Qantas Sydney Maintenance Plan
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: sydney, australia
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Couldn't agree with you more on the AVV issue.
These benefits that were voted in by Heavy Maint. a couple of EBA's ago, what were they?
When you say that base and line got no benefit from them did they go backwards in conditions?
Also if the numbers are the same as now, the majority of members were outside of heavy maint and as such the vote would have had to have been supported by the base and line members.
Where do you stand with the concept of protecting the conditions for future members?
Any Lame that I have spoken to from outside of heavy I have simply pointed out that in heavy maintenance there is strong feeling against the document and that that may not have been relayed accurately by some of our executives during their feedback meetings to other sections of Qantas.
These benefits that were voted in by Heavy Maint. a couple of EBA's ago, what were they?
When you say that base and line got no benefit from them did they go backwards in conditions?
Also if the numbers are the same as now, the majority of members were outside of heavy maint and as such the vote would have had to have been supported by the base and line members.
Where do you stand with the concept of protecting the conditions for future members?
Any Lame that I have spoken to from outside of heavy I have simply pointed out that in heavy maintenance there is strong feeling against the document and that that may not have been relayed accurately by some of our executives during their feedback meetings to other sections of Qantas.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that up until a few years ago the lame ratio was more to heavy maint. than it is now so that is how previous eba's were voted on.
Also I am not against protecting future lame interests, but in the same vain we have to make sure there will be lames to protect.
I see most of the points you guys are pushing but it seems the biggest one is with you elected delegates. You are fighting you so called representatives. you issue is with them not the rest of us.
Also I am not against protecting future lame interests, but in the same vain we have to make sure there will be lames to protect.
I see most of the points you guys are pushing but it seems the biggest one is with you elected delegates. You are fighting you so called representatives. you issue is with them not the rest of us.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
posted 8th June 2005 10:31
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CM
[/QUOTE] The tail payments was a request by heavy maintenance to allow for the future of heavy maintenance and probably your job.][/QUOTE]
We also wanted the EBA group to see if the QF could increase the size of the DILDO they are using to screw us with in H/m. This is about as believable as the above quote. CLARKE is not the rep for h/m lames.
You don't have a clue how much the current managment are setting back production in MEL h/m with their idiotic plans so as to be seen as earning their kpi money, it's bordering on criminal.
When it goes tits up though these morons will be gone and will get the blame if there's still a job.
? will EBA 8 have a lowering of tail payments for INTERNATIONAL line because i'm sure the H/M &DOM line lames would love to help save international line jobs if this EBA 7 gets up.
Yep its all going to plan / no division here
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CM
[/QUOTE] The tail payments was a request by heavy maintenance to allow for the future of heavy maintenance and probably your job.][/QUOTE]
We also wanted the EBA group to see if the QF could increase the size of the DILDO they are using to screw us with in H/m. This is about as believable as the above quote. CLARKE is not the rep for h/m lames.
You don't have a clue how much the current managment are setting back production in MEL h/m with their idiotic plans so as to be seen as earning their kpi money, it's bordering on criminal.
When it goes tits up though these morons will be gone and will get the blame if there's still a job.
? will EBA 8 have a lowering of tail payments for INTERNATIONAL line because i'm sure the H/M &DOM line lames would love to help save international line jobs if this EBA 7 gets up.
Yep its all going to plan / no division here
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: SYDNEY
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TURBO 5B,
HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN,
ON PREVIUOS EBA WHEN HEAVY VOTED FOR NEW STARTERS NOT TO GET DAYSHIFT PENALTIES...WHICH ONLY AFFECTED LINE!!!!
DIDN'T AFFECT HEAVY SO WHY DID THEY CARE.......
HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN,
ON PREVIUOS EBA WHEN HEAVY VOTED FOR NEW STARTERS NOT TO GET DAYSHIFT PENALTIES...WHICH ONLY AFFECTED LINE!!!!
DIDN'T AFFECT HEAVY SO WHY DID THEY CARE.......
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: London
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Screwed.
