QF Fraud - allowances

[blueloo]

Wonderful article in the Australian online today. Very accurate as they strive to be (haha) -

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCsQqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theaustralian.com.au%2Fbusiness%2Faviat ion%2Fqantas-pilots-stood-down-over-fraud-claim%2Fstory-e6frg95x-1226890706495&ei=iHtUU_2MHsvCkQWzw4GoBA&usg=AFQjCNH18B0OMfLHgJHzKV-N3QTPewp4hg&bvm=bv.65058239,d.dGI

Found this quote worthy of PPrune:

“If you’re a flight attendant helping yourself to relatively small amounts of alcohol from the flight deck or taxi dockets for unauthorised travel, you will probably lose your job,’’ said an airline insider

No matter how hard I look - i can never find the hidden alcohol supply on the flight deck... maybe it was hidden in the old windshield repellent canisters!

[V-Jet]

I commented on that! Not surprisingly it wasn't posted....

[neville_nobody]

Are allowances determined by your domicile? Where you actually live is irrelevant.

[h.o.t.a.s.]

It appears the First shots' been fired in the Industrial battle Ladies and gents…

There is no reason for this to have been leaked to the press.

You are now all greedy fraudulent overpaid bus drivers with alcohol on the flight deck to any layperson who reads this.

Try standing up to the pay freeze now suckers… :suspect::suspect::suspect:

[ITCZ]

Agree. This is not 'news,' it is an attack on the profession.

1. Firefighters
2. Paramedics
3. Rescue volunteers
4. Nurses
5. Pilots
6. Doctors
7. Pharmacists
8. Veterinarians
9. Air traffic controllers
10. Farmers

- See more at: Australia's Most Trusted Professions 2013 | Reader's Digest Australia | Reader?s Digest Australia (http://www.readersdigest.com.au/most-trusted-professions-2013#sthash.k3XfioI1.dpuf)

The politics of envy.

[mohikan]

Nice to see the arsehole FAAA immediately piling in on this.

I for one am getting tired of back stabbing cabin crew.

[standard unit]

I for one am getting tired of back stabbing cabin crew.

OK, I'll bite. :ok:

Do tell ???

[Angle of Attack]

The cabin crew are under so much pressure as it is, have a go at the union fair enough but keep the front line staff out of it. Rise above this crap. It's only the first shot.

[27/09]

1. Firefighters
2. Paramedics
3. Rescue volunteers
4. Nurses
5. Pilots
6. Doctors
7. Pharmacists
8. Veterinarians
9. Air traffic controllers
10. Farmers

I don't see Human Resources, Public Relations, or CEO's on that list. I wonder where they come?

[27/09]

Are allowances determined by your domicile? Where you actually live is irrelevant.

I would have thought so, and it can cut both ways. I bet if the course was at your domicile and you had to travel the company wouldn't pay any allowances.

[drpixie]

You asked for it. On a list that only goes to 50:

41. CEOs
45. Real estate agents
49. Politicians
50. Door-to-door salespeople

They didn't ask about HR or PR, so I'll assume they're right at the bottom with Politicians.

[Stalins ugly Brother]

This leak has all the fingerprints of the QF media machine all over it.

It's from the same files as the 3000, no hang on not big enough reaction, make that 5000 jobs but have no clue where we are actually going to sack 5000 from???!!

So lets leak about some greedy Rich pilots rorting the system to the detriment of poor little loss making Qantas, (the same poor little Qantas that our illustrious Senior management appear to rort every other day) provide little detail and let as much mud stick as possible on our profession. Great business plan you clowns and you wonder why we are all so engaged!!! :ugh::ugh::ugh:

It appears the First shots' been fired in the Industrial battle Ladies and gents…

Industrial dirty tricks early??? You bet. Because this mob are incapable of anything else, especially running an Airline.

Any other side show that they can conjure up just takes the focus off of their P#$$ Poor performance. :=

Lets wait for August and see who's fault it will be for the full year loss. Any other company with a respectable board would have had this CEO and His management team dismissed for these dismal performances over the last five years a long time ago. How much more crap do we have to endure???? :mad:

[Transition Layer]

Any 'perceived' favouritism in the treatment of Pilots v Cabin Crew is most likely due to the relative strength of each industrial organisation and the percentage of Union membership amongst each group of employees.

The multitude of awards and conditions that QF Flight Attendants work under has led to a somewhat fractured group of employees with lower Union membership and I believe can be partly to blame for the 'dobbing' culture that exists.

It is out of line for the FAAA (whilst not specifically mentioned in the article) to be commenting on this matter.

[bogdantheturnipboy]

If the allegations in The Australian article are correct then I have no sympathy for the senior Qantas pilots accused of fraud.

OK we know the media (particularly Murdoch papers) are not exactly the bastions of truth and there maybe another agenda here, but if it turns out to be true, then they should be sacked.

“Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters”
~ Albert Einstein ~

[RU/16]

$18000 for a 12 week course? What is this to cover?

[What The]

Accommodation, meals and incidentals.

[Variable Incidence]

Yes a poorly written and probably inaccurate media leak is questionable at this time!

However, if these individuals have knowingly done the wrong thing then they are guilty of defrauding the Company and bring disrepute both to themselves and our profession. Actions then justifiably have consequences regardless of who you are or what you do. There should be one measuring stick in this whether pilot, cabin crew or a manager with his/her hand in the till, if this is the case!

Let the matter be investigated properly and let's not be too quick to defend or judge without knowing all the facts.

[sarge75]

So only one of these pilots is a captain, then the other three are first officers yet earn more than $200,000 a year.

What a crock

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Qantas pilots stood down over fraud claim

by: Hedley Thomas
From: The Australian (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/)
April 21, 2014 12:00AM





FOUR senior Qantas pilots, ­including a captain, have been suspended from flying duties and removed from an ongoing training course after the discovery of an alleged expenses rort involving tens of thousands of dollars at the airline.


The pilots are under internal investigation for claiming almost $20,000 each from cash-strapped Qantas as an allowance for living away from their homes for the duration of the Sydney-based course, which is mandatory to upgrade their skills.


Senior sources told The Australian yesterday that the pilots had falsely purported that their NSW homes were more than 200km from Sydney. This meant they would have been entitled to about $18,000 each in allowances over the 12 weeks of the course.


The payment of the allowance is meant to compensate for the costs of accommodation, food and other miscellaneous expenses in Sydney when pilots are on a training course and living away from home for an extended ­period. The policy and its guidelines were designed to be strictly ­observed to ensure that only ­pilots who lived too far to commute would benefit from generous allowances.


The four pilots, all of whom are experienced on the Qantas 737 passenger jets, were immediately stood down after management discovered in recent days that they lived in Sydney and had no entitlement to the expenses.
It is understood that each of the pilots earns more than $200,000 a year in gross salary while the captain commands significantly more in salary and ­allowances.


An internal investigation is at an early stage and could lead to more serious ramifications. A fraud or attempted fraud on the airline, which has been reporting record losses and seen a collapse in its share price, may be referred to police.


A Qantas spokeswoman who was asked about the suspensions and the investigation replied with a written statement: “The overwhelming majority of Qantas staff do the right thing when it comes to allowances, but if we reasonably believe anyone is not sticking to the rules we’ll investigate and act accordingly.’’


The spokeswoman, who refused to confirm or deny the details that were provided to The Australian, added: “Qantas doesn’t comment on any individual staff issues.’’


Senior staff who want the investigation to ­determine if others have been rorting the system.


Flight attendants and their industrial representatives are watching management’s responses to the case because of perceptions that the pilots receive preferential treatment, an airline source said yesterday.
Flight attendants have complained internally that their colleagues have been fired over relatively minor amounts but pilots have been let off over more serious alleged misconduct.


“If you’re a flight attendant helping yourself to relatively small amounts of alcohol from the flight deck or taxi dockets for unauthorised travel, you will probably lose your job,’’ said an airline insider.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

There is no way any of the Pilots would have leaked this to the Aus. I think it an absolute disgrace that Qantas have leaked this story and doing so has breached a number of their own policies. If that was investigated I am certain they would deny all knowledge.

[assasin8]

Is Geoffrey writing under an alias now? This should be an internal matter, but some "senior" member of the politic bureau has released it to the media... This stinks of the same dirty campaign they ran during the PIA!!!

[Capt Basil Brush]

What if they are Sydney based, but commute? I know that's their decision, and accommodation etc in SYD is their problem, but technically their address could be more than 200km from SYD.

[pull-up-terrain]

What wouldn't suppose me is, if the pilots involved, come from somewhere which is 1.5 to 2 hour drive away but is still <200km away by distance and there has been some miscommunication between the pilots and management. Keep in mind there are quite a few pilots who come from areas south of Wollongong and commuting to Sydney everyday for a course would take a solid 1.5 to 2 hour drive each way in peak hour but is still less than 200km away.

[Variable Incidence]

Lets wait and see everyone! Reprehensible to leak this to the media yes but if the pilot's concerned have done the wrong thing knowingly then we shouldn't be blindly defending them. No-one is above the law if this is the case!

[Oakape]

All airlines have an address on file for each of their pilots, as well as contact phone numbers. The only way I can see that this could have developed, is if the pilots in question have a 'crash pad' close to the airport for reserve duties & the like.

If that is the case, it would appear that the company has suddenly taken exception to a situation that has been going on for years & decided to take the stance that the crash pad is the pilots actual address.

It would appear that it is either a zealous management type trying to earn brownie points or, as has been suggested, a shot across the bows to signal the commencement of a new, hard line industrial policy from management.

[allthecoolnamesarego]

It would appear that it is either a zealous management type trying to earn brownie points or, as has been suggested, a shot across the bows to signal the commencement of a new, hard line industrial policy from management.


Or, these pilots have lied about their address and are commiting a crime, for which they rightly should be punished!
I am concerened that people are more wortied that the media know about this than they are that the alleged crime took place.

[neville_nobody]

Or, these pilots have lied about their address and are commiting a crime, for which they rightly should be punished!
I am concerened that people are more wortied that the media know about this than they are that the alleged crime took place.

Crime what crime?? It is not a crime to give an address which you can be contacted at which is not your residence!!

If you move house alot it is often easier to leave your address at a relatives or a PO Box.

Same with phones you don't have to give a company your phone number, just a number to be contacted on.

There would also be pilots who for legal and security reason QANTAS can never know their real addresses.

My money is on this being a political stunt where the outcome is never reported but the initial investigation is.

[allthecoolnamesarego]

Neville, you jest surely?

Of course it is not a crime to give an address for contact reasons etc, but to willingly receive monies that you are not entitled to is a crime, it is called fraud.
If the pilots had received the money that they were not entitled to, and make no effort to correct the situation, they are committing a crime.

I am not saying these pilots did that, as no actual detailed facts have been given.

I agree, it does appear to be "media" driven, but if the allegations are true, then these guys/girls deserve everything they get.

Fraud is fraud, not matter how you spin it.

[neville_nobody]

but to willingly receive monies that you are not entitled to is a crime, it is called fraud.


Whether you receive money or not would depend on the contract and the interpretation of it. It is all a matter of opinion.

I agree with you if it is a straight open and shut case, however I doubt it would be that.

For example if you owned two houses one in the country and one in the city and you lived in both where is your address?

Or better still you are domiciled in Melbourne but commute from Sydney is that still fraud?

[Ollie Onion]

Surely if you have a house in Sydney even if it is not your main residence then it is still a little bit dodgy to them claim your allowances for being away from home.

I think it is disgusting that this has been leaked to the media, but if what has been said is true then the pilots have to take responsibility for their actions.

[itsnotthatbloodyhard]

Or, these pilots have lied about their address and are commiting a crime, for which they rightly should be punished!
I am concerened that people are more wortied that the media know about this than they are that the alleged crime took place.

Probably because you're really just stating the obvious - if someone deliberately did something bad, then they should get in trouble for it. I don't think many people would argue with that. In this case, there are an awful lot of details and potential grey areas that we know nothing about, so it's hardly appropriate to be working ourselves into a lather over it. I don't think it's unreasonable, though, to be wondering why 'senior sources' have leaked this to the press during what they themselves describe as 'the early stages of the investigation'.

(I'd quite like to see an article comparing this alleged rort to the APA bid, where Dixon would've got $60m, Joyce $20m, and the airline would've gone under. Not holding my breath for that one, though, especially not from News Ltd.)

[Zapatas Blood]

"Or better still you are domiciled in Melbourne but commute from Sydney is that still fraud?"

Yes. You will find it is.

[cattletruck]

Be wary of he who points the finger.

The first mistake was leaking this to the media. In a non-dysfuntional management environment this issue would have been dealt with internally with minimal damage to the brand, however there is another agenda at play obviously.

To paraphrase a famous John Lennon song: "All we are saying, is give us a management that can run an airline".

[chimbu warrior]

by: Hedley Thomas

............who should know better - his father was an airline pilot.

[V-Jet]

1) If the Company was defrauded they have MULTIPLE ways of getting anything back. Doesn't make it correct of course, but staff travel, wages garnishee, seniority, etc etc all the way up to summary dismissal with loss of super. And yes they have done that.

2) Just imagine for a second if said Company brought in a Captain for some indiscretion. I'll pick sexual harassment but it could easily be fraud or whatever. Point is this. As per every Company manual, we are in no uncertain terms told point blank that we speak out of turn we are dismissed. No if or buts. So Capt A is hauled in for a WK1 pattern to discuss 'alleged behaviour' and rather than walk out with his tail between his legs he has good legals behind him he goes to the media about his 'interview' over alleged sexual misconduct.

How do you think the Company would treat him?

The rights or wrongs of this are irrelevant. The QF media machine is now against an 'alleged' fraud - for which they 110% KNOW will cost them nothing. It's not even a legal matter - it's an internal issue!!!!

[International Trader]

This probably an old rort that has been going on for many decades and a" left over" from when QF was government owned. There was probably never a system to check the claims and nobody has bothered to create one or, they have just looked the other way.

Present any possibility to defraud and there will be those who will find a way to take advantage of it.

A similar thing happened just a few years ago at Dragon Air in Hong Kong.

I was told that pilots were presenting false receipts for inflated rental rates to the company for reimbursement over many years . When Cathay took over, a quick check of the books exposed the fraud.
Certainly ,retribution if not restitution was swift and caused a few Dragon Air pilots to return to Australia to look for work.
I believe that it went on for so long because some management types were among those doing the defrauding.

In any case, a crime is a crime and by making a false claim, the crime has been committed.

They had better just not look too far back. It would be an interesting exercise from the stories that I have been told over the years.

It could end up being a new income stream for QF!

[601]

dismissal with loss of super

That statement needs an explanation.

[FYSTI]

Of course the reverse happened for years. Pilots received a slot in another port where the training was to be conducted, therefore no allowances payable. In some cases, before training was even completed, or in most cases very soon after, hey presto a slot back in their original base. All costs of associated with being in another city for the duration of the training being borne by the pilot. Quite a scam, saved the company a fortune for more than a decade. Bet that one won't be leaked to the newspapers.

[Jackneville]

It is not a 'left over' from when QF was owned by the Government. When Qf was owned by the Government everybody was Sydney based, there were way less managers than Tech Crew and the GM earned about two and a half times what a Senior Captain earned...........these days there are
a sh*t load more managers than pilots and the CEO takes out about 15 times what a Senior Captain does.............:ugh:

[Flying Tiger]

Alleged fraud is not a legal matter, V-Jet?

Thanks for the giggle anyway.

[V-Jet]

It is an interpretation of internal company policy.

And that is coming from someone who had a personal cheque stolen by one of his employees from one of his companies, made out to cash by them (for $20,000) and had they not actually pleaded guilty in Court the NSW Constabulary said it was doubtful I would have got a conviction.

I'm glad you find things like that worth a giggle. I certainly do not. And that's with the passage of time. I found it a LOT less amusing when I was dealing with it.

The follow up (just for giggles) was a good behaviour bond, I did get my money back and they got a $500 fine.

And for more giggles, might we discuss Ms 'I've done nothing wrong!' Gillard, Wilson, Blewitt, Thomson and Williamson?

It is QF Company policy that nothing be discussed until internal disciplinary procedures have run their course. If you are a QF Captain, you are at worst a very good bush lawyer. These guys are NOT idiots and would have (again, at worst) a very good argument as to why they did what they did. Who leaked this, and why have they not been stood down?

And Company Super contributions can be withdrawn is my understanding. And yes I know this to have had occurred. In the instance I know of (decades ago) I agree with it happening, but the facts are that QF have many, many means of dealing with this quietly and getting their money - and more than their money back. Why the publicity?

[Romulus]

There is no way any of the Pilots would have leaked this to the Aus. I think it an absolute disgrace that Qantas have leaked this story and doing so has breached a number of their own policies. If that was investigated I am certain they would deny all knowledge.

Didn't you recently release an internal powerpoint presentation that specifically named people in line for certain roles within Qantas?

Bit of pot and kettle there SP even if you did delete it a bit later.

[noip]

Given that the Company knows where each pilot lives (and they do) I'm struggling to get this "fraud" thing. If someone applies for an allowance and they are approved ... perhaps the clerk should pay more attention.

This has all the hallmarks of managers (?) who live in a morals/ethics free zone.

Personally, I am utterly dismayed that QF Management have released this "stuff" ... I am utterly disgusted at their conduct which has the hallmarks of betrayal of trust.

But then ... look who we elected to stuff our country .... ?

[CamelSquadron]

Reading the article, it is more likely the source of the information is the "flight attendants and their industrial representatives".

The last three paragraphs stand out like a beacon as being inconsistent with the rest of the article.

The only reason the reporter would have spoken to "flight attendants and their industrial representatives" for this article would be because they are associated with the source of the information.

Just my one cents worth.

[kellykelpie]

I agree Camel! Why is it that everyone is asking for calm until investigation is complete, yet blaming The Company for leaking the story? Would seem more likely that this has come from another "source"....

[Australopithecus]

Are you two sphincters done? The FAAA source would have had to been informed by the reporter seeking comment, and the reporter would have been directed there by the original source, knowing that a juicy third party quote was in the offing.

There is no way that the original facts could be leaked by anyone other than the original compiler of said facts. Which is, contrary to all documented policy, someone in Qantas. Someone who needs a close encounter with Centrelink.

This kind of thing just invites a comparative retributive project. Say, a compilation of management rorts, boondoggles, failures and misrepresentations charted against the known renumeration of the perpetrators. What fun! Lets see whose fraud/looting is the greater sin.

Want a witch hunt? Fine. Let's have a witch hunt. The kindling is over there, and the line for the dunking chair forms to the right. Do I smell smoke?

Disclaimer: if these people are in breach of whatever rules apply (and its hard to keep count these days, what with the trough of riches being slurped by our current crop of fin-de-siecle custom-suited executive looters)*, they deserve their fates. The same as those who deliver negative value for eye-popping renumeration deserve their eventual reckoning. (I wish that I was not an atheist)

*call that hyperbole? This is hyperbole!

[V-Jet]

CS and KK:
If that is the case, QF should have made far better attempts at being 'quiet' about it. And if they wanted to find a 'source' they could.

Company manuals threaten death for looking sideways if not approved. Why is this instance so different?

And after decades of being blatantly lied to, I cannot accept an 'innocent mistake' excuse.

Print media is particularly swayed by QF drivel. I am biased because I have not seen a single instance in at least the last 5 years of QF behaving honourably. That article was devoid of real factual information - QF could have quashed it easily.

Industrial Relations trial by media?

[Potsie Weber]

Ok! Let's put the boot on the other foot.

Exactly why did the Company Secretary and Assistant recently resign effective immediately.

All very hush hush in the press makes me think there is something somebody doesn't want to get out.

Any Journo's out there? Start digging!

[V-Jet]

Exactly and well brought up.

Paraphrasing your excellent point: The legal custodians of the Company's right to operate have resigned in record time when whispers of a CASA investigation are heard. Within a few weeks evil Tech Crew of (probably) 20 years exemplary service are possibly found in breach of some obscure allowance that was possibly erroneously paid by the Company but can be recouped in days if need be.

I can't quite understand why one reached the media and the other doesn't.

But then again I am biased and don't trust the bastards!

[framer]

That article is clearly designed to make Jo Public think " pilots are w@nkers... how come I don't earn $200k?.....w@nkers".
I get the feeling that the article is the first shot in a media war that you guys don't even know you're part of.
You guys should release a story about management balls-ups like a previous poster said and include some examples of how a pilot can save the company ( or cost the company ) tens of thousands of dollars with a relatively routine decision.
That article is rubbish.

[Gemini Twin]

So if they lived 190 km away they are supposed to travel back and forth every day from home???

[Flying Tiger]

I know it's all about you v-jet, but next time I commit fraud can I refer the complainant to you for advice as to what is and what is not a matter to be determined with reference to the law?

[V-Jet]

I have major issues with airlines choosing trial by media instead of the more traditional approach that involves due process, law and solicitors.

Cast your mind back to that idiot Wirthless announcing to the world on behalf of that idiot CEO that Rolls Royce were to blame for Qf32 without reference to anything like facts. As it happened it was right, but in the words of a much better script writer than I 'that's a hell of a gamble with a multi billion dollar airline'.

Using the media to shoot from the hip without following THEIR OWN rules is not smart. And that's assuming what QF says is anything close to true. It -might- be (and that's really the point) but my inclination is that if QF say something is black, then I would at least suspect it's white.

