QANTAS Execs.....Pigs at the Trough.
Thread Starter
QANTAS Execs.....Pigs at the Trough.
FROM THE FIN REVIEW
Qantas chairman Margaret Jackson (the woman who said Qantas should worry less about its passengers and staff and more about its shareholders...Al) said the airline would consider new partnerships with carriers in the United States, Asia and Europe as it moved to expand operations. She also told ABC's Inside Business that the airline had toyed with the idea of a dual listing, but had not yet seen how that could add value and did not expect to pursue such a move in the short term. Qantas chief executive Geoff Dixon told Nine's Business Sunday the airline's executives could receive a salary bonus of about 50 per cent for the past financial year, although it had yet to be determined. He would receive a "large bonus". Jane Boyle
================================
I'm sorry but with Australia's media guffawing at the brilliance of Dixon I just can't see it. It is the same sort of bowing at the corporate gods we saw with the likes of Alan Bond and Peter Abeles and is VERY unhealthy.
Qantas' No. 1 competitor fell over and surprise, they make a big profit. Big deal. The execs, like snorting pigs at the trough then wallow amongst the dollars whilst seeking downward pressure on the salaries of their staff in the name of remaining relevant in the marketplace.
Pilots at Qantas (longhaul) are for example somewhat of an international datum for the lowest paid reference to a national coast of living base. In fact certai Asian airlines would love to pay their pilots such low wages. Have a look at what JAL, CAL, CX etc pay their pilots and then look at the tax rates in those countries. Those pilots are significantly better off than their QF counterparts. Then have a look at the cost of living and housing in the current required domicile for QF pilots and it is not a good prognosis.
Now of course, everybody in QF knows somebody who is unemployed ex AN or pilots still working in the bush after 10 years and management are too happy to tell you that the future is lower salaries and higher productivity ala Virgin Blue. However the truth is that they are very different beasts and QF has the inertia and momentum to always be in the marketplace as long as complacency doesn't creep in.
Is it thus not time for you guys (especially AIPA) to pipe up and say we want to be paid internationally competive salaries and will no longer be simply compliant to the wishes of management unless there are real gains in return. The Australian Airlines flying is in NO way a big win. Yes, if it retains seniority benefits it is important but it has done nothing to improve the lot of the current and future mainline pilot.
IMHO, unless AIPA start taking a very firm line, the future will lokk like this.
*Domestic 'A' scales withdrawn.
*Downward pressure on ALL real mainline salaries (ie: less than CPI increases). Especially harmful for YSSY crews.
*Newly branded operations which slowly take over from mailine ops. For example, the old Impulse services rapidly expand at the expense of QF Domestic ops.
*"Australian Airlines will not fly on any route QF flies on!!" QF only have to stop that route on Monday and AO can step in on Tuesday. Why restrict AO to 767's. Why not transfer the remaining Classics to AO and use them for the Japan services, paying Captains A$195,000 flat with no allowances, big savings there.
What I am saying is that AIPA and all QF pilots owe it to themselves and future Aussie pilots to take the initiative NOW and claw back losses which have been previously given up by AIPA reps only using the union as a stepping-stone to management, This has left the pilot body in poor shape and even in the current 'boom' conditions for Qantas it appears morale is nowhere near what it should be.
Why, because QF pilots are not reaping their fair share of the proceeds of the boom. The execs however ARE. You little lambs are being left out in the dry whilst the execs squeel with delight as they roll around in the trough of money forever telling you you're lucky just to have a job.
I am aware the above may offend some who either don't wish to confront reality, have stars in their eyes for the corporate messiahs or simply don't like to rock the boat. However you guys have a golden opportunity to sieze the day and at least partially restore the status of the professional pilot in this country.
I am far too old for it to benefit me personally, but I do hope it benefit you, your families and future pilots.
Should I hold my breath?
