The Axe Begins to Fall at Qantas
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Close to home
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Axe Begins to Fall at Qantas
Four of the visitors no longer have tenure at Qantas.Interestingly these four were the ones,the only ones who applied for positions in the LHR base.
The axe is about to make its way up the management tree.A certain general manager has not lived up to expectations and is also on the way out.
If you arrive at work and you cant log onto your workstation or your ID wont let you in the front door you know you are finished as a Qantas employee.
The next few weeks will see a few more password malfunctions.
The axe is about to make its way up the management tree.A certain general manager has not lived up to expectations and is also on the way out.
If you arrive at work and you cant log onto your workstation or your ID wont let you in the front door you know you are finished as a Qantas employee.
The next few weeks will see a few more password malfunctions.
"Downsizing" is yet another opportunity for narcissists to have fun by causing pain. The most productive technique for them is called "social bullying", usually arranged in a business setting by the bosses holding meetings from which the targets are deliberately excluded. This causes great pain in the targets since they can only guess at what the subject of the meeting was.
Then of course there is the firing by remote control.
First use of this technique I'm aware of was the financial meltdown around 1990 in London.
Employees of JP Morgan or suchlike company that would be kept were couriered a new ID Swipe card over a weekend.
Come Monday morning, security guards were posted at the doors and if your ID didn't work you were handed a bit of paper explaining you had been terminated and any personal possessions in the office would be sent to you.
One kid got so mad he threw the keys to his BMW company car into the Thames.
IBM are also known for having people escorted out of the building when they have been fired, so as to avoid the obvious.
The moral of the story is that if you have personal information or your own diary and industry contact lists, you had better keep them at home. In addition, any "knowledge worker" should look at the Intellectual Property provisions of their employment contract, and take steps to secure any writings that are legally theirs.
Then of course there is the firing by remote control.
First use of this technique I'm aware of was the financial meltdown around 1990 in London.
Employees of JP Morgan or suchlike company that would be kept were couriered a new ID Swipe card over a weekend.
Come Monday morning, security guards were posted at the doors and if your ID didn't work you were handed a bit of paper explaining you had been terminated and any personal possessions in the office would be sent to you.
One kid got so mad he threw the keys to his BMW company car into the Thames.
IBM are also known for having people escorted out of the building when they have been fired, so as to avoid the obvious.
The moral of the story is that if you have personal information or your own diary and industry contact lists, you had better keep them at home. In addition, any "knowledge worker" should look at the Intellectual Property provisions of their employment contract, and take steps to secure any writings that are legally theirs.
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunfish...It sounds as though the 'cold war' was more benign compared to the activities of large corporations..
You would have to ask what sort of person would engage in activities such as the ones you described.Although I imagine your term "most productive technique' was meant to be facetious...
No wonder in times of war countries have no problem getting enough people to carry out the most unsocial and at times inhumane activities....
You would have to ask what sort of person would engage in activities such as the ones you described.Although I imagine your term "most productive technique' was meant to be facetious...
No wonder in times of war countries have no problem getting enough people to carry out the most unsocial and at times inhumane activities....
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Oz
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It happens in many places these days - it only takes a disgruntled and knowlegeable employee a few minutes to do significant damage to IT systems or wipe data.
When the axe falls around here (software-based company), the same thing applies. I even saw our ex-GM escorted from the building a few minutes after he was told his tenure was up early last year. If it was my company, I'd do the same.
When the axe falls around here (software-based company), the same thing applies. I even saw our ex-GM escorted from the building a few minutes after he was told his tenure was up early last year. If it was my company, I'd do the same.
Lobe. yes I am being facetious. These people do things the way they do to maximise the pain of their victims because it bolsters their sense of self importance and self esteem, so it's highly "productive " to them.
A classic example is what they did to the 737 maintenance facility in Melbourne(?) Two years (?) ago. They told them that they were reviewing the operation and maybe outsourcing it to Asia. That went on for at least twelve months, then they gave them a twelve month reprieve and said they would review the decision again.
Can you think of a better way to cause pain, suffering and anxiety? Not only to the workers concerned, but to their wives and families? What will become of our house "if"? Will we be able to afford XXXX "If"?
This has gone on right through Qantas starting with the wisecracks about dinosaurs and the "legacy" carrier. The Board and management deserve a foot up the backside for their trash talk.
If you have to do stuff to a business to fix it, you do it quick and dirty or slow and clean, so as to minimise the pain for all concerned. Qantas has done, and apparently will continue to do "slow and dirty" - which maximises employee pain and minimises efficiency.
