AUGUST 24th - QANTAS [Archive] - Page 5

TIMA9X

25th Sep 2011, 16:46

This is what happens when you get a bunch of Execs who only want to see every action as something that is against their interests. Shameful manipulation of the facts.

Why are we not surprised. Yes, well said and why am I not surprised to read this today as well..

CBD

The notice for Qantas's annual meeting is expected to be dispatched to shareholders this week, three resolutions lighter than the bulk of the airline's pilots would probably like.

Despite a group of shareholders (endorsed by the pilots' union) getting enough support to put forward a resolution at the meeting, Qantas earlier this month said it had ''no legal obligation'' to carry the resolutions, which were seeking a vote of no-confidence in its chairman, Leigh Clifford, chief executive, Alan Joyce, and the rest of the airline's board.

''Qantas has decided that it is not appropriate for the no-confidence motions and the support statement (in its present form) to be included in the notice of meeting for the AGM,'' said the airline's company secretary, Cassandra Hamlin, in some correspondence obtained by CBD.

''As a matter of company law, regardless of whether or not it is supported by the majority of shareholders present and voting at a shareholders meeting, a no-confidence resolution has no operative effect.''
The proposed resolutions coincide with the increasingly hostile industrial dispute between Qantas and the pilots.

Hamlin in her letter added that the airline had given the Australian International Pilots Association the ''opportunity to submit a revised statement containing the substantive content of the supporting statement, omitting references to s249N [of the Corporations Act] and the no-confidence motions, for circulation to shareholders with the notice of meeting''.

Makes you wonder how you can revise a statement which pushes for a no-confidence motion without referring to a no-confidence motion.

BOARD GAME
Given the Qantas notice of meeting will not contain the supporting statement for the attempted no-confidence motion, CBD has managed to free up some space to include some excerpts from it.
''The board of the company has in recent years presided over a significant destruction in the value of shareholders' interests in the company,'' it starts.

Aside from noting how the share price had fallen from $5.62 to $1.45 since Clifford became chairman, the statement notes some of the events that have occurred under the present board.

These include the fines Qantas has been hit for ''unlawful cartel behaviour''; ''new aircraft have been ordered but not delivered and instead of using aircraft such as the Boeing 777 which competitors in and out of Australia have used with great financial success''; ''several engine failures and a number of safety incidents''; and Qantas falling out of the top 40 in the Readers Digest annual most trusted brand survey. Another event, which is probably the reason for the attempted no-confidence vote, regards Qantas management failing ''to develop co-operative working relationships with its labour force''.

Read more: Qantas grounds resolutions for annual meeting (http://www.smh.com.au/business/qantas-grounds-resolutions-for-annual-meeting-20110925-1krsr.html#ixzz1YytzQRTX)

Scott Rochfort smh 26-09-11 :D a breath of fresh air compared to S. Creedy @ News Ltd.

Another type of manipulation from our friends at Qantas legal, in my view and well spotted by Scott. Not all the media just write down the Q press releases.

As we head into a week of uncertainty with the global stock markets we should be reminded how Clifford and Joyce have lead Q over the past few months, including the hype leading up to the big 24th announcement, it really has not helped the share price, with their Q Asia plans.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-NFDj3ODGgO8/Tnx2zrUEQNI/AAAAAAAAABU/hAfC1Uza-bM/23-09-11%252520close%252520of%252520business-share-price.JPG

Again, we are only 2.5 cents off that low, I think Clifford will be feeling the heat, and so he should, it is my view his leadership has been a disaster for Q. since MJ departed, another disaster. No wonder AJ keeps banging on about natural disasters, it's all he knows. :E :(
.

PPRuNeUser0198

25th Sep 2011, 21:10

Two questions; I was flying the other day and noticed the red ties for the first time.

As this is not the correct company uniform - are the pilots in breach of uniform standards? And has there been any issues as such?

Also - why was an incorrect anti-ice panel fitted? Was this an engineering failure? What is Steve's position on this?

ALAEA Fed Sec

25th Sep 2011, 21:17

Not sure about the anti-ice panel. I would assume there was an EA to cover it.

DutchRoll

25th Sep 2011, 21:22

I have dealt with Capt Criddle numerous times and you could not get a more competent or professional pilot. He is even known to leave the cockpit (flightdeck) to thank each passenger at the door as they get off. He was just being a good Captain and because he was wearing a red tie they decided it was an IR isue.
Correct. I have flown with Gaz on a few occasions and he's excellent with the pax, and a very decent bloke and operator too.

Unfortunately this is what Qantas has become. Captains are regularly put in a position where it is only their point blank refusal to continue with the planned flight that gets problems they're not happy with "corrected", and ultimately it's his decision to go or not.

BTW, the company really does need to humanely put down its spokespeople. Corporate PR's political reaction to this is just an embarrassment to Qantas, as evidenced by the strong support for the Captain coming from the passengers.

Beer Baron

25th Sep 2011, 21:29

Worrals in the wilds

25th Sep 2011, 21:42

"Ties...United...Will Never Be Defeated" :}
Sorry, couldn't resist. A serious question though; do the ties get the point across? Call me dim (others do ;)) but I saw them on 7 and just figured there had been a uniform change. Given that the Qantas signature colour is red, I didn't connect them to industrial action. Just my two euros.

Thanks for the additional info about the incident.

ACT Crusader

25th Sep 2011, 22:27

Not complying with the company uniform policy was voted on as part of a range of industrial action tactics now available to us. The intention to wear the ties was notified to the company and Fair Work Australia in advance so as to comply with the law. There have been no issues that I am aware of as it is protected industrial action.

Yes it was voted on and approved by a ballot, but had it been notified to Qantas that it was to occur? 3 full business days notification makes it protected.

Keg

25th Sep 2011, 22:30

A serious question though; do the ties get the point across?

For those that disembark and see them up close, yes.

...but had it been notified to Qantas that it was to occur?

Yes. The requisite 3 days notice was provided to Qantas. It may have been more than 3 days from memory.

DutchRoll

25th Sep 2011, 22:31

The ties are already protected industrial action and the company knows it.

I consider the bright red tie simply joining in unison with our beloved CEO to celebrate his Christmas present from the Board of a 71% payrise. They're simply a highly visible reminder that he remains foremost in our minds.

DirectAnywhere

26th Sep 2011, 00:42

Frankly, I think the pas, ties etc. are more about getting a group of pilots, who are probably among the least industrially militant groups in the country, used to the idea of taking co-operative and protected action prior to the real stuff like overtime bans and stoppages kicking off.

unionist1974

26th Sep 2011, 07:59

DA , I think you are on the money there . You have these guys worked out , so to QF Management.

skybed

26th Sep 2011, 08:53

You can now vote online for/against the Qantas Boards remuneration recommendations.:bored:

600ft-lb

26th Sep 2011, 09:19

Dear Shareholder
Qantas has received a request from more than 100 shareholders (who collectively hold
0.0001% of Qantas’ shares on issue) that the attached statement, titled “A Case Against the
Advisory Resolution to Adopt the Remuneration Report for the Year Ended 30 June 2011”,
be given to all Qantas shareholders.
Under section 249P of the Corporations Act, Qantas is legally required to provide this
statement to all shareholders with our 2011 Notice of Meeting.
The statement recommends that shareholders vote against Qantas’ 2011 Remuneration
Report, however the statement was prepared and provided to Qantas before the 2011
Remuneration Report was published. The statement was coordinated by an ex-Qantas
employee.
The 2011 Remuneration Report is contained in the Directors’ Report set out from page 36 of
the 2011 Annual Report. The Report explains Qantas’ Executive Remuneration Objectives
and Approach, which are to:
• attract, retain and appropriately reward a capable Executive team;
• motivate the Executive team to meet the unique challenges Qantas faces as a major
international airline based in Australia; and
• link remuneration to performance.
I and my fellow Directors believe that Qantas’ Executive Remuneration Framework is
commercially and ethically responsible, and supports our objective of providing sustainable
returns to shareholders.
Therefore, the Directors recommend that you vote in favour of the Advisory
Resolution to adopt the Remuneration Report for the year ended 30 June 2011.
Yours sincerely
Leigh Clifford AO
ChairmanAngry leigh clifford is angry.

Mere mortals dare attempt to thwart the corporate gravy train:=

*toot*toot*

DutchRoll

26th Sep 2011, 09:24

......our objective of providing sustainable returns to shareholders.
Damn you Leigh Clifford! You just made me spit coffee all over my keyboard!

TIMA9X

26th Sep 2011, 11:09

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-FSziO7f7ObI/ToBXwelXvvI/AAAAAAAAABY/SLh7xSYTYBA/Qantas-shareprice-26-08-11.JPG

Aside from noting how the share price had fallen from $5.62 to $1.45 since Clifford became chairman,

smh story previous page, today he says..

I and my fellow Directors believe that Qantas’ Executive Remuneration Framework is
commercially and ethically responsible, and supports our objective of providing sustainable
returns to shareholders.
Therefore, the Directors recommend that you vote in favour of the Advisory
Resolution to adopt the Remuneration Report for the year ended 30 June 2011.http://www.animated-gifs.eu/cartoons-tom-jerry/0006.gif

You just made me spit coffee all over my keyboard! Yeah, LC & AJ combined have cost me a few keyboards this year as well.. possibly they both have a few shares in a computer spares company?

Worrals in the wilds

26th Sep 2011, 11:25

• motivate the Executive team to meet the unique challenges Qantas faces as a major international airline based in Australia
Is he counting the Executive team as one of the challenges faced by Qantas? They're certainly unique...:hmm:

I and my fellow Directors believe...

That's awful grammar, it should be "My fellow Directors and I". Surely that's primary school stuff. Maybe it's a Freudian slip. :\

P.S. Any grammatical errors in this post are included for illustrative purposes. :}

V-Jet

26th Sep 2011, 21:18

My take is that it was penned in a rush and probably under some political pressure as well. It reads more like an ALP press release on people smugglers than a reasoned stock market announcement.

It will be a VERY long hard fight to save the airline from these utterly incompetent buffoons, but that strategy (no confidence) is a nice little diversion.

Well done boys and girls, we just need a thousand more like that. Or a mysterious anthrax outbreak:)

Fuel-Off

27th Sep 2011, 04:10

Scuttlebutt about the line is that CBA CEO Ralph Norris is tipped to take over the Irish Bowel Movement. If this is the case, what was his tenure like during his days at Air New Zealand? Was it he, or Rob Fyfe that created the new and improved airline? Our brothers and sisters across the ditch care to share their experiences? We're all getting tired of twit after twit taking the helm of an Australian icon. :hmm:

Fuel-Off :ok:

Nose wheel first

27th Sep 2011, 06:04

Ralph Norris started the turnaround at Air NZ and Rob Fyfe has taken it to a whole new level.

I haven't got time to find it now, but google Ralph Norris and Phoenix Award.

If he took on the top job at QF I think you'd find the place would grow in leaps and bounds.

ACT Crusader

27th Sep 2011, 06:09

Fuel off - have a read here http://www.pprune.org/dg-p-reporting-points/458079-ralph-norris-quits-cba-ceo.html

esreverlluf

27th Sep 2011, 06:18

It has got to the point where almost anyone else would be preferable to the poison leprechaun. His, and Leigh Clifford's, continued existence are the greatest difficulties that Qantas face.

Please, God, let the rumour be true.

Fuel-Off

27th Sep 2011, 08:29

So on initial reading it would appear that Sir Ralph can read the signs of when a ship is sinking and knows where to plug the holes.

Here's hoping that the rumours are true. Although not Australian, a kiwi has got to be better than an Irishman! :mad:

Fuel-Off :ok:

Angle of Attack

27th Sep 2011, 08:33

Sorry about spilling your coffee on the keyboards, but this is a great sign, it is showing the pressure is on and it will continue to increase, their days are numbered.... Its only gonna get worse for them! :ok: BRING IT!

aveng

27th Sep 2011, 09:37

returns to shareholders

What the? Is he for real - there hasn't been a return/dividend to the shareholder for ages!:ugh:

ohallen

27th Sep 2011, 10:36

The only return for anyone in this debacle has been the select few at the top who seem to take no responsibility for anything AND we have to put up with their incessant whining about everyone else.

There you go, take another bonus for having an impact on everyone else, that's about all it seems to take to justify it.

Worrals in the wilds

27th Sep 2011, 10:46

If the rumour is true, will he get Board support?

If not, it may be like marrying into a dysfunctional family. You can have the best of intentions and do your darnedest to be productive, happy and a force for change, but if they're committed to being dysfunctional the only options are that you end up as mad as they are or have a whopping great domestic and leave. :hmm:

clotted

27th Sep 2011, 10:50

If the rumour is true, will he get Board support?
Stick to flying because you obviously don't know how the business world works: he won't get the gig unless he has board support.

Budfox

27th Sep 2011, 10:52

returns to shareholders

Hahahahaha

Yeah only returns for shareholders have been return back to all time bottom dwelling share price levels :}
Timber............

1a sound asleep

28th Sep 2011, 02:57

Yet to be released new advertising . This is not a joke

http://a3.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/304142_195771983827482_100001840447715_463972_1312804400_n.j pg

These are comments about this ad on FB

Heres my take
"My stupid sister went to Hong Kong on a No Frills Airline,met a short order cook,shagged him THEN missed her flight.Then when she tried to rebook it she was told by the No Frills Airline Booking Site she'd have to buy a whole new ticket for being a tart,THEN she called me & I told her..Ya shudda flown on Qantas ya dopey moll!".....All jokes aside WHO is the BOOB responsible for this ad? and if this is one of the BETTER ones what are the others like?...Bucket shop for sure VOMIT BUCKET AD most vile I hate it!,what are these retards doing to our brand?,attracting premium custom with backpackers?...no they can travel on an LCC (and there are PLENTY of them around) if they wanna save a quid"

Mstr Caution

28th Sep 2011, 11:04

On the subject of replacing CEO's, has anyone heard anything of Alan Joyce recently?

It's been over 2 weeks & nothing from AJ amidst stop works, birdstrikes & a tanking shareprice.

Last I heard was this:

Qantas chief remuneration not clear-cut - Airline News - etravelblackboard.com (http://www.etravelblackboard.com/article/123104/qantas-chief-remuneration-not-clear-cut)

MC

600ft-lb

28th Sep 2011, 11:14

More like

"My sister went to London via HongKong with a Qantas after booking a Qantas ticket on Qantas.com and somehow she ended up on a aircraft with a blue tail and pommy accents but has been assured its worlds best practice. Next time she's flying an airline to London, not airlines."

ohallen

28th Sep 2011, 11:24

Ah yes, but will safety be their first priority and they end up on an orange jet eventually.

Whatever medication these guys are on, we should all get some as it obviously works for some.

Can you believe anyone gets paid and probably gets massive bonuses to produce this stuff.

Sunfish

28th Sep 2011, 16:10

Advertisements are funny things. They get perverted in peoples minds. Sometimes this makes them funny and they go viral.

This one will probably be perceived as "Use a condom when you fly Qantas."

stubby jumbo

29th Sep 2011, 09:38

Just heard on ABC's PM program re: QF and FJ Union regulations (aka "lock out")
Again another example of disgraceful corporate behaviour in regards to Union activity.
The ILO is suitably outraged !!!!

When will it end?

This crowd (2 QF board members on the FJ board) are all party to this stench.

Just join the dots.....to whats going on at mainline.......TODAY

What a surprise...no one from QF would comment.....not even Olivia.:confused:

TIMA9X

30th Sep 2011, 01:06

Livi is at it again,
Latest Qantas strikes hit 8500 passengers (http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/latest-qantas-strikes-hit-8500-passengers-20110930-1kzsi.html)

Qantas says about 8500 passengers have been affected by a ground staff strike at airports across Australia this morning.and along comes OW with this huge revelation,
Qantas spokeswoman Olivia Wirth told Channel Seven passengers were being delayed and inconvenienced.
"It should be the travelling public that we focus on," she said.

What is clear to the "traveling public" none of this would be happening if the management had the foresight to be smart enough to sit down and resolve the issues with the various unions if indeed the focus was on the "traveling public." The manager bozos currently running the show at Q has lost all creditability with their media statements. Airlines are a "people business" something they have completely lost sight of over the last year or so.

A little birdie tells me that in the eyes of the Australian public, these managers are seen as the problem and not the staff, there is strong evidence, people are tiring of the Q group managers attitude towards their staff, I believe a large corporate account will be moving over to JBs camp in the not too distant future.... stay tuned.

Qantas linked to Fiji anti-union decree - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-09-29/qantas-linked-to-fiji-anti-union-decree/3041906)

For the record I believe this is the link for the above post... very interesting indeed...

