QF Staff Engagement Survey Participation Rate

[Ka.Boom]

Flight Ops:2555 Employees
1640 completed survey
54.19% Partipation
Cabin Crew:7164 Employees
3229 completed survey
45.07% participation
JetConnect:588 Employees
299 completed survey
52.64% participation
Engineering:4869 Employees
3428 Participation
70.40% Participation
Catering:2063 Employees
1042 Completed Survey
50.51% Participation
Qantas Overall Employees 29957
Completed Survey18707
Participation 62.45%
Lyell Strambi feels this is a fantastic result for Operations .The participation rate was 58%.Up from 47% in 2009 and 39% in 2010

[Tankengine]

Participation rate high!
Wait until they go through the results!:E
In previous surveys some were too apathetic to bother, now they ARE angry enough to respond!:mad:

[hewlett]

Were the previous survey results revealed, or was it only in the house format where each room denoted a subject of the survey and was given a colour indicator? ie green/orange/red.

[rodchucker]

So where do the missing 12,718 employees belong and what was their engagement?

Glad to see someone presumably with authority acknowledges Jetconnect and the staff are part of QF.

Now lets wait for the results of the analysis if it ever surfaces.

[Keith Myath]

The only way to effectively show ones disengagement is to NOT fill out the survey. If you fill it in - you will be counted amongst the engaged employees.

[What The]

What the numpties (I love that term) don't realise is that due to the password structure of the survey, multiple responses from the same person were allowed.

I know of one person who completed the survey 14 times. All on company time of course.

These numpties just can't win a trick.

[gobbledock]

I know of one person who completed the survey 14 times. All on company time of course.
It was Ken 'numptie' Borough! And on each survey form he wrote the same thing - "I love Qantas/I love management' !!

[DEFCON4]

Engineers had the highest participation rate and Cabin Crew the lowest.
The engineers must be really really pissed off

[unionist1974]

Of course , it would be too much to expect the knockers and whingers to put their money where their mouth is and leave the place , as it is so bad according to you lot . No , you will stay and take the benefits , hard won by previous generations of real Unionists . A load of sooks and whingers todays lot, put up or shut up comes to mind . Ah well enjoy .

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Well said Ian.

[Tidbinbilla]

On the contrary, Keith. I would have thought that NOT completing the survey implies that you're "engaged".

Not completing the survey means you have nothing positive NOR negative †o report. (Keeping the status quo).

Apathy (not completing surveys) gets you the result you deserve...

[airtags]

The Mods logic is correct:

participation rate up = simply means more people telling the numb-nuts in management that they have got it wrong.

Actually - while the rise in the 'log on' count might be lauded, the actual result is proabably far from pretty - which is why the survey methodology uses batches of ten as a base - why ...it then skews (lessens) the % decline compared to pevious.

I don't care about the numbers who logged on - I'm more interested in the qualitative results......oh I doubt there will be any 'attributable outcomes'

AT

[Mud Skipper]

Just to repeat this post.
I know of one person who completed the survey 14 times. All on company time of course.
Several people have mentioned the same, this was not posible in past surveys so no wonder there was a higher participation rate.
Lyell Strumbying it would be more like it, was this survey flawed on purpose or just a sign of the time incompetance?

[Keg]

The results from the previous survey were released- at least for flight ops. They weren't pretty. This time they will be much worse.

Last time too there were some comments from various personnel in flight ops management that perhaps flight crew didn't realize that it was about flint ops management rather than executive management. I know a number of crew who made it very clear that they were very much disengaged with both levels.

[urok]

If you fill it in - you will be counted amongst the engaged employees.

Unfortunately Keith is 100% correct. "Engagement" surveys measure how many employees are "engaged" by the business - ie. it measures how many employees feel the company care enough about the results to actually respond. The results are irrelevant - a high or simply improved completion rate of the survey - be it with scathing or peachy feedback - is enough to justify a few level's of management KPI bonuses being paid.

Company's who are interested in the results conduct "Culture Survey's" and other such named exercises, which are generally accompanied by million dollar investments in an outside and unbiased HR type company conducting said surveys, and generally run over a period much longer than a few months.

An "engaged employee" is one who is fully involved in, and enthusiastic about, his or her work, and thus will act in a way that furthers their organization's interests.

Employee Engagement is the extent to which workforce commitment, both emotional and intellectual, exists relative to accomplishing the work, mission, and vision of the organization. Engagement can be seen as a heightened level of ownership where each employee wants to do whatever they can for the benefit of their internal and external customers, and for the success of the organization as a whole.

