Merged: ASA Staff Shortage
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the gloves are off, then it's about time we started using stronger language and statements in the media.
Rob Mason's media rebuttal was logical, measured and 100% correct.
But will the media publish it? You know the answer.
In addition to Rob's release, we should issue short, sharp statements with strong catch-words. TFN called us shirkers and renegades.
He took his gloves off, it's time we did the same.
Rob Mason's media rebuttal was logical, measured and 100% correct.
But will the media publish it? You know the answer.
In addition to Rob's release, we should issue short, sharp statements with strong catch-words. TFN called us shirkers and renegades.
He took his gloves off, it's time we did the same.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On another thread undervaluedATC stated (and I was going to post this there, but it had nothing to do with that thread)
"And apparently it would cost less than $1 per ticket per passenger per year to give ATCs everything they asked for in the Vision document. But AsA hide behind the excuse that the ACCC would not let them pass that cost on. Which brings up the point of just how useless our negotiations are when AsA sets the revenue charge 5 years in advance after consulting with industry but not their employees. "
uvATC
I think we'll find that this is a rare alignment of the planets where that five year cycle of pricing occurs after a CA could have been signed. In other words, ASA could have factored additional staff costs into the pricing equation.
Do not be misled, ASA will use ANY excuse, or pretence, NOT to recompense their 'non-management' staff. Remember when the Oil price was high, and they put the daily fuel price on the front page of the Avnet. This was to condition staff to the 'doom and gloom' to once again temper any expectation of a meaningful pay increase in line with record Airways Activity and a decline in controllers. It is ironic that the ALM 'management industry standard', no trade-off in conditions, 4.3 % payrise was delivered as the Barrel price was pushing well above US$120 per barrel. This only twelve months after their jobs were revalued, as they were now managers and no longer controlled aircraft (Welcome to TIBA!) , and got payrises of 25-90%, car allowances,etc.
I honestly believe ASA don't really care either way about sick leave as required, but are finding it as a great sticking point to delay the CA. JH(GM ATC) has come out on the internal discussion forum in the last few days and stated that ATC sick leave over the last 17 YEARS has averaged 9 days.
A far cry from what the Spin Doctors in Canberra have been feeding a malleable and unimaginative Press for the last 12 months.
Also from GM ATC, total cost of ATCs (including Superannuation, LSL,etc even a % of the Gym FFS,) was $180 million last FY.
A 7% p.a. payrise, not touching any conditions, would cost in the order of $13-14 million dollars first year ( less than they 'officially' blew on GRAS) and rising correspondingly more in years 2 and 3. Quite a bit less than a $1 a passenger.
Every BS reason that ASA can find to delay signing is roughly $250k+ a week to ASAs bottom line. ASAs time-wasting negotiating team have already delivered ASA over $1.25million+ . Remember, under the Government Bargaining Framework (GBF) controllers are not allowed backpay. Wonderful thing the GBF, it applies to ASA staff but not to managers. I would love to see some of these people that we are paying an absolute Motza, to get the best of course, go out on the open market now and try to pull the kind of dollars ASA are paying them.
In regards to any industrial action, these costs will be borne by the airlines, and the travelling public. The airlines will still have to get the passengers home (or the poor punters on the cheap tickets may have to get themselves home), ASA won't miss out on their Airways charges, and the controllers will still have to move the aircraft, even if somewhat delayed.
Just like after WX delays,system failures, etc it will be left to Airline Schedulers, pilots, CC, engineers, ground handlers, refuellers, controllers and the rest of the great unwashed who aren't deemed worthy of any decent recompense, to put Humpty Dumpty together again, and make sure the travelling public somehow get home.
The Government Bargaining Framework encourages, and actually rewards, ASA management NOT to bargain in good faith. The only stakeholder that doesn't get hurt by industrial action is actually ASAs management. Industrial action delays the public, costs the airline, inconveniences other Aviation workers, and costs controllers money.
The money ASA management 'save' by delaying signing goes straight to the bottom line, and no prizes for guessing who profits from this in our bonus driven culture.
