MERGED: Alan's still not happy......
They can only be an imitation of Qantas.
Unfortunately the days of being a "QANTAS pilot" are gone. Upper management see themselves as the only true part of QANTAS, the rest of us are just a commodity of pilots, like fuel, parts...etc. In their eyes if your a short haul pilot, long haul pilot, cobham pilot, jet connect pilot, Jetstar pilot, Network pilot or Qantaslink pilot ( have I missed any?) your no more important than any other pilot group, and if you can operate an aircraft with a roo on the tail cheaper than someone else you get the gig!
If Jetstar is absorbed into Qantas, and crew are trained to Qantas service standards, the public won't care...they will be flying in new aircraft ( remember the huge A320 order), and the pilots will be wearing Qantas uniforms...well that makes it Qantas doesn't it!!!!
Oh and management....well they have expanded the Qantas brand if they do this....apparently everyone wins
.
Quote:
The most obvious seems to be a downsizing of Qantas to such a degree and rebranding of Jetstar to Qantas at a later stage with a lower cost base to compete.
The problem with this, is Jetstar can't be Qantas, even if they are rebranded as Qantas.
They can only be an imitation of Qantas.
Case example is Jetconnect. I've read passenger comments that although it's branded as Qantas, it doesnt "feel" like Qantas.
If it doesn't "feel" like Qantas, passengers may choose to fly with the competition.
MC
The most obvious seems to be a downsizing of Qantas to such a degree and rebranding of Jetstar to Qantas at a later stage with a lower cost base to compete.
The problem with this, is Jetstar can't be Qantas, even if they are rebranded as Qantas.
They can only be an imitation of Qantas.
Case example is Jetconnect. I've read passenger comments that although it's branded as Qantas, it doesnt "feel" like Qantas.
If it doesn't "feel" like Qantas, passengers may choose to fly with the competition.
MC
Jetstar delivers a product. If that product were to change, so would the service and standards delivering the product.
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Unfortunately not the Orient
Posts: 387
Likes: 0
Received 88 Likes
on
32 Posts
Jetstar delivers a product. If that product were to change, so would the service and standards delivering the product.
My money is on Jetstar being Jetstar and a leaner Qantas being Qantas.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blueskymine.
I would disagree.
JQ have changed their product over time.
Allocated seats, expanded network, inflight entertainment newer aircraft like the 787.
However there hasn't been an improvement in service standards.
If JQ is rebranded & people are still paid & treated the same by the company. Then the service they provide for the new product will not change.
TAA weren't a low cost carrier. It was a full service to full service branding change.
My point being, by changing the product it won't change the culture of the organisation.
An example of the cost reductions are the new A380 Cabin Crew. Within the same organisation & culture of QF mainline. The company introduced a new pay scale and recruited then trained to the organisation the lower paid crew.
MC
I would disagree.
JQ have changed their product over time.
Allocated seats, expanded network, inflight entertainment newer aircraft like the 787.
However there hasn't been an improvement in service standards.
If JQ is rebranded & people are still paid & treated the same by the company. Then the service they provide for the new product will not change.
TAA weren't a low cost carrier. It was a full service to full service branding change.
My point being, by changing the product it won't change the culture of the organisation.
An example of the cost reductions are the new A380 Cabin Crew. Within the same organisation & culture of QF mainline. The company introduced a new pay scale and recruited then trained to the organisation the lower paid crew.
MC
Last edited by Mstr Caution; 20th Aug 2014 at 03:49.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sandy Palms.
I think your right. Both Qantas & JQ will fail or succeed in their own rights.
In discussions I've had, JQ are about to learn what's it's like to be a legacy carrier.
Recent 10 year anniversary + Long Service Leave obligations for an increasing amount of staff=increased cost base.
MC
I think your right. Both Qantas & JQ will fail or succeed in their own rights.
In discussions I've had, JQ are about to learn what's it's like to be a legacy carrier.
Recent 10 year anniversary + Long Service Leave obligations for an increasing amount of staff=increased cost base.
MC
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: OZ
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jetstar gets absorbed in Qantas and aircraft are painted with red tails.
Whats next…
Network gets absorbed into Jetstar and aircraft are painted with Jetstar tails.
