Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

MERGED: Alan's still not happy......

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

MERGED: Alan's still not happy......

Old 22nd Feb 2014, 04:26
  #2481 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: I prefer to remain north of a direct line BNE-ADL
Age: 44
Posts: 1,034
I wonder how senior will be the Istanbul A380 base?
Angle of Attack is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2014, 04:32
  #2482 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Elsewhere
Posts: 334
Abbot is now saying that 'Qantas must get its house in order', and that 'there are plenty of signs that Qantas is serious about putting its house in order'.

Which begs the question, WTF have those who are paid handsomely for running the 'house' been doing for the last few years?
itsnotthatbloodyhard is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2014, 04:35
  #2483 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: I prefer to remain north of a direct line BNE-ADL
Age: 44
Posts: 1,034
[QUOTE]Which begs the question, WTF have those who are paid handsomely for running the 'house' been doing for the last few years?[QUOTE]

Something in between buckleys and none I guess...
Angle of Attack is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2014, 04:56
  #2484 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: illabo
Age: 51
Posts: 157
So shovel are you saying Joyce came into the job and his plan was to shrink the airline, cost thousands of families their livelihood and post enormous losses on his watch. Are you really saying that was his golden plan as CEO.

He may be a nasty piece of work but I severely doubt that was his plan.

I think you may be the delusional one. Actually, do you ever look in the mirror and say "geez I'm type of dog.". No I guess not, your persona is probably much like Joyce's - a dipstick in denial.
rodney rude is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2014, 05:04
  #2485 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Netherlands
Age: 63
Posts: 73
Okay...perhaps someone with a better grasp of IR law, and the appropriate EA, could explain what a sell-off of, for example, QF Engineering, would mean for all it's 'employees' benefits etc?
Would they have to pay redundancies or can they annex the 'business' and all it's minions, then in 6 months complain that 'QF Engineering Pty Ltd' are too expensive and pull the contract effectively shutting the place down and saving millions in redundancies....and then get 457's by the thousand with TA's blessing??

Extreme I know but not beyond the realms of the little fella's deviousness....
King William III is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2014, 05:18
  #2486 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 32
have to pay redundancies
I have heard that this is the reason for the asset (terminals etc....) sales.
Chad Gates is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2014, 05:21
  #2487 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 824
So shovel are you saying Joyce came into the job and his plan was to shrink the airline, cost thousands of families their livelihood and post enormous losses on his watch. Are you really saying that was his golden plan as CEO.
If shovel didn't mean that then I do.

He was tasked with extracting cash from Qantas. Otherwise they just earnt salaries and bonuses and as any reasonable person would understand that's just not possible. Have any of you tried to live in Sydney on $3m + living expenses + free confirmed 1st class travel + free cars + free restaurants + free partying+ bonuses. If you haven't tried, it's NOT easy!

Jetstar was the vehicle and not only did they make a dogs breakfast of that but they also made (aforementioned reason) a dogs breakfast of the company that does actually pay their outrageous benefits.

Which explains why anyone who understood how proud, hardworking and brilliant in their respective fields over 90+ years the employees were, will find it easier to understand why we are all so f&&:@/)/(/$/ed off we all are at the theft, lies and fraud that has gone on.

We do our jobs to 150% (and have done for 90+years) and these clowns earning 10-20 TIMES what we do, simply think they are mugs working for so little.
V-Jet is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2014, 05:23
  #2488 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,383
For goodness sake, why not just pay the CEO and the board whatever commissions were on offer so they can P..ss off into the sunset and let whoever has been driving this get on with it.
thorn bird is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2014, 08:02
  #2489 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,300
FFRATS, the FACTS that you so assiduously refer to are that the previous Board and CEO of Qantas tried to take the airline private and the shareholders they did this for are still on the register hiding behind nominee companies.

Alan was tasked with running Qantas to run the airline into the ground so that it could be acquired for a song by the same folk.

The FACT that he is not removed in the face of abysmal corporate performance is proof that those same major shareholders are well satisfied with his efforts on their behalf.

