PDA

View Full Version : Qf LAME EBA Negotiations Begin


Pages : 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

the rim
16th Feb 2011, 08:59
look i want annulised salary....but really it does cost,not wanting to boost the companys point but if we have 'AS" it will cost because our supper goes up along with other things so it becomes a cost to the EBA and therefore must be payed for in other terms...not saying I dont want it but we must consider what else is their for us.....Rim

the rim
16th Feb 2011, 09:06
dont think word has gone out for men to fill the ranks yet....

Clipped
16th Feb 2011, 09:22
alt work force

Go ahead AJ, make me and many others, just a little bit angrier.

Millet Fanger
16th Feb 2011, 10:50
The problem is, Rim, there is nothing to consider. Almost 5 months of negotiating with QF and no offer is on the table. Qantas again failing to negotiate in "good faith".

They are using the same old(meadow) tactics:-
1) Drag out negotiations - try to make backpay an issue.
2) Train up managers, and other creatures of the night. (One night time session every 4 years and Qantas deems them proficient - being a LAME is so easy).
3) 'Burn' money - whatever it takes. They spent $150m last time, destroyed the reputation of a great airline, and disengaged the workforce. (Don't worry, they don't have to reveal how much money has been flushed until after it's over).

Mind you, with QF using the same tactics as last time, might mean we end up getting a better deal than most were willing to accept, like last time.

Here's an idea AJ! Learn from history. Make a decent offer, save the money you are about to 'burn', engage with this part of your workforce. Use the positive press to show that you do know that working with your employees is essential in a premium airline.

the rim
17th Feb 2011, 06:13
sounds like something is warming up and SP wants us to keep our powder dry.....agree with you MF same old[meadow] tactics draw it out and hold the backpay over our heads,but I think SP has got that under control,just read that QF profits are up so we can see a big EA coming our way:ok:.....sorry I was dreaming:hmm:...or was that drinking:p

Jet-A-One
17th Feb 2011, 07:18
Regarding the wage claim:

An idea that was thrown around last EBA was to use their infamous 3% pay rise but applied to the base pay of the highest grade LAME (now Lvl 15) and carry that same dollar amount down to each of the lower grades.

On current base pay rates that's approx $65. 3% for a Lvl 15 but around 5% for a single licence LAME.

An idea that's likely to be shot down by some but acceptable to most, including the company. This would also help to bring the lower grade LAMEs a bit closer to the pay rates seen at Jet* and virgin.

Oh Me Oh My
17th Feb 2011, 09:20
As long as the aholes get what's coming to them, that includes those who signed the SOEs of the A380 blessed few, easy rides give me the sh!ts

What The
17th Feb 2011, 09:25
I believe a deal was done today.

MEA332
17th Feb 2011, 11:47
can you please elaborate on what deal you are talking about?

Is that a deal regarding the A380 bus boys or the EBA?

I like the Idea of 5% of Lvl 15 plus bolt on the day-shift penalty rates for those who don't get it, 2 points a year and I think that could be a start.

:ok::ok::ok::ok::ok:

ALAEA Fed Sec
17th Feb 2011, 20:15
I believe a deal was done today.

That would be news to me. Well it is a rumour network.

Jet-A-One
17th Feb 2011, 20:17
It's about time the shafting that was dished out to the post 96ers is rectified!

It's only a matter of time before there's more LAMEs that started after 96 than before. Then it will be very high in the priorities!

LAME2
17th Feb 2011, 21:35
It's only a matter of time before there's more LAMEs that started after 96 than before.

Goes to show the company will "buy" a cost reduction that will take years to mature.

So long as the final deal is fair, we should be satisfied. Sometimes it takes more than 1 EBA to get to your final desire. If what comes from EBA 9 does not satisfy you in terms of changes to wage structure etc, dont dispair, keep the discussions going between ourselves and develop a better more desirable proposal the company will accept.

MEA332
17th Feb 2011, 22:37
LAME 2, I agree with you on the point that we need to solve the pay structure over time, but I think that time has come to start ratling the chains.
The last thing we want though is that the older guys start to retire and leave a massive vacuum in the ranks without completing a restructure first as this would cut off the chances of getting back morning penalty rates and the top end pay level spectrum.

What is your opinion Fed Sec?

ALAEA Fed Sec
18th Feb 2011, 00:11
It's all a matter of how the pie gets cut up.

If I was post 96 and asked-

Do you want 5% more in shift penalties or 10% more in wages? Id most likely take the wages.

There is a lot of water to pass under the bridge first.

Jet-A-One
18th Feb 2011, 00:47
10% more in wages sounds good:D

and if the company wants something in return, I'm more than happy to vote for the pre 96ers to lose the same shift penalties and redundancy entitlements they gave up on our behalf back then...

Ngineer
18th Feb 2011, 03:33
I remember a meeting held at the Rowers during EBA 8, where the negotiating committee was excited to finally present us an offer that was placed on the table by the company (although some of the fine details at the time could not be fully told to us). Although the offer seemed acceptable to some, and was definately a long time coming, it was ultimately voted down by the members.

The ALAEA copped a bit of flack for the subsequent PIA, although this was a decision made by it's membership.

No deals will be done until the membership are happy with what is placed before us. And unless it is an acceptable offer, it will be all the way with PIA.

Oh Me Oh My
19th Feb 2011, 01:40
A good point you make Ngineer
This executive like no other before it gives it's membership the full voice, no matter where it is, I think the Forstaff EBA was a good example of this ALAEA exec said no membership said yes end result it goes through.
It's pleasing to have leadership that listens and does what the majority of it's members/ employees want not that I'd get that where I work

another superlame
19th Feb 2011, 06:26
OM OM were you one of the many who was unsuccessful in getting a 380 course? Because you seem to have quite a chip on your shoulder in regards to the young guys who have put in the hard work and jumped through the all the hoops CASA and QF have put before them.
Good luck to them I say.
You can go and join the base supervisor who was barking to anyone in tech training that would listen to his rant about AMEs being trained. It is these younger guys who have still have a reasonable attitude that will go places, not old crusty bitter LAMEs who in their eyes never have enough,licences, money , status. Move out of the way and give these younger guys a chance, be they 330,380 or 738 initial LAMEs.

SeldomFixit
19th Feb 2011, 09:00
Usually, the parents eat their young - what an interesting generation you are Supa......................:rolleyes:

another superlame
19th Feb 2011, 09:20
I am neither a wipper snapper or a relic Seldomfixit, I have been around long enough to see this crap happen more than once.
As some are talking about fixing the 96 EBA issues, if we let the dinosaurs have their way these things will never get resolved because they are on such a good thing all they way up at the higher levels anything that happens in these newer EBAs wont affect them.

If anyone can remember back to 93 when the AMEs let the new grading system in, well back then it didn't affect any AME as they were all currently employed, the new rules would only screw those who came after them.

So now nearly 20 years later new AMEs outnumber old AMEs, all that needs to happen is for a carrot to dangled in front of the newer people to screw the older members.

The same thing can happen here with the LAMEs. Look after the younger guys now and support them as they become LAMEs, if not as they start to outnumber the older guys , the carrot will be dangled to screw them.

This divide and conquer thing doesn't have to happen overnight, but it certainly has happened.

Reading this thread, why would a new young LAME want to be part of an association that wants to see them fail.

That would be parents eating their young.

the rim
19th Feb 2011, 21:18
yes, super I agree the younger LAME will if not already overtake the older one's I dont mind if the post '96 get the shift pen added into their wage,but leave out one "quack".I think "seldomfixit" should change his name to "neverfixit" as he does not post much on here that's useful,lets just see what the Bexley men come up with for ALL LAME's and hopefully soon.....rim

ALAEA Fed Sec
22nd Feb 2011, 04:45
Just sent out via our email system guys.


Hi members,

I just wanted to pass on a quick message regarding the Qantas EA discussions. As reported last week it was evident that Qantas were working towards an offer to be placed on the table. Further chats have taken place and there has been no real breakthrough. The parties meet again on Wed 2nd of March and we are pretty keen to see the colour of their money and their commitments to job security. At this stage we are unsure whether we are being stringed along so the back pay builds to a point where it becomes an issue should they threaten to take it away. For this reason we will not be accepting any further delay tactics and expect an offer in full to be presented. Failing this, the negotiating team will be looking at other options to secure an Agreement.

Cheers
Steve Purvinas
ALAEA
Federal Secretary

buttmonkey1
22nd Feb 2011, 05:43
it is oh so obvious now, we are dealing with first class time wasters.
so the field is set under starters orders for the pia stakes of 2011.
a simple overtime ban would probably cripple the brisbane operation.
now some of the field might have even jumped the gun :}

another superlame
22nd Feb 2011, 05:56
Unfortunately overtime bans in Sydney wont do damn thing. They have recruited in the past 2 years,put on the casual retiree brigade, this has killed all the overtime. If anything is going to work in sydney it will need to be no higher duties and intense scrutiny during inspections.

If some sort of action is required, it will be interesting to see if the retiree's support their workmates, or their managerial mates who keep them employed when there is no real manpower requirement to have them.

SeldomFixit
22nd Feb 2011, 08:56
Do you hate your Dad too Supa ? :ok:

poison pen
22nd Feb 2011, 09:29
Buttmonket1 can I have the inside lane as my pen is ready. Code 410.

the rim
25th Feb 2011, 21:36
hey buttmonkey1 I think the company would introduce the" lame on demand" if no one worked o/t,like last time they got rid of other operators....Rim

ALAEA Fed Sec
25th Feb 2011, 21:39
They can't. It would be a breach of our existing EBA. Remember we have a clause that says we are to retain all existing job functions.

Jet-A-One
26th Feb 2011, 20:29
There's been alot of talk on the company side lately about the introduction of the part 66 system.

Are they all talk Steve, or is it on the table in the current EA negotiations? Is the extra training LAMEs have to undertake to get to basic B1/B2 qualification going to be recognised with points in the pay scale or will it remain a bolt-on for the chosen few?

It's about time QF got serious about the new system and trained all LAMEs to at least a B1/B2 basics level.

the rim
26th Feb 2011, 20:48
yes fed sec thanks for the reply....but its been in the ppm since Bruce[who sadly passed away] put it there in '03 does that mean its part of our system of maint.....and jet-a-1 have a look at the mail out from CASA we got earlier this month the time line for the new lic is in it .... all LAME's should attend the workshops that are stated in the hand out,after that they will mail out YOUR part 66 licence and then you have time for a "discrepancy resolution" which there will be a few!!!!!!!:confused: ....rim

Jet-A-One
26th Feb 2011, 22:35
You're right Rim, we can expect CASA to issue our LIMITED Part 66 licences soon, but what QF then give you company approval for under their system of maint may be a different kettle of fish...

Even then, all LAMEs will still have to complete the theory and practical training required to get their Part 66 "basics" before they are eligible for a type course under the new regs.

I can see this being a way of the company deciding who gets to play with their new train set and who is left rotting on the "legacy fleet"...

It wouldn't be the first time they've used division in an attempt to conquer!

Like it or not, Part 66 is here to stay and QF should be committed to training all LAMEs to basic level or at least recognising those that have done the training off their own bat.

Redstone
27th Feb 2011, 10:23
Jet, with the calibre implementing the part66 changes from the company's side, don't be at all surprised if it is a monumental balls up. The fat controllers love child is alive and well and looking for new opportunities.

ALAEA Fed Sec
27th Feb 2011, 19:27
Are they all talk Steve, or is it on the table in the current EA negotiations? Is the extra training LAMEs have to undertake to get to basic B1/B2 qualification going to be recognised with points in the pay scale or will it remain a bolt-on for the chosen few?


It's already in the existing system. Bolt on worth 4 points for B1 and 1 point for B2. I am a bit disturbed by the way you have put it though. The options are not -

recognized with points in the pay scale
or
a bolt on for the chosen few

Wouldn't it be better if it was a bolt on for all? Why would anyone want it within the pay scale? If it is, it takes everyone closer to caps or the top level. The comment about the chosen few is a completely different subject, don't confuse it with how the training is paid. Both who gets this training and how it will be paid in the future have been the centre of much of the EA discussion. There are so many options and opinions it will almost be impossible to keep everyone pleased but we sure as hell will be trying.

ALAEA Fed Sec
27th Feb 2011, 19:43
This question has been asked in relation to no man transits. Just thought I would clarify a few things -

but its been in the ppm since Bruce[who sadly passed away] put it there in '03 does that mean its part of our system of maint.....


If that's what the PPM says, yes it is part of the sys of maintenance. What it says in our Industrial Agreement however is a different matter. The sys of maintenance can say anything it likes, if we have a legal binding Agreement that says something else, they would be in breach of that legal contract by trying to enact the clause in the sys of maint.

Hope this makes sense, let me know if further explanation required.

Jet-A-One
27th Feb 2011, 23:00
Thanks for the reply Steve.

Re how the B1/2 is paid- Personally I would of thought having it worth points would have prevented the company from trying to remove the payment down the track when it suits them or only paying those in sections where they determined it was required. The way super is calculated with bolt-ons was also a concern.

I didn't really consider how it would effect those lucky few on the top level or those that are capped out but that's prob just because I'm about 20yrs away from any caps at the rate QF train these days...

