Letter to Geoffrey Thomas (Aviation expert)
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A more chastened GT on Sunrise this morning where " Qantas Pilots are the best of the best, as of course are their Engineers "
All in the context of commenting on whether or not Pilots were being pressured to carry less fuel.
All in the context of commenting on whether or not Pilots were being pressured to carry less fuel.
Followed by the classic line
"Low Cost Carriers are perfectly safe".
Q. Name the last RPT airline in Australia to get a show cause?
Maybe he should research some of the ATSB reports around at the moment too.
And notice too there wasn't one piece of footage or mention of Jetstar when he spoke about LCCs....but plenty of other carriers. Nor any mention of the programs major sponsor.
I was neutral.....now "stone him!!!!". In the monty Python sense of course.
"Low Cost Carriers are perfectly safe".
Q. Name the last RPT airline in Australia to get a show cause?
Maybe he should research some of the ATSB reports around at the moment too.
And notice too there wasn't one piece of footage or mention of Jetstar when he spoke about LCCs....but plenty of other carriers. Nor any mention of the programs major sponsor.
I was neutral.....now "stone him!!!!". In the monty Python sense of course.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will preface this by stating that I am not an aviation expert, merely one of the multitude of walking freight that fly on QF, and fly quite regularly (every 2 weeks interstate and intrastate on QF and QFlink).
Since the demise of Ansett, QF has been my preferred carrier. I always chose to fly QF due to the fact that I felt it gave many Australians a job and futures for kids coming up through the ranks.
I am appalled by the current state of affairs. Management have absolutely lost the plot. I don't give a stuff about new FF programs or enhanced points earning. I don't give a stuff about new partnerships with Optus. I certainly don't give a stuff about new top tier Platinum One (or whatever they want to call it!).
What I do care about is the future of Australian men and women who are, and have been, doing a bloody great job looking after the flying public. Whether it be the hosties, pilots, F/O's or LAME's. I think that job protection is a must. Why are we outsourcing safety critical areas of the business? Quality control cannot be managed correctly when the process is done away from our business.
As has been stated previously, the experience that is gained by working in our own maintenance shops is not something that can be learnt from a text. It is something that is handed down to new generations of staff that come through the business.
I would like to point out to Mr Joyce and the board, you need to talk to the travelling public more. I would rather pay more for my flight and get a full service experience (which also relates to maintenance and training) than try to get the cheapest deal on a LCC. And I know that many of my colleagues would agree.
To the QF management team i say, you will only find the darkest corner of the room whilst you have your head up your arse. Please remove it and see the light.
to the QF staff, keep up the good fight! You have mine and many others support out there. We do not want to boycott the airline as we feel this will only hurt your cause. Thanks and keep up the great work on the ground and in the air guys and gals, and i'll see you next time i fly!
Since the demise of Ansett, QF has been my preferred carrier. I always chose to fly QF due to the fact that I felt it gave many Australians a job and futures for kids coming up through the ranks.
I am appalled by the current state of affairs. Management have absolutely lost the plot. I don't give a stuff about new FF programs or enhanced points earning. I don't give a stuff about new partnerships with Optus. I certainly don't give a stuff about new top tier Platinum One (or whatever they want to call it!).
What I do care about is the future of Australian men and women who are, and have been, doing a bloody great job looking after the flying public. Whether it be the hosties, pilots, F/O's or LAME's. I think that job protection is a must. Why are we outsourcing safety critical areas of the business? Quality control cannot be managed correctly when the process is done away from our business.
As has been stated previously, the experience that is gained by working in our own maintenance shops is not something that can be learnt from a text. It is something that is handed down to new generations of staff that come through the business.
I would like to point out to Mr Joyce and the board, you need to talk to the travelling public more. I would rather pay more for my flight and get a full service experience (which also relates to maintenance and training) than try to get the cheapest deal on a LCC. And I know that many of my colleagues would agree.
To the QF management team i say, you will only find the darkest corner of the room whilst you have your head up your arse. Please remove it and see the light.
to the QF staff, keep up the good fight! You have mine and many others support out there. We do not want to boycott the airline as we feel this will only hurt your cause. Thanks and keep up the great work on the ground and in the air guys and gals, and i'll see you next time i fly!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Perth Australia
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Response from GT
Hi Steve:
Firstly thank you for your time and trouble to put together the document and I comment as follows:
1. I have never ever described your members or Qantas pilots in anything but glowing terms. Recently I have had more opportunity to talk about the pilots’ skill level because of the well publicised incidents.
