QF piot retrenchments
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: NSW
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to Robert Gottliebsen at Business Spectator, and Etihad Airways CEO James Hogan, there is little or no truth in Rambo's claim:
Quite the opposite it seems.
And that was before the tie up with Delta & Northwest.
IMHO, the future is Intergration - not Segmentation.
...they are different companies and if anyboby starts mixing the two then management from both sides will have a field day.
Quite the opposite it seems.
RG: So, those legacy carriers that don’t change their work practices are likely to go out of business?
JH: Well, I think you’ve seen that recently what’s happening in Europe, especially with British Airways. British Airways has been very open in saying they need to reshape their work practices and they need to look at a solution where they can work with other carriers, because I guess one would say the greatest example of a legacy carrier tackling this issue has been KLM and Air France, where they’ve been able to integrate and share those support services and wind down what they don’t need.
IMHO, the future is Intergration - not Segmentation.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: A dozen towns ago
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kremin,
I think you're right about rabbit & rambo and by the tone of their posts, they are most likely the same person. I guess they're just mischief making to take their minds off their own T&C's being p1ssed up against the wall by the camel jocks. Misery loves company...
Teresa,
Agree with you about the master plan, quite deliciously (with apologies to Bruce McAveny) machiavellian really. It never made sense to me to have 320's & 787's in a LCC operation, I've always thought 320's & 330's was a better mix, maybe this is the start. Also heard that their project team had a 787 "wake party" last week, now I'm starting to believe my own rumours!
I think you're right about rabbit & rambo and by the tone of their posts, they are most likely the same person. I guess they're just mischief making to take their minds off their own T&C's being p1ssed up against the wall by the camel jocks. Misery loves company...
Teresa,
Agree with you about the master plan, quite deliciously (with apologies to Bruce McAveny) machiavellian really. It never made sense to me to have 320's & 787's in a LCC operation, I've always thought 320's & 330's was a better mix, maybe this is the start. Also heard that their project team had a 787 "wake party" last week, now I'm starting to believe my own rumours!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The B787 was ordered by the QF group for many reasons - but one important one was the delivery timetable promised by Boeing. It was going to be ready several years before the A350.
Now that the B787 is going to be further delayed by 6 to 12 months (there was a Seattle newspaper article recently which detailed some of the technical issues), the difference in delivery times will be so much shorter.
So the B787 still makes sense for mainline, while the A350 would integrate into the JQ fleet so much better. And BB did tell some techies recently that he was in talks with Airbus for a substantial order. He just didn't say what types...
Now that the B787 is going to be further delayed by 6 to 12 months (there was a Seattle newspaper article recently which detailed some of the technical issues), the difference in delivery times will be so much shorter.
So the B787 still makes sense for mainline, while the A350 would integrate into the JQ fleet so much better. And BB did tell some techies recently that he was in talks with Airbus for a substantial order. He just didn't say what types...
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Different blokes, both liars.
View their previous posts. Both obviously ex-EK now with JQ.
NEITHER WITH QF.
NEITHER WITH QF.
Last edited by Nuthinondaclock; 26th Jul 2009 at 00:58. Reason: Comma added.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Stralya
Posts: 577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Buchanan another tool. Rather naughty chap on a Qf flight if i remember! Boston consulting group with a sufficient knowledge of aviation to fit on the back of a postage stamp...
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QFinsider,
Not that I'm a supporter of BB, or Executive managers generally, but let's face it, their lot aren't the only ones who qualify as tools - especially if misbehaving on a QF flight is the major qualifying factor; I seem to recall a particularly senior QF captain behaving like a major one on a QF flight southbound from SIN. Something to do with (a) too much Champers pre-departure, and (b) making a demand (which was duly refused) to see the tech log in-flight. (c) was going to be very nasty indeed, until a moment of clarity during his Champered blurr convinced him that a retreat was in everyone's best interest.
Especially his.
At least BB married the one he was misbehaving with.
Not that I'm a supporter of BB, or Executive managers generally, but let's face it, their lot aren't the only ones who qualify as tools - especially if misbehaving on a QF flight is the major qualifying factor; I seem to recall a particularly senior QF captain behaving like a major one on a QF flight southbound from SIN. Something to do with (a) too much Champers pre-departure, and (b) making a demand (which was duly refused) to see the tech log in-flight. (c) was going to be very nasty indeed, until a moment of clarity during his Champered blurr convinced him that a retreat was in everyone's best interest.
Especially his.
At least BB married the one he was misbehaving with.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Darwin
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
6 months notice for redundancey. Maybe Qanats have hung in as long as they see viable. By giving notice now, from a business point of view, they are saying if things don't turn around after the busy holiday season, they will lay some pilots off. Kind of makes sense. As far as guys going to Jetstar, don't see how viable that would be either.
Reason is, they would have to be endorsed(if not already), inducted trained and checked to line. All of which could take a few months.
What happens, in 12 months time, when Qantas say, "we need you back". I'm sure there are plenty of guys who would run back in a heart beat without a second though of the cost or consequences of leaving Jetstar short staffed. These same guys that jump on here and whinge that Jetstar is so far beneath them.
