QANTAS Execs.....Pigs at the Trough.

[Al E. Vator]

FROM THE FIN REVIEW
Qantas chairman Margaret Jackson (the woman who said Qantas should worry less about its passengers and staff and more about its shareholders...Al) said the airline would consider new partnerships with carriers in the United States, Asia and Europe as it moved to expand operations. She also told ABC's Inside Business that the airline had toyed with the idea of a dual listing, but had not yet seen how that could add value and did not expect to pursue such a move in the short term. Qantas chief executive Geoff Dixon told Nine's Business Sunday the airline's executives could receive a salary bonus of about 50 per cent for the past financial year, although it had yet to be determined. He would receive a "large bonus". Jane Boyle
================================

I'm sorry but with Australia's media guffawing at the brilliance of Dixon I just can't see it. It is the same sort of bowing at the corporate gods we saw with the likes of Alan Bond and Peter Abeles and is VERY unhealthy.

Qantas' No. 1 competitor fell over and surprise, they make a big profit. Big deal. The execs, like snorting pigs at the trough then wallow amongst the dollars whilst seeking downward pressure on the salaries of their staff in the name of remaining relevant in the marketplace.

Pilots at Qantas (longhaul) are for example somewhat of an international datum for the lowest paid reference to a national coast of living base. In fact certai Asian airlines would love to pay their pilots such low wages. Have a look at what JAL, CAL, CX etc pay their pilots and then look at the tax rates in those countries. Those pilots are significantly better off than their QF counterparts. Then have a look at the cost of living and housing in the current required domicile for QF pilots and it is not a good prognosis.

Now of course, everybody in QF knows somebody who is unemployed ex AN or pilots still working in the bush after 10 years and management are too happy to tell you that the future is lower salaries and higher productivity ala Virgin Blue. However the truth is that they are very different beasts and QF has the inertia and momentum to always be in the marketplace as long as complacency doesn't creep in.

Is it thus not time for you guys (especially AIPA) to pipe up and say we want to be paid internationally competive salaries and will no longer be simply compliant to the wishes of management unless there are real gains in return. The Australian Airlines flying is in NO way a big win. Yes, if it retains seniority benefits it is important but it has done nothing to improve the lot of the current and future mainline pilot.

IMHO, unless AIPA start taking a very firm line, the future will lokk like this.
*Domestic 'A' scales withdrawn.
*Downward pressure on ALL real mainline salaries (ie: less than CPI increases). Especially harmful for YSSY crews.
*Newly branded operations which slowly take over from mailine ops. For example, the old Impulse services rapidly expand at the expense of QF Domestic ops.
*"Australian Airlines will not fly on any route QF flies on!!" QF only have to stop that route on Monday and AO can step in on Tuesday. Why restrict AO to 767's. Why not transfer the remaining Classics to AO and use them for the Japan services, paying Captains A$195,000 flat with no allowances, big savings there.

What I am saying is that AIPA and all QF pilots owe it to themselves and future Aussie pilots to take the initiative NOW and claw back losses which have been previously given up by AIPA reps only using the union as a stepping-stone to management, This has left the pilot body in poor shape and even in the current 'boom' conditions for Qantas it appears morale is nowhere near what it should be.

Why, because QF pilots are not reaping their fair share of the proceeds of the boom. The execs however ARE. You little lambs are being left out in the dry whilst the execs squeel with delight as they roll around in the trough of money forever telling you you're lucky just to have a job.

I am aware the above may offend some who either don't wish to confront reality, have stars in their eyes for the corporate messiahs or simply don't like to rock the boat. However you guys have a golden opportunity to sieze the day and at least partially restore the status of the professional pilot in this country.

I am far too old for it to benefit me personally, but I do hope it benefit you, your families and future pilots.

Should I hold my breath?:)

[CheckEssential]

A E .V
I can't believe you can write such c--p. I've been in the aviation industry 27 years, and yes, I'm at the demise of AN and would give my left gonad for a flying job with QF.

Simple, if your not happy Jan, P--S OFF !!!!

[Chimbu chuckles]

So CheckEssential.....what part of Corporate Management giving themselves huge bonuses while lowering the terms and conditions of staff do you find acceptable?

I know of ground staff at QF who have been forced to 'reapply' for their own jobs, and if you don't like it then we will find someone who does!...they litterally sit at the same desk, in the same room doing the same job for a 'different' employer on reduced wages and no staff travel...any wonder morale at QF is so bad!

It's not just QF of course, it's the latest reincarnation of Corporate greed that started with the excesses of the 80s....more and more beancounters are running the world for only their benefit...Worldcom & Enron are classic examples...Ansett too for that matter!!!

Big bonuses for short term 'improvement' in company performance...followed by farking off when things start to come unravelled has become the Beancounter/Management two step...the only staff around to wear the long term effects are the people being screwed in the short term.

Nothing leads me to believe that Dixon etc are in any way more honest or less motivated by personal wealth and power than any of their less lucky brethren at Enron...they are just blessed to be in a company that was put on an incredible sound footing by the previous owners while the previous owners of the competition, AN, assett stripped the place...and that 911 didn't happen in their backyard.

While I completely agree that a job at QF would be mana from heaven for presently unemployed AN pilot think a little down the track, not like the management types. If you join QF next week and find 10 years down the track that your wages and conditions have been driven into the toilet while 'the bosses' give themselves million dollar bonuses how will you feel?

As another example there is a 737 airline in the Pacific who has been offering each new pilot that is employed a different/lower pay scale for years....hardly fair when you consider what a miniscule percentage of the overall running costs of a Boeing are pilot wages is it? You can bet your last dollar that the beancounters at that airline haven't been going financially backwards in the same time period.

Any idiot could have been running QF successfully in the last year..what part of being handed 30+% of the domestic market on a platter and getting some more aeroplanes to make the best of that situation requires huge 'performance' bonuses.

What completely blows me out of the water is when these ar$eholes get bonuses for 'minimising' the damage that their own short term strategies cause!! Or if they've been really culpable they get several million to go away and say nothing to anyone...sheer unadulterated lunacy:mad:

Chuck.

[Al E. Vator]

Check Essential.....thinking such as that the reason the industry is in the shape it is.

I've been in the industry just as long - so what! I have seen it slide downhill and that is a sad thing. Myopic and selfish pilots in some cases only have themselves to blame fo the degradation of working conditions.

If you had read the bit "Now of course, everybody in QF knows somebody who is unemployed ex AN or pilots still working in the bush after 10 years and management are too happy to tell you that the future is lower salaries and higher productivity ala Virgin Blue. " you would see that I completely understand that scenario. Have been there myself also.

If you also read the post careully, you will notice that the future of QF does not effect me one bit (I have most assuredly P--SSED OFF). I do howwever have a simple desire to see the lot of professional pilots in this country improve, in spite of the actions of a few who would try to stop that.

[Keg]

Particularly galling when you consider that the bonuses are on the back of workers paid less, worked harder, with less resources etc, etc, etc.

[Pimp Daddy]

As much as some people find it distasteful - welcome to the real world.

Directors and Executives of companies are responsible to shareholders - not employees.

It is their job to produce the best possible result for their shareholders - not the employees.

Everyone says that they don't deserve it because luck went their way - it may have, but the bottom line is what counts.

Think of the alternative - if Ansett hadn't gone down last Sep and SIA had tipped some cash in - what would be left now? Would Qantas still be here? Would it be struggling under the costs of excess capacity in a hugely shrunken international market, whilst fending off massive discounting in a domestic market with 2 strong competitors?

[U2]

If a six figure salary and coastal lifestyle is not good enough, then why don't you by shares and receive the benifits. Or you could go on strike........




U2

[Kaptin M]

I (almost) did that once, U2 - and NOW I have ALL 3, plus a bit extra! :D
I also remember the posts here on PPRuNe from the overworked QF groundies who were bombarded with terminal fulls of abusive, p!ssed-off Ansett pax, when Ansett fell over.
It was THEY who carried the day, and allowed QANTAS to make those extraordinary profits.

Nice scenario, Pimp Daddy, "Think of the alternative" - but that DIDN'T happen, and Dixon and Co weren't put to any test, but rather, handed a bulging bottom line on a golden platter.

Sort of similar to claiming you're the "World's Best Pilot" for landing early, and saving half a ton of fuel, when in fact you had a 200kt tailwind up your clacker, isn't it! :cool:

[Chimbu chuckles]

U2...if the trend continues of screwing the workforce and at the same time self serving performance bonuses for merely doing the job they were hired to do...and no more...then you can bet there will be industrial action sooner rather than later...and it would not be unreasonable.

How's this for a bizarre concept...when a company does particulary well all the employees get a bonus...I bet you could convert the bonuses that the top 6 executives at QF will get into 5 or 10K bonuses for all the other employees in the company and get a better future result for the investment.


No one suggest that the boss of QF, or any other simularly large corporation, shouldn't be paid bloody well...and they are, but the bizarre bonus system and the general explosion of CEO/Management packages in the last 20 years( they have outstripped inflation by orders of magnitude) is cause for world wide worry.

Chuck.

[gaunty]

It's been said before and I'll repeat the Homeric warning again.

"Those whom the Gods would destroy, they first blind with hubris"

I don't think young Geoff is guilty of it, but he should make sure it is the required screensaver on all of his executives computer screens and require its contemplation for at least 2 minutes at the start of every workday before it will let them in to work.:cool:

[Kaptin M]

Similarly it is events such as 911 and the "Asian Crisis" that are conveniently used to cover poor management decisions that impact on the bottom line.
Conversely, Ansett's collapse provided QANTAS with a windfall for which the QF executives appear to have taken full credit.
According to many ex-AN posters here, Mr Dixon might like to consider sending some of his and the other execs bonus across the Tasman. ;)

But the question being raised here is one of ETHICS.
Is it ETHICAL for the top management of a national figurehead company such as QANTAS to act - in the words of the journalist - "like pigs at a (feeding) trough.

As we were taught as children, and as we have taught our children when there is an excess of say lollies or ice cream - a SPECIAL, EXTRA treat - "Don't be GREEDY! Share."

It appears as HYPOCRISY in the extreme when we see management cutting the salaries of employees who are already on a bread and margarine wage, whist they, the executives, reward themselves with BONUSES (to their already fat 7-figure salary+perks retainer), from the money taken!

Today's top executives of many high profile companies are more often than not, not seen as "loyal" to the company they run, but instead are available for re-hire to the highest bidder, or are subject to sudden replacement themselves - hence the tendency to "grab while the grabbing's good". OINK

[bonvol]

There is an old Nicholson cartoon from 89 that goes like this.

Picture a downtrodden worker speaking to a well suited exec.

Exec: "We can't afford to give you a wage rise. We have to stay competitive."

Worker: "Then why have executive salaries gone up so much."

Exec: (Dismissively) "We have to stay competitive."

[Sopwith Pup]

In some ways you all make a good point. The trouble is that the 80's slogan of "greed is good" has never gone away. It has just been disguised and hidden, the results are now apparent with all the corporate failures we've seen in the past year or two.
I think with the admission that some execs in QF are going to get bonuses in the region of 50% when the airline is pushing for an EBA giving 3% a year with trade offs, makes a lot of us blooooody angry. The EBA negotiations are going to be tough.
However with the industrial laws we have now, the ability to take industrial action of any kind has diminished. I hate to say it, but '89 is still in the back of people's minds and with the aviation industry in it's current shape, it would be a lot easier for management this time around.
I'm happy to have a job but not so happy with the way things are going. I think we have been got by the short and curlies, damned if I know what the answer is. :(

[Kaptin M]

As bonvol has said (but in different words), I believe the non-management workers are getting pretty p!ssed of with seeing the DOUBLE STANDARDS of management - the "It's okay for ME to continue on my 7-figure salary, and to receive a $2/5/8 million BONUS", on the one hand, and on the other telling the employees, "We have to trim down the workforce and those who are lucky enough to stay on will be offered a new contract. Of course it's going to mean a little more work for the same money, but if this company is to survive we have to make radical changes to the way we work!"

Well Sopwith, the answer is to follow the LEAD set by our managers.
Realise that you are in the job ONLY for yourself, not the good of the company.
Whenever you can - at every opportunity - work towards extracting every cent you can. Don't agree to any changes UNLESS they are going to benefit YOU.

As I see it the old management/worker relationship was one of, "When the Goose lays a golden egg let's make an omlette - that way everyone gets a little." Naturally, Management took a larger share, but we all ACCEPTED that.
Today's modern management philosophy is one of, "When the Goose lays a Golden egg, I'll boil it and eat it ALL myself."

Let's agree, and ALL play by the same rules - Greed is Good.
Okay?

[Spad]

I seem to remember that this very point, (top execs and politicians giving themselves huge pay rises while insisting that the hoi polloi (mere mortals like us) remained within hawke’s (sic) “Accord”), that was largely the cause of the seminal events of that-year-we-dare-not-mention-here.

[ferris]

Can I just point out that the ATC strike this Friday is exactly about this. The workers asked to give up conditions to receive 2% pay rises, while the managers walk away with unbelievable stuff (gongs, bonuses etc) for just doing a mediocre job. It's like an executive cancer spreading across lots of industries.

Enough is ENOUGH!

Good luck boys and girls.

[Keg]

You'd have to reckon that if a 50% bonus is good enough for the powers that be that it would be rude to not have that filter down the line! :rolleyes:

OK, back to reality and how to change it to something more equitable!

[Wirraway]

Wed "Melbourne Age" 28/8/02

Australia lagging in rewards to CEOs, says Qantas chairman
By Philip Hopkins
August 28 2002

Qantas chairman Margaret Jackson yesterday defended high salaries and option packages for chief executives in Australia, and criticised the level of debate on corporate governance.

"It's a hell of a job. (Chief executives) must be paid a reasonable amount to take on the responsibility and attract the talent," she said.

She also suggested that the Federal Government veto on increased foreign ownership in Qantas meant the airline was focusing sharply on labour costs and their effect on profitability.

On options, Ms Jackson said there were big differences in corporate governance between the United States and Australia.

CEOs or executives in the US received hundreds of millions of dollars worth of options, whereas in Australia it was tens of millions of dollars. "The magnitude is significantly different," she said.

Ms Jackson said that in Australia there were tougher hurdles that did not exist in the US.

"There is not enough discussion of the difference between Australia and the rest of the world," she said. At the moment, the options debate was akin to saying that someone had robbed the bank so everyone should be put in jail.

Arguing the case for a freer share register, Ms Jackson told a Melbourne Press Club lunch at the Windsor Hotel that aviation was a very capital intensive industry, and Qantas' cost of capital would now be 1 to 2 per cent higher because of the government's decision on foreign ownership.

"If labour rates are not competitive, we will not be in a position to compete on fares," she said.

[Kaptin M]

CEOs or executives in Australia received tens of millions of dollars worth of options . "The magnitude is significantly different," Ms Jackson said. OINK OINK


"If labour rates are not competitive, we will not be in a position to compete on fares," she said.

http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/aircraft/halopig.gif

[ferris]

Excuse me while I puke!

Why do executives need bonuses on top of their already enormous salary to do the job they were hired to do? I have an idea how to improve the bottom line/save jobs/keep the shareholders happy. Sack the top six execs. Or keep them on (in the spirit of promoting good will and loyalty), but JUST PAY THEM THEIR SALARY. In Ms Jacksons' words it would add "tens of millions" to the bottom line immediately. And you wouldn't have to go through the drama of gouging another $50 out of each employees pay packet.

Oh, I forgot, we need to attract TALENT! hahahahaha.





The author owns Qantas shares.

[Torres]

And corporate profits at the big end of town have never been better as large corporations are more and more protected virtual monopolies - particularly banks, airlines and communications.

Telstra is tipped to shortly announce a $4.8 Billion profit.

(Coundn't help but later editing this post. Poor Telstra - only came in with $3.7 billion. With such a "parlous" result will the executives have to hand back their perks?)

Now, I wonder if I can get my phone fixed?

And the banks are crying poor now the government have announced legislation to break their monopoly on credit cards - and credit card interest rates, five times savings bank interest rates!

And they wonder why Australian workers are pi$$ed off and talking strikes as the gap between the rich and poor continues to widen.

[shocka]

Ever since Qantas was awarded it's second biggest free - kick in corporate history, we have been led to believe that it's recent stellar performance was a direct function of good corporate governance above all else !

When your main competitor falls over, how can you not prosper
from it ? It seems that the current board are gleefully accepting the kudos that are not rightfully theirs based on an even playing field & are going to be paid bonuses contrived on a huge positive "abnormal" (AN's demise) addition to the balance sheet.

It now remains to be seen which snout get's to the trough first & stay's the longest !!

[The_Cutest_of_Borg]

This attitude is prevalent in the "executive" class. Make no bones about it, they see themselves as a breed apart, smarter than the rest and with a concommitant sense of entitlement.

For an example of this, 10 years ago the Chief Pilot of QF was paid 250,000 pa. This was about a 10% premium on a senior -400 Captain.

Two years ago the incumbent and his deputy divvied up 2 million between them in bonuses for doing essentially the same job. The proles have probably not kept up with inflation in the same time period. Their "talent" consisted mainly of crying poor(no rise for the workers) and following well established precedents.

One day, hopefully soon, the argument put forward by Ms Jackson will be recognised for what they are.

The mood of resentment will one day approach that of late 19th century France. It will take only a few more outrageous corporates scandals and a few more suspended sentences for theft of shareholders funds before people start taking matters into their own hands.


You heard it here first.

[KaptinZZ]

There are a number of things I learnt early in my career.

One is that you can never trust the c.... in management to do anything except look after themselves at your expense.

Another is that management sucks are the next worst quality of human beings.

Yet another is that pilots who seek to be managers are a dangerous breed. An article in an American flying magazine a few years ago said something like 'any pilot who puts on a suit every day and heads to the office has no business around aeroplanes'.

Ain't that true!

Shocka, I agree.

QF were handed 35 - 40% market share, but their profit increased by only about 10%, so the execs get huge bonuses - for what??

In real terms, it was a decrease in profit, not an increase.

[The Messiah]

I wonder if any of you raised these concerns at your respective QF interviews??

[spinout]

I understand that at a recient meeting with Q regional management and Eastern EBA team they were told that Eastern was not making enough money, that the business was not proforming to the required level UNLIKE Airconnex...
how do these people sleep at night...:eek: watch out mainline...

[PPRuNe Towers]

Meanwhile the founder and boss of JetBlue in the States takes a salary of $200,000 USD and no stock options. Further he states that, ' a fish stinks from the head.'

[VR-HFX]

Guess it shows the real 'Spirit of Australia' . A spirit that deifies rogues from Ned Kelly to Alan Bond.

The rush of QF management testosterone will undoubtedly lead them down the path of folly. As much as I would hate to see shareholders hard earned money being pi$$ed against the wall by buying into a dud investment in the US or even Singapore or NZ, it is a monty to happen. Big fish in small ponds do hallucinate. Big bonuses are like steroids, short term muscle and performance, long term sterility and premature death,

Let's face it folks, no one could dispute Dixon is a smarter guy with a QF namecard than an AN one can they!!

Pip Pip!

[KaptinZZ]

Last year it was published, and not denied, that Air NZ execs took huge bonuses in spite of the Ansett debacle.

It wasn't, the article pointed out, because of increased profits, and we all know the extent of the loss due to Air NZ's folly, but because ''the execs, including Big Garry, did their best under trying circumstances.'

Isn't that what we as pilots do every time we go flying? Do we get a bonus just for doing our jobs?

These guys get their bonuses because they screw the workers down to less than CPI salary increases, and incrementally lean out their conditions, thereby increasing productivity by stealth, and all the time crying poor. They are indeed C.... with a BIG C!!

Messiah, you sound like one of the management sucks I referred to above. Every worker deserves the right to not be screwed by the boss, and paid a fair reward for his/her effort.

[Kaptin M]

The unfortunate fact appears to be that top management of many companies are being rewarded on a YEARLY basis by way of absurd "performance bonuses", often amounting to the LUDICROUS amounts becoming common place.

Being of the magnitude they are, CEO's and their immediate underdogs, have now found that it IS possible to "GET RICH QUICK" - but at the medium to longer term risk of the health and longevity of the company and its "ground floor" employees.

