QF Solution on Offer

[WoodenEye]

According to this weekend’s AFR QAN’s YTD performance is down 41.14% and is a ‘break up play’.. With a price to earnings ratio of just 7 times, it is little wonder that analysts have run the numbers on a breakdown of Qantas’ assets. Hmmm! spinning off Jetstar is one thing - but selling the frequent flyer programme is something else altogether.

Right now a strong Australian Dollar and continuing industrial action is keeping potential buyers at bay, but it won’t be this way forever. QAN’s billon dollar cash holdings and cheap valuation will become increasingly attractive to Private Equity if the Chinese economy cools and our resources backed $ depreciates accordingly.

If the workforce doesn’t have a seat at the table when the next Bid happens, expect that what is being proposed by AJ will seem relatively sanguine.

Right now, personaly believe that an employee backed bid by Australian led investors is a solution on offer.

Hopefully it is something the Aviation Unions are also on to.

[QF94]

It works for South West in the US.

[1a sound asleep]

I posted this earlier.

So how can the unions fight? In all honestly I believe this is a no win situation the way it is being fought. I have said it all along and will say it again - BUY THE COMPANY.

Qantas has about 33,000 employees. Market Cap ($M):3,364 Equiv. Shares (M): 2,265. Share price Average $1.50.

Through the union, set up a super fund which invests in qantas, and redirect other super funds into Qantas shares. The entire value of Qantas equates to $101,000 per employee. I know many employees that would be capable of buying that level of shares.

With redirected superannuation I calculate that approximately $30,000 per employee and we would have control of the company.

AS for SQ and EK. Different animals. SQ competes on service. EK competes because (a) it pays the majority of its staff absolutely peanuts in Dubai Pesos under some of the worst non-union protection (b) EK buys a lot of its fuel and a substantially lower price (c) EK has low interest Government funding/loans (d) IT pays no tax (including income tax/GST/Carbon Tax/payroll tax). Reality is EK is a glossed up LCC. Sat in a EK 777 with 10 across seating?

Qantas will NEVER be able to compete with Emirates. This is not QF's fault.
Qantas must compete by offering a better route network and yes maybe joint ventures are the way to go WITHOUT killing off Australian jobs

Unless everybody buys some Qantas shares (AND TAKES CONTROL) this rott at the top will continue to fester. Each and every Qantas employee could use margin loans to buy $30,000 of QAN shares. This would mean a cash investment of $9000 per head, on average. (Loans available at 70% of share price) With redirection of super funds into QAN shares we would take control

Wake up. I have been preaching this for ages and I wonder if Qantas employees really believe in Qantas and are as passionate as they pretend.
I am advocating investment, not donation. This is a tax effective, deductible investment that will save Qantas and ultimately be a profit making excercise

[QF94]

So how can the unions fight? In all honestly I believe this is a no win situation the way it is being fought. I have said it all along and will say it again - BUY THE COMPANY.


This is a fight with no winners. Both sides are going to come out badly bruised and battered while the name QANTAS becomes a festering mess that no one will go within cooee of.

Qantas will NEVER be able to compete with Emirates. This is not QF's fault.
Qantas must compete by offering a better route network and yes maybe joint ventures are the way to go WITHOUT killing off Australian jobs

QANTAS is reducing its own network (both internationally and domestically) to make way for JQ. I haven't seen a QF ad on TV or the paper in a long time advertising its services and networks with the choir singing in the background. The only ads QF have are full page advertisements in the paper bashing the "rogue unions", building a stronger QANTAS etc etc. Meanwhile JQ has TV advertisements and newspaper advertisements. I've even noticed lately on the side of JQ aircraft that the wording "A QANTAS Group Airline" down the side has been replaced by "All day, every day, low fares".

Even JQ is ridding itself of the QANTAS name.

Wake up. I have been preaching this for ages and I wonder if Qantas employees really believe in Qantas and are as passionate as they pretend.
I am advocating investment, not donation.

Employees believe in QANTAS gone by. Not so much the current QF. It's been many years of constant conflict with the management undermining its own staff and keeping them under constant threat. Everyone is tired and just want to get on with what they're employed to do. No matter who you talk to, it is the same topic of discussion and everyone is just fed up.

Anyway, if all employees were to take up arms and buy an allotted amount of shares, who would be appointed as the management team to run QF? I could imagine the fighting over who is going to take control. Will it be the pilots? Engineers? Cabin crew? Cleaners? Check-in? Would it be a rotating term of managment?

It all sounds great, but I have seen how people within a crew carry on with one another. Imagine it at an upper level like running the company.

[packrat]

Trying to organize 30000 people to buy out Qantas would be a logistical nightmare.There are 16 unions .They would all need to be on the same page for this to work.A lot of Egos to deal with

[Checkboard]

Through the union, set up a super fund which invests in qantas, and redirect other super funds into Qantas shares.

What a great idea! :hmm: Ignoring the requirements under the Superannation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 on investments in the shares and property of employer sponsors of funds, having ALL of your Super invested in the future of your current employer is a great, "No Risk" solution! :ugh:

[NewPiper]

1a,

I think you are dreaming if you think employees will be able to buy the company or enough shares to control the company at the current market cap. Where do you think the shares are gonna come from? Most people holding Qantas stock now are losing money and I doubt they would sell for anything under $2.50ish. A successful bid would need to be pitched at the $3 to $3.50 range IMO. You can have my shares for $2.80 a piece!