I don't think so, Thant would mean all Jetstar aircraft would be up for a full repaint, which the company can not afford….. They lost how much….
Whats next…
Network gets absorbed into Jetstar and aircraft are painted with Jetstar tails.
I don't think so, Thant would mean all Jetstar aircraft would be up for a full repaint, which the company can not afford….. They lost how much….
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Distinguish the arenas.
Domestically QF and JQ are heading towards the same cost point. With the additional row that QF wants to squeeze in to its 737s there will be even less product differentiation.
That said I would still expect JQ to be considerably lower for some time,
but IFE and an apple and lounge access for some can't add much to the costs.
Internationally, both are high cost compared to competitors and will continue to bleed.
Air Asia X presently from KUL...
In a few years I would expect Thai Air Asia X, Indo Air Asia X, Lion Air, Cebu Pacific etc to be flooding our market from the LCC end
And much greater penetration from the Chinese airlines at the upper end.
Domestically QF and JQ are heading towards the same cost point. With the additional row that QF wants to squeeze in to its 737s there will be even less product differentiation.
That said I would still expect JQ to be considerably lower for some time,
but IFE and an apple and lounge access for some can't add much to the costs.
Internationally, both are high cost compared to competitors and will continue to bleed.
Air Asia X presently from KUL...
In a few years I would expect Thai Air Asia X, Indo Air Asia X, Lion Air, Cebu Pacific etc to be flooding our market from the LCC end
And much greater penetration from the Chinese airlines at the upper end.
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Australia
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's just so drab.
People say our domestic airlines are still worlds apart from Europe and the Americas and yes I guess there is some truth there.
That said by Australian standards of say 2 to 3 decades it has turned into a huge mound of compost.
There comes a time where one has to be thankful for the generation they belonged to and the experience had.
The mid 80's through to now on many levels have seen significant erosion in standards and a general way of airline employment.
Glad I'm not 19 and starting in 2014. I'd rather jump into a river full of hungry piranha's. Be more fun.
That said by Australian standards of say 2 to 3 decades it has turned into a huge mound of compost.
There comes a time where one has to be thankful for the generation they belonged to and the experience had.
The mid 80's through to now on many levels have seen significant erosion in standards and a general way of airline employment.
Glad I'm not 19 and starting in 2014. I'd rather jump into a river full of hungry piranha's. Be more fun.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SPEY
I thought we'd got over the bullsh*t mentality of yesteryears you demonstrate.
In your day you applied for, and accepted, the T&C's of the time.
Today applicants can only do the same.
If T&C's in your early days were better then bully for you, hope you enjoyed the Hiltons/Hyatts etc and the (occasional) crew discount!!
Todays applicants can only apply to, and ultimately accept or reject, what's on offer today.
Just as you did.....all those years ago.
In no way saying things haven't gone downhill, much as you may hate it still a pretty good job (Vs office 0900-1700 or whatever) for the 10/15/20% of people in life in ANY profession who actually still enjoy what they do....and can still, occasionally, reflect we get paid too much with a magic dawn takeoff ....or a magic sunset or......whatever!
Unfortunately only happens very, very occasionally!!
But then who was it who said: "life is what you make it".
I thought we'd got over the bullsh*t mentality of yesteryears you demonstrate.
In your day you applied for, and accepted, the T&C's of the time.
Today applicants can only do the same.
If T&C's in your early days were better then bully for you, hope you enjoyed the Hiltons/Hyatts etc and the (occasional) crew discount!!
Todays applicants can only apply to, and ultimately accept or reject, what's on offer today.
Just as you did.....all those years ago.
In no way saying things haven't gone downhill, much as you may hate it still a pretty good job (Vs office 0900-1700 or whatever) for the 10/15/20% of people in life in ANY profession who actually still enjoy what they do....and can still, occasionally, reflect we get paid too much with a magic dawn takeoff ....or a magic sunset or......whatever!
Unfortunately only happens very, very occasionally!!
But then who was it who said: "life is what you make it".
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Darwin
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In no way saying things haven't gone downhill, much as you may hate it still a pretty good job (Vs office 0900-1700 or whatever) for the 10/15/20% of people in life in ANY profession who actually still enjoy what they do....and can still, occasionally, reflect we get paid too much with a magic dawn takeoff ....or a magic sunset or......whatever!