Thanks again and keep up the good work!

ALAEA Fed Sec
28th Feb 2011, 02:00
Super is paid on the bolt on EASA payment.

Hard to take a payment away unless we negotiate it out. That being the case it could be negotiated out if a bolt on or not.

cheers

MEA332
1st Mar 2011, 21:38
Rumour has it the younger single Lic. A330 guys are lined up for Virgin and Jet* if the outcome of this EA does not help them get out of Lvl 4,5 and 6 and into a more decent pay grade. That will really increase the average age of the Qantas LAME. On the other hand, it might mean more training for other guys.

another superlame
2nd Mar 2011, 00:32
That is a gee up MEA. Virgin engineering are not even touching the 330s. The whole shooting match is being looked after by JHAS. As for pornstar, well you never know but I doubt that as well.

Why would the company increase the level of a single licenced younger LAME just out of the goodness of their heart?

Jet-A-One
2nd Mar 2011, 02:38
With Virgin to build a hangar for the 330 in SYD and Jet* also in need of more 330 guys, you're kidding yourself if you think the younger guys haven't noticed the shade of the grass on the other side of the fence Superlame. That's not to mention the AMEs that have switched camps in the last few years and are doing quite well!

Millet Fanger
2nd Mar 2011, 03:20
What's news from today's EBA negotiations, Fed Sec?

I know a lot of guys with an ichy trigger finger! Most think that 6 mths of negotiating with Qantas not being willing to put an offer down is too long. Starting the PIA process might be the catalyst for Oldmeadow to take the matter seriously. He got it wrong last time, pity he hasn't learnt from his mistakes!

Talkwrench
2nd Mar 2011, 08:11
Come on Millet Fanger! If you were being paid by the hour to provide 'expert' counsel and negotiation services to QF, it would be in your interest to keep the whole shebang grinding along for as long as possible, no?

Mr. O isn't a dope. He just trying to make a livin like everyone else. Give him a break! It's clear he wrote the book on the art of the unofficial 'go slow'!! We could learn a thing or two from him for sure!

ALAEA Fed Sec
2nd Mar 2011, 09:31
We only met for 2 hours today. Lot of figure comparisons and talk about lost customer handling income. Full day meeting tomorrow, I should put out a you-tube update next week.

BOBO THE CLOWN 23
2nd Mar 2011, 10:04
I wonder who prick of the month award will go to?

Jethro Gibbs
2nd Mar 2011, 23:51
They always :{ poor what a load of tish.

the_company_spy
3rd Mar 2011, 09:20
Let's get ready to rumble!

ALAEA Fed Sec
3rd Mar 2011, 09:22
Goodnight Ian.

domo
3rd Mar 2011, 09:25
Alan Joyce and Chris Nassenstein were at the Sydney Jet base today talking to the engineers, Just a meet and greet but it went down well got polite applause, could not make it myself to busy, but all good

Take five
4th Mar 2011, 01:04
The word was that AJ & CN may be a little worried about the exodus to VB when the new hangar is up and running. You would think that perhaps they could show a little good faith with our current EBA negotiations to gain a little common ground before the PIA begins.

MEA332
4th Mar 2011, 03:29
Get your resume ready "Another SuperLame", I think they need someone to clean the waste tank separators, perfect job for you!

another superlame
4th Mar 2011, 04:00
Wow MEA that was very witty of you. Did you come up with that all by yourself or did your husband help you?

Ngineer
4th Mar 2011, 04:11
Just saw the latest utube.

I believe PIA is the only way forward. Not just for securing an acceptable EBA, but to also break this rotten mindset that has plagued or company for many years.

Bring on the ballot.

the rim
4th Mar 2011, 20:18
Fed Sec,just looked at the utube presentation well done they are much better than a notice....how long are we to wait,is it going to be a long wait again :confused:

MEA332
4th Mar 2011, 20:37
There is no I in Team!, Super, I guess that is why you now live in a office cubicle on your own.
Fed Sec, did the Company put any offer on the table or was it all talk?

"Money talks and Bulls&*t walks", If the company keeps talking Bulls*&t, then we are ready to walk behind you.

another superlame
4th Mar 2011, 23:10
Just remember that MEA. I know only too well there is no I in team. I have seen too many people in QF who have their own agendas and push them for their own advancement and those who they hold dearly.

I, like you am part of the bigger picture and am happy to be part of a strong union, but it p1sses me off when a minority figure beats their chest and makes everyone else go along with it. As I said, I have seen it before and there are some doing it again.

Jet-A-One
6th Mar 2011, 05:16
Just to clarify Steve. With the proposed point in lieu of training per year:

If someone goes 4yrs without training, they'll accumulate 4 training points in lieu (on top of their service points). If they then get trained they will have already got the points so no extra.

If they were trained before accumulating any points in lieu, they would get 4 training points straight up and no more training points for the next 4 years (except service points).

Correct me if I'm wrong...

Syd eng
6th Mar 2011, 06:57
Jet A1

I take it that from now on you get your points each year and if and when you get trained you get none. Who will get more training than points that they accrue. Most of us have not been trained for almost 10 years now.

Jet-A-One
6th Mar 2011, 07:16
Getting no points for my next licence is fine by me IF I've already accrued the extra points IN LIEU of that training.

Getting no points straight up for an additional licence and instead waiting to be drip fed those training points 1 per year doesn't sound like a forward step to me.

Especially if the extra training point in lieu per year is only for the life of the EA.

A bit more elaboration on what was said in the last youtube is needed I think Fed Sec.

ALAEA Fed Sec
6th Mar 2011, 07:49
Good questions guys and a lot of thought has gone into this one.

Our proposal was that we get the additional point every year in lieu of training payments and it goes on forever not just the life of the EA.

That being said, most courses are worth 4 points (I know about the 330 and 380 but just park them for this exercise). If you do a course every 4 years on average, you will get 4 points each 4 year period, obviously 1 per year. Under our proposal you would just get these points automatically.

This system clearly will not benefit the queue jumpers who expect to be able to trump all others with a course every second year. Those LAMEs are few and far between anyway (the ones who succeed that is).

Qantas have advised us that the average time between courses for the average LAME is 6 years. If you are getting paid regardless of whether you train or not, it should encourage the company to undertake more training because they are paying for it anyway.

In the past it has not been uncommon for LAMEs nearing retirement age to get themselves on training to bump up the final salary. They would not need to now and the training will be more likely to go to those with many years left.

The non type payment also whacks a huge chunk off the calculations for other operator work with it becoming more attractive to in source work.

The are many transitional issues that I can't explain briefly here such as integration of B1 and B2 payments and dealing with the 380. Our first job has been trying to sell them on the concept as it has benefits for all involved.

cheers
Steve

Talkwrench
6th Mar 2011, 07:52
Thanks for the update Steve. I am looking forward to more detail around the 1 service point + 1 training point per year concept. Initially, it sounds good. Will advance people up the scale quicker. Will encourage loyalty. Will help out members in facilities that only work on one or two types. Only concern I can see would be for guys that gain a rating within two years from effective date of EA. As I understand it, they would stand to lose out, albeit briefly (considering the length of an average LAME career with QF). Other than that, looks great. Any other views?

PS: couldnt give a flying dugong about the state of Steve's hair, facial or otherwise. Am more concerned about the state of the EA negotiations.

Keep up the good work exec.

ALAEA Fed Sec
6th Mar 2011, 07:59
My hair was pretty much the same as any day in the last few years.

As for shaving, well that is a problem atm. Had my right hand surgically reconstructed a cuppla weeks ago and there are lots of things I can't do as it is still recovering. Situation so bad that I had to get Paul Cousins to cut up my dinner three nights ago.

Some crankers look for anything to pick on but you know what they say on the course. Drive for show and putt for dough.

Jet-A-One
6th Mar 2011, 08:21
Keep up the good work Steve.

The new points concept sounds quite interesting but I think there's many finer details to be revealed before anyone should form opinions. Especially when it comes to Part 66 integration.

I'd also be interested to know, in such an ageing industry, how many of your knockers have a full head of hair themselves...

QF81
6th Mar 2011, 09:18
One can only assume the quota levels will be lifted? No point having lots of Service and Training points and no place to go!

ALAEA Fed Sec
6th Mar 2011, 09:23
One can only assume the quota levels will be lifted? No point having lots of Service and Training points and no place to go!


That is our request.

the rim
6th Mar 2011, 22:27
Steve sounds like a good idear but it also looks like it will cost the company a lot of money[and they wont agree] have we done the figures on it,and where do we go from here....rim

ALAEA Fed Sec
6th Mar 2011, 22:57
It will cost the company money but it will also save them a fair chunk.

An extra service point per year adds about 1.25% pa. On top of 3% wage rises that makes 4.25% per year which certainly is not excessive. Then you take away the points we would have earned in training payments.

A course every six years at 4 points per course would have given you 5% over each 6 year period or .833% pa. All of a sudden the 4.25%pa reduces to 3.42%. If you take into account the fact that we have 5 and 6 point aircraft and customer training courses that are not included in the average one course in six year calculation, the rise itself sits arouns 3% pa still.

The benefits however are good for us - training will go to those who really want it and the ones who are constantly overlooked will still get paid. They are also good for the company - they can train as much as they like without worrying about additional costs and bring back as many customers as they like without worrying about additional payments.

The claim is so minimal it clears the way for other matters like the aggregate wage they promised us in 97 and elimination of those quotas.

From here - company had the ability to settle with us since before xmas. They keep stuffing us around. PIA will be lodged this week with FWA just to let them know we are serious.

Please be mindful however that our other important claims relate to job security and must be met by the company. No point negotiating a nice wage rise if you don't have a job.

ampclamp
7th Mar 2011, 01:21
Thanks for update & details fedsec.Sounds like a good system at first glance.
Good luck with the hand.

QF81
7th Mar 2011, 03:31
Steve, if the quota's get lifted, would the current requirements to move through the grades also be lifted? ie. To progress through the higher grades you require Training points only. If so, would a mix of Service and Training points allow progression to any grade?

MEA332
7th Mar 2011, 04:56
What if you have hit quota but have a dozen service points that you have not used to move up the ranks? Do the previous service points count to move up the grades or, will we start fresh from the new EBA agreement?

ALAEA Fed Sec
7th Mar 2011, 06:24
Expecting the training restrictions to be lifted.

Do however think it should be a fresh start for all. That way everyone will get the same percentage based rise out of the Agreement. Yes some will lose points but remember, those points are useless anyway atm.

cheers

Jet-A-One
7th Mar 2011, 08:12
True, the service points for those that are capped out may be good for nothing under the current system but I'm about to go up a grade with service points so I can't see myself voting for anything that will cost me that grade!

ampclamp
7th Mar 2011, 08:27
JA1, by the time it is finally negotiated, signed , sealed , voted and agreed (or not) I'm pretty sure you'll have your grade. Probably a good way to another point :E
You won't be alone and hopefully a transitional process can be worked out.

QF81
7th Mar 2011, 08:51
JA-1, I agree. I think that we have earned those Service points and should be used some how, rather than wiped off. Last EBA some LAMEs where in the "chicken before the egg" situation who had service points but got the Technology point first which then capped them out and unable to use their Service points. I understand if you are capped out the Service points mean sh$t, but seems a waste to wipe them clean slab. Maybe 2 Service points = 1 Training Point?

ALAEA Fed Sec
7th Mar 2011, 09:54
True, the service points for those that are capped out may be good for nothing under the current system but I'm about to go up a grade with service points so I can't see myself voting for anything that will cost me that grade!

If you are nearly at a new grade now, you still will get that grade. You will get the next one quicker also.

I understand if you are capped out the Service points mean sh$t, but seems a waste to wipe them clean slab.

But they mean jack sh$t. I know that, you know that, Qantas know that, why do you even want them? Let's say you have 8 unusable service points up your sleeve now. Would you rather -

a) another 250 service points under the current system given immediately

or

b) one point per year, no quotas, no restrictions and 18 levels.

Looks like a simple answer to me.

MEA332
7th Mar 2011, 11:03
I think we all need to give and take in regards to what the fed-sec is putting on the table.

Some might loose out in the short term, but we ALL will gain in the long term. We not only help ourselfs financially, but we open new windows of opportunity for Qantas Engineering to gain more third party work and increase the dwindling training that is currently on offer.

I think with some fine tuning, this could really work to everyones benifit.

At the end of the day, we want a company that is making money so we can get paid and the extra training will benifit everyone. :D

torquebox
7th Mar 2011, 20:51
Steve i see a potential flaw in this new training points system. There are guys out there at the moment who seem scared of using the licence they have, so i can see these people taking advantage of this by not doing anymore courses.

It doesnt seem fair that one person may be sitting on a 747-300 single rating for example, and just sits on that for the next few years and other guys are doing a course for a new aircraft, taking responsibility for that aircraft and yet they both will end up with the same points.

the rim
7th Mar 2011, 21:05
Thanks for the expanded reply Steve,sounds very good as for qf81,jet a1 and others a new system always leaves a few out dont worry about the points you have stored up you will catch up soon and as stated by Steve they mean jack sh%t in the present system ,lets just hope the company can see the rewards for them in this system....Rim

Jet-A-One
7th Mar 2011, 21:55
I don't mind if service points for guys that are capped out get wiped. Obviously they are about ass useful as tits on a bull anyway under the current system. But the service points earned by those lower in the pay scale that would go towards the next grade should be carried over into the new system. Also, is there anything in this new system that will go towards closing the pay gap for new LAMEs that are getting up to 30% less than the starting pay in the rest of the industry in this country?

