Qf Engineers Ready For Industrial Action
 

From the ALAEA Federal Secretary.....
Lets get ready to RUMBLE!!:ok:

Using the words of Darryl John Kerrigan, "tell him he's dreaming".....

time to get out your overalls and spanners MP

He's still looking for his brain though.........

I think the alaea is wrong on this the chances of qantas redoing two "D" checks is a joke
Lets work with the company to retain jobs and create future jobs instead of trying to refight past battles that we lost
Heavy is gone I dont see it coming back

FFS

whine about inaction, whine about action

You guys are pathetic, grow a backbone you association has, you gave it the charter by you vote in the ballot and when they follow your wishes you b!tch

The ALAEA is standing up and it's time you did

By the way read the notice in it's entirety and understand this it prompts the company to act, if it is challenged then a discussion will take place in or out of the IRC and a suitable compromise will be reached. A full D Check is not required just the checking of the areas that were disturbed during those checks.

My money's on two things

One, Lames are sick and tired of being taken for granted and will support the ASN grounding the aircraft

and two, more than staples will be found on OJO and OJQ

I am more than willing to go in for a stouch for the right reason.
What do we hope to win from this action as an association for members current and future?? As Domo said H245 is shut. Next battle

From my point of view it looks like a public pissing competion between SP and DC.
And the winner gets to say

I TOLD YOU SO !!

Does not look contructive and I doubt it will fly.

Baby with the bath water comes to mind...:ouch:

T and C's
 

Twitter n Bisted,I agree that some improvement in T and C’s would be good, did you have anything specific in mind? I think it will take some pretty fantastic T and C’s to convince the majority to accept a deal when 3% is the most likely offer from the company with regard to remuneration.Also it is worth noting that although H245 is gone, there are still some QF Heavy Maintenance facilities in this country. The things that the staff in those areas are being asked to accept in the eba in order to keep HM (and their jobs) in Australia are fairly substantial and if the eba gets up, they will have ramifications across all departments, line included. The proverbial thin end of the wedge.

this is about aircraft safety,these aircraft were done under sus standards,which has been proven,this is about passenger safety and the integrity of these 2 aircraft,and your license being used for continued certification of these aircraft,remember if one of these aircraft fall out the sky,who do you think Qantas management will come after SASCO or the last LAME to sign off on the aircraft

QMO,

Exactly. Our actions must be seen as protecting the integrity of aviation in this country - that the maintenance program on those two aircraft has been compromised and this has to be addressed.

What do we stand for?

We are always complaining of DC's inept and our spiralling standards at QF - well isn't this the most obvious response.

And, where is our Regulator?

Here is a Thought
 

Offer to do the D checks free of charge, on the condition that if and when you find serious matters that have not been done at SIA then they pay you full pay and agree to the T&C's mentioned.

You put your money where your mouth is, and so will they!

Cant see it happening though.........:ugh:

SQ

are you suggesting a part ownership between Qanats and the ALAEA in a maintenance facility ,why not:ok:

QF MAINT OUTSOURCED

I think it has already been done - It's called Avalon manned by Forestaff and the main winner was a slime of an ex ALAEA rep called Wally.

phased checks
 

Maybe an out for all concerned is to carry out certain stages of the d chk at each consecutive A chk just a thought .That way its a win win for both parties. Aircraft arent grounded and integrity of the safety culture is restored. I believe that the alaea are making inroads as rumor has it some chks have been seriously looked at to come back onshore.

lets not play who has the biggest johnson campaign.lets get it done .also i have to agree the eba is getting tired

i don't think an A check is enough time for some of the inspections that need hundreds of hours to complete,ie internal wing inspections/horizontal stab,under floor inspections,under toilet,seat track,and the list goes on:cool:

Get it right, If you going to run with a conspiracy theory get the names correct and you may sound more credible :}

There are 2 MROs at Changi airport (Singapore) SIAEC and SASCO.

SASCO are not in the picture this time, and anecdotal evidence suggests they do good work there

SIAEC is the MRO whom completed the "D" checks on the 2 aircraft subject to industrial action.

Bad industrial relations decision! Maintenance checks in Singapore are unrelated to the terms and conditions of an EBA.