I'm afraid people are still missing the point. If Qantas is broken up or reorganised, jetstar incorporated or whatever it doesn't matter. Cost bases don't matter either. What matters is whether the entity that has a 60% market share of the domestic market is privately owned or not.
Public companies are saddled with rules about governance and behaviour, private companies are not. Public companies have to report profits and be transparent about their financial performance. Private companies do not.
The potential value of the entity currently called Qantas to a private owner is immense. Lets start with that huge pool of cash (working capital), then lets look at the unfettered access to world financial markets provided by membership of IATA and the Montreal clearing house, those little items will make merchant bankers salivate.
Then we look at the potential for the owner of the entity called Qantas to leverage the performance of other investments by the provision of scheduled air services. You want to build a resort where? Sorry sunshine, if we don't fly to it, how do you expect to get customers? How about a chunk of Hamilton Island? What happens to Japanese tourists wanting to visit Noosa? How does Cairns fair if the schedules are changed? There is endless temptation to either help or hinder developments in all states by "adjustment" to service levels. They could even make or break State governments.
To put that another way, the entire Qantas debacle is about power. The power to blackmail entire Australian states as well as rape the travelling public.
Public companies are saddled with rules about governance and behaviour, private companies are not. Public companies have to report profits and be transparent about their financial performance. Private companies do not.
The potential value of the entity currently called Qantas to a private owner is immense. Lets start with that huge pool of cash (working capital), then lets look at the unfettered access to world financial markets provided by membership of IATA and the Montreal clearing house, those little items will make merchant bankers salivate.
Then we look at the potential for the owner of the entity called Qantas to leverage the performance of other investments by the provision of scheduled air services. You want to build a resort where? Sorry sunshine, if we don't fly to it, how do you expect to get customers? How about a chunk of Hamilton Island? What happens to Japanese tourists wanting to visit Noosa? How does Cairns fair if the schedules are changed? There is endless temptation to either help or hinder developments in all states by "adjustment" to service levels. They could even make or break State governments.
To put that another way, the entire Qantas debacle is about power. The power to blackmail entire Australian states as well as rape the travelling public.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Inside their OODA loop
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right on the money Sunfish. In extremis, this would appear to be the business model for Emirates, the airline facilitates the larger land play for Dubai.
If your thoughts are correct, it implies that current management & board (hence its prized status in the business community) also have immense POWER as they currently direct & facilitate the course of the airline towards the larger agendas, whilst blocking others.
If your thoughts are correct, it implies that current management & board (hence its prized status in the business community) also have immense POWER as they currently direct & facilitate the course of the airline towards the larger agendas, whilst blocking others.
You usually have pretty sound arguments Sunny, but in my view what you proposed denies the realities of the free market.
If Qantas tried to hold anybody to ransom in the manner you propose, the next call made by the victim would be to the ACCC, closely followed by a call to John Borghetti, who would happily step into the breach to pick up the slack.
Granted the call to the ACCC would be relatively futile, but the call to JB would reap immediate benefits.
The threat to employees from a privatised Qantas would be a renewed drive to lower costs. That scenario would test the mettle of the workforce.
The problem QF employees face, and one which it seems the majority of employees are still doing their best to mitigate, is the trashing of the brand. Qantas' biggest differentiator has been in its brand value and safety record, which has allowed Q to charge a premium for tickets.
The safety facade collapsed long ago with the Bangkok incident and has been reinforced multiple times since. That's no real fault of anyones because it was always a facade. Anyone who pegs their reputation to not f@cking up in this industry is always going to come undone eventually.
The brand value has been trashed by the board and management, but its clear to see employees are fighting hard to arrest the fall. Unfortunately having mostly lost its safety and quality market advantage, Qantas will have to compete on price going forward. To do that effectively they need to reduce cost. There is no other way. Qantas will never recover its brand value to the levels it once enjoyed. The travelling public are just too well informed these days.
Once people travel with other carriers and learn that Qantas isn't actually special, their travel choices going forward will be made more on facts than the emotion attached to a children's choir.
