AUGUST 24th - QANTAS
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA will get information today that should push the boundaries. I kid you not this is fair dinkum. Over the weekend a Qantas manager who is a LAME certified for aircraft maintenance checks on a plane several hours before the aircraft had even landed. He then went home and left the signed up package in the section.
This is what Qantas has become and I bet my left testicle that Qantas will back their manager to the hilt. Now as bad as this may seem, the very same manager is the only LAME in this country that I know who has previously had his licence suspended for carrying out unauthorized maintenance. You can read about it on this link -
Strange v CASA, AAT, 2002-04-12, Decision in full
Now lets put this is perspective. Good union member in Cairns places a witches hat fore and aft engine instead of at wingtip. Two minutes later he notices mistake and moves the hats. He was stood down for 3 weeks whilst they investigated the breach of a cardinal rule.
Then there is the cockpit door fiasco that is well discussed here.
This one will be interesting.
This is what Qantas has become and I bet my left testicle that Qantas will back their manager to the hilt. Now as bad as this may seem, the very same manager is the only LAME in this country that I know who has previously had his licence suspended for carrying out unauthorized maintenance. You can read about it on this link -
Strange v CASA, AAT, 2002-04-12, Decision in full
Now lets put this is perspective. Good union member in Cairns places a witches hat fore and aft engine instead of at wingtip. Two minutes later he notices mistake and moves the hats. He was stood down for 3 weeks whilst they investigated the breach of a cardinal rule.
Then there is the cockpit door fiasco that is well discussed here.
This one will be interesting.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sunny side up
Posts: 1,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
P.S. Let me tell you what will kill Qantas: Employee turnover. It may not even be turnover within the Qantas organisation, it may be in one of the outsourced services.
The GHS company needs dudes/dudettes, so they get some more. Need to be trained up, stay for a while... and the cycle continues. The outcome is a company staffed by newbies and people who can't get jobs elsewhere. The upshot is a lot more incidents, slower work, lost bags and general mayhem and chaos.
Of course not all GHS companies are bad to work for and they don't all have these problems, but anyone who's kicked around the ramp for a while has noticed the decline in expertise and standards since subcontracting and casualization have increased over the last decade. Does it affect the bottom line? Probably not, so who cares; until it's your bag that ends up in a ditch or your aircraft that gets delayed for four hours because someone bashed into it with a catering truck.
Over the weekend a Qantas manager who is a LAME certified for aircraft maintenance checks on a plane several hours before the aircraft had even landed. He then went home and left the signed up package in the section.
Last edited by Worrals in the wilds; 10th Oct 2011 at 23:08.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Lisbon
Posts: 995
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Over the weekend a Qantas manager who is a LAME certified for aircraft maintenance checks on a plane several hours before the aircraft had even landed. He then went home and left the signed up package in the section.
Maybe the managers can also run giant hoses from the airport to Mascot and empty the ****ters while sitting in Alan's office?
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Melbourne
Age: 54
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too Close to the Truth
Sandilands' is uncomfortably close to the truth.
"It seems fair to say that labor and management are adrift in the Qantas disputes, and that the customers, most of whom could be expected to be unmoved by such issues, could also drift away from the airline.
These are some of the issues that affect customers.
The London Olympics: Qantas has transferred half of its daily slots to London Heathrow to connections, really poor connections, with British Airways flights at Bangkok or Hong Kong from early next year.
Putting customers loyal to the Australian quality of the Qantas product onto a British Airways flight is insulting. It is an inferior product according to many travellers, it involves mid trip delays, and for an airline that seeks to leverage its Spirit of Australian branding, this is treachery.
Of course you don’t have to put up with this. What Qantas has done is openly invite its loyal customers to fly all the way to the games on a quality competitor, if they cannot secure seats on the two Airbus A380s Qantas will be flying daily to London via Singapore (one flight originating from Melbourne and the other from Sydney.)
The Red Q Asian mystery: Qantas linked the London reductions, which cut both jobs and its aged 747 fleet, to freeing up the money to invest in a brand new Asia based premium quality flying single aisle Airbus A320s.
The weird stuff: Qantas group CEO Alan Joyce is on the public record as saying this carrier will have full length sleeper seats in first class, and open up new connections between Asia and Europe as well as Australia, yet the A320 isn’t set up to cater for competitive luxury travel and can only fly with a full payload for around 5 hours 30 minutes, which won’t get it from Asia to southern Australia other than Perth and won’t get it from SE Asia non-stop to anywhere in eastern Europe.
