QANTAS Base maintenance sydney restructure ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: oz
Age: 59
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QANTAS Base maintenance sydney restructure ?
I have heard
20 base crews reduced to 10
10 avonics crews reduced to 5
5 airbus crews to stay 5
not sure about numbers but maybe the same, union wants to be involved in process. Any of you guys hear anything, Has this legs?.
20 base crews reduced to 10
10 avonics crews reduced to 5
5 airbus crews to stay 5
not sure about numbers but maybe the same, union wants to be involved in process. Any of you guys hear anything, Has this legs?.
It does make sense, better co-ordination of available manpower and bigger crews. The only problem is that they have to continue to pay the leading hands leading hand money for 2 years.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: sydney
Age: 65
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any ideas come out of the meeting?
It seems to me that 10 crews or 20 crews doesn't change the head count.
We still need more people for the work at this point in time.
It seems to me that 10 crews or 20 crews doesn't change the head count.
We still need more people for the work at this point in time.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Up left - Down right
Posts: 946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10 avonics crews reduced to 5
while the one crew does the day & night stoppers, the Int & Dom hand-me-downs.
We need more crews not less.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: n.s.w
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't get your knickers in a knot, despite being presented with some inovative and "out of the square" ideas, the ops managers decided to do absolutely nothing. all stays as is. they have not one clue.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Christmas Island
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is the ops managers job to find a way to implement the managements plans, or stop the stupidity flowing back to the floor???
Might be time to bring the 380 back into the stable so there is a better utilization of manpower...?
Might be time to bring the 380 back into the stable so there is a better utilization of manpower...?
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi all,
I know there has been a fair bit of rumour and some mixed messages coming from the various meetings that have taken place. Can some of you please give me some assistance here by posting your ideas in this anonymous manner regarding the following three issues.
On Fri we will be meeting with Snr managers over various issues. Your input here will help me form an opinion on how BM should operate into the future. I also recommend members not waste their time attending the chat fests that have been taking place. I think there are a number of junior managers who would struggle to organize a p#ss up in a brewery.
cheers
Steve
I know there has been a fair bit of rumour and some mixed messages coming from the various meetings that have taken place. Can some of you please give me some assistance here by posting your ideas in this anonymous manner regarding the following three issues.
- How do you feel about composite crews in Base Maint (please forget about the side issues such as rosters and SLII numbers, mainly interested in the idea of working cross trade)
- Are there too many layers of management for BM engineers and are the ops managers necessary?
- Should the 330 and Boeing crews be combined (forget about crew size atm)?
On Fri we will be meeting with Snr managers over various issues. Your input here will help me form an opinion on how BM should operate into the future. I also recommend members not waste their time attending the chat fests that have been taking place. I think there are a number of junior managers who would struggle to organize a p#ss up in a brewery.
cheers
Steve
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Looking for the bridge of trust
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Steve,
This is a very Sydney centric topic but let me put my 2 bobs worth in.
On point (1). For some reason, managers in Sydney have for a long time wanted to have composite crews. I think the main reason for this is they believe that they can build up crew strengths to 12 men each and at the same time halve the crew numbers. This enables them to decrease the required amount of LAMES on type by splitting the crew up during a shift and getting them to work on multiple aircraft at any one time. It also decreases the amount of Leading Hands required. Having a crew of 12 or more works OK on an "A" Check but splits the crew on layovers. I personally have no problem working across trades but I'm not sure about anyone else.
Point (2). Apparently at the last Road Show the Little Leprechaun stated it was his desire to have no more than 7 layers between him and the bloke on the lowest rung of the ladder. Now if you take apprentices, AME and LAMES as all being on the lowest rung then 7 steps takes you to Cox. If you take them separately then you only get to Hespe. Now, I don't know about you guys but if a was a recently made up Ops Manager who, let's face it, were only employed in that postion to be used as strike breakers during the last PIA, my sphincter would be twitching a bit. Their usefullness to the company is now superfluous and if they are to stay, I don't think I should have to go to them to get permission just to replace my uniform.
