MAM & Dom/Reg FAAA
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Melbourne, oz
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hope I can help here with some info regarding the sharing of office space between MAM and the FAAA. as there are some historical reasons behind it.
It goes back to the days when Ansett employed casuals. It was to facilitate the quite groundbreaking ( at the time ) roster system of being able to dump hours down to 85 per month. This system , whereby the most junior got first pick at the dumped work ( Ie reverse order of seniority) , was seen as a good thing due to the stagnation of seniority . At the time there was beginning to be a bit of a revolt amongst some junior people regarding the seniority system , and I know of one or two who were prepared to take it to industrial courts.The company would have probably loved this.
The difference between the Ansett casual agreement ,and what I understand is the current Q.F, one is that , at ansett, the union had the say on the levels of casual employees , NOT the company. Any further deployment of casual labour had to be agreed to by the association.
Thus , it was a good arrangement for the FAAA to lease out office space to Maurice. The domestic branch of the FAAA was not in terribly good shape financially , so it was also a win for them.
Maurice was Industrial Officer for the FAAA when I joined in 1981.
I believe any collusion theories re the FAAA and MAM are unfounded.
Collusion theories between MAM and Q.F management however may be a different kettle of fish.
Apologies for any typos, I've just come off a 14 hour nightshift.
It goes back to the days when Ansett employed casuals. It was to facilitate the quite groundbreaking ( at the time ) roster system of being able to dump hours down to 85 per month. This system , whereby the most junior got first pick at the dumped work ( Ie reverse order of seniority) , was seen as a good thing due to the stagnation of seniority . At the time there was beginning to be a bit of a revolt amongst some junior people regarding the seniority system , and I know of one or two who were prepared to take it to industrial courts.The company would have probably loved this.
The difference between the Ansett casual agreement ,and what I understand is the current Q.F, one is that , at ansett, the union had the say on the levels of casual employees , NOT the company. Any further deployment of casual labour had to be agreed to by the association.
Thus , it was a good arrangement for the FAAA to lease out office space to Maurice. The domestic branch of the FAAA was not in terribly good shape financially , so it was also a win for them.
Maurice was Industrial Officer for the FAAA when I joined in 1981.
I believe any collusion theories re the FAAA and MAM are unfounded.
Collusion theories between MAM and Q.F management however may be a different kettle of fish.
Apologies for any typos, I've just come off a 14 hour nightshift.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: cancun
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, so like he was there before 2003? Because like when did Ansett finish? Thats hot, coz like MAM was so not in the FAAA office in 2003 according to BRW 10/7/03:
"Qantas also called in casual flight attendants from the labor-hire company...(MAM) to help breal the strike. ... a former union official... He runs his business from a residential address in Hawthorne East, Melbourne."
So hot, coz like I found that in pprune.org archive.
So like man, they could be in cahoots could they? I mean like MAM and FAAA(domestic). And like FAAA(domestic) didn't want L/H flying?
So hot right now..........
"Qantas also called in casual flight attendants from the labor-hire company...(MAM) to help breal the strike. ... a former union official... He runs his business from a residential address in Hawthorne East, Melbourne."
So hot, coz like I found that in pprune.org archive.
So like man, they could be in cahoots could they? I mean like MAM and FAAA(domestic). And like FAAA(domestic) didn't want L/H flying?
So hot right now..........
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Priapism..
I understand what you are saying and I know that there are union offiicials who are serious in wanting to represent and protect their members jobs and conditions.
However.....We have here a former union official who has decided to supply cheap labour to the airlines and thus effectively lower and devalue the jobs and conditions of existing permanent cabin crew.
That in real terms is the opposite of what unions are there for.
Now you would think that the union would not want to be seen in the same street with someone who is doing that but not only that if the rumour is true they are sharing the same office...
There are some problems with association whether real or inferred as Kevin Rudd will tell you all about..
Cart if you are going to have any input either way include some reasoning instead of dismissing others views as being silly.
I understand what you are saying and I know that there are union offiicials who are serious in wanting to represent and protect their members jobs and conditions.
