Qantas and Its Appalling Brand Management

[captainrats]

Much is written and discussed about Qantas'woes.Poor choice of aircraft:Disengaged employees;offshoring;the cannibalising of mainline by Jetstar;shrinking network...the list goes on.
It becomes evident that there are two Qantas:One pre float and one post float.
Prior to float the brand was managed with kid gloves.It was innovative.Always ahead of the curve and always generated profit which ended up in the government coffers.The board was populated by governemnt appointees who left management to its own devices.Keith Hamilton,John Ward and John Menadue were superb as CEOs ,well respected by employees.
Qantas was a package that worked well.
Post float the brains of Qantas were deposed by Strong.He bought in his coterie from TAA/Australian.Enter Geoff Dixon,Strong's mate.An ex journo who worked for Ansett and migrated to TAA.A man in the twilight of his life and career.An unremarkable individual.A man without a skillset to run an international airline
The trashing of the brand began.The provoking of the workforce started.Employees became the enemy.
Australians dont generally manage brands well.Brands need to be re invented around every seven years.This requires a capital spend.The brand needs to be freshened up.
Qantas hasnt been freshened up for a decade or more.Several attempts were made but never really gained traction.The Qantas brand is very 20th Century.
We have had a changing of the guard.Dixon is gone and so is Jackson.Most of the senior executive have also departed.Lesley Grant is a noted survivor.She has achieved little.
So why has the 'script" (Sunfish's insight) remained the same? .Who is maintaining this script of provocation,divide and conquer,witholding of capital and brand neglect.
Why would anyone destroy such an iconic Australian brand?.
The governemnt must be involved at some level.They sit back and let it happen.If Qantas fails will it be bailed out?Will the government bail it out?.
Is there an agenda or is it just plain bloody stupidity.
No one has really come up with the definitive answer.I'll be damned if I can provide one.
The whole scenario makes no sense at all

[Ken Borough]

Since the float, the 'management' (a term I use loosely) had neither the courage nor foresight to reinvigorate Qantas. Instead, the easy path was taken and Jetstar created. The rest is history!

[gobbledock]

Since the float, the 'management' (a term I use loosely) had neither the courage nor foresight to reinvigorate Qantas. Instead, the easy path was taken and Jetstar created. The rest is history!

Very harsh words indeed from a management footstool and the President of the 'I Love Management Fanclub' !!
Ken, have management been neglecting to feed you your Shmacko's again ??

[WorthWhat]

If Qantas fails will it be bailed out? Will the government bail it out?.

Suspect not CR. Best you could hope for, is to be paid what your entitled to by the General Employee Entitlements and Redundancy Scheme (GEERS). It was established to assist employees who have lost their employment due to the liquidation or bankruptcy of their employer and who are owed certain employee entitlements. GEERS covers capped unpaid wages, annual and long service leave, capped payment in lieu of notice and capped redundancy pay.

That said! Suggest all concerned do whatever needs to be done to keep Qantas solvent. A dead Roo, would be a disaster for shareholders and staff alike. Best not to think about it.

[Captain Sherm]

Captainrats,

Your post is an excellent summation of how many Australians feel....and not just about Qantas. I imagine many employees of other corporatised and privatised government businesses, banks, unions, etc etc etc all have the same feeling of bewilderment and a deep sense of unease at being able to get any sense of an answer to "How did this all happen? How did those folks do this to us? Did we have to worship at the throne of Second Best?".

While it will not give a complete answer have a look at this website John Ralston Saul - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia and read one or two of his books

Saul's work encapsulates a lot of the "How did this happen" stuff and really ought to be a compulsory read before we all vote.

It's not just about Qantas and not just about its employees....as a small example, take the people who fly Qantas, they're the ultimate QF stakeholders....many have that same deep sense of unease. Why does car parking at MEL cost more than the air fare? Why on earth is there still a curfew at SYD or a second airport? Why can every other major city in the world have a rail link to the airport but not MEL?

I suspect almost all of the voters have an inbuilt and deeply embedded understanding that its always better to do things properly the first time. That in war, flood and famine the people can be trusted to understand changing paradigms and adjust to new challenges. But it does require leadership.

Maybe as pilots we, perhaps like surgeons and soldiers, know that you cannot properly lead and command by platitudes, ideology, consultancies, slogans, bright ill-thought through ideas and self-interest. Perhaps we are cursed with a little more insight.

Sherm has always been a fan of Oscar Wilde and I might close by sharing this quote:

"A dreamer is one who can only find his way by moonlight, and his punishment is that he sees the dawn before the rest of the world"

Sure there's something in there for all of us up at the pointy end. Have a look at Saul's work and let me know what you think.

[WoodenEye]

Should Qantas fail, god for bid, and some other airline, (together with associated supporting investors and the Government), does unexpectedly come to the rescue, don’t expect the Roo to be rebirthed as it is today.

