Borghetti Gone..........

[ron burgandy]

Guess he never really got over not getting the top job:ouch:

[Shlonghaul]

And LG as Executive Mgr. Customer & Marketing :rolleyes:

DEPARTURE OF MR JOHN BORGHETTI
GROUP EXECUTIVE – QANTAS AIRLINES


It is with sadness that I announce Mr John Borghetti, Group Executive – Qantas Airlines, will leave the company with effect from 4 May 2009.

It is no coincidence that 4 May 2009 is the 36th anniversary of John commencing his career with Qantas. While we are disappointed that he is leaving, we respect his view that thirty-six years with one employer definitely shows commitment over and above the norm.

John has made a very considerable contribution to the Qantas executive team since my appointment as CEO and I would like to thank him personally for this and for his long-term commitment to the company, its employees, customers and shareholders.

He has been generous with both his time and knowledge as we have been going through the difficult task of putting a new management structure in place at Qantas.

John leaves knowing our succession planning has developed a new generation of senior leaders who are well-prepared to take over the reins.

On behalf of the Board and all the team at Qantas, I wish John all the best in his future endeavours. We will not forget his contribution.

During his career at Qantas, John has notched up some major achievements, making Qantas a world-leader when it comes to airline product innovation and service delivery. John’s significant contribution to the Qantas Group’s commercial strategy should also be recognised.

John developed the world’s best airport lounges, he enlisted the services of great creative spirits like Neil Perry and Marc Newson, his vision led to the Qantas A380 being the world’s first designer passenger aircraft and, most recently, he drove the creation of our new $10m Centre of Service Excellence.

John Borghetti’s departure will trigger some changes to senior executive responsibilities. Mr Rob Gurney will be appointed to the Executive Committee in the role of Group Executive – Qantas Airlines, Commercial, as will Ms Lesley Grant as Executive Manager – Customer and Marketing, reporting directly to me.

Rob Gurney has more than 20 years experience in commercial aviation, gained with two of the world's leading airlines, Qantas and British Airways. He was appointed to the role of Group General Manager Sales and Distribution for Qantas Airlines in October 2003.

Lesley Grant was appointed Group General Manager Customer, Product and Service in Qantas Airways in May 2002. Before joining Qantas Airways, Lesley was the Senior Vice President Customer Service at Ansett/Air New Zealand Group. Lesley has been a Director of UNICEF Australia since June 2006 and is a member of the Chief Executive Women organisation.



Alan Joyce

[Sunfish]

From The Age this morning:

Last of the Dixon-era lieutenants leaves Qantas
Matt O'Sullivan
April 8, 2009

THE last vestiges of the Geoff Dixon-era at Qantas are about to be erased after the airline's third-in-charge, John Borghetti, announced his departure.

The decision by the 36-year veteran of Qantas to leave without a job to go to comes just two weeks after the airline slashed its senior management team by 20 per cent, or 90 jobs.

Mr Borghetti was expected to leave last year after he missed out on the top job at Qantas to Alan Joyce, but the company said at the time that he had "indicated" he would remain.

Qantas denied suggestions he had been forced out amid the major changes to the senior management team in the months after Mr Joyce's appointment.

Mr Joyce said in a statement that Mr Borghetti had recently discussed his role at the company with him. "While we are disappointed that he is leaving, we respect his view that 36 years with one employer definitely shows commitment over and above the norm," he said.

His sudden departure — he is to leave in three weeks — has left Qantas having to appoint two managers to fill his shoes. The sales and marketing chief, Rob Gurney, will take over the role of group executive of Qantas Airlines commercial while Lesley Grant will assume the title of executive manager of customer and marketing. She will report directly to Mr Joyce.

However, further changes in the senior management ranks have left some investors critical of the airline's ability to manage its way through the worst downturn in at least a decade.

"I would feel a lot more comfortable if (Peter) Gregg and Borghetti were there with Joyce," a fund manager said. "It's bloody ridiculous how they have turned over their senior management team."

