Qantas S.I.T. Forced Transfers Ballot
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Small turnout for the vote really, shows that alot of people thought the issue is to sensitive to vote on
I can recall 3 of these votes for ALAEA members by Election Australia. The turnout has been similar each time.
What is the union's perspective on operational issue's? Is it fair that guys with the A330 get to stay and those who don't get moved, is there a case for discrimination due to the circumstance i.e "why did he get that aeroplane over me"??.
age, race, sex, sexual preference, maritial status, political opinion etc.....
You wouldn't be successful if you based it on -
I missed out on a course, the boss doesn't like me, I don't cut corners like some or I don't play golf with the manager.
That's why Qantas proudly say that they abide by anti-discrimination laws and EEO policies. I wish they also had to abide by a moral code.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: sydney
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didn't realise that the vote was open to all LAMEs from all areas. I thought that because this was specific to SIT that it would have been their vote.
It isnt right for people to vote on something that ultimately wont affect them,but I guess this could affect more people in the near future
It isnt right for people to vote on something that ultimately wont affect them,but I guess this could affect more people in the near future
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Oz
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did not recieve the "how to vote" info, could be more in that boat. I know the guys in Base were quite reluctant to be the hang man, I realise the need for a unified position on this issue but given the turn out I'd say only the SIT blokes ended up voting in the end any way (plus a few more maybe).
As for training and perceved "positions on the ladder", forget it. The company have been making promises they have no intention of keeping, the endless 330 training will not eventuate, only the golden few will ever see it.
Maintain the rage, the war is far from over........
As for training and perceved "positions on the ladder", forget it. The company have been making promises they have no intention of keeping, the endless 330 training will not eventuate, only the golden few will ever see it.
Maintain the rage, the war is far from over........
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I really feel for those young blokes at the SIT, who most of them were top of there class during there apprenticeship
I believe that the area should decide their own fate in this particular situation, maybe the reason for the voter turn out.
I hope that this would be the same in the future.
Makes sense to me.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.
Posts: 1,116
Received 13 Likes
on
8 Posts
to alaea fed sec
1/ fed sec, can set out clearly what qantas can and cannot do with these transfers please. Any precedents ?
It would mean a change in extended hours roster and a change of "employer "given line and the base are separate businesses.
2/ If qantas just picked people and said 'you' start in your new section in a months time (for example) and you didn't want to change, could it be fought credibly in an industrial / legal sense because of the above points (roster, place of employment) ???
3/ If the above points can be fought wth a chance of success would qantas be faced with offering redundancies if they truly want to reduce numbers at SIO?
thanks.
It would mean a change in extended hours roster and a change of "employer "given line and the base are separate businesses.
2/ If qantas just picked people and said 'you' start in your new section in a months time (for example) and you didn't want to change, could it be fought credibly in an industrial / legal sense because of the above points (roster, place of employment) ???
3/ If the above points can be fought wth a chance of success would qantas be faced with offering redundancies if they truly want to reduce numbers at SIO?
thanks.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G'day Clamp,
Good questions and ones I have been asked dozens of times over the last couple of weeks. I will answer them shortly but I can generally say that there are a lot of members out there thinking about what they consider fair, that redundancies should be offered first (calls predominantly coming from those around retirement age) and every single LAME has a personal reason why changes being brought in by the company will unfairly affect them.
The company you guys are working for is being run by a pack of fools. The changes they are seeking in many cases do not make sense. LAMEs will be hurt by poor decisions that the Engineering management appointees are making such as the dumping of all contracts, a separate 380 dept and a merger in Mel that is entirely unnecessary. They have neglected training, not replaced staff who have left and have convinced themselves that the better on time performance this year is due to their fine management skills (it is because our PIA and associated work to rule has stopped).
Unfortunately the law (even under a Labor Govt.) is heavily weighted against workers. Two weeks ago my 17 year old daughter complained in writing to her boss at Subway that she was being underpaid by 20% compared to the minimum wage rates set by the National wage case. She was sacked within a week. I helped her lodge with Fair Work Aust and we have been told that the first concilliation hearing will be 6 weeks away. What hope have you got with laws that work against fairness. Qantas are masters at using these laws and their law firm (Freehills) wrote most of them in the first place. They are designed to fk you over. Ok, time to stop telling stories and get these questions answered. Please accept what I say when I explain that there is nothing legal you can do about something. Please support me and yourselves when I put out a notice recommending you work to rule, not cut corners, refuse half ar$ed training or withdraw your goodwill. These are our tools, we need to work with them.
Qantas can run their business however they like. They do have to "consult" us regarding changes but that is about it. Can they force staff from one section to another? Not at all. There is another door you can walk through if you don't like their offer. 12 blokes will only be given 2 options though.
Precedents? In 92 I was forced out of SIT to keep a job with Qantas. When SHM closed, staff were forced out of SHM to other depts. They are closing an engine line, if the staff want to remain employed, they must retrain and move to Base. In some cases, VR is offered but there are only a limited number on offer. Most staff faced with the situation prefer to move to the new section.
The argument that they are separate businesses is a bit of wishful thinking. It is a different business only when Qantas want it to be (to compete with each other in tendering processes, as an excuse not help each other to retain contracts, when they wish to not co-operate on training, when they just want to blame another dept). It is one company though, Qantas. The EBA covers all LAMEs in whatever they want to call their business units.
Different rosters? Didn't vote? There is something you can do about this. When you get to the new section, call for a vote. If 66% aren't in favour, it goes down and negotiations start for a new one. Careful you don't upset your new workmates though, they might like their roster.
No. Sorry, not at all on the above points. If we could use them, we would. If there was the smallest chance we could prevent changes for these reasons we would give it a go.
We do have some other ideas though unrelated to the points above that many members think are fair claims for decency for long serving loyal employees. Our ideas are a little outside the box, it may call on the members to stick together or it may not. I would rather not give Qantas a heads up on this forum though.
The redundancy thing comes up all the time. We know there are a large number who would love to escape right now. If they want to reduce SIT (SIO is a Murrayology. SIT is how we term it) LAMEs but need them elsewhere, we can't force them to offer VR. If I can term it a different way.
We don't need you in your job anymore but the great news is this. We have another job exactly the same as yours at the same rate of pay and classification (LAME) (suitable alternative employment) just across the street. Once they offer suitable alt. employment, they don't need to offer VR. Your choice is move or leave. Its harsh but thats the law. We can't force them to offer VR and won't waste our time trying.
Happy to answer any further questions.
ps. as I don't have the opportunity anymore, can each of you please raise 12 hold items this week on your aircraft, one for each LAME who they are trying to force into another dept against their wishes. Sorry, on second thoughts don't raise too many hold items, it may cost Kev his bonus.
Good questions and ones I have been asked dozens of times over the last couple of weeks. I will answer them shortly but I can generally say that there are a lot of members out there thinking about what they consider fair, that redundancies should be offered first (calls predominantly coming from those around retirement age) and every single LAME has a personal reason why changes being brought in by the company will unfairly affect them.
The company you guys are working for is being run by a pack of fools. The changes they are seeking in many cases do not make sense. LAMEs will be hurt by poor decisions that the Engineering management appointees are making such as the dumping of all contracts, a separate 380 dept and a merger in Mel that is entirely unnecessary. They have neglected training, not replaced staff who have left and have convinced themselves that the better on time performance this year is due to their fine management skills (it is because our PIA and associated work to rule has stopped).
