PDA

View Full Version : JHAS Keeps 457's over Local workers in new Redundancy round


NuckingFuts
1st Oct 2012, 04:30
It's a pretty sad state of affairs when you hear of this sort of thing happening to local workers.

So much for working for an Australian Company like JHAS. (John Holland)

JHAS has made a commitment to keep it's temporary Visa (457) staff and make local workers redundant.

How is that even possible?

Surely there are laws to protect Australian Citizens from being exploited by companies like this. It's not like we are in a corrupt third world country or anything!

With all the workers from Qantas being out of job surely these people should not be allowed to stay. But to axe local workers and retain these temporary workers is an outrage!:confused:

Keg
1st Oct 2012, 06:02
I think they have to? I think having 'sponsored' the people concerned under the 457s, they can't just drop them like a hot potato if they still have employment for them.

Ludicrous I know but they are responsible for those people during the term of the visa and thus they're more likely to let locals go whilst they still have that responsibility.

Romulus
1st Oct 2012, 07:00
Thank Julia's Fair Work Act.

"In Webster v Mercury Colleges Pty Ltd, Fair Work Australia held that
termination of a sponsored teacher was unfair because of the serious financial
consequences to the teacher and the social dislocation that was inevitable as a
result his summary dismissal."

457 Visa Legal Position (www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&ved=0CDwQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmalyonlaw.com%2FLiteratureRetrieve.aspx%3FI D%3D76190&ei=dD5pUNiUCq2RiQfL3oDYDw&usg=AFQjCNE6Mu8KAl4pGHkhFxx-Sm9nfDnWUw&sig2=O6Qq9yDGiTtVo2nYIDkpBg)

One would suggest that applies to all 457 visa holders who only have 28 days to get another sponsor or leave the country. In several instances 457 visa holders now have greater protection than local employees.

Stalins ugly Brother
1st Oct 2012, 13:51
"In Webster v Mercury Colleges Pty Ltd, Fair Work Australia held that
termination of a sponsored teacher was unfair because of the serious financial
consequences to the teacher and the social dislocation that was inevitable as a
result his summary dismissal."

Webster v Mercury Colleges Pty Ltd was a case of wrongful dismissal for gross misconduct.

Whilst the above quote is true the ruling by FWA was not purely based on the issue of the visa, it was also ruled on with consideration of the employer not following due process and the employee not given procedural fairness in the dismissal. The outcome was too harsh. Basically the punishment outweighed the crime in such that the punishment would have resulted in the employee, due to the terms of his visa, being required to return to his homeland and would have caused "harsh" financial consequences far beyond that of a citizen of Australia.

On the flip side this case also puts a more onerous burden on an employer. Employers maybe more prone to hire a local worker than a V 457ener in the future as it potentially could be harder to dismiss the fly ins in the case of any misconduct.

In regard to preferential treatment given to 457eners, my opinion is an employer cannot discriminate when determining a reduction in staff in a work force. An employer on a 457 visa will be subject to the same conditions of employment and the same due process as a local employee subject to the conditions of their contract/award.

Romulus
1st Oct 2012, 22:19
"In Webster v Mercury Colleges Pty Ltd, Fair Work Australia held that
termination of a sponsored teacher was unfair because of the serious financial
consequences to the teacher and the social dislocation that was inevitable as a result his summary dismissal."


Webster v Mercury Colleges Pty Ltd was a case of wrongful dismissal for gross misconduct.

Whilst the above quote is true the ruling by FWA was not purely based on the issue of the visa, it was also ruled on with consideration of the employer not following due process and the employee not given procedural fairness in the dismissal. The outcome was too harsh. Basically the punishment outweighed the crime in such that the punishment would have resulted in the employee, due to the terms of his visa, being required to return to his homeland and would have caused "harsh" financial consequences far beyond that of a citizen of Australia.

On the flip side this case also puts a more onerous burden on an employer. Employers maybe more prone to hire a local worker than a V 457ener in the future as it potentially could be harder to dismiss the fly ins in the case of any misconduct.

In regard to preferential treatment given to 457eners, my opinion is an employer cannot discriminate when determining a reduction in staff in a work force. An employer on a 457 visa will be subject to the same conditions of employment and the same due process as a local employee subject to the conditions of their contract/award.

Correct on all counts.

The 457 harshness test now includes the consequences of visa loss, something that simply isn't an issue with local employees. And that's the crux of it, common sense dictates you never pick a fight that's harder than you need to, so unless emotion gets in there somewhere the usual targets of Anglo Saxon males (ASM) as the obvious course of action remain.

We can all say how unfair it is and that the same group gets advantages elsewhere but until there is a counter to the current orthodoxy businesses know they can't fire women or minorities as easily as they can the ASM.

It should also mean that in good times more ASMs get hired, but that's a practice that comes under a lot more scrutiny for discrimination.

NuckingFuts
1st Oct 2012, 22:49
My God!
Who are you Romulus?
What HR rock did you climb out from under?
Would you prefer if we went back to slavery as well?

You obviously had something to do with JHAS. Can we thank you for helping it get to its current glory (not)? The bottom feeders of aviation.
Your ideology has certainly worked wonders there.

Romulus
1st Oct 2012, 23:10
My God!
Who are you Romulus?

What HR rock did you climb out from under?

Would you prefer if we went back to slavery as well?


If you read that in my post then you need to reread it until you understand what I wrote.

The analysis is very simple, why on earth would you pick a fight with an opponent who has the ability to line up Govt institutions that are exceptionally well funded against you?

In short, if you have any kind of common sense, you wouldn't.

Hence the ASM cops the sh*tty end of the stick when it comes time for layoffs.

That was my point.

And it's largely the same the world over.

Not saying it's right, just that it is the way it is.


You obviously had something to do with JHAS. Can we thank you for helping it get to its current glory (not)? The bottom feeders of aviation.
Your ideology has certainly worked wonders there.

JHAS is alive and employing people, would you prefer it closed?

I haven't been there for at least 5 years so I can't comment on what they're doing with anything but an outsider's view.

As for being bottom feeders - that's pretty unfair. But then, typing mindless criticism whilst behind a keyboard is pretty easy isn't it NF?

Who do you work for? What are you afraid of?

Methinks you have some inner self loathing bubbling away.

tail wheel
2nd Oct 2012, 00:55
Foreign skilled workers on 457 Visas may access to the same industrial relations laws as Australian workers. Foreign skilled workers on 457 Visas do not have any industrial relations advantage over Australian workers.


Foreign skilled workers on 457 Visas must be paid the same wages as comparable Australian workers. Foreign skilled workers on 457 Visas potentially cost an employer more than a comparable Australian worker, due to liabilities in the sponsoring agreement.

Romulus
2nd Oct 2012, 01:59
Foreign skilled workers on 457 Visas may access to the same industrial relations laws as Australian workers. Foreign skilled workers on 457 Visas do not have any industrial relations advantage over Australian workers.

Foreign skilled workers on 457 Visas must be paid the same wages as comparable Australian workers. Foreign skilled workers on 457 Visas potentially cost an employer more than a comparable Australian worker, due to liabilities in the sponsoring agreement.

Those are the words, the reality is a bit different (refer previous quotes).

Same as female employees, the words say equal treatment, the reality is often different (in both directions).

Jethro Gibbs
2nd Oct 2012, 02:04
And there are still mobs like ALG trying to bring in 457 visa holders this is just madness given current conditions in Australia.:mad::ugh:

tail wheel
2nd Oct 2012, 09:00
Romulus. Employers of overseas workers are subject to randon audit by DIAC. If you are aware of instances where overseas workers are not being paid an industry standard wage, I suggest you contact DIAC HERE (http://www.immi.gov.au/contacts/forms/services/).

mightyauster
2nd Oct 2012, 11:05
The problem Tailwheel, from a LAME's point of view, is Juliar's "modern" Aviation Award allows a minimum rate of pay which is far, far below what the airlines are actually paying, as they have realised some time ago that no one would work for them. Unfortunately, this is where the bottom feeders like AMSA, IASA and JHAS come in. :*
It is not only pay rates that are a concern. Since CASA have foisted the Part 66 system upon us, with the lie that the existing Mechanical LAMEs won't be affected, the reality is a foriegn full B1 rated LAME is much more economically useful than a legacy CASA LAME, especially if said companies don't want to pay for training.:mad:
I'm sorry, but the whole system is a complete and utter shambles.:ugh:

Romulus
2nd Oct 2012, 11:25
Romulus. Employers of overseas workers are subject to randon audit by DIAC. If you are aware of instances where overseas workers are not being paid an industry standard wage, I suggest you contact DIAC HERE.

TW, I suggest no such thing and there was certainly none of that when I was there. JH employs a lot of 457 visa holders throughout their business, there is an entire support unit at Corporate level there to assist Regional Businesses (as the various state groups are called) as well as the various specialist businesses inc JHAS. 457 visas are critical to JH operations so there is a commensurate level of focus. Bear in mind that if you get the process wrong when dealing with Indonesians for instance then JH managers can be done for people smuggling. There are VERY strict processes in place to make sure this thing is done correctly, right down to informing any foreign Govt of relevant visiting JH management because to even talk to people about job placement in Australia without due notice to the local authorities constitutes a breach of anti people smuggling laws.

What I am saying is that there are a number of potential avenues open to 457 visa holders, most notable the adverse action for significant impacts as noted above. There is also an avenue for claims of racial discrimination or vilification, harassment, etc etc etc.

In short if a 457 worker wants to make a fuss it is far easier for them to do so than an ASM.

Romulus
2nd Oct 2012, 11:42
The problem Tailwheel, from a LAME's point of view, is Juliar's "modern" Aviation Award allows a minimum rate of pay which is far, far below what the airlines are actually paying, as they have realised some time ago that no one would work for them. Unfortunately, this is where the bottom feeders like AMSA, IASA and JHAS come in.

Can't comment on AMSA or IASA but JHAS certainly weren't paying low end.

A key concept was to move to annualised salaries so guys get paid a good living regardless of overtime, the theory being that the incentive is then to get the work completed appropriately in less time with no need to do anywhere near as much overtime i.e. JHAS pays a level of overtime regardless but then gets the benefit of productivity boosts as things get completed more quickly and clients get value for money on the basis of quicker turnarounds.

In exchange JHAS needed the flexibility to roster people differing hours per week depending on the work required at that time. When your entire earning comes from selling time then time not billed is a major business killer. If you make 15% margin on a person's total cost then if 1 hour is wasted it takes approximately 7 hours of billed work to cover that wasted hour. That was why flexibility of hours rostered was critical. I know a number of the guys hated that, but essentially that is one of the key differences between working for an MRO and an airline where the load can be balanced and any overflow work outsourced.