To put it another way, and bluntly, management, and Boards, that deliberately f**k with workers heads deserve to get a foot up the backside. Workers, and Customers are entitled to respect, except it's obvious the Board and Management of QF don't think so, otherwise they wouldn't have treated staff and customers, the way they have.
A classic example is what they did to the 737 maintenance facility in Melbourne(?) Two years (?) ago. They told them that they were reviewing the operation and maybe outsourcing it to Asia. That went on for at least twelve months, then they gave them a twelve month reprieve and said they would review the decision again.
Can you think of a better way to cause pain, suffering and anxiety? Not only to the workers concerned, but to their wives and families? What will become of our house "if"? Will we be able to afford XXXX "If"?
This has gone on right through Qantas starting with the wisecracks about dinosaurs and the "legacy" carrier. The Board and management deserve a foot up the backside for their trash talk.
If you have to do stuff to a business to fix it, you do it quick and dirty or slow and clean, so as to minimise the pain for all concerned. Qantas has done, and apparently will continue to do "slow and dirty" - which maximises employee pain and minimises efficiency.
To put it another way, and bluntly, management, and Boards, that deliberately f**k with workers heads deserve to get a foot up the backside. Workers, and Customers are entitled to respect, except it's obvious the Board and Management of QF don't think so, otherwise they wouldn't have treated staff and customers, the way they have.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunfish, is right - it's a deliberate tactic that also aids the end-game of 'divide and conquer.' People get so worried about their future that 'collectivism' is broken down, the damn starts to exhibit cracks that eventually becomes a major breach as people, understandably, look to put their families before solidarity - they don't see that they have a choice. It's the realm of sickos, who normally have a psychopathic streak a mile wide and actually enjoy inflicting pain on employees and, by extension, their families. It's also normally associated with small d*ck syndrome.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: gold coast QLD australia
Age: 86
Posts: 1,345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right about that Sunfish, surposed be one particularly vicious female having a ball, as she watches the nbrs fall. Sad in one so young. Must have been her childhood.. Karma young lady, Karma.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: australia
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tough Love?
Sunfish
As an employer I've had the same thing done to me in reverse, and so have many other employers. One of the worst and hardest things you ever have to do is put good people off. Even so, I haven't learnt my lesson. I keep feeling that there is good out there and find these tactics very hard to use.
However when you've been done over a few times (either way), this is where it gets to, especially in big organizations. They are working from experience.
The reality is that many employees these days are doing THEIR thing and tough luck to any one else. Zero loyalty or consideration. The letter of the law mate. Its is the culture we live (and die) in. Kill or be killed. Sad.
BP
As an employer I've had the same thing done to me in reverse, and so have many other employers. One of the worst and hardest things you ever have to do is put good people off. Even so, I haven't learnt my lesson. I keep feeling that there is good out there and find these tactics very hard to use.
However when you've been done over a few times (either way), this is where it gets to, especially in big organizations. They are working from experience.
The reality is that many employees these days are doing THEIR thing and tough luck to any one else. Zero loyalty or consideration. The letter of the law mate. Its is the culture we live (and die) in. Kill or be killed. Sad.
BP
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BP, maybe you have had some bad experiences, but a boss I worked for once said 'mate, 98% of people want to do a decent job and earn their money. See that bloke (just arriving at 1000 in the morning) - he's probably been sitting at his kitchen table till 1100 last night, punching his computer to give me what I asked for. There's no way I am going to have a go at him because he's late.'
Personal pride precludes most staff from taking advantage. Whether they be pilots, cabin crew, tech crew or air traffic controllers, the 98% rule applies.
Personal pride precludes most staff from taking advantage. Whether they be pilots, cabin crew, tech crew or air traffic controllers, the 98% rule applies.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HaB
Couldn't agree more with the 98% theory. It is exactly that pride and integrity within oneself that has kept Qantas ticking over all these years.
But,
a Qantas boss would now prefer to remind you of how lucky you are to have a job. That is, take it or leave it. The door is that way.
The continual repressive, intimidating and unethical practises of the current regime has created a common bond betwwen 98% of employees - that is, f##k 'em.
But,
but a boss I worked for once said 'mate, 98% of people want to do a decent job and earn their money
The continual repressive, intimidating and unethical practises of the current regime has created a common bond betwwen 98% of employees - that is, f##k 'em.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: australia
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So many Roosters today, so many feather dusters tomorrow.
I agree with the 98% rule, but its 98% both ways. It is kindergarten level management to know the costs and problems of employing the wrong person. Thats why there is such an inordinate emphasis and effort put in to choosing the right person from the start. The company also doesn't want the pain, suffering and expense of sacking people because it hasn't worked out. The issue of the 98% rule isn't relevant here. The employer desperately wants it to work, the new employee wants it to work, thats a given. What happens though and I've seen it a million times, is tomorrow some other grass is greener and the employee just goes. Ala here today, gone tomorrow. In that situation the employee holds all the cards. Ask Rex. What gets me, if its so bad at Qantas, is how come so many people aspire to work there, and they have lists of applicants so high you can't jump over them?
My point is that times are a changing, and with supply and demand varying as they are, and who ever seems to have the upper hand sticking the boot in, well, thats the future. Both sides do it, but corporates have to do it in a different way just to comply with the law. Why not go back to GA where you'll really be loved???!!!
BP
My point is that times are a changing, and with supply and demand varying as they are, and who ever seems to have the upper hand sticking the boot in, well, thats the future. Both sides do it, but corporates have to do it in a different way just to comply with the law. Why not go back to GA where you'll really be loved???!!!
BP
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Beyond The Envelope
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BP....You Miss The Point
Work Colleagues at Qantas make the place enjoyable at a grass roots level.Its a family and we help each other.As a family we unfortunately have abusive parents(management)Aviation is a dynamic and fascinating industry which on another level leads to interesting and stimulating employment.All Qantas employees stay in the hope that they can make a change to way the place is run.If it wasnt for the employees there would be no customers.Its the employees that smooth over the clusterfarks of management.Everyone hopes that someone eventually will recognize the worth of the people who work at Qantas.Unfortunately these are most likely hopes held in vain
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Up left - Down right
Posts: 946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if its so bad at Qantas, is how come so many people aspire to work there, and they have lists of applicants so high you can't jump over them?
The hangers are a ghost town in Syd, barley see anyone all day.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: WZRCHS
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree with Short Circuit,
Even $140000 for 6 months, and most of that time enjoying the sights and serviced apartment, was still not enough for me to want the pleasure...
Mind you, offer me that now, and I'd be back in a flash.
I would even work in SYD, but I would have to be employed by QF, not some agency.
Aint going to happen, oh well, back to the beach
Even $140000 for 6 months, and most of that time enjoying the sights and serviced apartment, was still not enough for me to want the pleasure...
Mind you, offer me that now, and I'd be back in a flash.
I would even work in SYD, but I would have to be employed by QF, not some agency.
Aint going to happen, oh well, back to the beach
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Geosynchronous
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Short term focus management techniques don't work long term for the companies involved. But that doesn't worry execs who know they'll be long gone, cash in hand, before the chooks come home to roost.
Places that use the technique Sunfish mentioned (eg wrt 737s) end up with their best, most talented (aka employable) workers leaving when the writing's on the wall, and being left with the also-rans. Then, of course, when they realise they need someone to do the work again, they've got to spend way more than if they hadn't hatched their bird-brained plan in the first place...
Places that use the technique Sunfish mentioned (eg wrt 737s) end up with their best, most talented (aka employable) workers leaving when the writing's on the wall, and being left with the also-rans. Then, of course, when they realise they need someone to do the work again, they've got to spend way more than if they hadn't hatched their bird-brained plan in the first place...
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BP, you must have been burned badly as an employer. My history with QF ground crew, on and off, goes back a long time. Some social, addmitedly, but some professional as well. Sheer dedication and love of the job is all I witnessed - plus an incredible level of professionalism. I don't see any less dedication now than I did as a kid when I first saw those guys servicing the 707 on the tarmac at DRW in the 60's. They loved their job then - they would love to love it now. It's the 98% rule - all they need is leadership, and, I guarantee you, they are the best tech workforce in the world.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: australia
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why self destruct?
I hear what you are saying and believe me, I LOVE engineers compared with pilots. However this thread, in common with another close by seems to be pushing the view that Qantas just wants to piss all its employees off to the extent that they all leave.
I ask you, why would they do that considering all the consequences that you keep pointing out? They MUST be aware of them. It just doesn't make sense.
Many employers I know would crawl over broken glass to keep the kind of blokes you all say you are.
It would be a completely counter productive management strategy, even IF they intend to go to Asia.
So why don't you come up with an explanation to us uninformed as to why they would want to self destruct and perhaps be even risking the loss of a plane?
BP
I ask you, why would they do that considering all the consequences that you keep pointing out? They MUST be aware of them. It just doesn't make sense.
Many employers I know would crawl over broken glass to keep the kind of blokes you all say you are.
It would be a completely counter productive management strategy, even IF they intend to go to Asia.
So why don't you come up with an explanation to us uninformed as to why they would want to self destruct and perhaps be even risking the loss of a plane?
BP