Was Joyce really alluding to what this airline might do with some of the Boeing 787s the group has on order?
The business structure of the new luxury Asia based carrier is that it will be a China, Singapore, Malaysia or ‘other’ national flag carrier, meaning 51% owned by the nationals of the chosen state, and that it will take business off existing marquee brands, like Singapore Airlines, Malaysia Airlines and Cathay Pacific. Good luck!
However the business plan implies that Qantas sees no risk that China, Singapore or Malaysia might expect reciprocity of opportunity to set up similarly structured business units in Australia, thus positioning themselves for the technological future when viable airliner designs become available for non-stop flights between Australian cities and London, Paris and Frankfurt.
This could be a lethal assumption on the part of Qantas.
At the moment we see no signs of progress on the Qantas/Asia venture.
Off-shore labor: Qantas subsidiary Jetstar is already rotating poorly paid and apparently inadequately trained flight attendants through its domestic network, where they can work on ‘tag’ flight rosters that begin and end in Asia, but operate domestic sectors in the middle.
Jetstar says the flight attendants are trained to the standards of the countries of residence. Wake up Jetstar, this is Australia, our country, our standards.
Similar issues arise in the basing of Australian registered A330-200s in Singapore to operated Singapore-Melbourne-Singapore flights using pilots and cabin crew resident in Singapore and paid according to Singapore labor arrangements.
There is a dilemma or two for all parties in these arrangements. There is nothing inherently inferior at all in the standards of quality Asian carriers, many of which employ Australian pilots. The issue is not one of Qantas trying to replicate Singapore Airlines, which would quite possibly be received with enthusiasm by many travellers who have crossed over to that airline. It is a question about obliterating the Qantas investment in Australian based excellence for a lower cost, and much lower quality Jetstar product as an alternative to actually competing with overseas competitors.
Qantas has chosen to avoid the competitive task on routes to Asia and beyond to Europe with modern efficient wide-bodied jets, and done nothing but whinge about losing market share when it fact is hasn’t offered to fly the new growth routes so ably addressed by Emirates, Cathay Pacific and Singapore Airlines among others.
Qantas hasn’t had market stolen from it, rather than having given it up and away.
Jetstar type low cost franchises do make a lot of sense as an investment, yet they are not an alternative to keeping or winning the full service market in either Australia or on its longer haul markets. They create new demand, and grow aviation jobs. But they are no reason to abandon quality, especially where the opportunity resides in reputation and service delivery, rather than in the fare price."
Is time for an another inquiry.
"It seems fair to say that labor and management are adrift in the Qantas disputes, and that the customers, most of whom could be expected to be unmoved by such issues, could also drift away from the airline.
These are some of the issues that affect customers.
The London Olympics: Qantas has transferred half of its daily slots to London Heathrow to connections, really poor connections, with British Airways flights at Bangkok or Hong Kong from early next year.
Putting customers loyal to the Australian quality of the Qantas product onto a British Airways flight is insulting. It is an inferior product according to many travellers, it involves mid trip delays, and for an airline that seeks to leverage its Spirit of Australian branding, this is treachery.
Of course you don’t have to put up with this. What Qantas has done is openly invite its loyal customers to fly all the way to the games on a quality competitor, if they cannot secure seats on the two Airbus A380s Qantas will be flying daily to London via Singapore (one flight originating from Melbourne and the other from Sydney.)
The Red Q Asian mystery: Qantas linked the London reductions, which cut both jobs and its aged 747 fleet, to freeing up the money to invest in a brand new Asia based premium quality flying single aisle Airbus A320s.
The weird stuff: Qantas group CEO Alan Joyce is on the public record as saying this carrier will have full length sleeper seats in first class, and open up new connections between Asia and Europe as well as Australia, yet the A320 isn’t set up to cater for competitive luxury travel and can only fly with a full payload for around 5 hours 30 minutes, which won’t get it from Asia to southern Australia other than Perth and won’t get it from SE Asia non-stop to anywhere in eastern Europe.
Was Joyce really alluding to what this airline might do with some of the Boeing 787s the group has on order?
The business structure of the new luxury Asia based carrier is that it will be a China, Singapore, Malaysia or ‘other’ national flag carrier, meaning 51% owned by the nationals of the chosen state, and that it will take business off existing marquee brands, like Singapore Airlines, Malaysia Airlines and Cathay Pacific. Good luck!
