
Temporary 75% Roster EOI Final revision with so many hidden clauses and loopholes that you would need a QC to examine.
Temporary 75% Roster information sheet with more questions than answers.

To those who are gullible this is a send up and is intended to have a shot at the company and the FAAA for giving crew little or no chance to apply for this offer……Thanks guys

[Pegasus747]

Please dont have a go at the FAAA over this one....they only found out about it yesterday and whilst the company have contacted crew upline, they have limited ability in fact none, to contact crew other than via mail.

The FAAA it would appear have at least attempted to get the info to their members even if non members wont know.

It would also appear that the approval for the trial was only given on Saturday and rather than wait another two months before starting the trial the company made a decision to try and give some crew a chance to start in the next bid period.

Dissappointing i realise for those that might otherwise like to consider it in a more timely manner or at least try it at all....but if some crew try it and it works then it might form the basis of some conditions in the next EBA..the jury is out....lets wait and see..


If you are going to critisise anyone then it would seem that clearly some other than those 5k's from mascot know about it...Lowerlobe i would assume as an FAAA member you have now two days to make up your mind whther its suits you...


Be critical of the lack of notice..totally agreed...but at least not the concept

[stubby jumbo]

Here is yet ANOTHER example of the "Kylie inspired" initiative in 2004 called CREW CONNECT.

Remember all the hype and propaganda we were fed at the time.

A more "in touch" management team.

Yeah right!

This current bunch of "shelf packers" and "has beens" have not contributed one eye-O-Ta to the wellbeing of crew.

This latest example of giving us 24hours notice on the 75% BP just tops it off.Haven't the goons worked out that we come and go for short and long periods of time???:ugh:

We need a minimum of 14 days notice.

My Team Leader said to me last week after I had just finished a PER return, if we could sit down together for 30 mins and go through my DEVELOPMENT PLAN.:yuk:
Naturally, my reply was :"Look buddy I'm 41 years old, I've travelled the world for the best part of my life, I've got a couple of kids and a mortgage........my PLAN is to save enough money so that I get live comfortably in retirement........Kabish !!!!";)

....and walked out. If he wants a QF Development Plan-he can pay me for it:cool:

[lowerlobe]

Pegasus...My sarcasm was directed at both the FAAA and the company.If the union only found out about it on Saturday then it should have said so in the newsletter and expressed it's regret at the company's action.

It does no good at all to have officials spend time on a radio station and sound like they are giving the company a good rap.I bumped into a retired chief the other day and he heard the interview with Steven as well.He could not believe that Steve sounded more like a company rep than a union official.

The bottom line is that we are used to the company and their total disregard for us but you guy's ...sorry the FAAA have to be a bit more agressive.

[Pegasus747]

The FAAA's issue with the IFE is and will continue to be the affect on the crew.

The reliability issues are well known. It is not in the FAAA's interests to turn passengers off travelling with Qantas. That would not be in the interests of job security.

But as speedbirdhouse pointed out in another post the FAAA - International Division has commented publicy on a range of issues in relation to IFE and the effects on the crew.

When being interviewed on live radio its not in the interests of FAAA members to be seen to be bagging the **** out of Qantas and the IFE that passengers travel with someone else. I thought it was fairly balanced and the FAAA has some credibility with the members for raising this issue.

I note that the Domestic division dont send out newsletters or comment publicly on anything at all. Look at their website, if in doubt.

Wait till you see what comes out of the FAAA raising this issue both publicly and with the company in terms of what things are put in place for crew to help deal with the issues facing crew.

The FAAA cannot fix the IFE or convince Qantas to spend 100 million to replace it but they publicly speak to the stress that it places on crew.

Anyone that wants to suggest what the FAAA should be saying publicly on this issue should have regard to a range of flow on effects.

Or they could just do what the domestic division does...NOTHING about ANYTHING

[Pegasus747]

In fairness to those who post on here though, they wouldnt be aware that the bureacracy at qantas is quite incredible and the number of hands something must go throught to reach a decision is quite mind boggling.

Rarely is any notice given by qantas to flight attendants or the FAAA about anything. I dont think that's because of design merely because of utter and complete incompetence.

The decision making power is held so high that John Borghetti has to sign off a duty travel ticket for a manager to fly to melbourne for a meeting.

Ridiculous i hear you say...but quite true!!!

so when a decision like the 75 percent roster comes through on a weekend we should not blame the manager that tried to implement it ASAP.

Whoever was responsible for putting it out this weekend rather than waiting a bid period is probably as frustrated by the level of bureacracy he has to deal with as we are for being on the receiving end of it

[lowerlobe]

Pegasus ,

I don’t think that Steven’s interview should have gone boots and all into QF but the interview sounded as though it was with Kevin Brown rather than Steve. You said that “The reliability issues are well known” but that did not come out of the interview at all.

The company does not miss a chance to have a dig at us but all you can say is we have to be balanced and have credibility.The problem is that the situation is anything but balanced.

The company continue to have a shot at us with the allowances in Frankfurt and now this ridiculous situation of advertising something with little more than 24 hours notice.

There will be large numbers of crew getting home in the next week and basically saying WTF when they find out about this.They will look at the FAAA website and what do they find ..a newsletter telling us that ….“In our effort to investigate alternatives to provide flexibility for Long Haul Cabin Crew, the Association has agreed in principle with the Company to trial a 75% roster in BP250 for Sydney based Flight Attendants, Business First FA and CSS.”

That sounds like the union is working with the company and giving it’s members very little if any chance of taking advantage of it.

Your last post sounds just like the radio interview with Steve…you are just covering up for the company again…whose side are you on?

The last thing you should do though Pegasus is to try to deflect attention and distract crew away from this absurdity by having another shot at the S/H union and starting another bun fight.

Little wonder that we hold little hope of ever amalgamating the 2 unions with your example of leadership

[Pegasus747]

there you go making presumptions about leadership again LL.

I am sure the FAAA will put out a newsletter on monday or tuesday that gives more detail rather than the one sent today and obviously on a sunday and hastily put together to benefit members of the FAAA that wouldnt know anything about the 75 deal with contact from the FAAA

After all LL you found out from the FAAA didnt you

So despite your misgivings the FAAA reacted quite fast i would think. Especially on a sunday

but i am sure as with all things done by the FAAA you will find fault

YOu are entirely consistent.....

[Pegasus747]

Readers' Comments
Ralph Fiennes in sex scandal
By Marnie O'Neill

February 11, 2007 12:00

A QANTAS flight attendant faces the sack after being accused of having sex with British actor Ralph Fiennes in an aircraft toilet while flying from Australia to India.

Sydney-based Lisa Robertson, 38, met the star of The English Patient while working in the business-class cabin on flight QF 123 from Darwin to Mumbai on January 24.

In a confidential report to Qantas management obtained by The Sunday Telegraph, Ms Robertson is accused of chatting to Fiennes during the flight and being seen exiting the same toilet moments apart.
Read Full Story
Crew members waited outside the toilet? Sounds like jealousy to me. Normally they look out for each other to keep the coast clear.
Posted by: Nick Oz of Red HIll 4:03pm today
Comment 20 of 20

Since when do the flight stewards use the same toilet as the passngers, even in business class. Don't they have their own little haven where they can sleep on luxurious and spacious seats with their own toilets?
Posted by: George 3:45pm today
Comment 19 of 20

Please let Lisa be, look, I am quite a famous person and this wasn't the first time I'd enjoyed the services of flight attendant's. If every flight attendant I'd had sex with mid air were fired then the unemployment line would be very very long indeed. Thank you
Posted by: Ralph Fiennes of London 3:42pm today
Comment 18 of 20

This girl must have been either desparate or use to this sort of service. This guys not only ugly but looks a 100 years old. I suspect this is not her first frolic in the toilets of the mile high club. Not much can happen in this sort of confined space, so perhaps it should be called the one minute club. I know one minute sounds embarrassing anywhere, but to some its simply nothing.
Posted by: Hona Wikeepa of Sydney 2:49pm today
Comment 17 of 20

Unfortunately, there is a vile culture of dobbing on crew that is encouraged by the Current cabin Crew Management. morale has never been lower for cabin crew who work for a management who's noses are so firmly in the proverbial trough that it causes total disenchantment. This is a casual flight attendant who doesnt get sick leave, annual leave, or any travel benefits. cant get a home loan or a credit card either ...stress related behaviour i would have thought.
Posted by: A flight Attendant of Sydney 2:40pm today
Comment 16 of 20

Does anyone have her phone number ?
Posted by: Jimbo of Canberra 2:04pm today
Comment 15 of 20

All very innocent - there is nothing in this.I'd say one of the co-workers may have been jealous & decided to make a complaint.
Posted by: Wendy of Mid North Coast,NSW 1:42pm today
Comment 14 of 20