Peter Gregg, the key architect of the airline under previous boss Geoff Dixon, resigned in August, just a fortnight after he was overlooked for the airline's top job in favour of Mr Joyce.

[737 guru]

Interesting times ahead for the White Rat, lets see how long it will be before Jet* are competing directly with the main line on key routes at the peak times........:hmm::hmm::hmm:

[C441]

Whilst not saddened to see some other senior managers leave over the course of the last 12 months I am disappointed to see John Borghetti leave.

As some one who has been with Qantas for 23 years, I saw John Borghetti as one of the few (if not the only) senior manager who saw a place for a Premium service airline in the future of Qantas. I suspect that is possibly one of the is reasons he has chosen to take a different path.

[RAD_ALT_ALIVE]

Of course there's a place for a premium-service airline in the future of the Qantas Group.

It's called ETIHAD!:ok:

[Fruet Mich]

Hmm, I'm thinking he and many of the other high paying long serving Qantas management are having somewhat differing opinions to the future of Qantas to that of the little Irishman and his new vision management. It'll be a shame if he does go down the low cost road and distroy a fantastic brand. Shame to see John go.

[Richard Kranium]

Well this is indicative of modern day corporate garbage, the leprechaun has surounded himself with consumate kiss arse yes men and women.

I find it funny when the leprechaun says "John leaves knowing our succession planning has developed a new generation of senior leaders who are well repared to take over the reins"...I would say, well and more than prepared to be consumate "Greasy Pole Climbers".

I must be outdated, I don't go along with this new fandangled style of management, for me its the office goffer that climbs to the top job, the leprechaun, what did he do for Ansett, Jet* and now he is in Q...why?.

All we need to look around the world at these so called money gurus who ran all these banks and investment companies who have created this world financial catastrophy. Can you imagine the position Q would have been in now if "trickie Dickie" got his sale through to that symbol of disgust Macquarie Bank so that he could with his kiss arse greasy pole climbers could pocket millions of $'s.:yuk:

[redhawk37]

Hey loosing Dixon, Gregg and Borghetti basically in one go is pretty **** planning by the Board. Word is that the little Irishman is now running the top office in a culture of fear (code word "enagagement") and the board is beggining to wonder if the 3 New Amigos from Jetstar, Joyce, Hall and Buchanan are simply "one trick pony's"! Its one thing to live off the scraps of the parents for a number of years but where is the real growth?? JQ say its in international but any analysis shows that they have just managed to make the difficult skinny routes from Qantas work because of their lower cost base.

Apparently there is a real strategic vacuum at the top now that Gregg has gone and the Board is questioning Cliffords apaling treatment of both he and Borghetti. It was actually Gregg who stood up and told Clifford the BA merger was not a good deal for Qantas - another reason for his demise. The pressure is now on the 3 New Amigos to show that they can actually grow and build a business rather than cut, slash and sack!

I dont reckon its in their DNA! Some of the stories that are floating about concerning the jokes and laughter from the Jetstar mafia around the Excom table when all the sackings were forced on the managers - one of Joyce's Jetstar cronies gloating that it took 4 hours only to identify the 5000 who would be sacked, including individuals who's faces do not fit the new "young and focused" look.

Its not often you feel sorry for the QF senior managers but QCA is a pretty ugly place these days - get ready for "enagement" people!

[ditch handle]

Quote-

"Its not often you feel sorry for the QF senior managers but QCA is a pretty ugly place these days - get ready for "enagement" people!"

_______________

Just like QCC1 has been for the last eight years.

What? The self serving, parasitic trough feeders no longer feeling the love now that their benefactor is gone ?

Excuse me if my heart doesn't bleed :rolleyes:

[blueloo]

Have to agree - I am not sorry to see the "leeches" go. None of them stuck up for the staff before - so its just the wheel coming full circle.

In ye olde times I would say "Off with their heads!"

[Keg]

JQ say its in international but any analysis shows that they have just managed to make the difficult skinny routes from Qantas work because of their lower cost base.

