Forstaff Avalon
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Twilight Zone
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How quick we've forgotten the days when the ALAEA was in bed with Forstaff and Qantas at Avalon and even had a financial deal on the side. We may forgive Steve, but we will never forget.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gemfrog,
Steve wasn't Fed Sec at that time.
Avalon began as a greenfields site as a result of a collabaration between Qantas, Forstaff and the ALAEA. It WAS originally for overflow work and various checks for other airlines including Air pacific.
It was handy for that and created jobs for over 300 workers from the outset expanding to 1000 after about 5 years.
All engineers began at entry level rates but equal to that rate paid at Qantas. That's not bad for all these guys out of work.
Steve wasn't Fed Sec at that time.
Avalon began as a greenfields site as a result of a collabaration between Qantas, Forstaff and the ALAEA. It WAS originally for overflow work and various checks for other airlines including Air pacific.
It was handy for that and created jobs for over 300 workers from the outset expanding to 1000 after about 5 years.
All engineers began at entry level rates but equal to that rate paid at Qantas. That's not bad for all these guys out of work.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Avalon always was set up to allow them to close Sydney. Shame on the ALAEA of the day. Shame on the FedSec then who became a Manager down there and shame on the airline for lying through their teeth about the whole arrangement. It put 1000 people in Syd out of work despite assurances it wouldn't. No wonder they aren't trusted.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All True At the Start Wally M even sat in on interviews with D Townley now Wally M will be working with Con R to to push the boundaries of the EBA in everyway they can think of to screw people over .
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So the entire Federal Executive knew that from the start.....is that what you're saying?
All of the executive would have to meet, discuss and approve this arrangement knowing that Sydney would be closed down. A move that would affect a big slice of the membership. You're right ...shame on them. But's not going far enough.
So, if you have the evidence that there was fraudulent behaviour by the Federal executive, have you passed it on to the relevant authorities? Because that's what I think you should do. The members have been badly let down and the persons involved should be behind bars.
..........or , and I'm guessing, there's no paper trail or witness statements and the like. Just hearsay, which is a shame.
As for Wally M, my understanding is that he was voted out by the members after a long stint. Like another fed sec, Don Coleman, he was unemployable as an engineer in the industry and still has to earn a dollar. Industrial Relations skills in demand means jumping the fence and it's mandatory to have a thick skin and no conscience.
All of the executive would have to meet, discuss and approve this arrangement knowing that Sydney would be closed down. A move that would affect a big slice of the membership. You're right ...shame on them. But's not going far enough.
So, if you have the evidence that there was fraudulent behaviour by the Federal executive, have you passed it on to the relevant authorities? Because that's what I think you should do. The members have been badly let down and the persons involved should be behind bars.
..........or , and I'm guessing, there's no paper trail or witness statements and the like. Just hearsay, which is a shame.
As for Wally M, my understanding is that he was voted out by the members after a long stint. Like another fed sec, Don Coleman, he was unemployable as an engineer in the industry and still has to earn a dollar. Industrial Relations skills in demand means jumping the fence and it's mandatory to have a thick skin and no conscience.
I think your all drawing a long bow to suggest in 1998, the executive at the time understood the future plans of Qantas. I would suggest todays situation would not have been as fully understood by those executive members at the time.
20/20 hindsight is a wonderful thing.
Lame2
20/20 hindsight is a wonderful thing.
Lame2
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We allowed Sydney to close,then allowed tullamarine to close,now Avalon turn so what are we doing allowing all these engineers to loose jobs and do nothing.management has a plan to destroy maintenance in Australia .so what is our plan.
How do 'we' stop Qantas doing anything ? It's their train set at the end of the day, as long as they stay legal in what they do we can't force them to do or not do anything.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More news in Geelong Advertiser today 28/9/12 not on there web site as yet it would be good if staff got any news before it gets printed in local newspaper doesn't look like that's ever going to happen though .
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LAME2,
You are nearly there.
Only Qantas knew what they wanted. Avalon was just a trial to see what what worked and what didn't. The docking, tooling, stores, and manpower contract was always temporary as it was only expected to be for a few months to cope with the existing overflow work. What was a bonus was that it worked out well.
After the numbers were crunched, they found that after setup costs were deducted, and allowing for initial teething problems, it was very, very promising.
Qantas used old "everything" at the start. Equipment and tooling that was written off while they upgraded the same at Sydney. The stuff was still legit..just old.
But everyone had pulled together to make the facility a success to secure the future and that surprised Qantas, particularly when a/c were coming out "on time and under budget". Qantas got 3rd party work for the site and began to get more ambitious, but with all the temporary structure in place, they failed to get FAA approval.
It was then that Qantas realized the true potential of Avalon and began to make plans for the transition of heavy maintenance to Avalon.
What they didn't want to do was absorb all staff into Qantas due to the costs of doing so. It didn't matter they were paying Forstaff a little less than those costs anyway and if they were going to upset the unions along the way...so what! They were very good at doing that anyway, and if things turned pear shaped, they could dump the whole thing for Forstaff to sort out as the staff were THEIR employees.