ALAEA Fed Sec
7th Mar 2011, 22:45
There are lots of finer details to the proposal guys and we pretty much have an answer to all the problems raised by members and management.

Steve i see a potential flaw in this new training points system. There are guys out there at the moment who seem scared of using the licence they have, so i can see these people taking advantage of this by not doing anymore courses.


Management made mention of this. We haven't just dropped a concept on them, it is more detailed than the brief stuff I have put out there so far. We propose that a course be advertised by Qf like the 380's are. Anyone can apply, anyone can not apply. The 380 selection process imposed by FWA shall be used for all purposes. The selections are made from those who want to do the course. If not enough people apply (unlikely but it may happen) then Qf can tap LAMEs on the shoulder and tell them they must do it. Generally we see no point in having members forced to do courses they don't want. They should go to the willing and able.

I don't mind if service points for guys that are capped out get wiped. Obviously they are about ass useful as tits on a bull anyway under the current system. But the service points earned by those lower in the pay scale that would go towards the next grade should be carried over into the new system.


Absolutely. No suggestion these points would be lost.

the rim
8th Mar 2011, 09:45
Steve am sure the finer details may answer a few q's but knowing LAME's there are thoes who will say why is he/she getting the same money as me and he/she has only got one lic. remember when we merged and some guys were topped out with only 737 radio,do we want a system like that again......and I still think it will be too costly for QF so it looks like we are going to go into a PIA, if so then lets go......Rim

33 Disengage
8th Mar 2011, 10:33
With a management that won't engage, bring on PIA. LAMEs and pilots will make a good tag team. A common theme - management are doing anything but!!

Long term aviation professionals vs short term, bonus driven managers - no contest!

Ngineer
8th Mar 2011, 20:19
With a management that won't engage, bring on PIA.

it looks like we are going to go into a PIA, if so then lets go

The time has come.

buttmonkey1
8th Mar 2011, 22:12
i'm not holding my breath for anything to come of todays meeting,
why so many pre planned future meetings anyhow?
indicates to me they have no intention of finalising a decent deal.
i reacon it's time to get the pia survey and ballot out to the troops.

600ft-lb
8th Mar 2011, 23:58
Are you a member mcclown ?

If so you should have read your notices and you would know.

YOSHI
10th Mar 2011, 03:56
It seems as though the ALAEA have done the work for the QF team by putting the new points proposal together. For as much as I can see there would be no real opposition to it from the members and it would benefit the company in many ways, i.e. it would mean a more flexible and productive workforce. If QF does not come up with a counter offer then that will indicate they are just sandbagging for now, in which case PIA should be top of the list for us.

Short_Circuit
10th Mar 2011, 05:17
Most of us have not been trained for almost 10 years now. Some have not been trained for 20 years!

BrissySparkyCoit
10th Mar 2011, 05:43
...and on a side note, don't ya just love how they have come out with the engagement survey right as 3 groups are considering lodging applications for PIA!

The floggings will continue until morale improves!:ok:

the rim
10th Mar 2011, 07:06
in the 1900's Lenin[AJ] and his Bolsheviks[IO]said"with an iron fist we will lead humanity to happiness".....who said history never repeats its self.....ha.....Rim

ampclamp
10th Mar 2011, 22:14
fed sec,
job security is paramount of course.
Toward that end, have qantas and the alaea team discussed the 787 and possibility of the Boeing Gold Care option?

Any comment on the CMS situation where I hear there are a number of people being "released" .

Syd eng
10th Mar 2011, 22:43
Got told yesterday that the company had given up on the 787.Jetstar is getting them first and Jetstar is going to do it.

MEA332
10th Mar 2011, 23:13
Can you please elaborate on that Syd Eng, What do you mean the company has given up on the 787? They (Qantas) dont want to buy 787s or they dont want to maintain them?

Redstone
10th Mar 2011, 23:22
It means jetstar are getting the first chunk of 787s (ie before mainline) so jetstar will handle the maintenance (ie sub contract to cheapest supplier) then handle all 787 maintain.

Qantas Engineers will never work on the 787 is what sydeng means.

the rim
10th Mar 2011, 23:31
no customers no 787[if it ever comes]what is left for us ....working on old aircraft....with a EA hanging over our heads we more than ever need to stick together....Rim....oh I forgot we have the a380 that will keep us employed

33 Disengage
11th Mar 2011, 00:12
QF management have been working on this plan for approx. 6 years, Boeing has let the implementation side of things down by delaying the delivery of the 787.

What makes Qantas Qantas if it's not flown by QF pilots, crewed by QF cabin crew, maintained by QF engineering, or (domestically speaking) loaded by QF ground staff? Answer - Jetstar. Why pay a premium to travel on a budget airline?

Is this one of the reasons EBA negotiations have been dragging FedSec?

ALAEA Fed Sec
11th Mar 2011, 00:38
Hey guys. There are very good reasons why our PIA application has not been lodged yet but I can't really elaborate here.

As for 787, there has been discussions. They are split in two parts. HM and Line. HM is not due until the 10 year mark becasue these aircraft will not require maintenance, they are a perfect machine as you will all know. They have never had a major incident apart from that one onboard fire. The other 5 flights went well.

Line is another matter. I have no doubt they plan to register these aircraft in Sin and fly them under a different set of rules. They will come into Jetstar first and that would be a matter for the Jetstar members. When Qantas get them, Qantas LAMEs will expect to do the work. I'm sure Qantas will make you bid for it and in my opinion, the bid process will be flawed and you will stand no hope.

We need to cover off on these possibilities now. If we happen to find ourselves in the trenches fighting beside pilots who face similar issues, that may be benificial. The outcome of this EA is crucial and yes, the job security matters are a number one priority.

cheers

division1
11th Mar 2011, 03:59
How about a memo to the men and let us in the know then?
Why are we not heading into the pia ballot?
Todays Australian says we are expected to lodge within the week!
Also Fed Sec says the aim of management is to delay and frustrate.
We know that :ugh:
BTW,
if job security comes first, i sure hope the annualised salary comes second.
I will happily trade my 12+ service points for that.

ampclamp
11th Mar 2011, 04:33
Div 1,
I am sure fed sec and the team have valid reasons for not stating certain things publicly.
When the time comes we shall know.
Never mind the press talk.They take their info from here and other places.
The get well placed leaks from different parties to massage opinion , apply pressure etc.

ALAEA Fed Sec
11th Mar 2011, 23:11
I can go into some detail regarding one of the reasons for the hold up and it needs to be aired and discussed by all. In short, we can't go to battle unless everyone is supportive and knows what we are fighting for. We need 100% support.

Unfortunately in a large department we have a rogue Rep running around trying to turn LAMEs off our proposal becasue the unusable service points for those capped out will not be taken into account in the new system. As it stands today these points are about as useful as a bucket full of Mongolian Roubles.

This bloke who translated in 97 to near on the top level in his mid twenties now feels hard done by. He expects and is talking to others trying to convince them that this is the case. Effectively he wants all LAMEs to fight so he can use his useless service points to go up 4 levels whilst others go up one.

The ALAEA is attempting to put in place a new system that would benefit all as equally as possible. We aren't in the business of fighting for 4 levels for one LAME and 1 for another. Our proposal seeks to have all LAMEs move freely during the course of their service with Qf at a level every second year. We want new levels on top and no quotas, the thing that has caused most discontent over the past 13 years.

When this issue is sorted, we will lodge.

Are these words harsh? You bet they are and it is also a message to all ALAEA Reps. When you represent our members, you represent them. Not yourself.

33 Disengage
12th Mar 2011, 00:14
Thanks for the 'heads up' Fed Sec! There is a lot of interest in how the negotiations are going. Although a good number of LAMEs don't trust those negotiating on the company's behalf, and are ready for PIA to start, virtually everyone would prefer the matter to be settled so we can concentrate on doing our jobs.

The issue of, useless service points vs (what we understand) the new proposal to be, has been discussed in the past couple of days. From what I have heard, no one as spoken against the new proposal. Those that have spoken think it would be a good improvement on the present 'poorly designed' system. (That includes a couple of LAMEs who have half "a bucket full of Mongolian Roubles").

Millet Fanger
12th Mar 2011, 00:29
Weed out the 'company stooges' and the 'Rogue Reps'.

The ALAEA EA committee has 100% support!!!!!

the rim
12th Mar 2011, 01:14
as I stated before in a "new system" someone will always miss out a bit,but in the long term we ALL benefit......reel him:{ in and lets get moving :ok:

duderanch
12th Mar 2011, 01:32
So this bloke wants a 50% payrise.:ugh: EA increase plus another $320 per week. I wish him all the best. Don't worry pal I am sure there is an opening in management for you somewhere soon.
Only got 100% support from my section Fed Sec.
EA's should help everyone and not just a small greedy few.

Short_Circuit
12th Mar 2011, 03:50
Removing caps & quotas is a big step forward for all. Well worth the sacrifice of accrued service points.

BrissySparkyCoit
12th Mar 2011, 03:58
So far, since meeting Fed Sec last wednesday to hear about the progress of the EBA, I have discussed the proposed points system with quite a few other LAME's.

Only two have had negative sentiment towards the proposal. Both because of service points owing. Both stated that then needed to think about themself and not others. Both said think short term and not long term. Fine if you are planning to leave in 18 months I guess.

Personally, I stand to lose in the short term as I may possibly see a course in the next 18 months.

I am all for the new proposal however:ok:

the rim
12th Mar 2011, 08:35
If anyone thinks that accured service pionts will be transfered to a new system,"your dreaming" not only from a union position the company would not have it as it would move some up so fast that the pay office would not be able to keep up.......get real guys a new system starts from day one,no baggage,so get over it....Rim

Ngineer
12th Mar 2011, 09:28
There are quite a few people who don't care about the "proposal", some who are sitting on the fence, alot who like it, but also quite a few who are loosing points and are getting pretty pi$$ed off about it. But there are also a lot of guys, (and I mean alot!!) who have absolutely no idea what is being proposed. Their opinions will matter when the proposal (whatever it is) is released.

A few meetings to thrash it out wouldn't go a-stray so we can all get back on the same track. Slinging crap at each other will achieve very little.

BrissySparkyCoit
12th Mar 2011, 12:41
It is a proposal in progress I guess. People should just wait and see what the outcome of negotiations around it come to. I am certain the ALAEA will present to members very clearly what the proposal will being. Better to wait and see what the outcome is than to start getting all pi$$ed off.

Longbow25
13th Mar 2011, 03:04
Weed out the 'company stooges' and the 'Rogue Reps'.

Expect them, find them, identify them to everyone and then expel them as members.

It's the only way to deal with this sort of self interest

BrissySparkyCoit
13th Mar 2011, 05:19
That rep wouldn't happen to be our Avalon based curry loving rep would it?

33 Disengage
13th Mar 2011, 05:36
Longbow - "Weed out the 'company stooges' and the 'Rogue Reps'".Everyone will be affected differently by whatever is proposed. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and they are entitled to express it. However, if they are not upfront about their agenda i.e. pushing a personal agenda while representing the ALAEA; or a company agenda dressed up as a personal one, then they deserve to be exposed.

There will be a chance to debate the proposal, everyone will get a vote. Until then stay united and support the committee.


Longbow - "then expel them as members".
I think that takes things a bit too far. Being a member is a lot more than a particular position you take on an EA proposal!

BrissySparkyCoit
13th Mar 2011, 07:08
I spent 10 years as a delegate for an AME union and one of the things you have to do is encourage members to vote how they see fit. You can explain to them your personal opinion however, it's up to the member to decide for themself.

I recall a time when discussing an issue with the manager of our wonderful H3 facility in Brisbane. I agreed with his point of view on a particular issue however, the membership consensus was opposite to my view and that is what I was pursuing in negotiations.

He then said to me "well if you agree with me then you need to go out there and sell this to them".

Clearly, he had no idea what unions are about.

As I said, under the proposal (which is still being tweaked), I stand to lose in the short term however, I can see that the system will be a much fairer system in the long run. Change it now and disadvantage a few in the short term? Change it later and disadvantage a different group in the future? Perhaps there will be an agreement reached that keeps almost everyone happy? Who knows.

Until then, no point getting pi$$ed off about a proposal that is in the workings!

Ngineer
14th Mar 2011, 00:36
I am sure that there are a few "agenda's" going around. However, as always, membership will ultimately decide which way we go. We all have an opinion, and most importantly, we all have minds of our own.

Grassmere Avenue
15th Mar 2011, 01:52
I won't be holding my breath for Thursdays meeting.
QF seem to want to waste everyone's time.
6 months of meeting and still no offer.....

MEA332
15th Mar 2011, 04:10
It is time Qantas stops wasting its time paying "Old Meadow" all this money and re-engage with its workers to come up with a solution.

