Qantas screws more employees.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: London
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas screws more employees.
Once again Qantas uses all its resources to come down on its employees, more people stood down for not working overtime. Aircraft not being maintened to standard. Where will it all end?
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Zer Gut Ya?
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not that verification of QF screwing it's employees is needed, but what exactly are the details of these latest stand down's, Mr Chairman?
If this starts to become a regular occurence, we will be left without LAME's. And as a pilot, if the aircraft ain't fixed, it doesn't go flying. Then the airline doesn't make money and the bean counters don't get their bonus....
Naive, Yes?
If this starts to become a regular occurence, we will be left without LAME's. And as a pilot, if the aircraft ain't fixed, it doesn't go flying. Then the airline doesn't make money and the bean counters don't get their bonus....
Naive, Yes?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: London
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas Screws its employees.
Basically no one is happy with the the EBA negotiations which are on going. The company over the last few EBAs have being asking for a lot and generally getting it, more flexible rostering, permanent nightshift, etc etc. However the return from the company have being disappointing 3% 3%. Now I know what a lot of people are saying, you are lucky to have a job and things are tough out there. Dixon says it when ever he opens his mouth. But really things ain't that bad, there is a strong economy, low unemployment and Qantas is making money, lots of money. Dixon recently said QF will improve on last years record results. But yet the offer on the EBA is still no better than the CPI which is running at I believe about 3%. So 3% pay increase minus tax leaves about a pay increase of 1.5% which is aback ward step. This is especially so when you take into consideration the pay increases that various other organisations got over the last few years,
Police 14% . Nurses 10%. NSW Train Drivers 16%
So who is now happy with the Geoff Dixons offer of 3%, no one. Some one has to break this idea of Dixons of only 3% and if it has to be Engineering by having an overtime ban then so be it. And its begining to bite already, Bruce Deahm Line Maint Manager was down in MEL during the week and he was spitting chips about it threating people with there jobs if we did'nt buckle under. Individuals who have being supporting the over time ban have being questioned at length by there managers to try and get some one to admit that there is an offical directive from the union (there isn;t one) and then start sacking people. Rumour is if Deahm can't keep the workers down then he will be looking for a new job. So nobody is working overtime there ain't enought people to do the work and aircraft are going late or not getting the work done at all.
Police 14% . Nurses 10%. NSW Train Drivers 16%
So who is now happy with the Geoff Dixons offer of 3%, no one. Some one has to break this idea of Dixons of only 3% and if it has to be Engineering by having an overtime ban then so be it. And its begining to bite already, Bruce Deahm Line Maint Manager was down in MEL during the week and he was spitting chips about it threating people with there jobs if we did'nt buckle under. Individuals who have being supporting the over time ban have being questioned at length by there managers to try and get some one to admit that there is an offical directive from the union (there isn;t one) and then start sacking people. Rumour is if Deahm can't keep the workers down then he will be looking for a new job. So nobody is working overtime there ain't enought people to do the work and aircraft are going late or not getting the work done at all.
Just Binos
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Mackay, Australia
Age: 71
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I comment as a complete outsider looking in, and I will comment only once because I may be well off the track. I have no vested interest.
QF is only one company to employ the "you're lucky to have jobs at all" line while lining their executives' pockets, but it's the most obvious target on an aviation forum. I'd just like to add here that the LAME's are in a more powerful industrial situation than perhaps a lot of them realise.
If FA's strike, chaos ensues, not because the routine safety of a flight is put in danger, but because of regulatory imperatives. Laws can be changed very quickly by a hostile government with a compliant Senate.
As Kaptin M will ruefully tell you, if pilots withdraw their services the law of supply and demand will mean that while there may be temporary chaos, things will revert to normal fairly quickly, and probably to the financial benefit of the company. (Sorry to oversimplify things Kaptin, but you know what I mean).
If, on the other hand, all LAME's were to withdraw their services, the immediate fix-it is not quite so readily available. The law of supply and demand works both ways, people, and those who think that running a company consists only of screwing the staff (sorry, human resources) as far as possible to appease the shareholders, but more directly the executives, eventually find the reality is somewhat different.
Unfortunately when it all goes tits up, those executives take their multi million dollar packages as per their contracts (I could list a whole swag of publicly listed companies starting with AMP who fit this description) despite what they have done to shareholder "wealth".
