QANTAS - WHERE TO NOW?
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
767's getting a refurb it has been announced. I swear they don't know if they are arthur or martha. I thought they were for the scrap heap. Why refurb something the is meant to be gone by 2016. Not that they don't need it.
Where's EBU these days out of interest?
Disregard following a quick Google search.
Photos: Boeing 747-338 Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net
Disregard following a quick Google search.
Photos: Boeing 747-338 Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net
Last edited by DirectAnywhere; 20th Aug 2012 at 13:26.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far was the 767's refit its making the best of a bad situation until the stolen generation return to domestic ops. OR would you prefer to be rattling around squinting your eyes at the projector screen until 2016?
It would be marvellous for the 787's to come straight to QF ops, many things would be marvellous but the board has made their decision.
It would be marvellous for the 787's to come straight to QF ops, many things would be marvellous but the board has made their decision.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The mood has shifted on bonuses for high-flyers
YOU could never accuse Alan Joyce of having his head in the clouds.
The latest in an ever-lengthening conga line of corporate leaders to resist the temptation for a few extra million dollars in take-home pay, the Qantas boss yesterday declared he, too, would not accept a bonus this year.
A noble gesture, to be sure. But it immediately begged the question: After a year of turmoil at the airline, culminating in an expected loss of more than $200 million, why would he even imagine he was entitled to one?
The Macquarie Dictionary defines bonus as ''something given or paid over and above what is due''.
Corporate Australia, however, views them not as bonuses at all, but as entitlements that should be awarded regardless of performance.
Perhaps it is time the entire bonus system be declared a failure
and replaced by one where executives simply are paid to do their job and suffer the usual consequences for failure. It is clear our corporate leaders sense trouble. After a decade and a half of senior executives demanding and receiving massive pay increases each year, even as shareholders endured massive losses, the mood suddenly has shifted. This year, austerity is in.
Rio Tinto boss Tom Albanese led the charge in February. But it was BHP head Marius Kloppers who set the hounds running earlier this month when he relinquished his right to a bonus after heavy write-downs on BHP's recently acquired American shale gas territories.
Since then, a raft of manufacturers, financiers and funds managers have all donned the hair shirt, desperately hoping that shareholders refrain from voting down their salary packages at the annual meetings scheduled for later this year.
The catalyst for this sudden change of heart was legislative change last year that empowered shareholders to dump a company's directors if they were unhappy with the salaries they were awarding executives.
Under the two strikes rule, if more than 25 per cent of shareholders vote down the executive pay scheme two years running, then the board will automatically
be spilled and new elections must be held.
In the first year of the new world order, 108 listed companies recorded first strikes.
That focused attention on the huge divergence in the way salaries and bonuses are paid, the complexity in the way these schemes are constructed, the manner in which they are awarded and the ease with which the goals and hurdles can be shifted to ensure bonuses are paid.
The Qantas boss is a good case study, although it should be pointed out that his payment scheme is typical of the modern chief executive. Alan Joyce is far from unique.
Just a week ago, Joyce was awarded 583,000 Qantas shares. Given his declaration over the weekend that he wouldn't be taking a bonus, it seemed a little odd until you realise those shares relate to a previous year's bonus.
Despite the loss the airline is about to announce, Joyce could still attract a bonus this year. That is because at Qantas - and many other companies - bonuses are determined both by financial performance and personal goals.
The financial hurdles, such as returns to shareholders, make up 65 per cent of his bonus payment and clearly, this year he will miss out.
But the personal goals, the non-transparent ones, make up 35 per cent of his bonus. Exactly what these mysterious hurdles are is anyone's guess.
If the system worked - and clearly it does not - there would be a good case for including non-financial hurdles into a bonus system. For during a boom, many chief executives pick up massive bonuses for simply being in the right place at the right time.
There is little doubt that executives work harder during tough times when earnings suffer and share prices drop. And it is clear that Joyce has endured a much tougher period at the helm than his predecessors.
Time and again, however, we have witnessed executives happily accepting massive bonuses during boom years and then demanding the hurdles be rearranged during lean years because they had no control over the negative factors that affected share prices.
