Qantas post August 24
A possible (and undesirable) grand strategy:
1. Build JQ up to critical mass.
2. Push pilot contracts on JQ (Cadet contract is in + current attempt to implement part time pilot contracts, but due to Federal court action BB has now quarantined contract action until 01SEP11)
3. Send out messages to destabilize QF pilot group. Drag out JQ court mandated negotiation until D-Day. ( 24 Aug is one week prior JQ contract resumption)
4. 24 Aug - AJ bomb dropped.
5. Affected QF pilots told only options are SIN or JQ contract.
6. Faced with influx of contractors and no growth to EBA, JQ pilots are forced to accept contracts to upgrade based upon Air Pilot Award. New hires on on contract only.
7. Pilot EBAs die off and contracts reign. Coup d'état complete.
When you look at the Air Pilots Award used to set the cadet contract http://www.fwa.gov.au/documents/mode...f/MA000046.pdf (updated 1July2011) the minimum pay for narrow body jet captain is around $125K.
...go easy on the hand grenades, remember this is a rumour forum!
1. Build JQ up to critical mass.
2. Push pilot contracts on JQ (Cadet contract is in + current attempt to implement part time pilot contracts, but due to Federal court action BB has now quarantined contract action until 01SEP11)
3. Send out messages to destabilize QF pilot group. Drag out JQ court mandated negotiation until D-Day. ( 24 Aug is one week prior JQ contract resumption)
4. 24 Aug - AJ bomb dropped.
5. Affected QF pilots told only options are SIN or JQ contract.
6. Faced with influx of contractors and no growth to EBA, JQ pilots are forced to accept contracts to upgrade based upon Air Pilot Award. New hires on on contract only.
7. Pilot EBAs die off and contracts reign. Coup d'état complete.
When you look at the Air Pilots Award used to set the cadet contract http://www.fwa.gov.au/documents/mode...f/MA000046.pdf (updated 1July2011) the minimum pay for narrow body jet captain is around $125K.
...go easy on the hand grenades, remember this is a rumour forum!
Roller, might have been their grand strategy,
however they didn't consider step 4A.
QF pilots, stressed for the future of their jobs whilst undertaking PIA ground the airline with a series rolling stop work meetings to consider future.
FWA work Australia eventually steps in before QF go broke and make a ruling.
The result of that ruling will have direct consequence on the following steps of your grand strategy.
I really, really hope it doesn't come to this as it is totally unnecessary. However we no longer have anything to loose. Isn't that the most dangerous enemy? As I type this I have other windows open looking for contract jobs o/s. Never thought it would come to this but that's life.
Lets hope the shareholders see sense and replace the incumbent with a group that is prepared to work with the employees to everyone's benefit as the current management for some reason are not and will drive us all into the ground. We are ready, they just want to outsource. Unbelievable.
Oldmate, if half of that came true it would be a good start
however they didn't consider step 4A.
QF pilots, stressed for the future of their jobs whilst undertaking PIA ground the airline with a series rolling stop work meetings to consider future.
FWA work Australia eventually steps in before QF go broke and make a ruling.
The result of that ruling will have direct consequence on the following steps of your grand strategy.
I really, really hope it doesn't come to this as it is totally unnecessary. However we no longer have anything to loose. Isn't that the most dangerous enemy? As I type this I have other windows open looking for contract jobs o/s. Never thought it would come to this but that's life.
Lets hope the shareholders see sense and replace the incumbent with a group that is prepared to work with the employees to everyone's benefit as the current management for some reason are not and will drive us all into the ground. We are ready, they just want to outsource. Unbelievable.
Oldmate, if half of that came true it would be a good start
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone is zero
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roller, I'd take a punt on your hypothetical strategy being close to the money. Dates & timings are no accident (they never have been).
mohikan - DrPepz has been a good source of information regarding the unsuitability of those groups of pilots to CAAS. He indicates Tiger are having problems getting Indonesian pilots licenced in Singapore.
This comes back to Rollers strategy. Pilots will be required, what better what than picking who you want & offering contracts to the now soon-to-be redundant. I'm sure contracts would be conditional on gaining a Singapore licence. That's the place to look, the Singapore rules & regs relating to licence conversions & age limitations. That should provide a big clue.
mohikan - DrPepz has been a good source of information regarding the unsuitability of those groups of pilots to CAAS. He indicates Tiger are having problems getting Indonesian pilots licenced in Singapore.
This comes back to Rollers strategy. Pilots will be required, what better what than picking who you want & offering contracts to the now soon-to-be redundant. I'm sure contracts would be conditional on gaining a Singapore licence. That's the place to look, the Singapore rules & regs relating to licence conversions & age limitations. That should provide a big clue.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone is zero
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you hypothetically took the current long haul contract and transplanted it Singapore, and did a conversion to the pay rates to keep after tax dollars constant, I am sure there would be a large saving to QF just on their tax bill. I'm sure that's a significant figure in their calculations. This is tax arbitrage.
,
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: here
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The issue of management incompetence is a subjective one. The decisions they have made and continue to make beggar belief but that is because we (the employees) are looking at the situation from the point of view of making Qantas the best airline it can be.
It is my opinion that management have engaged a course of action contrary to this because their agenda is at odds with ours. Management don't want us to succeed.
The demise of Qantas was conceived with the birth of Jetstar and the decisions made have not been ill-considered, inept or incompetent. Far from it. They have been calculated, considered and delivered with the aim to bury the legacy.
To call management incompetent simply fails to acknowledge that subversive strategies are at play.
It is my opinion that management have engaged a course of action contrary to this because their agenda is at odds with ours. Management don't want us to succeed.
The demise of Qantas was conceived with the birth of Jetstar and the decisions made have not been ill-considered, inept or incompetent. Far from it. They have been calculated, considered and delivered with the aim to bury the legacy.
To call management incompetent simply fails to acknowledge that subversive strategies are at play.
Well said that man and a perfect articulation of what many of us are starting to realise.
"Work choices" was the tool QF management were going to use to deal with it's pesky unions.
The legislation perfectly tailored for QF, allowing it to do whatever it wanted to it's employee groups as long as it claimed, "operational reasons".
Now it seems bankrupting the company is the tool being used to force the governments hand re the Qantas sales act as a means to the same end.
Bastards.
"Work choices" was the tool QF management were going to use to deal with it's pesky unions.
The legislation perfectly tailored for QF, allowing it to do whatever it wanted to it's employee groups as long as it claimed, "operational reasons".
Now it seems bankrupting the company is the tool being used to force the governments hand re the Qantas sales act as a means to the same end.
Bastards.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: In the bone yard.
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just scratching around listening and reading between the lines...
What would happen if we woke up on Aug 24 and discovered that lot's of QF 747-400's had been reregistered in say... Malaysia?
This is a rumour site after all.
What would happen if we woke up on Aug 24 and discovered that lot's of QF 747-400's had been reregistered in say... Malaysia?
This is a rumour site after all.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: I prefer to remain north of a direct line BNE-ADL
Age: 48
Posts: 1,286
Likes: 0
Received 33 Likes
on
10 Posts
Someone told me Tiger getting a few of the cancelled A380's and configuring in 798 economy seats. Adelaide-Hobart for $7.35 one way assuming its full. And the special is return ticket for $12.00 , saves $2.35. They could even do Perth - Melbourne for $19.00 each way , only on the red eye.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Ozzzzzzz
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jetstar, Jetstar Int, Jetstar Viet etc etc etc ... were they born on their own?
No.
Have they set up their own operation through their own investment?
No.
Qantas, Qantas mainline has enabled these 'managers' to set up various off shoots of Qantas. Making profits by selling the reputation of Qantas.
Qantas International is making money. Creative accounting says otherwise. PIA, and voting yes, will cut at the heart of the airlines ability to make money. Jetstar makes money by selling muffins. Seriously, they don't make money. Not as much as Qantas makes.
The mere threat of PIA will kill the subsidiary airlines that Qantas has spawn. Qantas is still propping up pathetic excuses for airlines such as Jetstar Vietnam.
Qantas post 24/8 will be the same it is now. However, greater disengagement, management who couldn't give a rats, and pilots still working hard to make a dollar to make the airline money.
Tiger's current situation does not do Qantas managements thoughts of outsourcing much justice. The Australian public has seen that safety is actually important, and that low fares do not mean a safe flight. Sure, Qantas' fare's will remain the same, but greater profits will go into ar*seholes back pockets, and on the other hand you have JB moving current offshore work back to Oz. It's a lose lose for Qantas I think... Labour Gvt helps the current pilots cause.
Either way, Joyce and Clifford are d*ckheads.
Cafe Jamcia Blue anyone?
No.