Let me understand this correctly: A hardworking, intelligent woman's job is in jeopardy all because an oversexed, egotistical actor doesn't know how to be have decently and thinks he's God's gift to women? Does this sound fair to her?
Posted by: Michelle Murray of Sydney 1:32pm today
Comment 13 of 20

Good to see the hostesses solving the recent problems with in-flight entertaiment. .God forbid even Ralph Fiennes should be forced to watch a Ralph Fiennes film.
Posted by: Ashleigh Flanders of Melbourne 12:51pm today
Comment 12 of 20

What's Ralph's account of the encounter? Has anyone from Qantas even dared to approach him? No sacking until both sides of the story have been fully investigated. But then, has Qantas ever been fair or impartial in these matters, particularly when it involves those of star-status, whatever that is?
Posted by: chris johnson of Robina 12:47pm today
Comment 11 of 20

Really, who cares??? Isn't there more important things to be worrying about. So what if she shagged him. Good on her. Would have made the long flight more enjoyable!!
Posted by: Marie of Sydney 11:52am today
Comment 10 of 20

Unless someone actually caught them in the act, then they should shut up. It's probably one of those gay flight stewards with their nose out of joint. She was providing him with first class service. Who cares? Not me.
Posted by: The Rodster of sydney 11:51am today
Comment 9 of 20

I think the crew members over-reacted on this issue and they caught her doing nothing She had her cloth on, Ms Robertson provided a statement about it to Qantas Management and end of the story I think there must be a certain amount of jealousy on the part of the other crew members of not having the same luck as Ms Robertson in becoming close to the STAR. By the way it takes two to tango what about asking some questions to the British Actor as well, It is not fair on Ms Robertson
Posted by: Claudio Ampuero of Queanbeyan 11:24am today
Comment 8 of 20

Your reportage of the Ralph Fiennes incident is tawdry , to say the least. How you obtained the "confidential" Qantas report should be revealed by your journalist. If I was the flight attendant involved I'd sue both your newspaper and Qantas for breaches of privacy.
Posted by: David Shaw of Manly 10:46am today
Comment 7 of 20

If the only thing to it was that she was on her break and nobody saw or heard her actually having sex, then she did nothing wrong. If she spent too much time talking to him or was openly flirting, and allowed him to remain in the jumpseat which is against safety rules, then she would need to be disiplined (probably just cautioned) accordingly. But then, if the complaint is still being processed, I'm sure we don't have the airlines version of the events that were witnessed by other light staff on that flight.
Posted by: Tracey of Queensland 9:46am today
Comment 6 of 20

ralph is not a good looking actor. wonder if the air hostess is good looking. give the woman a break. bill clinton still remained the president of the usa it cant get more scandalous than that give her a second chance at her job...
Posted by: Observer 7:32am today
Comment 5 of 20

Sounds like a fair explanation of events to me. Good luck Lisa and i hope you clear your name. As for Qantas, I will just add this to my reasons why I do not fly Qantas anymore.
Posted by: Tracker of Sydney 3:01am today
Comment 4 of 20

ehearing the heading of this article, and the punishment meted out so far, i was expecting to believe that this airline hostess had indeed done something unacceptable on this flight. upon reading furthur, and finding out about her backround and understanding that she is an intelligent, capable, hard working woman, i changed my mind. her statement is very believable, and so, it seems, is she. it sounds like this actor was being a bit forceful, and maybe taking advantage of her friendliness and engaging manor, that in the past has served her well in her profession. i believe that this desrves more checking out so that a professional who has beexcellent doesnt lose her job because a man who was trying to get his way isnt the reason that she is fired from this airline.
Posted by: valerie a peters of usa 2:21am today
Comment 3 of 20

What's Ralph say???
Posted by: James of Manly 1:46am today
Comment 2 of 20

Fair play - leave her be
Posted by: Murry Walker 12:31am today
Comment 1 of 20

[lowerlobe]

Pegasus,

I didn't find out about the fiasco from the faaa website,I found out about it through pprune.I then went to the faaa site to see if there was any more news about it.I was expecting to see the faaa give the company a serve for it's stupidity but what do i find ..nothing really more than I found out on pprune.

However ,it was later that a post who is very very close to the elected officials basically telling us that the company tried it's best and you feel sorry for the manager who tried to introduce it.

You then went on to try and distract attention to this by having a shot at the s/h union and did so again by drawing attention to the ralph fiennes business.

I'm sure you'll bring out another newsletter to cover yourself though....and some here think there is a chance of the two unions joining forces...yeah right

[Pegasus747]

well lowerlobe it was the previous elected officials that split the FAAA not the current ones.

So when you suggest that the current officials are to blame then you need to realise that the current leadership are the ones trying to put it togther

You have no idea what is going on behind the scenes. and you will never know because you will never have the capacity to get yourself elected or solve the problems.

If it were all easy then i am sure anyone could it.

I am sure you will be at the FAAA gatherings over a coffee and a muffin to make a lot of suggestions and be part of a sensible discussion.

As you are reasonably intelligent i am sure the FAAA officials would welcome discussing your views and those of anyone who wishes to attend and be heard and of course hear stuff 1st hand.

i am sure you will not make some excuse about couldnt be bothered going coz its all a waste of time etc etc etc

i am very confident that someone with as much to say as you will be there with proverbial bells on.

If you want anything addressed in an FAAA newsletter just drop them an anonymous note perhaps.....

[capt.cynical]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What do you expect !! It was QF Shorthaul FA's after all.Not the accused, the "Dobbers"
True to form if you ask me. :ugh: :}

[SkySista]

Interesting that the WA papers did not name the FA concerned.

Also, I wonder how a 'confidential' report got to the press? SOmeone in QF PR perhaps?? WOuldn't be a bad way to 'sex up' the image and get business traffic from LCC's who think Qantas hosties are old... :E

OK ok I'm joking!!!

[FrankFoxworth]

Capt Cynical is so right the little dobber mentality in S/H strikes again what is in these peoples heads that they feel the need 2 dob their work mates in . I sincerely hope the allegation of having sex in the toilet was made in writing and signed by these creeps . The unfortunate Ms Robertson should have no trouble getting out of this and oh what fun she should have with these errrr "co workers".

[lowerlobe]

Thats great Pegasus ,

So you want us to hop down to the FAAA bunker to have a muffin and a skinny latte while you tell us how difficult the company has it.You want to tell us that we can't be too hard on the company and we have to keep a balanced approach which means that we give in all the time As USUAL.

The company screws up time and again and continually has a shot at us and all you want to do is turn the other cheek.

As I have menioned before you are more of an asset to Kevin Brown than his own department.

[surfside6]

I was in LAX, visited the crew website,saw the ad for 75% roster,downloaded the form and faxed it in.
Voila!
I dont live near the airport..but hey looks like I will be doing 75% of a roster.
You just need to be on the ball

[Lurker@L5]

A senior Qantas manager was today caught coitus interruptus on the photo-copying machine during office hours with an unknown PA. As a result the Board has agreed to pay the old satyr a performance bonus.

[lowerlobe]

Surfside,
Just as I said those who live within 5 km’s of the jetbase and THOSE WHO ARE FRIENDS OF THE FAAA will have no problem applying for something that had little more than 24 hours notice…..surfside's OK but stuff everyone else.

You just need to be on the ball……nice one

The company and the FAAA in their latest newsletter have advised crew that they should every check the crew or FAAA website every 12 hours to avail themselves of the latest developments.

A joint spokesperson for the company and the union said today that if crew wanted to have a life outside of flying and actually wanted to enjoy life then they have no one to blame except themselves.They should ring scheduling,the union or check online every 12 hours so as not to miss out on anything vital.

Imagine how many computers the company and the union would have to install worldwide just so that crew can “Get with the programme” as Surfside has told us.

How many of our hotels have rec club computers?

How long would the wait be for a computer if we checked as often as this?

What about crew on holidays or just enjoying their slip or home time without logging onto a computer just so that they take Surfside's advice and be on the ball........ Thanks Surfside for your careing and invaluable advice...Thanks for nothing

This is just another example of how much the company and the FAAA really care about crew!!!!!!!:yuk:

[surfside6]

You are not a happy little camper are you Lobey?
Ever heard of internet cafes or hotel business centres.
It takes thirty seconds to check the website.
I dont live near the airport and I hardly ever visit the base(except to go to work)thanks to the internet...its invaluable.

[sydney s/h]

Capt Cynical,

for you to comment on SH being "dobbers" re the whole onboard "ralph" incident just goes to show you know actually nothing about the story.

Keep your stupid comments to yourself if you don't know the whole and true story.

I actually do know excatly what occured onboard. Dobbing had nothing to do with it.

Don't believe everything you read.

