PDA

View Full Version : Qf LAME EBA Negotiations Begin


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

howyoulikethat
3rd Apr 2011, 02:02
Good luck boys,let the games begin.......beware the jubb jubb bird and hark the furious bandasnatch,evil lies in the strangest places.
Remember last time some peoples colours where truly shown and will never be
forgiven......"tell your heart that the fear of suffering is worse than the suffering itself,and no heart has ever suffered when it goes in search of its dream":cool:

Gas Bags
3rd Apr 2011, 02:08
It is easy to convince yourself of all the downfalls regarding the place you work. I have been there and been through it.

You sit in the lunch room discussing how bad the conditions are. Everybody has their own example of when it all went pear shaped...."I tried to get the tooling out of store the other night and they had sent it interstate, why they dont have two sets of the tooling based here is beyond me". "I tried to book out a few -5 screws and they only had -6's. Lucky for them they had thicker washers and I could get the aircraft going again".

I bet somebody even sat in the lunchroom who had been to a Lufthansa facility in Frankfurt and said it left anything Qantas has for dead.

You hear all this stuff in the workplace so it must be gospel and sure enough given time, in your mind it is. Sooner or later you even begin to tell the story you heard in the lunchroom about this fantastic facility that Lufthansa has in Frankfurt to other people, in the first person, just like the person you heard it from was telling it to his willing audience of world travelled listeners in the first person when you first heard it.

Overall Qantas has excellent facilities, spares, manpower levels, tooling, ground equipment, and I am sure a lot of stuff most other workplaces only dream of having. To suggest otherwise is naieve at best.

What Qantas dont have is a decent pay scale. That is what you should be talking about because convincing yourself that everything at Qantas is second rate because you dont like their IR tactics only makes you look foolish and it sticks out like a baby crying for its mothers teat.

What qualifies me to suggest any of this you are probably asking??? I know too many people who have and do work at Qantas. If we weren't hiding behind the anonimity of this forum I may even know you. If I didnt I would know somebody who does.

Wake up and fight for a way to get above any decent level on your pay scale without having to wait 30 years....That is what is important.

WheelsandBrakes
3rd Apr 2011, 07:13
Hey Gas Bags,

So overall QF have excellent facilities, manpower levels, etc, etc....?

Methinks you don't know anyone who works for QF at Perth!

ALAEA Fed Sec
3rd Apr 2011, 11:42
Isn't it past your bed time Ian?

Ngineer
3rd Apr 2011, 11:53
I can't believe he actually wastes his energy typing such childish remarks. Must be getting desperate.

Always good for a laugh though.

Jethro Gibbs
3rd Apr 2011, 12:31
So overall QF have excellent facilities, manpower levels, etc, etc....?


Not Avalon very much a backyard operation with insufficient and inadequate equipment and workshops for the tasks required Qantas is probably 20 years or more behind European type operations in having adequate Facilities to do the job.

Oh Me Oh My
3rd Apr 2011, 14:53
I must say Unionist 1974 or Ian or Ashhhhley send me some of that sh!t you're smoking

what utter nonsense but as someone else noted always good for a laugh

Just about at the point of action, tension is building we've had the manager speil on how tough times are, god I love putting them on the spot
" So when are you going to get rid of us ?"

What is Engineer on demand ?"

"Who is really in charge of engineering and would I know him if I tripped over him ?

Time for talk is over it's now time for action

Sunfish
3rd Apr 2011, 20:26
Gas bags and Unionist74 are QF management trolls.

...And as a matter of fact I have been right through Lufthansa facilities in Frankfurt and Hamburg on Ansett business, and in detail. Even in the early 1980's they had autonomous robot vehicles delivering spares from stores and a virtually paperless hangar.

The only thing that was a little disconcerting was watching LAMEs down Two Steins of beer at lunchtime in the caf.:eek:

Nepotisim
3rd Apr 2011, 20:56
Watching LAMEs down two steins of beer at lunchtime in the cafe.

I hope thats part of the EA bargaining.:eek:

33 Disengage
3rd Apr 2011, 21:14
First you claim some of the ALAEA eba committee are driven by greed, then you claim another one has been bought a certain executive member was given a dream ride to supervisor and he is negotiating for you , reckon he owes a favour or two, I DO but you are about to be thumped in a PIA vote that this same committee has recommended strongly to support.

Do you now concede that your (and hence Qantas') tactics are out of date and irrelevant?

kotos2
3rd Apr 2011, 22:30
Your efforts have to be applauded unionist1974 the last time this tactic was attempted it was highly successful......for the union. Is this like umm.... reverse physcology or something.And really who actually aspires to being a supervisor at QF. He is being punished!

buttmonkey1
4th Apr 2011, 00:50
that turdburglar is way out of touch.
what's this supervisor position anyhow?
the old international 'maint supervisor' perhaps?

had to wait all weekend,
but my yes vote is in the mail now.
and if anyone is still undecided
YouTube - With Us or Against Us (http://www.youtube.com/embed/-23kmhc3P8U)

Clipped
4th Apr 2011, 08:27
Ashhhhley

Now there's a mindnumbing, incompetent, yes man if ever I've met one. Promoted to his meaningless post by GH as a thank you for betraying LAMEs. That's what it takes to to succeed as a leader in Qantas.

Enjoy the the limelight while it lasts son.

Nepotisim
4th Apr 2011, 16:30
From the SMH........

Qantas sends secret strike breakers to train in LA (http://www.smh.com.au/business/qantas-sends-secret-strike-breakers-to-train-in-la-20110404-1cyqa.html)


Qantas sends secret strike breakers to train in LA
Matt O'Sullivan, Mark Hawthorne
April 5, 2011
QANTAS has been secretly sending managers to the US for training in ground-handling and check-in operations as the company steps up its preparations for looming strikes.

The airline has been readying its managers since before Christmas for the prospect of industrial action by ground staff, including baggage and ramp handlers in the second half of this year.

The training by private contractors at Los Angeles airport includes loading and unloading aircraft, as well as driving trucks in restricted airport areas.

Advertisement: Story continues below
Staff are also told about the basic legal requirements that they must meet in any ground-handling roles.

''It is very hands-on,'' said one source who has done the training. ''You have to drive the trucks out to the aircraft and do the loading and unloading, and lining the trucks up to the aircraft doors.''

Qantas has to resort to sending managers overseas for training in ground-handling because Australian contractors refuse to teach potential strike breakers here. It takes about five staff to unload a Boeing 737 aircraft and prepare it for another flight.

A Qantas spokesman confirmed managers had been sent to the US as part of its contingency plans, but said it was something the airline had done previously during industrial disputes over the past 10 years.

''This type of contingency measure is important to ensure our passengers can continue to fly as normal in the event of union-led strikes,'' he said.

''We were forced to use this contingency in the past when the TWU took unprotected industrial action.''

Qantas trains secret strike-breakers in LA
The airline has been engaged in negotiations with unions representing both licensed aircraft engineers and 1700 long-haul pilots for months. The engineers are considered more likely to strike.

But it is the thousands of Qantas workers represented by the Transport Workers Union who are considered most likely to take industrial action this year. The TWU represents baggage handlers, refuellers and ramp and catering staff.

The airline is suing the TWU for more than $1 million in damages for wildcat strikes by its members at capital-city airports two years ago.

However, attempts by Qantas to use strike-breakers is considered a short-term measure because once a passenger jet has been worked on by them it is regarded as ''tainted''. Other Qantas workers, such as engineers, are almost certain to refuse to later work on the aircraft.

Qantas has a history of training strike-busting workforces in preparation for periods of industrial unrest.

Last week the airline announced cost-cutting measures, including axing managers, in an attempt to combat high jet-fuel prices and the impact of natural disasters in Queensland, Japan and New Zealand on travel demand.

Jethro Gibbs
5th Apr 2011, 01:34
QANTAS has been secretly sending managers to the US for training in ground-handling and check-in operations
This company has way to many managers if they have the time to go to LA for this also how much would this cost.:ugh:too much.

Millet Fanger
5th Apr 2011, 03:14
Mr Joyce
If you, or any of your management team, ever bothered to engage (negotiate) with Qantas' employees you would be surprised.

1) QF would save millions from management strike breaking training in LAX.
2) Those managers would be more productive in their original jobs.
3) You would find that QF employees are an asset not liability.
4) Illiminate the negative publicity for Qantas in the media.
A quote from another thread. Sums up the situation at the moment.

Senior management that won't work with it's staff, and hence forces them into confrontation.

bandit2
5th Apr 2011, 03:28
Lets hope they teach the managers how to pull out the chocks before departing an aircraft.

BrissySparkyCoit
5th Apr 2011, 07:08
Rather interesting that they train up these people long before there is even a hint of industrial action.

Goes to show that their lack of willingness to negotiate in good faith is premeditated.

wingers
5th Apr 2011, 09:40
Seems that Newport Aviation has been reincarnated....OLDMEADOW has engaged Mr Kosoric aka resumedomain.com and Mr MacDONALD aka NEWPORT AVIATION.... via new disguise....looks like they have started via baggage in NZ... LAMES be aware

Ngineer
6th Apr 2011, 00:43
This forum is beginning to look a little like an EBA8 re-union.

Oh Me Oh My
6th Apr 2011, 03:35
Woo Hoo PARTY !:O!:ok:!:E

Righty Tighty
6th Apr 2011, 04:21
Firstly, The title of Manager at Qf is given to anyone who is happy to be a puppet or a nascissus
Heard that one of the larger Dmm's in CNS is also headed to LA,maybe for some check-in training,don't think he would fit in a tug.
Hopefully with his new skills he will leave engineering and manage check-in some where,or maybe he is using this as an alternative to pick up chicks instead of those nasty online dating services:ok:
Don't forget boys these 2 blokes up north are happy to go to work while you are out getting them a better pay deal:=

Silverado
6th Apr 2011, 04:59
A reminder to everyone that the PIA ballot closes on Wednesday 13/04/11 at 10am.

Please encourage everyone to vote (whatever their vote maybe).

The results will be officially published on the Fair Work Australia (http://www.fwa.gov.au/index.cfm?pagename=industrialballotsresult) website.

Here's an example of a recent ballot that failed to get the required 50% percent returned votes. NUW and Qantas Airways Limited (http://www.fwa.gov.au/documents/industrialballotsresults/nuw/nuw_20112580.pdf)

Bootstrap1
6th Apr 2011, 05:03
The BE AL-L and end all in CNS.

Quill Shaft
6th Apr 2011, 06:21
The BE AL-L and end all in CNS.

Makes me sick to think that when SHM was closing down, our association was doing what ever it could to help certain people keep their job, even though they were technically still not a QF LAME:yuk:

another superlame
6th Apr 2011, 06:59
You got it in one Quill Shaft. And to think that the career progression for the individual has come along in leaps and bounds at the expense of other loyal staff members.
But this is for another time I guess.

B.U.F.F.
6th Apr 2011, 07:25
Having read most of this thread and the sunnies saga, the one constant in this is management ( term used loosely).

The doom and gloom merchants don't seem to think you the worker has a memory.
1. fuel is actually cheaper now than awhile ago. If they hedged their price in US dollars then their mistake would be hurting them rather than the price.
2. I read the same article in the newspaper - exec pay rises that's fair but only if all receive it. I am sure all would appreciate a 58% bonus. I would work a bit harder if rewarded like that.

Overall i feel they (management) are giving themselves an out when it all goes down - blame the Unions. When it is their or their predecessors bad management plan and re - equipment debacle which is causing the most grief.

Other operators with marginal profits on long routes are using big twins like A330 and 777, makes sense to me only 2 engines to fuel and pax capacity pretty good even with business class.

Keep up the fight as we all benefit indirectly.

sky rocket
6th Apr 2011, 11:35
Game on Ian Oldmeadow. We are more united than last EBA. Let the ballot results show you.

QFBUSBOY
6th Apr 2011, 14:34
Ding dong the Dick is Dead.

Wonder why they cut his head off before the PIA started?

Maybe they didnt want a repeat of the SMH incident.

Farewell Club Buggery.:ok:

Jet-A-One
6th Apr 2011, 21:39
Good to hear the end of the biggest dick in the west!

Get rid of the two scabs in the far north and you may really get some
line guys on side once you get a decent EBA on the table GH...

Keep the buggery out of it and there's a chance we can reach an agreement. Start mobilising the scabs like Murray did last time and and the gloves will be off!

Choose your own destiny Gav.

33 Disengage
6th Apr 2011, 23:40
no progress has been made on the engineers' push for a 28.6 per cent pay riseThis is the little irishman's briefing to the media today (Herald Sun 7/4/11).

GH please tell those above you that if senior management want a fight, just keep going the way they are. The only brand damage that is happening at the moment is by joyce. His efforts today and on ACA on monday reveal his hand. What's his agenda? I will ponder that one on my J* flight to SFO!!!

opalops
7th Apr 2011, 00:33
Qantas isn't really tightening its seat belt

April 7, 2011 - 9:29AM
Comments 2 (http://www.smh.com.au/business/qantas-isnt-really-tightening-its-seat-belt-20110407-1d4y8.html#comments)



