Getting the real Qantas story to mainstream media

[Slippery_Pete]

Well, we all know the wonderful work Ben Sandilands is doing - this goes without saying.

And given the limited airtime they receive, Steve P and Woodward have really said some great things in the mainstream media - but unfortunately with very little exposure.

What has been alluded to in other topics, and which deserves a topic of its own, is the fact that the public really aren't getting the full story and the inflight PAs (which only represent the pilots' cause, not the engineers etc) have run out of steam. Unfortunately there are only two things the mainstream media are interested in these days - sensationalising breaking news (like coverage of the NZ earthquake or 9/11), or sponsored coporate advertising.

As much as Ben Sandilands and our union heads are doing everything they can, the fact remains that the mainstream media are essentially in bed with QF and will protect their corporate interests and agreements over all else. Having so called "experts" like Geoffrey Thomas with their snouts in the trough also doesn't help.

I'm calling anyone who wants their job to stay in Australia rather than with QantAsia to help get the plight of our flagship carrier into the headlines - not into offshoring.

We can all post up Sandiland's articles to Facebook, but the impact is restricted to generally small circles.

[email protected]

This is where we should start. I haven't sent anything yet, just hoping to start the ball rolling.

Send whatever you like.

Here are some suggestions:
Send a video link to Wirth's freudian slip (grounding, oops retiring).
Send a link to Sandiland's pages.
Send a video link from Joyce cutting 1000 jobs, and then a link to Joyce saying no jobs will be lost.

But remember - MediaWatch isn't just free advertising, and they won't just run a story because we pound them with our side of the story.

However - they WILL run a story if they can see evidence of poor/false/financially swayed journalism.
For example, with Wirth's "grouding oops retiring" slip, did channel 7 edit that out?
Or for example, Geoffrey Thomas, so called "aviation expert", always taking the management line because he works for channel 7.
Or for example, the recent Bangkok engine failure - and the failure of the mainstream media to report the issue has a known fix which can't be completed quickly because of offshoring engine maintenance.
Or for example, media playing footage of Joyce threatening to lay off workers conducting PROTECTED industrial action and not questioning the legality of this.

Let's get MediaWatch the angle they need to show QF's manipulation of the media and the one-sided story the public are getting.

[simsalabim]

Why do you think the public aren't getting the full story?
Media companies are corporate institutions that are hired by other corporate instituitions to sell the public goods and/or manipulate public opinion.
Journalists are the lackeys who know where their bread is buttered.They will write whatever their editors tell them. The editor will get his instructions from the media owner. The media owner will create the agenda according to what will produce the greatest control and or profit for himself or his corporation.Government, corporate and mass media is dependant on mass media ability to manipulate the truth.These scum are all in it together.The truth will never see the light of day . Not on commercial media nor ABC which is dependant almost entirely on the governments funding. These institutions are part of the problem not part of the solution. So stop dreaming that the media are interested in the truth. It simply doesn't serve their purpose.Forget it.Sandilands has very little readership . He is prepared to tell part of the bigger picture because I am guessing at his stage in life he isn't beholden to the corporate world for his living . He is a lone wolf in the wilderness. If you want to make a statement and attempt to change things get out to the next occupy Wall street rally.

[VBPCGUY]

Im just want the correct story run when SP costs many engineers their jobs:ugh:

[Trent 972]

Gruen Planet (ABC TV) with 'The Pitch' (http://www.abc.net.au/tv/gruenplanet/pages/s3342443.htm), 'Kwantas: The Flying wallaby', had another good shot at QANTAS offshoring, last night.
Thankyou Auntie.

[denabol]

My advice would be to start using social and on-line media far more than you do, because most share traders and for that matter anyone under around 40 is getting their news on a continually updated basis on a smart phone or a tablet.

Bill Sweetman on defence on Aviation Week is read far more than he is in the hard copy magazine if the claims that group makes for its on-line and print outlets are taken as correct. I think sites like Crikey and Business Spectator where Sandilands gets hosted have more clout in investment circles and public administration that a newspaper written one afternoon and not delivered until the next day.

The advice to circulate links to stories you think are important by Twitter or Facebook is spot on. There was an interview about using social media on ABC TV last night or maybe two days ago. I think this is a fight that has to be fought with the latest media weapons, not in the dying traditional media of newspapers.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Im just want the correct story run when SP costs many engineers their jobs


They are going to take our jobs anyway. They are slowly taking every job at Qantas. The Asian adventure will fail, then they will take 35,000 jobs through the sham venture.

We'd all be out of work now if Dixon got his way in 2007.

[gobbledock]

Steve there is no need to respond to VBPCGUY. He is actually a bag chucker from Melbourne, not even an engineer. What his beef is with you we have no idea? What is ironic is that if Joyce is successful at destroying QF along with wages and conditions, that might make Virgin the sole operating airline with a higher cost base per employee. What woul happen to Virgin staff like VBPCGUY? Well to start with it would be cheaper to have one of the third party contractors contracted to provide all the ramp handling at mainline ports, so VBPCGUY may find himself on less money and wearing a different color uniform but doing the same job. Junior, those living in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. You haven't been with Virgin since it's inception so you don't know exactly how unloyal and ruthless they too can be. Don't think for a moment that Borghetti will sit by and allow a role reversal where his operating costs are greater than his competitors.

