QF Fraud - allowances
It is an interpretation of internal company policy.
And that is coming from someone who had a personal cheque stolen by one of his employees from one of his companies, made out to cash by them (for $20,000) and had they not actually pleaded guilty in Court the NSW Constabulary said it was doubtful I would have got a conviction.
I'm glad you find things like that worth a giggle. I certainly do not. And that's with the passage of time. I found it a LOT less amusing when I was dealing with it.
The follow up (just for giggles) was a good behaviour bond, I did get my money back and they got a $500 fine.
And for more giggles, might we discuss Ms 'I've done nothing wrong!' Gillard, Wilson, Blewitt, Thomson and Williamson?
It is QF Company policy that nothing be discussed until internal disciplinary procedures have run their course. If you are a QF Captain, you are at worst a very good bush lawyer. These guys are NOT idiots and would have (again, at worst) a very good argument as to why they did what they did. Who leaked this, and why have they not been stood down?
And Company Super contributions can be withdrawn is my understanding. And yes I know this to have had occurred. In the instance I know of (decades ago) I agree with it happening, but the facts are that QF have many, many means of dealing with this quietly and getting their money - and more than their money back. Why the publicity?
And that is coming from someone who had a personal cheque stolen by one of his employees from one of his companies, made out to cash by them (for $20,000) and had they not actually pleaded guilty in Court the NSW Constabulary said it was doubtful I would have got a conviction.
I'm glad you find things like that worth a giggle. I certainly do not. And that's with the passage of time. I found it a LOT less amusing when I was dealing with it.
The follow up (just for giggles) was a good behaviour bond, I did get my money back and they got a $500 fine.
And for more giggles, might we discuss Ms 'I've done nothing wrong!' Gillard, Wilson, Blewitt, Thomson and Williamson?
It is QF Company policy that nothing be discussed until internal disciplinary procedures have run their course. If you are a QF Captain, you are at worst a very good bush lawyer. These guys are NOT idiots and would have (again, at worst) a very good argument as to why they did what they did. Who leaked this, and why have they not been stood down?
And Company Super contributions can be withdrawn is my understanding. And yes I know this to have had occurred. In the instance I know of (decades ago) I agree with it happening, but the facts are that QF have many, many means of dealing with this quietly and getting their money - and more than their money back. Why the publicity?
Last edited by V-Jet; 22nd Apr 2014 at 09:20.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 57
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by fedsec
There is no way any of the Pilots would have leaked this to the Aus. I think it an absolute disgrace that Qantas have leaked this story and doing so has breached a number of their own policies. If that was investigated I am certain they would deny all knowledge.
Bit of pot and kettle there SP even if you did delete it a bit later.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mostly at home
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given that the Company knows where each pilot lives (and they do) I'm struggling to get this "fraud" thing. If someone applies for an allowance and they are approved ... perhaps the clerk should pay more attention.
This has all the hallmarks of managers (?) who live in a morals/ethics free zone.
Personally, I am utterly dismayed that QF Management have released this "stuff" ... I am utterly disgusted at their conduct which has the hallmarks of betrayal of trust.
But then ... look who we elected to stuff our country .... ?
This has all the hallmarks of managers (?) who live in a morals/ethics free zone.
Personally, I am utterly dismayed that QF Management have released this "stuff" ... I am utterly disgusted at their conduct which has the hallmarks of betrayal of trust.
But then ... look who we elected to stuff our country .... ?
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reading the article, it is more likely the source of the information is the "flight attendants and their industrial representatives".
The last three paragraphs stand out like a beacon as being inconsistent with the rest of the article.
The only reason the reporter would have spoken to "flight attendants and their industrial representatives" for this article would be because they are associated with the source of the information.
Just my one cents worth.
The last three paragraphs stand out like a beacon as being inconsistent with the rest of the article.
The only reason the reporter would have spoken to "flight attendants and their industrial representatives" for this article would be because they are associated with the source of the information.
Just my one cents worth.
I agree Camel! Why is it that everyone is asking for calm until investigation is complete, yet blaming The Company for leaking the story? Would seem more likely that this has come from another "source"....