The proposed ALEA action will rightly be seen as an attempt to disrupt the company's operations, in order solely to advance an IR claim and protect jobs.

Not siding with Kwonnas or the engineers but don't expect public support, especially from any passengers whose travel plans are disrupted.

It's about time the ALAEA grew some balls.

I do think the industrial action will be an aberrant failure though.

Does the ALAEA only look in the past ? Isn't there another 747 in SIN now for a D check? That hasn't been mentioned in the proposed action.....

This action may work. If Qantas argues in the commission against it, the union can court the public with the "we're concerned with pax safety, and obviously management isn't". The Today Tonight reports are still relatively fresh, so this could be very interesting.

It's simple....as a QF PAX who just booked a return trip (on 738's) I want to know they are being maintained 100%, not like the OJ's mentioned above nor the CAC 737 in Japan or any other dodgy.

To me its black and white, fix it right the first time. I think most aussie pax think that way. We expect QF/JQ & VB all to maintain to a standard set in the past. About time we all stood up for it, PAX included.

J

Lets have a look at our options and how they will be viewed by the public -
-overtime and higher duties bans in support of EBA - greedy
-full stop work meetings in support of EBA - greedy and disruptive
-strike in support of higher wages - greedy and another reason to return Howard
-blackban OJO and OJQ in support of Aus Maint- already winning PR battle so why not

Remember these aircraft failed audits in Singapore and have had nothing but trouble since returning. We may all know about the staples in the EEL lighting on both aircraft but what about the other crap that didn't make the papers such as the steering bolt that was fouling because it was installed the wrong way. The swarf that was found in the WIU racks and last weeks finding on JQ. An oxy drop was attempted and only 1/3 of the jungle appeared, on investigation blanking plugs were found in the line from the check in Singapore 12 months ago. No need to worry though Qantas security were there to make sure the 500 did't fall in the wrong hands. It was rushed straight to DC who put it in the appropriate file. :=

It's time we made a stand on this one. We had a pi$$ weak union when they shut syd HM and they did nothing. This is our chance to get rid of the turd who did this to our workmates and so far the public is onside. I am yet to hear from one passenger or person in the press who doesn't care about safety and that QF aircraft get maintained properly. Cox can't drag us down in the press because he knows he is putting money before safety. ALAEA thanks for giving us a union again its about time.

How does the CAC 737 fire become aligned with militant industrial action?

That incident resulted in a world fleet inspection for a manufacturing deficiency, the inspection requirement doesn't relate to only those that have had maintenance performed.

Come on, keep up, you seem to be falling off a bit down the back there.......

MP.

i'd say his point is would the AD's get a look in with these 3rd party operators ,would it be just a sign off with out looking

"That incident resulted in a world fleet inspection for a manufacturing deficiency,.."

Seems like Boeing engineering standards are dropping, too :} (probably due to cost-cutting measures... oops sorry... as DC might put it... processes to survive competitive environments).

Boeing have made great airplanes in the past... and probably have saved many a passenger's neck (and maintenance engineer's reputation).

On the other hand, maintenance engineers have (in history) provided feedback to Boeing leading to an improved product. Undertrained and overworked engineers won't have the skills to recognise potential risks or the time to fill out forms every time they see a potential risk (and probably lack the incentive to do so if the company is undervaluing their efforts).

beware of what you ask for the public may turn if you upset their travel plans,safety at a cost until it effects joe blogs once a year trip to hnl with family.and just be aware maint issues happen everywhere

Grounding 2 aircraft won't interupt the public it will just mess with their scheds. I'd rather ground 2 aircraft than hit my own pocket with o/t bans. Is anyone really concerned about DC winning a pr battle? I can't see that happening.

The obvious question to ask is how would Qantas like it if instead of a CAC 737 burning on the Taramc it was a Qantas 747?

"Design deficiency"? my arse! Rotten maintenance.

mahatmacoat

Grounding those 2 aircraft would cause flight cancellations as well as delays because at present Qantas has no spare long range aircraft (due to the delay in A380 deliveries).

I do not want to stuff up joe public's travel plans but it is imperative that these aircraft have all the necessary inspections to ensure that they are safe. Qantas has been very lucky that the aircraft that fordran wrote about didn't have a depressurisation - lives would have been lost. No amount of spin from DC. GD, PG, MAJ, etc could justify lives being lost because of their desire to save/make money.

