Aviation Survey results

[hiwaytohell]

Agree Worrals...

Fed Sec, I have no issue with your cause, but I feel your approach is one of self harm and harm to to the industry in general. (If I did not feel so passionately I would certainly not be sticking my neck out on Pprune to have a go at you).

There is nothing good that could possibly come from yesterday's article in the AFR or more acurately the comments attributed to yourself. Putting out material that (in my view unfairly) denegrates our industry or certain employee groups within our industry only adds more fuel to the fire the likes of Clifford and Joyce are tending.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

I do disagree but that is ok, we all think differently.

I think massive damage is being done to Qantas now by a board who appear to know nothing about our industry. Wrong aircraft, wrong routes, wrong configurations, stupid ads, staff treated badly and still they think themselves worthy of massive wage hikes.

The survey results seem to indicate that the majority of employees agree with the above sentiments.

[blackhand]

@steve
Well mate it's their train set after all, we just get to keep it on the tracks.
Thats an analogy by the way.

Cheers
BH

[rodchucker]

Whilst Exec and Board have the right to decide what happens, in this case their actions are being justified by explanations that seem to be at odds with the facts and other informed opinions.

IMHO the publishing of the survey results put balance back into the public debate on what is happening and to the story that is being spun by QF. This does not change the power balance but may influence the ongoing debate on air safety and commercial decisions being made.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

but I feel your approach is one of self harm and harm to to the industry in general

.....and you would handle it how?

[hiwaytohell]

I'm pleased you asked Gordon.

To start with I would not get into the gutter as has been a lot of the union debate. Look I know both Clifford and Joyce and agree with probably 100% of the comment about Clifford. I am not so hard on Joyce though. He is kid with a big job, a pile of crap and he is out of his depth. Add to this competitors that stole his play lunch a long time ago.

In my past life I was part of EBA negotiations on both sides of the table. The AFAP guys back then achieved brilliant results, in some tough circumstances, but they were able to deliver outcomes that added value for those airlines.

Considering I have poked Steve in the nose here let me use an engineering example. Category A licences!. The ALAEA has totally smacked these down. The FedSec has been highly vocal denigrating the Cat A licence as unsafe and a threat to air safety (SMH Dec last year)... yet nothing could be further from the truth.

Currently a lot of tasks are performed by AMEs and signed off by a LAME... in many cases the LAME does not physically check the work, nor isthere any requirement for the the AME to be formally assessed as competent to undertake that task, and may have only learnt it on the job.

However what the Cat A licence does is to permit engineers, that have been trained and assessed as competent to carry out and certify a given task. However this guy is now accountable for that task, something an AME is not!.

This system is the future, and has been successful in Europe for many years (try and tell me Lufthansa do not know how to maintain aircraft).

But rather than embrace this system, open up new career opportunities for guys who might otherwise have been stuck as AMEs, provide over time a more efficient and competitive cost structure (because the alternative is more offshoring if the total cost structure does not evolve). This could even open up a whole new cadre of members for the ALAEA!!!

There is no downside here. AMEs are replaced with Cat A, they have greater accountability and better career prospects. The airlines improve their efficience and gain some cost savings. There will be little change in numbers to LAMEs, or B1 & B2s, that would not have been lost otherwise due to technology changes or competitive pressures.

Now what about Cat C??? It is in the too hard basket for CASA. But really it is an opportunity for the ALAEA!

We all need to evolve. I lived through several airline closures including Ansett and East West. They are not fun. Don't think it can't happen to Qantas.

With the current guys at the top, I agree they know bugger all about aviation, but we are not going to fix the problem bashing them up everyday in the media. This survey in the eyes of the people who put it together says one thing, but in the eyes of the public says something completely different, and not something helpful.

We have got to become part of the solution. Because if we don't the alternative is the way of the dinosaur. Get stuck in lead the change that way at least you can dictate some of the terms.

The other thing is we need to keep attracting quality talent to our industry. In the last decade Geoff Dixon did a great job of scaring people away. In the last year it has been the unions.

Now to take on the Qantas shareholders. The staff organisations need to have a 4 point strategy of how to revive the airlines fortunes... it matters not that staff are not empowered to carry this out, but you need to have the ideas. That way the shareholders will listen, and maybe even hear the message.

The solution is articulating "what we want to do to revive our favourite roo", and getting the shareholders pay attention. Right now they see the labour groups as the problem ...the union leaders have a great opportunity to cut out the nonsense and be seen as the solution.

[ampclamp]

Mods may I suggest getting back to the topic at hand please?

