QANTAS Base maintenance sydney restructure ?

[cementhead]

I have heard

20 base crews reduced to 10
10 avonics crews reduced to 5
5 airbus crews to stay 5

not sure about numbers but maybe the same, union wants to be involved in process. Any of you guys hear anything, Has this legs?.

[600ft-lb]

It does make sense, better co-ordination of available manpower and bigger crews. The only problem is that they have to continue to pay the leading hands leading hand money for 2 years.

[Big Unit]

Just a rumour cementhead. Meeting tomoz to put forward some ideas. Lets hope the outcome is even and not biased towards either side in particular (330 and boeing).

[nut turner]

Any ideas come out of the meeting?
It seems to me that 10 crews or 20 crews doesn't change the head count.:confused: We still need more people for the work at this point in time.

[numbskull]

sounds QF like shuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic. As nut turner says- the head count is still the same!!

[Short_Circuit]

10 avonics crews reduced to 5
So that makes one crew per shift, so who will do the A chks
while the one crew does the day & night stoppers, the Int & Dom hand-me-downs. :ugh::ugh::ugh:
We need more crews not less.

[company_spy]

Don't get your knickers in a knot, despite being presented with some inovative and "out of the square" ideas, the ops managers decided to do absolutely nothing. all stays as is. they have not one clue.

[hadagutfull]

Is the ops managers job to find a way to implement the managements plans, or stop the stupidity flowing back to the floor???

Might be time to bring the 380 back into the stable so there is a better utilization of manpower...?

[nut turner]

The ops managers job it appears is to create confusion and disharmony, therefore taking the focus off theirs and managements ineptness.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Hi all,


I know there has been a fair bit of rumour and some mixed messages coming from the various meetings that have taken place. Can some of you please give me some assistance here by posting your ideas in this anonymous manner regarding the following three issues.


How do you feel about composite crews in Base Maint (please forget about the side issues such as rosters and SLII numbers, mainly interested in the idea of working cross trade)
Are there too many layers of management for BM engineers and are the ops managers necessary?
Should the 330 and Boeing crews be combined (forget about crew size atm)?

On Fri we will be meeting with Snr managers over various issues. Your input here will help me form an opinion on how BM should operate into the future. I also recommend members not waste their time attending the chat fests that have been taking place. I think there are a number of junior managers who would struggle to organize a p#ss up in a brewery.

cheers
Steve

[The Bungeyed Bandit]

Steve,

This is a very Sydney centric topic but let me put my 2 bobs worth in.

On point (1). For some reason, managers in Sydney have for a long time wanted to have composite crews. I think the main reason for this is they believe that they can build up crew strengths to 12 men each and at the same time halve the crew numbers. This enables them to decrease the required amount of LAMES on type by splitting the crew up during a shift and getting them to work on multiple aircraft at any one time. It also decreases the amount of Leading Hands required. Having a crew of 12 or more works OK on an "A" Check but splits the crew on layovers. I personally have no problem working across trades but I'm not sure about anyone else.

Point (2). Apparently at the last Road Show the Little Leprechaun stated it was his desire to have no more than 7 layers between him and the bloke on the lowest rung of the ladder. Now if you take apprentices, AME and LAMES as all being on the lowest rung then 7 steps takes you to Cox. If you take them separately then you only get to Hespe. Now, I don't know about you guys but if a was a recently made up Ops Manager who, let's face it, were only employed in that postion to be used as strike breakers during the last PIA, my sphincter would be twitching a bit. Their usefullness to the company is now superfluous and if they are to stay, I don't think I should have to go to them to get permission just to replace my uniform.

Point (3). Yes, the Boeing and 330 crews should be combined although I would word that statement differently. The 330 crew should be melded into the existing Base Maintenance Crews. Any new aircraft type requires specialist crews to be made up but once all the teething troubles are ironed out and that new type has been bedded in there is no requirenment for them so long as there is enough licence coverage. This is especially true when the number of that aircraft type starts to exceed the number of aircraft type they are replacing. It is for this reason that the 380 should eventually be melded into the Base Maintenance structure instead of being run in the elitist fashion that it is now. The Fat Controller has a lot to answer for.

End of rant.

I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired!!!