Seabreeze

30th Sep 2011, 02:19

I know this has been mentioned many times before but perhaps it pays to reiterate the point again and again:

Qantas share price history
available here QAN.AX Historical Prices | QANTAS FPO Stock - Yahoo!7 Finance (http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=QAN.AX)

Share price on appointment of LC; Aug 2007 $ 5.58
Share price on appointment of AJ; Nov 2008 $ 2.32
Share price today 30th Sep 2011; at 11:47 $ 1.40

(Remember these are actuals not adjusted for inflation).

Well done boys: you have created a small fortune in aviation!

(Pity it is from a larger fortune to start with: also a pity some of my super is locked up in QAN.AX)

SB

73to91

30th Sep 2011, 02:38

I believe a large corporate account will be moving over to JBs camp in the not too distant future.... stay tuned
TIMA9X, since June JB's gang has picked up Optus, Leighton (gee the former QF CFO was happy to jump ship) and Spotless to add to former QF clients such as, Accenture, Google, the Australian Football League. I'm sure that I read recently that one of the big mining companies have jumped from QF to Virgin as well.

Just adds to the poor effort by management of QF.

walaper

30th Sep 2011, 02:54

Stubby also note in ABC interview this morning she denied QANTAS don't fly to Fiji although technically true their subsiduary with orange tail does. Nice to see ABC journo take her to task on a number of points unlike CH 7 smear jobs .

TIMA9X

30th Sep 2011, 03:33

Well done boys: you have created a small fortune in aviation!

Good point and spot on Seabreeze, everyone seems to know this piece of fact except the three major institutional shareholders. Perhaps when the AGM kicks off next month a few of us little guys who have shares should ask each representative for the big three, "why are you blindly supporting the current management?" Is it possible that the "big three investors" are privy to a big plan of some sort? :rolleyes:

1.08pm
Last Price ($A) $1.3970 Change -0.0230 -1.6% Prev Close

now below $1.40 and heading south....

TIMA9X

30th Sep 2011, 07:16

Qantas has had a chequered recent history, with earnings per share being as high as almost $0.40 in 2007, and as low as only $0.07 two years later. In the most recently completed financial year, Qantas eked out only 11.6 cents per share in earnings. In the past few years, Qantas' return on both assets and shareholders equity has been a good deal less than the average term deposit. It's hard to justify an investment in the Flying Kangaroo.
Read more: One cheap airline stock ready to fly (http://www.smh.com.au/business/one-cheap-airline-stock-ready-to-fly-20110930-1l0i9.html#ixzz1ZPxI9bGU)

At the close of another week Q shares hit a new low $1.41, way to go Mr Clifford.

Just adds to the poor effort by management of QF. Yeah, not a good week for the management, it is all building up to be an interesting AGM, very possible a few nervous executive types may be starting to ask themselves some hard questions. You gota say, it ain't all smooth sailing for them at the moment.

ohallen

30th Sep 2011, 08:11

Sorry, but there is no way that these Execs will EVER question what they are doing.

The only issue is the next bonus and extending their employment period.

Meanwhile they continue the phoney war and NEVER have to deal with the issues they should have to deal with.

unionist1974

30th Sep 2011, 09:39

TIM, The board has all the votes sown up , you blokes are just *issing in the wind . Grow Up , understand that Capital will never let labour take control. Come the revolution!

Arnold E

30th Sep 2011, 09:46

Yeah, not a good week for the management, it is all building up to be an interesting AGM, very possible a few nervous executive types may be starting to ask themselves some hard questions. You gota say, it ain't all smooth sailing for them at the moment.
Yeah, well that may be what you think, but I doubt very much it is what the "top end" think. I am willing to bet a slab of beer that there is no criticism of management from the major players. I am willing to bet another slab of beer, that the pay packages of the "top brass" will pass uneffected. All of these top players are in each others pockets. look at who is on who's board ad you will start to see a trend here. I can assure you the guys at the top do not give a toss about what the lower end of town thinks.....Fact

unseen

30th Sep 2011, 10:06

The top 10 or 20 investors in the company are not going to come to the AGM and heckle the board from the floor.

If they are concerned they will be talking to the board on a daily basis!

Arnold E

30th Sep 2011, 10:19

The top 10 or 20 investors in the company are not going to come to the AGM and heckle the board from the floor.

If they are concerned they will be talking to the board on a daily basis!

These investors are not concerned, Why?? because they are not playing with their money, its your money they are playing with....:(

stubby jumbo

30th Sep 2011, 10:32

.......'hate to admit it-but I agree with you Arnold.

The arrogance and contempt for staff from the "top end" is there every time you see one being "interviewed" (read: ramming their opinions down some impotent journo's throat).

As I will be officially a non staff member for the AGM and officially a SHAREHOLDER (along with a few others' in the same space as me).........we're already preparing our strategy for the meeting.
All very professional of course.

But as a concerned Qantas Shareholder I want CLIFFORD to answer(sic) the obvious questions:

AS A CONCERNED SHAREHOLDER.....

1.HOW CAN YOU AND THE BOARD (James Strong) JUSTIFY GIVING YOUR CEO SUCH A SIGNIFICANT PAY RISE AT A TIME WHEN WE HAVE WIDESPREAD INDUSTRIAL ACTION OVER WORKERS COMPARATIVE PALTRY PAY CLAIMS.?

2. THE SHARE PRICE HAS SEEN A SIGNIFICANT PLUNGE OVER THE PAST 2 YEARS.......DOES THIS NOT REFLECT POORLY ON YOUR CURRENT STRATEGY OF THE "ASIANISATION" OF THE ICONIC AUSTRALIAN BRAND.?

And yeah.....like Arnold suggests ....I bet a slab of beer that I will get JACK ****E as a response because they are basically "untouchable" have told themselves the lie so many times they are right ....they actually believe it.

But as actor Peter Finch once said in that classic movie -Network:

....."I'm as mad a hell and I'm not going to take it anymore"

I do not have to worry about bullying, victimisation,intimidation or threats any longer from Management (as I'm an ex staff member and the $$$$$$ have been banked :D)

See you at the AGM........its going to be a ball tearer.:ok:

Arnold E

30th Sep 2011, 10:56

See you at the AGM........its going to be a ball tearer.http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

Nup, going to be as boring as hell, same ole same ole.:ugh:

noip

30th Sep 2011, 12:40

q_qgVn-Op7Q

stubby jumbo

30th Sep 2011, 19:46

....thanks noip.

It still remains a very ,very powerful metaphor for the "masses" standing up and taking on the "top end"-be that in Govt or Corporate.

I have witnessed many QF (once loyal) staff with the same look in their eyes as Peter Finch..........over the last 8 years who feel totally shafted by this lot.

Worrals in the wilds

30th Sep 2011, 21:53

Flitting back to the advertising, out of interest...where's the product? In an ad campaign, it's usual to feature a picture of the product somewhere. In an airline's case, the product is the aircraft (usually the big comfy seat, though occasionally the type, eg A380), the staff, the food and the destination. For a LCC the secondary product is the price, although the primary product is still one of the aforementioned, i.e. we take you on this A/C with these funky hipster staff to this hard drinkin' destination CHEAP.

The recent Qantas ads haven't featured any photos of the actual product, not even nice pictures of the exotic destinations you can get to on Qantas (which EK are doing at the moment, presumably to detract from the 'we live in a sandpit' reality :}). There are exceptions, such as the 1990s LCC deliberately low rent 'witty statement' campaigns a la Freedom and early Virgin, but they were a bit of an era-specific thing when LCCs were new and now look a bit naff (kind of like Savage Garden; cool at the time but What Were We Thinking:E)?

We've had Nippers, loungerooms with kiddies, yuppies in the forest and now gals in t shirts. All very photogenic but there's no visual indication of what Qantas acutally does. You could argue that they're an icon, but that doesn't stop Vegemite, Chanel, Taj Hotels etc relentlessly ramming piccies of their product down your eyeballs. Even the mighty Coca Cola make sure they include a picture of the drink with the Dynamic Ribbon Device (TM). After all, advertising ain't rocket surgery. :}

Weird, weird campaign...:confused: Maybe an advertising guru could explain?

Captain Gidday

30th Sep 2011, 22:43

Worrals - Ever been to a fishing tackle store? Seen all those bright fancy lures and high tech gear? The sale succeeds when the FISHERMAN is hooked and buys some gear. It has little to do with what the fish might think of those lures in the water.
Advertising is the same. So long as you appeal to the dudes making the decisions and they buy your campaign, your job is done.
If your campaign, when it goes public, happens to coincide with an upswing in your client's business, then so much the better. Paydirt! You get to do your campaign for longer, or they think your skills are magical and will consult you next time.
For obvious reasons, if you were making the decisions at QF, you'd be wanting to get as far away as possible from the old 'I still call Australia home' ads, now that you quite clearly don't. Agency's job done, I reckon.

Nose wheel first

30th Sep 2011, 23:00

I'm not a marketing Guru Worrals, but here's my take on it.

-They don't show the aircraft because (with the exception of the Dugong) they are clapped out.

-They don't show the cabin/interiors because, well, (with the exception of the Dugong) they are clapped out. What's more the interiors in the Dugong are already in line for a makeover because when compared to the competition's offering they are decidedly average.

-They don't show their staff because that would be a VERY public admission that they have some great staff who they should be proud of. (Can't have that when you're in the middle of telling the world that they are a bunch of greedy good-for-nothing pups)

-There's no point advertising destinations they USED to, or are no longer going to fly to.
INTERNATIONAL: "Fly QF to BKK, wait for 5 1/2 hours and then connect on BA which has a VERY crap product to somewhere in Europe". OR, enjoy the new QF DOUBLE HUB flights..."Your European destination in 36 hours". QF to BKK, sit around and get bored out of your skull. BA to LHR, don't enjoy the flight. BA/random airline to Rome or Athens....
DOMESTIC: We gave all our flying to Jetstar, so come and fly QF on this star spangled sardine can to all your favourite holiday destinations. "We will sell you a QF priced seat on a Nostar aircraft where you will get Nostar service and no Nostar nuts". You will however be able to purchase a 20c packet of 2 minute maggi noodles for $8. It'll be $9 if you want hot water with them!

What have they got left?

A hot chick in a dumb shirt telling the world that she went to one of the few international destinations QF still goes to. While she was there she got blind drunk, picked up some random, had it off in the kitchen and is now too ashamed to come home because she caught something nasty.

That's really going to bring in the masses!

As Sunfish said.... maybe what they're trying to say is "When you fly Qantas, wear a condom"

bandit2

1st Oct 2011, 01:19

Speaking of advertising, when is the last time anyone has seen a QF ad on TV during primetime. I know I`ve seen a s&^tload of Jetstar ads. What do you think the ratio of QF:JQ ads are? Could that be part of the great conspiracy. The incompetent fool that is putting those QF ads in the papers has got to have a long hard look at himself.

TIMA9X

1st Oct 2011, 06:29

What do you think the ratio of QF:JQ ads are? Could that be part of the great conspiracy.Jetstar is AJs baby. This press advertising campaign in my view was designed to keep the print media boss's happy, didn't work..

Weird, weird campaign...http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/confused.gif Maybe an advertising guru could explain?
Good post W of theW, mate, I think Rowan Dean got it right back in August...

Joyce left exposed by Qantas campaign

Read more: Qantas To Sack 1000 People Start Airline In Japan (http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/joyce-left-exposed-by-qantas-campaign-20110821-1j4io.html#ixzz1ZVT8l4Sc)

Joyce left exposed by Qantas campaign Rowan Dean Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/joyce-left-exposed-by-qantas-campaign-20110821-1j4io.html#ixzz1ZVT8l4Sc (http://www.pprune.org/Joyce%20left%20exposed%20by%20Qantas%20campaign%20Rowan%20De an%20%20Read%20more:%20http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/joyce-left-exposed-by-qantas-campaign-20110821-1j4io.html#ixzz1ZVT8l4Sc)

They're called ''teaser ads'', and their purpose is to tease you in the old-fashioned sense. A sly wink and a hint of exciting things to come. Advertisers spend money on teaser ads when they wish to raise anticipation and intrigue about a coming event, such as a gigantic sale or a product launch.
Qantas has launched a mega-teaser campaign, the likes of which we rarely see these days. But as unions, politicians and pilots step up the war against Alan Joyce's restructuring plans, was it the right strategy?

You couldn't avoid the lavishly presented, beautifully crafted promise of a ''new spirit'' last week: a full colour wrap-around of every major newspaper that kicked off a multimillion-dollar print and online campaign to run for the next couple of months.

The ad intrigued readers. It got tongues wagging. It looked extremely impressive, and tantalising. But there was one problem. When the temptress stepped out from behind her veil . . . there was nothing to see.
What on earth was Qantas on about? A long-lens pic of a pretty young lifesaver; the quintessential blonde and blue-eyed Aussie Anglo-Saxon kid. A beautiful blue sky and . . . lots of evasive, obfuscating blurb.

Having written many corporate ads myself, it was easy to spot the craft of the copywriter, as he or she desperately resorted to familiar feel-good phrases and reassuring sentiments to avoid actually saying what this "new spirit" comprised. "Competitive" gets a mention, as does "stronger" and "rewarding". Finally, right towards the end - by which point most readers would have given up - there's a clue, when the copywriter refers to the "vast majority of our operations based in Australia". Aha! Gotcha. You're moving overseas.

Qantas is clearly relying on a fluffy, blockbuster campaign to "sell" something they know will be unpalatable to many. But by leaving the meaty details out, the campaign raises more questions than it answers. What on earth is the consumer supposed to "buy"? If there's a new airline, what's its name? Is there a new logo? Will it mean cheaper flights? Where is it going to be based? A "new spirit of partnership" - but with whom? Having pricked our interest, but failed to satisfy our curiosity, the teaser campaign forces us to look elsewhere for the answers.

And there they are, all over the news. Job cuts. Thousands of them. The Greens up in arms, reminding us all to check out the Qantas Sale Act of 1992. The unions are having a fit, claiming "they're expanding the airline but getting rid of Australian jobs, and that's a very fundamental mistake". Rival Virgin Australia cheekily grabbing the opportunity to steal some coveted "Aussie spirit" for themselves by offering jobs to those made redundant by Qantas.

Calls by shareholders for Joyce to go. Daily strikes threatened by unions, and subversive announcements made to passengers by pilots and hosties. Joyce forced onto the back foot, defending the redundancies while standing in front of the Harbour Bridge (proving he "still calls Australia home", presumably).
News that Neil Lawrence, of the ''Kevin 07'' slogan and the anti-mining tax ads, is behind the teaser campaign comes as no surprise. Qantas wanted to pull out the "big guns", and they don't come bigger. The opening salvos have been fired in what will be a drawn-out struggle for the hearts and minds of Qantas loyalists.

''I think the first message is the most critical and that is that Qantas international has to change or perish,'' Lawrence said.
Maybe, but that's not what the ads say. Perhaps it would have been better if they did. Honesty in advertising is a more powerful tool than obfuscation.
The details dribble out. We learn one of the new airlines will probably be called Jetstar Japan, while another doesn't have a name yet but will be based "somewhere in south-east Asia". Joyce has a Malaysian solution, perhaps. But lacking a single-minded and positive message to sell, Joyce is struggling to deliver the wonderful "new spirit" the campaign promises.

The tease continues, even on Twitter. So does this mean there will be four different brands, four different product stories and four different logos? Sounds like an ad man's nightmare.
[B]Rowan Dean is a panellist on The Gruen Transfer and a former advertising creative director.

I also found this piece interesting from the viewpoint of a Gen Y journalist.

Gen Y | Brand Loyalty | Qantas To Sack 1000 People (http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/gen-ys-only-undivided-loyalty-the-demands-of-brand-me-20110903-1jrly.html)

As I sat there, averting my eyes from Charlie Sheen's dead ones, I thought about how Qantas cut 1000 employees just days before it announced its profit had doubled. I wondered if there had ever been a day in the history of all businesskind when an employer said: ''Well, gentlemen, we seem to have raked in an astonishingly large profit; better raise those well-earned wages!''

In a similar brush with old-school businesskind, Gerry Harvey last week proclaimed that Australians should be spending more and we should be ''as happy as pigs in ****''.