[V-Jet]

This is beyond mere LAME/Crew debate. This is, as FedSec implies, about _general_ incompetence. There is nothing these management guys have done that is anything close to successful, what I see AFS (Steve) doing is 'super' unionism. He is not merely (as the witch and woofter would have people believe) asking for money, he is way above that. He sees major issues with the way the airline is run. FWIW I agree with him 100%.

I am a very right wing guy, yet in this case I see huge merit in what Steve is doing. Having run (small) companies I search for and treasure the rare people who look at their careers the way Steve does. He is so competent and confident in what he does that not only does he require the same from his employers but if they start (and let's face it, they are way beyond starting) to fail in their roles then he is prepared to seriously question them.

This is the role of board members, NOT union presidents. What I see as totally disgusting is that the very people who should be welcoming Steve's input are actively pillorying him in the press and everywhere else they can.

If more people had the ability and credibility at the pointy end of Qantas, then Qantas would be in a far better position than they are. Unfortunately the coterie of yes men surrounding the CEO and board are so incompetent they are totally threatened by competence and are acting out of fear and nothing else.

The survey may not achieve anything. But by god it is a sensational idea and I support that type of 'out of the box' thinking as much as I can. It is attempting to 'rate' management - who (lets not forget) spend their time working out how to 'rate' (and therefore screw) talented staff. It is a credit to Steve that he has come up with something like this to support the fact that it is the idiots in charge that are ruining the place and not the highly talented, hard working and seriously devoted believers who do the actual 'work' in their respective companies (especially Qantas) that are doing their utmost to have a job they are proud of for the next 20-30+ years.

[ejectx3]

Hear hear.

[hiwaytohell]

Ohhh please!!!

Whilst we can all agree on the fact that Clifford and Joyce are on the wrong path.... it is ultimately the shareholders who put them there.

I cannot accept the crap the unions have been pushing for the last couple of years is in anyway helpful to providing a solution.

Beating up our industry like was done in the AFR this week is bordering on criminal and denigrates our industry and the standing of the key professions in the eyes of the public. And for what purpose????.

Until we get the respect of the shareholders you cannot expect change. And to get the respect you need to be part of the solution... the survey does nothing to advance aviation in Australia, and it does nothing to find a solution to the union grievances with Qantas. It merely scores cheap points that pull everybody down further. AND further alienates the real holders of power... you don't get results this way.

[V-Jet]

In part true, but shareholders are simply not qualified to rate failed management - especially in something as technical as airlines, until it is too late. Except in extremely rare cases (takeovers for example) they react TO information, they do not create it. The 'job' of the shareholder (if you will) is to arm him/herself with 'better' information than the next one so as to be able to make a more 'informed' decision about the stock. Thus shareholders tend to behave like sheep on certain announcements - otherwise there would be no 'busts' like Enron, Lehmans etc. Ratings agencies too, are profiting from their analytical ability to 'see through' management spin in order to better advise the market.

What QF unions are attempting to do, any way they can, is in an adult manner (without shutting down the airline or involving death threats) is to make the point that there are major impediments to them completing their jobs to the best of their abilities. In otherwords, I guess, trying to get accurate information out to the shareholder so something is done before (as someone said) there is a smoking hole in the ground - and hopefully any smoking hole is _just_ the shareprice...

I get the feeling the media are starting to understand just how bad Qf management are. Traditional and childish techniques like simple strike action will in the long run achieve only negative results. The type of thinking that came up with the survey idea is what is required. Will it change anything of itself? Probably not, but it is different, clever and worthy of support. I found it a lot more interesting to read than vague whispers about possible FWA determinations anyway!

[hiwaytohell]

I agree that, shareholders may not be qualified to rate failed management or probably as more often the case not empowered to!

I have a lot of friends who have very successful businesses, some large, some small. One of the things that unite us is aircraft. So of course we take a very active interest in anything published in the media about aviation in general including Qantas.

Most are sympathetic to the issue of offshoring, however they all realise unless we evolve we face extinction so rather than sympathise with the very genuine concerns of staff & labour groups they cannot see past the fog of the union campaign. They don't blame the Board, the CEO or even the shareholders.

They blame an unworkable and totally inflexible industrial landscape (which is mostly not the case).

With the unions focusing on issues that dictate they way the busness can or cannot be run further alienates public support.