However.....We have here a former union official who has decided to supply cheap labour to the airlines and thus effectively lower and devalue the jobs and conditions of existing permanent cabin crew.
That in real terms is the opposite of what unions are there for.
Now you would think that the union would not want to be seen in the same street with someone who is doing that but not only that if the rumour is true they are sharing the same office...
There are some problems with association whether real or inferred as Kevin Rudd will tell you all about..
Cart if you are going to have any input either way include some reasoning instead of dismissing others views as being silly.
Last edited by lowerlobe; 10th Apr 2007 at 22:08. Reason: spelling ..
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Aus
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
John Howard's Liberal Government
For memory Maurice Alexander left the Faaa in the mid 1990's. He went to another company before setting up his own to supply Ansett. Casusal started at Qantas about January 2000. The John Howard Liberal Government bought in casualisation in the workplace, and Work Choices has meant there is no limit to the number of casuals employed in any industry. Something like 27% of all workers in Australia are now casuals. Maybe we need a change of government and a change to the Work Choices legislation.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: In a box, ready for shipping...
Posts: 717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lowerlobe...
Understand your point, but...
That's right - FORMER. He wasn't with the FAAA when he started MAM, and hasn't been affiliated with them (as a union official) since.
Therefore - as he is not part of the union, at what point should he exist to serve the NEEDS of union members? Ethics and morals don't come into it - it's all a question of relationships. At the FAAA, his clients were the members. At MAM, his client is Qantas.
It's an interesting thought that a former official of any union has an obligation to serve the best interests of ANY unions' members once they leave. BBBZZZZT - wrong. Whilst it would be nice for that to occur, they wouldn't last very long in this airline age of mis-management.
You could make this argument about any number of FORMER FAAA officials who left to either work for the airlines as management, or in MA's case, start up a company that - however you view it - prevents crew from shaping permanent, solid careers from their flying jobs.
Unfortunately, MA wasn't the first - and he certainly won't be the last.
Understand your point, but...
"However.....We have here a former union official who has decided to supply cheap labour to the airlines and thus effectively lower and devalue the jobs and conditions of existing permanent cabin crew.
That in real terms is the opposite of what unions are there for."
That in real terms is the opposite of what unions are there for."
Therefore - as he is not part of the union, at what point should he exist to serve the NEEDS of union members? Ethics and morals don't come into it - it's all a question of relationships. At the FAAA, his clients were the members. At MAM, his client is Qantas.
It's an interesting thought that a former official of any union has an obligation to serve the best interests of ANY unions' members once they leave. BBBZZZZT - wrong. Whilst it would be nice for that to occur, they wouldn't last very long in this airline age of mis-management.
You could make this argument about any number of FORMER FAAA officials who left to either work for the airlines as management, or in MA's case, start up a company that - however you view it - prevents crew from shaping permanent, solid careers from their flying jobs.
Unfortunately, MA wasn't the first - and he certainly won't be the last.
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Seatback 2..I think you may of misunderstood my point.I did not mean that because he was once a union official that he should for the rest of his business life protect union members jobs and conditions.
What I meant was that if you have someone that would run or apply for a union position you would imagine that they would have sympathies in that direction.
Imagine if say Peter Costello were to leave the Liberal party and join the Labour party.Do you think the Libs would have anything to do or want to share office space with him anymore?
What I meant was that if you have someone that would run or apply for a union position you would imagine that they would have sympathies in that direction.
Imagine if say Peter Costello were to leave the Liberal party and join the Labour party.Do you think the Libs would have anything to do or want to share office space with him anymore?
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Seatback 2......No probs...It is a funny world out there.
Just to prove what it is like through the introduction of cheap casual labour ,we have just been told by QF that there is another redundancy package.This is the second year in a row where they want to get rid of permanent Australian crew.
They are hiring cheap crew in AKL,LHR and probably BKK as well.
So much for the Spirit of Australia....
Just to prove what it is like through the introduction of cheap casual labour ,we have just been told by QF that there is another redundancy package.This is the second year in a row where they want to get rid of permanent Australian crew.