Point (3). Yes, the Boeing and 330 crews should be combined although I would word that statement differently. The 330 crew should be melded into the existing Base Maintenance Crews. Any new aircraft type requires specialist crews to be made up but once all the teething troubles are ironed out and that new type has been bedded in there is no requirenment for them so long as there is enough licence coverage. This is especially true when the number of that aircraft type starts to exceed the number of aircraft type they are replacing. It is for this reason that the 380 should eventually be melded into the Base Maintenance structure instead of being run in the elitist fashion that it is now. The Fat Controller has a lot to answer for.
End of rant.
I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired!!!
This is a very Sydney centric topic but let me put my 2 bobs worth in.
On point (1). For some reason, managers in Sydney have for a long time wanted to have composite crews. I think the main reason for this is they believe that they can build up crew strengths to 12 men each and at the same time halve the crew numbers. This enables them to decrease the required amount of LAMES on type by splitting the crew up during a shift and getting them to work on multiple aircraft at any one time. It also decreases the amount of Leading Hands required. Having a crew of 12 or more works OK on an "A" Check but splits the crew on layovers. I personally have no problem working across trades but I'm not sure about anyone else.
Point (2). Apparently at the last Road Show the Little Leprechaun stated it was his desire to have no more than 7 layers between him and the bloke on the lowest rung of the ladder. Now if you take apprentices, AME and LAMES as all being on the lowest rung then 7 steps takes you to Cox. If you take them separately then you only get to Hespe. Now, I don't know about you guys but if a was a recently made up Ops Manager who, let's face it, were only employed in that postion to be used as strike breakers during the last PIA, my sphincter would be twitching a bit. Their usefullness to the company is now superfluous and if they are to stay, I don't think I should have to go to them to get permission just to replace my uniform.
Point (3). Yes, the Boeing and 330 crews should be combined although I would word that statement differently. The 330 crew should be melded into the existing Base Maintenance Crews. Any new aircraft type requires specialist crews to be made up but once all the teething troubles are ironed out and that new type has been bedded in there is no requirenment for them so long as there is enough licence coverage. This is especially true when the number of that aircraft type starts to exceed the number of aircraft type they are replacing. It is for this reason that the 380 should eventually be melded into the Base Maintenance structure instead of being run in the elitist fashion that it is now. The Fat Controller has a lot to answer for.
End of rant.
I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired!!!
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: On the chopping board.
Posts: 929
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
If we are going to contemplate running comp crews in base, we have to move forward with this carefully to ensure that we have required minimum mech & sparkies per crew, and approp LAME numbers.
Atm we sometimes run with crew strentghs of 1+6 (sometimes better or worse). This number may drop off as staff numbers continue to decline. Under a comp crew structure, it will be lower still. A quick look at the 330 crews seems to prove this. Have you ever seen them operate with one or two avionic guys for example? And when they do, just ask them what it is like on a busy night.
Composite crews work well, but can also mask deficiencies in manpower.
Also, as we are becoming more flexible and productive for our employer, we should be asking for something in return for our efforts. It seems that this would be better suited for an EBA arena or other negotiating. Other area's/crews seem to have had this brought in by stealth. If the next EBA turns sour again, it will leave us all wondering why we bothered helping them out. WIIFM?
Atm we sometimes run with crew strentghs of 1+6 (sometimes better or worse). This number may drop off as staff numbers continue to decline. Under a comp crew structure, it will be lower still. A quick look at the 330 crews seems to prove this. Have you ever seen them operate with one or two avionic guys for example? And when they do, just ask them what it is like on a busy night.
Composite crews work well, but can also mask deficiencies in manpower.
Also, as we are becoming more flexible and productive for our employer, we should be asking for something in return for our efforts. It seems that this would be better suited for an EBA arena or other negotiating. Other area's/crews seem to have had this brought in by stealth. If the next EBA turns sour again, it will leave us all wondering why we bothered helping them out. WIIFM?
Last edited by Ngineer; 18th Mar 2009 at 08:54.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Up left - Down right
Posts: 946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fed Sec
1/ Composite crew = Jack of all trades, master of none.