The last bit sounds like something LC would say, in my view, his style of leadership :E

from Arnold E
See you at the AGM........its going to be a ball tearer.http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif
Nup, going to be as boring as hell, same ole same ole.:ugh:Not if a couple of thousand garden variety Q shareholders turned up at the AGM, would make a great press photo that would probably accelerate the downfall for the current lot at the top of Qs feeding trough, they have simply lost the plot and have poorly managed the once great image the Qantas brand held with the traveling public.

bandit2

1st Oct 2011, 15:42

These idiots keep telling us QF International has got to change. The changes as I see them are; The new Asia Airline, where`s the money from that going to go? Their bank seperate accounts. The same way JQ, QF freight etc. The EZE route cancelled & the Santiago route started, OK safe to say that equals one another, in money terms. QF International stays the same. The BKK & HKG to LHR routes shared with BA. Doesn`t sound like $200 million per year in that decision, especially after people endure a 5hr transit.
As consequence of the 5hr transits, I believe are more people onto the 380 via SIN to LHR. Yes more money from the 380! Where`s that money go? QF group I believe. End result, QF International still used as a scapegoat. Correct me if I`m wrong.

TIMA9X

2nd Oct 2011, 15:31

FLIGHTS OF FANCY
It must arguably be the second-most controversial remuneration package in recent Australian corporate history (after Leighton's former chief executive Wal King's $23.5 million farewell).
More than three years since departing Qantas, shareholder groups still want someone to pay (not in the monetary sense) for the airline's former chief executive Geoff Dixon's excessive pay packet.

The Australian Shareholders' Association has called for shareholders to vote against the re-election of Qantas director Richard Goodmanson at the airline's annual meeting at the end of the month in Sydney. The association has argued that Goodmanson was a member of the remuneration committee that awarded Dixon about $12.1 million in pay in the 2008 financial year and an additional $10.7 million for his final nine months of work.

''Mr Dixon was the fifth-highest-salaried executive in Australia running the 40th largest company by market capitalisation and was paid more than the CEOs of BHP, Commonwealth Bank and Woolworths,'' the association said in a statement.

It has also raised objections to Qantas's use of ''underlying earnings'' to set 65 per cent of the short-term incentives of its present chief executive, Alan Joyce.

The Qantas chief pocketed a $2 million cash bonus for the past financial year thanks to the 46 per cent lift in ''underlying'' profit. But the association has questioned why the airline includes one-offs in ''underlying'' earnings, such as the $95 million settlement with Rolls-Royce over last year's A380 incident in Singapore.

Read more: Auditor's concern a PIFfling matter (http://www.smh.com.au/business/auditors-concern-a-piffling-matter-20111002-1l3r0.html#ixzz1ZdWyskHd)

My bold
BEng(Civil), BCom, BEc, MBA

Independent Non-Executive Director

http://www.qantas.com.au/img/150x150/about-qantas/richard-goodmanson.jpg
Richard Goodmanson was appointed to the Qantas Board in June 2008.
He is a Member of the Remuneration Committee and a Member of the Safety, Health, Environment and Security Committee.
Mr Goodmanson is a Director of Rio Tinto plc and Rio Tinto Limited.
From 1999 to 2009 he was Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of E.I du Pont de Nemours and Company. Previous to this role, he was President and Chief Executive Officer of America West Airlines. Mr Goodmanson was also previously Senior Vice President of Operations for Frito-Lay Inc. and was a principal at McKinsey & Company Inc. He spent 10 years in heavy civil engineering project management, principally in South East Asia.
Mr Goodmanson was born in Australia and is a citizen of both Australia and the United States.
Age: 64

It's all starting to unravel in the mainstream press, that old saying comes to mind, "leopards don't change their spots."

How could AJ be proud to accept a $2 million dollar bonus for that horrible engine incident with the A380 in Singapore last year?

I think everyone on here would agree, the pilots did a wonderful job that day, the very people AJ and LC labeled “rogues” and “kamikazes” a few months later.

f63e_OwE_4g

Let's hope it comes back to bite them, the real rogues, the Qantas board IMHO...:*

Cactusjack

4th Oct 2011, 07:02

Nice chins Alan !

buttmonkey1

4th Oct 2011, 10:41

i can see why qantas recently announced closer ties with american airlines.
the management style sure has some distinct similarities...

American Airlines flight attendants protest bosses' executive bonuses at JFK airport
BY LORE CROGHAN
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
American Airlines flight attendants picketed at JFK Airport Wednesday to protest fat bonuses for their bosses in the face of big losses for their carrier.

About 30 workers and retirees waved signs saying "Bonuses for Failure?" and chanted "Down with corporate greed" on the sidewalk across the roadway from American Airlines' terminal.

Drivers of some passing cars honked to show solidarity with the flight attendants, many dressed in their navy-blue work uniforms.

"The top people have a lot of nerve taking their bonuses," said demonstrator Connie Patrick, 62, of Newtown, Conn., who has worked as a flight attendant for the airline for 43 years. "They're a bunch of Bernie Madoffs."

The top five execs have reaped $100 million in bonuses since 2005, while the carrier lost more than $4.2 billion. In 2003, the flight attendants agreed to cuts in pay and benefits worth $340 million annually, which they say kept American out of bankruptcy.

"We were promised when American got back on its feet that we would share in the profitability," said another protestor, Marilyn Catania, 60, of Rockville Centre, L.I. "But only the top people get the money.

"I had hoped to retire by now, but I'm going to have to work a few more years," said Catania, who's been an American flight attendant for 40 years.

The carrier's flight attendants earn $30,000 to $40,000 per year, which puts them in the middle of the pack on pay among the major airlines, said flight attendant Raymond Lewis, 40, of Stroudsburg, Pa., who's a rep for their union, the Association of Professional Flight Attendants.

"A regular work schedule is 75 to 80 hours a month, but most people I know in New York can't live on that," said flight attendant Jan Gadd, 44, of the lower East Side. "Most work at least 100 hours; I know people who work 140 hours to make ends meet."

The union issued a mock "14-count indictment" of their bosses charging "managerial incompetence" and "moral bankruptcy."

Protests were also held at LaGuardia Airport and nine other airports nationwide where the carrier has a presence.

It employs nearly 18,000 flight attendants. Their union has been in labor contract negotiations for three years.

The union bought a half-page ad in Wednesday's USA Today that trumpeted, "Wall Street greed is alive and well at American Airlines," and debuted a TV commercial that takes aim at American's CEO, Gerard Arpey.

After the protests, a company spokeswoman defended the bonuses and offered a hopeful word about labor negotiations.
"Performance-based compensation plans are considered good corporate governance," Missy Cousino said in a statement.

"We remain committed to working with all the unions to reach agreements addressing the needs of both parties that are in the long-term best interests of the company and all of its employees," she added.

stubby jumbo

4th Oct 2011, 11:18

i can see why qantas recently announced closer ties with american airlines. the management style sure has some distinct similarities...

Good Point ButtMonkey.

The QF num-nutz(aka "distinct similarities") can sure pick winners..... see this from todays SMH.

American Airlines parent AMR yesterday tumbled the most since 2003, triggering automatic trading halts, on growing concern the third-largest US carrier may be forced to seek bankruptcy protection. SMH 041011

A stroke a perfect timing kicking off the DFW route

Lets face it the whole SYD-DFW has been an unmitigated disaster. Maybe it had legs 10 years ago....when it was first muted . But hell.... no 777, low yields and a kit that struggles:confused:

But hey, we've been down this road many times before:rolleyes:

Suffice to say -if AMR go into Chapter 11..... another Long Haul route down the S-bend.

Maybe JQ will think its a goer.:E

SOPS

4th Oct 2011, 11:56

Well everything is going perfectly isnt it?:yuk:

mikk_13

4th Oct 2011, 14:19

if aa go tits up,
delta with v
cont and us air with star (singa and anz will most likely block)

not many choices of new partners.

hewlett

4th Oct 2011, 20:00

Add one more to the list of poor management decisions made.

stubby jumbo

4th Oct 2011, 23:08

TO DO List-nothing

Gingerbread

4th Oct 2011, 23:11

Andrew Sisson, whose Balanced Equity Management owns just under 10 percent of Qantas, said yesterday The ongoing dispute would need to be resolved for the share price to recover.

ampclamp

5th Oct 2011, 01:52

Thank you andrew "sherlock holmes" sisson. Andrew, as 10% owner perhaps a word in AJs ear that the tactics are flawed.

prairiegirl

5th Oct 2011, 02:19

loads are awesome, yield is better than awesome, and high value customers are liking all the choice that DFW allows when compared to LAX. AMR, with or without bankruptcy will come out smellin' like a rose. too much of a cultural tie in post 9/11.

i could be wrong, god knows my other half would say so, but i think we're still looking the wrong direction for what's coming.

have any of you guys been keeping up with the CDG based airline that BA owns? curious to hear your thoughts on that one.

Keg

5th Oct 2011, 22:43

loads are awesome, yield is better than awesome, and high value customers are liking all the choice that DFW allows

Now imagine if we were burning 60 tonne less using a 777 on the route with the same number of passengers!

Bad Adventures, it's a marathon, not a sprint. Lay the ground work, then put in the hard yards. We're not even close to having finished laying the ground work yet.

TIMA9X

5th Oct 2011, 23:57

Qantas sticks to Asia plan amid global chaos (http://www.smh.com.au/business/qantas-sticks-to-asia-plan-amid-global-chaos-20111005-1l9oq.html)

QANTAS is holding firm on its plans to expand aggressively into Asia despite the precarious state of the global economy, emphasising it has the flexibility to withstand the turbulence.
The airline is just weeks away from deciding whether to base its new premium airline - likely to be named RedQ or OneAsia - in Singapore or Kuala Lumpur. Jetstar is also ramping up its expansion into Asia, which will include the launch of a new domestic airline in Japan in partnership with Japan Airlines.
Despite the economic upheaval in Europe and deep concerns about the global economy, Qantas's chief executive, Alan Joyce, made clear yesterday the company was pushing ahead with its plans for Asia, although he said it did have room to ''cope with a range of different scenarios''.

The airline had been ''very conscious of managing our risks'' when planning the expansion into Asia.
''There is flexibility … to be faster in our growth or to scale back our growth,'' he said. ''It is a very sensible and measured approach to growth in the Asian markets.''
The International Air Transport Association this week warned the pace of growth in passengers worldwide had dipped and the freight business was shrinking at a faster pace.
Qantas's latest traffic figures also showed a fall in yields in August, compared with July, in domestic and international markets.

Shares in Qantas have slumped 46 per cent since the start of the year amid a deteriorating economic climate and a damaging stand-off with unions. The stock closed unchanged at an all-time low of $1.375 yesterday.
But Mr Joyce cautioned: ''I don't think there are enough signs for us today to say the market has actually gone into a recession or a decline.''

As part of its Asian expansion, the group has ordered 110 new A320 narrow-body aircraft from Airbus, the first of which will be delivered in 2015. Jetstar will take 99 of the new aircraft, which are 8 per cent cheaper to run than the older A320 versions, while the rest are destined for Qantas's premium Asian airline.
Qantas will also boost the frequency of flights on one of its newest routes between Sydney and Dallas, Texas. It plans to increase services from four a week to six by January and seven by July.
In May, Qantas dropped flights to San Francisco in favour of Dallas, which is the major hub for its alliance partner American Airlines. However, the Dallas route has proved to be a challenge for Qantas's Boeing 747-400 jumbos because it is at the limit of their flying range.
Qantas also expects to return to service in February the A380 superjumbo severely damaged by an engine explosion in November. It is having major repairs in Singapore.
Releasing third-quarter results yesterday, Etihad's chief executive, James Hogan, said passenger loads on flights from Europe remained strong, despite the economic turmoil. ''I am seeing the pressure on yields, but at the end of the day, we are still more aggressive [than competitors],'' he said.
Etihad would be ''more aggressive on our costs'' over the next year but Mr Hogan was confident the airline would break even by the end of 2011.
He said Etihad's alliance with Virgin Australia had led to a boost in first-class passengers from Australia

my bold
Again reading between the lines, it feels like the risk behind AJs big announcement in August has increased significantly as all economic pointers are against the plan..... it doesn't look good for AJ as I'm sure the share price is a worrying concern for the major institutional investors at Qantas.

I believe it is fair to say, the market has not reacted well to AJs big Asian plans, the Q shares have continued to fall since the hurried announcement on the 17th Aug, the board must be feeling the heat about the companies leadership and its direction... already we have seen yesterdays "death threat" thing look very shaky with this..
No respite in Qantas war of words (http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/no-respite-in-qantas-war-of-words-20111005-1l9no.html)

The police said the author of a threatening letter sent to a senior Qantas executive in May had been identified.

back in May:confused:
video posted for the record of this thread....
ZEIUEuNsLiM

framer

6th Oct 2011, 00:08

Who is the author of the abusive email sent to the TWU? Management?

bandit2

6th Oct 2011, 06:55

Funny thing happened today. I received a dividend from NRMA, I only hold 264 shares, but guess what? I received about $40. You know what their profit was $250 million after tax! Nice blokes aren't they.

Max Tow

6th Oct 2011, 07:28

In yesterday' s AFR there was a full page QF ad showing two pax sitting on red vinyl-looking armchairs in the jungle. Two pages later, a VA ad showing elegant hostie serving pax in the new sleeper seats on the A330 service to Perth. So vote for which scenario conveys luxury and which you'd rather be the customer in...
By the way, all this "spirit" stuff that Qantas are bleating on about...does anyone get it? My online dictionary gives one definition of "spirit" as "what remains after the body has died", so maybe that's it! Seriously though, with all that's going on at present, isn't QF advertising along these lines just money wasted? Does anyone really believe that there is a "new spirit" at Qantas when the editorial content alongside these expensive ads is full of stories of industrial strife and strikes, alleged falling safety standards, vastly inflated CEO salary increases,route cuts, death threats to management and all time low share price? C'mon!

ALAEA Fed Sec

6th Oct 2011, 07:37

Not money wasted if it comes out of the International budget. We can say they are losing even more money then.

ohallen

6th Oct 2011, 09:19

Yes I cannot believe this bull****e that keeps flowing while Rome burns.

I commented on another thread the ad looked like OW (with her hair done) but the critical thing was they looked like they were marooned in some godforsaken place with nothing around them, which seemed rather appropriate.

Full page ad in Smh may dent the bonus...oh sorry... there is no provision for it to actually go down, silly me.

TIMA9X

6th Oct 2011, 15:48

One down, three to go for Qantas

QANTAS has gained a much-needed fillip in its damaging stand-off with unions after reaching an in-principle agreement for a new pay deal covering more than 2100 domestic flight attendants.

As baggage handlers and other ground crew called off - at the 11th hour - a nationwide strike planned for today, Qantas has agreed to a 3 per cent annual wage rise over the three-year life of the new contract for members of the Flight Attendants Association of Australia's domestic division.
The deal for short-haul cabin crew also includes a $500 lump sum each year.

The flight attendants will still need to vote on the new contract late this month but the in-principle deal will be a relief for Qantas executives who are facing an increasingly acrimonious battle with three unions representing licensed aircraft engineers, long-haul pilots and ground crew.

CBA Equities has cited the cost of the industrial dispute as one of the reasons why it no longer believes Qantas's premium international operations will break even this financial year. The broker has slashed its expectations of cost savings from the international business this year from $85 million to $25 million.
The industrial unrest comes as Qantas and Virgin Australia vied for bragging rights yesterday over winning travel business from Rio Tinto.

Qantas trumpeted it had been re-signed as a ''major air service provider'' by the mining giant for the next three years, while its rival said it had won part of the miner's travel contract. However, it is a bigger victory for Virgin because it is one of its largest corporate wins since it began a revamp last year aimed at winning a bigger slice of Australia's $5 billion business travel market.

After hitting an all-time low early this week, shares in Qantas rallied 5 per cent to $1.445 yesterday, boosted by a rebound in the sharemarket. Virgin closed up 1¢ at 31.5¢.

The in-principle agreement with the FAAA's domestic arm ends six months of negotiations over a new three-year contract. In contrast, Qantas has been bogged down in talks with the long-haul pilots union for more than a year over a new enterprise agreement.
Although they will resume negotiations early next week, the sides remain deadlocked over the pilots' demands for job-security clauses to be inserted in contracts.

Last night, the Transport Workers Union, which represents baggage handlers and other ground crew, called off a two-hour stoppage planned for today. But Qantas said it was too late to reinstate 17 flights cancelled earlier in preparation for the strike. It accused the union of waiting until shortly before the planned strike action to call it off in order to disrupt passengers.
The TWU said its members would resume strike action next Thursday unless

Qantas management put a ''firm offer'' on the table.
Qantas passengers also face disruptions on Monday when the airline's licensed aircraft engineers plan to stop work for four hours in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane.

Read more: One down, three to go for Qantas (http://www.smh.com.au/business/one-down-three-to-go-for-qantas-20111006-1lbo1.html#ixzz1a171Izj7)

Well something positive for a change..

hoss

6th Oct 2011, 19:28

You know that crap background music in the QF advertisements. I wonder if they realize that is the music in the movie Gladiator as Russell Crowe dies at the end?

