Qantas Shame
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Keeping The Enema Bandit in line
Posts: 323
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
aircraft, oops, aircraft mark 2, oops, sorry, I mean ElPerro, sorry I get confused, you've gone very quiet. Are you upset that employee's get paid?
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ElPerro
Your union argues and through the threat of industrial action gains a 5% higher wage rate than would otherwise have been the case. This causes the airline to hire less workers in that field (if any good costs more then the amount sold is less than would otherwise be the case). As a result there are workers who would otherwise have been employed by the airline.
Firstly I note you prefaced it with "let me explain what unions do" - a clear attempt to authoritatively generalise the argument which doesn't seem justified. Not all unions threaten industrial action in all negotiations. In fact compared to the sheer number of negotiations, industrial action or the threat thereof is relatively uncommon these days.
Secondly you assert both a result and causation which are not necessarily related. A company paying 5% more than what they wanted to may or may not hire more or less staff. Who is to say what the company's financial position is? What the company wants to pay staff, and what it can afford to pay staff are two totally different things, and are highly subjective. Do you seriously believe a company goes to an EBA negotiation offering its very last penny to its workers?
"If any good costs more then the amount sold is less....". No, that's not necessarily true. It depends on the demand for that good. You're making unjustified assumptions that a union always reaches a point where it asks so much in salary that the company simply must employ less workers than it needs.
No EBA's aren't about give and take. They are about take.
Hey, unions are not all angels and they're not always sensible. No-one denies that. However you simply can't make sweeping anti-union generalisations (though I know you want to) and expect to be taken seriously. They are littered throughout several of your posts.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Top of Descent
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Breaking News......more Qantas shame!!
From the ABC Saturday October 3, 2009.
Qantas criticised over foreign butter
Qantas is under fire from the Federal Opposition for serving imported butter on its Australian flights.
Australian dairy farmers are receiving low prices for their milk because of a global downturn in demand for dairy products.
Farmers in Tasmania claim their industry is close to collapse after excessive rain and recent power cuts.
Tasmanian Liberal Senator Richard Colbeck says farmers are disappointed that Qantas is dishing up butter imported from Denmark.
"I found when I was flying to Western Australia last week that Qantas - the great Australian company, the national airline - is actually using butter from Denmark," he said.
"[That] really disappointed me, given there's significant subsidies on European butter at the moment, on European dairy products, and that adds up to disappoint local dairy farmers.
"They say on their website that they use the finest of Australian produce. This is clearly not Australian."
Qantas has confirmed it provides Lurpak butter.
A spokesman for the airline said the decision to purchase the cheaper Danish butter was made during the downturn in the aviation industry to minimise job losses.
Qantas says the butter served in its Qantas lounges is Australian.
***********************
So good of Qantas to help minimise Danish job losses
Qantas criticised over foreign butter
Qantas is under fire from the Federal Opposition for serving imported butter on its Australian flights.
Australian dairy farmers are receiving low prices for their milk because of a global downturn in demand for dairy products.
Farmers in Tasmania claim their industry is close to collapse after excessive rain and recent power cuts.
Tasmanian Liberal Senator Richard Colbeck says farmers are disappointed that Qantas is dishing up butter imported from Denmark.
"I found when I was flying to Western Australia last week that Qantas - the great Australian company, the national airline - is actually using butter from Denmark," he said.
"[That] really disappointed me, given there's significant subsidies on European butter at the moment, on European dairy products, and that adds up to disappoint local dairy farmers.
"They say on their website that they use the finest of Australian produce. This is clearly not Australian."
Qantas has confirmed it provides Lurpak butter.
A spokesman for the airline said the decision to purchase the cheaper Danish butter was made during the downturn in the aviation industry to minimise job losses.
Qantas says the butter served in its Qantas lounges is Australian.
***********************
So good of Qantas to help minimise Danish job losses
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Lisbon
Posts: 995
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hilarious ! Qantas choice of butter makes the news !!
What a joke.
Now,I may not be Qantas number 1 fan, I am happy to admit that, and I also recognise that everything a company does to protect or stabilize its bottom end may impact jobs,however even during a time of economic adversity and job cuts, if an airline ( publicly floated and measurable) cant make its own decisions about things such as what butter brand to serve, what chance does it have of long term survival ??
Let the airline make its own financial decisions, perhaps the money it saves from using items like Danish butter will go into improving service, staff morale, fair wages etc. That would be a benefit.
Perhaps Pricess Mary can become a 'Qantas Embassador' for butter ?
What a joke.
Now,I may not be Qantas number 1 fan, I am happy to admit that, and I also recognise that everything a company does to protect or stabilize its bottom end may impact jobs,however even during a time of economic adversity and job cuts, if an airline ( publicly floated and measurable) cant make its own decisions about things such as what butter brand to serve, what chance does it have of long term survival ??
