Aviation Survey Discussion

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

I suspect the mods would like discussion over the survey posted on a different thread so I have started this one up. Feel free to let me know how you feel about it, what we should do with the results or how we could make it better.

I will keep the actual data on the stickied thread.

cheers
Steve

[airsupport]

Steve,

I was very interested in this but of course cannot be part of it now as I am no longer employed in the Industry.

I realise that you can not change it now, and probably would not anyway on my advice ;) , however going by the qustions and answers you have posted here I do not think it is ever a good idea with these things to ask questions in the negative, like from memory question 9 you have posted. :ok:

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

I realise that you can not change it now, and probably would not anyway on my advice http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/wink2.gif , however going by the qustions and answers you have posted here I do not think it is ever a good idea with these things to ask questions in the negative, like from memory question 9 you have posted. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif


I would naturally agree with this theory, however, this one is similar to the words used by many big companies for employee engagement surveys.

In practice it is like this. You have 50 odd questions. The agree option that appears on top is generally agreement with what the company is doing. If the question read -

There are substantial obstacles at work to doing my job well

Then the agree button gives an inverse answer to those questions appearing in the same section. It makes the survey flow better and reduces mistakes and confusion.

[airsupport]

Okay, it is your survey......... :ok:

I would not trust the answers to any survey that asks negative questions, too much room for confusion and errors.

Maybe I take things too literally, but it is often the same in general conversation nowadays.

You said you basically agree with me, however if I was to ask you.......

Steve, do you not agree with what I said?

Maybe not you but most people would probably answer something like .......

Yes of course.

Which literally means you do NOT agree.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

All in context buddy.

[hotnhigh]

Fed Sec,
I think we all know how the results will pan out. My only question is what is to stop people doing the survey more than once?
I'm sure Wirthless will roll that one out as some sort of defence, not that they give a s*(t about the public, nor their perception.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

I think we all know how the results will pan out. My only question is what is to stop people doing the survey more than once?


You can't because it is linked to your IP address. Can only do once.

Interesting though because the internal Qantas one could be filled out as many times as you liked.

[caneworm]

Fed Sec, a question.

I didn't do the QF survey, never have, but are the questions in your survey a cut & paste from the QF survey or are the questions composed by you and/or the ALAEA think tank?

[Worrals in the wilds]

Couldn't you do it on two different computers though? Or a PC and a phone?

I'm not trying to be obstructive (or encourage cheating) but as H&H said, they're probably going to be ducking and weaving.

Interesting re the Qantas survey's multiple response option.

[BrissySparkyCoit]

Most of the questions are word for word from the qf survey.

[caneworm]

Thanks Brissy, I thought as much.
That being the case how can airsupport suggest that Fed Sec is posting "negative" questions when these questions have originated from the QF survey?

however going by the qustions and answers you have posted here I do not think it is ever a good idea with these things to ask questions in the negative, like from memory question 9 you have posted.

[airsupport]

That being the case how can airsupport suggest that Fed Sec is posting "negative" questions when these questions have originated from the QF survey?

I never suggested that, and Steve knows that, in fact he agreed with me that it would be better NOT to have any questions asked in the negative, but as he explained (and I did not know at the time) he is basically using questions from the Employer which are biased.

It is just they are asked in the negative, a silly idea in a survey, unless you are trying to confuse people.

It is like if I was to ask you .....................

Do you like PPRuNe ???

That is much safer, simpler and more likely to get the correct response than if I ask you...................

Do you not like PPRuNe ???

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Do you not like PPRuNe ???

With a yes or no answer is confusing.




I do not like Pprune. Agree/Disagree


Is a whole lot easier and as about as confusing as any of the questions get.

Most questions are very close to QF but they are written in a generic way so they become relevant for all airline employees. Some questions in this survey would not have been asked by Qantas.

Two computers may allow you to answer twice so long as they weren't in the same location. Pretty long measures to take though if you wanted to alter the result. Do we think someone is madly driving around Sydney as we speak asking friends if he can borrow their computer for a bit?

[caneworm]

Do we think someone is madly driving around Sydney as we speak asking friends if he can borrow their computer for a bit?

If they thought it may adversly affect their precious performance bonus, then yes

[Worrals in the wilds]

Darn, he's onto me. :suspect::}
Seriously, I think caneworm has a point. Anyway, good luck with your survey, glad you've gotten a decent turn out.

[V-Jet]

Firstly the survey is a terrific idea. I would have loved the ability to save the QF survey answers so there could be no lying and obfuscation.

The problem of people of doing the survey twice is a relatively minor problem compared to the inevitable wirthless responses which will b along the lines of:

1) There are no controls on 3rd party surveys
2) The people answering them have an axe to grind
3) The results in no way represent the responses we received in our standard surveys which are officially monitored and carried out by reputable firms every 2 years.
4) We believe it is extremely irresponsible for staff to be commenting publicly on such matters and view this most seriously...

etc etc etc.

For myself I filled out the Qf survey and because my previous responses clearly left some room for doubt, this time the only way they could have discounted the results or misread them was if they automatically removed any 'very-anti' replies. I doubt they would have allowed anything like what I wrote to get to the CEO (and as I didn't have police turn up I assume the responses were indeed anonymous) but I was of the opinion that someone must have read my responses and even if one other person outside the company read what I wrote then that one person may realise there is more to the Qf 'story' than that which is spat out by the vile group that are ruining the place.

Good luck with it all Steve...

[airsupport]

Do we think someone is madly driving around Sydney as we speak asking friends if he can borrow their computer for a bit?

No need if you know what you are doing. ;)

You simply drive around Sydney looking for unprotected WIFI modems. :ok:

[ampclamp]

And of course participating more than once can be done by both sides, so possibly cancel out and less significant. anyway it it will be interesting to watch.

[Arnold E]

Steve, do you want responses from GA people, or just the airline, I understand that the information you are looking for is more relevant to airline, but was just wondering?

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

I also implore you not to give any info from this survey to the media.



The idea was always to share this information. It's mostly so airline staff can feel normal because they like or dislike what their company is doing. If you aren't happy at work, you don't need to feel alone and certainly should not be subject to lies and propoganda from a management team telling you otherwise.