The company is screwed and squeezed for every drop it can return in the form of profit, hence returning unbelievable rewards (in the form of bonuses, saleable stock options, etc) to the upper management, and at the same time pleasing the shareholders and making them feel secure in their investment.
Once the company has been squeezed, the "ground floor" employees are on the receiving end, as their wages are sliced (or chopped altogether) to allow more $$$'s to be thrown into the "profit-sharing, bonus-paying" bin.

"Qantas is negotiating with unions on a new wages agreement, and Ms Jackson said a wage increase of less than 5 per cent was reasonable.
Qantas is understood to have offered a 3 per cent wage increase.

At bonuses (in addition to enormous salaries) running into the millions (or tens of millions) PER YEAR, a blind man can see that 2 or 3 years on this sort of money means one can retire to a lifetime of extreme wealth.
And after that, who cares what happens to the company!!

The bonuses of upper level management NEED to be based on LONG TERM company performance to insure against short term abuse and MIS-management by CEO's, etc, solely for THEIR personal, IMMEDIATE GRATIFICATION.

Bonuses paid, for example, ONLY every 10 - 12 years.


"Qantas chairman Margaret Jackson (the woman who said Qantas should worry less about its passengers and staff and more about its shareholders...) said the airline would consider new partnerships with carriers in the United States, Asia and Europe as it moved to expand operations."

And WHY would Ms Jackson and Co be considering new partnerships with carriers in the US?
I guess she answered that for all of us, with the following:

"CEOs or executives in the US received hundreds of millions of dollars worth of options, whereas in Australia it was tens of millions of dollars. "The magnitude is significantly different," she said."OINK "

http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/aircraft/halopig.gif

[Keg]

I'd happily accept 3% per annum if the bonus was going to be 50% of my pay. I find that 'appropriate'- no less 'appropriate' than it is for management anyway! :mad:

[KaptinZZ]

Kaptin M,

Isn't this what Mr Ed did to CX and then AN and may now be doing to BA???

Sounds familiar.

[The Messiah]

Kaptin ZZ I'm no management suck but just refuse to get all peed off about things I cannot change.

This year, of the 120 countries studied, 70% were found to be corrupt. Oz came 11th and NZ 2nd, Bangladesh last.

If you were in one of these positions to give yourself massive bonuses, would you do it? I bet you would. People are often too busy worrying about what everyone else is getting to enjoy their own time on this planet (23AG tax comes to mind).

Nobody at QF has a gun at their head, if you don't like it leave!

[grange.guzzler]

Messiah

There is an expresssion that "evil flourishes when good men do nothing". Not quite correct but I am not sure of the exact words.

It was those who ignored Hitler and did nothing " because they couldn't change anything" that ultimately allowed that cancer to flourish.

It was the compliant ACTU and sucks in big business that allowed the silver bodgie and that poisonous dwarf, Kelty, to flourish.

If you do nothing it WILL happen. If you see something that is wrong and speak up, maybe, just maybe, you and others of like mind will rise up against the parasites and oppressors. If you shrink back into your shell and say " I can't do anything" then guess what. You won't, it will.

To sit back and say "I wont sweat it because I can't do anything" is to be a scab against the world of good, and justice.

A pox on you and your miserable, compliant, syncophantic, suck, mates.

[The Messiah]

Blabbing on an anonymous forum will certainly do loads to stop the invasion.

You courageous freedom fighter you.:rolleyes:

[Keg]

C'mon Messiah, just because people choose to voice their opinions here doesn't mean they aren't trying their guts out to change things in the real world.

[The Messiah]

Fair enough

[Gnadenburg]

Great thread.

With a VB float I imagine Brett Godfrey will be propelled into the Top 100 Wealthiest List(Australia).

And I can also imagine it would still be very good business for him to pay Phillipino pilot wages.

Interesting to see if some of PPrunes outspoken find it fashionable to launch an attack on Godfrey.

[KaptinZZ]

Messiah,

Maybe I was a bit harsh with you.

I agree that if you dojn't like it you can leave, and I've said that very thing to CX guys on the Fragrant Harbour forum. But, it's different there. No active trade union movement; you're in THEIR country sucking a living out of it (but not displacing locals, before somebody reminds me), and still being paid damned well.

At QF, and I think it's been said elsewhere, pilots are on near third world salaries, comparatively speaking, and to watch the execs with their snouts in the trough at your expense must be particularly galling.

AND, if you don't try to change it, then it never will change.

Call me self righteous, or a liar, or whatever you choose, but if I was in a position where I could extract huge bonuses for no reason other than I could, I wold not.

[Kaptin M]

My guess would be that you are probably correct, KaptinZZ. Ansett was "window dressed" for sale to an over eager Air New Zealand. IMHO, SQ scratched the surface sufficiently deeply enough to see what was underneath the gloss [and the miraculous turnaround in Ansett's performance], and to walk away - as much as many ex-An employees insist that they were blocked. Anyway that's off the track as far as this thread is concerned - except for your point that Mr Ed brabbed HIS bonus and R A N.

So why SHOULD senior executives be paid these additional, HUGEbonu$e$ for doing the job for which they were hired?
The salaries and benefits alone are way beyond any REALISTIC figures, and surely there are MANY other qualified individuals who are able to achieve the same results, without the need to double dip.