A good example was the union demand to build a new A380 hangar! "Ridiculous with such a small fleet and a hostile inflexible industrial environment"... whereas it could have been led with; "How about we create a new business model that maximises Hangar 3 in Brisbane, but we will take responsibility for the effective control of the operation of that model. It will operate with word's best practice and when benchmarked performance targets are exceeded the benefit will be split 50:50 between staff and the company"

If you want a say in the corporate governance buy shares and get shareholder representation. At current share prices and the combination the staff numbers this is possible.

The next thing to get the public on side is to stop bagging the airline! My neighbour is a school teacher and a couple of weeks ago was ready to cancel his holiday, because he had formed the view that Qantas was not safe because of all the things going on with the unions. Well if people lose trust and stop flying then we all lose!

And the big one! Be the solution not the problem.
1) Identify the end game and prioritise what success really looks like
2) Identify and qualify all available resources
3) Look at the internal environment from the outside
4) Look at the external environment, technology changes, regulatory changes, competition, peers, benchmarks
5) Game plame the strategy... but you can only work with what is on the table. For example if the airline is not profitable options narrow. Changing CEO is not your decision, so deal with it.
6) Ensure no stakeholder is worse off.
7) Enact the solution.... otherwise accept the solution you are given.

Steve Purvinas has created an enormous public profile, but with that comes enormous responsibility. A responsibility to not just the issue of the day, or the hostility towards the CEO, but also a responsibility to the industry and paying it forward. He now also needs to be far more open and honest, with none of the exageration than he could have gotten away with in the past.

What worked in the past will not work today. The world has turned and the public don't really care because they now expect the $49 seat on Jetstar.

As for the survey I showed it to several businessmen friends and their view was "how can Qantas survive with such an outdated industrial climate. The staff earn more than everyone else and they are still not happy. I can see why they are sending their aircraft to China".... yes we all know the survey says nothing like this. But the public are no experts other than what's in it for them... the cheapest ticket!

[Sunfish]

Hiwayto hell, with respect, you don't understand a thing and your ego is getting in your way:

Ohhh please!!!

Whilst we can all agree on the fact that Clifford and Joyce are on the wrong path.... it is ultimately the shareholders who put them there.

I cannot accept the crap the unions have been pushing for the last couple of years is in anyway helpful to providing a solution.

Beating up our industry like was done in the AFR this week is bordering on criminal and denigrates our industry and the standing of the key professions in the eyes of the public. And for what purpose????.

Until we get the respect of the shareholders you cannot expect change. And to get the respect you need to be part of the solution... the survey does nothing to advance aviation in Australia, and it does nothing to find a solution to the union grievances with Qantas. It merely scores cheap points that pull everybody down further. AND further alienates the real holders of power... you don't get results this way.

Before getting down to brass tacks, I observe that it was not ALL the shareholders who put the board in place, it was a very select few of the largest shareholders all of whom hide behind the cloak of anonymity via nominee companies. Your implied suggestion that the election of the board is a democratic process is totally misguided, likewise the idea that the staff should grin and bear it because the shareholders have spoken.

The further implication - that the interests of those shareholders is exactly the same as the mum and dad investor is also totally false - look no further than the machinations surrounding the APA bid and the continued flirtation of the likes of Dixon, Singleton and others with a takeover bid. It's all perfectly legal of course.

The continued comments by Qantas staff about the possible misallocation of costs within the airline - if true, might also suggest that there is a "story" being pushed in support of god knows what agenda. Likewise the unbelievable actions of management - RedQ, grounding the airline, etc. its almost as if management WANTS the airline to be unprofitable. Furthermore, unions have made many suggestions and offers of ways to cut costs and improve revenues to management - all of which have been rejected out of hand.

Having said that, we get to the core of your personal problem - ego. You have fallen for the "professionalism" mumbo jumbo. Its common knowledge that pilots have a strong ego, like surgeons and barristers. You cannot, nor would want, to do the job without it. However that makes pilots as a group very, very vulnerable to flattery and appeals to your sense of "professionalism", same with engineers to a slightly less extent, I think.

This trap has been exploited for years by Qantas IR, they praise you for being "professional" when you cop it up the backside and call you "unprofessional" and accuse you of "denigrating the industry", "being ungentlemanly" and suchlike when you object. The management of the pilots unions spout the same rubbish to the membership and until Steve Purvinas took over, the same junk was force fed to Engineers.

The truth, mate, is that in wage and condition negotiations you need to believe you are dealing with rabid salivating narcissists who would snatch a crust of bread from your childrens hands if they thought there was money in it.

Don't fall for the mistake of thinking those guys in suits with private school accents and nice manners are not sharks. They are. They will slaughter you in a heartbeat if there is money in it for them.