The announcement on 27feb will be that certain golden assets will have been sold to these same people for a song. Expect Macquarie Bank and the APA lineup to figure in the announcement.
Sunfish is online now  
Old 22nd Feb 2014, 09:05
  #2490 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 468
Sunfish,

There will be a lot of people keenly interested if your predictions are true and as much as we would all like to know what is in the announcements along with the financial report, the "smart money" seems to be on a split of domestic and international into separate companies and Jetstar to evolve in an interesting way.
The key point to note is that the changes about to take place are (again) not in the company's interest, the shareholders and the travelling public.
AEROMEDIC is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2014, 09:45
  #2491 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: australia
Posts: 97
Sunfish, this is a Rumour network where many, incl. you, turn what is personal opinion or as Aeromedic puts it "predictions" out there as fact when it is far from the truth or just plain fantasy. That's fine and part of a forum but people shouldn't take offence when called for it and expect people take it on face value.

FACTS that you so assiduously refer to are that the previous Board and CEO of Qantas tried to take the airline private
I agree on this part of history and was there during it and was disgusted by the corporate greed. After that you lost me with your FACTS on Alan's job is to run Qantas into the ground for his mates to buy the crumbs.

It could just be the sharks have been circling and waiting for a feed with all the bad mistakes management have made since the failed APA deal. Was it inevitable after first 'attack'?

I guess we'll all know soon enough and you can quote the history of Qantas demise with authority and possibly have shown great foresight.

FFRATS
FFRATS is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2014, 11:10
  #2492 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Queensland
Age: 70
Posts: 23
For the record, and as a newbie here (although a long time lurker and enjoying reading the various topics) I'm not associated with the industry except as a fairly frequent flier, i.e. passenger. At my own expense too for what it's worth.

I have flown QF since the 70's, and have rarely had a bad experience on any of the numerous flights, first international and then when they became domestic too.

I am sickened to my stomach at the way the little and the rest of the board have ruined QF, to my mind. Not everyone wants to fly via DXB which, personally, I think is a hazy, glitzy, expensive dump with a few interesting tall buildings but little in the way of the culture or interest of SIN, BKK, KUL or HKG.

I can't make out if it is a deliberate ploy as some have suggested or if it is just sheer incompetence, but I fear the airline is going down the tubes. Who knows how many people will be affected by the upcoming announcement or what routes will disappear but, personally, I fear the worst as this particular board has hardly shone with its brilliant decision making.

I'm actually flying to Cairns in early May. Although it is a QF flight at present, it's just the sort of "tourist" route I see disappearing from QF and becoming JQ. Well if that happens I'll be asking for my money back, not a bloody voucher to be used at a later date, with all the add-on costs that entails.

I'm the first to admit I know nothing of the technicalities or the financial side of things, except for the various articles and blogs I read, but few of them leave me feeling good.

Co-incidentaly I read in today's Sydney Terrorgraph that the first female captain had been appointed as head of the 767 fleet. I wonder how long that job will last? Aren't QF supposed to be getting rid of the 767 asap?
bmam7 is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2014, 20:33
  #2493 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,300
The problem FFRATS is that the behaviour of QF management is so completely at variance with good management practice on so many levels that the excuse of mere incompetence is worn increasingly thin.

Five examples off the top of my head:

1. the grounding of th e airline.

2. The entire Asian adventure.

3. The malicious way the engineers have been treated over outsourcing and downsizing.

4. The continuing habit of publicising "reviews" leading to "statements" from on high on specified dates which continues to maximise fear, uncertainty and doubt among all employees.

5. The emirates tie up which will eventually lead to QF being merely an Emirates business name.


FFRATS, many of us with experience in business just shake our heads because we know what the predictable outcomes of these follies are.
Sunfish is online now  
Old 22nd Feb 2014, 21:01
  #2494 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 297
All the conspiracy theories in the world cannot explain why a seemingly competent board of directors continues to make decisions that continue to place Qantas the airline and the business in a downward spiral. The Qantas Constitution states that the board are mere caretakers of the business and contains requirements of the Qantas Board but unfortunately when Qantas was privatised the provisions of the constitution were not included in the Articles of Association which means the board has a moral and not a legal responsibility to ensure the business is handed on in a viable state.
Australia has not seen this type of behaviour but I assure you it was prevalent in the United States leading up to the Global Financial Crisis. Companies such as Kohlberg Kravis and Roberts(KKR) of which Leigh Clifford in a senior director and Bain and Company(Jayne Hrdlicka has a background) benefited massively from this restructure but millions of Americans lost their jobs. One must wonder why Qantas is such a basket case and the problem except for Virgin(68% foreign owned) Australia does not have an Australian based airline that can be used in a time of crisis. Emirates has given an assurance that they will help out but I can't see that working in the Middle East or Asia representing Australians.
If people lose their jobs and the shareholders lose their shirts then both the Regulator and Government need decide what is to be done. As has happened in the United States the Assets went private and the debt went public. The only answer is for the Government to buy a "Golden Share" which they are entitled to and then review board minutes for the last 8 years and they will find some interesting reading. As Mr Hockey said his interest is "National Interest" whereas the Qantas Board for the last ten years has been all for "Personal Interest".
busdriver007 is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2014, 21:55
  #2495 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 824
As Mr Hockey said his interest is "National Interest" whereas the Qantas Board for the last ten years has been all for "Personal Interest".
What he said. 100%.
V-Jet is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2014, 22:10
  #2496 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 186
The American Modern Story Comes to Australia.....