Are you two sphincters done? The FAAA source would have had to been informed by the reporter seeking comment, and the reporter would have been directed there by the original source, knowing that a juicy third party quote was in the offing.
There is no way that the original facts could be leaked by anyone other than the original compiler of said facts. Which is, contrary to all documented policy, someone in Qantas. Someone who needs a close encounter with Centrelink.
This kind of thing just invites a comparative retributive project. Say, a compilation of management rorts, boondoggles, failures and misrepresentations charted against the known renumeration of the perpetrators. What fun! Lets see whose fraud/looting is the greater sin.
Want a witch hunt? Fine. Let's have a witch hunt. The kindling is over there, and the line for the dunking chair forms to the right. Do I smell smoke?
Disclaimer: if these people are in breach of whatever rules apply (and its hard to keep count these days, what with the trough of riches being slurped by our current crop of fin-de-siecle custom-suited executive looters)*, they deserve their fates. The same as those who deliver negative value for eye-popping renumeration deserve their eventual reckoning. (I wish that I was not an atheist)
*call that hyperbole? This is hyperbole!
There is no way that the original facts could be leaked by anyone other than the original compiler of said facts. Which is, contrary to all documented policy, someone in Qantas. Someone who needs a close encounter with Centrelink.
This kind of thing just invites a comparative retributive project. Say, a compilation of management rorts, boondoggles, failures and misrepresentations charted against the known renumeration of the perpetrators. What fun! Lets see whose fraud/looting is the greater sin.
Want a witch hunt? Fine. Let's have a witch hunt. The kindling is over there, and the line for the dunking chair forms to the right. Do I smell smoke?
Disclaimer: if these people are in breach of whatever rules apply (and its hard to keep count these days, what with the trough of riches being slurped by our current crop of fin-de-siecle custom-suited executive looters)*, they deserve their fates. The same as those who deliver negative value for eye-popping renumeration deserve their eventual reckoning. (I wish that I was not an atheist)
*call that hyperbole? This is hyperbole!
CS and KK:
If that is the case, QF should have made far better attempts at being 'quiet' about it. And if they wanted to find a 'source' they could.
Company manuals threaten death for looking sideways if not approved. Why is this instance so different?
And after decades of being blatantly lied to, I cannot accept an 'innocent mistake' excuse.
Print media is particularly swayed by QF drivel. I am biased because I have not seen a single instance in at least the last 5 years of QF behaving honourably. That article was devoid of real factual information - QF could have quashed it easily.
Industrial Relations trial by media?
If that is the case, QF should have made far better attempts at being 'quiet' about it. And if they wanted to find a 'source' they could.
Company manuals threaten death for looking sideways if not approved. Why is this instance so different?
And after decades of being blatantly lied to, I cannot accept an 'innocent mistake' excuse.
Print media is particularly swayed by QF drivel. I am biased because I have not seen a single instance in at least the last 5 years of QF behaving honourably. That article was devoid of real factual information - QF could have quashed it easily.
Industrial Relations trial by media?
Ok! Let's put the boot on the other foot.
Exactly why did the Company Secretary and Assistant recently resign effective immediately.
All very hush hush in the press makes me think there is something somebody doesn't want to get out.
Any Journo's out there? Start digging!
Exactly why did the Company Secretary and Assistant recently resign effective immediately.
All very hush hush in the press makes me think there is something somebody doesn't want to get out.
Any Journo's out there? Start digging!
Exactly and well brought up.
Paraphrasing your excellent point: The legal custodians of the Company's right to operate have resigned in record time when whispers of a CASA investigation are heard. Within a few weeks evil Tech Crew of (probably) 20 years exemplary service are possibly found in breach of some obscure allowance that was possibly erroneously paid by the Company but can be recouped in days if need be.
I can't quite understand why one reached the media and the other doesn't.
But then again I am biased and don't trust the bastards!
Paraphrasing your excellent point: The legal custodians of the Company's right to operate have resigned in record time when whispers of a CASA investigation are heard. Within a few weeks evil Tech Crew of (probably) 20 years exemplary service are possibly found in breach of some obscure allowance that was possibly erroneously paid by the Company but can be recouped in days if need be.