2. I am well aware of the qualifications of engineers, the long hours, the shift work and the list goes on. Many would say that not nearly enough credit is given for the work that is done. The same can be said, of course, for the pilots.
3. You say: “You have also on a number of occasions supported Qantas comments about overseas facilities being as good as those in Australia. It appears from what we have heard that you are running directly from a Qantas PR running sheet.” There is no way that I am a Qantas mimic as you constantly say – hardly! The fact is simply this. LH Lufthansa Technik, HACEO and Singapore Airlines facilities are world class and used by airlines across the globe. If you have serious concerns about their facilities why not name them? You would be hard pressed to question the maintenance record of airlines such as Cathay Pacific and Lufthansa.
4. You say: “Qantas has said that it does and will not have enough A380s in their fleet to justify HM on this aircraft type. Qantas will ultimately have 20 A380s. Lufthansa on the other hand have 8 in service and 7 on order. Please do not support Qantas statements about aircraft numbers to justify maintenance facilities knowing that Lufthansa can do it with less planes than Qantas.” This reasoning is simply not correct and you know it. As everyone in the industry knows LH Technik is the world’s largest aircraft engineering business and it has set itself up as an A380 service centre for a host of airlines regardless of how many A380s they have. Which is why it will be - and is advertising as such - a 787 maintenance facility when it has not ordered one 787!! Steve, your point is a distortion of the facts which possibly raises questions about other items that you highlight.
5. Steve your claims regarding the 737s are at odds with my engineering sources and also Qantas’ so I am not sure where that leaves us. Can you produce the list of the 500 defects?? Perhaps you can post it on PPrune? With regard to the 90 defects I think in the end only 6 were confirmed as of Malaysian origin –which they deny - but regardless six is not acceptable I agree and I understand QF is not using them anymore.
6. You say that you don’t expect all your claims to be met but why include claims that will be ridiculed by the media. Not just by me but many others. Problem is just one silly claim in 28 can crucify you even if the other 27 are really valid and some clearly are.
7. Without knowing the full detail of the QF staff travel program I agree that it is wrong for say a one-year management graduate to get a seat ahead of a 20 year veteran.
8. I think it is a shame that your EBA negotiations are concurrent with the long-haul pilots and TWU because much of the media coverage lumps all the claims together into “airline unions are demanding” which doesn’t necessarily show you in a good light and blurs the issues.
9. But I agree with you that Qantas - and we in the media - should use one year figures to explain increases not three years or in your case two years. I certainly will do so from now on.
10. On wages do your figures include the 17.5% leave loading and the shift penalties which I believe can be up to 44% for the hours worked?
11. As I said rather than a lapdog for Qantas I am without doubt its most strident critic and have done so in various media platforms for years. I have long argued that Qantas has been last to market with cabin innovations that has cost them dearly and EK, SQ and CX etc have taken – higher yield - passengers away as well as millions of economy pax. See my article: (Where next for Qantas in the April Edition of Australian Aviation.) And this is not hindsight stuff…..
a. I lobbied then CEO James Strong in 1997 about Premium Y arguing that Australians are amongst the tallest in the world and we had many of the longest sectors to fly.
b. I also warned him about DVT becoming an issue.
c. I suggested one zone of a 747 be used and there be an increase of 10% in legroom and a 15% increase in fare level. He said they couldn’t make the business case.
d. I was touting the market draw of IFE for Y in the early-mid 1990s but to no avail at QF.
e. I also touted the virtues of a long-haul 300-seater (777 or A340) to serve many European cities that the 747 was way too big for. Again deaf ears.
f. Dixon later admitted that theses were all mistakes by Qantas and I still think it should order 10 to 20 777-300ERs now to replace the 747s over and above the 20 A380s.
g. I was also one of the few critics of the Airline Partners Australia Deal in 2007/08. You may recall Dixon touting Texas Pacific as the saviors of Continental as a reason to support the deal. I wrote strongly in Australian Aviation that that link was very wrong and mischievous.
h. Also I was scathing about the QF/BA deal in late 2008.
12. With more and more passengers - by percentage - flying on low cost carriers into Australia Qantas is now marginalized in many markets. Squeezed between better product /value premium carriers at the top end and LCCs below. Thus it is harder and harder for Qantas to command the higher fares that it used to. One member of PPrune posted that the latest BITRE figures were just one report. Indeed they are but go back over the last eight years and you will see that LCC numbers climb year-on-year and Qantas’ share declines year-on-year. It appears to be an irreversible trend.
13. On the same problem Qantas also once attracted passengers with its safety record but as airline safety in general has improved the ability to charge that premium is disappearing. Passengers change airlines for $10…I see it every day. Aircraft such as the 777 and 717 have never had a fatality.