I don't know how successful it was in practice, I left before it really got going, but that was the rationale. At the time it also meant that the guys got paid superannuation on the built in components like overtime and all other allowances which didn't all get paid on a more traditional hour based pay system.



It is not only pay rates that are a concern. Since CASA have foisted the Part 66 system upon us, with the lie that the existing Mechanical LAMEs won't be affected, the reality is a foriegn full B1 rated LAME is much more economically useful than a legacy CASA LAME, especially if said companies don't want to pay for training.
I'm sorry, but the whole system is a complete and utter shambles.

You are correct but I disagree with your conclusion. The system is a shambles, your point that a full B1 is much more economical than the CASA LAME hits the nail on the head. In the modern environment you need those efficiencies or your costs blow out massively.

This is where I think QF have missed THE critical point. It doesn't matter if you give the guys a 3% pay rise, that's not where the problem lies. Heck, as I recall it LAME's took a 0% pay rise around 9/11 and SARS. The problem lies in the restrictive work practices requiring too many people compared to the B1/B2 system. That is just structurally inefficient and the costs associated with that are far more significant than any 3% pay rise.

As for training, one of my beliefs was that a JHAS training school was a must. Any AME who showed the initiative to get their basics in place would be given a type course to become a LAME. From memory the average LAME age when I did the numbers was over 53, to me that represented a major issue. The other key benefit of an in house training school was if there were ever a period when no major work was won then the guys could be given additional ratings or whatever via modular teaching. Multiskilling is also essential if an MRO based in Australia is to be viable.

Ultimately the school was something that didn't proceed, was disappointed that it didn't.

mightyauster
2nd Oct 2012, 12:36
Romulus, I totally agree with you that the full B1 is far more efficient that the old CASA system, and I will go as far to say that it should've been introduced 15-20 years ago, with the introduction of fly by wire aircraft. A lot of people should be hanging their heads in shame that this mess has dragged on for so long - CASA, its political masters, the ALAEA and airline management.
My point is now, to stay employable and competitive with all the imports, I and lot of other CASA LAMEs, are now expected to cough for up to $28,000 and 2 1/2 years of rec leave.
I read with (non)amusement in the last week where the federal gubmint have bent to media pressure and are going to fund completion of training for a bunch of foreign medical students. It's funny how they can instantly find the resources to look after medical students, but Australian LAME's are expected to take a (savage) haircut when CASA changes the rules. :mad:

Romulus
2nd Oct 2012, 14:34
Mightyauster, as I understood it if you qualify as a LAME under the old system you get a cutover to the new until 27 June 2015 based on your existing CAR 31.

Civil Aviation Safety Authority - Becoming a LAME (http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:STANDARD::pc=PC_90491)

mightyauster
2nd Oct 2012, 16:05
Yes Romulus, CASA have allowed four years to change over. But how is that certain companies are allowed to import LAME's with full B1 Licenses, to the detriment of their own CAR 31 LAME's, telling them they need to fund their own license upgrades? It is a blatently discriminatory practice.:*

tail wheel
2nd Oct 2012, 18:54
The problem Tailwheel, from a LAME's point of view, is Juliar's "modern" Aviation Award allows a minimum rate of pay which is far, far below what the airlines are actually paying, as they have realised some time ago that no one would work for them. Unfortunately, this is where the bottom feeders like AMSA, IASA and JHAS come in.

DIAC, like most of Australia, recognise the Modern Awards are not a basis for employment of overseas skilled workers (or local employees). DIAC have established a TSMIT (http://migrationblog.immi.gov.au/2012/06/29/temporary-skilled-migration-income-threshold-and-english-language-exemption-annual-indexation/) (Temporary Skilled Migration Income Threshold) of $51,400 from 1 July 2012.

However, the TSMIT is only a base. The actual salary paid must be determined by market survey and the results submitted to DIAC with the Visa Nomination. The salary paid to an overseas worker must be equal to the salary paid to an Australian worker doing the same job. If there is no comparable Australian worker in the applicant company, the applicant company must submit wider industry market salary documentation.

empire4
3rd Oct 2012, 00:40
You are all arguing over semantics, the whole point is that AUSTRALIANS must come first. They are not, and have not been for a long time.

Can anyone name any other country in which a foreigner, non-citizen is kept over a national......? In a lot of countries foreigners have less rights than nationals. We are already doing them a service by A, giving them a job and B, giving them the same protection as Australian citizens.

An Australian should not lose their job and a foreigner keep theirs where it can be reasonably retrained. END OF STORY!

600ft-lb
3rd Oct 2012, 00:53
There is the argument that by forcing employers to treat them on all respects as an Australian there is a disincentive to employ a foreigner. But its a strange dynamic where this regulatory framework has been adopted so late in the world Australian LAMEs are at a competitive disadvantage in the world today, our employers and training organisations are playing catch up or just importing because that's cheaper. Coupled with most employers not wanting to spend to upskill their staff whilst trying to remove the LAME from the tarmac as much as possible... Situation as today currently stands.

tail wheel
3rd Oct 2012, 02:05
There is the argument that by forcing employers to treat them on all respects as an Australian there is a disincentive to employ a foreigner.

Well .... no ...... to you and empire 4.

Overseas skilled workers, working in Australia on a sub class 457 Visa have full entitlement to protection under Australian industrial and WH&S laws, as it should be. Australia does not have two classes of workers.

However, overseas workers do not have access to all the benefits enjoyed by Australians. For example, they can not access Medicare benefits but must buy and hold current Private Medical Insurance at their own expense. They can also not access any Australian social welfare benefits nor can they or their family obtain education or vocational training at Government expense.

If their employment is terminated for any reason they must either find an alternate sponsoring employer or leave Australia within 28 days of ceasing employment.

DIAC has a high priority to ensure Australians first and that no overseas worker shall displace an Australian Citizen or Australian Permanent Resident.

If you are aware of any instance where there are two identically qualified workers, one a tempory overseas worker, the other an Australian and the Australian is terminated in preference to the overseas worker, I am sure DIAC would want to be informed.

Does the ALAEA not take an interest in these matters?

empire4
3rd Oct 2012, 02:50
Tail Wheel, I partly agree with what you say. 600ft-lb is correct in what they said.

You and I both know 2 LAMEs by your definition are not the same. The Australian Mech licensed on B737-800 that just got sacked from Tulla compared to the French 457 visa holder Mech licensed on A330 are not considered the same. They do however hold the exact same base trade, license and with PCT can be retrained. Money is the only constraint as experience can be argued.

Is the definition of "Same Qualifications" suitable for the Aircraft maintenance engineering industry?? I don't think so.

Due to money only companies will take the 457 holder in this case. Is this right by Australians? I understand it is the best thing for the Company to do in regards to the bottom line, but this is something that the Unions MUST push to stop. We need to be nationalist, and protect ourselves and the future generations.

do you see my point? Have you worked overseas?

600ft-lb
3rd Oct 2012, 04:25
Tailwheel, i was casting a wide assertion in regards to a disincentive. You won't pay the thousands to the immigration dept for an application to employ a 457 when you can get the same locally at the same price.

as it stands for aircraft engineers, due to the lack of investment in skills training, lack of regulatory reform, looter management style etc, Australian LAMEs are being replaced by 'super' 5 cat mech/av combined lames trained in Singapore and china, imported by jhas and amsa because those companies can rightfully assert that bugger all Australians hold those qualifications and the ones that do won't work for 100k/year.

That's the dynamic currently in place in aviation, Australians are 10 years behind the world and therefore discriminated against.

Normally its a disincentive - in aviation its an incentive. Plenty of jobs for foreigners.

rudderless1
3rd Oct 2012, 04:38
Transition to b1 from mech is about 6 weeks theory and 3 weeks prac
At Aviation Australia.
Plus addition type requirement
They don't want b1 in Qf heavy it seems! They still train mech type
For them. Whilst training line to b1 type in the same class.
Question is has competency been achieved in the very short
Time frame. Europe had big issues on this.

All looks good on paper, but .....??? CASA worlds best at lowering standards

empire4
3rd Oct 2012, 06:08
600ft-lb, you've learned a hell of a lot in that bubble. 100 % correct in every way.

mightyauster
3rd Oct 2012, 10:17
600ft-lb, you have hit the nail square on the head!
Further to your contribution rudderless1, the Singapore CAAS conversion from a SAR 7 License to SAR 66 is only four weeks, theory and practical included, at a cost of about $4500. CASA then rubber stamp the Singaporean's CASA license. Again, the Australian citizen is at a competitive disadvantage; but it is all legal and the so called "Fair" Work Australia and the Immigration Dept is not interested.:mad:

tail wheel
3rd Oct 2012, 11:29
I am not familiar with the new LAME licensing system.

The intend of the 457 Visa is to supplement skills shortage areas, not replace training Australians.

What does ALAEA Fed Sec have to say about this? He is in a position to raise the matter with the Minister for Immigration.

Jethro Gibbs
3rd Oct 2012, 11:52
Good Luck with that .

mightyauster
3rd Oct 2012, 12:00
I have raised this isue with the ALAEA previously and they either cannot or will not do anything about it. It is one of the reasons I will not renew my membership.

Jethro Gibbs
3rd Oct 2012, 12:16
What does ALAEA Fed Sec have to say about this? He is in a position to raise
the matter with the Minister for Immigration.


Right the Minister is sitting in his office waiting for the call FFS get real .

ALAEA Fed Sec
3rd Oct 2012, 12:38
So. I don't read Pprune for a couple of days and all of a sudden we aren't doing something about a problem that we know about. Horsesh!t.

In the last few days we have written to the Govt about this in a lenghty submission to a review of the skilled 457 visa class list that is currently under review. So some poster here won't join us becasue we won't do anything about it? Who do you think we are bloke, the Govt? This whole sham was not our doing and the knobs in power now won't fix any of the draconian laws put in place by Johnny and his HR Nicholls mates.

Does anyone know what dealing with this Govt is like. Take this comment -

What does ALAEA Fed Sec have to say about this? He is in a position to raise the matter with the Minister for Immigration.

Yes I can raise it. I make an appointment to go to Cbr, I even have my own friggen ID to get in th place these days. I wait in the Bowen office and he gives me 15 minutes as we sip a luke warn tea prepared by a staffer. He shows much concern with the matters I raise and promises to continue to show much concern about it. What do you think happens? Nothing, absolutely friggen nothing. The idiots in Canberra are useless.