I can't quite understand why one reached the media and the other doesn't.
But then again I am biased and don't trust the bastards!
That article is clearly designed to make Jo Public think " pilots are w@nkers... how come I don't earn $200k?.....w@nkers".
I get the feeling that the article is the first shot in a media war that you guys don't even know you're part of.
You guys should release a story about management balls-ups like a previous poster said and include some examples of how a pilot can save the company ( or cost the company ) tens of thousands of dollars with a relatively routine decision.
That article is rubbish.
I get the feeling that the article is the first shot in a media war that you guys don't even know you're part of.
You guys should release a story about management balls-ups like a previous poster said and include some examples of how a pilot can save the company ( or cost the company ) tens of thousands of dollars with a relatively routine decision.
That article is rubbish.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know it's all about you v-jet, but next time I commit fraud can I refer the complainant to you for advice as to what is and what is not a matter to be determined with reference to the law?
I have major issues with airlines choosing trial by media instead of the more traditional approach that involves due process, law and solicitors.
Cast your mind back to that idiot Wirthless announcing to the world on behalf of that idiot CEO that Rolls Royce were to blame for Qf32 without reference to anything like facts. As it happened it was right, but in the words of a much better script writer than I 'that's a hell of a gamble with a multi billion dollar airline'.
Using the media to shoot from the hip without following THEIR OWN rules is not smart. And that's assuming what QF says is anything close to true. It -might- be (and that's really the point) but my inclination is that if QF say something is black, then I would at least suspect it's white.
I think referring to due process and his or her Lordship is far more reliable than allowing someone (who probably looks up to the Joyce/wirthless school of management 'technique') make decisions affecting lives based on discussions with Hedley Thomas and/or Rupert Murdoch. I doubt Hedley or Rupert even own wigs - just for starters!
Cast your mind back to that idiot Wirthless announcing to the world on behalf of that idiot CEO that Rolls Royce were to blame for Qf32 without reference to anything like facts. As it happened it was right, but in the words of a much better script writer than I 'that's a hell of a gamble with a multi billion dollar airline'.
Using the media to shoot from the hip without following THEIR OWN rules is not smart. And that's assuming what QF says is anything close to true. It -might- be (and that's really the point) but my inclination is that if QF say something is black, then I would at least suspect it's white.
I think referring to due process and his or her Lordship is far more reliable than allowing someone (who probably looks up to the Joyce/wirthless school of management 'technique') make decisions affecting lives based on discussions with Hedley Thomas and/or Rupert Murdoch. I doubt Hedley or Rupert even own wigs - just for starters!
Gemini Twin So if they lived 190 km away they are supposed to travel back and forth every day from home???
Some Q pilots live in NZ and Bali. If they CHOOSE to do that, why should the company be responsible for there travel arrangements?
You are BASED at a particular location and are expected to get to work. If Q need you to train in A DIFFERENT location to your BASING they will cover costs of accommodation etc, because THEY have 'made' you relocate (temporarily) for the training period. (Remember, if your personal circumstances dictate, you don't have to take the training slot - RIN excepted, and as a 'commuter' that is a gamble you take.)
Get real fellas, IF these guys have claimed money (not some obscure allowance) that they are not entitled to, they are committing fraud.
Yes, the info SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN MADE PUBLIC, but we are dealing with two SEPERATE issues here, the alleged fraud AND the alleged company privacy breech (for what APPEARS to be industrial reasons).
V-jet: big assumption that these people have had a 20 year career of exemplary service, they might just have been rorting the system for all these years and have finally got caught!
Stop putting in emotion and wait for facts before tainting either side with particular traits.
Last edited by allthecoolnamesarego; 22nd Apr 2014 at 22:14.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aside from the fraud issue.
The fact it was published in the media raises two issues.
It makes a mockery of the JUST CULTURE they have pushed over the last few years.
And.... It makes a mockery of the parchment / scroll or whatever it was called from the PWC love in. Remember that one about mutual respect etc etc.
The fact it was published in the media raises two issues.