There's been an amazing amount of bluff and bluster from Qantas CEO Alan Joyce over the past week. If you only read the headlines, you'd almost think Qantas was tightening its seat belt. It's not.
Putting 21 tired old 737s and a couple of near-ancient 767s up for sale makes for a good headline (http://www.smh.com.au/business/qantas-to-cut-ageing-boeing-fleet-20110403-1ct77.html), but the real surprise is buried in the fine print: despite the well-publicised impact of natural and nuclear disasters, the oil price, fragile domestic tourism, currency damage to inbound travel and the annoying John Travolta flight safety video, Qantas is expanding its domestic and international capacity in the second half of this year by 8 and 7 per cent respectively.
That is not belt tightening. Alan Joyce might be fiddling with the buckle, but the belt is sitting loosely over a pair of comfort-fit pants with the hidden waist expander as the airline goes for a second helping of roast turkey. And if Boeing can ever get its 787 to stay airborne for longer than the Spruce Goose, Qantas is looking at dessert with a shovel.
Advertisement: Story continues below
In an industry more rational than aviation, you'd expect the current litany of woes to mean no capacity expansion, if not a contraction.
What's more, the 737 and 767s of pensionable age won't really be missed. They're only in the air thanks to being written down to nearly zero, meaning the return-on-capital-employed figure made up for the more expensive maintenance, higher fuel costs and the brand damage caused by reduced reliability, tired cabins and worse seats.
(Not untypical was the cushion on my Thursday evening Sydney-Brisbane run being pretty much gone, leaving an uncomfortable metal bar under the thighs – and that was business class. I would not have wanted to be paying for it. Ditto “business class” in the old 737s that are basically economy seats with the middle chair blocked off. These planes have become incompatible with the Qantas makeover.)
So what's really happening with the Flying Roo when the walk isn't matching the talk? Those given to conspiracy theories might have an eye on the growing industrial relations tensions, but I suspect a bigger bet is being made on prosperity being just around the corner. That's always quite a bet in the risky aviation business.
There are some interesting factors caught up in that gamble. The current oil price jump is not like the last demand-driven tightening. Those with a better understanding of these things reckon there's about a $15 “risk premium” in today's price – it's the speculation about potential supply disruption, rather than a fundamental change.
The thing about a risk premium price spike is that it happens quicker and isn't accompanied by the natural hedge Australia tends to get from a stronger dollar. Yes, the Aussie is around post-float highs, but as a major energy and commodities exporter, our currency's recent rise has not kept pace with the oil price. If it had, our dollar would be buying something more like $US1.10.
The flip side is that the risk premium can disappear as quickly as it arose. A sudden resolution of the Libyan war could send the oil speculators running for the doors, wiping most of that premium out. Want to bet an airline's profitability on Libyan battlefields? I guess that's why it's called a risk premium.
In the meantime, the speed of the oil price hike is hitting inelastic demand – meaning higher petrol prices are immediately felt in consumers' hip pockets. Leisure travel is one of the more discretionary items in the household budget and quickly cut when the consumer perceives their domestic budget has to be tightened.
Well, their domestic tourism budget is being tightened anyway. The latest Roy Morgan Research holiday-tracking survey recorded the lowest January quarter score (57 per cent) since 2006 for Australians intending to holiday in Australia for their next trip in the next 12 months, but the highest score (10 per cent) in five years for Australians intending to travel overseas for their next trip in the next 12 months.
If the oil price was demand rather than risk premium driven, it would be symptomatic of a healthier, stronger economy. Before the GFC smashed the party, oil prices were a great deal higher, but everyone was having such a good time dancing, they barely noticed. Right now, people are noticing.
In this climate then, it's very strange for the two Australian airline groups to be increasing capacity. Maybe running an airline is like being an average farmer: if you weren't given to some form of optimism, you couldn't undertake the daily triumph of hope over experience. Yet there are reasons for some optimism - or excuses, depending on your disposition.
Qantas' international problems and profitability or lack thereof are very well publicised by the management. What you don't hear so much about is how very nicely profitable QantasLink is – the domestic regional business is doing very well indeed, so let's not draw attention to it. Include Qantas's ambition to grab more of the resources charter business and regional Australia is serving the Roo well. As the resources boom picks up pace, it should serve it even better.
The big promise of the capex boom being spread around, as preached by the Reserve Bank and Treasury, plus the billions being pushed into our economy by the terms of trade still means continued growth in employment and wages. Eventually, more jobs for more people with more money means more spending. The consumer might be suffering some sticker shock about electricity and petrol today, but that tends to wear off in time and the discretionary spending returns. Remember that the RBA doesn't see a consumer strike, but a healthy abating of “the run-up in household leverage”. Healthier households become stronger ones – the unknown is how long it will be before they feel healthy enough to handle more indulgence.
And business is waiting for its share of the capex and resources billions. The smarter operators are already working on getting theirs, both in services growth and services to the services growth. And winning and servicing business still requires plenty of travel.
It's much harder to find a sunny side of the international inbound street given the acknowledged current problems. Volume hope is still a few years away when China is richer again and we experience the next new wave of tourism, if we're smart enough to win it and if our carriers are competitive. In the meantime, there are plenty of us going shopping overseas and needing to come home again. Qantas's challenge is to be the carrier of choice on the routes we want.
Right now though, there are bums on seats, but the bums aren't yielding much profit. It's a brave CEO then who keeps adding capacity, providing more seats – or all is not quite so gloomy in the Qantas crystal ball.
It'd be nice to think that the real test of how serious Qantas is about its belt tightening will be revealed in the annual report when we see what's happened to the pay packets of the CEO and CFO – but somehow such things seem immune to turbulence.

blubak
7th Apr 2011, 02:31
Pls do us all the favour of not lying-Pls do us all the favour of not treating us as fools & Pls do us all the favour of being consistent in you & your management's communication.
If you wish to cast yourself as a trustworthy person then coming out with such absolute rot as you have done with your claim that the engineers are looking for 28.6% is an absolute disgrace.A letter to your employees will do nothing if you then go and make outlandish claims in the media as to what the wage claims of the union are,we are all not stupid and sucked in by this sort of propoganda-being truthful and not hiding behind smoke screens would be a good start towards reacing an agreement.

Ngineer
7th Apr 2011, 03:29
So, in the absence of GD what as changed? Nothing!!

ALAEA Fed Sec
7th Apr 2011, 04:39
So, in the absence of GD what as changed?

Sounds like they have one less "Life Coach". Any bets on who will be the next WA Manager?

Righty Tighty
7th Apr 2011, 04:59
Yeah Heard one of the larger DMM's from CNS is heading WA way,
lots of bad Lame's over there that will need coaching :D
Big Dick putting on a KEG?

Black Hands
7th Apr 2011, 05:41
The busiest port in the network... A consumer survey that ranks Perth as Australia's worst airport... Unsatisfactory facilities and ammenities available for use by engineering staff... One engineering building still condemned due to contamination caused by a storm over 12 months ago... Apparently the locker room is a "porta-hut" in the middle of bay 12. At least the male staff have one... Minimal ground equipment... Minimal spares... A disengaged workforce still reeling from 2 major industrial disputes in the last 5 years...

I can see people queuing up for that gig...

aveng
7th Apr 2011, 08:03
Interesting that Qf management would get rid of 767 and 737 management licence this close to PIA. Boy this lot really are Dumb. Good for us though.:ok:

Galley Raider
7th Apr 2011, 08:48
The DICK can always get a job with Newport

howyoulikethat
7th Apr 2011, 10:34
Intelligence has us believe,that a WMD is heading west...how you like that
you Qf LAMES....Club buggery is not dead,here's a thought,why not use all those Ops Managers as sacrificial lambs to the slaughter,after all they have done nothing since the last PIA.......on more money than us for
what,tellin us to how too suck eggs...please!
I say bring them forward...will the real Manager stand up....
Yehhh just as I thought...dirka dirka:suspect:

ampclamp
7th Apr 2011, 12:53
Not sure if this has been posted here before but it is a good read.Bolding is mine.

What if the Qantas unions asked for nothing?


Ben Sandilands from Crikey...

Although protected (read legal) industrial action is not going to happen at Qantas this side of Anzac Day, what would happen if the pilots, the engineers, the refuellers and the baggage handlers all withdrew their current pay claims?
Nothing. Based on nothing more than the statements made by Qantas group CEO Alan Joyce about how unprofitable its international business is, and how crippling labor costs are in Australia, it wouldn’t matter if the respective unions lined up outside Joyce’s office tomorrow morning promising a pay freeze for the next three years or five years.
Their jobs are still toast, because no matter what productivity deals they offer, no matter how much they are prepared to curtail pay and conditions, the company refuses to negotiate guarantees over keeping flying and engineering jobs in this country.
In a real sense, the noise the pilots and engineers and other Qantas employees are making about job security, are giving a failed management a cover behind which to hide.
While the timing is coincidental, and simultaneous protected industrial action by pilots, engineers, refuellers and baggage handlers may seem bad news for Qantas and travellers, the labor unrest is no more serious than the apparent failure of the current management and board to run an expanding, profitable and useful company.
For at least the past three months the tired old clichés about Qantas being undermined by ‘dumping’ on international routes have looked absurd beside the likes of Singapore Airlines and Emirates charging more for their premium products than Qantas, and holding their market share steady or rising while Qantas, clinging to aged jets and poor network decisions, keeps sinking toward single figures in market share.
(Qantas had only 17.7 percent of the international market in February, and even with Jetstar international reaching 7.6 percent share, it only had 25.6 per cent of the market as a group compared to a 35 per cent share in 2003 before Jetstar was invented, only to help drive Qantas customers elsewhere.)
The lesson from international traveller defections to foreign carriers may be that premium payers don’t care what a fare costs, and are abandoning Qantas for what they see as superior quality and convenience.
The current Qantas group strategy seems to be one of continued contraction, in international travel, and a line in the sand in domestic which is starting to look as much under threat from Tiger as Virgin Blue. It can’t go on.
In this morning’s installment of the industrial-action-about–to- tsunami-Qantas genre, in The Australian (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/aviation/qantas-faces-strikes-over-union-job-push/story-e6frg95x-1226025709829), its spokesperson says:
“The unions are threatening industrial action while the company deals with rapidly increasing fuel prices, an underperforming international business and the operational impact of natural disasters in New Zealand, Japan and in Australia.”
But its competitors are dealing with the same misfortunes, yet benefiting from the rebound from the GFC far more successfully than Qantas. Apart from the A380 groundings, Qantas has the same challenges as its peer airlines, who are all posting record profits and paying their shareholders dividends, while Qantas isn’t.
It is this group under-performance that leaves Qantas CEO Alan Joyce, and Qantas chairman Leigh Clifford and the board, no-where to run.
Their only answer is to pursue a policy of shedding Australian jobs, and Australian taxation and superannuation levy obligations, by sham arrangements in which its pilots, cabin attendants and engineers, some of them still resident in Australia, are paid according to Singaporean or New Zealand work place agreements.
The implication of what Joyce says is that Qantas cannot afford to be Australian to be competitive. It intends to deal with foreign competition to Europe for example, by basing Australian registered jets in Singapore, where they will fly between Singapore and Europe and Singapore and Australia, thus imitating the advantages it says Singapore Airlines enjoys.
This de-Australianisation of Qantas may reflect a wider view in business that Australia cannot maintain internationally competitive enterprises in its own country. It’s a debate quite a number of business leaders have joined one way or the other in recent decades.
But it is a painful position when it involves a strategy to gut the piloting and engineer excellence of Qantas for the cheapest source of labor available abroad. It even involves under cutting Australian jobs within Jetstar with Asia sourced Jetstar employees being paid according to Asia terms and conditions while flying in Australia.
These strategies, which also included Jetstar flying cadet pilots to NZ to open NZD bank accounts for pay which would avoid Australian superannuation and taxation obligations while working and flying exclusively in Australia, are at the core of union unrest and calls for job security clauses, whether pilots or engineers.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of demanding job security, there is a much bigger issue for the government of taxation security. Will it allow a precedent where anyone can be employed under a foreign contract issued by a foreign entity and evade Australian taxation and super levies while performing duties in Australia?
For Qantas, this off-shore migration of assets and labor is unlikely to lift earnings enough to sustain the profits and dividends shareholders might have expected if Qantas and Jetstar continue to drive customers away because of poor management decisions on fleet and network.
Qantas needs to attract customers more than it needs to destroy its traditions of skills and excellence in flying and engineering. If it fails it will not be in a position of strength when, as most analysts expect, the Asia-Pacific airline industry gets serious about trans border consolidations.

Sunfish
7th Apr 2011, 19:24
Qantas is dead as a career choice for Australians. Lets open the skies.

Disengagement
8th Apr 2011, 04:40
Interesting to see that at the last EBA Qantas was crying poor and the price of oil was US$147 and the Aussie dollar at $0.87. Now the price of oil is US$1.05 with Qantas hedged at US0.97 and the Aussie dollar at $1.05 . Also the Aussie $ to the Euro and Pound is at all time highs . So if Qantas is doing so bad with all this going for it GD should be looking at his finance people for a please explain and share holders should also be asking for an explanation.
It has finally came to me why they are spending so much money on new lounges though out its network and nothing on maintenance facilities. Its because the passengers are spending more time on the ground waiting for their aircraft and the Engineers more time on the aircraft fixing the fleet.
All Ebas there are reasons why Qantas cannot reward its staff ( Management excluded ) Desert Storm, Bird Flu, Sars , Iraq War , Vocalic Ash ,Tsunami, Queensland Floods, Japan Earthquake, EFC.
Now sure that these have had some effect on the the Airline but has Qantas Management just cried Wolf too many times . With comments like there are no cash bonus for Management when we all know that their bonuses are in Share bonuses so don't show in Annual Reports.
A pebble which falls into the water only makes a ripple , but when combine all the pebbles together and the fall into the water they make a wave . So all LAMES stick together and flight for the right to have the same playing field as Management when it comes to wage reviews and rewards.:D:D:D

ALAEA Fed Sec
8th Apr 2011, 05:45
I hear a senior official is going of on leave , great leadership


Ahh shock horror but as usual you have your facts wrong. The Senior Official, a good looking bloke, about my height is not taking leave. He is doing business in the States and will be back well in time for the any action that may take place.

He can work just as well from a Laptop in the States as he can from his Melbourne office. He will be meeting senior Officials from various American Aviation unions and then attending a One World alliance meeting.

Before you try and attack the senior official again, you may wish to know that this is the first time he has been sent overseas by the ALAEA in 5 years of office. He might even have a beer or two but thanks for thinking of him.

ampclamp
8th Apr 2011, 06:10
Keep trying 1974.
I'm surprised anyone running the show at QF can spell leadership let alone show any.

CN seems to want to but suspect the agenda comes from way above.

Fed sec just posted some fantastic news on another thread.

The Bungeyed Bandit
8th Apr 2011, 06:47
Quote:
"Interesting times we live in , gung ho boys it seems you are all up for
it. Or are you all , I hear a senior official is going of on leave , great
leadership , have you all got your leave forms in?"

Unionist 1974, while trolls and slimes like you continue to disseminate bullshit like that only strengthens the resolve of members of the association.

Have a beer for me while you're away Steve and enjoy.

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

bandit2
8th Apr 2011, 08:42
Unionist1974 aren`t you retired? Got anything better to do? Get a life!

kotos2
8th Apr 2011, 11:29
Unionist1974, a pitiful attempt at division. Said senior member more than deserves a holiday if he wishes and obviously has your measure so may as well enjoy himself. No doubt your compatriots are wishing you would take a hike so they can get on with business! Great work Fed Sec and all at the office keep it up.

KING GEORGE II
8th Apr 2011, 11:35
Cargo fraud fines $150,000,000.00 :bored:

qf 1
8th Apr 2011, 12:33
unionist isn't time u buggered off,you and your mates should bring it on,lets see which of your management mates will be left standing after this dispute..:p:p:p:p:p

Arnold E
8th Apr 2011, 12:50
Would you know who saved base maint by selling his soul

How is that a problem????

33 Disengage
8th Apr 2011, 13:05
The way you and LS are directing this thing it looks like there will be a lot of shareholder money flushed, and pain of all involved.

Yep, institutional shareholders will be onto the board looking for scapegoats. Whether this 'engineered' dispute gets closer to the endgame or not, there will be a big clean out of management again. How are DC, MH, and friends going these days? With any luck AJ and LC will be offered up as well!

Ngineer
8th Apr 2011, 15:12
He enjoys the attention. Put him on the ignore list.

howyoulikethat
9th Apr 2011, 00:13
Leave,why would you want leave???
The shows only just begun,I want front row seats to this one,
already told the family the holidays are pushed back a bit,but I'm sure
they will just enjoy havin me around a bit more instead of propin up an
airline on OT......how you like that.........!

another superlame
9th Apr 2011, 00:52
What OT are you talking about howyoulikethat? This time around is different, there is no OT to stop working.

lamem
9th Apr 2011, 08:29
With Big D*ck gone it will be interested to see who takes over in WA. I wonder if it will become an Ops Manager role instead. Whatever can this mean for the other LMO managers?

Dirkadirka
9th Apr 2011, 09:48
Ah good to be back on the prune.
Will the same [email protected] continue there good work unaffected by all whilst reeping massive pay packets by doing o/t during a pia . Only to get great rewards once the EBA was signed.
A notable one may be doing acting qld manager job often know as fat head (you know when you see him).
Everybody seems to have forgiven or forgotten those who worked o/t during the last eba will again be lining up for there cash cows 1/ o/t 2 new eba.
Don't forgive or forget!!!
Cns dmm's and there cronies are ready again to work where ever needed just to be assured that GH will still love them.
From Mt Isa break downs to townsville cns cronies will prevail thru another eba. Bring on the o/t( not only to i get sh!tload of o/t but a huge backpay and level rise as well as back to back 73classic/800 crse)
Each snr and dmm in cns is working against you to get the best possible outcome for themselves.
Oh and the alaea has seem fit also to let this slide.
god its good to get that off my chest.