Have they set up their own operation through their own investment?
No.
Qantas, Qantas mainline has enabled these 'managers' to set up various off shoots of Qantas. Making profits by selling the reputation of Qantas.
Qantas International is making money. Creative accounting says otherwise. PIA, and voting yes, will cut at the heart of the airlines ability to make money. Jetstar makes money by selling muffins. Seriously, they don't make money. Not as much as Qantas makes.
The mere threat of PIA will kill the subsidiary airlines that Qantas has spawn. Qantas is still propping up pathetic excuses for airlines such as Jetstar Vietnam.
Qantas post 24/8 will be the same it is now. However, greater disengagement, management who couldn't give a rats, and pilots still working hard to make a dollar to make the airline money.
Tiger's current situation does not do Qantas managements thoughts of outsourcing much justice. The Australian public has seen that safety is actually important, and that low fares do not mean a safe flight. Sure, Qantas' fare's will remain the same, but greater profits will go into ar*seholes back pockets, and on the other hand you have JB moving current offshore work back to Oz. It's a lose lose for Qantas I think... Labour Gvt helps the current pilots cause.
Either way, Joyce and Clifford are d*ckheads.
Cafe Jamcia Blue anyone?
Sue Bussell (Qantas IR) at the UNI of Sydney last year.
http://sydney.edu.au/business/__data...ell_190410.pdf
At about page 7 she discuss how Qantas played a roll in keeping the Modern pilot award to an absolute minimum so as to keep Australia competitive with internationals flying in OZ.
http://sydney.edu.au/business/__data...ell_190410.pdf
At about page 7 she discuss how Qantas played a roll in keeping the Modern pilot award to an absolute minimum so as to keep Australia competitive with internationals flying in OZ.
The recent review of Modern awards was an opportunity for the distinction between a safety net and conditions bargained in individual enterprises to be tested.
The Qantas group played a significant role in the review of the aviation industry awards. Although it might appear that an easy approach for Qantas would have been to stand back from the process because raising the industry standard would impact on our ‘low cost’ competitors more than on Qantas mainline, our view was that the long term competitiveness of the industry in Australia required that aviation industry awards remained as true Industry minima. Otherwise, we would have become potentially less competitive with international
carriers operating to Australia, and we also needed to protect our subsidiaries Jetstar and QantasLink – QantasLink provides services to regional Australia and has some community service obligations. The challenge was significant with some unions taking a very different
approach to the concept of a safety net being a minimum standard. We had to provide comprehensive data and the initial decisions of the Tribunal were then subject to a Ministerial request for review. However in the end, under very difficult circumstances the Tribunal got it right for this industry. There was no evidence of any individual being worse off and the awards provide for a fair minimum standard safety net that is a foundation – not a replacement - for collective bargaining.
In the longer term, the issue with modern awards will be the extent to which unions pursue arbitrated award variations to raise employment conditions outside of the bargaining stream. To the extent this does occur – if it occurs - the more the safety net will circumscribe the real scope for enterprise bargaining and hence the scope to tailor employment conditions to the needs of particular enterprises. If the Hawke/Keating
Labour Government and every Government since then was right – that the move from standard industry wide arbitrated outcomes to bargained enterprise level outcomes provided a key lever for economic reform and growth – then we need to be very careful that the safety net remains just that - an underpinning minima, not a vehicle for establishing new standards and benchmarks.
The Qantas group played a significant role in the review of the aviation industry awards. Although it might appear that an easy approach for Qantas would have been to stand back from the process because raising the industry standard would impact on our ‘low cost’ competitors more than on Qantas mainline, our view was that the long term competitiveness of the industry in Australia required that aviation industry awards remained as true Industry minima. Otherwise, we would have become potentially less competitive with international
carriers operating to Australia, and we also needed to protect our subsidiaries Jetstar and QantasLink – QantasLink provides services to regional Australia and has some community service obligations. The challenge was significant with some unions taking a very different
approach to the concept of a safety net being a minimum standard. We had to provide comprehensive data and the initial decisions of the Tribunal were then subject to a Ministerial request for review. However in the end, under very difficult circumstances the Tribunal got it right for this industry. There was no evidence of any individual being worse off and the awards provide for a fair minimum standard safety net that is a foundation – not a replacement - for collective bargaining.
