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

So you need a new fleet Leigh?

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

So you need a new fleet Leigh?

Old 16th Feb 2018, 09:55
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Elysium
Posts: 40
For all the hot air and braggadocio written here, none of you properly understand who you are dealing with and how they think. They arenít afraid of work to rule or loss of good will. The union doesnít seem to have any plan beyond holding a meeting. What happens after the meeting? Iím going to put my money on: not much. Why? Because there arenít any realistic options available, even within the EBA process. FWA isnít going to go scope clauses or the like and Qantas isnít going to give you any. Why? Because then everyone else will want one.

But good luck to you.
Justin. Beaver is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2018, 10:03
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 780
If you are under hardship, it is possible to access your Super. Donít forget, he has to pay tax on that as well. Has anyone asked if he is OK?
V-Jet is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2018, 10:14
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: preferably somewhere colder!
Posts: 53
We all know that they will use jetconnect as a threat come your negotiation. However all need to remember that jetconnect as an 'airline' themselves that can't provide a contract in this present market let alone crew what they need to do.
NGsim is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2018, 10:34
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Darwin
Posts: 283
Yep, my bad. Out by 5m.
I hope he is ok.
Why was Andrew (participant in 3 failed airlines) worth so much less than Gareth?

Last edited by What The; 16th Feb 2018 at 11:09.
What The is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2018, 12:49
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 1,245
AD and the CFO are both attending the SGM. Time to call them out on their idle threats of cancelling aircraft orders...the ball is in their court, not ours.
Transition Layer is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2018, 22:17
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 780
Justin, The problem is (the way I see it) that this is an extraordinarily inept management Ďteamí. Either long term employees succeed in bringing about change or Qantas wonít exist. Iíd rather go and count barnacles on a fishing trawler in the Territory than provide any support for the greatest bunch of self enriching incompetents I could possibly have imagined. I am
fortunate to have seen and lived through Qantas when you automatically went an extra 10 miles every day. This lot were in the box seat of airlines to do something special. They couldnít have done a worse job at running an airline, conversely they couldnít have done a better job at enriching themselves at the long term expense of the Australian economy. They also forget this is a business dealing with thousands of lives. For the first time a few weeks ago I heard the words used Ďif this keeps goingí and Ďdisasterí in the same sentence by someone highly qualified. Itís been unsaid in many thoughts, but this was the first time Iíve Ďheardí it. Once again, this isnít about money itís about everything that has (and is) being right royally stuffed up by people paid millions (even after tax) to do the opposite.
V-Jet is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2018, 22:38
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Elysium
Posts: 40
Originally Posted by V-Jet View Post
Justin, The problem is (the way I see it) that this is an extraordinarily inept management Ďteamí. Either long term employees succeed in bringing about change or Qantas wonít exist. Iíd rather go and count barnacles on a fishing trawler in the Territory than provide any support for the greatest bunch of self enriching incompetents I could possibly have imagined. I am
fortunate to have seen and lived through Qantas when you automatically went an extra 10 miles every day. This lot were in the box seat of airlines to do something special. They couldnít have done a worse job at running an airline, conversely they couldnít have done a better job at enriching themselves at the long term expense of the Australian economy. They also forget this is a business dealing with thousands of lives. For the first time a few weeks ago I heard the words used Ďif this keeps goingí and Ďdisasterí in the same sentence by someone highly qualified. Itís been unsaid in many thoughts, but this was the first time Iíve Ďheardí it. Once again, this isnít about money itís about everything that has (and is) being right royally stuffed up by people paid millions (even after tax) to do the opposite.
You can think theyíre inept all you like but the shareholders donít and neither does the market and thatís all that matters.
Justin. Beaver is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2018, 23:06
  #88 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 899
AD and the CFO are both attending the SGM. Time to call them out on their idle threats of cancelling aircraft orders...the ball is in their court, not ours.
I tend to agree with Justin, if the union 'invite' these cretins to the Special General Meeting of pilots then the union has no plan of attack. The 457 visa announcement was nearly two months ago.
Relying on a union that was grounded and locked out for wearing ties and making in -flight announcements to take a confrontational approach is self deluded.