[Ngineer]

If we are going to contemplate running comp crews in base, we have to move forward with this carefully to ensure that we have required minimum mech & sparkies per crew, and approp LAME numbers.

Atm we sometimes run with crew strentghs of 1+6 (sometimes better or worse). This number may drop off as staff numbers continue to decline. Under a comp crew structure, it will be lower still. A quick look at the 330 crews seems to prove this. Have you ever seen them operate with one or two avionic guys for example? And when they do, just ask them what it is like on a busy night.

Composite crews work well, but can also mask deficiencies in manpower.

Also, as we are becoming more flexible and productive for our employer, we should be asking for something in return for our efforts. It seems that this would be better suited for an EBA arena or other negotiating. Other area's/crews seem to have had this brought in by stealth. If the next EBA turns sour again, it will leave us all wondering why we bothered helping them out. WIIFM?

[Short_Circuit]

1/ Composite crew = Jack of all trades, master of none.

2/ Mechanical Vs Avionic work is completely opposite in manpower allocation. Where mech crews labour all day on 1 or 2 aircraft changing wheels & brakes, valves & actuators, topping oils & hydraulics, fixing leaks, towing to the run bay, etc etc avionics swoop in change a few boxes & relays, top the oxy, put in demands and flutter off to another & another aircraft, later returning to fit the bits that has been delivered. Its the nature of the work. To be put on a composite crew there will be no working 3 a/c at a time because avionic skills will be wasted on changing wheels & brakes instead of doing what we have trained to do. Remember there are twice the number of mech crews than avionic crews to cover the same number of A/C. Then, when there is a major wiring problem the reverse happens.

3/ To do a full 744 A check, takes 2 crews of avionics (16 plus) there would have to be 4 composite crews each shift on one A chk just to get the avionic work done. The mechanical trades have enough on their plate doing mechanical A chk work and would not be able to assist their sparky brothers and vice versa. Then who would do the cabin A chk and rectify the 120 odd DR&Rs

4/ The use of specialist crews aka 400 crews & 330 crews and lets not forget TEAM A380, may be good for the first few years until the A/C numbers build. It gives time to train enough LAMEs on type and have them return to normal crews as in the 400s. The FIVE 330 crews have gone on way too long and now the other 40 Boeing crews have not had exposure wasting valuable years of learning where we all could now be kicking 330s over the fence at a great rate of knots. But unfortunately the 330 sit on the ground all day waiting for the ONE 330 crew to finish the 3 other A/C before it. There was none of this rubbish when the 767 was introduced. In its time it was a very advanced piece of kit compared to the 747 classic but there was no problem because we all had exposure to it from day one.

5/ Composite crews may be great for transiting A/C, top the oils, kick the tyres and apply a few MELs but when it is time to fix them, see point 2 above… Composite will not fix the manpower shortage problem management have created, X number of LAMEs equals X no matter how many times you juggle, split & rejoin them only TRAINING will increase the numbers.

6/ I could go on and on but enough said…

[The Bungeyed Bandit]

Gee Mr Wobbles, nice to see you've sobered up.

[Millet Fanger]

A330 crews have sort of worked because one LAME was willing to 'supervise' ames working on 3 a/c at the same time in different locations. Unfortunately, the managers were too busy counting their bonuses to notice the shortage of trained, experienced LAMEs required to run the place.

The managers can't even come up with a plan to fix their problem, they have left it to a wee lad.

How about putting on a sh!t load of courses and drag half of MW back onto the floor for the next six months. Everybody might learn something!

[Short_Circuit]

one LAME was willing to 'supervise' ames working on 3 a/c at the same time in different locations.
Crikey .. Dont let C@S@ get wind of that. :eek:

[tjc]

Composite crews do not work in a semi - heavy environment; ie A Check, SA, HC.

Composite crews work on Line Transit and Overnight aircraft.

For semi heavy you need specialist personnel or the product will decline. The product declining have flow on effects for Line Aircraft. That is nil time so more MELs , deferring / overrunning time-ex work or OSIP.

Then you load up Line and .....you need more specialist on Line to fix flow ons etc; so you rob Base specialists of manpower.

Its a cycle that we have seen before, its not rocket science.

Remember the days of Block, Heavy, then A Checks then Line 1 / Line 2.

Oh, they were the days.

[Ngineer]

Maybe we can ask them to provide us with a business case first.

