Qantas to make a further 300 LAMEs Redundant?

[Long Bay Mauler]

Strong rumours coming out of another 300 LAMEs to be made redundant in the coming months.

Does this leave numbers at about 900 to 1000 licenced engineers?

Is this enough to maintain the fleet,or whats left of it?

[Jethro Gibbs]

Closing Avalon would make a hole in 300 and Forstaff Management have in the past week had a meeting with Qantas in Sydney that wont be for good news.

[Clipped]

And you thought Chris Nasty and Gavin Hurried had no plan.

Remember Q Future?

They'll wait till MX is up and running and then drop the axe.

We were warned from the very start by the New Zuulanders and SP has kept reminding us of their ulterior motives. Wasn't our Job Security clause the reason we got into a biff with these buffoons?

Reducing numbers achieves at least two things. Shrink the Qf numbers in the ALAEA and secondly they may even save a buck or two to hit their KPIs. Short term gains you bet!

[Engineer_aus]

I think I will put my hand up this time. It is becoming a joke now.

[happy clapper]

Well me old mate Mr G H has promised myself and my team in FNQ that all our jobs up here are safe.I mean he wouldn't do the nasty thing like make my DMM position redundant?After all the harassment we have carried out over the years to rid QF of all those nasty Lames who had the balls to ask questions!
We have completely covered up the real situation up here with lies and made up manpower requirements to save my job.
I mean we only on some days have 4 people on shift,
1 x Dmm,2 Snrs and 1 worker and a couple of flts a day,you cant get much leaner than that.
Cheers to another 10 years up here under the palm trees drinking XXXX,
Thanks Gav

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

If every LAME worked in accordance with Qantas procedures they would need to put on 300. Some think that turning a blind eye will keep them in the good books with management. This is a mistake.

[Suck&Blow]

What are you hearing Fed Sec, or are they keeping more dirty little secrects to themselves again?!! :yuk::yuk::yuk::yuk::yuk:

[Jethro Gibbs]

If every LAME worked in accordance with Qantas procedures they would need to
put on 300. Some think that turning a blind eye will keep them in the good books
with management. This is a mistake.

Its already happened at Avalon some crawlers thought they were safe and now they are gornnnnnnnnnnnnnnn don't lower yourselves it wont help .

[boeingsgoing]

Mr Nasty told us this just a few weeks ago. He mentioned that heavy maintenance was now there or there abouts and the line was next to sort out. (I think AVV was not in his mind when he said this). Use of the new licensing system etc was going to mean people getting the tap as there was not going to be enough VR's. so if AVV shuts (85) engineers ?? Then that's 200+ for the rest of QF eng. worrying times for most. Exciting times for a few.

[33 Disengage]

There is still room up here but not for long. Word out of Chris' office is that the next round of redundancies kicks off before mid '13, mainly for the boys in Avalon, and to a lesser extent, Sydney. Configs complete, a/c being parked in the desert, Mxi up and running, MOD bedded down. What do they need engineers for? Oh, yes, nothing like a bit of pressure for the AME EBA negotiations.

And they claim they got an award for being the best employer in Australia!

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

What are you hearing Fed Sec, or are they keeping more dirty little secrects to themselves again?!! http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/pukey.gifhttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/pukey.gifhttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/pukey.gifhttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/pukey.gifhttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/pukey.gif

I've been saying what I have been hearing for over 12 months. They want to sack you. You should be more interested in what I said before. In case you missed it.


If every LAME worked in accordance with Qantas procedures they would need to put on 300. Some think that turning a blind eye will keep them in the good books with management. This is a mistake.

[BP2197]

An opposing argument could be that the ALAEA should be pushing all maintenance providers to be as efficient and productive as possible as it is the only way for engineers to have a sustainable future and hence the association a membership base. In my view, the pressure which should be applied would be as follows:



Adopt Lean manufacturing techniques to continuously work towards and exceed leading practice turn times (and quality but obviously the current state is very good)
The additional capacity from the efficient work practices can then be used to take on more work - internal first and then potentially third party if the turn times really are leading practice
Systems of maintenance are certainly not efficient currently nor is the planning aspect - this makes the engineer look inefficient. Push the organisations to fix this asap!
Leadership styles in management are appalling (as evidenced by the survey) and result in lower engagement and hence productivity - surely a fair dinkum maintenance organisation would want to address this?
Embrace new technologies to enhance the systems of maintenance, planning and the actual job of the engineer.
I'm sure there are plenty of other suggestions that the members would have which could further improve the engineering function and ensure that the skills stay in Australia.