[DEFCON4]

Dobbing amongst the domestics is encouraged to the point where its become an art form.
This girl seems well able to take care of herself.
A couple of domestics may well bear the brunt of slander lawsuits.
Unfortunately,due to the transfer system it has crept into Longhaul.
Oh and JFTR...the domestics have not taken over ALL NRT trips.They will do the NRTs out of MEL and the QF 135/36 out of Sydney for 2 BPs.
Longhaul will continue to do QF21/22 and the flying ex PER to NRT.

[sydney s/h]

What would you know about the incident and slander lawsuits. Ummm...Nothing.

By the way...our division is called Shorthaul.

When you fly to more international destinations than us then let me know.

[DEFCON4]

Athens,Rome,Paris,New York,London,Bahrain,Amsterdam,Belgrade,San Francisco,Osaka,Sapporo,Nagoya,Bombay,Tahiti,Fiji,Los Angeles,Frankfurt,Vancouver,Buenos Aires,Johannesburg,Harare,Seoul,Hanoi,Honolulu.....to name just a few.Holidayed in most of them...slipped in all of them for a lot longer than you could even imagine.
The great days of flying are over...you are merely getting the scraps...which of course you are entitled to.
You are a pretender ..nothing more but a whole lot less.
In Longhaul we look after each other.
If the incident with Mr. Fiennes had occurred on a Longhaul crew it would never have been heard about.
The flings that Longhaul crew have had with celebrities are legion but have been kept in house.
Its known as discretion and is consistent with a higher level of sophistication than is displayed in the domestic arena of aviation in this country.
Also in life you get what you pay for...pay cheap...get cheap.
That is the one and the only reason domestics fly to SOME of these destinations...they are not better...... just cheaper.
Domestics...proud to be cheap

[sydney s/h]

Arghhh...the good old days...blah blah blah.

Well you dont fly to many of those destinations anymore. Why?

Get out of the past and move on (out the door in your case). Should have taken the VR package when you had a chance.

[DEFCON4]

With an economy running at full tilt and unemployment at historical lows now is a perfect opportunity to negotiate for "higher"(not lower) wages.
Unfortunately many have not recognized this and have allowed themselves to become the 21st Century "pit ponies".
They will be unable to participate fully in the opportunities available to others due largely to their reduced disposable income.
With hindsight everything becomes crystal clear.
Those who are proud to be "cheap" have been deceived.
They have allowed themselves to become disposable units of work.
George Orwell was right.

[stubby jumbo]

What is the common denominator at the moment?

THE TOILET

Its Management #101....... down the toilet.

1.First we have Blanket Boy alledgedly flushing down Blankets.-Toilet
.............2.Now comes our esteemed Robocop alledgedly working on Schindlers List-Toilet.

Maybe,we should change the name of the Crew Mag from THE SOURCE to

THE TOILET

We might just read it then.:E

[TightSlot]

Instead, you're gradually changing the name of PPRuNe to a toilet!!! Would everybody please calm down. Half of the recent posts have been created to demonstrate your own wit, and the rest your own prejudice.

Take a deep breath, and thne try again.

[capt.cynical]

Sydney S/H

Can you tell me the last time or indeed if ever a L/H crew member dobbed in a S/H crew member.
Think long and hard,you will need to.
:zzz: :rolleyes:

[samford]

For goodness sake - get over it. I've worked both sides, neither is perfect. Get on the the damn job and quit embarassing the rest of us with petty attacks.

[Pegasus747]

These are the sorts of prejudices that split the FAAA. Its the old emnities manifiesting itself.

The challenge of getting Long Haul And short Haul flight attendants to be united would need a significant change of attitude among some crew not a change in leadership in either division of the FAAA.

There is currently good will among the elected officials to keep the discussions on re-amalgamation going. Now that the new head of the domestic division has taken office after returning from London the talks will no doubt continue.

Many hope in time for a joint approach to the upcoming EBA's

[Bolty McBolt]

Everyone seems to be the talking about the alleged perpetrators of a lewd act on an QF flight

I would want to know who the dobber is, Who is the small minded person whom thought they would make a name for themself by going into print? :yuk:

That is whom I would want to know about, so at least I would be alert to this persons propensity to do the Un-Australian thing and dob.
Keep your guard up :ouch:

Anybody care to hint via ryhming similes' ?

[TightSlot]

Anybody care to hint via ryhming similes' ?
NO!

:ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

[lowerlobe]

Pegasus,

Firstly , in relation to the S/H FAAA you tell us … ……..

“Or they could just do what the domestic division does...NOTHING about ANYTHING”..

Then you tell us……..

“The challenge of getting Long Haul And short Haul flight attendants to be united would need a significant change of attitude among some crew NOT A CHANGE IN LEADERSHIP in either division of the FAAA.
There is currently good will among the elected officials to keep the discussions on re-amalgamation going”……


Personally I don’t think that there will be much good will between the two groups after that quote.

Or the possibility of an amalgamation for that matter if the current FAAA leadership is in place.

[sydney s/h]

Firstly Bolty McBolt, aren't you an engineer? If you are there is a very good chance you wouldn't even know the crew members involved.
And secondly, for you to attack the crew members involved when you don't even know the real story is stupid.
I'm not going into detail here but i can assure you that it wasn't a matter of crew members lined up at the toilet door waiting to bust them coming out of the toilet like it has been portrayed in the press.

[The The]

I would like to point out that the greater majority of Short haul flight attendants are EX-LONG HAUL. Over the past few years Long haul FA's have been transferring from the dark side in droves. They also do a lot of the international flying.
I guess most of them are happy with the short haul conditions or they wouldn't be here!!!

[FrankFoxworth]

nice dip in the QAN share price today boys 'n girls down 2.5% to $5.23c would indicate a swing in sentiment to the carve up merchant's grand plans ?????

[mrpaxing]

the bid gets through. most of the board goes ( replacement already in place), followed by a number of senior managers (restructure coming up again).
the bid fails- most of the board resigns for stupidity and looking rather silly ;followed by GD departure within 12 month.:E
keep the emails going to the pollies:D

[gloriais18]

QAN share price today due to it going ex dividend. 15c fully franked. Final price now $5.45.

[speedbirdhouse]

The weekend Financial Review had an excellent article by Robert Sutton that I’m sure will be of benefit for many of us at the rat. Especially those of us whose years of hard work and efforts are now measured by incompetent, sociopathic buffoons with no industry understanding together with a set of KPI’s being based upon our ability to generate reams of meaningless paperwork and our ability to fill in the dot.

Let’s face it ladies and gentleman. Those running this once proud company care NOTHING for it’s staff, or for that matter it’s continued LONG TERM success beyond it’s ability to provide them with MASSIVE personal wealth.

I know that I don’t need to remind current employees that we are treated like dirt but the following may help us cope.

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

“Stay detached. Passion is an overrated virtue in organizational life and indifference is underrated. This conclusion clashes with the message of most business books, which trumpet the power of exuding deep and authentic passion about your work, organization, colleagues and customers. All this talk is absolutely correct if you are in a good job and are treated with dignity and respect. But it is hypocritical nonsense to the millions of people who are trapped in jobs and companies where they feel oppressed and humiliated, where their goal is to survive with their health and self esteem intact and to provide for their families- not to do great things for a company that treats them like dirt.
Organizations that are filled with employees who don’t give a damn about their jobs will suffer poor performance, but in my book, if they routinely demean employees, they get what they deserve. When organizational life takes this ugly turn, linking your self-worth to how people treat you and putting all your effort and emotional energy into your workplace is a path to exploitation and self-destruction.
Self preservation sometimes requires the opposite response: learn to fell and practise indifference and emotional detachment. When your job feels like a prolonged personal insult, focus on just going through the motions, on caring as little as possible about the jerks around you, and think about something more pleasant as often as you can.
None of us has complete control over our surroundings, and we all get stuck with oppressive jerks whom we can’t change. There are times when the best thing for your mental health is not to give a damn about your job, company, and especially those nasty people. Some reseachers have suggested that “detached concern” can help employees avoid the burnout that results from constant exposure to other peoples problems. If you can’t bring yourself to care about good collegues, clients, and organizations, its a sign you need a break, to learn a new skill or move to a different job. But detached indifference- simply not giving a damn- might be the best that you can do to survive a workplace that subjects you to relentless humiliation.”

[stubby jumbo]

Thanks Speedbird:
i've been looking for a slogan to get thru 2007!

Bingo!

Detached Indifference ......it is.

Lets not have SAFETY WEEK this year.

My vote is DETACHED INDIFFERENCE week.
The coloured T- shirts will be -jaundiced;)

[stubby jumbo]

The inaugural nomination for the:
DETACHED INDIFFERENCE CONTRIBUTOR AWARD

goes to this gem in the latest Cabin Crew Newz:
Customer
Recovery
for Inflight
Entertainment
(IFE) Issues:

"We’ve experienced some ‘teething’ problems as
the new AVOD IFE system beds down. In light
of this and other IFE issues, some important
initiatives have been implemented.
eg:Before customers board the aircraft..........."