The only way to get these self-centred individuals to NOT inconvenience everyone but themselves, is to NOT reward them for NOT negotiating. I would be happy for the AIRC to put a value on the money that ASA have 'saved' and they can give it to the RFDS or other worthy recipient (no qualifying for a tax write-off either, ASA can lose that entitlement for being pig-headed). Controllers wouldn't get it,this would show that we are not prolonging the process knowing that we would get it in backpay anyway. This way BOTH parties would have to bargain in good faith, a far cry from what ASA have done in the past and now.
"And apparently it would cost less than $1 per ticket per passenger per year to give ATCs everything they asked for in the Vision document. But AsA hide behind the excuse that the ACCC would not let them pass that cost on. Which brings up the point of just how useless our negotiations are when AsA sets the revenue charge 5 years in advance after consulting with industry but not their employees. "
uvATC
I think we'll find that this is a rare alignment of the planets where that five year cycle of pricing occurs after a CA could have been signed. In other words, ASA could have factored additional staff costs into the pricing equation.
Do not be misled, ASA will use ANY excuse, or pretence, NOT to recompense their 'non-management' staff. Remember when the Oil price was high, and they put the daily fuel price on the front page of the Avnet. This was to condition staff to the 'doom and gloom' to once again temper any expectation of a meaningful pay increase in line with record Airways Activity and a decline in controllers. It is ironic that the ALM 'management industry standard', no trade-off in conditions, 4.3 % payrise was delivered as the Barrel price was pushing well above US$120 per barrel. This only twelve months after their jobs were revalued, as they were now managers and no longer controlled aircraft (Welcome to TIBA!) , and got payrises of 25-90%, car allowances,etc.
I honestly believe ASA don't really care either way about sick leave as required, but are finding it as a great sticking point to delay the CA. JH(GM ATC) has come out on the internal discussion forum in the last few days and stated that ATC sick leave over the last 17 YEARS has averaged 9 days.
A far cry from what the Spin Doctors in Canberra have been feeding a malleable and unimaginative Press for the last 12 months.
Also from GM ATC, total cost of ATCs (including Superannuation, LSL,etc even a % of the Gym FFS,) was $180 million last FY.
A 7% p.a. payrise, not touching any conditions, would cost in the order of $13-14 million dollars first year ( less than they 'officially' blew on GRAS) and rising correspondingly more in years 2 and 3. Quite a bit less than a $1 a passenger.
Every BS reason that ASA can find to delay signing is roughly $250k+ a week to ASAs bottom line. ASAs time-wasting negotiating team have already delivered ASA over $1.25million+ . Remember, under the Government Bargaining Framework (GBF) controllers are not allowed backpay. Wonderful thing the GBF, it applies to ASA staff but not to managers. I would love to see some of these people that we are paying an absolute Motza, to get the best of course, go out on the open market now and try to pull the kind of dollars ASA are paying them.
In regards to any industrial action, these costs will be borne by the airlines, and the travelling public. The airlines will still have to get the passengers home (or the poor punters on the cheap tickets may have to get themselves home), ASA won't miss out on their Airways charges, and the controllers will still have to move the aircraft, even if somewhat delayed.
Just like after WX delays,system failures, etc it will be left to Airline Schedulers, pilots, CC, engineers, ground handlers, refuellers, controllers and the rest of the great unwashed who aren't deemed worthy of any decent recompense, to put Humpty Dumpty together again, and make sure the travelling public somehow get home.
The Government Bargaining Framework encourages, and actually rewards, ASA management NOT to bargain in good faith. The only stakeholder that doesn't get hurt by industrial action is actually ASAs management. Industrial action delays the public, costs the airline, inconveniences other Aviation workers, and costs controllers money.
The money ASA management 'save' by delaying signing goes straight to the bottom line, and no prizes for guessing who profits from this in our bonus driven culture.
The only way to get these self-centred individuals to NOT inconvenience everyone but themselves, is to NOT reward them for NOT negotiating. I would be happy for the AIRC to put a value on the money that ASA have 'saved' and they can give it to the RFDS or other worthy recipient (no qualifying for a tax write-off either, ASA can lose that entitlement for being pig-headed). Controllers wouldn't get it,this would show that we are not prolonging the process knowing that we would get it in backpay anyway. This way BOTH parties would have to bargain in good faith, a far cry from what ASA have done in the past and now.