However the business plan implies that Qantas sees no risk that China, Singapore or Malaysia might expect reciprocity of opportunity to set up similarly structured business units in Australia, thus positioning themselves for the technological future when viable airliner designs become available for non-stop flights between Australian cities and London, Paris and Frankfurt.
This could be a lethal assumption on the part of Qantas.
At the moment we see no signs of progress on the Qantas/Asia venture.
Off-shore labor: Qantas subsidiary Jetstar is already rotating poorly paid and apparently inadequately trained flight attendants through its domestic network, where they can work on ‘tag’ flight rosters that begin and end in Asia, but operate domestic sectors in the middle.
Jetstar says the flight attendants are trained to the standards of the countries of residence. Wake up Jetstar, this is Australia, our country, our standards.
Similar issues arise in the basing of Australian registered A330-200s in Singapore to operated Singapore-Melbourne-Singapore flights using pilots and cabin crew resident in Singapore and paid according to Singapore labor arrangements.
There is a dilemma or two for all parties in these arrangements. There is nothing inherently inferior at all in the standards of quality Asian carriers, many of which employ Australian pilots. The issue is not one of Qantas trying to replicate Singapore Airlines, which would quite possibly be received with enthusiasm by many travellers who have crossed over to that airline. It is a question about obliterating the Qantas investment in Australian based excellence for a lower cost, and much lower quality Jetstar product as an alternative to actually competing with overseas competitors.
Qantas has chosen to avoid the competitive task on routes to Asia and beyond to Europe with modern efficient wide-bodied jets, and done nothing but whinge about losing market share when it fact is hasn’t offered to fly the new growth routes so ably addressed by Emirates, Cathay Pacific and Singapore Airlines among others.
Qantas hasn’t had market stolen from it, rather than having given it up and away.
Jetstar type low cost franchises do make a lot of sense as an investment, yet they are not an alternative to keeping or winning the full service market in either Australia or on its longer haul markets. They create new demand, and grow aviation jobs. But they are no reason to abandon quality, especially where the opportunity resides in reputation and service delivery, rather than in the fare price."
Is time for an another inquiry.
From Sandilands:
"Putting customers loyal to the Australian quality of the Qantas product onto a British Airways flight is insulting. It is an inferior product..."
Enough of this rubbish! Qantas rates no higher than BA in the current Skytrax Airline Quality rankings. Despite having well paid flight crews and doing its maintenance in-house, BA is profitable on its highly competitive international routes (it has to be because that's virtually its entire business) whereas Qantas isn't and apparently can only make money flying passengers in a cosy domestic duopoly, BA's morale boosting current advertising campaign is focused on the skill and commitment of its staff whereas Qantas is paying a fortune for full page ads this week criticising virtually every section of its employee base. And so on. Wake up guys, 82% of Aussie international departing passengers don't think the much vaunted "Australian quality of the Qantas product" (to quote Sandilands) is worth paying for. If that wasn't the case, Qantas presumably wouldn't have to resort to shifting its loyal customers onto such "inferior" partners.
And last but not least, BA's board seems to be a bit less self interested in the way that they treat their charge - despite running a larger operation, CEO Keith Williams earns roughly half of what Alan Joyce does, and during BA's recent difficulties, previous CEO Willie Walsh declined a bonus for three years - could you imagine Dixon,Joyce et al doing the same?
"Putting customers loyal to the Australian quality of the Qantas product onto a British Airways flight is insulting. It is an inferior product..."
Enough of this rubbish! Qantas rates no higher than BA in the current Skytrax Airline Quality rankings. Despite having well paid flight crews and doing its maintenance in-house, BA is profitable on its highly competitive international routes (it has to be because that's virtually its entire business) whereas Qantas isn't and apparently can only make money flying passengers in a cosy domestic duopoly, BA's morale boosting current advertising campaign is focused on the skill and commitment of its staff whereas Qantas is paying a fortune for full page ads this week criticising virtually every section of its employee base. And so on. Wake up guys, 82% of Aussie international departing passengers don't think the much vaunted "Australian quality of the Qantas product" (to quote Sandilands) is worth paying for. If that wasn't the case, Qantas presumably wouldn't have to resort to shifting its loyal customers onto such "inferior" partners.