Can you believe that someone would actually write this horse excrement, in Feb2007 when this has been going on for over 18 months:ugh: :ugh: :mad:

Yep , I'm now more DETACHED and INDIFFERENT:ooh:

[lowerlobe]

Interesting development regards the JFK slip (tech crew that is)

The tech crew union has argued that the 24 hour slip in JFK is insufficient to achieve suitable rest.

From BP 250 a second officer will be carried as well.....

I find it interesting that the tech crew have been able to argue that 24 hours is not enough and our union gave in and told us to vote YES to operating a shuttle.

If the tech crew think 24 hours is not enough they should try doing the shuttle........

As usual I'm waiting for the FAAA to tell us that the company has it tough and we have no right to ask for a slip in JFK.....

Thats MUFFIN MANAGEMENT idea of talking tough.....

[GPS72]

Vaile shrugs off Qantas debt fears
February 14, 2007
THE Federal Government is not worried about the massive amount of debt needed by private equity consortium Airline Partners Australia (APA) to successfully buy Qantas, Transport Minister Mark Vaile has said.
APA has offered $11 billion for the flying kangaroo with the bid now being examined by the Foreign Investment Review Board because some of the consortium's members are North American private equity groups.
Mr Vaile says the indebtedness of the consortium is not something for the Government to examine.
"It is (not), I don't believe, the Government's job to tell private sector organisations or the financial institutions what's an appropriate level of debt," Mr Vaile has said.
His comments contrast to those of his backbench colleague and former transport minister John Anderson who says the indebtedness of the consortium means the bid could fail to met the national interest.
Mr Vaile admitted it was possible the airline could go bust if the buyout was successful and the aviation industry was then hit with a crisis.
"That's not something we'd like to countenance," Mr Vaile has said.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, well, I bet if Mr. Vaile's job was on the line, he would like to countenance THAT!!
Essentially he is saying that the possibility of the Company getting into financial difficulty is a real possibility, considering the amount of debt we will carry, and if that is the case, then...well...stiff bikkies. But hey, let's not mention the war, shall we?
How can we as taxpayers keep supporting these clowns :ugh: :ugh:

[twiggs]

What exactly is the problem with the JFK shuttles from a cabin crew perspective Roaming wolf?

(because I have never done one)

[roamingwolf]

OK Twiggs,

If you have not done a shuttle it’s hard to explain but most of the problem is getting a decent kip without chems before you leave and then it’s a long hard day even if the wheels do not fall off.

From lowerlobes post it looks like the techies reckon that if you fly to New York 24 hours off is not enough rest and they only go less than half way if you know what I mean.

Does that give you some idea of the day I mean it’s a long one

I reckon the point is that the pilots union has got them something and the faaa keeps on doing ehhh I'm trying to think here..baking muffins and not much else.

So why havent you done one Twiggs

[twiggs]

Roamingwolf,
that answer I could have figured out myself, but has there been any real issues that have resulted in unsafe situations or OH&S issues?
The way I see it, it is just a hard day at the office with two 48 hr slips both sides of it.

I haven't done one because there is a seniority bidding system.

[Pegasus747]

The JFK is one of the hardest patterns to get and highly sought after by crew. Many crew choosing to do them back to back.

According to the minutes of the OH&S Committee and discussing it with the Safety Department there hasnt been a single Hazard report written since the shuttle started.

Even when there have been delays only one crew in many delays have voted not to continue on the trip and complete the shuttle when they could have voted to get off the aircraft in NYC

In the case of the pilots. The workload for a 2 person crew is enormous in what is one of the busiest areas to fly in the world according to AIPA.

Whilst Lowerlobe is correct that the Trip is indeed arduous. the shuttle was agreed to by crew in a vote put by the FAAA to its members in order to try and hang onto some flying. Much of which is going to others who are infinitely more productive and more cost effective for the Company to use to crew flights.

As the FAAA has said continually the challenges for EBA8 are going to be about delivering flexiblity to get the work back and keep the A380 lest it and the future of long haul goes elsewhere.

Nobody who flies is happy with the reality of our situation. We just have to ensure that we dont go the way of the manufacturing industry and a range of others that were just undercut by cheaper labour.

[prunezeuss]

That you consider an EBA8 is likely is encouraging.
I was of the opinion that it would be contracts for everyone.

[lowerlobe]

Twiggs

I was watching with interest your question to RW

I understand fully that you only believe it to be a hard day at the office because that’s where you are.

Not only that however but by your own admission you have not done a shuttle but proclaim them to be OK and safe…and you wonder why anyone doubts your stories

There are a number of problems here and we have talked about most of them before however this latest development by the tech crew puts a new slant on things.

The first is that because of the time difference between Syd and LA most crew do not indeed get much sleep before departure to JFK.This has been successfully argued by Tech crew as well.

The main point however is that our surrender artists in the FAAA encouraged crew to vote YES to doing a shuttle because they could not argue a case for retaining the slip.

The tech crew however, not only retained the slip but also have just proved that slipping for 24 hours is not enough!!!!!!!!!!!!

If the tech crew cannot achieve adequate rest during a 24-hour slip I think it would be fairly safe to say that we could argue that not having a slip is even more arduous.

By adding an additional crew member on the flight for tech crew the company has admitted that there is an issue with fatigue. If it were not then the company would not be putting another pilot on board…

AIPA sits down and fights for their members but not the FAAA.All we get from them is MUFFIN MORNINGS and a story as to how hard the company has it….

Maybe we should all join AIPA, as they seem to look after their members

[Shlonghaul]

Lowerlobe :D :D :D :D Well said mate. And the Kiwis are back on the shuttle again so there goes the argument that voting yes to the shuttle would protect Aust LH jobs.

As for the muffin mornings what they're not telling us is that you have to bring your own muffins :E

[hawke eye]

Its all about fatigue

Pegasus,
my understanding is the FAAA is there to protect its members and ensure our work is covered adequately by common sense safeguards.
Thats why we have a slipping formula, hours limitations and so on.

Unfortunately in some respects crew need to be saved from themselves.

Many crew bid back to back LAs, these cannot be healthy for you. One is bad enough let alone a roster full.

Some female crew will fly when they are pregnant. This is only my opinion but i can not believe that while a precious life is forming and in the early stages of its creation that we have mothers who will expose the foetus to flying in a pressurised environment, expose themselves to the air born bacteria that passengers bring onboard with them, the jetlag, the pushing and pulling of heavy carts, the lifting of passengers baggage, and in the worst case may have to block an exit with passengers attempting to get out in an emergency, oh not fogetting lugging a suitcase around every other day and the inability to have a rest should you for some unknown reason be feeling dam tired because your in the middle of a meal service somewhere in the AM somewhere around the world, somewhere at 30 000 feet.

sorry to ramble but i think you get the point.

The JFK shuttle should never have been put to a vote. Clearly there is a serious time change issue and clearly to have to operate a 15 plus hour day in the middle of an LA direct is not taking your memberships health and welfare into account.

As we know some crew are happy to fly 260 hrs a period if thay can. That doesnt mean its a good thing. The FAAA did the unconscionable by dangling dollars before the noses of greedy crew.
If the money wasnt there the sick leave would be very high. No one would do the shuttles.

The safety and health of the FAAA membership should be the highest priority and to compromise that because its all too hard to go to the commission and have a proper fatigue study on our job is very sad indeed. Even the Company now realises the ramifications and importance of fatigue.

MM had a fatigue study done on the LA and JFK shuttle.
It was by an academic who never actually flew, who used a computer model and some data to determine whether we would be fatigued or not. The long & short of it was it was determined we would be no more tired than on any other sector we flew. Incredible. He obviously didnt feel like many of us do when we have walked off the shuttle arriving back in LA.

Its time the FAAA did a proper fatigue study covering all aspects of our work using actual crew who can be monitored for approx 12 months taking into account everything that impacts us.

With carmen, new aircraft , growth in destinations and increased frequency to destinations flying is becoming harder not easier.

Lets see if the FAAA can be a leader in the world of aviation and not make excuses but carry out and complete an in-depth study that will harness the ever growing greed of the aviation industry and force it to give the health of its workforce a responsible priority.