Last edited by max1; 31st Jan 2009 at 10:38.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Melbourne
Age: 61
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the certifiedshafting blog;
I heard the other day that the Australian Union team agreed to take a per game pay cut on the condition that the executives no longer fly first class. I came to thinking that Airservices should show a similar restraint in executive spending before ****ting over its employees.
Suggested measures include:
- Stop flying Greg and his wife first class on Airservices money. Its a joke.
- Stop using Airservices money to buy corporate boxes at sporting events.
- Make all GMs fly economy for flights less than three hours.
- Stop having executive love in weekends where executive spouses are invited.
- Stop paying executives and third level managers thousands of dollars in bonuses when they haven't achieved anything.
- Stop wasting money on consultants who have no long term incentive to see Airservices work better but every short term incentive to tell greg what ever he wants.
- Stop Mr Mueller from writing long incomprehensible letters and consultation clauses that you then need to pay lawyers to review (because no one else can work out what the F@#k they mean).
- Take executive pay back to the equivalent public service rate - that is... some one in charge of HR in much larger departments would be an SES 1 - that is about $150k total package. In fact our organisation is no larger than many departments who are run by an SES 3 on around $300k. I would guess that greg gets paid far in excess to do such a **** job.
Oh - and I should mention (in addition to the previous comment) that all third level managers and above are entitled to leave as required at their managers discretion. So all of you wankers preaching about the absurdity of unlimited sick leave for an industry that has such strict medical conditions should turn a firm glare onto the dickheads that are running the place that have the same entitlement in reality.
I heard the other day that the Australian Union team agreed to take a per game pay cut on the condition that the executives no longer fly first class. I came to thinking that Airservices should show a similar restraint in executive spending before ****ting over its employees.
Suggested measures include:
- Stop flying Greg and his wife first class on Airservices money. Its a joke.
- Stop using Airservices money to buy corporate boxes at sporting events.
- Make all GMs fly economy for flights less than three hours.
- Stop having executive love in weekends where executive spouses are invited.
- Stop paying executives and third level managers thousands of dollars in bonuses when they haven't achieved anything.
- Stop wasting money on consultants who have no long term incentive to see Airservices work better but every short term incentive to tell greg what ever he wants.
- Stop Mr Mueller from writing long incomprehensible letters and consultation clauses that you then need to pay lawyers to review (because no one else can work out what the F@#k they mean).
- Take executive pay back to the equivalent public service rate - that is... some one in charge of HR in much larger departments would be an SES 1 - that is about $150k total package. In fact our organisation is no larger than many departments who are run by an SES 3 on around $300k. I would guess that greg gets paid far in excess to do such a **** job.
Oh - and I should mention (in addition to the previous comment) that all third level managers and above are entitled to leave as required at their managers discretion. So all of you wankers preaching about the absurdity of unlimited sick leave for an industry that has such strict medical conditions should turn a firm glare onto the dickheads that are running the place that have the same entitlement in reality.
malleable and unimaginative Press
The National Aviation Press Club Awards.
Major award presented by Mr. Richard Dudley, (General Manager - blah, blah) from Airservices Australia (one of the event sponsors!).
no journalistic conflict of interest there ....
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Kyeemagh
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the gloves are off, then it's about time we started using stronger language and statements in the media.
Rob Mason's media rebuttal was logical, measured and 100% correct.
But will the media publish it? You know the answer.
In addition to Rob's release, we should issue short, sharp statements with strong catch-words. TFN called us shirkers and renegades.
He took his gloves off, it's time we did the same.
Rob Mason's media rebuttal was logical, measured and 100% correct.
But will the media publish it? You know the answer.
In addition to Rob's release, we should issue short, sharp statements with strong catch-words. TFN called us shirkers and renegades.
He took his gloves off, it's time we did the same.
"one of our biggest problems is recruiting good people ... Without proper pay, there was a risk only "clowns", "losers", "screwballs" and "halfwits" would want to apply ... We need highly professional, highly skilled people ... If you're going to squeeze their pay you can't get them."
