Qf LAME EBA Negotiations Begin
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Darwin
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Steve,
If the allegation by the pilot can be confirmed, it is very telling of the underlying plans in place by the management of this airline.
Source: Qantas EA ballot
Qantas EA ballot
Tuesday, 07 June 2011 15:51
News - Latest
Hi Members,
Ballot papers have started arriving at homes seeking approval for a slightly varied and legally tighter set of options for Protected Industrial Action by Qantas LAMEs. I hope that you are all able to get the papers back to the Australian Electoral Commission as soon as possible and remind LAMEs that 100% of the members can select yes but we also require a return rate of greater than 50% to make the result valid. The ballot rolls were tidied up recently but it is usually the case that some members have moved or had their papers lost in the mail. If your paper does not arrive by the end of this week please contact the office and they will assist with a duplicate paper.
The ALAEA are recommending members approve these actions. Negotiations have been ongoing in the last two weeks and it this stage I think it would be fair to report that we are no closer to resolution. Without this second ballot we are assuming that Qantas always intended to have our first actions overturned in courtrooms and thus felt no compulsion to negotiate a fair outcome. Without the option of PIA being available, we consider it unlikely that the current Qantas negotiating team will deliver on the most important aspect of our claims being job security. We have since the commencement of these discussions said that they could increase our wages by $1000 per week and it all means nothing if we don’t have jobs.
In the past we have seen Qantas make some atrocious decisions that have taken away LAME jobs such as the closure of Sydney Heavy Maintenance, outsourcing of IFE work to two bit contractors who can’t even pay the reduced wage rates to their employees and the ditching of all customer work regardless of how profitable it had been. These decisions were made to the detriment of Qantas and we could not contest them in court because our EBA’s did not explicitly cover the matters. In our next EA we need to lock in Qantas work for Qantas LAMEs in binding clauses. Management have claimed that what we are seeking is inflexible and our response – too right it is. The clauses are designed to protect the airline from further poor management decisions, the decisions that today saw the Qantas share price drop below $1.90.
Yesterday I was contacted by a Qantas pilot. He gave me details of a friend who had been engaged by the airline as a consultant to do some work around the outsourcing of Qantas aircraft components. After looking at all the figures and reviewing the benefits/negatives of outsourcing the work, he advised them that the best option was to keep the work in-house. His consultancy with Qantas was thereby terminated because it was not the answer they were seeking. He claimed to be the third consultant to come to that conclusion, they were all terminated. From this example it has confirmed with us the problem we face negotiating an outcome with another party that appears not, or does not want to listen. However tight we can construct maintenance proposals that offer the best and most viable solution to the Qantas business, they want to take it to another place regardless of the evidence before them.
(My bolding)
If this ballot is not approved it will be likely that management will continue on it’s destructive path until their job is done. The ALAEA does not want to be in a position in five year’s time wondering why we did not act when we knew what was taking place. For those who were unable to get to membership meetings, the list below summarises the most important aspects of our job security claims –
Steve Purvinas
If the allegation by the pilot can be confirmed, it is very telling of the underlying plans in place by the management of this airline.
Source: Qantas EA ballot
Qantas EA ballot
Tuesday, 07 June 2011 15:51 News - Latest
Hi Members,
Ballot papers have started arriving at homes seeking approval for a slightly varied and legally tighter set of options for Protected Industrial Action by Qantas LAMEs. I hope that you are all able to get the papers back to the Australian Electoral Commission as soon as possible and remind LAMEs that 100% of the members can select yes but we also require a return rate of greater than 50% to make the result valid. The ballot rolls were tidied up recently but it is usually the case that some members have moved or had their papers lost in the mail. If your paper does not arrive by the end of this week please contact the office and they will assist with a duplicate paper.
