More concerns for QF staff

[skybed]

QF seeks rights variations
QANTAS is requesting changes to capacity determinations on a number of international routes, seeking variations which will enable the capacity to also be used “by any wholly-owned subsidiary” of the carrier. The International Air Services Commission yesterday published the requests, relating to the renewal of determinations which expire during 2012.
Affected routes include flights to Germany, Hong Kong, Thailand, and the Philippines, with Qantas in each case requesting renewals of current capacity allocations but with the modifications asking for the ability to operate using an offshoot airline. The move is intriguing given the previously announced plans for QF’s new Asian-based premium
airline, along with the expected rapid expansion of Jetstar International once it begins toreceive its long-awaited 787s.
:{:ugh:

[busdriver007]

lucky Jetstar Asia and Red Q are not "wholly owned"......they can't be....

[schlong hauler]

Why have the clause "wholly owned subsidiary" if there is no scope for another entity under the Qantas sale act? How do they get around this one in the future?
Wait and see i guess.

[manfred]

On the QF website it refers to Jetstar Australia as a "wholly owned subsidary", but only having a 49% stake in Jetstar Asia. Isn't this because local Singaporean law dictates a local carrier must be majority owned by Singaporeans?

Wouldn't this apply to RedQ and therefore how will a partial owned subsidary be able to use this variation that has been applied to the IASC?

[skybed]

this would be a good idea for AIPA/ALEA/TWU etc. to ask an aviation QC for an informed opinion.:confused:

[Taildragger67]

Wholly-owned sub (which holds the capacity rights) buys space on aircraft owned by partially-owned sub.

Looks to me not far off how the SIN-AKL flights are run - 3K (Jetstar Asia) number on a JQ-operated, VH- airframe.

So you'll have JQ-nnn being flown on a 9V- / 9M- airframe SYD-Asia-FRA.

[NewPiper]

We all know its only a matter of time before Jetstar gets its first A380 (most likely one of the now delayed QF A380's) and there will be nothing AIPA can do about it. If AIPA and other unions continue to strike, that will only assist in speeding up the arrival of Jetstar's inaugural A380 flight.

NP

[Short_Circuit]

AJ openly stated that the next 6 A380 deliveries would be put back (in AJ speak that meas) Jet* probably will take up the option of those A380's and fly then in Europe. Simple as that :ugh:.

[Redstone]

Great, 600 bogans on one aeroplane. I'm sure the great unwashed can't wait. Choice!

[ohallen]

Yes but can you see the profits that will flow from coffee and muffin sales.

The real issue is when they destroy Qantas, where will they stick all the costs to make it profitable?????

[C441]

If AIPA and other unions continue to strike, that will only assist in speeding up the arrival of Jetstar's inaugural A380 flight.

I hate to burst your bubble New Piper, but AIPA (or more accurately Qantas longhaul pilots) have not been on strike since 1966 and have not even had so much as a 30 second stop work meeting, let alone strike action, in the current dispute. ;)

However, if Qantas Group management have decided to employ the A380 through Jetstar or any other non-mainline entity, there's only one thing that will stop them... and that process may start on October 28th.

[jaded boiler]

NewPiper, you mention AIPA continuing to strike, can you name the first, or any subsequent occasions on which they have conducted an actual strike?

[outside limits]

Sorry to spoil such a good story, but Bruce was offered the 6 A380's but declined. He does not want them. Good story anyway.

[Redstone]

When it comes to the boards final solution, I doubt weather Bruce gets much of a choice in anything.

[Xcel]

Wouldn't matter what Bruce said... At the end of the day he is just a puppet... And a muppet ;)

[RATpin]

Xcel,thanks for the laugh.

[ACT Crusader]

C441 and jaded boiler, just for the sake of completeness, I am certain that one LH pilot took a one hour stoppage ('strike') earlier this year, basically to keep the work stoppage option alive past the 30 day period to commence PIA.

manfred - your premise is correct. When J* Asia was established about 7 years ago, the Singapore Govt had a shareholding and a couple of other singaporean buinesses to bring it to 51%.

[fatmike]

AIPA (or more accurately Qantas longhaul pilots) have not been on strike since 1966 and have not even had so much as a 30 second stop work meeting, let alone strike action, in the current dispute.

Crusader is correct. The President had 2 stop work meetings with himself before he flew from London to Singapore.

[PPRuNeUser0198]

Flew internationally the other day.

The FO did the AIPA PA.

Mentioned the following:

"Unlike the other unions , Qantas pilots are not taking industrial action, hence why we are making these P.A.'s".

I thought by wearing red ties and/or making PA's, you are taking a form of industrial action?

[Dixons Millions]

For those who have not seen the QF request of variation of rights, here is the link...

Leaving Facebook... | Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.iasc.gov.au%2Fapplications%2Ffiles% 2F4663.pdf&h=fAQHeUhS3)

[Roo]

T-Vasis I suspect your recollection of the announcement is incorrect.

The FO did the AIPA PA.