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane
Age: 66
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G/day all
Well I have been following this thread for some time, and fully support you controllers out there in your struggle with a Management team that could not manage a good s&^t even with a dose of the “runs”.
Back in the good old days of DCA, my dad was an ATC on a relief team, (from 1957-1968 X navy radio operator tele). As a child I remember moving from town to town, as dad got transferred from tower to tower,(Coffs harbour, Darwin, Tennant Creek, Alice Springs, Adielade, Sydney,Canberra,Back to Sydney ,ECT)
It was a great life as a kid. I also remember that we were quite well off compared to other families at the time, We went away camping and prospecting , fishing ect, every other weekend there was always plenty of time for the family.
I have been a PPl for about 20 years, (Now 51years old) and am in the process of completing my CPL. I would love to be an ATC as would my youngest son but ATM I net 70K and work 2weeks on and 1 week of. I work in the Transport industry. My son earns more that the training wage as a motor mechanic (he too is a pilot).
I cannot afford to drop over 40K net to train as an ATC. Even if they raised the salary to around 50k that would be OK. Not great but ok.
The powers that be really need to get fairdinkim and start to offer some real money for a job that not many people can do or even want to do.
If you’re senior management was paid commensurate with their ability they would not have enough money to buy a loaf of bread at the end of the week.
Anyway just my way wood thoughts good luck to all of you, as I feel you are going to need it
Cheers
Rat
Well I have been following this thread for some time, and fully support you controllers out there in your struggle with a Management team that could not manage a good s&^t even with a dose of the “runs”.
Back in the good old days of DCA, my dad was an ATC on a relief team, (from 1957-1968 X navy radio operator tele). As a child I remember moving from town to town, as dad got transferred from tower to tower,(Coffs harbour, Darwin, Tennant Creek, Alice Springs, Adielade, Sydney,Canberra,Back to Sydney ,ECT)
It was a great life as a kid. I also remember that we were quite well off compared to other families at the time, We went away camping and prospecting , fishing ect, every other weekend there was always plenty of time for the family.
I have been a PPl for about 20 years, (Now 51years old) and am in the process of completing my CPL. I would love to be an ATC as would my youngest son but ATM I net 70K and work 2weeks on and 1 week of. I work in the Transport industry. My son earns more that the training wage as a motor mechanic (he too is a pilot).
I cannot afford to drop over 40K net to train as an ATC. Even if they raised the salary to around 50k that would be OK. Not great but ok.
The powers that be really need to get fairdinkim and start to offer some real money for a job that not many people can do or even want to do.
If you’re senior management was paid commensurate with their ability they would not have enough money to buy a loaf of bread at the end of the week.
Anyway just my way wood thoughts good luck to all of you, as I feel you are going to need it
Cheers
Rat
And that's what it's all about Rat!
It amazes me that when we see a looming shortage of skilled professionals in this country, the clowns that pull the strings cannot, or will not, comprehend the simple reality.
Essentially three things drive people to achieve.
Lifestyle, yeah right! The continueing reliance on O/T in the face of the reductions on the ground has seen an end to that!
Salary? Well in the absence of the previous two, it's all that's left really, and probably the only thing that will re-invigorate the interest for future generations. Even back in your father's day, this was obviously recognised by the "company" otherwise your dad would not have been able to provide you with the life he did.
So what are the clowns who pull the strings doing with these facts? They attempt to recruit. Well boys see points 1, 2 ,and paticularily 3!
It aint' Rocket Surgery!
It amazes me that when we see a looming shortage of skilled professionals in this country, the clowns that pull the strings cannot, or will not, comprehend the simple reality.
Essentially three things drive people to achieve.
- Passion
- Lifestyle
- Salary
Lifestyle, yeah right! The continueing reliance on O/T in the face of the reductions on the ground has seen an end to that!
Salary? Well in the absence of the previous two, it's all that's left really, and probably the only thing that will re-invigorate the interest for future generations. Even back in your father's day, this was obviously recognised by the "company" otherwise your dad would not have been able to provide you with the life he did.
So what are the clowns who pull the strings doing with these facts? They attempt to recruit. Well boys see points 1, 2 ,and paticularily 3!
It aint' Rocket Surgery!
