Dick Smith "QF move to Asia".
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oz
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick Smith "QF move to Asia".
Sorry, but is this the same Dick Smith that told the Australian today that it is much cheaper for him to have his aircraft serviced OS???? That QF needs to go off-shore to stay afloat?????
AUSTRALIAN MADE and AUSTRALIAN OWNED
Dick Smith Foods are made in Australia by Australian owned companies. We believe this is important because it provides employment for Australians and all the profits remain here, helping the future of our country.
Dick Smith Foods supports products which are produced by Australian owned businesses, which are Australian grown and made, and those Australian owned companies which operate in a highly ethical manner.
ith that says
But hang-on-a-tick Dick, you've just said the following today in the Australian...
Move to Asia or go broke, Dick Smith tells Qantas
- Steve Creedy, Aviation writer
- From: The Australian
- July 13, 2011 12:00AM
Mr Smith warned yesterday that high wages and government policies that opened up local aviation routes to too much competition had put Qantas's mainline international operations in danger. He said the flying kangaroo was in a similar position to manufacturers forced to move offshore because of an inability to compete with lower-cost competitors.
He said servicing on his aircraft in Singapore and Dubai was 50 per cent cheaper than in Australia, and many airlines were operating at much lower costs than Qantas. While he supported the Australian airline, many of his business colleagues were not willing to pay extra to fly on Qantas and opted for cheaper tickets on rival carriers.
"I feel sorry for (Qantas chief executive) Alan Joyce, I feel sorry for the pilots and I totally blame the government," he said.
"The politicians have decided that we should have this open skies (regime) where you have to compete with completely different wage scales and salary scales.
"If they (Qantas) don't move virtually everything up into Asia call centres, maintenance, any overhead they can they will go broke."
Mr Joyce also warned that the future of international mainline services was not guaranteed when he set up a taskforce to develop a strategy to turn around the loss-making operations.
Analysts expect recommendations to be announced next month will include cutting marginal international routes, forging closer relations with partner airlines and setting up an Asian-based full service carrier to complement the Australian operations.
Mr Smith's comments angered pilot and engineers unions worried about job security and poised to take industrial action.
"Anyone can get a cheap roadworthy done on a car -- unfortunately, in our game, when something is missed, it tends to resurface at 30,000ft," Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association federal secretary Steve Purvinas said.
Australian and International Pilots Association vice-president Richard Woodward said Mr Smith had never worked as a professional pilot or in an airline. He said taking work out of the country would do great damage to the industry because of the loss of jobs and skills.
"Sure, things are tough out there, but there are other international carriers making significant amounts of money right now in these difficult times," he said
Sorry Dick, did you just tell us that it is cheaper for you to have your aircraft serviced oversees? But, I thought you said in your mission statement that you want to keep jobs in Australia to "help the future of our country".
You can't have it both ways Dick
The politicians have decided that we should have this open skies (regime) where you have to compete with completely different wage scales and salary scales.
"Sure, things are tough out there, but there are other international carriers making significant amounts of money right now in these difficult times," he said
Xcel, you state,
Xcel, do you believe I lose credibility by telling the truth?
The number of flights now being allowed into Australia from the Middle East by our Government makes it completely obvious to me and to anyone with any business sense that the Government has really stuffed-up in this situation.
Are you aware that the Chinese communist government restricts the number of overseas airlines operating into Hong Kong in order to protect Cathay?
Are you aware that the Canadian government restricts the number of foreign aircraft flying into Canada to protect their own airline?
What I am saying is a fact of life and it is really important that it is said. There is absolutely no advantage for me to state these important facts.
I understand that with a typical airline about 30% of the costs are related to labour. How, then, could Qantas possibly compete with airlines from the Middle East where they use virtual slave-labour from the Philippines and India to work on their aircraft?
Below is an answer I have given to a private message received on PPRuNe:
Also, below is a copy of an email I have sent to Richard Woodward, VP of the Australian and International Pilots Association:
I believe these emails (above) are self explanatory.
My suggestion is you look at the link to the safety brochure I was involved in, especially the paragraph on international operations.
At least I am prepared to stand up for Australians, Australian businesses and Australian pilots and engineers. What a pity so few do, and what a pity I am attacked for telling the truth.
Sorry old mate, but you just lost all credibility (what was left) on that one
The number of flights now being allowed into Australia from the Middle East by our Government makes it completely obvious to me and to anyone with any business sense that the Government has really stuffed-up in this situation.
Are you aware that the Chinese communist government restricts the number of overseas airlines operating into Hong Kong in order to protect Cathay?
Are you aware that the Canadian government restricts the number of foreign aircraft flying into Canada to protect their own airline?
What I am saying is a fact of life and it is really important that it is said. There is absolutely no advantage for me to state these important facts.
I understand that with a typical airline about 30% of the costs are related to labour. How, then, could Qantas possibly compete with airlines from the Middle East where they use virtual slave-labour from the Philippines and India to work on their aircraft?