The people who own airlines should also have this information so they can gauge in one sense how their appointees at board and CEO level are doing. Imagine if they "trusted" the rhetoric from press releases and briefings coming out of the internal surveys without seeing the figures?

If it is shared with one person, it is public information. I want you all to see these results and for that to happen, the media will see it. They may be parasites and some of them are less ethical than others but they will comment on this and I'd rather be talking about something I have been monitoring and co-ordinating than just reading about airlines who want to discredit it.

[DEFCON4]

Nothing gets in
Nothing gets out
Until these bastards back off
We want Errol to leave the building..
(AJ=Errol Flynn.Everything he touches he f**ks)

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Steve, do you want responses from GA people, or just the airline, I understand that the information you are looking for is more relevant to airline, but was just wondering?


Absolutely. I've listed about the 10 top companies to select as a check box and I've been just as interested in their progress as the bigger 3. Beyond that there are too many smaller operators to split off by name but there has been a large response from the "other" category.

Getting good feedback from places like Alliance, Skywest and CHC choppers.

[Kharon]

ALEA - Every morning I wake early, eager to get stuck into what I have on for the day. It's hard not to when you love your job.

The survey is great tool, it's like a gyroscope; once it's spun up and stable, there are lots of useful applications available for folks who can nut them out.

1000 is the magic number, I hope everyone who can participate does and tells their mates.


Well done that man. :D

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

1300 and rising.

[Ace Wasabe]

Well done Steve.....looks like you are getting a better participation rate than QF

[Toruk Macto]

I'm an other but not from NZ or Aust , you will be getting responses from Aussies from all over !

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

There may be a few but even some of the smaller cities in Australia that are listed have not had one response.

The Kiwi answers may have the odd Aussie from a smaller port included but there are quite a number on this list so it shouldn't be more than 5% out.

[indamiddle]

seems to be a small response from flight attendants so far. maybe if a link was posted to the crew trip swap web sites numbers from this group reponses would substantially increase. i haven't been on the sites for a number of years but maybe someone could post on them the link to the survey. one website is an internal qantas trip swap site and another popular one is yahoo trip swaps. sorry i don't have any more info for you.

[ohallen]

This is very good stuff so well done Steve.

Don't suppose you have thought to engage mainstream press on a day the Rat has some major announcement have you??It would be a touch ironic given their behaviour in recent times re major redundancies.

Don't expect you to signal the future here, but hope there is a smile on your face and that will be enough.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

seems to be a small response from flight attendants so far

If any of you have a means to pass on the link please do so.



Don't suppose you have thought to engage mainstream press on a day the Rat has some major announcement have you??

Managing press is not the favourite part of my job. It can happen any time of any day, usually inconviniently. I wouldn't talk about this survey on a day when we should be talking about another issue. We haven't even decided if when and where we would discuss it.

[indamiddle]

Yahoo!7 Groups (http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/QCCA_Sydney_Long_Haul/message/55)

[indamiddle]

[email protected]_TripSwapList_SYD@ya hoogroups.com.au



Send email
Find email

hope this is useful
more crew are on this second list if you can get in. maybe a crew member who uses these sites could PM steve or post the survey info on the websites for a week. should get the attention of a few crew. steve, try contacting the FAAA union and get them to do a bulk email to all the membership. this would get the attention of thousands of crew

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Thnx mate. Have emailed the FAAA Dom and Int. Can't speak for them but hope they will forward the link.

Not sure how to use the crew swap site if anyone can help.

[Ngineer]

You simply drive around Sydney looking for unprotected WIFI modems

You can change your IP quite easily from your own armchair if your network is set-up right. But why bother, I am confident that if every-one takes the survey just once then the real truth will emerge.

My only worry are the company stooges that will illegitimately try to bump up the bad results.

[Kharon]

NEng - My only worry are the company stooges that will illegitimately try to bump up the bad results. We got a bit of that, it's not a problem if your IT guys/gals are switched on. You can screen effectively.

Damn all Cane toads, Luddites and spoilers; in the end the truth, however spun, will out. Keep on rockin'; imagine flying about without grown up help.

Selah - keep the faith.

[ejectx3]

Olivia is busy filling out the survey pro management from Internet cafes all over Sydney ....

[hotnhigh]

Olivia is busy filling out the survey pro management from Internet cafes all over Sydney ....

I wonder what her level of engagement will be when she fills it out?

[tail wheel]

You can change your IP quite easily from your own armchair if your network is set-up right. But why bother, I am confident that if every-one takes the survey just once then the real truth will emerge.

My only worry are the company stooges that will illegitimately try to bump up the bad results.

Surveymonkey is a little more sophisticated than that. It is not foolproof but certainly a lot more difficult to beat than merely changing IP addresses from the same computer.

From the numbers Steve is getting, any corruption of the results by duplicate or multiple entries will probably be fairly insignificant.

But to be really significant and truly indicative of the Australian airline industry I suspect he needs at least 5% to 10% of all airline emplyees and that may mean a minimum around 3,000 to 6,000 responses, spread across all airlines, all industry vocations, not just pilots and engineers.

The final results may require professional analysis and publication to get the populace, including politicians and public servants, to sit up and listen?

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

So keep submitting all. We are at 1550 responses in three days. They are starting to come in slower but I think some other unions may promote it via their email lists shortly.

[Someperson]

Any plans in sending this off to the ASU? Few thousand people that could possibly complete it.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

I did to their union but haven't heard back.

[Sarcs]

Wow Steve some of those results are an overwhelming indictment on the flying rat's current management. It would appear management are totally disengaged from their workforce...doesn't bode well for a human interface/service industry when your frontline staff feel aggrieved!


This is the most revealing statistic when you compare the two main players (groups) in the Oz market, normally you would expect one or two % points between the players and 10% in favour/against would be ringing alarm bells...political polls are a case in point..