Wasn't that the point of JQ in the first place? To expand into routes that QF couldn't turn a profit on? Admittedly I don't like a formula that sees them taking over routes that we were already present on and making a profit but I've got no problems with them taking up the 'skinny' routes where we weren't previously.

[Oriana]

So Keg, as competing airlines undercut QF profitability on competing routes, are you going to take a pay cut to help lower costs?

[Ken Borough]

Oriana,

Your question should have read "So Keg, as competing airlines undercut QF profitability on competing routes, are you going to take a pay cut and/or work at less beneficial, but more realistic, terms and conditions to help lower costs?"

Without wanting to pre-empt Keg's response or diminish his exalted status, do you really want an honest answer that would cause him much embarrassment - whichever way he elects to answer your challenge. :}

[Wod]

Whoah!!

Two different models, not related to payscales fundamentally.

High cost is interline bags and passengers between airlines, and have a res system and baggage handling system which supports that.

Low cost is point to point trips. We don't know, or want to know, about whatever on-carriage arrangements you might have. We have a (cheaper) res system and baggage handling system which supports that.

Big biccies right there.

[Capt Kremin]

I'd happily take a pay cut now (via a lower divisor) if some way could be worked out to share more evenly the spoils when the good times return.
Under Dixon however, there never were good times. There was always a crisis brewing somewhere that meant that the workers in the company never got the bounty the upper level management always seemed to find.
So I agree... F%$# em.

[Oriana]

No Ken, my question should not have read with your embellishment - nor was it a challenge.

Please don't confuse this writer with some sort of management stooge - if I had my way, we'd all be working for more money, and a greater share of the profits too.:ok:

In all honesty, I was displeased at the 'let them have the crumbs' attitude - whether it was intended to be that way, or not - of Keg's post.

Whilst people working at JQ are resented by (some) mainline crews - and there are a few vocal usual suspects on here that carry a pathological hurt about it - the reality is if that arm of the group wasn't there, whether routes or services or whatever are 'gifted', or the numbers 'cooked' or 'fiddled' or "add your snide allegation ad-nauseum' , then there would be a greater market share taken by non-group companies like Virgin, Tiger of "insert name here" airways.

It's a simple equation really: whoever in the group does it cheaper, gets the lines. And, according to management, JQ here in Australia is not cheap enough - to whit, JQ NZ.

[blow.n.gasket]

Sorry Oriana , have to disagree.
Jetstar was Geoffs bastard love child.
A reflection of it's creators ,life given unto it as a result of WorkChoices.
Qantas pilots were never given a chance to participate in any Board decisions to "take on' the likes of Virgin.In fact Qantas pilots were actively lied to and manipulated by management during the creation of JetStar.
Is it any wonder there is underlying resentment there amongst Mainline pilots,particularly when there was already a Qantas sanctioned "lower cost model" under way in the form of 'Australian Airlines' in Cairns.
Who's to say AIPA and Qantas pilots would not have rallied to make a go of that model when things got tough?
Then along came WorkChoices and Dixon saw a way to circumvent the Unions and force workers onto AWA's , boast about the lower cost structures ,the efficiency gains etc,etc, I wonder what that would have done for the share price and the APA bid and senior managements pockets if all had panned out as hoped for,well that appears to have been the plan. A plan that has not exactly gone as envisaged.

So don't give me that crap about dinosaur's etc, it doesn't wash.

There will be a realignment of conditions and expectations, yet for most people an evolutionary rate is easier for people to get used to,or at least can be bought along with the realisation, However ,Dixon ,through WorkChoices and a compliant government saw a way to force "revolutionary" change on the Australian workforce, that is why Jetstar is here. That is why Management created Jetstar and why they are looking to NZ to further screw down wages and conditions, because they can. Doesn't mean they are right though, and doesn't mean Qantas pilots can't change if given a chance.