[victor two]

Slippery Pete
The story that has gained enormous traction across most media is that Qantas has been the innocent victim of a hostile union who has mounted a hopelessly misguided IR campaign against a company that is trying to manage a crucial period of change. The media are reporting that unions are writing hostile threats to Qantas managers, damaging the brand, deliberately encouraging the public to avoid using the brand and telling outright lies in a bid to apply commercial pressure instead of doing the right thing and negotiating across a table like a logical union should.

Funny thing is................. that is actually the truth so dont blame the media!

[TIMA9X]

victor two
that is actually the truth so dont blame the media!
Not everyone on here agrees with you either vt

uKs8OjC9k0E

[Capt Kremin]

Hey VT... troll's beddy bye time. Off you go now. (Nobody's falling for it...)

[Jonny Suave Trousers]

As a professional in main stream media I have to tell you your views are and I'm sorry to be blunt, utter BS.

We of course monitor this site but some of you make it hard when a lot of what is written is vitriolic and referring to media people as "scumbags" that are in the pockets of (insert name of right wing organisation here) doesn't help!

'Mainstream media' is just that, mainstream. If you know, you're not getting airtime, did you ever consider that your cause is maybe quite boring to the mainstream and not really newsworthy?

The Union movement have been fighting and negotiating with big business since Jesus was a boy, people in the main tend to tune out and rate it as boring.

Now I'm not saying I agree with the way Qantas is handling things, I think it's actually pretty ordinary, but my opinion doesn't matter, at the end of the day we have to sell papers and to do that you have to be mainstream.

On a parting note, most media people are left leaning, we don't have meetings with big brother to decide what to write to 'influence' the masses, lol. The ABC on the other hand...

[gobbledock]

On a parting note, most media people are left leaning, we don't have meetings with big brother to decide what to write to 'influence' the masses
Now that is funny! Of course YOU don't, you just write any BS that sells a story, the more exciting the better even if it is a lie, which is the norm.
As for meetings with Big Brother, my little reporter friend you may not swig Grange with big buiness but your bosses sure as sh#t do. If they are paid enough, threatened enough (removal of advertising revenue) they bow down and bend over. And you know it.
Oh yes, poor Rupert is innocent also?

[mister hilter]

Jonny ST, you are probably right about mainstream, selling papers and boring (or most people's low threshold of boredom).

But what about the loss of 35 thousand jobs at the stroke of a pen? Do you remember the ****storm in the aftermath of Ansett's demise? Nothing boring there but a lot of people with no income and subsequent loss of family and loss of life in some cases. Or is that just fodder for next week's headlines?

How about seeking out the other side of the story? For a union (ALAEA) formed in the early '60s that has never been in the least bit militant to suddenly find itself the vanguard of industrial relations in this country must surely warrant a few questions as to why. Care to take up the challenge JST?

[Jonny Suave Trousers]

I'll be straight with you, Unions are necessary, but the mainstream opinion right now (that could change) is that the Unions are 'holding Qantas to ransom'. And most people don't really care and just want to get home or go to work without disruption.

Opinion could easily be skewed the other way too, or could have been. Personal threats of violence etc to Qantas management along with tactical strikes designed to cause the most disruption is not helping win the PR war.

I'm sorry, but most people (you would have to agree) want both groups to stop acting like children and sort it out.

It could be argued that you are both hell bent on mutual assured destruction. Now thats newsworthy!

NB. Please refrain from your patronising tone it you decide to respond to this. It is not clever and just makes you appear to be a bit of a bully. I'm sure that's not the case is it?

[simsalabim]

Mister Hitler just beat me to it.The enormous amount of inside information available here on PPrune by the very well connected posters should provide you with all you need for an incredible expose of the fight for the future of the aviation industry in Australia.No need to take sides. The story is in the battle. Write it.Then get it published.Good luck.

[onetrack]

I guess JST will be coming back in his next post, stating the accuracy of media reporting is an unassailable fact. Thus we have headlines that cry;

"Passengers screeming in fear as Jet falls"...
"Engine explosion in Qantas jet" (when the true engine-out failure was totally unrelated to an explosion)...
"Hosties were 'shaking' as hydraulic fault causes Qantas plane return to Darwin" (never seen a hostie shake yet, they are pretty much all well-trained, and uber-cool)...
A hydraulic failure was reported as a cargo door that had burst open...

I might add that this only refers to aviation reporting - the incidence of erroneous, just plain misleading, or badly written and misspelt articles is never-ending.
Naturally, I won't even go into the greatest tool in the media's box of tricks... the error of omission.
If you don't want a newsworthy item that goes against the management guidelines to get any exposure, you just ensure it ends up in the round file (or more correctly, the "delete" button in todays electronic world)... :suspect:

[breakfastburrito]

JST, the "smoking gun" behind Qantas intent to deliberately destroy the international brand intent its right here - Qantas variation requests International Air Services Commission [.pdf] (http://www.iasc.gov.au/applications/files/4663.pdf) courtesy of skybed on another thread.