Q40. Looking ahead to the next 12 months my company will

Qantas
Get Better - 3%
Stay the same - 6%
Get worse - 90%
No opinion - 1%

Qantaslink
Get Better - 16%
Stay the same - 33%
Get worse - 48%
No opinion - 3%

Jetstar
Get Better - 7%
Stay the same - 21%
Get worse - 68%
No opinion - 3%

Virgin Group
Get Better - 63%
Stay the same - 29%
Get worse - 8%
No opinion - 0%




....however a 54.34 % point (Get Better) difference between the groups is a terminal indicator, even allowing for the fact that your survey maybe only being completed by disgruntled frontline workers :{

How does it go again..."Happy wife, happy life!".....for Hospitality/Tourist industry..."Happy frontline staff, happy clients, happy management, happy shareholders!"

An ailing flying roo is a barometer in Oz for an ailing industry!

ps Steve have you thought about forwarding the results to Ben Sandilands?

[TheWholeEnchilada]

http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/5428/q40.png (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/403/q40.png/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

How is this. Colors can be changed.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

This is the most revealing statistic when you compare the two main players (groups) in the Oz market, normally you would expect one or two % points between the players and 10% in favour/against would be ringing alarm bells...political polls are a case in point..


The split is quite large indeed.

The numbers of course are changing as more people submit and they are changing figures slightly based on factors such as the FAAA putting out an email. Obviously more Flight attendants answered on that day.

I'm not sure the "disgruntled employee" factor makes much difference. If it is assumed that "disgruntled employees" are more likely to be in a union or read Pprune or respond to a survey, would that not then be the case for all employers involved? By asking the same questions of all sample groups I think we at least will come up with very good cross comparison data.

The graphs I used were just the ones in Survey Monkey and as stated on other thread, they could be better. I may try upgrading the package or yes, someone smarter than I could do some better analysis and produce better graphs.

[Sarcs]

I'm not sure the "disgruntled employee" factor makes much difference. If it is assumed that "disgruntled employees" are more likely to be in a union or read Pprune or respond to a survey, would that not then be the case for all employers involved?

Steve I couldn't agree more, I was just putting fwd what the management stooges are likely to argue....

TWE excellent graph...perhaps add in a differences graph between the groups.:ok:

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

There has actually been quite a few managers respond as well. They are genuine because the responses or answers seem to reflect how I would think a middle level manager views their company.

Most are fairly favourable about the questions, particularly the pride for their organisation but clearly in some cases they reckon things could get better.

[Ngineer]

I am sure if the results get published the company will put some spin on it, such as - on a positive note although the figure is somewhat less than last survey, 10% of our employee's still think that the airline will do better in the next 12 months.

I wonder how much the company run survey cost in comparison to the ALAEA's.:ok:

(Sorry, I meant 3%!! a very ironic number!!!)

[blow.n.gasket]

Steve, a serious question if I may.
Is there any program in place with this survey to prevent multiple attempts by the same URL to answer.
If not then Management will have a way out to say the results can/are corrupted by only a few disgruntled persons who have answered multiple times.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

We're just analyzing the data so far and preparing a report. Returns growing by the hour.

[Jethro Gibbs]

How about a report listing how many outstanding and unresolved issues there are with each company on the charts above.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

We only have 20 pages for the report.

[Jethro Gibbs]

A PDF File would do.

[Mstr Caution]

With the news today of QF share price tanking & the profit downgrade.

Is the sample group large enough, credible enough to get it out to the media ASAP.

The survey was basically conducted prior to the profit downgrade.

Time to get the message out from the troops, we have the tanking share price to support our case to rid the Roo of these incompetents.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

We've got some professionals looking at the results so far. Presentation will come out in a couple of weeks.

[DirectAnywhere]

Will things get worse? The QF staff had that one right.

[hadagutfull]

Well, seems the survey results have just been backed up as a true reflection of the state of affairs ,based on todays announcements.

[Jethro Gibbs]

This is a nice little novelty but lets get real it will change nothing in the real world there are real issues to deal with.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

You just never know what it may flush out. The big question would be - How much damage is being done to an airline by having a completely disengaged workforce?

How could you measure that damage?

[DirectAnywhere]

Steve, I can't remember where I read it but there is an engagement figure below which staff are effectively actively working against a company's interests.

It would be interesting to find that figure and compare it to these results. The flight ops numbers, particularly amongst flight crew who control the company's biggest cost (fuel), were appalling.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

If anyone can find any interesting links to this stuff would be very handy.

[blow.n.gasket]

Direct wrote:

Steve, I can't remember where I read it but there is an engagement figure below which staff are effectively actively working against a company's interests.

It would be interesting to find that figure and compare it to these results. The flight ops numbers, particularly amongst flight crew who control the company's biggest cost (fuel), were appalling.



Message from the Chief Pilot - 2012 Engagement Survey results (04/06/2012)

The last 18 months have been difficult and this was reflected in Flight Operations’ 2012 Engagement Survey results. Fewer Flight Operations employees responded to the survey (48 per cent compared to 64 per cent in 2011) and overall engagement is lower.
Our results show that for Flight Crew, engagement is at 26 per cent (down 12 per cent from 2011). However engagement among Flight Operations Ground Staff is higher at 74 per cent, bringing the engagement score for Flight Operations overall to 38 per cent, down seven per cent on last year and 28 per cent below Qantas as a whole.
Among Flight Crew, we have seen declines in all question categories that can be compared to last year, and declines in all question categories compared to Qantas overall. The most significant gaps between Flight Crew and the Qantas average are in the areas of overall engagement, communication, Qantas values & behaviour, customer experience and competitive position.
In the context of the past 12-18 months, a decline in engagement was not unexpected. A high-level analysis of the results and your comments suggests that you are disengaged with organisation-led aspects such as leadership and strategy but more engaged with the ‘individual’ aspects of your work such as training, reward and working with your colleagues.
Overwhelmingly, you have told us that you are dissatisfied with the strategic direction of the company and I recognise your disappointment in the breakdown of respect between senior management and Flight Crew. It is clear that rebuilding the relationship between the organisation and our pilots is of the highest importance.
More than 900 Flight Crew (43 per cent) responded to the survey, and we have received thousands of written comments. We are working through the results including your comments, and will be in a position to share more at the mid-year Flight Crew Briefings. We will also use the briefings to talk about what we can all do to work more constructively together.
In the meantime, I would like to thank those of you who participated in the survey. The results do not paint a pretty picture for Flight Operations, but providing your feedback gives us a starting point for rebuilding our relationship with you.