And last but not least, BA's board seems to be a bit less self interested in the way that they treat their charge - despite running a larger operation, CEO Keith Williams earns roughly half of what Alan Joyce does, and during BA's recent difficulties, previous CEO Willie Walsh declined a bonus for three years - could you imagine Dixon,Joyce et al doing the same?
Last edited by Max Tow; 11th Oct 2011 at 05:09.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: sydney
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd like to challenge the 82% figure being quoted. Qantas gave routes to Jq. Add those numbers back into international travel figures before you start talking only 18% Market share. Also Qf has not defended or tried to compete with any new airlines or flights into or out of Australia. That's a management decision. They were so brutal in defending domestic Market share but give away international Market share without even trying.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: here and there
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
nice one fed sec,
think they could have got him for perjury on this one
that the applicant has since 1975 been an engineer with Australian Airlines now integrated into Qantas
think they could have got him for perjury on this one
that the applicant has since 1975 been an engineer with Australian Airlines now integrated into Qantas
Booglaboy: I think the Kangaroo route issue is a red herring. The economic difficulty of operating a multisector service to Europe in competition with carriers who can operate simple round trips through their hubs (and are in many cases state subsidised) is something that has driven just about every European carrier off the route, and BA down to a token presence. The fact is that for both BA & QF, the second sector (still less the third for those going on from LON or FRA) generates very little or no more yield than just flying from their bases to SIN,BKK or HKG, so why do it? Much as I dislike the business approach of recent QF senior management, any new management is going to have to address the issue and I haven't seen any proposal which overcomes the geography or suggests some protectionist restriction on the likes of Emirates, Etihad or Singapore Airlines. By the way, it seems reasonably sensible to operate all through services via one point (SIN). If you're going to London, why does it matter where you stretch your legs en-route, and if you want to stop over in BKK or HKG, there's no need for connecting schedules anyway.
P.s. to Mods re edits: I keep typing "Etihad" and the Prune site converts it into something Irish sounding...spooky!
P.s. to Mods re edits: I keep typing "Etihad" and the Prune site converts it into something Irish sounding...spooky!
Last edited by Max Tow; 11th Oct 2011 at 10:07.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: sydney
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep I do understand the geographical and government difficulties but that doesn't explain how Cathay can operate 4 flts a day to Sydney versus qf's 2. Or thai airways 2 flts a day versus qf's 1 or china southern or emirates or ethihad or china airlines etc etc etc and that's just Sydney. Management choose not to even attempt a challenge, even if it's just for Market presence. Look at it as advertising Qf if it doesn't generate huge profit. Give the flying public some choices. Who knows, perhaps they will support qantas over foreign airlines and profits will come. I forgot to mention that they probably don't count jet-connects % to qf's international Market share. So let's see the real figures of Qf + Jq + jx if it really is the 'qantas group'
The answer to your specific question re QF's lower frequencies to HKG,BKK etc is the quality of the respective network hubs. For CX vs QF on HKG for example, look at the catchment population of Cathay's network onward from or feeding into HKG and you'll find it's about 2bn if you include China,Europe etc. Even if you factor that down for the small (albeit rapidly increasing) percentage of Chinese who can afford to travel, it's still pretty impressive. Compare that with the QF mini-hub network to/from Sydney and it's just Oz & NZ at 30m....actually, it's worse because now CX fly direct to most of the major Australian & NZ cities so it's just regional NSW and Tassie at say 2m (I exclude Sydney & Hong Kong cities themselves as they're point to point and there's no network advantage). Scary stuff - in short, QF's frequencies must largely rely on point to point traffic whereas Cathay can take its 50% or so share of that AND fill extra aircraft with traffic connecting online through HKG. Moreover, once CX starts operating at much higher frequency than QF, even the point to point market starts to move their way because of the better choice of schedules.
Arguably, with its location at the far SE of the subcontinent and with direct services from most Aussie state capitals to major Asian and Gulf airports, SYD is no longer a hub even for Aus/NZ.
The QF business model of old is pretty much obsolete - it's just a shame that the process of change has been one of wrong decisions, wrong equipment, missed opportunities, eyes off the ball and arguably, board venality. At a time of huge change in the competitive landscape and when the organisation has needed leadership as never before, it's hardly surprising that the workers (and shareholders) feel let down.
Arguably, with its location at the far SE of the subcontinent and with direct services from most Aussie state capitals to major Asian and Gulf airports, SYD is no longer a hub even for Aus/NZ.