Steve Purvinas is on the right track. Play hard and go for the jugular because your opponent is doing the same, even as he asks you to "be professional" while he aims a kick at your balls.

To put that another way; Qantas showed its true colors when it grounded the airline. Fcuk the customers, fcuk the staff, this is about my bonus.

The only way you can get respect from management and the board is to threaten their bonuses by exposing their stupidity, meanness and short sightedness..

As for "respect" from the general community, I prefer money in my pocket.

[hiwaytohell]

Sorry Sunfish I understand far more than you realise.

The current path has not been working, is still not working, nor will it work in the future. It has not worked anywhere in the world.

I think Einstein surmised something about the definition of insanity as doing the same thing over but expecting a different result.

I don't for a moment disagree regarding the consensus re Clifford, Joyce, Dixon et al. What I disagree with is the approach.

I have first hand experience in some pretty nasty business with Qantas (more so in the Dixon era) so I do understand their modus operandi well.

I have also a lot of experience in EBA and AWA negotiations so I understand the process... I have also been through the flak from a number of failures including East West closure and Ansett.

The ways unions worked in the past does not wash today. And anyone who thinks it does is a dinosaur.

Back to the point of this thread, the survey... interesting read, but what does it say? Give Scott McMillan the top job at Qantas???... he's one smart cookie and might save the airline. But pay, conditions, contract terms will still continue to reform and not in a good way for staff.

My issues though are about bashing the industry in the media, creating a (false) impression one or more of our airlines are unsafe or unreliable... these only damage our industry and everybody loses.

The tack the various Qantas unions have been taking has not, is not, nor will work in the future to achieve the outcomes sought (maybe nothing will), what this says is that it is time for a change of approach.

You say "The only way you can get respect from management and the board is to threaten their bonuses by exposing their stupidity, meanness and short sightedness".... crap! You will get far more respect fixing the problem! Or at least being a part of the solution, and you are then in a lot stronger position to negotiate your pay cheque.

Let me look into my mirrored Ray Bans: May 2013 - Qantas announces it is investing in a new full service airline called Red Falcon based at Jebel Ali (JXB) this new airline will be a 50:50 joint venture with Emirates, the world's largest airline. December 2014 - (just in time for christmas) Qantas announces the cessation of all international services effective 31 December. The A380s are transferred to Red Falcon, television crews marvel as technicians apply decals in only 15 minutes to tranform the famous flying kangaroo into a majestic soaring falcon. The 787s that are not already with Jetstar will be transferred to service Jetstar's growing network to Singapore, Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta, Bangkok, Beijing, Hong Kong, Tokyo, Manilla, Los Angeles etc etc etc. A380 type rated pilots are invited to apply for fixed term contracts with Red Falcon based in SYD, MEL, BNE, PER etc. 10,500 positions made redundant. The Australian manager for Dnata says they will view favourably applications from former Qantas staff for contract ground handling positions. Air New Zealand Engineering Services successfully bids for all remaining domestic Qantas heavy maintenance and agrees to buy Hangar 3 in Brisbane for $85M and secures a deal with the Australian Government to bring in 300 guest workers from Asia on 457 visas due to skills shortages. Jetstar signs a further 20 year maintenance contract with Lufhansa Technic Philippines, and Red Falcon's A380s are maintained by Pakistani or Philippina guest workers at JXB. August 2015 - Leigh Clifford steps down as Chairman of the Qantas Board praising his successor Alan Joyce, saying "Alan has led Qantas through the most successful advances in the history of civil aviation".

Then again Sunfish you might be right I don't understand a thing.

[Jethro Gibbs]

Simple fact here is the employees the alaea and any other unions have no say or influence whatsoever in Qantas employees are just passengers on a ride till your pushed out the door.

[Sunfish]

Highwaytohell, with respect you may be right.

There may also be no solution and the Board and management will destroy the airline.

However I cannot overemphasize that the narcissists running the company cannot and will not listen to reason especially if you identify a problem before they do and, worse still, propose a solution. They hate that intensly.

I have seen a perfectly good female chief of staff fired for having the temerity to identify and correct a Directors mistake and the same thing happened to me many years ago. They will not listen to reason. They must be seen to be in command. Any suggestion they are in error, in any way at all, drives them into a foaming rage. I've seen that too.

The only thing that will stop a narcissist in their tracks is fear of exposure as incompetent in the face of overwhelming pressure and open revolt. Even then you need to put a metaphorical stake through their heart or they will try and rise again - that is what you are seeing one K. Rudd engaged in at present.

You are right, the union tactics may denigrate the industry, but the only way you will possibly get change is through industrial pressure of the most compelling kind.