Chief Pilot

Does not bode well for Qantas when you see engagement figures like this from front line operation staff.
Have Qantas done a risk analysis on such low engagement levels for such important staff as pilots?
I wonder what this sort of result does to the Companys risk levels from an insurance point of view?


If anyone can find any interesting links to this stuff would be very handy.

Does this help Steve?

Employee Engagement

A Leading Indicator of Financial Performance


Applied Behavioral Economics (http://www.gallup.com/consulting/122903/Applied-Behavioral-Economics.aspx)
Wellbeing (http://www.gallup.com/consulting/126584/Wellbeing.aspx)
Customer Engagement (http://www.gallup.com/consulting/49/Customer-Engagement.aspx)
Employee Engagement (http://www.gallup.com/consulting/52/Employee-Engagement.aspx)
Strengths-Based Selection (http://www.gallup.com/consulting/67/TalentBased-Hiring.aspx)
Strengths-Based Development (http://www.gallup.com/consulting/61/Strengths-Development.aspx)
Leadership & Succession (http://www.gallup.com/consulting/55/Succession-Management.aspx)
Employment Branding (http://www.gallup.com/consulting/122909/Employment-Branding.aspx)
Market Research (http://www.gallup.com/consulting/18157/Marketing-Research.aspx)
Brand Engagement (http://www.gallup.com/consulting/18061/Brand-Management.aspx)


The world's top-performing organizations understand that employee engagement is a force that drives performance outcomes. In the best organizations, engagement is more than a human resources initiative -- it is a strategic foundation for the way they do business.
Research by Gallup and others shows that engaged employees are more productive. They are more profitable, more customer-focused, safer, and more likely to withstand temptations to leave. The best-performing companies know that an employee engagement improvement strategy linked to the achievement of corporate goals will help them win in the marketplace.
Our Value
A Proven Approach and Interventions
Gallup supports organizations to systematically improve employee engagement using proven interventions at the local and enterprise level. Beyond setting the proper strategy, this process includes finding the right performance metrics that drive accountability, creating a comprehensive communication strategy, and designing development opportunities for every employee, manager, and leader.
What is your organization's ratio of engaged to not engaged employees?

Gallup's engagement ratio is a macro-level indicator of an organization's health that allows executives to track the proportion of engaged to actively disengaged employees.

In world-class organizations, the ratio of engaged to actively disengaged employees is 9.57:1.
In average organizations, the ratio of engaged to actively disengaged employees is 1.83:1.
Actively disengaged employees erode an organization's bottom line while breaking the spirits of colleagues in the process. Within the U.S. workforce, Gallup estimates this cost to be more than $300 billion in lost productivity alone. In stark contrast, world-class organizations with an engagement ratio near 8:1 have built a sustainable model using our approach. As organizations move toward this benchmark, they greatly reduce the negative impact of actively disengaged employees while unleashing the organization's potential for rapid growth.
Gallup's Research-Based Approach
Gallup's employee engagement work is based on more than 30 years of in-depth behavioral economic research involving more than 17 million employees. This research has appeared in prestigious business and scientific publications, including the Journal of Applied Psychology and the Harvard Business Review, and in our bestselling books First, Break All the Rules (http://gmj.gallup.com/content/1144/First-Break-All-Rules-Book-Center.aspx) and 12: The Elements of Great Managing (http://gmj.gallup.com/content/25402/Book-Center.aspx). Through rigorous research, we have identified 12 core elements -- the Q12 -- that link powerfully to key business outcomes. These 12 statements emerged as those that best predict employee and workgroup performance.
Linking Employee Engagement to Critical Business Outcomes
Gallup's latest meta-analysis (http://www.gallup.com/consulting/126806/Q12-Meta-Analysis.aspx) (an analysis of data from more than 152 organizations) shows dramatic differences between top- and bottom-quartile workgroups on key business outcomes. Beyond the significant differences engaged workgroups show in productivity, profitability, safety incidents, and absenteeism versus disengaged workgroups, we have proven that engaged organizations have 3.9 times the earnings per share (EPS) growth rate compared to organizations with lower engagement in their same industry.
Proven Return on Investment
Increasing employee engagement correlates directly with a positive impact on key business metrics. A partnership with Gallup enables your organization to design, implement, and execute an employee engagement strategy. At the same time, your organization will gain concrete evidence of the impact of this strategy on the bottom line. Gallup's proof of ROI goes beyond the case-study level. By continually validating the effect of increasing employee engagement through meta-analyses and business impact studies, we can observe trends across hundreds of clients. The observed net gain in key business outcomes for work units that grow employee engagement provides a direct linkage to ROI.
Gallup's approach blends strategic analysis with practical steps and advice to change how leaders view their work, their employees, and their customers.

[Engineer_aus]

Steve, on your other thread with all the info, is there any GA input, Network, Cobham, Skippers, Brindabella, Aeropelican, Pearl, Rex, Airnorth etc?

As for responses under the age of 25, perhaps there are not too many LAME's at that age, and or in the ALAEA?

I completed the UNSW survey and posted it off.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Steve, on your other thread with all the info, is there any GA input, Network, Cobham, Skippers, Brindabella, Aeropelican, Pearl, Rex, Airnorth etc?



There are responses from all of these but not a measurable quantity apart from Cobham. Under 25? Of course about a handful due to the time it takes to get our quals.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Message from the Chief Pilot - 2012 Engagement Survey results (04/06/2012)


Looks if nothing else the survey we are doing has forced them to actually release something. I can't believe that Flt Crew are 38% engaged though when I split off that group from our survey. If I look at one key question to that group.

Senior management are taking my company in the right direction

Response
Percent
Agreehttp://www.surveymonkey.net/i/t.gif 2.1%
Tend to agree http://www.surveymonkey.net/i/t.gif1.7%
Not sure http://www.surveymonkey.net/i/t.gif1.3%
Tend to disagreehttp://www.surveymonkey.net/i/t.gif 4.2%
Disagreehttp://www.surveymonkey.net/i/t.gif 90.8%


Only 3.8% reckon they are taking company in right direction. How can this lead to 38% engagement?

