Should Qantas remain the sole Australian National Flag Carrier?

[Torres]

SHOULD QANTAS REMAIN THE SOLE AUSTRALIAN FLAG CARRIER?


In another thread I questioned the merit and worthiness of what appears to be extremely excessive and generous senior executive bonuses and benefits, including termination benefits, paid to Qantas senior executives in the period 2008 to 2023 (the Joyce Years), during which the airline net lost exceeded Aus$3.9 Billion.

It appears Qantas has become simply another Australian commercial entity, where policy and corporate morals are dictated by Corporate and personal greed. It has been trashed since the Commonwealth was a shareholder and is no longer the People’s choice with many Australians refusing to fly Qantas.Interestingly, QANTAS Statutory After Net Tax Profit during the Joyce Years (2008 to date) indicate a net Loss of Aus$ 3.919 Billion, not all of which can be blamed on Covid, whilst Covid financial incentives to retain staff significantly benefited Qantas and reduced it's net loss over the same period.

In the same period QANTAS paid no Company Tax but received over $2 billion in tax payer funded Corporate welfare, including $900 million in JobKeeper payments, received during the pandemic.

One wonders why the CEO and senior executives enjoyed such generous and lucrative Bonuses and benefits - or any profit related incentive payments - funded by long suffering passengers, share holders and Australian tax payers??


Qantas is now being prosecuted in the Federal Court by the ACCC alleging the airline …. engaged in false, misleading or deceptive conduct, by advertising tickets for more than 8,000 flights that it had already cancelled but not removed from sale. (https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/accc-takes-court-action-alleging-qantas-advertised-flights-it-had-already-cancelled)

Qantas is facing a Class Action to refund passenger tickets for COVID cancelled flights (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-21/qantas-hit-with-lawsuit-for-holding-over-1b-credits/102755916). The action…. alleging the airline misled customers about their refund options, withheld funds, and engaged in a "pattern of unconscionable conduct".

The action comes one month after Qantas launched a campaign to encourage customers to use the remaining $400 million in flight credits held by the airline, and after Australia's consumer watchdog indicated its probe into the issue was almost complete.

I am sure Hudson Fysh, Paul McGinness and Fergus McMaster would be very disappointed with what their airline has become over the last two decades. It is equally obvious that many Qantas staff no longer share pride in their airline.


Should Qantas continue to be our sole National Flag Carrier? Or should the status of Australian Flag carrier be awarded to All Australian airlines which are:

· Australian registered companies in good standing;
· Majority Australian resident Directors;
· Operate Australian registered aircraft on an Australian AOC;
· Operate Domestic and International scheduled air services;
· With Australian crews employed under Australian industrial instruments.


“In good standing” should reflect a commitment to Australia, demonstrated honour and respect for their passengers and staff and pay Australian profit based taxes.

[aussieflyboy]

Airnorth? Skippers? Nexus? Sharp?

[Chronic Snoozer]

Or should the status of Australian Flag carrier be awarded to All Australian airlines which are:

· Australian registered companies in good standing;
· Majority Australian resident Directors;
· Operate Australian registered aircraft on an Australian AOC;
· Operate Domestic and International scheduled air services;
· With Australian crews employed under Australian industrial instruments.
Not using their good standing to peddle influence on political or moral matters.
Not peddling influence by awarding gifts or privileges to elected officials.
Not avoiding tax
Holding Australian customer satisfaction as a key metric in line with shareholder expectations.

[megan]

Does QF still call Australia home? Personally I just see it as another business enterprise competing for the travelers dollar.

[Icarus2001]

I reject the premise of your question.

In what way does Qantas exhibit the qualities of a "flag carrier" airline?

What does that really mean?

[Torres]

I did not suggest "....Qantas exhibits the qualities of a "flag carrier" airline?" I stated Qantas is Australia's Flag carrier. The "qualities" went out the door with James Strong and have been on a downhill slide ever since.

I haven't researched legislation but I believe Qantas officially became the national flag carrier when in legislation when nationalised by the Curtin Labor Government in 1947 and has remained so since.

Most Australians have always had a financial interest in Qantas, whether as a taxpayer or a shareholder.

Every one in public office, particularly Judges and parliamentarians are required to declare their pecuniary interests and any gifts received. That should include declaring gratis or beneficial Membership of benefits such as the Qantas Chairman's Lounge. It would appear some (or many??) Politicians have been "compromised" and am concerned some Judges may have been similarly compromised by Qantas.

[43Inches]

If you were to measure it by other standards, QF group would probably not exist, or at least not have been able to get to the size it is in the USA as it would cross anti-monopoly/trust boundaries. The same issue with Telstra and many other previously state owned companies that hold way too much market share to be challenged by any competitor.

As said before the sheer size of these companies combined with the nationalistic rhetoric they pedal makes them very hard to combat in the Australian market. Even politicians and judges that are not corrupted by freebies would be very hard pressed to challenge these companies as they would face probable career destroying backlash. At least now QF is so on the nose with the public there might be a window of opportunity.

Its the same way companies like Coles get away with below award/minimum wage payments, by offering to take on unemployed as a sort of working unemployment benefit. The gov turns a blind eye to the wages and Coles hires lots of casuals and keeps staples at below cost to hide true inflation. Most of the casuals don't stick around so they are constantly hiring, which makes the employment stats look better, and the low cost of milk/bread makes inflation look better than what it is.

[Callsign Please]

Just straight from Wikipedia:
​​​​A flag carrier is a transport company, such as an airline or shipping company, that, being locally registered in a given sovereign state, enjoys preferential rights or privileges accorded by the government for international operations.
By this definition, yes of course it remains a flag carrier. Legislation doesn’t matter, National ownership no longer matters either:
Today, it is any international airline with a strong connection to its home country or that represents its home country internationally, regardless of whether it is government-owned.

While Australians think of it as such, and foreigners recognise it as such, corporate or not it’s a flag carrier. I’d suggest it’s not a title for government or media to bestow, but a longer walk to mass agreement. Expensive ads help.

[Icarus2001]

Well for my two cents, Qantas is no longer our flag carrier. We do not have one, nor do we need one. As someone has mentioned above, if war breaks out Qantas will be required to assist the war effort but so would VA and REX etc

It is now a meaningless term. Perhaps "national carrier" has more meaning. Thai Airways for example or Singapore Airlines as owned by Temasek. Cathay certainly not.

[Lead Balloon]

Australia's real flag carrier is 34 Squadron.

Civilian operator? Might as well make it Bonza.

[chimbu warrior]

I would challenge the premise that Qantas is the sole Australian flag carrier.

Virgin and Air North both successfully operate international passenger services, as do Jetstar (admittedly a QF offshoot). Tasman Cargo operate international freight services.

That aside, QF obviously consider themselves the "chosen instrument" and enjoy favoured treatment in many aspects of international trade. That is out of balance, and the Federal government needs to foster increased opportunity for other Australian carriers.

[Global Aviator]

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1095x621/img_6334_64c046f94b3cb90031fcd7bfcc70315f9ef53072.jpeg
Is that not a flag carrier! 🤣

[Troo believer]

Of course Qantas is the national flag carrier. Name any other airline based in Australia capable of transversing the globe in 24 to 36 hours. Not even the RAAF has that capability.

[dr dre]

Just straight from Wikipedia:

A flag carrier is a transport company, such as an airline or shipping company, that, being locally registered in a given sovereign state, enjoys preferential rights or privileges accorded by the government for international operations.

It doesn’t have preferential rights or privileges per se, but the QF Sale Act places certain conditions upon the company that are not placed on any other airline in order to maintain pseudo status of a national carrier. So it is there in legislation.

[FO NappyBum]

[QUOTE=Freeotispriest2020;11500931]Gunbalanya Air Charters[/QUOTE

I think gunair have ordered:
20 x 777X’s
6 x Boom Supersonic Aircraft

Interesting to see how/if it will change long haul travel out of Aus

[LostWanderer]

Qantas absolutely WAS the true flag carrier at one stage in its life, I would find it hard to say they are these days. Now its more of a general term used by the good folks over in marketing to swell patriotic passengers to pick "The Aussie battlers" over superior competitors with much better products. Nothing more. If it wasn't for the Aussie folk buying into the sales pitch of supporting the hometown airline, QF would be a shell of what it is today.

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

That is what pissed Ansett off during the 2000 Olympics. Ansett paid huge bucks to be the official carrier, but everyone just assumed QF was. I mean, how could it not have been??

Qantas the International airline is a shell of its former self. If it hadn't "merged" with Australian and been able to utilize that strong domestic income it would have been stuffed long ago.

From 1993:The Qantas chairman. Mr Gary Pemberton, said the board had agonised over the decision and had considered using the combined name, before deciding that a single brand was the best option.

The proposed name of the carrier has been subject to considerable debate. The managing director of Qantas, Mr John Ward, said that in the end, the international marketability of the Qantas name had proved decisive. My bolding.

They've since pissed that away in actual terms, but Joe Public still thinks they fly all over the world. Marketing 101.

[Lucerne]

Yes, Qantas is and should be our flag carrier airline. There's no point bitching about corporate salaries and bonuses. That is all relative. It is a fair criticism though that the airline has been used as a political platform of late, to an extent that exudes political corruption between the airline and the current Federal Government. That should hopefully stop either now under new management or at the next election.

[puff]

One of the definitions of being the 'flag' or 'national' carrier of any airline should be is all your crew wearing a uniform must be based, live and pay taxes in the country are supposed to be the 'national' carrier of.

[Lucerne]

One of the definitions of being the 'flag' or 'national' carrier of any airline is all your crew wearing a uniform must be based, live and pay taxes in the country are supposed to be the 'national' carrier of.
Is that really a thing? Surely most international carriers if not all have foreign based staff.

[megan]

Of course Qantas is the national flag carrier. Name any other airline based in Australia capable of transversing the globe in 24 to 36 hours. Not even the RAAF has that capabilityYou can't traverse the globe with QF, they don't do the Atlantic bit, saying they might have a code share doesn't pass muster.


https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1024x683/block_col_8_desktop_33b1e97cc2fa31184129b86a3e9d18c182a3b9e5 .jpg

[SandyPalms]

You can't traverse the globe with QF, they don't do the Atlantic bit, saying they might have a code share doesn't pass muster.


https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1024x683/block_col_8_desktop_33b1e97cc2fa31184129b86a3e9d18c182a3b9e5 .jpg
Traverse doesn't mean circumnavigate. They are not the same thing.

[Troo believer]

But they have done and they are “capable “ easily of doing so.

[1A_Please]

The whole concept of being a flag carrier belongs to another era when airlines were government owned and landing rights and slots were gifted on that basis. Calling Qantas or any other privately owned airline a flag carrier in 2023 is meaningless.

[puff]

Is that really a thing? Surely most international carriers if not all have foreign based staff.

Sorry - should have been 'should', and if you see I said any crew wearing your uniform - of course not local based airport staff....

If you want to talk true 'flag' carriers - a good topical one at the more is QR - no foreign crew bases there !

[megan]

But they have done and they are “capable “ easily of doing soAnd that is exactly what I was implying, the Airlines halcyon days when they really did traverse the globe.

https://simpleflying.com/qantas-around-the-world-service/