Qantas chairman Margaret Jackson (the woman who said Qantas should worry less about its passengers and staff and more about its shareholders...Al) said the airline would consider new partnerships with carriers in the United States, Asia and Europe as it moved to expand operations. She also told ABC's Inside Business that the airline had toyed with the idea of a dual listing, but had not yet seen how that could add value and did not expect to pursue such a move in the short term. Qantas chief executive Geoff Dixon told Nine's Business Sunday the airline's executives could receive a salary bonus of about 50 per cent for the past financial year, although it had yet to be determined. He would receive a "large bonus". Jane Boyle
================================
I'm sorry but with Australia's media guffawing at the brilliance of Dixon I just can't see it. It is the same sort of bowing at the corporate gods we saw with the likes of Alan Bond and Peter Abeles and is VERY unhealthy.
Qantas' No. 1 competitor fell over and surprise, they make a big profit. Big deal. The execs, like snorting pigs at the trough then wallow amongst the dollars whilst seeking downward pressure on the salaries of their staff in the name of remaining relevant in the marketplace.
Pilots at Qantas (longhaul) are for example somewhat of an international datum for the lowest paid reference to a national coast of living base. In fact certai Asian airlines would love to pay their pilots such low wages. Have a look at what JAL, CAL, CX etc pay their pilots and then look at the tax rates in those countries. Those pilots are significantly better off than their QF counterparts. Then have a look at the cost of living and housing in the current required domicile for QF pilots and it is not a good prognosis.
Now of course, everybody in QF knows somebody who is unemployed ex AN or pilots still working in the bush after 10 years and management are too happy to tell you that the future is lower salaries and higher productivity ala Virgin Blue. However the truth is that they are very different beasts and QF has the inertia and momentum to always be in the marketplace as long as complacency doesn't creep in.
Is it thus not time for you guys (especially AIPA) to pipe up and say we want to be paid internationally competive salaries and will no longer be simply compliant to the wishes of management unless there are real gains in return. The Australian Airlines flying is in NO way a big win. Yes, if it retains seniority benefits it is important but it has done nothing to improve the lot of the current and future mainline pilot.
IMHO, unless AIPA start taking a very firm line, the future will lokk like this.
*Domestic 'A' scales withdrawn.
*Downward pressure on ALL real mainline salaries (ie: less than CPI increases). Especially harmful for YSSY crews.
*Newly branded operations which slowly take over from mailine ops. For example, the old Impulse services rapidly expand at the expense of QF Domestic ops.
*"Australian Airlines will not fly on any route QF flies on!!" QF only have to stop that route on Monday and AO can step in on Tuesday. Why restrict AO to 767's. Why not transfer the remaining Classics to AO and use them for the Japan services, paying Captains A$195,000 flat with no allowances, big savings there.
What I am saying is that AIPA and all QF pilots owe it to themselves and future Aussie pilots to take the initiative NOW and claw back losses which have been previously given up by AIPA reps only using the union as a stepping-stone to management, This has left the pilot body in poor shape and even in the current 'boom' conditions for Qantas it appears morale is nowhere near what it should be.
Why, because QF pilots are not reaping their fair share of the proceeds of the boom. The execs however ARE. You little lambs are being left out in the dry whilst the execs squeel with delight as they roll around in the trough of money forever telling you you're lucky just to have a job.
I am aware the above may offend some who either don't wish to confront reality, have stars in their eyes for the corporate messiahs or simply don't like to rock the boat. However you guys have a golden opportunity to sieze the day and at least partially restore the status of the professional pilot in this country.
I am far too old for it to benefit me personally, but I do hope it benefit you, your families and future pilots.
Should I hold my breath?
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Somewhere Balmy
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A E .V
I can't believe you can write such c--p. I've been in the aviation industry 27 years, and yes, I'm at the demise of AN and would give my left gonad for a flying job with QF.
Simple, if your not happy Jan, P--S OFF !!!!
I can't believe you can write such c--p. I've been in the aviation industry 27 years, and yes, I'm at the demise of AN and would give my left gonad for a flying job with QF.
Simple, if your not happy Jan, P--S OFF !!!!
Grandpa Aerotart
So CheckEssential.....what part of Corporate Management giving themselves huge bonuses while lowering the terms and conditions of staff do you find acceptable?
