Joyce ‘retires’ early 👍
- Firm order for four Boeing 787-9 and eight 787-10 aircraft, with deliveries starting in FY27.
- Firm order for 12 Airbus A350-1000s, with deliveries starting in FY28.
- Purchase right options split between Airbus and Boeing to complete A330 and A380 fleet replacement and provide for growth.
- Both orders include significant flexibility to adjust the timing of deliveries
The following users liked this post:
Even though the airframe may be 21 years old, it is highly unlikely that faulty engine is the original engine on the airframe.
Sainsbury wouldn't consider because it is not dramatic enough for a Crikey story.
Sainsbury wouldn't consider because it is not dramatic enough for a Crikey story.
The following users liked this post:
QANTAS have called these guys in to consult. Not saying anything illegal has been done, just reflecting on the company that advises QANTAS on flight delays.
https://www.smh.com.au/business/comp...25-p5fmih.html
https://www.smh.com.au/business/comp...25-p5fmih.html
The following users liked this post:
QANTAS have called these guys in to consult. Not saying anything illegal has been done, just reflecting on the company that advises QANTAS on flight delays.
https://www.smh.com.au/business/comp...25-p5fmih.html
https://www.smh.com.au/business/comp...25-p5fmih.html
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McKinsey_%26_Company
The controversies tab is where the interesting stuff lies.
When you live....
AFR is reporting a settlement between ACCC and Qantas - $100m fine for selling tickets on cancelled flights.
wonder if the board will be clawing that back from AJ?
wonder if the board will be clawing that back from AJ?
The following users liked this post:
The following users liked this post:
Take it to court and humiliate them, put Joyce on the witness stand for cross examination and rub his nose in the poo he created.
The following 2 users liked this post by dragon man:
Take it to court and humiliate them, put Joyce on the witness stand for cross examination and rub his nose in the poo he created.
It still amazes me what you can get away with in management. Imagine if a pilot flagrantly broke the law what would happen. Meanwhile if you are in management you can do whatever you want and the company has your back and will even pay the fine for you.
The following 7 users liked this post by neville_nobody:
That is what should happen but the ACCC will settle and QF know it. That's why there's a mea culpa. The management will walk away Scot Free with their 10s of millions.
It still amazes me what you can get away with in management. Imagine if a pilot flagrantly broke the law what would happen. Meanwhile if you are in management you can do whatever you want and the company has your back and will even pay the fine for you.
It still amazes me what you can get away with in management. Imagine if a pilot flagrantly broke the law what would happen. Meanwhile if you are in management you can do whatever you want and the company has your back and will even pay the fine for you.
By settling this no one personally is been held responsible. Joyce has sailed off into the sun set with $180 million minus tax , would he care if they took the $2.5 million minus tax bonus off him, I doubt it. The massive fine on a $2.5 billion profit is not even 4% after tax. Piss poor effort that Tony!!
The following users liked this post:
[img][/img]
OPINION PIECE FROM THE DAILY TELEGRAPH
James Willis2 min read
May 6, 2024 - 12:28PM
In August 2023 Gina Cass-Gotlieb famously claimed that Qantas would be hit with a record penalty for selling ghost flight tickets“We consider that this should be a record penalty.”
They were the bold words of ACCC chief Gina Cass-Gotlieb last year, when promising to throw the book at Qantas for their conduct.
“This is going to be an important test for us… penalties have been too low. We are pursuing this matter in court. We took it in a defined and strong way and we will continue to proceed,” she said.
Australians have every right to be scratching their heads and wondering what on earth happened. Having promised to fight Qantas to the death for selling tickets on flights that didn’t actually exist, the ACCC has done a deal and let them off the hook.
The Federal Court action is coming to an end, with Qantas to pay a proposed $100 million fine and another $20 million to customers.
Former Qantas CEO Alan Joyce was in charge of the airline during the “ghost flight” scandal.While the fine may seem hefty, it falls desperately short of what the ACCC was promising when this appalling behaviour first came to light.
In an interview about Qantas in August, Ms Cass-Gotlieb said: “The highest penalty to date against a breach of the Australian consumer law was $125 million against Volkswagen and we consider that this should be a record penalty for this conduct. We would want to get to more than twice that figure.”
She was threating a $250 million whack and that's before you include the compensation for dudded customers.
It was a promise that attracted many positive headlines for the ACCC, at a time when it felt like the entire country was piling on the Flying Kangaroo.
“We are going to seek a penalty that will underline that this is not just to be a cost of doing business. We consider (historic) penalties have been too low. This will be an important case in that regard” Ms Cass-Gotlieb said.