[company_spy]

Ask the guys working the composite crews at the moment candidly weather they actually work cross trade. If they answer truthfully you will find the only time they are "composite" is at the table in the smoko room. As someone pointed out the other day, we work very closely with the cross trade crews we line up with on shift now any way, where required (eng change etc) we adapt to a certain exetent to be composite. Composite crews will never work across three or more a/c types in Base Maint.

There are way too many layers of management. When you don't know who to approach with a problem, there are too many managers, and it allows them to pass the buck to easily. What (appart from signing uniform chits) do the ops managers do???????

Personally I could care less if the 330 is folded back into base, however if it were my business I would want a flexible workforce that could aquit any work on any a/c required, a more visible headcount. I would not want "streamed" or "boutique" pockets of people who are limited in what they can do.

[MR WOBBLES]

forget composites how is this for restruturing

SOURCE:Air Transport Intelligence news
MAS Engineering hopes to maintain Qantas aircraft
By Leithen Francis (mhtml:{DB83A929-885B-4527-B8B3-03D71870CD2F}mid://00000013/!x-usc:mailto:[email protected])


(Re-releases to add Qantas comment)
Malaysia Airlines Engineering and Maintenance (MAS EM) is hoping Qantas Airways will send some of its aircraft to Malaysia for heavy maintenance checks.
MAS EM senior general manager Roslan Ismail said in an interview that he is hoping Qantas may have heavy maintenance checks on Airbus A380s as well as Airbus A330s and some of its Boeing 747s done in Malaysia rather than Australia.
He also says MAS EM and Qantas are proceeding with plans to establish a joint venture that will utilise MAS EM's heavy maintenance facilities in Kuala Lumpur.
He says the two sides were originally planning to start the venture in this year's third quarter but now it will start in next year's first or second quarter.
"They [Qantas' maintenance and engineering bosses] said give them a few months to sort things out," he says.
"They have a new CEO at Qantas and they have this union problem."
Qantas executive general manager government and corporate affairs David Epstein says, however, that there are no immediate plans to send aircraft to Malaysia for maintenance work.
He says it is too early to make decisions on A380 work and there are no plans to send 747s to Malaysia as this work is carried out in Australia..
He also says Qantas has been in talks with its engineering workforce about having A330 work carried out at Qantas' maintenance base in Brisbane.
In addition, Epstein says no discussions are currently taking place on the proposed MRO joint venture with MAS, adding that it will not be possible to have it operating early next year as Roslan hopes.
Qantas appointed Alan Joyce as new CEO late last year and the unions in Australia are opposed to efforts to outsource work overseas.
But MAS EM has made inroads with Australia's Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), the regulatory body that needs to be won over if Qantas is to be permitted to outsource work to Malaysia.
CASA has already granted MAS EM regulatory approval to work on Australian-registered A330s, Boeing 737s and 747s.
MAS EM is well placed to get A380 work because Roslan says Qantas has no A380 hangar, although Epstein says Qantas has a 747 hangar at Sydney Airport that has been altered to accommodate A380s.
Roslan says MAS EM has a purpose-built aircraft hangar at Kuala Lumpur International Airport that can fit two A380s and one other widebody simultaneously.
Malaysia Airlines has ordered six A380s with the first to be delivered in January 2011. But MAS EM needs to have 20-25 A380s to work on to justify the investment in equipment to carry out A380 maintenance, says Roslan, adding that it is hoping Qantas can provide the necessary aircraft.
The Australian carrier has already come to loggerheads in the past with unions over efforts to get work done in Malaysia.
A few years ago Qantas was looking to get MAS EM to convert some of its 737-300s to freighters. But following union pressure, Qantas ended up doing the work in Australia at its facility in Avalon near Melbourne.

[company_spy]

Maybe the Malasians have let the cat out of the bag Mr. Wobbles... I wonder if MAS EM has ops managers??

[Ngineer]

Where else did you think the A380 would have major maint done? Down under? Youve got to be kidding.

The spirit of Australia.

[chockchucker]

Doubt very much that you'll see any 737 work return to Malaysia. particularly after the VH-TJU debacle.