The outcome may empower all aviation unions across the world.:ok:

[Guardian1]

I note with interest some of the resurrected discussion on JFK shuttles.
I note that lowerlobe, particularly has embarked on his usual anti FAAA campaign. As i have said on varying ocassions, lowerlobe particuarly does not know what he is talking about. He is depressingly clueless and only knows to critise the FAAA like some fishwife.
Anyhow, back to why i have decided to contribute some more comments onto this highly unrepresentative forum. Regarding JFK, THE FOLLOWING POINTS ARE RELEVANT :
1) 71% OF CREW IN A DEMOCRATIC VOTE SUPPORTED THE SHUTTLES
2) CABIN CREW ARE NOT PILOTS. LONG HAUL CABIN CREW CAN BE SUBSTITUTED VERY EASILY (AND ARE BEING SUBSTITUTED BY THE COMPANY) BY OTHER QANTAS CABIN CREW WHO WILL DO ALL OF OUR WORK IF WE WISH TO RAISE OBJECTIONS.
3) JFK SHUTTLES ARE HIGHLY DESIRED TRIPS.
Hawkeye, i respect your comments and clearly understand your viewpoint, unlike lowerlobe you are not anti-union and your views have logic. However, the Company is not interested in fatigue studies. It will clearly give the JFK shuttles to others who will do the work, if we were to withdraw the dispensation.
THAT IS THE REALITY OF THE SITUATION, HOWEVER UNPALATABLE TO ANY OF US.
Shortly, there will be new owners of Qantas. This new group of owners will not be in the mood to "discuss" JFK shuttles that may be raised by the FAAA.
Fundamentally, the new owners will be going for our throats and indeed for others including the Pilots. I HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WHAT I SAY, BUT THE FACT THAT THE pILOTS CANNOT EVEN GET AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COMPANY OVER THEIR SHORT HAUL AGREEMENT, WHERE DISCUSSIONS HAVE BEEN GOING ON FOR NEARLY A YEAR NOW, INDICATES THE AGGRESSIVE NATURE OF THE COMPANY.
No one will thank the FAAA, if it withdrew the JFK dispensation and the Company employed further overseas and then made Long Haul cabin crew COMPULSORILY REDUNDANT.
I am not being arrogant when i say that it is easy for people like lowerlobe who have minimal knowledge of the industrial laws or the industrial reality within Qantas, to attack the FAAA.
The long haul FAAA is the ONLY Qantas union constantly attacked by Geoff Dixon. This is because it stands up for the rights of its members. However. im sure the leadership of the L/H FAAA is not suicidal by embracing nonsense suggestions that emanate from individuals like lowerlobe.
TO DO SO WOULD LEAD TO DISASTER FOR LONG HAUL CREW.

[roamingwolf]

Guardian

Mate ,I’m glad you have come back because I was worried you might have dropped off the edge or something.

I had to laugh mate when you said “the long haul FAAA is the ONLY Qantas union constantly attacked by Geoff Dixon. This is because it stands up for the rights of its members”

Mate exactly WHEN was that.

Watch out Qantas …incoming muffin.

Pal as most of the time you only attack.As Hawke eye said most people are greedy and that is why the shuttle is popular.As Hawke said crew would do 260 hours a roster if they could and worry about their health later.

This thing is about the astronauts telling the company that they could not get enough rest in 24 hours after working about 7 hours.Mate it looks like the company has given them more crew or whatever because of the fatigue and then you say that the company are not interested in fatigue studies.

I tell you what pal if we could prove that the shuttle is too fatigueing and we are worried about the safety and health aspect and then tell them we know about the techy’s getting more crew because they are tired we would have a good case I reckon in court.

You have not even asked for separate transport in LAX on the way back and more often than not we have to wait for the astronauts and their bags.They wanted us to do the shuttle and you caved in and told us to do the same.

Mate lowerlobe might be anti faaa but he is only saying what the rest of us are thinking

Pathetic faaa

[lowerlobe]

Hey we have all 3 amigo’s on the one day ,see what a bit of attention get’s you.I think it’s great to see all 3 of the FAAA leaders have come out.Well done!!!!!!!!

Not only that but we have the FAAA cheersquad Twiggs who has never done a JFK shuttle but seems to know that they are just hard work….

Brilliant but then again that’s the FAAA supporters for you,hardly a group of deep thinkers

It’s also laughable when you read some of the comments .Like RW my favourite is this one…

“The long haul FAAA is the ONLY Qantas union constantly attacked by Geoff Dixon. This is because it stands up for the rights of its members”

Like RW I would like to know when that happened,I must have been away that day.It seems as though the only thing the FAAA can do is wave a white flag and bend over.

but this one is too good to pass up on….

“He is depressingly clueless and only knows to critise the FAAA like some fishwife”

After reading that I think the only reason that Geoff Dixon attacks the FAAA is that they are clueless and he knows he can get away with it.Geoff probably does not like Muffins anyway….

What I want to know is what is a fishwife and what is a critise because apparently she/it knows how to do that?

I think these give us an idea at just how clueless the FAAA really are.
As far as a democratic vote is concerned it was about as democratic as North Korea.I suppose though that if you live in North Korea it would seem to be democratic and that is because like the FAAA the North Korean Gov tells them that it is democratic…So it must be.

The reality is though that the FAAA has no intention of standing up for it’s members.Although it is standing up for the company quite well…

[Bad Adventures]

I recently did a JFK shuttle and it was an easy day. Total duty was nearly 17 hours due to delays at JFK but certainly much easier then a SIN-LHR sector. I wish i could get more of them but they are just way too senior. The extra cash in my pay was very useful to pay some over due bills.

[stubby jumbo]

Things are looking up for a change............Little Johnny appears stressed.
Maintain the rage:O There is hope for us yet.

[lowerlobe]

A few weeks ago Sven Reedless from the PR company FAAAAAAAAA (Flight Attendants abdicating any action and ambivalently against all activity) was interviewed on what it was like as a F/A.

For those of you who were away or did not hear the radio interview here is the unedited transcript…

Interviewer: Good Afternoon listeners, today we have as our guest Sven Reedless a F/A and also an elected official of the FAAAAAAAAA
Sven: Ahhh actually I’m a CSM

Interviewer: What exactly is the difference
Sven: We get to read the telegraph while eating a muffin and we wear a different tie….no… but not the latte coloured one. ……Unfortunately.

Interviewer:OK then Sven, There have been a lot of reports of problems with your IFE system.
Sven: Ahhh Hang on for a sec are we on Air…

Interviewer: Yes, we have been for about a minute or so now
Sven: Sorry, I was confused with that “ON AIR” sign…I know we are not flying but …ahh anyway, I’ve got my glasses and script ready. Ahhh They can’t see my script can they?

Interviewer: No Sven, this is radio
Sven:OK then I’m ready for the questions we talked about earlier.

Interviewer:(pressing button on desk) Thank God for the time delay…where was I, ohh Yes about the problems with the IFE.
Sven:Oh Yeah, well as usual those problems are a complete beat up by some sections of the media.Try one of my muffins…….mum gave me the recipe

Interviwer: Sven, Those reports though are from numerous passengers talking about multiple failures.
Sven: Well, that is a perfect example of media exaggeration there is usually only one failure.

Interviewer: Sven, we have had reports of it failing time and again.
Sven: No, sorry they only fail once although it may fail in a number of areas the seats only fail once.It may look like the seat has failed again but it is the same failure again so in real terms it is the same failure and we have just not fixed it the first time .We can do a number of very tricky things but they are only written up as failing once. Otherwise as you could imagine the paper work would be massive…..here try a muffin…..

Interviewer: What sort of tricky things can you do?
Sven: Ohh it’s very complicated .

Interviewer:How complicated is it?
Sven: We press a button…it’s really annoying when I’m trying to read the paper…….We can also give away free vouchers for a muffin …their very popular...even the gluten free ones

Interviewer: Does that work
Sven: Ahhhh what was the question?

Interviewer:Can you fix these problems with the IFE inflight?
Sven:Have I told you about the float that we are sponsoring in the next Mardi Gra……it’s shaped like a muffin

Interviewer: Getting back to the IFE problems is there a course you do as a CSM or is there any training to fix these IFE breakdowns.
Sven:Oh Yes there is a very technical course that we do, it lasts for weeks and..

Interviewer: Have you done this course?
Sven: Absolutely, it is a very technical course and it is too technical for even our technical crew. As I said it goes for 2 weeks and they give you a name badge and morning tea and everything.

Interviewer: Did you successfully complete this course?
Sven: Absolutely, our Group General Manager for Invisibility Lusley gave me a certificate and shook my hand, mum was there too and I supplied the muffins and…

Interviewer: The reports tell us of many problems with your IFE and frankly the passengers are not happy.
Sven: This IFE system is state of the art even the manufacturer does not understand it fully and as you might expect there have been some teething problems.

Interviewer: But these teething problems have been going on now for over 18 months
Sven: Ahh Well there are a lot of teeth and have I told you about our Muffin Mornings.

Interviewer: Well, what are you doing about these teething problems?
Sven: We have a team of dedicated orthodontists working on the problem at this very moment.

Interviewer: What have they found?
Sven: Apparently I have an impacted bicuspid or something.Probably from eating too many Muffins,I really have to cut back.