One of the best examples of this was QR National. When the Queensland government-owned company was floated on the stock exchange two years ago, chief executive Lance Hockridge's salary doubled from an already hefty $800,000 a year to $1.7 million.
On top of that, he was entitled to an extra $1.7 million a year in short-term bonuses. And there was a similar amount on offer in long-term bonuses. And all for doing the same job he'd done as a public servant.
Then, late last year, after the devastating floods that swept Queensland threatened to damage Hockridge's annual pay, the board conveniently shifted the goal posts to ensure he wasn't left out of pocket.
So embarrassed have our banks been in recent years at the exorbitant salaries paid to executives that they have attempted to portray an image of restraint.
The Commonwealth Bank's Ralph Norris famously froze his salary several years ago but managed a huge rise regardless after we learned it was only the base pay that was frozen, not the bonuses.
Westpac's Gail Kelly followed suit, but the following year was awarded a 15 per cent lift in base pay to make up for the previous year.
Those days are drawing to a close. The power is shifting back into the hands of shareholders
Read more: The mood has shifted on bonuses for high-flyers
The latest in an ever-lengthening conga line of corporate leaders to resist the temptation for a few extra million dollars in take-home pay, the Qantas boss yesterday declared he, too, would not accept a bonus this year.
A noble gesture, to be sure. But it immediately begged the question: After a year of turmoil at the airline, culminating in an expected loss of more than $200 million, why would he even imagine he was entitled to one?
The Macquarie Dictionary defines bonus as ''something given or paid over and above what is due''.
Corporate Australia, however, views them not as bonuses at all, but as entitlements that should be awarded regardless of performance.
Perhaps it is time the entire bonus system be declared a failure
and replaced by one where executives simply are paid to do their job and suffer the usual consequences for failure. It is clear our corporate leaders sense trouble. After a decade and a half of senior executives demanding and receiving massive pay increases each year, even as shareholders endured massive losses, the mood suddenly has shifted. This year, austerity is in.
Rio Tinto boss Tom Albanese led the charge in February. But it was BHP head Marius Kloppers who set the hounds running earlier this month when he relinquished his right to a bonus after heavy write-downs on BHP's recently acquired American shale gas territories.
Since then, a raft of manufacturers, financiers and funds managers have all donned the hair shirt, desperately hoping that shareholders refrain from voting down their salary packages at the annual meetings scheduled for later this year.
The catalyst for this sudden change of heart was legislative change last year that empowered shareholders to dump a company's directors if they were unhappy with the salaries they were awarding executives.
Under the two strikes rule, if more than 25 per cent of shareholders vote down the executive pay scheme two years running, then the board will automatically
be spilled and new elections must be held.
In the first year of the new world order, 108 listed companies recorded first strikes.
That focused attention on the huge divergence in the way salaries and bonuses are paid, the complexity in the way these schemes are constructed, the manner in which they are awarded and the ease with which the goals and hurdles can be shifted to ensure bonuses are paid.
The Qantas boss is a good case study, although it should be pointed out that his payment scheme is typical of the modern chief executive. Alan Joyce is far from unique.
Just a week ago, Joyce was awarded 583,000 Qantas shares. Given his declaration over the weekend that he wouldn't be taking a bonus, it seemed a little odd until you realise those shares relate to a previous year's bonus.
Despite the loss the airline is about to announce, Joyce could still attract a bonus this year. That is because at Qantas - and many other companies - bonuses are determined both by financial performance and personal goals.
The financial hurdles, such as returns to shareholders, make up 65 per cent of his bonus payment and clearly, this year he will miss out.
But the personal goals, the non-transparent ones, make up 35 per cent of his bonus. Exactly what these mysterious hurdles are is anyone's guess.
If the system worked - and clearly it does not - there would be a good case for including non-financial hurdles into a bonus system. For during a boom, many chief executives pick up massive bonuses for simply being in the right place at the right time.
There is little doubt that executives work harder during tough times when earnings suffer and share prices drop. And it is clear that Joyce has endured a much tougher period at the helm than his predecessors.
Time and again, however, we have witnessed executives happily accepting massive bonuses during boom years and then demanding the hurdles be rearranged during lean years because they had no control over the negative factors that affected share prices.