[1a sound asleep]

Theres no reason the right structure wouldn't comply with the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act

$2.80 a share? :ugh:what you want an instant almost 100% profit, talk about greedy.:mad:

As I illustrated earlier nothing to stop individual employees using margin loans to buy QAN shares. Sure the share price will rise and that will mean an instant profit for those that got in at $1.47.

All too hard? Yeah it is for most who want to sit back and hope it will all get better. Well it wont happen like that I am afraid.

You have to accept that the desire to smash apart the unions and break up the airline into bits comes from the board. And the board is only controlled by the shareholders. If you have no shares you have no say.

A huge group of united employees with shares could easily force control:ok:

[WoodenEye]

In no particular order, please consider the following clarifications to the above posts:

· Any employee backed shareholding strategy doesn’t need to acquire 100% of QAN to change the strategy management are presently pursuing, but preventing the set up of ‘Fantasia’ and halting the demise of Qantas International would need to be accepted as central to any new business plan,
· Employee shareholders would not assume responsibility for the role of management and running QF. That said, employee shareholders with a substantial holding can probably get appointed Director Representatives who could then partner with other aligned Directors to develop alternative strategy and policy. I.e. it would still fall to Management and the Unions to agree enterprise changes acceptable to both the ‘New Owners’ and the Workforce,
· A quick look at other takeover bids suggests that the prevailing share price jumps by around 50% when a bid is formally announced,
· Not only does it work for South West, more importantly, it would facilitate an overarching strategy with the potential to unite, Government, Shareholders & Staff. Without it, agree with the sentiment that a no win outcome is all but certain for all involved.

Doesn’t really matter if such an initiative is commenced by enlighten management, troubled shareholders or concerned staff, as ultimately all will need to support it if Qantas is to be turned around and a new course charted.

[NewPiper]

1a,

$2.80 per share may be an instant 100% profit for some, but not me mate. I have been a large shareholder for years (not just a token amount of shares like some of these crazy employees who actually think they should control the company) and participated in all capital raisings, so I'd be happy to just get my money back mate because its people like me that have funded this business that has kept people like you employed for years. Some of your colleagues on this forum even call airline investors 'morons' would you believe! The only morons around here are the vandals associated with these unions destroying their own jobs. Answer my question, where do you reckon most of these invisible shares are going to come from in this proposed takeover bid by employees without paying a big premium? **The book value as at Jun 2011 is $2.67. Qantas carry's its fleet of aircraft and engines at about $10b. The real value of their fleet is closer to $5b. If we say $2b of the $10b is engines, then QF are probably carrying $2-3b more in aircraft value Vs real commercial value on their balance sheet or around $1.30 per share. So the adjusted book value ought to be more like $1.40 per share PLUS the frequent flyer business.

Therefore you can forget your pipe dream plan of gaining control at these levels!

NP

**Numbers published by Macquarie Private Wealth.

[Crossing Guard]

As we all know Macquarie Bank are never wrong about anything and everything.Warren Buffett has often said that airlines are a poor investment.There are those that believe that unions are responsible for Qantas' woes.Unions are not responsible for the purchase of aircraft or the development of a network or the cost of borrowings.In fact unions make no managerial decisions whatsoever.The only cost that unions seek to influence is the cost of labour.The cost of fuel and the purchase cost of aircraft are outside their jurisdiction.
The total cost of labour for the Qantas business is 16% and has been declining for the last 10 years.
The wages bill for the Qantas Exco and the board are substantial and much higher than a comparable size airline.
The trouble at Qantas has its roots in the merger with Australian and the subsequent loss of operational expertise.Many of the executives now running Qantas were at the helm of Ansett when it folded .They are now weaving their magic at Qantas.One only has to look at Virgin and its accomplishment of the last 12 months to recognize the ability of a very competent CEO.
If John Borghetti was running Qantas it would not be in the mess that it now finds itself.
Scapegoating the unions for management incompetence is the oldest cliched spin on the planet.There are still those naive enough to believe it

[NewPiper]

Crossing,

All investments are poor investments if one pays too much for them. Rather, QF will prove to be a good rebound opportunity in time from these levels (no doubt well and truly missed by all union members on this forum). Buffett also says be greedy when others are fearful.

NP

[Crossing Guard]

Lets revisit this conversation in 12 months time...and commiserate
Lets not confuse fear with commonsense
Your Buffett quote was not made by him in relation to Aviation

[QF94]

so I'd be happy to just get my money back mate because its people like me that have funded this business that has kept people like you employed for years. Some of your colleagues on this forum even call airline investors 'morons' would you believe! The only morons around here are the vandals associated with these unions destroying their own jobs.

New Piper, if you don't like your investment, bail out. I guess it takes a moron to invest in a company of morons. Your words not mine. Your piddly amount of shares do not keep us in jobs. We have not cut dividend payments for the last few years, even though QANTAS has been the most profitable airline. Maybe you should be criticising the people you put your faith and trust in. Maybe you did mean that the management are morons, but I suspect I'm wrong about that point.

Long before the greedy investors like yourself came in and stuffed QANTAS, it was government owned and run. Not a brand. A company that had control on everything that went on in it and made smart decisions on the aircraft it flew.