Dirkadirka
9th Apr 2011, 09:54
Bit of a dig steve at the association but these jokers in cns have ruined more than one members careers while you guys knew and continue to know about there and GH's tactics and have done F2ck all
Ah again thats better isn't it.

ALAEA Fed Sec
9th Apr 2011, 16:37
I'm glad you feel a bit better and yes, everything you have said is spot on. The DMM's are Pr1cks and we have nothing about it.

We don't actually appoint the DMMs, Qantas does. They have both been given a life ban from the ALAEA. I'm concerned that every time I give them a bad wrap to Senior managers, their jobs become more secure.

Unfortunately, the good blokes who may have been building harassment cases against the Ba$tards all seem to leave. I know its hard but we need one to hang in there until we have a decisive blow. Then I take it those who have left will come out of the woodwork with supporting statements.

Sunfish
9th Apr 2011, 22:16
ALEA Fed. Sec. - warning. Be aware that American Customs officials can confiscate a laptop computer or memory stick on arrival in the States and examine it at their leisure. They don't even have to give a reason.

Make sure that there is nothing "sensitive" on your laptop, preferably even take a "virgin" new laptop that has never held sensitive information because "undeletes" are a real possibility.

I wouldn't put it past QF to attempt to arrange this to happen. In any case unions are not popular in America and I don't think Customs would need much prodding.

You can call me paranoid on your return.

BTW it's interesting how the trolls appear to spread FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) during negotiations. I think Unionist 1974 is most probably "Aircraft", remember him?

Quill Shaft
9th Apr 2011, 22:40
Fiji and the off shoring of Qantas/Jetstar
April 9, 2011 – 12:10 pm, by Ben Sandilands
The obvious but not yet official cancellation of an order for eight 787 Dreamliners by Fiji carrier, Air Pacific, is probably about a lot more than the inability of Boeing to get its composite airliner act together.

If the Qantas investment of around 46 per cent of Air Pacific has a future at all, it lies in a transition of that stake into a new low cost offshore franchise for Jetstar.

But such an end game scenario has a few problems. Fiji has trouble at a government level in getting on with the rest of the world, and its own ethnic Indian population, and rightly or wrongly, is no longer seen as a particularly inexpensive and low risk place to sink funds.

Air Pacific is also in the red, according to official reports, and under intense competitive pressure from Jetstar and Pacific Blue services.

Exiting a commitment for eight of anything at this stage is hardly surprising, and it would not have done this without the direction of Qantas given its interest in the carrier, which it has in recent times tried to sell.

If however costs and political risks are considered acceptable, Fiji has obvious appeal as a low cost Pacific carrier base, and a location which Qantas could find very attractive as a means of undermining or destroying its own higher cost and gradually imploding Australian based activities as well as setting up a bit of price tension with its Jetstar and Jetconnect operations in New Zealand.

Is this too cynical an assessment? Not after its recent efforts with the basing of Australian registered A330s in Singapore under Singaporean labor rules to by-pass the Australian labor and tax law obligations the current management of Qantas appear to regard as odious.

Once Air Pacific is dead, or transformed under an orange star, or replaced by same, an operation based on A330s, or 787s if they ever pass muster, could emerge.

Disengagement
9th Apr 2011, 23:41
It was not that far back when another Orange tail started and looked as if CNS was going to close and the cries to the Union for help and the rest of the stations to rally behind a small station and help. And I am sure the cries came loudest from those now stabbing the rest of you Lames in the back.

But that is typical , when you have a weak character and have no guts to stand up on your own , you will always fall behind and be propped up by someone because you have not got the backbone to stand up for yourself.

Thank god they were not at Anzac Cove in WW1 or we all be eating Turkish bread instead of Tip Top ;)
KARMA comes to everyone :ok::ok:

lamem
11th Apr 2011, 08:59
Rumour from up north that the white witch has joined Big D*ck on the scrap heap. Whoever could be next?

Syd eng
11th Apr 2011, 11:18
White Witch as in LW?

kotos2
11th Apr 2011, 22:42
Maybe the brissy boys will get to hang on to the gym equip that hangs off the wall waiting for an APU change.

Jet-A-One
11th Apr 2011, 23:45
Who is going to come up with all the revolutionary cost saving measures now?

Do we get to keep the awesome sugar despensers?

BigHelga
12th Apr 2011, 02:24
Two mis-managers from up at pineapple hivy maintenence cuz got the chop today!

mutorcs
12th Apr 2011, 02:59
Does anyone know what's happening to him?

BrissySparkyCoit
12th Apr 2011, 03:27
Two from Brissy heavy got the chop today apparantly.

Ngineer
12th Apr 2011, 06:35
Maybe this is fallout from the latest engagement survey.

MEA332
12th Apr 2011, 07:51
Management or LAME's?

Black Hands
12th Apr 2011, 12:48
I never really enjoy seeing anyone's employment terminated, but these two bumbling, incompetent buffoons won't be missed...
7 years ago these two of "Three Amigos" had the enviable opportunity to genuinely create a "worlds best practice" heavy maintenance facility for 767 aircraft, transitioning into an A330 "centre of excellence"... A brand new facility, a willing and flexible workforce with the ability to share decades of experience gained from other heavy maintenance facilities around the country and abroad, without some of the "shackles" traditionally associated with other heavy maintenance facilities...
Unfortunately their "open door" policy didn't translate to an "open ear" policy...
I fear the trail of carnage these two clowns have left behind has hamstrung the viability of widebody heavy maintenance in this country for years to come...

Oh Me Oh My
12th Apr 2011, 13:54
Went to a dinnner party on the weekend met up with middle manager from rio tinto, she made some very interesting comments re alternative workforces and shelf companies that was until the missus mentioned I was an aircraft engineer.
The note I took though was that it was that she spoke of a foreign workforce 'poised' to fly in, surely the government wouldn't allow this ?

Anyone ?

Disengagement
12th Apr 2011, 15:03
You do not terminate the employment of your trusted Generals that have been though the passed industrial actions and acted for the company to the extent to tell the commission what ever they were told to say even under oath and have their testimony showed for what is was under cross examination. But that was under raffy.
Also if you are dismiss a aircraft worker it is Commonwealth law that they cease access under ASIC guide lines to the Airport , but this has not happened so they ASIC cards have not been cancelled as per Federal Law , so they have not been terminated by Qantas Airways just reallocated . If this is not the fact Qantas is in breach of federal law .
Where will we see them next ? My guess is not the railways:=

Silverado
13th Apr 2011, 06:45
ALAEA and Qantas Airways Limited (http://www.fwa.gov.au/documents/industrialballotsresults/alaea/alaea_20112652.pdf)

72% VOTED

80% VOTED YES

816 Yes votes
204 No votes

The ALAEA notice can be read HERE (http://www.alaea.asn.au/notices/notices-2011/237-all-qantas-members-notice-0192011-ea-protected-action-ballot-results.html)

Silverado
13th Apr 2011, 06:53
PIA BALLOT MAY 2008 (http://www.fwa.gov.au/documents/industrialballotsresults/alaea/alaea_20082975.pdf)

81% VOTED

81% VOTED YES

Todays ballot compares very closely with 2008.

Qantas, you now know your employees position, your move:ok:

HMMECH
13th Apr 2011, 08:03
Here we go again! I wonder how much they have put in the kitty this time to waste .

YOSHI
13th Apr 2011, 09:33
Good to see that the majority are united again.

Clipped
13th Apr 2011, 10:28
Predictable result.

Obviously the majority of us see very little has really changed.

Now to the negotiating team - Go get em boys!

To Q management, wake up. Produce a FAIR deal with security. Done deal.

HARDNUT
13th Apr 2011, 10:54
Good to see it got up, would heve been better if there were a few more yes votes.

Anyone who voted no to PIA is obviously happy with their pay at the moment, so it goes without saying any increase gained will be donated to charity by the No voters.

Anyone with any integrity should do this.

Did you do it last time????????????? Danny,Allister,mark,beal & geoff??

company help watch
13th Apr 2011, 11:36
hardnut,

The word integrity has nothing to do with the poeple from cairns you mentioned. The words that come to mind are Selfish and greedy.

midas
13th Apr 2011, 12:14
Job security is just as big an issue as a fair payrise in this EA. LAME's that have voted NO are not seeing the big picture. It is no secret, you just have to listen to management to see that they would like us gone except for a couple of 'Super LAME's' so they can sign for the PART A Licences.

I wonder who the biggest whingers will be if jobs are lost due to the duties that are carried out by us at the moment are taken away. Historically it is the brain washed who have voted NO or even worse, those that have not voted at all.

It is no use getting a big payrise if there is no job to go to.

Maybe the union should just 'commit to discussing not having job security' in the EA and do nothing. It seems to have worked for management for about 5 EBA's about annualised salary.

The Yes vote for the PIA is a great result for unity by QANTAS LAME's as shown in the LAME wars of 2008 (George Lucas is preparing a screenplay). Hopefully, but I doubt it, management can get their heads out of their troughs and commit to a fair deal because really that's all we are after. It is shown that we are the lowest paid in the RPT world in Australia when you compare apples with apples, it's not as if we are being greedy unlike management.

Great effort by the ALAEA Executive as usual:D, if only QANTAS management could support their staff as well the ALAEA support their members:ugh:.

airtags
14th Apr 2011, 03:07
well done on the vote - puts a bit of power in the negotiation game.

BTW: Heard that there were 12 x A380 on-wing engines getting the close up look in Sydney yesterday (OQD/OQB & ?)? Also advised of unconfirmed report of one 380 donk reporting abnormal in-flight vibration?? - possibly routine, -anyone have any info?

AT

Clipped
14th Apr 2011, 09:33
Anyone who voted no to PIA is obviously happy with their pay at the moment

No. Ignorant of their future at Q.

Jethro Gibbs
14th Apr 2011, 12:25
Seems Qantas staff are rearranging the deck chairs at Avalon to save there own arse.

the_company_spy
14th Apr 2011, 12:42
Cns guys doing B1 conversion training? Didn't realise the A380 was due to fly through there?

popeye49
14th Apr 2011, 22:46
Maybe the B1 Guys are required for the CX transits.

Jet-A-One
15th Apr 2011, 06:24
Which slimy management prick made this statement:Qantas threat over strike vote - The West Australian (http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/breaking/9192780/qantas-threat-over-strike-vote/)

"The airline says that the average engineer earns $150,000 a year."

I've been an engineer at QF for 15 years and I'm yet to crack $100k!

If CN is going to allow such bull$hit public statements this time around then the gloves are off! Bring on PIA!!!

Fu(k I'm Pi$$ed off!

Oh Me Oh My
15th Apr 2011, 07:29
Don't get mad, get even

That's my motto especially after reading all the lies in the press

36% increase demanded ..... Lies
Ave 150k / year .... Lies
Free laptops for everyone ! ....... Lies

division1
15th Apr 2011, 08:22
And what of yesterdays meeting?
Another waste of time?
Might be time for some feedback/stop work meetings.

hewlett
15th Apr 2011, 08:55
Time to hunka down again. Rumoured they are willing to double their losses this time round.....Assclowns.....

LAME2
15th Apr 2011, 09:30
Be prepared for the unexpected.

We educated QANTAS IR in 2007/2008. I'm sure their memories go back that far. They were "hurt" last time and will try and educate us this time around. Be patient. Be prepared to take a fair deal when you see one (probably not early in the process, but it will come). I say again, be patient.

Arnold E
15th Apr 2011, 09:37
We educated QANTAS IR in 2007/2008.

You are not fair dinkum are you???:ugh:

LAME2
15th Apr 2011, 09:58
Perspective Arnold. Don't always look at it from an Engineers perspective.

QANTAS IR learned a bit regarding different tactics in 2007/2008. Much like armies have changed the way they fought each other over the years, 2007/2008 brought a different perspective and learnings to the IR arena. They may say they are prepared to have the 2011 dispute cost more than last time, but I'll bet they would have no such intention. They will have different tactics to use this time around, ones we haven't yet thought of.

I'm still wondering where their alternative workforce is. I wonder what color cloth they will wear. I wonder if they are Australian. These are my unanswered questions, all I ask is you don't cut me down too quickly. Could be there is no alternative workforce and they will take any action we give on the corporate chin. If that's the case I don't mind being proved wrong and labeled as such.

So I say, be patient.

LAME2

division1
15th Apr 2011, 10:28
Patience is wearing thin.

sky rocket
15th Apr 2011, 11:19
The PPM has only made it easier since 2007/08. We didn't even crack the taps back then.

Clipped
15th Apr 2011, 11:51
I'm still wondering where their alternative workforce is.

There is one thing you can sure bet on. Q will spend more time, energy and resources fighting us than simply 'negotiating in good faith'.

So I say, be patient.

Use stealth. And above all follow instructions from the ALAEA to a tee.

Did I mention, save a few bucks on the side. Q a gonna be a whole lot nastier - AAhh, rhymes with C Nasty.

But we will prevail. United we stand. We have others in the airline on our side so any scabs on the scene are in for a difficult time.

sniggiH
15th Apr 2011, 12:35
Surely you earn more than $100k, be honest.:* One of my boys had only been in the company less than 8 years when he escaped the collapse of SYD Hm to the blissful and prosperous (for some) sanctuary of sunny Cairns.He would have earned around 100k the first year when the other two mortons were in control.

Then towards the end of 2007 my subordinate Notsew and I took over the Dmm's positions. Moving forward we rolled out a regime where we looked after (and still do) certain employees that fit specific criteria - easily influenced, unable to think for themselves, spineless, self centred, money grubbing, gutless, subservient, totally incompetent and incapable of carrying out any aircraft maintenance, other than Nil transits.

It goes without saying that anyone who wishes to be accepted into my little benifits club will be a clone of myself- any knowledge of aircraft systems whatsoever is prohibited!

Beal has shown great loyalty and his training now reflects his commitment and he definitely meets all of the above criteria.

J A 1 , if you can get a transfer to Cairns I will look after you. If you meet the criteria you will earn in excess of 150k, more like 200k plus, if you get here before the PIA finishes. Otherwise your time up here will be shortlived!

Something I forgot to mention is you also need a deep throat!

Jet-A-One
15th Apr 2011, 21:08
Sounds good sniggiH!

I've heard that's how they roll up in CNS. That an incompetent (ock $ucker would Be-All I'd have to be to make it up there. Apparently even a failed course earns you MORE TRAINING! I also herd they're throwing around the B1 training so it might be a good time to make my move. Maybe my contacts in the Happy Clappers Church will get me in...

I'd say it'd be best send my resume direct to you or notseW because it's fairly obvious GH doesn't know or care whats going on up there.

Ngineer
15th Apr 2011, 23:29
I'm still wondering where their alternative workforce is.

Send in the clowns?? Who are they kidding.

howyoulikethat
16th Apr 2011, 00:32
Beware the JHAS Line type specific contract,just ask the Virgin LAMES
about there A330's..............the tip of the iceberg me thinks:sad:

PTTSwitch
16th Apr 2011, 05:50
Heard there was a certain manager & ops manager wandering around at 1am in morning in Syd asking the guys how they felt......

Is this showing there is a little worry in the ranks??? Bit late don't you think!

Silverado
16th Apr 2011, 06:35
As per usual, lower management tell upper management what they want to hear, after all, they only talk to the a lickers anyway, who paint rosy pictures.

Its not until PIA ballots and engagement surveys are run, that they find out the real thoughts of their workforce:rolleyes:

They can't hide behind the wall I'm beating my head against, any longer:ugh:

BrissySparkyCoit
16th Apr 2011, 15:28
I believe thats what CN and AJ did in Brisbane Heavy several weeks back..... an un-announced visit and walk around......

