Merged: Qantas Engineers Set to Strike
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hotdog
Sad but true, Some also call it "egalitarianism, which many think has made us the country we are today.
Now, when someone makes the following statement:
...it cannot be left unchallenged. So should it be criminal to refuse to voluntarily work on your days off? PAF, what kind of country do you want to live in exactly? Tsarist Russia? Pre-Civil War USA? We are not serfs or slaves to be horsewhipped if we don't work more than we agreed to in our contract of employment.
PAF, you're air force. Thank you for defending my right to free speech and the laws of our land, under which thankfully, we can both say as we please within reason and I can refuse to work on my days off and not be a criminal.
While I may disagree with your sentiments I do not think you should be cast as a criminal for expressing them. I would request the same from you.
Now, when someone makes the following statement:
You may not like the conditions you work under, however punishing random people in society (in an attempt to punish your CEO) should really be criminal.
PAF, you're air force. Thank you for defending my right to free speech and the laws of our land, under which thankfully, we can both say as we please within reason and I can refuse to work on my days off and not be a criminal.
While I may disagree with your sentiments I do not think you should be cast as a criminal for expressing them. I would request the same from you.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'ultralights' sadly it's shaping up to be that way. But if they (engineers ) all walked for good that might very well do the trick but the aftermath of it would have lingering effects for many years to come. (see WW3 aca 1989).
CW
CW
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DAF
no need to walk for good ,it looks like the OT bans are already starting to bite hard,give it a few more weeks,then a 2day stoppage should just about do it
You know the old saying boys - "Dreams are Free":
You know the old saying boys - "Dreams are Free":
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: melbourne
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keep up the overtime bans indefinately until Dicko is ousted by the rest of the board. All we want is whats fair Geoff. 3% is below inflation.
..QF DAY 1
...QF DAY 2
....QF DAY 3
.....QF DAY 4
......QF DAY 5
.......QF DAY 6
........QF DAY 7
.........QF DAY 8
..........QF DAY 9
...........QF DAY 10
....... = Delays
Notice a pattern here Geoff, the red stonewall is QF engineers. Every aircraft you try and get passed us just gets blocked by defect after defect. God bless the "PPM"
Oh yeah, in case you didn't work it out,notice the delays getting longer and longer and longer.
PS
....................................................... ..................................QF
CITY HOTELS RUBBING THIER HANDS $$$$$$$$$$$$$$
..QF DAY 1...QF DAY 2....QF DAY 3.....QF DAY 4......QF DAY 5.......QF DAY 6........QF DAY 7.........QF DAY 8..........QF DAY 9...........QF DAY 10....... = Delays
Notice a pattern here Geoff, the red stonewall is QF engineers. Every aircraft you try and get passed us just gets blocked by defect after defect. God bless the "PPM"
Oh yeah, in case you didn't work it out,notice the delays getting longer and longer and longer.
PS
....................................................... ..................................QFCITY HOTELS RUBBING THIER HANDS $$$$$$$$$$$$$$
PAF how do you propose Qs Engineers solve their pay and condition issue then?
From what I can see negotiations with the company are at a standstill as Q does not wish to pay more then 3%, and the engineers want more (fair call from my perspective). They have given Q plenty of warning that the stop work and lack of overtime where going to happen and yet Q did nothing. As far as inconveniencing the public, the public have been condoning the underpayment of engineers by purchasing Q tickets. It is now biting them back and if they have issues with this then they should be prepared to pay more for their tickets to cover the TRUE cost of flying in safe and well maintained aircraft.
As far as being illegal it is up to the government of the time to set the law, and they have set out that these stop work meetings are legal.
From what I can see negotiations with the company are at a standstill as Q does not wish to pay more then 3%, and the engineers want more (fair call from my perspective). They have given Q plenty of warning that the stop work and lack of overtime where going to happen and yet Q did nothing. As far as inconveniencing the public, the public have been condoning the underpayment of engineers by purchasing Q tickets. It is now biting them back and if they have issues with this then they should be prepared to pay more for their tickets to cover the TRUE cost of flying in safe and well maintained aircraft.
