Qantas to make a further 300 LAMEs Redundant?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas to make a further 300 LAMEs Redundant?
Strong rumours coming out of another 300 LAMEs to be made redundant in the coming months.
Does this leave numbers at about 900 to 1000 licenced engineers?
Is this enough to maintain the fleet,or whats left of it?
Does this leave numbers at about 900 to 1000 licenced engineers?
Is this enough to maintain the fleet,or whats left of it?
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And you thought Chris Nasty and Gavin Hurried had no plan.
Remember Q Future?
They'll wait till MX is up and running and then drop the axe.
We were warned from the very start by the New Zuulanders and SP has kept reminding us of their ulterior motives. Wasn't our Job Security clause the reason we got into a biff with these buffoons?
Reducing numbers achieves at least two things. Shrink the Qf numbers in the ALAEA and secondly they may even save a buck or two to hit their KPIs. Short term gains you bet!
Remember Q Future?
They'll wait till MX is up and running and then drop the axe.
We were warned from the very start by the New Zuulanders and SP has kept reminding us of their ulterior motives. Wasn't our Job Security clause the reason we got into a biff with these buffoons?
Reducing numbers achieves at least two things. Shrink the Qf numbers in the ALAEA and secondly they may even save a buck or two to hit their KPIs. Short term gains you bet!
Join Date: May 2011
Location: North Shore
Age: 55
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well me old mate Mr G H has promised myself and my team in FNQ that all our jobs up here are safe.I mean he wouldn't do the nasty thing like make my DMM position redundant?After all the harassment we have carried out over the years to rid QF of all those nasty Lames who had the balls to ask questions!
We have completely covered up the real situation up here with lies and made up manpower requirements to save my job.
I mean we only on some days have 4 people on shift,
1 x Dmm,2 Snrs and 1 worker and a couple of flts a day,you cant get much leaner than that.
Cheers to another 10 years up here under the palm trees drinking XXXX,
Thanks Gav
We have completely covered up the real situation up here with lies and made up manpower requirements to save my job.
I mean we only on some days have 4 people on shift,
1 x Dmm,2 Snrs and 1 worker and a couple of flts a day,you cant get much leaner than that.
Cheers to another 10 years up here under the palm trees drinking XXXX,
Thanks Gav
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If every LAME worked in accordance with Qantas procedures they would need to put on 300. Some think that turning a blind eye will keep them in the good books with management. This is a mistake.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If every LAME worked in accordance with Qantas procedures they would need to
put on 300. Some think that turning a blind eye will keep them in the good books
with management. This is a mistake.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: EVERYWHERE
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas to make a further 300 LAMEs Redundant?
Mr Nasty told us this just a few weeks ago. He mentioned that heavy maintenance was now there or there abouts and the line was next to sort out. (I think AVV was not in his mind when he said this). Use of the new licensing system etc was going to mean people getting the tap as there was not going to be enough VR's. so if AVV shuts (85) engineers ?? Then that's 200+ for the rest of QF eng. worrying times for most. Exciting times for a few.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Pity City
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is still room up here but not for long. Word out of Chris' office is that the next round of redundancies kicks off before mid '13, mainly for the boys in Avalon, and to a lesser extent, Sydney. Configs complete, a/c being parked in the desert, Mxi up and running, MOD bedded down. What do they need engineers for? Oh, yes, nothing like a bit of pressure for the AME EBA negotiations.
And they claim they got an award for being the best employer in Australia!
And they claim they got an award for being the best employer in Australia!
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What are you hearing Fed Sec, or are they keeping more dirty little secrects to themselves again?!! 
If every LAME worked in accordance with Qantas procedures they would need to put on 300. Some think that turning a blind eye will keep them in the good books with management. This is a mistake.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An opposing argument could be that the ALAEA should be pushing all maintenance providers to be as efficient and productive as possible as it is the only way for engineers to have a sustainable future and hence the association a membership base. In my view, the pressure which should be applied would be as follows:
- Adopt Lean manufacturing techniques to continuously work towards and exceed leading practice turn times (and quality but obviously the current state is very good)
- The additional capacity from the efficient work practices can then be used to take on more work - internal first and then potentially third party if the turn times really are leading practice
- Systems of maintenance are certainly not efficient currently nor is the planning aspect - this makes the engineer look inefficient. Push the organisations to fix this asap!
- Leadership styles in management are appalling (as evidenced by the survey) and result in lower engagement and hence productivity - surely a fair dinkum maintenance organisation would want to address this?
- Embrace new technologies to enhance the systems of maintenance, planning and the actual job of the engineer.
Last edited by BP2197; 24th Oct 2012 at 08:53.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks like the Qf PR department have rolled out one of their old characters. To dispell some of your diatribe I can confirm that -
Qantas don't want the most efficient operation. They had it for 737 HM, the most efficient in the world actually with unbeatable quality. They closed it.
We have offered them a cheaper roster in Brisbane - rejected.
We offered maintenance on demand with less LAMEs than they need today - rejected.
We have offered to do outsourced work in house with no staff increases - rejected.
Qantas don't want to make money now, they want losses so they can channel funds to other parts of the business and get foolish governments to support them.
Qantas don't want the most efficient operation. They had it for 737 HM, the most efficient in the world actually with unbeatable quality. They closed it.
We have offered them a cheaper roster in Brisbane - rejected.
We offered maintenance on demand with less LAMEs than they need today - rejected.
We have offered to do outsourced work in house with no staff increases - rejected.
Qantas don't want to make money now, they want losses so they can channel funds to other parts of the business and get foolish governments to support them.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Twilight Zone
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BP2197...you're suggestion to implement some global trendy mumbo jumbo is not going to make any difference to those running what was once a great airline. As long as the labour costs are cheaper overseas, that's where the work will go. Its that plain and simple to see that's all that matters to those Bean-Counters currently running Qantas.
Efficiency, Safety, Quality, Commitment to faithful & highly skilled employees......all irrelevant today in the eyes of AJ and his band of morally bankrupt board members.
Efficiency, Safety, Quality, Commitment to faithful & highly skilled employees......all irrelevant today in the eyes of AJ and his band of morally bankrupt board members.
whatever happens, nothings stopping you working in the newly required contract positions created by short sightedness and if you want come back into full time employment 12 months later just sign here.
like we all haven't seen this before...
like we all haven't seen this before...
Last edited by 600ft-lb; 24th Oct 2012 at 11:34.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As the airline continues to move forward to regain sustained stability there will always be those that are adversely affected.
Not by design, by necessity.
The answer is here: Like Sands Through The Hourglass | Common Flame
MP
Not by design, by necessity.
The answer is here: Like Sands Through The Hourglass | Common Flame
MP
Last edited by Managers Perspective; 24th Oct 2012 at 21:41.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As the airline continues to move forward to regain sustained stability there will always be those that are adversely affected.
Not by design, by necessity.
Not by design, by necessity.
Do you actually believe this stuff MP? Ever paid any consideration to the passengers that are/were adversely affected? Perhaps that was by necessity as well eh? Nobody would be silly enough to design it that way, surely.
Last edited by Lodown; 25th Oct 2012 at 02:31.