ALAEA Fed Sec
16th Apr 2011, 15:46
Problem is that they only really speak/listen to their mates.

kotos2
17th Apr 2011, 07:18
Not surprising when most head for the hills when the suits show up,however I believe the "filters" did get bypassed and the story told how it really is during the tour.

BigHelga
17th Apr 2011, 09:16
Did they have a manager who escort them around or were the troops free to speak their minds and were CN and AJ free to talk to anyone they wished without being pointed at the "right" people? Two managers gone from up there? Was it because of this unannounced visit?

hewlett
17th Apr 2011, 23:11
Unescorted and approachable on the Line.

Mr Mott
18th Apr 2011, 01:06
This thread has moved into the usual approach and that is playing the man and not the organisation. All the talk about the CNS guys, what GH said what CN did just makes the writers look bitter.
You would all, be better in concentrating on how to get a decent/fair deal, one that satisfys your expectations but allows the airline to continue to function, grow and move forward, some old practices have to change, just as you adapt and change in your personal life.
The ALAEA is negotiating for you and that is appropriate, however you should all look more broadly.
Ask yourself these questions:
1/ If I was the CEO of an icon company would I allow for open ended job security clauses, no CEO worth his salt will allow this to occur. Would you?
2/ If you were the CEO facing a significant loss, would you fold and allow control to be held by others (this applies to all the current open EBA's at QF)
3/ What could I do - shut the airline down (a real possibilty), sell off the divisions (Catering, Airports, Engineering, Freight and just move to core business- flying passengers, move more activity to J*, use the off shore arms of the group to manage core business.
4/ What can I do to ensure that I have a future, or do I continue and price myself out of a market.
If you think I am a company troll, I feel sorry for you, I am however a person who put in many years at QF, I continue to be a LAME (28 years), but I do see things form a different prospective maybe you should too.
MM

Clipped
18th Apr 2011, 04:38
CN and AJ

Regardless of their feel good visits to listen to the troops. These guys are driving the agenda that seeks to undermine what we have. Yep, we don't like Ops Mgrs to the Gavins, but ultimately CN and AJ wan't the big changes implemented. Changes that are not in our best interests.

You could ask them,

Where is the job security for ALL LAMEs?
Why are you seeking the lowest possible standards to meet worlds best practice?
Why are we so concerned about aircraft airworthiness whilst you solely talk of cost?
Why do we need to tender for Qantas and Jetstar contracts? Tenders that have questionable processes.
Why are you not attracting both Heavy and Line contracts? Contracts that were worth $millions in the past.
Why are you questioning our ability to handle the 787 fleet within the Qantas Group?
Why are you not ramping up our training school facilities for EASA and type training.
Why are we continually reminded by you that we are too expensive whilst each of you earn ten times a LAME wage, at least?
Why do you feel the need to continually put us down eg. 'we do not have a monopoly on quality'?
Why am I surrounded by morons, you call leaders?
Why do you despise the ALAEA? We have a democratic right to have our Association speak on our behalf, the ALAEA is US.
Why is it that none of the above has little to do with a wage increase however you label us as greedy?

CN and AJ, I know you're reading this, why do I need to air my views on a public forum because using the Qantas communication tools would have me 'outed'.

Above is not an exhaustive list but I am tired of you both talking engagement whilst quietly destroying the fabric of a once great engineering company.

hewlett
18th Apr 2011, 05:54
Bravo Clipped.:D:D:D:D

Suck&Blow
18th Apr 2011, 06:27
Please Clipped can you get onto our ALAEA negotiating committee and hammer home some truths to the people on the other side of the table! :D:D:D

Jethro Gibbs
18th Apr 2011, 06:44
Qf Lame Eba Negotiations Begin have they begun all seems to have stalled what is going on right at this time have there been any meetings or what of late seems nothing is going on.

Gas Bags
18th Apr 2011, 07:05
Jet-A-one,


"The airline says that the average engineer earns $150,000 a year."


Perhaps Mr Nasty is under the impression that the average LAME at QF gets paid the same as the average strike breaker at QF they engaged from the last time you guys went at it.

It sure wasnt this figure the last time I spoke to a couple of friends who work for QF. One from A330 Brisbane hangar on about $70,000 PA, another receiving full shift payments in a purely line maintenance port 2 day 2 night 12 hour roster just broken $100,000 PA for the first time.

Just remember what this guy did to our colleagues over in NZ, and as one of them put it, he did it smiling.

A walk through the workplace in the middle of the night 'engaging' staff is a bit of a pisstake I would have thought. Why has it taken the potential of another loss of $150 million plus for these guys to hit the coalface and meet you guys....Could it be it is a lot easier to shoot a deer at 300 yards with a high powered rifle, than it is to walk up to it, put a revolver barrell between its eyes and pull the trigger!

GB

ALAEA Fed Sec
18th Apr 2011, 11:40
Qf Lame Eba Negotiations Begin have they begun all seems to have stalled what is going on right at this time have there been any meetings or what of late seems nothing is going on.



I remember last EBA discussions putting out about 4 notices asking for patience. Jethro if you live near a river, take a seat and eventually the dead bodies of your enemies will come floating by.

Toolpants
19th Apr 2011, 02:21
Hey Fed Sec.
The Big Perth Manager was sacked recently but is staying around until the end of August. Do you think this has anything to do with possible PIA ?

BTW, all you ALAEA guys are doing a sensational job and I thing the last ALAEA elections proved this. Well done all of you.

Sunfish
19th Apr 2011, 03:25
I have no skin in this game. Mr Mott, you are making a fundamental wrong assumption: that is that QF Management are bargaining in good faith - time and again this has been shown to be completely untrue.


Mr. Mott:

1/ If I was the CEO of an icon company would I allow for open ended job security clauses, no CEO worth his salt will allow this to occur. Would you?

No, but I would give a guarantee that if performance standards are met I will not take work offshore.

2/ If you were the CEO facing a significant loss, would you fold and allow control to be held by others (this applies to all the current open EBA's at QF)

"Profit" and "Loss" are extremely rubbery figures, as is QF's supposed desire for an "adequate" return. These numbers are never spelt out and they seem to be adjusted when necessary to justify Qf managements position. For example, QF International will never be allowed to generate and "adequate" return while even one of its Australian employees is paid more than Asian wages.

3/ What could I do - shut the airline down (a real possibilty), sell off the divisions (Catering, Airports, Engineering, Freight and just move to core business- flying passengers, move more activity to J*, use the off shore arms of the group to manage core business.

That is exactly what they are doing - moving everything not nailed down out of Australia, but still calling themselves and Australian Airline and demanding preferential treatment from the Government on this basis. I have no objection to QF offshoring everything, just open the skies at the same time so that we can have more competition and more direct flights that don't hub through SYdney.

4/ What can I do to ensure that I have a future, or do I continue and price myself out of a market.

QF can't "price themselves out of the market" when they have 30% + of seat capacity.

If you think I am a company troll, I feel sorry for you, I am however a person who put in many years at QF, I continue to be a LAME (28 years), but I do see things form a different prospective maybe you should too.
MM

I'm sorry for you too.

Big Unit
19th Apr 2011, 04:43
Why am I surrounded by morons, you call leaders?


Pure gold, and oh so true.

Silverado
19th Apr 2011, 05:54
Alan Joyce attacks 'kamakaze' pilots, engineers unions (http://www.heraldsun.com.au/business/qantas-chief-alan-joyce-attacks-kamakazi-pilots-engineers-unions/story-e6frfh4f-1226041601194?from=public_rss)

A day before his meeting with the unions, how nice:rolleyes:

airtags
19th Apr 2011, 06:08
Well he had yet another chance to set the agenda........

...............if Worthless was a worthy and effective advisor the game of stab the union would be kept behind closed Exec doors. Nobody wins the industrial chess game when it is played out with childish grabs - the "kamakaze" cliche no doubt was written into the speech for no other reason other than to get the sound bite.

Would have thought the pilots and engineers could have been more professionally challenged (ie 'what can they offer in return etc etc?) - but today's sermon did nothing other than to firm up support for the employees.

- by comparison, not much made about JQ struggling with fuel prices and falling leisure numbers. Also not a word about using the schedule to shift pax traffic onto JQ services.

All very sad really.......

AT

..........in the spirit of quoting all things Japanese maybe 'fall on your sword' might also be on the agenda?

Clipped
19th Apr 2011, 07:25
the lavender leprechaun

Why are you surprised?

Their actions and inactions clearly reveal their agendas.

Our failing, is that we yearn for that ray of hope, that there will be a turn around for the good, only to be slammed down again and again and again.

I hold very little hope. Led by a dysfuctional management that expends more time, energy and money putting down their own employees than getting on with the task of getting this airline back on track.

For those who missed it here it is

QANTAS chief executive Alan Joyce has accused unions of a "kamikaze campaign" that could seriously damage the airline.
The warning came as the airline lifted its fuel surcharges by in some cases more than 50 per cent, in a move that will add up to $100 to the price of one-way international flights.

Addressing the Australian Institute of Directors in Sydney today, Mr Joyce said Qantas was under sustained attack from certain elements of the trade union movement pushing unacceptable job security demands that amounted to a veto on change.

He said he found it bizarre that Qantas was being singled out when it had lower turnover rate and more long-serving staff than most Australian companies.

“I understand why people want job security,” he said. “But it is no more in my power to guarantee jobs in writing than to promise that Santa will swing by on December 24.”

The airline currently faces wage and job security demands from unions representing pilots, engineers and baggage handlers.

The unions are worried that the airline's expansion into Asia will see Australian jobs replaced by lower-paying offshore work.

Engineers have already voted in favour of post-Easter industrial action and pilots say they are poised to do so if they cannot reach an arrangement. Talks with baggage handlers have yet to start but the Transport Workers Union has also threatened future strike action.

Mr Joyce said profitable expansion by Qantas benefited all employees and Jetstar Asia had protected Australian jobs by sending profits back into the group and feeding traffic into mainline Qantas.

He said he still hoped to reach a mutually beneficial outcome with unions but the demands being put forward by union leadership “are so extreme and so damaging to Qantas” that he could not accept them.

“Any strike action could be seriously damaging to our performance in the short term,” he said.

“But the long-term effect could be even worse: to drive our international customers into the waiting arms of the competition who are largely not Australian-owned, not unionised and have few Australian workers.

“This is a recipe for permanent damage to our brand, and puts at risk the long-term security of our jobs.”

AJ - I think you and your predecessors have done plenty to drive away our customers, the recepients of every low blow cost cutting measure and it's earned you that special bonus. But hey, blame the unions.

Cheap.

Spanner Turner
19th Apr 2011, 09:56
Hey Division 1,

"change" in the management sense does not exist. It is a complete load of crap dreamt up to justify screwing people over in exactly the same way as CN's latest verbal diarrhoea suggests.

Make no mistake, with his latest crap in the L/E he has nailed his colours to the mast - he is full of management speak and no substance - so he got a couple of 60 year old hangars painted and wants a bloody medal - spare me please.

Do you remember when we actually had real property maintenance sections that knew and maintained ALL of our equipment and infrastructure? I do. All of that has been whittled away over the years (admittedly before CN was on the scene) yet he comes in and gets a little bit of maintenance approved that was about 10 years overdue and thinks he's kicked a few goals - I beg to disagree.


As for his little "change" dialogue, please read the below article that I posted elsewhere on another topic but is just as relevant here. Note also that this article was written by an Adjunct Professor of Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology who has also worked in this so-called "change" field. Note his use of the word "toxic" and also I'll quote the key point from the article below,


It was no doubt a PR person who dreamt up the phrase "change management" as a euphemism for destructively turning workplaces upside down, sacking people and generally changing things without making any positive difference at all to an organisation’s outcomes or outputs.


Noel Turnbull, adjunct professor of media and communications at RMIT University, writes: (http://www.crikey.com.au/)

PUBLIC RELATIONS PRACTITIONERS (http://www.crikey.com.au/topic/public-relations-practitioners/), SPINNING THE MEDIA (http://www.crikey.com.au/topic/spinning-the-media/)

One of the PR industry’s most problematic activities is dreaming up justifications for toxic workplace practices imposed by psychopathic managers.

This week three unconnected incidents reminded me of the problem. First, the PRIA sent me an email promoting an internal communications seminar in which the two words most likely to reduce productivity -- "change management" -- were used; then the latest issue of the Australian Institute of Company Directors journal, The Director, spruiked the need for government to take on board business nous to improve its performance; and, finally a report by a Melbourne University academic estimated that the annual cost of work stress was about $730 million through the impact on individuals of depression.

It was no doubt a PR person who dreamt up the phrase "change management" as a euphemism for destructively turning workplaces upside down, sacking people and generally changing things without making any positive difference at all to an organisation’s outcomes or outputs. In my last book (How PR Works: but often doesn’t ) I included a plain person’s guide to change management, which said: "Over the past two decades a generation of change managers has set out to transform organisations -- from universities and companies to charities and government departments." The guide said "change managers":

1. Announce soon after arrival, and before any analysis that might cloud judgments, that the organisation must face up to the new competitive environment and must change to survive.

2. Sack significant numbers of incumbent managers and replace them with friends and colleagues from previous jobs.

3. Increase the number of middle managers and management levels giving new managers titles such as organisational capability development manager.

4. Ensure none of the new managers have definable line management accountabilities or job descriptions written in English.

5. Objectify the people the organisation is set up to serve. E.g. citizens become customers of government departments while students and courses at universities become clients and services.

6. Announce a major reorganisation to affect change and confront the challenges of the competitive environment.

7. Identify another agency or group with which to merge, form strategic alliances or generally hold meetings with.

8. Retrench as many operational staff as possible, singling out in particular anyone with detailed knowledge of how systems actually work.

9. Introduce a culture based on continuous meetings and managerial Newspeak while insulating all managers from any operational realities.

10. Identify any centres of excellence or international best practice in the organisation, close them down and outsource the function to someone more expensive and less effective.

11. Promulgate changes to any systems that effectively meet client/customer needs.

12. Introduce a completely untried IT system designed to integrate all existing systems and produce massive productivity savings.

13. Sack any operational staff who had not previously taken redundancy packages for the failures in these changes to systems and the IT implementation.

14. Announce another major reorganisation to enhance effectiveness and focus more effectively on change.

15. Move on to next job, before the organisation goes into critical state and after including in CV details of change management expertise, to start the process all over again.

Speaking to PR people about change management and its destructive impact you always get rueful agreement on how it works and why it’s bad -- but most PR people go along with it because that’s the way to keep your job.

The Melbourne University study, written by associate professor Anthony LaMontagne, found that 1.5 million workers have, or have had, depression with the condition caused by job strain in the case of 13% of men and 17% of women. The annual cost of this $730 million and this is probably a small part of the total cost of lost productivity from toxic workplaces and mindless change.

At the same time the AICD is advocating more business nous or the government sector -- presumably the same sort of nous that has given us the GFC; psychopathic (sorry I mean charismatic) CEOs who sack people and urge the government to cut spending on social programs to pay for the cost of cleaning the GFC mess up; and, appeals for reforms that always leave most people worse off.

All these business claims have become conventional wisdom as PR platoons promote the platitudes and politicians and the media uncritically accept them.

The interesting thing about this conventional wisdom is that it is buttressed by an arrogant certainty that the proponents of change are right and that there is no alternative. GE CEO Jeff Immelt, during his recent visit to Australia, didn’t shy away from organisations’ need to change (GE is no angel in the retrenchment field) but argued that managers need to listen to others and that "No matter how much you think you are listening, no matter how much you think you are in touch with markets, you can always do better. I think remaining extremely humble about what you know and what you don’t know is crucial".