Ohcirrej
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: This is the internet FFS.........
Posts: 2,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know the mantra on any ANS who strives to be "The World Leader" (coz apparently they all are) is we are service providers, with the good old "fiscal responsibility to the customer" flag being waved. Sorry, but SAFETY is the word. It takes an individual of extreme intestinal fortitude who stands to make a bonus in ATC through this supposed "fiscal responsibility" to do the right thing. Money can make people do strange things, and greed even worse.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
from the certified shafting ********:
Friday, January 30, 2009
More Bad Press 5
Dear Louise, Get some reality please, otherwise known as do a bit of ****en research, not simply regurgitate a 'fed' story.
Kevin Rudd talks of wage constraint and tighter fiscal policies where it will 'cost jobs'.
The total wages cost of Air Traffic Control in Australia is in effect less than the tax and the profit that Airservices pays the government.
A strike is far from a forgone conclusion; but the clock is ticking. Stop work meetings are far more likely as a first step.
Your Key points:
1. The dispute is a test of the governments call for wage restraint.
Where productivity is proven, it should be rewarded, an offer of reduction in real term wages is not the equivalent of restraint, it's opportunism. Compare ATC wages growth with AWOTE since 1990; which way are ATC wages headed?
2. It would have serious implications for the struggling tourism industry
A full blown strike yes, a stop work, no! Linking the tourist industry a the ATC wages dispute is akin to link GP charges with Hospital funding, related yes, critical no.
3. The union has rejected Airservices' offer and recommended strike action.
That's just wrong, the union has initiated a legal bargaining period and is asking it's members to vote on a range of options as required by law, in order to take any of the listed industrial actions.
Fact, Air traffic is at Record levels; BTRE predictions is reduced growth, not reductions; note the subtle difference?
This means that graphs like this:
Are still going to trend upwards. Compare this to the reduction in ATCs in the corresponding period and it is clearly a productivity gain, which has not been rewarded in any way. In fact when compared to AWOTE Australian ATCs have slipped some 23%.
All this in a climate where the worldwide shortage has seen more ATCs leave Airservices in the last 12 months at higher rates than any other year. Why would ATCs leave:
1) To get away from arguably the worst ANSP in the modern world,
2) For better conditions of employment,
3) For an increased salary.
The current cost of Air Traffic Control wages is close to $1.00 per ticket. Do not confuse 'Airways revenue' with the cost of the service, the service costs do not proportionally rise if the ATC wages do.
A rise of 63% would cost every punter a grand total of 63 cents a ticket. An extra 63 cents a ticket is never going to be the catalyst for crippling the tourism industry! The full claim is on average for 39% or 39 cents a ticket. Civil Air's vision is a claim not a settling point; but the counter claim (the Airservices Offer) a reduction in real wages is not even close to reality either. There has been no pay-rise for in excess of 12 months, the 'conditions of service' that the employer wishes to remove far exceeds the financial offer; they want to remove conditions of employment without paying for them; most controllers will not want to surrender any conditions of employment. IT'S ALREADY A **** PLACE TO WORK!!!!!
We also repeat that the 'efficient rostering' proposed is nothing to do with the Certified Shafting Process; it's a total smoke screen, a good PR Spinners line.
More Bad Press 5
Dear Louise, Get some reality please, otherwise known as do a bit of ****en research, not simply regurgitate a 'fed' story.Kevin Rudd talks of wage constraint and tighter fiscal policies where it will 'cost jobs'.
The total wages cost of Air Traffic Control in Australia is in effect less than the tax and the profit that Airservices pays the government.
A strike is far from a forgone conclusion; but the clock is ticking. Stop work meetings are far more likely as a first step.
Your Key points:
1. The dispute is a test of the governments call for wage restraint.
Where productivity is proven, it should be rewarded, an offer of reduction in real term wages is not the equivalent of restraint, it's opportunism. Compare ATC wages growth with AWOTE since 1990; which way are ATC wages headed?
2. It would have serious implications for the struggling tourism industry
A full blown strike yes, a stop work, no! Linking the tourist industry a the ATC wages dispute is akin to link GP charges with Hospital funding, related yes, critical no.