What Qantas failed to grasp was that the relatively small cost to absorb the Forstaff employees was significantly LESS than they thought and would have avoided costly union unrest, increased output through higher morale and would have had the ability to have Avalon assist Tulla (and vice versa) with manpower transfers as the needs arose.
Like everyone else, Qantas couldn't see 9/11 coming or the GFC so if they had taken on on Forstaff employees it wouldn't have changed things. Qantas were still responsible for employee entitlements whether they were Forstaff employees or not.
So Forstaff expanded instead.
The reality is that in the early days, this site was "a work in progress" and if it closed after a year.... No problems. Everyone knew it was just a temporary situation.
As for the ALAEA, their "consultation fee" would cease and all parties would go home with money in their pockets and consider what to do next.
The executive couldn't know what Qantas didn't know themselves until the potential for Avalon became clearer.
As cunning as they are, Qantas managers only react to a situation...they don't plan ahead.
Avalon became bigger, better and cheaper in the short term and Qantas invested in hangar extensions until something hit the fan.
The rest you know....
You are nearly there.
Only Qantas knew what they wanted. Avalon was just a trial to see what what worked and what didn't. The docking, tooling, stores, and manpower contract was always temporary as it was only expected to be for a few months to cope with the existing overflow work. What was a bonus was that it worked out well.
After the numbers were crunched, they found that after setup costs were deducted, and allowing for initial teething problems, it was very, very promising.
Qantas used old "everything" at the start. Equipment and tooling that was written off while they upgraded the same at Sydney. The stuff was still legit..just old.
But everyone had pulled together to make the facility a success to secure the future and that surprised Qantas, particularly when a/c were coming out "on time and under budget". Qantas got 3rd party work for the site and began to get more ambitious, but with all the temporary structure in place, they failed to get FAA approval.
It was then that Qantas realized the true potential of Avalon and began to make plans for the transition of heavy maintenance to Avalon.
What they didn't want to do was absorb all staff into Qantas due to the costs of doing so. It didn't matter they were paying Forstaff a little less than those costs anyway and if they were going to upset the unions along the way...so what! They were very good at doing that anyway, and if things turned pear shaped, they could dump the whole thing for Forstaff to sort out as the staff were THEIR employees.
What Qantas failed to grasp was that the relatively small cost to absorb the Forstaff employees was significantly LESS than they thought and would have avoided costly union unrest, increased output through higher morale and would have had the ability to have Avalon assist Tulla (and vice versa) with manpower transfers as the needs arose.
Like everyone else, Qantas couldn't see 9/11 coming or the GFC so if they had taken on on Forstaff employees it wouldn't have changed things. Qantas were still responsible for employee entitlements whether they were Forstaff employees or not.
So Forstaff expanded instead.
The reality is that in the early days, this site was "a work in progress" and if it closed after a year.... No problems. Everyone knew it was just a temporary situation.
As for the ALAEA, their "consultation fee" would cease and all parties would go home with money in their pockets and consider what to do next.
The executive couldn't know what Qantas didn't know themselves until the potential for Avalon became clearer.
As cunning as they are, Qantas managers only react to a situation...they don't plan ahead.
Avalon became bigger, better and cheaper in the short term and Qantas invested in hangar extensions until something hit the fan.
The rest you know....
Last edited by AEROMEDIC; 28th Sep 2012 at 03:03.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
qantas does not one a sucess story,avalon was a sucess but aircraft maintained in china is cheaper than in geelong and who cares about quality anymore ,unless the federal and state government interfered to keep jobs here that is nothing much the union can do.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aircraft heavy maintenance base
Qantas is concentrating by having one base in future but look at Singapore airline,Lufthansa,KLM!and so on ,they have more than one base and investing in more bases,when other airline is becoming smarter QF goes the opposite.
Last edited by Bagus; 1st Oct 2012 at 02:36.
Bagus the reality is LH and SQ are major players in the aircraft maintenance game. They have cheap labor, and many third party customers.
Qantas have more expensive labor, high aussie dollar, and third party customers don't like them because they find defects instead of penning off inspections without even removing access panels.
Qantas have more expensive labor, high aussie dollar, and third party customers don't like them because they find defects instead of penning off inspections without even removing access panels.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was at one of the initial briefings when Avalon was announced,and the comments in the room were that it was being set up to compete and close H245. Guess what happened next? All new tooling was bought and sent direct to Avalon, while Sydney was left to continue working with out dated equipment, and at times, rely on Avalon for equipment support. And of course,Sydney engineers were sent to prop up the whole show because it struggled to do what its masters were asking.It was only when it was able to stand alone that management could shutdown Sydney in 2006. You didn't need to be Einstein to realise that its all a long term plan to phase big jet heavy maintenance out of Australia.The question for Brisbane Heavy is how long before that shuts? 2017? 2020? 2025?
Qantas used old "everything" at the start. Equipment and tooling that was written off while they upgraded the same at Sydney. The stuff was still legit..just old
All new tooling was bought and sent direct to Avalon
LAME2