What is going on at the present time with Qantas International is similar to what took place domestically in the US in the 80’s and 90’s after the industry was internally deregulated by President Carter and US airlines had to come to grips with costs determined by a regulated market structure.

In situations where employees remain quite well paid but shareholders then receive deregulated market rates of return, a realignment of shareholder and employee payoffs is inevitable and ultimately necessary for financial survival and job security. IMHO, real question right now ought to be; How to make the transition fairly?

Choices considered by US carriers such as DELTA, NWA & UAL, included, amongst other things:
· Using economic pressure to lower labour costs,
· Using cash flow for alternative business investment,
· Leveraged takeovers, and
· Spin off into LCC’s.

Sounds eerily familar doesn’t it.

In all cases, contested outcomes and plummeting share prices resulted in either widespread layoffs and subcontracting or a significant reduction in wages. In 1985, UAL Pilots took a 29 day strike to resist such pressures and eventually it was recognised in the US that both employees and shareholders had just claims. In the case of United, all employees (other than flight attendants) took a 15% wage reduction in exchange for 55% of United Airlines Stock.

[DEFCON4]

the Best American Airline

Highly unionised and profitable: I give you Southwest Airlines.
If Qantas was to adopt the same MO as Southwest it would have a shot at excellence.
Its a nice dream but wont happen.Not while the place is being run by narcissists who have an overblown sense of entitlement.
I thought Dixon was a turd.Clifford is the whole sewage farm

[Wally Mk2]

Gee I'm surprised this thread is still running, the Mods must be asleep!

Still QF I believe either has to change or it will come to an end as we know it. The latter hopefully never as after all any Co really is made up of real people & any Co's biggest assets (it's employees) can only take so much before they too fail like any piece of operating 'machinery'
The business world these days is ulgy & none more so than in aviation sadly.


Wmk2

[oicur12.again]

"Highly unionised and profitable: I give you Southwest Airlines."

I bet they complete the engagement surveys though.

The work ethic at Southwest would be almost impossible to foster in an airline like QF.

Could you imagine a QF skipper helping load bags while the FO greets and seats pax?

[Sunfish]

Oicur:

Could you imagine a QF skipper helping load bags while the FO greets and seats pax?

Mate, it's about empowerment if you have ever flown Southwest and watched them work you will understand this. Qantas staff had it once, but their authority and sense of ownership of their job has been progressively eroded by years of rotten management. They need to be given it back.

When you see a Five foot tall Southwest check in chick pull her gloves on and go out and struggle to plug in external power on an arriving 737 you immediately understand that you are watching a team. There are no demarcation disputes, it's their aircraft, airport and passengers. There are no excuses, they know that it is up to them to deliver a good customer experience, not some disembodied manager somewhere.

To put it another way they are not just "doing my job" like so many other workers.


Qantas had that same spirit in the 1970's and at least half the 1980's. I have never been prouder than watching a QF cabin crew at LHR around 1975 dealing with a highly apprehensive family of migrating Poms. Mum, Dad and Two little kids. Even before we were airborne the Cabin crew had sussed them out and were regaling them with advice, ideas and feeding the kids ("Orange juice - that's liquid Australian sunshine") it was a treat just to watch.

I don't think the disempowered lot we have today would even be permitted to take the time to pull something like that off.

[prairiegirl]

seriously......

pilots loaded bags back in the 70's?? I WANT PICTURES LOL

[Keg]

Was talking to a colleague at work yesterday (pilot) who is doing an MBA. He said that on the course he is doing, QF is held up as a beacon of what NOT to do. Apparently QF has one of the 'least educated' management workforces when it comes to formal training/ management degrees. His course talks about 'the ideal' and then they talk about Qantas.

I've cleaned the cabin, I've gone the extra mile for pax- a couple of days back walked down to the bulk to confirm for a nervous pax that her dog was actually on board- and done lots of things to keep the show on the road. I suspect my dodgy back would go if I tried chucking bags into the thing. I do all this for the passengers and my own personal pride. Sadly, given the fact that management don't recognise this, at some stage in the future I'm going to have to withdraw those extra efforts for a short period of time until they get the message.

Perhaps if you're not actually working for Qantas you shouldn't comment on what those who do work there will or will not do for their airline when they are properly acknowledged and respected by their management for our efforts.

[Tempo]

Sunfish...

I think you are right on the money.

[prairiegirl]

Keg

got it in one - i don't work for Qantas and i'm not a pilot. i am merely a lowly sales plebe out to make a buck just like the next guy. i don't want your back or anyone else's back to go out on my behalf. lol

[capt.cynical]

GOD's

The OH&S "Nanny's" would S%*T themselves if they knew what the "Flight Stewards" of the 70's & 80's used to do to keep the show on the road.

[ampclamp]

keg

Keg, I have a mate who is a Chairman's lounge card holder and is a director at a large multi national industrial firm. He has worked in HR /IR for years and is well informed in regards to the QF way.
I've had many conversations with him about QF HR and IR in particular and they are very poorly rated in that area. Quite the example of how not to do it.
The culture must change from the top down. Until then it is confrontation and do as I say not as I do.