14. More than anything else, what the airline industry in Australia is facing is the fallout from government policy over the past 20 years of privatizing airlines, allowing greater access to the Australian market in line with global liberalization and also giving 100% foreign owned airlines access to the domestic market. (Virgin Blue in 2000 and Tiger Airways).
15. On that issue I have also been a strident critic of deregulation repeatedly warning about its effects on the industry. It has devastated the US airline industry and ruined many lives.
16. A number of PPRuners have questioned my relationship with Qantas. Over the past 10 years it has been more “toxic” than “working” but that has certainly improved over the past two years. Yes I am a QF FF with silver status thanks to the linking of credit cards rather than flying and I note QF is onto that and now going to increase rewards for people who fly rather than accumulate points via CCs. And for the record yes Qantas does from time to time provide me travel to industry functions however I prefer to stay at home and would reject the majority of the trips offered by airlines in general. However in many cases I actually pay for my trips as it is policy for a number of the organizations I do work for. With regard to the Chairman’s lounge yes seen it twice in Perth to do interviews with Joyce and to set up a TV shoot for Channel 7. And no never had a bottle of Grange, which is good as I don’t drink red.
Steve, this industry is at the crossroads as we are seeing a tsunami of LCCS in Asia and Australia and I am deeply concerned about the affects of AirAsia on our industry in Australia. It has seat mile costs of approximately 2.5c ASK and Australians are flying with it in droves! How do you stop that? I don’t think you can!
You guys in Sydney haven’t seen the affects of Air Asia yet but look at the numbers ex Perth and Melbourne to Bali and KL…awesome and frightening. Indonesia AirAsia is four times daily between Perth and Bali and AirAsia X double daily with an A330 to KL. And yes AirAsia does not compete with Qantas but more Jetstar however its fare levels have the effect of dragging down fares across the board.
The local tourism industry in WA has been hit very hard as people make the choice between a trip down south or flying to Asia. In Feb 2011 largely because of AirAsia, Bali was the second most popular destination out of Perth with 44,000 pax with KL third at 29,000 pax. Singapore was number one ex Perth with 70,000 mainly because of SQ.
Steve you say in your email that “regarding increases to redundancy entitlements – We shall only press these claims if Qantas refuses to deliver the job security we are after. The idea is that if you want to tear the house down, we will make it too expensive for you.” It will not be Qantas that tears that house down it will be the travelling public.
I agree absolutely with your members Qantas has to be far, far smarter to make Qantas a compelling first choice for travel. (Some PPruners have criticized Qantas for flying around old aircraft. To be fair the QF Group should have 35 787s by now and nearly their full fleets of A380s but as we all know it has been let down badly by Boeing and Airbus.)
Question is, how do we achieve all of this in the current toxic environment? Perhaps you can lead the way and say roll over the EBA for 12 months and let’s reinvent Qantas. Challenge Joyce to reinvent travel! You would have every Australian behind you!
Qantas will not fall down this year or next nor in five years but unless this toxic environment is fixed and unless the airline gets on the front foot with commercial innovations it may not see its 100th year. Doomsday? All you have to do is look at history. Hundreds and hundreds of airlines have collapsed in the past 30 years, many of them household names or institutions. Who would have ever thought in the 1970s that Pan Am would be gone in 20 years or TWA shortly after. And more recently Japan Airlines bankruptcy is the biggest corporate collapse in Japan’s history with more than 16,000 staff gone. Sure Qantas isn’t Japan Airlines but if it wasn’t for the FF program and Jetstar it would be in lousy shape and that is a cold hard sobering fact!
Steve I deliver management and staff lectures on the need for change and delivered one this week in China. I start off with pictures of flight lines and production halls from Long Beach (Douglas and then McDonnell Douglas), Palmdale (Lockheed) and San Diego (Convair ) in California and also Boeing from 1960 to 1990. It’s a great picture show –if you like planes- but the point I make is that in the PP slides there are 45 airlines and five manufacturers. Today only five airlines and one manufacturer survive in their own right with the rest bankrupt, merged or out of the commercial aircraft business. Sobering stuff!
If SQ or EK smell blood what is to stop them setting up a domestic operation in Australia? Nothing! More likely what is to stop Etihad taking a slice of Virgin Australia and investing serious capital to fast track 10 more A330s? Nothing! And with the $A so strong Australian domestic operations are far, far more lucrative to an offshore airline. There has never been a better time. This isn’t rocket science it’s holistically simply history repeating itself which it has an annoying habit of doing.