If investors had half a brain, they wouldn't invest in the share market and hope to make a quick buck. That's what race tracks and pokies are for.

It appears that as an investor, you have the God given right to dictate to a company and its employees. Without employees, and competent ones at that, there would be no business and "investors" like yourself would not be able to make money off the backs of those employees.

As has been mentioned, the employees and unions don't make incompetent decisions that drive a share price down, and yet reward the board of directors for either their incompetence or deliberate sabotage of a company to drive its share price down so that it is ripe for the picking, whilst lining their own pockets.

If you want to believe in your own self-importance, that's your prerogative.

Maybe one should look at Richard Branson's ethics. Customers and investors come second in the business. Employees come first. Without happy employees, you will not have happy customers or investors. Voila, QANTAS.

Once again, if you don't like your QANTAS investment, sell up, cut your losses and get out of our faces. Otherwise, get a seat on the board of directors and make some decisions. You have the same mentality as our current regime of imbeciles and would fit in perfectly.

[unseen]

It appears that as an investor, you have the God given right to dictate to a company and its employees.

Correct.

The shareholders own the company.

The employees work for the shareholders.

God has nothing to do with it.

[ABAT4t2]

and everyone has a big mouth and is full of ideas until the **** hits their fan.

I will say it again: management spin about competing globally means you go down to the lowest common denominator. That ultimately means health care, pensions everything. We or even the western industrialised world cannot compete with China and we shouldn't try.

Australian wages and product pricing takes into account the social infrastructure in place in Australia as prices do in China, i.e. there ain't no social infrastructure.

Qantas today, NAB tomorrow. Think about it.

[QF94]

It appears that as an investor, you have the God given right to dictate to a company and its employees.

Correct.

The shareholders own the company.

The employees work for the shareholders.

God has nothing to do with it.

Incorrect unseen. Employees work for the company. Shareholders buy shares into the company hoping to get a return.

Even as a shareholder, you don't get to have much of a say. Even if you were to oppose the remuneration package of the directors, they will see fit to pay themselves.

Here is a snippet from QANTAS to its shareholders dated 26 September 2011:


"The 2011 Remuneartion 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"

The above three points indicate that the Executive is not capable and should not be retained. QANTAS faces the same challenges as Virgin Australia, being based in Australia. Remuneration of the directors should be cut if linked to performance, as the share price has dived and there have been no returns to the valued shareholders for the last few years.

Were the shareholders asked if the CEO could get a 71% pay increase or the rest of the board for that matter? Do the shareholders have a say in the type of aircraft chosen to fly? Do the shareholders have a say in how the company is run? No. No and No.

With the management's ideas and the shareholders' money, the management can blow it any way they want, and it costs them nothing, leaving shareholders like yourself in the dark and waiting for a return on their declining investment.

If you think employees work for the shareholders. Sure. I'm happy to take your money every fortnight and put it in my pocket. My paypacket doesn't change, regardless of the share price. God has nothing to do with that either.

[NewPiper]

QF94,

Its an attitude like yours that will drive the investor celebrations when your job or the jobs of people like you become 'offshored' and that is only a matter of time. Angry souls have no place in a business like Qantas.

Best you get your resume in order if not already done so, pretty soon you are going to need it!

NP

[WoodenEye]

For your consideration.

The philosophy of ownership is intended as an alternative to 100 years of Australian adversarial industrial negotiations. It has at its heart, employee voice/participation, productivity and a fair share of enterprise contribution put at risk by shareholders and employees alike. It is not a panacea for all that one doesn’t like about where Qantas is going, but it is a concept that has saved a lot of companies and jobs in the UK & the US.

Yes, I do admit that Australia’s industrial system got us by quite OK; right up until we found ourselves in the deep end of globalisation - a genie no one has been able to put back in the bottle.

Experience elsewhere in the world has shown that employee shareholders are able to influence company policy and strategy and right now it is QF’s strategy that is underpinning all the angst. That said, there is a world of difference between turning Qantas around and using the current Qantas situation to fight legitimate concerns about the unintended consequences of globalisation.

To be frank, why would Government/Shareholders do the heavy lifting necessary to save Qantas International if QF’s own employees won’t get behind a strategy that has the potential to save their jobs by bringing together Government, Shareholders and Staff.

[cart_elevator]

*sigh* I know we are not meant to feed trolls

New Piper:

Your continual 'glee' at the prospect of Australians losing jobs,having jobs off-shored is utterly disgusting.

I have a family to support,a mortgage and I may be facing that exact prospect. I have worked hard for QF and should get some of the loyalty back from management that I have shown them.

I don't really care if you are who you say -some 'investor of magnitude' or if you are just some QF management idiot trying to get a rise out of people on here.

Your attitude is totally un-Australian,and so totally wrong in so many ways.

To think that someone would revel in the fact that others may lose their jobs,and then wave it in their faces :mad::mad::mad:

You are a repulsive human being. :ugh:

[QF94]

QF94,

Its an attitude like yours that will drive the investor celebrations when your job or the jobs of people like you become 'offshored' and that is only a matter of time. Angry souls have no place in a business like Qantas.

Best you get your resume in order if not already done so, pretty soon you are going to need it!