Below is an answer I have given to a private message received on PPRuNe:
I was reasonably accurately reported [in The Australian Tuesday 12 July, “Move to Asia or Go Broke, Dick Smith Tells Qantas”] and I would be delighted if you start a thread on PPRuNe about this. The only inaccuracy [in the article in The Australian ] that I could see is where the article said,
“Mr Smith warned yesterday that high wages and government policies that opened up local aviation routes to too much competition had put Qantas's mainline international operations in danger”
In fact, I’m not talking about opening up local aviation routes. What I was referring to is the fact that Qantas has to compete on international routes with carriers that pay far less in wages and salaries.
...as per the attached email to Richard Woodward, I am actually on your side. I am simply trying to explain a fact, and that is that when the Whitlam Government decided to open up our Australian television manufacturing industry to competition from Asia, it was obvious that we would not have an industry. This is exactly what eventuated. All the engineers and workers in the factories ended up getting the sack.
The Federal Government decided a number of decades ago that our international aviation should be opened up to the marketplace without any restrictions in relation to the completely different standards of living and salaries paid. Surely the writing was on the wall then!
Would you really prefer that I don’t state the truth and just watch while Qantas goes broke? Surely not! I am the person who has consistently said that I am happy to pay more to fly with Qantas because I consider it safer – but I am a lone voice. In fact, I was attacked mercilessly by the industry, including pilots, when as Chairman of CASA I told people not to always fly with the cheapest airline.
You mentioned Dick Smith Foods – it’s a great example of what will happen to Qantas. Dick Smith Foods used to turn over $80 million per year – that was when I was getting lots of free publicity for supporting Australian farmers. Since then, the turnover has dropped to about $8 million and it’s on-track to go broke because just about every Australian simply supports the product which is advertised most – especially if it is cheaper. Our beautiful Australian peanut butter made with Australian peanuts used to have about 15% of the market. Now it has dropped to about 6% while Kraft has 60% and we are about to be dumped by the supermarkets even though it’s 20% cheaper than the Kraft peanut butter which contains inferior Argentine peanuts. Why does everyone return to buying Kraft? Because it is advertised most and Kraft have extra margins to spend even more on marketing.
I always fly internationally with Qantas even though it costs me an absolute fortune. However, I would be remiss in not telling the truth – people stop me in the streets and say, “Dick, thanks for saying it how it is”. Well, I see present Government policies completely destroying our iconic Qantas international airline just as the Government destroyed our wonderful electronics manufacturing industry.
If this is not said, then it will happen. You should be supporting what I am saying and getting a change in Government policy, not criticising me.
“Mr Smith warned yesterday that high wages and government policies that opened up local aviation routes to too much competition had put Qantas's mainline international operations in danger”
In fact, I’m not talking about opening up local aviation routes. What I was referring to is the fact that Qantas has to compete on international routes with carriers that pay far less in wages and salaries.
...as per the attached email to Richard Woodward, I am actually on your side. I am simply trying to explain a fact, and that is that when the Whitlam Government decided to open up our Australian television manufacturing industry to competition from Asia, it was obvious that we would not have an industry. This is exactly what eventuated. All the engineers and workers in the factories ended up getting the sack.
The Federal Government decided a number of decades ago that our international aviation should be opened up to the marketplace without any restrictions in relation to the completely different standards of living and salaries paid. Surely the writing was on the wall then!
Would you really prefer that I don’t state the truth and just watch while Qantas goes broke? Surely not! I am the person who has consistently said that I am happy to pay more to fly with Qantas because I consider it safer – but I am a lone voice. In fact, I was attacked mercilessly by the industry, including pilots, when as Chairman of CASA I told people not to always fly with the cheapest airline.
You mentioned Dick Smith Foods – it’s a great example of what will happen to Qantas. Dick Smith Foods used to turn over $80 million per year – that was when I was getting lots of free publicity for supporting Australian farmers. Since then, the turnover has dropped to about $8 million and it’s on-track to go broke because just about every Australian simply supports the product which is advertised most – especially if it is cheaper. Our beautiful Australian peanut butter made with Australian peanuts used to have about 15% of the market. Now it has dropped to about 6% while Kraft has 60% and we are about to be dumped by the supermarkets even though it’s 20% cheaper than the Kraft peanut butter which contains inferior Argentine peanuts. Why does everyone return to buying Kraft? Because it is advertised most and Kraft have extra margins to spend even more on marketing.
I always fly internationally with Qantas even though it costs me an absolute fortune. However, I would be remiss in not telling the truth – people stop me in the streets and say, “Dick, thanks for saying it how it is”. Well, I see present Government policies completely destroying our iconic Qantas international airline just as the Government destroyed our wonderful electronics manufacturing industry.
If this is not said, then it will happen. You should be supporting what I am saying and getting a change in Government policy, not criticising me.
Dear Richard
I refer to the article in The Australian today, “Move to Asia or Go Broke, Dick Smith Tells Qantas”.
Richard, I am actually on the side of our Australian pilots and our national carrier, Qantas. I am simply pointing out that once the Government made the decision that our Australian-owned international airlines would have to compete on an unlevel playing field with airlines that were based in places like China and India, that there is simply no way of them remaining in business unless costs are reduced to a similar level.
Of course, it would be different if Australians were prepared to pay more to fly with Australian-owned and based airlines paying Australian salaries, however my experience is that most Australians are not.
You may not know, but I always fly with Qantas internationally whenever I can, even though some of Qantas’ airfares are quite high compared with their competitors.
