Geoffrey Thomas awarded RAES "Journalist of the Year"

[belowMDA]

This link is to an excellent article detailing how journalists' investigative stories are watered down or hampered by reliance upon advertising revenue in the publications they work for. It is a very frustrating read, in that it'll piss you off, but is enlightening with regard to the current vein of conversation. I do not intend this to be a criticism of GT as I do not know his history of articles.

The Broken Wall by Blake Fleetwood

[Ken Borough]

Not news?

This is a stale story: the awards were presented in Paris way back in June.

[FoxtrotAlpha18]

From where I stand, there's only one aviation writer with a skerrick of credibility; and that's Ben Sandilands - unfortunately, he 's not main stream.

Ben Sandilands is just a cranky old bugger with a bug up his ar$e!

GT is an honourable and accomplished writer, and does not mooch off airlines or anyone else as has been so subtly suggested on the previous page. Also, the point of writing an article or a news item is not always to expose something, but to also inform people.

And as for the suggestion that he was pissing in Airbus's pocket with that recent A380 article - I assure you there is NO love lost between GT and Airbus!

[Howabout]

FA18,

I don't think that I suggested that the gentleman mooches

off airlines or anyone else as has been so subtly suggested on the previous page.

My question relates to aviation journalism in general. There seems to be no willingness to investigate stories where the smell is akin to a two-week-old dead fish.

Here's a really simple one for the journos: TIBA; does it exist or not?

[geoffrey thomas]

Response from GT

Hi All:
Many thanks for the few kind words and not so many thanks for the brickbats.
For the record I have not had a trip from Qantas in over five years. My relationship with that airline has been rock bottom for years because of Dixon and co.
YES I was invited on its A380 delivery BUT I paid my own way to Toulouse and was in fact invited by Airbus, much to my surprise.
I am also really no friend of Airbus which usually accuses me of being a Boeing stooge.
As far as Sunrise is concerned it is not and cannot be an in-depth aviation forum. I try to add some understanding for the public in the confines of one minute grabs but it is very hard.
I do not want to scare the living daylights out of passengers and am positive if possible. BUT TV is challenging. Quick grabs - ten word answers.
For the record I do it for nothing and living in Perth that means I get up at 3.30am in the morning. Stupid? Perhaps!
I strive to help in a small way develop understanding between the public and the industry but it is difficult to convey the complexity of the industry to a lay audience without putting them to sleep.
You all my be interested to know that the article that won that award that started this thread was all about how de-regulation has ruined the airline industry in the US - a message that I think most of you would agree.
Perhaps you should read it and then pass judgement.
May the debate on my stupidity and bias continue!!
Best Geoffrey T
0417936610

[FoxtrotAlpha18]

You feeling guilty for some reason Howabout?

Originally Posted by neville nobody

...the reason he gets hammered here is that he sucks up to the airlines for reasons only known to himself. (I could guess at what those reasons are however that would be speculation.)

Originally Posted by Mr. Hat

He's an absolute sell-out...

Very suggestive...anyway...

He puts his name to all his work, so his credibility is constantly on the line out there...most of you guys hide behind psudonyms when you make your comments. Plus, those of you call for fair and balanced journalism, but where's the balance in most of your comments!?!? At least some of you know the difference.

[geoffrey thomas]

Further thoughts

Just for the record, I resigned from my position as SE-Asian Editor at Aviation Week in 2000 over the magazine pulling an article that disputed Airbus claims on the A380's performance.

In 2004 I was shown the door at The West over a dispute relating to my coverage of Skywest and exposing the BS it was peddling at the time.
The Skywest PR hack was a friend of the then editor.

Both extremely costly to me.

Another aspect is that these days we have lawyers crawling all over our copy and the restrictions can be tough on what you can and can't say.

ALSO and please remember this...we report what people say. These articles you cite that I have written are NOT always my opinion but what I am told. Yes we strive to find another point of view but many people will make accusations but cannot or will not back them up.

In some cases, such as Rex, some issues are still in court so they are off limits.

How do we know they haven’t some axe to grind? A major part of our job is to try and sort the truth from fiction when we are not privy to the whole story.

Best GT

[Icarus2001]

Well Mr Thomas, you earn big brownie points from me for showing in the forum named in your honour. Shows some integrity.

Why oh why in the last few articles in the West about Perth airport, there is always a Skywest tail front and centre of the accompanying photograph? How is HD?

[geoffrey thomas]

Good Point!