I think If Qantas wanted to, I know the boys in Engineering would be more then happy to draft up a future plan to include;

-Long term 3rd party contracts with foreign operators

-A sustainable future for Qantas and Qantas Engineering

-Re-gain that Qantas image it once had of been the safest airline in the world.

- Be competitive and at the same time a great place to work and earn a decent wage/salary.

-Draw up a future plan to strive towards.


It is not that hard to invest in the people that work for the airline, instead of wasting time and money with a contractor that gets off on seeing the demise of Qantas, does Qantas realise he is being paid by another airline to damage its image.....

ALAEA Fed Sec
15th Mar 2011, 06:34
The ALAEA lodged for PIA at 5PM today.

I expect there to be a hearing regarding the ballot by the end of the week in FWA.

33 Disengage
15th Mar 2011, 06:41
Fed Sec,

I, and many of those I work with, support the PIA application. Is this lodgement part of the process after 6 months of "negotiations", or have things turned nasty this week?

ALAEA Fed Sec
15th Mar 2011, 06:44
Just sick of going to meeting after meeting and getting nowhere. They need to know that this is real, they seem to have short memories.

ampclamp
15th Mar 2011, 07:01
Either way it will flush ot their next move for better or worse.

Are the ground staff under a PIA at present?

MEA332
15th Mar 2011, 07:10
Just goes to show that Qantas Management have learnt NOTHING!

Good going Q Management :D:D:D Clap Clap for the Handicaps!, seems like you guys are too busy pissing off your staff, rather then running the company like you should and creating more routes that you can fill the parked 747s, 767s and the A330s you decided to paint in orange. Good work guys, I am sure you are proud of the achievments you have made already this year.
Funny thing is, some people started to have faith in you Chris Nassenstein, good going mate! Would have thought you knew all about the previous PIA when you had to send Air NZ engineers to turn around your aircraft.

The Exodus to VB, J* etc here they come, good AME's your way.
:ok::ok::ok::ok::ok:

another superlame
15th Mar 2011, 07:30
The only exodus will be when QF offer redundancies, other than that there will only ever be natural attrition.

Righty Tighty
15th Mar 2011, 09:35
Hi Fed Sec,
Does this mean us retired QF Lames should be expecting a call from Newport Aviation in the future?:=
I think I will have to see what my reply was last time,something like go :mad: yourself,I would of thought that these so called managers learnt from the Murray Moments last PIA.

Millet Fanger
15th Mar 2011, 10:17
The industry is so small in Aussie, the numbers available that participated last time has diminished. A few are working as AMEs in Qantas; most are working for 2 men and a ladder, John Holland, etc; some in L.A.; a couple working on contract for Qantas in Tech Services etc. A few regretted getting involved, to many 'difficult' evenings out in the local area. I doubt they could put to many together to sit in the hotel room.

Yes, the intelligence from QE management is absolutely amazing!!!

the rim
16th Mar 2011, 00:16
why will they need them we have got nothing to do now and all day to do it....and I dont think we are going to walk off....are we:bored:

Short_Circuit
16th Mar 2011, 01:35
There are plenty of QF AME's actively looking for jobs elsewhere. They see no future at QF.:(

whatdouknow
16th Mar 2011, 04:12
To BRISSYSPARKYCOLT, what you stated is no longer true!

"That rep wouldn't happen to be our Avalon based curry loving rep would it"

He is not a Rep (Official) anymore and Avalon is now covered by two new Executive Members. To suggest he still exists would be upsetting to many at Avalon.

From what I understand they are much more interested in fighting for all of the members... including Qantas. Seem to be trying to do a good job too.

The word on the floor is roll on Qantas PIA, as you guys have unity that Avalon dreams off.

BrissySparkyCoit
16th Mar 2011, 13:23
Excellent news whatdouknow. That rep sounded like he was stuck in the old days of the association where personal gain came first and members came second. How things have changed!!!

whatdouknow
16th Mar 2011, 19:00
Yes... it appears that it was time for those two to go.

As for the future, many are just waiting for a big win against those in charge and who knows, Avalon may have guys that finally understand how to stand together.

You never know the Qf guys might even lead the charge...
:ugh::ugh::ugh:

Righty Tighty
16th Mar 2011, 23:31
Hi Fed Sec,
Heard through the grapevine that Jetstar has been offered hangerspace
in SYD and BNE by big brother,thought H245 and 271 had to be removed
for more terminal space and was a big part of closing Heavy down.
Hope to see the ALAEA involved in pornstars next EBA:rolleyes:

Jethro Gibbs
17th Mar 2011, 00:40
Qf guys at Avalon are to busy stabbing each other in the back .

ALAEA Fed Sec
17th Mar 2011, 02:04
PIA ballot has been approved by Fair Work Australia.

The voter rolls will now have to be collated and it should open in about 10 days time. Will be an electronic vote.

cheers

Oh Me Oh My
17th Mar 2011, 08:14
PIA PIA PIA
PIA PIA PIA
PIA PIA PIA
PIA PIA PIA
PIA PIA PIA
PIA PIA PIA
PIA PIA PIA

The war drums are deafening
It's Time once again for the engineers to deliver a message to those who seek to hold us down

We will never yield to tyrants

To be sure to be sure.......................

sky rocket
17th Mar 2011, 09:45
My ballet paper has not arrived yet. Can we speed up the process?
That's a big YES from me. :ok:

up2us
17th Mar 2011, 10:17
Thanks Fedsec and execs for your efforts of late,

Today we had an informal feedback session after work and there was certainly a lot of questions regarding the loss of service points (ie for blokes on level 8, 12 & above and how it would be managed) and also regarding the 'customer' payments.
Would you prefer an email to the union with more details about these enquiries or should I throw them out here for all to discuss. I do understand that we are only in the early stages with regards to above details however if we are heading into P.I.A we should all be very clear what we are fighting for!

Keep up the good work mate.

ALAEA Fed Sec
17th Mar 2011, 11:04
Send me an email mate at [email protected]

up2us
18th Mar 2011, 03:29
Thanks Fedsec, I'll get on to the email.

I noticed earlier in your reply you had an email address attached, it now appears to be missing. Can you repost please or if not I'll just email Bexley and they can forward on.

Ta mate.

chockchucker
18th Mar 2011, 07:16
Behold! The latest load of utter tripe from CN...................



I’m disappointed the ALAEA is conducting a ballot asking our LAMEs to take Protected Industrial Action (PIA). This will hurt Qantas and has the potential to cause disruption and pain to our passengers, our colleagues and the reputation of Qantas Engineering (QE).

I watched the 2008 dispute between QE and the ALAEA as a third party customer and I have to ask why anyone would want to go through that not once, but twice? OK on the face of it, maybe it looked like a win for the ALAEA and the LAMEs but was it really?

The view from the long white cloud
I was a QE airline customer at Air New Zealand back then and we suddenly found ourselves without any support. We didn’t care whose fault it was or what the dispute was about. This was AirNZ’s largest international operation, critical to our business, and we were suddenly left high and dry. We had no choice we had to keep flying so, of course, we found other providers.

After the dispute, QE (Gavin Harris in fact) came to ask us back. Sure the prices were higher, but the main reason we stayed away was because our people in Sydney told us there was still so much animosity between management and staff. At that time, we didn’t think either party had learned anything from the dispute or learnt to resolve their differences by talking to each other so we were nervous there would be more industrial action in the future and we couldn’t take that risk.

A damaged reputation
The dispute in 2008 certainly hurt Qantas. A conservative estimate of the financial cost put it well over $100M. It also cost Qantas Engineering the respect of the rest of the company and, to a large degree, of the travelling public. One of the most insidious effects was to create an even bigger rift between QE Management and the LAMEs. And of course, we’re now almost totally out of customer work.

I’m not defending either party, I’ve heard blame on both sides and if what I’ve heard is true, it certainly sounds like some pretty bad things happened.
But it’s now 2011 and the world has moved on. I’m working with you at QE now and when I took this job on, I made it a personal mission to leave QE in a better state than I found it. Hopefully everyone in QE has seen some of the changes we’re making, whether it’s new facilities, changes to processes and procedures, the Executive Leadership Team out and about in the workplaces or Service Quality.

We’re trying to make things better, but we can only do that by focusing on the future. We can’t change the past. So I’m asking you to think about the future too. Don’t let us go the way of Eastern Airlines (US) in 1989 where, on the day the airline went out of business, destroyed by strikes, the union cried ‘Victory’. Thousands of people now unemployed, is that really a victory?

It’s a different world
Let’s look at our reality for a moment. The world has never seen so many crises - volcanoes, earthquakes, nuclear threats, tsunamis, revolutions and, in our own backyard, floods, cyclones and bushfires. Because we’re a global company every incident affects us and impacts our costs. Last year, we dealt with 15 separate crises.

At the same time, our industry is evolving, we’ve got new aircraft coming – game changers like the 787, fuel prices are sky rocketing, yields and demand are falling. It’s a different world and to survive and succeed in this new world, we’ve got to look forward; and stop letting the past dictate our future.

I’ve met many of you who have been here for 20, 40, 50 years along with your partners at the long service awards. It’s clear to me you love this airline and you love fixing aircraft. I don’t think you can commit your life to something unless you’re passionate about its survival.

Where’s the Qantas offer?
Many of you have told me that you’re waiting for us to put an offer on the table and I can tell you that this is imminent. It might seem like it’s been a long time coming, but let’s look at the negotiations so far. In October 2010, the ALAEA presented an extensive and complex verbal claim of 28 individual items. We respected that and in good faith have been working to evaluate and cost every single item. Now, these weren’t simple items either, some of them were extremely complex and on top there’s a wage claim proposing a new pay structure.

To say that we’ve been sitting still is simply untrue. In order to bargain in good faith, we have to evaluate every claim in detail before we can respond to it. We need to run it by legal and finance for approval and of course get ExCo’s sign off. That all takes time and with such an extensive and complex claim you can see why it’s been a few months.

I’m not just saying this for effect, the ALAEA’s claim really is extreme. We simply can’t afford to give everything they’ve asked for. However, we’ve made some progress as you’ll see in the attached document. Keep in mind too that the unions have rejected the majority of our claims without discussion.

Our finance people are meeting with the Union on Tuesday to discuss our costings of their proposed pay structure.

We’re at a crossroads here guys, and I’m asking you to choose your path very carefully. I don’t want to go through a dispute and a number of you have told me you don’t either. The choice you make now is critical to our future success and to our survival. Please consider your options carefully. I promise you that we will do the same.

Regards
Chris




Is it just me? Or are the walls getting harder and the heads softer when it comes to comunicating with QF management? I still don't think they get the message.

I also wonder exactly how many EA meetings, that started preliminary discussions nearly 12 months ago, our beloved EGM for engineering has actually been to? My guess would be ZERO!

Oldmeadow must harldy be able to contain his glee at the naivety of the management at QF and their willingness to blindly follow his advice and line his pockets simultaneously.:ugh:


Any comment in response to Chris FEDSEC?

Gas Bags
18th Mar 2011, 07:38
That has NZ written into every word.

Cmon guys, work for less, work harder, its the only way, you will all lose your jobs unless you all just do what we want.....Trust me fellas.

That actually makes me laugh....Is he serious?

You guys are already some of the lowest paid in the industry....who does he think he is kidding. What has Qantas profit been in the last few years?

Hey Chris....get your mates over at ANZ to pay me the outstanding $40,000 they owe me from when you cut mine and my families livelihood at Ansett afloat....Then I might give a toss about the view from the "long black cloud".

ALAEA Fed Sec
18th Mar 2011, 08:19
It's true. Chris has not been to one of the 20 or so meetings.

The sad thing is, he is a pretty friendly, upfront guy and I think he genuinely believes what he has written. It's amazing what you can shield yourself from.

ejectx3
18th Mar 2011, 08:27
It also cost Qantas Engineering the respect of the rest of the company

Errr..no I think you'll find it won them the admiration and respect of all QF employees. :D

Jethro Gibbs
18th Mar 2011, 08:42
Its not a Lie if you Believe it. "George Costanza"

buttmonkey1
18th Mar 2011, 09:11
chris seems to be a nice enough guy, maybe he does not realise
some of the 2008 protagonists linger on at the negotiation table.
he needs to have a good hard look at his team. maybe even kick
some arse. obviously the current team is not achieving his goals.

Clipped
18th Mar 2011, 09:24
After the dispute, QE (Gavin Harris in fact)

Well there's a problem straight up.

Let’s look at our reality for a moment. The world has never seen so many crises - volcanoes, earthquakes, nuclear threats, tsunamis,

etc etc. And not one of these events will have an impact on our negotiated bonuses - Senior Management. Just have a look at the share price and the investment world's view of the direction of this airline. Nice work AJ.

For the rest of the dribble, sounds very much like the rubbish Cox and Dixon threatened us with a couple of years ago.

Dear Senior Management - LAMEs are inherently fair, that's why you hear we 'love the airline and fixing planes blah blah blah'. After having to tolerate the revolving circus at the top for years, stop f##king us around and give us a fair agreement. There's not much more to it.

Ngineer
18th Mar 2011, 09:44
chris seems to be a nice enough guy

Maybe, but he ain't calling the shots. In-fact I have absolutely no idea what shots he calls.

Heard all the same crap before the last PIA. This is why this PIA is so important to us. We need to drive home the msg that either our management must change, or we must change our management.