The only approach that ever yields results is to withdraw the goodwill. It isn't done openly or verbally. Just quietly.
Rated De is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2018, 23:10
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 648
Originally Posted by v-jet View Post
justin, the problem is (the way i see it) that this is an extraordinarily inept management Ďteamí. Either long term employees succeed in bringing about change or qantas wonít exist. Iíd rather go and count barnacles on a fishing trawler in the territory than provide any support for the greatest bunch of self enriching incompetents i could possibly have imagined. I am
fortunate to have seen and lived through qantas when you automatically went an extra 10 miles every day. This lot were in the box seat of airlines to do something special. They couldnít have done a worse job at running an airline, conversely they couldnít have done a better job at enriching themselves at the long term expense of the australian economy. They also forget this is a business dealing with thousands of lives. For the first time a few weeks ago i heard the words used Ďif this keeps goingí and Ďdisasterí in the same sentence by someone highly qualified. Itís been unsaid in many thoughts, but this was the first time iíve Ďheardí it. Once again, this isnít about money itís about everything that has (and is) being right royally stuffed up by people paid millions (even after tax) to do the opposite.
👍👍👍👏👏👏👏👍👍👍
dragon man is online now  
Old 17th Feb 2018, 00:30
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 780
You can think theyíre inept all you like but the shareholders donít and neither does the market and thatís all that matters.
Airlines are specialised. Analysts most certainly are not! Analysts were pretty keen on Enron, Lehmans, World Com, Lyondell and closer to home Bond Corp, Qintex etc etc etc as well - right up until the time they weren't.

I met a banker a couple of years ago who was very boastful about his relationship with 'Alan'. Having no idea who I was or what I (really) did I let him feed me the lines from the Great Man. I inherently do not trust bankers to understand much at all really, but all I could think of afterwards was that the lenders had ZERO idea about what Qf was doing and wasting money on. The penny will drop - make no mistake, it always does. The only reason it's lasted as long as it has is that Qf is a near monopoly. It's pretty hard to stuff up a near monopoly, but they sure are giving it a red hot go! I mean come on, $1.7b of borrowed cash, essentially to guarantee their own bonuses? That's straight out of the Enron copybook!

The first 35 seconds is enough:

They're analysts, they don't know preferred stock from livestock!
V-Jet is offline  
Old 17th Feb 2018, 03:12
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 789
Goodwill

Angryrat, Dragonman,

Is it just goodwill? Changing Haneda to Joburg is $4049 as a straight swap. Iím sure you can do the numbers at Divisor +5, or Drop Paid with Fixed Protection, for the same days away. Being Ďassignedí the Haneda would be at the higher end of that range.

Overall it comes down to the balance between goodwill/money and workrate/disruption/engagement, how that plays out in a market with an increasing shortage of pilots and to what extent Qantas mainline remains insulated.
*Lancer* is offline  
Old 17th Feb 2018, 03:37
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Elysium
Posts: 40
Originally Posted by V-Jet View Post
Airlines are specialised. Analysts most certainly are not! Analysts were pretty keen on Enron, Lehmans, World Com, Lyondell and closer to home Bond Corp, Qintex etc etc etc as well - right up until the time they weren't.

I met a banker a couple of years ago who was very boastful about his relationship with 'Alan'. Having no idea who I was or what I (really) did I let him feed me the lines from the Great Man. I inherently do not trust bankers to understand much at all really, but all I could think of afterwards was that the lenders had ZERO idea about what Qf was doing and wasting money on. The penny will drop - make no mistake, it always does. The only reason it's lasted as long as it has is that Qf is a near monopoly. It's pretty hard to stuff up a near monopoly, but they sure are giving it a red hot go! I mean come on, $1.7b of borrowed cash, essentially to guarantee their own bonuses? That's straight out of the Enron copybook]
Get back to me if and when Qantas ends up like those companies. Until then itís a false association driven by your industrial grievances.

When the SP is high and the market is happy, the PPRuNe experts say itís all because of fuel prices and dumb luck. If the SP was low, that would all be Alanís fault and he should be sacked. In other words, he canít win unless he gives you what you want industrially. Itís not going to happen.
Justin. Beaver is offline  
Old 17th Feb 2018, 03:49
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 780
Industrially, I want an airline that works and will be around in 50 years time. Everything else is window dressing.

Explain to me why you borrow $1.7b to secure bonuses? Qantas needs aircraft urgently, 10 years ago. Why is it wasting capital on largess instead of capex?

Getting back to you once Qf is financially wrecked is just a tadge too late don't you think?
V-Jet is offline  
Old 17th Feb 2018, 03:58
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Elysium
Posts: 40
Originally Posted by V-Jet View Post
Industrially, I want an airline that works and will be around in 50 years time. Everything else is window dressing.

Explain to me why you borrow $1.7b to secure bonuses? Qantas needs aircraft urgently, 10 years ago. Why is it wasting capital on largess instead of capex?