- Layman's definition that is smack on from Wikipedia. As you can see, Employee Engagement is a very valuable commodity - hard work and good will that costs nought alot...

[stubby jumbo]

Yep, that would be moi ! And yes the algorithm is correct. I indeed completed the survey (only once :hmm:)
And yes- I hammered home my views on company LEADERSHIP (lack of),STRATEGIC DIRECTION (ditto) COMMUNICATION (ditto) RECOGNITION PROGRAMS (ditto) MERIT SELECTION /CAREER PLANNING (ditto).

In fact EVERYTHING ...........thats why I'm... "one of them" totally and utterly disengaged and thats why.......

I'm getting out of this joint.:(

The final straw came for me last month......when after an extended delay ex LHR and completing a 19hour 50min TOD some management "NUMPTIE" wrote a letter of complaint because he witnessed..... "some of the crew (whilst waiting for their keys and allowances) were not wearing their jackets in the lobby of the hotel".
1. Why didn't he bother to approach the CSM to give his "feedback"?
2. It was 31 degrees outside.
3. Is the non wearing of a jacket.......that big a deal in the grand scheme of things?????

Upon returning to SYD -all crew had a copy of the "complaint" letter in our files from our Cabin Crew Managers with a note-PLEASE EXPLAIN. (The complaining manager had his name blacked out)
Nothing.... about......"we realise it was a tough sector and we appreciate your efforts" :D....just explain and/or dob in the crew who were NOT wearing jackets !

So........The orange surrender flag has gone up......or should I say I'm in a Kamikaze dive (FCKUNI CLOWN !!:mad::mad:)

As a once loyal , engaged employee who loved coming to work, felt proud to say I worked for Qantas , won SAAB and eXcel awards to someone now who is embarrassed to even mention to anyone that I work for Qantas .....over the years my loyalty has been crushed by the ineptitude of "management" and their obsession with greed, lies and the total contempt for our customers. In fact, the overall arrogance of the regime's -post Ward has been nothing short of appalling.

Engagement.........yeah.....pffft !

[600ft-lb]

Of course , it would be too much to expect the knockers and whingers to put their money where their mouth is and leave the place , as it is so bad according to you lot . No , you will stay and take the benefits , hard won by previous generations of real Unionists . A load of sooks and whingers todays lot, put up or shut up comes to mind . Ah well enjoy .

A 'real unionist' is a a person who used to be a part of a union and represented workers then using their knowledge on the workforce takes up a lucrative job consulting to companies on how best to get an EBA signed with the least amount of $.

OK, that really makes sense.

How's this for a point of view, we'll be working for Qantas long after the current crop of management are long gone in disgrace like the previous. We don't have short term bonuses to meet knowing we'll be gone by the time today's decisions come home to roost.

Good luck with it all, I know its just a big game to IR and consultants. The current crop of management are all so well remunerated into the millions per year that they don't care about their future within Qantas. They know as long as the corporate circle jerk matey matey club continues they can jump from job to job playing financial games.

Why would they care when they've probably got a few board positions and a ceo position lined up with their mate they gave a subordinate role to many years earlier.

Good luck Qantas, listen to your staff, you might learn something about whats wrong.

Or maybe you'll tell them.

Or engage consultants to post on PPRUNE telling us all how stupid we are.

[fishers.ghost]

These surveys are a gauge of how well management is doing in regard to destroying the embedded Qantas culture of service and excellence.From all accounts they are succeeding.
Management feels that excellence is no longer relevant and that those who hang on to this notion are not only irrelevant but are impeding the forward momentum of the corporation.
Where that forward momentum will lead is unclear.The sale of Qantas is still on the agenda.The government of the day is complicit in this.BA is still interested but is being a little quieter about its aspirations.The general consensus amongst all interested parties is that Australia does not deserve a premium national carrier.
The indifferent juggernaut rolls on

[Sunfish]

"Destruction Of The Qantas Culture"

Why yes, don't you understand this?

The Board and senior management of the airline are operating to what I call " a script". This became obvious and alarm bells began ringing the instant I heard Dixon (or was it Jackson?) using the phrase legacy airline to describe Qantas International.

It is quite simple; Jetstar is the new Qantas. The Board want to kill the old Qantas. When "Stubby Jumbo" and others here state that they are leaving after 20+ years with Qantas, this is music to the Boards ears - they want you to leave.

I will try and explain the mindset because I have seen it before. I apologise if I get the description slightly wrong.

....A mainline pilot:

What you believe you are:

A highly skilled professional who started in GA, worked hard and through long experience and devotion to professionalism, now sit at the pinnacle of aviation achievement as a Qantas B747 Captain.