2/ Mechanical Vs Avionic work is completely opposite in manpower allocation. Where mech crews labour all day on 1 or 2 aircraft changing wheels & brakes, valves & actuators, topping oils & hydraulics, fixing leaks, towing to the run bay, etc etc avionics swoop in change a few boxes & relays, top the oxy, put in demands and flutter off to another & another aircraft, later returning to fit the bits that has been delivered. Its the nature of the work. To be put on a composite crew there will be no working 3 a/c at a time because avionic skills will be wasted on changing wheels & brakes instead of doing what we have trained to do. Remember there are twice the number of mech crews than avionic crews to cover the same number of A/C. Then, when there is a major wiring problem the reverse happens.
3/ To do a full 744 A check, takes 2 crews of avionics (16 plus) there would have to be 4 composite crews each shift on one A chk just to get the avionic work done. The mechanical trades have enough on their plate doing mechanical A chk work and would not be able to assist their sparky brothers and vice versa. Then who would do the cabin A chk and rectify the 120 odd DR&Rs
4/ The use of specialist crews aka 400 crews & 330 crews and lets not forget TEAM A380, may be good for the first few years until the A/C numbers build. It gives time to train enough LAMEs on type and have them return to normal crews as in the 400s. The FIVE 330 crews have gone on way too long and now the other 40 Boeing crews have not had exposure wasting valuable years of learning where we all could now be kicking 330s over the fence at a great rate of knots. But unfortunately the 330 sit on the ground all day waiting for the ONE 330 crew to finish the 3 other A/C before it. There was none of this rubbish when the 767 was introduced. In its time it was a very advanced piece of kit compared to the 747 classic but there was no problem because we all had exposure to it from day one.
5/ Composite crews may be great for transiting A/C, top the oils, kick the tyres and apply a few MELs but when it is time to fix them, see point 2 above… Composite will not fix the manpower shortage problem management have created, X number of LAMEs equals X no matter how many times you juggle, split & rejoin them only TRAINING will increase the numbers.
6/ I could go on and on but enough said…
2/ Mechanical Vs Avionic work is completely opposite in manpower allocation. Where mech crews labour all day on 1 or 2 aircraft changing wheels & brakes, valves & actuators, topping oils & hydraulics, fixing leaks, towing to the run bay, etc etc avionics swoop in change a few boxes & relays, top the oxy, put in demands and flutter off to another & another aircraft, later returning to fit the bits that has been delivered. Its the nature of the work. To be put on a composite crew there will be no working 3 a/c at a time because avionic skills will be wasted on changing wheels & brakes instead of doing what we have trained to do. Remember there are twice the number of mech crews than avionic crews to cover the same number of A/C. Then, when there is a major wiring problem the reverse happens.
3/ To do a full 744 A check, takes 2 crews of avionics (16 plus) there would have to be 4 composite crews each shift on one A chk just to get the avionic work done. The mechanical trades have enough on their plate doing mechanical A chk work and would not be able to assist their sparky brothers and vice versa. Then who would do the cabin A chk and rectify the 120 odd DR&Rs
4/ The use of specialist crews aka 400 crews & 330 crews and lets not forget TEAM A380, may be good for the first few years until the A/C numbers build. It gives time to train enough LAMEs on type and have them return to normal crews as in the 400s. The FIVE 330 crews have gone on way too long and now the other 40 Boeing crews have not had exposure wasting valuable years of learning where we all could now be kicking 330s over the fence at a great rate of knots. But unfortunately the 330 sit on the ground all day waiting for the ONE 330 crew to finish the 3 other A/C before it. There was none of this rubbish when the 767 was introduced. In its time it was a very advanced piece of kit compared to the 747 classic but there was no problem because we all had exposure to it from day one.
5/ Composite crews may be great for transiting A/C, top the oils, kick the tyres and apply a few MELs but when it is time to fix them, see point 2 above… Composite will not fix the manpower shortage problem management have created, X number of LAMEs equals X no matter how many times you juggle, split & rejoin them only TRAINING will increase the numbers.
6/ I could go on and on but enough said…
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A330 crews have sort of worked because one LAME was willing to 'supervise' ames working on 3 a/c at the same time in different locations. Unfortunately, the managers were too busy counting their bonuses to notice the shortage of trained, experienced LAMEs required to run the place.