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission Chair Gina Cass-Gottleib claimed Qantas would be hit with a “record penalty.” Picture: Jane DempsterAfter initially denying the severity of the allegations - Qantas has now waved the white flag. They have admitted to misleading customers by selling tickets for flights it had already cancelled internally. Ghost flights. They also cancelled thousands of other flights without telling ticket holders of their decision.And this wasn’t for a single month. The airline concedes this happened between May 2021 and August 2023. 2 years and 3 months. Disgracefully, part of this occurred during the worst stages of the pandemic, when booking trips and holidays was a nightmare.
86,000 dudded customers will be compensated a total of $20 million and rightly so.
The ACCC says the conduct of Qantas was “egregious .
Wonderful - so then a basic point.
If the behaviour was worthy of a “record penalty”– as the consumer watchdog insisted it was – then a record penalty should have been issued.
Once again we have a case of the ACCC being all bark and no bite
OPINION PIECE FROM THE DAILY TELEGRAPH
By fining Qantas $120m, the consumer watchdog proves it is all bark and no bite
Why did the $120 million fine for Qantas fall short of the “record penalty” threatened by the consumer watchdog?James Willis2 min read
May 6, 2024 - 12:28PM
In August 2023 Gina Cass-Gotlieb famously claimed that Qantas would be hit with a record penalty for selling ghost flight tickets“We consider that this should be a record penalty.”
They were the bold words of ACCC chief Gina Cass-Gotlieb last year, when promising to throw the book at Qantas for their conduct.
“This is going to be an important test for us… penalties have been too low. We are pursuing this matter in court. We took it in a defined and strong way and we will continue to proceed,” she said.
Australians have every right to be scratching their heads and wondering what on earth happened. Having promised to fight Qantas to the death for selling tickets on flights that didn’t actually exist, the ACCC has done a deal and let them off the hook.
The Federal Court action is coming to an end, with Qantas to pay a proposed $100 million fine and another $20 million to customers.
Former Qantas CEO Alan Joyce was in charge of the airline during the “ghost flight” scandal.While the fine may seem hefty, it falls desperately short of what the ACCC was promising when this appalling behaviour first came to light.In an interview about Qantas in August, Ms Cass-Gotlieb said: “The highest penalty to date against a breach of the Australian consumer law was $125 million against Volkswagen and we consider that this should be a record penalty for this conduct. We would want to get to more than twice that figure.”
She was threating a $250 million whack and that's before you include the compensation for dudded customers.
It was a promise that attracted many positive headlines for the ACCC, at a time when it felt like the entire country was piling on the Flying Kangaroo.
“We are going to seek a penalty that will underline that this is not just to be a cost of doing business. We consider (historic) penalties have been too low. This will be an important case in that regard” Ms Cass-Gotlieb said.
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission Chair Gina Cass-Gottleib claimed Qantas would be hit with a “record penalty.” Picture: Jane DempsterAfter initially denying the severity of the allegations - Qantas has now waved the white flag. They have admitted to misleading customers by selling tickets for flights it had already cancelled internally. Ghost flights. They also cancelled thousands of other flights without telling ticket holders of their decision.And this wasn’t for a single month. The airline concedes this happened between May 2021 and August 2023. 2 years and 3 months. Disgracefully, part of this occurred during the worst stages of the pandemic, when booking trips and holidays was a nightmare.86,000 dudded customers will be compensated a total of $20 million and rightly so.
The ACCC says the conduct of Qantas was “egregious .
Wonderful - so then a basic point.
If the behaviour was worthy of a “record penalty”– as the consumer watchdog insisted it was – then a record penalty should have been issued.
Once again we have a case of the ACCC being all bark and no bite
Give back your ill gotten bonuses you disgusting grubs.
Airline is run by morons. Honestly. Just buy some planes and pay your staff. Not that hard.
Maybe just outsource your own jobs…oh wait
you already did.
Airline is run by morons. Honestly. Just buy some planes and pay your staff. Not that hard.
Maybe just outsource your own jobs…oh wait
you already did.
The following 5 users liked this post by Gas Chamber:
The following users liked this post:
The following users liked this post:
GEE HE IS SO GOOD
Save
Share
Normal text sizeALarger text sizeAVery large text sizeA Qantas’ new CEO Vanessa Hudson is desperate to appear different to her predecessor Alan Joyce. Funny, ’cos they sure as hell apologise the same way.
“Sorry, not sorry.” That’s the reflex response from the airline’s Mascot headquarters, irrespective of who’s boss.
Vanessa Hudson says she wants to be judged by her actions, not her words.CREDIT: JOE ARMAO When Qantas settled the Australian Consumer and Competition Commission’s ghost flights case against it on Monday, agreeing to pay $120 million in penalties and compensation, Hudson reduced the airline’s wrongdoing to mere “delays in communications”. Thus, “the penalties and compensation that have been outlined today is for delays in communications”.
Delays that went on systematically for 15 months and which Qantas magically happened to profit from!
Let’s be real here. Qantas has admitted to misleading consumers and made an undertaking not to repeat the misconduct. It has admitted the misconduct was not limited to the winter of 2022, as originally alleged, but continued until August 2023.
But this is the Qantas way – it is so entrenched. “We’re sorry but alongside our apology, here is our self-serving minimisation of what really happened.” It is absolutely no different to Qantas saying: “We’re sorry for sacking 1700 people illegally, but we had sound commercial reasons.” Play Video
Play video
0:47
Qantas will repay customers $20 million for selling tickets to flights it planned to cancel.
Qantas’ settlement was even characterised as “a win” for Hudson in some quarters.
How is it ever a victory to pay $120 million for wrongdoing? It’s not even about the number, it’s about the shame associated with it. It’s being the kid caught with the face full of cake mix when you swore black and blue you never touched it.Qantas also said the $120 million will be recognised in its financial accounts as an item outside underlying profit. That means it will have zero impact on the profit measure that determines half of Hudson’s bonus. Half her luck.
“We absolutely have maintained and continue that we did not take fees for no service,” she insisted.
Hudson is strictly correct that the ACCC dropped its claim, as part of the settlement, that Qantas wrongly accepted payment from the affected customers.
But what is always omitted from analyses of the ghost flights misadventure is that the ACCC’s action evolved from its original investigation into Qantas’ COVID flight credits, which single-handedly made Qantas the most complained-about company in Australia.
When Qantas cancelled flights during the pandemic, which it regularly did, tickets were transferred into COVID flight credits. Redeeming those credits was, for so many customers, outrageously difficult. It is near impossible to resist the conclusion that it was difficult by design.
Qantas customers were in 2020 owed $2 billion in COVID credits, but by August last year, with all remaining credits set to expire on December 31, 2023, Qantas was assuring the public that the balance was down to $370 million. Then a Senate committee forced Qantas to admit that, actually, the balance was $570 million!
ACCC chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb. The ACCC’s action evolved out of its original investigation into Qantas’ COVID flight credits.CREDIT: EDWINA PICKLES That’s why, days before that Senate hearing, unveiling a record $2.5 billion profit for 2023, Vanessa Hudson said, “This is not as good as it gets for Qantas,” presumably because she was counting on $500 million of expired COVID credits dropping straight into her profit for 2024. That was undeniably an attempt at fees for no service.
Sadly for Hudson, when the ACCC launched its bombshell action over the ghost flights, it also forced Qantas to remove the expiry dates from all COVID credits. But this is all in the past, right? Wrong.
When you attempt to use a flight credit, Qantas transfers you into a special booking engine which displays airfares that are often significantly higher than the airfares offered on the exact same flights in the regular qantas.com booking engine.
This is the system whether you were attempting to use a COVID flight credit in the past or a regular Qantas flight credit today (regular flight credits replaced COVID flight credits for any cancelled bookings after October 2021 and unlike COVID credits, they expire after 12 months).
In recent months, Qantas added a legal disclaimer to this process. “If you use a payment method other than Flight Credit on qantas.com,” it says, “lower fares may be available.”
Customers are forced to click “I understand” if they wish to proceed and redeem their credit. There is no “I don’t understand” button. You can either indicate your understanding that you are being ripped off or you can forfeit all of your money. Those are your binary options.
Qantas then hits you with a $99 booking fee, which they deduct from your credit, even though your re-booking has been 100 per cent self-administered!
What’s more, “You can only use your Flight Credit to book fares that are equal to or higher than the value of your Flight Credit.” Therefore, if you have a $500 credit and the airfare you want to book is $199, you simply lose $301 (or technically $202 once you factor in the self-booking fee). Qantas adds that $301 to its gargantuan profits as “breakage” revenue.
Ghost flights were just one in a suite of behaviours that were emblematic of Qantas’ poor culture.CREDIT: PETER RAE Qantas could issue you with a new $301 credit. That would be the ethical thing to do, but being ethical is expensive, so they don’t.
At the very minimum, Qantas has banked multiple tens of millions of dollars this way and by the definition of any ordinary, reasonable citizen, it is deceptive conduct. It is legal theft at scale and it is still happening.