What the Board believes you are:

A balding, ancient and overpaid Prima Donna who refuses even simple requests for operational economies on account of mythical "safety' concerns, justifying them on the basis of their so called "experience" - which is irrelevant in today's dynamic business environment.


A Flight Attendant:

What you believe you are:

A consummate professional who has learned through long practice and training how to manage passengers so as to afford them a pleasant travel experience consistent with operational safety.

What the Board believes you are:

An ugly old fat hag who is totally resistant to change, paid far too much, and is far too vocal in demanding a totally unreasonable and uneconomic level of creature comforts on behalf of "her" customers.


An Engineer:

What you believe you are:

A professional of many years experience who with hard acquired skills and experience has dedicated themselves to making every Qantas aircraft as safe as it is humanly possible to be made on every flight.

What the Board believes you are:

A greasy jumped up car mechanic that is paid far too much money by virtue of an insidious system of blackmail and extortion managed by their union....and of course is totally resistant to any change in their archaic work environment.



Anyway, that is how I've seen this play out in another industry. The common factor is that experience is seen as a handicap because it is perceived as making people resistant to change. Of course management doesn't go the extra step of determining exactly why the change is being resisted. They only did one unit of organisational behaviour in their MBA and they were taught that resistance to change is natural - and therefore make the false assumption that there are no concrete reasons why the changes they propose are dangerous and should be resisted.

They therefore ignore advice and press ahead....until there is a smoking hole in the ground.

I watched an IT company decide in 1992 that some Forty or so COBOL programmers should be made redundant because COBOL was a "Legacy programming environment" and that the programmers were old, ugly and impossible to retrain. All of those programmers made lots of money thereafter as consultants dealing with Y2K. The Board of the IT company had forgotten that the eternal verities of computing don't change, and neither do the laws of aviation. Gravity always wins, no matter how "dynamic" you think your "Business environment" is, and no management technique is going to replace training and experience when the proverbial hits the fan, at night, in bad weather, a long way from land.

[Red Jet]

Bravo Sunfish:D:D

In fact - your lucid wit and reflections are the only reason I keep lurking at this forum. Please let us know when you decide to write a book!!

[stubby jumbo]

Sadly, Sunfish your post is right on the money.

Dixon was the stooge sprouting the LEGACY word at every staff forum he addressed. Now.... I see through this orange -tinted smoke screen.

Your descriptions of how management / Board see us is also a sad truth.

My equation for success:

Experienced / Engaged people +Safety #1+ a Customer focussed culture + Committed Management

[DutchRoll]

Unfortunately Keith is 100% correct. "Engagement" surveys measure how many employees are "engaged" by the business - ie. it measures how many employees feel the company care enough about the results to actually respond. The results are irrelevant - a high or simply improved completion rate of the survey - be it with scathing or peachy feedback - is enough to justify a few level's of management KPI bonuses being paid.

As tempting as it is to be cynical, this is not the case. The KPIs are not determined by how many people fill out the survey. The KPIs are determined by the statistical results of the survey responses compared to last time.

Not filling out the survey is like not voting, with your opinion then ceasing to have any relevance to anything and Management being free to invent (ie, "spin") any explanation for the lack of voting they like. Perhaps "The employees who didn't do the survey are obviously quite content with everything as they think there is nothing which could be improved".

The statistical results of the survey (ie, the analysis of employee satisfaction and engagement on each question/topic) go to Board level, I am told.

The #1 way of kicking the Board right in the teeth would be to have everyone fill it in, and everyone mark each question with the lowest score possible.

[Worrals in the wilds]

Onya Sunfish.
I'm seeing the same management approach in another aviation business at the moment. Too many 'professional' managers don't have a single clue about the actual product or what the company does. That would be okay, except that they hate and distrust the staff who do have a clue.

Is the Qantas survey anonymous or only 'confidential'?

[whatever6719]

Great post Sunfish. U have so eloquently put into words exactly what is happening out there at the moment. After 20 plus years in the company, I'm prepared to wait this out. I've seen enough to know that change happens and can happen quickly and unpredictably.
What is being inflicted on us is unsustainable. Something's gotta give.

Stubby jumbo, I'm sorry to hear you are leaving like this. People like you deserve so much more. You would have given your all over the years but unfortunately, as happens all too often, your efforts go unappreciated by management. I'm sure you will find an employer that will value you more than QF (which won't be very hard at all!!)

[DutchRoll]

It's "confidential", not anonymous.