[ampclamp]

Steve, Its a sly decimal point old mate.

[Sarcs]

Ben has his finger on the weak pulse of the flying roo..

Planetalking "Qantas debate avoids the tough questions":
Postscript Tony Webber, an informed and always interesting commentator on matters Qantas, as a former Qantas Chief Economist, lost it on ABC News 24 this morning when he said that Singapore Airlines, Emirates and Etihad ‘don’t have the same profit requirements’ as Qantas.
That is completely untrue. Webber cannot fail to be aware of the corporate pressures on each of these carriers, nor the public record statements made by their senior executives, nor the assessments circulated by investment houses, nor the clear evidence that Singapore Airlines had recently lost the plot, and come under intense pressure to reform its attitudes and business model, a process which doesn’t quite appear to be complete despite some earnest efforts by the current management of this listed company.
Qantas in many respects, is less a special case than it pretends, and more a company where the quality of its management and its engagement with its staff is a real, and unfortunately damaging, factor in its performance.

Full article here:
Qantas debate, post share plunge avoids the tough questions | Plane Talking (http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2012/06/06/qantas-debate-avoids-the-tough-questions/)

...Steve when is the board going to wake up and smell the roses??:ugh:

How long before the situation becomes terminal or is it aleady there?:rolleyes:

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/7786/letterl.jpg

[600ft-lb]

I don't think the Towers Watson staff would be trawling the internet for infringer's of their copyright, so it seems that your survey is being read by the right people Mr FedSec and they didn't like the raw results being distributed.

Maybe its all a bit too real for some of them without the sugar coated fluff put around the results via the Towers Watson(tm) SurveyResultSugarCoatinator(tm) algorithm used to provide engagement percentages hidden in paragraphs with heaps of words and nothing relevant to say.

The best way to see how well Qantas is performing is an industry wide survey, which is what has been done here and it is quite clear that Virgin is the employer of choice at the moment. Saying you are an employer of choice is 1 thing, being it is another.

[V-Jet]

So they would be extremely happy to see the results of their research duplicated and it proved to everyone you are nothing but a fool to waste your money in such a way..

Perhaps commission TW to do an industry wide survey on employees behalf - make it official?

----

A high-level analysis of the results and your comments suggests that you are disengaged with organisation-led aspects such as leadership and strategy but more engaged with the ‘individual’ aspects of your work such as training, reward and working with your colleagues.
Overwhelmingly, you have told us that you are dissatisfied with the strategic direction of the company and I recognise your disappointment in the breakdown of respect between senior management and Flight Crew. It is clear that rebuilding the relationship between the organisation and our pilots is of the highest importance.


Perhaps they are finally realising that despite all of us being massively overpaid (to the tune of $500,000+pa) we are actually happy flying aeroplanes (which we can all do very competently) and building work relationships on our own terms and not just because we are working for 'Qantas'. In other words (and reading between the lines) I think they actually got a shock getting the results and knowing that we can fly (or fix) jets for anyone in the world and not just the the worlds most incompetent airline operators.

I suspect a large number of crew may have ticked the 'planning to leave' box... What I am surprised about, is that the sentence above does seem to convey some level of concern. I would have guessed they simply wouldn't have cared - less to sack if we leave voluntarily, which is what I deep down think is 'the plan'.

For what its worth (and speaking purely on my own behalf) my 'respect' for senior management over the last 10-15 years has reduced to the level of boiling festering hatred. Knowing I had to get my point across to complete cretins of the highest order, I took great care to explain in words of two syllables exactly what I did think of their airline running abilities and in general terms why. Normal people (IQ's higher than shoe sizes) would know when they screw up monumentally - these 'people' are not of such high intelligence:)

[V-Jet]

More than 900 Flight Crew (43 per cent) responded to the survey, and we have received thousands of written comments. We are working through the results including your comments, and will be in a position to share more at the mid-year Flight Crew Briefings. We will also use the briefings to talk about what we can all do to work more constructively together.


Sorry to harp on this insulting letter, but the more I read this, the worse it gets.

'received thousands of comments', 'working through the results', 'be able to share more soon', 'can talk about it...'

What the???

RUN THE BLOODY AIRLINE YOU BLITHERING IDIOTS AND !!!!STOP!!!! TALKING ABOUT RUNNING IT! THIS THE WHOLE PROBLEM IN A NUTSHELL!!!

TRY FOR JUST ONE MOMENT TO IMAGINE YOU ARE RUNNING AN ICONIC BUSINESS AND GIVE US SOME HOPE (we cannot expect miracles after all) THAT YOU ACTUALLY KNOW THE FIRST THING ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE DOING!!!!

God give me strength!! That letter is unbelievable!! It gets more and more appalling every time I read it...

[IAW]

"Perhaps commission TW to do an industry wide survey on employees behalf - make it official?"

I like this idea a lot. But they will either ask for too much money to run the survey, or just make up some "exclusive arrangement with Qantas" excuse. Its worth asking :)

[Shark Patrol]

Steve, give those 'gentlemen' at Qantas nothing! Rephrase the questions slightly, bin the existing results and start again. I'd do the new survey again in a heartbeat and I'm sure others would feel similarly. The letter you received is a classic of "shooting the messenger" rather than reading the message.

B*stards!!!

[600ft-lb]

It's more along the line of Towers Watson being done away with by a free website, it's just a typical corporate minded response. Compare it to Encyclopedia Britannica which for years owned the top spot for knowledge, being made irrelevant by Wikipedia.

But there is nothing stopping another survey being made with rephrased questions and a different answering scale which seems to be the problem that TW have with this all.

TW don't own the rights to the english language or a rating scale of 1 to 6..

And, even though we would all be inconvenienced, I'm sure all aviation employees would understand and be more then happy to participate again in a community produced and driven engagement survey.. in fact we might get even more responses in backlash to TW's actions.

And at the end of the day, what is stopping this from being a regular bi-annual effort for the benefit of the whole industry. Collaborate with the companies involved and they might be more then willing to use the results as their own benchmarks of their own performance and potentially save themselves millions in consultants fees in the process.