Hi Icarus2001;

HD is well as are Peter N, Ian G, Stan Q, and Brett G et al.
In fact you raise an interesting issue.
While I write the story, I do not select the pictures, nor edit the story nor write the headline and have little or no input on cutting it to fit the space. That policy is newspaper wide across the globe, which is always a challenge, particularly when writing about technical issues.
Best GT

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Hi Mr Thomas,

I think it's tops that you are prepared to post on here as you have. I will assume that you would also be prepared to answer a couple of questions. Even if I don't like your answers, the credibility rating will go up.

I understand that grabs are short and they can be taken out of context, Sunrise however is live but you only get a couple of questions to answer and limited time. This role is completely different to the one at ATW where you can write whatever you like.

I think I've seen or heard you a couple of times on Sunrise or similar radio shows. You have given glowing reports on the overseas maintenance facilities and claim that Qantas only use worlds best facilities.

Q 1 - What overseas maintenance facilities have Qantas used in the past 5 years that you are refering to with your positive comments? (this is a general knowledge question to test if you understand the industry. I will assume the longer it takes to answer, the more calls you have had to make to get the answers. I will text you immediately to let you know these questions are here.)

You circulate in the Aviation industry in which most of us work. If you circulate in this area and claim to be an aviation expert, I am sure you would be aware of shonky maintenance that was exposed in the public from overseas facilities such as wiring that was stapled together and failed Qantas audit reports. It was our Association that put these things out there.

Q 2 - Why have you never contacted the ALAEA to discuss any maintenance issue?

Lawful Industrial Action was taken by LAMEs at Qantas after 18 months of negotiation where Qantas had not budged from their opening position. Engineers had waited 3 1/2 since any rise at all whilst Dixon and co. had recieved cumulative wage rises above 50%. After the engineers got a wage rise of about 4.8% pa, you asked Geoff Dixon this question -

Surely the long-running and mischievous industrial campaign by ground engineers this year..........

Q 3 - Why did you use the word mischievous to descride our lawfully conducted protected Industrial Action?

[The Mr Fixit]

I read an bio somewhere depicting GT's career in Aviation (btw kudos for having the balls to post as yourself not many do including moi)

(1) greatest excitement - inaugural flight of the B777

(2) greatest disappointment - missing Concorde flight due to son's birthday

Think that about says it all, I could be wrong but hey that's journalism

[geoffrey thomas]

ALAEA Fed Sec

Good questions I would agree.

My only issue with the stand taken by the union was simply that all maintenance done overseas was shonky and thus scaring the travelling public.

Qantas has had its work done overseas for decades at place like Manila, (Lufthansa) Singapore by SIA Engineering, Malaysia (MAS), New Zealand, Hong Kong and various places in China.

My point was the no-one would question the maintenance done to CX, SQ and LH aircraft.

SIA refute absolutely that they were responsible for the shonky wiring and claim its was from part of the aircraft they had nothing to do with.

Agree absolutely that the management of QF did the wrong thing by the engineers but that is another issue and I have covered off on that many times in my attacks on QF management both in print on radio and TV.

I was extremely critical of the Airline Partners Australia buyout and fought relentlessly for that to fail.

Sincerely hope that after the settling in period the new management embraces staff for the benefit of all at Qantas.

Hope that answers some of your queries.

And I am happy to look at the issue more closely perhaps for ATW or Australian AViation.

Best GT

[geoffrey thomas]

Missed a question

Q2: Why didn't I called the union?

Why didn't you call me? Everyone else does and I am not hard to find.

The issue that I was focused on was simply the relentless scare campaign, which is what I was asked about over and over again. Are Qantas aircraft safe etc etc.....

Q 3 - Why did you use the word mischievous to descride our lawfully conducted protected Industrial Action?

Again the word mischievous was used only to describe the scare campaign - nothing else.

Best GT

[Keg]

Geoff, if you can't see that the use of your word mischevious left a lasting impression in the minds of the public that the entire campaign was about overseas maintenance rather than it being 98% about QF's lack of engagement in meaningful enterprise bargaining then you've just gone down another two or three pegs in my opinion.

I generally don't mind most of your articles but it's your lack of care as evidenced in this one example that causes me to question your motives.

My point was the no-one would question the maintenance done to... SQ... aircraft.

Really? You need to talk to people like KT in SIN. You need to talk to some of the supervising LAMEs up there including one bloke that left QF to go to SAEC (I think) and then returned a few years later. You need to talk to some of the ICAO auditing teams that go through there from time to time. Find some engineers and pilots that worked on the former SQ 744s that were leased by Ansett and ask them about SQ maintenance. Like John Laws used to say, 'oils ain't oils'.