Quill Shaft
18th Mar 2011, 09:47
How about we get a legally binding commitment from the company that we will not lose any backpay if we allow negotiations to continue and in return we do not go down the path of PIA?

Clipped
18th Mar 2011, 09:53
Quill

Your showing a hand of trust.

Something that is alien to Qantas management and it's Board.

Our failing, is our continual hope that things will turn around for the better, only to be bluntly reminded about our dire position in this competitive world by an overpaid management team who will not be around as we keep living in the mess they have created.

Talkwrench
18th Mar 2011, 10:39
Chris,
You seem like a nice guy and I applaud your genuine efforts to get out and about amongst the staff. But really, what am I supposed to think about the company’s commitment to reaching agreement when they haven’t put any type of offer on the table after some 6 months of negotiation? You say that it has taken a long time to assess the alaea’s claim and that may be true, but why has your team not had an alternative to offer up? To my mind, it’s either they don’t have any idea what they really want or they are sticking to carefully planned strategy to frustrate and antagonise. To what end, I can’t fathom. Either way it doesn’t reflect what you seem to stand for. Or maybe I’ve got it all wrong.

You say you’re disappointed that the alaea applied for ballot to pia. So am I. Why does it have to come to this? Your team is forcing me to take a position that I don’t really want to have to take. But wheels are now in motion and positions will be taken. This could have been delayed or even avoided so easily. If your team just said “we are still assessing the cost of your claims, but in the meantime, here is an alternative offer that we will be communicating to the staff”, I’m sure we would not be voting for pia in the next week or so.

I can only assume that this is the path your team wanted to take.

You say an offer from the company is now imminent. My cynicism tells me that this offer was never going to be made until the alaea took the steps toward pia ballot.

I want to believe you Chris, I really do. I hope for all concerned the imminent company offer is a real gamechanger.

ALAEA Fed Sec
18th Mar 2011, 10:45
How about we get a legally binding commitment from the company that we will not lose any backpay if we allow negotiations to continue and in return we do not go down the path of PIA?


With the utmost respect, I'd like to demonstrate how this would work.
Qantas, will you sign a document declaring that you will not take away our back pay and we will not take PIA? Sure sign here.

April 2011 - Do you have an offer for us today? - No
May 2011 - Do you have an offer for us today? - No
June 2011 - Do you have an offer for us today? - No
July 2011 - Do you have an offer for us today? - No
August 2011 - Do you have an offer for us today? - No
Sept 2011 - Do you have an offer for us today? - No
Oct 2011 - Do you have an offer for us today? - No
Nov 2011 - Do you have an offer for us today? - No
Dec 2011 - Do you have an offer for us today? - No
Feb 2012 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
Mar 2012 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
April 2012 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
May 2012 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
June 2012 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
July 2012 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
August 2012 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
Sept 2012 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
Oct 2012 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
Nov 2012 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
Dec 2012 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
Feb 2013 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
March 2013 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
April 2013 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
May 2013 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
June 2013 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
July 2013 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
August 2013 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
Sept 2013 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
Oct 2013 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
Nov 2013 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
Dec 2013 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
Feb 2014 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
March 2014 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
April 2014 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
May 2014 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
June 2014 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No
July 2014 -Do you have an offer for us today? - No

About this stage you would most likely be wondering what to do to get them to put an offer on the table. You may consider taking PIA because by then you would have realised that there is absolutely nothing that compels them to make an offer apart from this. Guess what? That's right you can't because of some stupid document you signed.

Quill Shaft
18th Mar 2011, 11:05
Point taken.

I suppose to add to my previous suggestion, if the company is close to putting an offer on the table as they say, the agreement could have a time limit of another month. All back pay would be guaranteed up to that point and no pia would be taken.

After this date the gloves would be off - pia can be taken and backpay from that point on only can be taken.

Talkwrench
18th Mar 2011, 11:17
Quill Shaft,

I see the logic and reason in your words. However, it seems to me that the ball is already rolling. I'd suggest that the best thing to be done is to hold on, bite down and ride it out with the support of your fellow members to whatever the future holds.

The company has generally stuck by some pretty simple tactics ever since the EBA's started. Divide and conquer is one that comes to mind.

Our defence is equally simple. Unity is strength. I know it sounds corny, but it is true.

ALAEA Fed Sec
18th Mar 2011, 12:06
I suppose to add to my previous suggestion, if the company is close to putting an offer on the table as they say, the agreement could have a time limit of another month. All back pay would be guaranteed up to that point and no pia would be taken.


Legally PIA can't be taken for about a month anyway. We have 20 days for a ballot and then 3 business days to notify them of any action. I can't see us going in first day and taking it. We would give negotiation every opportunity beforehand and action would only be taken as a last resort.

Nice to hear them even talking about an "offer". I don't think that would be the case without the PIA application. If the vote goes down, I doubt the "offer" will become a reality.

rudderless1
18th Mar 2011, 12:10
1974 WTF what did Lames get pre 2006 without selling off the
Farm?
Good faith bargaining and working with 1500 varied opinions
Does pose it's challenges and take time.
Please educate us all though, what have you achieved since 1974?
Well done Steve, it's hard to keep it rational.:ok:

the rim
18th Mar 2011, 12:14
talkwrench,your post is so close to the mark,CN has made himself look like he is a mate and likes the LAME but his no show at the EA meetings and lack of comment on our direction is upsetting....I have listened to his talks and have been inspired by them,but now we have this situation of entering into a PIA because Qantas wont agree...to anything ....come on Chris look at the history and look at whats posted on here,you are smart enough to know thats something amiss....put it right .....the rim

Quill Shaft
18th Mar 2011, 12:15
Talkwrench,

Fedsec & co have been going to these meetings for 6 months now and they know better than anyone if the company is just stringing us along or not.

I trust SP knows what he is doing so come ballot time I will vote in favour.

Like most, I dont want to go down this path hence my suggestion but it seems innevitable.

BrissySparkyCoit
18th Mar 2011, 13:50
I did post a nasty message about unionist74..... but I think adding this stooge to ignore is better.

Millet Fanger
18th Mar 2011, 15:08
CN could possibly believe what's in his memo, I don't know him so I'm not sure.

What I do know is:-

During the last dispute the LAMEs didn't stop providing support to Air NZ, QE management (GH) terminated the contract. They then downsized the workforce.

QE management can't put any sort of offer on the table but they can fly an 'alternative workforce' around the world giving them 'covert' training at night. Been happening since at least early February. Outsource.

Today we have seen QE management renege on the spirit, if not the letter, of the EBA signed with the Avalon LAME workforce. D-checks offshored.

Maybe CN is just a puppet, not allowed to make decisions, not fully aware of the end game. He himself states We need to run it by legal and finance for approval and of course get ExCo’s sign off.Look at QF managements dealings with all the different groups of employees in the recent past - pilots, cabin crew, ground staff, engineers. The pattern is stall negotiations, downsize, outsource, offshore.

QF's attitude is - If our actions break the law, that's alright, let the lawyers clean up our mess i.e. Qantas freight; Cadet pilot program; LAME overseas posting allowances; Fair Work Australia Jetconnect hearing; Sunstate Engineers 'buggery' campaign.

Crash or crash through!! - Seems to be the company motto.

Jet-A-One
19th Mar 2011, 02:09
Dear Chris,

Thank you for going to the trouble of writing your letter. Most of what you have written rings true and some is utter crap you've obviously been fed by your understudies. (your opinions on what lead to the loss of third party contracts within QF demonstrates this).

I'm prepared to give you the benefit of the doubt as, even though I haven't met you myself, alot of people who's opinions I value say you're a fairly straight shooter.

I too am upset that it has come to a vote for PIA but I can assure you my vote will be in favour of it.

I suggest it's time to step up mate. Start attending the EA meetings and pull these a$$clowns you'e sending to negotiate into line.

I'm sure you don't want to be remembered as the bloke who achieved little more than a few new coats of paint on some old hangars at Mascot...

regards, JA1

33 Disengage
19th Mar 2011, 02:33
After reading your memo a few questions sprung to mind.


1) Who cancelled the Other Operator’s contracts without warning? Do you blame the LAMEs?
2) Why did Qantas management take the Jetstar engineering work to a third party MRO?
3) Does Qantas not have the resources to cost the ALAEA’s log of claims in under 6 months?
4) If “it’s a different world” why do Qantas use the same tactics during every negotiation?
5) Is your offer “imminent”? - you have 20 days to present it before any action can be taken.

Ngineer
19th Mar 2011, 09:04
1) Who cancelled the Other Operator’s contracts without warning? Do you blame the LAMEs?


And after we agreed to flexibilities in Casual workers, I might add....:mad:

Pure Bugary, nothing more - nothing less.

“imminent”?

If you wait long enough I guess.....

We should play them at their own game, like when Dixon took his staff travel offer off the table. Because they have strung us along this far, lets take all our flexibilities off the table. All the way with PIA.:ok:

aveng
20th Mar 2011, 02:20
I think the easiest (and shortest) way to find an agreement would be to bar the contractor (I.O.) that is getting payed by the hour from attending EA meetings.
Tell Qantas that we will only deal with Qantas - not guns for hire.:ok:

griffin one
20th Mar 2011, 03:53
Chris has replied with an email that does nothing more to engage staff then to inflame them.

The first priority as usual for all lames is ensure the safety of the general flying public and be concious to act in the utmost proffesional manner while debate rages over talk of PIA and ea negotiations.

33 Disengage
21st Mar 2011, 17:26
Another 9000 Qantas staff are now officially disengaged as TWU members (Refuellers, Catering, Baggage handlers, etc) head towards PIA.

Now lets see, what is the common cause for 30,000 of Qantas' staff to be indispute? Could it possibly be (mis)management!

bandit2
21st Mar 2011, 21:37
In regards to CN's letter, the money he's throwing around to fix up the sess pit they call the jet base etc, seem's to have been approved fairly quickly. At the end of the day it's all about money, I think the reno's to our facilities around Australia would outdo our 3% plus a few bonus offerings. Not that I don't appreciate the improvements. But, sorry Chris heard it all before!

Jethro Gibbs
22nd Mar 2011, 00:48
Look at the latest notice on the ALAEA site Re the Forstaff EBA a sub standard agreement agreed to and work lost ALAEA #Winning think not.:(

SeldomFixit
22nd Mar 2011, 10:38
ALAEA is about Qantas - first, second and third. Anyone else donating as a member is pi$$ing money against a wall.:*

YOSHI
22nd Mar 2011, 11:24
With regards to the painting at the jet base, I suspect it's to do with compliance to the impending EASA aligned reg's. The existing facilities fall a long way short of what is expected ( Required! ) under the new system.

Although it could be because, as happens in Real Estate, a quick paint job before you sell!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Something else to consider is the lack of overtime at the Jet Base at the moment. Just when it seemed there was a shortage of staff and the workload was begining to back up, it's all gone away, even the part timers are not getting much of a look in.

Maybe it's to do with the recent extention of the flying times between 'A Checks'. Clever in one way but when you consider the Boeing fleet are now fast approaching 20 years old (some are already over 20 years old), is it actualy a good move?
I'm not so sure the punters would be impressed............or even the crews...

BrissySparkyCoit
22nd Mar 2011, 11:37
ALAEA is about Qantas - first, second and third. Anyone else donating as a member is pi$$ing money against a wall.:*

Um..... any Virgin LAME's care to comment?

33 Disengage
22nd Mar 2011, 18:48
The ALAEA isn't an institution that comes and seeks you out crying into your beer at the local derro. :{ If you aren't getting enough support from the ALAEA kick the local rep up the a$$. If you don't have a rep, get off your backside and do something!

Don't blame Qantas because it has active reps (and LAMEs for that matter).

Red Baron
23rd Mar 2011, 01:47
Maintain the rage! :E

blubak
23rd Mar 2011, 04:30
Jet a1,your suggestion is brilliant-CN should attend a meeting himself & then report back to us all(management & employees) with the same letter so that we all know what each other is being told & what his thoughts are.
He wants us to believe he is a fair guy & we can give him that opportunity & in return we will also be fair to him.
Just as a 2nd point-if an offer is imminent,let him be a bit more specific & put a time frame on it.He tells us he wants to make progress and find a solution without disruption-WELL,SO DO WE.
If he is prepared to write that an offer is imminent,he must have an in depth knowledge of how close it is-share it with us & if it is reasonable & fair-PROBLEM SOLVED.

Clipped
23rd Mar 2011, 09:22
Latest notice - comprehensive and alot of food for thought.

Over the last week we have been contacted by a number of members who are either unable to view the YouTube updates or are unclear of our collective objectives as we work towards a new Qantas LAME Agreement. The result of this EA will flow directly to Forstaff employed LAMEs through the parity clause therefore they have been included in this notice for information purposes.

The ALAEA committee submitted claims with Qantas at the first EA meetings in 2010. The list was comprehensive and based on member feedback at the time. As negotiations have progressed, discussions have focussed on two areas of our claims, wages and job security. As of today, no offer has been made by Qantas for the negotiating team to consider. Communication sent by Qantas management has indicated that an offer is imminent, however we view this with some suspicion.