If the performance was repeated on a 744, A330 or A380 I'm fairly sure it would be well highlighted to the media and Qantas well know it.:ok:

[QF22]

I had the misfortune to work there last year.
The locals call Hangars 5 and 6 at KLIA "The Qantas hangars"
If QF send any type of aircraft there, they have rocks in their heads.
The worst place I have ever worked.
Hangars are ok, everything else is crap !

[ampclamp]

How do you feel about composite crews in Base Maint (please forget about the side issues such as rosters and SLII numbers, mainly interested in the idea of working cross trade) No we do what we were trained to do within current awards, no favours no trial without payback and serious ananlysis of the ramifications for safety and our members well being
Are there too many layers of management for BM engineers and are the ops managers necessary? OK my area is not base but...as an indicator...Some of the Ops managers seem to be OK.Are they req'd? In reality they should be be given some have good hands experience.But thee are clearly too many layers and mr Joyce knows it.Apprentice,AME,LAME,Snr LAME (plus its various levels) DMM or the equivalent, Ops manager,then another level I'm not sure what he's called but ours has a nice "Timber" to it) then donut king or the equivalent and they are just the levels I personally speak to let alone the more lofty levels.
Should the 330 and Boeing crews be combined (forget about crew size atm)? Yes of course they should.More people on the panic jobs, less empires(not that that is an issue!:ugh::yuk: ) Skill sharing and from a company perspective if you allow specialisation you leave yourself open to more radicalisation and targeted industrial tactics in the future so rather than separating the trouble you breed it.When the novelty of the shiny new big jet wears off they'll know.

[Short_Circuit]

Looking at Saturday Night workload the Composite Bus Boys have 8 A/C
to service tonight, one an A chk, with 8 people, that does not compute!
1 A/C per person on the crew!

I hope the 330 LAMEs carry out proper supervision of the AMEs. :rolleyes:

[NWT]

Just wait till you have your licence changed to the wonderfull JAR66 type....B1 covering most of B2's routine work (especially line maint). Cross trade normal, multiple aircraft types worked is the norm. I work on 4 different types at any one time. Never done any different...very inefficient to have crews only working one aircraft type..

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

G'day all,

Thanks for those who have taken the time to help me with these questions. The Ops Managers don't seem to have too much support. I think Qantas can do without them. The other questions however will see many opinions put forward and an outcome that some will not support if changes are or aren't made.

The composite crew issue appears to be the most contentious one. I understand that the Jack of all trades may not work in Base. I think it does on the tarmac and as an Avionics LAME who worked in a composite situation for 12 years, I have no problem doing a wheel change and to some extent enjoyed the change. The other complications with Mech crews assigned to one aircraft and the Av crews moving about may also make it hard.

330 and Boeing combined crews seems to be the go. Unless I am directed otherwise, this will be the ALAEA position. We do not however support the 10 legacy 20 combined crew concept. It is either all or nothing.

Some have indicated that we should be demanding payments or some other recompense for changes. Without being too specific, there are some decisions that management could make and we would not be able to do anything about them. We have seen that many times in the past and sure we will in the future. The ALAEA just tries to get in early to make sure that the stupid decisions of the past such as the closure of SHM and the appointment of Ops Managers doesn't occur again.

When talk of restructure is about there is one thing we can always object to. That is rosters. If it is extended hours, 66% of the LAMEs must accept it and without this Agreement, the whole thing falls apart.

cheers
Steve

[Short_Circuit]

Please don't get my wrong. Most avionics would not have a problem doing mechanical tasks and vice versa and would enjoy the break in routine, however, it would not be best use of trade specific manpower nor would it speed up the rectification rate.

I am worried that some manager (trying to make a name for himself) will make a rash decision and destroy what worked for 80 years in one moment of madness that would be impossible to reverse, destroy the jobs and livelihood of our people and our department.

PS
If they want ATLAS back, I believe we should have a payment as there is a lot of extra work & study involved to keep current to their procedures. QF are profiting from it, so should we all.

[mahatmacoat]

Qantas to axe 100 top execs: report

Qantas Airways Ltd is reportedly preparing to slash around 100 senior executive staff, as new chief Alan Joyce finalises a review of the carrier's management structure.



Oh to be an Ops Manager. Murray promised me a job for life.