Interviewer: No Sven not with you, I meant with the IFE system.
Sven Ohh sorry, well we think it is the wisdom teeth, there is not enough room and they have to come out.

Interviewer: Does that take long to fix:
Sven: Well, if we removed the wisdom teeth from every passenger that complained about the iFE we would never land.It’s very messy as well.

Interviewer:Sven,For a union rep you seem to be very pro company.
Sven:I’m glad you asked that question.

Interviewer:Ahhh Sven…Well…are you going to answer my question.
Sven:Ahh well The company employs us and we have decided that the best course of action is not to annoy them.That way they might forget about us with all that’s going on and we might slip through the net.The company has it very tough at the moment.The upper management has the huge task of spending their bonus’s and some other things so we sort of just try and hide in the corner.

Interviewer:Is there anything that you would addressed in talks with the company.
Sven:Well,personally I would like to see a muffin on every crew meal tray.

Interviewer:Is that it?
Sven:Yep that’s about it.

Interviewer: Ahh right well, Thanks Sven for giving us an insight into international flying.
Sven: Have you tried one of my Muffins, their great and low fat as well…...

Interviewer: Goodbye


:E :E :E

[Pegasus747]

Anyone in here actually reading Lowerlobe's constant anti, Qantas anti FAAA diatribe might actually believe he was unbalanced.

Clearly that is not the case as he has an equally maginficent sized chip on each shoulder. One for qantas and one for the FAAA.

Lowerlobe is not a happy person and tries to convince the small audience on here that somehow he is representative of the wider crew community.

Let's just face facts.

Lowerlobe told us in unequivocal terms that the vote on the JFK dispensation would be defeated- result 71% voted for it. Not because they liked the idea of such an arduous tour of duty but because unlike lowerlobe (or should i say King Canute) by merely saying no to something does not stop the tide from coming in.

In relation to the IFE. It was the FAAA that commented in every major metropolitan newspaper about the IFE failures and the effect on crew. Lowerlobe hears one of many radio interviews and because its not full of the vile anti Qantas bile that fills his world its somehow some giant sellout.

The reality is that some good may well come of the public airing of this issue by the FAAA, which is certainly more than Lowerlobe has ever done on any issue.

The King canute (lowerlobe) solution to all problems is not to try and negotiate some middle ground but to go for broke on everything and have some win or a complete loss potentially at any cost. A phirric victory will not ensure the relevance of the Long Haul Division or an EBA8 as opposed to an AWA.

A vote for King Canute is clearly a vote for making yourself irrelevant.

You have to be AT the table to negotiate. And the last time the FAAA negotiated with Qantas King Canute wasnt there or at any FAAA meetings because more than likely his highness is not a member and hides behind anonymity whist pillorying those who put their names to everything as elected officials.

The real Braveheart

[OCCR]

Hate to tell you this Pegasus but Lowerlobe opinions are what the majority of crew are now thinking about the goons in the FAAA.
Whispers are around that a new group is being formed to challenge these total incompetents......I can't wait till the next election.....
We need a change in the FAAA bunker, Bolt and the wigged one must go! they don't fly anymore, they have lost touch with the membership and the company regards them as total fools and laughs at them.
:E

[roamingwolf]

Pegasus give it a rest mate I thought the radio joke was a ripper.A bloke I had a beer with at the local took the last package said he heard the real interview and he asked if Steven had left the faaa and was working for the company.

A lot of us are thinking the same thing that lower has posted.If you reckon Dixon hates us because you stand up to him you are having yourself on mate.I reckon you guys should have a good look at yourself and think about what you should be doing.

I know I’m no scolar but what does phirric mean?I could’nt see it in the dictionary are you making words up again Pegasus.

Get with the program Pegasus because you are being looked at as the peter foster of the union movement

Mate at the rate your doing I bet your on Dixons Christmas card list.

[Explicitus]

Pyrrhic: named for Pyrrhus of Epirus who reportedly said something along the lines of, "If we are victorious in one more battle like this we are utterly ruined."
His victory was more damaging to him than the Romans, hence "pyrrhic victory" a victory that cost too much.

Sorry to poke my nose in, this remark implies no opinion on the matter either way.

[twiggs]

Hate to tell you this Pegasus but Lowerlobe opinions are what the majority of crew are now thinking about the goons in the FAAA.
Whispers are around that a new group is being formed to challenge these total incompetents......I can't wait till the next election.....
We need a change in the FAAA bunker, Bolt and the wigged one must go! they don't fly anymore, they have lost touch with the membership and the company regards them as total fools and laughs at them.

OCCR,
you can not claim that "the majority of crew" think any particular way.
If a new group is forming then great, I hope they have some innovative ideas that do offer a choice.
In the meantime though, I think we need to wait till the end of the year before we can begin to pass judgement on the current leadership.
The job they did with the last EBA was excellent, considering the situation they inherited, so we can look forward to the next round of negotiations with some hope.

[midsection]

The last 3 JFKs I have done have all been a walk in the park.
I can not understand what some of you are whinging about.
Or is it you have nothing to complain about so this week it is the JFKs.

Take some advice. ;) If you dont like doing them bid for something else. :D

[Eden99]

OOCR wrote "Hate to tell you this Pegasus but Lowerlobe opinions are what the majority of crew are now thinking about the goons in the FAAA.
Whispers are around that a new group is being formed to challenge these total incompetents......I can't wait till the next election....."


Love to know which circles you mix in OCCR..... are they the same non-union circles as lowerlobe??

I talk with heaps of crew..... Mijatov and the L/H FAAA have huge support. Whether it is at recent FAAA elections or votes like for EBA7 (88%)OR the JFK Dispensation (71%) ALL actual evidence indicates strong support for the current FAAA leadership.


And of course why wouldn't it? The current officials reversed every failure of EBA6 as they promised, LH conditions are the best in Australia and are right up there with the best in the world.

The current officials don't lie.... they communicate well and they are talented.


I t will be interesting if "anothe group" stands at the FAAA elections next year. It will be interesting what platform they could possibly have, because they won't have experience, they wont have a clue about the new industriaL LAWS, and most importantly they will be facing the existing officials who have fulfilled ALL their promises.

Nevertheless, it could be fun watching the likes of lowerlobe or OCCR leading an opposing group. COMEDY AT ITS BEST :)

[cartexchange]

A new group for the FAAA, that would be too good to be true.....
they have my vote!

[capt.cynical]

A word of warning to all the FAAA bashers.
Be carefull of what you wish for.:uhoh:

[speedbirdhouse]

Indeed........:ugh:

[mrpaxing]

the american flight attendants are not allowed to do return east-west coast or the other way for safety reasons, FAR 121...
there have been several reports by Pilots AND CSM about crew being asleep while waiting for a take off slot in JFK. if the OH committee has not seen any reports, its either the company hides them, the fAAA does not want to deal with them or otherwise. If they OH/FAAA really want to know they would run a survey on every flight for a month. simple:rolleyes:

[gloriais18]

FAR121 is a very large document. Specifically how does FAR121 address F/A duty time limitations? Just interested.

Possibly, when all Cabin Crew flying on Australian registered aircraft are represented by one unified industrial body, the first consideration should be a licensing system for cabin crew.

[lowerlobe]

Gloriais18..The point is that under US law US cabin crew are not allowed to operate LAX/JFK/LAX but we do and the FAAA has gone along with it...not only that but the tech crew say that 24 hours in JFK is not enough to get adequate rest....Think about it...

As far as a reply to Twiggs/Pegasus and Eden is concerned her are just a few pertinent observations…

First Twiggs. Apparently it is not possible for OCCR or anyone to claim they speak for the majority of crew. This is unless you are Twiggs of course…. because on at least three occasions Twiggs has claimed SHE represents the majority of crew. So like management it is a case of “Do as I say not as I do”. This ranks with some of Twiggs other classics such as it’s the destinations that are important and it aint the money…Nothing more needs to said there!!!!

Secondly, I admit that I am not happy with QF management but then again with the level of disengagement at an all time high I don’t think there would be many employees who are happy with the situation. For the last 30 years or so I have watched the company on an almost weekly basis attack us and other groups of employees.

These continue to this day and unless you are completely delusional will not stop either regardless of who owns the company.

If there were no attacks there really would be no need for unions and imagine what an airline we would have if management and employees were not on a war footing.

However in a previous post Pegasus who is close to the FAAA officials defends the company…YET AGAIN by saying a crewmember is anti company……………WTF…Who’s side are you on?

Then he makes a significant slip by putting the FAAA and the company in bed together by saying that I am against the FAAA and the company…Pegasus do you know what a turncoat is?

Third, both Pegasus and Eden talk about a democratic vote. The JFK referendum was anything but democratic and only the North Korean regime would look at it as such. The vote was carried out by the FAAA with no safeguards whatsoever.