[V-Jet]

Compare it to Encyclopedia Britannica which for years owned the top spot for knowledge, being made irrelevant by Wikipedia.


600'/lb - maybe you solved the problem right there:)


*IF* Towers Watson are reading this, I would like them to know that no-one has any issue with them, but in defending the indefensible they will be seen as collaborating with the group of people who are hell bent on destroying a much loved company as such it will be treated very personally by those being destroyed. If Comrade Livvy is privy to this (quite like the poetry there:)) and merely passing it on, please try for one day to just tell the truth and not lie - it can become quite addictive, a way of life even. This survey is being defended because people are sick of decades of mis truths and lies emanating from the exact same steaming pile of incompetent excrement.

[aveng]

I reckon they have been poke into action by the big Q, shut it down and they might get repeat business.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

I reckon they have been poke into action by the big Q

Either that or they are avid readers of Pprune.

[clear to land]

I've got no issue doing another survey Steve. Difference between Coal Face and management (lack of a capital letter intended): We CARE!!!!

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

I'm not convinced that they have any legal grounds to stop us doing what Qantas object to. I won't lay out our legal case here but I can say that nothing good would come out of it for Qantas or the survey mob.

[Shed Dog Tosser]

Mr Purvinas,

How much money does ALEA stand to make from the sale of your survey data, assuming it is proven that Tower Watson have some intellectual rights to the words in the english language you chose to use.

I wonder how much money Tower Watson can claim to have lost if it is proven that they have the intellectual rights to the words in the english language you chose to use.

.............. I wonder who really is the poison pen behind the letter.

Good job ALEA, I guess we know someone is watching, listening and is a little worried.

[600ft-lb]

I'm not going to suggest I know what I'm talking about in relating to IP law etc, but just for info, they only have 2 patents registered (that I could find)

WIPO - Search International and National Patent Collections (http://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/result.jsf?query=FP%3A%28towers+watson%29&maxRec=6&filter=TOWERS+WATSON+LIMITED&filterField=PAF_M&prevFilter=)

1.WOWO/2012/069824 (http://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2012069824&recNum=1&office=&queryString=FP%3A%28towers+watson%29&prevFilter=%26fq%3DPAF_M%3A%22TOWERS+WATSON+LIMITED%22&sortOption=Pub+Date+Desc&maxRec=2) -A METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ANALYSING DATA REPRESENTING ATTRIBUTES OF PHYSICAL ENTITIES2.WOWO/2010/136812 (http://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2010136812&recNum=2&office=&queryString=FP%3A%28towers+watson%29&prevFilter=%26fq%3DPAF_M%3A%22TOWERS+WATSON+LIMITED%22&sortOption=Pub+Date+Desc&maxRec=2) -A METHOD AND APPARATUS RELATING TO SIMULATION OF ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

The ALAEA are not doing the survey for profit. I can write a question as quickly as some boffin from Tower Watson. Would be interesting if we starting providing the service for free to all Aviation companies and our friends in other unions did it in their industries.

It would be just like dumping cheap seats on already busy routes.

[Jethro Gibbs]

Meanwhile around 500 are losing there job. :(

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

We are tackling the immediate problem but I think it equally as important to attack the cause.

[ejectx3]

Every qf staff member is behind you steve

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Thnx Ej. Just another thing Jethro and all. The ALAEA is a team. 10 staff, 20 Executive members and 100 Reps. It just happens to be that one posts openly here under his title. It doesn't mean that I do everything myself and I am sometimes unfairly given credit for works not of my own. We can handle more than one issue at once.

Knowing staff are behind what we do is great. I think the number one issue that is driving Qantas down is poor employee engagement. A tardy cabin interior can be overcome by warm and friendly smile. A completely engagaed pilot will look for ways to save fuel. Wage increases are less important for those who love going to work and I know LAMEs would allow change if they weren't treated like fools by the clowns running that part of the business.

[Shed Dog Tosser]

With the share price where it is, I doubt ALEA's alleged breach of copyright and alleged theft of intellectual property will be high on the "To Do" list.

The present share price,,,,,,,,,,, you just couldn't invent a joke that funny.

[ejectx3]

Sadly that's probably exactly what Elaine and the board are all concentrating on.... The survey

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

You know what they say - the truth will set you free.

Let's hope the truth in this case will set a few of them free.

[Mstr Caution]

Legal Defence:

If the same questions were asked of the same employee group the result would be the same or similar.

As the results from the same employee group differ significantly, the questioned asked and or the methods used to tabulate results must be DIFFERENT to the tecnnique & copyrighted system used by Tower Watson.

MC

[Armchairflyer]

If the same questions were asked of the same employee group the result would be the same or similar.Actually they might be quite different, depending on, e.g., the respondents, a time lag between surveys, and the psychometric properties of the questionnaire. However, as pointed out already it might be possible to find very similar items not only in other surveys but in academic journals, too, in which case AFAIK one is allowed to use them freely for non-commercial purposes (as long as the source is cited correctly).

Sorry for the interjection from the other side of the globe, in doubt just disregard especially since IANAL (been in the quantitative social sciences for several years now, though, including developing and analyzing employee surveys for a consulting firm. If you feel I might be of any help, feel free to PM me).

All the best
ACF

[Engineer_aus]

Steve, there is a whole department now on media and social media purely for this type of thing. So yes the big rat does read this.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

I think they call it the crisis centre. Boy Qantas know how to waste money.

This survey however is not about Qantas. Its about our industry. I think someone suggested earlier that it will come t nothing. The idea is bigger than that. Only unions are placed to measure engagement across any particular industry. Profitibility is directly related to employee engagement. Certain companies will want it hidden whilst others know they will score well.

If we do this every year and release the results as wide and professionally as possible, the ones who score low will have to lift their marks. In turn employees would need to be treated better and that is somethng that will make the lives of workers better.

[unionist1974]

Great stolen survey , pity you could not prevent Tulla closing .

