Kangaroo Court!

[rudderless1]

From the Avalon thread

Interesting... when you damage a plane, Qantas spokesman David Cox said workers involved in the incident had been stood down “pending a full investigation”. . When you sell of the company Dixon said the $A11 billion ($US9 billion) deal from the consortium Airline Partners Australia (APA) had been "clouded by emotion", as board members and management stood to make huge personal gains."The real Achilles' heel was that it got very, very emotional -- principally because I and the senior management team were going to earn tens of millions of dollars as part of it. Go figure
fix767 is offline Report Post Reply

The question is these clowns were intent on and would have sent QF broke if the bid had not failed!

Why do they retain there stewardship?
Why did they still get their bonus's?
Why were they not stood down?
Why does the Government and community accept this?
Why do the shareholders accept it?
Why are we so willing and content to screw and condemn those on the floor for such a relatively small F up?

:confused::sad:

[mmciau]

I'd suggest that many of Australia's big public companies have majority shareholders that are 'institutions'.

It is 'nigh impossible' for an institution to be 'moral and ethical' when its sole responsibility is to achieve best dividend for itself!

While the Qantas theatre was going on, all the institutions would be doing was 'get us the best dollar!!'

Mike

[Wingspar]

spot on!

The institutions, who call the shots, are happy if they get max coin!

[3 Holer]

Wingspar & mmciau are spot on the money with their observations and QF didn't go broke so the rest is ..............HISTORY!:ouch:

[lowerlobe]

and QF didn't go broke so the rest is ..............HISTORY!
3 Holer....So if someone were to walk into a crowded shopping center and wave a handgun around but in the end decided not to fire it and so just walked away......is there no case to answer to...

With your argument no one was hurt and everyone went home happy for that outcome to be realised......you are saying that it's all history and therefore no investigation is needed at all.....

[DutchRoll]

The institutional morality involved is kind of like taking rent from a mob boss who is using your place as a base for running his money laundering program, his assassination business, and his massage parlour empire.

You're getting good money, and you're not doing anything "wrong" yourself, so you don't really care as long as the money keeps rolling in.

That's how Corporate ethics works these days. Don't ask, don't tell. Just keep banking the cheques.

[3 Holer]

lowerlobe, your gun toting scenario is totally different to what we are talking about here. Waving a gun around a shopping centre is a criminal act and defined so by law.

The corporate cowboys always seem to stay within the "law" and provided no one gets shot (read: loses job), no one gives a rat's arse about their ethics.

In fact, Dutch Roll has summed it up perfectly.

[lowerlobe]

3 Holer...For obvious reasons I'm not suggesting that anyone on the Qantas board did anything which could be considered a criminal act....

My point was that simply because something has occurred in the past and is therefore part of history it does not preclude an investigation because the takeover did not proceed and is history...

[Whiskery]

..........it does not preclude an investigation because the takeover did not proceed and is history...

Want a bet on it ?

As already stated - Dutch Roll has summed it up perfectly.

[flyinggit]

Corporate thieves & white collar crime is rampant in OZ & beyond the moral laws of our society. QF are just part of that 'industry' I believe. My father thinks QF or more to the point Dixson ought to be ashamed of himself & he's involved in the corporate sector & isn't proud of some things that go on within.

I like yr analogy 'DutchRoll'



Flyinggit

[Pinky the pilot]

Corporate ethics

A contradiction in terms these days Dutchy, don't you reckon?:hmm:
Good analogy btw.:ok: