Qantas Sydney Maintenance Plan
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Blue Mountains
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
eagleboy,
Where are you getting your information ?
Or are you just speculating ?
I have heard many of these rumours as individual rumours, have you simply put them all together and filled in the blanks to make it some what believable.
Point of issue : If the LAME to AME ratio is reduced to 30% the crews in the so called 'Core' would be decemated, as the ratio is 70% at the moment (according to H.T's April Quarterly Brief).
Does the Company plan to hire more ame's to build up the numbers ?
Where are you getting your information ?
Or are you just speculating ?
I have heard many of these rumours as individual rumours, have you simply put them all together and filled in the blanks to make it some what believable.
Point of issue : If the LAME to AME ratio is reduced to 30% the crews in the so called 'Core' would be decemated, as the ratio is 70% at the moment (according to H.T's April Quarterly Brief).
Does the Company plan to hire more ame's to build up the numbers ?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: sydney, australia
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CM .. You thought wrong.
I see you've adopted the Trustee 1 defence. (I don't wish to answer the question so I will attack the persons character or upbringing and maybe bring sexual function/preferences into it. or as a final resort cr@p on for several hundred words that amount to nothing)
I really thought that you were above all of that. A worthy adversary even.
I guess that even you can no longer justify the Associations handling of this eba.
You may as well give up and hand the keyboard over to the next exec member to defend the actions of that bunch of amatuers.
I see you've adopted the Trustee 1 defence. (I don't wish to answer the question so I will attack the persons character or upbringing and maybe bring sexual function/preferences into it. or as a final resort cr@p on for several hundred words that amount to nothing)
I really thought that you were above all of that. A worthy adversary even.
I guess that even you can no longer justify the Associations handling of this eba.
You may as well give up and hand the keyboard over to the next exec member to defend the actions of that bunch of amatuers.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Someone that I know, works in an area that is privy to a lot of the information to do with Business change within the company.
This was from a draft, there has been a lot more work done since it was written but I am unable to say as it might give this person away and that is the last thing that I want to do.
There is a lot of this out there because the managers have been briefed and unfortunatly for upper managment, fortunate for us, some of this has then been passed on. Managment is not very happy to say the least.
Yes there will be a lot of LAME redundancies and there will be some employment, at a later date,of AME'.
The Company is also looking forward to employing new apprentices, under a reduced hours apprencetiship scheme post July 1. As they will then be able to train apprentices in specific focused areas and not full apprenticeships like in the past.
Apprentices will be the main source of recruiting for Engineering and they will only take who they want, with the cull being very rigid. They will not get a job if they are not good enough, even if the Company needs the numbers.
You will see a lot more apprentices around as they are a very cheep form of labour.
This was from a draft, there has been a lot more work done since it was written but I am unable to say as it might give this person away and that is the last thing that I want to do.
There is a lot of this out there because the managers have been briefed and unfortunatly for upper managment, fortunate for us, some of this has then been passed on. Managment is not very happy to say the least.
Yes there will be a lot of LAME redundancies and there will be some employment, at a later date,of AME'.
The Company is also looking forward to employing new apprentices, under a reduced hours apprencetiship scheme post July 1. As they will then be able to train apprentices in specific focused areas and not full apprenticeships like in the past.
Apprentices will be the main source of recruiting for Engineering and they will only take who they want, with the cull being very rigid. They will not get a job if they are not good enough, even if the Company needs the numbers.
You will see a lot more apprentices around as they are a very cheep form of labour.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: sydney, australia
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does this redunancy and then rehiring of Lames have something to do with the customer aircraft payments issue.
ie If you take a redundancy and come back 2 yrs later instead of being paid for the licences you hold you get paid for the aircraft you certify for?
What is the big picture?
ie If you take a redundancy and come back 2 yrs later instead of being paid for the licences you hold you get paid for the aircraft you certify for?
What is the big picture?
Guest
Posts: n/a
turbo don't worry mate.crystal and his mates are protecting us
our jobs are in good hands with an experienced team getting us great results when the company have been making record profits, should be a piece of cake to save our jobs with their connections.
I'd rather be a mexican with balls than a castrated yank
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turbo,
I have no knowledge of any plan to hire LAME's, but if the company was to do so in the future they would not be coming back as the level that they left at and they will have to cop all the reduced benefits.
At the moment there is a lot of incentive to stay so as to maintain and build on your level, QANTAS do not want this. It may well bite them like it is in Avalon, where LAME's leave to take advantage of lucrative short term contracts overseas, then return on the same if not better conditions. They know that they can get a job because attrition is so high at Avalon.
It all ties in together if you think about it.
The combining of all maintenance departments in Sydney under one managment structure.
OT bank for all.
Other Operators payments only for SIT contract section.
Reduced Ad hoc and maintenance visit payments for everyone else.
This is all about reducing the cost structure in Sydney and increasing the flexibility in the business.
Through, shift loading reduction, manpower cost reduction through LAME reduction, cheap labour in the form of apprentices.
Welcome to the new world
I have no knowledge of any plan to hire LAME's, but if the company was to do so in the future they would not be coming back as the level that they left at and they will have to cop all the reduced benefits.
At the moment there is a lot of incentive to stay so as to maintain and build on your level, QANTAS do not want this. It may well bite them like it is in Avalon, where LAME's leave to take advantage of lucrative short term contracts overseas, then return on the same if not better conditions. They know that they can get a job because attrition is so high at Avalon.
It all ties in together if you think about it.
The combining of all maintenance departments in Sydney under one managment structure.
OT bank for all.
Other Operators payments only for SIT contract section.
Reduced Ad hoc and maintenance visit payments for everyone else.
This is all about reducing the cost structure in Sydney and increasing the flexibility in the business.
Through, shift loading reduction, manpower cost reduction through LAME reduction, cheap labour in the form of apprentices.
Welcome to the new world
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CM
And which point might that be ?
The one that we should bend over and take it squarely in the
?
I do not think so....
I think that you are missing my point actually CM.
I look at what the company is doing and is planning to do, as an attempt to devalue what we do and it\'s importance in the public eye.
They Ansett and TAA portrayed their pilots as overpayed bus drivers in their dispute.
I do not think that we are Glorified Car Mechanics, a car mechanic earns more than most in avaition.
The company are looking in the wrong places to save money.
Why not look at IT, the system that we use in Sydney is totally crap and wasts an aweful lot of time.
The Guys and Girls in Heavy Maintenance want to work a more efficient shift but the company says no... They trialed a healthy and efficient shift during the A330 reconfigs last year that gave the company an extra two hours a day, increased moral, reduced the need for overtime and had the last plane ready eleven days early. But the company did not want it. Heavy Maintenance managment made a huge blue there, they missed a golden opportunity to show to the company what they could do.
They should be looking to book in super A checks to run in the middle of D checks, to occupy the manpower while awaiting workshops and increase their burn rate.
Avalon is a failure, their turn time is pathetic, not to mention the cost of positioning the aircraft there.
If the company increased moral even just a little, the effect would be out of site.
One of these days QANTAS will wake up and realise that instead of outsourceing maintenance, they should have continued in the vein of John Menadue in the mid to late eighties. Back then Qantas was looking to expand Maintenance and use our excellent maintenance reputation to attract customer work that would suppliment our maintenance work. Look at all the other quality airlines in the world who have dome just that. They call it an MRO these days and talk of them as if they are a new concept.
When we started outsourceing our maintenance, it was seen by most others in the industry as a failed concept and they were bringing their maintenance back in house or looking to the reputable MRO\'s. The only ones pushing the concept were those who were looking to make money from it.
A golden opportunity lost
And which point might that be ?
The one that we should bend over and take it squarely in the
?I do not think so....
I think that you are missing my point actually CM.
I look at what the company is doing and is planning to do, as an attempt to devalue what we do and it\'s importance in the public eye.
They Ansett and TAA portrayed their pilots as overpayed bus drivers in their dispute.
I do not think that we are Glorified Car Mechanics, a car mechanic earns more than most in avaition.
The company are looking in the wrong places to save money.
Why not look at IT, the system that we use in Sydney is totally crap and wasts an aweful lot of time.
The Guys and Girls in Heavy Maintenance want to work a more efficient shift but the company says no... They trialed a healthy and efficient shift during the A330 reconfigs last year that gave the company an extra two hours a day, increased moral, reduced the need for overtime and had the last plane ready eleven days early. But the company did not want it. Heavy Maintenance managment made a huge blue there, they missed a golden opportunity to show to the company what they could do.
They should be looking to book in super A checks to run in the middle of D checks, to occupy the manpower while awaiting workshops and increase their burn rate.
Avalon is a failure, their turn time is pathetic, not to mention the cost of positioning the aircraft there.
If the company increased moral even just a little, the effect would be out of site.
One of these days QANTAS will wake up and realise that instead of outsourceing maintenance, they should have continued in the vein of John Menadue in the mid to late eighties. Back then Qantas was looking to expand Maintenance and use our excellent maintenance reputation to attract customer work that would suppliment our maintenance work. Look at all the other quality airlines in the world who have dome just that. They call it an MRO these days and talk of them as if they are a new concept.
When we started outsourceing our maintenance, it was seen by most others in the industry as a failed concept and they were bringing their maintenance back in house or looking to the reputable MRO\'s. The only ones pushing the concept were those who were looking to make money from it.
A golden opportunity lost
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: sydney, australia
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Couldn't have put that better myself.
p.s C.M it probably should have read Goodbye to the world as we know it.
What do you think of the extended hours airbus shift that was worked CM. Do you know of it?
p.s C.M it probably should have read Goodbye to the world as we know it.
What do you think of the extended hours airbus shift that was worked CM. Do you know of it?
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What don't You HM people understand about the word VOLUNTARY?
Here are some defintions from the Macquarie Dictionary that may help you all out.
1. done, made, brought about, etc , by free will or choice
2. acting on one's own will or choice
3. relating to or depending on voluntary action or help
4. having the power of willing or choosing.
If you cant work it out from here, there is nothing that will save you all in this EBA and no negotiating commitee would be able to either.
Maybe we should have put in the EBA that the, 44's full of paper on fire, for you all to stand around in pity city should be placed for those who want to stand around and winge all day everday!!!!!!
Here are some defintions from the Macquarie Dictionary that may help you all out.
1. done, made, brought about, etc , by free will or choice
2. acting on one's own will or choice
3. relating to or depending on voluntary action or help
4. having the power of willing or choosing.
If you cant work it out from here, there is nothing that will save you all in this EBA and no negotiating commitee would be able to either.
Maybe we should have put in the EBA that the, 44's full of paper on fire, for you all to stand around in pity city should be placed for those who want to stand around and winge all day everday!!!!!!
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Blue Mountains
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pity City,
For me the word VOLUNTARY has nothing to do with it at all.
For me the issues are as follows.
Six months ago or more, Heavy Maintenance LAME's were told two things by George Herdsic.
1 If OT Banking was to be in the EBA, that their would be consultation with those LAME's effected and that we would have consultation and input into what form it might take.
2 If OT Banking was to be in the EBA, that only those LAME's who would be effected by the changes (i.e. Heavy Maintenance LAME's), would be voting on the issue.
Only to find out now that this is it and there was and will not be any consultation on the issue and everyone is voting on it, even those not effected by the changes.
There are LAME's in Heavy Maintenance who like the idea of an OT Bank, but they do not like the form that it is in and are disapointed that they were not consulted nor able have some input. Most LAME's in Heavy Maintenance are angry that they were mislead by their elected Executive Representative.
This misleading behavior by the Elected Executive Members Gets even better though, and extends to misrepresentation.
After the bans were lifted, 'B' and 'C' Shift Delegates held information meetings, to have the DRAFT EBA read and explained. At there two meetings, resolutions to reject the document in its entirity and for the bans to be reinstated and escalated, were unanimously passed by 'C' shift and all but two (who abstained) from the 'B' shift meeting.
'A' shift also held a meeting. However, their meeting was attended by Tish (Elected Executive Representative). When asked what the other shifts thought of the DRAFT, they were told by Tish that one shift was unanimously for it and the other was 50/50. 'A' Shift did not persue their own resolution. When 'A' shift LAME's found out of this, they were angry to say the least.
George and Tish then went on to vote for the document at the following Executive Meeting to debate the issue, even though they knew that Heavy Maintenance (Who they represent and who elected them onto the Executive) were not in favour of it at all.
Heavy Maintenance are disappointed and upset that they were not consulted and angry that they have been misled and misrepresented.
These are the issues as I see them.
The word 'VOLUNTARY' has nothing to do with it at all.
For me the word VOLUNTARY has nothing to do with it at all.
For me the issues are as follows.
Six months ago or more, Heavy Maintenance LAME's were told two things by George Herdsic.
1 If OT Banking was to be in the EBA, that their would be consultation with those LAME's effected and that we would have consultation and input into what form it might take.
2 If OT Banking was to be in the EBA, that only those LAME's who would be effected by the changes (i.e. Heavy Maintenance LAME's), would be voting on the issue.
Only to find out now that this is it and there was and will not be any consultation on the issue and everyone is voting on it, even those not effected by the changes.
There are LAME's in Heavy Maintenance who like the idea of an OT Bank, but they do not like the form that it is in and are disapointed that they were not consulted nor able have some input. Most LAME's in Heavy Maintenance are angry that they were mislead by their elected Executive Representative.
This misleading behavior by the Elected Executive Members Gets even better though, and extends to misrepresentation.
After the bans were lifted, 'B' and 'C' Shift Delegates held information meetings, to have the DRAFT EBA read and explained. At there two meetings, resolutions to reject the document in its entirity and for the bans to be reinstated and escalated, were unanimously passed by 'C' shift and all but two (who abstained) from the 'B' shift meeting.
'A' shift also held a meeting. However, their meeting was attended by Tish (Elected Executive Representative). When asked what the other shifts thought of the DRAFT, they were told by Tish that one shift was unanimously for it and the other was 50/50. 'A' Shift did not persue their own resolution. When 'A' shift LAME's found out of this, they were angry to say the least.
George and Tish then went on to vote for the document at the following Executive Meeting to debate the issue, even though they knew that Heavy Maintenance (Who they represent and who elected them onto the Executive) were not in favour of it at all.
Heavy Maintenance are disappointed and upset that they were not consulted and angry that they have been misled and misrepresented.
These are the issues as I see them.
The word 'VOLUNTARY' has nothing to do with it at all.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So basically your arguement is not with the EBA but the union. Easy fix vote for a different executive next year.
Would you have complained if the EBA had no mention of Ot Banking but had a item that only effected O/S line engineers for example.? I am not one of them, just trying to identify a minority group with in our union.
Seems like HM are saying that everyone else is selling them out but if the shoe was on the other foot I doubt they would be the same.
Why did alot of your guys move to brisbane? Maybe they could see what was happening in Sydney. Rats leaving a sinking ship!!!
If there is a way to make sure the company does not sell you all off wouldn't you try to do it rather than make the decision easier for them just to sell it off and cut costs. You all seem to be drowning in your own sorrow.
We will see in the next week or so what happens, I hope sanity prevails.
Would you have complained if the EBA had no mention of Ot Banking but had a item that only effected O/S line engineers for example.? I am not one of them, just trying to identify a minority group with in our union.
Seems like HM are saying that everyone else is selling them out but if the shoe was on the other foot I doubt they would be the same.
Why did alot of your guys move to brisbane? Maybe they could see what was happening in Sydney. Rats leaving a sinking ship!!!
If there is a way to make sure the company does not sell you all off wouldn't you try to do it rather than make the decision easier for them just to sell it off and cut costs. You all seem to be drowning in your own sorrow.
We will see in the next week or so what happens, I hope sanity prevails.
With the greatest of respect. There are "voluntary" things and there are "voluntary" things.
As in: "Would you like to buy and Anzac day badge?"
and: "I've been reviewing your performance, promotion potential, and deciding who is going on the next training course. By the way, we wonder if you would like to consider joining our overtime bank? It would help us a lot. It is voluntary of course."
As in: "Would you like to buy and Anzac day badge?"
and: "I've been reviewing your performance, promotion potential, and deciding who is going on the next training course. By the way, we wonder if you would like to consider joining our overtime bank? It would help us a lot. It is voluntary of course."
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Blue Mountains
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pity City,
I see no need to wait until next june. There is an avenue to persue now with the current vote that will be shortly underway. I will be voting 'NO' for the reasons that I have already listed on these pages and hopefully we can have another go, but this time get it right.
As I have, in all of the EBA that I have voted on. I always look into what it is that I am actually voting on and what it means for the people who are effected by it. I then vote accordingly, knowing within myself that I have made an informed decision using all of the information that was at hand.
I voted against EBA III mainly because I did not think that it was right for us to trade off the conditions of future employees of the company for our own short term financial gain. I thought then that it might create a divide in the workforce and this is what has happened. Look what we have now, two more divides in the form of OT Bank and Tail Payments.
As a whole I do not have a problem with the association. What I do have a problem with is being misinformed and misrepresented, by fellow members and representatives. I take issue with some of the things that have been written on these and other pages, as a lot of what people are saying is not correct and the common reaction is to personally attack whoever for what they might have said rather than debating the topic as is the intention of these forums.
I do not think that we are being sold out in Heavy Maintenance and I am not drowning in my sorrow nor are anyone of my work mates. I, as are many others, am frustrated with the misinformation that is being spread to other shifts, sections and departments.
I can see the need to change the way we work and to adapt the the needs of an ever changing industry, but I do not think that the companies current approach is the right one. The issues of Heavy Maintenance in Sydney should be being presented to the workforce and solutions found and implimented in that business unit, as they are with Base and the Lean-Sigma Program. Not just dumped on the department in the form of an EBA, without so much of a wisper as to the bigger plan, if there is one at all.
The fact is that the vast majority of LAMES in Heavy Maintenance are not happy with the agreement and I am simply stating why so that LAME's in the areas that are not effected by these changes can understand and make their own informed decisions.