Talk about vision in the marketing department. I guess the jungle scene(AFR) represents check-in at T3!;)

BP2197

6th Oct 2011, 19:36

Bandit2, pleased for you that you got a dividend however I'm not really sure your point. Qantas has billions of dollars of invested capital and a 4% return is not adequate to pay out anything. Unlike the NRMA, airlines are hugely capital intensive - ie if you don't make lots of money, you can't replace the things that helped you make that money in the first place.

Anyone who thinks that the level of profit generated this year is sufficient is dellusional - if that is all we made year in year out for the next ten years we would go bust as the next years capital requirements would have to be funded out of debt.

On a similar note, whether or not you believe that international incurred a $200m loss to the business is irrelevant. For all I care, say it broke even. No one is disputing that it has $5b invested in it so therefore as a shareholder you would expect it to make 10% or $500m. Obviously it didn't do that and doesn't ever look like doing that. Somehow one of you clever cookies need to find a way to get it to come up with a $700m (or $500m) turnaround so that it can pull its weight.

DutchRoll

6th Oct 2011, 21:13

You don't think Management got themselves into this situation in the first place with a series of poor decisions?

I love the modern day logic: Management screwed it up. Now the employees must wear the pain of fixing it. This of course extends even to businesses going bankrupt. Management run the business bankrupt, take off with all their bonuses and entitlements, and the employees fight for years over getting what's left of the scraps. All sound Aussie airline business practice.

On an all together separate note, does anyone actually find it quite obscene from a business perspective that during the baggage-handlers/TWU stop-work, there were actually enough Managers available to keep quite a lot of the show on the road, despite none of the workers actually working?

Am I the only person in the room who sees something fundamentally wrong with this in a business sense?

Max Tow

6th Oct 2011, 21:53

Dutch Roll: This tired cookie comes out from someone every time. If a worker in your office had an accident, and you had to spend all morning taking them to hospital, would you by your argument expect shareholders to suggest that if you had time to help then you clearly weren't busy enough?
I sympathise with your cause but abusing colleagues isn't going to help. As a current QF shareholder my anger is with those at the top of the tree, not with workers doing their best to keep the show on the road so that there are a few customers left when this is all over.

ALAEA Fed Sec

6th Oct 2011, 22:33

Max Tow, 35,000 employees love Qantas. It breaks their heart to see what Management are doing to the place. In the next 12 months passengers will move away from Qantas in droves. It will lead to the downfall of the Board.

A new management team will eventually be appointed and lets hope they come from a different tribe. 35,000 people will then be fully supportive and passengers will come back. It's the staff who will rebuild the airline.

anonymouspilot

6th Oct 2011, 22:36

Max,
I don't think Dutchie was having a go at workers, he was implying there are too many managers!

Max Tow

6th Oct 2011, 22:47

Anonymous Pilot: That may well be true, I just don't buy the particular argument he uses to prove it!

DutchRoll

6th Oct 2011, 23:08

I don't think Dutchie was having a go at workers, he was implying there are too many managers!

Wot he said. ;)

And if their skill at cargo loader driving is anything to go by (on eyewitness reports), I am quite surprised someone wasn't actually killed the other day when the dozens of managers took over the job.

bandit2

6th Oct 2011, 23:18

BP2197,
Maybe the Board, CEO & Management should lead by example & curb their bonus`s, wage increases, bonus shares etc! Just a thought.

brodle

7th Oct 2011, 01:29

"No one is disputing that it has $5b invested in it so therefore as a shareholder you would expect it to make 10% or $500m."

BP2197. Many enlightened investors (Buffet etc) would never believe they could get a 10% return from a capital intensive, low margin business such as an airline.

The only airlines to achieve this sort of return regularly are those that reinvest heavily in their product and people (Southwest etc). Southwest's long term average is still only ~8%. The Jester group comes nowhere near it (subsidised or not).

If you are looking for a 10% return on capital (or ROCE) from airlines the best policy would be to either short airlines or buy the ones that are managed properly.

ampclamp

7th Oct 2011, 02:06

QF Int should be able to turn a profit and I suspect it does a bit better than a 200 million loss. They tell so many lies how would we know. Even if all of an airline's divisions dont pull equal profits one depends on another. It is the sum of its parts. A fruit and veg shop probably makes great margins on its cherries and sfa on potatoes. It still sells potatoes. cant just sell the cherries and call yourself a fruit and veg shop. We all know where this is heading, qf is being phased out as best and as fast as they can.

Fris B. Fairing

7th Oct 2011, 02:39

I think we need a bumper sticker. ALAEA? AIPA? TWU? Anyone? Everyone?

clotted

7th Oct 2011, 04:21

ampclamp,
I'd like to hear your qualifications for knowing how to run an airline. You seem to have a critical opinion on all aspects of airline operations. The opinions and criticisms of someone who has a proven success record in running an airline or any business really is much more believable IMHO than an apparently disgruntled Qantas employee or ex-employee.

Back Seat Driver

7th Oct 2011, 05:18

clotted - Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: canberra

11 Feb 2011 I'm told nothing came of this...
I have also been told this happened.

9 Mar 2011 I was talking to a Qantas mate today …

27 May 2011 I'm told by people who claim to be in the know that if AIPA's pay claim succeeds…

24 Jun 2011 Are you sure? The people I talk to tell me that the claim says…

5 Aug 2011 They tell me that you get paid artificial extra hours by flying at night…
Are my friends not telling me the truth?

2 Sep 2011 My Qantas friend tells me….

3 Oct 2011 My contact in the airline tells me that is not what your claim is about….
I have checked with my Qantas source who is an AIPA member….
That is exactly what my source is telling me….
How can a Joe Public such as myself…

Research Assistant for Minister Fumble Albanese, are you?

mach2male

7th Oct 2011, 08:21

The reason on paper mainline doesn't make a profit is because its been grossly mismanaged for 10 years.Its has had little capital expenditure on the hard product.Cost cutting has reached a point where both safety and service have been compromised.Cost apportioning has seen millions directed to Jetstar.The international network is now so small to be almost irrelevant to the business traveller
Lack of profit is a result of absolute managerial incompetence.
How do you turn a well respected international airline into a basket case?
Let Geoff Dixon and Alan Joyce manage it for you.

ampclamp

7th Oct 2011, 10:16

clotted , if you think running qantas right now is a success, your opinion of success is a little different to mine. Paying your self the rewards[71% more] before actually a positive result is a great motivation for the troops to accept 3% and the sack.
JB down the road was backed into a corner by the qf jq pincer but has trumped them with his current tactic. Fancy that, talking to the troops and pulling on the same end of the rope. QF too busy trying to squash its staff rather than trying to compete.

Shed Dog Tosser

7th Oct 2011, 10:32

The whole death threats issue, if true is certainly deplorable, the act of a cretin.

That said, this is a big spin game, I would put my money of the whole death threats thing being more spin, an internal set up to find sympathy from the masses, an attempt to change the tide on a battle it would appear they are losing.

I hope it is spin, I would hate to think this sort of bullying and scare mongering would still exist in this day and age.

Jack Ranga

7th Oct 2011, 12:34

I always thought that when 'death threats' of this nature were received that they were seldom released to the media. They were investigated and dealt with appropriately (usually the work of deluded morons).

Anybody who received threats of this nature with any courage, integrity or dignity would see this for what it was.

But then again, the person who received these threats doesn't have any courage, integrity or dignity, does he?

clotted

7th Oct 2011, 19:38

JB down the road was backed into a corner by the qf jq pincer but has trumped them with his current tactic.
The last reports I read were that Qantas as making a profit and Virgin wasn't. Hasn't this been so for most of VB's life? I think that the jury is out on JB and Virgin despite his initiatives. I hope he succeeds. If reports can be believed, is it not true that VB pays its pilots about 20% less than Qantas for more hours and VA even less pay; the uncontested reports are that the TWU just signed up for an EBA which gives its workers 17% less than Qantas workers get now; not much is said publicly on VB LAMES money matters but isn't all VA maintenance done overseas except for that which is contracted out in Australia to employers who employ contractors and isn't that what the AALEA job security claim is all about?
BSD: I may live in Canberra but not all Canberrans don't work for the pollies. Some us have real jobs.

Red Jet

7th Oct 2011, 21:32

Some us have real jobs.

Be that as it may, you owe it to yourself to spend some of your spare time conducting some research into the subject material at hand! You, sir, know very little about Virgin and the direction JB is taking us!

clotted

7th Oct 2011, 22:13

As I said, I hope JB succeeds at Virgin but seeing you are a Virgin insider, is anything that I said incorrect regarding VB or VA? I am more than happy to be corrected.

booglaboy

8th Oct 2011, 02:39

The licenced engineers are paid better than Qf unless your are a multiple licensed Qf engineer who has been with the company over 30 years. Virgin got a good eba and are happy with all the positive things happening there. A hangar is being built in Syd right now to increase maintenance capabilities

kotoyebe

8th Oct 2011, 03:55

The licenced engineers are paid better than Qf unless your are a multiple licensed Qf engineer who has been with the company over 30 years.

Boogla,

You must be mistaken. I just read in The Australian this morning, Olivia telling everyone that the QF engineers are "the highest paid in the world".

Funny thing was that she didn't mention who the highest paid airline execs in the world were...

booglaboy

8th Oct 2011, 04:50

Can assure you I've been paid much better working in Asia as a LAME than I ever have under Qf. I still have all the documents to show Olivia or any other company stooge if they wish to speak the truth in future

Ka.Boom

8th Oct 2011, 05:08

OW is either a liar or a misinformed twit...perhaps both.
This spin emanating from QCCA8 is repugnant

DutchRoll

8th Oct 2011, 11:08

In the new language of "Olivia-ese", every single employee in Qantas is actually the highest paid in the world for any given occupation.

Olivia should've quit while she had a couple of tiny shards of credibility left (which was quite some time ago now). Then at least she would've been able to rebuild her career post-Qantas.

Worrals in the wilds

8th Oct 2011, 12:00

They're still talking about the bucks like it's the only thing that matters to people. This steps around the interesting issue that clotted mentioned; Qantas workers are well paid by aviation standards but they're still cranky. Very, very cranky.

Maybe it's not all about the money? I know that to most corporate types that's like saying the sky is green, because frequently, the sort of people who become corporate monsters would sell their first born for a bonus. However, money isn't the only factor in workplace satisfaction. The fact that Virgin, Alliance, Tiger and other Aussie airline staff aren't lighting up Fookbook and this BB (among others) with a litany of complaints about their employers even though they often earn the same or less is further evidence of this. Sure there are spats, but nothing like the level of animosity that exists between Qantas management and staff.

It's like one of those really ugly marriage breakups you read about in the papers (if you read the gossipy girly bits:}) where Boringly Devoted Wife finds out after twenty years that Mr Mogul has been shagging the arse off anything that can't run away fast enough. The upshot is often a multimillion dollar claim from said BDW because 1. she's pissed off, 2. what's there to lose? and 3. It's the best available square up. Of course there's option 4 where she's just a gold digging bitch (no doubt Qantas management would put their staff in this category :E) but it's not always the case. Either way, the whole thing usually costs a fortune, makes everyone involved look bad and doesn't actually achieve a lot. The lawyers end up cleaning up the baitfish and all that's left is a wreckage.

Sound familiar? :uhoh:

Unfortunately, in a toxic workplace there is no concrete way to address problems if the management don't want to listen. You can't down tools and say 'we're going out on strike until you show us a basic level of respect, recognise our efforts and give us a great big hug.' It's illegal. The only thing you can do is wait for the EBA (which only deals with 'hard' stuff like pay and conditions) and express your frustration within those EBA parameters and the Fair Work Act. Despite what the Cliffords of this world like to claim, the FWA is fairly limiting about IR action. The days of everyone standing down at the whim of a Union decree are largely over.

IMHO, anyone who claims it's all about the money and greedy Qantas workers wanting more dosh has not spoken to many Qantas workers, ie people who have ASICs, wear PPE and keep the aircraft flying, rather than people who do meetings and powerpoint. I'm not one to jump on the blanket Management Sucks bandwagon, because meetings and strategic planning are important (dunno about Powerpoint :hmm:), but they're not all that's important. If you're running an airline, you also need all the boring aircraft stuff and motivated, dedicated people to keep it happening.

They may have spoken to a few managers though, because that's the Party Line. Qantas is sticking with the 'we can't afford it, they want everything and we only made a paltry half a billion' in the media because it sidesteps the questions about the culture of bullying, insults and demonization of operational staff that seem to be endemic within Qantas.

Arnold E

8th Oct 2011, 12:10

The days of everyone standing down at the whim of a Union decree are largely over. my bold

That never happened anyway, remember, a union is a group of people with like interests and is run by its members. Remember, the Minerals council of Australia, The Farmers Federation and the Chamber of Manufacturers etc, etc are all unions, like it or lump it.

standard

8th Oct 2011, 12:20

Qantas management simply do not want to deal with unions. They have stated, that they do not want to have to consult unions in regards to future plans.

Unfortunately for them, Qantas IS a unionized work force, otherwise they would be dealing with 35000 separate employees.

If they took the time to remove their heads from their arses and then the trough of greed and actually consult with the unions then QF might have a fighting chance!!

What the F#ck do we need 110 A320's for???... are all the other airlines getting it so wrong operating wide body aircraft between Asia and Australia???

This management either needs to change their strategy or leave, if Qantas is to survive into the futute... or even the next 5 years.

Worrals in the wilds

8th Oct 2011, 12:23

Arnold, fair enough. I'm a relative young 'un and just rely on the building site/waterfront/airside stories from the 1970s that get aired at the pub. Trust me on this; I'm not anti Union. :ooh:

My point is that strikes are a lot more regulated than they were forty years ago. I believe that the Qantas Board and PR machine are playing the Union Heavy card as if it's still the 1970s in the hope that the public will buy it. Poor Widdle Qantas at the mercy of the Big Bad TWU just isn't the reality any more, unless the action is endorsed by FWA as a result of a breakdown in EBA negotiations. Qantas keep forgetting to mention that.
Unfortunately for them, Qantas IS a unionized work force, otherwise they would be dealing with 35000 separate employees...
They'd luurve that. 35,000 bickering individuals? You'd be lucky if anyone got paid at all. That's what companies do with their contract managers; set them all off against each other, ban them from discussing their salaries, set unachievable goals and eat away at their conditions one by one. Managers are worse off than wage earners when it comes to job security, conditions and sometimes pay, because they negotiate individually. It's amusing that so few of the poor little suckers realise it while they're looking down their noses at the plebs.

standard

8th Oct 2011, 12:32

I see your point, the point i was trying to make was infact that they are not dealing with 35000 employees rather unions, negotiating on their behalf. They have to accept this if the airline is to move forward.

Worrals in the wilds

8th Oct 2011, 12:46

100% agree. Effective companies don't usually have Union Trouble. It's bad for business and often indicative of a deep divide between management and workers. Good companies have management and workers that work together and respect each other. There are tiffs (particularly at EBA and budget time) but for the most part, everyone's on the same page, ie let's make some money by selling stuff. Likewise, in the these degenerate :} modern times when Union membership is voluntary (and not just volunteering to pay up or cop a lump of 2 by 4 to the head :ouch:), a Union that is too divisive or inflammatory starts losing members.

In my experience most workers don't want to strike. They don't want to attend carpark meetings and rah rah with the media cameras watching. They just want to go to work for a reasonable wage for a company that makes it known that they're an important part of the business, and go home again. A lot of that doesn't even cost a lot, but even when the big boofy types laugh at the corporate 'we value your input' emails, if they feel the thanks is genuine (albeit wanky)...they're happy.

standard

8th Oct 2011, 12:50

To put it simply it's about having a common goal.

Clearly QF management and the unions do not. The unions want to secure the futures of its members and the airline into the future, the management do not. This management are not even concerned about the shareholders.

The agenda of the current management are set on lining their own pockets at employee and shareholder expense.

Ichiban

9th Oct 2011, 06:23

The link below is to a Peter Switzer interview of Geoff Dixon on 6th October 2011.

Geoff's comments about the aviation industry start at the 5.40 minute mark & Qantas pilots get a mention after the 7.15 minute mark.

Geoff Dixon | Switzer (http://www.switzer.com.au/video/geoff-dixon/)

Mister Warning

9th Oct 2011, 07:16

The more someone says "I really mean this", the less we should believe it.

astroboy55

9th Oct 2011, 09:06

wow...so now the reason QF pilots have a good reputation is because management approved the training.

maybe management will start flying the planes, fixing the planes, refuelling the planes, and serving the customers.

