Qantas denies using prisoners to clean

[Bad Adventures]

Claims that Qantas is using prisoners from Singapore's Changi Prison to clean aircraft before maintenance are outrageous accusations, the airline says.

An engineers union said day release prisoners from the jail were used to clean the flight deck of Qantas jets ahead of maintenance.

Executive general manager of Qantas engineering David Cox has denied the claims. "This is an outrageous accusation which we categorically deny," a spokesman for Mr Cox said. "No prisoner in Singapore has access to any Qantas aircraft undergoing heavy maintenance."

Earlier on Tuesday, the Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association federal secretary Steve Purvinas told a parliamentary inquiry that prisoners also were used to wash down wheel bays.

He told the inquiry into the impact of the potential sale of Qantas on its budget subsidiary Jetstar that prisoners were released under supervision and taken to the Qantas aircraft.

"The prisoners are used to wash down the wheel well bays before inspections, they're used to go upstairs into the flight deck of the aircraft and to clean the area out so it's ready for inspection by the local engineers," Mr Purvinas said.

Changi Prison houses Singapore's most serious criminal offenders, including those sentenced to death.

Melbourne drug trafficker Nguyen Tuong Van was hanged at Changi in December 2005 after being convicted of trying to smuggle almost 400 grams of heroin through Singapore to Australia.

Initiated by the Senate, the inquiry is looking at a bill proposed by Family First senator Stephen Fielding, which aims to offer the same protections to Jetstar that are offered to Qantas under the Qantas Sale Act.


©AAP 2007

[rammel]

QF came out to refute this straight away, but their response seemed a bit too quick. Now I don't know if this is true, but how is QF to know how a contractor in SIN gets their employees.

My personal opinion on this is that it is most likely true, just have to wait and see.

[LME-400]

It's a big call.

Hope the ALAEA isn't going down the wrong path.

[BHMvictim]

I wonder if the Singaporean govt. supplies cheap workers to Maintenance facilities? Maybe illegal immgrants from Mainland China? Work to pay for their deportation?

Could be a way to save money and look after their mates in certain companies? I wonder if they do this??

Here's and idea.... could save $$$ by having female prisoners inspect and re-pack headsets for the entertainment system.

I wonder where they get them done now?

[No SAR No Details]

There is more than one witness to back up the claim apparently.
Big call by QF to express "outrage".
What would be the public perception of QF if they not only have a prison workforce cleaning the aircraft but get caught lying about it?

[middleman]

I saw this happening first hand in Singapore 9 years ago. I was really surprised at the time. They were not really hardened criminals but Illegal immigrants (mainly Bangladeshi) bussed in every morning spending their day in shorts and thongs with a bucket of MEK and a rag, cleaning stringers in the cargo bay of D Check aircraft. At the time I was told they are made to do it for "a couple of dollars an hour" until they have earned enough to pay their flight home.
It was quite sad really. I saw so many of them washing themselves in MEK.

There were of course no QANTAS aircraft there then but I'm not surprised in the least it still goes on.

[CAVEDWELLER]

I have in the past worked in Singapore and my understanding was the government hires out illegal immigrants, uses their pay to pay for board and deportation and gives them the rest.SASCO uses them as cleaners and a fine job they do. It seemed to be mostly Cambodians when I was there, they liked the deal so much they kept returning again and again. Singapore imports everything including labour. How would Cox know about SASCO'S recruitment practices, I only found out from a local. You can't talk to them as they speak no english. Maybe we could try work for the dole or day release prisoners to match "worlds best practice".

[B A Lert]

If this is how Qantas are seeking to break the unions in Australia, their policies are nothing short of despicable. Surely Qantas conducts all necessary checks to see that its off-shore providers are paying their employees/contractors etc at least the going rate for the appropriate labour in whatever country they are in? Nothing would surprise about what would happen in the Lyin' City but if ever there was a smell of open exploitation, then this is it, be the exploited crims from Changi or a bunch of IIs trying to eke out their fare to return to the place from whence they came.

The gun is well and truly smoking.



.

[stubby jumbo]

For the first time BA Lert.....I agree with your post.:D

Must be something in the wind tonight.

Speaking of Hot Noxious Wind........or should I say-Stench. Darth and his bunch of cronies must be in the bunker as we speak-plotting Plan "B".

Bet he's wising he was hang'n out in his Wagga Pub with a few of his hick cow cocky mates in the West throwing back a few "quiet one's".

[Keg]

I like this statement in the Australian by Cox:

"If it turns out to have any legs at all and our people have sat on it and pulled it as an industrial trick, then I will be extremely upset with them because their job was to watch Qantas's back on that site," he said

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21378301-2702,00.html

So even if it did occur it's actually the engineer's fault! :ugh: :rolleyes:

[Flyingblind]

Hmmm looks like Qantas is really under the spotlight nowadays, cant even turn a trick O/S at the moment. Almost makes me sorry for GD! :{

[rammel]

This just backs up my thinking from an earlier post. QF were quick to deny it, but it seems that they don't know.