They are hiring cheap crew in AKL,LHR and probably BKK as well.
So much for the Spirit of Australia....
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: cancun
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well if MAM is in bed with FAAA and the FAAA is in bed with QF, 6degrees of separation would suggest eventually. Everyone has a price, look at LR in Zoo, after a 6 pack - how fine.
its not a question MA doing the right thing as he was a union rep. its the union doing the right thing by its permanent staff. and the casuals. anyone in S/H happy with the current climate. VR in s/h too.
its not a question MA doing the right thing as he was a union rep. its the union doing the right thing by its permanent staff. and the casuals. anyone in S/H happy with the current climate. VR in s/h too.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cairns QLD
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MAM
Clarrie!
Are you still up......have another red!!
Can you believe that this exceptionally brilliant managerial type is still in a position that entails actually trying...sorry attempting to look after people? And supplying Companies that he once worked for? Hang on did I say Work???? ok appeared for. What an oxygen thief this person is!!! To anyone that wants to apply for a job with this Company....have a good look at where its been. There is no need surely to actually use them is there?
Are you still up......have another red!!
Can you believe that this exceptionally brilliant managerial type is still in a position that entails actually trying...sorry attempting to look after people? And supplying Companies that he once worked for? Hang on did I say Work???? ok appeared for. What an oxygen thief this person is!!! To anyone that wants to apply for a job with this Company....have a good look at where its been. There is no need surely to actually use them is there?
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After reading galleyslag's post I have this nauseous concept of maurie,Darth,LG and others in this one big bed....talk about a nightmare !!!
Talking about everyone having a price...Someone once told me that when Darth was interviewed about his political leanings he replied "I was born and raised a Labour man and I am still a labour man....I just have to forget that when I go to work".....If that is true then some of us do indeed have a price...
Talking about everyone having a price...Someone once told me that when Darth was interviewed about his political leanings he replied "I was born and raised a Labour man and I am still a labour man....I just have to forget that when I go to work".....If that is true then some of us do indeed have a price...
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: syd/aust
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i do understand that the moderators fly but,just in case they have not viewed my previous post..........why was all this info removed from cabin crew section of pprune from where it was started???????? thanks gigs
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Herre is an excerpt from a L/H FAAA newsletter...
"We have also contacted the FAAA Domestic Regional Division with a desire to have a joint position in relation to the protection of full time jobs and an appropriate balance between full time and casual employment in the light of the divisional flying agreement.
At this stage we have not been contacted by the FAAA Domestic Regional Division to confirm their availability to be part of those discussions"
You would think with VR in both L/H and S/H that the domestic FAAA would be in contact with their L/H counterparts wouldn't you?
"We have also contacted the FAAA Domestic Regional Division with a desire to have a joint position in relation to the protection of full time jobs and an appropriate balance between full time and casual employment in the light of the divisional flying agreement.
At this stage we have not been contacted by the FAAA Domestic Regional Division to confirm their availability to be part of those discussions"
You would think with VR in both L/H and S/H that the domestic FAAA would be in contact with their L/H counterparts wouldn't you?
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: MEL
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lowerlobe
if you have a look at both faaa divisions websites there has been a bit of bitch slapping going on between the two about the vr and casuals. first lh bitch about the casuals and overseas bases, then sh say its not as simple as saying the casual's fault then lh come back out and say we love casuals and wouldn't critize them oh and by the way sh won't talk to us......... pathetic really.
i do have to agree with a previous post though, its not like anyone can stop or even restrict qf putting on all the casuals or sending work o/s for that matter, so blaming anyone other than our johnny is just infantile.
if you have a look at both faaa divisions websites there has been a bit of bitch slapping going on between the two about the vr and casuals. first lh bitch about the casuals and overseas bases, then sh say its not as simple as saying the casual's fault then lh come back out and say we love casuals and wouldn't critize them oh and by the way sh won't talk to us......... pathetic really.
i do have to agree with a previous post though, its not like anyone can stop or even restrict qf putting on all the casuals or sending work o/s for that matter, so blaming anyone other than our johnny is just infantile.