I'll never fly a LCC because...
Fair points metro man.
However - Virgin Blue cabin crew are paid above the average cabin crew wage these days - would you support them in taking a similar stance in an effort to improve conditions (not just for themselves, but -) for everyone?
Exceptional circumstances sure - i've happily gone in at 2am on annual leave to do a 21 (yes - twenty one!) hour 4 sector duty to pick up a soldier who was killed - and I did this on my birthday, but I can not be held responsible for a companies lack of oversight when it comes to the travel plans of 200 passengers, funeral or otherwise. God knows, i've missed a few funerals, weddings, birthdays and births at short notice...
And, sure, the aircraft may be certified for less - I didn't sign my employment agreement with boeing (or airbus or embraer) - I signed it with an airline that also put pen to paper and agreed!
I was one of those Ansett passengers, and also one of those Ansett staff members. I lost my job, and missed an important occasion. I too remember the tears - but no regrets, just respect!
8888 - I didn't say everyone - I don't doubt there are others like you - however you are certainly not in the majority (beyond an anonymous online forum - ie in the real world). I guess my point is, the planes do not fly without pilots, and for now, they certainly don't fly without flight attendants - like it or not... Flight Attendants, like pilots are a requirement - and like pilots, we are just trying to make a living... I know first hand at Qantas (short haul) and Virgin Blue, there is generally a healthy respect for the pilots, which for the most part is reciprocated.
No disrespect to Obie beyond that he has shown flight attendants...
That is as far as I will be drawn into an iron curtain debate... Safe flying...
However - Virgin Blue cabin crew are paid above the average cabin crew wage these days - would you support them in taking a similar stance in an effort to improve conditions (not just for themselves, but -) for everyone?
Exceptional circumstances sure - i've happily gone in at 2am on annual leave to do a 21 (yes - twenty one!) hour 4 sector duty to pick up a soldier who was killed - and I did this on my birthday, but I can not be held responsible for a companies lack of oversight when it comes to the travel plans of 200 passengers, funeral or otherwise. God knows, i've missed a few funerals, weddings, birthdays and births at short notice...
And, sure, the aircraft may be certified for less - I didn't sign my employment agreement with boeing (or airbus or embraer) - I signed it with an airline that also put pen to paper and agreed!
I was one of those Ansett passengers, and also one of those Ansett staff members. I lost my job, and missed an important occasion. I too remember the tears - but no regrets, just respect!
8888 - I didn't say everyone - I don't doubt there are others like you - however you are certainly not in the majority (beyond an anonymous online forum - ie in the real world). I guess my point is, the planes do not fly without pilots, and for now, they certainly don't fly without flight attendants - like it or not... Flight Attendants, like pilots are a requirement - and like pilots, we are just trying to make a living... I know first hand at Qantas (short haul) and Virgin Blue, there is generally a healthy respect for the pilots, which for the most part is reciprocated.
No disrespect to Obie beyond that he has shown flight attendants...
That is as far as I will be drawn into an iron curtain debate... Safe flying...
Last edited by ozangel; 27th Oct 2009 at 13:20.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Earth
Age: 36
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flight TT567 out of Hobart was cancelled after a flight attendant became ill, and no replacement staff were available.
Are they running out of cabin crew?
They can hire me!!!
“Unfortunately we do not have a crew base in Hobart and so no replacement was available (and) we need a certain amount of cabin crew to fly each flight by law.”
Last edited by Pequena_Inquieta; 27th Oct 2009 at 13:49.
"Flight Attendants- By and large the only differentiating factor between airlines."
Not quite.
Type of aircraft operated
In flight entertainment
Quality of meals
Convenient schedule
Safety record
Frequent flyer program
Lounges
Price
Reliability
Reputation
Customer service on the ground
Seat pitch
You are tending to rather over estimate your importance just a little aren't you ?
Not quite.Type of aircraft operated
In flight entertainment
Quality of meals
Convenient schedule
Safety record
Frequent flyer program
Lounges
Price
Reliability
Reputation
Customer service on the ground
Seat pitch
You are tending to rather over estimate your importance just a little aren't you ?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ozangel, I admire your calmness and agree with some of what you say.
Ditch, not FA bashing generally. Making an observation from almost 15 years in the airline game and offering a counter argument to a previous post. The respect that I showed to those whom I directed my earlier comments towards was, on numerous occasions, most certainly not reciprocated and some of the stories I could tell would, perhaps, make even you raise an eyebrow. Whilst outstanding F/A's might be an airline marketers dream I would suggest that they are misleading as the 'only' differentiation factor. Some of the airlines in my neck of the woods are a case in point if you include safety and standards in there somewhere.
Ditch, not FA bashing generally. Making an observation from almost 15 years in the airline game and offering a counter argument to a previous post. The respect that I showed to those whom I directed my earlier comments towards was, on numerous occasions, most certainly not reciprocated and some of the stories I could tell would, perhaps, make even you raise an eyebrow. Whilst outstanding F/A's might be an airline marketers dream I would suggest that they are misleading as the 'only' differentiation factor. Some of the airlines in my neck of the woods are a case in point if you include safety and standards in there somewhere.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Metro Man,
“AN flight attendents were grossly over paid in the first place”
And yet at the time QF had some cabin crew earning considerably more.