Let the airline make its own financial decisions, perhaps the money it saves from using items like Danish butter will go into improving service, staff morale, fair wages etc. That would be a benefit.
Perhaps Pricess Mary can become a 'Qantas Embassador' for butter ?
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ahh Yes the...
'Spirit of Australia'.....
'The Flying Kangaroo'....
Play the patriotism angle with Australian children's choir singing world wide....
'I still call Australia home'.......but buy overseas goods when cheaper
'Spirit of Australia'.....
'The Flying Kangaroo'....
Play the patriotism angle with Australian children's choir singing world wide....
'I still call Australia home'.......but buy overseas goods when cheaper
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.........................................or your new shirts that were made in Indonesia (tag still left on)
.........................................or the CC's unserviceable tags that were printed OS in such huge numbers - complete with a typo (fright number instead of FLIGHT number)
- but to add balance;
....................................... it seems that we really don't produce a lot in Australia anymore ! (and with the govt's blind focus on letting anyone flying in and out of Australia we can probably add pilots, CC & eng's to the import list in the near future)
cue the choir...
.........................................or the CC's unserviceable tags that were printed OS in such huge numbers - complete with a typo (fright number instead of FLIGHT number)
- but to add balance;
....................................... it seems that we really don't produce a lot in Australia anymore ! (and with the govt's blind focus on letting anyone flying in and out of Australia we can probably add pilots, CC & eng's to the import list in the near future)
cue the choir...
Registered User **
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A bit of foreign butter seems rather insignificant compared to having your aircraft maintained and crewed by cheaper foreign sources.
Lobey is spot on,they play the 'You're Australian,We're Australian,spend your money with us' sentimental approach and then in the same breath source anything they can offshore.
Twiggs might say that it is a insignificant amount of an insignificant item but it adds up to a huge amount of money.The office would like us to think "it's only butter,so why worry".
I think it was an American airline who saved millions by taking the individual packets of peanuts off.
Think about how many packets of butter they serve everyday and how much that would mean to Australian dairy farmers.
That is if the 'Spirit of Australia' is interested.
Butter,uniform shirts,paper work,maintenance, it all adds up.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Look up and wave
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay folks, they buy all Australian products and go tits up because the cost base is too high.
If you want your 'Australian' airline to remain competitive and continue to employ over 30000 Australians then give them a little slack.
In a global market the strongest survive. As to dairy? well it would be better for the economy if the little two bit dairy farms with old equipment and poor hygiene standards closed or merged eventually evolving into something with critical mass that can compete. Sometimes you can only flog a dead horse for so long and Tasmania is so resistant to change that the economy has been stagnant for decades.
If you want your 'Australian' airline to remain competitive and continue to employ over 30000 Australians then give them a little slack.
In a global market the strongest survive. As to dairy? well it would be better for the economy if the little two bit dairy farms with old equipment and poor hygiene standards closed or merged eventually evolving into something with critical mass that can compete. Sometimes you can only flog a dead horse for so long and Tasmania is so resistant to change that the economy has been stagnant for decades.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Heaven
Posts: 584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hypocritical Jingoism
The point is that they(Qantas) are more Australian than football meatpies kangaroos and holden cars when it suits..except when it comes to costs.
Qantas---costs above service and safety---forever and always
Qantas---costs above service and safety---forever and always
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dog House
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by me
Your union argues and through the threat of industrial action gains a 5% higher wage rate than would otherwise have been the case. This causes the airline to hire less workers in that field (if any good costs more then the amount sold is less than would otherwise be the case). As a result there are workers who would otherwise have been employed by the airline.
Originally Posted by Dutch Roll
Over-simplistic, misleading, and illogical in itself (which you accuse others of being), like several of your arguments. Your comments are too long for me to dissect them all here, but I'll start with that little bit.
Firstly I note you prefaced it with "let me explain what unions do" - a clear attempt to authoritatively generalise the argument which doesn't seem justified. Not all unions threaten industrial action in all negotiations. In fact compared to the sheer number of negotiations, industrial action or the threat thereof is relatively uncommon these days.
Firstly I note you prefaced it with "let me explain what unions do" - a clear attempt to authoritatively generalise the argument which doesn't seem justified. Not all unions threaten industrial action in all negotiations. In fact compared to the sheer number of negotiations, industrial action or the threat thereof is relatively uncommon these days.
Originally Posted by Dutch Roll
Secondly you assert both a result and causation which are not necessarily related. A company paying 5% more than what they wanted to may or may not hire more or less staff.
Originally Posted by Dutch Roll
Who is to say what the company's financial position is? What the company wants to pay staff, and what it can afford to pay staff are two totally different things, and are highly subjective. Do you seriously believe a company goes to an EBA negotiation offering its very last penny to its workers?
