QANTAS Execs.....Pigs at the Trough.
And corporate profits at the big end of town have never been better as large corporations are more and more protected virtual monopolies - particularly banks, airlines and communications.
Telstra is tipped to shortly announce a $4.8 Billion profit.
(Coundn't help but later editing this post. Poor Telstra - only came in with $3.7 billion. With such a "parlous" result will the executives have to hand back their perks?)
Now, I wonder if I can get my phone fixed?
And the banks are crying poor now the government have announced legislation to break their monopoly on credit cards - and credit card interest rates, five times savings bank interest rates!
And they wonder why Australian workers are pi$$ed off and talking strikes as the gap between the rich and poor continues to widen.
Telstra is tipped to shortly announce a $4.8 Billion profit.
(Coundn't help but later editing this post. Poor Telstra - only came in with $3.7 billion. With such a "parlous" result will the executives have to hand back their perks?)
Now, I wonder if I can get my phone fixed?
And the banks are crying poor now the government have announced legislation to break their monopoly on credit cards - and credit card interest rates, five times savings bank interest rates!
And they wonder why Australian workers are pi$$ed off and talking strikes as the gap between the rich and poor continues to widen.
Last edited by Torres; 3rd Sep 2002 at 07:46.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: australia
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
shocka
Ever since Qantas was awarded it's second biggest free - kick in corporate history, we have been led to believe that it's recent stellar performance was a direct function of good corporate governance above all else !
When your main competitor falls over, how can you not prosper
from it ? It seems that the current board are gleefully accepting the kudos that are not rightfully theirs based on an even playing field & are going to be paid bonuses contrived on a huge positive "abnormal" (AN's demise) addition to the balance sheet.
It now remains to be seen which snout get's to the trough first & stay's the longest !!
When your main competitor falls over, how can you not prosper
from it ? It seems that the current board are gleefully accepting the kudos that are not rightfully theirs based on an even playing field & are going to be paid bonuses contrived on a huge positive "abnormal" (AN's demise) addition to the balance sheet.
It now remains to be seen which snout get's to the trough first & stay's the longest !!
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Sydney
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This attitude is prevalent in the "executive" class. Make no bones about it, they see themselves as a breed apart, smarter than the rest and with a concommitant sense of entitlement.
For an example of this, 10 years ago the Chief Pilot of QF was paid 250,000 pa. This was about a 10% premium on a senior -400 Captain.
Two years ago the incumbent and his deputy divvied up 2 million between them in bonuses for doing essentially the same job. The proles have probably not kept up with inflation in the same time period. Their "talent" consisted mainly of crying poor(no rise for the workers) and following well established precedents.
One day, hopefully soon, the argument put forward by Ms Jackson will be recognised for what they are.
The mood of resentment will one day approach that of late 19th century France. It will take only a few more outrageous corporates scandals and a few more suspended sentences for theft of shareholders funds before people start taking matters into their own hands.
You heard it here first.
For an example of this, 10 years ago the Chief Pilot of QF was paid 250,000 pa. This was about a 10% premium on a senior -400 Captain.
Two years ago the incumbent and his deputy divvied up 2 million between them in bonuses for doing essentially the same job. The proles have probably not kept up with inflation in the same time period. Their "talent" consisted mainly of crying poor(no rise for the workers) and following well established precedents.
One day, hopefully soon, the argument put forward by Ms Jackson will be recognised for what they are.
The mood of resentment will one day approach that of late 19th century France. It will take only a few more outrageous corporates scandals and a few more suspended sentences for theft of shareholders funds before people start taking matters into their own hands.
You heard it here first.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Asia
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are a number of things I learnt early in my career.
One is that you can never trust the c.... in management to do anything except look after themselves at your expense.
Another is that management sucks are the next worst quality of human beings.
Yet another is that pilots who seek to be managers are a dangerous breed. An article in an American flying magazine a few years ago said something like 'any pilot who puts on a suit every day and heads to the office has no business around aeroplanes'.
Ain't that true!
Shocka, I agree.
QF were handed 35 - 40% market share, but their profit increased by only about 10%, so the execs get huge bonuses - for what??
In real terms, it was a decrease in profit, not an increase.
One is that you can never trust the c.... in management to do anything except look after themselves at your expense.
Another is that management sucks are the next worst quality of human beings.
Yet another is that pilots who seek to be managers are a dangerous breed. An article in an American flying magazine a few years ago said something like 'any pilot who puts on a suit every day and heads to the office has no business around aeroplanes'.
Ain't that true!
Shocka, I agree.