[Clipped]

there are some decisions that management could make and we would not be able to do anything about them. We have seen that many times in the past and sure we will in the future. The ALAEA just tries to get in early to make sure that the stupid decisions of the past such as

Throwing away the ANZ contract, and all those other customers that had provided steady revenue streams for all these years. Doubling and tripling the handling contract rates and then blaming LAMEs as too expensive, what business acumen.

Buggery in every sense.

[Short_Circuit]

100 execs sacked,,,, wont even notice they are gone, not deep enough.

[tech-line]

where I work we don't have the segragation that appears to be present at QF, on any given night I/we are expected to work on 4 different types be it boeing or airbus.
That is the right way being trained on all types so there is always someone who can take up the slack orshare a problem with.
Never thought you could have a segragated team on a "special" fleet.
Oh well what would I know.

[Ngineer]

Sounds like a great place to work Tech-Line. :ok: Reminds me of our workplace many years ago. It would be nice to see them back again.

Either way, its a good thing the ALAEA has jumped on this topic. The last thing we need is a handfull of SNR LAME's whipping the crap out of the boys whilst chasing their own pocket-book ambitions, or trying to prove something. This should be a group effort with all onboard.

[Short_Circuit]

With the imminent departure of D Cox from engineering and the bringing of QE back from segregation, it is a no brainer that eliminating the current split between Boeing and Airbus (A330) crews was needed to answer the manpower problem plaguing SYD Base for some years.
It is a disgrace that we have wasted so many years of on the job experience under the rule of the fool(s) at the top. There are hundreds of highly experienced engineers ready to jump in and fix the problem, as has been relayed up the ladder, but ignored to the detriment of our group. It is also a no brainer that training the senior (older) LAMEs that are capped out and here for the long run will not cost the company any increase of wages for the new licences because of the quota capping pay system (what genius worked that out, all be it too late).
Is there some sense of intelligent space being displayed here?
Is someone rebuilding the bridge of trust?
Only time will tell and here’s hoping.

[Redstone]

Well it seems there is going to be a few more managers leaving soon, particularly from SYD BASE MAINT, it will be interesting to see who gets to sit in the big chair and what implications that has for the 3 ops managers

[Ngineer]

Well it seems there is going to be a few more managers leaving soon

I sincerely hope you are right mate. Management are again sprouting off that there will be no-more new LAME's made up, further cut backs in training, etc. Still not listening to most of the workforce. Things have not changed since MH's demise. We are still going along the same path. Things will come to an enormous grinding halt before long. Its a shame to see our business contracting whilst others in the same field are moving forward.

GH has had enough time to show that he is not capable of running the business. He doesnt seem to have any control over business matters, and does not claim responsibility for some decisions of late. Move along please.

[blackhand]

Respect to you blokes working on the big machines.
Spent my life working in GA and helicopter maintenance.
I was once pinged by CASA for not being present in the hanger while one of my AMEs changed a wheel on Cessna 206 for " not being present to supervise unlicenced maintenance engineer" At the time I was working on an aircraft in the next hanger.

So how does it work for High Capacity RPT LAMEs?

From reading this thread there seems to be a different meaning for "Direct Supervision" for group 20 Aircraft.

Blackhand

[Short_Circuit]

I assure you that when AME's are working our Grp 20, there will be a LAME at the A/C, if none avail the A/C work will have to wait, (speaking for Boeing crews only of cause). :ok:

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

I was once pinged by CASA for not being present in the hanger while one of my AMEs changed a wheel on Cessna 206 for " not being present to supervise unlicenced maintenance engineer" At the time I was working on an aircraft in the next hanger.

I would love to know more about this one mate. Please send me a pm if you can. reason?

Qantas docked the wages of 4 LAMEs because they refused to work unsupervised on a 747-300 aircraft at Tullamarine. There was no 747-300 licence holder on the airport whatsoever and we have reported the event to CASA. They won't give us a straight answer over this incident yet from what you are saying there appears to be very strict guidelines outside Qf.

[The Original Jetpipe]

Sorry to steal the thread.....but say you joined Qantas as an AME with CASA and EASA licenses, what would be the "procedure" for obtaining a type course on a company aircraft? Is there a waiting list or is it as "rumoured" who you drink/play golf/ski with that helps you get place on a course? it seems they require more LAMES but are not willing to train or pay for the people they want?

Regards
TOJP.