Unfortunately the law (even under a Labor Govt.) is heavily weighted against workers. Two weeks ago my 17 year old daughter complained in writing to her boss at Subway that she was being underpaid by 20% compared to the minimum wage rates set by the National wage case. She was sacked within a week. I helped her lodge with Fair Work Aust and we have been told that the first concilliation hearing will be 6 weeks away. What hope have you got with laws that work against fairness. Qantas are masters at using these laws and their law firm (Freehills) wrote most of them in the first place. They are designed to fk you over. Ok, time to stop telling stories and get these questions answered. Please accept what I say when I explain that there is nothing legal you can do about something. Please support me and yourselves when I put out a notice recommending you work to rule, not cut corners, refuse half ar$ed training or withdraw your goodwill. These are our tools, we need to work with them.
1/ fed sec, can set out clearly what qantas can and cannot do with these transfers please. Any precedents ?
It would mean a change in extended hours roster and a change of "employer "given line and the base are separate businesses.
It would mean a change in extended hours roster and a change of "employer "given line and the base are separate businesses.
Precedents? In 92 I was forced out of SIT to keep a job with Qantas. When SHM closed, staff were forced out of SHM to other depts. They are closing an engine line, if the staff want to remain employed, they must retrain and move to Base. In some cases, VR is offered but there are only a limited number on offer. Most staff faced with the situation prefer to move to the new section.
The argument that they are separate businesses is a bit of wishful thinking. It is a different business only when Qantas want it to be (to compete with each other in tendering processes, as an excuse not help each other to retain contracts, when they wish to not co-operate on training, when they just want to blame another dept). It is one company though, Qantas. The EBA covers all LAMEs in whatever they want to call their business units.
Different rosters? Didn't vote? There is something you can do about this. When you get to the new section, call for a vote. If 66% aren't in favour, it goes down and negotiations start for a new one. Careful you don't upset your new workmates though, they might like their roster.
2/ If qantas just picked people and said 'you' start in your new section in a months time (for example) and you didn't want to change, could it be fought credibly in an industrial / legal sense because of the above points (roster, place of employment) ???
We do have some other ideas though unrelated to the points above that many members think are fair claims for decency for long serving loyal employees. Our ideas are a little outside the box, it may call on the members to stick together or it may not. I would rather not give Qantas a heads up on this forum though.
3/ If the above points can be fought wth a chance of success would qantas be faced with offering redundancies if they truly want to reduce numbers at SIO?
We don't need you in your job anymore but the great news is this. We have another job exactly the same as yours at the same rate of pay and classification (LAME) (suitable alternative employment) just across the street. Once they offer suitable alt. employment, they don't need to offer VR. Your choice is move or leave. Its harsh but thats the law. We can't force them to offer VR and won't waste our time trying.
Happy to answer any further questions.
ps. as I don't have the opportunity anymore, can each of you please raise 12 hold items this week on your aircraft, one for each LAME who they are trying to force into another dept against their wishes. Sorry, on second thoughts don't raise too many hold items, it may cost Kev his bonus.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: melbourne
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bring back rotation
bring back rotation, then all the guys who got shafted to base in the late eighties, early ninety,s could have their turn at the sio and all the guys who have been at the sio staight out of their time could learn a little.No shots across the bow, But since the contracts have evaporated why not. have a vote on three groups one for fixed term sio,one for fixed term base and one for a rotation roster.the initial twelve might have to wear some pain short term, but a two year rotating scenario would benefit all concerned.
now to the night shift issue, did all lames in base and sio vote on extended hour rosters back in the 90,s ?
now to the night shift issue, did all lames in base and sio vote on extended hour rosters back in the 90,s ?
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Sydney
Age: 44
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and all the guys who have been at the sio staight out of their time could learn a little.No shots across the bow
The rotation theory might seem simple, but lives are shaped around the work shifts, and lets face it, some people just do not want to work night shifts, and some just can't.
Look at the company's track record. Do you think they could be organised / bothered to give people enough warning of their rotation.
"Oh look, my leave is approved for my family trip to Europe. My rental car is booked and so are hotels"
"Actually, ummm, sorry, but you're rotating in two weeks and will be on a different shift, so no leave...."