Members would be aware that a PIA ballot will be underway within days, and it may be the case that Qantas drops an offer on the table that appears tempting on the surface but is missing the detail and/or job security protections we are seeking. It is of utmost importance that members support a PIA campaign regardless of any preliminary offers made by the company to settle. It could be that they offer a nice wage incentive to sign up without the job security clauses and, in our view, doubling LAME wages would be pointless if you soon don’t have a job.

I now intend to go into some detail regarding the wages and job security portions of our claims but remind members that there are other areas of work such as the return of salary sacrifice computers and some staff travel issues that are also being discussed.

Job Security

Without doubt this is our number one priority. Since our last success there has been much work undertaken by Qantas, both visible and behind the scenes, to implement an aggressive industrial agenda designed to erode employee influence and security. The ALAEA will not take an acquiescent approach to Qantas and its “Engineering vision” which has, in the past, led to the closure of the Sydney Heavy Maintenance facility and Engine and Component overhaul shops. To understand where Qantas wants its business to be in 5-10 years cannot be established by reading employee engagement notices issued just prior to employees considering PIA. We have verified our concerns based on the message being sent to the business world and real feedback we are receiving both directly from management and other parties that deal with them. They include:

Some comments by Chris Nassenstein November 2010 to Aviation Week –

Nassenstein: We have almost none now. It was before my time, but a labour dispute caused the airline to really review the cost/benefit of doing third-party work, and the carrier came to the conclusion that it was actually more expensive than it thought. I am not sure that we'll stick with that decision, there are definite benefits with doing third-party work in line maintenance, but we'll have to convince the marketplace that we can offer a stable labour environment. We are not looking for any at the moment, though.

Nassenstein: I think we always need to be open to that. In the long term, as aircraft leave the fleet and as new aircraft come in, they will require less maintenance. Attaining critical mass, particularly with heavy maintenance, is going to be more and more of a challenge. In order to get a fleet size to justify doing heavy maintenance, you need to look at JVs as a way of cooperating.

I would say our long-term trend for widebody aircraft is probably more toward outsourcing heavy maintenance.

Nassenstein: We're evaluating GoldCare. We've had meetings with Boeing on that quite recently, so we're going through that process at the moment.

Nassenstein: In the long term, I would say it will probably mean a smaller but more specialized and higher-trained group of engineers. That will be a difficult process, but we have to be a bit realistic. Number one, we don't have the monopoly on quality, and number two, the modern fleet going forward is going to require less maintenance.

A lot has been said by some Qantas managers about the attempts made to source third party work however behind the scenes members report that the Reps from other operators such as Thai and Atlas have advised them that they have either accepted contract prices from Qantas only to have Qantas withdraw their contract or that they are having no success even getting a quote in the first place. We confronted Gavin Harris about this at an EA meeting and he remained adamant that they were doing all they could to secure third party work. He was later contradicted by another manager who confirmed that Qantas were turning customers away. The key protections we are seeking for job security are described below along with the Qantas responses.

Line Maintenance

In the current agreement we have a clause to retain our existing job functions. We are seeking that clause be enhanced by describing the functions the clause refers to. In particular we want listed matters related to aircraft handling and the carrying out of pre-flight safety checks. When presented with this claim Qantas explained that they wanted to “keep the options open” and went on to explain the benefits of exploring opportunities such as a LAME on demand system they are developing. In our view LAME on demand sounds like a system to make LAMEs redundant so the airline can be converted to a low cost model.

We have also sought to protect Avionic LAME work on IFE systems by locking in training, manpower and certification ability on both the Panasonic and Rockwell systems. This is being discussed as Qantas seeks to further outsource these functions to third parties.

Cat A licences are now allowable under CASA Regulations. The ALAEA is concerned that mass introduction of these part licences will remove the requirement to have proper fully licenced LAMEs working their existing roles. Our claim is for no Cat A licences to be utilised by the airline during the life of the Agreement except for Avionic LAMEs to do their existing pre-flight checks and subsequent certification.

Heavy Maintenance

Firstly I would like members to consider the moves both past and future by Qantas regarding Joint Ventures. In all cases, a Joint Venture has led to work previously carried out in house being handed to other companies for the sole purpose of doing it cheaper. The “Joint Venture” involves the other party supplying cheaper labour and Qantas supplying work. In doing so Qantas loses direct control of both the quality of work and availability of the parts or aircraft being worked by the third party. We are unaware of any recent joint venture that has led to the other parties supplying work to Qantas to take advantage of the engineering excellence the workforce has developed.

With the Nassenstein model of more outsourced work, we say that it is crucial for our future to retain in-house ability to carry out heavy checks on new aircraft as they arrive. Upon us now are the A380 C checks and so long as management continue to erode existing facilities at the current rate, we will never have a chance of winning a bid for this work. Securing it is vital for those Qantas LAMEs employed in heavy facilities, particularly those at Avalon who face a declining 747 workload as the aircraft acquire parking spots in a Californian desert. Our claim is for a hangar, training and staff ready and available to carry out these checks.

With the prevalence of contract arrangements being increasingly used by Australian companies including the Qantas group, we are also demanding protection to prevent our jobs from being undercut by individuals or labour hire groups offering to do the work for less money. It would be farcical to think we could negotiate our wage rates, lock them into a binding legal contract (our EA) only to see Qantas cut another arrangement with another group to sidestep our Agreement. The claim is that any contract arrangement entered into by Qantas must offer the same or better wages and conditions as negotiated in the EA we are currently discussing. This clause is a must to protect the job security of employees to be covered by the Agreement.

Wages

The ALAEA has proposed substantive changes to the current graded structure. We have, since its inception, struggled with quotas, restrictions, low starting salaries and the constant reluctance of the airline to train because each course is measured in an ongoing financial sense. With the Nassenstein
vision of a smaller but higher qualified group of Engineers, we assume that model may work for them if training is continually fed to those already capped out. In our view that is unacceptable.

What we have sought in a new model is –

• 2 points per year of service
• No payment for future training
• 3 new levels
• No quotas or restrictions
• A380 to come back within the system
• 3% pa rise to wages and allowances

Being paid two points per year is an expensive claim. This, however, is almost entirely offset by the non-payment of training and based on reasonable new licence acquisitions; our figures put the total cost of this portion of our claim at 3.11% pa.

There are two key transitional issues that our Executive is currently discussing. We (the committee) are satisfied that all outstanding unusable service points could not be used in the new system to automatically jump several levels should it come in. We understand that some members feel that they have earned these points and they should be retained but the benefits of accelerated progression and lifting of quotas would far outweigh the desire of members to hang on to unusable points that mean nothing in the current system. The result if it is accepted by the company would be equal progression from where members sit today at a rate of a level every second year. The outcome therefore would be equitable to all and would not represent a union who is fighting to advance one portion of the membership over another.

The other translation issue involves the handling of past customer course training. This matter is complex with some members in certain bases being paid, others not and the prospect of A320 and 777 aircraft returning to the handling list. No decisions have been made by our committee regarding this matter and it will be discussed at length should the need arise into the future.

The other two wage claims relate to increases in Senior LAME payments in line with increased responsibilities and the payment of wages in an aggregate wage format. The aggregate wage (or annualised salary) was a previous commitment given by the company in 1998 and never honoured. In our view, any calculations of our claim that include the cost of an aggregate wage should not be taken into account, rather the company should see this as a large saving they have made already by not introducing it when it was due.

Getting an outcome this time around will not be simple. We expect Qantas to fight tooth and nail to defend its right to dismantle the Qantas Engineering business whilst still publically saying that they would never compromise safety. The managers behind this, in most cases, have been with the business for less time than our average member and do not intend to hang around to see the carnage they will leave behind. Most of them have probably already applied for jobs at the railways.

Be assured the ALAEA will not exercise the right of Protected Industrial Action unless it is absolutely necessary. If we do so it will be done for a good cause and only after negotiation has been given every opportunity of success. Our claims are a work in progress and can only succeed with your support. Without approval in the upcoming ballot, we won’t even stand a chance of successfully negotiating. Feel free to send me an email should you have any further questions.


STEVE PURVINAS
Federal Secretary

For all those who want Nassy at EA meetings - make no mistake, he is an architect of our present and futureless system.

Ngineer
23rd Mar 2011, 12:04
Number one, we don't have the monopoly on quality

This is a comment that is becoming more and more common amongst management. And what I don't understand is what kind of manager sells down his own product in such a dispicable way? The type that wants to wind down his business I guess.

Employee's of this airline who are experienced and qualified to make such observations, and Australians alike, were once proud of QF's high standards. It's about time we had a bit of loyalty in the ranks.

Gas Bags
23rd Mar 2011, 12:06
zkeng on the 2nd Oct 2010:


A Word of Warning

Do not trust C.N. Never ever ever.

Ask the AirNZ guys about the mess he made there. Plenty of very good Engr's left because of him. Since he left for QF, some of the screw-ups have been reversed. Unfortunately, some of the structural changes cannot be reversed.

He has been hired to break you, and he'll do it smiling.

I'll say it again, DO NOT TRUST HIM. Keep everything he puts in print, write down everything he says, you'll need it.
Oh, and he hates confrontation from large groups :E



Engine Wizard on the 2nd Oct 2010:


Air NZ all over again?

Before trusting Chris "Slash-and-Burn" Nassenstein, ask the opinions of all the Air NZ staff he screwed over - before he was given a huge bonus and then getting hired by Qantas. The man has a well-documented history of causing damage. As zkengr has posted, many Kiwis are watching this unfold with great concern. Deja :mad: vu. Hang tough, guys.


He may come across as a "nice guy" but it may pay to heed these two previous posts in your immediate voting future.

The fact that CN has not attended a single meeting is telling. Nothing like being able to distance yourself from what you are controlling and then leaving yourself free to travel the network kissing babies and having the troops refer to you as a nice guy who comes across as a straight shooter.

I would suggest he is well down the road he has been hired to travel, and it is a road he knows well.

GB

Oh Me Oh My
23rd Mar 2011, 19:18
Thanks for the reminder GB, I am one who has seen this nice guy approach and I did think maybe things will change. :confused:

This executive has shown me that they are very serious about what they do unlike others that have gone before them. I work in an area when an ex executive member high profile quit the union when he lost so much for lifelong beliefs. :yuk:

In 2008 we went into battle and I was scared I have a young family and job security was high on my list I do not have the gonads or ability to up and change my job. My / Our union showed everyone how it was done, we got a result that none ever had, I walked around like I was on a cloud chest puffed out I was so proud of our solidarity, our strength of purpose I have not forgot that feeling and I have not forgot that strength of purpose. :ok:

Bring it on CN and QF Management there are many more ways to skin a cat than you'll ever know. :eek:

SP, PC, WV, WB, MW and our rep BC, the rest of the executive and EBA negotiation committee you showed us how to play the game as a team and win as a team keep up the good work I don't always agree with you 100% but I support you 100% as I know you will fight for us all the way. :D

PS to all the detracters and company puppet trolls infecting this forum in the last 5 years the asn has leapt forward representing all its members you just have to read the eTorque to see that. :=

Suck&Blow
24th Mar 2011, 01:14
Just received S.P's SMS. So, it took 6 months for Chris to come to this brilliant plan! :yuk::yuk::yuk:. Thanks, but no thanks.
Maintain the rage!!!!

aveng
24th Mar 2011, 01:54
funny I thought the same 6 months for 3+3+3 -boy they must be really slow or something.:ok:

buttmonkey1
24th Mar 2011, 01:56
chris' offer, 3+3+3, WTF :confused:
didn't WE give them that concession on day one?
his facade is starting to show some cracks.

ampclamp
24th Mar 2011, 04:34
Yes it took too long and it will not satisfy everyone (never will) but it is a good start.
At least we have a talking point.3/3/3, open up grades temporarily but no job security clauses.I presume that I read that correctly?
Will likely only help the top paid people not those with shorter service or lower paid folks.

What is temporary? Won't help me anyway not being held back.
The job security thing will be a sticking point, maintaining current duties etc.

If they wont talk about job security I want honesty and openess in what they have planned ie when they are going to shaft line people?
"Maint on demand". Gold Care what of that?

Until that is sorted and in the open it means jack as when they change the preflt rules we'll lose a lot of people pretty smartly.Wont matter what grade if unemployed.

kotos2
24th Mar 2011, 05:31
CN made a strong start and given the rhetoric would probably have made a good boss. However it now seems he is taking the engineers by the hand and trying to lead them up the garden path for a good old fashioned rodgering.
This is not just about fair renumeration, its about the future of aviation and jobs in Australia.Is it true 40-50 jobs are up for the chop in component maintenance Syd and Mel? Sure seems like GD is alive and kicking and still pulling the strings or maybe its Clifford! I am not too happy about going into PIA but it seems there is little choice with QF just playing corporate games so I will be voting yes!

sicflyer
24th Mar 2011, 06:01
3 + 3 + 3 just ok. Still puts us behind cost of living over the next 2 yrs.

More important to get job security clauses in. If CN can't give us this then should come clean about QF future plans. Most of us have families and need management to come clean and to be honest for once so we can all make informed choices. No security no deal....

Jet-A-One
24th Mar 2011, 06:48
CN you are a joke!

3 + 3 + 3 is an insult!