To repeat myself, a STOP HAS to be made to these ANNUAL bonuses, but preferably a COMPLETE STOP to bonuses altogether!
The sheer $ize of them in such a short term ENCOURAGES management decisions designed to "get in, grab it and run" leaving the company to crumble AFTER their departure.

STOP the short term bonuses. Average the company's performance over an 8 - 10 year period, and pay the bonus THEN.

But better yet, STOP the bonus system altogether. http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/aircraft/halopig.gif



They ARE only doing what's EXPECTED of them on the $alary paid!

[ftrplt]

Whilst I dont disagree with some of the comments about large bonuses, some form of bonus system is required to get the talent the board thinks is best. Its here to stay whether we like it or not. It only takes one or two companies to offer them and every one else must then follow suit.

All those who think the Qantas result was a foregone conclusion just because Ansett collapsed is not thinking straight. How about the fact the the City Flyer initiative is considered to be one of the final nails in the Ansett coffin, one of many good management decisions there I think.

The comment about near third world wages is absolute rubbish; 5 year Second Officers on the 400 pulling in around 120K a year to do very little and senior 400 Captains pushing 300K. In a few years time I will be earning more (as a Second Officer if I chose to) than a Squadron CO in the RAAF that is responsible for $640 million worth of aeroplane and 150 men. Im quite sure he will be putting in quite a few more hours at work than I ever will.

There is absolutely no relevance in comparing pay rates in Australia with those achieved in the US; and when they are its invariably selective quoting to make the difference look as big as possible.

None of this means I wont be pushing for a pay rise if it can be achieved, but it can only be argued on merit and must be cognisant of the current environment, not some crap about the US guys getting more than me.

[dghob]

Quote: "Nobody at QF has a gun at their head, if you don't like it leave!" (Messiah)

That's a thoughtless but pretty common statement when subjects like this one are being tossed around.

To a lot of people their jobs do represent a gun at their head - lose the job and that's it - penthouse to sh*thouse in one move.

[Chimbu chuckles]

ftr plt,

I agree with your wage comparison comments...as far as I'm concerned USD300,000 at United or wherever and AUS300,000 at QF is near enough the same thing in relative terms...I think what some do is say US300K is A$580K odd and then whinge that they are under paid in world terms...this is a rediculous and invalid comparison.

If you want to earn big net $ then do what a lot of us have done and/or continue to do...go overseas and work as an expat. If a pilot wants to live in Brisvegas and fly jets for VB on A70K/120k then compare his package to a similar operation in the US/EU BUT you must take into account relative costs of living...and don't forget US regional jet drivers are paid very little until they reach the top rungs within that system and they spend years in the company before they get more than 10 days or 2 weeks annual leave....many, many US F/Os in regionals actually qualify for food stamps :eek:

But if CEOs either don't wind it in, or the Govt/ share holders don't rein them in there will be massive reaction from the workers..whether they realise it or not their greed is becoming more and more under the spot light...and viewed for what it is!

As you say, companies are forced to compete for talent...time for the Govt to tax that talent to the point where these spiv packages are no longer viable.

Chuck.

[Gnadenburg]

Ftr Pilot

You can do better than that.City flyer?Surely more.

Being on the winning team the euphoria can some times be delusionary.

QF`s magic formula has a lot more to do with luck and powerful political lobbying then many care to admit.

I agree,QF wages fair.

Raising the issue of RAAF wages may be as irrelevant to some as perhaps,comparisons to United wages.

How do the VB and Qantas bonuses to staff compare?

How will Godfrey`s bonus(After a float) compare to Dixons?

With VB`s low wages won`t that be a rort?

[Lead Balloon]

Gnadenburg

I may have this wrong, but didn't Godfrey help start an Airline in this country, from scratch. It could have gone either way, and he could have trashed his reputation and a few years momentum by failing. Thankfully for the shareholders he has succeeded.

Contrary to popular belief on this forum, shareholders own companies and are in it to maximise their returns. The penultimate people Dixon and Godfrey are the shareholders, not the employees.

Of course, you can always go too far... as some of the flops of recent years have proved.

And really, if it's that easy to run a business (especially a fickle one like airlines), then get out there and do it.

[Gnadenburg]

Just being unfashionable.

Some who are quick to level an attack at QF go awfully quiet when similar occurs at VB.

[How's it Hanging]

As everyone has said, the bonuses make no sense, whether it be to shareholders or employees, and it is only management and board types feathering their own nests. As I have said before it is time the government stepped in to protect shareholders and employees by making the practice illegal.
As for some comments about needing to pay these amounts to attract the best people, I can only say what a lot of crap!
You could probably pick almost any tech crew member from within the Qantas group who has been with the company for a couple of years, and therefore has a bit of background on the different areas of the company, give them a couple of months of briefings on the more detailed workings of the company, and they would be able to do just as good a job as GD, and would be happy to do it for a miserly $500,000 a year. (not that anyone really wants to sit in an office!)
Give GD 2 months training on our jobs and he would still be about 4 years and a lot of luck away from being remotely capable.