You know it will happen.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: australia
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't think the rotation issue is not going to come to fruition, that would prob involve another vote and that vote would prob really be able to voted on by the SIT boys as it would affect there lives more. As you said with leave and all the rest it would just be to complicated. The other issue is that the crews are composite these days and it was only the mechanical guys that rotated in the past, so it would be pretty hard to split a crew and rotate it. Fed Sec is this an idea that is seriously being thrown around???
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: q-ville
Age: 78
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm wearing asbestos underwear.
Just get over it...
If you're in base maint and happy, well good for you - you've found your niche! Well done
If you're in base maint and unhappy, because you can't get to line... perhaps it's just not your thing.
Accept it - why don't you!
There's way too much whinging going on.
Rotations are a load of B/S because as soon as the base guy gets up to speed and in a groove, he's done. Time for another guy to fill his shoes.
Swapping manpower adhoc between Sit and Base are a bad idea because Line Lames have different perceptions of what is a "go" condition for an aircraft as compared to a Base Lame's perspective.
And also, who needs another uninterested Lame being paid $130k in the hangers anyway?
Sending SIT guys to base will provide another 12 oxygen thiefs!!!
Ok, so it's my first post!
I'm wearing asbestos underwear. Ready to be flamed!
If you're in base maint and happy, well good for you - you've found your niche! Well done
If you're in base maint and unhappy, because you can't get to line... perhaps it's just not your thing.
Accept it - why don't you!
There's way too much whinging going on.
Rotations are a load of B/S because as soon as the base guy gets up to speed and in a groove, he's done. Time for another guy to fill his shoes.
Swapping manpower adhoc between Sit and Base are a bad idea because Line Lames have different perceptions of what is a "go" condition for an aircraft as compared to a Base Lame's perspective.
And also, who needs another uninterested Lame being paid $130k in the hangers anyway?
Sending SIT guys to base will provide another 12 oxygen thiefs!!!
Ok, so it's my first post!
I'm wearing asbestos underwear. Ready to be flamed!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NSW
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting
Interesting that Base seem to think SIT Lames are above them? Would have thought its the Domestic Boys who think they are above everyone else, including Base...
The Facts - SIT was profitably, offsetting its operational costs with between 15-17 million per year....Then Managements mismanagement meant they couldnt attract anymore people so the contracts had to go so more staff could be made available....Guys this isnt a Base versus the SIT, it wont be long before Base or domestics will be looking for support as management decide manpower can be reduced...
Time to stop the crap what people think and focus on the issue at hand...
The Facts - SIT was profitably, offsetting its operational costs with between 15-17 million per year....Then Managements mismanagement meant they couldnt attract anymore people so the contracts had to go so more staff could be made available....Guys this isnt a Base versus the SIT, it wont be long before Base or domestics will be looking for support as management decide manpower can be reduced...
Time to stop the crap what people think and focus on the issue at hand...
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: On the chopping board.
Posts: 929
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Give it a rest guys. I think most of us are getting pretty sick of some of the w@nkers slagging off base guys, (except for you Heavyjet, I enjoyed that one), and the base guys slagging off SIT. I have worked in both and can say that most are a professional and smart bunch of fellas, regardless on whether they lube gears, rig flaps, or fix bleed defects in an hour flat.
To suggest otherwise is simply a display of ignorance and inexperience. Lets stay united and on topic.
To suggest otherwise is simply a display of ignorance and inexperience. Lets stay united and on topic.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: melbourne
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pisstake
how about we engage the managers,bring out the tragedy map,sit by the fires at camp krusty,carry out a lap,have a clear and transparent forum,build a bridge of trust with some rope and sticks,empower the twelve and lets all stay where we are. see problem fixed
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: On the chopping board.
Posts: 929
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
PS Fed Sec,
Sorry to hear about your daughter loosing her job. It's pretty hard not to take stuff like that personal when it happens to your own family. Makes me wonder what sort of Country we are living in.
Sounds like a few of those $ubw@y managers deserve a good footlong up em!