[Oriana]

Surprise, surprise, Blown Gasket shows up.:rolleyes:

Where in my post did I mention anything about dinosaurs??:hmm:

Realistically, how much of your pay and conditions would you have sacrificed in order to keep the domestic flying? Would you have accepted 90hrs/months for $100K as an FO and accept LOCO type T & C's? If you were a 737 or 767 driver, and you had to take a big hit in pay and rostering because management consider crew wages a legitimate target in cost cutting measures in order to compete with the likes of Virgin/Tiger/Lion etc., yet the Pacific Barons didn't have to sacrifice one scabby shekel off their wages - would you still be willing to change???

[Keg]

In all honesty, I was displeased at the 'let them have the crumbs' attitude - whether it was intended to be that way, or not - of Keg's post.

WTF? I think you need to improve your comprehension Oriana. My original comments defending J*s role were in response to Redhawk's attack.

I then went on to voice my concern about the perversion of the originally stated J* role into simply taking over routes that QF has been turning a dime on. Blown.n.gasket covers that issue off in more depth though so I won't bother responding.

By all means continue to delude yourself that I and (some) others have a pathological hurt about J*. In that respect your confirmation bias that my comments were designed to comment adversely on the J* role is the most telling part of the discussion thus far. :rolleyes:

Have a nice night.

[blow.n.gasket]

Surprise surprise ,Oriana comes back for more!
Read what I wrote ,sport.
The only reason JetStar exists is because of Government conniving.
Under the pre-Howard meddled Corporations Act Qantas would not have been able to "transmit business" to JetStar which wouldn't have existed anyway!
So your hypothesis regarding how much Qantas pilots would have had to sacrifice to prevent flying being siphoned off is just that ,hypothetical.
Who knows what would have occured if JetStar wasn't given a WorkChoices conceived ceasarian birth?
The big question will be, what will happen going into the future?

Your jibe regarding the barons though is spot on.

I think you have totally misconstrued what Qantas pilots are upset about.
JetStar is here, granted. However if we had a Qantas management that actually managed the whole JetStar birthing process rather than Management using JetStar to try and metaphorically industrially castrate Qantas then the whole birthing process may have been totally different.

What we actually had was a CEO who had a Government on his side and Legislation he hepled create which led him to believe he didn't need to negotiate, just dictate because he thought he had a lay down misere. Imagine what the relationship would be today if JetStar was formulated from within the ranks of Qantas pilots. There would have been gnashing of teeth for sure ,as there is with any difficult birth, but junior people in particular would have embraced the lower wages and lesser conditions in order to gain quicker promotion, exactly as what occured with Australian airlines in Cairns.

So in answer to your question yes there would have been a hit in pay and rostering ,just as there was with the setting up of Australian.
The only difference I suppose is AIPA would have negotiated the best deal possible under the circumstances, unlike the JPC.
As Dixon always said, "you only get what you are willing to negotiate".

[Lookleft]

BnG- I think that-

"The only reason JetStar exists is because of Government conniving."

is right up there with the grassy knoll and the Chinese submarine off Portsea!

The only reason Jetstar originally was bought into existence was as a low cost competitor to Virgin. It wasn't created from scratch but was a rebadged Impulse which Dixon bought for that very reason. It was his ace up the sleeve. Dixon did not like pilots (by way of his background role in Australian Airlines during the dispute) and wanted to separate Jetstar pilots from Mainline pilots.

The MOU required Mainline pilots to go to reduced pay and conditions if they wanted a start with Jetstar. Dixon was not a stupid person and knew that promotional opportunities was a big motivator for most pilots. He was right when the movement of pilots between one business to the other was all one way but it was never going to be unrestricted access.

The subsequent success of Jetstar (by management standards), took everyone by surprise so it was expanded internationally and basically has snowballed from there. Its reason for being has changed dramatically with the whole"Pan Asian Strategy".

[Richard Kranium]

Hmmm, I would venture to say that Jet* exists because of AIPA, "ticky dickie" was not going to negotiate with them, he was going to fix AIPA good and proper, one of his big complaint was that United, when under Capter 11 was able to re arrange its house into a new order, errr like "all bets are off boys" and her is your new pay scales chaps to which Q had its hands tied and couldn't compete with, so how do you get around that problem, and problems that will appear in the future.