The managers can't even come up with a plan to fix their problem, they have left it to a wee lad.
How about putting on a sh!t load of courses and drag half of MW back onto the floor for the next six months. Everybody might learn something!
The managers can't even come up with a plan to fix their problem, they have left it to a wee lad.
How about putting on a sh!t load of courses and drag half of MW back onto the floor for the next six months. Everybody might learn something!
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Composite crews do not work in a semi - heavy environment; ie A Check, SA, HC.
Composite crews work on Line Transit and Overnight aircraft.
For semi heavy you need specialist personnel or the product will decline. The product declining have flow on effects for Line Aircraft. That is nil time so more MELs , deferring / overrunning time-ex work or OSIP.
Then you load up Line and .....you need more specialist on Line to fix flow ons etc; so you rob Base specialists of manpower.
Its a cycle that we have seen before, its not rocket science.
Remember the days of Block, Heavy, then A Checks then Line 1 / Line 2.
Oh, they were the days.
Composite crews work on Line Transit and Overnight aircraft.
For semi heavy you need specialist personnel or the product will decline. The product declining have flow on effects for Line Aircraft. That is nil time so more MELs , deferring / overrunning time-ex work or OSIP.
Then you load up Line and .....you need more specialist on Line to fix flow ons etc; so you rob Base specialists of manpower.
Its a cycle that we have seen before, its not rocket science.
Remember the days of Block, Heavy, then A Checks then Line 1 / Line 2.
Oh, they were the days.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: n.s.w
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ask the guys working the composite crews at the moment candidly weather they actually work cross trade. If they answer truthfully you will find the only time they are "composite" is at the table in the smoko room. As someone pointed out the other day, we work very closely with the cross trade crews we line up with on shift now any way, where required (eng change etc) we adapt to a certain exetent to be composite. Composite crews will never work across three or more a/c types in Base Maint.
There are way too many layers of management. When you don't know who to approach with a problem, there are too many managers, and it allows them to pass the buck to easily. What (appart from signing uniform chits) do the ops managers do???????
Personally I could care less if the 330 is folded back into base, however if it were my business I would want a flexible workforce that could aquit any work on any a/c required, a more visible headcount. I would not want "streamed" or "boutique" pockets of people who are limited in what they can do.
There are way too many layers of management. When you don't know who to approach with a problem, there are too many managers, and it allows them to pass the buck to easily. What (appart from signing uniform chits) do the ops managers do???????
Personally I could care less if the 330 is folded back into base, however if it were my business I would want a flexible workforce that could aquit any work on any a/c required, a more visible headcount. I would not want "streamed" or "boutique" pockets of people who are limited in what they can do.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
forget composites how is this for restruturing
SOURCE:Air Transport Intelligence news
MAS Engineering hopes to maintain Qantas aircraft
By Leithen Francis
(Re-releases to add Qantas comment)
Malaysia Airlines Engineering and Maintenance (MAS EM) is hoping Qantas Airways will send some of its aircraft to Malaysia for heavy maintenance checks.
MAS EM senior general manager Roslan Ismail said in an interview that he is hoping Qantas may have heavy maintenance checks on Airbus A380s as well as Airbus A330s and some of its Boeing 747s done in Malaysia rather than Australia.
He also says MAS EM and Qantas are proceeding with plans to establish a joint venture that will utilise MAS EM's heavy maintenance facilities in Kuala Lumpur.
He says the two sides were originally planning to start the venture in this year's third quarter but now it will start in next year's first or second quarter.
"They [Qantas' maintenance and engineering bosses] said give them a few months to sort things out," he says.
"They have a new CEO at Qantas and they have this union problem."
Qantas executive general manager government and corporate affairs David Epstein says, however, that there are no immediate plans to send aircraft to Malaysia for maintenance work.
He says it is too early to make decisions on A380 work and there are no plans to send 747s to Malaysia as this work is carried out in Australia..
He also says Qantas has been in talks with its engineering workforce about having A330 work carried out at Qantas' maintenance base in Brisbane.