[Mr Qantas]

This is just rubish the numbers are clearly made up by a dirty union trying to trick people to its lies. I may be retired but i still go to reunons with my former work mates and yes the staff are happy becase they have told me. Qantas has done the staff and it was a good result if you look at these dificult times the union survey isnt even sanctioned by Qantas.

[600ft-lb]

Well Mr Qantas you've sold me. That anecdotal evidence was really enlightening. If only there were a way to integrate that vital Qantas evidence into this industry survey...

[jaded boiler]

Mr Qantas it might be prudent to take one of your reminyls before posting. And please learn to spell.

[AEROMEDIC]

Look, I am also retired, and my old work mates are telling me how they struggle to understand what Alan Joyce is doing to their company. He seems hellbent on turning Qantas into a low cost carrier no matter what. Anyone would think that he is getting a huge bonus to do so.
No one that I have spoken to (and it's a lot) has anything good to say about this management or their ability to manage. I am not a shareholder, but if I were, I would be most unhappy about the share price right now.
With Joyce and Clifford's recent meteoric pay rise, what are their KPI's ???
:ugh:

[ejectx3]

I'd bet my left nut, Every pilot, and every engineer and every single cabin crew member despise the way Qantas has been left to rot by this lot.

[avionicame]

I'd bet my left nut, Every pilot, and every engineer and every single cabin crew member despise the way Qantas has been left to rot by this lot.

Here here!

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

I haven't releaased the results of one question yet but does anyone want to guess the answer? That is how many are in favour.

I have the full trust in the people running my company.

Qantas, Virgin, Alliance.

[stubby jumbo]

......I'll have a go Steve - but not as far as betting my left nut !

VIRGIN = 76%
ALLIANCE = 66%
QANTAS = 22%

Look, I am also retired, and my old work mates are telling me how they struggle to understand what Alan Joyce is doing to their company. He seems hellbent on turning Qantas into a low cost carrier no matter what. Anyone would think that he is getting a huge bonus to do so.

I am also one of the lucky one's who retired a while back.

Let me tell you -every time I see a former colleague or any one working for QF for that matter ....its the same.

"AJ and is a turkey, Board haven't a clue and we (staff) have all had a gutful and are working on an exit strategy".

And lets not even start on ........Staff Travel when this all turns to ****e !:hmm:

[UPPERLOBE]

And lets not even start on ........Staff Travel when this all turns to ****e

A minor issue I know, I worked for QF for 40 years, at sometime during the latter bits they brought in a rule with regard to the usage of long service free trips after retirement. I (amongst many others I know) neglected to use my 40 year free trip within five years of retiring and sure enough they sucked it back.

To me it's a lot like people who get a gold watch after 40 years service being told to hand it back because you haven't worn it in five years.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Any other guesses on the trust management question?

[Livs Hairdresser]

Dunno about the others but :

Qantas 3%

I'm feeling generous today.

[IAW]

Qantas: 0%
Virgin: 75%
Alliance 90%

[V-Jet]

I can't see how _anyone_ could support what management have done - well except for the dishrag that appears on TV occasionally. If it isn't 0 it would be very, very close to it.

I'll put my money on 0 - with the caveat that it could be slightly higher if dishrag and friends responded.

Probably a direct photo negative (i.e. directly inverse) of that other red tailed company with whats-his-name again at the helm..

[ejectx3]

My left nut is nervous

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Remember managers are responding to the survey also at a current rate of about 3%.

[V-Jet]

That would make Qf leadership respect at a maximum of 3%, but I would make an educated guess not _all_ of them are happy watching massed rogerings occurring, so in all I reckon from that 2.5% for Qantas, 90+% for VBA. Alliance 65 - 70

??..

[ejectx3]

Any final results or lawyers it a halt to this?

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

On the legal side of things I can only say this - no comment.

Just working now to get the information professionally presented.

[Ngineer]

One of the greatest advertisers of a company is it's staff. And I think that the results showing what % of staff would recommend this company (and subsequently any subids) to their friends is a very sad reflection of where we have gone. Especially as alot of our customers were the Aussie public, a great proportion of which usually knows someone who works at QF.

After reading the latest internal email regarding docking of pay for those unfortunate enough to be rostered when MOD came into effect and who maybe tried to do what they thought was morally the right and legal thing and safest thing to do I thought is it hardly any wonder?

What would you say at a BBQ if asked about the safety of this airline and Australia's new system of maint, and our government?

[Managers Perspective]

What would you say at a BBQ if asked about the safety of this airline and Australia's new system of maint, and our government?

I would say that we are now just starting to catch up to world standards.

The changes are fully supported by the major aircraft manufacturers and government.

But as we progress there are those that are adversely affected by the change, and some of those are squealing like pigs as they try to hold on to the "good old days" when there was plenty of profit in the business.

MP

[Ngineer]

I would say that we are now just starting to catch up to world standards.


Thanks for a good laugh MP!!:ok:

[Redpanda]

We are heading down to world standards.........

Roll on 31st of August, and I'm out of this Reduced Standards industry.

Let the crooked management Reap what they sow.

There's no integrity left...............

[Jethro Gibbs]

Another 100 announced to go today should have a rolling counter for job loses.

[ampclamp]

Where are the losses from Jethro?:confused:

EDIT apparently component maint area. :sad:

[noclue]

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/companies/job-cuts-as-qantas-shifts-component-maintenance-workshop-from-sydney-to-melbourne/story-fn91v9q3-1226404574229)

[Jethro Gibbs]

Once again the media knows before the employees and unions .:ugh:

[Nassensteins Monster]

Quote:
What would you say at a BBQ if asked about the safety of this airline and Australia's new system of maint, and our government?
I would say that we are now just starting to catch up to world standards.

The changes are fully supported by the major aircraft manufacturers and government.

But as we progress there are those that are adversely affected by the change, and some of those are squealing like pigs as they try to hold on to the "good old days" when there was plenty of profit in the business.

MP

MP it behoves you to read the transcript of the FWA hearing on 14 June re MoD. Available here (http://www.alaea.asn.au/news/391-transcript-of-fwa-hearing-thursday-14th-june-2012.html).

It's revealing that from testimony provided by QF management, every domestic operator EXCEPT QANTAS provides pilots with classroom preflight check training and the latest safety and maintenance updates LAMEs receive. It's revealing - and appalling - that the FWA commissioners make specific mention of those facts.