[Aim Point]

How Qantas can take the heat out of its union disputes

Author, Greg Bamber, Professor, Department of Management at Monash University

Qantas chief Alan Joyce could learn much from US-based Southwest Airlines. AAP

The looming confrontation between Qantas and its pilots, engineers and baggage handlers could easily become Australia’s most dramatic industrial conflict since the waterfront dispute of 1998.

But it seems that some of the parties involved are not considering solutions available to ensure these disputes don’t develop into a full-blown crisis.

Rather than holding constructive talks, they appear to be making public inflammatory comments in a series of heated exchanges. In the latest salvo, Qantas chief Alan Joyce publicly condemned unions' “kamikaze campaign” on wages, describing their talk of industrial action as “throwing oil on the fire”.

Union leaders have previously criticised senior managers as “hard-line”, accusing them of trashing the Qantas brand while awarding themselves huge pay increases while denying modest pay increases and job security to workers.

Qantas and the unions need to adopt long-term, cultural changes to their industrial relations regime if the parties are to avoid costly disputes that destroy shareholder value, put jobs at risk and endanger Qantas' corporate reputation.

Qantas could learn from the experience of US-based Southwest Airlines, which has worked hard to foster good relations between managers, employees and unions and has become one of the most successful airlines in the world.
Navigating forward

At 90 years old, Qantas is one of the most successful “legacy” airlines in the world.

Legacy airlines generally reflect militaristic traditions of command-and-control. But partly because of this highly adversarial approach, legacy airlines like Qantas seem not to find it easy to achieve trust and high productivity from their workers.

Adding to this tension is a tendency to outsource, restructure and cut employment costs – highlighted in Qantas’s recent move to base staff overseas and outsource some maintenance work.

This reflects Qantas’s aim to cut costs in the face of rising fuel prices and tougher competition, but has left groups of Qantas staff concerned about their pay and job security.

The Southwest solution

In contrast, Southwest – a much younger airline – has developed a constructive management culture that strongly values the views and interests of its employees.

Southwest was founded in 1971 in Texas. Like Qantas, Southwest it is heavily unionised, with 88% of employees paying union dues.

Nevertheless, Southwest adopts management strategies based on fostering partnerships, mutuality and staff engagement.

By 2007, Southwest had become the largest airline in the world by total number of passengers carried per year and it has been continually profitable since it was founded.

This is unusual in the airline industry, which often faces much turbulence, currently from rising fuel costs.

Southwest attributes much of this success to its constructive relationship with its staff and the unions.

The airline holds quarterly briefings with unions when its profits are reported and according to management, aims to treat its staff like “family”.

Employees are treated more as a source of value, rather than as a cost. Consequently, it has never retrenched any of its workers.

The airline allows employees to choose their own representatives at company meetings and respects the legitimacy of the union.
Business logic

In Up in the Air, our book on the airline industry, a Southwest executive explained the business logic behind the company’s management style.

“Our people know what the airline industry environment is like,“ the executive said. "I am confident they will do what it takes to keep Southwest on top. I would consider it a failure if we have to go to our employees and tell them to take a pay cut.”

Southwest generally works through difficult issues in a form of joint problem-solving, in partnership with the workforce rather than via public slanging matches and threatening industrial disputes.

While many airlines have tried to copy aspects of productivity-enhancing innovations pioneered by Southwest – such as the fast turn-around of planes – its industrial-relations strategies have not become commonplace.

But this does not mean that Qantas cannot transform its management and industrial-relations strategy.

After a period of much turbulence in the US, another large old legacy airline, Continental, succeeded in transforming its previously troubled management and industrial relations in the 1990s.

The adversaries at the Flying Kangaroo could learn much from the constructive dialogue, cooperative approaches and mutual-gains-style negotiations that Southwest managers and unions adopt – and from Continental’s transformation.

As they confront big issues, such learning would be in the interests of all the Qantas stakeholders – including investors, workers and the customers.

[legaleagle73]

My wife is an HR manager for a large international company. She recently went on an organisational development course run by a well respected firm in that field. I won't give all the details because I don't want to cause grief to anyone but, essentially, after speaking about how employees should be treated, Qantas was raised as an example of a company getting it all wrong. Anyone see a theme here?

[C441]

A friend recently did a business study, that included interviewing staff, of one of our recently successful football clubs.
He came away with one overriding impression.
From the property stewards to the CEO there was one common perception; we are all responsible for the result on the field and the success of this club and we are given the appropriate resources and support to achieve it.

This could not be said for Qantas today.

[rocket66]

First of all I do not work for Qantas. From what I read things are not all fine and dandy as they should be. Transperency is a big word not often understood by people in high places these days.

If management is not transparent usually it means they have things to hide.