3. The union has rejected Airservices' offer and recommended strike action.
That's just wrong, the union has initiated a legal bargaining period and is asking it's members to vote on a range of options as required by law, in order to take any of the listed industrial actions.
Fact, Air traffic is at Record levels; BTRE predictions is reduced growth, not reductions; note the subtle difference?
This means that graphs like this:
Are still going to trend upwards. Compare this to the reduction in ATCs in the corresponding period and it is clearly a productivity gain, which has not been rewarded in any way. In fact when compared to AWOTE Australian ATCs have slipped some 23%.
All this in a climate where the worldwide shortage has seen more ATCs leave Airservices in the last 12 months at higher rates than any other year. Why would ATCs leave:
1) To get away from arguably the worst ANSP in the modern world,
2) For better conditions of employment,
3) For an increased salary.
The current cost of Air Traffic Control wages is close to $1.00 per ticket. Do not confuse 'Airways revenue' with the cost of the service, the service costs do not proportionally rise if the ATC wages do.
A rise of 63% would cost every punter a grand total of 63 cents a ticket. An extra 63 cents a ticket is never going to be the catalyst for crippling the tourism industry! The full claim is on average for 39% or 39 cents a ticket. Civil Air's vision is a claim not a settling point; but the counter claim (the Airservices Offer) a reduction in real wages is not even close to reality either. There has been no pay-rise for in excess of 12 months, the 'conditions of service' that the employer wishes to remove far exceeds the financial offer; they want to remove conditions of employment without paying for them; most controllers will not want to surrender any conditions of employment. IT'S ALREADY A **** PLACE TO WORK!!!!!
We also repeat that the 'efficient rostering' proposed is nothing to do with the Certified Shafting Process; it's a total smoke screen, a good PR Spinners line.
G'Day 'Undervalued..'
Re;
"A rise of 63% would cost every punter a grand total of 63 cents a ticket."...
Surely a response could be / SHOULD be -
Why would it cost the punters anything? Really? (And we all know it ain't 63% salary Inc...)
All that would happen is that ASA would return $XXX LESS to the GOVT as 'that' TAX......er 'profit'.....er revenue.
So instead of the Govt getting around $100M from the farepayer - read taxpayer - they would get a bit less.....
Unless the govt is demanding a specific amount of revenue from the venture, the extra costs involved would simply mean less revenue paid to the Govt??
To my mind, it should be 'revenue neutral'....that is, the charges adjusted to meet the NEEDS of the industry, the NEEDS of ASA, (NOT necessarily $m'sfor CEOs etc...), the NEEDS of the infrastructure - Navaids/comms etc etc.- and not forgetting a 'R&D' or 'Project' fund from time to time to explore the adaptation of newer technologies........(ADSB? WAAS? etc etc..
The Airport fees are 'collected' by the Airlines/Operators on behalf of the Airport Administrators, and passed on, are they not?
Would this not help everybody - especially in these 'trying times' - as per the PM's comments??
Others' thoughts?? Or have I missed something?
Re;
"A rise of 63% would cost every punter a grand total of 63 cents a ticket."...
Surely a response could be / SHOULD be -
Why would it cost the punters anything? Really? (And we all know it ain't 63% salary Inc...)
All that would happen is that ASA would return $XXX LESS to the GOVT as 'that' TAX......er 'profit'.....er revenue.
So instead of the Govt getting around $100M from the farepayer - read taxpayer - they would get a bit less.....
Unless the govt is demanding a specific amount of revenue from the venture, the extra costs involved would simply mean less revenue paid to the Govt??
To my mind, it should be 'revenue neutral'....that is, the charges adjusted to meet the NEEDS of the industry, the NEEDS of ASA, (NOT necessarily $m'sfor CEOs etc...), the NEEDS of the infrastructure - Navaids/comms etc etc.- and not forgetting a 'R&D' or 'Project' fund from time to time to explore the adaptation of newer technologies........(ADSB? WAAS? etc etc..
The Airport fees are 'collected' by the Airlines/Operators on behalf of the Airport Administrators, and passed on, are they not?
Would this not help everybody - especially in these 'trying times' - as per the PM's comments??
Others' thoughts?? Or have I missed something?