Add an extra grade for EVERYONE (including raising the starting grade) and you might be getting close.

WTF have you been doing for the last 6 months?

Maintain The Rage !!!

Clipped
24th Mar 2011, 06:55
Nassenstein: In the long term, I would say it will probably mean a smaller but more specialized and higher-trained group of engineers. That will be a difficult process

Months of meetings, negotiations and just being strung along for them to come up with 3%pa.

For those who just see the money value to this EA, just heed those words above. If you think the PIA process might be difficult just imagine in a year or two when your unemployed and having to look for a new job. I'm not being alarmist, but this is the clear ,direction of our current strategy, Q Future - eliminate the legacy costs - that is US.

I for one will demand the inclusion of a job security clause that protects my welfare and the integrity of aviation maintenance at this airline.

Quill Shaft
24th Mar 2011, 07:22
Didn't receive an SMS from SP.

How do I get on the list?

Tried the ALAEA website but could not see it anywhere??

sky rocket
24th Mar 2011, 10:02
Show us that there is a future for QF Engineering CN. Put those words into an EA and we will be happy. NO FUTURE = NO CN. We will show you the revolving management door.:ok:

poison pen
24th Mar 2011, 11:32
Relax people. Lets wait and see what SP has to say. At last Chris has been present to an EA meeting. One of the problems Chris has is the people below him still hang onto the last PIA and they want revenge.
Chris needs to start by using the big broom in QF Management.

PP

ALAEA Fed Sec
24th Mar 2011, 11:37
If CN got rid of all Ops managers, maybe 3% would look good.

the_company_spy
24th Mar 2011, 11:51
If CN got rid of all the "ops managers" he would not only see some decisions actually get made, a 6% rise could be funded.

comrade10
24th Mar 2011, 15:58
bring on the circus, all the qantas management clowns have been taught to juggle again, loving the engagement by the way, cant wait to get to work every day to another ridiculous management idea! BNE heavy, doomed to fail! wake up chris, shes hemoraging at the seems....your loosing sheeties by the bucket load and you cant replace them with contractors, cause guess what? there going to MRTT and the like for twice the rate. About time you guys wake up and smell the coffee, if you dont start rewarding and treating the skilled trade AME,s with respect at BNE Heavy then you wont have anyone left, there was a day when I can remember a job as a sheetie at qantas was a job for life! not anymore jokers....l

Gas Bags
24th Mar 2011, 19:24
Where’s the Qantas offer?
Many of you have told me that you’re waiting for us to put an offer on the table and I can tell you that this is imminent. It might seem like it’s been a long time coming, but let’s look at the negotiations so far. In October 2010, the ALAEA presented an extensive and complex verbal claim of 28 individual items. We respected that and in good faith have been working to evaluate and cost every single item. Now, these weren’t simple items either, some of them were extremely complex and on top there’s a wage claim proposing a new pay structure.

To say that we’ve been sitting still is simply untrue. In order to bargain in good faith, we have to evaluate every claim in detail before we can respond to it. We need to run it by legal and finance for approval and of course get ExCo’s sign off. That all takes time and with such an extensive and complex claim you can see why it’s been a few months.

I’m not just saying this for effect, the ALAEA’s claim really is extreme. We simply can’t afford to give everything they’ve asked for. However, we’ve made some progress as you’ll see in the attached document. Keep in mind too that the unions have rejected the majority of our claims without discussion.

Our finance people are meeting with the Union on Tuesday to discuss our costings of their proposed pay structure.

We’re at a crossroads here guys, and I’m asking you to choose your path very carefully. I don’t want to go through a dispute and a number of you have told me you don’t either. The choice you make now is critical to our future success and to our survival. Please consider your options carefully. I promise you that we will do the same.




How many of the extensive, complex, 28 verbalised claims that has taken 6 months to evaluate in order for them to negotiate in good faith have been referred to in the offer put forward?

You have Chris's promise, in writing, that the company has carefully considered their options before putting this offer on the table.

GB

MEA332
25th Mar 2011, 01:54
When will CN and the rest of the cronies get off their high horse and start showing us some respect by putting something on the table that is more then just 3+ 3+ 3+. that should be the minimum before we even start. CN instead of insulting the union and its members, atleaset offer an item on the list, then we may start taking you guys more serious.
:=

buttmonkey1
25th Mar 2011, 02:32
simple as saying Qfuture has been a total waste of time and their plans
for 'lame on demand', aka 'lame-less tarmac', is a folly. consign it to the
industrial scrapheap along with it's proponents, and lets 'move forward'.

that in a nutshell is all chris needs to add to his latest offer. his big win
will be the regaining the goodwill he had generated amoungst the troops.
every one can save face before the pia comes to be. well perhaps not the
arseclowns peddling the lames future demise.

Silverado
25th Mar 2011, 05:16
unionist1974,

It's pretty obvious your not privy to the goings on between Qantas and the unions. Stop wasting your time.

ASU National Net - Update on Qantas EBA 9 Talks (http://www.asu.asn.au/media/airlines_qantas/20110321_qantas.html)

Update on Qantas EBA 9 Talks 21 March 2011

By the ASU, the airlines industry union

On 18th March 2011 the ASU NNT team met with Qantas and had productive talks regarding EBA 9.
The ASU NNT delegates believe we have a settlement we can recommend to our National Delegates meeting which will be held on 31 March 2011.
At that meeting a recommendation will be made by our delegates to our members about the EBA until that time we have no further comment.
If you want more information talk to your local organiser or delegate or National Negotiating Team member.

Clipped
25th Mar 2011, 06:56
With the share price so low a good dispute will get them off the hook with the big investors and analysts

A public company, so poorly run by our Exco and so poorly overseen by the Board - how do these fools keep their jobs? It sure must be a tightly held matey club up there.

If only they could devote their energy to real strategic growth and not industrial persecution of their staff, we might find the time to respect their office and titles.

This company is now a sham in the business world and has a share price to prove it. AJ and Cliffy, get off your a##s and take this company forward with your loyal staff, so that the business and general community can rebuild the faith they once held for this icon.

Silverado
25th Mar 2011, 07:51
Chris reinforced our desire to reach agreement so we can remain focused on achieving our vision of becoming the industry benchmark for safety, quality and efficiency.

I thought thought we were on a downward spiral, to the level of "worlds best practice"

Didn't CN say "We don't have the monopoly on quality"

Hollow words, me thinks.

Oh Me Oh My
26th Mar 2011, 09:12
Unionist 1974 Heard a whisper, you're a company muppet !

To CN honestly WTF ! An offer is imminent and all it is is 3% and clear quotas that's crap you may as well stayed at home.

Maintain the rage, where's my ballot ?

Bootstrap1
27th Mar 2011, 03:25
If this goes to PIA at what stage will the union and members accept an agreement? Just before or just after the point of no return. When will the ALAEA have some face to face meetings with the members and give some proper feedback.

SMSs and emails are good but being able to ask questions and listen to other peoples concerns in a meeting wouldn't go astray.

It seems this campaign is being run by a few people who think they know what everyone wants. I don't know if everyone wants to go down the path of 2008 and put their jobs in jeopardy again.

LAME2
27th Mar 2011, 05:06
I don't know if everyone wants to go down the path of 2008 and put their jobs in jeopardy again
Then if these people are members, they will have their vote counted like everyone else. If they vote no, and the majority votes no with them, so be it. As in the past, I would expect the Association to take that on board and move forward with that decision being the basis for further talks. If these people vote no and the majority votes yes, then I would expect these people who voted no to accept the result graciously and professionally. They should not try to undermine the process just because they voted against the action. Sometimes we don't get what we want, when we want it, in a democracy.


It seems this campaign is being run by a few people who think they know what everyone wants

Perhaps you need to talk to the Association to let them know what you specifically want. You have been asked previously for ideas. They are only a phone call away.

Bootstrap1
27th Mar 2011, 05:23
Fair enough LAME2. Point taken.

ALAEA Fed Sec
27th Mar 2011, 05:42
It seems this campaign is being run by a few people who think they know what everyone wants.

That's what a union is all about. The few put out a notice asking for member input. They tell us what they want and we form a claim from that input. The campaign is based on legal advice and experience in such matters and you are correct, it gets run by a few.

The other option is a campaign run by 1600 individuals seeking 1600 different outcomes. You would then hear comments like this - Well he is working overtime so why shouldn't I?

When will the ALAEA have some face to face meetings with the members and give some proper feedback?

If you can read, you will understand the feedback. My email address was on the last notice and 1600 members received a SMS message from my phone. Call me if you are a member and still have a problem. If you elect to put your trust in the managers and their friends, the ones who closed Syd HM, then I'm wasting my time with this message.

As for meetings. What chance do you think we would have getting Qantas to approve our entry to their premises whilst a PIA ballot is on? I'd try one of the above methods if you need more info.

If this goes to PIA at what stage will the union and members accept an agreement?

When do you accept a deal from a used car salesman? Do you take his first price? The one on the windscreen under the words "discounted". I'd want an opportunity to talk him down first. Am finding it a bit hard to do that with Qantas when posts like this are appearing on public forums and a few (just a few) blokes are showing signs of weakness at the knees in front of managers.

Ngineer
27th Mar 2011, 05:54
What about a few Rowers meetings?

There is alot of mis-communication, and alot of guys who think this EBA is only about a payrise. We are seeing division as a result, it needs to be nipped in the bud so we can focus on the same agenda.

Jet-A-One
27th Mar 2011, 05:54
Most members I talk to don't want to go down the PIA road but they will vote for it to show the company we are fair dinkum and to have the tools available if needed later.

Regarding the wage claim, GH is making it fairly clear he won't consider the 2 points per year model without a big fight and if the last dispute is anything to go by they won't give any more than the 3%pa headline wage rise. So it comes down to the sweeteners. A temporary opening of quotas just isn't going to cut it for most members. Unless there's an extra grade or points for EVERYONE it's not going to be voted in.

Opening up the quotas temporarily is great if you are one of the lucky ones who pick up a grade or two but it's going to make it very hard for those trying to get into the over-subscribed quotas after the life of the agreement. A very short sighted proposition.

The compulsory recognition and thus payment of EASA allowances for ALL LAMEs who achieve the applicable qualification and not just those picked by the company is another thing we should be pursuing seriously. QF should be forced to bring all LAMEs and AMEs into the new system not just those they segregate over to separate operations like "Team380". This is yet another divide and concur issue!

Just a few of my opinions and what I'm hearing around the traps. Feel free to shoot me down.

Arnold E
27th Mar 2011, 05:57
The other option is a campaign run by 1600 individuals seeking 1600 different outcomes.

That's called work choices, you dont want to go there. Stay with your union and trust them.

ALAEA Fed Sec
27th Mar 2011, 06:04
What about a few Rowers meetings?

They would come before we took any action. PIA is at least 6-8 weeks away and a lot of water will pass under the bridge first. We need members to show some nerve.

Bootstrap1
27th Mar 2011, 07:07
Jet A One and Ngineer that is the point to wanted to make, I just didn't make it well

ALAEA Fed Sec
27th Mar 2011, 07:15
What they have said pretty much mirrors what our notices have been saying. Just a few simple points are-

-We want a negotiated outcome. Qantas did not give us one scrap of anything until the prospect of PIA was before them. Take that possibility away and we move 6 months back with no prospect of conclusion.

-This EA is not about a pay rise. It is about job security and hopefully, to fix a few ongoing issues with our pay system.

-Do not take your Industrial advice from Managers.

-Do not take your Industrial advice from want to be Managers.

-Please read our notices, emails etc... Read them again if need be or call me. If I don't answer, send an SMS and I will get back to you.

cheers

Ngineer
27th Mar 2011, 07:27
They would come before we took any action.

If we get that far. I am concerned that the vote may turn into a debacle because of alot of mis-informed people.

ALAEA Fed Sec
27th Mar 2011, 07:30
Some more comms will come out tomorrow.

Talkwrench
27th Mar 2011, 08:48
Well I'm bemused to say the least.

6 months or more down the track and they proffer 3+3+3 and a quota fiddle. The same old formula. sigh. where's the innovation? where's the ground breaking vision?

It aint rocket science fellas.

The exec proved themselves last eba and the members proved themselves last eba.

On that basis alone I'll be ticking the yes box.

Use the old noodle and you'll work it out.

LAME2
27th Mar 2011, 09:30
We should all be seeking a fair deal. In todays environment, that possibly means for the majority, some form of job security. If we were to accept only a 3% PA rise with no other clauses, I feel we are voting some of our brothers out of the company. We would be agreeing, to a reduction in our numbers. We would be agreeing to a reshuffling of our crew composition and our rostering. Fewer numbers on days, more people on nights or alternatively fewer numbers on nights and more nightshifts per roster pattern. Recent experience shows we are not fully informed of the consequences of our discussions with the company. I refer to the B747 outsourcing. "Vote for an early EBA to help us capture extra work otherwise it will be sent overseas". Only to see the overhaul checks sent overseas. Give with one hand and with slight of hand, take with the other.

This period of instability may contain the most important decisions of our careers, one our children will either hold in disdain or thank us for. Decisions where we aid the demise of our proud profession or support the foundations on which it has been built.