One of the best examples of this was QR National. When the Queensland government-owned company was floated on the stock exchange two years ago, chief executive Lance Hockridge's salary doubled from an already hefty $800,000 a year to $1.7 million.
On top of that, he was entitled to an extra $1.7 million a year in short-term bonuses. And there was a similar amount on offer in long-term bonuses. And all for doing the same job he'd done as a public servant.
Then, late last year, after the devastating floods that swept Queensland threatened to damage Hockridge's annual pay, the board conveniently shifted the goal posts to ensure he wasn't left out of pocket.
So embarrassed have our banks been in recent years at the exorbitant salaries paid to executives that they have attempted to portray an image of restraint.
The Commonwealth Bank's Ralph Norris famously froze his salary several years ago but managed a huge rise regardless after we learned it was only the base pay that was frozen, not the bonuses.
Westpac's Gail Kelly followed suit, but the following year was awarded a 15 per cent lift in base pay to make up for the previous year.
Those days are drawing to a close. The power is shifting back into the hands of shareholders
Read more: The mood has shifted on bonuses for high-flyers
.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sunny side up
Posts: 1,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps it is time the entire bonus system be declared a failure
In the short term (ie that manager's tenure
) the 'effiencies' are maintained which makes the bottom line look groovy, but in the long term the business suffers because the bonus system doesn't take into account the fact that sometimes a company needs to spend money on boring things like staff and maintenance. The business ends up being held together with string, duct tape and a skeleton staff, and the manager collects their bonus and buggers off to their next victim (sorry, 'future challenge'
) before the string and duct tape give out. Then it falters and the management blame everyone but themselves (their horrid bolshy staff, internet sales, foreign competition, lack of government support, aliens). It couldn't be their fault because after all, they were efficient.
Last edited by Worrals in the wilds; 20th Aug 2012 at 21:56.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the previous management did the real damage.
Just out of curiosity, can someone shed some light on the book - "The men who killed Qantas" - Who does the author single out and why?
Just out of curiosity, can someone shed some light on the book - "The men who killed Qantas" - Who does the author single out and why?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EBU?
Where's EBU these days out of interest?
No future apart from that.
Should have been flown to the Arizona desert while they had the chance, but once again, the task was bungled by management.
Yeah, I managed to find a photo dated February this year. I was wondering if she's still there.
Surely they can't be planning to leave her there until she just rusts away? There must be plans to cut her up or do something with her. Terribly sad. I flew her shortly before she ended up down there. An undignified end for a grand old aircraft.
Surely they can't be planning to leave her there until she just rusts away? There must be plans to cut her up or do something with her. Terribly sad. I flew her shortly before she ended up down there. An undignified end for a grand old aircraft.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Joyces' pay rise and bonus foregone..? Not on your life.
Alan Joyce has already pocketed a 71% rise in base pay and bonuses from last year, and statements from him with regard to "forgoing a pay rise and bonus" relates to THIS year.
Having helped themselves to hefty pay rises, this board can easily afford to make "sacrifices" this year as any such extra payment may alienate the institutional investors that currently support them.
It is outrageous that they think this action should be seen as them doing their part and show the way down the austerity pathway.
It would have been better to hand back the previous pay rise and bonuses as these were based on poor KPI's and poor past performance. THAT would have shown the measure of the man to acknowledge that they did not do well at all and did not earn their money.
Not going to happen. THEY know how to run the company.
Having helped themselves to hefty pay rises, this board can easily afford to make "sacrifices" this year as any such extra payment may alienate the institutional investors that currently support them.
It is outrageous that they think this action should be seen as them doing their part and show the way down the austerity pathway.
It would have been better to hand back the previous pay rise and bonuses as these were based on poor KPI's and poor past performance. THAT would have shown the measure of the man to acknowledge that they did not do well at all and did not earn their money.
Not going to happen. THEY know how to run the company.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EBU?
Surely they can't be planning to leave her there until she just rusts away? There must be plans to cut her up or do something with her. Terribly sad. I flew her shortly before she ended up down there. An undignified end for a grand old aircraft.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: goulburn
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is obscene that there is any inference that the bonus has been foregone because that implies there was an entitlement to them.