Jethro you may take aim and say this is the ALAEAs fault because we haven't bulit a nice relationship with the Govt. Have the other unions fixed the problem? Virtually every god damn profession you can think of is on that 457 list and not one union can convince a Labor Government to put Australian workrs first. If you can tip that I may be a little angry, frustrated and ready to step away from the great big line of union leaders heaping false praise on the current Govt, you'd be pretty close to the mark.

Jethro Gibbs
3rd Oct 2012, 12:48
FED SEC i was just pointing out to the other poster that if they think the minister sits in his office waiting for a call from you they are dreaming I agree with you that the governments bloody useless so calm down.

ALAEA Fed Sec
3rd Oct 2012, 13:11
I'm not angry at you Jethro. I'm angry at the issue. What is occurring is so morally wrong and unions for the last 10 years have been banging their heads up against the wall to get things fixed and nothing happens.

Romulus is so correct about most the things he has posted on this thread. The laws have loopholes and the companies make the most of them, I would even go as far as to say that the the loopholes were made deliberately so companies could act immorally and say they are just doing what is lawful. The law is an a$$. The lawmakers are a$$holes.

Romulus is however wrong about the creation of employment. Aircraft fly and must be fixed. JHAS doesn't create the need for labour, they just supply it. If JHAS go away, someone else will supply it. The work being done cannot be carried out offshore.

JHAS want to keep the 457 imports because they are non union and some cut corners on the job. They do not hold the Aussie values of pointing out deficiencies and demanding they get fixed. They are more inclined to turn a blind eye to aircraft defects and certify defective aircraft as fit to fly. This is why JHAS are losing contracts, the quality is getting worse.

JHAS are not meeting training obligations to overcome the shortfalls in labour that create the need for 457 holders in the first place. No apprentices and bugger all training. They are destroying our industry and really, it would be better off for safety outcomes and the industry in general if they just left town.

mightyauster
3rd Oct 2012, 13:28
I hear ya SP, but there is no point in spending what few shekels I earn on union dues if I can't get results and I am heartily sick of being shat on, by virtue of the misfortune of being born here.

Flying Spag Monster
3rd Oct 2012, 13:58
The analysis is very simple, why on earth would you pick a fight with an opponent who has the ability to line up Govt institutions that are exceptionally well funded against you?

Because once, many moons ago it was considered the right thing to do... And there goes Australia, the basic values that established a nation are shot. Corporations had an obligation to shareholders and the community in which they existed, that is employment. But now it's shareholders only, as if we all own companies and employ foreigners to do the hard stuff, sounds like the Middle East. I work in a country where the foreigner (me), is very much second behind the local who gets paid more for the same job. If the work dries up I will be short shifted well before they will and....so I should. Useless Government more concerned about the letter of the laws they have cobbled together rather than their true reason for Government, that is for the benefit of their people. Get out now....

Romulus
3rd Oct 2012, 19:43
The analysis is very simple, why on earth would you pick a fight with an opponent who has the ability to line up Govt institutions that are exceptionally well funded against you?

Because once, many moons ago it was considered the right thing to do...

Talk about selective quoting FSM! You've completely changed the context of what I wrote.

If you have a situation where you need to make a worker redundant and Worker A is an ASM whereas Worker B is a minority female on a 457 visa, both of whom have the same written legal rights, why would you make B redundant when they also have the options of placing the racist card, the sexist card and the harshness test cited previously? Add the fact you've paid for their visa and once they are redundant the odds are they will have to leave the country whereas the local will usually be available to rehire if things pick up and the case for keeping Worker B gets quite a bit of backup. So why would you make B redundant?

In short, you wouldn't, it makes no sense.

Romulus
3rd Oct 2012, 19:46
Romulus is however wrong about the creation of employment. Aircraft fly and must be fixed. JHAS doesn't create the need for labour, they just supply it. If JHAS go away, someone else will supply it. The work being done cannot be carried out offshore.

Leaving aside true Line activities Virgin used to get most of their hangar checks done in NZ and took the cost of ferrying rather than building a team in Australia.

Are you sure it can't be done overseas for Qantas as well?

ALAEA Fed Sec
3rd Oct 2012, 22:57
Most of the Virgin HM is still done in NZ. I think though Romulus the thrust of your point here is correct. Any airline can take a plane half way around the world if they like to get a light bulb changed. My point though is that the JHAS activities are predominently tasks that are practically unable to be sent offshore (like overnight or short checks). If you did you would be pi$$ing money up against a wall, so yes it may be something Qantas would consider.

empire4
4th Oct 2012, 00:23
This whole sham was not our doing and the knobs in power now won't fix any of the draconian laws put in place by Johnny and his HR Nicholls mates

Steve, I think concentrating on who started 457 Visas is a little silly. They are needed for a lot of Australia's industry. Every country needs immigration to move forward. Whether it be Howard, Rudd or GIllard the problem lies within the IR laws allowing them to stay when times get tough or they are not needed. At present JG's Fair Work Australia is anything but. We have to look forward, looking backward will do jack S#*T

I do acknowledge that the ALAEA are trying to do something, and you are doing a job I could not do. This problem has been dragging on for years. The defense needs to be ramped up.

600ft-lb
4th Oct 2012, 01:14
I think time would be better spent by not fighting these changes but by actively lobbying the government to give Qantas and every other employer an incentive to train to upskill their own blokes. Tax breaks, funding whatever. The government has been handing out cash year after year to the car industry which has shrunk unrecognisably, it would be a pittance compared to that. The government is the ones responsible for the current state but time won't be turned back on this regulation. We need everyone on board to train up our local workforce to be competitive in the world.

JHAS and AMSA for example will not employ a local 2 or 3 cat traditional LAME when they can assert the ones they want, 5 cat's, do not exist on shore - they then have justification to look overseas, so good luck getting this trade of the 457 list as long as this situation exists.

And to qualify the last statement, good luck getting the government to discriminate between LAME sub types in the 457 list to only allow super LAMEs.

aveng
4th Oct 2012, 01:37
I hear ya SP, but there is no point in spending what few shekels I earn on union dues if I can't get results and I am heartily sick of being shat on, by virtue of the misfortune of being born here.

I look forward to seeing the results of your political lobbying on behalf of the Australian aviation industry.

Seriously? You don't get "results". As a collective whole we stand a chance. I for one believe that what I pay to the ALAEA is worth every cent. I dare say it is the ONLY union who truly represents its members.

"few shekels" indeed?:cool:

NuckingFuts
4th Oct 2012, 04:13
"It's the Vibe".

A most relevant expression here you could say.

Jethro Gibbs
4th Oct 2012, 09:01
And still more of this 457 Visa sponsorship will be considered This is just Bloody Madness in Australia today.:ugh:
SEEK - Are you an experienced Aircraft Engineer? Job in Sydney (http://www.seek.com.au/Job/are-you-an-experienced-aircraft-engineer/in/sydney-sydney/23267805)

Romulus
4th Oct 2012, 09:14
JHAS are not meeting training obligations to overcome the shortfalls in labour that create the need for 457 holders in the first place. No apprentices and bugger all training. They are destroying our industry and really, it would be better off for safety outcomes and the industry in general if they just left town.

SP, I know you're a bit frustrated but really?

Outside QF and Virgin Tech they're about the biggest employer going. They're financially safe as part of the Leighton group, they're keeping a facility going in Melbourne after QF have largely left, there are a whole bunch of people there who earn a living.

Yes they're trying to do things differently, I don't know exactly how but as an MRO they have to. They have to become more productive than the in house alternative in order to survive. It's a harsh reality that the world has moved on and the ideal Australian model is just too costly compared to the way others do things.

That's the challenge for you and your members, and it's a tough one, I'm not arguing it isn't. But unless you and your guys adapt then either JHAS or some other MRO is going to nip at your heels until someone at QF bites the bullet and outsources vast swathes of work to that MRO. That sort of powerful decision making takes guts, and given QF grounded themselves tough decisions with massive impacts have been made, no matter whether you think those decisions right or wrong.

As soon as someone provides a genuine alternative, and I agree JHAS doesn't have the right model at present, then it just takes one of the new CEOs to make it happen and the whole house of cards comes tumbling down.

Gas Bags
4th Oct 2012, 10:16
I have worked in 5 different countries over the years and I can tell you that from my experience as soon as the going gets tough the expat gets going.....no if's, and's, or but's. They all look after the local staff first. That being said I always got paid a lot more than the locals.

Forget the ALAEA thay can do nothing about this. Accept that fact and move on. Whilst private (non government funding) is allowed to finance political parties in Australia situations like this will continue. Who has the money..?

GB

genxfrog
4th Oct 2012, 10:22
Romulus, your analysis that JHAS is financially safe due to its umbilical chord to Leightons is obscured optimism. Ansett was owned by that mob across the Tasman and their owners and Management team were the first ones to bail when it went belly up, remember that moment?
JHAS needs to stand on its own feet and whilst it continues to haemorrhage financially to the alleged tune of millions and millions, Leightons will microscope it for a little longer but the ruthlessness of business is just around the corner.
The current plan isn't working that's true, but the biggest worry is there seems to be no clue from its Senior Management on how to develop a plan that will work.
Jetstar, Virgin and Tiger will decide how long JHAS will continue to flicker on unless Leightons makes an early decision that the experiment failed and call it a day.

Romulus
4th Oct 2012, 11:42
genxfrog - that's a fair call. What I was really driving at were people's entitlements etc were safe. If JHAS is to remain then yes it must become profitable and that fact needs to be understood by all involved.

ALAEA Fed Sec
4th Oct 2012, 12:59
Romulus, I think from memory, you are not an aircraft person. Bean counters are trying to run JHAS, not aircraft people. You fit that mould when you make comments like -

Yes they're trying to do things differently, I don't know exactly how but as an MRO they have to. They have to become more productive than the in house alternative in order to survive.

Aircraft people know the profitable model and it goes against the grain of everything bean counters are taught at their University courses. About two years ago a JHAS manager called me and asked to come for a coffee and chat. He said "Steve, we are losing money, how do we become profitable?". I told him how. He did the opposite.

Aircraft maintenance is a process that has been refined over 100 years. You need experienced people to make the most of the learned processes. JHAS and others for that matter have elected to promote idiots over experienced engineers because idiots do not argue. This is the flawed process that is losing JHAS money. Do you undrstand this or do you need further explanation?

Romulus
4th Oct 2012, 13:09
Further explanation please SP. Airlines all over the world are changing how they do engineering and we're not seeing a flood of planes dropping out of the sky.