NP

NP,

I guess that's why you're offshored and you are an angry soul because your shares are not doing so well. See your much revered CEO about why your share price is wallowing in the pits. Not the workers who don't have a say in which direction the company is going. It's also reassuring to know that individuals like yourself will derive great pleasure when jobs are lost so you can make a few miserable dollars. I hope your afterlife has enough space for all the dividends QANTAS will be paying you.

It's a looooong way back to $2.80. 5, 10, 15 years? Who knows? Who cares? Enjoy your losses, because I certainly am.

It's a bit difficult to have offshore people running a business in Australia, unless that's the direction of QANTAS. Maybe you would like QF onshore with you. Quite possible you may want to get back into a company that offshored you.

I will be here in QANTAS long after the board are made to step down once their own "indiscretions" are exposed and the angry mob of shareholders want explanations as to why a company like QANTAS has fallen from grace in such a short period as it has in the last 7 to 10 years. It takes a long time to build a company like QANTAS, but not so long to destroy it in the name of making it a "Stronger QANTAS" for a greedy few, inclusive of yourself.

[Gingerbread]

Half of Qantas' jobs are on the line - as the boss Alan Joyce gets a nice $2 million bonus | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/qantas-strikes-to-hit-10000-passengers-today/story-e6frfq80-1226180043504)

Alan Joyce has warned that half the airline would "be gone" within a year, if unions pursued their industrial campaign into 2012. "If action continues as the unions have promised, we will have no choice but to shrink the airline bit by bit," he said.
The Qantas Board will not be stepping down. Shareholders have spoken and Government is not going to use the Sale Act to halt the establishment of RedQ.

If the workers want to keep Qantas in Australia, it looks more and more like they are going to have to buy in.

[C441]

Sadly true, however some figures posted on another forum make that option increasingly unlikely too.

When 240 shareholders own 82.5% of the shares on offer, the other 133,400 shareholders have little chance of acquiring a reasonable holding at a reasonable price.

I'm sure you can guess who's amongst the 240 "lucky" owners who would stand to gain enormously from any even relatively inflated offer for the company.:rolleyes:

[QF94]

I was in attendance at the AGM yesterday, and it was a disgusting display of arrogance and beligerance on the part of the board. Especially when the remuneration of AJ was passed, to see him look up at the shareholders, sit back in his chair and smirk at everyone. Also stating that they (the board) will not be told how to run "their" business. It is not their business at all. Richard Branson can say Virgin is his Business, because it is. Bill gates can say Microsoft is his buisness because it is. This pack of parasites are milking a company for all it's worth to build their own business, offshore, otherwise known as Jetstar Asia.

It was a foregone conclusion that the resolutions were passed in favour of the board, and whether there is continued industrial action or not, "we will have no choice but to shrink the airline bit by bit." This has been going on since the days of Geoff Dixon and since May 2004 when the birth of Jetstar was the beginning of the death of QANTAS.

AJ went on to say that if they go ahead with the Pan Asia move, not one Australian job will be lost. He's correct. it will be 'tousands' of jobs.

Dick Smith was also surprising in the Daily Tele today. "If QANTAS International doesn't get globalised wages it will go out of business". There is a flaw in this theory. if Australia doesn't get globalised prices for the cost of living, Australia will be out of business. We simply cannot compare our wages with Asia, as we cannot compare our cost of living with Asia. Corporations are quite happy to employ cheap labour overseas, whilst putting thousands of Australians out of work. Here's the kicker. How will these same businesses be able to stay in Australia when there is no one to buy their products?

It is unfortunate to think this, but QF days look numbered and may be laying next to Ansett. if this happens, the board may have to take residence overseas for their own protection. The alleged death threats may become a reality. For the record, I am not making the threat. just an observation.

[neville_nobody]

"If QANTAS International doesn't get globalised wages it will go out of business".

I assume he was talking about the board isn't he?

[hadagutfull]

I missed part of the dribble by AJ..

What is the reason the share price has tanked??

According to those oracles.....

Hmm shrinking the airline ha.. Before it was a covert plan. Now they can use this dispute as an overt plan to carry out what they were gonna do anyway.

[QF94]

Quote:
"If QANTAS International doesn't get globalised wages it will go out of business".
I assume he was talking about the board isn't he?


The board won't be out of business. They've propped themselves up nicely. AJ was in Ansett and look what happened to it.

[1a sound asleep]

Quote:
"If action continues as the unions have promised, we will have no choice but to shrink the airline bit by bit," he said.

Qantas is baiting the unions to ramp up action IMO. Its what they want so they can legitimately shrink Qantas down. Surely this is obvious to people??

[QF94]

Quote:
"If action continues as the unions have promised, we will have no choice but to shrink the airline bit by bit," he said.

Qantas is baiting the unions to ramp up action IMO. Its what they want so they can legitimately shrink Qantas down. Surely this is obvious to people??

This is obvious, and has been for some time. The issue is, it is going to be done regardless. That is why the board are not negotiating and wanting the dispute. The dispute is their cover. If there is no dispute, and the basic 3% is accepted with nothing else, we will still be too expensive because LAME's are on $170,000 a piece while the pilots are on $300,00 or so say AJ and OW, and will only delay their shrinking of the airline, not stop it.

[1a sound asleep]

and will only delay their shrinking of the airline, not stop it.