As far as being illegal it is up to the government of the time to set the law, and they have set out that these stop work meetings are legal.
If all the engineers quit for greener pastures then I think you would find that the effect would be slightly more inconvenient for the public then just striking. The last time the aviation group had a mass walk out the government was called into fix the problem…. You never know PAF, you may get called into work on the Qs aircraft to keep the country running. 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so where does the delays caused by lack of staff come into the "i dont condone action that effects the traveling public" equation?
its not ok for striking staff to cause inconvenience, but its perfectly fine for management and execs to cause inconvenience through delays caused by no investment in equipment, maint or staff?
its not ok for striking staff to cause inconvenience, but its perfectly fine for management and execs to cause inconvenience through delays caused by no investment in equipment, maint or staff?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Up left - Down right
Posts: 946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ultralights, you have summed the situation up very short & to the point.
For the past 5 years the public have been increasingly inconvenienced
by poor & worsening departure times, delays and cancellation even though
there has been unlimited amounts of overtime & people there working it.
It has not been created by LAMEs but by the company, it is just worse
now because we have burned out by over working but enough is enough.
If QF wants us to go back to doing ridiculous amounts of overtime they
had better reward us with some of the spoils we have made for the
company ie 5%. It has not been made for the GREEDY few at the top. It is
to share amoung ALL the staff that make it happen (and I mean not just LAMEs)
For the past 5 years the public have been increasingly inconvenienced
by poor & worsening departure times, delays and cancellation even though
there has been unlimited amounts of overtime & people there working it.
It has not been created by LAMEs but by the company, it is just worse
now because we have burned out by over working but enough is enough.
If QF wants us to go back to doing ridiculous amounts of overtime they
had better reward us with some of the spoils we have made for the
company ie 5%. It has not been made for the GREEDY few at the top. It is
to share amoung ALL the staff that make it happen (and I mean not just LAMEs)
PAF continues to produce exactly the same flawed argument over and over again:
You always conveniently forget to reverse your own argument and apply/impose the same requirements on management that you prescribe for unions..
The Management of Qantas has no compunction whatsoever about "harming the General Public", whether by industrial dispute or normal operational practice. Nor do they engage in the "ethical decision making practice" you wish to foist on Unions.
Qantas, even without industrial action, cancels flights at will "harming the general public" in the process. In fact CASA neatly sidestepped one of the requirements of an RPT licence for both Ansett and Qantas around 1979 - by specifically allowing "yield management" (cancellation of under loaded flights), which in theory is not allowed by the terms of the licence which requires airlines to operate to schedule.
You even have the CEO of Qantas, Geoff Dixon, reiterating that his one duty is to Qantas Shareholders, no mention of a duty to the general public there.
Qantas saw this dispute coming. They were warned, they were pleaded with, yet they still did nothing to avoid it, even foregoing the opportunity of further meetings and negotiations. They have deliberately and coldly f**ed the LAMES around for Eighteen months. That's not "ethical" under your prescription.
As for your nonsensical suggestion that people just walk and find a new job, that's just stupid in the short term. In economic terms its a lose/lose situation. Qantas has to incur costs for recruitment, selection and training, then incurs further costs as its new staff start at the top of "the learning curve" and have to work their way down to reach peak efficiency (you are aware of learning curves I take it?). Similar costs obtain for the employee who leaves.
The obvious solution then, in Frozo land, since no one wants the public to be harmed by strike action and mass resignations are damaging to both company and employee, is to appoint an independent arbitrator whose decisions are binding on all parties.............
.....Oh wait! ..........We had that!
My problem is the ethics behind the decision to harm the general public by the Engineer's union. I have a problem with how you are dealing with your problem!
You may make arguments that management have done the wrong thing by you, but an ethical decision making process doesn't support your decision to harm others in your attempt to harm management.
You may make arguments that management have done the wrong thing by you, but an ethical decision making process doesn't support your decision to harm others in your attempt to harm management.
