Letter to Geoffrey Thomas (Aviation expert)

[geoffrey thomas]

A response from GT

Dear All:

Yes from time to time I do read PPrune and in fact I joined when there was 2000 members back in the 1990s.
I am travelling at the moment and do not have time to digest all of Steve's points but will do so over the next few days and responsd by Saturday. I hope that is acceptable to all.

But please allow me to make a few points.
1. There is probably no-one in Australia who has been more critical of Qantas in the public arena than myself. Over and over again I have pointed out that in recent decades Qantas has been last to market with consumer innovations. If they had been first instead of last then the public may have been more supportive of the airline.
2. No-one was more critical than me of the proposed Aviation Partners buyout of 2007/08.
3. I have never ever said that LAMEs are overpaid tradesman. I have the highest respect for their work. As I do the Qantas pilots.
4. I hate what is happening to our airline scene but it is reality of today and what our politicians have set in play.
5. The problem is as simple as it is tragic. The public will not pay what the engineers and pilots deserve. Passengers change airlines for a saving on a foreign LCC of $5. Just look at the numbers. LCCS carry 20% of the traffic into Australia. Qantas is at about 18% and declining.
6. Sure Qantas management needs to reinvent the airline as I have said many, many times on radio, TV and in Australian Aviation.
7. Australian Aviation has been critical of the lack of innovation at Qantas for decades.
8. One of you asked if I was brave enough. I am only one of two I think that actually uses my real name on PPrune. I am up to it.
9. No I am not a member of the Chairman’s Lounge but a member of the Qantas Club through my Silver FF card earned on real points.

But please allow me to answer Steve’s point more fully on the weekend.
Regards,
Geoffrey Thomas

[TIMA9X]

The crap coming out of these reports and stories is the same stuff that has been presented by Qantas itself via Worth for some time.

Exactly, sadly this crap is allowed to continue unchecked for the damage it is doing to Q, makes me wish.........

[Chronic Snoozer]

G'day GT,

Good on you for using your real name, but then your jobs probably not on the line being a journo and all,

The public will not pay what the engineers and pilots deserve.

Its a shame the public won't pay what the QANTAS managers deserve.

[Sunfish]

"QAN shareholder" first appeared on Pprune on Feb 15th 2011. His posts consistently support management. "Unionist1974" first surfaced in September 2010.

The posts of these people attempt to elicit violent and illegal responses - generate more heat than light. Ignore them.

[PACIFIC BARON]

Something you won’t see on Sunrise or in print

Ben Sandilands take on the current situation

Something you won’t see on Sunrise or in print | Plane Talking

[stewser89]

I gotta agree that AA is sometimes critical of Qantas and other airlines.

In this month there is an article from Australian Aviation written by GT entitled 'time to hit the reset button'

It is neither glowing account of the QF management or QF staff but an honest call on how the author see is.

Pick up this months copy and have a read for yourself.

Cameron

[breakfastburrito]

Originally Posted by geoffrey thomas

8. One of you asked if I was brave enough. I am only one of two I think that actually uses my real name on PPRuNe. I am up to it.

Just a small point GT, this comment implies anonymity of this site is a negative. On the contrary, many of most extraordinary FACTUAL revelations of the unseemly underside of this industry have surfaced only because of the anonymity. Many professionals "workshop" theories about all sorts of things only because of the anonymity, I believe this has been a positive for the industry, it effectively allows much greater oversight of management than would be possible if we had to reveal our identity. From time to time this anonymity is abused, but this is also a two way street, with airline managements "trolling" their own agenda's.

I would argue, that public safety has been enhanced by anonymity forums & knowledge sharing among professionals, allowing the public to observe and even participate in the debate.

[Spanner Turner]

Well,

considering that "Q" do not - & have not had, the capability to carry out inhouse heavy maintenance on their own 744's since 2005/6 - one must wonder who carried out the assembly of one of the poor old girls wing landing gear rear trunnions which has been found horrifically damaged by a Syd Base Maintenance Engineer!!

Yes, all those frequent flyers can cast their eye today across from the SYD Domestic Terminal and see the poor old girl stranded in H271 up on jacks while she's repaired with care by those that love her - yes those terrible overpaid / costly LAME's. If there're any pollies with a conscience sitting up in the Chairmans Lounge - just take a look through the glass - cast your eye to the right and find the Hangar with 271 written on the top (it's the one next to the old heavy maintenance hangar numbered 245 which in a complete case of irony was the hangar that this aircraft spent the first 16 years of it's life having heavy maintenance done on her until tragically shut-down)

You can't miss the aircraft - it's the one with the jacks installed at the wing roots to support it. ( Q corporate will now be on the phone to have the doors closed ASAP) can't have Joe Public witnessing the truth now, can we?

This landing gear was very close to complete failure - but luckily the damage was picked up by an ex-Syd heavy maintenance engineer (is there any other kind ?)

Expect to see it parked there for a while - Syd no longer has the support shops to effect a timely repair. What a joke.


.

[Sunfish]

More posts like spanner turners, might be of assistance with your case.

[Gas Bags]

Lame 1 posted:

I would be interested to know if GT has receive free/or discounted flights on QF group A/C including upgrades and access to Qantas Club lounges /Chairmans lounge.

Geoffrey,

I see you have only answered part of this question, with a reference to the Chairmans lounge.

Perhaps in your expanded reply to Steve you could answer the remaining sections?

More specifically, do you, or have you at any time in the past, received any benefit from any company that forms part of the Qantas group, in the form of free travel, free upgrades, free entry on an ad hoc basis to any of the lounges your silver card does not automatically entitle you, or any other form of free or discounted benefit?

I do not work for Qantas so this dispute does not directly effect me, however it would be interesting to know the answer to this question.

GB

[Jack Ranga]

Geoffrey,

Your comments on Sunrise were a disgrace. If you are a frequent reader of pprune you would be well aware that Steve posts on here regularly. You could have got the facts from his side BEFORE you made those ridiculous comments on Sunrise.

Is this the type of lazy journalism you win awards for? Or is this the way journalism is generally in Australia, regurgitating company spin because you are too lazy to do some research.

I'd like to be able to say that I'll watch Sunrise, waiting for your retraction but I don't think that will happen will it?

[ozbiggles]

I think he already has really Gas Bags.
I think he has written some non flattering things on Qantas management.
Let him reply in time. Rather than have a go, if the argument is well reasoned and explained to him he may actually come on side.

[Jack Ranga]

oz,

He reads pprune, It didn't take me long to work out that ALAEA Fed Sec is who he says he is. He could have got the facts before that diatribe on Sunrise.......but he didn't. It's simply not good enough for him to contact SP after the fact, not if you're going to put yourself up as an 'expert.'

Do you reckon he'll go on Sunrise and make an apology and retract? (They wouldn't let him for a start)

[piston broke again]

Geoffrey,

So "more people are arriving into Australia on LCC's than they are Qantas". Ask yourself why??

It's because Qantas fly old aircraft with an inferior product to other full service carriers - Look at Etihad, Qatar, Emirates, Singapore, Cathay...If QF spent half as much time, effort and money on improving the product and engaging their staff, there wouldn't be these disputes.

New technologies aren't being implemented to make things easier for frequent flyers (tag your own bags etc), it's to cut costs because you're dealing with a CEO who only knows how to cut labour costs and not improve revenue. Do you think woolworths invested in their 'scan your own items' technology to make it better for the customer? No! It takes longer, but it saves $$ in labour. Thats all this is, bottom line. Its all about cutting costs...

Geoffrey if you were told tomorrow your position as a journalist is now being moved overseas, you have to take it, you have to take the pay cut - how would that make you feel? Would you still want to work for them? Always ask yourself what would I be doing in this situation.

Stop sensationalising over this 'laundry list of demands that are stupid'. - That is not journalism. Very weak Geoffrey. Very weak!