Listening, of course, takes time. But people rushing to move on the next position before the damning impact of their changes becomes apparent, are also the ones most notorious for arguing that change must be speedy.

*Ritual declaration of interest: the author has worked on change management programs in the private and public sector but no longer does

Acknowledgement also to Crikey.com

:ok:
.

hewlett
19th Apr 2011, 11:28
Maybe because they are sick of the systematic dismantling of an Australian icon to achieve shortsighted financial goals, and now that they are locked into the vortex, are just pissed at the bullshit shamelessly peddled.

the rim
19th Apr 2011, 11:59
lets just take one thing at a time
miserable working for QF...I think not, we all love working on aircraft
solving defects and the like,and are proud working for QANTAS
lacking self esteem ...we are not and were proud of our tradition,AND WE WANT THAT BACK
Yes there are some who are on good money...but work a shift that warrents good pay
full of bile....yes we are because we want a fair go as we see what OUR bosses get and we want a fair deal nothing more or less and that will bring back the good will and respect to a once great company....the rim

BrissySparkyCoit
19th Apr 2011, 12:22
with a hatred for the Company that funds their being.

True to form, Unionist74 twists the facts.

People posting here do not have a hatred for the company.

Quite the opposite. Most people had a great sense of pride in working for Qantas and most still do to a certain extent, albeit, with a sense of despair.
They are now fed up with the systematic destruction of the company for the greed of a few.

The future for staff and the airline is far from clear. We hear on the one hand that Qantas is one of the most financially sound airlines in the world yet jobs are constantly under threat... staff branded as "kamikaze's" for asking for a fair go?

It is the Pilots, Engineers and Cabin Crew along with many other staff that have made Qantas the great company it was in the past. It's just sad to watch that all fall apart.

We are told "If you don't like it, leave". That's a very simplistic solution.

I for one, do not want to leave. I want those that are damaging the company to leave.

Yet we are told it is our representatives from various trade unions that are "damaging the brand".

Putting bumbling fools on TV who don't know a staple from an approved repair is damaging the brand just to quote one example.

1746
19th Apr 2011, 12:53
It is the Pilots, Engineers and Cabin Crew along with many other staff that have made Qantas the great company it was in the past. It's just sad to watch that all fall apart.
BSC, from my perspective "It's soul destroying to watch all that be ripped apart" is closer to reality!

D Delay-Hay
19th Apr 2011, 15:19
Hey Fed Sec, is there any plan for the union to go to the media to refute the propaganda that AJ keeps spinning?

Sunfish
19th Apr 2011, 17:20
Mr. Joyce is spreading FUD - Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt.

Mr. Joyce and his management cohorts have made it quite plain that they have total contempt for their entire Australian workforce and wish to replace them at their earliest opportunity.


He said he still hoped to reach a mutually beneficial outcome with unions but the demands being put forward by union leadership “are so extreme and so damaging to Qantas” that he could not accept them.

“Any strike action could be seriously damaging to our performance in the short term,” he said.

“But the long-term effect could be even worse: to drive our international customers into the waiting arms of the competition who are largely not Australian-owned, not unionised and have few Australian workers.

“This is a recipe for permanent damage to our brand, and puts at risk the long-term security of our jobs.”

The obvious stupidity is the implication that "long term job security" can only come from accepting Third world conditions of employment.


There are other management trolls on this forum, just as they did at the time of your last EBA. "Unionist1974" is most probably "Aircraft", remember him?

airtags
19th Apr 2011, 23:02
FUD - quite right Sunfish - Joyce & Co lack vision simply because they can't see over the top of their wallets.

Noted that the Board esp Clifford who has an overt opinion on everything, have all been somewhat silent and very, very low key.

Yesterday's speech was little more than a rant from a tyrant in trouble and if his advisors had any professional ability they would brief Joyce, CN & Ors., to stick to the main game and not drag industrial negotiations into the open.

Speaking of advice - QF Corp Affairs flunkie who should know better:
pls note that you really need to watch your 'cafe talk' - very offensive to the operational staff that actually do the work .... :=

AT

33 Disengage
19th Apr 2011, 23:27
Q) Why did Joyce make such inflammatory statements about the combined Union leadership in a press conference the day before meeting with them?

A) Because it suits his agenda to have industrial unrest!

Q) Why have Qantas Corporate failed to negotiate in good faith with Pilots, Engineers or TWU?

A) Because it suits Joyce's agenda not to settle any EBAs at the momment!

Q) How long will "big money" sit back and let such a destructive force remain as Qantas CEO?

A) ?

ampclamp
19th Apr 2011, 23:38
AJ's "kamikaze" line is very insulting considering it is the pilots and engineers trying to keep things safely in the air.

All the more for those of us whose parents fought against Japanese back then.

It is the boards and CEOs of the various airlines that are the true kamikazes in a racing dive to the bottom.And we all know what happens to kamikazes.

Mr Joyce you are not doing yourself or qantas any favours.The divide needs to be narrowed not widened by silly rhetoric.

Ngineer
20th Apr 2011, 00:07
There are other management trolls on this forum, just as they did at the time of your last EBA. "Unionist1974" is most probably "Aircraft", remember him?

Exactly. They are just here to wind ppl up, and ppl still fall for it hook line & sinker.

“But the long-term effect could be even worse: to drive our international customers into the waiting arms of the competition who are largely not Australian-owned, not unionised and have few Australian workers.


I don't believe we are asking much. Just a fair go and protection from the real agenda of destroying our future and that of Aussie families.

AJ you have a choice. Either ambrace the spirit of Australia and our workers (who provided QF with the excellence in Engineering and Safety that this airline was built on), or forgo all of that and head offshore. Then what will you be left with? It seems the path you are trying to take is destroying this airline, not us!

People used to fly us because our safety record was unblemished. Now we have a managers telling us that safety is simply a given with any MRO or operator. Why can't you guys see what we all can see, that this type of short-selling of our safety and standards is destroying us. We were once "Worlds best practice" in everything we did.

I usually try to maintain some sort of decorum in these threads, but seriously, some of our managers need a good rocket up their backsides.

Millet Fanger
20th Apr 2011, 08:21
Why can't you guys see what we all can see, that this type of short-selling of our safety and standards is destroying us.It was most probably a rhetorical question, but put yourself in AJ's, LS's, and CN's shoes. They don't care about Australia, it's aviation history, or an iconic brand. They are just a "gun for hire". They accepted the job because the money was good and they think it might add something to their CV. The long term survival of Qantas isn't their focus. Their focus is to get some results in the short term and move on before it falls in a heap. What long term damage to the future, the brand, the employees is a concern for those who follow.

The shame about the situation is that the Board should be the custodians of the future of Qantas. They are just sitting back, cheering on AJ, LS and CN.

Think of the damage Sol Trujillo did to Telstra (and also Australia). Again, the Board sat back until it was to late.

Patricia Cross, Richard Goodmanson, Garry Hounsell, Paul Raynor, Dr John Schubert, Barbara Ward, James Strong, General Peter Cosgrove - Wake up, you're asleep at the wheel, do something!!

Clipped
20th Apr 2011, 10:50
Patricia Cross, Richard Goodmanson, Garry Hounsell, Paul Raynor, Dr John Schubert, Barbara Ward, James Strong, General Peter Cosgrove - Wake up, you're asleep at the wheel, do something!!

Congratulations MF.

Finally someone has exposed the root cause.

mmciau
20th Apr 2011, 11:22
Millet Fanger,

That's true if the Board are fully informed by Management of the state of affairs.

I know of CEOs that don't fully brief their Boards!

Mike

Handbrake
20th Apr 2011, 13:37
7.30 - ABC (http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2011/s3197175.htm)






Check out 7:30 report tonight.

division1
20th Apr 2011, 21:02
The 7:30 report was interesting
Alan Joyce @ 6:40
"we are hopefull that sense will prevail, and our people
will agree to a sensible outcome for all the parties"

Yep, just need to put a sensible offer on the table.

ALAEA Fed Sec
21st Apr 2011, 05:23
Hey Fed Sec, is there any plan for the union to go to the media to refute the propaganda that AJ keeps spinning?



All in good time. We've been arranging a few other things.

33 Disengage
21st Apr 2011, 07:11
Just to prove the point that Qantas won't be forced to negotiate in "good faith" if it doesn't want to, they have removed the LAME job functions during a transit check. As of today the paperwork issued by Qantas for a transit check has stamped down the "sign off column" - LAME NOT REQUIRED.

No discussion, no consultation, in breach of it's own QEPM, in breach of an EBA agreement, a unilateral Kamikaze decision.

You may as well roll out the next Engagement Survey, I didn't think it was possible, but I am more disengaged than I was when I filled out last week's survey.

Ngineer
21st Apr 2011, 12:09
Just to prove the point that Qantas won't be forced to negotiate in "good faith" if it doesn't want to, they have removed the LAME job functions during a transit check. As of today the paperwork issued by Qantas for a transit check has stamped down the "sign off column" - LAME NOT REQUIRED.



This little change should be a good example to the public on what we are fighting for, ie their best interests more than ours.

I think 7 days notice for PIA should see us clear of the Easter break.

YOSHI
22nd Apr 2011, 00:48
AJ's jpb is to make money for the shareholders.

The Board Members are shareholders.

There are two ways he can make money,

1/ Incerase revenue.

2; Reduce expenses.

The revenue is on track ( $450 millinon profit for the first half of the financial year ).

All thats left now is to reduce expenses.

How best to achieve this?

Reduce your pay!!!

By not giving you a pay rise that is at least in line with the rise in livivg costs, you are taking a pay cut!

QF Management is only interested in making money, they are not interested in the long term success of QF. Only short term gains (3 to 5 years ).

Qf Management cannot be trusted, they will never negotiate 'In Good Faith'.

The Black Panther
22nd Apr 2011, 01:30
We can all see the current stand-off by management has the appearance of a hidden agenda to contract the mainline business, middle management included. To dispense with it's expensive wage model and embedded inefficient work cultures (let's not mention the brand equity and safety record thanks to highly trained and devoted employees, no let's not go there).

The new world order wants an LCC airline with a dividend included (good luck!). The mainline airline can enjoy the monolopy of the critical mass domestic market.

Just as dividends and LCC's don't usually appear in the same sentence I am as confused with AJ's statements as anyone.
"We love our pilots, they are so experienced and devoted"
Their dreamin' if they want fookin job security !!

So here's The Olive Branch.
Let's be honest there are alot of the mature engineers amongst us who are being worn down by the bullying tactics of management. It's a constant buggery campaign and we have all experienced it.

The last fight cost the Red Rat $150m.
I am only guessing but perhaps there is 300 engineers Australia wide who would gladly say "show me the money, I'm out of here"
Each would attract an average package excluding leave entitlements of about $180K given most will be long term employees. That totals $54m.
The remaining 900 Lames get job security, surely AJ would sign off on 75% of his current LAMEs as secure.

The alternate is a long long drawn out fight with no winners, public included and one big extraordinary expense (Ansett No.2) on the 2011 Annual report.

Sure it's a white flag and politcally it goes against unionism, but we are against a company, a government regulator and globalisation of reduced safety investment by airlines.

It's about moving on (so I can enjoy a latte while I read Friday's Aviation section), we have a mature workforce, the company will not stop until there is a smoking hole in the ground and most of us don't want to be around for that. We have a group that would gladly be the martyrs and leave our younger and tougher warriors to fight on while they get some job security for a period.

Do a survey who wants to go, who wants to stay.
Go to AJ.... here's the numbers.
Give the remaining job security and it's a deal.
Bring on your Lameless tarmacs and No man ONS, get rid of middle managers, utilise the Rolls Royce Gold Card (Sorry GH and gang, services not required), gloat over the resurging share price and call us when there's a smoking hole in the ground.

That's when we will say "Safety isn't about money it a culture, let's start again"

I would personally prefer the Olive Branch but happy to go the 15 rounds if AJ is in no mood to negotiate.

Have a happy Easter.

Over to you Fed Sec....

ALAEA Fed Sec
22nd Apr 2011, 02:15
Sure it's a white flag and politcally it goes against unionism, but we are against a company, a government regulator and globalisation of reduced safety investment by airlines.



But they are against the ALAEA. That is you, me and about 1600 dedicated employees that love the company and don't want to see it torn to pieces by a greedy bunch of pr1cks who don't know what they are doing and don't care if the airline is there 10 years from now.

LAME2
22nd Apr 2011, 02:45
The Olive Branch

The company managers can do this now, it's in the current EBA. Put a phone call through to the Association and request talks. They then put on the table their planned redundancies. The Association looks at the figures and tries to get the best deal, not just for those made redundant but those who remain.

I also believe it is for the company managers to come to the table with such a proposal, not the Association.

Understand there are some of us who do not wish to get into another 2007, but it is too early at this time to contemplate something like you say and I would not consider it to be a EBA item. Seek support from fellow LAMEs but do not surround yourself with negativity. Negativity is a downward spiral.

Right now, as a collective, we have supported our Association in their negotiations. We need to be patient and let the team do their work. It is important, especially for those of us who have reservations regarding the planned actions, to show our good faith towards our team and be supportive.

A deal will be brokered in good time. It may take longer than most of us would like, that's life. It is easier to get a good deal when the company managers want to do a deal. It is making the managers hungry for the deal making process we have struggled with to date. Time will tell and keep your eyes open for buggery details.

LAME2

The Black Panther
22nd Apr 2011, 03:31
The Olive BranchPositives
Only LAMES wanting to leave, leave
The company will save potentially millions
The new engineering model is concieved without incestuous risk
The travelling public is not disrupted
The Qantas share price rebounds for share holders

Negatives
Safety's priority takes a corporate downgrade
The safety risk to the travelling public just got higher (Only the PM's aircraft will get a visual after each transit by an engineer)
Corporation defeats the worker
The aircraft engineering industry in Australia takes another rocket in the ar$e
Revenue from Australian travellers pays the income of foreign workers

PS. We are still an outside chance with FWA giving balance to industrial disputes. We wouldn't have a chance if Tony Abbott was in charge with his WorkChioces policy mark II.

ALAEA Fed Sec
22nd Apr 2011, 03:50
Just for consideration and based on my assumptions and knowledge.

A LAMEless tarmac would not allow 300 to go, I think it would be far less, maybe 100? You can't just halve the terminal workforce with this model as evidenced at Virgin who still have sizeable dayshift numbers for their flights. The bigger problem is the shift of the workload from day to night.

Agreeing to this model would not garauntee job security. They would only be looking at the next project. Remember when the worforce costs x dollars a year, management are always pressured to reduce that cost further. I have just attended an Americas MRO conference and it is interesting to listen to them speak, and what a blast it was for us 9 American and 1 Australian union official mingling with 7000 airline managers and hangers on. The Engineering boss of US airways stated that his brief from the board was - your Engineering budget for the next 12 months must not be more than the previous 12 months. I was sitting there wondering how they could even cater for a CPI wage rise and the coverage for a larger fleet.

ampclamp
22nd Apr 2011, 03:56
LAME2 you correct of course.They may offer redundancies anytime they wish.

The fact they have not made any VR offers (despite the obvious over staffing in one area I can see) says they either have other plans for those people or are totally inept.
I actually know they acknowledge the over staffing and problematical work practices (they set up and allow) so they must have other plans or simply have given up.

I know a few guys who would walk if given the chance.Good workers very experienced and productive but just had a gut full of the nonsense.

QF also know that having LAMEs at the turnaround does offer an advantage for delay reduction.And we all know the business customer hates delays. The place thrives on delay codes, meetings and the blame game over who'll cop those lost minutes.

If they are serious about delay minimisation they will keep LAMEs on tarmac. There is considerable value in doing so.Value versus costs.