If the shareholders (institutions and retail investors alike) continue to accept this state of affairs knowing or caring about nothing except the balance sheet and dividend, their end result is cast in stone, although of course the instos will see it coming and get out first, leaving the mums and dads to absorb the loss.
To me it's simply a shame that a venerable Aussie institution is no more, and Dixon's efforts to outsource every job are a smack in the eye to Australia for the short term gain of a few, including himself.
I'm not a fan of heavy handed industrial action. The union movement in general is paying the price for its 60's and 70's tactics. But all cycles eventually turn. I wish the LAME's well in their action which isn't really an action, and if the QF share price falls as a result, tough titties.
QF is only one company to employ the "you're lucky to have jobs at all" line while lining their executives' pockets, but it's the most obvious target on an aviation forum. I'd just like to add here that the LAME's are in a more powerful industrial situation than perhaps a lot of them realise.
If FA's strike, chaos ensues, not because the routine safety of a flight is put in danger, but because of regulatory imperatives. Laws can be changed very quickly by a hostile government with a compliant Senate.
As Kaptin M will ruefully tell you, if pilots withdraw their services the law of supply and demand will mean that while there may be temporary chaos, things will revert to normal fairly quickly, and probably to the financial benefit of the company. (Sorry to oversimplify things Kaptin, but you know what I mean).
If, on the other hand, all LAME's were to withdraw their services, the immediate fix-it is not quite so readily available. The law of supply and demand works both ways, people, and those who think that running a company consists only of screwing the staff (sorry, human resources) as far as possible to appease the shareholders, but more directly the executives, eventually find the reality is somewhat different.
Unfortunately when it all goes tits up, those executives take their multi million dollar packages as per their contracts (I could list a whole swag of publicly listed companies starting with AMP who fit this description) despite what they have done to shareholder "wealth".
If the shareholders (institutions and retail investors alike) continue to accept this state of affairs knowing or caring about nothing except the balance sheet and dividend, their end result is cast in stone, although of course the instos will see it coming and get out first, leaving the mums and dads to absorb the loss.
To me it's simply a shame that a venerable Aussie institution is no more, and Dixon's efforts to outsource every job are a smack in the eye to Australia for the short term gain of a few, including himself.
I'm not a fan of heavy handed industrial action. The union movement in general is paying the price for its 60's and 70's tactics. But all cycles eventually turn. I wish the LAME's well in their action which isn't really an action, and if the QF share price falls as a result, tough titties.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Zer Gut Ya?
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gotta agree, Chimbu. Well put binos.
So how do we get these unions and associations to all work together to achieve a common benefit?
I'm certain that AIPA wouldn't even be a part of it, the COM is arrogant and entrenched as a part of management. Most of us are fairly cynical as to the COM's motives anyway. They seem to leave the COM and land in cushy management positions on a regular basis.
So, as pilots, we are stuck with the 3% over and over. But the rest of the company doesn't need to be. It's just finding common ground.
So how do we get these unions and associations to all work together to achieve a common benefit?
I'm certain that AIPA wouldn't even be a part of it, the COM is arrogant and entrenched as a part of management. Most of us are fairly cynical as to the COM's motives anyway. They seem to leave the COM and land in cushy management positions on a regular basis.
So, as pilots, we are stuck with the 3% over and over. But the rest of the company doesn't need to be. It's just finding common ground.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Harbour City
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm certain that AIPA wouldn't even be a part of it, the COM is arrogant and entrenched as a part of management. Most of us are fairly cynical as to the COM's motives anyway. They seem to leave the COM and land in cushy management positions on a regular basis.
So 3% pay increase minus tax leaves about a pay increase of 1.5%
As for the alaea directing members to perform overtime bans I can assure you that they dont want a bar of it. There is no bans at Sydney and Brisbane International were the senior Execs reside and I now for a fact that they are totally opposed to this unortherised chaos.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no bans at Sydney and Brisbane International were the senior Execs reside and I now for a fact that they are totally opposed to this unortherised chaos.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You need to do a moron check on yourself Mr Cairman. If you get a 3% pay rise your take home pay and the tax you pay both increase by 3%. You will have 3% more take home pay so stop this spread of misinformation that we now is common from you southern stars
If your attitude Mr Q is typical of QF managers, then i feel very sorry for all of QF staff. sad times indeed.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Sydney
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Q's attitude is typical of QF management. Now you see what we have to put up with. Vive la Revolution and good luck LAMES!