“I'm not suggesting the flight attendents killed AN by themselves, many departments deserve recognition for the part they played. I already mentioned the pilots, the baggage handlers weren't exactly under paid and worked to death, the aircraft cleaners earned more than I did as a turbo prop captain.”
Yep, once again, compared to which airline. AN staff salaries were NO different to QF’s and in some cases (such as longhaul pilots) lower.
Try again my friend, this time use some real information when debating.
“AN flight attendents were grossly over paid in the first place”
And yet at the time QF had some cabin crew earning considerably more.
“I'm not suggesting the flight attendents killed AN by themselves, many departments deserve recognition for the part they played. I already mentioned the pilots, the baggage handlers weren't exactly under paid and worked to death, the aircraft cleaners earned more than I did as a turbo prop captain.”
Yep, once again, compared to which airline. AN staff salaries were NO different to QF’s and in some cases (such as longhaul pilots) lower.
Try again my friend, this time use some real information when debating.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Brisbane
Age: 77
Posts: 1,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And Metro - I for one am grateful to those Ansett crew who refused to fly.
I worked with so many different people in the Airline Industry all over the World for more than 40 years, and as I said earlier this was one of the most disgusting and upsetting things I have ever seen.
No other AN Employees there that day could believe it, the Captain didn't want to go but had to, even the Engineers and Porters dispatching the 767 had to be ordered to see it out as it was, EVERY Employee was concerned for the pax, and the Company, except the flight attendants.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Brisbane
Age: 77
Posts: 1,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"That's not how we did it at Ansett"
Incidentally several people talking about EBAs, I am not positive but fairly sure this disgusting incident was before there were EBAs.
Also I am NOT having a go at Flight Attendants in general, or "Hosties" as they were known for most of my working life, I have worked with many really great Flight Attendants all over Australia, and also in many other parts of the World for more than 40 years.
It was just these 9 that sad day.
Yep, once again, compared to which airline.
There is a BBC program available on YouTube about the downfall of British Leyland. Worth watching, and one done in a similar manner on Ansetts downfall would be particularly interesting.
Who would like to be admitted to hospital and have the nurses behaving like unionised cabin crew ?
"I'm not dealing with that patient, he's bleeding everywhere. I'm off shift in ten minutes some one else can deal with him. It's the juniors job to fetch the doctor, he'll have to wait untill she gets back. I don't care it's not in my job description. We're supposed to have four nurses for this and I don't care if three can safely do the job, he'll have to have his operation another day. I'm not changing my meal break just because someones been run over. Why shouldn't a senior nurse be paid more than a junior doctor ?"
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sunny side up
Posts: 1,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Senior nurses are paid more than junior doctors, by about twenty grand. It's one of the reasons there's such a doctor shortage in Australia.
Unions don't have the teeth (or the numbers) they used to have fifteen years ago. Even the TWU's pretty wussy these days. Could anyone see this type of thing happening today (genuine question, I don't work for an airline)?
Second genuine question: why were airline wages so relatively high in the seventies? Was there a shortage of available candidates?
Unions don't have the teeth (or the numbers) they used to have fifteen years ago. Even the TWU's pretty wussy these days. Could anyone see this type of thing happening today (genuine question, I don't work for an airline)?
Second genuine question: why were airline wages so relatively high in the seventies? Was there a shortage of available candidates?
Join Date: May 2000
Location: vic
Age: 23
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
most of the posts here centre around the fact the the F/As could have continued with reduced crew and that was the norm if someone went sick enroute and had to be offloaded. But now LCCs have taken that option away by crewing the aircraft with minimum compliment. So if one has to be offloaded for whatever reason, then the show is all over.
I for one don't believe that it is a flighty's problem if he/she is crook and can't go on, but to blame them for the flight cancellation is abhorrent. The brain surgeons that make decisions to go with absolute min crew do so with the full knowledge of risk analysis saying that at some stage they may have to cancel a flight due to crew shortage and are happy to run with that risk.
So no blame can be apportioned to the flight attendants.
The one star line only last week diverted a 330 to darwin so a 321 could operate due to lack of crew and the same said line ferried an aircraft back from dps empty due to crew illness, so if thats the risk the run then they must cop the brunt of the blame.
As has also been mentioned many times before, as a passenger if you buy a ticket on one of these LCCs, then you also run the risk of being stranded especially now they are operating internationally. So for the sake of a few extra bucks I think I'd go with the full service, if you have the option of course!
I for one don't believe that it is a flighty's problem if he/she is crook and can't go on, but to blame them for the flight cancellation is abhorrent. The brain surgeons that make decisions to go with absolute min crew do so with the full knowledge of risk analysis saying that at some stage they may have to cancel a flight due to crew shortage and are happy to run with that risk.
So no blame can be apportioned to the flight attendants.
The one star line only last week diverted a 330 to darwin so a 321 could operate due to lack of crew and the same said line ferried an aircraft back from dps empty due to crew illness, so if thats the risk the run then they must cop the brunt of the blame.
As has also been mentioned many times before, as a passenger if you buy a ticket on one of these LCCs, then you also run the risk of being stranded especially now they are operating internationally. So for the sake of a few extra bucks I think I'd go with the full service, if you have the option of course!
Last edited by dodgybrothers; 28th Oct 2009 at 05:36.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: australia
Age: 59
Posts: 425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
looks like the rules have changed re min crew 747.
currently 12 crew full a/c.
reduced pax(none upper deck) is 11.
i don't know how long these rules have been about.
be careful booking jetstar over the xmas/new year period. they are already canceling flights on an ad hoc basis re crew shortages. the last week of each roster is when this is happening as crew reach max hours. be aware with xmas in this roster things will definitely not be any better this month!
currently 12 crew full a/c.
reduced pax(none upper deck) is 11.
i don't know how long these rules have been about.
be careful booking jetstar over the xmas/new year period. they are already canceling flights on an ad hoc basis re crew shortages. the last week of each roster is when this is happening as crew reach max hours. be aware with xmas in this roster things will definitely not be any better this month!
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“Compared to other jobs in general.”
That’s great, but you should consider the comparative advantage from one airline to the next wrt labor costs. There was none. QF had higher labor costs and yet you imply that labor costs sent AN to the wall.
That’s great, but you should consider the comparative advantage from one airline to the next wrt labor costs. There was none. QF had higher labor costs and yet you imply that labor costs sent AN to the wall.
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QF had higher labor costs and yet you imply that labor costs sent AN to the wall.
High pay and good conditions are something most employees aspire to. If the business is making money and is able to reward its workers accordingly then why shouldn't they enjoy the fruits of their labour ?
Microsoft and Google are profitable and able to attract and reward the best people. Because they are able to attract the best people they are profitable and so it continues.
Ansett weren't profitable for many reasons so how were they supposed to sustain $70 000 flight attendents and $50 000 aircraft cleaners back in the 1990s ? The baggage loaders weren't exactly industrious and hard working either. Compared to other loaders I had experience of, the Ansett ones were paid twice as much, took twice as long and used twice the number.
B767s with flight engineers, cabin crew refusing to operate with one less even though they were still in excess of the legal requirement, pilots refusing a flight because the wrong meal was provided, incompetent management.
Then when the inevitable happens and things fall apart everyones in tears expecting the government to step in and keep it all going. Plus travellers got slugged with the Ansett ticket tax so the employees could get their entitlements.
The main difference was QANTAS in the past ran its business in such a way that it was profitable and could sustain a high cost unionised workplace. I have no doubt that QF pay and conditions were similar to or exceeded Ansetts, however they made money.
Different story today for QF, much stiffer competition and a global financial crisis. Back in the 1990s it was just AN with a similar cost structure, now it's Virgin and Tiger with their much leaner operations and efficient work practices.
If QF can continue with its pay and work practices and still remain in the black then fine. If they can't they must either change or go the way of AN.
Microsoft and Google are profitable and able to attract and reward the best people. Because they are able to attract the best people they are profitable and so it continues.
Ansett weren't profitable for many reasons so how were they supposed to sustain $70 000 flight attendents and $50 000 aircraft cleaners back in the 1990s ? The baggage loaders weren't exactly industrious and hard working either. Compared to other loaders I had experience of, the Ansett ones were paid twice as much, took twice as long and used twice the number.
B767s with flight engineers, cabin crew refusing to operate with one less even though they were still in excess of the legal requirement, pilots refusing a flight because the wrong meal was provided, incompetent management.
Then when the inevitable happens and things fall apart everyones in tears expecting the government to step in and keep it all going. Plus travellers got slugged with the Ansett ticket tax so the employees could get their entitlements.
The main difference was QANTAS in the past ran its business in such a way that it was profitable and could sustain a high cost unionised workplace. I have no doubt that QF pay and conditions were similar to or exceeded Ansetts, however they made money.
Different story today for QF, much stiffer competition and a global financial crisis. Back in the 1990s it was just AN with a similar cost structure, now it's Virgin and Tiger with their much leaner operations and efficient work practices.
If QF can continue with its pay and work practices and still remain in the black then fine. If they can't they must either change or go the way of AN.
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
Different story today for QF, much stiffer competition and a global financial crisis. Back in the 1990s it was just AN with a similar cost structure, now it's Virgin and Tiger with their much leaner operations and efficient work practices.
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have no doubt that QF pay and conditions were similar to or exceeded Ansetts, however they made money.
so how were they supposed to sustain $70 000 flight attendents and $50 000 aircraft cleaners back in the 1990s ?
The second and usual part of arguments that appear with monotonous regularity from people like Metro man is that they begrudge anyone else being paid the level they are on but when it comes to justifying their own pay packets they tell everyone that they earn every cent they get.......