The S-Curve isn't going to work either because Virgin can and will continue to match frequency/capacity, and it looks as though AJ has worked that out. The market is going to stabilise eventually, and it will probably look a bit like how it looked when there was only Ansett and TAA.
Whether it meets the career expectations of employees or not, Qantas has to lower its cost base, because it will never recapture the brand value that has now been lost. That's not to say that it can't be the airline that it once was, it just means that they are unlikely to ever be able to get the ticket premiums that they used to enjoy.
I believe that Qantas will always enjoy a small benefit from its brand, because it is quite difficult to completely destroy the image of something as iconic as Qantas, and I'm sure the new CEO's brief will be to rebuild what AJ has destroyed, but make no mistake it will be built on a lower cost base than what you currently see.
The reason I know this is that it has already been repeated many times all over the world. It's not rocket science, its airline economics. Look at the US majors. Granted that if it wasn't for Ch.11 probably none of them would currently exist, but they emerged leaner and stronger and are now making serious money because they have a lower cost base, a more consolidated industry, and a more focused strategy. Whether they can maintain it will be more a product of the workforce than the management. Ch.11 allowed them to circumvent the power of the unions for the moment, whether that can be sustained going forward will be interesting to watch.
By way of comparison, Australia has pretty much completed the consolidation phase, both major carriers have a reasonably focused strategy domestically, so that leaves the cost base. Virgin is currently competitive, therefore Qantas has to respond.
(F$cknose what the Qantas international strategy is, but I'm guessing it will look more like Virgin in 5 years time, than Virgin like Qantas. J* Asia I think is still in a state of flux. Looked good on paper, not so good in reality.)
Because Qantas and Virgin domestic operate in a protected environment, they are not highly exposed to global economic forces. i.e cheap labour in China cannot impact the cost of business in Australia (I am talking specifically about pilots here, I understand cheap labour dramatically effects many other labour groups) because Chines pilots cannot fly Australian aircraft (yet!).
There is always the chance that the next idiot will come along and try and start another LCC in Oz, but they will eventually go broke, as Virgin would have if not for Ansett's demise.
It is my view that the best chance Qantas pilots have to put a floor under conditions is to collaborate with the unions that represent Virgin pilots and have a relatively unified approach to the cost of pilot labour. To be clear, pilots are just a commodity, but one where the commodity has some control over the supply side through industrial legislation.
Of course Virgin pilots need to recognise the same problem, as they are more at risk. For Virgin to compete with Qantas, everything else being equal, they need to have a cheaper ticket. JB was gifted a lower cost base when he walked into Virgin and, despite having had a pretty good crack at increasing it, he will be continually striving to have a lower cost base than Qantas. So as Qantas lowers their cost base, Virgin will need to respond. Hence downward pressure on Virgin salaries going forward.
The days of regulation are gone for sure, and with it the ability to charge on a cost plus basis. This has been good for punters, but not so good for business owners or their employees. For Australian pilots to protect their conditions they need to be better organised than they currently are because the business owners are circling.
The answer is in AUSALPA, but I doubt that wounds have sufficiently healed for that to be anything more than wishful thinking for at least another decade. The problem I see is that if the pilots cannot learn from the past and move on, then management will continue to be one step ahead.
If Qantas tried to hold anybody to ransom in the manner you propose, the next call made by the victim would be to the ACCC, closely followed by a call to John Borghetti, who would happily step into the breach to pick up the slack.
Granted the call to the ACCC would be relatively futile, but the call to JB would reap immediate benefits.
The threat to employees from a privatised Qantas would be a renewed drive to lower costs. That scenario would test the mettle of the workforce.
The problem QF employees face, and one which it seems the majority of employees are still doing their best to mitigate, is the trashing of the brand. Qantas' biggest differentiator has been in its brand value and safety record, which has allowed Q to charge a premium for tickets.
The safety facade collapsed long ago with the Bangkok incident and has been reinforced multiple times since. That's no real fault of anyones because it was always a facade. Anyone who pegs their reputation to not f@cking up in this industry is always going to come undone eventually.