Getting back to you once Qf is financially wrecked is just a tadge too late don't you think?
Obviously youíd support a decision to improve 737 utilisation to allow Mel-Bali and Osaka flying and decisions to have more appropriate aircraft on WA might routes then? Those are the kind of decisions that will help ensure the airline is around in 50 years time.
Justin. Beaver is offline  
Old 17th Feb 2018, 04:03
  #95 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 899
When the SP is high and the market is happy, the PPRuNe experts say it’s all because of fuel prices and dumb luck. If the SP was low, that would all be Alan’s fault and he should be sacked. In other words, he can’t win unless he gives you what you want industrially. It’s not going to happen.
Nice strawman, it isn't industrial it is reality; Qantas need a new fleet.

This 'management' had the opportunity of a lifetime with historical low rates of interest and build in yields. Fuel price being as low as it was, meant they could either invest or ignore; they chose the latter. Instead what they did was spend $1.75 billion of shareholder funds driving the share price higher and rewarding themselves handsomely. As I gestured to Mr Clifford, I am sure he has access to Forbes magazine, so by all means Justin have a read.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/greatsp.../#5414e3147841


Given Mr Joyce's very humble upbringing in Ireland, it is likely that the man has known some real hardship. Those of us who have also experienced it can attest that support and community are vital. I remain disappointed how quickly he forgot the community, the family that a modern labour intensive airline actually is.

The share price is but a reflection of perceptions. That perception is now just beginning to challenge the carefully cultivated and repeated narrative.

Industrially he may attempt to gamble again that the events of 2011 are behind him and the public still believing that Qantas was 'terminal' and 'transformed'. He may blame pilots, he may blame staff and 'overpaid' pilots, that may or may not work, but ultimately they need a new fleet.

It is obvious to those in the company, it is obvious to the traveling public, their competition and even the MBA types running projections through black box computing program and 'selling' opinion as an analyst.

What disguised the structural problem that has been neglected by the 'management' was cheap fuel.

Pilots simply withdrawing co-operation will provide pressure, the company will attempt to identify transgressors and set up adversarial industrial HR against them, however CAR224 provides the ultimate protection. Well used it is difficult to identify, almost impossible to police yet very powerful.
Rated De is offline  
Old 17th Feb 2018, 04:19
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 780
Originally Posted by Justin. Beaver View Post
Obviously youíd support a decision to improve 737 utilisation to allow Mel-Bali and Osaka flying and decisions to have more appropriate aircraft on WA might routes then? Those are the kind of decisions that will help ensure the airline is around in 50 years time.
Qantas is the issue, and as anyone with half an idea would understand, outsourcing is brilliant today and a disaster tomorrow. Outsourcing is the VERY last thing any company needs, Qantas especially.

Please answer the one question I asked. Why was $1.7B thrown away on self enrichment when it was desperately needed for fleet replacement?
V-Jet is offline  
Old 17th Feb 2018, 09:38
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Elysium
Posts: 40
Originally Posted by V-Jet View Post
Qantas is the issue, and as anyone with half an idea would understand, outsourcing is brilliant today and a disaster tomorrow. Outsourcing is the VERY last thing any company needs, Qantas especially.

Please answer the one question I asked. Why was $1.7B thrown away on self enrichment when it was desperately needed for fleet replacement?
What are you talking about self enrichment? The buy back of about 317m shares starting in 2016 was done at average prices well below todayís price. Most shareholders would I think regard that as good capital management. Fleet decisions would be in accordance with the annual capital expenditure guidance theyíve given the market. Off the top of my head this is about $1-2b per annum. Enough to buy more 787s if the numbers for more than 8 stack up I would have thought.
Justin. Beaver is offline  
Old 17th Feb 2018, 10:28
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: S33E151
Posts: 780
Originally Posted by Justin. Beaver View Post
What are you talking about self enrichment? The buy back of about 317m shares starting in 2016 was done at average prices well below today’s price. Most shareholders would I think regard that as good capital management. Fleet decisions would be in accordance with the annual capital expenditure guidance they’ve given the market. Off the top of my head this is about $1-2b per annum. Enough to buy more 787s if the numbers for more than 8 stack up I would have thought.
Done a bit of study have we? Asked someone further up the chain? Unfortunately the get out clause you quoted of ‘most shareholders’ is the one flaw in your argument.

For the longevity of the company (which you yourself seemingly espouse). What utter crap! Give your brain a chance!!

You use the pittance of return a (relatively mild) change of contract a single group of employees ‘might’ allow - but in the same breath you also seemingly ignore that fact that self enrichment share purchases with BORROWED FUNDS!!!! are entirely legitimate. What complete nonsense! Qf has a fleet burning upwards of 10-13 tonnes an hour of fossil fuels when every one of our competitors carries around 20-30% pax less per flight (assuming FULL), but burns c4.5 tonnes. And it's been like this since 1995!! This is insane!!!! I could explain this to a child of 3, but Qf management - clearly beyond them.

Since when have BORROWED funds at the expense of a company’s long term viability ever worked out in favour of anyone but the recipients of said largesse? One example please?

Without you fully understanding the implications of what you write - you have proved you have absolutely no idea about what makes a company either successful, viable or even profitable. In other words you represent the ‘perfect’ and ‘balance sampled employee’ at your advertised workplace. Well done your employers - they chose a perfect drone. If you work hard (and say ‘yes’ more often - Peter Warren?? - don't know why I remember that, but it should the Qf exec Mantra!!) you may too have a chance at the executive bathroom key. And that’s assuming (I suspect VERY erroneously) that the ‘yes men’ you said ‘yes’ to, will actually leave enough in the trough (once they’ve emptied it) for you to enjoy. Real individual success in life? Cant see that happening for you my friend, because that takes individual thought and genuine understanding. So far, you’ve demonstrated none of that. Play the Group Think concept hard - it’s your only chance.

Here’s a simple thing about business. Business is about charging prices that people feel are justified for the service they receive. Qantas has had a second to none brand name - and again as you say - Still!! (despite the monumental screwups of the last 20 years) so why the fxcx aren’t you giving it the tools to do the job it can? The only dollars ‘you’ have spent are on share buybacks and buying trinkets for low cost carriers which have either failed to take off at all, net dollar one, or even better, been nationalised by communist governments and left your employees in danger of life imprisonment. You just could NOT make this stuff up (stuffup - pun!!

So we get back to the original question. Qantas spent $1.75B (they are the really big numbers JB - if you don’t understand, just ask Siri) on share buybacks when Qantas desperately needs aircraft. Why?

If you can’t answer answer that very simple question (clearly it's very tricky for a Pikey management team) then can you possibly try to provide in ONE simple sentence what is the Qf Mission Statement?? It might be helpful for employees to know what it is that they are working for - you know, instead of providing bonuses....

PS: What purchases for the benefit of Qantas in the future has Weeman actually made? You work for an airline (forgive me for explaining this to you - from your comments I have to assume you don’t understand) but airlines use aeroplanes to take people from where they are to where they want to go. Just like Uber (see I can speak millennial too!) or a traditional taxi service, you actually need aeroplanes to do this. Are you with me so far? I don’t want to leave you behind - maybe ask someone if you are lost? Getting back to the original point - you need equipment to do this. Where are the examples of Weemans purchases - as in, investment for the future of the airline?

PPS: We haven't even got to a myriad of other, real issues yet - I'm looking forward to discussing those...

Last edited by V-Jet; 17th Feb 2018 at 11:30. Reason: iphone issues... apologies if there are more I haven't seen.
V-Jet is offline  
Old 17th Feb 2018, 15:59
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 831
Originally Posted by Rated De View Post
I tend to agree with Justin, if the union 'invite' these cretins to the Special General Meeting of pilots then the union has no plan of attack. The 457 visa announcement was nearly two months ago.
Relying on a union that was grounded and locked out for wearing ties and making in -flight announcements to take a confrontational approach is self deluded.

The only approach that ever yields results is to withdraw the goodwill. It isn't done openly or verbally. Just quietly.
Ok, so according to Rated, attempting to organise pilots is a waste of time. The only successful strategy is chinese whispers to not answer the phone. Yep, management are going to be shaking in their jocks, Rated. You da man.
Derfred is offline  
Old 17th Feb 2018, 18:13
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 69
Posts: 809
Off the top of my head after a few vinos,
AIPA Angels.
Media saturation offering an alternative to whatever Qantas Media and the Qantas Angels try to pass off as fact.
Scrutiny of all Qantas financials .
Offer an alternative interpretation to the Qantas KoolAid narrative .
A staff accessible website to report all forms of wasteage and cross subsidisation of subsidiaries and managerial ineptitude.
An IR expert to advise on what is/isn’t possible/Legal.
A financial expert to comment on the next annual reports with regards to FIRS compliance.
Take the fight to the smartest guys in the room.
They have been given Carte Blanc by mainstream media thus far.
There’s more than one way to piss off a Pikey !
blow.n.gasket 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.