[ebt]

Gee Keg, it certainly seemed that ALAEA were playing the overseas maintenance card pretty hard, so that seems a little unfair.

Look, with any type of journalism, you cannot please everyone all the time. GT has a hard task as someone with a strong background in the industry writing primarily for a broad audience where to them it seems that there are very black and white issues which are one way or another very emotional. In that sense, some detail may get lost in the 'translation', but overall I think he does a good job. And to be fair, to have the sort of aviation coverage that we do in such a relatively small industry (and smaller still in WA) is not too bad, and a credit to the journos who specialise in the industry.

I know it was a whlie ago now, but congratulations GT on the award.Go for back to back!

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Good work Mr Thomas and I would agree that your answers have passed the test. The only facility not mentioned was ST Aerospace in Singapore.

I would agree that LH as an airline is highly regarded but surprisingly, LH Technik Manilla does not do any work on LH aircraft. I have also been informed that they are not even their preferred Asian supplier.

Would anyone question CX or SQ maintenance. I think so but that is for the players up there to discuss although there have been instances in Singapore of non Qf parts being fitted to Qf aircraft after the parts storage led to the mixing of components.

The facility that works on CX aircraft (HAECO) recently mounted all four engines on the same Qf aircraft incorrectly and they were unable to rig the flaps on a Qf 747-300 which was ferried back to Avalon for rectification.

The shonky wiring was EEL (floor path) on a 747-400 aircraft. All other Qantas aircraft were checked and the only other one found with the same problem (in dozens of locations) was the second aircraft that had been to the same facility. The facility claims it was not them because they didn't work in the areas of concern however the floorboards had been removed in those locations. Certainly the ALAEA doesn't accept their answers. We are disappointed that CASA appears to have.

We have attempted to work closely with the new Joyce team. We have quietly gone about our business until recently. We have been reporting our concerns directly to the airline but unfortunately their actions indicate that they are continuing to turn a blind eye to problems both within and outside our shores.

Qantas didn't build the best safety reputation by chance, it started from day one. Staff were sufficiently trained and held pride in what they did because they weren't threatened with loss of work to overseas facilities unless they did the job quicker and cheaper.

The situation was suitably summed up by a manager in Cairns recently when he said -

Qantas used to be 95% ability and 5% company. Now it is the other way around. 95% company and 5% ability.

[lowerlobe]

[QUOTE]Q2: Why didn't I called the union?

Why didn't you call me? Everyone else does and I am not hard to find. QUOTE]

That's fair enough GT but....

Whether there is any substance to the allegations or not there are always two sides to a story.

When commenting in the media on a topic such as this and for the story to be fair and balanced would it not have been prudent to contact one of the two parties which in this case is the union and get their side of the story?

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Why didn't you call me? Everyone else does and I am not hard to find.

I concede that the distribution of our press releases does not extend to ATW. Usually the journos contact us after a press release is made to all newspaper, radio and television outlets. Again it was well known that the ALAEA were openly speaking about maintenance issues and it would have been easier to look us up than the ALAEA knowing which one of the hundreds of journos in this country was about to disagree with the matters we were placing on the public record.

I understand that it is beneficial for Australian journos or experts to praise an Australian airline and not scare the public without cause. Our process is simple. We take any matter of genuine concern to the airline, if they don't act we go to CASA, when they do nothing it is off to the press. Placing a maintenance issue in the public forum may not fix what has happened but it certainly puts the airline on guard to make sure it doesn't happen again.

If your goal is to water down the "scare campaign" by denouncing what we say, I would expect it to at least be based on fact after some investigation, not just general positive statements that appear to be paraphrased from a Qantas PR manual.

You have my number now and I look forward to working with you when the need arises.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Again the word mischievous was used only to describe the scare campaign - nothing else.

The word was used to describe our Industrial campaign of 2008. The legal protected industrial action that LAMEs took after attempting without progress to attain a fair wages and conditions package after 18 months of negotiation and 3 1/2 years without a wage rise.

The maintenance issues or "scare campaign" came nearly 12 months before our PIA had begun. Maintenance problems were rarely talked about during our Industrial campaign.

The ALAEA is a professional organisation of Engineers with a joint function. We are the industrial advocates for 3000 members around the country and also have a Technical Department with its own seperate committee to address maintenance concerns.

I think it was a little unfair to descibe our campaign as mischievous. Overall I think it was great that you have answered these questions and certainly the credibility has gone up a touch. Hopefully it continues to rise in the eyes of ALAEA members.

cheers
Steve

[Buster Hyman]

Get a room you guys!!!