Christ, take what they give and hope that AJ gets the arse in a year or 2. Make it hard for them. Union action is just giving it to them on a silver platter. 1989 all again

[QF94]

Christ, take what they give and hope that AJ gets the arse in a year or 2. Make it hard for them. Union action is just giving it to them on a silver platter. 1989 all again

Hope AJ gets the flick in a year or two? There was hope he may have been a bit different than Dixon. He is just as bad, if not worse, with Clifford's backing. That will be like waiting for the next federal election and hope all will be OK after the carbon tax is in place next year.

I don't believe that industrial action is what most people want, but the situation is a bit like the cartoon below. We are being trashed by the board and this is the last great act of defiance.

http://i1235.photobucket.com/albums/ff432/QF94/defiance.jpg

[NewPiper]

I'll say it again, all three unions are falling into a massive bear trap. Shutting down 50% of Qantas is a reality and like I said before, it may seem like a radical move but THEY WILL DO IT if necessary, and when they do, the share price will start to rise. 98% of shareholders approve of the boards intentions and even though the board doesn't personally own all outstanding shares, 98% of all outstanding shares authorise them to run the Company and make decisions for shareholders, employees and customers.

Ansett all over again?? Well not quite, but for the employees that will be sacked, yes it will be Ansett all over again, most of whom are innocent hard working, dedicated QF employees who understand the simple concept that QF is now post 9/11, post SARS, post GFC, high Oil prices etc etc AND trying to operate in an environment full of heavily subsidised competitors. For the shareholders, it won't be Ansett all over again, because they own several other valuable portfolio assets that will soak up (in time) plenty of slack left behind by QF LH. Also, QF LH is not worth much today. In fact, some say the market is attributing a NEGATIVE value on the share price because of QF LH. If true, that should be a huge red flag for employees.

The market gap left behind by QF LH will feed Jetstar growth for years and make it an even more valuable and profitable business. The QF LH 'Shell' will still be owned by shareholders and those 'smirk' faced board members (as you call them) will inevitably re-start QF LH in some form or another without the menacing staff that I understand were present at the AGM yesterday.

98% of shareholders support the CEO. Take 1a's advice and do a deal, but time is fast running out. The damage has already been done, and its only a matter of time now before LH ops get seriously reduced and restructured which will result in big job losses.

No doubt, most posters on here will blame it on corporate greed (correctly so) but blind Freddy can see that some of the contributory fault lies with the Union leaders but they will NEVER admit that. They probably already know that their battles are fruitless, so rather than swallow their pride, they will fight to the end with member funds until members lose their union and their jobs.

Unless deals are done now, it will all end in tears, mainly for the affected employees and associated industry businesses but not the Shareholders.

Madness!!! Why fight an unwinnable battle?

NP

[LAME2]

Bring back the overtime bans and let us all be patient and wait. A deal will come when the Board and Managers want a deal, not a minute sooner. That will come when institution investors start getting anxious about their investment.

A further Senate hearing begins this Friday. It could also bring forward a resolution to this, but I doubt it. Hopefully it will expose QANTAS Management plans as risky and against the National Interest. If that occurs , the union movement will have to claim it as a win, but that alone will not get us a deal.

[neville_nobody]

I can't see a deal occurring as it would be in direct opposition to the stated company's direction for the future. They aren't going to change the off shoring to Asia and even if the government intervened and forced negotiations that is always going to be a sticking point. You need a third party (ie the government, a court case, or a takeover and removal of the board) to intervene and stop the company's outsourcing into Asia. Striking isn't going to do much.

So all that will happen is that jobs will be lost over a period of time as they slowly shrink the company.

[booglaboy]

Is everyone forgetting that jetstar is owned by qantas, paid for by qantas and has no rights without qantas. Shut down qantas and jetstar will fold inside a year. It is not a cash cow. It makes a profit on paper due to creative accounting and at the expense of qantas mainline. Jetstar's whole international fleet are qantas aircraft. Fold qantas, jetstar will go too

[Short_Circuit]

Shut down qantas and jetstar will fold inside a yearProblem is they have been spinning lies for so long they have confused truth & fiction, they think J* is propping up QF :ugh:

[-438]

You can blame who ever you like, but blaming the pilots for this mess is out of step with reality.

Qantas pilots are not on strike.
Qantas pilots have not been on strike since 1966.

Red ties and PA's will not cause loss of revenue for QF.

Any current pay rate Qantas pilots are on has been mutually agreed by Qantas management and Qantas pilots.

[QF94]

Is everyone forgetting that jetstar is owned by qantas, paid for by qantas and has no rights without qantas. Shut down qantas and jetstar will fold inside a year. It is not a cash cow. It makes a profit on paper due to creative accounting and at the expense of qantas mainline. Jetstar's whole international fleet are qantas aircraft. Fold qantas, jetstar will go too

QANTAS won't fold or disappear. The name will be around enough to keep Jetstar going. I'm sure the board won't want to pay themselves Jetstar salaries. They still need QANTAS shares, because there's no such thing as a Jetstar share.

IF QANTAS was to disappear, so do the big salaries. Also, an Australia without QANTAS is one that won't function as well either. The infrastructure of QANTAS within this country is too big for any other airline or aviation company to fill. Even Jetstar.

QANTAS won't be halved. If it is, then Jetstar won't be able to take advantage of QF's leverage in buying power as was stated in yesterday's meeting, and will have to pay higher prices for its fleet. It doesn't have the investment grading QANTAS has. Jetstar actually has zero in anything.