The vote should have been carried out by the Australian electoral commission. One of those representing the FAAA here claimed that it was illegal for the AEC to do this however it is far from illegal and in fact they do it for unions and other groups on a regular basis.

They also claimed that it would cost thousands of dollars but when I checked with the AEC I was told it would cost nowhere near that.

The AEC would have counted and initialed each and every vote and ensured no irregularities. The FAAA just printed them out with no safeguards such as this. How many vote cards did the FAAA print? No one knows because they were not numbered or initialed as the AEC does.

There is also the issue of how the vote was carried out. Normally with a referendum both sides of the argument are printed and given to people to read so as to be fair.

Normally there is a YES case and a NO case inserted with the ballot card so you can make up your own mind .Not with the FAAA though as they did not want any fairness in your thinking. They did not want anyone telling crew the reasons for voting NO to the shuttle as they had their own little chicken little scare campaign in full swing…

I am not suggesting that anyone in the FAAA office or the returning officer did anything illegal or wrong and I’m sure Pegasus/Eden/Guardian will protest that there is no way they would have been party to any wrong doing but the fact remains that if they were sincere in holding a DEMOCRATIC vote they would have asked the AEC to conduct it.

Finally, The FAAA tries to cloud the issue with abuse and nonsensical rhetoric to distract and confuse crew.

Eden tells us that if there were another group standing then they would have no idea…

The arrogance of eden is astounding. Does he honestly think that out of the thousands of crew they are the only 2 or 3 people who have any idea of what to do or would have any ability?

I sincerely hope there is another group standing for the next elections because we need someone to stand up and show support for CREW and not the company. As I said the current leadership of the stands for….

Flight Attendants abdicating any action and ambivalently against all activity

[Pegasus747]

It would be fair to say that emotions run high in the forum mainly because people are afraid for their futures.

If it were possible to have a rational debate on the subject of the policies of the FAAA without the resort to personal invective it would be a miracle because of the level of personal hatred and envy that exists in some here. But i will try one last time and then i will go and enjoy 3mths long service leave....


There has been considerable critisism of the encumbent FAAA officials. One would think that the job of a long haul flight attendant is at an all- time low, but no one can raise anything other than the JFK dispensation to lay at the feet of the FAAA.



Lets take things into proper perspective...

Overseas bases-

The partial demise of the Long Haul Division started with the introduction of the overseas based crew. If crew had stood up at that time and fought a pitched battle perhaps including some form of direct action we may not be so industrially weakened now. THE current leadership of the FAAA were not running the FAAA then


Long Service Leave Assignment-

One of the most vexing things about life at the moment is the assignment of LSL. This is regulated by state laws and not part of our EBA. The assignment of leave is out of the control of the FA

Reduced Flying -

As would be abundantly clear to all, we have jetstar, australian airlines and short haul. All of whom flying 20-30% more hours than Long Haul for less money. That is why our flying is going.

The current leadership of the FAAA inherited the worst EBA since they started in the early 90's and have been cleaning up the residue of that ever since.

The easiest way to make the long haul division more relevant is to become cost effective, and be at the bargaining table to reach agreements.

Those that feel that the FAAA now is giving things away need to list those things.

Its easy to be generraly unhappy, but let's put things into perspective. There has been no wholesale reduction in conditions.

Wage rates are the highest in the industry, our meal allowances are so much higher than those of others that they will give them our work to save the money.

The real challenge will be to address these things in EBA8.

If job security and maintanance of income is important then we will need to see what crew are prepared to do to keep it.

It's easy to talk tough in here. But other than negitiation and compromise the only effective tool of flight attendants is direct industrial action.

over 60% of flight attendants are women. Industrially non agressive by nature. Most flight attendants are so heavily geared financially that they wouldnt take more than a couple of days action even when it is legal.

If a new team wants to take over the management of the fAAA and responsibility for crew conditions and job security they will have to offer something other than rhetoric and critisism of others.

Despite the grumblings of crew. many of whom totally out of touch with the real world. We are among the highest paid workers in the country. when you take into consideration the fact that we can be replaced with and 18yo for 30% of the average income of long haul crew in a few weeks, i for one wouldnt be tempting Dixon or the new owners to Go for it!!

Anyone that has a real strategy rather than airing their frustration here should be making suggestions to the current officials now not waiting for another team when its too late.

The current officials will be surveying crew and holding meetings as always before the EBA negotiations start.

If it comes back that crew want a miracle then they need to elect a snake oil salesman because as far as i know the current officials will try hard but not promise miracles.

If we didnt have Jetstar, Australian Airlines, Short Haul, and Overseas crew who would willingly absorb all of our work for less money the job would be easy.

Lets face it, when we were riding on a high in the 80's and early 90's none of these were competing with us for our own work. The world for the Qantas Long HAul FLight attendant has changed. And as with all evolution, it will be survival of the fittest.

We either adapt and accept change or we perish.

If anyone out there is telling you that they can do a better job, then listen to what they say. But when you listen, also question them.

How would they deal with the current situation differently.

The pilots have several cases before Federal Court, some of which have already been dismissed. They have deep pockets and one thing that we DONT have.

A marketable skill.

As far as licensing is concerned. Be careful what you wish for. There are benefits to be sure in licenseing. But there are also potential drawbacks. And what is essential is that you need to dot the I's and cross the T's on that.

In relation to where we go from here, i would suggest that management read this more than flight attendants. They see the division and love it. The feed on our internal battles and weaknesses.


There is no doubt that they would like to get rid of 60% of the current crew at least. The challenge will be growing long haul not shrinking it, and whether crew are prepared to accept what needs to be done to achieve that or whether they want to go the way of the dodo

[samford]

So, has the FAAA had much to do with FARSA in AKL? I ask this, because obviously any US flying lost by Australian based L/H would likely be picked up by AKL.
Now that AKL have a Collective Agreement and the union actually have some leverage within Jetconnect (which, lets not forget, is QF owned), perhaps it's time the two unions joined forces on various issues surrounding cabin crew in L/H.
The company have been very strategic in utilising the overseas bases to gain further leverage in making changes, an example would be giving JFK shuttles and (inturn) more LAX flying to AKL. If AKL was to get the same protection against this, then who would be left to fly these arduous patterns?
There seems to be alot of talk about getting a united front between FAAA S/H and L/H, but don't forget FARSA in NZ too. At the rate the AKL base is growing, it is scary to think that any progress made will be lost just as fast because if the flying is given to them instead, it has been all for nothing.

I know it has been said before, but the S/H and L/h FAAA NEED to sort some level of cooperation out prior to the commencement of bargaining. It is absolutely essential all unions beit FARSA, L/H, S/H and LHR start talking more.

I for one am not happy about the current situation in S/H. I do not bid for regional flying, but unfortunately most of it is filled with MAM casuals - who, incidently have an agreement with the S/H FAAA, go figure!

Regional flying defeats the purpose of me transferring divisions in the first place. The general feeling in S/H is not that we think L/H have it too good, most of us know we were screwed over and it frustrates me that everyone accepts it, because they feel there is nothing we can do.

Of course there is something we can do, and while I don't know the answers, I am pleading with all crew to PLEASE unite. We have a sorded past in recent years, but we must move forward from that and learn from it. It's time for change, and we need to rally our respective unions and get progress on these issues before it's gone too far.

[stubby jumbo]

A well considered and thought provoking post-Pegasus.:D

Some salient points for all of us to consider.

I don't envy anyone having to deal /negotiate with the treachery, lies , deceit and bullying from the current ( Non ) -Management team.

Darth and his team must sit back and laugh with glee at where they have us positioned at the moment.

However, I'm a true believer in:

"EVERY DOG HAS ITS DAY"

[Pegasus747]

Stubby jumbo,

Thanks for your comments. In Relation to the other unions like FARSA and the Thai Collective and the London Base i would say the following.

There is regular dialogue and meetings between the officials except for the thais.

An attempt was made my previous officials to organise the thai base and the FAAA paid about 24K pa to a thai based flight attendant to help organise them.

It would appear that the person in question didnt have her contract renewed and was isolated. The strategy of the FAAA under previous management was to help them raise their conditions so as to be less of a threat to long Haul.

The thais and the kiwi's are not stupid. They know that the only reason that they have the jobs that they do is because of the significant cost savings thaat qantas derives from using them.

In New Zealand FARSA is not interested in helping Australian Based long Haul crew to the detriment of their own members. They are actively negotiated to ensure career path and promotion for them and better conditions, but are mindful of not pushing too hard and becoming less attractive.

They negotiated CSM and CSS positions for NZ based crew in the last agreement as they believe that their members are entitled to promostion too.

That would impact significantly on LH crew promotion and could potentially mean that AKL/LAX/NYC/SFO flying could be all Kiwi based crew (many australian) with onboard managers too.