You should read it in conjunction with the Qantas Sales Act (http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=qantas%20sales%20act%20pdf&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.comlaw.gov.au%2FDetails%2FC2004C00317%2 F08c1c4df-fbe1-46ee-9760-a75885a3d709&ei=wQ6hTuncGeqWiQfYvuDBBg&usg=AFQjCNH5w2qqIlpkoGb4V2gOpCN5gINEcA&sig2=rXiTziU4mNqqhxcLsI3efA), section 7



change of its company name to a name that does not include
the expression “Qantas”; and
prohibit Qantas from conducting scheduled international air
transport passenger services under a name other than:
(i) its company name; or
(ii) a registered business name that includes the expression
“Qantas”; and
require that the head office of Qantas always be located in
Australia; and
require that of the facilities, taken in aggregate, which are
used by Qantas in the provision of scheduled international
air transport services (for example, facilities for the
maintenance and housing of aircraft, catering, flight
operations, training and administration), the facilities located
in Australia, when compared with those located in any other
country, must represent the principal operational centre for
Qantas; and


Right there is the bones your investigative piece, all factually documented. The "opinion in the media that the unions are trying to destroy Qantas" is debunked by this documentary evidence. Why is this blatant breach of the law ignored? Will this bit of "boring" news ever see light in the MSM?

[booglaboy]

I'm confused. The alaea has been attempting to negotiate for an agreement for over a year. The previous eba took almost 2 years. Who is it that is failing to negotiate? It's certainly not the alaea. I strongly suggest any honest reporters out there do some real research. Many of us including myself would happily give an insiders view.

[adsyj]

JST

Thank you for posting. I find the usual comments made on this board commenting on how inept the media are when reporting most aviation incidents quite tedious as well.

HOWEVER with regard to the current IR dispute all areas of the media are grossly lacking in any form of journalism. There is a huge story unfolding and the media seems intent on only regurgitating what is fed to them by management. If any journalist in any area of the media took the time to investigate any of the claims made on this board alone you may find yourself with the story of your life.

What we as a group are most disappointed about is the lack of balanced reporting, Why doesn't a journalist pick up the phone talk to Steve Purvinas or Captain Woodward at AIPA. Listen to what they have to say. Don't take it on face value but investigate and write a story that informs the public. Is that not journalism???

I am absolutely convinced that if a reporter took the time to dig into this dispute and report his or her findings I think the public would quickly side with Qantas staff.

JST pick up the ball and run with it I'm sure you wouldn't be disappointed.

[BP2197]

If we are going to preach the safety message how about some strong analytics to support the case. Surely an organisation such as the ALAEA can undertake an analysis of major incidents such as hull write offs where maintenance error is a leading contributor. This would be an irrefutable platform to go forward with and demonstrate the value of a Qantas LAME to the public.

Having absolutely no basis other than gut feel, I would suggest that the number of incidents is relatively small and would have significantly declined over the past decade, particularly if the statistic was made relative to the number of flights operated. I would put this down to the amazing redundency capabilities of modern aircraft rather than anything else.

ALAEA Fed Sec, I challenge you to commision such a piece of work and I will be very very happy for you to prove me wrong. Maybe the Centre for Asia Pacific Aviation could perform this as an independant thrid party.

[Slippery_Pete]

Hi JST.

While a lot of PPrune is people slagging off and getting things off their chest, what you also probably need to realise is that the motivation of QF staff discussing the current industrial situation is their jobs - their mortgages - their families. Perhaps if you drew a parallel between your own job (and the prospect of losing your job because someone in Asia will write articles for 20% less so your CEO gets a 70% payrise), you might understand why people are quick to anger and point fingers. Surely a good journalist can cut through the chaff and still pull out the absolute wealth of information on this site.

I also understand that controversy and popular news sells, and that's pretty much a core concept of any media business. I don't think there's anyone on here who doesn't understand that the success of the media rests solely on selling stories - in the same way that when it comes down to it, jobs in aviation are provided by bums on seats.

What we don't understand however, is that while you have admitted there are questions about QF managements behaviour, why is it that ALL of the mainstream media articles are geared pro-management/anti-union?

Why is this? Is it because union bashing is popular among the public? I can probably accept this is partly so - it appears from a lot of reader feedback that union bashing is a great past-time amongst the public.

But if I were a betting man, I would put the majority of my money on the fact that it comes down to laziness. It is a hell of a lot easier to essentially reprint Qantas press releases and print them as fact, than it is to actually do the research involved.

Let's consdier if, as you imply, the publishing of stories comes purely down to controversy and "news-worthiness". The so called "grounded" aircraft this last fortnight, were not grounded as a result of strike action. These aircraft had already previously been slated for retirement some time this year, and new replacement aircraft have already been in Australia and operating for months already. If you wrote an article about this, exposing Qantas' media stunt to discredit the unions and turn public opinion against staff (and entitled it "Qantas Lies and Bullying"), then surely it would sell papers. It would also actually be true, too.

On a parting note, most media people are left leaning, we don't have meetings with big brother to decide what to write to 'influence' the masses, lol.

So my proposed article "Qantas Lies and Bullying" above, if it were presented to Channel 7's Sunrise show (sponsored by Qantas), are you trying to tell me it would be run and not heavily edited or completely cut? I just don't believe otherwise, but I'm willing to listen if you can tell me otherwise.

I agree - the media have to sell news and make money, I just don't agree that reprinting QF press releases and PR spin is the only news which will sell papers. It is, however, the only news that will sell papers that doesn't require a scrap of effort or investigative journalism to produce.


but my opinion doesn't matter


It will matter if you get up and MAKE it matter.