The ALAEA are recommending members approve these actions. Negotiations have been ongoing in the last two weeks and it this stage I think it would be fair to report that we are no closer to resolution. Without this second ballot we are assuming that Qantas always intended to have our first actions overturned in courtrooms and thus felt no compulsion to negotiate a fair outcome. Without the option of PIA being available, we consider it unlikely that the current Qantas negotiating team will deliver on the most important aspect of our claims being job security. We have since the commencement of these discussions said that they could increase our wages by $1000 per week and it all means nothing if we don’t have jobs.
In the past we have seen Qantas make some atrocious decisions that have taken away LAME jobs such as the closure of Sydney Heavy Maintenance, outsourcing of IFE work to two bit contractors who can’t even pay the reduced wage rates to their employees and the ditching of all customer work regardless of how profitable it had been. These decisions were made to the detriment of Qantas and we could not contest them in court because our EBA’s did not explicitly cover the matters. In our next EA we need to lock in Qantas work for Qantas LAMEs in binding clauses. Management have claimed that what we are seeking is inflexible and our response – too right it is. The clauses are designed to protect the airline from further poor management decisions, the decisions that today saw the Qantas share price drop below $1.90.
Yesterday I was contacted by a Qantas pilot. He gave me details of a friend who had been engaged by the airline as a consultant to do some work around the outsourcing of Qantas aircraft components. After looking at all the figures and reviewing the benefits/negatives of outsourcing the work, he advised them that the best option was to keep the work in-house. His consultancy with Qantas was thereby terminated because it was not the answer they were seeking. He claimed to be the third consultant to come to that conclusion, they were all terminated. From this example it has confirmed with us the problem we face negotiating an outcome with another party that appears not, or does not want to listen. However tight we can construct maintenance proposals that offer the best and most viable solution to the Qantas business, they want to take it to another place regardless of the evidence before them.
(My bolding)
If this ballot is not approved it will be likely that management will continue on it’s destructive path until their job is done. The ALAEA does not want to be in a position in five year’s time wondering why we did not act when we knew what was taking place. For those who were unable to get to membership meetings, the list below summarises the most important aspects of our job security claims –
- Qantas LAMEs to carry out work on all new aircraft types (787 and 380)
- No introduction of Cat A licences in our workplaces (currently covered by unenforceable side letter from last EBA)
- No contractors to be employed unless they are paid the same wages and conditions as us (to take away the financial incentive for the company to bypass our agreement)
- Continue to retain all existing job functions (recommitment to the existing clause and clarification of our current functions)
- IFE work to be carried out in-house (to prevent another IASA fiasco)
Steve Purvinas
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jethro - I believe that the reconfig project may be significantly slowed not least due to some important stages in the project scope that were accidently fogotten about but have MAJOR legislative implications....
Additionally, I'm reliably informed that the little bloke may have been given a (not too detailed) heads up that all is not good on the project's financials - and that the cost blowout is so ugly that it will require a James Packer One-Tel style moment with the board.
The latter of which will need to be done fairly quickly before the number leaks out further and the terrain warning sounds on the share price- I suspect however he'll try to hold out to post 30 June and carry fwd the hit (my guess only)
The upside is that this latest management crash & burn performance may actually give the Fed Sec & Co a little more range???
AT
Additionally, I'm reliably informed that the little bloke may have been given a (not too detailed) heads up that all is not good on the project's financials - and that the cost blowout is so ugly that it will require a James Packer One-Tel style moment with the board.
The latter of which will need to be done fairly quickly before the number leaks out further and the terrain warning sounds on the share price- I suspect however he'll try to hold out to post 30 June and carry fwd the hit (my guess only)
The upside is that this latest management crash & burn performance may actually give the Fed Sec & Co a little more range???
AT
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.
Posts: 1,116
Received 13 Likes
on
8 Posts
Nothing piques a shareholders interest more than a crumbling share price.
There will be sacrifice if it continues. There must be. The chair and CEO at least and I say so as a shareholder.
A weak share price makes raising capital more difficult and dilutionary and weak earnings may lead to ratings downgrades making debt more expensive.