[airtags]

underscoring Keg's & ..'gasket's rationale.

Feb Mar stats:

QF Domestic down 2.26%
QF International down 15.39%
JetSAR up 34.23%*

the role of the JQ generic has, and continues to, erode the core rather than than the competition. JQ it seems is often directly competing more with QF than other operators.

There is a big difference between market shift & market share - it's a critical precipe that is often overlooked especially when the generic is blindly used principally as a means to instigate/facilitate broad operational reform.

AT

[Going Boeing]

How much of the 34.23% increase for Jetstar is the traffic on the CNS-NRT routes that were gifted to them in the reporting period. They didn't generate any of that traffic, it was already there courtesy of mainline.

Lies, Damn Lies & Statistics.

[blow.n.gasket]

Lookleft, simply bulldust in response to your reply.

"The only reason JetStar exists is because of Government conniving."
is right up there with the grassy knoll and the Chinese submarine off Portsea


Dixon bought Impulse because he got it at the right price and he knew what was coming regarding WorkChoices.
He was after all Chairman of the Australian Business Council of Australia at the time. The very same organisation that stumped up money to write WorkChoices .
The Legal firm that wrote WorkChoices was Freehills, yes one of the 4 legal firms that Qantas use.

If it wasn't for changes to the Corporations Act regarding Transmission of Business then there is no way JetStar would be siphoning off as much of Mainline's flying as they presently are.

Jurno's even quipped at the time that Dixon and Jackson needed to contact the electoral commission in order to change their home address to Canberra because of the amount of time they were spending down there ,when all this was going on.

Coincidence? Hardly! :ooh:

[QFinsider]

As a scribe mentioned on Qroom.

The crap will be dispelled to how this mystical magical entity is 30% cheaper...

An audited set of accounts showing the transfer pricing...

Naturally if this so called miracle were real there would be one other "legacy airline" doing it...

[blow.n.gasket]

This whole "fairy tale" smacks of Enron!
"The smartest guys in the room"!

[Lookleft]

No worries BnG I will accept your bulldust in response to my reply!

[blow.n.gasket]

What bulldust Lookleft.
The facts if you want them are in Hansard and other public domains if you wish to verify and confirm what occured.

[Lookleft]

"Lookleft, simply bulldust in response to your reply."

"What bulldust Lookleft."

Sometimes watching a dog chase its tail is a fun thing to do.

[blow.n.gasket]

It's your tail do with it as you wish.
Is that why you keep looking left is it? :ok:

[Jets on]

Thanks for all your input. I was previously under the impression that J* was created to circumvent the QANTAS sale Act so that Geoff and his crew could break up the company, syphon the assets (routes etc ) and then declare the main line unprofitable and put it to the sword, while selling J* and pocketing the cash

[blow.n.gasket]

Didn't AIPA file for a court case against Qantas/JetStar over the Qantas Sale Act?
What's happening with that?
It appears to us mere mortals on the line that since the Team Bazza junta we are back to masquerading as a Holtesque "rollover and play possum" union again are we?
Figures most of the Team Bazza executive were from that regime.

[VH-Cheer Up]

Wasn't this thread about Borghetti?

[heads_down]

he's no longer important as he is just another person you see in the street who has put in over 30 years into the company and got nowhere but out the door.

[David Brent]

Wonder if Borghetti ever did a psych profile and jumped through the hoops or fell off the list to be replaced by a new smarter cadet?

No, he worked in the mail room....which means it qualifies him to run an airline while Eastern/Sunnies fly an aircraft with a red rat tail and never get a go..

[heads_down]

I've heard many successful stories out of Qantas's mailroom and reception in the past.
Some receptionist in Perth turned CSM jumping all hooplas. No wonder the then base manager was also shown the door shortly after she arrived sydney.
Also heard a mailroom person became CSM in sydney, it did take a while. Nasty little imp also.

[longjohn]

Wow, and some of you people fly aeroplanes...........

Must be a hell of a psych test. :rolleyes:

[heads_down]

we don't actually "fly" the plane, we merely serve the food.