The results will show whether that is fact or a misrepresentation.
If the hurdles were not achieved (and how could they possibly be with the indicated results) someone should slam this lot once and for all.
The results will show whether that is fact or a misrepresentation.
If the hurdles were not achieved (and how could they possibly be with the indicated results) someone should slam this lot once and for all.
But the personal goals, the non-transparent ones, make up 35 per cent of his bonus. Exactly what these mysterious hurdles are is anyone's guess.
Let's not forget that Joyce was awarded $600,000 worth of shares 2 months after the grounding for "meeting performance hurdles" They even paid too much for the shares! Muppets!
They even paid too much for the shares! Muppets!
QANTAS chief executive Alan Joyce has finished his year on a high note, being granted nearly $600,000 of the airline's shares yesterday.
Two months after Mr Joyce grounded the airline, stranding 70,000 people worldwide for days, the Qantas board awarded him 375,014 shares bought for him by the company's share plan trustee at $1.58 each, the result of Mr Joyce meeting performance targets.
Read more: Qantas chief reaps $600,000 share bonus
Two months after Mr Joyce grounded the airline, stranding 70,000 people worldwide for days, the Qantas board awarded him 375,014 shares bought for him by the company's share plan trustee at $1.58 each, the result of Mr Joyce meeting performance targets.
Read more: Qantas chief reaps $600,000 share bonus
Last edited by The The; 21st Aug 2012 at 05:00.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas works soft news as Thursday’s hard landing looms
Qantas works soft news as Thursday’s hard landing looms
Qantas works soft news as Thursday's hard landing looms | Plane Talking
This commentary appeared in the Crikey Daily Mail today
Qantas appears to be preceding Thursday’s announcement of a much flagged ‘real money’ statutory loss for the financial year to June 30 with text book media manipulation diversionary stories.
Since Monday these have included:
The Joyce strategy, of not investing in Qantas long haul until it becomes sustainably profitable in two to four years times, comes when its international competitors, and those damned Virgins, are growing at around 5-6% per annum, meaning that if the flying kangaroo roo isn’t getting new stuff in that period of time, its enemies will be maybe 25% bigger, and have taken away market share Qantas might never recover.
The rumors about an Emirates rescue plan for Qantas have reached the point where the UAE giant has taken control of the agenda, tersely noting that it is only interested in doing code shares, setting a six month, now five month, deadline for the Australian carrier to get over it and do the deal.
Considering the time ACCC approvals and the political discussion may take, that’s a very tight deadline. Uncontroversial code share or alliance deals typically take longer than six months for regulatory approval. The tick is clocking.
As it is for the Jetstar Hong Kong venture, and as it no longer does for the much hyped but discontinued attempt to base a premium single aisle carrier in Kuala Lumpur, a city to which Qantas doesn’t fly, if we don’t count Jetstar Asia, which is emphatically not premium anything.
But, can Joyce bring better news on Thursday? This remains possible. The recent Qantas decision to pull three Jetstar flights off the Gold Coast route, and add three full service Qantas 737 services after it abandoned the routes four years ago has been grasped as evidence that the airline has realized that the patience of its core customers, higher fare paying business and discretionary travellers, has run out when it comes to Jetstar, and run away to Virgin.
The underlying theme of Qantas statements of guidance in recent times has been consolidation, not expansion, which may be ill timed given the massive expansion of its competitors, but may also be prudent given the broad scale economic uncertainties.
That is a difficult proposition to juggle. Its most profitable activity, selling frequent flyer points to third parties, ultimately depends on being a large and highly rated brand, not a smaller brand diluted by a two brand strategy.
Joyce stands to gain investor support in delivering the already promised increased transparency to the Qantas financials on Thursday from its earlier decision to divide the domestic and international divisions into business units with their own CEOs and managements. It really depends what costs get allocated to which division, and how they are related to the loyalty program.
Does Qantas have any more capital cost increases, or decreases. Will there be more new jets than previously announced, or fewer?
If there are any more feel good stunts between now and Thursday morning the news is likely to be worse not better all around.