When the Whitlam Government decided to reduce all duties on electronic consumer equipment, they knew at the time that it would mean we would no longer have an electronics manufacturing industry in this country. Fantastic Australian companies that were icons - as Qantas is - such as AWA and ASTOR, basically had to close down. It was an absolute disaster. As you know, we do not make any television sets, DVD players or amplifiers in Australia because local companies simply can't compete.
By the look of it, when it comes to the “open skies” policy, the Government hasn't looked at – or admitted – that in effect it means that we won’t have our own airline industry that flies internationally in competition with carriers with completely different salary structures.
It is all incredibly sad and a complete catastrophe for Australia, especially if we ever have another war and we don’t have the expertise that a national carrier would provide.
You may not remember, but when I was Chairman of CASA we produced a safety brochure and I personally wrote the wording which, in effect, cautioned fare-paying passengers against opting for the cheapest ticket prices as those companies would normally spend the bare minimum on safety as required by the Regulator, whereas companies with higher ticket prices often spent more than the minimum on safety.
It’s interesting – I was universally attacked for this and within weeks of me resigning as Chairman all copies of the document were destroyed by CASA.
If you would like to look at the document I refer to, it is on my Dick Smith Flyer website –see link HERE. Particularly look at paragraph #2 and, more importantly, paragraph marked #5 re. international travel.
Yours faithfully
Dick Smith
I refer to the article in The Australian today, “Move to Asia or Go Broke, Dick Smith Tells Qantas”.
Richard, I am actually on the side of our Australian pilots and our national carrier, Qantas. I am simply pointing out that once the Government made the decision that our Australian-owned international airlines would have to compete on an unlevel playing field with airlines that were based in places like China and India, that there is simply no way of them remaining in business unless costs are reduced to a similar level.
Of course, it would be different if Australians were prepared to pay more to fly with Australian-owned and based airlines paying Australian salaries, however my experience is that most Australians are not.
You may not know, but I always fly with Qantas internationally whenever I can, even though some of Qantas’ airfares are quite high compared with their competitors.
When the Whitlam Government decided to reduce all duties on electronic consumer equipment, they knew at the time that it would mean we would no longer have an electronics manufacturing industry in this country. Fantastic Australian companies that were icons - as Qantas is - such as AWA and ASTOR, basically had to close down. It was an absolute disaster. As you know, we do not make any television sets, DVD players or amplifiers in Australia because local companies simply can't compete.
By the look of it, when it comes to the “open skies” policy, the Government hasn't looked at – or admitted – that in effect it means that we won’t have our own airline industry that flies internationally in competition with carriers with completely different salary structures.
It is all incredibly sad and a complete catastrophe for Australia, especially if we ever have another war and we don’t have the expertise that a national carrier would provide.
You may not remember, but when I was Chairman of CASA we produced a safety brochure and I personally wrote the wording which, in effect, cautioned fare-paying passengers against opting for the cheapest ticket prices as those companies would normally spend the bare minimum on safety as required by the Regulator, whereas companies with higher ticket prices often spent more than the minimum on safety.
It’s interesting – I was universally attacked for this and within weeks of me resigning as Chairman all copies of the document were destroyed by CASA.
If you would like to look at the document I refer to, it is on my Dick Smith Flyer website –see link HERE. Particularly look at paragraph #2 and, more importantly, paragraph marked #5 re. international travel.
Yours faithfully
Dick Smith
My suggestion is you look at the link to the safety brochure I was involved in, especially the paragraph on international operations.
At least I am prepared to stand up for Australians, Australian businesses and Australian pilots and engineers. What a pity so few do, and what a pity I am attacked for telling the truth.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1a sound asleep, you're right about EK but Dixon never believed the challenge and now QF is so far behind their competitors that only legislative change wrt open skies can help them.
I reckon EK pilots are 50pc more productive than QF at similar all up costs. QF's overall labour costs are huge compared to EK's given their ability to pay workers from the sub continent much less. This comes at personal cost to EK pilots as fatigue and has a safety impact that is yet to be discovered by EK in my opinion.
I reckon EK pilots are 50pc more productive than QF at similar all up costs. QF's overall labour costs are huge compared to EK's given their ability to pay workers from the sub continent much less. This comes at personal cost to EK pilots as fatigue and has a safety impact that is yet to be discovered by EK in my opinion.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Incidentally QF don't have a 'right' to Australian international flying, Kingsford Smith's company' ANA started while they were a Queensland domestic carrier, and in this regard I'd see no benefit in protecting them individually. I see benefit in protecting Australian airlines which compete globally but cannot do so on an even playing field because of varying compliance by middle east airlines with labour laws and rights and compliance by local regulators. Have a look at EK's, Etihad and Qatar's FTLs and FRMS setup and you'll get the picture.
I have long believed Mr Smith was out of his depth as boss of the Australian regulator and that he pushed a private flying agenda based on a narrow cross section of experience but he has been misinterpreted here. If Australian international flying is not protected then it cannot compete.
