Its Time Mr.Joyce

[stubby jumbo]

Agree ROKAPE.

We had the phenomenon you describe-thrusted upon us in 2004 under the sham banner of "Crew Connect". The "thinking" behind this initiative was to sack all of the operational Line Managers(who were operating crew-CSM's and ground managers) all sacked in one foul swoop.

The result was a bunch of MBA "managers" aka chumps who came from such industries as banking, casino's,hospitals,supermarkets, department stores and even the Army. The "managers had absolutely no operational experience in the airline industry -other then jumping on a flight as pax to SYD-MEL in Y/C.
They managed by KPI's and balanced scorecards.
When we came to them with an operational issue- they would just give you the look of -WHAT THEARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

So senior management are bewildered why engagement is at 20%. Simple -the crew could not give a rats ( about QF Corporate) !

But, in saying this-when you leave QCC and get onto the AC -everything changes. We are proud to work for Qantas and take safety and customer service very seriously.

Sure- go ask any other Joe Average who work for other large organisations and I'm sure they would just say :

"Suck it up Buddy -it ain't no different here and at least you get decent pay ,6 weeks Leave and Staff Travel"

My point though is -I reckon we can get back to being THE best again -IF and its a big IF......someone has the gonads to say: "enough is enough" in reference to cost cutting, offshoring, outsourcing,leasing engines, overseas bases, safety shortcuts and to your point Rokape-management who are in a constant state of fear (of being punted for poor performance for not achieving their KPI's)-MBA Executive types

This RR saga may turn out to be the tipping point for QF-lets hope they tip the right way

[SOPS]

KPI

I have to ask...what is a KPI???

[vorky]

Key Performance Indicator - generally predefined ratings you are expected to reach in your particular position which determine whether a bonus is payable or not.

Generally this means cost cutting, keeping head counts down, etc. while outputting at a higher achievement rating aka working your underlings into the ground.

[skybed]

KPI's

for QF onboard managers means no bonus just take the sh**t from your manager depending if he likes you or not and some annual stats they roll out which in most cases are incorrect.!!!
Last year they invented 'summer school" for OBM who haven't met their KPI's. They had to go and retrain for 3 weeks. What i have heard on the grape vine most participants failed the exams and have been demoted. very engaging

[Worrals in the wilds]

I have to ask...what is a KPI???

You lucky, lucky person. Think Dilbert.

Generally this means cost cutting, keeping head counts down, etc. while outputting at a higher achievement rating aka working your underlings into the ground.

And for God's sake don't present your superiors with a big bill for vital repairs, necessary equipment, staff training etc, even if it's vital and/or necessary. In many companies, the 'there are no problems only solutions' mantra coupled with KPIs has created a legion of middle managers in operational areas who are terrified of admitting there's a problem or asking for money to fix it, even if they can understand the problem in the first place, which is by no means assured.

Problems then get ignored until they become moot or a crisis (unless the media cottons on). Once they become a crisis the Execs are left looking eggy on TV and desperately trying to pretend that the whole thing's under control, while behind the scenes they're running around asking their underlings; WTF happened? WTF is a gizmo? HTF did it fail? How do we fix it without buying a new bunch of gizmos, because the Board / Minister is starting to get suss but we're still too scared to ask them for any money?

You will notice that the question "how do we fix it properly and improve the system so it doesn't happen again?" does not appear on the list.
The question "How do we build a great product?" is now officially listed as extinct, having not been spotted in the wild since 1985.

I've not worked for QANTAS but this modus calamitas seems to be becoming the norm across all operations based businesses, not just airlines (and it's happening in government departments as well, although in government you don't get sacked for missing KPIs, just transferred to Bedourie or bullied until you leave).

[AWB_Clerk]

Qantas spokeswoman "Clearly harrassed"

Maureen Shelley
From: The Daily Telegraph, The Daily Telegraph November 10, 2010

A Qantas spokeswoman said there was no update on the situation with its own fleet although she confirmed that Qantas was continuing its suspension of all A380 flights while the engines were under investigation.

When asked for comment on Qantas' continuing woes regarding the $12 million fine by the European Commission on its involvement in a cargo price-fixing cartel until 2005, the previous ASIC fine of $20 million for the same issue and the suspension of A380 flights while celebrity ambassador-at-large actor John Travolta was in the country, the clearly harassed spokeswoman conceded "It's all happening"

AJ really does need to look at doing something with this PR muppet. Both are doing themselves no favours.

And as I type I can hear another lightning storm over YSSY..... Yes Olivia, it is all happening.

AWBC

[ampclamp]

Hard work being a PR type especially trying to polish a turd.

[airtags]

tough gig for the poor girl - especially when the cliche cupboard is bare....
..........

[Ken Borough]

tough gig for the poor girl - especially when the cliche cupboard is bare..............

..and especially when she's so far out of her depth she must have drowned long ago. Why is Qantas persisting with this lady who really repeatedly displays little knowledge of the industry? Shame is she is probably the best that Coward Street has to offer the media.

Yes, agreed. The cliche cupboard is really bare!

[Worrals in the wilds]

If they start using Max Markson you'll know the manure really has hit the prop...

[TIMA9X]

Why is Qantas persisting with this lady who really repeatedly displays little knowledge of the industry?

Yep.. When it all happened she was still happening to be clueless!

Is it just me, AJ was very quick to blame RR but did he unwittingly kick an "own goal" by making the general public unnecessarily scared of RR powered A380s? I noted that news.com.au referred to the RR powered A380 as the "scarebus" yesterday.

[ozbiggles]

Don't feel to sorry for her.
She would already be working on a promotion and pay rise for saving Qantas by herself when it comes time for her performance review..... and keeping costs down.

[TIMA9X]

Qantas 'scarebus' QF32 was a flying wreck | News.com.au

Qantas 'scarebus' QF32 was a flying wreck

Last week's mid-air emergency off Singapore also badly damaged a wing, which may have to be replaced.
The Herald Sun can reveal the full list of damage as Airbus A380 was nursed back to Singapore on three engines.
When it touched down the fuel systems were failing, the forward spar supporting the left wing had been holed and one of the jet's two hydraulic systems was knocked out and totally drained of fluid.
Sources compared flight QF32 to the Memphis Belle, the World War II bomber that struggled back to England from Germany on its final mission and became the subject of an award-winning 1990s Hollywood movie by the same name.

Further to my post above.....Wow!

[Keg]

The quoted 'sources' don't know much about the real story of the Memphis Belle. It's final mission wasn't nearly as dramatic as the movie portrayed. On the other hand, I think the A380 was much worse than originally portrayed.

[teresa green]

Nancy Bird Walton, would not be pleased about her namesake at all. I was dragged along to the cabin crew review by one of my kids, and very good it was too. But even then NAncy was being paid out for spending most of its time in the hangar, in fact there was a ditty sung about this very aircraft. Seems it has taken over where old VH EBB left off. For those to young to know, in her 21 years of flying for QF, she got locked behind a pole during engine runups, so they had to take the pole out, which in return caused all power on the jet base to cease, those locked in lifts, and those who lost all work on computers were not amused. She left her port aileron on the landing lights in Rome, ran off the runway in HKG and got stuck in mud, had a cat get loose in the hold, and for three whole weeks they had to leave food for it. (The owner sued QF) Had horrible noises (cracking) on the flight deck, which used to frighten the s%it out of the crew, (but for 21 years nobody could find the cause) had a snake loose in the main cabin, (somebodies pet), now that scattered the PAX, somehow got a monkey, yes a monkey, trapped inside the aileron area, dead of course, in fact extremely dead, and she smelt so bad they left it outside the hangar, whilst trying to find the cause. (It took some days) and each day got worse, as you can imagine. She was known far and wide as "buckets of bolts" and I am sure some older LAMES could add to her "achivements" A light hearted coment I know, but perhaps some aircraft are simply " jinxed" or simply "lemons" I would hate Nancy to be one, named after such a special lady.

[Short_Circuit]

VH-EBB (747-200 P&W))also had an uncontained fan failure of NBR 3 engine after a bird strike on TO out of SYD.
But this has nothing to do with AJ and the current mob running the show.

[QFBUSBOY]

There has not much mention being made of the previous Qantas management under Geoff Dixon's stewardship that put in place this train of events. All these woes are as a result of decisions that were made in the previous 5 to 10 years.

If you outsource your maintenance, always take the lowest quote possible, let your money making machines leave Base & Heavy Maintenance with deferred items in the Tech Log, then this was always going to be the result.

Qantas management thought that the Engineers industrial action did major damage to the brand, well its about time that they shoulder the blame for this debacle. This is far worse in terms of damage to the airline. The root problem is not the A380, it is a culmination of top management decisions related to running the airline. Its everything from pilots, to cabin crew, to engineering,to ramp staff, to cleaners,to check in staff, etc. This list goes on. It is having managers in engineering who have no engineering background, but rather Bachelor of Arts majoring in Australian History. It is this sort of people we have running an airline. I am not saying that they don't try to do the right thing, but you have to question the reason for people with no technical knowledge in positions of managing a business that is highly reliant on knowing what the outcomes are for not managing your equipment properly. It is understandable that the CEO is not a pilot or engineer, but when your middle management don't have the right qualifications for the position, then it is only a matter of time. Alan Joyce and previously Geoff Dixon have gone on the record stating that these new aircraft require less maintenance. I don't know if they have noticed, but geez, all the engineers I know have never been so busy. If this is how they are brand new, God help us when they start to age and require Major Maintenance. I am sorry to say, but we as employees are in REAL trouble for the future.

Its always great to have the newest toy on the block, but when it doesn't perform as advertised and you don't seek proper recompense for what damage is being done to the brand, then you would expect staff and the public to lose faith in the managers making these critical decisions. Maybe its time to really listen to some of your staff on the floor, and not your Yes men/women, and stop paying lip service through Employee Engagement Surveys. It might also be a good idea to trot out some of your Senior pilots and engineers to explain what is really happening to your aircraft. Sorry Alan, but some of your explanations of Technical detail leave a lot to be desired. It might sound good to the media(who have no clue) but even Technical people can explain things in layman's terms. In my own opinion, Qantas would look far more professional if the explanations were from experts in their field, and not from people who have no technical knowledge.

[73to91]

QFBUSBOY
Was told recently that whilst Dixon, can be blamed for much of the disaster, the Chairman of Woolworths, started this 'train of events' Dixon just followed his lead.


I have a suggestion, the day AJ states that the A380's have been cleared to return to normal operations, he and Clifford get themselves onto the 1st aircraft, no matter where they are departing from.

Then the next x in the senior management group i.e. direct reports to AJ, accompanied by 1 board member, gets themselves on the next x flights as well.
If they are safe enough for Qantas tech & cabin crew to work on and the paying pax to fly on, it will be a walk in the park for the senior management group.

PS: No P & J class travel here, seats must be downstairs, under the wings, with clear view of the RR engines, 'to be sure'

[framer]

he and Clifford get themselves onto the 1st aircraft

Nah that'l never happen, thats the sort of thing Fyfe would do...can't have that, people might actually think they're displaying signs of leadership and that will just confuse everyone for sure.

[framer]

Ya know what....AJ could still come out of this ok if he played his cards right. It's still early enough in his tenure to look like the guy who inherited a lemon and had the balls to turn it all around. Get the QF brand back to basics, bring the maintenance home. He could still do it if he cares about how he will be remembered.