Worrals in the wilds

9th Oct 2011, 12:32

Speaking of which, with the ALAEA going out tomorrow will we be seeing more palefaced managers running around the ramp in their best camping gear 'helping out'? :E

If so, the TV interviews would be great; 'I'm Mandy from finance, this is Mindy from HR and we're doing a wheel change on this A330...oh sorry, it's a 767. Do they use the same size wheels'? :}:}

Nassensteins Monster

9th Oct 2011, 22:56

IMHO, anyone who claims it's all about the money and greedy Qantas workers wanting more dosh has not spoken to many Qantas workers, ie people who have ASICs, wear PPE and keep the aircraft flying, rather than people who do meetings and powerpoint. I'm not one to jump on the blanket Management Sucks bandwagon, because meetings and strategic planning are important (dunno about Powerpoint http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/yeees.gif), but they're not all that's important. If you're running an airline, you also need all the boring aircraft stuff and motivated, dedicated people to keep it happening.

They may have spoken to a few managers though, because that's the Party Line. Qantas is sticking with the 'we can't afford it, they want everything and we only made a paltry half a billion' in the media because it sidesteps the questions about the culture of bullying, insults and demonization of operational staff that seem to be endemic within Qantas. Perhaps in a moment of introspection I would admit to being one of those people on the anti-management bandwagon. Now is not one of them.

Where there is smoke there is fire. We have been witness to an appalling litany of poor decisions despite the best advice of frontline staff. He have been left to deal with the consequences of these appalling decisions. There is a major credibility gap and a chronic and long-running debt and deficit in the Goodwill Bank.

There is a saying in the military: "there are no bad units, only bad leaders"; and at my local childcare centre: "there are no bad children, only bad parents"; and at my kid's school: "there are no bad students, only bad teachers."

Sadly, disengagement is evident at various levels in this company. Staff would probably show a little more engagement if our "fearless" leaders made an appearance at the coalface a little more often, and showed - proved - they were as engaged with the workforce as they expect the workforce to be engaged with their strategies.

I'd be happy to rise to the challenge if it was articulated to me face to face in terms that mattered to me from a leader who knew me and my colleagues, who respected what we did and who supported us, who did not fear the filthy masses, who had the courage to face us, to spend a day and a night at the coalface and see the challenges we face as a result of the litany of poor decisions. Yes there is the odd mug in any team who would attempt to make such a team leader feel uncomfortable, but the rest of the team would not tolerate it. That is the kind of leadership we crave. The kind of leadership we see everywhere but here.

(I still don't know what the last head of QE looks like. Apparently he wore glasses. The only reason I know what his successor looks like is because of the spam emails I receive fog-horning the latest company propaganda.)

In a perfect world, when the dust has settled after these various and parallel disputes, I'd like to see a round table where representatives from management and the front line leave baggage at the door, sit down and truthfully engage with one another. The executive don't have a monopoly on good ideas. If they started listening to the ideas that come from such round tables, we may save this airline together. But you the managers need to step up. We will follow.

woollcott

10th Oct 2011, 09:36

"..............that mattered to me from a leader who knew me and my colleagues"

Couldnt agree more. 10 years ago, our manager knew all of us by name, knew the names of our wives and girlfriends, even knew what kind of car we drove.
Nowadays, if sighted, managers refer to you as "mate", simply because they dont know your name, much less anything else about you ...............

busboy330

10th Oct 2011, 11:30

SMH:
Executive pay: the high cost of market failure (http://www.smh.com.au/business/-1lh2o.html)

The Australian Council of Super Investors (ACSI), the body which represents industry super funds, marked its ten-year anniversary last month with a ten-year study on executive pay.

It found the decade to 2010 saw median CEO fixed pay in the Top 100 ASX Australian companies rise 131 per cent and the median bonus increase 190 per cent.

This far outstrips the 31 per cent increase in the S&P/ASX100 over the 10 years.

“The findings … also indicate that while CEO cash pay – the value of pay disclosed excluding share-based payments – has fallen from the peak of 2008, it remains much higher than any year before 2007,” said the ACSI report. “This is despite the S&P/ASX100 declining 30 per cent over the three years to June 30, 2010.

“Median cash pay for top 100 CEOs in 2010 was $2.786 million, down 2.4 per cent from 2009 and 4.1 per cent from the record peak of $2.904 million in 2008. Despite this decline, median cash pay for a CEO of a top 100 company in 2010 was 12 per cent higher than any year prior to 2007.”

So, we have workers’ pay rising roughly 3 per cent a year, and the average super fund return over the decade little more than 3 per cent as well. Nonetheless, executive salaries put on double digit returns.

How can this possibly be regarded as a functioning market?

The market is broken. Supply and demand are not intersecting efficiently. On the supply side, there are plenty of contenders for CEO roles. Scarcity is a bogus argument – especially as there is no credible evidence that paying more money achieves a better result. The argument of higher pay for higher performance is based more on lobby group chimera than empirical evidence.

TIMA9X

10th Oct 2011, 12:11

Great post busboy330,
reading the comments and presto
As a share holder in many public companies, I along with many other shareholders are getting increasingly concerned how one part of our workforce ( the executive employees) getting their rewards and incentives from taking from the operational workforce (staff employees). In the past CEOs were visionaries that added value to a company through entreprenuership. These days they are increasingly accounts driven with their total creative focus on costs.
In the sad case of Qantas, executives are being paid increasing more per hour each year. However, the total remuneration paid for operational staff across the company divided by hours worked is decreasing. In other words, executive income and bonuses are not based on entreneurship but instead screwing costs out of the hourly rates on operations workers. This is so short term thinking. Sack executives like Joyce with this kind of thinking ...FAST!. As shareholders we must stand up and make all our employees work as a team instead of against each other.

Michael has articulated the problem very well here. This discontinuity can't go on. Take Qantas for example. Management have destroyed shareholder value to the point where not only is there no dividend but the share price recently hit an all time low.
In this case you would expect Alan Joyce and his wealth destroying executives to be shown the door. But no..they are rewarded for achieving this destruction.
That the major institutions who control the majority of the Qantas share capital sit back and do nothing just ads weight to the point Michael makes in this article.
The occupy wall street movement may come to Australia quicker than anyone thinks if shenanigans like this continue.

As another QAN shareholder, I support the strike of the engineers, the pilots etc. They will be there long after this CEO has left the country.
I have used all my shares to vote against the remuneration of Alan Joyce. I have seen the company's share price dive under Joyce.
What I can see is low-cost Joyce is running the airline to ground. To think that runt is receiving $5M when he can't even run or manage the company is ridiculous. To think he receives $5 when he can't even issue dividends to shareholders? Give me 20 airline pilots salaries = 1 CEO salary.
I want my value for money back. I ask the board to see reason and get rid of that CEO before he destroys the company.

Did the Qantas pilots who safely landed that crippled A380 super jumbo get $million bonuses for saving the lives of 440 people and the airline from $$Billion liability, from lawsuits, loss of equipment and loss of reputation OR did management just receive the $million bonuses.

The message is getting around just in time for the AGM....:uhoh::ouch:

.

framer

10th Oct 2011, 12:40

Give me 20 airline pilots salaries = 1 CEO salary.
Thats a good point actually. Does anyone company do that? The f/o salary is about 60% captain salary, why not tie the CEO's salary to the first year Captains base salary? Make it say....10 times the first year captains base salary and it moves as the workforces salary moves. Would make negotiations easier.

TIMA9X

10th Oct 2011, 14:07

Wider agenda in union stand-off with Qantas
Wider agenda in union stand-off with Qantas (http://www.smh.com.au/business/wider-agenda-in-union-standoff-with-qantas-20111010-1lhkt.html)

Negotiations with the unions have been under way for the best part of a year. The agreement with pilots expired late last year, the engineers early this year and the baggage handlers and catering staff agreements expired in June. Simmering discontent between both sides quickly boiled over with the unions refusing to back down on even frivolous claims and the company determined to give no quarter resulting in the authorised action.

But Qantas raised the stakes significantly with its plans to shift some of its operations offshore, particularly the new full service carrier in Asia. Along with the new carrier, it was announced that 1000 jobs would be lost in Australia, a deliberately provocative move during wage negotiations.
Had the move been portrayed as an expansion of the empire, rather than a brutal shift to lower costs and move jobs offshore, it may well have received a better reception from the workforce and, indeed, customers. But there are still serious doubts about whether RedQ or OneAsia or whatever it will be called will ever fly.

For a public company to announce such a monumental shift without having nailed down even vague details, is highly unusual. Not only is a brand name yet to be dreamed up, Qantas management have yet to figure out exactly where this new airline would be based. Singapore and Kuala Lumpur both have been mentioned. But months after the announcement, we are still flying blind, leading some to conclude that the entire strategy merely is a threat or, rather, an option if the company can't bring its workers to heel.

While Qantas's plan to establish a low-cost domestic carrier in Japan, in partnership with Japan Airlines, makes sense, the full service south-east Asian operator is fraught with risk. It takes years to turn a profit on any new airline. Jetstar Asia, based in Singapore, has only recently turned a profit after years of losses.

The unions have managed to strike at least one serious blow to the credibility of Qantas's hierarchy.

Despite the titanic quest to trim costs, Alan Joyce and most of his senior team members were awarded major lifts in salary. Odd timing to say the least. That's forced Joyce on the defensive. The company spin now is that his pay is 10 per cent less than the average paid at the ASX Top 50 companies. That's all well and good. But Qantas isn't in the top 50. It's ranked number 60. my bold

Read more: Wider agenda in union stand-off with Qantas (http://www.smh.com.au/business/wider-agenda-in-union-standoff-with-qantas-20111010-1lhkt.html#ixzz1aO3aLXQB)

Things are really hotting up.

Sunfish

10th Oct 2011, 18:54

I am afraid that The Board and Senior Management of Qantas are about to learn a lesson I learned on about the Third day of my first job as a General Manager of a company:

Your employees can make more trouble for you, then you can for them.

Trust me on this.

Manage as if you were on the bottom of the pyramid, not the top. It's safer and ultimately more satisfying as long as you aren't a narcissist.

I have a friend who was at one stage a Director of a major bank I asked her what her secret of good management was: "I create the conditions where other people can succeed at what they must do." was her answer. If you drive that message "down" (up?) through management ranks, your business is automatically successful and profitable.

P.S. Let me tell you what will kill Qantas: Employee turnover. It may not even be turnover within the Qantas organisation, it may be in one of the outsourced services.

gobbledock

10th Oct 2011, 20:16

Just curious, With all these 'managers' and so forth running around the ramp performing ramp duties while others are on strike, has anyone senior within QF assessed any associated risks with that being undertaken? Have these individuals received appropriate training? How is CASA viewing this issue, closely surveilling this as it takes place, from a risk perspective?

fl610

10th Oct 2011, 20:24

How is CASA viewing this issue, closely surveilling this as it takes place, from a risk perspective?

Nah, it's Qantas........they know what they are doing! :ooh:

ALAEA Fed Sec

10th Oct 2011, 20:35

CASA will get information today that should push the boundaries. I kid you not this is fair dinkum. Over the weekend a Qantas manager who is a LAME certified for aircraft maintenance checks on a plane several hours before the aircraft had even landed. He then went home and left the signed up package in the section.

This is what Qantas has become and I bet my left testicle that Qantas will back their manager to the hilt. Now as bad as this may seem, the very same manager is the only LAME in this country that I know who has previously had his licence suspended for carrying out unauthorized maintenance. You can read about it on this link -

Strange v CASA, AAT, 2002-04-12, Decision in full (http://www.airsafety.com.au/decisions/c412atbn.htm)

Now lets put this is perspective. Good union member in Cairns places a witches hat fore and aft engine instead of at wingtip. Two minutes later he notices mistake and moves the hats. He was stood down for 3 weeks whilst they investigated the breach of a cardinal rule.

Then there is the cockpit door fiasco that is well discussed here.

This one will be interesting.

DutchRoll

10th Oct 2011, 21:34

I really wish I could say that this surprises me, Steve.

Worrals in the wilds

10th Oct 2011, 22:55

P.S. Let me tell you what will kill Qantas: Employee turnover. It may not even be turnover within the Qantas organisation, it may be in one of the outsourced services. This is already a problem for many independent GHS companies. Dudes need to be trained up, they stay for a while, realise the pay and conditions are pretty average and aviation isn't the glamorous game it's cracked up to be... so if they're decent, they leave. Off to the mines, the good construction companies and any number of decent businesses that need people to move heavy stuff or make sandwiches in bulk, and value their efforts accordingly.

The GHS company needs dudes/dudettes, so they get some more. Need to be trained up, stay for a while... and the cycle continues. The outcome is a company staffed by newbies and people who can't get jobs elsewhere. The upshot is a lot more incidents, slower work, lost bags and general mayhem and chaos.

Of course not all GHS companies are bad to work for and they don't all have these problems, but anyone who's kicked around the ramp for a while has noticed the decline in expertise and standards since subcontracting and casualization have increased over the last decade. Does it affect the bottom line? Probably not, so who cares; until it's your bag that ends up in a ditch or your aircraft that gets delayed for four hours because someone bashed into it with a catering truck. :ouch:
Over the weekend a Qantas manager who is a LAME certified for aircraft maintenance checks on a plane several hours before the aircraft had even landed. He then went home and left the signed up package in the section. That takes Working From Home to a whole new and scary level. :ooh:

Cactusjack

11th Oct 2011, 02:18

Over the weekend a Qantas manager who is a LAME certified for aircraft maintenance checks on a plane several hours before the aircraft had even landed. He then went home and left the signed up package in the section.

Perhaps this is their idea of 'wold's best practise'?
Maybe the managers can also run giant hoses from the airport to Mascot and empty the ****ters while sitting in Alan's office?

WorthWhat

11th Oct 2011, 03:26

Sandilands' is uncomfortably close to the truth.

"It seems fair to say that labor and management are adrift in the Qantas disputes, and that the customers, most of whom could be expected to be unmoved by such issues, could also drift away from the airline.
These are some of the issues that affect customers.

The London Olympics: Qantas has transferred half of its daily slots to London Heathrow to connections, really poor connections, with British Airways flights at Bangkok or Hong Kong from early next year.
Putting customers loyal to the Australian quality of the Qantas product onto a British Airways flight is insulting. It is an inferior product according to many travellers, it involves mid trip delays, and for an airline that seeks to leverage its Spirit of Australian branding, this is treachery.

Of course you don’t have to put up with this. What Qantas has done is openly invite its loyal customers to fly all the way to the games on a quality competitor, if they cannot secure seats on the two Airbus A380s Qantas will be flying daily to London via Singapore (one flight originating from Melbourne and the other from Sydney.)

The Red Q Asian mystery: Qantas linked the London reductions, which cut both jobs and its aged 747 fleet, to freeing up the money to invest in a brand new Asia based premium quality flying single aisle Airbus A320s.
The weird stuff: Qantas group CEO Alan Joyce is on the public record as saying this carrier will have full length sleeper seats in first class, and open up new connections between Asia and Europe as well as Australia, yet the A320 isn’t set up to cater for competitive luxury travel and can only fly with a full payload for around 5 hours 30 minutes, which won’t get it from Asia to southern Australia other than Perth and won’t get it from SE Asia non-stop to anywhere in eastern Europe.

Was Joyce really alluding to what this airline might do with some of the Boeing 787s the group has on order?

The business structure of the new luxury Asia based carrier is that it will be a China, Singapore, Malaysia or ‘other’ national flag carrier, meaning 51% owned by the nationals of the chosen state, and that it will take business off existing marquee brands, like Singapore Airlines, Malaysia Airlines and Cathay Pacific. Good luck!

However the business plan implies that Qantas sees no risk that China, Singapore or Malaysia might expect reciprocity of opportunity to set up similarly structured business units in Australia, thus positioning themselves for the technological future when viable airliner designs become available for non-stop flights between Australian cities and London, Paris and Frankfurt.

This could be a lethal assumption on the part of Qantas.

At the moment we see no signs of progress on the Qantas/Asia venture.

Off-shore labor: Qantas subsidiary Jetstar is already rotating poorly paid and apparently inadequately trained flight attendants through its domestic network, where they can work on ‘tag’ flight rosters that begin and end in Asia, but operate domestic sectors in the middle.

Jetstar says the flight attendants are trained to the standards of the countries of residence. Wake up Jetstar, this is Australia, our country, our standards.

Similar issues arise in the basing of Australian registered A330-200s in Singapore to operated Singapore-Melbourne-Singapore flights using pilots and cabin crew resident in Singapore and paid according to Singapore labor arrangements.