I have long believed Mr Smith was out of his depth as boss of the Australian regulator and that he pushed a private flying agenda based on a narrow cross section of experience but he has been misinterpreted here. If Australian international flying is not protected then it cannot compete.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: rangaville
Posts: 2,280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He said servicing on his aircraft in Singapore and Dubai was 50 per cent cheaper than in Australia
Why is it that Australians whinge about the cost of things when it all comes back to globalisation. The reason your maintenance is 'expensive' in Australia is because your LAME is getting paid a fair quid for his/her labour. The foreign labour is getting paid farkall and is probably not qualified in the work they are doing and having it overseen by an engineer. It is further exacerbated by the 'nanny state' regulatory regime we 'enjoy' in Australia.
Globalisation = a scam. A scam in which wealth is further re-distributed from the middle class to our 'friends' in management as bonuses.
What's the solution then ? Have the Australian Government nationalise Qantas, then the employees can have the job security, terms, conditions and working practices they want.
Stick the bill for all this to the tax payer as Qantas becomes part of the public service.
Stick the bill for all this to the tax payer as Qantas becomes part of the public service.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick,
I agree with a lot of your comments, particularly with how government policy has helped create the situation we are in.
However, I'm not convinced that foreign carriers' lower cost base has as great an impact as you believe. Qantas has always had a higher cost base than our competitors, and yet has up until recently managed to make healthy profits. Why do you think this is so? Apart from having a higher cost base, how much have factors like poor fleet choice, Jetstar cannibalising Mainline, poor route structure, lack of investment in product etc etc affected the bottom line?
I notice on your website you promote your products as made by companies which act in a "highly ethical manner". The problem I have with your comments in the Australian article is that they give credibility to the unethical manner in which Qantas is acting. If you genuinely want to try and resolve this situation in the best interests of Australia and Australian employees you should at least be trying to ascertain :
1. If the accounts that Qantas presents to the media are an accurate and fair representation of the state of the company, particularly how costs are apportioned between parts of the group.
2. What alternative solutions may exist to offshoring the company, preferable by consulting in good faith with current employees.
Shouldn't we at least try to explore these things before throwing our hands in the air and moving Qantas to Asia?
I agree with a lot of your comments, particularly with how government policy has helped create the situation we are in.
However, I'm not convinced that foreign carriers' lower cost base has as great an impact as you believe. Qantas has always had a higher cost base than our competitors, and yet has up until recently managed to make healthy profits. Why do you think this is so? Apart from having a higher cost base, how much have factors like poor fleet choice, Jetstar cannibalising Mainline, poor route structure, lack of investment in product etc etc affected the bottom line?
I notice on your website you promote your products as made by companies which act in a "highly ethical manner". The problem I have with your comments in the Australian article is that they give credibility to the unethical manner in which Qantas is acting. If you genuinely want to try and resolve this situation in the best interests of Australia and Australian employees you should at least be trying to ascertain :
1. If the accounts that Qantas presents to the media are an accurate and fair representation of the state of the company, particularly how costs are apportioned between parts of the group.
2. What alternative solutions may exist to offshoring the company, preferable by consulting in good faith with current employees.
Shouldn't we at least try to explore these things before throwing our hands in the air and moving Qantas to Asia?
Sorry but there are major flaws in Mr Smith's logic here:
I worked as an airline pilot for a major carrier in Asia and was paid way more than my QF colleagues. That carrier was and remains massively profitable, in spite of the 'threat' from dodgy low-cost operators.
Qantas can pay Australian-trained pilots well (using like carriers as a datum) and still reap in millions in profits.
The likes of Air France/KLM and Lufthansa are 'burdened' by far stricter social, pension and other fiscal requirements and obligations to their very well paid pilots than QF and yet still manage to turn good profits and expand - also in the face of competition from the likes of Emirates.
We are witnessing the rapid deconstruction of what was once a national icon. That this deconstruction is totally unneccessary is a disgrace. This relentless push to offshore everything is just a smokescreen for CEO's and Directors to qualify for fatter bonuses and fattened CV's for their move to the next corporate stop. I dont feel at all sorry for Mr Joyce - this current PR hype that "Qantas's mainline international operations in danger" is a transparent comment, trotted-out regularly at EBA time to scare gullible staff-members.
Im sorry Mr Smith but you state that: "At least I am prepared to stand up for Australians, Australian businesses and Australian pilots and engineers". Nice words but sure as hell was not reality in my case. I once worked for Compass Airlines and you didn't do much good for that airline or it's employees. Indeed the actions at CASA then were the reason I ended up at the well-paying foreign airline! Not what you should ever regard as your proudest moment (you will know the tawdry politicians and businesspeople involved behind the real reason Compass was shut down) and completely at odds with your words here today.
People don't fly Qantas because it's cheap they fly it because its safe.
I like the idea of Smiths Peanut Butter and will do anything to avoid the global multi-nationals. However that Peanut Butter is probably not sufficiently different to attract sufficient customers. Qantas is different. It is globally acknowledged as safe and professional. Destroying precious brand-differentiation by foolish offshoring is a complete act of stupidity.
Keep it truly Australian and it can and will prosper. Send it all offshore and it will become just another crappy means of transport.
Sure the Company Directors will get fatter pay checks and share parcels but Australia will lose yet another brand and product. Of all people, the futility such short-term thinking should not be lost on Dick Smith.
I worked as an airline pilot for a major carrier in Asia and was paid way more than my QF colleagues. That carrier was and remains massively profitable, in spite of the 'threat' from dodgy low-cost operators.