I see no need to wait until next june. There is an avenue to persue now with the current vote that will be shortly underway. I will be voting 'NO' for the reasons that I have already listed on these pages and hopefully we can have another go, but this time get it right.
As I have, in all of the EBA that I have voted on. I always look into what it is that I am actually voting on and what it means for the people who are effected by it. I then vote accordingly, knowing within myself that I have made an informed decision using all of the information that was at hand.
I voted against EBA III mainly because I did not think that it was right for us to trade off the conditions of future employees of the company for our own short term financial gain. I thought then that it might create a divide in the workforce and this is what has happened. Look what we have now, two more divides in the form of OT Bank and Tail Payments.
As a whole I do not have a problem with the association. What I do have a problem with is being misinformed and misrepresented, by fellow members and representatives. I take issue with some of the things that have been written on these and other pages, as a lot of what people are saying is not correct and the common reaction is to personally attack whoever for what they might have said rather than debating the topic as is the intention of these forums.
I do not think that we are being sold out in Heavy Maintenance and I am not drowning in my sorrow nor are anyone of my work mates. I, as are many others, am frustrated with the misinformation that is being spread to other shifts, sections and departments.
I can see the need to change the way we work and to adapt the the needs of an ever changing industry, but I do not think that the companies current approach is the right one. The issues of Heavy Maintenance in Sydney should be being presented to the workforce and solutions found and implimented in that business unit, as they are with Base and the Lean-Sigma Program. Not just dumped on the department in the form of an EBA, without so much of a wisper as to the bigger plan, if there is one at all.
The fact is that the vast majority of LAMES in Heavy Maintenance are not happy with the agreement and I am simply stating why so that LAME's in the areas that are not effected by these changes can understand and make their own informed decisions.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see your side Gone Sailing, it just gets me when ever you see a guy from HM at work they are constantly in my ear about how we, lames not in HM, have or are selling them out. They then tell me how I should vote.
I am glad that the ballot is an online one so that people will vote for what they want and won't be pressured by peers into voting the way other want them to as would happen in a mass meeting.
On the tail payments issue, the only ones it effects and has done so for years is the ITB guys and now a few base guys with Atlas. Where is the big deal there. Did you guys in HM get tail payments for the ANZ D checks years ago?
I see that the company is trying to break us all up but at the same time we are doing a pretty good job of it ourselves.
I think most of this is all about the age old rift between HM & Servicing. A couple of EBA's ago it was HM that voted an EBA in that benefited them without anyone else gaining. Now the shoe is on the other foot and look at all the noise it has brought up.
Remember when Avalon was set up, big blow up by lames in HM. "I will never go down there" Never see me there" were some of the quotes from quite senior lames in HM. But yet one by one they went down there and made lots of money. ****ting in your own nest would be a pretty apt description. If you guys never supported Avalon you would have been in a way stronger position now wouldn't you!! Maybe it was only a few, but those of you who did not go and stuck to your morals can look at the guys who did go and ask them why they went, Money perhaps. I bet they did not think of the long term harm they have done to HM.
Before Avalon; HM was a world class facility and now it is just a HM facility and soon it may just be an empty hangar where world class maintenance used to be performed.
So I guess decisions of past and present LAME's in HM are now affecting innocent bystanders. Remember you reap what you sow
I am glad that the ballot is an online one so that people will vote for what they want and won't be pressured by peers into voting the way other want them to as would happen in a mass meeting.
On the tail payments issue, the only ones it effects and has done so for years is the ITB guys and now a few base guys with Atlas. Where is the big deal there. Did you guys in HM get tail payments for the ANZ D checks years ago?
I see that the company is trying to break us all up but at the same time we are doing a pretty good job of it ourselves.
I think most of this is all about the age old rift between HM & Servicing. A couple of EBA's ago it was HM that voted an EBA in that benefited them without anyone else gaining. Now the shoe is on the other foot and look at all the noise it has brought up.
Remember when Avalon was set up, big blow up by lames in HM. "I will never go down there" Never see me there" were some of the quotes from quite senior lames in HM. But yet one by one they went down there and made lots of money. ****ting in your own nest would be a pretty apt description. If you guys never supported Avalon you would have been in a way stronger position now wouldn't you!! Maybe it was only a few, but those of you who did not go and stuck to your morals can look at the guys who did go and ask them why they went, Money perhaps. I bet they did not think of the long term harm they have done to HM.
Before Avalon; HM was a world class facility and now it is just a HM facility and soon it may just be an empty hangar where world class maintenance used to be performed.
So I guess decisions of past and present LAME's in HM are now affecting innocent bystanders. Remember you reap what you sow