It makes a mockery of the JUST CULTURE they have pushed over the last few years.
And.... It makes a mockery of the parchment / scroll or whatever it was called from the PWC love in. Remember that one about mutual respect etc etc.
V-jet: big assumption that these people have had a 20 year career of exemplary service, they might just have been rorting the system for all these years and have finally got caught!
Stop putting in emotion and wait for facts before tainting either side with particular traits.
Stop putting in emotion and wait for facts before tainting either side with particular traits.
A lot of paranoia and jumping at shadows here
Agree totally with the shadow jumping. And that is EXACTLY why this stuff should be OUT OF THE MEDIA!!
MC: Absolutely. IF fraud is proven is irrelevant in my mind. There are a myriad of avenues to deal with it, and as I keep saying Qantas will not be out of pocket and disciplinary measures will be followed. The abuse of process is the issue.
allthecoolnamesarego, I think you have somewhat missed Gemini Twin's point. Reference section 49.1.2(b) of the short haul EBA. Your quote...
...is not entirely correct. If the crew member lives within 200km of the location of the training they do not qualify for the allowance even if they are training out of their base.
Hence the point of them driving 190km to and from training each day.
None of what I have posted has any relevance to the stated allegations. It is simply clarifying an EBA provision.
Q need you to train in A DIFFERENT location to your BASING they will cover costs of accommodation etc, because THEY have 'made' you relocate
Hence the point of them driving 190km to and from training each day.
None of what I have posted has any relevance to the stated allegations. It is simply clarifying an EBA provision.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: In the big chair
Age: 48
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems to me that the only thing missing here is the offending crew having some association to/with Eddie Obeid.
Surely it is time that Warren Truss set up an Aviation ICAC to rid the industry of such corruption. First item of business could be examining the issue of price-fixing of freight, for example....
Surely it is time that Warren Truss set up an Aviation ICAC to rid the industry of such corruption. First item of business could be examining the issue of price-fixing of freight, for example....
Anyone know anyone in finance department and in particular, section looking after staff expenses?
I'd bet that the team that looks at staff expenses could tell you some stories about fraud when it comes to expenses, the issue there is that for example, a PA might purchase something for their boss but the boss approves it.
It's a rort when management types send flowers to staff when they are sick, getting married, have just had a baby, farewell gifts whilst the rest of us usually put a few $$'s in an envelope. Management types think they can do it and so do it.
Wasn't it a joke that QF recently held and paid for farewell drinks/feed recently for management types whilst the majority of the 5000
do not get the same company paid farewell - or was that a fort?
When it comes to duty travel, isn't it a rort when the most senior of management can stay at a 5 star hotel whilst others stay at hotels as per policy that are certainly not 5 star? Or is that OK under the caste system at QF?
Isn't it a rort when the CEO bumps a commercial pax from 1st class? Sure I read that the previous CEO did this type of thing.
Isn't it a rort when senior management types can pick up the phone and request employment for best friend of son or daughter and get a role, no questions asked?
As I said, anyone know anyone in finance department and in particular, section looking after staff expenses?
I'd bet that the team that looks at staff expenses could tell you some stories about fraud when it comes to expenses, the issue there is that for example, a PA might purchase something for their boss but the boss approves it.
It's a rort when management types send flowers to staff when they are sick, getting married, have just had a baby, farewell gifts whilst the rest of us usually put a few $$'s in an envelope. Management types think they can do it and so do it.
Wasn't it a joke that QF recently held and paid for farewell drinks/feed recently for management types whilst the majority of the 5000
do not get the same company paid farewell - or was that a fort?When it comes to duty travel, isn't it a rort when the most senior of management can stay at a 5 star hotel whilst others stay at hotels as per policy that are certainly not 5 star? Or is that OK under the caste system at QF?
Isn't it a rort when the CEO bumps a commercial pax from 1st class? Sure I read that the previous CEO did this type of thing.
Isn't it a rort when senior management types can pick up the phone and request employment for best friend of son or daughter and get a role, no questions asked?
As I said, anyone know anyone in finance department and in particular, section looking after staff expenses?