The company has basically won the fight over the EBA, the EBA that they were giving us 6 months ago was for 3% and now guess what its 3% with a few useless sweeteners which means nothing for the vast majority of people. But no matter, for it will be voted in as most people are tired and want the whole thing out of the way. But we have being very badly treated by both the company and the ALAEA, 3% is a step backwards. The company will of course cite various other airlines which are in dire straits etc etc but QF is actually making money, and thats money is due to the effoerts of the people who work there.
So what do you do to compensate yourself for this very poor go backwards EBA which our beloved Association has got for us. Well do what I have being doing for the past few years, Do nothing, rest up at work, sit back and smell the roses,
for you will need your energy for your second job. Yes, you will need that second job to pay the mortage and feed the kids because fixing aircraft for QF simply dosen't pay enough any more. So when you go to work in future don;t actually do any work, say its to hard, you don't understand the manual, the tools are loss, no parts, computers are down, there are heaps of excuses which I have used for years and now are yours. So in future to compensate for our go backwards EBA, go backwards in the work department and let some one else do it.
So what do you do to compensate yourself for this very poor go backwards EBA which our beloved Association has got for us. Well do what I have being doing for the past few years, Do nothing, rest up at work, sit back and smell the roses,
for you will need your energy for your second job. Yes, you will need that second job to pay the mortage and feed the kids because fixing aircraft for QF simply dosen't pay enough any more. So when you go to work in future don;t actually do any work, say its to hard, you don't understand the manual, the tools are loss, no parts, computers are down, there are heaps of excuses which I have used for years and now are yours. So in future to compensate for our go backwards EBA, go backwards in the work department and let some one else do it.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: sydney, australia
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TURBO 5BHOW DO YOU EXPLAINON PREVIUOS EBA WHEN HEAVY VOTED FOR NEW STARTERS NOT TO GET DAYSHIFT PENALTIES...WHICH ONLY AFFECTED LINE!!!!
At least when we sold out then we took thirty pieces of silver.(which incidentaly, that payrise is still enjoyed by the post 96 starters because it is built into their base rate unlike the 3 bonus points for eba 5 which new lames dont get)
This time there is no 30 pieces of silver in reward for selling out.
All there is is division.
And, as was the case 10 years ago if the executive recommended it it was usually accepted.
If you still have blind faith in them to recommend a package, then it is up to you to decide whether to listen to them or do a bit of research for yourself.
I suggest reading all of the eba's.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: sydney, australia
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that up until a few years ago the lame ratio was more to heavy maint. than it is now so that is how previous eba's were voted on.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Blue Mountains
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In all my time at Qantas, Heavy Maintenance LAME's have always been outnumbered by line and base.
Since the closure of line 3 and then 2, numbers in heavy have dropped away, leaving a greater ratio.
I think that we all need to look at it from a different angle.
Ever since EBA's came to be in Qantas, we have been conned to various degrees by many people at many levels. Even by those amongst us.
The company is not silly and they have had the upper hand the whole time, something that is not likely to change.
Remember the first couple, we were told 'Its a great deal, we get a pay rise and all we had to do was agree to talk about productivity improvements'.
Then once they had lured us into a false sense of security, slowly one by one they started to pick away.
EBA 3 (October 1996) I can remember being told at the mass meeting by the chair of the mass meeting, that the six o'clock start money thing was not an isssue because the company was not going to change the shifts anymore with the northern winter and there fore it was worth nothing to us anyway.
We know that the company had this man in their pocket, because shortly after he popped up fighting for the other side.
This was when I was an AME but that is how they play the game. There is one exec member, who is not very popular at all in Heavy, who is doing the same thing as we speak, what is his motivation ? maybe the opening up of the quota positions will see him go up a level and that will suit him fine when he takes the one of the redundancies that are about to be offered and his base is that little bit higher.
Nice golden handshake.
Everyone has their own reasons to vote the way that they do. The problem is that a lot of people are mislead. There needs to be better communication of the implications of any agreement that we negotiate. It needs first to be analised correctly by someone who knows what they are reading and then it needs to be explained to the members in detail, not washed over like this one was to me at my exec roadshow.