Maybe the government should step in and nationalise the company. Set the wages for the board and stabilise the company in the National Interest. Not in the interest of the self-serving dozen on the board.

[MACH082]

Personally I think LC aka 'the emperor' is the cause of this head ache.

Obviously AJ is his mouth piece and LC is calling the shots at Qantas.

AJ will take the fall or the credit whatever the result. I believe it will be the fall, as this strategy they are pursuing has knobs on it.

Let's hope LC chokes on his grange for the good of the nation. Perhaps the Rio Tinto fellas need to be brought on board from his last stoush as 'advisers'

He'd love that :ok:

[slim]

Don't forget, by Alan Joyce's stated plan, "RedQ' or whatever is only Stage 1 of his restructure of international ops. He hasn't said how many stages are to come, but rest assured if you cave in at stage 1 you will be decimated in the later stages. May well happen even if you don't cave in.

[WoodenEye]

All that yesterday has confirmed is, one way or another, Qantas International is set to change.

Keeping Qantas Australian desperately needs fresh vision. Clearly more of the same isn’t going to change what’s already afoot.

Qantas has some very valuable assets (route rights, landing slots, aircraft orders, etc), attractive not only to Jetstar, but also to astute investors skilled at picking over airlines in distress.

As they say, opportunity is born out of adversity and there is a window of opportunity to use yesterday’s outcome to build momentum necessary for an employee backed bid for Qantas, but it requires action now.

[Gingerbread]

INDEPENDENT senator Nick Xenophon says a special inquiry may be needed to resolve the industrial dispute between Qantas and three of its unions.

The South Australian senator said the inquiry should have the powers of a royal commission.

"These actions by Qantas management are just extraordinary," he said on ABC Radio today.

"It has implications going well beyond an industrial dispute. It has national interest implications."

He claimed Fair Work Australia did not have the jurisdiction to delve into the issues at the core of the dispute, including claims by Qantas management its international operations were losing money.

Any further industrial action should be suspended, he added, pending the outcome of a judicial inquiry.

Hear! Hear!

[hadagutfull]

Hey Leigh ... Remember this tripe that dribbled from your lips

• Mr Clifford has responded that it is not the board's place to resolve industrial disputes, saying this should be worked out between the management and staff. He went on to say: "The reality is that there is need for significant change in this organisation. That doesn't mean we*don't respect the hard work and the loyalty of our employees".

U pack of :mad:ts

[1a sound asleep]

Smart lawyers will argue there is NO threat to Australia's essential service.
Strategic Airlines Perth and Brisbane today, ramped up DJ and JQ, domestic SQ, EY and 8 738 fro DL ready on standby.

Could get messier and messier. Back right off and let the plan to sack you/have you resign collapse. If you dont scabs will take your job. Consider your self warned.

[NewPiper]

1a,

Scabs will take 'your' job....The word 'your' in this context is a bit rich. Some people would be hoping that the scabs will arrive in droves so that most of those LH menacing pilots and engineers can finally be sacked. Shareholders would be popping champagne corks by now. Anyone who thinks a drop in the share price is a given, think again! That may not happen and if it does, most of those 98% voters will step in and support the stock if it falls anyhow. Like I said before, hook line and sinker!

NP

[mach2male]

But a very old and repetitious tune

[sfde]

Just watched an interview which AJ admitted that the failed take over bid would have been a mistake and that hindsight shows this. Hindsight also shows that the executive should have purchased B777s and that freight cartels and Vietnam are a bad idea. Even their mighty Jetstar plan has seriously damaged their international product apparently.

I am having trouble finding an executive decision that in hindsight has been a good move.:ugh:

[3 Holer]

If John Borghetti was running Qantas it would not be in the mess that it now finds itself.


If Aunty had aggetts she would be Uncle.

NewPiper = QF management TROLL. cart_elevator - Yes, stop feeding!!:ok:

[Avgas172]

Could get messier and messier. Back right off and let the plan to sack you/have you resign collapse. If you dont scabs will take your job. Consider your self warned.

Right now in Australia a 'stop go' person in the mines is earning 130K a year, my brother lost his job in the Ansett collapse and like most of the Ansett employee's he hasn't lost anything over the last 10 years or whatever it is, finding 30,000 employees in Australia willing to work for Q is not going to happen. If the airline collapses so be it, life goes on and as Virgin proved so will air travel in Australia.
How many of you are currently driving a fully imported car instead of one made here?, until we all wake up it's not gonna get any better.

[QF94]

How many of you are currently driving a fully imported car instead of one made here?

I drive a car manufactured here. It's a number of years old, but made here, when lots of things used to be made here. Also, it's cheaper than the new cars to maintain as I maintain it myself for a fraction of the cost of getting the dealer or mechanic to do it, and it's cheaper than using public transport.

It's called self-sufficiency and keeping control of my own maintenance and keeping the dollars in house.

If they pay me out, that wouldn't be so bad. The mortgage would be paid off, I can sit on government benefits for a while until I find another job and just keep swimming.

[WoodenEye]

An 'us-versus-them' workplace is just bad business

Nothing that has happened in the bitter Qantas dispute suggests that the "big end of town", in support of Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce, has learnt much at all about workplace democracy.