In addition, Epstein says no discussions are currently taking place on the proposed MRO joint venture with MAS, adding that it will not be possible to have it operating early next year as Roslan hopes.
Qantas appointed Alan Joyce as new CEO late last year and the unions in Australia are opposed to efforts to outsource work overseas.
But MAS EM has made inroads with Australia's Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), the regulatory body that needs to be won over if Qantas is to be permitted to outsource work to Malaysia.
CASA has already granted MAS EM regulatory approval to work on Australian-registered A330s, Boeing 737s and 747s.
MAS EM is well placed to get A380 work because Roslan says Qantas has no A380 hangar, although Epstein says Qantas has a 747 hangar at Sydney Airport that has been altered to accommodate A380s.
Roslan says MAS EM has a purpose-built aircraft hangar at Kuala Lumpur International Airport that can fit two A380s and one other widebody simultaneously.
Malaysia Airlines has ordered six A380s with the first to be delivered in January 2011. But MAS EM needs to have 20-25 A380s to work on to justify the investment in equipment to carry out A380 maintenance, says Roslan, adding that it is hoping Qantas can provide the necessary aircraft.
The Australian carrier has already come to loggerheads in the past with unions over efforts to get work done in Malaysia.
A few years ago Qantas was looking to get MAS EM to convert some of its 737-300s to freighters. But following union pressure, Qantas ended up doing the work in Australia at its facility in Avalon near Melbourne.
SOURCE:Air Transport Intelligence news
MAS Engineering hopes to maintain Qantas aircraft
By Leithen Francis
(Re-releases to add Qantas comment)
Malaysia Airlines Engineering and Maintenance (MAS EM) is hoping Qantas Airways will send some of its aircraft to Malaysia for heavy maintenance checks.
MAS EM senior general manager Roslan Ismail said in an interview that he is hoping Qantas may have heavy maintenance checks on Airbus A380s as well as Airbus A330s and some of its Boeing 747s done in Malaysia rather than Australia.
He also says MAS EM and Qantas are proceeding with plans to establish a joint venture that will utilise MAS EM's heavy maintenance facilities in Kuala Lumpur.
He says the two sides were originally planning to start the venture in this year's third quarter but now it will start in next year's first or second quarter.
"They [Qantas' maintenance and engineering bosses] said give them a few months to sort things out," he says.
"They have a new CEO at Qantas and they have this union problem."
Qantas executive general manager government and corporate affairs David Epstein says, however, that there are no immediate plans to send aircraft to Malaysia for maintenance work.
He says it is too early to make decisions on A380 work and there are no plans to send 747s to Malaysia as this work is carried out in Australia..
He also says Qantas has been in talks with its engineering workforce about having A330 work carried out at Qantas' maintenance base in Brisbane.
In addition, Epstein says no discussions are currently taking place on the proposed MRO joint venture with MAS, adding that it will not be possible to have it operating early next year as Roslan hopes.
Qantas appointed Alan Joyce as new CEO late last year and the unions in Australia are opposed to efforts to outsource work overseas.
But MAS EM has made inroads with Australia's Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), the regulatory body that needs to be won over if Qantas is to be permitted to outsource work to Malaysia.
CASA has already granted MAS EM regulatory approval to work on Australian-registered A330s, Boeing 737s and 747s.
MAS EM is well placed to get A380 work because Roslan says Qantas has no A380 hangar, although Epstein says Qantas has a 747 hangar at Sydney Airport that has been altered to accommodate A380s.
Roslan says MAS EM has a purpose-built aircraft hangar at Kuala Lumpur International Airport that can fit two A380s and one other widebody simultaneously.
Malaysia Airlines has ordered six A380s with the first to be delivered in January 2011. But MAS EM needs to have 20-25 A380s to work on to justify the investment in equipment to carry out A380 maintenance, says Roslan, adding that it is hoping Qantas can provide the necessary aircraft.
The Australian carrier has already come to loggerheads in the past with unions over efforts to get work done in Malaysia.
A few years ago Qantas was looking to get MAS EM to convert some of its 737-300s to freighters. But following union pressure, Qantas ended up doing the work in Australia at its facility in Avalon near Melbourne.