Originally Posted by Dutch Roll
"If any good costs more then the amount sold is less....". No, that's not necessarily true. It depends on the demand for that good. You're making unjustified assumptions that a union always reaches a point where it asks so much in salary that the company simply must employ less workers than it needs.
I'm astounded you actually believe what you wrote. The demand of a good is inversely proportional to it's price. You've totally ignored the supply side of the equation. You seem to be under the incorrect belief that price vs demand is the only influencing factor, and that it's not a relevant factor at that! Amazing. You seem to be attempting to point towards the price elasticity of demand which is the factor that determines the slope of the demand line (how sensitive demand actually is to price), whilst you seem to indicate that it's horizontal or negative. The fact remains, a given amount of supply and a union = a higher price given a fixed demand level (that does not mean a constant demand, it means a fixed relationship between price and demand). A union pushing the price above the market rate (supply vs demand) results in a lower level of employment than would otherwise be the case. Whilst I understand you many not understand or agree, people who do say this have won Nobel Prizes in Economics.
Originally Posted by me
No EBA's aren't about give and take. They are about take.
Originally Posted by Dutch Roll
.... EBAs result in demands and concessions from both sides. If Qantas conceded to pay me, as a pilot, $1 million a year that'd be great.
Originally Posted by Dutch Roll
Even individuals who are on private contracts do this sort of negotiation. EBAs are where a representative body does it on an individual's behalf.
Originally Posted by Dutch Roll
Of course, if the company preferred, it can have 2,500 pilots book appointments for individual contract discussions a few weeks before its next expiry date.
Originally Posted by Dutch Roll
Hey, unions are not all angels and they're not always sensible. No-one denies that. However you simply can't make sweeping anti-union generalisations (though I know you want to) and expect to be taken seriously. They are littered throughout several of your posts.
I'll say it again -
Unions cause higher unemployment and cost those at the bottom of society.
and:
Dutch Roll:
You're previous posts show that you are an ex-RAAF C130 Captain. You exercised your freedom of choice when you joined QF. I support you in that choice. You signed up to QF employment T&C's and a given wage. You had your pilot training totally paid for. The fact that you now use a union to attempt to further your individual financial situation at the expense of others and yet still claim you would be hard done by without a union I personally find staggering. Don't you?
Last edited by ElPerro; 5th Oct 2009 at 12:59.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dog House
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Enema
Somebody has gone very quiet. I haven't heard any aircraft buzzing about or any Spanish yodling of late.....
I must say I find it shocking and indicative of the group of people you work with that you believe that someone who believes in the free market like myself must be someone else who advocated it (Aircraft?) - yes, only one person in Australia believes this.
What's more indicative is the way that people move once joining the airline industry. "And a step to the left" (Dutch Roll for example?)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dog House
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Max1:
Ad hominem attacks don't make you sound cool in front of other people, and don't make your argument more convincing.
What point do you as an Air Traffic Controller have to make on Qantas pay? I'm not saying you aren't entitled to an opinion on this - I'm serious - what is your beef in this - how do you think this effects you? What is your point on aircrew pay?
Ad hominem attacks don't make you sound cool in front of other people, and don't make your argument more convincing.
What point do you as an Air Traffic Controller have to make on Qantas pay? I'm not saying you aren't entitled to an opinion on this - I'm serious - what is your beef in this - how do you think this effects you? What is your point on aircrew pay?
Last edited by ElPerro; 5th Oct 2009 at 14:00.
A bit rich Elperro to have a dig at someone 'attacking' you when your busy having a spray on anything a union may or may not have done.
There are some forms of employment that give you a choice of joining a union, civil aviation being one. If you are involved in it one day you may understand why you would want to be in one.
There are other forms of employment where you don't have a choice to be part of a union. You may be aware of one? It gives you things like the Aircrew Sustainability Project, ground jobs, postings to ground jobs around the corner. You didn't like the ASP but what can you do about it? Complain to the S/L who just got posted to DP?
You may have something in your DNA against unions and we all know unions have done bad things, but most rational people would acknowledge they have done some good as well.
A pilot in RPT with no union would have as much chance of negotiating with the people who run airlines as a boggie talking to Shep about avoiding a ground job and getting a payrise.
There are some forms of employment that give you a choice of joining a union, civil aviation being one. If you are involved in it one day you may understand why you would want to be in one.
There are other forms of employment where you don't have a choice to be part of a union. You may be aware of one? It gives you things like the Aircrew Sustainability Project, ground jobs, postings to ground jobs around the corner. You didn't like the ASP but what can you do about it? Complain to the S/L who just got posted to DP?
You may have something in your DNA against unions and we all know unions have done bad things, but most rational people would acknowledge they have done some good as well.
A pilot in RPT with no union would have as much chance of negotiating with the people who run airlines as a boggie talking to Shep about avoiding a ground job and getting a payrise.