However the risks of your identity being divulged to QF management are pretty low. The survey is administered by Towers Watson, a huge multinational HR consulting company totally unrelated to Qantas. They have a duty to keep employee identities confidential and it is in their best commercial interests to strictly enforce that (otherwise no-one will ever do their surveys). They only release the analysed data from the responses to Qantas.

[packrat]

Qantas mainline has two main CC groups:QAL and QCCA.
QAL are the old timers...their tenure ranges from around 12 years to around 40 years.This is the group managment wants to get rid of.
QCCA fly exclusively on the A380.Shiny new aircraft,shiny new crew.
QAL are targeted threatened and intimidated.This is particularly so if you are male over 50 and have over 25 years service.They want you gone.
QCCA crew are given enormous latitude regarding transgressions.
I keep my head down and it stays down.
I dont work for Qantas.I work for the passengers
45% participation rate says it all.

[Ngineer]

I spoke to a couple of Sydney ramp guys (freight) on the Easter weekend. Apparently their manager was looking for a couple of overtime volunteers for that weekend, and after asking around she quipped that "in a couple of years there won't be any more overtime, infact you probably won't have a job here". She did this with a fat grin on her face.

If engagement needs to improve then 100% of management need to be serious about it, not just those at the very top.

[Worrals in the wilds]

To which the best response is "and neither will you, sweetheart". Then deny saying it.
Sociopathic middle managers survive in part because people put up with their crap.
That said, Qantas seems to have an awful lot of them.

[Shark Patrol]

To continue on with Sunfish's analogy:

How do frontline QF staff view their executive management? The same way Gwyneth Paltrow felt about her grandmother!

[hewlett]

Sunfish nails it again. Now over to unionist1974 for some educated insight.

[noip]

hewlett,

You forgot the ...

</sarcasm>

tag ..


:)

[gobbledock]

Now over to unionist1974 for some educated insight.
Nah, GD is out of the country on holdiays and is to busy to post a comment.....

[unionist1974]

Ah Sunfish , the great failed warrior form Ansett . Never come to terms that he and the mob he worked for are failures , that said some vey good trade unionists at , The young guy out of the trimming shop who went on to become a National union official comes to mind Ian was his first name a real left winger, good bloke , was it Jones ? I'll think of it . Well Sunfish old boy never in the same class , you are a perpetual whinger .

[600ft-lb]

Nah, GD is out of the country on holdiays and is to busy to post a comment.....

Somehow, I don't think GD with his multi multi millions of dollars he managed to get out of Qantas for his tenure at the helm, would give a rats(hah) whats going on at Qantas these days.

None of them ever would, temporary holders of positions given to each other by their own circle jerk of mates that will look after each other through the years ahead.

The upper 'elite' echelons of the corporate world have infiltrated all the positions ensuring they're remunerated extremely well at the total expense of everyone below them. Through the banks, the broking houses, the investment funds (who always vote yes to CEO remuneration packages), all aspects of the corporate world are in on it.

That's why people with operation experience and ground level knowledge have been slowly but surely wiped out from management levels.

Temporary holders of command in company X that care not what happens to it down the track.

[unionist1974]

^600ftllb , I take you missed out , well so did i nuff said

[600ft-lb]

Mr unionist

I will never 'make it' because my job involves getting my hands dirty, literally.

Just have to wonder, the endless pursuit of profits at the expense of everything else, how has America, the shining beacon of capitalism and totally free business practices been faring lately ?

The whole mantra of outsource outsource outsource in America has been the downfall of that country. Wages have stagnated, industry is dead, profits for American companies are way up, wages for CEO's are the biggest in the world yet wages for the middle class have gone backwards in the last 20 years. No protection for members of unions, no collective bargaining, no minimum wages in many states. Collapsing dollar and unpayable debt.

Yet Australia has strong unions, laws to protect people who belong to unions and strangely a strong economy. Figure that paradox out.

Hence the reason for my negative views on the corporate circle jerk who make their own lives better at the expense of the other 99.5%

[33 Disengage]

600ft-lb - Unfortunately unionist has sold out on his mates in any union. He's trying to get into the "corporate circle jerk". Although he has honed the tactics for an industrial dispute (failed last time though), they laugh at how base and illiterate he is.

Unionist - I think you are mistaken, the guy out of the trim shop had tickets on myself but not backed up by any real talent. Old Ianmeadow was his name.

[Sunfish]

Unionist1974, I wear your hatred as a badge of honour.

[unionist1974]

Sunfish , unlike a lot on here I do waste my emotions on hatred , I quite enjoy your posts m just that I choose to differ on certain issues and think that you are wrong . Hate you ! not at all .