It will be used as a threat but losing LAMEs off the turnaround particularly in the major ports will degrade delay figures markedly.QF cannot afford to give VB free kicks.Network, frequency, on time performance and frequent flyer are kings in business market.
They need to guard that vigilantly.

If they were sensible they'd grandfather current practices offer 3% and some sweets and commit to have meaningful ongoing discussions with regard to manning levels and duties in the future.
With the right framework I am sure the ALAEA would consider some changes.
Evolution not revolution.But someone must be the bulwark against mediocrity in aircraft maintenance.
I dont speak for the union so it is just an opinion only.

Jet-A-One
22nd Apr 2011, 04:39
Fed Sec

We've heard alot about our claims and the relevant "costings" etc. so far but what do they want (other than no job security clauses or wage rise >3%)?

CN has made mention of a model with fewer, more qualified engineers in the past and the "LAME on demand" idea is no secret either. Are they trying to work this into the EA?

There are quite a few blokes around that would jump at VR and the rest of us want job security, training and a decent wage. Is the "olive branch" something being discussed?

Ngineer
22nd Apr 2011, 04:48
Olive branch

Your model assumes that the "smoking hole" in the ground would occur before the airline goes out of business.

If Qantas wants to be just another LCC like the others, then what niche do they have to capture the market??? A/ Nothing!!

A few years back QF employed a surveyor to analyse what attracted customers to an airline. Apparently the answer was "on time performance". Safety was way down on the list. (I know this because they invested thousands on "change management programs", and the ppl running them tried to drum this into our head).

Since then we have seen outsourcing of maintenance (as management now see us as a waste of money), the many quality lapses as a result (and a great majority the public would not be aware of), managers walking around tagging us as below "world's best practice" whilst stating that safety is now a given, and co-incidently a loss of market share of Australian travellers.

If we had any management that new what they were doing, they wouldn't be wasting money on these so called analysts that are giving them all the wrong answers.

As standards keep slipping we will soon be on par with every other Joe Blow flying tins cans out of an airport.

LAME2
22nd Apr 2011, 06:36
QF also know that having LAMEs at the turnaround does offer an advantage for delay reduction

Never understood why QANTAS do not market their LAME transit inspections in their advertising. Marketing themselves as more attuned to the Businessman's needs, Safety is our first priority etc. Instead they continue with the love/hate relationship.

ampclamp
22nd Apr 2011, 07:11
It is a point of difference and it does add value and they know it.But wont use it lest they give us another point of public leverage in the future.

I am certain they will look very hard at the above (cost v value in LAME on demand) and weigh the options.
They will play hard and use the threat against us but in the end having a LAME on the spot saves a ship load of grief and therefore avoidable delays.

Yes it adds costs to the price of a turnaround but how much does it , and, in what way does an avoidable delay cost? Some of those costs are not measurable immediately or are tangible.

Gas Bags
22nd Apr 2011, 08:28
The unfortunate reality with the LAME'less tarmac is that the proof is in the pudding. Over time the pilots stop writing defects up in the tech log throughout the days operation as they know that an engineer is not at hand. (This of course goes without saying that I am referring to anything other than defects that will have an affect on safety of flight).

Bottom line is that the number of items that get written up throughout the day will decrease dramatically over time once the LAME'less tarmac comes into being. Take a snap shot today of the number of tech logs written up during the day at QF and another snapshot 3 years from the introduction of the LAME'less tarmac and I will be vindicated in what I say.

The other unfortunate reality is that the whole world operates a LAME'less tarmac and with the current QF management you would have to say it is inevitable.

I agree with Steve P that the overall numbers of LAME's will not actually be affected to the extent that most would think, but different work practices will cater for the change.

The point of this post is that the LAME'less tarmac is a massive bargaining tool to be used to make a real increase to the pay rates at QF.

The LAME'less tarmac will come to you sooner or later but what you need to do is trade it for a SUBSTANTIAL pay increase when it ultimately becomes the norm.

I will say it again, the pay rates at QF are p!ss poor overall, and the bullsh!t that management have been peddling over the last few years of hard times to keep pay increases below CPI whilst they continue to turn profits with the word Billion attached to them is a complete joke.

QF will pay a second officer 10's of thousands of dollars more than some certifying LAME's with many years of service with the company and that to me is a slap in the face to all of us who have done the study, logging of practical time over many many years, and in more and more cases spent many tens of thousands of dollars training ourselves. Every time you certify an aircraft out with a CRS you are taking the same responsibility for the hundreds of human beings on board in the same way that the captain of the aircraft is when performing their duties.

LAME's are their own worst enemies when it comes to pay rates........We are worth a hell of a lot more than we get paid currently, and I for one dont understand anybody who could be happy with a pay system that will take somewhere around 30 years to get to the measly sum of approximately $140,000 per annum, and that is only if they start as a 21 year old and stay with the same company their whole working life.

You guys are as trapped as the pilots with their seniority system that locks them into the mindset that they cannot leave the company for fear of losing their position on the list, which in turn leaves you at the company's mercy.

another superlame
22nd Apr 2011, 09:01
Why is it that QF is keen to trash their own LAMEs, but the LCC cousin J* pays their LAMEs more for a single licence than QF does.

If they want to Jetstarise Qantas then make them pay equivalent wages.

buttmonkey1
22nd Apr 2011, 09:12
how can this management be trusted when they imply a constant threat
to our current way of life. even the last lot of fools had the nouse to be
more upfront with their bastardry.
most here seem to be sending the same msg, tell us what these changes
are precisely, and we may even entertain working together on them.
can't see the buttmonkeys being affected all that much anyhow, but the
domestic bros should surely get a worry on, as the no lame ramp is
already set in the ppm for the 738 and 330 operations within Australia.
that should be an interesting scenario, as the most heat the dom bros
have yet felt is in their fancy new gourmet kitchens.

buttmonkey1
22nd Apr 2011, 09:22
Good point another superlame,
jetstar lames get paid a lot more for single and multiple licenses
jetstar lames have an annualised salary
jetstar lames get an annual bonus tied to the Qantas executives bonus
jetstar lames don't have to put up with any where near the B.S. at QF
jetstar lames don't have hundreds of assclown managers making their job harder.
need i go on?

SpannerTwister
22nd Apr 2011, 11:59
......as the most heat the dom bros have yet felt is in their fancy new gourmet kitchens....

In the previous PIA, for the first time in living memory, we as LAMEs stood united.

Cones shoulder to shoulder to Black-handers, Internationals with Domestics, ignoring the LAME's motto..."Divided we stand and divided we fall".

Again we need to present a united front to the company.

No SYD Vs MEL, No DTB Vs ITB, No Red Team Vs Blue Team, just one body, united and 100% backing the Association.

Does anyone really believe that Management have a workable "contingency plan" in the event we take PIA ?

Their only (realistic) option is to resort to a "Lock-out", and I don't think anyone, on either side of the fence, would consider that a realistic possibility.

Their world fell apart when one base at a time took four-hour holidays and no-one did overtime.

That is, a very small percentage of LAMEs, for a very small percentage of the time, took 33% of one day off.

Purely from a serviceable-domestic-aircraft POV, there are 2 - 3 "A" or "Phase" checks on the 737 Fleet each night.

OK, Give the A/C, what, 2 - 3 day over-run, after that you'll be losing YOUR SERVICEABLE aircraft at the rate of 2 - 3 / day.

It's a given that there'll be the same number of aircraft daily that would be fixable with LAME-power but not with out-of-experience management LAMEs, and the same number of aircraft AGAIN that even with the best LAMEs in the world would be a tow-to-the-hangar proposition, add in a miscellaneous issue or two and after a couple of days they'll be parking around 10 aircraft a day on the fence.

They're not going to lock us out !!

SP....We're behind you !!

ST

tjc
22nd Apr 2011, 12:27
that should be an interesting scenario, as the most heat the dom bros have yet felt is in their fancy new gourmet kitchens

So you have worked the domestic system?

domestic bros should surely get a worry on, as the no lame ramp is already set in the ppm for the 738 and 330 operations within Australia

Still need a LAME for first flight, ER, extended ground time (which is most weekends and public holidays), terminal to terminal transfer aswell as the countless questions the tech and cabin crews ask prior to departure.

We are all in this together.

YOSHI
22nd Apr 2011, 13:57
United we Stand, Divided we Fall...............

All ALAEA Members rember this.

SpannerTwister
23rd Apr 2011, 01:28
We are all in this together.
United we Stand, Divided we Fall...............

All ALAEA Members remember this.+1

SpannerTwister

The Black Panther
23rd Apr 2011, 08:32
Just to be consistent.
Every other segment has a multiple levels of management why should engineering be different.

Plus it gives them someone to sack in time tough economic times.

Jethro Gibbs
23rd Apr 2011, 08:32
Can anyone tell me why we need Ops Managers?????

To fill the empty chairs thats about all.:ok:

Gas Bags
23rd Apr 2011, 09:09
Can anyone tell me why we need Ops Managers????? :confused::confused:


Because for a crew of guys you obviously need to have 2 senior 1's, 1 senior 2, a DMM, and of course a line ops manager, and then obviously a maintenance manager. To consider supervising a crew with anything less than 5 levels of management would be ludicrous!!!


When does it start guys , i am on standby to help out , quids are good .


I assume you are talking about play school...with your spelling you may not be qualified to attend, but dont let that stop you trying.....

Short_Circuit
23rd Apr 2011, 09:24
So James Strongs " 4 step to the board" has been blown out of the water with multiple levels of management inserted to give a course of sackings so not to actually reach the morons that have caused the mess. :mad::mad:

another superlame
23rd Apr 2011, 10:19
Obviously Ops Managers are there to sign uniform chits and impose ridiculous rules about putting a leave application in.

When it comes to operational awareness of the day to day running of 'da bizness' they haven't a clue.

Oh and 1 in particular is there to send out dyslexic emails about things that have no relevance to the task at hand.

Jet-A-One
23rd Apr 2011, 11:10
Does anyone know why they're sending extra guys to LAX at the moment? I think 4 from SYD Base and not the usual suspects. They don't even know why they were chosen and what for. Just been told fill out all the visa forms etc. and be ready to go after easter. Scab force?

HARDNUT
23rd Apr 2011, 11:12
United we bargain, divided we beg!!!!!

The lens
23rd Apr 2011, 21:51
1) I might consider VR if offered;
2) I could then show up part-time as a ' maintenance consultant';
3) Just a thought for others: consider making a submission to Senate inquiry into pilot training and aviation safety under terms of ref. (j) 'any other related matters.' (Thanks, Fed.Sec, for Submission 49-a great job.)

TL

The lens
23rd Apr 2011, 22:27
Google 'James Kirby Jetstar not Qantas as our national airline?':

Article is from early Feb. 2011, so I wonder how AJ's '.....strategic review of the airline' is coming along, and what has it come up with so far.

TL

mmciau
23rd Apr 2011, 22:52
I'm getting the feeling that Qantas will be allowed to slowly grind down to closure - Management manufactured disputes, run a management controlled media campaign that the "Pilots and others are always asking for more, more and more.'

"Nothing left for us but to recommend cessation of operations and dispersal of remaining assets or strip assets to like organisations"

Is this the evolving scenario to get around the Qantas Sale Act??

Then Management will pick up their lunch boxes and go over to Jetsar which is not bound by the Qantas Sales Act

Mike

MEA332
24th Apr 2011, 06:42
Guys, I would not be worried at all about Qantas folding or selling off, Qantas is part of Australia's defence strategy and strategic defence mechanism for moving troops. It will be against the defence strategy and it will leave Australia open and vulnerable if they sell up to foreign investors. One would hope that the right people would not allow such a plan to be executed. The trolls on the other hand..... they would not know what national pride is if it hit them in the head. :ugh:

howyoulikethat
24th Apr 2011, 22:35
Looks like the whole 787 project is goin to J*,maybe its time to be
a "numpty",just give us the VR and we will go over and join a engineering
setup thats not full of useless layers of management:D

YOSHI
25th Apr 2011, 04:25
"numpty"
In Scotland a numpty is the village idiot or just a fool.

United we bargain, divided we beg!!!!!

The Best Yet!

33 Disengage
25th Apr 2011, 10:03
From the lastest Plane Talking edition, Ben, while discussing the mess that Qantas has got itself into says

the emphasis by qantas on how it will be harmed by a future industrial settlement doesn’t really address the issue as to why it is failing to pay its shareholders, satisfy its customers, or participate in the post gfc recoveries enjoyed by major competitors. Could it just be that it is being poorly managed, or that the plot, whatever it is, has been lost?Spot On!! :D:D:D

the rim
25th Apr 2011, 10:46
all things aside....over the easter break EQ has been down[great QF IT system that it is]new 747-400 check sheets for engine work ...that dont reflect whats in the amplification.. hope someone lets Quality and Risk know... I am...so what are they setting us up for....there are ame's and apprent's on the ramp[thats a good thing]...but whats it all mean for US:\....the rim

howyoulikethat
25th Apr 2011, 12:26
"yes got him".........
Teamwork really does make the Dreamwork.........
"Too infinity and beyond.........":confused:

hewlett
25th Apr 2011, 16:51
Chris N, you made a good start of it, accept the panther's olive branch, let the cranky old bastards go(some not so old) and don't allow the deal to be welched on this time, pay the sunnyboys what they are owed and let the rest get on with business, of course as long as it's ok with Big Al and his trusty sidekick LC.

You talk of change, tell the troops what you have in mind for f:mad::mad:ks
sake. If its about efficiency and quality not just pocket lining for the execs then it may not be as difficult as you think!

And while your chewing the fat with Big Al tell him just to dump the international arm, its a liability just like customers,rename the commuter division something catchy like Australian Airlines and the circle will be complete!

Elton Jon
27th Apr 2011, 06:45
Panther's Olive BranckYes Hewlett I agree with Panther's Olive branch as well.

The question is who gets an offer. The Buttmonkeys jobs are effectively redundant given the customer refinement program carried out by GH last PIA, so it I think they would have a good case if the some blue teamsters tried to jump the queue.

hewlett
27th Apr 2011, 07:22
I don't think GH was responsible for the customer debacle, he's not that dumb.Just misguided meat in the sandwich.

SpannerTwister
29th Apr 2011, 01:58
I don't think GH was responsible for the customer debacle, he's not that dumb.Just misguided meat in the sandwich.

Hmm, I honestly don't know...........

He's certainly no fool, but IIRC wasn't he actually THE manager in charge of International Contracts when Qantas ditched them ?

Was that his decision ?? Where was he in the QF tree at that time, was MH his boss, or was he "sideways" on the tree, so to speak, from MH at that time ?

ST

Clipped
29th Apr 2011, 02:28
An intuitive post from another thread, pretty much sums it up really.

Lets see if I have got perspective on this....


Qantas Profit 2009....$163,315,000 (BAD Unions!!)

Lufthansa Profit $388,252,000 (Must have BAD Unions!)

National Aviation Company of India Loss -$1,260,317,000 (Good Unions!)

Phillipine Airlines Loss -$266,000,000 (Good Unions!)

JAL Loss -$1,309,693,000 (What Union?)

Air France KLM Loss -$1,729,475,000 (Nasty Unions!)

Five things stand out for me....
1) Qantas isnt doing it tough....they've just ballzed it up
2) There is no correlation between Unions Vs Profit....Even in places like India where labour costs are basically zero....you can still ballz it up
3) Ken...stop it...your hand will get tired....anyone who has worked for Q knows how to see and smell the crap being peddled as solutions....
4) QF board need to smell what they are shovelling
5) Re A380 Fuel Burn...if its not as per advertised performance, QF will be compensated...like they were with the RB211-524G's which didnt work as advertised..so no loss there..