The next EBA for Long Haul crew will be potentially the most complex ever undertaken by officials. There are now 3 employment lawyers on the staff of the FAAA as well as A senior barrister who works closely with them. The officials that will work with the paid staff will be some of the most experienced in the history of the FAAA.

Some have suggested getting a professional negotiator. can i just say that Geoff would tell Bob HAwke to get F***ed as quickly as MM.

As far as i am concerned, everything that we currently earn, and every benefit is important. OH&S will play a strong part in this EBA and any changes to work rules etc will have significant OH&S implications.

If we could guarantee that no other F/A in the group would come in and undercut us to get our flying and ensure their job security it would be a great thing. Sadly that is unlikely to be the case as we live in a world of dog eat dog and looking after no1.

There is a lot of work going on with the unions working together to defeat the current government and change the IR laws. That will at least bring some fairness back to the system.

But we cant count on a Labor win at the federal election and have to be prepared for what may head our way.

The Unions in the USA that have been successful are the ones that have a relationship with management. They are the ones at the table rather than knocking on the door.

the best example of that is the old AFAA and AICCA. The AFAA was considered the soft option by many crew, but at the end of the day they were the union that the company chose to deal with and we lost 75% home base leave and got a bid system of sorts.

The days of those sorts of conditions are long gone and the thing of legend like when the water came up to the hotel bar in Bahrain.

We live in a very different world now and the conditions of the 70's are foreign to every non government airline in the world.

The private airlines like us without the govt support and public service mentality in management and employees are a cut throat place to work and bargain in

[lowerlobe]

Preunzeuss,

I don’t know if you understand what rhetoric is but my posts are hardly that. I would also like you to point out examples of my abuse. I have certainly used parody as a method to make my point but that is certainly not abuse. If you want to read abuse then I suggest you read some of Guardians and Eden’s post.

I understand fully the problems facing unions but continually giving in does nothing. A company like ours only understands determination and a willingness to stand up for your rights. If they think they have you on the back foot and they see you publicly admitting that your cost base is too much etc…then they will crucify you.

The reason I am using the JFK shuttle as an example is twofold. First is that the FAAA caved in and told all crew they had to vote yes or we would lose our jobs. DO you think for a second that those in the office had smiles on their faces because they had already won?

Secondly the tech crew have identified fatigue as an issue. If we were able to prove that the shuttle is dangerous on those grounds then we have put the company into a difficult position. If they chose to replace us with AKL crew for example we could and should mount a publicity campaign to show how stupid and reckless the company was acting. CASA and the media would be asking questions and if we had tangible proof of a dangerous level of fatigue then I believe we could win.

Of course Pegasus/Eden and Guardian will post now that I don’t know what I’m talking about but then again they don’t want to admit they are possibly wrong and look stupid so they will never do this and this is why I’m continually criticizing them for their methods.

Roaming wolf came up with a good idea and I notice that none of the FAAA has mentioned it. At the very least crew after completing the shuttle and falling asleep on the bus have to wait fore the tech crew who have to go to collect their bags. WHY doesn’t the FAAA ask for separate transport after the shuttle if the tech crew are delayed. If the tech crew are going to be delayed they can catch a cab or similar.

The FAAA don’t ask for anything they are like the cartoon of Elmer Fudd tip toeing past a huge dog trying to be quiet.

“Be Vewy Vewy Qwiet…SHHHH I’m twying to find the Wabbit and not wake the Dog”

The tech crew union have gor their members something but what do we get from the FAAA….MUFFIN MORNINGS…

The next thing we know will be recipes on the union website

[Pegasus747]

Lowerlobe,

You dont seem to realise that even when you have a good idea you do yourself constant discredit by posting it on here.

If you believe that we need seperate transport you need to write an ICAN like everyone else. The FAAA takes their copy of the ICAN like they do for every issue raised and use it to demonstrate empiracle evidence that there is an issue.

One person alone suggesting something doesnt necessarily mean that the company will act. They will also not just act on something because the FAAA says so.

The first thing they would say is where is the complaints. No iCAns no emails etc.

I actually think that seperate transport would be meritous if it can be demonstrated that there is an ondgoing problem.

Why dont you write to the the base manager and copy in the FAAA with your suggestion. I think its a good one.

You actually might be taken seriously if you lost your invective and bitterness.

And btw the Muffin morning was the concept of the previous leadership and is being brought back at the request of the members.

The only difference here is that FAAA have an office close to the base now and we are not beholding to qantas to hold the discussions on their premises or in their "BUGGED" rooms.

Make no mistake the recent renovations included all the latest in listening devices. At least that's what i have been told and as such am very careful about what i say in a briefing room

[speedbirdhouse]

......and the corporate criminals about to make obscene wealth by flogging it off.:yuk: :yuk: :yuk:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21237498-12272,00.html

Morale.......? If only people knew the truth.

[lowerlobe]

Pegasus ,
Do you know the meaning of the term invective?

If so show some examples that I have used!

As far as being bitter is concerned it couldn't be further from the truth.I may be disillusioned at your lack of leadership and curious about your motivation and direction but not bitter.

By the way your analogy of the AICCA and the AFAA is a very poor one.The 75% stand down was not lost because the company decided to sit down with them and not the boys union.It was because the AICCA stuck their head in the sand and said it won't happen.They were effectively out manoeuvred by the company and the girls union was the company's vassal.If the AICCA had put an effective proposal to the company and arbitration it would not have turned out the way it did.Basically the company told arbitration that two out the 3 parties had agreed so it went through.

The company did not win..WE LOST..they out played the union because of their arrogance...sound familiar

[roamingwolf]

Boys and Girls,

Well it looks like the classic is back on some of the NRT trips.Thats going to impress our Japanese customers NOT..talk about groundhog day!

[twiggs]

Don't get too carried away Roamingwolf,

I think you'll find the classic on only two 21's in the whole roster.

[lowerlobe]

RW ,

You are 100% correct and I fell over with the bit about someones lights being on but she's not at home.

I understand exactly what you are saying about the 300's on the NRT's.The Japanese pax are very discerning as we were told ad nauseum by the company and even given a cultural lesson one night before sign on.

To say the Japanese and most people I suppose disliked the 300 would be an understatement.Now with our motto of "yesterdays technology tomorro" they are putting them on an important market yet again.

They are bad enough on domestic flights and really should be made into something useful like beer cans.

The Japanese like the latest of everything and to turn up at the airport and see something that should be in a museum is typical.

The funny part is the company spokesperson here AGAIN defends the company.

TWIGGS....Is the company putting the classic on the NRT flights...YES or NO....not maybe or only for a few flights....YES or NO......simple question really

[twiggs]

Out of 56 QF 21's, 2 will be on the classic!
Gee you guys are drama queens.

[lowerlobe]

Twiggs,

I asked a simple question that I thought even you could comprehend.

Let's see if you try it this time.....

Is the company using an antiquated aircraft in a market that they want to increase......YES or NO............

The lights are on but.........

The company tells us that the Japanese market is one that not only do they want to keep but increase.They used the 300's for years to Japan and had more complaints than you could jump over.The Japanese want the latest and if you have ever been to a Japanese technology show you might understand and in fact you probably do.However as usual you are pushing the company line but then only you can speak for the majority of crew.....ehh Twiggs

[stubby jumbo]

Don't know about you guys on here, but I've had a gutfull of this whole tawdry "hostie in the loo" affair.

Again the image and reputation of Qantas L/H crew takes a battering because of some -----------:mad: who is /was never employed by Qantas.

She is the product of the Jit Conneect recruitment sham ( in which they recruit from a resource pool in Auckland that hit rock bottom about 3 years ago!!!-quality candidates go to Air NZ)
Then, naturally she wants to return to Oz to fly for mainline, but again she goes thru the FLAWED external recruitment sham -called MAM ( again from a very depleted candidate pool -as there conditions -Contract -C ...are pathetic.)

So this is the result.

SHAME ON YOU QANTAS HR.

This sorry saga would not have happened IF we kept the whole recruitment operation -inhouse ( Qantas crew recruiting qantas crew ) , offered decent award conditions and treated the Flight attendant community with professionalism-NOT how its now being portrayed as:
BIMBO'S WHO ENTICE MOVIE STARS INTO LOO'S-as part of the full service airline offering-ha ha ha very funny.
Both Sunday rags today have EXCLUSIVE'S on the matter!
I have had it..... putting up with smart arsed pax cracking a jokes about hostie's in loo's.-BORING !!!!:ugh: :ugh:

Anyway, if ever you need an example of this whole overseas basing, MAM thing dragging the brand down this is it !

Who gets the blame????? Not Management:yuk:

Its the Aussie Hostie/Stewardess/Flight Attendant community.

Nice one Lisa.:rolleyes: