PDA

View Full Version : Qantas~The Loss Of Invincibility


fishers.ghost
3rd Dec 2010, 02:33
Social media unveils damage to Qantas brand after safety woes



http://images.smh.com.au/2010/12/02/2076350/alan-joyce-420x0.jpg In the media wars . . . the Qantas chief executive, Alan Joyce, has had to explain the engine woes to the public. Photo: AP

SAFETY concerns have hurt the once-untouchable Qantas brand. The issue has been burning up online chat sites, but analysts are divided over whether the damage is permanent.
An analysis of recent online chatter about Qantas has found a wave of negative opinion about the airline on various social media sites and blogs, with criticism focusing on service and safety. It found the Qantas chief executive, Alan Joyce, was wrong to claim there had been no damage to the brand.
Analysis by the online reputation management specialists SR7 found Qantas had done a good job of engaging with people in social media and responding to criticism but that it was facing an uphill battle.
The SR7 analysis found the Qantas brand had been the most hurt in peer-to-peer reviews, outside of those platforms such as Twitter and Facebook that are being actively monitored by the airline.
The key issues emerging on social media sites were users questioning Qantas's safety standards and stating that they would stop flying with Qantas because its safety record and overall reliability had lost much of its previous integrity.
The analysis found that Qantas had suffered reputational damage, which could amount to tangible financial loss, through commentary on social media.
Recent research by Convergys Corp found that one negative customer review on YouTube, Twitter or Facebook could cost a company up to 30 customers. But Qantas has clearly done better at handling its image outside the online space, with several communications specialists praising the way the airline has engaged with the public.
Paul Gardner, chairman of Grey Group advertising agency, said while the brand was tarnished, it was not permanently damaged. Mr Gardner said Qantas had followed a well-planned communications strategy.
''Qantas has positioned this quite carefully. They didn't fail, an engine made by Rolls-Royce failed - they were quite clear that it was an engine made by Rolls-Royce and a plane made by [Airbus]. The other thing they did brilliantly was that they managed to really play up the quality of the captain. The first thing they released was the captain's recording.''
Andrew Butcher, principal of the communications group Butcher & Co, said Qantas had done everything it could to avoid long-lasting damage, particularly making the CEO available to the public and the media so quickly. ''That's something that a lot of companies don't do, get out there immediately with their leader. Qantas gave it the respect it deserved. They didn't wait to test the water.''
But he said the big issue now facing Qantas was that every minor issue would be magnified and given more weight than in the past.
The advertising executive Brendan Van Maanen agreed Qantas would be subject to more scrutiny by travellers. People would compare it with competing airlines.
''People keep talking about Rain Man [the movie in which Dustin Hoffman's character says Qantas never crashes] but at the time Rain Man came out the Qantas brand was impenetrable. Once you've lost that you can't get it back.''
Mr Van Maanen, the managing partner of Onion ad agency, said the Qantas brand had been harmed and was vulnerable to competition.
''It's about the long-term repositioning of the brand in the mind of consumers. Qantas no longer holds that lofty position that no one else can challenge.''

Old Fella
3rd Dec 2010, 03:11
I think one of the greatest short-comings in the public relations area for Qantas is having the CEO, Mr Joyce, or the PR lady fronting the media. What the public seeks is an explanation in plain english from someone who understands the issue with the Trent and how the incident was handled by the crew. Qantas also need to make it clear that uncontained engine failures are not isolated to Rolls Royce Trents. It is undeniable that this failure could have ended much worse than it did, however the fact remains that the crew were able to recover the aircraft to Changi and no injuries were sustained by anyone aboard. It would seem obvious to me, that especially in light of information coming from the ATSB, that RR have erred in the quality control area of pruduction in relation to the oil feed pipe which failed. Off centre counter boring of the item leading to the failure should have been detected in pre-build inspection. It was not, apparently, and thus Qantas and other operators of the A380 Treent 900 powered aircraft would seem to have a legitimate cause for seeking compensation and also able to keep their reputation (Qantas) in tact.
All the bally-hoo regarding "off-shore" maintenance is, in this case, unjustified in my opinion.

Skynews
3rd Dec 2010, 03:14
I know it shouldn't matter, but every time I look and see that little Irishman pretending to care about Qantas, a shiver runs down my spine. :}

If employees have no pride in the company, that will, if it hasn't already, transfer to the customers.

I just can't find anything to be proud of anymore, either as an employee or customer. I simply like to get the $$$ and go home.

ROH111
3rd Dec 2010, 03:49
FacePPRuNe?

- likes this..

Old Fella
3rd Dec 2010, 04:14
Skynews, if you really feel that way you maybe should find another employer. Your stated attitude will do neither you or your company any good.

somewhereat1l
3rd Dec 2010, 04:54
The problem for Qantas old fella is that if all the employees found another employer they would lose about 80% of the staff

Worrals in the wilds
3rd Dec 2010, 04:55
I think one of the greatest short-comings in the public relations area for Qantas is having the CEO, Mr Joyce, or the PR lady fronting the media.

I think the CEO came across well and flying on the A380 was a particularly good touch, but IMHO he would have been better complemented in the television media by either a pet LAME or pet pilot, preferably uniformed, middle aged and pleasant looking ('trustworthy' in PR 101, if not always in real life :E) instead of a pouting gen Y who repeatedly gave the impression that Qantas thinks its passengers are idiots. There's no point in being overly technical with explanations, but going so far the other way (there were like, fire engines and stuff) appears flippant and doesn't lend a gravity to the airline's response that I think the public expect.

Just my $0.02 and PR is a subjective game at the best of times, but once the Captain card was played (which I agree they did very well, and they were lucky to have such an experienced crew on board so they could do that) I don't think they handled the TV media particularly cleverly. I know a lot of people that never use their computer for anything except emails who have been concerned about Qantas 'problems', primarily after watching the news on telly.


...outside of those platforms such as PPRuNe and Faceyawn that are being actively monitored by the airline.

Should we all be installing anonymisers? :suspect::}

airsupport
3rd Dec 2010, 05:14
Well I think, and I know of a lot of others that agree, that the greatest problems at Qantas are NOT the concerns with the A380 and other Maintenance problems, serious as they are, of much more concern is the shocking way Qantas are treating some Employees, in particular these LAMEs at Sunstate. :mad::mad::mad:

Skynews
3rd Dec 2010, 06:03
Skynews, if you really feel that way you maybe should find another employer. Your stated attitude will do neither you or your company any good.

Very admirable, but it's the attitude of just about every one from the CEO down. Do you think he is there for a reason that doesn't involve dollars in his bank account?

Problematic anyway, where do you suggest we go?

I dream of working for an airline that prides itself on setting the higher standards, there used to be one. If you are. Share holder maybe you need to reconsider your options.

Thats what she said
3rd Dec 2010, 08:04
My mate Dave would never do that

KRUSTY 34
3rd Dec 2010, 08:15
Mainstream media reporting that the ATSB have indicated in their report, that the experience of the crew was a significant factor in the safe outcome of what was an extremely serious event.

Hello, Macfly! Has the penny dropped yet?

Arnold E
3rd Dec 2010, 08:22
Skynews, if you really feel that way you maybe should find another employer. Your stated attitude will do neither you or your company any good
I have nothing to do with QANTAS in a bussiness sence, but, I do have a problem with the way they treat their employees. Should employees have the right to withdraw their labour whenever they feel the right? I think so, what say you?:confused:

DEFCON4
3rd Dec 2010, 08:32
Qantas built its reputation during the 60s and 70s.It was maintained during the 80s and 90s.Then it was privatised and taken over by a domestic airline.
The great work done by the men and women on the shop floor was about to be undone.
The successful managment team was replaced by uncaring trough snouting incompetents.Bonuses were introduced and outsourcing became rampant.The workforce was ostricized.Staff participation was neutered and replaced by the divine right to manage mantra of Scrotum Face.
Now its all hitting the fan the employees are being embraced once more by management.Pilots and Cabin Crew are being trotted out as faces of qantas Safety.
No one is buying this crap.
Will this be recognized at EBA time? Bet your nads it wont.
The only group telling it as it really is are the guys who maintain these birds.
Finally the media and the public are taking notice.
BBQs,dinner parties and pubs have become forums for discussion about the rot that has set in at Qantas.
Joyce has a watershed opportunity to re engage the workforce.If he screws it up he may as well go home.He needs to talk to rthe real people and stop listening to the butt kissers who are feeding him misinformation and disinformation.
Employees need to be proactive.
Get a group together and make an appoinment to see the guy.
If that doesnt work an en masse withdrawal of labour may be in order

Arnold E
3rd Dec 2010, 08:37
The Word is..... Hypocrisy!!!

I agree with you DEFCON4:ugh:

QF22
3rd Dec 2010, 08:57
Joyce, Dixon, and Strong are all tarred with the same brush !
It is only the loyal staff who are holding QF together, and after years of neglect and buggery that is at breaking point.
QF is a ticking time bomb !
Let's hope AJ has the intestinal fortitude to steady the ship, but i doubt it.
Just another CEO lining his pockets before he abandons ship.

Ka.Boom
3rd Dec 2010, 09:15
Its the brand stupid.
Get it? The Brand
Who makes the brand?
The Staff Allan....the staff.
Are you deaf?
Make yourself a legend and start listening!!!!

Redstone
3rd Dec 2010, 09:41
All the bally-hoo regarding "off-shore" maintenance is, in this case, unjustified in my opinion.

And you are entitled to that opinion OldFella, no matter how narrow it may be:ugh:

Arnold E
3rd Dec 2010, 09:50
I very, very strongly suspect that you are NOT an OLD Fella:=

teresa green
3rd Dec 2010, 10:12
Defcon4, sadly right on the button. What the hell has happened. The pride of our fleet, suffering all this humilation. 49 years of airline ops for me, the proud TAA (and deservably so) the great airline that was Ansett, the people who gave their all, The boss cocky airline Qantas, the pride of the nation, all gone and stuffed up in the name of carpet baggers and shareholders. What the :mad:? What the hell did we give our all for? Standards, safety, loyalty, pride, it was all there. It did not matter if you were a pilot, cabin crew, or the company dishwasher, we were all in there together, old fashioned perhaps, but it was the foundation of the way things were done, and the way to the future. And now its all about money, QF engineering scattered, no seamless work here, cabin crew employed by some company, who would not know a galley from a camels ar$e, remember when the aircraft were clean, both inside and out, and hold items were no more than 5 or 6, at the most, (aircraft going out with 76 hold items was the last I heard) so where does it end? Does it take a smoking hole in the ground, for people to realise that we are not dealing with jam tin labels here? We are dealing with aircraft, it does not matter how many jesus boxes they carry, they are still aircraft, and the A380 showed that, the skill of her crew got her home, and once more QF's luck held out. I hope that after all these years, that I am in that aircrew bar in the sky when the big one happens, I don't think I could deal with it, firstly because my kids fly, and secondly because I know it never should have happened, and thirdly because they will conduct a witch hunt, trying to pin it on some hapless LAME or pilot, but never admitting they were the cause, their greed, their lack of knowledge, their stupidity, in bringing down what was once the nations pride. Amen

Turban
3rd Dec 2010, 10:34
secondly because I know it never should have happened, and thirdly because they will conduct a witch hunt, trying to pin it on some hapless LAME or pilot, but never admitting they were the cause, their greed, their lack of knowledge, their stupidity, in bringing down what was once the nations pride. Amen


Spot on :ugh::oh:

Sunfish
3rd Dec 2010, 19:17
A simple visual inspection with a Mk.1 eyeball would have noticed that eccentric counterbore on the oil pipe.

A simple, "Go and No Go" gauge would have also detected it.

Exactly what are/were Rolls Royce thinking?

As there is a mating pipe, probably with O rings, and a clamp over the fitting according to the ATSB the whole assembly has to be under continuous asymmetric stress, not a good idea.

400 people almost dead and an aircraft almost written off because of a rotten counterbore?

I will make a tiny allowance for crappy surface finish if its Inconel, which is difficult to machine, but not for that much rotten geometry.

So next question; what else didn't RR get right?

...and since QF outsourced their engine maintenance, they had better be asking exactly the same question.

airtags
3rd Dec 2010, 22:18
Now that the ATSB has given it's position, the real inquiry should begin.

Who knew or if AJ is to believed, who DID NOT know? & why?
Where is the 'responsible officer' who is listed on the AOC? and what was his part?

The other questions go to credability - including that the inspections were done by RR & Q - no independent verification - (another win for self regulation) - The tragic media and comms strategies also need to use the borescope.

Interesting twist is that both NSW & VIC OHS law makes provision for designers and manufacturers of plant. The Act(s) make specific the platform of knowledge of and the obligations arising from potential risk.
Qantas' positon articulated by AJ efectively lays the justification for both the NSW & VIC Authorities to initiate action against Qantas and Rolls Royce.

Got an email from a friend who copied it from advice given to some of the CC that have banded together with a no win/no fee legal firm to have a run at getting their own slice of compensation for lost income.

(wonder if they'll join Joe & the Sunstate engs'?)

AT :E

The Professor
3rd Dec 2010, 22:25
"What the hell has happened."

The removal of regulation.

The emergence of a system subject to market competition.

Jabiman
3rd Dec 2010, 22:48
But as usual, this removal of regulation has been abused by management to excess.
Much like removal of regulation in the banking sector set them up for enrichment of management and a bail out by the suffering taxpayer.

stubby jumbo
3rd Dec 2010, 23:15
Would have to agree with most of your comments.


For me....It ranges from sadness.......bewilderment.......frustration and anger.

Probably the lowest point of my time at QF was the sickening APA bid. To read that 22 of the top Exco members would of pocketed millions of dollars and that they were urging ALL shareholders/staff to vote YES:yuk:
The realising what the GFC would have done to the airline IF it got up.

They call Qantas the luckiest airline in the world.

I 100% agree...... when you think of the QF1 "incident", APA bid, QF72,QF87 and now the QF 32 !!!! ( I could name a few others here-but ! :mad:)

The common thread running through all of these "events" is that the operation continued on due to the skill,guts and dedication of Qantas people.

Sadly for the victims and families of the Pike River mine disaster- an enquiry is being dome AFTER this shocking event.

I reckon its time to have a full enquiry at Qantas ....NOW ....before its too late.

PLEASE

Who would make up the panel of enquiry ????
That is for another topic.

~ Stubby.

Jack Ranga
4th Dec 2010, 00:48
Arnold,

Jaba is referring to Rob Fyfe, boss at Air New Zealand. From what I remember the bloke does a day a month at the workface. He regularly does cabin service beside his flight attendants etc.

From what I also read he makes the tough decisions whilst engaging his staff. His staff respect him, he doesn't draw a massive, out of proportion wage for his services. If you think of where ANZ has come from in the last 10 years, remarkable!

gobbledock
4th Dec 2010, 03:35
Australian aviation reached a turning point a few years back. A turning point that none of us are going to like. This industry within our continent is lining itself up for a smoking hole. The seeds have been sewn and we are well and truly along the path into this journey.
Poor regulation, CEO greed, incompetence and a rapid decline in standards, systems and resources has set the wheels for a smoking hole well and truly in motion. The signs are there, the evidence is there and the escalation in incidents and occurences is there.
Tick tock.....

teresa green
4th Dec 2010, 10:18
Arnold, I know who he is, he is my vintage. He is a very experienced pilot, with enormous experience. In fact a bloke who could fly the pants of most of us, right G?

frangatang
4th Dec 2010, 18:32
You lot keep hanging shit on RR ad nauseum. Wonder what you will say when your GE packs up spectacularly. And get over this ferking QF icon thing will you. Vegemite is septic tank owned but you dont complain!

PittsS2A
4th Dec 2010, 19:24
The gobbledock is right on the money.

Every day now I expect to wake to hear the news that a QF Aircraft has bought the farm somewhere around the world.

The F'wits that manage the place dont care that a tragedy is not too far away, they will continue to chop the guts out of QF until the big one occurs and then they will collect their money and run for the hills.

Anyone who thinks that talking to AJ will convince him to hit the brakes and chuck the place into reverse needs their head red, come hell or high water we are going to find out just how far costs can be cut before tragedy occurs. It's not a case of if anymore but a case of when.

qf 1
4th Dec 2010, 19:36
i agree as a former Lame at Qantas,and one that has worked in Europe,in defense and general aviation,when i got to Qantas their standards where second to none,as time has past i have seen the standard drop to those of the Greek operators and beyond.There has now been too many major incidents and the propabilities of a hull loss i think are very close.the management have cooked the golden goose,once Heavy Maint started to be de centrelized out of Sydney that was the beginging of the end for Qantas,good luck to thoese qantas employees that are left you will need it.

Sunfish
4th Dec 2010, 20:02
Frangatang:

You lot keep hanging shit on RR ad nauseum. Wonder what you will say when your GE packs up spectacularly. And get over this ferking QF icon thing will you. Vegemite is septic tank owned but you dont complain!


Many years ago I had to sit through presentations by BAE about their wonderful 146 aircraft. I also had to sit with some of their engineers while they patiently explained the wonderful new maintenance features of this amazing aircraft to me - "features" that Boeing had applied at least Twenty years before. I got the distinct feeling I was being talked down to as an ignorant colonial.

Contrast that with the reception one used to get at Boeing - there was, almost an air of humility since we were the customer. Douglas of course was different. They told you in the first Thirty seconds that they had built the DC3 - every time, and therefore you could tell them nothing.

Years later I had to sit through more British smoke and mirrors BS regarding databases, again delivered in this cultivated Oxbridge accent.