The wider issue of where our industry is at is a Four Corners type story. Would you like me to raise it with them? My story on QF 32 in Australian Aviation was the basis of the A380 piece they did recently.
I could go on and on but a number of people who have contacted me over this issue have said that they didn’t read all of your reply as it was too long. Of course there was a good reason for that but I am sure people may have already switched off to my ramblings by now.
Again I thank you for the time and trouble you have given to put your members’ concerns across and in perspective and I will strive to get these points across both in print and electronically ASAP.
Regards,
Geoffrey Thomas
[email protected]
Firstly thank you for your time and trouble to put together the document and I comment as follows:
1. I have never ever described your members or Qantas pilots in anything but glowing terms. Recently I have had more opportunity to talk about the pilots’ skill level because of the well publicised incidents.
2. I am well aware of the qualifications of engineers, the long hours, the shift work and the list goes on. Many would say that not nearly enough credit is given for the work that is done. The same can be said, of course, for the pilots.
3. You say: “You have also on a number of occasions supported Qantas comments about overseas facilities being as good as those in Australia. It appears from what we have heard that you are running directly from a Qantas PR running sheet.” There is no way that I am a Qantas mimic as you constantly say – hardly! The fact is simply this. LH Lufthansa Technik, HACEO and Singapore Airlines facilities are world class and used by airlines across the globe. If you have serious concerns about their facilities why not name them? You would be hard pressed to question the maintenance record of airlines such as Cathay Pacific and Lufthansa.
4. You say: “Qantas has said that it does and will not have enough A380s in their fleet to justify HM on this aircraft type. Qantas will ultimately have 20 A380s. Lufthansa on the other hand have 8 in service and 7 on order. Please do not support Qantas statements about aircraft numbers to justify maintenance facilities knowing that Lufthansa can do it with less planes than Qantas.” This reasoning is simply not correct and you know it. As everyone in the industry knows LH Technik is the world’s largest aircraft engineering business and it has set itself up as an A380 service centre for a host of airlines regardless of how many A380s they have. Which is why it will be - and is advertising as such - a 787 maintenance facility when it has not ordered one 787!! Steve, your point is a distortion of the facts which possibly raises questions about other items that you highlight.
5. Steve your claims regarding the 737s are at odds with my engineering sources and also Qantas’ so I am not sure where that leaves us. Can you produce the list of the 500 defects?? Perhaps you can post it on PPrune? With regard to the 90 defects I think in the end only 6 were confirmed as of Malaysian origin –which they deny - but regardless six is not acceptable I agree and I understand QF is not using them anymore.
6. You say that you don’t expect all your claims to be met but why include claims that will be ridiculed by the media. Not just by me but many others. Problem is just one silly claim in 28 can crucify you even if the other 27 are really valid and some clearly are.
7. Without knowing the full detail of the QF staff travel program I agree that it is wrong for say a one-year management graduate to get a seat ahead of a 20 year veteran.
8. I think it is a shame that your EBA negotiations are concurrent with the long-haul pilots and TWU because much of the media coverage lumps all the claims together into “airline unions are demanding” which doesn’t necessarily show you in a good light and blurs the issues.
9. But I agree with you that Qantas - and we in the media - should use one year figures to explain increases not three years or in your case two years. I certainly will do so from now on.
10. On wages do your figures include the 17.5% leave loading and the shift penalties which I believe can be up to 44% for the hours worked?
11. As I said rather than a lapdog for Qantas I am without doubt its most strident critic and have done so in various media platforms for years. I have long argued that Qantas has been last to market with cabin innovations that has cost them dearly and EK, SQ and CX etc have taken – higher yield - passengers away as well as millions of economy pax. See my article: (Where next for Qantas in the April Edition of Australian Aviation.) And this is not hindsight stuff…..
a. I lobbied then CEO James Strong in 1997 about Premium Y arguing that Australians are amongst the tallest in the world and we had many of the longest sectors to fly.
b. I also warned him about DVT becoming an issue.
c. I suggested one zone of a 747 be used and there be an increase of 10% in legroom and a 15% increase in fare level. He said they couldn’t make the business case.
d. I was touting the market draw of IFE for Y in the early-mid 1990s but to no avail at QF.
e. I also touted the virtues of a long-haul 300-seater (777 or A340) to serve many European cities that the 747 was way too big for. Again deaf ears.
f. Dixon later admitted that theses were all mistakes by Qantas and I still think it should order 10 to 20 777-300ERs now to replace the 747s over and above the 20 A380s.
g. I was also one of the few critics of the Airline Partners Australia Deal in 2007/08. You may recall Dixon touting Texas Pacific as the saviors of Continental as a reason to support the deal. I wrote strongly in Australian Aviation that that link was very wrong and mischievous.
h. Also I was scathing about the QF/BA deal in late 2008.