QF were handed 35 - 40% market share, but their profit increased by only about 10%, so the execs get huge bonuses - for what??
In real terms, it was a decrease in profit, not an increase.
Last edited by KaptinZZ; 28th Aug 2002 at 05:41.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: somewhere in Australia
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand that at a recient meeting with Q regional management and Eastern EBA team they were told that Eastern was not making enough money, that the business was not proforming to the required level UNLIKE Airconnex...
how do these people sleep at night...
watch out mainline...
how do these people sleep at night...
watch out mainline...
Guess it shows the real 'Spirit of Australia' . A spirit that deifies rogues from Ned Kelly to Alan Bond.
The rush of QF management testosterone will undoubtedly lead them down the path of folly. As much as I would hate to see shareholders hard earned money being pi$$ed against the wall by buying into a dud investment in the US or even Singapore or NZ, it is a monty to happen. Big fish in small ponds do hallucinate. Big bonuses are like steroids, short term muscle and performance, long term sterility and premature death,
Let's face it folks, no one could dispute Dixon is a smarter guy with a QF namecard than an AN one can they!!
Pip Pip!
The rush of QF management testosterone will undoubtedly lead them down the path of folly. As much as I would hate to see shareholders hard earned money being pi$$ed against the wall by buying into a dud investment in the US or even Singapore or NZ, it is a monty to happen. Big fish in small ponds do hallucinate. Big bonuses are like steroids, short term muscle and performance, long term sterility and premature death,
Let's face it folks, no one could dispute Dixon is a smarter guy with a QF namecard than an AN one can they!!
Pip Pip!
Last edited by VR-HFX; 28th Aug 2002 at 16:17.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Asia
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last year it was published, and not denied, that Air NZ execs took huge bonuses in spite of the Ansett debacle.
It wasn't, the article pointed out, because of increased profits, and we all know the extent of the loss due to Air NZ's folly, but because ''the execs, including Big Garry, did their best under trying circumstances.'
Isn't that what we as pilots do every time we go flying? Do we get a bonus just for doing our jobs?
These guys get their bonuses because they screw the workers down to less than CPI salary increases, and incrementally lean out their conditions, thereby increasing productivity by stealth, and all the time crying poor. They are indeed C.... with a BIG C!!
Messiah, you sound like one of the management sucks I referred to above. Every worker deserves the right to not be screwed by the boss, and paid a fair reward for his/her effort.
It wasn't, the article pointed out, because of increased profits, and we all know the extent of the loss due to Air NZ's folly, but because ''the execs, including Big Garry, did their best under trying circumstances.'
Isn't that what we as pilots do every time we go flying? Do we get a bonus just for doing our jobs?
These guys get their bonuses because they screw the workers down to less than CPI salary increases, and incrementally lean out their conditions, thereby increasing productivity by stealth, and all the time crying poor. They are indeed C.... with a BIG C!!
Messiah, you sound like one of the management sucks I referred to above. Every worker deserves the right to not be screwed by the boss, and paid a fair reward for his/her effort.
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
The unfortunate fact appears to be that top management of many companies are being rewarded on a YEARLY basis by way of absurd "performance bonuses", often amounting to the LUDICROUS amounts becoming common place.
Being of the magnitude they are, CEO's and their immediate underdogs, have now found that it IS possible to "GET RICH QUICK" - but at the medium to longer term risk of the health and longevity of the company and its "ground floor" employees.
The company is screwed and squeezed for every drop it can return in the form of profit, hence returning unbelievable rewards (in the form of bonuses, saleable stock options, etc) to the upper management, and at the same time pleasing the shareholders and making them feel secure in their investment.
Once the company has been squeezed, the "ground floor" employees are on the receiving end, as their wages are sliced (or chopped altogether) to allow more $$$'s to be thrown into the "profit-sharing, bonus-paying" bin.
"Qantas is negotiating with unions on a new wages agreement, and Ms Jackson said a wage increase of less than 5 per cent was reasonable.
Qantas is understood to have offered a 3 per cent wage increase.
At bonuses (in addition to enormous salaries) running into the millions (or tens of millions) PER YEAR, a blind man can see that 2 or 3 years on this sort of money means one can retire to a lifetime of extreme wealth.
And after that, who cares what happens to the company!!
The bonuses of upper level management NEED to be based on LONG TERM company performance to insure against short term abuse and MIS-management by CEO's, etc, solely for THEIR personal, IMMEDIATE GRATIFICATION.
Bonuses paid, for example, ONLY every 10 - 12 years.
"Qantas chairman Margaret Jackson (the woman who said Qantas should worry less about its passengers and staff and more about its shareholders...) said the airline would consider new partnerships with carriers in the United States, Asia and Europe as it moved to expand operations."
And WHY would Ms Jackson and Co be considering new partnerships with carriers in the US?
I guess she answered that for all of us, with the following:
"CEOs or executives in the US received hundreds of millions of dollars worth of options, whereas in Australia it was tens of millions of dollars. "The magnitude is significantly different," she said."OINK "
Being of the magnitude they are, CEO's and their immediate underdogs, have now found that it IS possible to "GET RICH QUICK" - but at the medium to longer term risk of the health and longevity of the company and its "ground floor" employees.
The company is screwed and squeezed for every drop it can return in the form of profit, hence returning unbelievable rewards (in the form of bonuses, saleable stock options, etc) to the upper management, and at the same time pleasing the shareholders and making them feel secure in their investment.
Once the company has been squeezed, the "ground floor" employees are on the receiving end, as their wages are sliced (or chopped altogether) to allow more $$$'s to be thrown into the "profit-sharing, bonus-paying" bin.
"Qantas is negotiating with unions on a new wages agreement, and Ms Jackson said a wage increase of less than 5 per cent was reasonable.
Qantas is understood to have offered a 3 per cent wage increase.
At bonuses (in addition to enormous salaries) running into the millions (or tens of millions) PER YEAR, a blind man can see that 2 or 3 years on this sort of money means one can retire to a lifetime of extreme wealth.
And after that, who cares what happens to the company!!
The bonuses of upper level management NEED to be based on LONG TERM company performance to insure against short term abuse and MIS-management by CEO's, etc, solely for THEIR personal, IMMEDIATE GRATIFICATION.
Bonuses paid, for example, ONLY every 10 - 12 years.
"Qantas chairman Margaret Jackson (the woman who said Qantas should worry less about its passengers and staff and more about its shareholders...) said the airline would consider new partnerships with carriers in the United States, Asia and Europe as it moved to expand operations."
And WHY would Ms Jackson and Co be considering new partnerships with carriers in the US?
I guess she answered that for all of us, with the following:
"CEOs or executives in the US received hundreds of millions of dollars worth of options, whereas in Australia it was tens of millions of dollars. "The magnitude is significantly different," she said."OINK "
Nunc est bibendum
I'd happily accept 3% per annum if the bonus was going to be 50% of my pay. I find that 'appropriate'- no less 'appropriate' than it is for management anyway! 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Established.
Age: 53
Posts: 658
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kaptin ZZ I'm no management suck but just refuse to get all peed off about things I cannot change.
This year, of the 120 countries studied, 70% were found to be corrupt. Oz came 11th and NZ 2nd, Bangladesh last.
If you were in one of these positions to give yourself massive bonuses, would you do it? I bet you would. People are often too busy worrying about what everyone else is getting to enjoy their own time on this planet (23AG tax comes to mind).
Nobody at QF has a gun at their head, if you don't like it leave!
This year, of the 120 countries studied, 70% were found to be corrupt. Oz came 11th and NZ 2nd, Bangladesh last.
If you were in one of these positions to give yourself massive bonuses, would you do it? I bet you would. People are often too busy worrying about what everyone else is getting to enjoy their own time on this planet (23AG tax comes to mind).
Nobody at QF has a gun at their head, if you don't like it leave!
Last edited by The Messiah; 29th Aug 2002 at 09:55.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Messiah
There is an expresssion that "evil flourishes when good men do nothing". Not quite correct but I am not sure of the exact words.
It was those who ignored Hitler and did nothing " because they couldn't change anything" that ultimately allowed that cancer to flourish.
It was the compliant ACTU and sucks in big business that allowed the silver bodgie and that poisonous dwarf, Kelty, to flourish.
If you do nothing it WILL happen. If you see something that is wrong and speak up, maybe, just maybe, you and others of like mind will rise up against the parasites and oppressors. If you shrink back into your shell and say " I can't do anything" then guess what. You won't, it will.
To sit back and say "I wont sweat it because I can't do anything" is to be a scab against the world of good, and justice.
A pox on you and your miserable, compliant, syncophantic, suck, mates.
There is an expresssion that "evil flourishes when good men do nothing". Not quite correct but I am not sure of the exact words.
It was those who ignored Hitler and did nothing " because they couldn't change anything" that ultimately allowed that cancer to flourish.
It was the compliant ACTU and sucks in big business that allowed the silver bodgie and that poisonous dwarf, Kelty, to flourish.
If you do nothing it WILL happen. If you see something that is wrong and speak up, maybe, just maybe, you and others of like mind will rise up against the parasites and oppressors. If you shrink back into your shell and say " I can't do anything" then guess what. You won't, it will.
To sit back and say "I wont sweat it because I can't do anything" is to be a scab against the world of good, and justice.
A pox on you and your miserable, compliant, syncophantic, suck, mates.
Nunc est bibendum
C'mon Messiah, just because people choose to voice their opinions here doesn't mean they aren't trying their guts out to change things in the real world.
Great thread.
With a VB float I imagine Brett Godfrey will be propelled into the Top 100 Wealthiest List(Australia).
And I can also imagine it would still be very good business for him to pay Phillipino pilot wages.
Interesting to see if some of PPrunes outspoken find it fashionable to launch an attack on Godfrey.
With a VB float I imagine Brett Godfrey will be propelled into the Top 100 Wealthiest List(Australia).
And I can also imagine it would still be very good business for him to pay Phillipino pilot wages.
Interesting to see if some of PPrunes outspoken find it fashionable to launch an attack on Godfrey.
Last edited by Gnadenburg; 30th Aug 2002 at 04:58.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Asia
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Messiah,
Maybe I was a bit harsh with you.
I agree that if you dojn't like it you can leave, and I've said that very thing to CX guys on the Fragrant Harbour forum. But, it's different there. No active trade union movement; you're in THEIR country sucking a living out of it (but not displacing locals, before somebody reminds me), and still being paid damned well.
At QF, and I think it's been said elsewhere, pilots are on near third world salaries, comparatively speaking, and to watch the execs with their snouts in the trough at your expense must be particularly galling.
AND, if you don't try to change it, then it never will change.
Call me self righteous, or a liar, or whatever you choose, but if I was in a position where I could extract huge bonuses for no reason other than I could, I wold not.
Maybe I was a bit harsh with you.
I agree that if you dojn't like it you can leave, and I've said that very thing to CX guys on the Fragrant Harbour forum. But, it's different there. No active trade union movement; you're in THEIR country sucking a living out of it (but not displacing locals, before somebody reminds me), and still being paid damned well.
At QF, and I think it's been said elsewhere, pilots are on near third world salaries, comparatively speaking, and to watch the execs with their snouts in the trough at your expense must be particularly galling.
AND, if you don't try to change it, then it never will change.
Call me self righteous, or a liar, or whatever you choose, but if I was in a position where I could extract huge bonuses for no reason other than I could, I wold not.
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
My guess would be that you are probably correct, KaptinZZ. Ansett was "window dressed" for sale to an over eager Air New Zealand. IMHO, SQ scratched the surface sufficiently deeply enough to see what was underneath the gloss [and the miraculous turnaround in Ansett's performance], and to walk away - as much as many ex-An employees insist that they were blocked. Anyway that's off the track as far as this thread is concerned - except for your point that Mr Ed brabbed HIS bonus and R A N.
So why SHOULD senior executives be paid these additional, HUGEbonu$e$ for doing the job for which they were hired?
The salaries and benefits alone are way beyond any REALISTIC figures, and surely there are MANY other qualified individuals who are able to achieve the same results, without the need to double dip.
To repeat myself, a STOP HAS to be made to these ANNUAL bonuses, but preferably a COMPLETE STOP to bonuses altogether!
The sheer $ize of them in such a short term ENCOURAGES management decisions designed to "get in, grab it and run" leaving the company to crumble AFTER their departure.
STOP the short term bonuses. Average the company's performance over an 8 - 10 year period, and pay the bonus THEN.
But better yet, STOP the bonus system altogether.
They ARE only doing what's EXPECTED of them on the $alary paid!
So why SHOULD senior executives be paid these additional, HUGEbonu$e$ for doing the job for which they were hired?
The salaries and benefits alone are way beyond any REALISTIC figures, and surely there are MANY other qualified individuals who are able to achieve the same results, without the need to double dip.
To repeat myself, a STOP HAS to be made to these ANNUAL bonuses, but preferably a COMPLETE STOP to bonuses altogether!
The sheer $ize of them in such a short term ENCOURAGES management decisions designed to "get in, grab it and run" leaving the company to crumble AFTER their departure.
STOP the short term bonuses. Average the company's performance over an 8 - 10 year period, and pay the bonus THEN.
But better yet, STOP the bonus system altogether.
They ARE only doing what's EXPECTED of them on the $alary paid!