Some of the people doing the important jobs in this gig are not doing their homework, and I cannot emphasise how important homework is right now.
I hope that the current agreement is voted down so that we can sort out these issues now, but if not there is June 2006 and January 2007, to continue the fight.
We need to sort out our pile though, and quick.
Since the closure of line 3 and then 2, numbers in heavy have dropped away, leaving a greater ratio.
I think that we all need to look at it from a different angle.
Ever since EBA's came to be in Qantas, we have been conned to various degrees by many people at many levels. Even by those amongst us.
The company is not silly and they have had the upper hand the whole time, something that is not likely to change.
Remember the first couple, we were told 'Its a great deal, we get a pay rise and all we had to do was agree to talk about productivity improvements'.
Then once they had lured us into a false sense of security, slowly one by one they started to pick away.
EBA 3 (October 1996) I can remember being told at the mass meeting by the chair of the mass meeting, that the six o'clock start money thing was not an isssue because the company was not going to change the shifts anymore with the northern winter and there fore it was worth nothing to us anyway.
We know that the company had this man in their pocket, because shortly after he popped up fighting for the other side.
This was when I was an AME but that is how they play the game. There is one exec member, who is not very popular at all in Heavy, who is doing the same thing as we speak, what is his motivation ? maybe the opening up of the quota positions will see him go up a level and that will suit him fine when he takes the one of the redundancies that are about to be offered and his base is that little bit higher.
Nice golden handshake.
Everyone has their own reasons to vote the way that they do. The problem is that a lot of people are mislead. There needs to be better communication of the implications of any agreement that we negotiate. It needs first to be analised correctly by someone who knows what they are reading and then it needs to be explained to the members in detail, not washed over like this one was to me at my exec roadshow.
Some of the people doing the important jobs in this gig are not doing their homework, and I cannot emphasise how important homework is right now.
I hope that the current agreement is voted down so that we can sort out these issues now, but if not there is June 2006 and January 2007, to continue the fight.
We need to sort out our pile though, and quick.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some of the people doing the important jobs in this gig are not doing their homework, and I cannot emphasise how important homework is right now.
I'm concerned that they are doing there homework but they just aren't handing it in.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gone Sailing,
In all my time at Qantas, Heavy Maintenance LAME's have always been outnumbered by line and base.
Since the closure of line 3 and then 2, numbers in heavy have dropped away, leaving a greater ratio.
This comment is flawed because there has actually been an increase. Although line 2 & 3 were disbanded, all of the people in those areas were redeployed in line 1 or line 2 in Brisbane. Additionally there has been further employed in Brisbane. Don't forget that Heavy Maintenance covers Sydney, Bribane, Melbourne and Avalon. Avalon have also employed further people to fill the Qantas positions.
So in fact Heavy Maintenance has actually grown.
In all my time at Qantas, Heavy Maintenance LAME's have always been outnumbered by line and base.
Since the closure of line 3 and then 2, numbers in heavy have dropped away, leaving a greater ratio.
This comment is flawed because there has actually been an increase. Although line 2 & 3 were disbanded, all of the people in those areas were redeployed in line 1 or line 2 in Brisbane. Additionally there has been further employed in Brisbane. Don't forget that Heavy Maintenance covers Sydney, Bribane, Melbourne and Avalon. Avalon have also employed further people to fill the Qantas positions.
So in fact Heavy Maintenance has actually grown.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: sydney, australia
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crystal Marinara you've done it again.
A clear attempt to distort a simple fact.
If you weren't fronting the executive roadshows then maybe you should have, you could show them a thing or two on how to disguise the truth.
What you're saying is that there has been an increase in H/M staff levels, this is probably true. They are still outnumbered by line and base.
Therefore when H/M staff levels were lower they were still outnumbered by line and base.
It's not rocket science.
A clear attempt to distort a simple fact.
If you weren't fronting the executive roadshows then maybe you should have, you could show them a thing or two on how to disguise the truth.
What you're saying is that there has been an increase in H/M staff levels, this is probably true. They are still outnumbered by line and base.
