Merged: It's Too Late Mr. Joyce.
Today a CASA Manager (Acting) wasted about $6000 during the hour (1 of 7) testimony he spent trying to convince a hearing that "I consider that it is a serious safety deficiency for pilots to talk to engineers, this communication should only be conducted through Operations, via written reports".
Rarely could a written communication convey the detail and accuracy of a 1 minute explanation, person-to-person. (To say nothing of the questions the engineer may have for me to establish some more detail.)
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 61
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No surprise
Today a CASA Manager (Acting) wasted about $6000 during the hour (1 of 7) testimony he spent trying to convince a hearing that "I consider that it is a serious safety deficiency for pilots to talk to engineers, this communication should only be conducted through Operations, via written reports".
Go The Skull !
"I consider that it is a serious safety deficiency for pilots to talk to engineers, this communication should only be conducted through Operations, via written reports"
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: gold coast QLD australia
Age: 86
Posts: 1,345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What the fu$%? Pilots and engineers don't engage in conversation? If you have a freckin problem the first person you speak to on getting on the arm is the LAME on duty. Who else would you as ask, your mother in law? Spare me. It has always been a partnership, certainly in TAA, they fixed em, we flew em, one could not operate without the other. A good relationship, a few good jokes, always some sledging re footy etc, a important part of a days flying. Things are worse than I thought.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Vladivostok
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flabbergasted, flumoxed, dazed, astounded, disheartened 
Pilots shouldn't talk to engineers it compromises safety !!!!!
What complete and utter rubbish by an obvious complete and utter idiot
If this is the type of individual that is within the halls of our regulator we are doomed that is one of the most moronic statements I have ever heard in my life, god help us all
Pilots shouldn't talk to engineers it compromises safety !!!!!
What complete and utter rubbish by an obvious complete and utter idiot
If this is the type of individual that is within the halls of our regulator we are doomed that is one of the most moronic statements I have ever heard in my life, god help us all
Surely he has been misquoted.
Tootle pip!!
Thread Starter
CASA:
If this does represent CASA's official position, I'm shocked. It is however consistent. Written communication is subject to audit by CASA isn't it? Errors can be disclosed in writings and punished can't they? What next? Don't talk to the refueller, send him your fuel plan?
I almost always start a flight if possible by a walk through the hangar to see what is going on. If there is anything in an MR I'm curious about, I ask the engineers. If anything seems dodgy, it's also back to the hangar for a chat.
All I ever get when I query "ops" is "What? It always does that", the ginger beers are always much more forthcoming, to the point of educating me, or a slight adjustment of something or parts ordered for replacement.
"I consider that it is a serious safety deficiency for pilots to talk to engineers, this communication should only be conducted through Operations, via written reports"
I almost always start a flight if possible by a walk through the hangar to see what is going on. If there is anything in an MR I'm curious about, I ask the engineers. If anything seems dodgy, it's also back to the hangar for a chat.
All I ever get when I query "ops" is "What? It always does that", the ginger beers are always much more forthcoming, to the point of educating me, or a slight adjustment of something or parts ordered for replacement.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Standing at P37
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 2 seperate quotes below are from the "transit/check" procedure from two seperate 4 engined aircraft operated by a fairly large local airline - you'll see that it is an actual requirement (that is certified by a LAME) to have a "chat" with the tech and/or the cabin crew when required.
No doubt that this will soon be amended in light of the insights of our latest CASA "safety expert". In fact, due to the actions recently taken against some LAME's in this country for raising a cockpit door safety issue when all they should've been doing was a "general visual", I've no doubt that there will be a lot of stand-downs when management see/hear pilots talking to engineers!
From maint requirements of a large 4 engined european built aircraft:
From maint requirements of a large 4 engined american built aircraft:
Sorry for long post but thought I'd also post this article that was forwarded to me - it's written by a professor from The Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology.(it's about a month or two old) Does it sound vaguely familiar to anyone ? Thought you'd love this Sunfish !
Noel Turnbull, adjunct professor of media and communications at RMIT University, writes
PUBLIC RELATIONS PRACTITIONERS SPINNING THE MEDIA
One of the PR industry’s most problematic activities is dreaming up justifications for toxic workplace practices imposed by psychopathic managers.
This week three unconnected incidents reminded me of the problem. First, the PRIA sent me an email promoting an internal communications seminar in which the two words most likely to reduce productivity -- "change management" -- were used; then the latest issue of the Australian Institute of Company Directors journal, The Director, spruiked the need for government to take on board business nous to improve its performance; and, finally a report by a Melbourne University academic estimated that the annual cost of work stress was about $730 million through the impact on individuals of depression.
It was no doubt a PR person who dreamt up the phrase "change management" as a euphemism for destructively turning workplaces upside down, sacking people and generally changing things without making any positive difference at all to an organisation’s outcomes or outputs. In my last book (How PR Works: but often doesn’t ) I included a plain person’s guide to change management, which said: "Over the past two decades a generation of change managers has set out to transform organisations -- from universities and companies to charities and government departments."
The guide said "change managers":
1. Announce soon after arrival, and before any analysis that might cloud judgments, that the organisation must face up to the new competitive environment and must change to survive.
2. Sack significant numbers of incumbent managers and replace them with friends and colleagues from previous jobs.
3. Increase the number of middle managers and management levels giving new managers titles such as organisational capability development manager.
4. Ensure none of the new managers have definable line management accountabilities or job descriptions written in English.
5. Objectify the people the organisation is set up to serve. E.g. citizens become customers of government departments while students and courses at universities become clients and services.
6. Announce a major reorganisation to affect change and confront the challenges of the competitive environment.
7. Identify another agency or group with which to merge, form strategic alliances or generally hold meetings with.
8. Retrench as many operational staff as possible, singling out in particular anyone with detailed knowledge of how systems actually work.
9. Introduce a culture based on continuous meetings and managerial Newspeak while insulating all managers from any operational realities.
10. Identify any centres of excellence or international best practice in the organisation, close them down and outsource the function to someone more expensive and less effective.
11. Promulgate changes to any systems that effectively meet client/customer needs.
12. Introduce a completely untried IT system designed to integrate all existing systems and produce massive productivity savings.
13. Sack any operational staff who had not previously taken redundancy packages for the failures in these changes to systems and the IT implementation.
14. Announce another major reorganisation to enhance effectiveness and focus more effectively on change.
15. Move on to next job, before the organisation goes into critical state and after including in CV details of change management expertise, to start the process all over again.
Speaking to PR people about change management and its destructive impact you always get rueful agreement on how it works and why it’s bad -- but most PR people go along with it because that’s the way to keep your job.
The Melbourne University study, written by associate professor Anthony LaMontagne, found that 1.5 million workers have, or have had, depression with the condition caused by job strain in the case of 13% of men and 17% of women. The annual cost of this $730 million and this is probably a small part of the total cost of lost productivity from toxic workplaces and mindless change.
At the same time the AICD is advocating more business nous in the government sector -- presumably the same sort of nous that has given us the GFC; psychopathic (sorry I mean charismatic) CEOs who sack people and urge the government to cut spending on social programs to pay for the cost of cleaning the GFC mess up; and, appeals for reforms that always leave most people worse off.
All these business claims have become conventional wisdom as PR platoons promote the platitudes and politicians and the media uncritically accept them.
The interesting thing about this conventional wisdom is that it is buttressed by an arrogant certainty that the proponents of change are right and that there is no alternative. GE CEO Jeff Immelt, during his recent visit to Australia, didn’t shy away from organisations’ need to change (GE is no angel in the retrenchment field) but argued that managers need to listen to others and that "No matter how much you think you are listening, no matter how much you think you are in touch with markets, you can always do better. I think remaining extremely humble about what you know and what you don’t know is crucial".
Listening, of course, takes time. But people rushing to move on to the next position before the damning impact of their changes becomes apparent, are also the ones most notorious for arguing that change must be speedy.
*Ritual declaration of interest: the author has worked on change management programs in the private and public sector but no longer does
Could this sound like an Airline you know ??
No doubt that this will soon be amended in light of the insights of our latest CASA "safety expert". In fact, due to the actions recently taken against some LAME's in this country for raising a cockpit door safety issue when all they should've been doing was a "general visual", I've no doubt that there will be a lot of stand-downs when management see/hear pilots talking to engineers!
From maint requirements of a large 4 engined european built aircraft:
1) D. Consult Flight Crew to discuss aircraft log entries (if required) and liaise with the Customer Service Manager (CSM) and/or Cabin Crew for a hand-over of any issues and/or defects experienced on the previous flight leg.
From maint requirements of a large 4 engined american built aircraft:
2) B. (Maintenance Supervisor or Nominated LAME).(1) Debrief technical crew and discuss Aircraft Technical Log entries if required. (2) Review all EICAS alert, status and auto event (snapshot) messages.
Check against Aircraft Technical Log and enter any outstanding items.
Check against Aircraft Technical Log and enter any outstanding items.
Sorry for long post but thought I'd also post this article that was forwarded to me - it's written by a professor from The Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology.(it's about a month or two old) Does it sound vaguely familiar to anyone ? Thought you'd love this Sunfish !
Noel Turnbull, adjunct professor of media and communications at RMIT University, writes
PUBLIC RELATIONS PRACTITIONERS SPINNING THE MEDIA
One of the PR industry’s most problematic activities is dreaming up justifications for toxic workplace practices imposed by psychopathic managers.
This week three unconnected incidents reminded me of the problem. First, the PRIA sent me an email promoting an internal communications seminar in which the two words most likely to reduce productivity -- "change management" -- were used; then the latest issue of the Australian Institute of Company Directors journal, The Director, spruiked the need for government to take on board business nous to improve its performance; and, finally a report by a Melbourne University academic estimated that the annual cost of work stress was about $730 million through the impact on individuals of depression.
It was no doubt a PR person who dreamt up the phrase "change management" as a euphemism for destructively turning workplaces upside down, sacking people and generally changing things without making any positive difference at all to an organisation’s outcomes or outputs. In my last book (How PR Works: but often doesn’t ) I included a plain person’s guide to change management, which said: "Over the past two decades a generation of change managers has set out to transform organisations -- from universities and companies to charities and government departments."
The guide said "change managers":
1. Announce soon after arrival, and before any analysis that might cloud judgments, that the organisation must face up to the new competitive environment and must change to survive.
2. Sack significant numbers of incumbent managers and replace them with friends and colleagues from previous jobs.
3. Increase the number of middle managers and management levels giving new managers titles such as organisational capability development manager.
4. Ensure none of the new managers have definable line management accountabilities or job descriptions written in English.
5. Objectify the people the organisation is set up to serve. E.g. citizens become customers of government departments while students and courses at universities become clients and services.
6. Announce a major reorganisation to affect change and confront the challenges of the competitive environment.
7. Identify another agency or group with which to merge, form strategic alliances or generally hold meetings with.
8. Retrench as many operational staff as possible, singling out in particular anyone with detailed knowledge of how systems actually work.
9. Introduce a culture based on continuous meetings and managerial Newspeak while insulating all managers from any operational realities.
10. Identify any centres of excellence or international best practice in the organisation, close them down and outsource the function to someone more expensive and less effective.
11. Promulgate changes to any systems that effectively meet client/customer needs.
12. Introduce a completely untried IT system designed to integrate all existing systems and produce massive productivity savings.
13. Sack any operational staff who had not previously taken redundancy packages for the failures in these changes to systems and the IT implementation.
14. Announce another major reorganisation to enhance effectiveness and focus more effectively on change.
15. Move on to next job, before the organisation goes into critical state and after including in CV details of change management expertise, to start the process all over again.
Speaking to PR people about change management and its destructive impact you always get rueful agreement on how it works and why it’s bad -- but most PR people go along with it because that’s the way to keep your job.
The Melbourne University study, written by associate professor Anthony LaMontagne, found that 1.5 million workers have, or have had, depression with the condition caused by job strain in the case of 13% of men and 17% of women. The annual cost of this $730 million and this is probably a small part of the total cost of lost productivity from toxic workplaces and mindless change.
At the same time the AICD is advocating more business nous in the government sector -- presumably the same sort of nous that has given us the GFC; psychopathic (sorry I mean charismatic) CEOs who sack people and urge the government to cut spending on social programs to pay for the cost of cleaning the GFC mess up; and, appeals for reforms that always leave most people worse off.
All these business claims have become conventional wisdom as PR platoons promote the platitudes and politicians and the media uncritically accept them.
The interesting thing about this conventional wisdom is that it is buttressed by an arrogant certainty that the proponents of change are right and that there is no alternative. GE CEO Jeff Immelt, during his recent visit to Australia, didn’t shy away from organisations’ need to change (GE is no angel in the retrenchment field) but argued that managers need to listen to others and that "No matter how much you think you are listening, no matter how much you think you are in touch with markets, you can always do better. I think remaining extremely humble about what you know and what you don’t know is crucial".
Listening, of course, takes time. But people rushing to move on to the next position before the damning impact of their changes becomes apparent, are also the ones most notorious for arguing that change must be speedy.
*Ritual declaration of interest: the author has worked on change management programs in the private and public sector but no longer does
Could this sound like an Airline you know ??
Last edited by Spanner Turner; 17th Nov 2010 at 15:01.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Godzone
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HotNhigh
- (#3) well said.
- (#12) agree (concise list by the way), but it won't happen, (can't), in the modern management world. (see #29)
Spanner Turner
- (#29) so bloody true. Prof Noel Turnbull is dead on. {I was disposed of at step eight (fed gov dept)}.
- (#3) well said.
- (#12) agree (concise list by the way), but it won't happen, (can't), in the modern management world. (see #29)
Spanner Turner
- (#29) so bloody true. Prof Noel Turnbull is dead on. {I was disposed of at step eight (fed gov dept)}.
Any way these two gentlemen can be put on the Board at QF?
(Between them they have more vision & braincells than the current lot combined!)
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Western Pacific
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The prominence of accountants, encroaching into operational areas where their discipline has no experience eventually triggers the sequence of events that prove catastropic.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once again, my family and I are about to cross the Pacific. After several experiences, each progressively worse, we booked with another airline. (The last flight across with Qantas resulted in a 48 hour test of endurance...and coffee.) It's a less convenient schedule than Qantas, but I'll be enormously happy if the airline just takes off and lands somewhat close to scheduled times. And it's not just me and my family that has noticed it. Mr Mott, continued knocking will not make it better, but Qantas has far worse issues...the customers are leaving for other carriers. I've had enough of the BS dressed up as "customer service".
Last edited by Lodown; 17th Nov 2010 at 21:40.
Thread Starter
Spanner Turner, thank you for a wonderful post!
The reasoning behind the managers actions are as follows in bold:
The guide said "change managers":
1. Announce soon after arrival, and before any analysis that might cloud judgments, that the organisation must face up to the new competitive environment and must change to survive.
I must make my mark and be seen to be doing something.
2. Sack significant numbers of incumbent managers and replace them with friends and colleagues from previous jobs.
I will not tolerate folk who are smarter and more expereinced than me, especially when they say "You can't do it that way! or "That won't work!" My friends don't know anything, so they will try to make my ideas work.
3. Increase the number of middle managers and management levels giving new managers titles such as organisational capability development manager.
I don't know how to do "X", therefore I will insulate myself from failure and put another management layer between myself and "X". I can always sack them if they can't do "X" either.
4. Ensure none of the new managers have definable line management accountabilities or job descriptions written in English.
This is called diffusion of responsibility. I also start committees. Whatever the causes of failures are, it isn't me.
5. Objectify the people the organisation is set up to serve. E.g. citizens become customers of government departments while students and courses at universities become clients and services.
I simplify the business by removing any need to treat people or problems as individual things requiring pricey intelligence, expertise, training, experience and attention to detail. One size fits all. Our products and services can now be delivered by cheap untrained monkeys. Read the manual.
..Besides, I like firing people who think they are more important than me, how dare they?
6. Announce a major reorganisation to affect change and confront the challenges of the competitive environment.
I want to be seen to be responsible only for good things. The bad things that I can't understand, I can ignore and preferably outsource.
7. Identify another agency or group with which to merge, form strategic alliances or generally hold meetings with.
Here is my next regular overseas trip and another Board position. The lunches at the club are nice too.
8. Retrench as many operational staff as possible, singling out in particular anyone with detailed knowledge of how systems actually work.
I remove anyone who has the capacity to disagree or contradict me.
9. Introduce a culture based on continuous meetings and managerial Newspeak while insulating all managers from any operational realities.
Bullsh1t baffles brains. No one will understand what I am trying unsuccessfully to do.
10. Identify any centres of excellence or international best practice in the organisation, close them down and outsource the function to someone more expensive and less effective.
You are a threat to my authority. No one must know that there are sections of this organisation that are successful without my inputs. You must not succeed without my direction and management
11. Promulgate changes to any systems that effectively meet client/customer needs.
I want to be able to understand the business and pry and poke without having to talk to any human.
12. Introduce a completely untried IT system designed to integrate all existing systems and produce massive productivity savings.
Mr. X of (Name your consulting company) takes me to lunch and tells me I'm a genius.
13. Sack any operational staff who had not previously taken redundancy packages for the failures in these changes to systems and the IT implementation.
Mr. X tells me to sack Mr. Y before he tells the Board that the system doesn't work and can never work.
14. Announce another major reorganisation to enhance effectiveness and focus more effectively on change.
I cover my tracks by confusing the paperwork. What's past cannot now be investigated
15. Move on to next job, before the organisation goes into critical state and after including in CV details of change management expertise, to start the process all over again.
Take the money and run, it's getting hot in hear. I have not produced improvements, things are getting worse.
Not all MBA's (including me) think this way.
The reasoning behind the managers actions are as follows in bold:
The guide said "change managers":
1. Announce soon after arrival, and before any analysis that might cloud judgments, that the organisation must face up to the new competitive environment and must change to survive.
I must make my mark and be seen to be doing something.
2. Sack significant numbers of incumbent managers and replace them with friends and colleagues from previous jobs.
I will not tolerate folk who are smarter and more expereinced than me, especially when they say "You can't do it that way! or "That won't work!" My friends don't know anything, so they will try to make my ideas work.
3. Increase the number of middle managers and management levels giving new managers titles such as organisational capability development manager.
I don't know how to do "X", therefore I will insulate myself from failure and put another management layer between myself and "X". I can always sack them if they can't do "X" either.
4. Ensure none of the new managers have definable line management accountabilities or job descriptions written in English.
This is called diffusion of responsibility. I also start committees. Whatever the causes of failures are, it isn't me.
5. Objectify the people the organisation is set up to serve. E.g. citizens become customers of government departments while students and courses at universities become clients and services.
I simplify the business by removing any need to treat people or problems as individual things requiring pricey intelligence, expertise, training, experience and attention to detail. One size fits all. Our products and services can now be delivered by cheap untrained monkeys. Read the manual.
..Besides, I like firing people who think they are more important than me, how dare they?
6. Announce a major reorganisation to affect change and confront the challenges of the competitive environment.
I want to be seen to be responsible only for good things. The bad things that I can't understand, I can ignore and preferably outsource.
7. Identify another agency or group with which to merge, form strategic alliances or generally hold meetings with.
Here is my next regular overseas trip and another Board position. The lunches at the club are nice too.
8. Retrench as many operational staff as possible, singling out in particular anyone with detailed knowledge of how systems actually work.
I remove anyone who has the capacity to disagree or contradict me.
9. Introduce a culture based on continuous meetings and managerial Newspeak while insulating all managers from any operational realities.
Bullsh1t baffles brains. No one will understand what I am trying unsuccessfully to do.
10. Identify any centres of excellence or international best practice in the organisation, close them down and outsource the function to someone more expensive and less effective.
You are a threat to my authority. No one must know that there are sections of this organisation that are successful without my inputs. You must not succeed without my direction and management
11. Promulgate changes to any systems that effectively meet client/customer needs.
I want to be able to understand the business and pry and poke without having to talk to any human.
12. Introduce a completely untried IT system designed to integrate all existing systems and produce massive productivity savings.
Mr. X of (Name your consulting company) takes me to lunch and tells me I'm a genius.
13. Sack any operational staff who had not previously taken redundancy packages for the failures in these changes to systems and the IT implementation.
Mr. X tells me to sack Mr. Y before he tells the Board that the system doesn't work and can never work.
14. Announce another major reorganisation to enhance effectiveness and focus more effectively on change.
I cover my tracks by confusing the paperwork. What's past cannot now be investigated
15. Move on to next job, before the organisation goes into critical state and after including in CV details of change management expertise, to start the process all over again.
Take the money and run, it's getting hot in hear. I have not produced improvements, things are getting worse.
Not all MBA's (including me) think this way.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 61
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA Senior Management C.V -
Announce soon after arrival, and before any analysis that might cloud judgments, that the organisation must face up to the new competitive environment and must change to survive.
2. Sack significant numbers of incumbent managers and replace them with friends and colleagues from previous jobs.
3. Increase the number of middle managers and management levels giving new managers titles such as organisational capability development manager.
4. Ensure none of the new managers have definable line management accountabilities or job descriptions written in English.
5. Objectify the people the organisation is set up to serve. E.g. citizens become customers of government departments while students and courses at universities become clients and services.
6. Announce a major reorganisation to affect change and confront the challenges of the competitive environment.
7. Identify another agency or group with which to merge, form strategic alliances or generally hold meetings with.
8. Retrench as many operational staff as possible, singling out in particular anyone with detailed knowledge of how systems actually work.
9. Introduce a culture based on continuous meetings and managerial Newspeak while insulating all managers from any operational realities.
10. Identify any centres of excellence or international best practice in the organisation, close them down and outsource the function to someone more expensive and less effective.
11. Promulgate changes to any systems that effectively meet client/customer needs.
12. Introduce a completely untried IT system designed to integrate all existing systems and produce massive productivity savings.
13. Sack any operational staff who had not previously taken redundancy packages for the failures in these changes to systems and the IT implementation.
14. Announce another major reorganisation to enhance effectiveness and focus more effectively on change.
15. Move on to next job, before the organisation goes into critical state and after including in CV details of change management expertise, to start the process all over again.
Announce soon after arrival, and before any analysis that might cloud judgments, that the organisation must face up to the new competitive environment and must change to survive.
2. Sack significant numbers of incumbent managers and replace them with friends and colleagues from previous jobs.
3. Increase the number of middle managers and management levels giving new managers titles such as organisational capability development manager.
4. Ensure none of the new managers have definable line management accountabilities or job descriptions written in English.
5. Objectify the people the organisation is set up to serve. E.g. citizens become customers of government departments while students and courses at universities become clients and services.
6. Announce a major reorganisation to affect change and confront the challenges of the competitive environment.
7. Identify another agency or group with which to merge, form strategic alliances or generally hold meetings with.
8. Retrench as many operational staff as possible, singling out in particular anyone with detailed knowledge of how systems actually work.
9. Introduce a culture based on continuous meetings and managerial Newspeak while insulating all managers from any operational realities.
10. Identify any centres of excellence or international best practice in the organisation, close them down and outsource the function to someone more expensive and less effective.
11. Promulgate changes to any systems that effectively meet client/customer needs.
12. Introduce a completely untried IT system designed to integrate all existing systems and produce massive productivity savings.
13. Sack any operational staff who had not previously taken redundancy packages for the failures in these changes to systems and the IT implementation.
14. Announce another major reorganisation to enhance effectiveness and focus more effectively on change.
15. Move on to next job, before the organisation goes into critical state and after including in CV details of change management expertise, to start the process all over again.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: gold coast QLD australia
Age: 86
Posts: 1,345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Imagine this. Arriving on arm. Capt Bloggs to LAME. The nose wheel has severe vibrations. LAME, Skipper, I must have that in writing, I cannot talk to you. Capt. Bloggs. What the Fu$%? LAME. I cannot speak to you it has to be in writing. Capt. Bull****. No Capt. CASA has decreed it must be in writing. Capt. Fu$% CASA. Then lets go back to the way it was. Arriving on arm. Capt to LAME, the nose wheel is vibrating big time, have a look will yer mate. LAME, she is stuffed skipper, looks like she has earned herself a night in the hangar. You will have to find yourself another set of wings. Will you ring ops or will I? Which one makes sense? Madness.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i think it's time to get a refund on those unused tickets to Europe,and finally dump those QF shares that im holding,while theres still some cash around from the flying kangaroo.Looks like QF is heading the way of Ansett.There i said it..
Last edited by qf 1; 18th Nov 2010 at 18:26.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.
Posts: 1,116
Received 13 Likes
on
8 Posts
teresa green
G'day trees are green
well we do want it in writing but... the rest is just laughable if indeed it is a correct quote and not out of context.
I thoroughly enjoy my interaction with the crews I meet.We sometimes do not see everything in the same light but I respect their job and for professionalism they show.
Often with tricky defects you just need to talk to the crew.Doing that via ops or anyone else out of touch is lunacy and cannot happen if they actually wish to fly at some stage.
back to the topic, I hope AJ and the board do come to grips with public perceptions and deal with root cause not brand management alone.
well we do want it in writing but... the rest is just laughable if indeed it is a correct quote and not out of context.
I thoroughly enjoy my interaction with the crews I meet.We sometimes do not see everything in the same light but I respect their job and for professionalism they show.
Often with tricky defects you just need to talk to the crew.Doing that via ops or anyone else out of touch is lunacy and cannot happen if they actually wish to fly at some stage.
back to the topic, I hope AJ and the board do come to grips with public perceptions and deal with root cause not brand management alone.
Thread Starter
TIMA9X:
The word has been out since 2004 when I first visited this website.
The problem is that incentivising managers with bonuses for short term performance is lethal to an organisation if it is carried to the highest levels.
The Board and Senior management of a company should be thinking Ten years out.
Middle management maybe Five years out.
Coal face people, one year out.
Bonuses should reflect those time horizons.
Giving a CEO stock options that are exerciseable in a year or Two is asking for trouble because the temptation is to maximise short term value NOT long term shareholder value.
This problem is compounded even further in airlines by Two other well known factors.
Firstly any maintenance engineer knows that the guy who brings in $100 of new revenue is rewarded with pats on the back. The engineer who just saves the airline $100 in repair costs by quickly fixing a problem is invisible and gets nothing.
Engineers can live with that if they have managers who understand this perpetual issue and act accordingly - such as reminding the big bosses that the Qantas brand value as the worlds safest airline is built solely on its investment in the training and maintenance of its staff, nothing else. This is why the Chairman Jacksons (?) quote to the effect that "The Board and CEO have done more for this airline than anyone else" was so offensive.
The second factor is that the damage caused by wear and corrosion are cumulative and it takes many years to appear in the structure and systems of an aircraft (not so the engines). If, thanks to the Australian taxation system, you wish to keep your aircraft operating efficiently for Twenty plus years, you had better be doing more than just the specified minimum.
However, if I am a manager on a short term bonus scheme, and I plan to leave the company in Five years time, what incentive have I got to do the work and make the bonus reducing investment that will pay off long after I've left?
You think a few cans of Boeshield T9 and a few hours labour for spraying are expensive? Try costing the time of needing a pneumatic hammer to get out rusted in wing to body pins a few year later. Try costing glass bead blasting to remove corrosion that wouldn't have happened if the surfaces had been protected properly.
The standard QF line today and in future is "we do what the manufacturer says to do", which is strictly correct, but it ignores the fact that if you are the pioneer of a new aircraft type, you had better be doing a dam sight more than the manufacturer tells you to do since you are going to be the first to find out what wears out and generally goes wrong.
This is why Alan Joyces' latest update on the engines was so nauseating - blaming Rolls Royce for everything. Would I be right in thinking that Fifteen years ago QF would have told Rolls Royce in no uncertain terms that they had a problem, not sat on their hands like some beggar waiting for the great RR oracle to speak.
Furthermore, although I stand to be corrected, the American maintenance systems are based on a "buy it fly it, then sell it" approach that sees a much faster fleet turnover than Australia because of the different taxation treatements of capital goods. Either deliberately or otherwise their maintenance system was (still is?) geared to this American cycle of maybe using an aircraft for Ten years or so then flogging it. That meant that in the past Australian airlines were used to dealing with problems that no one else had seen (or cared about).
My guess is that QF will learn nothing from this incident and the strategy will continue as planned. The worst thing is that if it took Ten years of cost cutting to reach the situation we have today, it will take an equal amount of time, and a hell of a lot of investment, to get back to where you were, assuming there was even the motivation at Board level to do so, which I don't think there is.
Appears the word's out in the mainstream business press.
The problem is that incentivising managers with bonuses for short term performance is lethal to an organisation if it is carried to the highest levels.
The Board and Senior management of a company should be thinking Ten years out.
Middle management maybe Five years out.
Coal face people, one year out.
Bonuses should reflect those time horizons.
Giving a CEO stock options that are exerciseable in a year or Two is asking for trouble because the temptation is to maximise short term value NOT long term shareholder value.
This problem is compounded even further in airlines by Two other well known factors.
Firstly any maintenance engineer knows that the guy who brings in $100 of new revenue is rewarded with pats on the back. The engineer who just saves the airline $100 in repair costs by quickly fixing a problem is invisible and gets nothing.
Engineers can live with that if they have managers who understand this perpetual issue and act accordingly - such as reminding the big bosses that the Qantas brand value as the worlds safest airline is built solely on its investment in the training and maintenance of its staff, nothing else. This is why the Chairman Jacksons (?) quote to the effect that "The Board and CEO have done more for this airline than anyone else" was so offensive.
The second factor is that the damage caused by wear and corrosion are cumulative and it takes many years to appear in the structure and systems of an aircraft (not so the engines). If, thanks to the Australian taxation system, you wish to keep your aircraft operating efficiently for Twenty plus years, you had better be doing more than just the specified minimum.
However, if I am a manager on a short term bonus scheme, and I plan to leave the company in Five years time, what incentive have I got to do the work and make the bonus reducing investment that will pay off long after I've left?
You think a few cans of Boeshield T9 and a few hours labour for spraying are expensive? Try costing the time of needing a pneumatic hammer to get out rusted in wing to body pins a few year later. Try costing glass bead blasting to remove corrosion that wouldn't have happened if the surfaces had been protected properly.
The standard QF line today and in future is "we do what the manufacturer says to do", which is strictly correct, but it ignores the fact that if you are the pioneer of a new aircraft type, you had better be doing a dam sight more than the manufacturer tells you to do since you are going to be the first to find out what wears out and generally goes wrong.
This is why Alan Joyces' latest update on the engines was so nauseating - blaming Rolls Royce for everything. Would I be right in thinking that Fifteen years ago QF would have told Rolls Royce in no uncertain terms that they had a problem, not sat on their hands like some beggar waiting for the great RR oracle to speak.
Furthermore, although I stand to be corrected, the American maintenance systems are based on a "buy it fly it, then sell it" approach that sees a much faster fleet turnover than Australia because of the different taxation treatements of capital goods. Either deliberately or otherwise their maintenance system was (still is?) geared to this American cycle of maybe using an aircraft for Ten years or so then flogging it. That meant that in the past Australian airlines were used to dealing with problems that no one else had seen (or cared about).
My guess is that QF will learn nothing from this incident and the strategy will continue as planned. The worst thing is that if it took Ten years of cost cutting to reach the situation we have today, it will take an equal amount of time, and a hell of a lot of investment, to get back to where you were, assuming there was even the motivation at Board level to do so, which I don't think there is.
Last edited by Sunfish; 19th Nov 2010 at 14:55.