Sounds like a few of those $ubw@y managers deserve a good footlong up em!
Yet again our only strength is in Unity. We need to all stick together not slag each other!
Guys united we stand - we proved it last year - lets strengthen our resolve and do it again and again till it becomes second nature to look out for all LAMEs - if we don't we are doomed!
For far too long have we collectively let the Freeh*lls and *ldme*dows of this world pick us off a few at a time!
Changes have been forced on lots of us and they will continue to crop up and the only hope we have is from our combined single mindedness of purpose and unity!
All the best to those about to have their working worlds changed against their wishes - I know it is not pleasant!!!!!!
Guys united we stand - we proved it last year - lets strengthen our resolve and do it again and again till it becomes second nature to look out for all LAMEs - if we don't we are doomed!
For far too long have we collectively let the Freeh*lls and *ldme*dows of this world pick us off a few at a time!
Changes have been forced on lots of us and they will continue to crop up and the only hope we have is from our combined single mindedness of purpose and unity!
All the best to those about to have their working worlds changed against their wishes - I know it is not pleasant!!!!!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I'd stated earlier in this thread, this compulsory shift of a few engineers from S.I.T. to Base was not going to be pretty, and the management seem to be succeeding in what they set out to do. Destabilise the troops and have them slanging off at one another, and who's better than who, and which section is better than which. The old divide and conquer reigns supreme, and a precentage of blokes look for the first opportunity to have a dig at one another, while management carve up the company and pull the rug out from underneath us.
Unless I'm mistaken, don't we all work for QANTAS? Why is engineering at Base better or worse than S.I.T. or S.I.T. better or worse than Base and Domestics, and why is there a difference in the "quality" of engineers between the sections and the way things are done? We all are supposed to work by the same manuals and carry out the tasks as required. Unfortunately, a certain few have a certain way of doing things, and unless it's their way, it's not up to scratch.
I guess this perception is spread by a miserable few that felt they were above others that should have gone to the terminal and didn't get to go, or should have gone to Domestics and didn't get to go, so then slag off at those that went, and spread their own misery amongst those that stayed behind.
Unless I'm mistaken, don't we all work for QANTAS? Why is engineering at Base better or worse than S.I.T. or S.I.T. better or worse than Base and Domestics, and why is there a difference in the "quality" of engineers between the sections and the way things are done? We all are supposed to work by the same manuals and carry out the tasks as required. Unfortunately, a certain few have a certain way of doing things, and unless it's their way, it's not up to scratch.
I guess this perception is spread by a miserable few that felt they were above others that should have gone to the terminal and didn't get to go, or should have gone to Domestics and didn't get to go, so then slag off at those that went, and spread their own misery amongst those that stayed behind.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: q-ville
Age: 78
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No flame? you must be nice guys huh?
There's no innate difference between the Base - Line - Heavy engineer. 
They are the same animal. (did you see the full stop?)
Hopefully they all did apprenticeships, basics and type courses.
The only thing is that some excel in different aspects of our trade.
When you have a guy who relishes a flap change and loves getting the rig down to the closest 0.005" - why would you put him in a line situation.
Vice versa - If a guy is great at making operational decisions, knowing how much meat is in the system, so that he can let the flight get to it's destination, why would you put him in Base?
The 12 that go to Base will be like fish out of water, Tools? what tools? the DDG and a pen are his tools
I'm still wearing my Asbestos underpants
They are the same animal. (did you see the full stop?)Hopefully they all did apprenticeships, basics and type courses.
The only thing is that some excel in different aspects of our trade.
When you have a guy who relishes a flap change and loves getting the rig down to the closest 0.005" - why would you put him in a line situation.
Vice versa - If a guy is great at making operational decisions, knowing how much meat is in the system, so that he can let the flight get to it's destination, why would you put him in Base?
The 12 that go to Base will be like fish out of water, Tools? what tools? the DDG and a pen are his tools
I'm still wearing my Asbestos underpants