The brand value has been trashed by the board and management, but its clear to see employees are fighting hard to arrest the fall. Unfortunately having mostly lost its safety and quality market advantage, Qantas will have to compete on price going forward. To do that effectively they need to reduce cost. There is no other way. Qantas will never recover its brand value to the levels it once enjoyed. The travelling public are just too well informed these days.
Once people travel with other carriers and learn that Qantas isn't actually special, their travel choices going forward will be made more on facts than the emotion attached to a children's choir.
The S-Curve isn't going to work either because Virgin can and will continue to match frequency/capacity, and it looks as though AJ has worked that out. The market is going to stabilise eventually, and it will probably look a bit like how it looked when there was only Ansett and TAA.
Whether it meets the career expectations of employees or not, Qantas has to lower its cost base, because it will never recapture the brand value that has now been lost. That's not to say that it can't be the airline that it once was, it just means that they are unlikely to ever be able to get the ticket premiums that they used to enjoy.
I believe that Qantas will always enjoy a small benefit from its brand, because it is quite difficult to completely destroy the image of something as iconic as Qantas, and I'm sure the new CEO's brief will be to rebuild what AJ has destroyed, but make no mistake it will be built on a lower cost base than what you currently see.
The reason I know this is that it has already been repeated many times all over the world. It's not rocket science, its airline economics. Look at the US majors. Granted that if it wasn't for Ch.11 probably none of them would currently exist, but they emerged leaner and stronger and are now making serious money because they have a lower cost base, a more consolidated industry, and a more focused strategy. Whether they can maintain it will be more a product of the workforce than the management. Ch.11 allowed them to circumvent the power of the unions for the moment, whether that can be sustained going forward will be interesting to watch.
By way of comparison, Australia has pretty much completed the consolidation phase, both major carriers have a reasonably focused strategy domestically, so that leaves the cost base. Virgin is currently competitive, therefore Qantas has to respond.
(F$cknose what the Qantas international strategy is, but I'm guessing it will look more like Virgin in 5 years time, than Virgin like Qantas. J* Asia I think is still in a state of flux. Looked good on paper, not so good in reality.)
Because Qantas and Virgin domestic operate in a protected environment, they are not highly exposed to global economic forces. i.e cheap labour in China cannot impact the cost of business in Australia (I am talking specifically about pilots here, I understand cheap labour dramatically effects many other labour groups) because Chines pilots cannot fly Australian aircraft (yet!).
There is always the chance that the next idiot will come along and try and start another LCC in Oz, but they will eventually go broke, as Virgin would have if not for Ansett's demise.
It is my view that the best chance Qantas pilots have to put a floor under conditions is to collaborate with the unions that represent Virgin pilots and have a relatively unified approach to the cost of pilot labour. To be clear, pilots are just a commodity, but one where the commodity has some control over the supply side through industrial legislation.
Of course Virgin pilots need to recognise the same problem, as they are more at risk. For Virgin to compete with Qantas, everything else being equal, they need to have a cheaper ticket. JB was gifted a lower cost base when he walked into Virgin and, despite having had a pretty good crack at increasing it, he will be continually striving to have a lower cost base than Qantas. So as Qantas lowers their cost base, Virgin will need to respond. Hence downward pressure on Virgin salaries going forward.
The days of regulation are gone for sure, and with it the ability to charge on a cost plus basis. This has been good for punters, but not so good for business owners or their employees. For Australian pilots to protect their conditions they need to be better organised than they currently are because the business owners are circling.
The answer is in AUSALPA, but I doubt that wounds have sufficiently healed for that to be anything more than wishful thinking for at least another decade. The problem I see is that if the pilots cannot learn from the past and move on, then management will continue to be one step ahead.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas frequent flyer float plan put on ice
It is understood management will tell the board it does not want to pursue a partial float or trade sale of Qantas Loyalty after examining the option for the past nine months.
The decision is expected to be *supported by the board, which will meet next week ahead of the airline’s annual results release next Thursday.
Qantas has been exploring floating 30 to 40 per cent of the airline’s *10 million-member frequent flyer program in a process being run by Macquarie and Citi. Analysts estimate the entire *business is worth between $2.5 billion and $3 billion.
The move was part of a wider *strategic review. Other options, such as splitting the domestic and international business to attract more foreign investment, remain under consideration. But it is understood the frequent flyer portion of the review will be formally killed off after a board decision next week.