There is a dilemma or two for all parties in these arrangements. There is nothing inherently inferior at all in the standards of quality Asian carriers, many of which employ Australian pilots. The issue is not one of Qantas trying to replicate Singapore Airlines, which would quite possibly be received with enthusiasm by many travellers who have crossed over to that airline. It is a question about obliterating the Qantas investment in Australian based excellence for a lower cost, and much lower quality Jetstar product as an alternative to actually competing with overseas competitors.

Qantas has chosen to avoid the competitive task on routes to Asia and beyond to Europe with modern efficient wide-bodied jets, and done nothing but whinge about losing market share when it fact is hasn’t offered to fly the new growth routes so ably addressed by Emirates, Cathay Pacific and Singapore Airlines among others.

Qantas hasn’t had market stolen from it, rather than having given it up and away.

Jetstar type low cost franchises do make a lot of sense as an investment, yet they are not an alternative to keeping or winning the full service market in either Australia or on its longer haul markets. They create new demand, and grow aviation jobs. But they are no reason to abandon quality, especially where the opportunity resides in reputation and service delivery, rather than in the fare price."

Is time for an another inquiry.

Max Tow

11th Oct 2011, 04:47

From Sandilands:
"Putting customers loyal to the Australian quality of the Qantas product onto a British Airways flight is insulting. It is an inferior product..."

Enough of this rubbish! Qantas rates no higher than BA in the current Skytrax Airline Quality rankings. Despite having well paid flight crews and doing its maintenance in-house, BA is profitable on its highly competitive international routes (it has to be because that's virtually its entire business) whereas Qantas isn't and apparently can only make money flying passengers in a cosy domestic duopoly, BA's morale boosting current advertising campaign is focused on the skill and commitment of its staff whereas Qantas is paying a fortune for full page ads this week criticising virtually every section of its employee base. And so on. Wake up guys, 82% of Aussie international departing passengers don't think the much vaunted "Australian quality of the Qantas product" (to quote Sandilands) is worth paying for. If that wasn't the case, Qantas presumably wouldn't have to resort to shifting its loyal customers onto such "inferior" partners.

And last but not least, BA's board seems to be a bit less self interested in the way that they treat their charge - despite running a larger operation, CEO Keith Williams earns roughly half of what Alan Joyce does, and during BA's recent difficulties, previous CEO Willie Walsh declined a bonus for three years - could you imagine Dixon,Joyce et al doing the same?

booglaboy

11th Oct 2011, 05:32

I'd like to challenge the 82% figure being quoted. Qantas gave routes to Jq. Add those numbers back into international travel figures before you start talking only 18% Market share. Also Qf has not defended or tried to compete with any new airlines or flights into or out of Australia. That's a management decision. They were so brutal in defending domestic Market share but give away international Market share without even trying.

buttmonkey1

11th Oct 2011, 05:36

nice one fed sec,
think they could have got him for perjury on this one
that the applicant has since 1975 been an engineer with Australian Airlines now integrated into Qantas

Max Tow

11th Oct 2011, 06:58

Booglaboy: I think the Kangaroo route issue is a red herring. The economic difficulty of operating a multisector service to Europe in competition with carriers who can operate simple round trips through their hubs (and are in many cases state subsidised) is something that has driven just about every European carrier off the route, and BA down to a token presence. The fact is that for both BA & QF, the second sector (still less the third for those going on from LON or FRA) generates very little or no more yield than just flying from their bases to SIN,BKK or HKG, so why do it? Much as I dislike the business approach of recent QF senior management, any new management is going to have to address the issue and I haven't seen any proposal which overcomes the geography or suggests some protectionist restriction on the likes of Emirates, Etihad or Singapore Airlines. By the way, it seems reasonably sensible to operate all through services via one point (SIN). If you're going to London, why does it matter where you stretch your legs en-route, and if you want to stop over in BKK or HKG, there's no need for connecting schedules anyway.

P.s. to Mods re edits: I keep typing "Etihad" and the Prune site converts it into something Irish sounding...spooky!

booglaboy

11th Oct 2011, 07:23

Yep I do understand the geographical and government difficulties but that doesn't explain how Cathay can operate 4 flts a day to Sydney versus qf's 2. Or thai airways 2 flts a day versus qf's 1 or china southern or emirates or ethihad or china airlines etc etc etc and that's just Sydney. Management choose not to even attempt a challenge, even if it's just for Market presence. Look at it as advertising Qf if it doesn't generate huge profit. Give the flying public some choices. Who knows, perhaps they will support qantas over foreign airlines and profits will come. I forgot to mention that they probably don't count jet-connects % to qf's international Market share. So let's see the real figures of Qf + Jq + jx if it really is the 'qantas group'

Max Tow

11th Oct 2011, 09:59

The answer to your specific question re QF's lower frequencies to HKG,BKK etc is the quality of the respective network hubs. For CX vs QF on HKG for example, look at the catchment population of Cathay's network onward from or feeding into HKG and you'll find it's about 2bn if you include China,Europe etc. Even if you factor that down for the small (albeit rapidly increasing) percentage of Chinese who can afford to travel, it's still pretty impressive. Compare that with the QF mini-hub network to/from Sydney and it's just Oz & NZ at 30m....actually, it's worse because now CX fly direct to most of the major Australian & NZ cities so it's just regional NSW and Tassie at say 2m (I exclude Sydney & Hong Kong cities themselves as they're point to point and there's no network advantage). Scary stuff - in short, QF's frequencies must largely rely on point to point traffic whereas Cathay can take its 50% or so share of that AND fill extra aircraft with traffic connecting online through HKG. Moreover, once CX starts operating at much higher frequency than QF, even the point to point market starts to move their way because of the better choice of schedules.
Arguably, with its location at the far SE of the subcontinent and with direct services from most Aussie state capitals to major Asian and Gulf airports, SYD is no longer a hub even for Aus/NZ.
The QF business model of old is pretty much obsolete - it's just a shame that the process of change has been one of wrong decisions, wrong equipment, missed opportunities, eyes off the ball and arguably, board venality. At a time of huge change in the competitive landscape and when the organisation has needed leadership as never before, it's hardly surprising that the workers (and shareholders) feel let down.

Worrals in the wilds

11th Oct 2011, 10:11

Enough of this rubbish! Qantas rates no higher than BA in the current Skytrax Airline Quality rankings. Despite having well paid flight crews and doing its maintenance in-house, BA is profitable on its highly competitive international routes (it has to be because that's virtually its entire business) whereas Qantas isn't and apparently can only make money flying passengers in a cosy domestic duopoly, BA's morale boosting current advertising campaign is focused on the skill and commitment of its staff whereas Qantas is paying a fortune for full page ads this week criticising virtually every section of its employee base.

Fair call, Max. :D
Arguably, with its location at the far SE of the subcontinent and with direct services from most Aussie state capitals to major Asian and Gulf airports, SYD is no longer a hub even for Aus/NZ.
Sydney is still the hub of Australian airline operations because it is by far the busiest airport in the country, both internationally and domestically. The next two don't even come close.

Even though you're possibly right about the location, more people want to fly to Sydney than everywhere else put together.

UPPERLOBE

11th Oct 2011, 10:15

Yep, you are correct Max, funny how no one in the media (yeah I know, but I still believe in fair play) asks why Qantas has actually ended up where it is?

Worrals in the wilds

11th Oct 2011, 10:20

Or mentioned that Air New Zealand is ticking along nicely, despite their only southern network catchment population being penguins, who (as we all know)...don't fly. ;)

stubby jumbo

11th Oct 2011, 10:35

Well its been a while,but Qantas has finally pulled off being nominated for a very ,very prestigious international award.......wait for it:

Best Airline driving customer service and crisis management via social media at the 2nd Annual SimpliFlying Awards for Excellence in social media:D:D:D:D:D

The Best Airlines Driving Revenue Through Social Media – Introducing the Top 5 nominees for the 2nd SimpliFlying Awards for Social Media Excellence | Leaders in airline & airport customer engagement :: SimpliFlying (http://simpliflying.com/2011/the-best-airlines-driving-revenue-through-social-media-introducing-the-top-5-nominees-for-the-2nd-simpliflying-awards-for-social-media-excellence/)

Brings a warm glow....all over

Take a bow Exco........you have done good.

Max Tow

11th Oct 2011, 10:52

WITW: Sorry, I wasn't challenging SYD's pre-eminence in Australian aviation but as a "hub" in the sense of the opportunity or necessity to connect to get to other cities. Latest figures are 2010 35m, MEL at 28m and BNE 19m - I suspect it would have been far more Sydney-centric esp in international traffic terms a decade or so ago. It would sure have helped QF if the First Fleet had chosen DRW!
Re Air NZ. I agree though not quite so rosy according to CNBC interview on 6th Oct:
"National carrier Air New Zealand is undergoing a major review of its long-haul flights. Though it posted a net profit of NZ$81 million ($62 million) for fiscal year ended June 30, 2011, its international network has been under pressure, losing a million dollars a week." However just contrast Rob Fyfe's positive attitude to taking staff through change with the confrontational QF bulldozer...and I'm sure it does help to have chosen 777s!

News Headlines (http://www.cnbc.com/id/44811302)

C441

12th Oct 2011, 07:15

I have been told that an interesting discussion on 'Corporate Spin', with perhaps some quite specific references to the current dispute, can be enjoyed on the Gruen Planet at 9:00pm tonight.

If you miss it, check out the ABC Gruen Planet (http://www.abc.net.au/tv/gruenplanet/) website or IView in a day or two.

mcgrath50

12th Oct 2011, 07:44

Unions split over Qantas war as Paul Howes warns strikers | The Australian (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/aviation/unions-split-over-qantas-war-as-paul-howes-warns-strikers/story-e6frg95x-1226164346308)

Looks like we are losing the battle for 'hearts and minds', check out the comments, it's greedy unions not greedy fat cat execs :(

UPPERLOBE

12th Oct 2011, 09:29

Have to love the way The Australian has covered their ar5e there, 9 comments 8 anti union and one anti management.

Balanced reporting PPPHHHHTTTT!!!

busboy330

12th Oct 2011, 11:40

Gruen Planet, it's up on iview:
ABC iview (http://www.abc.net.au/iview/#/view/839794)

buttmonkey1

12th Oct 2011, 22:32

this website Qantas Airways - Airline Review (http://www.destinationtravel.info/reviews/qantasairways.html) seems to sum up the qantas situation quite well.
the section on corporate culture...

Qantas has long sat on its hands and relied on its flag carrier status to win itself customers, however the travelling public have demonstrated their dissatisfaction by booking on other airlines offering a superior product. The upper echelon of the company is an old boys club, devoid of ideas, initiative or talent where promotion is based on ‘brown nosing’ and knowing the right people. Corruption and incompetence thrive within the company at all levels. Senior management despise the airline’s unionised staff and the airline suffers from an upstairs/downstairs culture. Ordinary business decisions are celebrated as landmark achievements by Qantas’ mediocre managers. Alan Joyce has been accused of ‘Jetstarizing’ Qantas and many aviation commentators now believe he is the wrong man for the job and predict his demise. Qantas' poisonous corporate culture is the root cause for the airlines decline.

the history section is also revealing...

Geoff Dixon, the airline’s antagonistic CEO would have profited $60 million from the transaction and he recommended ‘sell’. A rapid deterioration in the airline’s balance sheet preceded his replacement by the Irish born Jetstar CEO, Alan Joyce, one of corporate Australia’s few openly gay CEO’s.

:yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk:

spelling_nazi

12th Oct 2011, 23:01

The entire review is spot on

TIMA9X

13th Oct 2011, 00:03

e9q6M2mIhHA

These guys will say anything......How much more does AJ earn compared to the PM?.....

simsalabim

13th Oct 2011, 00:11

Wow! This writer is right on the money. It is refreshing to see truth in journalism. It is a very rare commodity these days. Thanks buttmonkey1. Qantas Airways - Airline Review (http://www.destinationtravel.info/reviews/qantasairways.html)

Anulus Filler

13th Oct 2011, 00:52

Wow! This writer is right on the money. It is refreshing to see truth in journalism.It is a very rare commodity these days. Thanks buttmonkey1. Qantas Airways - Airline Review

Just reading a few other reviews from this site and it seems to be amazingly biased towards Emirates. Maybe the ipods and Qantas club memberships hayven't quite been delivered yet. As for emirates, seems that this airline can't do no wrong.

manfred

13th Oct 2011, 01:09

Emirates - Airline Review (http://www.destinationtravel.info/reviews/emirates.html)

Emirates Airlines is a successful example of Dubai’s growth philosophy: centrally planned capitalism. The emirates visionary ruler Sheikh Saeed bin Maktoum Al Maktoum believed his country should become an international travel hub so needed an airline – so he created one – Emirates. The airline sources the best talent for all areas of management and maintains the highest of professional standards. Emirates’ corporate image remains spotless, its professionalism high and staff generally feel privileged to work for the company.

:yuk:

Here's a more independent view, instead of that lovefest

Emirates Airline Customer Reviews | SKYTRAX (http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&sqi=2&ved=0CCYQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.airlinequality.com%2FForum%2Femrts.htm&ei=7DmWTpKAPI-XOvbcufkB&usg=AFQjCNHuhLaieEHXVLRnzSVTCeqUL2J6mg)

buttmonkey1

13th Oct 2011, 01:17

"Some of the names it’s earned from customers include Onestar, Pornstar and ****star."

how true, rotflmao.

TIMA9X

13th Oct 2011, 04:20

Today's announcement in full..
c-ReroCAT7E

k7OCkC37ePE

part 2 (the most interesting for me) he starts claiming how unique he is. Delusions of grandeur me thinks.

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/files/2011/10/message-chart-597x450.jpg

This chart doesn't say a lot for these guys... probably why AJ sounded a little desperate with today's announcement, the pilots action today regarding the AGM vote appears to be rattling AJ and for sure LC who is staying behind the scenes again...

AIPA are on the right track in my view.
.

DUXNUTZ

13th Oct 2011, 06:05

I don't even work for Qantas (or any affiliation) and watching this joke of a person is really aggravating.

"exploring partnerships in Singapore or Malaysia" - good luck with that, bring on the annihilation.....

ejectx3

13th Oct 2011, 07:07

Last part of video 1.."I am extremely disappointing..."...

yes Alan..yes you are.

neville_nobody

13th Oct 2011, 07:12

For someone who is apparently a smart guy; Alan has an appalling command of the English language. The CEO's of most Asian carriers speak better English than he does and it is probably their 2nd or 3rd language!

Maybe the Level 6 language requirement should be extended to CEO's as well:E

TIMA9X

13th Oct 2011, 17:38

xQmNhzNH_9E

In reply to Alan Joyce's press conference yesterday Captain Richard Woodward made some great comments in this video. He came over well, finishing with a challenge for Alan Joyce. What are your real plans for Qantas Mr Joyce? Captain Woodward is right, Joyce is floundering, (when you take a hook out of a fish's mouth, they flap around a bit afterwards) he has indeed sent out mixed messages for months but as we wake up today, nothing is clearer about what direction Qantas is headed as a business other than it's all the staffs fault.

Think about it, what amazing new positive development in Joyce's business plan has evolved since the now famous August 24th announcement which was announced on August 17th?... nothing, zero, zilch, only mixed messages causing industry followers to guess things like, Far Q KL or Singapore? All we know so far is Q has on order 100 odd narrow body NEO aircraft (with sleeper seats to accommodate the Martin Ferguson types) that will compete against the likes of SQ, CX EK etc who all favour modern wide body equipment.. clear as mud, right?

Frankly, it's a mess, everything Joyce and co talk about always ends up feeling like a reduction in service levels, routes, staff whilst the opposition airlines fill the gaps that Joyce's poor decisions produce for them. In business terms it is AJ lead by LC who are "kicking own goals" for the opposition airlines to take advantage of. Virgin's horizons to expand as alliance gets green light (http://www.smh.com.au/business/virgins-horizons-to-expand-as-alliance-gets-green-light-20111013-1ln4e.html)

JB must be over the moon, more importantly SQ managers will be rubbing their hands with glee pondering over their next move (new weapons in the armory) to take on the old enemy and arch rival Qantas.

What amazes me about Joyce, his press conference took nearly 30 mins of national TV time (ABC News 24) but he revealed nothing new, moreover he appeared defensive, and if we all take a deep breath and watch the raw footage of the conference again (posted on this thread part 2 reveals a lot) I believe Joyce has damaged the Qantas board and their credibility in managing the airline. Take it from me, many journalists left that room yesterday mumbling "what was all that about Mr Joyce?" more of the same, "he blamed everyone but himself." I believe many journalist would probably nominate 13.10.11. Qantas Sydney airport press conference as the most boring and non conclusive press engagement of the year. When I think about it, I can't remember a CEO of recent times justifying every aspect of his pay details like AJ did yesterday. For me this is a sign that he and his board are worried about getting voted down at the AGM, lets hope they are, it is they who are letting the side down.