If RR are true to form, their sales and customer relations people will still be spouting beautiful BS delivered in that lovely accent, and probably referring to their great and glorious history "we built the Merlin you know".

As far as I'm concerned, you are as good as your last gig, and RR aren't doing that well.

Lodown
4th Dec 2010, 21:56
One of the good things about cost-cutting CEO's is that that's what they focus on. The problem with cost-cutting CEO's is that that's what they focus on.

GodDamSlacker
6th Dec 2010, 09:20
The Biggest Mistake the board has ever made was to listen to Marget Jackson & Geoff Dixon & giving the CEO job to Joyce, he has no idea how to run a major airline, just a cheap crap low cost bus service....
Borgetthi should have been the CEO, things would have been so different even now...
As for that stupid PR girl, send her back to where ever she came from, she has no idea a total goose...

73to91
8th Dec 2010, 19:51
Re 'astroboy'

ive heard from multiple sources, both inside and outside QF, that Joyce will not be having his contract renewed next year. Apparently the board, even Clifford, are not impressed with his constant focus on Jetstar at the expense of mainline, and his neglecting of the 'premium' product. The inside mutterings i dismissed instantly, but the talk from independent external sources stuck with me, due to their close business associations with QF........



So, this opens up a new discussion.
Who could they get? If left to the board do they go after Fyfe at Air NZ or ask an Aussie to return home like James Hogan at Etihad?

Offer a public apology to John Borghetti and beg him to come back? Not much chance of that happening though, is there?

Are there any senior operational guys floating around the likes of Cathay, Emirates, etc who started out at QANTAS and would like to come home?

What about internally? Anyone know of or believe that there is someone there?

Captain Dart
8th Dec 2010, 20:00
I wouldn't wish managers from Cathay Pacific on anybody; even QANTAS!

Examples (the euphemisms say it all) : the Screaming Skull (current CASA CEO), the Ayatollah (a previous CASA CEO), Red Oddington (Ansett no longer even exists), David Downturn (associated with the APA bid for QANTAS)...see the Fragrant Harbour forum for even more competent and engaging potential CEO's!

skybed
8th Dec 2010, 21:50
year by AJ( lets hope it does happen) as the AOC has been transfered to the COO.
:mad:

Jabiman
8th Dec 2010, 23:59
My firm belief is that KB would do a far better job than AJ. :ok:

The Kelpie
9th Dec 2010, 00:07
Julian Asange would be good. He has a pedigree of getting the facts out there instead of all this media spin. ;-)

More to Follow

The Kelpie

breakfastburrito
9th Dec 2010, 00:09
Engine fault adds to airline's woes
Matt O'Sullivan
December 9, 2010

QANTAS'S headaches over its fleet of A380 aircraft have been further compounded after a defect was found in a newer engine on one of its superjumbos, which is still on the factory floor in France.

The discovery of what is believed be a faulty oil tube in one of the new plane's Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engines has forced the manufacturer to change it, delaying slightly the transfer of ownership of the next superjumbo to Qantas at Airbus's plant in Toulouse.

Qantas is also due to take delivery of another new A380 - its eighth since 2008 - this month but its fleet manager has conceded in an email to pilots that ''we will be lucky to see it in service by Christmas''.

The airline is desperate to take delivery of the new A380s so that it can fill gaps left in its network by the grounding of most of its existing superjumbo fleet. Only two of its six existing A380s have returned to service since a mid-air engine explosion on a Qantas superjumbo on November 4.

''One step forward and two back! We can't take a trick in getting more aircraft into the air and back into service,'' Qantas's fleet manager said in the email to pilots on Tuesday.

The latest revelation comes as Rolls-Royce's lawyers failed to turn up at the Federal Court in Sydney yesterday to hear Qantas's compensation case against the British company.

However, Qantas's lawyers submitted to the court a letter from Rolls-Royce calling for parts of an affidavit detailing arrangements between the two companies to be kept confidential after The Age made a request for access to the document on Tuesday.

Merrill Lynch also estimated yesterday that the grounding could cost Qantas as much as $207 million, which comprises $70 million in repair costs and $137 million in lost revenue.

The Qantas fleet manager's email reveals the extent of the troubles Qantas is having to manage its worldwide network, as he highlighted ''why it has been so difficult to come up with a long-term plan''.

Qantas declined to respond to questions yesterday.

Insiders believe it could be months before Qantas can return the A380s to service between Australia and Los Angeles, one of its two key international routes.

The latest headaches are also said to highlight Qantas's decision early this decade to bet on the A380 and Boeing's long-delayed 787 Dreamliners as the core of its replacement aircraft.

Qantas has said in court documents that it will be ''uncommercial'' to fly its A380s between Australia and the US while engine-thrust restrictions imposed by Rolls-Royce remain in place. It means the superjumbos will be able to carry only 80 passengers instead of the usual 450.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau also said yesterday that three out of 45 Rolls-Royce engines checked since an order was made on December 2 had failed inspections.
source:The Age (http://www.theage.com.au/travel/travel-news/engine-fault-adds-to-airlines-woes-20101208-18prq.html)

LondonSloop
15th Dec 2010, 08:34
According Bloomberg's 14 Dec 2010 Note to Investors-

'Qantas Airways Ltd may post a 40 percent decline in combined profits next year on slower economic growth, higher fuel costs and austerity measures in Europe, International Air Transport Association Chief Executive Officer Giovanni Bisignani told reporters in Geneva yesterday.'

struggling
15th Dec 2010, 08:48
Somebody's got it Wrong.

Today's MacBank Memo says:

12-month price target: A$3.13. QAN remains attractively priced, and we maintain our Outperform recommendation.
:uhoh:

MR WOBBLES
17th Dec 2010, 04:56
Very Interesting
:D

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2010/12/08/overt-and-covert-singapore-airlines-bashing-over-a380-rr-engines/ (mhtml:{282216D4-7425-446B-8C1A-74CF10C82ED5}mid://00000006/!x-usc:http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2010/12/08/overt-and-covert-singapore-airlines-bashing-over-a380-rr-engines/)

TIMA9X
17th Dec 2010, 14:14
Sorry MR WOBBLES, I had trouble with your link.... so I re-posted here.
Overt and covert Singapore Airlines bashing over A380 RR engines – Plane Talking (http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2010/12/08/overt-and-covert-singapore-airlines-bashing-over-a380-rr-engines/)

Whilst Alan Joyce has distinguished Qantas from Singapore by grounding the Qantas A380 fleet he still faces the same engineering quality problem of having no real control over the quality of the engines used on its A380s and some B747s. In fact Singapore Airlines (through its engineering subsidiary SIAEC, SAESL, HAESL and IECO) and its higher risk philosophy has more control over the Qantas brand than Qantas itself. Joyce and the Qantas Board continue to put the Qantas brand at risk, and this is no longer just a possibility it is definite.The Qantas Board should be intelligent enough to recognise that putting the Qantas brand in the hands of overseas engineering is an unacceptable risk, both from commercial and a passenger safety considerations.
The Qantas Board needs to commit to and spend the capital (approximately $100 million) to have its A380 and new B787 fleets overhaul and maintenance done in Australia. Its a cheap price to pay to protect the only market advantage Qantas has, its brand and safety record.
Great piece, yes, a very interesting read for those who may have missed it. For me it sums up exactly what many on here have been on about for some time now! I thought LH was taking care of the Trent 900s on behalf of RR, is this still the case?

Thanks for the link, cheers. :ok:

Sunfish
17th Dec 2010, 19:40
I told you all that this would happen. This is a Schadenfreud moment.

TIMA9X
18th Dec 2010, 01:36
I told you all that this would happen.Indeed, Sunfish.... It occurred to me that AJ's career spans over the "cut and slash mentality" as far back as Aer Lingus, EI had lurched through one crisis after another (some say, "still does") before he joined AN in 1998. Look what happened to AN before he joined the QF group! To AJs credit he did a good job at J* in the early stages but now seems to be caught in a rut! To my mind, the "cut & slash mentality" is out dated, hence the fusion of the J* & QF brands that we see evident in 2010.

This corporate culture was well established by GD and it appears that AJ has continued way too long with this strategy unable to change course as "cut & slash" seems to be all he knows..

May be I am old school, but staff pride at QF played a big part in why "brand Qantas" became an international airline icon. Diminish the "pride factor" (staff morale) you end up with a big hole in the brand.

Engineering "know how" at QF was a huge pride factor lost under the tenures of GD & AJ.

When I see Santa this week with my family Christmas wish list, one wish will be that Santa delivers the huge parcel "of pride" back to the QF group. (which was lost between Dublin & Sydney)

Sad that we have to rely on Santa to deliver.. even he knows the value of "well maintained reindeer's" to pull his sled along....

Jingle bells,

Ngineer
21st Dec 2010, 06:35
It wasn't that long ago that a very senior QE manager stood in-front of a large group of LAME's in Sydney and said that he did not consider SIA to be an unsafe airline. (playing down the importance of our reputation in safety as usual). In-fact it was right before the A380 engine failure. Funny that......

Sunfish
21st Dec 2010, 20:07
Struggling:

Today's MacBank Memo says:
Quote:
12-month price target: A$3.13. QAN remains attractively priced, and we maintain our Outperform recommendation

If you think any utterance made by Macquarie Bank at any time for any reason is anything more than self serving crap then God help you.

While I am not suggesting in any way that Macquarie would ever do this, it is not unknown for people who have a large amount of shares they wish to sell to arrange for the stock to be promoted forcefully to retail markets.

It is very difficult ever to prove its been done. There are ongoing investigations in the USA of the links between certain stock brokers, banks and journalists.

If you want to lose your faith in financial markets, and you have time on your hands, read the investigative articles here:

Deep Capture Blog (http://www.deepcapture.com/)

gobbledock
26th Dec 2010, 12:32
Sunfish, your last post was perfectly articulated. The link to the Deep Capture Blog is spot on. Only a fool believes everything an investment firm touts.

teresa green
27th Dec 2010, 10:23
It was not quite that pleasant Unionist. The unions had far to much say in all airlines at that time. Most managers were not bastards. For a start most came from the hanger floor or the flight deck, and had a fair idea what they were talking about.(not like the beancounters you have today). The strike in the early eighties was a dispute by cabin crew over the galleys in the SP 747 and yes they were supported by other unions on the base. Tthe poisoning of pilots was caused by a few pilots who took it upon themselves to make uncalled for remarks to gay cabin attendents about the spreading of AIDS, who in return "rimmed" their food. Yes, you are correct, QF came very close to going broke not because of bad management but because the country was going thru a downturn. The three major airllines were then TAA, Ansett and Qantas, they were all top heavy to a degree, but good to work for, well run, excellent engineering, and excellent standards in flight training, and most of all, a souce of pride to their employees. Sadly that has just about all gone. In the name of the dollar. But one thing remains, despite QF treating its staff badly, the staff in return still stick blindly to their loyality, always have, probably always will, and QF marches on and flys inspite of its self. It is truly an enigma, far better brains than myself have tried to work out, some of its crazy ideas, like about every four years, its shreds staff, normally the best it has and starts hiring people who have no idea, and it does this every four years, breaks up depts, fires good managers, and then goes back to sleep again.You can almost set your watch by it. A career company it is not, and has a reputation as not a good place to start in business for any post graduate with a business degree. We were lucky Unionist, we saw the best of that world, despite all the failings, it was a good place to be.

biton
27th Dec 2010, 21:18
Sunfish;

Blue horseshoe loves Qantas Airlines.

Ngineer
28th Dec 2010, 09:07
who in return "rimmed" their food.

For those of us who have had sheltered lives, what does it mean to have one's food "rimmed"?

gobbledock
28th Dec 2010, 09:19
Blue horseshoe loves Qantas Airlines.
Now that wins the 'post of the day award'. Nice work Biton. And I concur !

teresa green
28th Dec 2010, 09:54
Ok, I know about "rimming" but what is a blue horseshoe?

breakfastburrito
28th Dec 2010, 10:01
Teresa
I'm channelling Bud Fox, dam, what was that classic "greed is good" Gordon Gecko, late 80's movie...

Keg
28th Dec 2010, 10:16
Having your meal 'rimmed' was to have it run around the 'rim' of the loo by the F/A.

gobbledock
28th Dec 2010, 10:22
I'm channelling Bud Fox, dam, what was that classic "greed is good" Gordon Gecko, late 80's movie...

Wake up, will ya pal? If you're not inside, you're outside, OK? And I'm not talking a $400,000 a year working Wall Street stiff flying first class and being comfortable, I'm talking about liquid. Rich enough to have your own jet. Rich enough not to waste time. Fifty, a hundred million dollars buddy. A player, or nothing. - Gordon Gekko


Aagh I see Teresa Green's apetite for information and quest for knowledge is strong, much like the hunger for riches and wealth that drove Gordon and Bud.
Keep seeking and ye shall find the answer......

gobbledock
28th Dec 2010, 10:25
Having your meal 'rimmed' was to have it run around the 'rim' of the loo by the F/A.
Master Keg is correct ! However the term 'being rimmed' takes on a whole new meaning these days !!

teresa green
28th Dec 2010, 10:30
Can't help you there mate, I am famous for falling asleep in movies, in fact the missus has banned me from going any more, due to my habit of nodding off. (I have never got quite used to the idea of paying to see someone pretending to be someone else).

teresa green
28th Dec 2010, 10:55
Gobbledock, you are not wrong, just googled it, blimey, perhaps another word needs to be found. Anyway it made a couple of tech crew blokes very ill, in fact one S/O was on the critical list for a few days. Naturally pilots from all airlines were outraged, and the offending cabin crew started to face the possibility of manslaughter charges had that S/O died. Needless to say a truce was called but there was a lot of argy bargy at every chance for some time to come, in fact there was a famous fight on a crew bus, between a F/O and a FSD/CSM. It started as a verbal, but soon ended up with the both trying to beat the living cr$p out of each other, sadly for both, the Chief Pilot of the day happened to be on the bus,( he had hitched a ride) and both were stood down, (but both were reinstated later). I think we were a little less politically correct in those days.

TIMA9X
28th Dec 2010, 11:22
Wow.... :)The Loss Of Invincibility threadThe plot thickens....:ouch:

SOPS
28th Dec 2010, 16:33
slight thread drift I know...but rimmed food!!!..I think I may well be sick:eek::eek:

Ken Borough
29th Dec 2010, 04:18
The strike in the early eighties was a dispute by cabin crew over the galleys in the SP 747 and yes they were supported by other unions on the base

Note quite Teresa! It was all about a manning issue in the SP Bus Class on the Tasman routes. FAs in those days belonged to two unions who could not agree: the girls in one and the blokes in the other. The FAs did get support from the blue collars, including the TWU, but when the Company threatened FAs with stand-down all over the world, the FAs returned to work while their brothers on the ground all over Oz remained on strike over the use of Staff Labor rather than in support of the welshing FAs. Those around at the time will recall Salaried Staff trained as FAs. The atmosphere between the FAs and the pilots was quite toxic, and well as between the boyth and girls.

teresa green
29th Dec 2010, 05:42
Perhaps you are correct Ken, but there was also a galley issue, of that I am sure, and you are quite right about the fight between the boys and girls,in fact one girls car did not have one wheel on her return to the carpark after working. However we must not take over their postings about problems of old, those days are over, and belting each other up over disputes is now over. (But not nearly as much fun), all to serious these days.

Worrals in the wilds
29th Dec 2010, 08:34
Anyway it made a couple of tech crew blokes very ill, in fact one S/O was on the critical list for a few days.

With food poisoning? Out of interest, how did they prove it was from the rimming? Or was it chemical poisoning from the loo treatment stuff?
Sorry to drift on this, but it caught my attention and I'm now morbidly curious. In any case, it was a frightful thing to do to someone, particularly if they were responsible for the safe handling of an aircraft. :yuk:

BTW, if you've been googling that word you may have found a few movies you won't sleep through. I only hope your computer is in a secluded part of the house :}!

teresa green
29th Dec 2010, 09:17
My memory was the bloke was diagnosed with a bug called samonella which is pretty serious, which is picked up by contaminated food, he was up the track, ran out of fluids, fainted, hit his head on the wash basin, when he came to, rang his skipper, who got the quack, and into hospital he went. His condition went down hill, and there was much concern. I don't want to start another C/C Tech crew crew thing here, this was in the 80's, AIDS was having a impact, and there was much stress, some died (including a couple of Tech Crew) and it was a very sensitive subject. There were some C/C who were willing to say "rimming" went on as it disgusted them, and as far as I know the S/O was nothing more than a innocent victim. There were more. It caused a lot of grief between the pilots and cabin crew, and as most of both were innocent, it was quite silly looking back on it now, just shows best to say nothing, you just don't know where it leads.

gobbledock
29th Dec 2010, 13:49
The below statement was from mid 2010, penned by Nouriel Roubini. He is a switched on economist who seems to get things right more often than not. Worth a read for those about to sink a chunk of change into any airline.

Where Roubini is concerned, the great recession has some way to run.
"The crisis is not over; we are just at the next stage. This is where we move from a private to a public debt problem," he says, his speech the mongrel drawl of a man who was born in Turkey to Iranian parents, raised in Israel and Italy and lives in New York. "We socialised part of the private losses by bailing out financial institutions and providing fiscal stimulus to avoid the great recession from turning into a depression. But rising public debt is never a free lunch, eventually you have to pay for it."
As eurozone leaders panic and markets continue to dive, Roubini believes Greece will prove to be just the first of a series of countries standing on the brink.
"We have to start to worry about the solvency of governments. What is happening today in Greece is the tip of the iceberg of rising sovereign debt problems in the eurozone, in the UK, in Japan and in the US. This... is going to be the next issue in the global financial crisis."
It already is. And Roubini claims to have foreseen it as far back as 2006.
"I was writing about the PIGS [Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain] six to nine months before everyone else, I was worried about the future of the monetary union back in 2006," he says. "At the World Economic Forum I outraged a policy official by suggesting the monetary union might break up."
Roubini has sandwiched a visit to the The Daily Telegraph's offices between a private meeting with Bank of England Governor Mervyn King – "I regularly meet with policy makers. I don't know if it's even worth mentioning" – and a talk at the London School of Economics. I ask him if I can see his LSE speech.
"I haven't written one. I never prepare a speech, I don't even have notes. I usually just speak out of my own thoughts; stream of consciousness."
It's a manner he adopts when we meet. Looking over my shoulder, declining eye contact, he moves seamlessly between what he describes as the economist's usual suspects – "the US, eurozone, Japan, China, emerging markets, inflation, deflation, markets" – as he must when teaching his 400 students in New York.
The prognosis for all the suspects save China and the emerging markets is grim, little wonder given the backdrop of a 3.8pc drop in the FTSE last week and panic among investors spooked by German chancellor Angela Merkel's short-selling ban. The ban has been dismissed as fiddling while Rome, or rather the eurozone, burns.
Roubini believes Greece's problems will see the country forced to restructure its debt and raises the longer term prospect of a breakdown of the union with the potential exits of Greece, Spain and Portugal.
Could it survive such a blow? "Well you could think of a world where there is a eurozone with only a core of really strong economies around Germany," he says. "But the process that would lead to one or more countries leaving the union would be so disruptive that the euro as a major reserve currency would be severely damaged."
Like many economists, Roubini does not talk in absolute predictions. It is all about what could happen in worse case scenarios.
But he argues they are only becoming more likely under current political leadership, the UK's new Conservative-Liberal coalition included. "I am worried about the hung parliament. Whenever you have divided, weak or multi-party governments, budget deficits tend to be higher. It is harder to make the necessary sacrifices."
He dismisses the £6bn of cuts announced by the coalition as "small compared to what is needed", but rejects the idea that the UK is worse off than many of its peers.
"In the US there is a lack of bipartisanship between Democrats and Republicans, in Germany Merkel has just lost the majority in her legislature, in Japan you have a weak and ineffective government, in Greece you have riots and strikes," he says. "The point is that a lot of sacrifices will have to be made in these countries but many of the governments are weak or divided. It is that political strain that markets are worried about. The view is: you can announce anything, we'll see whether you're going to implement it."
This, he explains, is the ultimate challenge facing governments.
"If you're pushing through austerity while there is growth that's one thing, but if you're pushing it through while the recession is deepening, politically that is harder to sell. And the eurozone doesn't just need fiscal consolidation but also structural reform to increase productivity and restore competitiveness," he says.
Germany is the blueprint, Roubini points out, but "it took a decade for them to see the benefits of structural reform and corporate restructuring".
"If Spain and Portugal start today, you'll see the short-term cost without the long-term benefit and they might run out of political time," he says. "That's why I worry about several eurozone members having to restructure their debt, or deciding that the benefits of staying in the monetary union are less than the cost of it."
The prognosis for the UK is, at least, a little less alarming. An independent currency gives it a few more levers to pull – quantitative easing means default is unlikely to be an issue. But that comes with its own challenges.
"Eventually inflation will go up and that erodes the real value of public debt," Roubini says. "In that scenario the value of the pound will fall sharply. It could even become disorderly and that could damage the economy, the financial markets and also the role of the pound as a reserve currency."
Yet another challenge for Government then. Whether the coalition can live up to it remains to be seen. And whether it thinks it has to.
Roubini is adamant that the great recession is not over. But a temporary economic pick-up, which would convince governments that reform is unnecessary, could bring its own problems.
"People asked me why I saw there was a bubble and my question was why others didn't. During the bubble everybody was benefiting and losing a sense of reality," he says. "And now, since there is the beginning of economic recovery – however bumpy that might be – in some sense people are already starting to forget what happened two years ago. Banks are going back to business as usual and bonuses are back to levels that are outrageous by any standards. There is actually a backlash against even moderate reforms that governments are trying to pass."
Reform, Roubini insists, is necessary, recovery or not. "We are still in the middle of this crisis and there is more trouble ahead of us, even if there is a recovery. During the great depression the economy contracted between 1929 and 1933, there was the beginning of a recovery, but then a second recession from 1937 to 1939. If you don't address the issues, you risk having a double-dip recession and one which is at least as severe as the first one."
Roubini has built his reputation on such forecasts. So, given the real reputation builder was forecasting the crisis, has he been one of the few to enjoy the troubled times of the past few years?
"We are witnessing the worst global economic crisis in the last 60 to 70 years and for an economist that offers an opportunity," he says. "So it has been interesting, but the damage financially and economically has been so severe and so many people have suffered. Anybody involved has to bear that in mind."

cart_elevator
30th Dec 2010, 06:21
TG

It all comes down to the old truth which my mother told me years ago 'You should never p*ss off the people who serve your food'

Not that I would ever condone it, but I come from a 5 star dining background.. never, EVER be rude waitstaff in a restaurant (or cabin crew on an aircraft for that matter) They control it all :ok:

Again, I would never condone, or do it, but it still goes on today (in both restaurants and in the air).

You would be very surprised what happens to your food when you 'go-off' at a waiter, even in a 5 star dining restaurant !!