"Unlike the other unions , Qantas pilots are not taking industrial action, hence why we are making these P.A.'s".

Far more likely he said this which is similar but slightly different...
"We're Doing everything possible to avoid carrying out any work stoppages, which is why we're currently making these announcements."

IMO, highly unlikely he would have made any mention of "other unions" given that AIPAs beef is with Management.

Given you recall something other than the intent of the announcement, the message did not get across very well! YES, AIPA members are carrying out a form of protected industrial action and no one is denying this. Perhaps the announcements are too long and need to to be simplified to the key points?



Qantas Pilots dedicate their careers to looking after Qantas passengers
Keep Qantas pilots flying Qantas aeroplanes.
Learn more at the Qantas Pilots website (http://www.qantaspilots.com)

[PPRuNeUser0198]

Roo

He definitely made mention of the unions as that stuck in my mind.

On the two flights I did (up and back), the PA seems to be quite a variation to the script. Both were considerably different and they way they were spoken, it would appear they were being thought of as they were speaking, with some of the script thrown in, as I recognised some of the wording. It came across long-winded and a little tardy.

Just for note - any QF380 drivers out there; check your mic's. On the four 380 flights I have done, the flight decks PA's have been deafening. Extremely loud. Especially with headphones on. CSM PA's were fine.

[Ngineer]

I thought by wearing red ties and/or making PA's, you are taking a form of industrial action?

Maybe a wearing green tie, or one with a shamrock??

[NewPiper]

C441 & Jaded Boiler,

For simplicity, just insert the letters PIA where I have used the word 'strike'.

NP

[Jock p]

This confirms what others have been saying for a while about how Qantas is subsidising Jetstar to its own detriment and to circumvent the Qantas Sale Act.
For those who haven't seen it, Senator Xenophon's speech of 23rd Aug is reproduced below.

Senator XENOPHON (South Australia) (19:37): I rise to speak tonight on an issue that is close to the hearts of many Australians, and that is the future of our national carrier, Qantas. At 90, Qantas is the world's oldest continuously running airline. It is an iconic Australian company. Its story is woven into the story of Australia and Australians have long taken pride in the service and safety standards provided by our national carrier. Who didn't feel a little proud when Dustin Hoffman uttered the immortal line in Rain Man, 'Qantas never crashed'?

While it is true that Qantas never crashes, the sad reality is that Qantas is being deliberately trashed by management in the pursuit of short-term profits and at the expense of its workers and passengers. For a long time, Qantas management has been pushing the line that Qantas international is losing money and that Jetstar is profitable. Tonight, it is imperative to expose those claims for the misinformation they are. The reality is that Qantas has long been used to subsidise Jetstar in order to make Jetstar look profitable and Qantas look like a burden. In a moment, I will provide detailed allegations of cost-shifting that I have sourced from within the Qantas Group, and when you know the facts you quickly see a pattern. When there is a cost to be paid, Qantas pays it, and when there is a profit to be made, Jetstar makes it.

But first we need to ask ourselves: why? Why would management want Qantas to look unprofitable? Why would they want to hide the cost of a competing brand within their group, namely Jetstar, in amongst the costs faced by Qantas?

To understand that, you need to go back to the days when Qantas was being privatised. When Qantas was privatised the Qantas Sale Act 1992 imposed a number of conditions, which in turn created a number of problems for any management group that wanted to flog off parts of the business. Basically, Qantas has to maintain its principal place of operations here in Australia, but that does not stop management selling any subsidiaries, which brings us to Jetstar.

Qantas has systematically built up the low-cost carrier at the expense of the parent company. I have been provided with a significant number of examples where costs which should have been billed back to Jetstar have in fact been paid for by Qantas. These are practices that I believe Qantas and Jetstar management need to explain. For example, when Jetstar took over the Cairns-Darwin-Singapore route, replacing Qantas flights, a deal was struck that required Qantas to provide Jetstar with $6 million a year in revenue. Why? Why would one part of the business give up a profitable route like that and then be asked to pay for the privilege? Then there are other subsidies when it comes to freight. On every sector Jetstar operates an A330, Qantas pays $6,200 to $6,400 for freight space regardless of actual uplift. When you do the calculations, this turns out to be a small fortune. Based on 82 departures a week, that is nearly half-a-million dollars a week or $25½ million a year.

Then there are the arrangements within the airport gates. In Melbourne, for example, my information from inside the Qantas group is that Jetstar does not pay for any gates, but instead Qantas domestic is charged for the gates. My question for Qantas management is simple: are these arrangements replicated right around Australia and why is Qantas paying Jetstar's bills? Why does Qantas lease five check-in counters at Sydney Terminal 2, only to let Jetstar use one for free? It has been reported to me that there are other areas where Jetstar's costs magically become Qantas's costs. For example, Jetstar does not have a treasury department and has only one person in government affairs. I am told Qantas's legal department also does free work for Jetstar.