The dispute (http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/editorial/the-qantas-dispute-must-be-resolved-in-the-national-interest-20111030-1mqf7.html) has all the hallmarks of traditional adversarial industrial relations being played out that, in the end, may have to be settled by some form of arbitration.

This is not, however, just a dispute about executive salaries and staff wage levels but rather about three key unions and thousands of employees wanting to protect their jobs. The real issue here goes even further than job security. The employees have no real say in discussions and major decisions that affect them — and Qantas is not alone in operating this way.

Is it not high time that we investigated a better way of managing relations between employers and employees? A way does exist: give staff a stake in the business, a financial stake and a voice....................................................!

If nothing is done, Australia will continue along this adversarial industrial relations path, which helps neither employers nor employees as evidenced by the damage done to Qantas.

Dr Klaas Woldring is a retired former Associate Professor at Southern Cross University and is honorary secretary of the Australian Employee Ownership Association.

Source: http://www.nationaltimes.com.au/opinion/politics/an-usversusthem-workplace-is-just-bad-business-20111103-1mxdf.html (http://www.nationaltimes.com.au/opinion/politics/an-usversusthem-workplace-is-just-bad-business-20111103-1mxdf.html)

[blow.n.gasket]

November 03, 2011

Why should a Pilot* earn less than a manager?

Klaus Schwab, Founder and Executive Chairman, World Economic Forum
http://www.forumblog.org/.a/6a00d8345279f069e20162fc1ba7f0970d-320wi (http://www.forumblog.org/.a/6a00d8345279f069e20162fc1ba7f0970d-pi)Criticism of capitalism has increased in recent months. Protest movements, such as "Occupy Wall Street," are outraged at the excesses of bankers who, according to the protesters, bear the main responsibility for the current economic crisis – but apparently are not being held responsible. A growing number of voices from different parts of society are now showing solidarity with the anti-capitalism activities and reflecting the widespread frustration felt by citizens.
Undoubtedly, these anti-capitalist protests have their finger on the pulse of our time. But it is not enough to simply condemn capitalism for its undeniable excesses. We need a deeper analysis of why the capitalist system, in its current form, no longer fits the world around us.


When the crisis began in January 2009, I said in my opening speech in Davos: “Today, people from every corner of the globe ask how it was possible that decisions could be taken, led by greed or incompetence and with no effective oversight − decisions that had terrible consequences, not only for the global economy but also for real people, who have lost their pensions, their homes or their jobs. They feel bewildered, confused, scared and angry.” At that time it was expected that the crisis would lead to a fundamental re-evaluation of the behaviour of senior managers in business as a whole and above all in financial services. Nearly three years have now gone by and we have still not learned the lessons from past mistakes. The system that has led us into the crisis has been outdated for years. We will not overcome the crisis in the long term if we continue to deny the need to overhaul the system. There are three reasons why capitalism needs to be reformed:
Capitalism is out of balance. The use of virtual capital for the purposes of speculation in relation to the use of capital in the real economy has exploded beyond any reasonable proportion and is now out of control. Financial operations to balance out the risks are necessary but not transactions that speculate on the speculation itself.
In the original system of capitalism there was a clear distinction: between the entrepreneur, who bears the risk of the investment and is therefore rewarded with the profit; and the manager, whose professional task is to secure the long term future of the company in the interest of all stakeholders. As a result of an excessive bonus system, the manager became associated with the interests of the capital owners and this has perverted the system. This is the fundamental root problem of the current situation: excessive salaries have severely undermined the business ethos for managers.
Capital is no longer the decisive factor of production in today's global economy. Competitive advantage is increasingly determined by innovative ideas or immaterial services, and less on the basis of capital. Additionally, with a rise in the standard of living, the general emphasis is shifting from quantity to quality. Economic success of tomorrow will no longer decided by capital but rather by the production factor "talent". So in a sense, we are moving from capitalism to "talentism."
The protests around the world are dangerous if they are used as means of class warfare. What we do need, however, are new impulses that lead us to re-think in order to bring about the necessary corrective action to the flaws of the system.
Above all, the manager’s job must be re-professionalized. The fact that talent has now become the key success factor is often used as justification by companies for paying exorbitant salaries and bonuses. But talent is not the crucial factor only for the manager’s profession, but for any kind of job. Why should an outstanding pilot (QF32)* earn less than a mediocre manager? Why should a surgeon of worldwide renown earn less than the CEO of a global company? Of course, ideally everyone should earn according to their responsibility and performance. But the main professional motivation should be ones vocation - and not simply the desire to make a profit. Separating managers and risk-takers will also reign in those financial transactions where profits benefit individuals but risks are collectivized, meaning the average tax-payer must shoulder the burden when things go wrong. In short, we need to move from excessive capitalism to a market economy in which social responsibility and obligations are not just empty words.

*= not part of the original text.
*= teacher in original text.
changed for effect.

[teresa green]

What about the possibility of approaching Twiggy Forrest, Nathan Tinkler et al, some have shown interest in keeping QF in Australia, indeed one of them posted on PPRUNE offering help in this way, and were advised to contact the AIPA. I am more than happy to get into the Greens piggy bank and do my bit, and if many of us could and would and those not able to yet could come in by stealth, giving what they can, we just might pull this off. Just imagine a QF with happy staff, the right aircraft, the right routes, offering the cabin crew a career instead of a contract, the engineering unit restored, and everyone giving 101%. like TE and Virgin, we could shine. Oh and offer Borgetti a block of flats to come back. Dream on I guess, but without a dream, we have nothing.