So at a BBQ when asked if Qantas Domestic is still safe to fly I have a moral obligation to reply rather equivocally "well yes, but less so than every other operator including Tiger, and here's why (for the two reasons stated above)."

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

If pics are of employees please try and ensure they are good looking ones like the bloke below.

http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/7483/spfeopanel3.jpg

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Hey all. Survey will close this weekend. Working on a presentation booklet for employees, investors, politicans and other interested parties.

I'm trying to fill in some blank areas in the pages with some nice pictures of workers, aircraft and airports. If anyone has any that they can share with me it would be much appreciated.

Please email to [email protected] (fedsec%40alaea.asn.au)

[Worrals in the wilds]

I take it that the Qantas dress code allows three day growth these days? :}

[genxfrog]

Is that Alan Joyce after plastic surgery?

[BIGDOG2008]

I have been following this thread with interest. The question I have is this.
A nice glossy report produced by the ALAEA about employee engagement with staff pictures no less will mean exactly what ? We already know staff at the rat arent happy. I guess we will know that exactly 98.3 % of staff arent happy or engaged. Will it change anything ? :ugh:

[V-Jet]

The absolute tragedy with that photo Steve, is that I doubt any management (certainly not the 'engaged' ones) would have any idea what the actual background in that shot is.

Is that Alan Joyce after plastic surgery? Impossible. If it were you would be able to see shoes poking out the bottom of the shirt about where Steve's belt is..

[The Green Goblin]

That panel behind Steve is obselete.

And with it a wealth of knowledge and resource in emergencies.

Long live the in flight engineer!

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

The sad thing is that I still have an active licence on it.

[Spanner Turner]

Steve,

Could you just cycle 1 and 3 bleed switches to get those high stage lights out ? Bloody slack coneheads!

:ok:
.

[Worrals in the wilds]

For us non-LAMEs, is it a 747-200? :confused:

[Spanner Turner]

For us non-LAMEs, is it a 747-200?


Close my friend - it's a 747-300.

:ok:

[Worrals in the wilds]

Cool, thanks.
Lovely aircraft. :ok:

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

The LCD fuel gauges may help you get it even a little closer. I think only the late 300's had em.

[Managers Perspective]

A great peice of memorabilia, surprising how quickly things become obselete now days.....

MP.

[Worrals in the wilds]

There are plenty of 747-300s still flapping their wings.
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?aircraft_genericsearch=Boeing+747-300&aircraftsearch=

Still plenty of unionists around, too. :E
Thousands turn out for Labour Day march in Brisbane | The Courier-Mail (http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/thousands-turn-out-for-labour-day-march-in-brisbane/story-e6freoof-1226348812538)

[Managers Perspective]

Still plenty of unionists around, too.
Thousands turn out for Labour Day march in Brisbane | The Courier-Mail (http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/thousands-turn-out-for-labour-day-march-in-brisbane/story-e6freoof-1226348812538)

Interesting article and very relevant, given that the Queensland Labor Party is now also obselete.

MP.

[Worrals in the wilds]

For the moment...they won't be forever; there are always swings and roundabouts. Presumably Howard figured that out after he lost government and his own seat due (in part at least) to Work Choices. :E IMO the Qld ALP lost a lot of votes due to the unannounced asset sales, which most unions (and their members) were very much opposed to.

Labour Day is the day for workers and the actual trade unions, not the ALP. Apparently they got a slightly better turn out than the previous year despite the ALP's well deserved trouncing at the polls and the federal government's abysmal polling in Queensland. One doesn't necessarily follow the other.

Actually the Queensland Labor Party is obsolete and has been since 1962; I assume you're referring to the ALP Queensland? ;)
Queensland Labor Party - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queensland_Labor_Party)


IIRC the ALAEA is not affiliated with the Labor Party.

[Arnold E]

Interesting article and very relevant, given that the Queensland Labor Party is now also obselete.

I think you are obsolete, why dont you go to another country that is more agreeable to your likes??

[victor two]

Survey is a complete waste of time, paper and bandwidth.....

So everyone has had a chance to announce that they feel unsafe at work, can't raise safety issues, feel the company doesn't love them, puts obstructions up in their way and doesn't listen.

Yet - right now there are thousands of young pilots laying awake at night in their little rented flats hoping and praying that the get a call for an interview with the same companies that they just read are apparently awful and tomorrow will hit mum and dad up for $30 or $40K for a type rating with said awful companies.

If there was any benfit to all this chest beating and mindless statistical trickery, I fail to see what it was! Changes nothing and will be forgotten in about 3 weeks!

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

If there was any benfit to all this chest beating and mindless statistical trickery, I fail to see what it was! Changes nothing and will be forgotten in about 3 weeks!

Well you won't have to worry about it then will you. In case it is you, stop sending me threatening letters about the survey release.

[CaptCloudbuster]

Beat me to it Steve.... Towers Watson don't agree;)

[Jethro Gibbs]

600 are losing there job which seems to have been forgotten so quickly.

[600ft-lb]

600 are losing there job which seems to have been forgotten so quickly. I don't think it's forgotten, but any implication that anyone except the board and the CEO is completely to blame is wrong. They set the direction, they choose to outsource. There is enough narrow bodies, A320s and B737s as well as A330s to keep everyone well and truly in a job. They choose not to.

You just wait next when the uptake to move to Brisbane is dismal, which by all accounts so far, it is, the facility can't get up to full strength and it's just a token effort, like the Jetstar A320 facility. And like the Jetstar, the majority of all of the checks will be done in the Philippines.

Maybe you'll feel better when the next lot of line redundancies come out later on in the year when R&D goes to Skystar or QGS ?

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

600 are losing there job which seems to have been forgotten so quickly.

27000 people will lose their jobs unless the ship is turned around.

[LAME2]

27000 people will lose their jobs unless the ship is turned around.

Nobody wants to think of that but it's becoming more of a possibility. Was given my "change is good" lecture this week. They say they have 3 billion in the bank but they talk and act like their broke.

Too many questions, not enough answers.