Qantas works soft news as Thursday's hard landing looms | Plane Talking
This commentary appeared in the Crikey Daily Mail today
Qantas appears to be preceding Thursday’s announcement of a much flagged ‘real money’ statutory loss for the financial year to June 30 with text book media manipulation diversionary stories.
Since Monday these have included:
- Lingerie model Miranda Kerr becoming the face of a yet to be reannounced relaunching of the Qantas Club loyalty program. Tick young male executives
- The refurbishing of 16 aged 767s that were supposed to be retired by delayed Dreamliners by 2010, which will turn up from late next year but go to Jetstar instead. Tick adult executives tempted by Virgin’s new leather sets, in Virgin’s new jets
- Free wi-fi in major domestic terminals. Tick nerds and unaccompanied minors
- CEO Alan Joyce opts out of bonuses dropping pay from $5 million to an estimated $2.3 million. Tick angry shareholders
- Qantas pilots being stood down for arguing about takeoff calculations at Dallas Fort Worth as a thunderstorm approached. Spot the story that undermines costly legacy pilots before new route cuts to Qantas long haul are announced at the financial results conference.
The Joyce strategy, of not investing in Qantas long haul until it becomes sustainably profitable in two to four years times, comes when its international competitors, and those damned Virgins, are growing at around 5-6% per annum, meaning that if the flying kangaroo roo isn’t getting new stuff in that period of time, its enemies will be maybe 25% bigger, and have taken away market share Qantas might never recover.
The rumors about an Emirates rescue plan for Qantas have reached the point where the UAE giant has taken control of the agenda, tersely noting that it is only interested in doing code shares, setting a six month, now five month, deadline for the Australian carrier to get over it and do the deal.
Considering the time ACCC approvals and the political discussion may take, that’s a very tight deadline. Uncontroversial code share or alliance deals typically take longer than six months for regulatory approval. The tick is clocking.
As it is for the Jetstar Hong Kong venture, and as it no longer does for the much hyped but discontinued attempt to base a premium single aisle carrier in Kuala Lumpur, a city to which Qantas doesn’t fly, if we don’t count Jetstar Asia, which is emphatically not premium anything.
But, can Joyce bring better news on Thursday? This remains possible. The recent Qantas decision to pull three Jetstar flights off the Gold Coast route, and add three full service Qantas 737 services after it abandoned the routes four years ago has been grasped as evidence that the airline has realized that the patience of its core customers, higher fare paying business and discretionary travellers, has run out when it comes to Jetstar, and run away to Virgin.
The underlying theme of Qantas statements of guidance in recent times has been consolidation, not expansion, which may be ill timed given the massive expansion of its competitors, but may also be prudent given the broad scale economic uncertainties.
That is a difficult proposition to juggle. Its most profitable activity, selling frequent flyer points to third parties, ultimately depends on being a large and highly rated brand, not a smaller brand diluted by a two brand strategy.
Joyce stands to gain investor support in delivering the already promised increased transparency to the Qantas financials on Thursday from its earlier decision to divide the domestic and international divisions into business units with their own CEOs and managements. It really depends what costs get allocated to which division, and how they are related to the loyalty program.
Does Qantas have any more capital cost increases, or decreases. Will there be more new jets than previously announced, or fewer?
If there are any more feel good stunts between now and Thursday morning the news is likely to be worse not better all around.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have heard the Boston Consulting Company (BCG) have been given the flick in favour of Bain in Co.
I wonder how much has/is being spent on MGMT Consulting? Would be a good question for the shareholder meeting on Thurs.
Surely with the salaries being paid, management should be able to "strategize" in house.
Im sick of people inventing ways to avoid personal accountability.
I wonder how much has/is being spent on MGMT Consulting? Would be a good question for the shareholder meeting on Thurs.
Surely with the salaries being paid, management should be able to "strategize" in house.
Im sick of people inventing ways to avoid personal accountability.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 74
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wasn't it Jimmy Bow Tie who signed up Boston Consulting for a 15 year contract which has only just lapsed to be replaced by Bain & Co.
How many ex Bain & Co people on the Board?