12. With more and more passengers - by percentage - flying on low cost carriers into Australia Qantas is now marginalized in many markets. Squeezed between better product /value premium carriers at the top end and LCCs below. Thus it is harder and harder for Qantas to command the higher fares that it used to. One member of PPrune posted that the latest BITRE figures were just one report. Indeed they are but go back over the last eight years and you will see that LCC numbers climb year-on-year and Qantas’ share declines year-on-year. It appears to be an irreversible trend.
13. On the same problem Qantas also once attracted passengers with its safety record but as airline safety in general has improved the ability to charge that premium is disappearing. Passengers change airlines for $10…I see it every day. Aircraft such as the 777 and 717 have never had a fatality.
14. More than anything else, what the airline industry in Australia is facing is the fallout from government policy over the past 20 years of privatizing airlines, allowing greater access to the Australian market in line with global liberalization and also giving 100% foreign owned airlines access to the domestic market. (Virgin Blue in 2000 and Tiger Airways).
15. On that issue I have also been a strident critic of deregulation repeatedly warning about its effects on the industry. It has devastated the US airline industry and ruined many lives.
16. A number of PPRuners have questioned my relationship with Qantas. Over the past 10 years it has been more “toxic” than “working” but that has certainly improved over the past two years. Yes I am a QF FF with silver status thanks to the linking of credit cards rather than flying and I note QF is onto that and now going to increase rewards for people who fly rather than accumulate points via CCs. And for the record yes Qantas does from time to time provide me travel to industry functions however I prefer to stay at home and would reject the majority of the trips offered by airlines in general. However in many cases I actually pay for my trips as it is policy for a number of the organizations I do work for. With regard to the Chairman’s lounge yes seen it twice in Perth to do interviews with Joyce and to set up a TV shoot for Channel 7. And no never had a bottle of Grange, which is good as I don’t drink red.
Steve, this industry is at the crossroads as we are seeing a tsunami of LCCS in Asia and Australia and I am deeply concerned about the affects of AirAsia on our industry in Australia. It has seat mile costs of approximately 2.5c ASK and Australians are flying with it in droves! How do you stop that? I don’t think you can!
You guys in Sydney haven’t seen the affects of Air Asia yet but look at the numbers ex Perth and Melbourne to Bali and KL…awesome and frightening. Indonesia AirAsia is four times daily between Perth and Bali and AirAsia X double daily with an A330 to KL. And yes AirAsia does not compete with Qantas but more Jetstar however its fare levels have the effect of dragging down fares across the board.
The local tourism industry in WA has been hit very hard as people make the choice between a trip down south or flying to Asia. In Feb 2011 largely because of AirAsia, Bali was the second most popular destination out of Perth with 44,000 pax with KL third at 29,000 pax. Singapore was number one ex Perth with 70,000 mainly because of SQ.
Steve you say in your email that “regarding increases to redundancy entitlements – We shall only press these claims if Qantas refuses to deliver the job security we are after. The idea is that if you want to tear the house down, we will make it too expensive for you.” It will not be Qantas that tears that house down it will be the travelling public.
I agree absolutely with your members Qantas has to be far, far smarter to make Qantas a compelling first choice for travel. (Some PPruners have criticized Qantas for flying around old aircraft. To be fair the QF Group should have 35 787s by now and nearly their full fleets of A380s but as we all know it has been let down badly by Boeing and Airbus.)
Question is, how do we achieve all of this in the current toxic environment? Perhaps you can lead the way and say roll over the EBA for 12 months and let’s reinvent Qantas. Challenge Joyce to reinvent travel! You would have every Australian behind you!
Qantas will not fall down this year or next nor in five years but unless this toxic environment is fixed and unless the airline gets on the front foot with commercial innovations it may not see its 100th year. Doomsday? All you have to do is look at history. Hundreds and hundreds of airlines have collapsed in the past 30 years, many of them household names or institutions. Who would have ever thought in the 1970s that Pan Am would be gone in 20 years or TWA shortly after. And more recently Japan Airlines bankruptcy is the biggest corporate collapse in Japan’s history with more than 16,000 staff gone. Sure Qantas isn’t Japan Airlines but if it wasn’t for the FF program and Jetstar it would be in lousy shape and that is a cold hard sobering fact!