The Management of Qantas has no compunction whatsoever about "harming the General Public", whether by industrial dispute or normal operational practice. Nor do they engage in the "ethical decision making practice" you wish to foist on Unions.
Qantas, even without industrial action, cancels flights at will "harming the general public" in the process. In fact CASA neatly sidestepped one of the requirements of an RPT licence for both Ansett and Qantas around 1979 - by specifically allowing "yield management" (cancellation of under loaded flights), which in theory is not allowed by the terms of the licence which requires airlines to operate to schedule.
You even have the CEO of Qantas, Geoff Dixon, reiterating that his one duty is to Qantas Shareholders, no mention of a duty to the general public there.
Qantas saw this dispute coming. They were warned, they were pleaded with, yet they still did nothing to avoid it, even foregoing the opportunity of further meetings and negotiations. They have deliberately and coldly f**ed the LAMES around for Eighteen months. That's not "ethical" under your prescription.
As for your nonsensical suggestion that people just walk and find a new job, that's just stupid in the short term. In economic terms its a lose/lose situation. Qantas has to incur costs for recruitment, selection and training, then incurs further costs as its new staff start at the top of "the learning curve" and have to work their way down to reach peak efficiency (you are aware of learning curves I take it?). Similar costs obtain for the employee who leaves.
The obvious solution then, in Frozo land, since no one wants the public to be harmed by strike action and mass resignations are damaging to both company and employee, is to appoint an independent arbitrator whose decisions are binding on all parties.............
.....Oh wait! ..........We had that!
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Find a better paying job. Apparently there is a skills crisis? In this thread people have argued that that QF engineer's are poorly paid and ill-treated. If that's the case then apply for jobs in other companies. If you don't wish to change companies or work locations then you have made a financial decision not to do so. QANTAS are not a monopsony.
Further, I want what I was promised. Simple. That is, to be "looked after when times are good" in return for the sacrifices - both financial and non-financial - I made for QF.
I agree, it is unfortunate that a four hour stop work meeting will inconvenience passengers. But please keep in mind that we offered to have a one hour information meeting with skeleton crews to maintain the operation. GD refused. Does that refusal constitute the legal obligation to negotiate in good faith? Is that showing goodwill to the passengers? Granted, innocents will suffer. C'est la guerre. Collateral damage is a fact of life. But we didn't trigger the 4 hour stop work meeting. And as GD says, the disruptions were minimal because we gave three days notice. The schedule was amended as necessary to produce the minimal delays. The real delays are being caused by a lack of manpower.
I know what you're thinking: "why did you need an information meeting? Wont emailed notices suffice?" Well, I guess you had to be at the meeting to understand the importance of dialogue.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: utopia
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In reality ,the majority of Mr Joe Publics wouldnt even know whats going on apart from reading odd bits that flights are delayed because of engineers wanting a pay rise---events that always look bad for unions.
Maybe a bit costly ,but why not put half page adds in the major newspapers,explaining the reasons for actions.
excellent safety record due to a qualified team of workers
offshore work coming back faulty
Dixons record bonuses ,pay rises etc
the 3% offer behind inflation.
Qantas,s record profits
The threat of bringing scabs in at much higher rates of pay
etc,etc,etc
"are we really inconsiderate to keep you flying safely"
Maybe a bit costly ,but why not put half page adds in the major newspapers,explaining the reasons for actions.
excellent safety record due to a qualified team of workers
offshore work coming back faulty
Dixons record bonuses ,pay rises etc
the 3% offer behind inflation.
Qantas,s record profits
The threat of bringing scabs in at much higher rates of pay
etc,etc,etc
"are we really inconsiderate to keep you flying safely"
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: sydney
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
P-A-F
I have read your posts for a while now and all I can say is that you are an ill advised MORON. Until this EBA affects you and your family personally pull your head in, you seem to be the lowest common denominator.
I have read your posts for a while now and all I can say is that you are an ill advised MORON. Until this EBA affects you and your family personally pull your head in, you seem to be the lowest common denominator.