[Col. Walter E. Kurtz]

Some solutions/scenarios:

1.Workers agree to accept 2-3% increase, on the proviso that, in good faith and in the interest of securing the company's future and profitability, the management not accept the 50% bonuses.

2.The employees - flight crew, ground staff, bureaucrats, everyone - form a syndicate, and attempt to buy a major/controlling stake in QF.

3. A series of indefinite strikes by all workers in protest at senior management conduct. Retaining a good PR/advertising company would be worth the investment: Not many Aussies like to hear of companies making huge profits, paying execs ridiculous bonuses and stripping pay and conditions off the 'workers'. This should hep get the point across.

Best time to do this is NOW whilst there is a monopoly - company will be denied turnover, and the competitors are not big enough (yet) to take advantage of this.

You need to have the courage to play this brinksmanship with these people, or soon, Australian Airlines will be doing most of your flying, on C scale pay rates. I remember when I was in GA--it seems a thousand centuries ago--we went into a interview to join the company. I left the office after I had completed an interview, and this old man came running after us, and he was crying. He couldn't see. We went there, and they had come and crossed off every question I answered. There they were in a pile--a pile of little answers. And I remember...I...I...I cried, I wept like some grandmother. I wanted to tear my teeth out, I didn't know what I wanted to do. And I want to remember it, I never want to forget. And then I realized--like I was shot...like I was shot with a diamond...a diamond bullet right through my forehead. And I thought, "My God, the genius of that, the genius, the will to do that." Perfect, genuine, complete, crystalline, pure. And then I realized they could stand that--these were not monsters, these were men, trained pilots, these men who flew with their hearts, who have families, who have children, who are filled with love, who may have even flown in GA--that they had this strength, the strength to do that. If I had ten divisions of those men, then our troubles here would be over very quickly. You have to have men who are moral and at the same time were able to utilize their primordial instincts to kill without feeling, without passion, without judgment--without judgment. Because it's judgment that defeats us……… But I digress….where’s that medication gone……

[Gnadenburg]

Colonel.

My favourite of yours and to quote-"I watched a snail crawl along the edge of a straight razorblade.That`s my dream,that`s my nightmare".

Smoke some good **** in Cambodia?

[Col. Walter E. Kurtz]

Gnadenburg,

I was/am on the verge of great things.

[2daddies]

I'm sure that if or when Virgin management decides to so brazenly reward themselves for doing nothing more than what they were hired to do, then all of us will sharpen our verbal knives as much as we have against the Big Red Vampire.

In the interim, back to Qantas.

I find it interesting to note that if QF management had allocated part of their "performance" bonuses to QF staff (THE most important part of the company, make no mistake), then not only would the pay freeze and reduced salary increments enforced upon employees not have been required for so long (or at all, in a perfect world) but also 15 (that's right, 0.045% of the QF workforce) Impulse pilots would have kept their jobs and been saved the ignomany of renegotiating car and home loans, going to other operators and asking for work in a market where jobs are as rare as hen's teeth, and, in some cases, lining up in a Centrelink queue.

I'm trying to be positive at the moment, but I hope I can be forgiven for seeing red (pardon the pun :D ) in the face of such blatant opportunism at the helm of Australia's flag carrier.

P.S - It would be lovely if pilots got a performance bonus;
Pilot: "Oh, look - I landed the plane smoothly on a wet runway in nil-wind conditions"

Board of Directors: "Congratulations. Here's a cheque for 50% of your base salary." :confused:

[Kaptin M]

As Lead Balloon has pointed out, Mr Godfrey DEVISED the business plan for Virgin Blue from scratch - certainly a very different scenario than the responsibilities and work incentives taken on by the QF upper management. An airline that has been flying profitably for more than half a century (having been bankrolled by successive Australian governments for the majority of that time.)

And here`s an interesting FACT that I learned today from CNN ("Money Line").

Q. How does the salary of the AVERAGE CEO compare with that of the AVERAGE worker?

A. 400 times MORE! OINK, OINK.

http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/aircraft/halopig.gif

[Gnadenburg]

Godfrey`s money?

Poorly paid staff will do him just fine.

Love the new EBA too.3 years time 128K a year for VB Captains.Just beautiful for future VB shareholders eh Kapt M.

Lock em in.Float next year and you still have VB pilots the poorest by a country mile for many shareholders meetings to come.

Not the first time the Poms have done us over.

If Australian Airlines is a success Dixon has devised his own airline too.Albeit Australian workers renumerated to a fair standard.

One-eyed at best Kapt M.

I wish the QF boys had gone on strike too.Maybe pilots would be a little more respected and renumerated in Australia today.

[Chimbu chuckles]

Dixon didn't devise AA...it was the idea of a PX F28 Captain mate of mine in Cairns...he put it in a letter to Dixon, got a favourable response, they corresponded for a short while (read he fleshed the idea out for Dixon!!) and then...nothing. Wasn't a year after that before the AA rumours coming from QF and wherever else.

Does he feel 'cut off'?

You bet he does!!

He had rather hoped for a job there to get him out of PX but no such luck.


Chuck.

[Gnadenburg]

Chimbu

Cool.

We can say it was 89ers who created the idea of Virgin Blue.

Just tire of some attidutes that VB has vindicated the actions or consequences of 89.

