Forstaff Avalon
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So why not just cut the Journos out of the picture and put the story out there the Journos seem to be very selective in reporting Avalon is a good example the public read the local paper and think there are jobs there by the thousand which we know is far from the truth
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about you let CASA know
Fed Sec is right what's the point They have a surprise inspection at Avalon and Qantas know about days before hand so they can have a big clean up and get a catered Lunch organised they are a joke.
Fed Sec is right what's the point They have a surprise inspection at Avalon and Qantas know about days before hand so they can have a big clean up and get a catered Lunch organised they are a joke.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jethro,
This advance notice has been standard practice for decades.
To be fair, it gives the operator a chance to restore to compliance those things overlooked in internal audits.
If no notice is given, then there is a mountain of minor non conformances like a clean up in a workshop, tooling not segregated, spillover in compartments of screws, etc. that get picked up and a mountain of paperwork generated.
I KNOW that these things should not have to occur but they do, and use up time and resources better allocated to more important issues.
Surveys without notice usually mean that there is something major that is suspected to exist and usually instigated from a confidential report, so CASA EXPECT to find it.
If Qantas gets advance info on a SURPRISE visit, then CASA would become aware of that fact during the visit. If so, then the real issue is who tipped Qantas off and what does CASA do about it?
So was this really a surprise visit, or a planned visit due to the wind down of Avalon.
I think that it was the latter, as it might be construed that with the overhang of job losses may interfere with the flow of compliance with good practice.
(unless there's other info on this)
This advance notice has been standard practice for decades.
To be fair, it gives the operator a chance to restore to compliance those things overlooked in internal audits.
If no notice is given, then there is a mountain of minor non conformances like a clean up in a workshop, tooling not segregated, spillover in compartments of screws, etc. that get picked up and a mountain of paperwork generated.
I KNOW that these things should not have to occur but they do, and use up time and resources better allocated to more important issues.
Surveys without notice usually mean that there is something major that is suspected to exist and usually instigated from a confidential report, so CASA EXPECT to find it.
If Qantas gets advance info on a SURPRISE visit, then CASA would become aware of that fact during the visit. If so, then the real issue is who tipped Qantas off and what does CASA do about it?
So was this really a surprise visit, or a planned visit due to the wind down of Avalon.
I think that it was the latter, as it might be construed that with the overhang of job losses may interfere with the flow of compliance with good practice.
(unless there's other info on this)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LOFO at Avalon
The formal FWA hearing dealing with LOFO at Avalon was scheduled in FWA Melbourne 8 October 2012.
So whats Happened its 31/10/12 and soon more may be going .
So whats Happened its 31/10/12 and soon more may be going .
Last edited by Jethro Gibbs; 31st Oct 2012 at 01:05.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Twilight Zone
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jethro, maybe check the FWA website and see if there's anything there about what happened? Not sure it really matters anymore as the writing is on the wall for all to go soon anyway. 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I know. I am running the case. In summary. They had compulsory redundancies. The have a last on first off rule. They also have a rule that says after retrenchments, they must train up to cover any lost skills.
They excluded some people from the last on first off list because they had for example 737 licences (so they could keep some of their mates who they gave this course to relatively recently). They have no right in the EBA to pick and choose people to exclude from the last on first off list because they have a particular licence or skill. To the contrary, they specifically have a rule that says they must train to cover any lost skills.
Some people lost their jobs unfairly because of this breach.
They excluded some people from the last on first off list because they had for example 737 licences (so they could keep some of their mates who they gave this course to relatively recently). They have no right in the EBA to pick and choose people to exclude from the last on first off list because they have a particular licence or skill. To the contrary, they specifically have a rule that says they must train to cover any lost skills.
Some people lost their jobs unfairly because of this breach.
Last edited by ALAEA Fed Sec; 31st Oct 2012 at 11:10.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: australia
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fed Sec
What kind of outcome are you hoping to obtain from FWA?
Would some of the individuals affected be looking for reinstatement or possibly much deserved compensation?
I look forward to seeing some accountability being enforced on this bunch. A comprehensive win might actually cause some management snouts to lift from the Forstaff/Qantas trough for the briefest of moments.
Good luck with the hearing.
What kind of outcome are you hoping to obtain from FWA?
Would some of the individuals affected be looking for reinstatement or possibly much deserved compensation?
I look forward to seeing some accountability being enforced on this bunch. A comprehensive win might actually cause some management snouts to lift from the Forstaff/Qantas trough for the briefest of moments.
Good luck with the hearing.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fed sec,
I wish you luck in this case. I really do.
It's unfair that people should lose their jobs because a company chooses to protect others in a non compliant LOFO process.
However, Fair Work Australia has demonstrated already that they are ready to rule against good sense as they have done in the matter of PR525218 re pre flight safety checks.
If they see that the "greater good" is served by ruling in favour of the company..they will.
They let the ALAEA (and indeed the travelling public) down very badly considering the evidence and failed to take in account the safety concerns involving passengers.
So I think it's hard to see them ruling fairly in this matter.
Good luck anyway.
P.S. The flight safety check orders have expired. Will you take this matter to the Senate Inquiry for CASA to answer ??
I wish you luck in this case. I really do.
It's unfair that people should lose their jobs because a company chooses to protect others in a non compliant LOFO process.
However, Fair Work Australia has demonstrated already that they are ready to rule against good sense as they have done in the matter of PR525218 re pre flight safety checks.
If they see that the "greater good" is served by ruling in favour of the company..they will.
They let the ALAEA (and indeed the travelling public) down very badly considering the evidence and failed to take in account the safety concerns involving passengers.
So I think it's hard to see them ruling fairly in this matter.
Good luck anyway.
P.S. The flight safety check orders have expired. Will you take this matter to the Senate Inquiry for CASA to answer ??
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What kind of outcome are you hoping to obtain from FWA?
Would some of the individuals affected be looking for reinstatement or possibly much deserved compensation?
P.S. The flight safety check orders have expired. Will you take this matter to the Senate Inquiry for CASA to answer ??
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Public are beginning to ask is Qantas a safe airline,I use to promote to friends and relative to fly Qantas as we use to have the best maintenance system but now I told them if u can get a cheaper fare fly with that carrier.Cutting down on maintenance staff and preventing engineers from doing their jobs is disastrous.ALAEA is only trying to make the airline safe.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2/11/12 Commissioner Gregory of Fair Work Australia has reserved his decision and members will be advised as soon as the decision is handed down.
Wonder if there will be a decision before everyone is gone .
Wonder if there will be a decision before everyone is gone .