Steve I deliver management and staff lectures on the need for change and delivered one this week in China. I start off with pictures of flight lines and production halls from Long Beach (Douglas and then McDonnell Douglas), Palmdale (Lockheed) and San Diego (Convair ) in California and also Boeing from 1960 to 1990. It’s a great picture show –if you like planes- but the point I make is that in the PP slides there are 45 airlines and five manufacturers. Today only five airlines and one manufacturer survive in their own right with the rest bankrupt, merged or out of the commercial aircraft business. Sobering stuff!
If SQ or EK smell blood what is to stop them setting up a domestic operation in Australia? Nothing! More likely what is to stop Etihad taking a slice of Virgin Australia and investing serious capital to fast track 10 more A330s? Nothing! And with the $A so strong Australian domestic operations are far, far more lucrative to an offshore airline. There has never been a better time. This isn’t rocket science it’s holistically simply history repeating itself which it has an annoying habit of doing.
The wider issue of where our industry is at is a Four Corners type story. Would you like me to raise it with them? My story on QF 32 in Australian Aviation was the basis of the A380 piece they did recently.
I could go on and on but a number of people who have contacted me over this issue have said that they didn’t read all of your reply as it was too long. Of course there was a good reason for that but I am sure people may have already switched off to my ramblings by now.
Again I thank you for the time and trouble you have given to put your members’ concerns across and in perspective and I will strive to get these points across both in print and electronically ASAP.
Regards,
Geoffrey Thomas
[email protected]
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 61
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Response from GT
What a load of crap. One man's opinions from the seat of an armchair critic. You are sitting on the outside looking in and have no idea.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: sydney
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
gobbledock, you can't say it is crap because you don't with what he says or don't like the facts without spin.
I don't agree with it all but for the most part I think he is on the money.
Why don't the unions get together and take it to the board to give the airline a proper rejuvenation. Be realistic and buy 777s for f%$ks sake. Open up new routes. Dallas is the first new port for QF in ages and look at all the hoo-ha they made about it.
Personally I think they should have used VH-OEG which has been repainted and looks fresh. But no they used OEE which looks tired old and faded. Not the best publicity when you are trying to spruik your business.
Instead of fighting every step of the way, get all unions to be unified and put forward a business case to move forward and up. Don't give the management fools reasons to say no. Do the homework for them. It seems a lot of people have done it already, they just need to change to focus from now to the future.
I don't agree with it all but for the most part I think he is on the money.
Why don't the unions get together and take it to the board to give the airline a proper rejuvenation. Be realistic and buy 777s for f%$ks sake. Open up new routes. Dallas is the first new port for QF in ages and look at all the hoo-ha they made about it.
Personally I think they should have used VH-OEG which has been repainted and looks fresh. But no they used OEE which looks tired old and faded. Not the best publicity when you are trying to spruik your business.
Instead of fighting every step of the way, get all unions to be unified and put forward a business case to move forward and up. Don't give the management fools reasons to say no. Do the homework for them. It seems a lot of people have done it already, they just need to change to focus from now to the future.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Near an Airport
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GT: What a muppet.
Armchair critic sums him up very well.
Perhaps GT should get down to the shop floor for a week or so and have a shot at reality swinging a spanner (if anyone would let you near one), then perhaps you might understand the situation better; have a look around, see what state the place is in, use the clapped out IT system to order a part which is more often than not rarer than hens teeth, admire the recent hangar painting and ponder how that improves workers productivity over investing in GSE maintenance and equipment to enable people to actually do the job properly.
I know; how about you take a look at some of the aircraft with defects sitting around that come out of these "world class" facilities with components whose repairs/overhauls have been outsourced and ask yourself how could it be so if it was all done at a "world class" level? (looking in H271 at a certain 747-400 that's sitting there would be a good start at the moment)
You may not be a lapdog for QF, but you really don't have a clue what goes on, yet you go on Sunrise and sprout that dribble about engineers that I have personally seen work very hard to get a product of quality out in an environment which seems to be pitched at nearly any level you care to think of to prevent it happening by management.
Christ, 3%, salary sacrifice for a laptop and to be allowed to buy (not be given) your own membership to the Qantas Club is nothing in comparision to what these professionals give in good will to QF.
Go back to your rocking chair.
AWB
Perhaps GT should get down to the shop floor for a week or so and have a shot at reality swinging a spanner (if anyone would let you near one), then perhaps you might understand the situation better; have a look around, see what state the place is in, use the clapped out IT system to order a part which is more often than not rarer than hens teeth, admire the recent hangar painting and ponder how that improves workers productivity over investing in GSE maintenance and equipment to enable people to actually do the job properly.