In the longer term, the issue with modern awards will be the extent to which unions pursue arbitrated award variations to raise employment conditions outside of the bargaining stream. To the extent this does occur – if it occurs - the more the safety net will circumscribe the real scope for enterprise bargaining and hence the scope to tailor employment conditions to the needs of particular enterprises. If the Hawke/Keating
Labour Government and every Government since then was right – that the move from standard industry wide arbitrated outcomes to bargained enterprise level outcomes provided a key lever for economic reform and growth – then we need to be very careful that the safety net remains just that - an underpinning minima, not a vehicle for establishing new standards and benchmarks.
Nunc est bibendum
I wonder if AJ has offered to purchase Tiger AUS off Tiger SIN. That way he can keep it 'in his back pocket for a rainy day' the same way that Dixon did with Impulse. Jetstar's growth will then be zero as it's handed all to the airline formerly known as Tiger.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Upperlobe:
be careful what you thinkout loud:
for instance AJ @ Melbourne Press Club 2011 - phrases like:
1. better deployment of assets and
2. dodging (not very well) the well placed questions by one print journo (who for the record didn't get a Dallas ticket, ipad or 380 ride and is on Olivia's blacklist) in relation to applying such phrases to basing some existing QF a/c offshore in say... KL or China. (looking back AJ spluttered and choked a little before giving a pollie BS answer)
Then go back to AJ's bullish chatter upon taking up the JQ gig about building the perfect airline - at which time he used phrases like:
1. annualised cost reduction of at least 5 to 10%
2. enhancing codeshares with franchise like alliance (to leverage equity and step around bi-laterals)
3. Flexible asset use by alliance members (any aircraft, any crew, anywhere)
4. Streamlining regulatory systems
5. Leveraging the workforce (outsource and promote saving through labour turnover which diminishes union influence)
oh and who can forget those haunting references to that 'poisonous' Qantas culture etc etc etc
Seems he might just get the last part of his dreamshot before a Coronial Inquiry into a smoking hole in the ground or organised shareholders step in........sadly it'll probably be the former. (Would however like to think the Regulators may take on a bit of the burden and show that they are serious about declining safety standards.....sadly it'll probably only be after the previous)
AT
be careful what you thinkout loud:
for instance AJ @ Melbourne Press Club 2011 - phrases like:
1. better deployment of assets and
2. dodging (not very well) the well placed questions by one print journo (who for the record didn't get a Dallas ticket, ipad or 380 ride and is on Olivia's blacklist) in relation to applying such phrases to basing some existing QF a/c offshore in say... KL or China. (looking back AJ spluttered and choked a little before giving a pollie BS answer)
Then go back to AJ's bullish chatter upon taking up the JQ gig about building the perfect airline - at which time he used phrases like:
1. annualised cost reduction of at least 5 to 10%
2. enhancing codeshares with franchise like alliance (to leverage equity and step around bi-laterals)
3. Flexible asset use by alliance members (any aircraft, any crew, anywhere)
4. Streamlining regulatory systems
5. Leveraging the workforce (outsource and promote saving through labour turnover which diminishes union influence)
oh and who can forget those haunting references to that 'poisonous' Qantas culture etc etc etc
Seems he might just get the last part of his dreamshot before a Coronial Inquiry into a smoking hole in the ground or organised shareholders step in........sadly it'll probably be the former. (Would however like to think the Regulators may take on a bit of the burden and show that they are serious about declining safety standards.....sadly it'll probably only be after the previous)
AT
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a sort of natural attraction between AJ and Tiger so they deserve to be together and share the same level of scrutiny/fate.
It would be better if the Rat was not part of that equation.
I also remember that with HIH the CEO had a blacklist of journos....seems if they don't say what the scripted message is then they are not invited to the party.
Oh thats right, the Rat took the same approach with Skytrax.
Someone PLEASE save us from this lot.
It would be better if the Rat was not part of that equation.
I also remember that with HIH the CEO had a blacklist of journos....seems if they don't say what the scripted message is then they are not invited to the party.
Oh thats right, the Rat took the same approach with Skytrax.
Someone PLEASE save us from this lot.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone is zero
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airtags, Your post #56 is probably the best clear-eyed, logical analysis of the Australian aviation IR strategy I ever seen on this site, particularly point 5. Every pilot should study this carefully & think through the implications.
When you combine this post with rmcdonal post #54 you can see the puzzle begining to form the picture. Kudos to you both.