Then there is the area of disruption handling where flights are cancelled and people need to be rebooked. Here, insiders tell me, Qantas handles all rebookings and the traffic is all one way. It is extremely rare for a Qantas passenger to be rebooked on a Jetstar flight, but Jetstar passengers are regularly rebooked onto Qantas flights. I am informed that Jetstar never pays Qantas for the cost of those rebooked passengers and yet Jetstar gets to keep the revenue from the original bookings. This, I am told, is worth millions of dollars every year. So Jetstar gets the profit while Qantas bears the costs of carriage. It has also been reported to me that when Qantas provides an aircraft to Jetstar to cover an unserviceable plane, Jetstar does not pay for the use of this plane.

Yet another example relates to the Qantas Club. Jetstar passengers can and do use the Qantas Club but Jetstar does not pay for the cost of any of this. So is Qantas really losing money? Or is it profitable but simply losing money on paper because it is carrying so many costs incurred by Jetstar? We have been told by Qantas management that the changes that will effectively gut Qantas are necessary because Qantas international is losing money but, given the inside information I have just detailed, I would argue those claims need to be reassessed.

Indeed, given these extensive allegations of hidden costs, it would be foolish to take management's word that Qantas international is losing money. So why would Qantas want to make it look like Qantas international is losing money? Remember the failed 2007 private equity bid by the Allco Finance Group. It was rejected by shareholders, and thank goodness it was, for I am told that what we are seeing now is effectively a strategy of private equity sell-off by stealth.

Here is how it works. You have to keep Qantas flying to avoid breaching the Qantas Sale Act but that does not stop you from moving assets out of Qantas and putting them into an airline that you own but that is not controlled by the Qantas Sale Act. Then you work the figures to make it appear as though the international arm of Qantas is losing money. You use this to justify the slashing of jobs, maintenance standards and employment of foreign crews and, ultimately, the creation of an entirely new airlines to be based in Asia and which will not be called Qantas. The end result? Technically Qantas would still exist but it would end up a shell of its former self and the Qantas Group would end up with all these subsidiaries it can base overseas using poorly paid foreign crews with engineering and safety standards that do not match Australian standards. In time, if the Qantas Group wants to make a buck, they can flog these subsidiaries off for a tidy profit. Qantas management could pay the National Boys Choir and the Australian Girls’ Choir to run to the desert and sing about still calling Australia home, but people would not buy it. It is not just about feeling good about our national carrier—in times of trouble our national carrier plays a key strategic role. In an international emergency, in a time of war, a national carrier is required to freight resources and people around the country and around the world. Qantas also operates Qantas Defence Services, which conducts work for the RAAF. If Qantas is allowed to wither, who will meet these strategic needs?

I pay tribute to the 35,000 employees of the Qantas Group. At the forefront of the fight against the strategy of Qantas management have been the Qantas pilots, to whom millions of Australians have literally entrusted their lives. The Australian and International Pilots Association sees Qantas management strategy as a race to the bottom when it comes to service and safety. On 8 November last year, QF32 experienced a serious malfunction with the explosion of an engine on an A380 aircraft. In the wrong hands, that plane could have crashed. But it did not, in large part because the Qantas flight crew had been trained to exemplary world-class standards and knew how to cope with such a terrifying reality. I am deeply concerned that what is being pursued may well cause training levels to fall and that as a result safety standards in the Qantas Group may fall as well. AIPA pilots and the licensed aircraft engineers are not fighting for themselves; they are fighting for the Australian public. That is why I am deeply concerned about any action Qantas management may be considering taking against pilots who speak out in the public interest.

A lot of claims have been made about the financial state of Qantas international but given the information I have presented tonight, which has come from within the Qantas Group, I believe these claims by management are crying out for further serious forensic investigation. Qantas should not be allowed to face death by a thousand cuts—job cuts, route cuts, quality cuts, engineering cuts, wage cuts. None of this is acceptable and it must all be resisted for the sake of the pilots, the crews, the passengers and ultimately the future of our national carrier.

[Mud Skipper]

Jock p,

As your post indicates, it's been two months since Senator Xenophon made this speech and it seems to have raised little if any attention in the general public as media will not report it and politicians on both sides appear complicit with the game plan of Dixon and Joyce.

Alternately, not wanting to fall into the boards hands, I do wonder if a full on strike is the only way to highlight the airlines plight however we can't allow any action to be entwined with the baggage handlers strikes as this would muddy the waters.
Lamentably it's possibly illegal to take action as a result of anything contained in this speech as it would not pertain to our EBA.

Perhaps we should have a "Occupy" event of our own at the annual meeting!

All off duty Pilots to attend in red ties, literally lined up rank and file:E

[Baxter Dewall]

Paxed the other day and the PA was given as the a/c shutdown at the gate waiting for the bridge. The seat belt sign went out, and as usual the madding crowd went nuts to get their belongings.

The PA was barely audible and the majority of punters near me were not even listening or worse still, didn't give a r@ts @rse about it. A few even said words along the lines of "...... these people are drawing a long bow if they think that they are the only ones that can operate an aeroplane safely. They need to get out a bit more"

Their words; not mine.