[TIMA9X]

What we don't understand however, is that while you have admitted there are questions about QF managements behaviour, why is it that ALL of the mainstream media articles are geared pro-management/anti-union?
Slippery_Pete, fantastic post, your question is what has been bugging me for months. To be fair I have been encouraged by the quality of many stories from Fairfax as well.

by, JST, The ABC on the other hand... The ABC out of all the media outlets have looked at both sides of this current dispute with Qantas & the unions.

Let's consider if, as you imply, the publishing of stories comes purely down to controversy and "news-worthiness". The so called "grounded" aircraft this last fortnight, were not grounded as a result of strike action. These aircraft had already previously been slated for retirement some time this year, and new replacement aircraft have already been in Australia and operating for months already. If you wrote an article about this, exposing Qantas' media stunt to discredit the unions and turn public opinion against staff (and entitled it "Qantas Lies and Bullying"), then surely it would sell papers. It would also actually be true, too.
Says it all....

[breakfastburrito]

JST, here is a copy of a previous post (http://www.pprune.org/dg-p-general-aviation-questions/453331-australian-aviation-v-australian-media.html#post6488604) in June. The media has been co-opted by a combination of large "communications" resources available to powerful entities wishing to push their messages & overworked/under-resourced journalists.

Spinning the Media: Key findings in a week in the life of the media
by Wendy Bacon, Michelle Loh, Alex Taylor and Sasha Pavey

2203 separate stories were analysed across 10 newspapers between September 7 and 11, 2009 to see whether they were initiated by public relations or promotions.


The study found that nearly 55% of stories analysed were driven by some form of public relations — a media release, a public relations professional or some other form of promotion.


The 10 newspapers were the hard-copy editions of The Australian Financial Review, The Advertiser (Adelaide), The Courier-Mail (Brisbane), Daily Telegraph, Herald Sun, The Mercury (Hobart), The Australian, The Age, Sydney Morning Herald and The West Australian.


Sydney’s Daily Telegraph, which topped the week’s study with 70% of stories analysed triggered by public relations. Australian Centre for Independent Journalism student researchers identified media releases behind 44% of The Daily Telegraph’s stories analysed.


The least PR driven publication for this week was its competitor The Sydney Morning Herald with only 42% PR driven stories. Melbourne, the only other Australian city to have two metropolitan newspapers, followed a similar pattern: stories analysed in The Age were 47% public relations driven compared to 65% of The Herald Sun.


In this week, papers owned by News Ltd, which controls more than two-thirds of the Australian metropolitan print media market, were more PR driven than those owned by Fairfax Media.


Articles were identified across the Australian print media in which journalists put their by-line on stories that were republished press releases with little or no significant extra journalism work. Of 2203 articles, more than 500 or 24% had no significant extra perspective, source or content added by reporters.


News and feature stories were analysed across health, medicine, science, technology, business, politics, rural, arts, entertainment, environment and energy and motoring rounds. Different publications focus more heavily on different rounds so for this reason; we did not have the same number of articles in each round or across each publication.


The business and politics rounds had the lowest concentration of PR-driven journalism, with business coverage being half public relations driven (50%) and politics at more than one third at 37%. The lower figures for politics may be because more public relations activity happens behind the scenes through journalists’ relationships with politicians and their advisers and for that reason is harder to identify.


The highest levels of PR content were found in the innovation/technology (77%) and police (71%) rounds.


Other rounds were health/medicine/science (52%), education (63%), arts/entertainment (61.80%)



Spinning the Media: Key findings in a week in the life of the media (http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/03/15/spinning-the-media-key-findings-in-a-week-in-the-life-of-the-media/)

Coincidently I was listening to an interview with the head of thenational "Communications" association about this study. When asked about the 55%, he replied that he was surprised - if "media professionals" (AKA spin doctors) were doing their job properly & representing their clients interests he would have expected the number to be closer to 75%! He was disappointed!

[Going Nowhere]

Anyone would think BB and Kochie were long lost brothers... :suspect:

http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2011/10/22/1226173/973017-melissa-doyle-and-david-koch-hosts-of-channel-seven-breakfast-tv-show-039-sunrise-039-.jpg

http://resources0.news.com.au/images/2010/07/12/1225890/746368-bruce-buchanan.jpg

[denabol]

From tomorrow access to most of the News Limited newspapers will be pay for view.

This is the point where free sites like Business Spectator, Crikey, Plane Talking, Flight Global, and for that matter Pprune, become the default source of information for those that just find it inconvenient to renew their subscriptions to pay wall sites even if the fee is tiny.

The Age and Sydney Morning Herald sites are going pay as well soon like the Australian Financial Review. I think when it comes to getting the message to the public the whole game is now going to change big time.

Maybe it won't be a change for the good, but maybe it will see more information being sourced from people unaffected by advertising, since on line ads are dirt cheap and nobody is every going to make a living out of them.

But to use this situation to best advantage people who work for airlines are going to have to look carefully at how these changes play out, and change media tactics accordingly.

[DutchRoll]

On a parting note, most media people are left leaning....
Like some of the "mainstream" opinion columnists and editors out there?