Qantas can pay Australian-trained pilots well (using like carriers as a datum) and still reap in millions in profits.
The likes of Air France/KLM and Lufthansa are 'burdened' by far stricter social, pension and other fiscal requirements and obligations to their very well paid pilots than QF and yet still manage to turn good profits and expand - also in the face of competition from the likes of Emirates.
We are witnessing the rapid deconstruction of what was once a national icon. That this deconstruction is totally unneccessary is a disgrace. This relentless push to offshore everything is just a smokescreen for CEO's and Directors to qualify for fatter bonuses and fattened CV's for their move to the next corporate stop. I dont feel at all sorry for Mr Joyce - this current PR hype that "Qantas's mainline international operations in danger" is a transparent comment, trotted-out regularly at EBA time to scare gullible staff-members.
Im sorry Mr Smith but you state that: "At least I am prepared to stand up for Australians, Australian businesses and Australian pilots and engineers". Nice words but sure as hell was not reality in my case. I once worked for Compass Airlines and you didn't do much good for that airline or it's employees. Indeed the actions at CASA then were the reason I ended up at the well-paying foreign airline! Not what you should ever regard as your proudest moment (you will know the tawdry politicians and businesspeople involved behind the real reason Compass was shut down) and completely at odds with your words here today.
People don't fly Qantas because it's cheap they fly it because its safe.
I like the idea of Smiths Peanut Butter and will do anything to avoid the global multi-nationals. However that Peanut Butter is probably not sufficiently different to attract sufficient customers. Qantas is different. It is globally acknowledged as safe and professional. Destroying precious brand-differentiation by foolish offshoring is a complete act of stupidity.
Keep it truly Australian and it can and will prosper. Send it all offshore and it will become just another crappy means of transport.
Sure the Company Directors will get fatter pay checks and share parcels but Australia will lose yet another brand and product. Of all people, the futility such short-term thinking should not be lost on Dick Smith.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like it or not, the "open skies" are here to stay. The ATO's aircraft depreciation policies may be an area of comprimised competitiveness though.
All the engineers I know working over in the sand pit are getting paid quite well and the airlines they work for seem to be growing OK too.
Offshoring is just another way to help the pr1cks running QF line their pockets further.
The success of QF in the future will be what built it. Aussie pilots, Aussie engineers and Aussie cabin crew etc. And an Aussie CEO that has the intestinal fortitude to make the right decisions to get us back to what we once were: A great AUSTRALIAN airline with engaged employees and a focus on safety and service. That's our niche.
All the engineers I know working over in the sand pit are getting paid quite well and the airlines they work for seem to be growing OK too.
Offshoring is just another way to help the pr1cks running QF line their pockets further.
The success of QF in the future will be what built it. Aussie pilots, Aussie engineers and Aussie cabin crew etc. And an Aussie CEO that has the intestinal fortitude to make the right decisions to get us back to what we once were: A great AUSTRALIAN airline with engaged employees and a focus on safety and service. That's our niche.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: australia
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So Dick, based on your logic, lets just pack EVERYTHING up and move it to Asia, then. The whole fricking lot. Not just Qantas - but all those companies (and that is pretty much all of them) who would like to increase their bottom line in the short term without really thinking of the consequences to their country.
Including the products YOU make, because I'm sure that some chinese guys in a sweat shop could produce it cheaper. And thats better for you and the bogan consumers right?
We will move anything that produces, provides, services etc overseas, simply because it is the only way to make them profitable, because the moronic Australian government is too stupid to even attempt to maintain our way of life.
So, now what happens to these businesses, that have been built up over hunderds of years, find that Australians now can't access any of their products or services, because they are ALL OUT OF WORK, and therefore have NO MONEY?
Dick, this isn't brain surgery. In order to have an Australian economy, you must have JOBS. If we decide to outsource ALL OUR JOBS overseas, then we have very little left. Comprehend?
Sorry mate - but on this occasion, you are VERY, VERY WRONG! We need to think of our country, and long term, not just until the next shareholders meeting! This country is RAPIDLY going down the gurgler.
I'm ashamed that you, as a patriotic Aussie, would sell your countrymen out so easily. You should be hanging your head in shame, Dick.
Including the products YOU make, because I'm sure that some chinese guys in a sweat shop could produce it cheaper. And thats better for you and the bogan consumers right?
We will move anything that produces, provides, services etc overseas, simply because it is the only way to make them profitable, because the moronic Australian government is too stupid to even attempt to maintain our way of life.
So, now what happens to these businesses, that have been built up over hunderds of years, find that Australians now can't access any of their products or services, because they are ALL OUT OF WORK, and therefore have NO MONEY?
Dick, this isn't brain surgery. In order to have an Australian economy, you must have JOBS. If we decide to outsource ALL OUR JOBS overseas, then we have very little left. Comprehend?
Sorry mate - but on this occasion, you are VERY, VERY WRONG! We need to think of our country, and long term, not just until the next shareholders meeting! This country is RAPIDLY going down the gurgler.
I'm ashamed that you, as a patriotic Aussie, would sell your countrymen out so easily. You should be hanging your head in shame, Dick.
I'm not to intelligent but Dick if all Australia companies took that attitude it would start a cycle.