[Gas Bags]

Ozbiggles,

As I stated I am a bystander in this. When I watched that clip Geoffrey came across as very knowledgeable and extremely well informed on the subject matter, and his address was given with such confidence that one could not hesitate to assume its correctness.

Then I thought about the target audience that Sunrise has, the following that Kockie has amongst the audience, and for the average person watching over their morning coffee, or beer, they would have made their minds up in that few seconds of airplay.

Geoffrey must have received his information from somewhere. It so happens that his information matched the Qantas CEO's information perfectly, so one can only assume that he has received it from him, or one of his underlings. Where did the figure of 3-400 million dollars per year come from, I am sure it did not come from Steve!

For an industry expert to accept an interview on a prime tv station during one of the most watched shows of the day and so confidantly express the most glaringly obvious falsities is either incompetant or contrived. I do not believe that Geoffrey is incompetant.

I then asked myself what possible reason would this industry expert have to do what he did. Lame1 obviously came to the same conclusion I did.

Do not take this the wrong way, I agree with Geoffrey on a number of points, however he is totaly incorrect in quite a few of the others. The industry has changed and Qantas employees need to change with it. The unions (read the employees) provide balance to this change to ensure that one persons direction is indeed the right one. Without the unions involvement in this inevitable change Alan Joyce would have no maintenance carried out in this country, and a handful of cat A maintenance staff and mechanics running the line. He runs just that sort of operation in Singapore and Vietnam.

Specialised reporters should be capable of performing a basic fact check prior to appearing on prime time TV to talk about potential major disruptions to this countries transport system if they are to be deemed to be industry experts.....Or did Geoffrey run into Alan in one of the lounges during his frequent travels and have a quiet word with him.

Oh and ozbiggles, it is too late to get him on side, the damage is done. All those coffee drinking morning tv watchers now believe that each and every engineer is demanding free travel in first class, a free laptop, free access to the Qantas Club, 6 weeks leave, and a myriad of other 'ridiculous' claims in their 'laundry list', which if Qantas is to provide 'will be the beggining of the end for Qantas'.

And how does the average beer swilling, vodka and diet coke, drinking couple with kids and a huge mortgage on $60,000 a year know this, because this industry expert told them so and the trustwirthy David Kock reinforced it to them.

I am shocked at this mans actions, and I am not even an employee.

GB

[Mr. Hat]

Excellent letter Steve, it was great to learn about the background of the Engineers.

GT, stick to your Western Australian infomercials. This is serious and you my friend, you need to be careful as the QF pilots and engineers have a lot at stake. I wouldn't go shooting my mouth off like that again. Joyce and Wirth are going to push you (ipad and grange in hand) into the lions den and watch you from the stands.

Don't you think its strange and kind of COINCIDENTAL that the Qf group have MULTIPLE employee groups across MULTIPLE business' either taking industrial action against them or taking them to court. Isn't it also UNCANNY that Qf are constantly on the wrong side of the law getting fined for this cartel and for that price fixing scam? They announce a 500 MILLION dollar profit and now cry poor come wage negotiations time.

You're a smart guy you should join the dots before opening your mouth. Alternatively negotiate a very good package with Qf when agreeing to do PR. Are you a betting man? Are you picking up what I'm putting down?

[oicur12.again]

Since when were Etihad, Qatar, Emirates, Singapore, Cathay low cost airlines?

[aussie027]

I agree with Keg,
Get Steve's letter along with one from the pilots on a 1 page ad in the major papers so the public can get at least a glimpse of what is really going on instead of the BS sprouted by the lamestream media reading out/printing the airline companies press releases.
The pilots can tellabout the hiring of new pilots under different company names with different payscales and conditions instead of under their existing EBA's to sit in the same cockpits.
This is happening not just at Jokestar but at Cobham too.
Any other companies people know about???

How is this even legal under Aust IR laws when these new companies are only created to specifically circumvent mutually agreed EBA's???

Need to get public awareness up now more than ever, esp with the Senators still digging into the issues and yet to report.