Janet Albrechtsen? Andrew Bolt? Piers Akerman? Greg Sheridan? Dennis Shanahan? Left leaning? Chris Mitchell, Editor of The Australian? Left leaning? You are seriously not going to make me start pasting quotes and editorials up here from all of the above, are you? We may have to agree to disagree on which direction "left" actually is according to conventional wisdom! :eek: Some of the above appear to be aspiring to reach the levels of famed US personalities like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh.

You are certainly quite right in what you say about selling papers though. If it doesn't sell papers, it's often not considered newsworthy. You can get 5,000 people massacred in central Africa and nary a person raises an eyebrow (Yeah whatever. Who cares?), but when Brangelina are rumoured to be splitting, it's up on the TV news in the first 5 minutes (OMG did you hear about Brangelina? Is it true? :eek:).

As a Qantas employee and pilot, I'm personally quite frustrated on occasions by MSM reporting of the dispute. It appears that any nonsense sprouted by Olivia Wirth or released by her in a press release is quite uncritically and prominently reported in the MSM, even when it can be shown to be either false or flagrantly misleading. I don't really understand why you wouldn't make a simple phone call or two and take 10 minutes of your time to clear up any misconceptions. :confused:

The most prominent serial offenders newspaper-wise are News Ltd staples like the Daily Telegraph which harbours several of the more nuttier columnists and reporters seen in Australia, and The Australian whose editor is known to have a political inclination leaning prominently in one direction which he has previously made no secret of in certain exchanges with some of his own journalists. The SMH tends to mostly get its facts right on this dispute (which will unfortunately have me immediately accused of supporting a left-wing agenda) and journos like Ben Sandilands obviously get some very sharp inside information about the real goings on within Qantas.

BTW, in case you haven't noticed, threats and intimidation between Qantas and its employees do not occur on a one-way street. In fact Qantas has a long and proud tradition going back to the very start of the Dixon era of threatening its employees with mass layoffs and various other things if they don't accept pay freezes, etc. In day to day work, being threatened by a Manager is just ho-hum. I had a beauty from a Qantas HR Manager many years ago, in writing, alluding to termination of employment for breach of contract. Naturally he shot his mouth off before he had his facts straight and subsequently conceded it was a mistake when it was brought to the attention of the Qantas Chief Pilot, but I kept the letter for posterity. He has since been promoted to quite a senior management position, as you do in Qantas.

That's my take on it, anyway.

[Bigdog01]

Groundings - oop's retiring aircraft.
Going to be sold - 787 delayed -still required- didn't bother booking in maintenance due. Can't do it in Australia - due to closure heavy maintenance. Can't get it done overseas ( at the right price) didn't book it in.
Solution
- blame industrial action more newsworthy than the truth.(Management stuff up)

Call the Unions thugs and bullies - spin we are ready to go back to the table and negotiate but our position hasn't changed. No job security as we are moving off shore!

[QueenBuzzzzz]

JST, I take exception to 2 of your previous points :

our "cause is quite boring to the mainstream and not really newsworthy"... then why get involved at all? Why report ANYTHING to do with this dispute? Surely if OUR cause is boring then the WHOLE story is boring. Your point doesn't make sense.

then,

"mainstream opinion right now is that unions are holding Qantas to ransom"...well who's fault is it if that's what the main think? When you don't provide balanced reporting the main have no choice but to believe what is written.

And lastly, you have to remember that Qantas employs 35 000 workers. Say we each have 10 people in our immediate family and 10 close friends and 20 distant friends. I can guarantee you that there are at least 1 400 000 Australians that do find this mess newsworthy and who do want the full story.

By not providing, in detail, both sides of this story you are doing yourself an injustice as a journalist and by assuming the main don't care you are insulting Australian intelligence.

[airtags]

realities: nothing will happen to balance the stories until we all start pushing out the facts.

Worthless and even more dissapointing of late, Justin Kelly get away with spruiking lies and ignorance for their boss because today's journalists are largely weak.

Creedy has never written a truly analytical piece in his life and muppets like Geoffrey Thomas just parrot the company line because they know nothing else.

The inside Q story is one of huge stuff ups, poor management choices, and outright deception. Draw up a list - it's long and the losses are substantial. e.g. The current reconfig of the 744's is yet another chapter in this sad saga. In fact publish the list as the top 50 line items that the shareholders don't know about.

The story starts with the erosion of the safety management system under Joyce and ultimately it will end with a Coronial investigation. That's the reality and that's the story that needs to be told. Offshore underpaid, overworked and less experienced pilots will make mistakes. Inexperienced CC (who in reality get the pax off in an emergency) will also make mistakes. Serious mistakes means people die. it's that simple. Even the likes of Alan Milne stating re RR: "we didn't know there was a problem" - lies or incompetence - either way Q is damn lucky they did not have 451 funerals to send flowers to.

In between there are tens of millions of losses due to management stuff ups (the 330 3 abreast J class seats alone represent 14% of the alleged international loss).

Then add in all the other lies - last week 5 a/c grounded but they neglected to say that a new one arrived in YMML the very same night - what about the use of the Prime Minister's 737 as a spare parts resource and that failed Wx unit that caused the PM to divert a while back was actually a replacement taken from older QF a/c to replace the one taken previously - same for the VHF antenna that came off the PM's a/c to get a QF a/c back on line..(refer RAAF email to QF leaked to Fairfax last year) .....just like the 380's nil parts, nil time issue - it means a/c are increasingly running around with more and more defects.