Nationalise the Debt/Loss (taxpayer bailouts/guarantees), Socialise the Risks (its everybody's fault, so we all need to lift), and Privatise the Profits......ah, the beauties of conservative capitalism.....


Sure, the mining and carbon taxes were poor attempts at wealth redistribution. The horse had already well and truly bolted on the mining side of things. Mr Howard let that one go through to the keeper. Subsidies that support the masses are well worth weighing up. Subsidies that funnel profits to the few at the expense of many are simply immoral.

Who picks up the tab when the game is up? The dismissed and the only people paying tax, the little guy in the middle......

Last edited by Acute Instinct; 22nd Feb 2014 at 23:35.
Acute Instinct is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 00:00
  #2497 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Melbourne
Age: 49
Posts: 113
....The only answer is for the Government to buy a "Golden Share"....
Not quiet Bus Driver.

Another alternative would be for Government to buy a significant share of Qantas via an Employee Share Trust and for the Trust to repay the Government using future cash flow generated from wage freezes and productivity increases.

In effect, this would give Government twice as much bang for its buck, seeming achieve Tony Abbott's quest for productivity and would facilitate Government and the Workforce having in place Directors responsible for oversighting their interests in what strategy Qantas is pursuing, where it is investing and where it is employing.

Recall that the concept was raised with the ACTU by Dr. Shan Turnbull around the time of the APA bid and those interested should be able to find on the net details of what he proposed.
WorthWhat is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 00:46
  #2498 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: The Cesspit
Posts: 237
It's actually the board's charter to look after personal interests (of the shareholders). Crap job they've done admittedly.

What is NOT in their charter (or the charter of any company that any of us have ever invested in), is the national interest. Who's national interest?? What does that even mean?? Just because my passport may have some cuddly edible creatures on the front cover does not mean I will make investment decisions/business decisions based on anything but sound financial sense.

How many of us have invested in property/stocks/business opportunities because of the "National Interest"? Not many I'm guessing. So why should a QF shareholder/board member be any different?

Yes, Joe Hockey probably does act in the "National Interest" (I still have no idea what that means, other than it has all the hallmarks of being either xenophobic or bogan) but THAT'S HIS JOB.

I can't imagine calls for the taxpayer being forced to become stockholders will help any current QF employees. The new board members of Tony Abbott and Eric Abetz will make Clifford look like Mother Teresa.
Be careful what you wish for.

Instead of forcing a Holden/Ford/Alcoa/SPC worker or millions like them (including VA employees) to buy QF shares, convince them. I'd love to be convinced once again that QF is a good investment. I haven't seen or heard anything coming from QF (and as someone said that's 33,000 people, not a board and senior management) to convince me.

And instead of having a potential shareholder base of 20 million, that needs to be opened up to 6 billion. The QSA is from a bygone era. If anyone thinks a shareholder is going to make decisions based on the colour of their passport you're delusional.

Last edited by Progress Wanchai; 23rd Feb 2014 at 02:19.
Progress Wanchai is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 01:23
  #2499 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,963
Originally Posted by Acute Instinct View Post
Subsidies that funnel profits to the few at the expense of many are simply immoral.
Personal political affiliation aside, that ^ is current Australian Liberal in a nutshell, sadly.
Hempy is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2014, 01:48
  #2500 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Brisbane, Qld
Posts: 1,139
Perhaps that's the problem Progress WanChai, it's all about the profits and the shareholders, there's no legal requirement for most of them to act with any 'Moral Regard' to the people they work for or the community that supports them so they don't.
Ixixly is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.