Look at it another way. With the current Board and Management you are done for anyway and have nothing to look forward to except endless cost cutting until one day they come for you.

Either the company goes broke and you are done for, or the company is doing so badly that the Government rescinds the Qantas Sale Act after blackmail over the remaining jobs. Then you get exposed to the tender ministrations of perhaps Packer, Dixon, et al. which is not going to be fun either.

Bear in mind that the head of Ryanair detests pilots and calls them "cloud bunnies" do you actualy think the Board and management of Qantas have any respect for you at all? Of course not! The evidence is overwhelming in the form of the deliberately cruel methods they use to downsize and outsource.

However its your choice and I wouldn't for a minute like to be in your position.

Rock, hardplace. The flogging will continue until morale improves.

[hiwaytohell]

OK... so when we boil it all down we only disagree on the tactics!

Even blind freddy can see the past union tactics are not working, and if we look around the world will see that they have never worked anywhere else in the last 20 years.

Steve Purvinas has built, to his credit, an enormous profile, but with that comes enormous responsibility. I personally believe it is time for the transition to being part of the solution (after all by definition engineers either build or fix things).... our industry in Australia is in so desperate need of champions.... however it is a fine line from being the villan on TV going on with crap about "slow basting" to being the chanpion who is trying to convince shareholders his members have a plot to save our national treasure.

The debate needs to be taken out of the gutter. Because believe me public respect will make a difference, it might not sway Joyce or Clifford, but it will sway the remaining institutional shareholders.... and it will/can sway our elected representatives, and although no longer Gov owned, pressure from Canberra still matters.

[AEROMEDIC]

Good call Sunfish......

There is no easy or quick solution to this dilemma.

The board, plainly and simply sees themselves as the ONLY conduit to the way out, and why that kind of thinking persists is the REAL problem.

Looking at it from a different perspective, the problems are almost insurmountable, but not beyond redemption. What it needs is a different mindset for this.
The pathway for this would be difficult given that there is a strong alienation by the board toward the stakeholders. There would have to be compromise and a willingness to put long term animosities aside for the greater good.
This, I believe, is an impossible task for the current board so the situation will continue until Qantas merges with interested external parties or gets taken over. In the meantime, Qantas will lurch from pillar to post until this happens.
The current strategy to consider an arrangement with Emirates is flawed as they will only jeopardize the One World Alliance... but then who makes a profit out of code sharing?

Maybe it's time for this board to go.......

Excuses about unions and competition just don't wash anymore. Most blue chip companies would have made changes by now and engagement of the employees in getting out of this mess should be paramount.
If employees passion and dedication to their jobs could be resurrected there would be a far greater chance of returning this full service airline to some of it's former glory.

[Worrals in the wilds]

...it will sway the remaining institutional shareholders...

I don't think they give a toss any more than the board does. If they did they wouldn't have supported the board's actions over the past twelve months.

...and it will/can sway our elected representatives, and although no longer Gov owned, pressure from Canberra still matters.

They didn't do much about the grounding of the fleet . Why would they care what the staff do now? The current federal government know little about aviation and care even less. Maybe if Qantas manufactured unprofitable cars it would be a different story...

The debate needs to be taken out of the gutter.

If Purvinas (or the TWU for that matter) were out slagging off Alliance and Virgin on a daily basis I'd agree with you, but they aren't. There are rarely any aviation related IR issues mentioned in the press, except at Qantas. The other major carriers largely manage to keep their staff engaged and sort out their EBA biffos in private, and the unions correctly have very little to say about them.

The continuous bad publicity for Qantas is not an ALAEA creation. It is a Qantas management creation as they lurch from one stuff up to the next. All the ALAEA has done is draw public attention to the stuff ups, and good for them. Otherwise the stuff ups would still be occurring, but behind closed doors, or only documented by Ben Sandilands. Why should the unions pretend everything in the Qantas garden is rosy when it so obviously isn't?

[hiwaytohell]

Do you want to win or do you want to be right?

The continuous bad publicity for Qantas is not an ALAEA creation. It is a Qantas management creation as they lurch from one stuff up to the next. All the ALAEA has done is draw public attention to the stuff ups, and good for them. Otherwise the stuff ups would still be occurring, but behind closed doors, or only documented by Ben Sandilands. Why should the unions pretend everything in the Qantas garden is rosy when it so obviously isn't?

Because it is not going to fix the problem!

For the unions to win these battles the tactics need to focus on winning, not on being right! This must include being, and being seen to be, the solution.