[struggling]

Consider if you will, today’s ‘bold print’ regarding what’s happening at Qantas.
· The Unions- we’re not giving up,
· Joyce warns of Qantas Break-up, and
· Dixon – Qantas cannot walk away from mergers.
Which, in Struggling’s opinion, is ‘code’ for:
· The Government and the Unions reaching Sale Act agreement, and
· Making Jetstar independent of, but associated with Qantas OneWorld.

Bring it on I say.

[Gingerbread]

Employee Share Ownership Suggested as a Solution for QANTAS.

The Australian Employee Buyout Centre called this week on Alan Joyce, CEO of Qantas and the heads of the three unions in the dispute with Qantas to embrace employee share ownership as a solution. Elena Kirillova, Chairman of AEBC said "The Unions are concerned that Qantas management is committed to cutting costs and moving jobs off-shore as part of the Asia strategy. There is insufficient focus in the debate on the extent to which Qantas can relocate to Asia in view of the restrictions imposed on Qantas by the Qantas Sale Act..From: http://www.aeoa.org.au/0024/default.asp?id=72 (http://www.aeoa.org.au/0024/default.asp?id=72)

[clotted]

Has anyone else noticed that WoodenEye, Struggling, and Gingerbread are the only posters who post with black letters in lieu of blue letters and more to the point, generally espousing generally the same views?
Is it too sinister to think they might be the same person?:eek::eek::eek:
I'm told that WoodenEye is the former AIPA President having been forced to move on to his next dream by his constituency.

[Gingerbread]

Your mistaken Clotted.

The constituency did not tell Woods to move on from his dream as you put it. Woods won the 2007 popular vote with the pilots, but was then politically undermined by some on his committee with lies and spin that is only now becoming obvious to those still interested in what took place way back then.

That same constituency is now asking:
· Why AIPA pulled funding for the previous president’s Qantas Sale Act case the night before the hearing, and
· Why AIPA is not yet articulating a strategy that will put Qantas and its pilots on the same page.

Yep! AIPA has a lot riding on upcoming arbitration and how the Qantas Sale Act will be applied.

Even if those you like to play the man and not the ball feel otherwise, believe Woods is quite comfortable with what’s going down.

Good luck to you. I think you are going to need it.

[teresa green]

Clotted = CBR= Troll.

[WoodenEye]

Aer Lingus pilots seek 4% stake in company


PILOTS AT Aer Lingus have sought a 4 per cent stake in the company in return for agreeing to generate savings of up to €30 million as part of an overall recovery deal at the airline.

Aer Lingus is seeking to make savings of €97 million by the end of 2011 across a range of activities, and has been in negotiations with unions on the plan for several weeks. The restructuring would see the airline shedding 676 jobs. However, Aer Lingus has warned that if no agreement is reached on the cost-saving measures by today it will press ahead with measures unilaterally – a move that could see several hundred additional staff being let go.

Aer Lingus has warned that it will ground aircraft and cut both short-haul and transatlantic routes in the absence of a deal. The additional job cuts would be compulsory redundancies. An “extraordinary” meeting of the Aer Lingus board will be held this evening at its head office at Dublin airport to consider the outcome of the talks with unions.

In a statement released yesterday, Aer Lingus chief executive Christoph Mueller said the board would take “decisions to proceed with alternative means of delivering the savings within the same timeframe as the plan in the absence of [an] agreement”.

It is understood the pilots have offered to generate €30 million in savings through greater productivity. In return, the pilots have sought a 4 per cent stake in the listed airline. Based on yesterday’s closing price of 55.5 cent, this would be worth €11.7 million.

It is understood that Aer Lingus’s management has ruled out this proposal on the basis that it could not favour one group of workers by offering them shares in the business. In addition, it not clear what mechanism Aer Lingus would use to issue the shares. Its stock is tightly held, with Ryanair owning 29.6 per cent and the Government holding 25 per cent of the stock.

The pilots currently own more than 4.5 per cent of Aer Lingus between their pension fund and an entity called Tailwind Nominees, which bought shares in the airline at the time of Ryanair’s first bid for its rival.

If the stake sought by the pilots was granted, Aer Lingus staff could end up owning about 23 per cent of the airline when the existing employee share ownership trust (Esot) – which has a 14.4 per cent stake – was taken into account.

Various options have been examined by unions and management in recent weeks to generate the savings sought by the company. Unions are opposed to cuts in pay, while management is disputing whether the level of savings proposed by unions would actually be realised.

Commenting on this yesterday, Mr Mueller said: “We acknowledge that savings have been offered. However, it is critical that savings must be delivered in a full and meaningful way from 2010 and not deferred beyond the timeframe of the plan. This has not been the case so far.”

Aer Lingus has warned that if the overall cost-saving plan is not agreed by today it will introduce measures unilaterally. The airline and unions spent several hours yesterday at the Labour Relations Commission to try and secure a final deal on the overall cost-reduction plan...


From: The Irish Times - Tue, Dec 01, 2009 - Aer Lingus pilots seek 4% stake in company (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2009/1201/1224259803061.html)