I gaurantee if they are given positions at Jetstar, there will be a minimum R.O.S required.
My motivation, yes I currently have an application with Jetstar.
Reason is, they would have to be endorsed(if not already), inducted trained and checked to line. All of which could take a few months.
What happens, in 12 months time, when Qantas say, "we need you back". I'm sure there are plenty of guys who would run back in a heart beat without a second though of the cost or consequences of leaving Jetstar short staffed. These same guys that jump on here and whinge that Jetstar is so far beneath them.
I gaurantee if they are given positions at Jetstar, there will be a minimum R.O.S required.
My motivation, yes I currently have an application with Jetstar.
Last edited by metrosmoker; 31st Jul 2009 at 01:33.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone is zero
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
metrosmoker, if I follow your logic, J* should employ you while the "Qantas Group" guys & girls (who also had an application in, passed the psych, sim check, initial endorsement, cyclic's & possibly probation check) should be sacked & join the dole queue. Is this correct?
Last edited by breakfastburrito; 30th Jul 2009 at 09:23.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: utopia
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's right breakfastburrito ... So if I follow your logic, you think mainline QF SOs should be given preferential placements into other qantas groups (J*/qantaslink) without conducting a recent skill & psych, sim or interview, while guys & gals who work for the qantas group who jumped through all the hoops where sittiing on LOIs for months and then told they'll have to do it all over again? Is this correct?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone is zero
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the record I do not agree with anyone from the "Qantas Group" being sacked, and a new joiner being employed elsewhere in the "Qantas Group". I have never advocated such a policy, nor do I support it.
Personally I support a GOAL type arrangement that allows pilots to follow the work within the group.
I have not agreed with previous AIPA's administrations actions regarding regional & Impulse coverage & support.
If the roles were reversed, I would support a J* pilot being employed by QF, rather than being sacked.
I was most pleased that ex-AN (the supposed corporate enemy) pilots were employed by QF, all of them have been a pleasure to fly with.
Management are the ones pushing this agenda, not the pilots.
Personally I support a GOAL type arrangement that allows pilots to follow the work within the group.
I have not agreed with previous AIPA's administrations actions regarding regional & Impulse coverage & support.
If the roles were reversed, I would support a J* pilot being employed by QF, rather than being sacked.
I was most pleased that ex-AN (the supposed corporate enemy) pilots were employed by QF, all of them have been a pleasure to fly with.
Management are the ones pushing this agenda, not the pilots.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Away
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Media campaign?
The story, if it ran, would last a day.
The continued employment of a group of pilots is not news.
Sorry, but you are laboring under mistaken ideas if you think otherwise.
The story, if it ran, would last a day.
The continued employment of a group of pilots is not news.
Sorry, but you are laboring under mistaken ideas if you think otherwise.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mostly at home
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must be under the mistaken belief that the Government / Labor party would give a rats about a major Australian company seemingly openly flouting their policies.
Something about "Transfer of Business" and ducks?
I think it would last more than a day in the media ....... a lot more than a day.
N
Something about "Transfer of Business" and ducks?
I think it would last more than a day in the media ....... a lot more than a day.
N
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Darwin
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, That is what I am saying. If Qantas pilots go to Jetstar, then they should expect to be required to stay there for a reasonable period of time. What that time frame is, I don't. But why should another airline be dissadvantaged in 12 months time because of the current situation.
Most importantly, this is my view as is affects me at present.
Why should my plight be any less/more important than anyone else's. I doubt there is one guy in Qantas who would take a pay cut, demotion etc to save the job of another pilot in the company. Everyone will have an opinion dependig on how the situation will affect them. If you can't see that, than is it any wonder that pilot's have the industrial issues that we have.
Most importantly, this is my view as is affects me at present.
Why should my plight be any less/more important than anyone else's. I doubt there is one guy in Qantas who would take a pay cut, demotion etc to save the job of another pilot in the company. Everyone will have an opinion dependig on how the situation will affect them. If you can't see that, than is it any wonder that pilot's have the industrial issues that we have.
polesmoker
You said :
Are you referring to "the company" as in the Qantas "Group" or simply the Mainline operation?
Because pay cuts/less hours are exactly what is being considered right now by the pilot group to avoid retrenchments and a huge majority of pilots are willing to do so in order to save jobs.
You clearly have no idea...good luck with your Jetstar career
You said :
I doubt there is one guy in Qantas who would take a pay cut, demotion etc to save the job of another pilot in the company.
Because pay cuts/less hours are exactly what is being considered right now by the pilot group to avoid retrenchments and a huge majority of pilots are willing to do so in order to save jobs.
You clearly have no idea...good luck with your Jetstar career
Nunc est bibendum
I doubt there is one guy in Qantas who would take a pay cut, demotion etc to save the job of another pilot in the company.
It appears that metro is somewhat ignorant as to what QF drivers are willing to do in order to help out others. Sadly it's that type of ignorance that keeps the J* and QF crew at arms length. Many of us are mature enough to not succumb to those sorts of confirmation biases.
Ah, I see Transition Layer beat me to the punch.