Globalisation has been sold to the west as a way of getting "cheap stuff" from the third world. A secondary meme that has been perpetuated is that the only way we can improve the lot of the poor in the third world is to "engage" them through trade so we can have an influence to pull up their working conditions & pay. This was merely a Trojan horse, when in fact, the aim of globalisation has been to export the third world terms and conditions to the west. If you want proof positive, re-read post #54.
When you combine this post with rmcdonal post #54 you can see the puzzle begining to form the picture. Kudos to you both.
Globalisation has been sold to the west as a way of getting "cheap stuff" from the third world. A secondary meme that has been perpetuated is that the only way we can improve the lot of the poor in the third world is to "engage" them through trade so we can have an influence to pull up their working conditions & pay. This was merely a Trojan horse, when in fact, the aim of globalisation has been to export the third world terms and conditions to the west. If you want proof positive, re-read post #54.
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I wonder if AJ has offered to purchase Tiger AUS off Tiger SIN. That way he can keep it 'in his back pocket for a rainy day' the same way that Dixon did with Impulse. Jetstar's growth will then be zero as it's handed all to the airline formerly known as Tiger.
"Globalisation has been sold to the west as a way of getting "cheap stuff" from the third world."
Anytime you make investments in the global market or purchase goods and services, you are not only participating by seeking the best return, you are in fact instructing the market to impose the very same conditions on the wider labor force that you appose when they are forced upon you. We all like competition within the market place to bring us cheaper Ipods and fashionable Nikes but we don't like it when the market attempts to influence our own little patch of capitalism.
"the aim of globalization"
There is no "aim" of globalization. Globalization is the natural evolution of a market place changing as new entrants gain influence and compete with the traditional power bases of the west. The last 30 years have seen changes to the control of global capital that have made it much easier to flow to nations with lower labor costs such as india and china. To think that investors would restrict this flow of capital to simply keep western employees happy is fanciful thinking.
"export the third world terms and conditions to the west."
Yes, the freeing up of global capital will result in a leveling of the playing field. Developing countries will see rises in living standards and western countries will be forced to compete. Those that don't will rapidly decline.
The demise of the greenback, the impending default of several EU nations and the increase in pressure to formulate an alternative global currency (http://money.cnn.com/2011/02/10/mark...r/index.htmare) all indications that the global market place can no longer be controlled by a select handful of participants. This will bring obvious change.
The banksters on Long Island are under threat.
Anytime you make investments in the global market or purchase goods and services, you are not only participating by seeking the best return, you are in fact instructing the market to impose the very same conditions on the wider labor force that you appose when they are forced upon you. We all like competition within the market place to bring us cheaper Ipods and fashionable Nikes but we don't like it when the market attempts to influence our own little patch of capitalism.
"the aim of globalization"
There is no "aim" of globalization. Globalization is the natural evolution of a market place changing as new entrants gain influence and compete with the traditional power bases of the west. The last 30 years have seen changes to the control of global capital that have made it much easier to flow to nations with lower labor costs such as india and china. To think that investors would restrict this flow of capital to simply keep western employees happy is fanciful thinking.
"export the third world terms and conditions to the west."
Yes, the freeing up of global capital will result in a leveling of the playing field. Developing countries will see rises in living standards and western countries will be forced to compete. Those that don't will rapidly decline.
The demise of the greenback, the impending default of several EU nations and the increase in pressure to formulate an alternative global currency (http://money.cnn.com/2011/02/10/mark...r/index.htmare) all indications that the global market place can no longer be controlled by a select handful of participants. This will bring obvious change.
The banksters on Long Island are under threat.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: In the bone yard.
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ouch... truth hurts though.
"The banksters on Long Island are under threat."
Would that be the 50 faceless heroes who gave us the GFC? if so vengeance will be sweet.
"The banksters on Long Island are under threat."
Would that be the 50 faceless heroes who gave us the GFC? if so vengeance will be sweet.
Trouble is UL, that they will have all their money moved offshore into some alternative system to feed off like parasites, while the system that allowed them to get away with it will go into recession/depression!! And we will all be taken away with it for the ride.
"Globalization" is the biggest fraud ever perpetuated on the West - the whole aim is to lower labour costs, increase corporate profit and put it squarely into the pockets of ever-greedier and more corrupt management heroes!
"Globalization" is the biggest fraud ever perpetuated on the West - the whole aim is to lower labour costs, increase corporate profit and put it squarely into the pockets of ever-greedier and more corrupt management heroes!