This week in media/marketing terms, yesterdays Qantas press conference coupled with guest appearances from GT on sunrise, Martin Ferguson, the News Ltd aviation hacks working overtime, was a demonstration of how powerful the "Qantas Marketing Machine" (QMM) really is.

Please do not blame all the mainstream media. I believe we have seen some great pieces in support (at least going to the trouble to find both sides of the issue) regarding the staffs struggle to be heard ie; SMH, Ten News, Radio 2UE 2SM and the ABC including the new news 24. Believe it or not there has been some good stuff from SKY news as well.

I liked this one from the ABC, the QMM works hard on this story but no one from Qantas would go on air.

.
8_UtqLbp90w

The QMM doesn't control all the media outlets, and the fight isn't over, this week was a set back, we learn and move on, but learn from our mistakes. It's all about finding a common simple war cry or slogan with a message for all the Qantas staff unions, start singing from the same song sheet when you get to the name of the song, my working title is "Save our Qantas" suggested to me by one of my sons... You know, it's funny, in the advertising game sometimes the best slogans are the simple ones.

There are many punters out there who don't necessarily care to much about the business side of airlines but would support the pilots, engineers, CCs rampies and bag wrestlers automatically, if you all just said, "Save our Qantas," they know there are problems because they hear it on the news, at the end of the day, they relate to all of you, the workers, or to put it another way, you guys are brand Qantas to the punters, and some of them may have shares.

.

JDI

13th Oct 2011, 21:37

TIMA9X
Excellent Summary, Excellent suggestion!!

I think all Unions have got to try and take the PR spin away from "Pay and Conditions" and get the very real and simple message out there into the media and public: "Save our Qantas"!

Let's face it, without Qantas continuing to exist into the future, the "Pay and Conditions" will be totally irrelevant (and let's not be fooled into just hoping that this is not their Real game plan?)

mohikan

13th Oct 2011, 21:43

I think yesterdays events demonstrate that Olivia Wirth is an exceptionally dangerous individual when she gets her act together.

She may present poorly on TV, but remember her main job is the orchestration and manipulation of the mass media to the Qantas 'message'. Yesterday was an a-grade example of this occurring.

It started with Joe Hildebrand at midnight exactly and by 8am the key message "Qantas Pilots earn more then the PM" had resonated across all media outlets. Its still on the SMH online website this morning.

All the usual right wing suspects piled in on message, and we are now familiar with how Martin Ferguson has disgracefully caved in to his big business mates as well.

Don't get me wrong, I am supporting the PIA with every ounce of my energy, but I think that in a number of areas AIPA has got it's strategy dangerously wrong.

To Joyce and his organ grinder (Clifford) ultimately this dispute is not about money. If you read the text of Joyce's many speeches since Nov last year, he almost always mentions something like "We will not allow the unions to dictate how we run the business".

This type of theme (whilst false in fact) is like a red rag to a bull at the big end of town. Groups such as the Business Council of Australia believe Australia should be a thinly failed Plutocracy where the occasional democratic principle inconveniently creeps in. There is no place for worker or individual influence on proceedings

Joyce's peer group, the other big business CEO's, will be rallying around him, make no mistake. Because the issue now is wider then cost, the issue now is the implication that someone other then an executive is allowed to have any sort of control over the business.

Having the Tourism Council, the BCA and now the Labour Party in his back pocket means that if Joyce stays on message he will ultimately prevail.

Joyce is an emotional character. He is prone to inflammatory remarks and clearly sees himself as part of a new generation of union busters that the extreme right wing believes Australia desperately needs. By attacking him and the EXCO personally, AIPA's strategy appears to be to try and break Joyce and cause him to resign.

The problem is though, with the whole Australian business community, and now the government behind them, Joyce and Clifford have basically been given the justification and the green light to run the airline into the ground over the issue of 'union influence'.

Unlike other employees who have a significant emotional investment in the Airline, these two are just happy to use the business as an ideological plaything.

Thats what makes this situation so dangerous. You cannot reason with people who make decisions not based on reality, but on ideology and misguided principle alone.

hotnhigh

13th Oct 2011, 22:12

Hear what you are saying Mohikan. It's correct that this dispute has nothing to do about pay and conditions, considering the 20% productivity gain AIPA is supposedly presenting to Qantas.
It's a mechanism to deliver an ideology that the ultra right wing has been wanting for a very long time. Unfortunately, for them, the truth that what they have done, and are doing, is the greatest threat to qantas' existence.
Example, yesterday, in some newspapers, Qantas ran ads proclaiming the great benefits and appeal of the A380 and then went onto to say that is why they are reconfiguring 744s with the true flat bed business seats. It was an interesting admission. On the one hand the ad suggested that the A380 is apparently a winner, (and load factors on the A380 would suggest this) but they (the qantas board) then defer 6 A380s for introduction. Why is that?
We know the real reason is the money that was going to be put aside for the A380s is going to be used to fund the 110 A320neos. Thus enabling the shift offshore of a large amount of capital that should have been utilised to continue the build up of the A380 fleet.
Why does qantas want to present the information in this way? Because it's another smokescreen to steer people, read investors, away from the truth. The gameplan in Asia is a big gamble. They are gambling with money leveraged from Qantas to try and create these ventures. The corporate structure of these entities along with the financial setup for the purchase, lease and operation of the aircraft in Asia requires a very stringent analysis. Some would say forensic analysis.
But this current industrial sideshow does nothing to help fix the qantas business. It provides cover for the failing of the qantas board. Qantas is an Australian Airline. It has completely lost focus of that ideal during the last ten years. Qantas employees don't want a payrise, they want a future. They want Qantas to thrive. They don't want this stoush, the board do.

Fris B. Fairing

13th Oct 2011, 23:20

TIMA9X

Congrats to your son. It would look good on a bumper sticker.

http://www.adastron.com/aviation/vault/save-our-qantas.jpg

I'll buy a few.

Keg

13th Oct 2011, 23:30

Can I suggest a variation on the theme and have a few slightly different versions. Underneath in slightly smaller letters, you could have:

Qantas flight, Qantas pilot.

Qantas aeroplane, Qantas engineers

Qantas service, Qantas staff. (Struggling to come up with something that fits with the TWU).

Worrals in the wilds

13th Oct 2011, 23:38

Doesn't Qantas Service, Qantas staff cover the TWU as well as the CS staff? Anything referring to bags will lead to unPC hostie jokes. :}

Short_Circuit

13th Oct 2011, 23:42

Could we buy them from the qantas Pilots web site?:ok:

73to91

14th Oct 2011, 00:35

Just three international airlines, Singapore Airlines, Emirates and Air New Zealand, operate one-quarter of the seats that are flown into Australia. What do they have in common? They are all majority-owned by governments.

Qantas cannot sustainably compete against these airlines in the international market, particularly Singapore and Emirates. There are two reasons for this.

Cost advantages
The first is that these airlines have a significant cost advantage over Qantas.

According to information in the most recent annual reports, Qantas's costs (defined on a cents-per-available-seat kilometre basis) are 14 per cent higher than Singapore’s; 25 per cent higher than Air New Zealand’s; and 49 per cent higher than Emirates. (These figures haven’t been adjusted for differences in average sector lengths.)

At the back of the plane, where price is the only thing that matters, a cost advantage is critical. Qantas simply cannot profitably compete for this growing segment of passengers.

Strong growth motivations
The second reason why Qantas can’t compete with these airlines is that the government-owned airlines are motivated to grow the number of seats they operate at two to four times the rate at which Qantas is motivated to grow its seats.

What is behind this stronger motivation? The return that government-owned airlines see when making their seat decisions is the return they get from the airline and from the tourists they bring into Singapore, Dubai, and Auckland. The return that Qantas sees is just the return it gets from the airline.

(Air New Zealand, to be fair, is less likely to be influenced by the return from tourists than is Singapore Airlines, and both are less concerned about tourism numbers than Emirates.)

Over the most recent financial year, Qantas earned around $10 per passenger; Singapore Airlines $60; Emirates $47; and Air New Zealand $39.

The economies of Dubai, Singapore and Auckland, however, stand to gain around $200 per day for each Aussie tourist that they bring into the country. And if those Aussies stay on average 19 nights they stand to gain around $4000 per tourist.

Government-owned airlines see a potential return of around $4050 when contemplating increasing the seats they fly while Qantas sees just $10.

Nationalisation of Qantas International
What does Qantas need to do to compete against these airlines? If the Australian government is not willing or able to provide support, they should split out the international business and sell it to the government.

Under government ownership, the new international business will "internalise" the considerable benefits associated with inbound tourism.

They will significantly increase the number of seats added to the market and the number of ports to which they fly, including ports that they gave up on under private ownership, such as Rome, Paris, Zurich and Mumbai.

To protect domestic tourism, the new airline would quarantine a certain number of seats for travel by foreign residents to Australia, setting average airfares at much lower levels for foreigners.

This is not a new strategy – it happens now. For example, a one-way flight booked on October 13, at 9.17pm on BA flight 7372 for travel from London Heathrow to Sydney on October 30 costs an adult economy passenger booking from the UK 724 pounds or $1149. Conversely, an adult economy passenger booking at the same time from Australia on exactly the same flight has to pay $1428.

The new Qantas International would not contemplate a start-up business in Asia. Engineering, pilots, cabin crew and ground handling jobs in Australia would be saved. The major source of antagonism in the current conflict between Qantas and the unions is the large-scale shift of jobs offshore – this wouldn’t be an issue under nationalisation.

Teaming up with Tourism Australia
The new Qantas International would team up with Tourism Australia to market Australia to the rest of the world rather than adopting strategies that are not as in sync as they are under private ownership.

Tourism Australia could help the new Qantas in shaping strategies to direct more capacity to routes where the inbound tourism benefits are currently greatest, and to those routes where there is greatest promise for strong tourism growth.

They could also help in ensuring that the benefits are shared equally around Australia, with more of the growth in capacity allocated to regions where tourism is a bigger share of regional income and job creation, such as Cairns.

Other Australian carriers
Of course, Qantas is not the only Australian-domiciled carrier that flies international Australian services. These carriers will need to be supported so that they are not unfairly impacted.

It’s not unusual for privately-owned carriers to compete alongside government-owned carriers. The Air-Asia brand does precisely this in Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand, while Jetstar Asia does the same in Singapore.

A plan to nationalise Qantas is a little pie in the sky, and the government's modus operandi in recent times is to sell not buy assets, but Qantas International’s problems run so deep that all options should be on the table. Let’s consider them all.

Tony Webber was Qantas Group general manager microeconomics and then chief economist between 2004 and April 2011. He is now managing director of Webber Quantitative Consulting (http://www.webqc.com.au/), and contributed this article to BusinessDay.

Read more: Nationalise Qantas International! (http://www.smh.com.au/business/nationalise-qantas-international-20111014-1lo1o.html#ixzz1aiBZnZZi)

ampclamp

14th Oct 2011, 01:01

quitting australia now touring asian skies

BP2197

14th Oct 2011, 01:14

I wasn't quite sure where this was heading or who it was written by but now it all makes sense. Anyone who has been to one of Mr Webber's presentations (always involving the Magnum icecream examples) over the years knows that he is a great communicator and an absolute gentleman. He also took a bullet when it was decided that the economics department was a luxury the group couldn't afford.

His analysis of the costs is a sobering reminder of the external enviroment that Qantas is attempting to compete in.

Worrals in the wilds

14th Oct 2011, 01:21

This government can't even run a government, let alone an airline. They're not even any good at being socialists. :yuk: It's an interesting argument, but I can't see it happening while the current mob of idiots in Canberra are busy schmoozing up to their corporate friends and ignoring the people who put them there in the first place.

ampclamp

14th Oct 2011, 01:56

Well if that poorly informed twit Ferguson and the PM step into the dispute to bash a few unions to get a decent headline in the very biased Murdoch press they'll lose the few votes they have left.

cart_elevator

14th Oct 2011, 07:07

Regarding Mr Webbers pstory in the SMH today about nationalising Qantas.

This is a very important story.

Many on here and elsewhere don't know that Mr Webber was actually a very senior executive at Qantas,before leaving recently. He was in charge of the department that mostly dealt with government.

He knows more about the plight of Qantas than anyone.

For him to put this statement out in the press is a huge move,it shows he is still passionate about our National Icon.

Unions: Involve him as soon as you can. He is a wealth of knowledge.Get him onside :ok:

The The

14th Oct 2011, 09:05

As Qantas loses millions due to industrial strife, Virgin chief executive John Borghetti used a business luncheon on Friday to highlight how well the nation's second-biggest airline was travelling.

Thousands of Australian passengers had their travel plans disrupted on Friday, due to Qantas flight cancellations, delays and union disputes on pay and job cuts.

Meanwhile, on Thursday Virgin moved a step closer to a proposed alliance that would give it access to Singapore Airlines' vast Asia network, with the competition regulator clearing it in a draft ruling.

It also won the `most admired' category of the International Customer Service Professionals awards this week.

On a day the overall market was down nearly one per cent, Virgin shares closed up two cents, or 6.15 per cent, at 34.5 cents.

Qantas fell half a cent to $1.56.

Mr Borghetti said pay differences between Virgin and Qantas pilots were only "single digit" and often existed because Qantas used larger aeroplanes.

They were available on industrial umpire Fair Work Australia's website, he said.

"I saw that line and must admit I did have a bit of a chuckle to myself," Mr Borghetti told an Australian British Chamber of Commerce lunch.

"If we were able to keep pilots or any part of the workforce and pay them 50 per cent less than the other guy: gee, we must be really good.

Mr Borghetti said it was important to get the comparison right.

"We don't pay the same salaries for A380 and 747 pilots because we don't have A380s and 747s ... you've got to compare like for like, the bigger the aeroplane is, the more the salary is."

Virgin's pilots union were reported as being delighted with the agreement struck in August, which filled some of the pay differentials with Qantas.

A check of the Fair Work Australia website by AAP showed a level 1 captain with Virgin Australia would be paid a fixed remuneration of $217,500 per year.

Mr Borghetti said Virgin was flying extra hours to cater for disrupted Qantas passengers this month but was otherwise focussed on its own plans to capture more of the corporate travel market.

It already has won regulatory approval for partnerships with Etihad Airways, Air New Zealand and America's Delta Air Lines.

The alliances meant it now offered more flights across the Tasman Sea and in North America than its major competitor, he said, without naming Qantas.

Stick it to em JB (http://finance.ninemsn.com.au/newsbusiness/aap/8360360/virgin-adds-honolulu-to-network)

mmciau

14th Oct 2011, 09:12

In JB's speech, shouldn't that read Etihad

The Computer changes the "Abu Dhabi-based airline company Name to what is shown here - stupid computer!!

Mike

ohallen

14th Oct 2011, 09:13

Yes well done and it is also nice to see him stick it so very carefully to AJ in a way that few others have achieved and with such style.

To the victor goes the spoils I say and I know who my money is on long term.

Now if only SQ could lend him some metal to really stick it to the Rat. Anything would do.

TIMA9X

14th Oct 2011, 15:37

Qantas bans no-confidence move

Matt O'Sullivan

October 15, 2011

http://images.smh.com.au/2011/10/14/2692371/joyce-420x0.jpg

QANTAS has received a rap over the knuckles for not allowing a motion of no confidence in chief executive Alan Joyce and the board to be put to shareholders later this month.

But two influential advisers to some of Qantas's largest institutional investors have recommended shareholders vote in favour of the airline's pay card for the senior executives.

The voting advice from CGI Glass Lewis and ISS Governance takes the wind out of the sails of attempts by unions and the Australian Shareholders Association to have investors vote against the pay packages for Mr Joyce and the rest of his senior management team.

Although CGI has urged a vote in favour of all the resolutions at Qantas's annual meeting on October 28, it has taken exception to the company not allowing a motion of no confidence in Mr Joyce, chairman Leigh Clifford and the rest of the board to be put to shareholders.
Qantas objected to the motion from a group of more than 100 shareholders to be aired on the basis that it would have ''no operative effect'' under company law.
But the proxy adviser said Qantas had not given a good reason for not allowing it to be put to the AGM, adding that ''we do not agree that having 'no operative effect' is adequate justification''.
The chance for shareholders to have proposals raised at annual meetings was a core right and ''any challenge to or derogation from that right by boards is a serious matter'', CGI said.

Despite the government threatening to intervene in Qantas's damaging industrial relations dispute, unions are stepping up their action in the lead-up to the AGM.