1 Off shore everything to third world cheaper countries.
2 Those third world countries lack experience.
3 Employ expat experience to lift there game.
4 Countries wealth goes up so does cost of living.
5. Australians brains leave the country to pursue huge opportunities that are created overseas take there families etc
6. The high income earners who pay the tax are gone
7. Australia slowly becomes a dust bowl with no one left, except for the uneducated and unskilled?
8 No need for the boat people to come any more?
Why not just make a better product?
Works for Air New Zealand they have an open skies no protection. They realized they couldn't compete on price so created a better product.
1 Off shore everything to third world cheaper countries.
2 Those third world countries lack experience.
3 Employ expat experience to lift there game.
4 Countries wealth goes up so does cost of living.
5. Australians brains leave the country to pursue huge opportunities that are created overseas take there families etc
6. The high income earners who pay the tax are gone
7. Australia slowly becomes a dust bowl with no one left, except for the uneducated and unskilled?
8 No need for the boat people to come any more?
Why not just make a better product?
Works for Air New Zealand they have an open skies no protection. They realized they couldn't compete on price so created a better product.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I watched the TV interview – Dick didn't say anything against Qantas staff: he pointed out a few facts of life brought about by Open Skies policy (Howard Government). In fact he said to keep all pilot operations in Australia would probably have very little effect on profits because of the small percentages [of overall cost] involved.
Dick's message: if Qantas competes head-to-head with Asian carriers, but with higher costs, it can't survive long-term. The tone was not anti-Qantas; it was a big-picture view of any business competing in a globalised market.
The question: is the QF Board using globalisation to ensure survival, or are they going way beyond what is necessary in a march towards obscene profit (at the expense of it's loyal staff and the suffering of customers).
Dick's message: if Qantas competes head-to-head with Asian carriers, but with higher costs, it can't survive long-term. The tone was not anti-Qantas; it was a big-picture view of any business competing in a globalised market.
The question: is the QF Board using globalisation to ensure survival, or are they going way beyond what is necessary in a march towards obscene profit (at the expense of it's loyal staff and the suffering of customers).
In the three 100-hourlies I have had done, one in Singapore and two in Dubai, in all cases they have either been Australian or British LAMEs in charge. However, the difference is that there appeared to be only one LAME supervising between five and ten Philippino or Indian workers. On these three occasions the maintenance was superb and I have spoken to lots of people who have had services in these locations and all report that the maintenance is as good as in Australia. Why wouldn’t it be if it is an Australian or British LAME signing off?
Wow! I have now been told on this site by an anonymous poster who is not even game to use his/her own name that I was “out of my depth” as the boss of the Australian regulator when the same poster makes no comment or criticism of the existing Chairman and his experience in aviation.
I am also now being blamed by another anonymous person that I “didn’t do much good" for Compass and was complicit in it being closed down.
The poster makes no comment about the incompetent management by a certain Mr Grey.
The problem I see at the present time is that most business colleagues I know consider that airlines like Emirates and Etihad are just as safe as Qantas and, in fact, claim to me that they have even newer aircraft and because of that they are safer.
Of course it’s never mentioned that their staff overhead costs – as mentioned before – of up to 30% of the operating costs of an airline are far, far less.
Yes, I agree that these airlines pay the pilots and a handful of licensed maintenance engineers really good money. The problem is that just about everyone else is on wages and salaries that would not be legal in Australia.
Jay Arr has said,
The answer is complicated. For a start, if we want to keep a majority of Australians employed by Qantas we will have to somehow convince people to pay more for their airfares with Qantas. I think this could be possible, but very difficult.
Alternatively, Qantas will have to get all its workers working as efficiently as possible using world’s best practice and also move some of their overheads to countries where costs are lower so that Qantas can compete with airlines which most Australians consider to be just as safe.
If neither of these things eventuates, I believe Qantas will follow the famous electronics manufacturer, AWA – i.e. the Qantas brand will completely disappear. This would be a catastrophe and a disaster for Australia in my view.
Not many people, including me, thought that Ansett could close so spectacularly and so quickly. I don’t want that to happen to Qantas. That is why I am speaking up now and stating some of the facts of the situation.
Wow! I have now been told on this site by an anonymous poster who is not even game to use his/her own name that I was “out of my depth” as the boss of the Australian regulator when the same poster makes no comment or criticism of the existing Chairman and his experience in aviation.
I am also now being blamed by another anonymous person that I “didn’t do much good" for Compass and was complicit in it being closed down.
The poster makes no comment about the incompetent management by a certain Mr Grey.
The problem I see at the present time is that most business colleagues I know consider that airlines like Emirates and Etihad are just as safe as Qantas and, in fact, claim to me that they have even newer aircraft and because of that they are safer.
Of course it’s never mentioned that their staff overhead costs – as mentioned before – of up to 30% of the operating costs of an airline are far, far less.
Yes, I agree that these airlines pay the pilots and a handful of licensed maintenance engineers really good money. The problem is that just about everyone else is on wages and salaries that would not be legal in Australia.
Jay Arr has said,
Dick. I'm listening. So what you do think needs to be done, what do we NEED to do?
Alternatively, Qantas will have to get all its workers working as efficiently as possible using world’s best practice and also move some of their overheads to countries where costs are lower so that Qantas can compete with airlines which most Australians consider to be just as safe.