Last edited by Ex FSO GRIFFO; 3rd Feb 2009 at 06:42.
No GRIFFO, I don't think you are missing anything ... unless I am too!
I remember ... back in the dark ages ... when one of the reasons given for getting rid of your mob was that the cost of FS was subsidised by the Airlines and that they considered it a TAX.
Obviously the Airlines don't mind paying an annual $100M tax to the Government now ....
I remember ... back in the dark ages ... when one of the reasons given for getting rid of your mob was that the cost of FS was subsidised by the Airlines and that they considered it a TAX.
Obviously the Airlines don't mind paying an annual $100M tax to the Government now ....
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nah Griffo, I don't think so, reference "missed something" and "revenue neutral". Your problem is that your too bloody logical.
As for Undervalued, his problem is that he's having difficulty accepting the reality of the old adage about not letting the facts get in the way of a good story. It was always thus young'un. Where's Gaunty when mentoring is needed?
For my money, the only bloke who seems to be getting it right is Ben Sandilands and, unfortunately, he's not mainstream. But, at least he seems to be willing to dig and not accept what I think is outrageous spin.
I suppose that the outcome of the ballot will determine which way it goes. And, while I don't like industrial action, because it affects me too, maybe the mooted overtime ban will either prove the point, or validate the claim that the problems would be fixed with reference to shortages.
Finally, you coulda knocked me down with a feather when I saw the list of "managers" on the other thread. Unbelievable - did somebody make that up, or is that reality?
As for Undervalued, his problem is that he's having difficulty accepting the reality of the old adage about not letting the facts get in the way of a good story. It was always thus young'un. Where's Gaunty when mentoring is needed?
For my money, the only bloke who seems to be getting it right is Ben Sandilands and, unfortunately, he's not mainstream. But, at least he seems to be willing to dig and not accept what I think is outrageous spin.
I suppose that the outcome of the ballot will determine which way it goes. And, while I don't like industrial action, because it affects me too, maybe the mooted overtime ban will either prove the point, or validate the claim that the problems would be fixed with reference to shortages.
Finally, you coulda knocked me down with a feather when I saw the list of "managers" on the other thread. Unbelievable - did somebody make that up, or is that reality?
G'Day 'Howabout'.....
"Finally, you coulda knocked me down with a feather when I saw the list of "managers" on the other thread. Unbelievable - did somebody make that up, or is that reality?''
I agree totally with you!!
IS THIS LIST FOR "REAL"..??????
???????
Where are the STAFF at the 'Pointy End'???????????
You know, the 'revenue makers'.............
Those wot bring in da money....the 'workers' ...not the 'w-nkers'....
And 'THEY' said - well 'HE' did - that that ole' FLIGHT SERVICE 'Thingy' cost TOO MUCH......'affordable ...wot was that other word??)
And we were LEAN,...VERY LEAN by the time we 'got RID of' our mid-level management!!!
p.s. Any one hear the PM's speech in 'The House' today?
It will no doubt be repeated - GREEDY Executive staff got a BIG mention.....
I agree totally with you!!
IS THIS LIST FOR "REAL"..??????
???????
Where are the STAFF at the 'Pointy End'???????????
You know, the 'revenue makers'.............
Those wot bring in da money....the 'workers' ...not the 'w-nkers'.... And 'THEY' said - well 'HE' did - that that ole' FLIGHT SERVICE 'Thingy' cost TOO MUCH......'affordable ...wot was that other word??)
And we were LEAN,...VERY LEAN by the time we 'got RID of' our mid-level management!!!
p.s. Any one hear the PM's speech in 'The House' today?
It will no doubt be repeated - GREEDY Executive staff got a BIG mention.....
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh well, I suppose I must be Griffo's vintage, never worked for the company, but knew a few - particularly the FS guys in what used to be known as ADDN. As an aside, what dick agreed to give up our 'A' - yeah, I know that's thread drift. It's just always given me the sh*ts.
As for the rest of you, truth will tell (I hope). And if Mr Sandilands is watching, from this old timer, you've got it nailed IMHO.
As for the rest of you, truth will tell (I hope). And if Mr Sandilands is watching, from this old timer, you've got it nailed IMHO.