A trade or private equity sale of *Qantas Loyalty was ruled out earlier in the review because potential buyers wanted more than 50 per cent ownership of the business and the airline was unwilling to relinquish control.
Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce is expected to announce the decision on August 28 when the airline releases its annual results and gives the market an update on the structural review and its transformation program, which is aiming to cut $2 billion of costs over the next three years.
Qantas on Wednesday declined to comment when asked about the status of the loyalty business review.
The Australian Financial Review’s Street Talk column had on Wednesday reported a partial float appeared increasingly unlikely.
Read more: Qantas frequent flyer float plan put on ice
The decision is expected to be *supported by the board, which will meet next week ahead of the airline’s annual results release next Thursday.
Qantas has been exploring floating 30 to 40 per cent of the airline’s *10 million-member frequent flyer program in a process being run by Macquarie and Citi. Analysts estimate the entire *business is worth between $2.5 billion and $3 billion.
The move was part of a wider *strategic review. Other options, such as splitting the domestic and international business to attract more foreign investment, remain under consideration. But it is understood the frequent flyer portion of the review will be formally killed off after a board decision next week.
A trade or private equity sale of *Qantas Loyalty was ruled out earlier in the review because potential buyers wanted more than 50 per cent ownership of the business and the airline was unwilling to relinquish control.
Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce is expected to announce the decision on August 28 when the airline releases its annual results and gives the market an update on the structural review and its transformation program, which is aiming to cut $2 billion of costs over the next three years.
Qantas on Wednesday declined to comment when asked about the status of the loyalty business review.
The Australian Financial Review’s Street Talk column had on Wednesday reported a partial float appeared increasingly unlikely.
Read more: Qantas frequent flyer float plan put on ice
The management team will be under pressure to provide more details about its plans to slash controllable costs in its international division by one-third, or $1 billion a year.
Aaah, but were his lips moving?
Last edited by OBie101; 21st Aug 2014 at 00:09. Reason: ... for being a dithering old f4rt and getting beaten to the same sentiment!
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What The
Into context please - if you don't occasionally get a kick out of the game for whatever reason, if you're part of the 80% (90%...95%??) of the population who are just doing what they're doing for the $$ and filling in time until they die - then I reckon that's pretty sad.
Maybe that's just my strange outlook.
And no, not ovepaid - indeed seriously underpaid for the truly magnificent skills that I provide to my employer every single day I deign to grace his workplace with my presence!!
Cheers!
Into context please - if you don't occasionally get a kick out of the game for whatever reason, if you're part of the 80% (90%...95%??) of the population who are just doing what they're doing for the $$ and filling in time until they die - then I reckon that's pretty sad.
Maybe that's just my strange outlook.
And no, not ovepaid - indeed seriously underpaid for the truly magnificent skills that I provide to my employer every single day I deign to grace his workplace with my presence!!
Cheers!
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Australia
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An apology.
galdian
My apologies if I came across in an unappreciative tone.
I absolutely understand that people sign up for T&C's at the time. I had a great time in aviation and am now living another passion. I am grateful for my 26 years of airline employment.
I also agree that life is what you make it however I guess the point I was trying to convey is that it is a touch sad that people in the industry no matter their role be it air/ground/back office or opps the genuine concern for people by management is absent and it appears to be a race to the bottom.
More seats, less and smaller loos, more cancellations than ever and more 'efficiencies and transforming to make airlines better than ever' Great words from the Spin Dr's yet the reality is different from the pretty pictures.
Yes some things are better, technology has improved, systems changed and without suggesting we return to 'Hyatt' days I firmly believe the lack of humanity, care and family contribute to a more uncertain, destabilized and unhappy work environment. Timeless qualities that cost nothing and transcend generations. It's a shame really.
That's progress and I take your point, we all live in different eras and one doesn't miss what they have never had.
I'm glad you seem very happy where you are and again I didn't intend to offend.
My apologies if I came across in an unappreciative tone.
I absolutely understand that people sign up for T&C's at the time. I had a great time in aviation and am now living another passion. I am grateful for my 26 years of airline employment.