I know; how about you take a look at some of the aircraft with defects sitting around that come out of these "world class" facilities with components whose repairs/overhauls have been outsourced and ask yourself how could it be so if it was all done at a "world class" level? (looking in H271 at a certain 747-400 that's sitting there would be a good start at the moment)
You may not be a lapdog for QF, but you really don't have a clue what goes on, yet you go on Sunrise and sprout that dribble about engineers that I have personally seen work very hard to get a product of quality out in an environment which seems to be pitched at nearly any level you care to think of to prevent it happening by management.
Christ, 3%, salary sacrifice for a laptop and to be allowed to buy (not be given) your own membership to the Qantas Club is nothing in comparision to what these professionals give in good will to QF.
Go back to your rocking chair.
AWB
Last edited by AWB_Clerk; 21st May 2011 at 14:31. Reason: typo and clarity
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is alan and his mates likely to get another 50% plus bonus again?.GT suggests we defer our agreement for 12 month and basically have a pay freeze whilst those at the top make stupid decisions
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: On the chopping board.
Posts: 929
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
13. On the same problem Qantas also once attracted passengers with its safety record but as airline safety in general has improved the ability to charge that premium is disappearing.
BTW, I believe another Engine incident has occurred. If you read Ben Sandilands then you maybe aware of it.
Last edited by Ngineer; 21st May 2011 at 07:48. Reason: More info.
I know exactly what is going on with management.
They all sit around the boardroom late at night whispering sweet nothings to each other about the forecast growth of aviation in China and the Asian region in general.
They then ask each other how can they capitalize on the growth and grow the company into these regions. A few ideas are thrown around, they slap each other on the backs, clink the grange glasses together and work out how to implement them.
Suddenly Asian growth becomes a religion (akin to global warming) and anyone who disagrees with the plan is shot down. If you're not with us, you're against us! The entire upper management become focussed on chasing growth opportunities in Asia. Jetstar Asia was this vehicle, but hell, it isn't doing what was intended (making money). Meet Qantas Asia.
The problem is while chasing the golden fleece in Asia, they have dropped the ball back home. The Asian airlines are getting stronger with better products, and if Qantas does not look out, they will be on home turf very soon.
Moral of the story? You need a solid base to grow from. Not only that, but do you think the Asians are going to let us gringos steal their market? HELL NO! They will fight aggressively on all fronts.
JB has the right idea, work with partners in different regions and focus on home. That way your airlines will compliment each other.
Qantas need to tuck their shirt in back home before they try to take on Asia. If they had any brains they would be looking at ways to work with Singapore Airlines or Cathay Pacific. Of course, management are way to arrogant for that. They think they are better and smarter than everyone else! If JB ties up with Singapore Airlines (and it will happen) It will be game over Qantas.
777s now, retire the 747s and use the 787s for growth/partnerships in Asia and the thinner international routes back home.
They all sit around the boardroom late at night whispering sweet nothings to each other about the forecast growth of aviation in China and the Asian region in general.
They then ask each other how can they capitalize on the growth and grow the company into these regions. A few ideas are thrown around, they slap each other on the backs, clink the grange glasses together and work out how to implement them.
Suddenly Asian growth becomes a religion (akin to global warming) and anyone who disagrees with the plan is shot down. If you're not with us, you're against us! The entire upper management become focussed on chasing growth opportunities in Asia. Jetstar Asia was this vehicle, but hell, it isn't doing what was intended (making money). Meet Qantas Asia.
The problem is while chasing the golden fleece in Asia, they have dropped the ball back home. The Asian airlines are getting stronger with better products, and if Qantas does not look out, they will be on home turf very soon.
Moral of the story? You need a solid base to grow from. Not only that, but do you think the Asians are going to let us gringos steal their market? HELL NO! They will fight aggressively on all fronts.
JB has the right idea, work with partners in different regions and focus on home. That way your airlines will compliment each other.
Qantas need to tuck their shirt in back home before they try to take on Asia. If they had any brains they would be looking at ways to work with Singapore Airlines or Cathay Pacific. Of course, management are way to arrogant for that. They think they are better and smarter than everyone else! If JB ties up with Singapore Airlines (and it will happen) It will be game over Qantas.
777s now, retire the 747s and use the 787s for growth/partnerships in Asia and the thinner international routes back home.
Thats all well and good GT, but would you care to justify your comment on sunrise that what pilots and engineers are fighting for will cost $300 million per year? You didnt get time to do it on TV, but you have plenty of time to reply on this forum.