Maybe someone needs to copy a typical day with MEL's all over the place and send them to Crikey.
Maybe someone needs to copy a typical day with MEL's all over the place and send them to Crikey.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Zer Gut Ya?
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fark me. Was that for real?
First things first. Were you seriously threatening my house Mr Qantas? Were you seriously threatening QF LAME's out there with the same thing? I would reccommend you put your name to these proceedings, a$$hole.
Secondly. Moron check. If you get a 3% GROSS rise in income, then what will your tax do, assuming that you pay 48.5 cents in the dollar? I'm not even going to answer any further, because given this fella's grammar and spelling, he's clearly one iced vovo short of the full packet.
Mr Qantas, if you wish to get on this board and threaten, cajole, abuse, and use your clear lack of insight or knowledge or logic, then you better be prepared to get some right back again.
Personally, I hope that someone comes along and takes YOUR house. Your "troublemaking Mexican" was doing what he thought was right. Oh, and I have news for you? He is farken right....
Jeez, ultrlights, don't worry mate. This bloke ain't QF management any more than I'm the Queen.
First things first. Were you seriously threatening my house Mr Qantas? Were you seriously threatening QF LAME's out there with the same thing? I would reccommend you put your name to these proceedings, a$$hole.
Secondly. Moron check. If you get a 3% GROSS rise in income, then what will your tax do, assuming that you pay 48.5 cents in the dollar? I'm not even going to answer any further, because given this fella's grammar and spelling, he's clearly one iced vovo short of the full packet.
Mr Qantas, if you wish to get on this board and threaten, cajole, abuse, and use your clear lack of insight or knowledge or logic, then you better be prepared to get some right back again.
Personally, I hope that someone comes along and takes YOUR house. Your "troublemaking Mexican" was doing what he thought was right. Oh, and I have news for you? He is farken right....
Jeez, ultrlights, don't worry mate. This bloke ain't QF management any more than I'm the Queen.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Here
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whoa, who was that guy?
Now that had to be a wind up.
Then again, perhaps that truly is how The Big Q's management think.
Meantime, go hard LAME's.
Now Bino, would you run that bit about how the LAME's are not subject to the same supply/demand equation the pilots were subject to, way back in '89?
I can forsee the foreign taps opening to sub-continental labour if strikes were called.
No, of course that's not possible...or is it?
With respect to those involved in the drama of '89, immigration laws were passed to clear the way for foreign pilots to come on in.
If Dixon is cutting costs in times so good, what will happen in five or so years time when times are not so good?
No boom lasts forever.
Back to the current non-action then, how far can The Company go before strikes are called by its employees, be they LAME's, pilots, FA's or ground staff?
What the latter posts refer to regarding costs are poignant.
Prices keep going up while salaries keep going down.
Sorry, but when other perks and allowances are subtly removed, worse, when retention costs to employees INCREASE as they have for Jetstar pilots paying for ratings and even renewals, a gross increase of 3% on salary (that's before tax you mug, Mr. Q) is a step backwards, not forwards.
Again, go hard LAME's.
It'll be the pilots that're attacked next.
As if they're not being done-in already!
Then again, perhaps that truly is how The Big Q's management think.
Meantime, go hard LAME's.
Now Bino, would you run that bit about how the LAME's are not subject to the same supply/demand equation the pilots were subject to, way back in '89?
I can forsee the foreign taps opening to sub-continental labour if strikes were called.
No, of course that's not possible...or is it?
With respect to those involved in the drama of '89, immigration laws were passed to clear the way for foreign pilots to come on in.
If Dixon is cutting costs in times so good, what will happen in five or so years time when times are not so good?
No boom lasts forever.
Back to the current non-action then, how far can The Company go before strikes are called by its employees, be they LAME's, pilots, FA's or ground staff?
What the latter posts refer to regarding costs are poignant.
Prices keep going up while salaries keep going down.
Sorry, but when other perks and allowances are subtly removed, worse, when retention costs to employees INCREASE as they have for Jetstar pilots paying for ratings and even renewals, a gross increase of 3% on salary (that's before tax you mug, Mr. Q) is a step backwards, not forwards.
Again, go hard LAME's.
It'll be the pilots that're attacked next.
As if they're not being done-in already!
The law of supply and demand actually states the reverse of what some of you think it does.
It states that the higher the price paid, the more supply will be made available.
It follows that as the price (pay) falls, less LAME's (and pilots) will be available.
I suspect that Geoff Dixon, doesn't understand this, or if he does, he will push for overseas recruitment "because there are not enough LAME's available in Australia".
The trouble I suspect is that GD thinks (like many narcissistic managers) that he is in control of the situation, and that things happen when he "pulls levers and presses buttons" in management speak.
The reality is that the most junior sixteen year old baggage handler, let alone a pilot, FA or LAME, can make a larger and more immediate impact on Qantas than Dixon can.
Do I need to explain this to anyone? Except of course Mr. Qantas.
It states that the higher the price paid, the more supply will be made available.
It follows that as the price (pay) falls, less LAME's (and pilots) will be available.
I suspect that Geoff Dixon, doesn't understand this, or if he does, he will push for overseas recruitment "because there are not enough LAME's available in Australia".
The trouble I suspect is that GD thinks (like many narcissistic managers) that he is in control of the situation, and that things happen when he "pulls levers and presses buttons" in management speak.
The reality is that the most junior sixteen year old baggage handler, let alone a pilot, FA or LAME, can make a larger and more immediate impact on Qantas than Dixon can.
Do I need to explain this to anyone? Except of course Mr. Qantas.
Sunfish I disagree with you but enjoy most of your posts. perhaps you could provide a reference to your version of this economic theory?
If this were true there would be many more higly paid pilots and only a few low paid? Huh?
I maintain that a persons salary is a function of how hard it is to replace them.
If I employ a gardener for a week she
could only command what the "market" suggests was a reasonable rate of pay. Lets say $15 an hour for 40 hour = $600 gross. Now if there was a shortage of labour, ie people no longer wanted to do the job then the price she could command would rise proprtionately.
That is what the building industry has been facing recently. Young people generally do not see trades as attractive careers so as a result the shortage of supply has pushed pay rates higher. A builders labourer earns good money now and yes they earn it too. Plasterers, plumbers and electricians are short in supply high on price.
Why do bar jobs pay poorly? Because the barrier to entry is low so there is an oversupply of labour. Why do dentists earn very well? There are significant barriers to entry to the profession (trade) with a lengthy study (and hence no income) period which leads to a shortage of supply.
It follows that as the price (pay) falls, less LAME's (and pilots) will be available.
I maintain that a persons salary is a function of how hard it is to replace them.
If I employ a gardener for a week she
could only command what the "market" suggests was a reasonable rate of pay. Lets say $15 an hour for 40 hour = $600 gross. Now if there was a shortage of labour, ie people no longer wanted to do the job then the price she could command would rise proprtionately.That is what the building industry has been facing recently. Young people generally do not see trades as attractive careers so as a result the shortage of supply has pushed pay rates higher. A builders labourer earns good money now and yes they earn it too. Plasterers, plumbers and electricians are short in supply high on price.
Why do bar jobs pay poorly? Because the barrier to entry is low so there is an oversupply of labour. Why do dentists earn very well? There are significant barriers to entry to the profession (trade) with a lengthy study (and hence no income) period which leads to a shortage of supply.
Just Binos
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Mackay, Australia
Age: 71
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunfish, While your simple explanation of one side of the law of supply and demand is correct as far as it goes, you omit the relevant side of the law which is that the larger the supply for a fixed demand, the lower the price needing to be paid. Aviation, and flying in particular is a special case as we all know. Just how many industries do you know where people are prepared to work for nothing? Do you know of another industry where the demand is exceeded by supply by a bigger ratio? I've stated on these pages before that given the law of s&d I am amazed at the conditions airline pilots managed to accumulate over the years.
life as a journey,
A perfectly valid point which didn't escape me when I wrote the original post, and difficult to answer definitively, but I'll try to articulate the difference as I see it. Some participants in the 89 dispute may take offence, but I mean none, just stating my view of PERCEPTIONS at the time. Some may also interpret this as racist; those who know me know better, again, it is perceptions I'm talking about.