You're right, I'm not an aviation person, so I would be interested in hearing the advice you gave JHAS as to how they could make a go of it.

rudderless1
4th Oct 2012, 13:53
Yep

Ugly American: seats come loose on ‘Kafkaesque’ Qantas partner | Australian Aviation Magazine (http://australianaviation.com.au/2012/10/ugly-american-seats-come-loose-on-kafkaesque-qantas-partner/)

AEROMEDIC
4th Oct 2012, 15:25
Airlines all over the world are changing how they do engineering and we're not seeing a flood of planes dropping out of the sky.

It's really comforting to NOT have aircraft falling out of the sky and it's a testimony to the ingenuity of the designers of today's large wide bodied aircraft that have the built in redundancy and safety that we need.
These aircraft are very forgiving in what can happen to them before they finally "drop out of the sky"

Pilots and engineers can make mistakes and and these aircraft will still operate albeit sometimes beyond their design limitations. But with inadequate maintenance or pilot skill, eventually it won't be enough.
The cause of a crash may be just a minor weakness in design not envisaged by the designer, a simple failure to remove static port protective covers or lack of experience by ground staff failing to identify a serious problem that is catastrophic in flight.
The probabilities of such an event just increase when good practices in maintenance decrease and so therefore risk also increases.

There cannot be ANY good reason, business or otherwise to increase risk at any time by an operator or MRO.

mightyauster
4th Oct 2012, 23:30
Quote:
I hear ya SP, but there is no point in spending what few shekels I earn on union dues if I can't get results and I am heartily sick of being shat on, by virtue of the misfortune of being born here.
I look forward to seeing the results of your political lobbying on behalf of the Australian aviation industry.

Seriously? You don't get "results". As a collective whole we stand a chance. I for one believe that what I pay to the ALAEA is worth every cent. I dare say it is the ONLY union who truly represents its members.

"few shekels" indeed?http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/cool.gif

Sorry sunshine, unless you are part of one of the major airlines, the ALAEA has little or no bite at all. If you are stuck in a company where Australian citizens are definitely a minority, the ALAEA has even less influence; hence my negative cost/benefit analysis.:(

Romulus
4th Oct 2012, 23:47
Ugly American: seats come loose on ‘Kafkaesque’ Qantas partner | Australian Aviation Magazine

A loose seat is not an aircraft dropping out of the sky.

Not saying that it's right, but I have no doubt this has happened plenty of times before regardless of maintenance undertaken. I've flown on several Qantas flights with broken chairs where I spent the entire flight continually trying to pull my chair forward rather than fully recline into the person behind me because the damn thing wouldn't lock.

Romulus
4th Oct 2012, 23:53
Aeromedic - if you don't want risk you don't do or achieve anything. Life has a degree of risk associated with it, it comes down to managing that risk.

Just as cars have gone from drum brakes to disks, engines are now good for 200K miles etc and servicing intervals have increased and actual time spent in servicing has decreased as newer technology has replaced old so it is for aircraft. New developments mean less maintenance is required, and new maintenance techniques reduce the time spent actually doing services.

It has always been thus ad hopefully ever will.

Clear example - ever used a borescope in anything? If so then you've just saved a motza in time and cost. Bringing all those developments to bear is what needs to happen to maintain a cost advantage over the competition and thus ultimately helping secure jobs.

Propstop
4th Oct 2012, 23:58
Romulus
Therein lies the problem; the loose seats are what the passenger sees. They come to the conclusion that if the seats we are sitting on have been poorly maintained, remembering they are part of the particular airlines image, surely what else has been skimped or overlooked in the maintenance of that particular aircraft.
A major or catastrophic event is usually the sum of minor events which have not been attended to, and this fact alone is what the beancounters cannot comprehend.
I fear a major wakeup call is around the corner and as a regular traveller I hope I am not part of it, as we all do.
To quote Gobbledock........tick..tock.

tail wheel
5th Oct 2012, 01:54
JHAS are not meeting training obligations to overcome the shortfalls in labour that create the need for 457 holders in the first place. No apprentices and bugger all training.

There was a requirement under the previous Government that an employer must spend a minimum of 1.5% (I think?) of total payroll cost on staff training, or pay a penalty to the ATO.

I suspect that provision may have been rescinded?

Lucerne
5th Oct 2012, 02:07
Was there union action at JHAS prior to this decision being made? That would be an easy explanation for it.

Nero62
5th Oct 2012, 06:19
The fundamental issue is that the industry is losing money and is exposed to international competition on their doorstep, like few others.

There has to be better returns for all the risks of running a business than putting your money in a bank. JHAS ownership aside, those with long track records in aviation are doing no better, look at how LHT gave up on LTQ. Virgin have $4B in assets, the bank would give u $200M in interst on that, no risk. Virgin actially earned $27M. Qantas have $21B in assets, that would earn a cool $1B in a bank. Qantas lost $350M. Many companies expect 20% return on assets. BHPB gets 23% and its been up to 38%. Do the math.

JHAS deserves every support to make a go of it an a tough industry. The heavy maintenance it does would be overseas now, were it not for them.

genxfrog
5th Oct 2012, 08:45
tail wheel....you are spot on. That requirement was abolished in the mid 90's because the Government decided that it was being rorted and was too hard to monitor and fix. Companies were using corporate social functions and claiming it as "training" in order to meet the 1.5% training expenditure. Boardroom meetings, weekends away at conferences whilst balancing a holiday attached to it, corporate boxes at sporting events etc.
Big business won the day and now they cry about skills shortages.

AEROMEDIC
5th Oct 2012, 12:51
Aeromedic - if you don't want risk you don't do or achieve anything. Life has a degree of risk associated with it, it comes down to managing that risk.

Just as cars have gone from drum brakes to disks, engines are now good for 200K miles etc and servicing intervals have increased and actual time spent in servicing has decreased as newer technology has replaced old so it is for aircraft. New developments mean less maintenance is required, and new maintenance techniques reduce the time spent actually doing services.


Romulus

Sure, we have better, newer and less labour intensive aircraft, but the risks are not the same in different industries.
Risk management in the aircraft industry is run by the carriers and MRO's, not the regulators.
Costs, unfortunately, dictate the level of engineer oversight and maintenance management. Pilots are under continual pressure to ensure on time schedules are kept and are treated like bus drivers along the way.
The carriers and MRO's in tough competitive times are under great economic pressure themselves, so it follows that risk increases to meet "on time under budget " milestones.
Management of that level of risk becomes the domain of the pilots and engineers by default when told "just do it !! "

Those companies that are under pressure have the pilots and engineers in this country to thank for being dedicated and committed to their jobs and we are lucky to have them.

Sunfish
5th Oct 2012, 20:30
While I generally agree with Romulus, I need to make two points,

1", the work smarter not harder mantra doesn't work in aviation. It is not possible to do things differently in many cases.

There are a number of factors at work here:

- massive legal regulation of airworthiness that requires, among other things, complete traceability and time/event history for every aircraft, without which the aircraft is just scrap metal - this is what killed Ansett. There is no escape from this.

- the continuous search for aircraft performance which results in complexity and lethal penalties from failure to maintain. As someone told me, current designs are no longer fail safe, but the cheaper "damage tolerant" standard.

- the simple fact that bad or insufficient maintenance does not manifest itself for years, and when it does, it may have catastrophic and unrecoverable results. This fact is also a great temptation to bean counters and the unprincipled or lazy, since they will not have to wear the cost of the failure their Mal investment causes.

I view these matters as so important that I seriously doubt that anyone without a judeo Christian or Japanese work ethic is capable of building or maintaining a safe aircraft - there need to be motivations of fear, guilt, pride etc. to make sure the job is done right, and these do not obtain much on the Asian mainland in my opinion.


The second point is that the jhas facility is extremely valuable infrastructure because it's replacement cost is incalculable, or at least in the middle billions. The planning and approval costs for such a facility are stratospheric, not to mention the scarcity of real estate at international airports. Some may have noticed portable office structures inside the hangar - they have been there since at least as early as 1976 since it was regulatorily impossible to modify the original hangar design.

Sorry for the punctuation but it's difficult posting in bed with an iPad and a cat trying to sit on your chest.

Kharon
5th Oct 2012, 22:48
Sunny # 61 - Sorry for the punctuation but it's difficult posting in bed with an iPad and a cat trying to sit on your chest.


Sunny 'posting', in bed, in a cat house, with a cat on your chest; is not only bad form, but a strict liability offence, if'n you get caught. :D :D


Sorry mate, irresistible.

Arnold E
6th Oct 2012, 09:56
I dont beleive "cat houses" are illegal in Victoria.:cool:

Rudder
6th Oct 2012, 10:12
The sad fact here is that no one wants to do business with JHAS. They have managed to drive away just about every customer they have had and the ones that are there do it under sufferance due lack of alternative.

Unfortunately the staff on the floor wear the fallout. Those with the 457's just have a stay of execution at the moment.

Romulus
7th Oct 2012, 01:06
The sad fact here is that no one wants to do business with JHAS. They have managed to drive away just about every customer they have had and the ones that are there do it under sufferance due lack of alternative.

Unfortunately the staff on the floor wear the fallout. Those with the 457's just have a stay of execution at the moment.

Rudder, I haven't been there for a number of years so I have no idea about the specifics, can you enlighten me/us as to what it is JHAS do to alienate customers? I keep an interest in what they're doing as well as the overall scene because I found it a fascinating industry, as I've posted previously it's clear something isn't working.

But what is it that is driving customers away?

At the end of the day this is only an internet forum but if there's anything they can do to turn around their performance I'd say get it out on here and hope like heck somebody there is smart enough to read, digest and apply the relevant things to the business so it isn't lost for ever. Once it closes down it will be gone and with it a whole bunch of Australian jobs (regardless of 457 utilisation). And that would be a great shame.

genxfrog
7th Oct 2012, 05:39
Romulus, the problem stems from the fact that John Holland owned by Leightons is a construction company and JHAS is managed by people with a construction / infrastructure industry mentality. Leightons and John Holland only entered the Aviation MRO Industry for a quick dollar and didn't do enough to utilise industry expertise and knowledge from those who have worked and Managed in the Aviation MRO Industry. Senior Management given the role to run JHAS at its inception were ignorant, stubborn and refused to listen to the workers and middle level Managers who were desperate to make the business a long term success. John Holland and Leightons have always had a reputation for doing things their way with no room for input from their employees. I doubt anything has changed.