I think referring to due process and his or her Lordship is far more reliable than allowing someone (who probably looks up to the Joyce/wirthless school of management 'technique') make decisions affecting lives based on discussions with Hedley Thomas and/or Rupert Murdoch. I doubt Hedley or Rupert even own wigs - just for starters!

[Variable Incidence]

A lot of paranoia and jumping at shadows here:confused:

[allthecoolnamesarego]

Gemini Twin So if they lived 190 km away they are supposed to travel back and forth every day from home???


Yes. Just like ANY company, Qantas don't care where you live, as long as you get to work. Why is it Q's problem where YOU choose to live?

Some Q pilots live in NZ and Bali. If they CHOOSE to do that, why should the company be responsible for there travel arrangements?

You are BASED at a particular location and are expected to get to work. If Q need you to train in A DIFFERENT location to your BASING they will cover costs of accommodation etc, because THEY have 'made' you relocate (temporarily) for the training period. (Remember, if your personal circumstances dictate, you don't have to take the training slot - RIN excepted, and as a 'commuter' that is a gamble you take.)

Get real fellas, IF these guys have claimed money (not some obscure allowance) that they are not entitled to, they are committing fraud.

Yes, the info SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN MADE PUBLIC, but we are dealing with two SEPERATE issues here, the alleged fraud AND the alleged company privacy breech (for what APPEARS to be industrial reasons).

V-jet: big assumption that these people have had a 20 year career of exemplary service, they might just have been rorting the system for all these years and have finally got caught!

Stop putting in emotion and wait for facts before tainting either side with particular traits.

[Mstr Caution]

Aside from the fraud issue.

The fact it was published in the media raises two issues.

It makes a mockery of the JUST CULTURE they have pushed over the last few years.

And.... It makes a mockery of the parchment / scroll or whatever it was called from the PWC love in. Remember that one about mutual respect etc etc.

[V-Jet]

V-jet: big assumption that these people have had a 20 year career of exemplary service, they might just have been rorting the system for all these years and have finally got caught!

Stop putting in emotion and wait for facts before tainting either side with particular traits.

and

A lot of paranoia and jumping at shadows here

Educated guess. Around 20 years to Command, hence my use of that length of service. Certainly more than 10. No-one gets to Command (well almost) without what the Company would term 'Exemplary' service so I felt that was reasonable. Certainly that would be the term a defence lawyer would use. If it wasn't exemplary conduct displayed over many years, then why would Charlie Q put them in the LHS seat of one of their jets?

Agree totally with the shadow jumping. And that is EXACTLY why this stuff should be OUT OF THE MEDIA!!

MC: Absolutely. IF fraud is proven is irrelevant in my mind. There are a myriad of avenues to deal with it, and as I keep saying Qantas will not be out of pocket and disciplinary measures will be followed. The abuse of process is the issue.

[Beer Baron]

allthecoolnamesarego, I think you have somewhat missed Gemini Twin's point. Reference section 49.1.2(b) of the short haul EBA. Your quote...
Q need you to train in A DIFFERENT location to your BASING they will cover costs of accommodation etc, because THEY have 'made' you relocate
...is not entirely correct. If the crew member lives within 200km of the location of the training they do not qualify for the allowance even if they are training out of their base.
Hence the point of them driving 190km to and from training each day.

None of what I have posted has any relevance to the stated allegations. It is simply clarifying an EBA provision.

[Insider Trader]

It seems to me that the only thing missing here is the offending crew having some association to/with Eddie Obeid.

Surely it is time that Warren Truss set up an Aviation ICAC to rid the industry of such corruption. First item of business could be examining the issue of price-fixing of freight, for example....

[73to91]

Anyone know anyone in finance department and in particular, section looking after staff expenses?

I'd bet that the team that looks at staff expenses could tell you some stories about fraud when it comes to expenses, the issue there is that for example, a PA might purchase something for their boss but the boss approves it.

It's a rort when management types send flowers to staff when they are sick, getting married, have just had a baby, farewell gifts whilst the rest of us usually put a few $$'s in an envelope. Management types think they can do it and so do it.

Wasn't it a joke that QF recently held and paid for farewell drinks/feed recently for management types whilst the majority of the 5000 :suspect: do not get the same company paid farewell - or was that a fort?

When it comes to duty travel, isn't it a rort when the most senior of management can stay at a 5 star hotel whilst others stay at hotels as per policy that are certainly not 5 star? Or is that OK under the caste system at QF?

Isn't it a rort when the CEO bumps a commercial pax from 1st class? Sure I read that the previous CEO did this type of thing.

Isn't it a rort when senior management types can pick up the phone and request employment for best friend of son or daughter and get a role, no questions asked?

As I said, anyone know anyone in finance department and in particular, section looking after staff expenses?

[indamiddle]

#1 these 'facts' have been reported by the media.....😕
#2 superannuation already in your account is yours, the company has no legal right or actual ability to take money from your account. The only action available to them is not to place any more funds into account. e.g. someone may have accumulated a large amount of unused sick leave which may entitle the employee to a prorated payout would be unlikely to get any money. I am not sure what would happen with any annual or long service leave.
#3 I did not see the comments by FAAA but the interest of some cabin crew here is how the pilots are treated if guilty. A number of cabin crew have been sacked for theft, very minor by comparison with the allegations against the pilots.

[Managers Perspective]

If guilty, send to the gallows.

MP.

[V-Jet]

MP: Your best post yet. 100% agree. And you would know if you have read this thread I do have a foot in each camp, so to speak.

So, just to throw cats amongst pigeons, a $20k fraud gets the gallows.

So, what does a $3-4billion fraud get?

It's not bonuses is it?

[Managers Perspective]

Not a bonus, a one off share issue to a family trust shell company.

MP.

[halas]

Any connection here to the person or group that allegedly threatened to kill AJ?


halas

[Collando]

Is it fraud to say QANTAS employs Australian cabin crew on long haul when in fact New Zealand based Jet Connect cabin crew operate between Melbourne / Los Angeles on the A380.

[Big M]

In my experience - these items are a "claim".
I believe I'm "entitled" to a certain monetary amount and I claim it from my employer. If my employer concurs (this is actually the name of a company that provides third party management of said claims) then the "claim" is paid. If they don't concur then the claim is not paid. No fraud involved. If the company pays a claim and then subsequently decide that it is not valid then they instruct employee to repay the amount. Same as "claiming" a deduction on your tax return-if the ATO decides it's not valid then you have to pay it back.

I've had "claims" rejected before. Once claimed for payment when I thought I was off duty but subsequently proved I was on duty and not entitled. Quite innocent of course, no drama - money not paid. I wasn't trying to "pull a scam" but just a mistake. I imagine it's the same as if you believe you are outside a certain area and believe you can claim an amount for "off base training". This is why so many "bean counters" are employed - obviously to count beans and to ensure that certain beans are entitled to the claimant.

No need for "hanging from the mast"

:ok:

[bogdantheturnipboy]

Fraud = an intentional dishonest act or omission done with the purpose of deceiving.

If staff knew they were outside the area and not entitled - then according to this legal definition, it is IS fraud.

[maggot]

Beat up
:*

[dragon man]

The Captain as well. Starts his course Monday I believe.

[VH-Cheer Up]

$200k w@nkers? For a minute, I thought you might be talking about certain fringe lunatic-party senators-elect. One minute earning $25k a year in a sawmill, then bringing in the new financial year with a $195k/year job, plus perks, allowances, and the ability to tell the PM to get stuffed.

I know who I'd rather be following down the glideslope on a rainy night with windshear, and it's not the guy with the stubby fingers!

[Tankengine]

An apology should come from QF about pushing this to the media before getting things sorted in house.:mad:
It is a lesson to a few here in the first pages of this thread who are so quick to hang people without knowing any facts!:ugh:

You can be sure the company will paint their employees in the worst possible light!:hmm:

[ratpoison]

You can be sure the company will paint their employees in the worst possible light!
Very true words indeed. It therefore must be said that a move must be taken that thousands of employees publicly paint their "management" in the worst possible light! :cool:

[theheadmaster]

Unless one knows the exact circumstances, it is inappropriate to be calling for apologies from anyone. If, for instance, the crew had made an error of judgement, but were allowed off with a warning, would it be appropriate for Qantas to offer an apology?

The crew concerned may be innocent or guilty and still have their jobs. Lets not be pointing the finger at Qantas or the crew without knowing all of the facts. Perhaps it is better that we just remind ourselves to be careful and not act inappropriately.

[ohallen]

Don't really care about the facts or circumstances, all I know is this should never have been in the public domain.

History would say there is only one way this happened and why it happened so we all realistically know there is only one side that put it out there.

Shameful in anyone's language and shows there is just no low bar in this war of attrition and hopefully kharma comes back one day.