If neither of these things eventuates, I believe Qantas will follow the famous electronics manufacturer, AWA – i.e. the Qantas brand will completely disappear. This would be a catastrophe and a disaster for Australia in my view.
Not many people, including me, thought that Ansett could close so spectacularly and so quickly. I don’t want that to happen to Qantas. That is why I am speaking up now and stating some of the facts of the situation.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the risk of thread drift Mr Smith, I don't know much about the current chairman as he appears not to be in the media pursuing a radical new airspace agenda.
I, like many others, are anonymous because we work in the industry and gain income from it. I know a little of you through the Air Force navigator who helped plan your trip round the world in the 206.
Otherwise it doesn't matter to me commercially if QF stays or goes except they represent legacy investment in aviation training and standards that the low cost models can't afford to pursue and with QFs demise we may say good bye to those standards.
I, like many others, are anonymous because we work in the industry and gain income from it. I know a little of you through the Air Force navigator who helped plan your trip round the world in the 206.
Otherwise it doesn't matter to me commercially if QF stays or goes except they represent legacy investment in aviation training and standards that the low cost models can't afford to pursue and with QFs demise we may say good bye to those standards.
Let's offshore everything to Asia, just like America did in the 90s and 00's.
Now look at America, record profits for businesses, destruction of the middle class and the highest unemployment since the depression.
That's the future for this country if anything resembling a skilled job is offshored to the lowest bidder, the company's do great, record profits for all, bonuses for expert management, the country as a whole suffers when its citizens are left without employment.
Then you've got that people like Rhinehart, who did nothing but was born into riches, she wants to create a SEZ to import workers from india and the phillipines to bypass safeguards in our IR legislation because being the richest in the country JUST ISN'T ENOUGH. That's how smart the smartest people in the country are.
Should we just give up and move to a fairy godmother clean energy job like Gillard promised will happen as we 'transform' our economy. Or do we just turn into unskilled drones clocked by the minute in some mine in QLD or WA making sure we dig the exact amount to cubic meters per hour otherwise profits will be hit and ship it off overseas because we're too stupid in this country to do anything else ?
Think bigger, Dick, Qantas made over a billion but a few years ago, the world hasn't changed that much, my pay packet surely hasn't, but the ones in China have been sky rocketing, reckon it's going to be slave labour forever ?
Big corporation social responsibility includes not disrespecting the country they are based in, founded in, majority customers from etc. I know that doesn't tie up with MBA 'smartest people in the room outsource at all costs I've got KPI's to reach and bonuses that have already been spent on a new Porsche 911'. If it's too expensive and the economy of scale doesn't exist, WHY doesn't it exist ? WHY isn't there a main facility in this country in 1 location thats a hub for maintenance ?
You know whats really funny, Dick, in all my time in the industry being a burden on the likes of yourself, all the the amazing initiatives, the spiv's that come to the company to run courses for the staff, taking days, weeks, months of manpower off the tools, the lean sigmas, everything, I'm still doing my job exactly the same as before. It still takes as long as it takes to change an engine.
The "Economies of Scale" argument is a joke. If the facility has enough aircraft to see the staff working on back to back aircraft, like Qantas does, and the workers do, the economy of scale argument needs to exist because the PRODUCTIVE workers need to support the LAYERS and LAYERS of management and their hangers-on's, the 'workplace initiatives' the 'forums' all staff must attend, AWAY FROM THE JOB.
It also needs to exist so the staff can navigate through the minefield of policies and procedures, 1000's of pages worth, as breaching them can lead to dismissal. And the JUST culture is punitive if you know the P&P exists and didn't follow it to the letter. All created by some genius in an ivory tower.
You think Qantas would be so expensive if I didn't need to sit down for 2 hours trying to work out an expense claim, filling it out, printing off authority notes, photocopying receipts, looking up codes, trying to find my old boarding passes even though THE COMPUTER SYSTEM SAID I TRAVELLED, when the company agreed in writing and agreement to pay it anyway. And will refuse to pay me if the expense claim isn't completed within a specified time frame ? Expenses I had to pay with my own personal credit card on company service for ? Some wasted time right there.
Yet will happily dock a weeks worth of pay without explanation and be lucky if I see that money within the next month when they are found to be in the wrong - and they always are, more wasted time.
Have 500 different applications that all have different passwords and you need to call mumbai to get a reset which doesn't work 1/2 the time and are fun to try and understand. Prove to the Quality guy/CASA that we're authorized to certify a password, book out spare parts another password, look up email another password, log into computer another password, lookup online techlogs another password, book duty travel another password, more wasted time.
Try to find some obscure part in the manuals that 'have been digitized' but were NEVER catagorized, leaving us to trawl through literally thousands of PDF's with a search function that doesn't work
How about burdening the crew leadership with mountains of clerical paperwork instead of leaving him able to perform his duties as a lead hand ? Hand writing timesheets even though the work plan is available ? Performing useless duties that contribute nothing ? more wasted time
A few examples of what we as a whole employee group have to go through on a daily basis, more wasted time.
You reckon its because we're too inefficient and expensive. There's a reason why they say that - and its got nothing to do with actual on the job working.