Romulus
7th Oct 2012, 07:20
Genx, that doesn't actually say anything mate. That's not to say I disagree with you, just that your statement doesn't actually identify any problem at all other than a very broad view that people didn't listen.

What didn't they listen to? What could/should have been done? I'm asking the question that you're effectively saying initial JHAS management should have asked.

What do you think they should have done to make the business a success?

thecurseofskydrol
7th Oct 2012, 07:58
I understand that the 457 visa issue is complicated and the situation is not good at JHAS, but I believe this us vs them argument put forward by some here is just way too simplistic, and has way to much of a zenophobic tone for me to say nothing.

Ive worked with a lot of these guys at one of these "457" companies that is mentioned, and very few of them were actually on 457's. Most were permanent residents through the skilled migration program. The few on the 457's were well on their way to getting PR. All of them were top guys, who were highly skilled, highly rated knew their stuff. They had families here and were trying to improve their families lives like everyone else.

The problem is, they dont know their rights and how they can improve their situation. Some companies pay under the award for these highly skilled engineers, and as such they dont get the pay and conditions that they should. this ends up undercutting local staff with the guys from overseas being treated like c$&p.

I believe that the union has a stong role to play in getting these guys onboard and letting them know how things can be improved through union protection and enterprise agreements. This would not only protect wages and conditions for Australian workers but also protect the interests of fellow engineers who come here who should enjoy the same rights and conditions as Australian workers.

I believe this to a be a position that exploits the fact that line maintenance will always have to be done here, without the us vs them ugliness postulated previously. It also recognises the globalised reality of aviation in 2012, where highly skilled engineers will always be sought after.

imperial shifter
7th Oct 2012, 08:01
I regularly advised management that they should sell up because they had no idea what they were doing. That's still the only option that may keep the place operational. I could bang on about JHAS issues for hours but I'm over it.

ALAEA Fed Sec
7th Oct 2012, 09:48
Romulus I know you want this place to be a success and the posters here did as well. I read their posts and understand exactly what they are saying, it is like you are also reading the same posts and just don't understand the problem. I do owe you a more in depth answer as well to explain as I offered last week. This is part of the conversation I had with management.

You talk about efficiencies or productivity/profitability, however you want to term it. Correctly we understand that a business must make money, no issue with that. To convert what I am talking about to examples you can undrstand I will put it a different way.

So say you have a business that is struggling, lets call it JHAS. You want to change somthing. You can either make the operation cheaper or make the operation better (more work output). Problem is, to make it better you need to spend some money. Now the accountants faced with this situaton always go for the cut costs model, it's simple for people who do not know a business to adopt. It creates problems later on, people who do know the business try to warn the decision makers who invariably do not listen, they just blame, lose more contracts, cut more costs until there is nothing left.

Alternatively, the business can fight for more work by selling their quality product. In order to do that, you need a quality product (JHAS has never had that but could have). When you have people delivering quality, others around them learn the methods to create what is being delivered. These people are proud of their work and if rewarded sufficiently will do anything for management because they would work together as a team. I've been part of a team like this before at Qantas (then some idiot went and changed it).

So at JHAS what does this mean. Early on there were Engineering mistakes. These occurred because management wanted to make it profitable from day one and did not employ enough experienced people. There were far too many unlicenced Engineers working alone and insufficient oversight. This is not a model for success in Aviation maintenance. I can assure you, an exprienced LAME may even be twice as expensive as an AME, they will nearly always deliver 2-3 times the work output if deployed correctly. This is no offence to AMEs, many of whom are fantastic. The LAME however works untethered, doesn't need to check with another to make a decision and in most cases just has greater exprience levels.

Qf Mel had a high ratio of LAMEs. They managed to drop the heaviest of 737 c checks from 42 days to under 20. Fastest time in the world by a mile. Now this is a market that could deliver something unique and JHAS could have done the same. Non aviation people are running fine businesses and the people there just will not listen. The wrong Engineers have been promoted to management positions. You (am talking Hr, IR non aviation persons) have selected leaders based not on their ability or knowledge but their promises of absolute loyalty to flawed models designd by buffoons.

Bagus
7th Oct 2012, 10:43
So what will happen in Brisbane ,ratio of LAME too AME in a crew just like what they have in JHAS ,will the turn time get better with that model champion by the new Engineering boss they had to employed to change heavy maintenance ,most probably he came on a 457 too.

genxfrog
7th Oct 2012, 11:46
Romulus, there is no "one" answer that will fix the current problem at JHAS. My point is that had their business leaders worked as a unit with their employees, many of the problems that they now face may have been avoided. I will give you an example. I understand the current EBA expired in March 2010, and currently Im told it has not been renewed with their employees and Unions and negotiations continue. A customer to JHAS (Virgin, Tiger, Jetstar etc) would want certainty with their aircraft maintenance via industrial peace and a locked in EBA would provide this. No one in their right mind would want to hand over one of their aircraft or a long term maintenance contract to an organisation in the middle of their EBA negotiations. So what does JHAS do instead? It drags things out for almost 3 years and my sources tell me there is no end in sight for the negotiations to conclude soon.
One would think that it would be a priority at JHAS to lock in a new EBA and use this as a selling point to their existing and potential new customers but those who sit at the higher end of the John Holland bureaucracy just don't get it.

Rudder
7th Oct 2012, 23:59
I dont particularly want to be too specific with instances as it will identify me, The List would be long though. However pretty much all of what has been said by ALAEA and more is the case.

His view is from a HR point of view. Mine is from the downstream affect of that and actual performance and dealing with them point of view.

It's just a shambles.

AEROMEDIC
8th Oct 2012, 00:53
Well, the message has been repeated quite clearly for some time now and I'm sure that company managers either don't read these posts or couldn't give a toss.
The message......? "You get what you pay for"

If you want a check to be "on time and under budget" and high quality, you pay the money and get the BEST people.....AND you support them.

It never ceases to amaze me to see high cost projects start up and then have the value eroded away by poor staff selection whatever the category. Then the compounding effect of "band aid management" undermines the morale of those left followed by staff reductions and shutdown.
:ugh::ugh::ugh:

aveng
8th Oct 2012, 01:30
It would be helpful if the "new breed" of aviation management realised that when a Lame puts his/her signature and licence number to a job, that the "ownership" of responsibility lasts for the life of the aircraft. Maybe if they placed themself in our position - they would understand why undercutting and taking short cuts make LAME's nervous.

TheWholeEnchilada
8th Oct 2012, 03:07
First up, I don't have a dog in this fight. I've been following this thread with interest, particularly the Romulus / Fed Sec debate.

This post by aveng screams out for an outsiders view (no slight on aveneg intended)
It would be helpful if the "new breed" of aviation management realised that when a Lame puts his/her signature and licence number to a job, that the "ownership" of responsibility lasts for the life of the aircraft. Maybe if they placed themself in our position - they would understand why undercutting and taking short cuts make LAME's nervous.

The "new breed" of [generic] managers understand exactly the point you have made, in fact, it is the cornerstone of the modern business model. It is the LAME and pilots who give them plausible deniability - in short you and I are their "bunnies". Its even worse for pilots, because, they are usually unable to defend their actions at the subsequent inquiry, and hence speculation about their performance can always be used to cast doubt.

By virtue of being licensed, we give managers cover to cut corners, take the bonuses whilst we bear the risk if it all goes wrong. How many times have you actually heard a senior manager or CEO stand up and say "actually, we the senior management made a mistake". It is always about finding a low level functionary to carry the can (QF Freight Cartel US prosecution is the classic case in point)

pacificmarlin
8th Oct 2012, 11:59
Firstly, I am employed at JHAS, but am not in any position to be aware of redundancy selection criteria or any rumours surrounding it.

I do work with those on 457 visas and in most cases cannot question their competancy or resposibility.

What I do know from reading the above is :

These LAME's were brought in initially to provide a skill set not available at the time. A330 Mech and Avionics.
JHAS has trained numerous people in the meantime with A330 courses in both trades. At a rough count 20.

Currently the 457's work in a day/night 7 day shift environment, as do the majority of those trained.
As far as I am aware, no one willing to work in this same environment, is under threat of redundancy.
Whereas, the few who may be, with the same qualifications, have refused to work the shift pattern that actually makes them available when the majority of the A330 maintenance is carried out.

Wages, as far as I am aware - are comparable. I certainly can't go to JQ without losing money.

Whilst I am all for protecting the Local (having spent 5 years as an expat, I always knew I was in the gun first), this argument has been skewed.

Concerning JHAS, we are all aware that it was set up and originally managed by those out of their league.
This was followed by others more used to running a building site.
Now we've upgraded to the guy who brought us Myki.:rolleyes:

What I have noticed though, is there is now an intense focus on a quality product at the expense of short cuts. A focus on Safety with the employment of a QF person that takes it all seriously.

I have heard recently, that no longer will we be the whipping boy of the Customer and if rumours are true, recent events show this.

I can only hope that this trend upwards continues and the snide remarks of disaffected workers and former workers will fade to a whisper.

As for the ALAEA, good luck to you.

SRM
8th Oct 2012, 22:08
I have heard recently, that no longer will we be the whipping boy of the Customer and if rumours are true, recent events show this.

Pacific Marlin, It is an attitude like this that has caused problems with customers in the past.

When will JHAS learn that the customer wants a quality product delivered on time without issues.

Rudder
8th Oct 2012, 22:17
Got it in one SRM.

JHAS is doomed while you have guys thinking like this working for them.

You only have to look at the number of aircraft now parked out the front to what is was just 12 months ago to see what effect the customers have. They are walking out the door and with them a lot of jobs.

pacificmarlin
9th Oct 2012, 03:55
You guys are really hardcore hehe. Please tell me what all the aircraft were doing out the front? Sounds like you're sitting on Jhas computers next to each other holding hands, hoping someone will come and save your incompetent asses. Maybe you're even some of the guys who sucked courses out of Jhas and now avoid the aircraft like the plague. Could you even be SP's message boys spreading fear to the masses who live in the good old days? Take a trip gentlemen and see the world. Maybe even try working somewhere else that gives you some real satisfaction.
Maybe you don't see aircraft at Jhas because you start (work?) after they have left and go home before they arrive.
You're too funny!

SRM
9th Oct 2012, 08:24
Pacificmarlin, FYI I have worked overseas and base my last post on what I have experienced.

There are MRO's opening up in Asia that can do exactly what the customer requires and one is backed by Boeing.

In my opinion if JHAS do not get there act together, they will not survive in the long term.

Rudder
9th Oct 2012, 10:29
Pacific,

Thankfully I dont work there and have to put up with you but there it is for all to see why JHAS is doomed.