There will be sacrifice if it continues. There must be. The chair and CEO at least and I say so as a shareholder.
A weak share price makes raising capital more difficult and dilutionary and weak earnings may lead to ratings downgrades making debt more expensive.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Downunder
Age: 74
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too much procrastination Qantas !!
Fair Work Australia has granted ALL Australian workers on award rates a pay increase of 3.4%.
I can see no reason why Qantas LAMEs covered by our EBA shouldn't receive the same benefit.
Our STARTING point for negotiations should now be 3.4%.
Qantas had the chance, but missed the boat, to negotiate at the 3% level, but now that FWA has set the benchmark at 3.4% I can see no reason why we should settle for any less.
All award-rate employers have to pay the 3.4% regardless of their bleeting about the ability (or otherwise) to pay, I see no reason why QE should treat us any differently.
ST
I can see no reason why Qantas LAMEs covered by our EBA shouldn't receive the same benefit.
Our STARTING point for negotiations should now be 3.4%.
Qantas had the chance, but missed the boat, to negotiate at the 3% level, but now that FWA has set the benchmark at 3.4% I can see no reason why we should settle for any less.
All award-rate employers have to pay the 3.4% regardless of their bleeting about the ability (or otherwise) to pay, I see no reason why QE should treat us any differently.
ST
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Downunder
Age: 74
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The above post
37% of people who read this will cut and paste it as their Facebook status, will you post it as your Facebook status for at least one hour ?
If not, will you at least Cut And Paste the above post and email it to your work address and then send it to all your other LAME friends at work ?
ST
If not, will you at least Cut And Paste the above post and email it to your work address and then send it to all your other LAME friends at work ?
ST
Spanner, as Steve as mentioned before 3%, 3.4% or a 100% pay rise will mean diddly squat if Joyce is allowed to keep destroying the company until there is nothing left.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Downunder
Age: 74
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bootstrap1
Spanner, as Steve as mentioned before 3%, 3.4% or a 100% pay rise will mean diddly squat if Joyce is allowed to keep destroying the company until there is nothing left.
If you think we should put in some pay claim, what would you suggest it be ?
ST
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In da clouds
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Self implosion
Has the CEO really lost the plot by degrading the very company he is charge of in front of the competition.
They must actually be laughing their way out the door.
If you heard what he is reported to have said, wouldn't you go back to the office gather the faithful and come up with a plan to sink the knife in all the way to the hilt and twist.
Absolutely disgraceful.
Shareholder revolt coming.
The workers can very rarely ever shut down a company, however incompetent management does it all the time.
They must actually be laughing their way out the door.
If you heard what he is reported to have said, wouldn't you go back to the office gather the faithful and come up with a plan to sink the knife in all the way to the hilt and twist.
Absolutely disgraceful.
Shareholder revolt coming.
The workers can very rarely ever shut down a company, however incompetent management does it all the time.
Last edited by B.U.F.F.; 8th Jun 2011 at 11:24. Reason: new thought
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: australia
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hey guys I have just posted on "pilots"thread what are we doing running around like chooks with their heads cut off...stay carm the ALAEA and AIPA have it in hand let them do the work and like I said stay carm look to the front and smile we only look like mugs on here saying things like dead bodies floating past ...come on let us act like LAME's not like mugs....the rim
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ST our wages claim went in 6 months ago. We are not trying to work it out now. I appreciate your passion but you don't ever negotiate by walking in and saying that we want at least 3.4% pa. When you sell a car you don't say you want at least 20 grand for it. They ain't gunna give you 22 grand or 4% wage rises negotiating from the bottom.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Downunder
Age: 74
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's a fair call Steve, but as well as the job security clauses, I'm also going to be doing the sums carefully, and if the cash amount isn't at least 3.4% then it's a "No" vote from me.
Completely understand your point that $1,000 week increase means SFA if we don't have a job, but by the same token having a job means SFA if we don't have sufficient pay.
I need both, the dollars to pay my mortgage this week and the job security to pay the mortgage next week.
Well, That's my two-bobs worth.
ST
Completely understand your point that $1,000 week increase means SFA if we don't have a job, but by the same token having a job means SFA if we don't have sufficient pay.
I need both, the dollars to pay my mortgage this week and the job security to pay the mortgage next week.
Well, That's my two-bobs worth.
ST
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: melbourne
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ST
actually i would give up any pay rise for at least three years if this company would commit to building hangers and bringing jobs back on shore, think of the future and the ame,s waiting to become lames.
actually i would give up any pay rise for at least three years if this company would commit to building hangers and bringing jobs back on shore, think of the future and the ame,s waiting to become lames.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Near an Airport
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
griffin one
You would not be alone in that.
I would take job security/future over an extra 0.4% anyday.
AWBC
actually i would give up any pay rise for at least three years if this company would commit to building hangers and bringing jobs back on shore, think of the future and the ame,s waiting to become lames.
I would take job security/future over an extra 0.4% anyday.
AWBC
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect that most members would take a 12 month wage freeze if the board was replaced by a group of people who were actually interested in the future of Qantas.
Putting my dreams aside however the target today is a reasonable wage package and job security clauses to prevent the destruction.
Putting my dreams aside however the target today is a reasonable wage package and job security clauses to prevent the destruction.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Due to expansion of the scope of its services our client Qantas
Permanent positions available at Avalon Airport for B737NG LAME Mech and Av. Open to Aust and NZ Residents. Relocation assistance discussed.
Posted this Morning.
SEEK - VACANCY - B737-6/7/8/900(CFM56) Licenced Engineers Job in Geelong & Great Ocean Road
Posted this Morning.
SEEK - VACANCY - B737-6/7/8/900(CFM56) Licenced Engineers Job in Geelong & Great Ocean Road
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Castle NastySwine
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
!!!
The beginning of the end, or the end of the beginning?
Most people prefer planes when bits don’t fall off
by Ross Neilson
21 Nov 05:55am
By now there should be a persistent warning light flashing in the cockpit of the good ship Qantas. It’s indicating that a large mass of brand confidence among the Australian public is smouldering strongly, emitting smoke and may be about to drop off the starboard wing into the sea.
A close-up of the stricken A380 in Singapore. Photo: AP
It used to be welded on but there’s definitely a crack appearing.
This week at Auspoll we thought it would be fascinating to test whether the recent run of technical problems which have plagued the Flying Kangaroo have made any tangible dent in our perception of the airline’s hitherto ‘safe as houses’ image. And it set the red light flashing.
It was Oscar Wilde who said ‘to lose one jet engine mid-flight may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose three looks like carelessness’. Well, he wasn’t talking about jet engines really, but a great many other people are in recent days. And his essential point holds; one incident we might shrug off, another almost immediately gets our close attention, but when we get a third hard on its heels there is a strong inclination to perceive a worrying wider problem.
Jet engines are things few of us want to talk about or think about generally. Much better when they’re boring because they just work flawlessly, first time, every time. What’s to talk about? But a certain route to water-cooler topicality is to explode and burn while attached to the wing of a huge airliner full of passengers 10,000 metres above the sea. Gets tongues wagging.
We surveyed 1,500 people across Australia and firstly asked them to rate a range of airlines according to their perception of how safe they are. Qantas can take some heart from this with 69% rating them either quite safe or very safe. Before they open champagne in the boardroom however, they might note that of the six rival airlines we asked people to rate, three of them ranked higher than Qantas. And the strongest score - 83% rating it safe - went to their pesky rival Virgin Blue.
There is another irritating dashboard alarm flashing in the negative responses to this question. For five of the six airlines, the proportions of people rating them quite unsafe or very unsafe ranged between 3% and 6%. The standout was (sound intermittent siren) Qantas – 21% of respondents felt it was unsafe.
Next we asked people outright whether the recent problems had affected their confidence in our national flagship airline. Only a minority of respondents said the incidents had not affected their confidence in Qantas at all, with 40% saying they had reduced it a little and a further 25% saying they had reduced it a lot. Overall, 65% less confident in the Red Roo than before.
We also asked what people thought of the expanding competition on overseas routes with the entry of new players such as the recently announced alliance of Virgin Blue and Etihad. Australians are keen travellers and pretty savvy about looking for value. A resounding 67% thought new competitors will improve things for those heading OS.
And lastly we asked whether the recent woes would make people more likely to choose a rival carrier over once trusty old Qantas. Almost half (48%) said the incidents would make no difference, but the 41% who said they would make them more likely to choose another carrier set off the last warning light on the console. That cockpit must look like a disco by now.
On these results, the appropriate disposition for Qantas senior management about now would be both alert and alarmed. Put the fire out, give everyone a drink. Panic never helps.
by Ross Neilson
21 Nov 05:55am
By now there should be a persistent warning light flashing in the cockpit of the good ship Qantas. It’s indicating that a large mass of brand confidence among the Australian public is smouldering strongly, emitting smoke and may be about to drop off the starboard wing into the sea.
A close-up of the stricken A380 in Singapore. Photo: APIt used to be welded on but there’s definitely a crack appearing.
This week at Auspoll we thought it would be fascinating to test whether the recent run of technical problems which have plagued the Flying Kangaroo have made any tangible dent in our perception of the airline’s hitherto ‘safe as houses’ image. And it set the red light flashing.
It was Oscar Wilde who said ‘to lose one jet engine mid-flight may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose three looks like carelessness’. Well, he wasn’t talking about jet engines really, but a great many other people are in recent days. And his essential point holds; one incident we might shrug off, another almost immediately gets our close attention, but when we get a third hard on its heels there is a strong inclination to perceive a worrying wider problem.
Jet engines are things few of us want to talk about or think about generally. Much better when they’re boring because they just work flawlessly, first time, every time. What’s to talk about? But a certain route to water-cooler topicality is to explode and burn while attached to the wing of a huge airliner full of passengers 10,000 metres above the sea. Gets tongues wagging.
We surveyed 1,500 people across Australia and firstly asked them to rate a range of airlines according to their perception of how safe they are. Qantas can take some heart from this with 69% rating them either quite safe or very safe. Before they open champagne in the boardroom however, they might note that of the six rival airlines we asked people to rate, three of them ranked higher than Qantas. And the strongest score - 83% rating it safe - went to their pesky rival Virgin Blue.
There is another irritating dashboard alarm flashing in the negative responses to this question. For five of the six airlines, the proportions of people rating them quite unsafe or very unsafe ranged between 3% and 6%. The standout was (sound intermittent siren) Qantas – 21% of respondents felt it was unsafe.
Next we asked people outright whether the recent problems had affected their confidence in our national flagship airline. Only a minority of respondents said the incidents had not affected their confidence in Qantas at all, with 40% saying they had reduced it a little and a further 25% saying they had reduced it a lot. Overall, 65% less confident in the Red Roo than before.
We also asked what people thought of the expanding competition on overseas routes with the entry of new players such as the recently announced alliance of Virgin Blue and Etihad. Australians are keen travellers and pretty savvy about looking for value. A resounding 67% thought new competitors will improve things for those heading OS.
And lastly we asked whether the recent woes would make people more likely to choose a rival carrier over once trusty old Qantas. Almost half (48%) said the incidents would make no difference, but the 41% who said they would make them more likely to choose another carrier set off the last warning light on the console. That cockpit must look like a disco by now.
On these results, the appropriate disposition for Qantas senior management about now would be both alert and alarmed. Put the fire out, give everyone a drink. Panic never helps.