If the "management" thieves had their way, it would be APA's puppy now!

Unfortunately for the yobbo it is still on his watch...Cost cutting has a limit and it was passed. It was supposed to happen on another's shift...
It is a direct result of the Dixon edict.

Take a perfectly reputable airline and cut the living daylights out of a couple of things that made it what it is..One of those was maintenance, Dixon wanted it offshore, it is and look what happens!!

I will not strap my backside to OJO/OJQ until they are passed inhouse!
:E

Grounding 2 744 would result in in CANX flights eventually. The sched is so thin on the 744 fleet that within 1 week you would start to see effect
.e.g. Late departures due to awaiting the incoming A/C.. QF does not have spare aircraft sitting around so the sched is juggled and aircraft swapped constantly between flights to meet the demands. This works ok with known ground time. There is enough buffer built in to handle unscheduled engine changes etc but take 2 pieces out and the house of cards may not stand up should other non sched maintenance be required.

FOG

So now we are insulting Taiwanese engineers? (As well as Philippino and Singaporean?). Any more comments like these and the public will start to believe DC's insulting remarks about QF engineers being xenophobic.

BTW, wasn't it a brand new aircraft?

http://www.easybourse.com/Website/dy...e=2&pageliste=

NSEU

5 years old. recent maintenance was carried out on the offending part.

Thanks, Going Boeing... I stand corrected.

Going Boeing,
The Boeing inspection, subsequently made madatory within 24 days by FAA Emergency AD 2007-18-51 has now been escalated by Emergency AD 2007-18-52 to within 10 days and repeat every 3,000 flight cycles on the basis of initial inspection results. Those initial inspections uncovered several other cases of detached hardware; in some cases on recently delivered aeroplanes that would not normally have had any maintenance work carried out in this area.
How do you know recent maintenance was carried out on the offending part?
Not that it matters in light of the above report.

Would you prefer

"I fkn lie here dead because Aussie engineers didn't have the balls to ground defective aircraft"

FFS money over safety every time for you clowns

Who said that we are striking? That's why banning two unsafe aircraft has been chosen so we don't get the public offside. Frozo have you read the papers, seen the tv or heard any negative comments about the action on the radio. The public are 100% behind the union.

eg. I was watching a news program on CNBC Asia today that is based in Singapore and they had a story on the grounding of the 2 planes. The ALAEA had the balls to talk to them live. They read a preprepared statement from SIA backing the SIAEC facility in an attempt to ambush the asn and within 30 secs it was completely turned around. The interviewers from Singapore even agreed that grounding the planes was the only action so open your eyes and see whats happening.

What arguments can the press run when so many problems have been generated from the o'seas facility?

Err not true, if the union invests the time and effort in crafting a good PR campaign to match the one that Qantas will no doubt launch.

I think it is now time for the ALEA to push the big red "SAFETY" button with the public real hard.

For example, if its true that QF has provisioned for a hull loss in the next five (or was it ten?) years, then this fact should be widely (and negatively) reported.

To me, it appears that Qf senior management are adopting the same approach to safety as a certain large oil company whose Longford plant blew up.

"Do what you can with the money we give you."

"**** the regulations and training manuals, for which you will receive princely rewards"

" Hope that nothing happens on your watch, because you will be the scapegoat if it does."

That Qf engineering was second to none is unquestioned. I was always in awe of our maintenance, the knoweldge of our engineers nd the standards they adhered to professionally.

Short sighted management will come and go. It is the engineers who carry the can. It is time the airline was reclaimed by those with the operational expertise and these "visitors" be sidelined...Airlines are about moving people and freight safely and efficiently from A to B. That involves operational staff not bean counters with no understanding that safety does in fact cost money.

Q bean counters have "costed" an accident, they had better hope they are not on their junket when it happens


A properly targeted safety campaign is not industrial no matter what Cox or Dixon alledge. It is us with our bums strapped to the seats and those who maintain them and whose signature appears on the Tech Log who lose!

It isn't about race, it isn't about nationalism. It is about standards. This regime has sold out standards and ought be held to account before it is too late. If the regime won't listen the public will!

Well said

Safety before schedule -- whose motto?