The QF business model of old is pretty much obsolete - it's just a shame that the process of change has been one of wrong decisions, wrong equipment, missed opportunities, eyes off the ball and arguably, board venality. At a time of huge change in the competitive landscape and when the organisation has needed leadership as never before, it's hardly surprising that the workers (and shareholders) feel let down.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sunny side up
Posts: 1,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Enough of this rubbish! Qantas rates no higher than BA in the current Skytrax Airline Quality rankings. Despite having well paid flight crews and doing its maintenance in-house, BA is profitable on its highly competitive international routes (it has to be because that's virtually its entire business) whereas Qantas isn't and apparently can only make money flying passengers in a cosy domestic duopoly, BA's morale boosting current advertising campaign is focused on the skill and commitment of its staff whereas Qantas is paying a fortune for full page ads this week criticising virtually every section of its employee base.
Arguably, with its location at the far SE of the subcontinent and with direct services from most Aussie state capitals to major Asian and Gulf airports, SYD is no longer a hub even for Aus/NZ.
Sydney is still the hub of Australian airline operations because it is by far the busiest airport in the country, both internationally and domestically. The next two don't even come close.
Even though you're possibly right about the location, more people want to fly to Sydney than everywhere else put together.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sunny side up
Posts: 1,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or mentioned that Air New Zealand is ticking along nicely, despite their only southern network catchment population being penguins, who (as we all know)...don't fly. 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Perth
Posts: 503
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FINALLY......some good news
Well its been a while,but Qantas has finally pulled off being nominated for a very ,very prestigious international award.......wait for it:
Best Airline driving customer service and crisis management via social media at the 2nd Annual SimpliFlying Awards for Excellence in social media
The Best Airlines Driving Revenue Through Social Media – Introducing the Top 5 nominees for the 2nd SimpliFlying Awards for Social Media Excellence | Leaders in airline & airport customer engagement :: SimpliFlying
Brings a warm glow....all over
Take a bow Exco........you have done good.
Best Airline driving customer service and crisis management via social media at the 2nd Annual SimpliFlying Awards for Excellence in social media
The Best Airlines Driving Revenue Through Social Media – Introducing the Top 5 nominees for the 2nd SimpliFlying Awards for Social Media Excellence | Leaders in airline & airport customer engagement :: SimpliFlying
Brings a warm glow....all over
Take a bow Exco........you have done good.
WITW: Sorry, I wasn't challenging SYD's pre-eminence in Australian aviation but as a "hub" in the sense of the opportunity or necessity to connect to get to other cities. Latest figures are 2010 35m, MEL at 28m and BNE 19m - I suspect it would have been far more Sydney-centric esp in international traffic terms a decade or so ago. It would sure have helped QF if the First Fleet had chosen DRW!
Re Air NZ. I agree though not quite so rosy according to CNBC interview on 6th Oct:
"National carrier Air New Zealand is undergoing a major review of its long-haul flights. Though it posted a net profit of NZ$81 million ($62 million) for fiscal year ended June 30, 2011, its international network has been under pressure, losing a million dollars a week." However just contrast Rob Fyfe's positive attitude to taking staff through change with the confrontational QF bulldozer...and I'm sure it does help to have chosen 777s!
News Headlines
Re Air NZ. I agree though not quite so rosy according to CNBC interview on 6th Oct:
"National carrier Air New Zealand is undergoing a major review of its long-haul flights. Though it posted a net profit of NZ$81 million ($62 million) for fiscal year ended June 30, 2011, its international network has been under pressure, losing a million dollars a week." However just contrast Rob Fyfe's positive attitude to taking staff through change with the confrontational QF bulldozer...and I'm sure it does help to have chosen 777s!
News Headlines
Gruen Planet
I have been told that an interesting discussion on 'Corporate Spin', with perhaps some quite specific references to the current dispute, can be enjoyed on the Gruen Planet at 9:00pm tonight.
If you miss it, check out the ABC Gruen Planet website or IView in a day or two.
If you miss it, check out the ABC Gruen Planet website or IView in a day or two.
Last edited by C441; 12th Oct 2011 at 07:28.
Unions split over Qantas war as Paul Howes warns strikers | The Australian
Looks like we are losing the battle for 'hearts and minds', check out the comments, it's greedy unions not greedy fat cat execs
Looks like we are losing the battle for 'hearts and minds', check out the comments, it's greedy unions not greedy fat cat execs