Then there's the hand on heart promise stated in the Senate Inquiry that the 330's going to SIN are and WILL be AUS registered and crewed ....guess what rego is on them now.... all this to say nothing of the $83 million that was amortised across the QF Group to cover JQ's start up - I can't see the return in any report - actually the reporting while compliant, is deliberately designed to mask opex.

Team Clifford with Joyce at the helm are not listening to the terrain warnings - their spin is louder than the horns and apart from Purvinas we are all playing a gentlemans' game and letting them put our livlihoods and safety at risk.

QF closed out below 1.50 on Friday - the small number of intitutionals carry the power and they are hanging onto the belief that the grand plan will give the numbers some positive climb - This week therefore EVERYONE needs to raise the mismanagement issues with examples on talkback, blogs and online.

This is not about IR - it's about sound business sense and I'm quite sure that everyone from the cleaner to the captain can suggest at least 3 ways to save costs and improve efficiency. Getting rid of Joyce and Clifford's other patsies is a good start.

Oh when you do log on to read Creedy and Co - start giving the Oz some feedback as it is currently the weakest aviation section I have seen anywhere in world........ the lawyers pages are even more interesting!!

institutionals pls note: - back Joyce's bonus and I will make sure I encourage as many people as I know to ensure their investments, super etc goes nowhere those funds.

rant over
AT

[onetrack]

deanbol - Murdoch and those who have decided to charge for on-line viewing of their news have made a serious error of judgement, and are unable to grasp the fact that the Internet has made their "pay to read", financial model of newspapers, something that cannot be simply transferred to the Internet.

I will pay to read news on the 'Net from on-line major newspapers, when I find high quality journalism; well written, balanced articles; articles without serious errors such as sentences missing (indicating a total lack of simple proof-reading); articles that haven't been copied almost in their entirety from some other news source; and articles that have photos and videos related precisely to the story (i.e. - not "generic" pictures).

Until that time, I will source my news and views from the 10,000 other websites that give their information freely, and which information is then exchanged freely with others, to ensure wide dissemination.

The old days of newspapers ruling the world are behind you, Mr Murdoch. You are a dinosaur living in the 21st century, and your inability to adapt to our 21st Century methods of fast, personal, and widespread communication, without resort to paying for news, and the bias of your personal support for your favourite political parties and leanings, being included as part of the deal, are long gone.

[Daylight Robbery]

Requests for his assistance, assume 'JST' is actually capable of a readership and not just a lightweight who enjoys being contrary. I have a little trouble understanding the reason for his involvement in this forum....

[TIMA9X]

Qantas looked at farming out jobs smh 24/10/11

Confidential documents seen by the Herald reveal that Qantas managers have discussed plans to end its ground-handling operations by 2020. The talks were part of a range of options canvassed by managers about what shape the airline should take in the longer term.

The discussions included outsourcing to labour-hire companies the loading and unloading of aircraft. This would have thrown into jeopardy the jobs of as many as 2500 Qantas workers employed primarily as baggage and ramp handlers at airports around the country.

and,

But last night Qantas said it had ''absolutely no plans to outsource'' its ground-handling operations.


The corporate affairs chief, Olivia Wirth, said the company did consider a ''range of options across all areas of our business from time to time but that is not an option that is being considered or implemented''.
''Qantas doesn't use outsourcing.





Read more: Qantas looked at farming out jobs (http://www.smh.com.au/travel/qantas-looked-at-farming-out-jobs-20111023-1mel2.html#ixzz1bcFbuIN8)

Gentleman, note this story emerges early Monday morning (a well worn tactic used by the Q PR machine) on the week of the AGM. OW spins it to say "Qantas doesn't use outsourcing." (full stop) Joe punter after reading that would fall for it hook line and sinker.

We all know this is a half truth at best! Qantas group also includes J* who definitely outsource. For all of us we know she is spinning a yarn to appease the TWU on the week leading up to the AGM. She is sending out the message that Qantas all of a sudden, are willing to talk to the TWU, but I believe only until the AGM is out of the way. I don't believe the management are serious at all considering their track record.

My point is, if we are to get the message across the the public, we need a astute union media operator burning the candle Sunday night/early Monday morning waiting for a story like this, to counter the spin.

On this story, reading between the lines, I see a journalist taking the time to read a document he received from Qantas or a third party claiming that the management were / still are looking very seriously at making redundant 2500 staff.

My first thought after reading this story.. Is this figure 2500 on top of the already announced 1000 job cuts?

I sense Matt O'sullivan the writer of this piece (by far one of the more balanced journalist reporting on the current Qantas/union situation) would be glad to hear other points of views to expand this story. Sadly throughout this Qantas campaign the unions have been too slow to react or challenge the spin from the Qantas spin machine.

The journalist moves on because he has to meet his media outlet's deadlines hence the story gets lost. The unions spend the rest of the week playing catch up to get their counter punches in on the story that started early Monday morning, by then it's Friday, the weekend comes and goes, the cycle starts all over again.

As this is AGM week, AJ and OW will be looking for every opportunity to get get their version of positive spin in, trust our side of the fence can be slick with the counter spin that would make the AGM very uncomfortable for the Q managers this coming Friday.

[DasTrash]

Qantas doesn't use outsourcing.


Today I am pleased to advise you that Qantas has extended our Master Operating Agreement with Cobham Airline Services for a further six years. Cobham will continue operating the B717s until the expiry of the aircraft leases in 2018. The new operating agreement covers all thirteen B717s, including the two additional Brisbane-based aircraft that we recently announced will be joining our fleet in early 2012. Narendra Kumar
Executive Manager
Qantas Regional Airlines Group


Nope, no outsourcing going on here.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Qantas doesn't use outsourcing.



RB211's, CFM's in fact all engines are outsourced.
Most component maintenance.
767 now in Sin.
737's returned recently form o'seas.
380 now in LHT Frankfurt.
The entire Avalon AME workforce and many LAMEs outsourced to Forstaff.

They just blatantly lie to the public. Isn't there something in the Qantas policies about honesty, integrity and ethics?

[Sunfish]

Honesty, integrity and ethics? Those were discarded when management bonuses were introduced. Never get between a Yuppy and a pile of money.

[adsyj]

Steve

You would think that as a public company they would be bound by some rules regarding public statements which may affect the share price.

I am astounded that they their blatant lies to the public continually go unchecked. If Qantas can get away with it god knows how many other companies are doing it. In my view the whole Qantas PR message is tantamount to some form of corporate fraud. Shouldn't the executive be doing everything thay can to talk up the company and thereby providing some momentum to the shareprice.

As has been mentioned here before these bastards are playing a different game to us. They are about destruction and dismantling Qantas as we know it. At what point will they have to declare the true plan to the shareholders.

It continues to be ****ty times. Over the weekend friends I was with have totally fallen for the Qantas lies and are regurgitating how overpaid and underworked I am as a pilot. Very frustrating:ugh:

Still one hopes that eventually the truth will come out and AJ and his mates will be called to account. I hope so anyway

[h.o.t.a.s.]

Speaking of Lies, and outsourcing for that matter, from the Keep Qantas flying website:

'Qantas-operated flights are flown by Qantas pilots.
All Qantas-operated flights are flown by Qantas pilots.

This includes every Qantas domestic flight and every Qantas international flight.

Union claims to the contrary are incorrect and misleading.'



Erm... Jetconnect, Express Freighters Australia, Atlas, and ATA. Just FOUR organisations that operate International and Domestic Qantas flights without Qantas pilots. Not codeshares, but actual Qantas Flights with Qantas flight numbers :hmm:

[compressor stall]

h.o.t.a.s - The statement is deliberately ambiguous.

By using the word "operated" they appear to have chosen to mean by mainline staff. i.e. "qantas operated" means QF flights crewed mainline staff (as opposed to Jitconnect, Cobham etc).

Thus, they can then "truthfully" claim that every (dom/intl) flight with Qantas pilots on board is crewed by Qantas pilots. Given the aforementioned premise this statement is not incorrect.

[h.o.t.a.s.]

Yep, you're right, and the ambiguity wont be questioned by journalists, or the general public, who will think that it applies to their Jetconnect flight across the ditch (which is the obvious intent).
It can be added to the list of half truths and blatant lies that have been permeating the 30 second grabs throughout the media. These are the ones that do alot of damage, get published unquestioned and, disappointingly, usually end up unanswered by opposing voices.

I may have missed it but personally I haven't seen, or at least can't cite an example of the Employees side using this tactic.

No matter how much of a low blow it is, you can't deny its effectiveness, and the unions/employees don't seem to be winning any friends by playing fair!

[Roo]

Yeah transpose the word operated for branded and it becomes a lie..

'Qantas-branded flights are flown by Qantas pilots.
All Qantas-branded flights are flown by Qantas pilots.'

Surreptitiously passing off QF Branded as QF Operated goes to the very heart of this issue.

[whatever6719]

Thats perfect!! Roo's post above is able to elegantly neutralise QF's spin on
Qantas pilots always crew Qantas operated flights.

If the term BRANDED was emphasised in negotiations, and to counter what Wirth is saying, they are left with egg on their face.

[simsalabim]

For a classic example of what we are up against in the unwinable battle for truth in journalism , have a look at this piece of Union bashing rubbish published today in the SMH.

Loyalty no longer its own reward

Paul Sheehan:

Sydney Morning Herald columnist


October 24, 2011 Opinion



Read more: Loyalty no longer its own reward (http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/loyalty-no-longer-its-own-reward-20111023-1meb0.html#ixzz1bgvgSSTL)


I will get the ball rolling in pulling this story apart by referring to the first two paragraphs:

Almost a year ago I flew Qantas internationally. Mistake. The aircraft was old, the entertainment system completely non-functional, and the steward in my section was perfunctory (the adventure had died for him years before). When I pushed my seat back for sleep, it barely moved. There was nothing faulty about the seat. It's what you get on Qantas economy long-haul. A stiff neck and a zombie arrival.

I might have treated this as an aberration, a hazard of travelling long-haul economy class, but the experience turned out to be the beginning of the end of my years of loyalty to Qantas. It has since become obvious that Qantas staff, from the pilots down, regard passengers with contempt. Every time they are in dispute with management over pay and conditions, Qantas customers are used as cannon fodder.

Sheehan's grievences are valid . However he should look no further than QF Management (as opposed to QF staff) being responsible for the following

1)The old aircraft 2) The crap Rockwell Collins IFE bought on the cheap 3)The steward perfunctory , the "adventure had died long ago" Why wouldn't it have died ? having to continually apologise to livid customers for 1) and 2)
4) The seat barely moving

Yet this is according to Sheehan a problem caused by Qantas staff ! What a laugh ! My sides are splitting!
The article illustrates perfectly the Big End of town being looked after by their cohorts in the media.

[simsalabim]

The long-haul A380 pilots are among the best paid in the industry.
According to Qantas they earn 50 per cent more than their peers at Virgin Australia and competing Asian carriers. The pilots are taking industrial action because they want their pay and conditions extended to Jetstar pilots.

Read more: Loyalty no longer its own reward (http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/loyalty-no-longer-its-own-reward-20111023-1meb0.html#ixzz1bh4ZK4MM)


Sheehan now compares QF A380 pilot pay with Virgins. Only one problem . Virgin don't fly A380 's . Hmmmmmm .......not really a fair comparison but what the heck.When the agenda is to bust the unions on behalf of the Big Boy's Corporate Club why worry about valid comparisons. Waste of time really.

[paulg]

Here is a summary by Bernard Keane on Crikey.com:

Essential: Qantas management to blame for dispute | Crikey (http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/10/24/essential-meh-on-the-republic-but-fired-up-about-qantas/)

Crikey.com Monday 24 October 2011

Essential: meh on the republic, but fired up about Qantas
by Bernard Keane
Voters think Qantas management is mainly to blame for its ongoing dispute with its workforce but don’t support government intervention to resolve it, new Essential Research polling finds. And views on a republic haven’t budged in nearly two years.

Last week Essential asked several questions about voter views of Qantas and its dispute. Around 36% of voters believed Qantas management was to blame for the dispute, compared to 13% who blamed Qantas staff and 37% who said both were equally to blame. Even more Liberal voters blamed Qantas management, 25%, than staff, 22%. Only 24% supported government intervention in the dispute, with 62% supporting Qantas and the unions negotiating a settlement, a view that was remarkably consistent across different voters.

Asked to respond to a series of statements about Qantas, only 21% agreed moving operations to Asia was necessary for Qantas’s future and 61% disagreed; 30% strongly. Almost 90% agreed Qantas should keep jobs in Australia (51% strongly); 73% agreed much-loathed CEO Alan Joyce is overpaid (compared to 20% who thought Qantas staff were overpaid), and 67% agreed Qantas staff had genuine concerns that management should address.

The only positive for Qantas management was that 54% agreed that industrial action was “irresponsible and disruptive”, compared to 31% who disagreed. But on what caused more damage to Qantas’s reputation, industrial action or moving jobs offshore, 62% agreed the latter and only 27% the former.



How can we get this reported in the main stream media?

[ejectx3]

Surprisingly it's on news.com.au

[QF94]

Just getting off topic a little bit, but within what's happening. Here's a SMH article about the sale of QF aircraft from back in April of this year. I don't know if it's been posted elsewhere, but here it is anyway.

Fleet for sale as Qantas cuts flights (http://www.smh.com.au/business/fleet-for-sale-as-qantas-cuts-flights-20110403-1ct74.html)

Here's just a snippet of the article:

"Qantas has also put on the block a two-decade-old Boeing 767-300, which it has described as ideal for conversion to a freight aircraft. That sale is in addition to the earlier-than-planned retirement of two other 767s announced by Qantas last week.
Facing what it described as the ''severest crisis'' since the global financial downturn in 2008, Qantas last week stepped up its cost-cutting efforts to combat high jet fuel prices. The measures include axing managers and cutting domestic and international flights."

This article is from April 4 2011. Alan Milne doesn't need to look at his fleet record to see wich regos are going to be sold. All the classic 737's are being put against the fence as well as the 767's.

These items need to be brought up at the AGM this Friday and made public once again. This regimeneeds to be brought to account and made to step dwn for the mistruths and deceit they are spreading.

[TIMA9X]

People don't trust Qantas team: survey (http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/people-dont-trust-qantas-team-survey-20111024-1mgat.html)
People don't trust Qantas team: survey

October 24, 2011 - 8:39PM

AAP
Australians don't trust Qantas management or their plan to outsource jobs offshore, a survey has found.
The National Essential Report poll shows overwhelming dissatisfaction with the Alan Joyce-led management team at Qantas and their proposed strategy for the airline.
About 67 per cent of those surveyed agreed that Qantas workers have legitimate concerns, while just 13 per cent disagree.


The poll was conducted between October 19 and 23, based on 1017 respondents.


nice counter punch from Captain Woodward



"Alan Joyce and his team have spent tens of millions of dollars trying to convince the public that shifting the airline to South-East Asia is necessary and that Qantas workers are somehow trying to destroy the company," Captain Woodward said.

and


A Qantas spokeswoman said the polling was a union attempt to damage the airline.
"This is more push polling being used by the unions to deliberately damage the Qantas brand as part of their industrial campaign," she told AAP.
This time Qantas PR are playing catch up...
Sounds like they are getting desperate back in the Q PR bunker..

Good work guys... the week is really hotting up and it's still Monday...just...

[manfred]

An expanded view of the aforementioned survey:

Qantas in PR tail spin - The Drum Opinion - Qantas is allegedly winning the PR war against the unions, but the verdict of this week's Essential Report shows otherwise. (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/3597954.html)