Of course we just don't compare with the likes of SASCO/SIAEC/HAECO when it comes to not burdening your workers with idiotic policies and procedures. But we more then compare when it comes to actually working on the aircraft. If we're too expensive, don't blame the guy on the floor, he's there day in day out, 4am starts, nightshifts, public holidays, xmas, easter, pissing rain, 50+celcius along with working in confined spaces ie fueltanks, dangerous chemicals, hydraulic fluid that gets everywhere and BURNS. It's funny in a sad way that the aircraft maint engineer profession has been denigrated to 'overpaid mechanics' by the breed of management that has come through int he last 10 years. I'd LOVE to see any of them jump in the fuel tank with me. I'd LOVE it. There is something else at fault here and its not the worker.
Now look at America, record profits for businesses, destruction of the middle class and the highest unemployment since the depression.
That's the future for this country if anything resembling a skilled job is offshored to the lowest bidder, the company's do great, record profits for all, bonuses for expert management, the country as a whole suffers when its citizens are left without employment.
Then you've got that people like Rhinehart, who did nothing but was born into riches, she wants to create a SEZ to import workers from india and the phillipines to bypass safeguards in our IR legislation because being the richest in the country JUST ISN'T ENOUGH. That's how smart the smartest people in the country are.
Should we just give up and move to a fairy godmother clean energy job like Gillard promised will happen as we 'transform' our economy. Or do we just turn into unskilled drones clocked by the minute in some mine in QLD or WA making sure we dig the exact amount to cubic meters per hour otherwise profits will be hit and ship it off overseas because we're too stupid in this country to do anything else ?
Think bigger, Dick, Qantas made over a billion but a few years ago, the world hasn't changed that much, my pay packet surely hasn't, but the ones in China have been sky rocketing, reckon it's going to be slave labour forever ?
Big corporation social responsibility includes not disrespecting the country they are based in, founded in, majority customers from etc. I know that doesn't tie up with MBA 'smartest people in the room outsource at all costs I've got KPI's to reach and bonuses that have already been spent on a new Porsche 911'. If it's too expensive and the economy of scale doesn't exist, WHY doesn't it exist ? WHY isn't there a main facility in this country in 1 location thats a hub for maintenance ?
You know whats really funny, Dick, in all my time in the industry being a burden on the likes of yourself, all the the amazing initiatives, the spiv's that come to the company to run courses for the staff, taking days, weeks, months of manpower off the tools, the lean sigmas, everything, I'm still doing my job exactly the same as before. It still takes as long as it takes to change an engine.
The "Economies of Scale" argument is a joke. If the facility has enough aircraft to see the staff working on back to back aircraft, like Qantas does, and the workers do, the economy of scale argument needs to exist because the PRODUCTIVE workers need to support the LAYERS and LAYERS of management and their hangers-on's, the 'workplace initiatives' the 'forums' all staff must attend, AWAY FROM THE JOB.
It also needs to exist so the staff can navigate through the minefield of policies and procedures, 1000's of pages worth, as breaching them can lead to dismissal. And the JUST culture is punitive if you know the P&P exists and didn't follow it to the letter. All created by some genius in an ivory tower.
You think Qantas would be so expensive if I didn't need to sit down for 2 hours trying to work out an expense claim, filling it out, printing off authority notes, photocopying receipts, looking up codes, trying to find my old boarding passes even though THE COMPUTER SYSTEM SAID I TRAVELLED, when the company agreed in writing and agreement to pay it anyway. And will refuse to pay me if the expense claim isn't completed within a specified time frame ? Expenses I had to pay with my own personal credit card on company service for ? Some wasted time right there.
Yet will happily dock a weeks worth of pay without explanation and be lucky if I see that money within the next month when they are found to be in the wrong - and they always are, more wasted time.
Have 500 different applications that all have different passwords and you need to call mumbai to get a reset which doesn't work 1/2 the time and are fun to try and understand. Prove to the Quality guy/CASA that we're authorized to certify a password, book out spare parts another password, look up email another password, log into computer another password, lookup online techlogs another password, book duty travel another password, more wasted time.
Try to find some obscure part in the manuals that 'have been digitized' but were NEVER catagorized, leaving us to trawl through literally thousands of PDF's with a search function that doesn't work
How about burdening the crew leadership with mountains of clerical paperwork instead of leaving him able to perform his duties as a lead hand ? Hand writing timesheets even though the work plan is available ? Performing useless duties that contribute nothing ? more wasted time
A few examples of what we as a whole employee group have to go through on a daily basis, more wasted time.
You reckon its because we're too inefficient and expensive. There's a reason why they say that - and its got nothing to do with actual on the job working.
Of course we just don't compare with the likes of SASCO/SIAEC/HAECO when it comes to not burdening your workers with idiotic policies and procedures. But we more then compare when it comes to actually working on the aircraft. If we're too expensive, don't blame the guy on the floor, he's there day in day out, 4am starts, nightshifts, public holidays, xmas, easter, pissing rain, 50+celcius along with working in confined spaces ie fueltanks, dangerous chemicals, hydraulic fluid that gets everywhere and BURNS. It's funny in a sad way that the aircraft maint engineer profession has been denigrated to 'overpaid mechanics' by the breed of management that has come through int he last 10 years. I'd LOVE to see any of them jump in the fuel tank with me. I'd LOVE it. There is something else at fault here and its not the worker.