60 odd thousand a year and a Yankee Doodle Dandee two week self-funded 737 course.Professional pilots bow your heads.

But the AFAP is strengthening!

[Kaptin M]

Australian Airlines is the nothing more than a budget QANTAS carrier - using QANTAS aircraft.
The ploy of starting up an "express" subsidiary of the parent - QANTAS Express could just have easily been used - is nothing new in the airline world. It is, and has been for a decade or more, managements' strategy for introducing lesser conditions into established companies. ie, re-setting the clock.
It saves head-on industrial confrontation by slowly introducing more workers, on lower rewarded structures than existing workers. Slowly the "budget/express" (read Australian airlines) will take more and more flying away from QANTAS, as management declares more and more routes "unprofitable" or " able to be operated more efficiently by AA".

Experienced unions are aware of this, and so I expect there have been some trade-offs, or complicity with QF management in the passive acceptance of something introduced to maintain QF upper managements' salaries and bonuses at an "acceptable level" for themselves.
Why should THEY be expected to forego their multi-million dollar annual payouts, when they can send another hundred or more workers on $40-50k p.a. to the Dole queue, and reduce the remainders' pitiful salary by several thousand dollars?

At $20 MILLION a year (that was the figure quoted as being the salary of the AVERAGE CEO, on CNN) life is bloody tough!

Just to re-cap, that CEO salary of 400 TIMES (more than the average worker) was TIMES, and NOT 400%, which would only be 4 times!

So you see, Gnadenburg, Dixon has only COPIED a strategy (successfully) used in the USA, the U.K., and Europe, whereas Mr Godfrey ala Virgin Blue started from the ground floor - no existing infrastructure, staff, office space, terminals, and so forth, PLUS the gamble of a new brand.

Dixon has introduced Australian Airlines, riding on the back of QANTAS - even to allowing customers Frequent Flyer points credit and usage between the two.

The blow to Australia's professional pilots was dealt in 1989, when the scabs who went to work for Ansett, Australian, IPEC and East-West, EFFECTIVELY removed the decades of work previous pilots had put in, to make the AFAP our representative body. You can thank those @ssholes for the position that Australian domestic airline pilots are in today, and the long road that lies ahead in re-building the conditions.

[Gnadenburg]

From where I sit:

Godfrey,modelled on a European formula.Not his money.Will make millions and millions with his workers on below industry standard wages out of a float.

His workers rewarded with a taxed $1000 bonus and a case of wine that wholesales for $36.

As a further reward,just before the killing that will be made from a float,the pilots are being locked into a lousy EBA.

Can just see the prospectus now,our super professional pilots(pay for their training) are just super competitive(paid at least 30% less than our competitors).

Dixon,a mug from Wagga.His staff suitably renumerated.

On your last paragraph I have never argued.

[Lead Balloon]

Gnandenburg

The point that I think Kaptin M and I are making is still valid - and is the way of the capitalist system.

Godfrey spent his own time and money developing a business plan. The fact it is not his money, is neither here nor there. In fact how many companies ever use their own money for expansion or start-up - they tend to go to the market for the best deal available. The money provided by Virgin to create Virgin Blue is probably worth three times any money that could have been provided by a less astute investor like a Saudi Bank or an Asian Infrastructure bank. This is where Godfrey gets his reward - in bringing forward a viable business plan that will turn a small investment into a large return via investments (Corrigan) and ultimately an IPO. Godfrey quite rightly deserves the return on his time and expertise he has invested.

The question of employees getting a return is answered quite simply: What risk have they taken to deserve a just return. I bet you there was a time for Godfrey where he had everything on the line and more whilst he was putting together this deal, as is the way of these things. High risk - High Return. Everything always looks easier with the 20:20 vision hindsight gives us.

If a Company is using monopolistic powers to drive down wages then we need more competition, which will then allow more choice for the employees that have something out of the ordinary to offer.

The question of Qantas execs getting paid a fair sum is for the board and ultimately the shareholders to decide. If the shareholders believe Dixon is not improving the value of Qantas then they will frog march him out of there in no time at all. So far, whether by good management or good luck, it would be hard to say that he is doing a bad job.

[longjohn]

Why do CEO's get huge salaries?

Because the shareholders percieve them as a scarce resource worthwhile of such rewards and responsibility, supply and demand.

Airline staff in general are not a scarce resource. These days I can shake a tree in the park and 50 pilots and F/A's will fall out of it, all qualified to work my new start up airline.

Ex AN CSO's, bagsnatchers and the like would love to return to the gravy train where your $38k base salary swells to nearly $100k on the back of overtime and roster hijacking.

But the CEO's and management types are harder to find, particularly good ones (just look at Ansett under Ables).

So what if Dixon gets $10 mill a year, the shareholders just want return on investment and capital growth, if management are delivering and exceeding expectations then I too would reward them with a bonus.

Funnily enough CEO's do not undercut one another on salaries, they do not leave school and become a CEO (of a karge company)one year later, they do not create seniority lists to protect their position even though other aspirants may be able to produce a better outcome, they take full responsibility when ANYONE in the company stuffs up.

Oh, and they don't jealously bitch about each other in their seemingly endless spare time.