How much exactly has Qantas paid out to Boston consulting over the years? The figure I heard was $1.5 Billion. Could that be correct???
Now that Bain & Co rule the roost could this account for Boston Bruce's departure?
How many ex Bain & Co people on the Board?
How much exactly has Qantas paid out to Boston consulting over the years? The figure I heard was $1.5 Billion. Could that be correct???
Now that Bain & Co rule the roost could this account for Boston Bruce's departure?
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1.5 Billion - No Way
I would think somewhere between $5-$15 million but I'm only guessing.
In any case - I dont think they got their monies worth
$1.5 Billion has been shaved off the shareprice though and the rest
I would think somewhere between $5-$15 million but I'm only guessing.
In any case - I dont think they got their monies worth
$1.5 Billion has been shaved off the shareprice though and the rest
Last edited by crystalballwannabe; 21st Aug 2012 at 09:08.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And the best bit is that in consulting world you get free kicks for 12 months to start all over again and contradict everything that has already been said to justify the fee.
Maybe someone should ask what management are doing while this fiasco goes on.
Maybe someone should ask what management are doing while this fiasco goes on.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 57
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by crystalball
I would think somewhere between $5-$15 million but I'm only guessing.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
when you look at the comparisions< Joyce is doing OK
Joyce does it tough
QANTAS chief executive Alan Joyce seems to have a more Samaritan spirit than some of his counterparts throughout the Asian region. On Monday, Qantas said Joyce - who has overseen a slump in his airline's share price to its recent all-time low and tomorrow is expected to report the airline's first full-year loss since its listing - will forgo his annual bonus.
That means Joyce will have to make do with an estimated $2.3 million in fixed remuneration for the 2012 financial year.
But some Asian airline bosses have not been so restrained. Take the chief executive of Singapore Airlines, Goh Choon Phong, who was paid a bonus in the year to March 31 when his airline reported a $S1.13 billion ($862 million) profit.
Singapore Airlines disclosed its chief executive was paid a $S732,976 bonus, taking his total short-term pay to $S1.74 million. He received another 95,000 restricted stock and performance options, worth about $S1 million.
That means Goh - with his short-term and long-term incentives - earned about the same as Joyce in the 2012 financial year. But only if he ultimately hits his performance targets on his options. How greedy for the chief executive of an airline that not only reported a profit but is worth more than three times Qantas on the sharemarket.
Cathay Pacific chief executive John Slosar had the temerity to bag $HK11.82 million ($1.45 million) in total remuneration despite the airline in its latest set of full-year accounts reporting a measly $670 million in profits. His remuneration included about $495,000 in base pay and a $360,000 bonus. Cathay is worth more than double Qantas on the sharemarket.
Read more: Mirvac chief not keen on addition
QANTAS chief executive Alan Joyce seems to have a more Samaritan spirit than some of his counterparts throughout the Asian region. On Monday, Qantas said Joyce - who has overseen a slump in his airline's share price to its recent all-time low and tomorrow is expected to report the airline's first full-year loss since its listing - will forgo his annual bonus.
That means Joyce will have to make do with an estimated $2.3 million in fixed remuneration for the 2012 financial year.
But some Asian airline bosses have not been so restrained. Take the chief executive of Singapore Airlines, Goh Choon Phong, who was paid a bonus in the year to March 31 when his airline reported a $S1.13 billion ($862 million) profit.
Singapore Airlines disclosed its chief executive was paid a $S732,976 bonus, taking his total short-term pay to $S1.74 million. He received another 95,000 restricted stock and performance options, worth about $S1 million.
That means Goh - with his short-term and long-term incentives - earned about the same as Joyce in the 2012 financial year. But only if he ultimately hits his performance targets on his options. How greedy for the chief executive of an airline that not only reported a profit but is worth more than three times Qantas on the sharemarket.
Cathay Pacific chief executive John Slosar had the temerity to bag $HK11.82 million ($1.45 million) in total remuneration despite the airline in its latest set of full-year accounts reporting a measly $670 million in profits. His remuneration included about $495,000 in base pay and a $360,000 bonus. Cathay is worth more than double Qantas on the sharemarket.
Read more: Mirvac chief not keen on addition