The 89 dispute was a PR disaster because pilots were PERCEIVED as being pampered and highly paid as it was. They initiated the dispute themselves rather than having it forced upon them by continual erosion of conditions and goodwill and morale (I can hear Amos and Tool Time sharpening their pencils already
) and finally, their replacements, whatever we may think of their actions, were seen to be from places like the US and Europe. Our flying public, who just wanted to get airborne again and bugger the pampered pilots, was comfortable with the fact that pilots from such civilised nations were demonstrably capable of flying the relevant machinery.
Remember also the law of supply and demand for pilots applies all over the world, not just Australia, so there was never going to be a shortage of applicants to fill the vacant positions.
Now I may be on the wrong track here, and if so I will willingly apologise and withdraw, but I get the impression LAME's conditions are under attack simply as a means of cutting costs, and I'm not sure why qualified people from other first world countries who are not suffering from the same oversupply as pilots would bother coming here to fill positions under that sort of attack.
Which leads us to the point of the third world countries. This is a purely subjective view, but I don't think Australians would accept the concept of such a basic foundation of our jealously guarded safety record being undermined by bringing in third world workers to solve an industrial problem caused by management wanting to cut costs. The executives' salary and options packages, together with the massive profits QF is reporting proudly to their shareholders, are powerful ammunition to fire against the necessity for such an action, and I believe this time it would be a PR disaster for the QF board, not the LAME's.
Again, I recognise that is an opinion only, but it's what I see as the big difference between today and 89. I might also add that if Mr QANTAS is an example of the quality of the enemy, that is a heartening sign.
life as a journey,
Now Bino, would you run that bit about how the LAME's are not subject to the same supply/demand equation the pilots were subject to, way back in '89?
The 89 dispute was a PR disaster because pilots were PERCEIVED as being pampered and highly paid as it was. They initiated the dispute themselves rather than having it forced upon them by continual erosion of conditions and goodwill and morale (I can hear Amos and Tool Time sharpening their pencils already
) and finally, their replacements, whatever we may think of their actions, were seen to be from places like the US and Europe. Our flying public, who just wanted to get airborne again and bugger the pampered pilots, was comfortable with the fact that pilots from such civilised nations were demonstrably capable of flying the relevant machinery.Remember also the law of supply and demand for pilots applies all over the world, not just Australia, so there was never going to be a shortage of applicants to fill the vacant positions.
Now I may be on the wrong track here, and if so I will willingly apologise and withdraw, but I get the impression LAME's conditions are under attack simply as a means of cutting costs, and I'm not sure why qualified people from other first world countries who are not suffering from the same oversupply as pilots would bother coming here to fill positions under that sort of attack.
Which leads us to the point of the third world countries. This is a purely subjective view, but I don't think Australians would accept the concept of such a basic foundation of our jealously guarded safety record being undermined by bringing in third world workers to solve an industrial problem caused by management wanting to cut costs. The executives' salary and options packages, together with the massive profits QF is reporting proudly to their shareholders, are powerful ammunition to fire against the necessity for such an action, and I believe this time it would be a PR disaster for the QF board, not the LAME's.
Again, I recognise that is an opinion only, but it's what I see as the big difference between today and 89. I might also add that if Mr QANTAS is an example of the quality of the enemy, that is a heartening sign.
Icarus, I'm just being picky. Any Economics textbook will explain it the way I did.
The effect is the same as you say, if people are hard to replace (ie limited supply) they can get a higher price (pay), however the textbook puts it the other way around.
The effect is the same as you say, if people are hard to replace (ie limited supply) they can get a higher price (pay), however the textbook puts it the other way around.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: australia
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the LAMEs took it to task, the media would get hold of a few cases of LAMEs getting pampered too and publish it. Remember, the public lets the media do their thinking for them.
Next thing we'd see immigration relax for that particular vocation, CASA give special consideration for CTC and the same thing as 89 would happen.
The public couldn't care less about the industrial situation in Aviation generally, they just want to keep flying.
It will be the Royal Commission that I hope never happens that sheds light on the systematic mistakes made by government departments and airline management.
K
Spelling!
Next thing we'd see immigration relax for that particular vocation, CASA give special consideration for CTC and the same thing as 89 would happen.
The public couldn't care less about the industrial situation in Aviation generally, they just want to keep flying.
It will be the Royal Commission that I hope never happens that sheds light on the systematic mistakes made by government departments and airline management.
K
Spelling!
Last edited by Kanga767; 23rd Jan 2005 at 21:14.