[lowerlobe]

IF there is any truth to this story and the company said yesterday that it is an outrageous fabrication then they will have complete deniability.

At about this time they will be looking for a patsy....

[Shlonghaul]

Does this mean that we now refer to Changi Airport as Stalag 13?? :E :E

[tifters]

Quote: "No prisoner in Singapore has access to any Qantas aircraft undergoing heavy maintenance."

He doesnt actually deny they are used for cleaning during normal transits/overnights.

[Toolman101]

Quote
"It was quite sad really. I saw so many of them washing themselves in MEK."

I don't suppose any one told them not to breathe it or to avoid contact with it.
I know life's cheap there, but cancer's not a pleasant way to die for anyone especially if you are unaware of danger.

They should send the QF management for a day's cleaning and let them experience how the rest of the world lives

[Kanga767]

Could you point me in the direction of information that might link cancer to exposure to MEK?

Thanks,


K

[speedbirdhouse]

This link doesn't seem to mention cancer specifically but it sounds like nasty stuff anyway.

http://www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=78-93-3

[LME-400]

Could you point me in the direction of information that might link cancer to exposure to MEK?

Thanks,


KHow about the other direction..

============================================================ ===============
Health Hazard Data
============================================================ ===============
LD50-LC50 Mixture: TLV: 200 PPM
Route Of Entry - Inhalation: YES
Route Of Entry - Skin: YES
Route Of Entry - Ingestion: YES
Health Haz Acute And Chronic: EYES: SEVERLY IRRITATING. IF NOT REMOVED
PROMPTLY, MAY RESULT IN PERMANENT DAMAGE. SKIN: PROLONGED CONTACT MAY
IRRITATE AND CAUSE DERMITITIS. INHALATION: VAPORS ARE IRRITATING TO
RESPIRATORY TRACT AND MAY AFFECT THE CNS. INGESTION: LIQUID ASPIRATED INTO
THE RESPIRATORY SYSTEM DURING INGESTION MAY CAUSE PULMONARY EDEMA.
Carcinogenicity - NTP: NO
Carcinogenicity - IARC: NO
Carcinogenicity - OSHA: NO
Explanation Carcinogenicity: THE COMPONENTS OF THIS PRODUCT HAVE NOT SHOWN
ANY EVIDENCE OF BEING CARCINOGENIC.
Signs/Symptoms Of Overexp: INHALATION: MAY CASUE HEADACHE AND DIZZINESS.
Med Cond Aggravated By Exp: NONE SPECIFIED BY MANUFACTURER.
Emergency/First Aid Proc: EYES: FLUSH WITH LARGE AMOUNT OF WATER. GET
MEDICAL ATTENTION. SKIN: REMOVE CONTAMINATED CLOTHING. WASH AREA WITH SOAP
AND WATER. GET MEDICAL ATTENTION IF IRRITATION PERSISTS. INHALATION: REMOVE
DO NOT INDUCE VOMITING. KEEP AT REST. GET MEDICAL ATTENTION.

It also seems to vary between manufactures MSDSs. One I saw indicated birth defects were possible of the sort that may increase the risk of certain cancers. (Evidence was from lab rats).

Education is king. Any educated person smelling MEK and seeing how well it cleans would be very weary of it.

http://www.temarry.com/MSDS/Methyl_Ethyl_Ketone_msds.htm
http://www.jtbaker.com/msds/englishhtml/m4628.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teratogen
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/teratogenic

[Kanga767]

Actually that's what I was subtly hinting at ;)

Although we all heard the stories (as apprentices I guess)about cancer and MEK, I have never been able to confirm it through any literature.

As a chemical, of course, it needs to be treated with respect as per the MSDS, but MEK being a prolific carcinogen, with the sort of exposure that happens in the hangar, frankly seems to be an Aviation urban legend.


K

[VR-HFX]

Prisoners on the flight deck, hookers in the aisles...what on earth is going on down there??:uhoh:

Get them all back in the office where they belong:}

[LME-400]

And remember, where MEK was, X55 wasn't far behind.
http://www.euapps.shell.com/MSDS/DownloadRtf?downloadUrl=http://sww.chemicals.shell.com/GSAPEHS/MSDS/000000001136_AU_EN.rtf

[Bellthorpe]

What a beat up!

The objective is to get the aircraft clean, is it not?

[rmm]

The objective is to get the aircraft clean, is it not?
I think it's more a case of highlighting why we struggle to compete with some of these cut price Asian facilities.
What's the cost of employing the crim compared to a legit cleaner in Oz?

[Bellthorpe]

What's the cost of employing the crim compared to a legit cleaner in Oz?

An invalid comparison. The aircraft is not in Australia.

[rmm]

An invalid comparison. The aircraft is not in Australia.

QF Engineering management would appear to think it a valid comparison

[BHMvictim]

Pull your head in Bellthorpe. You seem to be here as a troll only.
Aussie based staff are fed up to hind teeth with being referred to as "uncompetitive".
So are we to accept the few minuscule dollars/hr that the crims do in order to be competitive??
are you a kiwi by any chance??