So many Australians have had, and continue to have, infuriating experiences with these credits. It is occurring right under the noses of our politicians and regulators whose apathy on the matter is profoundly depressing.
Ghost flights were just one in a suite of behaviours that were emblematic of Qantas’ poor culture. To suggest that settling this one matter means Qantas is now a trustworthy company is to be wilfully blind to extremely recent history.
If Vanessa Hudson changed Qantas’ unbelievably aggressive revenue management practices, I would agree with her pretension to be “restoring confidence in the national carrier”. Until then, it looks to me like just another chapter in Qantas’ storied history of image management.
OPINION
Sorry, not sorry: Qantas perfects the art of the non-apology
Joe Aston
ColumnistMay 8, 2024 — 11.13amSave
Share
Normal text sizeALarger text sizeAVery large text sizeA Qantas’ new CEO Vanessa Hudson is desperate to appear different to her predecessor Alan Joyce. Funny, ’cos they sure as hell apologise the same way.
“Sorry, not sorry.” That’s the reflex response from the airline’s Mascot headquarters, irrespective of who’s boss.
Vanessa Hudson says she wants to be judged by her actions, not her words.CREDIT: JOE ARMAO When Qantas settled the Australian Consumer and Competition Commission’s ghost flights case against it on Monday, agreeing to pay $120 million in penalties and compensation, Hudson reduced the airline’s wrongdoing to mere “delays in communications”. Thus, “the penalties and compensation that have been outlined today is for delays in communications”.Delays that went on systematically for 15 months and which Qantas magically happened to profit from!
Let’s be real here. Qantas has admitted to misleading consumers and made an undertaking not to repeat the misconduct. It has admitted the misconduct was not limited to the winter of 2022, as originally alleged, but continued until August 2023.
But this is the Qantas way – it is so entrenched. “We’re sorry but alongside our apology, here is our self-serving minimisation of what really happened.” It is absolutely no different to Qantas saying: “We’re sorry for sacking 1700 people illegally, but we had sound commercial reasons.” Play Video
Play video
0:47
Qantas to repay customers for selling tickets for cancelled flights
Qantas will repay customers $20 million for selling tickets to flights it planned to cancel.
Qantas’ settlement was even characterised as “a win” for Hudson in some quarters.
How is it ever a victory to pay $120 million for wrongdoing? It’s not even about the number, it’s about the shame associated with it. It’s being the kid caught with the face full of cake mix when you swore black and blue you never touched it.Qantas also said the $120 million will be recognised in its financial accounts as an item outside underlying profit. That means it will have zero impact on the profit measure that determines half of Hudson’s bonus. Half her luck.
“We absolutely have maintained and continue that we did not take fees for no service,” she insisted.
Hudson is strictly correct that the ACCC dropped its claim, as part of the settlement, that Qantas wrongly accepted payment from the affected customers.
But what is always omitted from analyses of the ghost flights misadventure is that the ACCC’s action evolved from its original investigation into Qantas’ COVID flight credits, which single-handedly made Qantas the most complained-about company in Australia.
When Qantas cancelled flights during the pandemic, which it regularly did, tickets were transferred into COVID flight credits. Redeeming those credits was, for so many customers, outrageously difficult. It is near impossible to resist the conclusion that it was difficult by design.
Qantas customers were in 2020 owed $2 billion in COVID credits, but by August last year, with all remaining credits set to expire on December 31, 2023, Qantas was assuring the public that the balance was down to $370 million. Then a Senate committee forced Qantas to admit that, actually, the balance was $570 million!
ACCC chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb. The ACCC’s action evolved out of its original investigation into Qantas’ COVID flight credits.CREDIT: EDWINA PICKLES That’s why, days before that Senate hearing, unveiling a record $2.5 billion profit for 2023, Vanessa Hudson said, “This is not as good as it gets for Qantas,” presumably because she was counting on $500 million of expired COVID credits dropping straight into her profit for 2024. That was undeniably an attempt at fees for no service.Sadly for Hudson, when the ACCC launched its bombshell action over the ghost flights, it also forced Qantas to remove the expiry dates from all COVID credits. But this is all in the past, right? Wrong.
When you attempt to use a flight credit, Qantas transfers you into a special booking engine which displays airfares that are often significantly higher than the airfares offered on the exact same flights in the regular qantas.com booking engine.
This is the system whether you were attempting to use a COVID flight credit in the past or a regular Qantas flight credit today (regular flight credits replaced COVID flight credits for any cancelled bookings after October 2021 and unlike COVID credits, they expire after 12 months).
In recent months, Qantas added a legal disclaimer to this process. “If you use a payment method other than Flight Credit on qantas.com,” it says, “lower fares may be available.”
Customers are forced to click “I understand” if they wish to proceed and redeem their credit. There is no “I don’t understand” button. You can either indicate your understanding that you are being ripped off or you can forfeit all of your money. Those are your binary options.
Qantas then hits you with a $99 booking fee, which they deduct from your credit, even though your re-booking has been 100 per cent self-administered!
What’s more, “You can only use your Flight Credit to book fares that are equal to or higher than the value of your Flight Credit.” Therefore, if you have a $500 credit and the airfare you want to book is $199, you simply lose $301 (or technically $202 once you factor in the self-booking fee). Qantas adds that $301 to its gargantuan profits as “breakage” revenue.
Ghost flights were just one in a suite of behaviours that were emblematic of Qantas’ poor culture.CREDIT: PETER RAE Qantas could issue you with a new $301 credit. That would be the ethical thing to do, but being ethical is expensive, so they don’t.At the very minimum, Qantas has banked multiple tens of millions of dollars this way and by the definition of any ordinary, reasonable citizen, it is deceptive conduct. It is legal theft at scale and it is still happening.
So many Australians have had, and continue to have, infuriating experiences with these credits. It is occurring right under the noses of our politicians and regulators whose apathy on the matter is profoundly depressing.
Ghost flights were just one in a suite of behaviours that were emblematic of Qantas’ poor culture. To suggest that settling this one matter means Qantas is now a trustworthy company is to be wilfully blind to extremely recent history.
If Vanessa Hudson changed Qantas’ unbelievably aggressive revenue management practices, I would agree with her pretension to be “restoring confidence in the national carrier”. Until then, it looks to me like just another chapter in Qantas’ storied history of image management.
The following 3 users liked this post by dragon man:
“The liars at Qantas lied to customers over ghost flights, then lied about their lies
There is seemingly no end to the deception at the flying kangaroo.”
Bernard KeaneMay 06, 2024crickey.com.au
Sadly for Hudson, when the ACCC launched its bombshell action over the ghost flights, it also forced Qantas to remove the expiry dates from all COVID credits. But this is all in the past, right? Wrong.
When you attempt to use a flight credit, Qantas transfers you into a special booking engine which displays airfares that are often significantly higher than the airfares offered on the exact same flights in the regular qantas.com booking engine.
This is the system whether you were attempting to use a COVID flight credit in the past or a regular Qantas flight credit today (regular flight credits replaced COVID flight credits for any cancelled bookings after October 2021 and unlike COVID credits, they expire after 12 months).
In recent months, Qantas added a legal disclaimer to this process. “If you use a payment method other than Flight Credit on qantas.com,” it says, “lower fares may be available.”
Customers are forced to click “I understand” if they wish to proceed and redeem their credit. There is no “I don’t understand” button. You can either indicate your understanding that you are being ripped off or you can forfeit all of your money. Those are your binary options.
Qantas then hits you with a $99 booking fee, which they deduct from your credit, even though your re-booking has been 100 per cent self-administered!
What’s more, “You can only use your Flight Credit to book fares that are equal to or higher than the value of your Flight Credit.” Therefore, if you have a $500 credit and the airfare you want to book is $199, you simply lose $301 (or technically $202 once you factor in the self-booking fee). Qantas adds that $301 to its gargantuan profits as “breakage” revenue
When you attempt to use a flight credit, Qantas transfers you into a special booking engine which displays airfares that are often significantly higher than the airfares offered on the exact same flights in the regular qantas.com booking engine.
This is the system whether you were attempting to use a COVID flight credit in the past or a regular Qantas flight credit today (regular flight credits replaced COVID flight credits for any cancelled bookings after October 2021 and unlike COVID credits, they expire after 12 months).
In recent months, Qantas added a legal disclaimer to this process. “If you use a payment method other than Flight Credit on qantas.com,” it says, “lower fares may be available.”
Customers are forced to click “I understand” if they wish to proceed and redeem their credit. There is no “I don’t understand” button. You can either indicate your understanding that you are being ripped off or you can forfeit all of your money. Those are your binary options.
Qantas then hits you with a $99 booking fee, which they deduct from your credit, even though your re-booking has been 100 per cent self-administered!
What’s more, “You can only use your Flight Credit to book fares that are equal to or higher than the value of your Flight Credit.” Therefore, if you have a $500 credit and the airfare you want to book is $199, you simply lose $301 (or technically $202 once you factor in the self-booking fee). Qantas adds that $301 to its gargantuan profits as “breakage” revenue