I emailed you a few week ago over a comment in The West about pilots earning $500,000 and while you replied to my question with some very good points, you didnt really answer it. As you well know, the uninformed public will take notice of figures. If they dont really know what staff travel or other benefits really mean, they do know about $$$. So to quote unrepresentative figures is akin to misreporting. I dont want to harp on about the 500k article because that is old news now, but your comment about the cost of the union demands is in the same vein. If you want to quote figures, make sure they are the truth.
I emailed you a few week ago over a comment in The West about pilots earning $500,000 and while you replied to my question with some very good points, you didnt really answer it. As you well know, the uninformed public will take notice of figures. If they dont really know what staff travel or other benefits really mean, they do know about $$$. So to quote unrepresentative figures is akin to misreporting. I dont want to harp on about the 500k article because that is old news now, but your comment about the cost of the union demands is in the same vein. If you want to quote figures, make sure they are the truth.
Just a small point....
I noticed Geoff mentioned the Qantas FF program several times in his response and the fact that the airline is going to reward people more for flying than not in earning points.
The enormous cost to the airlines in letting people earn points by spending on everything from groceries to rental cars to cruises has cost many of them dearly.
This issue was raised approx 10-15 yrs ago in the USA, as Geoff mentioned history repeating itself.
Carriers found themselves with FF seats being taken up by people who had never been on 1 of their planes in the past having gotten points via every other means other than flying frequently with that carrier.
This basic concept of giving airline pax who had flown with the carrier a few extra points for staying at hotels and renting cars with the carriers partner businesses on their trips was good in the beginning but then it spiraled out of control and denigrated into the situation Ive mentioned above, no flying at all but still earning points.
US airline FF schemes alone were/are worth Billions in equivalent fares to every airline and have long been considered a liability to the carrier by the very managements whose poor decisions/greed in letting them grow and morph into what they have become came back to bite them, hard.
Billions in lost revenues, and managements world wide are penny pinching on nickel and dime stuff.
Maybe all airline managements need to look at changing this point earning situation instead of screwing current point holders over with low FF seating availability, blackout dates etc etc
They wont though, the Genie is too far out of the bottle now and everyone is doing it this way so there is more than likely no going back.
I noticed Geoff mentioned the Qantas FF program several times in his response and the fact that the airline is going to reward people more for flying than not in earning points.
The enormous cost to the airlines in letting people earn points by spending on everything from groceries to rental cars to cruises has cost many of them dearly.
This issue was raised approx 10-15 yrs ago in the USA, as Geoff mentioned history repeating itself.
Carriers found themselves with FF seats being taken up by people who had never been on 1 of their planes in the past having gotten points via every other means other than flying frequently with that carrier.
This basic concept of giving airline pax who had flown with the carrier a few extra points for staying at hotels and renting cars with the carriers partner businesses on their trips was good in the beginning but then it spiraled out of control and denigrated into the situation Ive mentioned above, no flying at all but still earning points.
US airline FF schemes alone were/are worth Billions in equivalent fares to every airline and have long been considered a liability to the carrier by the very managements whose poor decisions/greed in letting them grow and morph into what they have become came back to bite them, hard.
Billions in lost revenues, and managements world wide are penny pinching on nickel and dime stuff.
Maybe all airline managements need to look at changing this point earning situation instead of screwing current point holders over with low FF seating availability, blackout dates etc etc
They wont though, the Genie is too far out of the bottle now and everyone is doing it this way so there is more than likely no going back.
Last edited by aussie027; 21st May 2011 at 08:26.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: oz
Age: 65
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Geoff, On sunrise you stated that Qantas engineers were amongst the highest paid engineers in the world, how did you come by that? Off the top of my head i would say that the average lame earns approximately 110k to 120k which includes shift loading, of course there will be some who earn more, is this based on the strong Aussie dollar? The way i look at it, it's disposable income that matters most, if i was living in a country where housing prices were cheap and cost of living was a lot less you wouldn't expect a high wage, but you have to look at the median wage of other trades ie. plumbers carpenters etc. [ who if make a mistake is not usually life threatening ], take away the shift loading, and you'll find that we are behind. Shift loading brings our wage up, but as has been said before how would you like to have to work nightshift , public holidays, weekends etc. also we find it difficult to take leave on these days as 90% of the time it's rejected due insufficient manpower. In my opinion we work very hard in very trying circumstances with all the obstacles [company made ] put in front of us to get the aircraft out safely, and i for one would forget any payrise if as a trade off we could get rid of all the idiots that are trying to pull Qantas engineering down and then let us get back to doing what we do best and return us to the world's best and safest.
Rant over.
Rant over.