[Bellthorpe]

Pull your head in Bellthorpe. You seem to be here as a troll only
A troll? Why, because I have a contrary view to some? No, I have no intention of pulling my head in, and every intention of stating my view.
Aussie based staff are fed up to hind teeth with being referred to as "uncompetitive"
Are you missing the point deliberately? There are no 'Aussie based staff' in Singapore to clean Qantas' aeroplanes. You see, 'Aussie based staff' are based in ... well, they're based in Australia. The aeroplanes in question are, at the time of their cleaning, in Singapore. Are you following this?
So are we to accept the few minuscule dollars/hr that the crims do in order to be competitive??
In every country in the world in which Qantas bases its aircraft, foreign nationals perform work. Catering, tyre pumping, cleaning, you name it. Sometimes their rates are higher, sometimes they are lower. But they don't compete with 'Aussie based staff'. Perhaps you are confusing this with the bigger picture of having major maintenance done overseas? That's a valid and important issue, but it's not the issue being discussed in this thread.
re u from NZ by any chance??
I'm sorry, but as an adult I find myself unable to respond to the language of SMS.

[LME-400]

Perhaps you are confusing this with the bigger picture of having major maintenance done overseas?Now I'm confused. I'm sure Heavy Maintenance, Stringers and 'D' checks were mentioned in this thread.

[Bellthorpe]

Now I'm confused. I'm sure Heavy Maintenance, Stringers and 'D' checks were mentioned in this thread

Not by me. And it's my comments to which BHMvictim took exception, resulting in my reply.

[Bumpfoh]

Outsourced heavy maintenance is precisely what the ALAEA is talking about here, and the fact that AUS based QF heavy is continually bench-marked against outfits such as SASCO who "employ" these people to conduct cleaning duties and the like.

If you are looking to get a rise out of fellow pruners you're certainly heading down the right path.:= :=

Cox wouldn't know if you were rodgering him with a hot rock up the clacker let alone the employment practices of their overseas MRO's of choice! :ugh:

[LME-400]

Oh well. I just didn't think the 'cleaning' issue was about turnarounds at the terminal.

More to do with cleaning aircraft undergoing a HM visit.

I must of thought wrong.

[fordran]

I think this link makes a few things clear

http://www.alaea.asn.au/CMS/plainText/Notices/files/160307_Prisoners%20Working%20on%20Qantas%20Aircraft.pdf

[Bellthorpe]

It does make a few things clear.

But it doesn't explain why the use of prisoners to clean aircraft is a problem.

[mrpaxing]

its called security/ and protecting/maintaining a secure environment at airports. :ugh:

[LME-400]

But it doesn't explain why the use of prisoners to clean aircraft is a problem.

You would hope there was supervision of these people such that security was not an issue.

The main issue for most is cost.

[DutchRoll]

But it doesn't explain why the use of prisoners to clean aircraft is a problem.
It is a security problem giving any type of prisoner access all around the aircraft, unless you want to have something approximating one-on-one supervision (and I bet they don't). They may be "low" security, but are they vetted in any way (I'll bet they aren't)? For god's sake, we even keep a close eye on friendly, unescorted, over-stayed VISA deportees when they're sitting on the aircraft for a few hours!

It is also a moral/ethical problem. Oh, well a relative one I guess. If you don't have any problems with child-labour philippino sweatshop workers producing textiles for the Australian market because they're cheaper and more efficient (those kids complain way less than pesky fully-paid Aussie adults), then you'd hardly have a problem with illegal immigrants and small-time criminals being forced to clean an Australian aeroplane for next-to-nothing I suppose. I mean, many people appear to have very "flexible" ethics/morals when there's money involved.

[fordran]

I can't see what the problem with it is. If we use prisoners to clean then the airline becomes more profitable, the Executives receive bigger bonuses, their wives are then happier and wish to have sex with them more often, the more sex they have the happier they become and the better they treat the remaining employees.

[hoss]

mate, i'm going to nominate you for an excel award:ok: . QF need more people like you;) .

[Oh Please]

A statement based on hearsay. Not admissable in court - with absolutely evidence to support it.

And what do we get - a confidential reporting system implemented by the ALAEA. For god's sake - CASA has one, Qantas has one, the press have one. I guess the ALAEA have to have something to divert the public from critical appraisal of employment T&Cs whenever the ALAEA come up with the latest outrageous wage claim.

Aircraft safety is a collaboration of staff, company, and regulator. The ALAEA could have a passionate, vital, leadership role in aviation safety. So why is it that this association only brings it up when it has an industrial barrow to push? It seems that they too subscribe to the mantra - safety costs, because it only seems to be important when they seek to line there own pockets.

This statement is a slap in the face of aviation professionals working in this country from regulator thru to the guy turning the spanner. I am ashamed.

[No SAR No Details]

You need to look at the context that the matter was raised. It was in a senate inquiry attempting to save your industry by highlighting the quality differences between "us and them"