Tidbinbilla
30th Dec 2010, 07:29
Rightio. The rimming has been done to death. Let's now get back on topic :ok:

Tidbinbilla
30th Dec 2010, 08:28
Cactusbutt, you have me confused with the straighter (and more educated/level-headed) part of the act, Tailwheel.:8

I'm as t-witter and bisted as the next bloke. But I keep getting my wucking mords fuddled this time of year. Perhaps I should lay off the Christmas Cheer a little......:p:ugh:

(Can I still say CHRISTMAS HCEER without being politically incorrect?)

Of course we can! Happy new year all!!:ok::} *HIC!!*

flying-spike
30th Dec 2010, 12:14
I would hate to hear what happened to the crew

ozaub
31st Dec 2010, 04:22
Back on thread, and Happy New Year to All.
IMO Qantas is more lucky than invincible; just read recent ASTB report on OJM “Electrical Event” in Jan 2008 or report on VH-OJH Bangkok overrun accident in 1999. So why does everyone bang on about the airline’s safety record?
Statistically Qantas is no safer than Southwest, poster child of the low cost carriers. Southwest has flown for 38 years and like Qantas has never killed a pax on a jet. But Southwest operates four times as many A/C (550 vs 132) and seven times as many flights as Qantas. Admittedly in 2005 Southwest killed a single person in a car when flight 1248 overran on to a highway, but equally Qantas has had on-ground fatalities including a pax fall in Feb 2009 and I recollect a galley accident c. 1992.

breakfastburrito
31st Dec 2010, 05:22
Ozaub, the answer to all your questions is in Nuts! (http://www.amazon.com/Southwest-Airlines-Business-Personal-Success/dp/0767901843/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1293775998&sr=1-5) - The story of Southwest. Virtually every LCC does everything the OPPOSITE of what makes Southwest the probably the best airline ever.

The book is from $0.01 (plus postage) on Amazon. I cannot recommend highly enough that as many airline employees as purchase, read & share this book with colleges.

Things don't need to be done they way they are. The current crop of managers can't even lift the recipe from the HowTo manual that is Nuts! Of course, the secret to Southwest is its employee's & a management that acknowledges & rewards as such. Instead we get a group of industrial Neanderthals hell bent on creating empires & short term bonuses. It will end in tears unless we take control back.

Read the book.

Romulus
31st Dec 2010, 06:10
Seconded.

"Nuts" is great reading.

Anyone from Southwest on here able to confirm it's true not just some guys impressions from the "helicopter view"?

gobbledock
31st Dec 2010, 10:30
Romulus,
I agree, the book is excellent. I am friends with an Australain aviation consultant who worked for Southwest as an Engineer for around 8 years. He reckons that the book is pretty much true in all aspects, with just the odd embelishment, otherwise spot on.
Irrespective of some of the familar LCC format such as cheap fares with high seat occupancy, tight turnarounds and second tier airports utilised and a workforce that admittedly works pretty damn hard the 'aura' of the airline remains unique.

We have had many long conversations about the LCC difference between Herb Kelleher's outfit and Aussie LCC's as an example, and it would take way too long to recite, but the basic differences are that Kelleher engaged with his staff across ALL levels and he mandated that his managers did the same. He promoted from within and thus kept a large pool of experienced managers and frontline staff for extensive periods, often decades. Happy staff means a productive workforce, in turn the consumer scores a win, the staff score a win and the airline score a win. All staff reaped some reward financially from the company's performance, rather than a select group of silk tie wearing latte sipper's raping the staff for all they can. Basically the managers are engaged with staff at all levels (engagement by means of varying forms - respect, equity, fairness, communication and reasonableness to name a few points). When staff are required to 'go the extra mile' they do so knowing that it increases the longevity and viability of their job. The same cannot be said for the majority of todays LCC's.

Southwest also has maintained it's pride due to a majority happy workforce. This doesnt mean they have not had some issues over the years, but in general those issues are very minimal when compared to other airlines that operate under a similar framework. They have remained financially viable through almost their entire existence, but the GFC bit them hard and some maintenence cutting saw a few issues arise as well as some 'FAA punitive action', but in all they keep making some profit each year without the need to enforce mass retrenchments or mergers to survive. Management lead by example during the good periods AND during cyclic downturns and do not resort to shafting the workforce as their first avenue of cost cutting. No senior managers earn multi million dollar packages for not performing.

So basically yes, the book is pretty accurate. Kelleher was similar to our very own Clive Palmer from what I understand. Everybody gets their palms greased for earning their organisation a quid. Sounds ok to me.....

ozaub
31st Dec 2010, 21:40
Thanks folks. I've ordered my Nuts and look forward to reading it. BTW I worked for Boeing when it too was an inspirational employer - long, long ago!

aviator_38
4th Jan 2011, 10:53
hello,

Has the December issue of e-Torque ie http://www.alaea.asn.au/news/e-torque/e-torque-december-2010.html been withdrawn? Have not been able to
access this.

Cheers
James

neville_nobody
4th Jan 2011, 11:33
Worth noting that Herb was actually a founder owner of Southwest, which I feel for any business is a big plus. Somewhat similar to a Gerry Harvey/Clive Palmer etc

If the business goes under then there goes all their cash and most of their pride so it is in their and your interest that the business goes ahead.

However when you get big corporations with no owner it doesn't really matter to senior management that the thing goes broke as they can just move onto their next $500k job somewhere else.

MR WOBBLES
4th Jan 2011, 21:04
dec issue e torque


Overt and covert Singapore Airlines bashing over A380 RR engines – Plane Talking (http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2010/12/08/overt-and-covert-singapore-airlines-bashing-over-a380-rr-engines/)

KRUSTY 34
4th Jan 2011, 22:41
Compulsory reading.

If the QF32 incident had a different outcome, I imagine it would have been compulsory reading at what would have been Australia's greatest Coronial inquest!

Idiots! :ugh:

aviator_38
5th Jan 2011, 00:02
MR WOBBLES, Thank you.

I read the article, first in " Plane Talking" , then saw it again in the December issue of " e-Torque ".

That particular issue of the newsletter seems to be unavailable now, which is why I was wondering if it had been withdrawn from the ALAEA website.


Cheers
James