Figures from ATW... http://atwonline.com/sites/atwonline...t%202010_0.pdf

Imagine what could be achieved at Q if they genuinely attempted to have their employees onside.

YOSHI
30th Apr 2011, 03:42
I heard QF Management had a Foot in Mouth event at the meeting with the ACTU Members last week......in particular with the Virgin!

This will no doubt cause them much embarrasment at the negotiating table.

Clipped
1st May 2011, 09:03
Foot in Mouth event

OK Yoshi, spell it out for the un-informed. It is a rumour network.

YOSHI
1st May 2011, 14:11
Foot in Mouth !!!

VB Executive Member attended.

AJ slated VB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
AJ and his merry men not happy when they found out that all in attendendance were not QF employees..........................

To explain.............ACTU requested ALAEA (and all unions invited ) to send Exectuive Member to attend the meeting, so one was sent.............not specified that they had to be a QF employee, just a member of the Union Executive.
Remeber the ALAEA represent all LAMEs in Aus. not just those employed by QF............

So they sent a member of the Exectuive.........

Redstone
1st May 2011, 22:40
So Yoshi, are you saying AJ said nasty things about VB to an exec member he thought to be a Qf employee, when in reality was a VB employee?

LAME2
1st May 2011, 22:55
Sounds like a storm in a tea cup. Executive members wear many hats, as we all do at different times. At the time of being in the meeting, the member was participating as an executive member, not a VB employee.

33 Disengage
2nd May 2011, 02:47
LAME2 - It is a "storm in a teacup", so why did AJ "lose it" when he found out? Symptoms of a captain (I use that term loosely) starting to realize that he is going down with the ship.

ConcernedLAME
2nd May 2011, 03:02
AJ seems to be that way inclined...during a recent Roadshow in BHM a member asked a question which got him all fired up....And behaving very childishly towards the member who asked it.

I found it very disturbing that the CEO of a company could behave so poorly ..especially in front of his so called team.

Clipped
2nd May 2011, 09:55
Uni

After deciphering your post, I find myself ... actually ... possibly ... mildly ... agreeing with you.

airtags
2nd May 2011, 12:01
I see LTP announced a new facility upgrade for Manilla - focus on 380, 330 & other types.

A further lowering of the ceiling on Australian maintenance.

whatdouknow
3rd May 2011, 04:14
do you think that the white rat will already have there work scheduled for this new OS facility?

whatdouknow
3rd May 2011, 04:16
so... if there was an imposter at the ACTU/Qf Meeting, who's fault is that?

surely someone would have egg on his/her face for not realising. Hope not too many secrets were discussed.

Gas Bags
3rd May 2011, 07:17
I see LTP announced a new facility upgrade for Manilla - focus on 380, 330 & other types.

A further lowering of the ceiling on Australian maintenance.


Airtags,

I can understand the immediate reaction is to state what you have, however, what is the product like coming out of the LHT facility at NAIA? I have not been there myself so I cannot answer that question. Have you been there?

I would imagine that if QF ever send their aircraft to that facility then they will have a very large oversight team attending as well. The main role of the oversight team is to ensure a quality product.

I can state that for a 737 overhaul a normal oversight team would consist of 1-3 people, with some operators (the Indians especially) sending 7-8 staff to attend an overhaul. Qantas in the recent past sent between 12-16 people as an oversight team for a 737 overhaul in Asia. Obviously the numbers will be higher for a widebody.

Any MRO will do what the customer requests. That is how it works. If a team of 12-16 on a narrow body aircraft cant get a facility to provide the correct service then there should be planes dropping out of the sky on a regular basis.

On another thread I questioned a post that stated Qantas facilities, spares, manpower, etc were sadly lacking, and guess what, they were compared to LHT by others as a comeback to show how incorrect I was. As a matter of fact the almighty Sunfish even accused me of being a QF company troll in his post that stated the LHT facilities in the 80's were well advanced, for my daring to state such a thing, in his response to my post. (For the record I am not a QF troll....matter of fact I think the majority of QF management are inept, from the top to the bottom!).

Cake and eat it too?????????

GB

Jet-A-One
3rd May 2011, 08:58
Get over it "Gas Bags". The comment is in relation to the current EA negotiations at QF. Something that doesn't seem to have much to do with you...

You wonder why you get accused of being a troll?

Gas Bags
3rd May 2011, 09:06
Easy JA1, This is not personal....And it does have something to do with me. The longer QF manage to drive the wages at QF backwards with their less than CPI increases has an effect on the rest of the industry.

In my opinion all LAE's should be paid the same as a Captain at QF, as we all take the same responsibility all day everyday, and yes into the future as the signature on any CRS does not get erased at the end of the flight but stays valid for the life of the aircraft.

Ask yourself this before you get all defensive over your company, how does it get to a point where a LAE only gets paid around $70,000 a year?

Disgraceful...........

Jet-A-One
3rd May 2011, 09:50
I do agree with that.

Ngineer
3rd May 2011, 10:00
I would imagine that if QF ever send their aircraft to that facility then they will have a very large oversight team attending as well. The main role of the oversight team is to ensure a quality product.


Interesting point. I had a tour of a similar operation a few years back. There was 1, (yes only 1 LAE with his category lic) from that MRO certifying for the QF aircraft in the hangar and for the people working on it. He was also certifying for another 2 aircraft parked in the same hangar. He was a very busy boy, and had a mop in his a$$ cleaning the floors as well. The people working on the aircraft were not LAE's, in fact it was hard to distinguish their exact qualifications. This is not an opinion, just what I saw. And yes I did note that there were QF engineers there. I believe that their role was not for certification, rather to make sure that documentation was handled correctly and to supply technical/logistical support as requested by the MRO. (Though I stand to be corrected if that was not the case). They were also very busy.

The main role of the MRO is to supply a quality product, not the oversight team.

Now compare this (in direct contrast) to how Sydney Heavy operated. Numerous Licensed Aircraft Engineers working on the same aircraft. Numerous tradesmen and apprentices being trained. Alot of talent, albiet a more expensive option. Yet people still ignore all of these factors as having any real impact to our impeccable safety record, or quality of aircraft in that era. Having seen some third party work coming through H245, I can personally say from experience that some older aircraft from other operators came in as heaps of junk. They were not the quality we were used to working on, and hadn't been maintained to our standards.

Our past management destroyed all of this because, very basically, they had no clue about our work, quality or product. Totally understandable considering they are controlling a maintenace operation whilst having zero maintenace experience.

Gas Bags
3rd May 2011, 10:17
Ngineer,

Valid points raised. As opposed to a tour, I have been in numerous MRO's throughout the world as a tech rep over a period of years, and have many good friends that are professional reps. I am here to tell you that it is the role of the tech rep (oversight team) to hold the MRO to task over the product they present. You will never certify as a customer for a work pack being undertaken by an MRO. Every MRO is operated as a business and they will shortchange you at every turn if you allow them. It can turn decidedly nasty at times, especially if you are on your own and against a team.

I do not disagree with you that the QF product is/was amongst the worlds finest. That is undeniable.

The point I am making is this...If a team of more than ten reps from Qantas cannot ensure that they receive a quality product from ANY MRO IN THE WORLD, then it is clearly not safe to travel by air as thousands of aircraft get maintained by independant MRO's throughout the world each year with much smaller oversight teams than Qantas send with their aircraft.

I agree with every point you raise regarding Sydney Heavy. Unfortunately the majority of MRO's will not operate in this manner as they are not part of an airline in the same way that Syd HM was.

It is a real shame that the world has gone this way, and facility's like Syd have been closed down for the express purpose of outsourcing to an overseas facility. Reality is reality and it is now up to the oversight team on any overhaul to get the best product from whatever facility they find themselves in. There are a lot worse than LHT I can assure you.

GB

Black Hands
3rd May 2011, 14:06
I would imagine that if QF ever send their aircraft to that facility then they will have a very large oversight team attending as well. The main role of the oversight team is to ensure a quality product.

The QANTAS "oversight team" generally comprises 2 teams consisting of a production plannner, a materials/logistics representative, an avionic and mechanical LAME, a team leader and sometimes a representative from quality assurance. Apologies if I've forgotten someone... Working a day and afternoon roster aligning with a particular shift or LAME from the MRO.

The traditional QANTAS heavy maintenance facilities of Sydney and Melbourne Tulla, where a LAME is available to carry out, supervise and certify that each individual task has been performed correctly, ensures a high quality product. In stark contrast to LTP and similar MRO's, where 1 Mechanical and 1 Avionic LAME on each shift certify for every task carried out by MRO staff during the check, with minimal input or supervision, if any, due to the volume of work carried out each day.

The role of the QF LAME's as part of the "oversight team" is to determine defect rectification and repair processes, with the tasks physically performed by MRO staff and certified for by their LAME. In conjunction with the materials/logistics representative, QF LAMEs organise the arrival of required spares, and "vet" all completed task cards. The quality of the inspections and other scheduled maintenance tasks completed are the responsibility of the certifying LAME employed by the MRO.

Every MRO is operated as a business and they will shortchange you at every turn if you allow them. It can turn decidedly nasty at times, especially if you are on your own and against a team.

In my experience, the costs associated with the "check" only, have been predetermined, with defects found during functional tests and visual inspections billed on an adhoc basis. A reluctance to document and rectify defects, incorporate mods or carry out AD's due to the associated increase in hangar time, in turn complicating the arrival schedule of the next customers aircraft appears to be the norm. Which is why our aircraft return home with so many deferred items, costs then worn by QF engineering.

33 Disengage
3rd May 2011, 20:44
Olivia is in the Australian today and states "Qantas has negotiated in good faith for several months and exhausted all avenues possibleIf QF have been negotiating "In Good Faith" and "exhausted all possible avenues" why:-

1) Is nobody on the company's negotiating committee able to make a decision without going to QF corporate first?
2) Why does CN always have "more important meetings" to attend than the EBA meeting?
3) GH has stated that QF has "trump cards" that they have "not played yet".
4) Why are QF actively breaking provisions in the last EBA i.e. Transit Chk sheets

Jet-A-One
3rd May 2011, 23:48
Crunch time?

The Australian 4/5/11 (http://m.theaustralian.com.au/BusinessBreakingNews/pg/0/fi302214.htm)

YOSHI
4th May 2011, 00:39
Poor Olivia, I don't think she or QF Managemant know what the meaning of ' negotiate' is!

I also wonder how they sleep at night when they tell so many lies to the Press (and the public)?

I wonder if they would accept it if the Engineers used the same ethics when doing maintainance?

D Delay-Hay
4th May 2011, 00:50
The company is defaming all the LAME's by spreading this propaganda in the media, surely the ALAEA needs to refute these lies in the media otherwise Joe Public thinks that we're holding the company to ransom.
How about letting the public know about the real facts of the negotiation so far.

Ngineer
4th May 2011, 03:22
She's just doing her job, though I am glad she is on their team and not ours.

GH has stated that QF has "trump cards" that they have "not played yet".


Completely opposite to what I heard.

Jet-A-One
4th May 2011, 03:30
Pax numbers up almost 5% and they still cry poor. :rolleyes:

Finance News Network (http://www.finnewsnetwork.com.au/archives/finance_news_network17627.html)

another superlame
4th May 2011, 03:42
This whole thing..........and then all of a sudden,nothing happened. Work just keeps on being done, planes keep flying, EBA talks go nowhere. Same old,same old.........
The talk of trump cards and the like just seems very juvenile whether it is true or not.The suspense is just sleep provoking.

Millet Fanger
4th May 2011, 04:20
Ngineer - I heard GH use the analogy re trump cards in the H271 smoko room while addressing approx. 40 LAMES about 3 weeks ago. It was alluded that one of the trump cards could be some form of annualized salary but it would exclude sick pay. Can't remember what other trump cards might be but he was referring to more than one card.

Ngineer
4th May 2011, 04:34
Cheers, I thought the "trump cards that 33d was ref to was in relation to our upcoming PIA action.

opalops
4th May 2011, 05:07
Ms Wirth said the airline remained committed to finding common ground with the engineers.

"We are willing to negotiate on reasonable pay and conditions but we cannot accept union demands for a veto on change which would damage Qantas, restrict our business and jeopardise the jobs of their members and all other Qantas employees," she said.


...... Sounds like a threat to me??

Sunfish
4th May 2011, 18:59
I think Olivia is out of her depth again as I believe that the ALAEA has numerous examples of lack of good faith.


from Wiki:

In philosophy, the concept of Good faith — Latin bona fides “in good faith”, bona fide “genuine” — denotes sincere, honest intention or belief, regardless of the outcome of an action; the analogous concepts are bad faith (duplicity) and perfidy (pretense). In law, bona fides denotes the mental and moral states of honesty and conviction regarding either the truth or the falsity of a proposition, or of a body of opinion; likewise regarding either the rectitude or the depravity of a line of conduct. As a legal concept bona fides is especially important in matters of equity.

In law:

In contract law, the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing is a general presumption that the parties to the contract will act in good faith and honestly in abiding the promise of the contract, and shall not avoid contractual responsibility by shifty means or denying what the other party understood from the terms of the contract. A lawsuit (or a cause of action) based upon the breach of the covenant occurs when one party to the contract claims technical excuses for breaching the contract, or when he or she uses specific contractual terms in order to refuse to perform the contractual obligations, despite the circumstances and understanding between the parties.

Short_Circuit
5th May 2011, 02:27
Is it too late to include an IFE payment per A/C type in the new EA negotiations;)

Clipped
5th May 2011, 09:53
It would take them another few months to cost that one.

Jet-A-One
5th May 2011, 21:43
First it was the laptops, now the federal government has ended the lease car tax rort. Sydney Morning Herald (http://www.smh.com.au/national/crackdown-on-excess-car-use-to-avoid-tax-20110505-1eaeb.html)

This Enterprise Agreement is in desperate need of some new sweeteners!

ampclamp
5th May 2011, 22:40
Flat rate of 20% recommended.Those doing under 15,000 will be better off.
The Henry review could have gone several steps further imho

Lower tax rates have made leasing for most LAMEs a losing game.
At least far less attractive. In my workplace the numbers leasing have fallen considerably.

FED SEC,
I believe the company has applied for conciliation before FWA , is that correct?
If so what does it mean for us and them?

ALAEA Fed Sec
5th May 2011, 23:08
Yep true will get notice out today.

Ngineer
6th May 2011, 01:27
A flat FBT rate of about 16-17% would have been alot fairer rather than the 20% reported in the paper. This makes Salary sacrificing a less attractive option. Will wait for the facts on budget night.

Hopefully QF and ALAEA will work through this IASA mess. Used to take at least 2 IASA guys to turn around a 400. Whats the bet that local management will eventually expect the transiting LAME to take up the slack.

ampclamp
6th May 2011, 03:31
G'day ngineer,
The do not want to make salary sacrifice enticing, far from it!
yes best wait and see the nitty gritty details but so much of the budget gets run up the flagpole before budget night these days I'd say it is in the bag.

JETTRONIC
6th May 2011, 06:34
With all the latest developments with Virgin Australia, will it force the rat to come to the table?????