But lets just look at it.


Virgin all but gone. Work that JHAS would have done now done in NZ and elsewhere.
Tiger all but gone. AMSA doing line maintenance and heavy maintenance done in Singapore.
Skywest also gone to Singapore.
Jetstar all but gone overseas.
Skytraders all but gone. Heavy maintenance to Singapore, Line maintenance to themselves and now have their own CAR30 approval to do minor checks if they so choose.
QANTAS -JHAS never had any to start with.


So with what customers are JHAS going to survive? They aren't is the answer. Everyone has just given up.

Wellwellwell
9th Oct 2012, 11:36
Brace yourself.....
Well, I don't work for JHAS either but I do side with marlin on this. The thing is, the owners of JHAS have invested a lot of money to employ 350 odd aircraft maintenance people for the last four years when it would have probably now been turned into some warehouse or storage facility. They gave it a go for no other reason but to try and make it work, so maybe it isn't, maybe it is. What I can say is that while this industry is struggling all around, airlines just won't pay a premium for maintenance at the expense of the competitive market they operate in. It's a trend unfortunately that won't be reversed.

What I can guess about that customer list for what it's worth...as marlin pointed out, the staff at JHAS are paid competitive wages, which means that operators that don't want to pay $140+ an hour for heavy maintenance choose to go to places where it's cheaper. All of those customers are not paying more than JHAS, so I suspect their decisions are price sensitive. Hasn't Virgin always had heavy checks sent to NZ, even from back as far as 2002? Now they are alliance partners I guess you would only expect it to grow. JQ started sending checks to ST years ago, Tiger as well. Line is probably gone to AMSA because they are all in the same family. Skytraders......who, oh yeah I'm sure they're upset about that. Skywest get all their other heavy checks done in singers, so why stop paying $30 an hour and send it to JHAS? I heard JHAS have about 30 line customers, that's probably where the business does well and then has to prop up the rest. Low volume, highly skilled activities over short periods of time is where the industry can continue to focus on in Australia. After all, the international airlines are frowing here all the time, and while QF isnt interested someone has to fill the gap, and I sure dont want it to be the singaporean scab outfit....more about them later. We, as a group should be defending our last frontier of professionism in Line Maintenenace as clearly, the days of 80-100 thousand man hour checks at high rates are gone. For an airline it's tough doing it yourself while your competitors don't, let alone a third party that pays the same rates and has to make a profit. Sorry folks, it doesn't work.

Romulus said smarter not harder. Agree totally, this thread was about the retention of migrant skills at the expense of local workers. Unfortunately you can't discriminate like that. They are individuals with families that came here in a system that allowed them to, it's not JHAS's issue. Did JHAS do it deliberately or did they do what the customer asked with tight deadlines to bring in a first of type aircraft. Marlin said they have trained, so whats the issue? I'm sure that customer could have given that work to the same line maintenance provider as the B777s, oh yeah that's a Singaporean company that allegedly flaunt the visa laws to conduct transits on their own fleet and while the poor guy is here on a few bucks a day, just do a couple of transits on these other customers while your here. Then fly him back before anyone finds out. Now that is the crap we should be focussing on. The positive thing is that customer gave the work to JHAS, how many of our fellow brothers are 457s, I bet the ratio is more locals now, maybe not so when they started. Yep, if our CASA slugs had woken up years ago our industry would have been better prepared.

I say JHAS is exactly what we need, you say close it down. Well if it does go, we may start sitting up thinking maybe we should have backed it. It sounds as though the ALAEA may not be getting dues from a handful of 457 guys at JHAS. Theres probably a lot of guys there that do and always have and maybe a few that would be mystified their dues go to a guy that wished it would close. Figure that one out? Maybe I was mistaken and that's not what I read.....can't be bothered looking for it now.

VBA Engineer
9th Oct 2012, 11:46
That's not what we are hearing, the work is coming out of JHAS due to poor quality and the associated safety concerns.

Work is going overseas at greater overall cost to find a suitable alternate.

The airlines that are listed above not only left JHAS, they slammed the door on the way out and they all talk to each other about it.

NuckingFuts
9th Oct 2012, 12:10
pacificmarlin

- Your contempt for your fellow workers and your failure to grasp the English language gives us no doubt as to your origins.

If you were as good as you claim you are, you would be still happily employed in your own Country. You have obviously burnt those bridges and are now intent on setting fire to them here as well.

Enjoy your stay! Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

genxfrog
9th Oct 2012, 13:00
Wellwellwell.....the reason for allowing 457 Visa workers into the country has been supposedly about alleged skills shortages in the Industry. Have you been in a coma and not seen the hundreds and hundreds of recent retrenchments at Qantas and Forstaff? Where's the skills shortage now or are you still asleep? I reckon you'd see it differently if it was you being told you're finished whilst someone on a 457 remained doing your job.
Beat your chest as loud as you like.....your hypocrisy is louder!

empire4
10th Oct 2012, 00:18
Its about nationalism, its about Australian citizen jobs. A 457 Visa is for a skill shortage which does not exist. I'm sick of people jumping on the racist, xenophobic discrimination train every time something is mentioned about any 457 guy/girl. No one here has mentioned race. The only thing we all care about is jobs and doing the right thing by Aussies.

As for JHAS, talk to anyone at Virgin Tech Services, talk to anyone at Jetstar or Qantas in Tulla. The quality is terrible. Simple short cuts brought around by idiot management and poor quality in recruitment.

You are an idiot if you think they pay $30/hr in places like Singapore or Malaysia. That is not how they make there money.

Romulus
10th Oct 2012, 01:11
You are an idiot if you think they pay $30/hr in places like Singapore or Malaysia. That is not how they make there money.

Singapore are effectively "buying" jobs by selling LAME time at USD35 per hour according to a couple of sources.

That's not just salary, that's with all on costs for employing people plus company overheads, supporting staff etc.

To break even in the Australian environment where on costs (without any company overhead) are approximately 30% then a LAME would be earning about 25 per hour.

There's no way that can be done and nor should it.

Problem is on a 100,000 hour check when you look at 15,000 LAME hours (assuming a 15% LAME requirement is a bit low at roughly 1 in 7 I admit but not too far off the mark) then on a straight wages component of even $100,000 per Australian LAME then you're looking at about $65 per hour (again, no overhead allocation, just straight up LAME cost) and that $30 differential translates to $450,000.

Just for LAME time.

That's what the industry is up against in this country, and whilst there is no excuse or reason for poor quality if any form of heavy maintenance is to survive in Australia we need to figure out how to do good quality checks in a more efficient manner.

You can bark at me all you like that the aviation industry has developed these processes over 100 years but unless we somehow find a way to really deliver value to the Australian aviation industry then only very minor checks and line activities will remain. It's that simple. I don't know what the answer is, doing what I do I see a large number of businesses in trouble, most of them go under. JHAS was one that I reckon could be saved, and aviation as an industry is one of the few I found really interesting and JHAS in particular holds something of an emotional grip on me (hence me sticking around this forum 5 years after I left JH). But for whatever reason it just hasn't worked as well as it perhaps could have. I'd love to know the reasons for it, and if nothing else it would give the current management team some kind of insight into what people are thinking. Equally it's not that easy to trust, I get that. But somebody has to give it a go, simple as that.

Romulus
10th Oct 2012, 01:21
That's not what we are hearing, the work is coming out of JHAS due to poor quality and the associated safety concerns.

Work is going overseas at greater overall cost to find a suitable alternate.

VBA, what sort of quality issues are there?

Surely somebody from JHAS is getting in to see the relevant people at VBA to get a review of the output from the client perspective and putting corrective action in place?

VBA have a vested interest in JHAS succeeding, if it fails then the semi LCC is building to their cost base which is anathema to VBA's long term profitability and future. That is obviously detrimental to what VBA want, it is clearly detrimental to JHAS, so wtf is being done to correct it?

Jesus wept, if that facility is closed and the certifications lost then it will never reopen. The only reason it could be turned into an MRO was because it already existed and was operating, the cost of starting again would destroy any business case.

Frick me, this is a serious capability that needs saving. Are you seriously suggesting nobody in either camp is doing anything about it?

Kiwiconehead
10th Oct 2012, 01:36
Problem is on a 100,000 hour check when you look at 15,000 LAME hours (assuming a 15% LAME requirement is a bit low at roughly 1 in 7 I admit but not too far off the mark)

That's probably overstating the LAME, where Skywest send theirs, they have 2 LAMEs on the check for an F100, same place we send ours.

And if JHAS has quality problems then it must be horrendous compared the total sh!t coming out of some of the overseas alternatives.

middleman
10th Oct 2012, 02:00
I believe VA really do want JHAS to succeed and want to continue to use them. There are only so many quality issues you can put up with though. I believe there is quite a list!

You can only beat your head against the wall so many times before you have to implement Plan B.

Romulus
10th Oct 2012, 02:23
I believe VA really do want JHAS to succeed and want to continue to use them. There are only so many quality issues you can put up with though. I believe there is quite a list!

You can only beat your head against the wall so many times before you have to implement Plan B.

Mate, not disagreeing with you there, good quality outcomes are everything. Didn't they get a senior VB person in to make sure everything ran well (no names on PPrune)?

Fricking heck, is anyone from JHAS talking to the big kids at VBA to actually resolve all of this stuff???

mightyauster
10th Oct 2012, 03:02
Well, talking to one of VA's reps, I was told VA, at one stage, was getting really cheesed off that their aircraft were being damaged on an almost weekly basis. The low light being the damaged wing tip on the brand new, never seen service, VA A330 recently.
Another observation that was made, in respect to the diversity of imported labour, was practice of the different ethnic groups speaking their own languages on the job. It was pointed out that this is very bad for safety, as everyone on the aircraft should know and understand what others are doing. In fact the rep said, in his experience overseas, it should be mandated that one language only be used on the job, in this case english.

chimpstar
10th Oct 2012, 03:47
Sounds like the situation at JHAS is deteriorating rapidly.....I just hope it does not get to the point where engineers are physically assaulting each other on the line due to their various indifferences as happened recently :ugh: its sad times we live in when that starts happening.

SRM
10th Oct 2012, 04:46
Fricking heck, is anyone from JHAS talking to the big kids at VBA to actually resolve all of this stuff???