I put my faith in the Bexley boys. They may not hit a home run each time but they give their all for the rest of us. I'm sure the likes of company CEO's and CASA Management grind their teeth at night thinking what will arrive from Bexley tomorrow. Keep them honest lads. The likes of others wont.

Rant over. Apologies to all.

1746
27th Mar 2011, 10:25
I put my faith in the Bexley boys. They may not hit a home run each time but they give their all for the rest of us. I'm sure the likes of company CEO's and CASA Management grind their teeth at night thinking what will arrive from Bexley tomorrow. Keep them honest lads. The likes of others wont.
Hear, hear!

LAME 2 - I saw no rant!

The only apologies that are required are from the posers who call themselves management!

Jethro Gibbs
27th Mar 2011, 10:58
Vote for an early EBA to help us capture extra work otherwise it will be sent overseas". Only to see the overhaul checks sent overseas.
Should have seen that coming when they wanted early EBA vote "fail"

kotos2
27th Mar 2011, 11:41
The other operators are circling. Sign up for the EBA quickly so they have confidence in the stability within QF. Yeah right! Ground Hog day.

YOSHI
27th Mar 2011, 21:47
A vote for PIA is a must................
If you vote no then you are entrusting your future with QF managenent.
If you vote no then you are entrusting your house, your kids your lifestyle with QF management.

If you think QF management is doing a good job of running the company for long term performance, and is doing it's best to further the aircraft maintenance industry in Australia, then vote no, it's as simple as that..........

If you cannot confidently answer 'yes' to the above paragraph, then you must vote 'YES' for PIA.

I would expect that QF is the biggest single employer of LAMEs in Aus. so we are responsible for ensuring the long term viability of the profession, as QF management is only concerned with short term profit, even at the expense of Australia's Aircraft Engineering capability.

As Fed Sec has said, it's about more than money!

I am one of the few who would benefit from the removal of quotas, but I also want a long term future, something this 'offer' does not give.

Bigdog01
27th Mar 2011, 23:00
Being a sunny bunny I was interested to hear of a visit by the Q team over the weekend. Did you get the usual lip service "were not here to negotiate but explain the company position".
You like us already know the company position as we see and hear the Irish brogue through out the media crying poor - although they do announce a 56% increase in profits.
So it must be future poor after he screws up the airline!

Doesn't it make you feel all warm and fuzzy when they open this way - knowing full well that they are just ticking the box's so that when it blows up they can say we have been communicating with the staff.
Firstly the person talking is not or will ever be allowed to make a decision regarding the EA.

I can not see the Irish giving anybody job security as he rides the down ward spiral ( his contract short term) ours is long term. He will be long gone with the golden hand shake, while we are still there trying to glue the wheels back on.

Unity is a must.

Millet Fanger
28th Mar 2011, 05:25
Just got out of one of those meetings. Were told that they aren't holding the meeting to tell us how to vote, but the industry would cease to exist if we voted 'Yes'. (Possible slight exaggeration).

They didn't like the tactics the ALAEA were employing, but were speechless when asked about using Oldfield Consulting and couldn't give an answer as to why they waited for a PIA ballot before putting out such a basic 3x3x3 offer on the table.

The best part was when asked "What will you do if we vote 'Yes'"? The answer was "We haven't stopped negotiating, there are other matters that we are willing to consider".

So, if the offer tabled by Qantas is not their best and final offer, if they are willing to consider more, why not vote 'Yes' to enable the ALAEA negotiating team to get the best offer posible?

YOSHI
28th Mar 2011, 08:03
Millet Fanger.
I couldn't agree more.
As I said at the beginning of all this 'Let the games begin'. If we don't vote yes for PIA then we WILL lose the game.

Vote yes for PIA.............

Clipped
28th Mar 2011, 09:43
SP and team,

I think you guys are doing a sterling job. Keep it up. Thankfully it is not me that has to sit across those mongrels at the negotiating table.

You have provided lots of info recently and lames need to understand that the next phase of the negotiation process needs to be a vote of solidarity that allows our negotiating team to get the best outcome.

Trust my Association or trust Qantas management .... now let me think about that.

ALAEA, you've got my YES vote.

Oh Me Oh My
28th Mar 2011, 11:46
Trust my Association or trust Qantas management

It about says it all, I don't make decisions regarding my future or our future lightly QF management right up to the stubby irishman have no concern for us at all only we can safeguard our future :ugh:

VOTE YES FOR PIA and LET THE NEGOTIATION TEAM DO IT"S JOB
:ok:
After all at least we voted them unlike QF Mgrs who just got 'appointed' sometimes over and over :eek:

ALAEA Fed Sec
29th Mar 2011, 02:24
You have no idea what we have.

Currently we have the right (within our EBA) to retain all existing job functions. A right won by ALAEA members when they stood up for their rights last time around.

I would not suggest any member take advice from a unionist who has been involved in some way with the dismantling of Australian facilities. Now we are left fitting substandard parts and engines because of another group that did not have the balls to stand up.

Oh Me Oh My
29th Mar 2011, 04:26
Heard a rumour that managers were in SIN last week sourcing possible scab labor, anyone heard similar ?

33 Disengage
29th Mar 2011, 04:44
The first vote has been posted - Yes for PIA. Running total 100% for, zero against.

Don't forget, vote early and vote often!

Slim Dog
29th Mar 2011, 04:57
A YES vote has been cast and sent! :)
Good luck guys and I for one hope for a solid outcome!

chockchucker
29th Mar 2011, 05:40
Heard a rumour that managers were in SIN last week sourcing possible scab labor, anyone heard similar ?


Bruce Buchannan and other assorted Jetstar executives were indeed sighted holding meetings in a Singapore hotel a week or so back. Couldn't say what the subject of their meetings, with other un-identified people, was all about.


Heard it might be regarding Singapore line maintenance contracts but, your guess is as good as mine.

Quill Shaft
29th Mar 2011, 05:47
Its a YES vote from me :ok:

Millet Fanger
29th Mar 2011, 06:11
GH was in SIN on Tues & Wed last week talking ronin Qantas employed LAMEs.

I've voted Yes. Still 100% for PIA at the moment.

ALAEA Fed Sec
29th Mar 2011, 06:40
They were up in Sin talking about 380 Hangar space.

lamem
29th Mar 2011, 07:55
There are Managers missing in action at the moment. Possibly contingency training. Possibly in the US of A.

Oh Me Oh My
29th Mar 2011, 09:06
Good to hear its all above board..............................................:eek:

Ballot here, another YES to PIA sent off

100% still :ok:

33 Disengage
30th Mar 2011, 00:08
It's a pity DM hasn't gone missing in action. I can't believe that QE management have rolled him out to try and convince LAMEs to vote no. After his record (still remember reading the court transcripts) from last pia, I think his efforts in the last week has converted a few no votes to the yes side of the argument.

It's a big YES vote from me. 100% maintained.

Talkwrench
30th Mar 2011, 06:36
Signed, Sealed, Delivered...you know how it goes!

100% target on track!

Jethro Gibbs
30th Mar 2011, 08:31
After today's news I would think the the EBA PIA or not will end up being what we have now or less most likely less.

division1
30th Mar 2011, 08:33
Hoping my yes vote will help them to go sharpen their pencils.

Millet Fanger
30th Mar 2011, 09:12
After today's news I would think the the EBA PIA or not will end up being what we have nowAre you commenting on the fact that there will be more money in the kitty because they are cutting the 'fat' out of the management ranks?
or
Are you commenting on the fact that in Feb Jet* Domestic Seat Revenue decreased by 5%, and, Jet* International decreased by almost 5% while Qantas International increased it's seat revenue percentage?

Nothing to do with Qantas mainline, Jetstar is 'totally separate', remember!

Either way the PIA ballot is about giving a bargaining chip to the ALAEA because QE management refuse to negotiate. 6 months of negotiating achieved nothing, application for PIA and we got an incomplete offer.

Maybe Old Ianmeadow's consultancy might get the chop!

Jethro Gibbs
30th Mar 2011, 10:23
Management refuse to negotiate. 6 months of negotiating achieved nothing, application for PIA and we got an incomplete offer which is still nothing I cannot see these p#$%ks giving anything unless its to themselves they would rather run the place off a cliff and collect there package of $$.

ALAEA Fed Sec
30th Mar 2011, 13:15
In 2008 when Qantas made a record profit the situation was as such.

Fuel $147 US a barrel. Dollar .89 - .96.

With fuel so cheap now, what the hell are they whinging about?

The Mr Fixit
31st Mar 2011, 10:10
Oops better watch out the very fabric of our world is crumbling ........ really Alan that ole chestnut ...... again

Another ballot paper in the mail still on target for 100% :ok:

the rim
31st Mar 2011, 10:44
on target for 100% there she goes....sent

poison pen
31st Mar 2011, 11:07
My YES vote has been signed by my Poison Pen and it is now ready to proceed to the Tech Log, Cabin Log, Overnight work packages etc etc.

Poison Pen is ready SP

Bigdog01
31st Mar 2011, 12:11
Well here we are another week of the IRISH crying poor.

Interesting article in the news paper today, top 9 execs at Q so proud of posting profit gave themselves big back slap and 58% increase in wages.

So lets see 58% of 4 mil = 2.32 mil nice bonus to make the next year more bearable - should cover the cost of living increases.

Staff increase 3% example wage 61000 = 1830 nearly covers increase in electricity and water. Doesn't cover fuel and groceries. damn get over it.
You work for the caring sharing Q management.
:*

the_company_spy
31st Mar 2011, 12:21
top 9 execs at Q so proud of posting profit gave themselves big back slap and 58% increase in wages


and meanwile, here we are maintaining multi-million dollar aircraft with clapped out ground equipment, lack of tooling, lack of hangar sspace, lack of support workshop personell, lack of manpower - but plenty of "why isn't that jet serviceable yet"

when will the penny drop?

Oh Me Oh My
31st Mar 2011, 12:38
ffs if its not an irishman doing a woe is me and chest beating to the world that the old red rat is going down the drain :yuk:, its prima donnas and their lost customer payment or service points:mad:, i lost out too but you don't see me gettin on my soapbox I just take my sights on the manager that stole it from me, sorry bout the rant after all it is late.:*

sky rocket
1st Apr 2011, 00:53
When my ballot paper arrived, my first thoughts were to vote yes. I've been thinking long and hard about how I will vote. I can't find any reason why I would even consider putting a tick in the No box. Congratulations Bexley, another YES vote posted to the AEC.:ok:

Silverado
1st Apr 2011, 01:20
Thanks Keith for your email yesterday. If I had any doubt's before, now I'm certain. Another YES vote.

Ngineer
1st Apr 2011, 03:10
As long as we "tender" for "our" own work I will tender my yes vote.

Yesssssssssss!:ok:

The one thing that makes this Airline great was it's reputation for safety. This fight will save our jobs and our airline, not destroy it.

MEA332
1st Apr 2011, 05:51
If Qf and Ian are thinking of settling old scores before putting the airline first, I am sure the shareholder will soon figure that out fast!

The general public I speak to this time around are asking me...

"Wow, 9000+ pissed off staff, what is going on over at Qantas, what are they doing?"

"How can Qantas let the situation get to this?"

"Are we going to hear about a crash, I am too scared to fly Qantas now, are they safe?"

The general public are over hearing about Aircraft defects, PIA, delayed and cancelled flights due to QF miss-management.

Clipped
1st Apr 2011, 08:39
I have no wanting to harm the airline.

But management's greed, lies, short sightdness and self serving hypocisy leaves me no choice than attack their existence.

YES.

ALAEA Fed Sec
1st Apr 2011, 11:23
Thnx for that perspective Ian.

HARDNUT
1st Apr 2011, 12:18
Rumour has it that after visiting Singapore G.H dropped in at Cairns to word up his Dmm sc$bs! With not much work they don't realise but once they have helped out the company in this PIA their heads will be on the chopping block. The company can't justify having 2 Dmm's there with minimal work. Hope you guys have saved all your O.T money from last PIA because aviation is a small industry , everyone knows about them. Maybee they can go to the railways. :)

YOSHI
1st Apr 2011, 19:38
unionist1974

you obviously have no idea what you are talking about,

and your old mate in base maint is obviously a 'Company Man'

P.S. Fed Sec, YES!!!!!!!!!

33 Disengage
1st Apr 2011, 20:17
I am dumb, so dumb , it has taken me ages to figure out what lay behind the training points proposal .Half of your quote is correct, but let's look at the second half of it. If your conspiracy theory is correct, why has the ALAEA recommended a YES vote for PIA? i.e. A big NO to the half baked offer that Qantas made after 6 months of negotiations, which would have satisfied the greed that you imply drives the negotiators.

Old Ianmeadow's tactics worked for many years but wake up to yourself it's a different Executive these days!

Gas Bags
2nd Apr 2011, 23:15
and meanwile, here we are maintaining multi-million dollar aircraft with clapped out ground equipment, lack of tooling, lack of hangar sspace, lack of support workshop personell, lack of manpower


Perhaps you could have a spy around the real world and you would see how laughable that comment is!!

the_company_spy
3rd Apr 2011, 00:08
Sorry Mrs Bags, you are so right, compared to the 3rd rate set up that Lufthansa has in Frankfurt, Qantas is a world benchmark.