[Jethro Gibbs]

Isn't it good to see that someone still lives in Fairyland .

[BP2197]

Fairyland maybe but the other course of action is only expediting the demise. Your call.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Looks like the Qf PR department have rolled out one of their old characters. To dispell some of your diatribe I can confirm that -

Qantas don't want the most efficient operation. They had it for 737 HM, the most efficient in the world actually with unbeatable quality. They closed it.

We have offered them a cheaper roster in Brisbane - rejected.

We offered maintenance on demand with less LAMEs than they need today - rejected.

We have offered to do outsourced work in house with no staff increases - rejected.

Qantas don't want to make money now, they want losses so they can channel funds to other parts of the business and get foolish governments to support them.

[Jethro Gibbs]

Here is a tip the Employees & the ALAEA aren't steering the ship we have no say in the course that has been set simple as that we are just passengers .

[genxfrog]

BP2197...you're suggestion to implement some global trendy mumbo jumbo is not going to make any difference to those running what was once a great airline. As long as the labour costs are cheaper overseas, that's where the work will go. Its that plain and simple to see that's all that matters to those Bean-Counters currently running Qantas.
Efficiency, Safety, Quality, Commitment to faithful & highly skilled employees......all irrelevant today in the eyes of AJ and his band of morally bankrupt board members.

[600ft-lb]

whatever happens, nothings stopping you working in the newly required contract positions created by short sightedness and if you want come back into full time employment 12 months later just sign here.

like we all haven't seen this before...

[Managers Perspective]

As the airline continues to move forward to regain sustained stability there will always be those that are adversely affected.

Not by design, by necessity.

The answer is here: Like Sands Through The Hourglass | Common Flame (http://blog.commonflame.org/the-hourglass/)

MP

[Lodown]

As the airline continues to move forward to regain sustained stability there will always be those that are adversely affected.

Not by design, by necessity.


Holy crap Batman! Someone's been drinking the Kool-Aid again.

Do you actually believe this stuff MP? Ever paid any consideration to the passengers that are/were adversely affected? Perhaps that was by necessity as well eh? Nobody would be silly enough to design it that way, surely.

[AEROMEDIC]

As the airline continues to move forward to regain sustained stability there will always be those that are adversely affected.


M.P.

You clearly don't think that Qantas may NOT be heading in the right direction "going forward".

Treating employees as "collateral damage in going forward" is the prime reason Qantas is finding itself in the position it is.
If you ARE a manager...... you're not a very good one.

Good managers listen, assist, guide, engage others to achieve set goals.

[Jethro Gibbs]

As the airline continues to move forward to regain sustained stability there
will always be those that are adversely affected


Seem to recall someone else who was moving forward and its not working for her at all .

[Sunfish]

Managers Perspective:

As the airline continues to move forward to regain sustained stability there will always be those that are adversely affected.

Not by design, by necessity.


You are obviously not a manager or if you are, you're a psycopath.

As I have observed many times before with respect to Qantas, its management delight in inflicting mental pain on its staff by a constant stream of destabilising statements regarding job security.

I believe Qantas have the right to reduce the size of its workforce whenever and wherever it likes. I once had to fire 30% of my then staff to save a company.

However I did it cleanly on a Friday afternoon with no warning and with a cash sweetener and the offer of references and future rehiring if possible. Monday morning I told the rest of the staff what had happened and why, and that their jobs were safe.

To drag the process out over years in the way Qantas has is at best plain bad management or at worst the action of a psycopath who likes to see people in pain and anguish.

It is possible to do this type of restructure over years - but with a transparent road map, lots of consultation and frequent communication as well as redeployment and job search assistance for those affected.

To put that another way, you either do it quick and dirty on a Friday afternoon or slow and clean over months or years.

The Qantas method of "slow and dirty" is the strategy of a fukcing bunch of morons; it maximises insecurity and anguish, and minimises morale and engagement, which MUST affect performance.

Furthermore, if they can do it to engineers, they can do it to the pilot group or CC as well.