Yes many times, over and over again but it still continues :ugh:

aintsaying
10th Oct 2012, 06:57
The title of this thread is all about 457 visa persons.
Of all the areas where layoffs are currently occuring right now, how many of them work beside the 457 visa guys? Last I herd the majority of the layoffs are at heavy maintenance. The 457 visa guys work on line and they all have A330 ratings.
Now I agree its bulls#$%t that when layoffs occur locals are hit first and not the 457 visa guys. But under the immigration laws in Australia the 457 visa guys are protected for 5 yrs. And even if the employer/sponsor did lay them off their relocation back to their own country would have to be paid as well.
Australia is NOT the only country that does this either.
As for the quality of work that comes out of JHAS, has anyone considered the work load that is given to JHAS by the customer?
What would you do if your work package included a fan lube, boroscope, engine wash and a full power vibe run all on the same engine? This would be in addition to the normal airframe work package (flap/leading edge/gear lubes/ hyd filters/ interior).I'm not even going to mention parts availability either. And don't forget that the aircraft lands at 2330hrs and gets towed into the hangar at 0030hrs. The normal nightshift duration is 2000hrs to 0600hrs. Now dont forget that the customer also schedules the aircraft for an 0600 departure, so that means you need to have the aircraft back on line, at the gate, by 0500hrs.
So you are all saying "just defer" the work. Hmm....good idea. Would be nice if the customer would let them!
The boys and girls working nights at JHAS do their best to meet the needs of the customer but get let down by a whole lot of other factors. And in the end it will be them who takes the blame and takes the hit.

Since mightyauster mentioned A330 damage...what was the story about VH-XFB's engine pylon that got bent? Who did that? Was it done in Australia?

pacificmarlin
10th Oct 2012, 08:49
- Your contempt for your fellow workers and your failure to graps the English language gives us no doubt as to your origins.

I'm now assured that you guys know nothing about Jhas at all.

Just a few points to educate you:
We already know that no engineers with the A330 are in the gun due to the 457's with the only possible exception those that have scored the course and refuse to work the shifts required.
Possibly the reason that 12 months ago there were heaps of a/c parked was because Tiger was grounded for under training it's crews.
If Jhas were a parking lot, they'd be concerned, but as far as I'm aware, maintenance is generally c/out IN the hangar.
VBA, you may notice that every 6 months or so there are great stories about quality and efficiency at Jhas.
It's funny that this usually occurs when Virgins bills are due. I believe currently they owe closer to 10 than 5mill. With previous admin, the more noise, the less they paid of what they owed. We now have a very different admin.
Granted, I know little of H/ maint. But I'm sure the Fed Sec can enlighten you of the future of that.
Tiger is here to stay. A compromise for possible future C checks here, and to put an end to Amsa and Jhas undercutting each other to death for transits, wasto let them have it. It's funny that this doesn't mean a loss of work or revenue, because Amsa doesn't fix anything. It just comes back to us.

Nutso, I love your style, always loved the Flintstones.
I graps your fear man.

Wellwellwell
10th Oct 2012, 09:40
Gens frog...
Didn't once say I agree with people loosing jobs, yep that sucks. As for the skills shortage now, unfortunately JHAS needed A330/Trent B1s and B2s 18 months ago. I'm sure if anyone at Qantas or Forestaff bothered to apply for the endless weeks of ads that I recall seeing at the time for BNE/SYD/PER/MEL then they probably would have been guaranteed a gig. The thing is, no one leaves Qantas unless its through redundancy.

Just do some training I hear everyone say. Yeah, try and get anything approved by CASA these days, let alone a new type. And how would get CASA approved PCT for an aircraft that's not here yet? Easy when your buying new ones from Airbus, but didn't they lease the first few from EK?

My guess is they did everything they could, then exhausted all avenues to have full coverage at all ports by bringing in a few 457s. At the time it was a genuine skills shortage. Anyway, I always thought that the unions are notified of all 457s and have the opportunity to object? Anyone verify that?

As for the damaged A330, I heard it was damaged by another ground handler towing a JQ ship?

ALAEA Fed Sec
10th Oct 2012, 11:56
Anyway, I always thought that the unions are notified of all 457s and have the opportunity to object? Anyone verify that?



Not the case.

Aircraft Engineers should come off the Govt approved list.

pacificmarlin
10th Oct 2012, 21:49
Just curious, how many A330 Lames were made redundant at QF Mel?

pacificmarlin
11th Oct 2012, 02:53
How many Lames laid off at QF Mel hold the A320?

pacificmarlin
11th Oct 2012, 03:07
You expect JHAS to put off the 457's and employ ex QF guys without the licences that bring in the revenue, then train them on full wages.
Is this correct?
Any comments? Fed Sec?

genxfrog
11th Oct 2012, 09:59
pacificmarlin....im sure FedSec will respond to your question soon however I'm sure your comedy routine on this thread is simply about you having a chip on your shoulder about some past event where a Union upset you? We work alongside your type quite often, we're so used to it now.....its getting boring.

mightyauster
11th Oct 2012, 10:39
I can understand what pacificmarlin is getting at, but my beef is with certain companies that abuse the 457 visa system as an excuse to not pay for locals to remove the restrictions from their B1 licenses. I can name individuals who were brought into this country who were not qualified for the job , but had the much vaunted full B1 (one didn't even have any type ratings!), and then had tens of thousands of dollars spent on them with type courses. This practice is plainly discriminatory to any normal person, but legal in the eyes of the Immigration Dept, because the company concerned has demonstrated compliance with the perceived shortage of qualified LAME's. :ugh:

pacificmarlin
11th Oct 2012, 11:52
I'm sorry Genx, I didn't mean to hurt anyone's feelings. BUT, you all are talking about a company I am employed by. I am a Lame and am an Australian. I have re- read this thread, and can assure you that although my posts do contain something bordering sarcasm, they also contain the most fact. Not hearsay, fact. My queries of the Fed Sec were there because everyone else seems to fall back to his 'voice of knowledge' definitely no pun intended. I have no gripe with the ALAEA other than everyone seems to expect them to be the Almighty voice. Previous to going overseas, I had been involved and attended several soirees to Bexley in various roles.
What do you guys want? Do you really want to rip shit out of an organisation that is trying to meet a demand and not only profit, but grow.
Since I began here, the growth has been exponential for line and overnight aircraft and carriers.
When at VB prior VT, I also saw exponential growth that was beyond capacity leading to shortcuts and failings.
I question a lot of these postings and it is our right to do so.
Get this right though, I'm not here for anyone's entertainment.
If people want to tell untruths to make themselves feel better and it affects me, I'll challenge it and be as sarcastic as I deem necessary.
I am not a unionist and that is just a personal choice, one made since I returned.
Basically because the ALAEA represents to the lowest common denominator.
I do find incompetence objectionable, so feel no need to support it through unionism. That's also my right.
Thanks for your attention.

NuckingFuts
11th Oct 2012, 12:19
We're so privileged to have you here.:ok:
Seeing how you're in the 'know', maybe you can enlighten us as to whether it is true 2 A330 LAME's were made redundant.

pacificmarlin
11th Oct 2012, 12:28
Nutso, I have no idea. This may be your chance to challenge it legally. I have heard that incompetence and non attendance may be influences leading to redundancy. Does that worry you?

NuckingFuts
11th Oct 2012, 12:48
Again with the character assasination of your colleagues. You must be a joy to work with.
Just to be clear, I was saying 'we' at pprune are privileged to have you here educating us with your wisdom. I don't work at JHAS.
'Incompetance and non attendance', is that what you are suggesting your former colleagues were made redundant for? I can't speak for them, but obviously you can.

Incompetance must be on the skills shortage list as well. JHAS seem to have employed a couple. Care to comment on that untruth? (sarcasm welcome)

NuckingFuts
11th Oct 2012, 12:56
During a quarrel where Remus mocked the height of the walls, Romulus slew Remus and became the sole ruler of the new Rome, which he had named after himself.
To enlarge his empire, he allowed exiles and refugees, homicides and runaway slaves to populate the area.

Romulus,

Interesting choice of names!
That couldn't be right.
Surely you must be a trekky. :}

Romulus
11th Oct 2012, 19:42
Definite Trekky - Picard as the one true captain!

Here, Romulus was simply for "Rome wasn't built in a day"

imperial shifter
11th Oct 2012, 22:00
Rumour has it that ST and his merry band may be defecting to VB YSSY. The 457 issue may clean itself up.

And as per usual the redundancy selection was more about personalities and little empires than anything else.

Rudder
11th Oct 2012, 23:31
I have heard that incompetence and non attendance may be influences leading to redundancy

So now there is an admission that there is incompetence and it is not the customers fault.:ugh::ugh::ugh:

pacificmarlin
12th Oct 2012, 00:16
You have crew where someone (of any nationality) requires constant supervision. They are there because at the time of employment, they either interviewed well or were recommended by someone with an empire to build. Or any number of other reasons.
Are you willing to suffer the inefficiency of always needing two people to do the job of one, or do you do a risk analysis and only allocate them simple tasks?
Either way, this will put pressure on the rest to carry the load.
I suggest that this happens everywhere.
What would you recommend?

imperial shifter
12th Oct 2012, 00:55
Marlin. That's the rub with 457's. Once JHAS commits to them they're stuck with them no matter how crap they are. And some are shockers. If they commit to locals (and some are shockers!) they're on a six month trial period so can be dumped if they don't perform. JHAS's 457 program seams to be an expensive method of seeing whether the grass is greener on the other side of the planet. Given our customers have pulled most of our 330 hangar work I can only assume that the experiment has failed.

pacificmarlin
12th Oct 2012, 02:03
Where were the local applicants when the jobs were advertised?
Are there any A330/A320 LAME's available even now.
I am aware there are some casuals who have bought schools, but even those will expect to be flown from their home ports, given accomodation and cars, as they have when supporting the H/Maint line.
As far as I'm aware, there was simply no one available at the time.
In reference to a previous post, the roughly 20 LAME's trained since were in Mel alone. I am aware that training also went to outports.
Experience doesn't come when you recieve your rating unfortunately.

Anyone have a practical solution?

imperial shifter
12th Oct 2012, 02:39
Fair point that their may not have been any available 330 lames but basically JHAS took on a project (jetstar 330 A checks and line) that they we're not capable of fulfilling in any way. Instead of biting of more than they could chew they should of spent more time preparing, including licence training of locals, so they had full capability.
From heavy two 330 and about six 320 tickets have gone. These numbers will grow over the next week.
You're right about experience but I'm sure what your point is. Are you refering to the locals, imports or ex RAAFies?
And finally, what do you want a practical solution to? As I posted earlier the JHAS brand is toast so I believe the only solution is for them to get out of aviation and give somebody else a crack.