[TIMA9X]

The public will not pay what the engineers and pilots deserve

Bulldust! I don't think the public were given a vote on this matter and are now voting with their feet because of the uncertainty created by the bozos steering the ship since 2006! The whole thing stinks.

Although I agree that this thread should be a sticky for all to see, I don't accept from a self proclaimed "aviation expert" the above statement, no matter how he wishes to reply in full at a later date, the damage has been done, and it is clear to me what side of the fence this expert is on. What he said on "dumbrise" is unforgivable for a guy who is a so called veteran expert. Sorry, but the stakes are too high now for all the dribble generated @ Qs PR office, sanctioned by "destructo" AJ and the board. I am positive that AJ & OW are sniggering with delight, patting themselves on the back for feeding the media with misinformation.

I believe if we stay on message the public will pick up on these managers shortcomings, no "spirit in their Australia."

I won't be rushing out to buy another copy of Australian Aviation as a small protest.
I am convinced, all the drama with tech issues over the past year or so would not have been so severe if the once proud engineering shop was still intact.

[Worrals in the wilds]

5. The problem is as simple as it is tragic. The public will not pay what the engineers and pilots deserve. Passengers change airlines for a saving on a foreign LCC of $5. Just look at the numbers. LCCS carry 20% of the traffic into Australia. Qantas is at about 18% and declining.

I assume you're taking the numbers from BITRE's International Airline Activity Report 2010. This is well worth reading for anyone interested in the industry.
http://www.bitre.gov.au/publications...les/1210_M.pdf

There is an excellent pie chart in that report that illustrates the market more accurately than the one statistic you quote (p8). 81.6% of international traffic in/out of Aus is not on LCCs. Carriers like SQ, Air New Zealand, MH and EK are each carrying over 8% of the load. The only LCC to approach those numbers is Jet* with 8.1%; the other LCCs are carrying 6.2% (the two Poo Blues, who will presumably become not-so-LCC Virgin Australia very soon) and Air Asia X with 2.8%. Tiger were too small to be listed as a percentage, but their annual pax total was 8641. These are not big numbers.

CX, Thai and MH are also carrying respectable loads and there are a number of smaller carriers like Royal Brunei who are developing a small but loyal local support base through competitive prices and excellent service.

This has to be biting into Qantas' 18% more than the collective Bogan Airways, although such analysis is beyond the scope of the report. While it's true the Qantas share declined from 2009 the amount (0.9%) is hardly a massive drop. SQ dropped by 1.0% in the same period. ANZ and EK sustained their share, and they are both full service carriers.

I think it's drawing a long bow to infer that the low cost carrier revolution is strangling full service travel in and out of Australia because the figures simply don't reflect that. What I think they do reflect is a number of savvy, well advertised foreign full service carriers that are gradually increasing their Australian market share at Qantas' expense.

Many Australians were traditionally suspicious about flying with foreign carriers. I'm sure everyone here who works in aviation has fielded several phone calls from their older rels booking airline tickets along the lines of 'whether those [insert foreign operator's country, usually Asian] are safe, dear'. However, as time goes by, firstly Aussies get less parochial and secondly a number of foreign carriers develop reputations for running safe, quality airlines. This decreases the former public bias against foreign carriers and erodes what was formerly Qantas' number one sales strategy... We're AUSSIE and we're SAFE becuase of that.

Qantas is speeding this process up by constantly offshoring stuff, using foreign crew, bitching and sniping about their staff and badly managing the PR whenever anything goes wrong. Talk to the average non-industry punter and they'll be full of how Qantas isn't SAFE anymore. If Qantas isn't AUSSIE either, then what's the advantage? People will continue to drift to SQ, EK and the like who advertise more effectively and provide a better product. Whether these are safer products is up for debate but as Ekman once said, Perception is reality to the Perceiver.

The LCCs will continue to do well in the backpacker, beach holiday and Kiwi F&R markets (and good luck to them) but IMO it's Singapore, Emirates and Cathay who will poach the Qantas pax, as Qantas management continues to fiddle while their product's reputation burns.

P.S. Thanks for replying to the thread.