Therefore when H/M staff levels were lower they were still outnumbered by line and base.
It's not rocket science.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was merely making a comment about this sentence.
Since the closure of line 3 and then 2, numbers in heavy have dropped away, leaving a greater ratio.
And I am correct in what I say!
Since the closure of line 3 and then 2, numbers in heavy have dropped away, leaving a greater ratio.
And I am correct in what I say!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turbo 5B,
I did but no one wants to hear the truth. He stated that because of the demise of line 2 and 3 that the numbers had dropped. I disagree with this point. This has not caused a drop in the numbers. But no one wants to hear this. The heavy Maintenance numbers have actually grown due to the demise of line 2 and 3.
Pull your head from the sand and smell the roses all of you.
The fact that you are overmanned in heavy maintenance is the big concern. The company can not sustain these numbers. Some of you may have to go.
You all whinge and complain about how hard done by you all are, but wait and see if they try and kick you out.
You will all whinge again.
I did but no one wants to hear the truth. He stated that because of the demise of line 2 and 3 that the numbers had dropped. I disagree with this point. This has not caused a drop in the numbers. But no one wants to hear this. The heavy Maintenance numbers have actually grown due to the demise of line 2 and 3.
Pull your head from the sand and smell the roses all of you.
The fact that you are overmanned in heavy maintenance is the big concern. The company can not sustain these numbers. Some of you may have to go.
You all whinge and complain about how hard done by you all are, but wait and see if they try and kick you out.
You will all whinge again.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: sydney, australia
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CM you've just done it again.
The debate was that Line and Base have always outnumbered H/M, and as such we have never had the power to vote in conditions that Line and Base didn't want themselves.
"The numbers have grown due to the demise of line 2 & 3"
Line 3 was a demise I'll grant you that, but line 2 got "relocated".
And they are still short of manpower to open up their second line when the hangar is ready. So some of us have to go maybe, but where that is we don't know.
And if the company wasn't intent on shipping all of our f*cking D checks down to AVV to be worked on by an ALAEA endorsed and set up labour hire centre Line 1 wouldn't appear to be overstaffed.
So pull your head out of your own @rse and smell the decay that you as an executive member have created by allowing the "overflow facility" to be the main maintenance facility.( A bl00dy high class one at that ..not)
And whats more if they are going to give some of us the boot the least we can do is to increase our base level so we get a better payout.
You arrogant PR!CK.
ps You are so far removed from the truth because of the little fantasy world of assumed power that you wouldn't recognise the truth if it jumped up and bit you on your stupid big fat @rse.
The debate was that Line and Base have always outnumbered H/M, and as such we have never had the power to vote in conditions that Line and Base didn't want themselves.
"The numbers have grown due to the demise of line 2 & 3"
Line 3 was a demise I'll grant you that, but line 2 got "relocated".
And they are still short of manpower to open up their second line when the hangar is ready. So some of us have to go maybe, but where that is we don't know.
And if the company wasn't intent on shipping all of our f*cking D checks down to AVV to be worked on by an ALAEA endorsed and set up labour hire centre Line 1 wouldn't appear to be overstaffed.
So pull your head out of your own @rse and smell the decay that you as an executive member have created by allowing the "overflow facility" to be the main maintenance facility.( A bl00dy high class one at that ..not)
And whats more if they are going to give some of us the boot the least we can do is to increase our base level so we get a better payout.
You arrogant PR!CK.
ps You are so far removed from the truth because of the little fantasy world of assumed power that you wouldn't recognise the truth if it jumped up and bit you on your stupid big fat @rse.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Orstraylia
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah Crystal,
your standard response when you obviously have been shown up and don't have anything smart to retort with!
Why don't you accept the fact that your opinion/ line of thought isn't necessarily the view of the members on the floor, inspite of what you and any other fellow exec members may think!
A good representative will LISTEN to the members.
your standard response when you obviously have been shown up and don't have anything smart to retort with!
Why don't you accept the fact that your opinion/ line of thought isn't necessarily the view of the members on the floor, inspite of what you and any other fellow exec members may think!
A good representative will LISTEN to the members.