JHAS GM
12th Oct 2012, 05:06
Hi. I don't intend to be an everyday feature in this forum, or plan to dispel every rumour out there. But I couldn't help myself in this discussion.......

When I came to this business, it's fair to say that there was room for improvement. Generally, if a business doesn't make money it gets shut down - simple as that. And fundamentally we were losing money. In fact this business has never made any money since John Holland bought it. It really is admirable that John Holland have continued to invest and try to make this business work.

And its not just about the money. For a business to be truly sustainable it must also be sustainable from the perspectives of culture, safety and quality. It must be customer focussed and deliver value in what it does.

I have read through the posts below and while I will obviously have some differences in opinion about a number of the points made, I agree entirely with the ALAEA and several other posts in relation to the opportunities that are available to the business. JHAS provides a service and capability which I believe are needed within the industry. There will always be a local need for line and overnight work. Opportunities in heavy maintenance are harder, but also possible. We have a brilliant facility and a dedicated workforce of great people with decades of expertise. Aircraft break, and we have the skills, experience and facilities to fix them.

Contrary to post by “The WholeEnchilada” I would be the first to stand up and say that we, senior management, have made mistakes over the life of JHAS’s operations. These mistakes have, in part, led to our current situation. But the whole team is now pushing forward a program of activity to rectify this through a number of avenues, including pursuit of future revenue streams, cost reductions, improving our efficiency and improving our quality. Redundancies are simply awful, but unfortunately in this case necessary - and regardless of residential status we have to maintain the right mix of skills and licences. We are also having difficult but frank discussions with all our customers, investing in our safety infrastructure, putting a huge effort into our quality assurance programs and rebuilding how this business works. We are on the right track and things are improving. However if JHAS is to survive and if we are to keep this capability and these jobs, we need the support, effort and commitment of the whole industry. Everyday our dedicated employees do fantastic things and the aim is to make this business sustainable for the long term.

Everybody wants JHAS to be successful - our staff, our customers, government and the unions. Collectively we have an interest in seeing a strong and healthy local aviation maintenance industry. We all need to be working to make JHAS central to that.

Cheers

737 guru
12th Oct 2012, 10:44
Fantastic debate happening here amongst industry people who are passionate about the oz industry surviving well into the future and if JHAS can continue to employ 300+ engineers around the country let's support them!!!!!!

Now is not the time to start eating our own....... :=:=

AEROMEDIC
12th Oct 2012, 11:21
Good to see management responding at this time, however I have to ask "Have you transmitted this information effectively to your staff so they know the facts and future direction?"

I cannot express how important this can be at this point in time.

imperial shifter
12th Oct 2012, 11:55
RA. It's great to see a GM partake in a debate on this forum instead of just threatening legal action against staff who posted as a previous GM did. I started at JHAS not long after it took the reins and of all the hundreds of people I've worked with in that time I don't recall anybody who didn't want the place to succeed. In fact I don't think I've many that don't think it could succeed and prosper. But as long as management fail to paint a clear vision of the future and empower the workforce so we can all work together I don't see how that can happen. The atrocious Enterprise Agreement. It's inbuilt disincentive to put in that bit extra. The absurd amount of money that JHG have spent to keep it beyond it used by date and the unwillingness to negotiate a new one in timely fashion says it all. Despite my negative comments, if I didn't want JHAS to succeed I wouldn't bother posting. Fcuk, you just made me redundant and I still care enough to bother writing this when it would be much easier to just move on. Untill JHG learn how to engage and motivate aviation workers JHAS is screwed. Simple as that.

600ft-lb
12th Oct 2012, 12:42
I understand JHAS needed a foot in the door, which is where my point will lead. But now they're in the game, it's obvious this isn't a cheap sport. Skilled labour costs money, facilities cost money, training costs, safety costs, everything costs.

The race to the bottom in terms of chasing the ever lower expectation of the LCC and international operators by providing the service at absolute minimum cost has had this effect on JHAS.

If JHAS were able to charge customers more then the cost of doing the business would they be running at a loss ?

I think it's time the AMSA's and JHAS's and the IASA's(RIP) stop pandering to the unreal expectations of foreign and local carriers for doing the work for next to nothing. It's not JHAS's fault they are trying to balance running a profitable business with a fully compliant service to the industry. We should be at least glad there is a further airliner based career path out there except the major airlines.

I just make this suggestion, the next time Air "insert 3rd world country here" says we want to pay $50/transit, tell them its $1000 - ie the cost of doing business plus a bit on top, it will only benefit us all.

genxfrog
12th Oct 2012, 13:25
JHAS GM (yeah right)....you say redundancies are simply awful and we have to maintain the right mix of skills and licences. Then you terminate the employment of LAME's with the most skills and Licences? How does that make sense? You say that "we are on the right track and things are improving" Are you kidding? JHAS has lost millions and continues to lose money on a monthly basis. You say "the whole team is pushing forward a program of activity....etc, etc". Obviously a team that doesn't involve its employees or encourage input from the workforce. In fact, anyone with any constructive criticism will find themselves with the lowest scores on some manipulated "skills" matrix that you use to select who is made redundant and who stays. Events of the past few days confirms this.
If you really are the GM, then let your actions and not your words build the confidence of the workforce. We've heard it all before from those before you and when the going got tough.....they were the first to seek highly paid transfers to another part of the John Holland Group or left completely. Those who really give a stuff about the Industry and specifically JHAS are still here.

600ft-lb
12th Oct 2012, 13:53
All companies are like that genx. There are the wheelers and dealers who spend more time off the tools then on, they're looked upon as the go getters. The ones that have a clue are not usually recognised for the real, core value they bring to an organisation.

That's just something I've noticed working at the big Q

The ones who were given the DCM probably spoke out about safety/quality/poorly performing staff or made an insecure 'boss' look stupid.

ALAEA Fed Sec
12th Oct 2012, 20:44
I hope you are reading this Manager. Read the last 3 posts. Actions speak louder than words. What you did last week is in complete contrast with what you are saying. Ok. You do not have enough work and must reduce the workforce size, we understand that. You sacked the wrong people.

The best workers spend their time on the job. They don't seek limelight or credit for what they do. They don't get on here and tell everyone they are better than the rest, Pacificmarlin style. They report problems so you know what really needs to be fixed and they don't cut corners. These are the most valuable people in your Aviation business. Instead you have rated highly the ones who spend more time inflating their own value by putting down others, Pacificmarlin style.

I know the blokes you sacked and have worked with them. Your business won't succeed when you get rid of your best people.

Talking about profit. How much have you blown in court rooms preventing the staff securing a poroper wage agreement? You have lost a big case and now even have to pay the legal fees for the unions. This is madness. You should sit down with us and work out how to make your business successful and abandon this idea that cost cutting is the key. It just creates more problems.

I could write 10 pages of advice for you on here. When I know that you are interested in a successful business model I will. Until then, I hope you go back to construction and allow a real aviation company to take charge of those hangars.

Arnold E
12th Oct 2012, 22:58
We should be at least glad there is a further airliner based career path out there except the major airlines.

Like where, for instance??

NuckingFuts
18th Oct 2012, 09:59
JHAS GM, I imagine this is you

Conflict cloud over myki man's new job | theage.com.au (http://m.theage.com.au/victoria/conflict-cloud-over-myki-mans-new-job-20110123-1a17v.html)

A picture of corporate integrity.

Tickets please?

gobbledock
18th Oct 2012, 12:40
And don't forget this little 'gem' below. Nice reward one may question. How much did ASA pay Metron again????:

Metron Aviation Appoints Greg Russell as Executive Aviation Advisor

Dulles, Virginia - August 20,
2012 - Metron Aviation, a subsidiary of Airbus Americas and member of
the Airbus ProSky Alliance, is pleased to announce the appointment of Greg Russell as Executive Aviation Advisor for the Asia Pacific region. Mr. Russell joins Metron Aviation from Airservices Australia where he was Chief Executive Officer and possesses over 30 years of aviation experience in developing strategies and applying technologies to transform the performance of air transportation systems.

Mr. Russell is a recognized Air Traffic Management (ATM) and Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) visionary who spearheaded Airservices Australia's initiatives to improve air traffic efficiency and environmental performance. During Mr. Russell's tenure, Airservices positioned themselves as a world leader in the utilization of cutting-edge technology to enable real-time collaboration among airline, airport and Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP) operations. His key programs have produced dramatic, measurable benefits for Australia's aviation stakeholders, improving flight times, lowering delays and decreasing congestion, all while reducing emissions and fuel burn. Until recently he was Vice Chair of the Civil Air Navigation Service Organisation (CANSO) and Chair of the CANSO Asia Pacific
CEO Committee."

Metron Aviation - Metron Aviation Appoints Greg Russell as Executive Aviation Advisor (http://www.metronaviation.com/news/press-releases/424-metron-appoints-greg-russell.html)

NuckingFuts
9th Nov 2012, 05:01
So what's the word on the street folks, how long has the place left to run?

easily_confused
9th Nov 2012, 20:26
Yawn, why don't you just give it up Nucking Futs and wish this place success. Do you want to see more people out of jobs?

fruitloop
10th Nov 2012, 22:51
imperial shifter.
Were you a compulsory or a "Volunteer" ?? If compulsory you have my sympathies.
As you have stated a number of 330 and 320 engineers have been made redundant,how many "refused" to work "flexible hours".??
pacificmarlin.
As several have stated you must be a "pleasure" to work with..
aintsaying.
Your statement regards "Time management vs Expectations"is so true..

imperial shifter
11th Nov 2012, 03:57
fruitloop.
Compulsory, and thank you. I don't think the engineering side of the industry can get much lower than it is now. Sooner or later things will stabilize but whether I'm a part of the industry then is hard to see. Flexibility wasn't the issue in the heavy maint. redundancies. JHAS put all their eggs in the VB basket and VB pulled the plug leaving JHAS high and dry. This gave management the opportunity to rid themselves of people they probably see as "difficult" for whatever reason eg. union reps. HSR's etc. and people with non-standard contracts. Licence coverage, skills, abilities and flexibility had little to do with the selection given some of the useless cfusk still their. The core problem with flexibility at JHAS is the billshut EA. Always has been. And I don't think NuckingFuts wants to see "the place" fail. He, as I do, just wish to see JHAS disappear up it's own arse and somebody competent run the company. The work itself is not diminishing, just the will and ability of the people to manage it. The long term worry is that the people that "do" that work will diminish making it difficult to bring heavy work back onshore when Asian wages catch up to ours in the future. But in the meantime Aus. Post needs mail sorters at Tulla. :sad: