Qantas~ A Business in Decline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sunny QLD
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Pros : We all got to go home an hour early, because in that course you can only pass around knives for so long before someone attempts self harm."
bahahahahahaha!!!!! Made my day
bahahahahahaha!!!!! Made my day
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Darwin
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QF don't charge JQ less for their disrupted pax on flts after 2000.
It's the same ridiculously cheap fare for every flt regardless of the departure time depending on the city pair. I'm sure it's all just a "book entry" anyway.
It's the same ridiculously cheap fare for every flt regardless of the departure time depending on the city pair. I'm sure it's all just a "book entry" anyway.
Talking to the ground engineer from CGK, every time he gets paxed home on duty he has to go Garuda because it's cheaper than QF.
Is Qantas ditching unaffordable excellence?
February 10, 2011 – 8:09 pm, by Ben Sandilands
Here is something risky to think about in the context of the dispute between Qantas and the Australian and International Pilots Association over job security.
If Qantas were to remove the burden of excellence from its balance sheet, those pilot training, maintenance and standards costs that do more than just tick the boxes that make the carrier legal, what are the chances of disaster striking?
The answer is obvious. They would be the same chances that apply to other carriers who do the absolute minimum but claim to be conforming with ‘world’s best practice’, because in the weasel words of air safety standards, ‘best practice’ and ‘minimum required practice’ are identical.
The probability of a ‘hull loss’ which is a euphemism risk assessors use for a heap of dead people on world wide newscasts is probably one disaster every 25-30 years for a large airline.
This means that any such airline might not have a very bad accident for 50 years, or not until tomorrow. But if the company is saving $200 million a year by dispensing with excess excellence, meaning anything which is in excess of the minimum required to be able to claim conformity with ‘world’s best practice’, it will be more than several billion dollars ahead within a decade, and an accident could happen anyhow. Because ‘**** happens’ as Tony Abbott so lucidly put it the other day.
This is what is troubling about the apparently urgent need for Qantas to put an end to the unsustainable losses on its long haul operations, as flagged by Qantas CEO Alan Joyce a week ago in an address to the Melbourne Press Club.
The company has persisted with a failed network concept and a failed re-equipment program and uncompetitive products and seems determined to try and solve these issues by off shoring some of its assets and costs through the device of basing Australian registered aircraft in Singapore. The small beginnings of a major shift in strategy. It closed an engine shop that was critical to keeping its aged fleet of Rolls-Royce powered 747s safe over the far southern ocean routes or across the Pacific to North America. It deals itself out of knowledge and oversight over the engines Rolls-Royce put on its flagship A380s, only to put better versions on those supplied to other A380 operators without telling Qantas a thing until one of them rips itself apart, and tears 27 holes through the wing in the process, on the November 4 flight of one its A380s from Singapore to Sydney.
At the tense meeting between itself, its strike breaker contractor and the union yesterday Qantas refuses to consider anything that might give job security to the pilots that are the best trained in the world.
Why? There are several possible reasons for this. The widely discussed possible reason is that Qantas is determined to end the employment of pilots under ‘legacy’ terms and conditions and churn them back, through Jetstar, under different agreements. The less widely discussed reason refers to nebulous statements from Jetstar about the setting up of a pilot resource from which non Australian pilots flying elsewhere on the Jetstar franchises could perform flying in Australia for Jetstar at favorable rates. No doubt like those of guest workers in the building industry employed on temporary visas.
If such an arrangement is set up for Jetstar there is no reason why it then couldn’t be applied to Qantas, what’s left of it.
The bizarre situation arises now that Qantas has a cadre of pilots who appear to have a longer term loyalty to the carrier than its management. The former are prepared to put standards ahead of remuneration if it keeps the carrier truly Australian. The latter don’t want to know about it.
It isn’t clear if Qantas has thought through the consequences of undercutting and severing those legacy costs that are its brand ‘premium’. It is clear however that Alan Joyce has calculated the immediate consequences of not lifting productivity at Qantas, and this is where there is considerable pain and bafflement and anger in pilot ranks. They are prepared to lift productivity and keep pay in check.
Surely there must yet be room in this stand off for Joyce to make different, more constructive choices, that will engage and retain that part of the Qantas legacy which is priceless.
February 10, 2011 – 8:09 pm, by Ben Sandilands
Here is something risky to think about in the context of the dispute between Qantas and the Australian and International Pilots Association over job security.
If Qantas were to remove the burden of excellence from its balance sheet, those pilot training, maintenance and standards costs that do more than just tick the boxes that make the carrier legal, what are the chances of disaster striking?
The answer is obvious. They would be the same chances that apply to other carriers who do the absolute minimum but claim to be conforming with ‘world’s best practice’, because in the weasel words of air safety standards, ‘best practice’ and ‘minimum required practice’ are identical.
The probability of a ‘hull loss’ which is a euphemism risk assessors use for a heap of dead people on world wide newscasts is probably one disaster every 25-30 years for a large airline.
This means that any such airline might not have a very bad accident for 50 years, or not until tomorrow. But if the company is saving $200 million a year by dispensing with excess excellence, meaning anything which is in excess of the minimum required to be able to claim conformity with ‘world’s best practice’, it will be more than several billion dollars ahead within a decade, and an accident could happen anyhow. Because ‘**** happens’ as Tony Abbott so lucidly put it the other day.
This is what is troubling about the apparently urgent need for Qantas to put an end to the unsustainable losses on its long haul operations, as flagged by Qantas CEO Alan Joyce a week ago in an address to the Melbourne Press Club.
The company has persisted with a failed network concept and a failed re-equipment program and uncompetitive products and seems determined to try and solve these issues by off shoring some of its assets and costs through the device of basing Australian registered aircraft in Singapore. The small beginnings of a major shift in strategy. It closed an engine shop that was critical to keeping its aged fleet of Rolls-Royce powered 747s safe over the far southern ocean routes or across the Pacific to North America. It deals itself out of knowledge and oversight over the engines Rolls-Royce put on its flagship A380s, only to put better versions on those supplied to other A380 operators without telling Qantas a thing until one of them rips itself apart, and tears 27 holes through the wing in the process, on the November 4 flight of one its A380s from Singapore to Sydney.
At the tense meeting between itself, its strike breaker contractor and the union yesterday Qantas refuses to consider anything that might give job security to the pilots that are the best trained in the world.
Why? There are several possible reasons for this. The widely discussed possible reason is that Qantas is determined to end the employment of pilots under ‘legacy’ terms and conditions and churn them back, through Jetstar, under different agreements. The less widely discussed reason refers to nebulous statements from Jetstar about the setting up of a pilot resource from which non Australian pilots flying elsewhere on the Jetstar franchises could perform flying in Australia for Jetstar at favorable rates. No doubt like those of guest workers in the building industry employed on temporary visas.
If such an arrangement is set up for Jetstar there is no reason why it then couldn’t be applied to Qantas, what’s left of it.
The bizarre situation arises now that Qantas has a cadre of pilots who appear to have a longer term loyalty to the carrier than its management. The former are prepared to put standards ahead of remuneration if it keeps the carrier truly Australian. The latter don’t want to know about it.
It isn’t clear if Qantas has thought through the consequences of undercutting and severing those legacy costs that are its brand ‘premium’. It is clear however that Alan Joyce has calculated the immediate consequences of not lifting productivity at Qantas, and this is where there is considerable pain and bafflement and anger in pilot ranks. They are prepared to lift productivity and keep pay in check.
Surely there must yet be room in this stand off for Joyce to make different, more constructive choices, that will engage and retain that part of the Qantas legacy which is priceless.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just rec'd yet another email with another CC international pattern that clearly suggests that the (alleged) international losses are self inflicted by inept management of resources.
So on the back of the other little gem previously noted that gives 22 crew a nice little break, there's now another Aussie holiday for 5 crew to pax from London to operate....... a Mel>SIN>Mel and then pax back to London.....oh..... and this will happen 3 times during the roster!! (the CC source says that there are also record numbers of crew on reserve!???)
Someone else can do the exact maths and before the Orange Emperor's dept of spin and deception rush to claim thay are only lowly CC on meagre base salaries well below the national average, add up the real cost of dropping the salable seats, paying the accom, gnd tpt & allowances plus the OT.
Add to this the pushing of pax onto JQ by reduced QF schedules and less than suitable a/c - (loved my AKL pax on a grotty, tired 737) - it is not unreasonable to suggest that there is either serious incompetence or a wilful, destructive agenda.
Industrial productivity just became a very wide two way street!
AT
---------------------+
|* Pattern: AUS31X013 | Base: LON Complement: CFA 5
+---------------------+
Route Code: LHR99 Weeks: 3 Dates Op: 04/02
Skills:
Report Departure Arrival Slip Trans Min Duty Duty
V Service C P Sectors Time Day Lst Utc Day Lst Utc Time Time Rest Hours Credit
0 QFA0010 8 P LHR/SIN/MEL 2100 FR 2200 2200 SU 0640 1940 33:10 20:00 22:40 22:40
0 QFA0009 8 MEL/SIN 1550 MO 1705 0605 MO 2140 1340 45:10 12:00 9:20 9:20
0 QFA0010 8 SIN/MEL 1920 WE 2020 1220 TH 0640 1940 32:55 12:00 8:50 8:50
0 QFA0009 8 P MEL/SIN 1605 FR 1705 0605 FR 2140 1340 25:19 12:00 8:35 8:35
0 QFA0031 8 P SIN/LHR 2259 SA 2359 1559 SU 0620 0620 15:21 15:21
Days Away: 10
+---------------------------+
So on the back of the other little gem previously noted that gives 22 crew a nice little break, there's now another Aussie holiday for 5 crew to pax from London to operate....... a Mel>SIN>Mel and then pax back to London.....oh..... and this will happen 3 times during the roster!! (the CC source says that there are also record numbers of crew on reserve!???)
Someone else can do the exact maths and before the Orange Emperor's dept of spin and deception rush to claim thay are only lowly CC on meagre base salaries well below the national average, add up the real cost of dropping the salable seats, paying the accom, gnd tpt & allowances plus the OT.
Add to this the pushing of pax onto JQ by reduced QF schedules and less than suitable a/c - (loved my AKL pax on a grotty, tired 737) - it is not unreasonable to suggest that there is either serious incompetence or a wilful, destructive agenda.
Industrial productivity just became a very wide two way street!
AT
---------------------+
|* Pattern: AUS31X013 | Base: LON Complement: CFA 5
+---------------------+
Route Code: LHR99 Weeks: 3 Dates Op: 04/02
Skills:
Report Departure Arrival Slip Trans Min Duty Duty
V Service C P Sectors Time Day Lst Utc Day Lst Utc Time Time Rest Hours Credit
0 QFA0010 8 P LHR/SIN/MEL 2100 FR 2200 2200 SU 0640 1940 33:10 20:00 22:40 22:40
0 QFA0009 8 MEL/SIN 1550 MO 1705 0605 MO 2140 1340 45:10 12:00 9:20 9:20
0 QFA0010 8 SIN/MEL 1920 WE 2020 1220 TH 0640 1940 32:55 12:00 8:50 8:50
0 QFA0009 8 P MEL/SIN 1605 FR 1705 0605 FR 2140 1340 25:19 12:00 8:35 8:35
0 QFA0031 8 P SIN/LHR 2259 SA 2359 1559 SU 0620 0620 15:21 15:21
Days Away: 10
+---------------------------+
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Dununda
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not Only But also
The company continues to tell anyone who will listen that the LHR base is cost effective and offers the highest level of customer service.
The truth will never be known but it is very clear that it is designed to drive down wages and offshore Australian jobs.
Patterns like this are jaw droppingly inefficient.Bear in mind the QAL CC EBA is up for renegotiationThese patterns are perhaps a warning shot across the bows.Currently QAL operate only one LHR a day.Perhaps the intention is to make ALL flights to LHR(Ex Oz) operated by the LHR base.The FAAA are a very weak group.They approve and allow patterns like this by not contesting them
There is definitely an agenda here
The truth will never be known but it is very clear that it is designed to drive down wages and offshore Australian jobs.
Patterns like this are jaw droppingly inefficient.Bear in mind the QAL CC EBA is up for renegotiationThese patterns are perhaps a warning shot across the bows.Currently QAL operate only one LHR a day.Perhaps the intention is to make ALL flights to LHR(Ex Oz) operated by the LHR base.The FAAA are a very weak group.They approve and allow patterns like this by not contesting them
There is definitely an agenda here
But wait, there's more.
This for one of the 380s going to frankfurt for a c check.
It raises a few questions.
On the same day a 744 will operate the 5 into fra. Does this provide an opportunity to run the 380 into fra? You know, give the unsuspecting passengers an opportunity to fly on it, one in which they weren't expecting?
It would be a pleasant surprise to most and probably leave a favourable impression for some repeat busines down the track.
No doubt the answer will be, no too hard. We know best, we'll take it up empty.
Also the last line is interesting reading. No seats out of fra to get the crew out. Yep, this international business model is completely stuffed.
+---------------------+
|* Pattern: OQC02X061 | A/C Type: A380 Base: SYD Category: CPT F/O S/O HOME TRANSPORT
+---------------------+
Route Code: Weeks: 6 INT
Report Departure Arrival Free Flight Time Duty ADP
Service T Pax Sectors Time Day Lst Utc Day Lst Utc Of Duty Total Night Period Credit
QFA0031 PAX SYD/SIN 1630 WE 1730 0630 WE 2230 1430 16:05 ( 8:00) 9:30
QFA6023 SIN/FRA 1505 TH 1605 0805 TH 2225 2125 47:25 13:20 9:25 14:50 3:15
QFA0006 PAX FRA/SIN 2220 SA 2320 2220 SU 1820 1020 24:05 ( 12:00) 13:30
QFA0006 PAX SIN/SYD 1855 MO 1955 1155 TU 0625 1925 ( 7:30) 9:00
Elapsed Time: 134:25 ETAC: 0:00 Totals: 13:20 9:25 46:50 3:15
Days Away: 7 Minimum Pattern Credit: 38:30 Applicable Credit: 43:58
Creation Reason: to ferry VH-OQC to FRA for C check. nil seats ex fra fri...ss
This for one of the 380s going to frankfurt for a c check.
It raises a few questions.
On the same day a 744 will operate the 5 into fra. Does this provide an opportunity to run the 380 into fra? You know, give the unsuspecting passengers an opportunity to fly on it, one in which they weren't expecting?
It would be a pleasant surprise to most and probably leave a favourable impression for some repeat busines down the track.
No doubt the answer will be, no too hard. We know best, we'll take it up empty.
Also the last line is interesting reading. No seats out of fra to get the crew out. Yep, this international business model is completely stuffed.
+---------------------+
|* Pattern: OQC02X061 | A/C Type: A380 Base: SYD Category: CPT F/O S/O HOME TRANSPORT
+---------------------+
Route Code: Weeks: 6 INT
Report Departure Arrival Free Flight Time Duty ADP
Service T Pax Sectors Time Day Lst Utc Day Lst Utc Of Duty Total Night Period Credit
QFA0031 PAX SYD/SIN 1630 WE 1730 0630 WE 2230 1430 16:05 ( 8:00) 9:30
QFA6023 SIN/FRA 1505 TH 1605 0805 TH 2225 2125 47:25 13:20 9:25 14:50 3:15
QFA0006 PAX FRA/SIN 2220 SA 2320 2220 SU 1820 1020 24:05 ( 12:00) 13:30
QFA0006 PAX SIN/SYD 1855 MO 1955 1155 TU 0625 1925 ( 7:30) 9:00
Elapsed Time: 134:25 ETAC: 0:00 Totals: 13:20 9:25 46:50 3:15
Days Away: 7 Minimum Pattern Credit: 38:30 Applicable Credit: 43:58
Creation Reason: to ferry VH-OQC to FRA for C check. nil seats ex fra fri...ss
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
Sunfish, agreed. As I have said, I believe AIPA have caught the company off guard. The timing for the "final solution" is when the B787 deliveries are scheduled to crank up. Sources indicate the management suite is in a state of shock, totally unprepared for the current situation.
The company appear to have deliberately incited revolution, but not just yet. They would want to be very careful that they don't provoke a "scorched earth" mentality, as there will be no winners. As I have said, it is in managements hands to stop the madness, they are the ones who have backed everyone into a corner.
The company appear to have deliberately incited revolution, but not just yet. They would want to be very careful that they don't provoke a "scorched earth" mentality, as there will be no winners. As I have said, it is in managements hands to stop the madness, they are the ones who have backed everyone into a corner.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Perth
Posts: 503
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ants nest
Is there any work group in QF that "management" aren't having a crack at?
Cabin Crew-tick.... YES
Pilots-tick-....YES
Engineers-tick....YES
Front Line staff-tick....YES
Support Staff-tick....YES
Reading the SMH today-we have the TWU (Baggage Handlers) losing in court against QF big fines pending. AIPA to advise of industrial action next week. ALAEA taking "protected industrial action". FAAA ........mmmmmm? ASU.....?
Then you get Gareth Evans(I thought he was a pollie who had an affair with the leader of the Democrats !....any way..) sending out a Notice to All Staff.....we won't be bullied or intimidated.....rant rant. Then the "leaked" announcement (front page of the Fin Review yesterday) of a Qantas #2 premier brand based in KUL or SIN.
The more I see this unfold the more I reckon this is a totally considered and thought out Project Plan hatched in the bowels of QCA .
Call it a Conspiracy Theory......whatever!
But all of the signs are there. The penny dropped for me yesterday when one of our "Managers" came into our briefing to announce that:
"We have to stay strong and work together to protect our jobs...(then the punchline) -IF WE DON'T SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCE OUR COST BASE WE MAY NEED TO MAKE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THE BUSINESS."
BINGO !
So step by step the Project Plan unfolds. The first Milestone is coming up. Scope Creep will occur when all Unions combine.
The Qantas Ants nest that has been sitting there for a long time in the lush Australian landscape...... it is now being systematically jumped on by "management" and sticks poked into the holes.
Just be careful Stick Pokers......when the last time you have been bitten by one of those Bull Ants.
Be careful what you wish for
Cabin Crew-tick.... YES
Pilots-tick-....YES
Engineers-tick....YES
Front Line staff-tick....YES
Support Staff-tick....YES
Reading the SMH today-we have the TWU (Baggage Handlers) losing in court against QF big fines pending. AIPA to advise of industrial action next week. ALAEA taking "protected industrial action". FAAA ........mmmmmm? ASU.....?
Then you get Gareth Evans(I thought he was a pollie who had an affair with the leader of the Democrats !....any way..) sending out a Notice to All Staff.....we won't be bullied or intimidated.....rant rant. Then the "leaked" announcement (front page of the Fin Review yesterday) of a Qantas #2 premier brand based in KUL or SIN.
The more I see this unfold the more I reckon this is a totally considered and thought out Project Plan hatched in the bowels of QCA .
Call it a Conspiracy Theory......whatever!
But all of the signs are there. The penny dropped for me yesterday when one of our "Managers" came into our briefing to announce that:
"We have to stay strong and work together to protect our jobs...(then the punchline) -IF WE DON'T SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCE OUR COST BASE WE MAY NEED TO MAKE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THE BUSINESS."
BINGO !
So step by step the Project Plan unfolds. The first Milestone is coming up. Scope Creep will occur when all Unions combine.
The Qantas Ants nest that has been sitting there for a long time in the lush Australian landscape...... it is now being systematically jumped on by "management" and sticks poked into the holes.
Just be careful Stick Pokers......when the last time you have been bitten by one of those Bull Ants.
Be careful what you wish for
How many of these unionised workers who are campaigning for Aussie jobs and conditions always buy Australian products even if they are more expensive and inferior to foreign competition.
Drives a Japanese car, uses a Finnish mobile phone, watches a Korean tv, wears clothes made in China, has furniture from Indonesia and buys food in the supermarket based on price alone.
Thinks of his own pocket first yet expects everyone else to pay extra to maintain his terms and conditions.
Drives a Japanese car, uses a Finnish mobile phone, watches a Korean tv, wears clothes made in China, has furniture from Indonesia and buys food in the supermarket based on price alone.
Thinks of his own pocket first yet expects everyone else to pay extra to maintain his terms and conditions.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Orstralya
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How many of these unionised workers who are campaigning for Aussie jobs and conditions always buy Australian products even if they are more expensive and inferior to foreign competition.
Drives a Japanese car, uses a Finnish mobile phone, watches a Korean tv, wears clothes made in China, has furniture from Indonesia and buys food in the supermarket based on price alone.
Thinks of his own pocket first yet expects everyone else to pay extra to maintain his terms and conditions
Drives a Japanese car, uses a Finnish mobile phone, watches a Korean tv, wears clothes made in China, has furniture from Indonesia and buys food in the supermarket based on price alone.
Thinks of his own pocket first yet expects everyone else to pay extra to maintain his terms and conditions
a) I drive a holden, even if Holden are owned by GM
b) Please name a mobile phone brand made and owned in Australia and I'll buy one
C) Have paid extra to furnish my house with as much locally made furniture as I can (local manufacturing sector already been gutted by globalisation but, what's left is of far superior quality)
d) Will always use the local green grocer where possible as the fruit and veg is , again, of greater quality. However, multi-national supermarket chains managed with the same race to the bottom style management as Qantas, are making it more difficult to source locally manufactured products.
As usual, this argument you bring Metro, seems to always come from people in positions of privilage whose jobs have not yet been, or are very unlikely to be, hoovered out of the country for the short term gain of the few.
So, don't be surprised if the silent majority put up a fight to maintain a little piece of what our forefathers fought for (and in a lot of cases died for).
If a country's economy isn't for it's own people, who's if for?
Metro,
To look at it from another angle, how many people pay a bit more for a mercedes car even though a hyundai is cheaper, how many people stay at a hilton hotel even though the local backpackers is cheaper, how many people pay extra for a swiss watch when a chinese one also tells the time. The reason these more expensive products survive in the market is that you get what you pay for.
The reality is that the difference in crewing costs between Qantas and its competitors is NEGLIGIBLE, and more than offset by the good outcomes in events such as the QF32. The real cost difference between Q and the others is fuel. While competitors have spent money upgrading to more fuel efficient aircraft, Qantas have wasted money on starting a low yield, ego driven low quality carrier, and on bonuses to the former CEO.
To look at it from another angle, how many people pay a bit more for a mercedes car even though a hyundai is cheaper, how many people stay at a hilton hotel even though the local backpackers is cheaper, how many people pay extra for a swiss watch when a chinese one also tells the time. The reason these more expensive products survive in the market is that you get what you pay for.
The reality is that the difference in crewing costs between Qantas and its competitors is NEGLIGIBLE, and more than offset by the good outcomes in events such as the QF32. The real cost difference between Q and the others is fuel. While competitors have spent money upgrading to more fuel efficient aircraft, Qantas have wasted money on starting a low yield, ego driven low quality carrier, and on bonuses to the former CEO.
If a country's economy isn't for it's own people, who's if for?
All thanks to "globalisation" and 12 years of the Howard Liberal Government.
You know it's true.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Pity City
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Metro Man
I am a Qantas shareholder, I own a small part of the company, shareholders pay all employees of the company. On the whole I am happy with the work the Pilots, Cabin Crew, Engineers and Ground Staff do. I am not happy with the work senior management are doing:-
1) Share price has tanked.
2) No dividends paid for years (or a long time into future if QantAsia starts).
3) Diminishing network.
4) Old aircraft.
5) Goodwill flushed down the toilet.
6) Destruction of iconic brand.
Not sure if I missed something, oh yes
7) Job and tax leakage out of Australia.
Not bad for a company calling itself 'The Spirit of Australia'!!
1) Share price has tanked.
2) No dividends paid for years (or a long time into future if QantAsia starts).
3) Diminishing network.
4) Old aircraft.
5) Goodwill flushed down the toilet.
6) Destruction of iconic brand.
Not sure if I missed something, oh yes
7) Job and tax leakage out of Australia.
Not bad for a company calling itself 'The Spirit of Australia'!!
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is interesting to note that jet aviation is credited (along with containerised shipping) as being one of the key enablers of globalisation. It is ironic that it is one of the least globalised industries that one could imagine with so many restrictions on ownership, routes and landing rights.
World wide, airline profits are dismal and one would think that in the long run, the only real end to this will be considerable consolidation of the industry - certainly for international routes maybe not so for domestic. Will this happen, unlikely in the near term due to soverign interests being maintained but one could guess that airlines which continue to make losses will become extinct or become takeover targets - the Air Italia fiasco case in point.
What does this mean to Qantas? I don't really know but you could guess that the competition will continue to increase capacity and reduce fares. The public really only care about getting the cheapest fare not who is captaining the plane or who worked on the wing. I wish it wasn't like this but it is and the world will continue to change whether we like it or not.
World wide, airline profits are dismal and one would think that in the long run, the only real end to this will be considerable consolidation of the industry - certainly for international routes maybe not so for domestic. Will this happen, unlikely in the near term due to soverign interests being maintained but one could guess that airlines which continue to make losses will become extinct or become takeover targets - the Air Italia fiasco case in point.
What does this mean to Qantas? I don't really know but you could guess that the competition will continue to increase capacity and reduce fares. The public really only care about getting the cheapest fare not who is captaining the plane or who worked on the wing. I wish it wasn't like this but it is and the world will continue to change whether we like it or not.
Nunc est bibendum
If our management spent as much time actually working on the business (product, route network, etc) as they do trying to screw over the workers and/or get around our agreements then we'd be world beaters.