Their attacks on Mr Joyce's pay have been central to their campaign for job-security clauses to be inserted into new enterprise agreements. His total pay this year rose from $2.92 million to $5 million, due largely to share-based payments increasing from $964,000 to $2.72 million.
But in urging a vote in favour, CGI said Qantas had aligned executive pay and the company's performance over the past year, and Mr Joyce's pay was in line with that of his peers.
The proxy adviser described the accounting-based reporting of share-based pay for Mr Joyce as ''misleading'' because, while his reported pay was $5 million, ''his actual remuneration'' was just over $3 million.

Read more: Qantas bans no-confidence move (http://www.smh.com.au/business/qantas-bans-noconfidence-move-20111014-1lp9l.html#ixzz1alobCurH)

Well, good and bad news, the good news AJ and LC got a rap over the knuckles, the bad news, they are still getting away with it... :(

qfcabin

15th Oct 2011, 04:03

Those who see Olivia Wirth as merely a mouthpiece, and not a very effective one may be interested in this. Seems she may not just speak the Co message but also assist in its formulation.

Olivia Wirth
Group Executive Government and Corporate Affairs, Qantas Airways Limited

Olivia Wirth is the Qantas Group Executive, Government and Corporate Affairs responsible for the company’s external and internal communication, stakeholder relationships and is the company spokesperson. She is also a member of the Qantas Group Executive Committee.

Olivia was previously the Head of Corporate Communication for the Qantas Group, appointed in 2009. Olivia has over 15 years of experience in public affairs, most recently as the Executive Director of industry association and lobby group, the Transport and Tourism Forum (TTF).

She has worked in a range of public and corporate affairs roles including the London based, Business in the Community (part of the Prince's Trust), the Australian Tourist Commission (now Tourism Australia) and the former Minister for Small Business and Tourism, the Hon. Joe Hockey MP. Olivia is a Board member of the European Australian Business Council and the Qantas Foundation.

Arnold E

15th Oct 2011, 06:34

Gor blimy, it just goes to show that you dont have to be partiularly good at anything to get a job in the spin industry. If this is the best they have to offer, I might consider changing occupations.:rolleyes:

amos2

15th Oct 2011, 07:35

...and, as we have all discovered in recent years, due to freedom of information laws, there are many people who have gone straight from High School to : Local Council, State Politics, Federal Politics, the ACTU, unions within the ACTU, civil rights groups, tree hugging groups, greenie groups, biosphere groups and sundry other "gravy train" occupations where they bleed the tax payers dry, enjoy an over inflated salary, massive PUBLIC superannuation benefits and usually are married or partners to similar types with different names!?

Is that rorting the system, or is that rorting the system.

Has anyone checked out Olivia?

If not, do so.

I bet you a useless ticket on a Qantas flight that she has never had, what we would all call, a proper job since leaving high school!

And I bet she's also married to another government bludger rorting the system!

By another name!

MR WOBBLES

16th Oct 2011, 02:41

Give the directors' club a kick over soaring salaries (http://www.smh.com.au/business/give-the-directors-club-a-kick-over-soaring-salaries-20111015-1lqdf.html)

worth a read

MR WOBBLES

16th Oct 2011, 04:12

http://www.openaustralia.org/regmem/scan/register_interests_10218.pdf

http://www.openaustralia.org/regmem/scan/register_interests_10306.pdf

what a top web site start digging you don't know what you may find

OpenAustralia.org: Are your Representatives and Senators working for you in Australia's Parliament? (http://www.openaustralia.org/)

That the time for the presentation of the report of the Rural Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee on the Qantas Sale Amendment (Still Call Australia Home) Bill 2011 be extended to 21 November 2011

Search: the word 'qantas' (OpenAustralia.org) (http://www.openaustralia.org/search/?s=qantas)

at least Mr swann gave the grange back

http://www.openaustralia.org/regmem/scan/register_interests_10617.pdf

Mr Leslie Chow

16th Oct 2011, 04:45

Classic filler, read my mind

Tops

600ft-lb

16th Oct 2011, 05:23

Now this would definitely cause a flat spin
2010‑2011

The Parliament of the
Commonwealth of Australia

THE SENATE

Presented and read a first time

Qantas Sale Amendment (Still Call Australia Home) Bill 2011

No. , 2011

(Senators Xenophon and Bob Brown)

A Bill for an Act to amend the Qantas Sale Act 1992, and for related purposes

Contents
1............ Short title....................................................... ...................................... 1
2............ Commencement................................................ ................................... 1
3............ Schedule(s)................................................. ........................................ 2
Schedule 1—Amendments 3
Qantas Sale Act 1992 3

A Bill for an Act to amend the Qantas Sale Act 1992, and for related purposes
The Parliament of Australia enacts:
1 Short title
This Act may be cited as the Qantas Sale Amendment (Still Call Australia Home) Act 2011.
2 Commencement
This Act commences on the day this Act receives the Royal Assent.
3 Schedule(s)
Each Act that is specified in a Schedule to this Act is amended or repealed as set out in the applicable items in the Schedule concerned, and any other item in a Schedule to this Act has effect according to its terms.

Schedule 1—Amendments

Qantas Sale Act 1992
1 Subsection 3(1)
Insert:
associated entity has the same meaning as in the Corporations Act 2001.
2 Paragraph 7(1)(h)
Omit “(for example, facilities for the maintenance and housing of aircraft, catering, flight operations, training and administration)”.
3 After paragraph 7(1)(h)
Insert:
(ha) require that Qantas ensure that, of the facilities, taken in aggregate, which are used by Qantas subsidiaries and any associated entities in the provision of scheduled international air transport services, the facilities located in Australia, when compared with those located in any other country, must represent the principal operational centre for the subsidiary or associated entity; and
(hb) require that the majority of heavy maintenance of aircraft and the majority of flight operations and training conducted by, or on behalf of, Qantas is conducted in Australia; and
(hc) require that the majority of heavy maintenance of aircraft and the majority of flight operations and training conducted by, or on behalf of, Qantas subsidiaries and any associated entities is conducted in Australia; and
4 After paragraph 7(1)(i)
Insert:
(ia) require that at least one of the directors of Qantas has a minimum of 5 years’ professional flight operations experience; and
(ib) require that at least one of the directors of Qantas has a minimum of 5 years’ aircraft engineering experience; and
5 Subsection 10(1)
After “application of the Minister,”, insert “100 shareholder members or shareholder members who hold at least 5% of the shares in Qantas,”.
6 Subsection 10(2)
After “application of the Minister,”, insert “100 shareholder members or shareholder members who hold at least 5% of the shares in Qantas,”.

Quick, upgrades, grange a grand finals tickets all round!

TIMA9X

16th Oct 2011, 09:11

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-912HGKuB5pw/TpqT8AG_fwI/AAAAAAAAACs/vfLDyeZi5zI/s512/300_save-our-qantas-large.jpg

Save our Qantas Nick.

breakfastburrito

17th Oct 2011, 02:34

Borghetti didn't mention the Q word

It was the airline whose name they darned not speak. Guests who came to listen to Virgin Australia chief executive Jonh Borghetti at a well-attended lunch in Melbourne organised by the Australian British Chamber of Commerce surely would have expected the guest of honour to at least mention rival Qantas every so often.

But no, Borghetti insisted on calling it "that airline" or "a certain rival" and so on and so forth.

It was all a bit light-hearted and Borghetti did his best not to revel in the industrial dramas Qantas is experiencing.

But in the end he couldn't resist on subtle dig while clarifying that Virgin didn't actually pay its pilots substantially less that Qantas does [my bold BB] (Qantas has more of the bigger planes and, basically pilot who fly those get paid more), as Qantas had claimed.

Lunch host: "Here was I reading Qantas saying your pilots are paid 50 per cent less than Qantas pilots - poor blokes, I want to give them some money." Quick as a flash, Borghetti replied: "Maybe he [Qantas boss Alan Joyce] was comparing CEO salaries at the time." (To be fair, Borghetti's wage was actually 44 per cent less than that of the Qantas boss.)

Borghetti also go some laughs when one questioner asked him why he should buy Virgin shares. "I'm not a stockbroker... so you should discuss that with your financial advisor," said Borghetti. "Oh, they don't know what they're talking about," came the reply. "Do you want me to go to jail? Will you visit me?" said Borghetti, as the crowd roared with laughter.

He got a similar response when asked about Virgin's culture. "When I arrived they called customers 'guests'. I said why, you can't get guests to pay when they come to your house. But it turns out they really want to treat the people who fly with us as guests."
AFR: Rear Window, page 38 Monday 17 October 2011

amos2

17th Oct 2011, 10:41

...and a good position for you too, AF?

fl610

17th Oct 2011, 19:42

"Just because you are right doesn't mean that you will win!" - Brian McCarthy 1989.

caneworm

17th Oct 2011, 21:17

This link posted without comment

Apply for the A330 Captain job posted by Morson Wynnwith Ltd | AviationJobSearch.com (http://www.aviationjobsearch.com/jobs/pilots/sydney/a330_captain-109269.html)

Gingerbread

18th Oct 2011, 02:34

Your right 600ft-lb, any amendment to the Qantas Sale Act - [The Still Call Australia Home Bill 2011] would definitely cause a flat spin But! probably not for reasons you are contemplating.

The Qantas Sale Act, as it stands, already imposes on Qantas obligations it is intent on flaunting.

That the proposers of the bill (Senators Xenophon and Bob Brown) have not called on the Minister of Aviation to uphold the Sale Act is what needs to be rectified forthwith.

maggotdriver

19th Oct 2011, 03:50

Caneworm, interesting reading! Is it Cathay or someone else? Jetstar? QF? That's decent coin at last $192 000 net. Maybe they're trying to see how many others would want a QF job? Any more info would be good.

TIMA9X

19th Oct 2011, 05:04

3IkYCE3LcR4

.
For the record.

TIMA9X

19th Oct 2011, 10:06

Keep up the pressure.. Yep agree, I have seen this lot getting away with it and now I believe the mainstream media are showing signs that they are on to them.

Over the last 48 hours AM and OW have "tripped up" exposing a few dents in their rhetoric.... It started with the death threats story causing a few frowns with the mainstream journalists, this week they are asking questions at the press conferences... couple this with the latest RR incident in BKK and I believe we are seeing the management's credibility beginning to unravel in time for the AGM.. which has been (to borrow an over used word) "impacting" the Qantas brand slowly but surly for the past couple of years.

Ix-oS8PN9E4

. latest highlights for this week again... for the record of this thread.

.

Millet Fanger

19th Oct 2011, 10:53

While AJ, LC and co play their predetermined ideological games with it's staff, the competition is cleaning up. It's their responsibilty to deal with ALL the issues Qantas face, not get bogged down with only one issue.

sheppey

19th Oct 2011, 11:30

Apply for the A330 Captain job posted by Morson Wynnwith Ltd | AviationJobSearch.com (http://www.aviationjobsearch.com/jobs/pilots/sydney/a330_captain-109269.html)Isn't it illegal under Australian legislation to discriminate based on age? If so, the advertisement should be pulled.

Keg

19th Oct 2011, 13:36

Not if there are regulatory issues in other countries that preclude the age.

QF22

19th Oct 2011, 19:05

Morson and Wynneth are a UK base contract agency.
I guess if they recruit pilots who sign and overseas contract, maybe they can get away with it.
I am contracting, but overseas, and i can tell you age and race discrimination is alive and well.
I am sure some our learned colleagues will answer our questions.
Cheers!

TIMA9X

20th Oct 2011, 13:54

Boards told to heed protest votes (http://www.smh.com.au/business/boards-told-to-heed-protest-votes-20111020-1macv.html)

A further 10 companies including Rio Tinto, Qantas and engineering major Downer EDI remain on shareholder watch lists after receiving two strikes against their executive remuneration reports since 2008.
Any shareholder protest is likely to cost more than just a company's reputation. Analysis prepared by the brokerage JP Morgan found companies that received a ''strike'' against their remuneration report underperformed the benchmark S&P/ASX 200 by more than 3 per cent in the month following the vote.
New rules introduced by the government in July made it tougher for companies to ignore protest votes. Under the so-called two-strikes rule, if a company gets more than 25 per cent no votes on a remuneration report in two consecutive years, shareholders vote on a board spill.

Read more: Boards told to heed protest votes (http://www.smh.com.au/business/boards-told-to-heed-protest-votes-20111020-1macv.html#ixzz1bKUj3i49)

Funny that LC can be associated with two company names on the watch list.:rolleyes:

_Cc-LPCn_Fo

some background in this video.

runesta

20th Oct 2011, 15:12

A lot of people here simply miss the point
The fact is the ongoing industrial actions simply accelerates the end of Qantas (and your job security)
Many blame senior executives, the CEO and the board for their incompetence and the demise of Qantas
I do not dispute this if they had put 8 nails in the coffin then surely the industrial actions are the 9th nail
It is not logical to use management incompetence as an excuse to inflict penalties on passengers
Some are forgetting these industrial actions are equally if not more damaging to your company because they directly impact your passengers - and they are the people who pay your wages!
Most Australians these days don't care about buying Australian - it is why most Aussies nowadays don't use Telstra or drive Holdens. If they are truely fed up they will leave in droves and never come back

The day your airline stops flying executives and board members will find themselves new jobs. Union leaders will still have their jobs and potential careers in the ALP, but what work will be available for average workers like you?

Those who put their faith in political processes are sadly misguided by empty promises that will be broken. i.e. What were the material outcomes from the Senate Enquiry on Safety? Most politicians have no balls to do anything.

And then there's the constant spin by Qantas management that they are world's best and safest with the best premium product when in reality they fly trashy 767 and 737400s around the network and 747s with IFE that don't work.
On the other hand you have union leaders who claim their workforce is the best and most superior workforce (when, like Qantas management, they're not by a long shot) and trash people in the same profession overseas as cheap labour producing lower quality work.

Both of these viewpoints are totally absurd and highlight typical Australian arrogance and ignorance.

When will they realise they are ALL far from world's best (management AND the workforce) and actually realise how backward-looking they are?

stiffwing

20th Oct 2011, 15:36

"maggotdriver
Good stuff?!
Caneworm, interesting reading! Is it Cathay or someone else? Jetstar? QF? That's decent coin at last $192 000 net. Maybe they're trying to see how many others would want a QF job? Any more info would be good."

Its china southern, employed out of Guangzhou. Not qf,although it might as well be jq with the amount of their pilots headed there..

TIMA9X

20th Oct 2011, 23:25

by runesta Most Australians these days don't care about buying Australian - it is why most Aussies nowadays don't use Telstra or drive Holdens. If they are truely fed up they will leave in droves and never come back
I know I am going to get shot down on this but we should all take note of all what runesta says in his post. I think everyone on here knows I support all of the staff at Q but the reality is the management have slowly turned the once loyal customers against the Q brand since the early Dixon days leading up to the APA bid. Joyce is the big problem, he is the face of Qantas and the other faces he has chosen to speak for Qantas (OW) in my view has damaged the Australianism that went with the brand forever, similar to what Sol Trujillo created at Telstra .
Solomon Trujillo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_Trujillo#Australia.27s_views_on_Sol_Trujillo)After Trujillo left Telstra and Australia, he was quoted in an BBC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC) interview describing Australia as racist, backward and like "stepping back in time". During his time in Australia, media commentators and cartoonists repeatedly made reference to Trujillo's Hispanic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanic) background including caricatures of him as a "bandido". The group of American executives who were recruited to work at Telstra were referred to, along with Trujillo, as the "three amigos".[14] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_Trujillo#cite_note-13) In the BBC interview, Trujillo cited Australia's "very restrictive" immigration policies and rigid rules on company privatisation as his evidence for the nation being backward and racist. When Trujillo's resignation from Telstra was announced, Prime Minister (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Minister) Kevin Rudd (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Rudd) gave an "Adios" response. Trujillo described Mr Rudd's use of the term as "racism personified".[15] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_Trujillo#cite_note-14)[16] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_Trujillo#cite_note-news.com.au-15) Trujillo's views on racism in Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_Australia) were repudiated by several businessmen and political leaders.I note that Trujillo played the racism card, but the reality at that time for him, Australians didn't accept him as the face of Telstra. The same applies for Joyce today, people simply don't like their combative styles, they simply and quietly voted with their feet.

From where I sit, a big protest roll up in/or outside the AGM is the best form of protest on the 28th.. The news crews would eat it up, and in a short space of time LC and AJ would probably end up on the scrap heap because of their incompetence. AF group CEO ring any bells .....?

http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2011/07/20/1226098/524015-110721-alan-joyce-qantas.jpghttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/d6/Solomon_Trujillo.jpg/150px-Solomon_Trujillo.jpg

rfyjMAQ6yNY