I know of ground staff at QF who have been forced to 'reapply' for their own jobs, and if you don't like it then we will find someone who does!...they litterally sit at the same desk, in the same room doing the same job for a 'different' employer on reduced wages and no staff travel...any wonder morale at QF is so bad!
It's not just QF of course, it's the latest reincarnation of Corporate greed that started with the excesses of the 80s....more and more beancounters are running the world for only their benefit...Worldcom & Enron are classic examples...Ansett too for that matter!!!
Big bonuses for short term 'improvement' in company performance...followed by farking off when things start to come unravelled has become the Beancounter/Management two step...the only staff around to wear the long term effects are the people being screwed in the short term.
Nothing leads me to believe that Dixon etc are in any way more honest or less motivated by personal wealth and power than any of their less lucky brethren at Enron...they are just blessed to be in a company that was put on an incredible sound footing by the previous owners while the previous owners of the competition, AN, assett stripped the place...and that 911 didn't happen in their backyard.
While I completely agree that a job at QF would be mana from heaven for presently unemployed AN pilot think a little down the track, not like the management types. If you join QF next week and find 10 years down the track that your wages and conditions have been driven into the toilet while 'the bosses' give themselves million dollar bonuses how will you feel?
As another example there is a 737 airline in the Pacific who has been offering each new pilot that is employed a different/lower pay scale for years....hardly fair when you consider what a miniscule percentage of the overall running costs of a Boeing are pilot wages is it? You can bet your last dollar that the beancounters at that airline haven't been going financially backwards in the same time period.
Any idiot could have been running QF successfully in the last year..what part of being handed 30+% of the domestic market on a platter and getting some more aeroplanes to make the best of that situation requires huge 'performance' bonuses.
What completely blows me out of the water is when these ar$eholes get bonuses for 'minimising' the damage that their own short term strategies cause!! Or if they've been really culpable they get several million to go away and say nothing to anyone...sheer unadulterated lunacy
Chuck.
I know of ground staff at QF who have been forced to 'reapply' for their own jobs, and if you don't like it then we will find someone who does!...they litterally sit at the same desk, in the same room doing the same job for a 'different' employer on reduced wages and no staff travel...any wonder morale at QF is so bad!
It's not just QF of course, it's the latest reincarnation of Corporate greed that started with the excesses of the 80s....more and more beancounters are running the world for only their benefit...Worldcom & Enron are classic examples...Ansett too for that matter!!!
Big bonuses for short term 'improvement' in company performance...followed by farking off when things start to come unravelled has become the Beancounter/Management two step...the only staff around to wear the long term effects are the people being screwed in the short term.
Nothing leads me to believe that Dixon etc are in any way more honest or less motivated by personal wealth and power than any of their less lucky brethren at Enron...they are just blessed to be in a company that was put on an incredible sound footing by the previous owners while the previous owners of the competition, AN, assett stripped the place...and that 911 didn't happen in their backyard.
While I completely agree that a job at QF would be mana from heaven for presently unemployed AN pilot think a little down the track, not like the management types. If you join QF next week and find 10 years down the track that your wages and conditions have been driven into the toilet while 'the bosses' give themselves million dollar bonuses how will you feel?
As another example there is a 737 airline in the Pacific who has been offering each new pilot that is employed a different/lower pay scale for years....hardly fair when you consider what a miniscule percentage of the overall running costs of a Boeing are pilot wages is it? You can bet your last dollar that the beancounters at that airline haven't been going financially backwards in the same time period.
Any idiot could have been running QF successfully in the last year..what part of being handed 30+% of the domestic market on a platter and getting some more aeroplanes to make the best of that situation requires huge 'performance' bonuses.
What completely blows me out of the water is when these ar$eholes get bonuses for 'minimising' the damage that their own short term strategies cause!! Or if they've been really culpable they get several million to go away and say nothing to anyone...sheer unadulterated lunacy
Chuck.
Last edited by Chimbu chuckles; 26th Aug 2002 at 03:24.
Thread Starter
Check Essential.....thinking such as that the reason the industry is in the shape it is.
I've been in the industry just as long - so what! I have seen it slide downhill and that is a sad thing. Myopic and selfish pilots in some cases only have themselves to blame fo the degradation of working conditions.
If you had read the bit "Now of course, everybody in QF knows somebody who is unemployed ex AN or pilots still working in the bush after 10 years and management are too happy to tell you that the future is lower salaries and higher productivity ala Virgin Blue. " you would see that I completely understand that scenario. Have been there myself also.
If you also read the post careully, you will notice that the future of QF does not effect me one bit (I have most assuredly P--SSED OFF). I do howwever have a simple desire to see the lot of professional pilots in this country improve, in spite of the actions of a few who would try to stop that.
I've been in the industry just as long - so what! I have seen it slide downhill and that is a sad thing. Myopic and selfish pilots in some cases only have themselves to blame fo the degradation of working conditions.
If you had read the bit "Now of course, everybody in QF knows somebody who is unemployed ex AN or pilots still working in the bush after 10 years and management are too happy to tell you that the future is lower salaries and higher productivity ala Virgin Blue. " you would see that I completely understand that scenario. Have been there myself also.
If you also read the post careully, you will notice that the future of QF does not effect me one bit (I have most assuredly P--SSED OFF). I do howwever have a simple desire to see the lot of professional pilots in this country improve, in spite of the actions of a few who would try to stop that.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Oztraya
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As much as some people find it distasteful - welcome to the real world.
Directors and Executives of companies are responsible to shareholders - not employees.
It is their job to produce the best possible result for their shareholders - not the employees.
Everyone says that they don't deserve it because luck went their way - it may have, but the bottom line is what counts.
Think of the alternative - if Ansett hadn't gone down last Sep and SIA had tipped some cash in - what would be left now? Would Qantas still be here? Would it be struggling under the costs of excess capacity in a hugely shrunken international market, whilst fending off massive discounting in a domestic market with 2 strong competitors?
Directors and Executives of companies are responsible to shareholders - not employees.
It is their job to produce the best possible result for their shareholders - not the employees.
Everyone says that they don't deserve it because luck went their way - it may have, but the bottom line is what counts.
Think of the alternative - if Ansett hadn't gone down last Sep and SIA had tipped some cash in - what would be left now? Would Qantas still be here? Would it be struggling under the costs of excess capacity in a hugely shrunken international market, whilst fending off massive discounting in a domestic market with 2 strong competitors?
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
I (almost) did that once, U2 - and NOW I have ALL 3, plus a bit extra! 
I also remember the posts here on PPRuNe from the overworked QF groundies who were bombarded with terminal fulls of abusive, p!ssed-off Ansett pax, when Ansett fell over.
It was THEY who carried the day, and allowed QANTAS to make those extraordinary profits.
Nice scenario, Pimp Daddy, "Think of the alternative" - but that DIDN'T happen, and Dixon and Co weren't put to any test, but rather, handed a bulging bottom line on a golden platter.
Sort of similar to claiming you're the "World's Best Pilot" for landing early, and saving half a ton of fuel, when in fact you had a 200kt tailwind up your clacker, isn't it!
I also remember the posts here on PPRuNe from the overworked QF groundies who were bombarded with terminal fulls of abusive, p!ssed-off Ansett pax, when Ansett fell over.
It was THEY who carried the day, and allowed QANTAS to make those extraordinary profits.
Nice scenario, Pimp Daddy, "Think of the alternative" - but that DIDN'T happen, and Dixon and Co weren't put to any test, but rather, handed a bulging bottom line on a golden platter.
Sort of similar to claiming you're the "World's Best Pilot" for landing early, and saving half a ton of fuel, when in fact you had a 200kt tailwind up your clacker, isn't it!
Grandpa Aerotart
U2...if the trend continues of screwing the workforce and at the same time self serving performance bonuses for merely doing the job they were hired to do...and no more...then you can bet there will be industrial action sooner rather than later...and it would not be unreasonable.
How's this for a bizarre concept...when a company does particulary well all the employees get a bonus...I bet you could convert the bonuses that the top 6 executives at QF will get into 5 or 10K bonuses for all the other employees in the company and get a better future result for the investment.
No one suggest that the boss of QF, or any other simularly large corporation, shouldn't be paid bloody well...and they are, but the bizarre bonus system and the general explosion of CEO/Management packages in the last 20 years( they have outstripped inflation by orders of magnitude) is cause for world wide worry.
Chuck.
How's this for a bizarre concept...when a company does particulary well all the employees get a bonus...I bet you could convert the bonuses that the top 6 executives at QF will get into 5 or 10K bonuses for all the other employees in the company and get a better future result for the investment.
No one suggest that the boss of QF, or any other simularly large corporation, shouldn't be paid bloody well...and they are, but the bizarre bonus system and the general explosion of CEO/Management packages in the last 20 years( they have outstripped inflation by orders of magnitude) is cause for world wide worry.
Chuck.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's been said before and I'll repeat the Homeric warning again.
"Those whom the Gods would destroy, they first blind with hubris"
I don't think young Geoff is guilty of it, but he should make sure it is the required screensaver on all of his executives computer screens and require its contemplation for at least 2 minutes at the start of every workday before it will let them in to work.
"Those whom the Gods would destroy, they first blind with hubris"
I don't think young Geoff is guilty of it, but he should make sure it is the required screensaver on all of his executives computer screens and require its contemplation for at least 2 minutes at the start of every workday before it will let them in to work.
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Similarly it is events such as 911 and the "Asian Crisis" that are conveniently used to cover poor management decisions that impact on the bottom line.
Conversely, Ansett's collapse provided QANTAS with a windfall for which the QF executives appear to have taken full credit.
According to many ex-AN posters here, Mr Dixon might like to consider sending some of his and the other execs bonus across the Tasman.
But the question being raised here is one of ETHICS.
Is it ETHICAL for the top management of a national figurehead company such as QANTAS to act - in the words of the journalist - "like pigs at a (feeding) trough.
As we were taught as children, and as we have taught our children when there is an excess of say lollies or ice cream - a SPECIAL, EXTRA treat - "Don't be GREEDY! Share."
It appears as HYPOCRISY in the extreme when we see management cutting the salaries of employees who are already on a bread and margarine wage, whist they, the executives, reward themselves with BONUSES (to their already fat 7-figure salary+perks retainer), from the money taken!
Today's top executives of many high profile companies are more often than not, not seen as "loyal" to the company they run, but instead are available for re-hire to the highest bidder, or are subject to sudden replacement themselves - hence the tendency to "grab while the grabbing's good". OINK
Conversely, Ansett's collapse provided QANTAS with a windfall for which the QF executives appear to have taken full credit.
According to many ex-AN posters here, Mr Dixon might like to consider sending some of his and the other execs bonus across the Tasman.
But the question being raised here is one of ETHICS.
Is it ETHICAL for the top management of a national figurehead company such as QANTAS to act - in the words of the journalist - "like pigs at a (feeding) trough.
As we were taught as children, and as we have taught our children when there is an excess of say lollies or ice cream - a SPECIAL, EXTRA treat - "Don't be GREEDY! Share."
It appears as HYPOCRISY in the extreme when we see management cutting the salaries of employees who are already on a bread and margarine wage, whist they, the executives, reward themselves with BONUSES (to their already fat 7-figure salary+perks retainer), from the money taken!
Today's top executives of many high profile companies are more often than not, not seen as "loyal" to the company they run, but instead are available for re-hire to the highest bidder, or are subject to sudden replacement themselves - hence the tendency to "grab while the grabbing's good". OINK
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Sydney
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is an old Nicholson cartoon from 89 that goes like this.
Picture a downtrodden worker speaking to a well suited exec.
Exec: "We can't afford to give you a wage rise. We have to stay competitive."
Worker: "Then why have executive salaries gone up so much."
Exec: (Dismissively) "We have to stay competitive."
Picture a downtrodden worker speaking to a well suited exec.
Exec: "We can't afford to give you a wage rise. We have to stay competitive."
Worker: "Then why have executive salaries gone up so much."
Exec: (Dismissively) "We have to stay competitive."
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Sydney.
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In some ways you all make a good point. The trouble is that the 80's slogan of "greed is good" has never gone away. It has just been disguised and hidden, the results are now apparent with all the corporate failures we've seen in the past year or two.
I think with the admission that some execs in QF are going to get bonuses in the region of 50% when the airline is pushing for an EBA giving 3% a year with trade offs, makes a lot of us blooooody angry. The EBA negotiations are going to be tough.
However with the industrial laws we have now, the ability to take industrial action of any kind has diminished. I hate to say it, but '89 is still in the back of people's minds and with the aviation industry in it's current shape, it would be a lot easier for management this time around.
I'm happy to have a job but not so happy with the way things are going. I think we have been got by the short and curlies, damned if I know what the answer is.
I think with the admission that some execs in QF are going to get bonuses in the region of 50% when the airline is pushing for an EBA giving 3% a year with trade offs, makes a lot of us blooooody angry. The EBA negotiations are going to be tough.
However with the industrial laws we have now, the ability to take industrial action of any kind has diminished. I hate to say it, but '89 is still in the back of people's minds and with the aviation industry in it's current shape, it would be a lot easier for management this time around.
I'm happy to have a job but not so happy with the way things are going. I think we have been got by the short and curlies, damned if I know what the answer is.
Last edited by Sopwith Pup; 26th Aug 2002 at 23:41.
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
As bonvol has said (but in different words), I believe the non-management workers are getting pretty p!ssed of with seeing the DOUBLE STANDARDS of management - the "It's okay for ME to continue on my 7-figure salary, and to receive a $2/5/8 million BONUS", on the one hand, and on the other telling the employees, "We have to trim down the workforce and those who are lucky enough to stay on will be offered a new contract. Of course it's going to mean a little more work for the same money, but if this company is to survive we have to make radical changes to the way we work!"
Well Sopwith, the answer is to follow the LEAD set by our managers.
Realise that you are in the job ONLY for yourself, not the good of the company.
Whenever you can - at every opportunity - work towards extracting every cent you can. Don't agree to any changes UNLESS they are going to benefit YOU.
As I see it the old management/worker relationship was one of, "When the Goose lays a golden egg let's make an omlette - that way everyone gets a little." Naturally, Management took a larger share, but we all ACCEPTED that.
Today's modern management philosophy is one of, "When the Goose lays a Golden egg, I'll boil it and eat it ALL myself."
Let's agree, and ALL play by the same rules - Greed is Good.
Okay?
Well Sopwith, the answer is to follow the LEAD set by our managers.
Realise that you are in the job ONLY for yourself, not the good of the company.
Whenever you can - at every opportunity - work towards extracting every cent you can. Don't agree to any changes UNLESS they are going to benefit YOU.
As I see it the old management/worker relationship was one of, "When the Goose lays a golden egg let's make an omlette - that way everyone gets a little." Naturally, Management took a larger share, but we all ACCEPTED that.
Today's modern management philosophy is one of, "When the Goose lays a Golden egg, I'll boil it and eat it ALL myself."
Let's agree, and ALL play by the same rules - Greed is Good.
Okay?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: From a suitcase
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I seem to remember that this very point, (top execs and politicians giving themselves huge pay rises while insisting that the hoi polloi (mere mortals like us) remained within hawke’s (sic) “Accord”), that was largely the cause of the seminal events of that-year-we-dare-not-mention-here.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can I just point out that the ATC strike this Friday is exactly about this. The workers asked to give up conditions to receive 2% pay rises, while the managers walk away with unbelievable stuff (gongs, bonuses etc) for just doing a mediocre job. It's like an executive cancer spreading across lots of industries.
Enough is ENOUGH!
Good luck boys and girls.
Enough is ENOUGH!
Good luck boys and girls.
Nunc est bibendum
You'd have to reckon that if a 50% bonus is good enough for the powers that be that it would be rude to not have that filter down the line! 
OK, back to reality and how to change it to something more equitable!
OK, back to reality and how to change it to something more equitable!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Townsville,Nth Queensland
Posts: 2,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wed "Melbourne Age" 28/8/02
Australia lagging in rewards to CEOs, says Qantas chairman
By Philip Hopkins
August 28 2002
Qantas chairman Margaret Jackson yesterday defended high salaries and option packages for chief executives in Australia, and criticised the level of debate on corporate governance.
"It's a hell of a job. (Chief executives) must be paid a reasonable amount to take on the responsibility and attract the talent," she said.
She also suggested that the Federal Government veto on increased foreign ownership in Qantas meant the airline was focusing sharply on labour costs and their effect on profitability.
On options, Ms Jackson said there were big differences in corporate governance between the United States and Australia.
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.
Ms Jackson said that in Australia there were tougher hurdles that did not exist in the US.
"There is not enough discussion of the difference between Australia and the rest of the world," she said. At the moment, the options debate was akin to saying that someone had robbed the bank so everyone should be put in jail.
Arguing the case for a freer share register, Ms Jackson told a Melbourne Press Club lunch at the Windsor Hotel that aviation was a very capital intensive industry, and Qantas' cost of capital would now be 1 to 2 per cent higher because of the government's decision on foreign ownership.
"If labour rates are not competitive, we will not be in a position to compete on fares," she said.
Australia lagging in rewards to CEOs, says Qantas chairman
By Philip Hopkins
August 28 2002
Qantas chairman Margaret Jackson yesterday defended high salaries and option packages for chief executives in Australia, and criticised the level of debate on corporate governance.
"It's a hell of a job. (Chief executives) must be paid a reasonable amount to take on the responsibility and attract the talent," she said.
She also suggested that the Federal Government veto on increased foreign ownership in Qantas meant the airline was focusing sharply on labour costs and their effect on profitability.
On options, Ms Jackson said there were big differences in corporate governance between the United States and Australia.
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.
Ms Jackson said that in Australia there were tougher hurdles that did not exist in the US.
"There is not enough discussion of the difference between Australia and the rest of the world," she said. At the moment, the options debate was akin to saying that someone had robbed the bank so everyone should be put in jail.
Arguing the case for a freer share register, Ms Jackson told a Melbourne Press Club lunch at the Windsor Hotel that aviation was a very capital intensive industry, and Qantas' cost of capital would now be 1 to 2 per cent higher because of the government's decision on foreign ownership.
"If labour rates are not competitive, we will not be in a position to compete on fares," she said.
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
CEOs or executives in Australia received tens of millions of dollars worth of options . "The magnitude is significantly different," Ms Jackson said. OINK OINK
"If labour rates are not competitive, we will not be in a position to compete on fares," she said.
"If labour rates are not competitive, we will not be in a position to compete on fares," she said.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excuse me while I puke!
Why do executives need bonuses on top of their already enormous salary to do the job they were hired to do? I have an idea how to improve the bottom line/save jobs/keep the shareholders happy. Sack the top six execs. Or keep them on (in the spirit of promoting good will and loyalty), but JUST PAY THEM THEIR SALARY. In Ms Jacksons' words it would add "tens of millions" to the bottom line immediately. And you wouldn't have to go through the drama of gouging another $50 out of each employees pay packet.
Oh, I forgot, we need to attract TALENT! hahahahaha.
The author owns Qantas shares.
Why do executives need bonuses on top of their already enormous salary to do the job they were hired to do? I have an idea how to improve the bottom line/save jobs/keep the shareholders happy. Sack the top six execs. Or keep them on (in the spirit of promoting good will and loyalty), but JUST PAY THEM THEIR SALARY. In Ms Jacksons' words it would add "tens of millions" to the bottom line immediately. And you wouldn't have to go through the drama of gouging another $50 out of each employees pay packet.
Oh, I forgot, we need to attract TALENT! hahahahaha.
The author owns Qantas shares.