I also agree that life is what you make it however I guess the point I was trying to convey is that it is a touch sad that people in the industry no matter their role be it air/ground/back office or opps the genuine concern for people by management is absent and it appears to be a race to the bottom.
More seats, less and smaller loos, more cancellations than ever and more 'efficiencies and transforming to make airlines better than ever' Great words from the Spin Dr's yet the reality is different from the pretty pictures.
Yes some things are better, technology has improved, systems changed and without suggesting we return to 'Hyatt' days I firmly believe the lack of humanity, care and family contribute to a more uncertain, destabilized and unhappy work environment. Timeless qualities that cost nothing and transcend generations. It's a shame really.
That's progress and I take your point, we all live in different eras and one doesn't miss what they have never had.
I'm glad you seem very happy where you are and again I didn't intend to offend.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Difference of opinion perhaps......
Virgin Express wrote:
You usually have pretty sound arguments Sunny, but in my view what you proposed denies the realities of the free market.
If Q tried to hold anybody to ransom in the manner you propose, the next call made by the victim would be to the ACCC, closely followed by a call to John Borghetti, who would happily step into the breach to pick up the slack.
Capitalism plain and simple. Socialise the risk, nationalise the loses. and privatise the profits. In that exact order. Socialise the risk by scaring the crap out of the workforce. But they are all still here. Next nationalise the loses by going to the government and ask for 3 big ones from the taxpayer to cover your bottom line. Yep, tried that too. Last but not least, go private......Its just business.....
KR
You usually have pretty sound arguments Sunny, but in my view what you proposed denies the realities of the free market.
If Q tried to hold anybody to ransom in the manner you propose, the next call made by the victim would be to the ACCC, closely followed by a call to John Borghetti, who would happily step into the breach to pick up the slack.
Capitalism plain and simple. Socialise the risk, nationalise the loses. and privatise the profits. In that exact order. Socialise the risk by scaring the crap out of the workforce. But they are all still here. Next nationalise the loses by going to the government and ask for 3 big ones from the taxpayer to cover your bottom line. Yep, tried that too. Last but not least, go private......Its just business.....
KR
Last edited by Acute Instinct; 21st Aug 2014 at 05:00.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: melbourne
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where will we be five years from now?
Exactly in the same position.
the board is seriously dropping the ball on international.
787 deliveries on hold flying three rolls royce powered 744 around burning twice as much fuel as a 777 or 787.
flying nearly fifteen year old A330 around that will be ready for retirement in five years.This is a never ending game of catchup with no vision past next fridays boardroom luncheon.
i hope someone asks some hard hitting questions next week.
Exactly in the same position.
the board is seriously dropping the ball on international.
787 deliveries on hold flying three rolls royce powered 744 around burning twice as much fuel as a 777 or 787.
flying nearly fifteen year old A330 around that will be ready for retirement in five years.This is a never ending game of catchup with no vision past next fridays boardroom luncheon.
i hope someone asks some hard hitting questions next week.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 704
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PPrune. Free strategic and operational consulting to airline boards everywhere.
(If only they would listen...)
Seriously - so much wisdom gathered here, so little effective decision-making in the board room.
Reverse the roles: If a PIC with 400 souls on board faced an in-flight crisis and didn't make good decisions, the potential outcomes range from 400 headstones to a bit of scraped paint - but whether s/he survived (literally) the outcome, s/he would forever carry the blame. Accountability is forever. It's all built into the pilot's psyche, even at solo level where you might only hurt yourself.
Yet, at board level, they play with their toys. I bet another logo tweak and uniform redesign will be just around the next corner. Nero fiddles while Rome burns.
(If only they would listen...)
Seriously - so much wisdom gathered here, so little effective decision-making in the board room.
Reverse the roles: If a PIC with 400 souls on board faced an in-flight crisis and didn't make good decisions, the potential outcomes range from 400 headstones to a bit of scraped paint - but whether s/he survived (literally) the outcome, s/he would forever carry the blame. Accountability is forever. It's all built into the pilot's psyche, even at solo level where you might only hurt yourself.
Yet, at board level, they play with their toys. I bet another logo tweak and uniform redesign will be just around the next corner. Nero fiddles while Rome burns.