Had a look at the new interior of the virgin product....DAM! it absolutely sh#ts all over the QF product. Me thinks a little war is brewing....

the rim
6th May 2011, 07:33
yes JETTRONIC,it will bring them to the table bleating about how dicky's newer airplanes are better than our old girls and JB has all the info to beat us....they will want us to continue without PIA so we can hold onto our jobs....dicky came out at the launch of VA this week saying he was going in to direct competition with QF in j class...and it will take at least 2 Lame's on a -400 to do the IFE....and "GUESS WHAT"we dont have that many:ugh:

division1
6th May 2011, 07:49
The IFE is going to be a real problem now iasa is gone.
Luckily most crews will accept a 90 minute delay while
we ponder over unsuccessfull reboots before the inevitable
hold item. There will be heaps of U/S seats and maybe
total AVOD loss, degraded mode if you are lucky.
Wow, with pia comming within the week it is going to be
a total fooking disaster.

another superlame
6th May 2011, 08:18
Well with IASA going t1ts up, it would be a good time to prove to the morons running the place that bringing things back inhouse helps with (a) job security,(b) morale and (c) quality.
I know I am going out on a limb here, but it needs to rammed into their inferior brains that the failure of their service provider is a good thing.

tjc
6th May 2011, 08:18
The IFE is going to be a real problem now iasa is gone

So the potential of some of the IFE coming back inhouse is a bad thing???

The new QF 738 full AVOD went to Panasonic with what seems to be no questions asked and they have been doing JX since the word go.

It would not surprise me which backyard outfit gets the work on the IFE from now.

division1
6th May 2011, 08:40
Partly for the reason RIM stated, we don't currently have the manpower
to match what iasa threw at the task.
We don't have the practical skills right now, due to having no involvement
in the 744 ife maintenance up till now.
Seems many of the 744 avionic lames have some limitation that they can't
certify for the maint anyhow. PLEASE CHECK YOUR EQ QUALS CAREFULLY.
It's going to take time to get comfortable with this dogs breakfast of a system,
till then, with the PIA, planets aligning, yes, it will be a major problem.

Clipped
6th May 2011, 08:56
This IASA saga is a great opportunity for QF Eng management to make a positive gesture by reclaiming ALL IFE work in house, opening up the training school and getting that refresher training out to LAMEs.

Time will tell, but I think it is only wishful thinking.

Longbow25
6th May 2011, 09:24
Wouldn't mind a dollar or two that it ends up going to Panasonic.

The last thing QF would want is Steve's (ALAEA) boys anywhere near it

B.U.F.F.
6th May 2011, 10:51
As an interested bystander who in the long run will benefit from whatever happens to the big teams. What is happening with the QLink boy's.

I see from most post's here Q are extolling their virtues of having formal meetings but no outcome.
How sad when you think they don't get the outcome they want.
Which is we won't move so you (the union's) have to do all the moving - if they don't then they the union's are unreasonable.

So where is the negotiation or bargaining part ?

post a profit - cry poor
cover a big percentage of fuel rise with 4 surcharge increases - cry poor
increase services - cry poor
buy other operators, new aircraft - cry poor
give exec's pay rise - cry poor
maybe they need to look in the mirror and not to see if the expensive suit is on straight.

YOSHI
6th May 2011, 13:26
It used to be called an 'Enterprise BARGAIN Agrement',

Now it's called an 'Enterprise Agreement'.

The 'BARGAINING' has been left out!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Longbow25
6th May 2011, 22:32
To much procrastinating, time to make them bleed a little, or a lot!

Bigdog01
6th May 2011, 23:37
Lets have a look at these 2 words, then use a thesaurus for the meanings:

Enterprise - difficult or important project.
Difficult for them
Important for us (LAME)
other words - scheme,crusade, risk, hazard, try, attempt. Many more associated words but these cover Q attitude.

Agreement - The act of agreeing.
no comment here.
other words - understanding, complying, compromise, concession,negotiation,bargaining, acknowledging. Words with meanings they don't understand.

Lets just use 2 of the words to mandate Q attitude to replace EA

" DIFFICULT ACKNOWLEDGING " the importance of its staff.

Oh Me Oh My
7th May 2011, 04:34
Right on the money BD1 :ok:

Time to ramp up, monday will be an absolute waste of time, time for some rowers meetings too :E

oh and on a slightly seperate subject, where the f#$% are the pilots ! I thought they were shoulder to shoulder with us, looks like they're stalled, has the company offered them something ? :mad:

ampclamp
7th May 2011, 04:38
The pilots are having meetings soon but can tell you they are quite interested in what WE are going to do and when.
Some cannot wait it seems.

division1
7th May 2011, 05:38
Hopefully WE are going into bat after the next exec meeting (thursday?)
Speaking of the pilots, have they even had a PIA ballot yet?
They seem about as reliable as some DMM's.
Speaking of which, the DMM's have already been approached by company
managers as to which side of the fence they stand.
Cudo's to those that have told the managers to naff off.
After all, DMM's have probably benefited the most from our previous toils.
Definately one in Brisvegas needs monitoring.
Can only guess where the CNS assclowns are positioned.

Offchocks
7th May 2011, 07:10
division1

"Speaking of the pilots, have they even had a PIA ballot yet?"

No.

"They seem about as reliable as some DMM's."

I and a lot of my collegues have a lot of respect for you gentlemen, so why the agro?

Crusty Demon
7th May 2011, 10:39
The majority of pilots are 200% behind you. The company stalling tactics are trying to divide us, however our day is drawing nearer. The planets are slowly aligning.

Then again management plants trying to divide us is what they want. Wait to see what we will be writing up in the log when the PIA starts.

Clipped
7th May 2011, 10:53
Wait to see what we will be writing up in the log when the PIA starts.

Crusty.

Your spot on. That's all it will take.

Short_Circuit
9th May 2011, 23:17
ie, 1 x 387 blown in XXX lt

ampclamp
10th May 2011, 06:25
Monday will be interesting to say the least.

The Black Panther
10th May 2011, 06:45
The boss of Qantas, Alan Joyce, is about to face his toughest challenge since he took the top job in 2008: compromise with the unions and reduce margins or face some damaging industrial action.

The spectre of messy industrial action comes at a time the airline is suffering from a battered image following a string of midair emergencies last year, low staff morale and discontent that the Qantas brand is being run down to skimp on costs and promote its budget airline, Jetstar, which is less unionised and has cheaper pilots.

Talks with some unions, including the Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association (ALAEA), reached a dangerous point yesterday. The boss of the association warned that it would strike on Friday. The Transport Workers Union is also holding talks, as is the Australian and International Pilots Association, over a deal for its long-haul pilots.
Advertisement: Story continues below

These three unions represent a big swag of the group's staff and could make life difficult for Qantas - as well as for customers. On one side, staff feel disengaged and poorly treated, and want more security; on the other, management is looking at its numbers and the impact if it bows to union demands.

The problem Joyce faces is that Qantas pilots are paid more than some regional counterparts, and in cases where other pilots are paid more, their productivity is believed to be higher. The only way Joyce will be able to convince the board that he can justify a pay increase is if he can get agreed productivity gains. If the unions don't buy this, there will be industrial fireworks.

Qantas pilots and engineers have wage claims - but are offering no productivity gains - which Qantas says mean a 25 per cent rise in pilot costs over three years and 36 per cent for engineers.

Aviation analyst Kevin O'Connor, who wrote a report on Qantas before leaving Merrill Lynch last week, says it is crunch time for the company. In his report O'Connor concludes that Qantas is the most expensive airline in the region.

"Margins have been protected by it also having the highest yield, but rising competition means we think it must improve productivity," he says.

Qantas unions have scope to offer productivity gains, and Qantas has powerful levers, via its low-cost Jetstar operation and the incoming 787 fleet, with which to extract productivity gains, O'Connor says.

But the clock is ticking. Qantas is neck and neck with Air New Zealand for having the highest cash operating expenditure among its regional peers. Its saving grace to date has been its yields, which are among the highest in the region. They have enabled it to offset costs and give it one of the highest margins per passenger kilometre among its peers. But its yields are under attack. Competition in the shape of lower prices, better quality products and a perception that the company is running down the Qantas brand, are forcing down its yields.

Competition intensified yesterday, when Emirates announced it would scrap its fuel surcharge on all flights.

If strikes and other forms of industrial action are thrown into the mix, customers will vote with their feet. The engineers took industrial action in 2008, causing disruptions for thousands of passengers.

Qantas meets the pilots' union this week over stalled talks on a new deal with its long-haul pilots.

Fireworks ahead if Qantas staff won't agree to link pay rises to productivity gains (http://www.smh.com.au/business/fireworks-ahead-if-qantas-staff-wont-agree-to-link-pay-rises-to-productivity-gains-20110509-1efwc.html)

What The
10th May 2011, 07:05
Qantas pilots and engineers have wage claims - but are offering no productivity gains - which Qantas says mean a 25 per cent rise in pilot costs over three years and 36 per cent for engineers.

That is a blatant lie by an ill-informed ignorant reporter. A journalist would do some research before attempting to comment on an issue they obviously know nothing about. Amazingly the coward reporter didn’t put their name to it.

ampclamp
10th May 2011, 07:20
Just parroting the company line.cant expect much more from a parrot.

As a group I expect that the company would have enough respect to actually talk about anything they would like us to do.
They maybe be surprised by the results of a more open approach but I suspect they want all the gains and do not want to pay for any of it.
sad state of affairs. Lying to the media will not help.

600ft-lb
10th May 2011, 07:25
Journalism these days has been replaced with repeating word for word official company releases.

Cut and paste. Lazy reporting.

ACT Crusader
10th May 2011, 07:34
Where's Ben Sandilands? What's his take on the planned action?

The Black Panther
10th May 2011, 07:38
Looking forward to the Engagement Survey results that were going to be released after a senior management and board review with the survey consultants (02May2011)

I'll bet we won't see them at all or at least until post PIA.

bandit2
10th May 2011, 08:06
Just wondering what the grand total for all the fines Qantas have copped due to the price fixing scandal? I'm sure that scandal has done a far bit of damage to our brand. They find money to pay the fines, but not enough money to give their workers a decent payrise & SOME job security.F%#king money hungry a#%^holes.

Nudlaug
10th May 2011, 08:09
Gotta love the last union directive that just came out re action on monday, very creative i love it!
Great job Steve! :ok: :ok: :ok:

up2us
10th May 2011, 10:01
G'day Fed Sec and All loyal members out there!
Why don't we put the company on notice that each time they tell a blatant lie to the media there will be a stop work meeting due to the lie.We will then explain to the press why we have c/o this pia and that the company were told of the consequences of lying (my 3yo already knows there is a consequence if she lies!). We already have 2 good reasons, ie the average wage is $150k and also our wage claim is 36% over 3 years. Also the article about no productivity gains is absurb, how about the iasa issue and we happily/enthusiastically helped out which apperently is about 2-3 million annually saved

Bumpfoh
10th May 2011, 10:04
Bugger,

not on day shift Friday and R/O Monday, should be entertaining though.

Hold the line chaps.:ok:

K9P
11th May 2011, 00:12
What productivity gains did the board post to garner a 58% pay rise then?

griffin one
11th May 2011, 01:04
To fedsec
maybe all lames that hold shares should transfer them to the ALAEA, the union then would hold the 1% required for voting at the annual shareholder meeting.

chockchucker
11th May 2011, 01:40
Where's Ben Sandilands? What's his take on the planned action?


Here 'tis..............



Qantas, job security and a real discussion
May 10, 2011 – 6:51 pm, by Ben Sandilands

There are several problems for the public, and the media, in the reporting of the Qantas industrial issues that see the engineers taking protected industrial action this Friday and the pilot union possibly opting to do the same but later.

One problem is that Qantas has in the main responded to specific union claims with generalisations, meaning it is not arguing the issues that are the trigger for industrial action, and the other is that for the most part the media reports the union arguments in brief and in passing.

The result is that the public isn’t particularly well informed as to how either management or labor see the issues.

The reason Plane Talking carries detailed reports about the union side is that no-one else does, and the reason it hasn’t so far published detailed, line by line rebuttals or commentaries from Qantas is that there haven’t been any, as yet.

This summary of the situation being circulated among members of the engineering union, the ALAEA typifies the situation.

The Age Old Battle of Capital and Labour in the Qantas Licensed Engineers Strike Action

In what is shaping up as watershed battle for Qantas the age old fundamental argument of where a company should spend its capital is at the forefront of the issues.

The Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association (ALAEA) has given notice to Qantas its members intend to take industrial action to promote and further their claims in enterprise bargaining. Whilst the ALAEA’s wages claim is within the Qantas 3% parameters, the major sticking point is the ALAEA’s claim for security of employment for Qantas engineering employees.

In effect this claim is for Qantas to spend a relatively small amount of its capital to provide engineering and maintenance facilities, training and tooling to enable Qantas to perform the full maintenance of its new aircraft fleet in Australia which has a direct effect on employment opportunities for current and future Qantas engineering employees. The ALAEA estimates this amount to be less than $20 million for an investment that will sure up a major high technology capability providing benefits in aircraft safety, employment, spin offs to local companies and Government taxation revenue for the next 15 to 20 years.

Qantas currently performs the majority of its old fleet, the Boeing B747s, 767 and 737s, and Airbus A330 maintenance in Australia. However the B747 fleet is gradually being replaced by the Airbus A380 and the new Boeing 787 is intended to replace the B767 fleet. Qantas at present is not intending to do the A380 and B787 maintenance in Australia and the ALAEAs enterprise bargaining claim would have that work done in Australia.

The ask by the ALAEA is not a big one in dollar terms as Qantas already has a state of the art ($80M) Airbus heavy maintenance hangar in Brisbane and one in Sydney capable of accommodating an A380. The Brisbane hangar currently does B767 and A330 work and if the A380 work went into Brisbane the older B767s maintenance could be moved to Avalon Victoria which has done B767 heavy maintenance previously and has that capability. This would mean the Brisbane facility would become a dedicated Airbus facility.

The B737 fleet is maintained at Qantas Tullamarine Victoria with some overflow going to Avalon and occasionally overseas. The Avalon facility currently performs B747 maintenance and some B737 overflow maintenance and has a B767 capability. The issue of accommodating the B787s is somewhat more uncertain but has not arisen yet due to the uncertainty of the delivery of the aircraft. In summary Qantas is capable of satisfying the ALAEA job security claim, it just doesn’t want to make the investment in Australia.

If the ALAEA was successful in getting Qantas to agree to its job security claim there would be ongoing benefits to the economies and revenue for Queensland, NSW, Victorian governments as well as the Federal Government as effectively the majority of Qantas maintenance expenditure would occur within Australia.

That is a succinct argument. But where is the precise Qantas response, at this stage?

It is the lack of engagement by Qantas with the specifics of the pilot and engineering union claims that drives much of their job security concerns, which to summarise is that it doesn’t matter what they offer management it just wants them to go away and die, or not get in the way of a master strategy to shift much of the activity and assets of the Qantas group overseas.

If this is the strategy, and there is a fair bit of evidence that it is just in terms of things said by management, then government, and the public, might reasonably expect a good argument from Qantas as to why it can no longer make enough money in Australia, and some sort of reassurance that by calling Shanghai, Singapore, Auckland and Malaysia home on an expanded scale everything will be better than before.

If this is the strategy will it really substantially solve what may be other deep seated problems in Qantas, or resolve questions as to whether the group is experiencing troubled times because of how it runs its business in this country instead of unduly attaching blame to the fact that it is a predominantly Australian enterprise.

blubak
11th May 2011, 05:17
Ben Sandilands-that is an excellent question,do you think he will get a precise answer??
WE now have the executive manager of engineering giving false information about the salary range of LAME's,what a pity he did'nt bring that subject up when he was standing in front of us trying to tell us he was our friend and wanted to put the past behind us.1 hopes he is not expecting a sausage sizzle to solve anything & if it did make any impact ,be assured now that the 1 or 2 steps that might have been taken in the forward direction have now gone backwards 10 fold in 10seconds.