|
Qantas's problems stem mostly from some very intransigent unions. Kenny is probably being a little sensitive but I don't think there is anything wrong with experienced people running the show.However, when they become staid and intransigent then it's time for a change. I also don't think J* is an example of new ideas either.J* was born when VB was introduced and was more of a reaction combined with the chance or wish to lower staff costs....hardly ground breaking ideas.There were LCC's already operating in other parts of the world before J*.... The other problem which has been noted is the old 'inverted pyramid' which QF excels at.It has been said that other airlines which have far bigger fleets have far less layers of management than QF.Looking at some of the titles you see in QF reminds me of the TV show 'Yes Prime Minister' and the antics of Sir Humphrey Appleby building up the Civil Service at all costs. Twiggs....I noticed that you chalked up another one the other day so I imagine you must be proud of yourself.Reading his post I think Prunezeuss has made a good proposal to you.....are you prepared to accept his challenge?...Yes or No? I imagine that there are a lot of phone calls being made in the halls of power at Mascot this week shoring up support just in case your name is on the list to be escorted out of the building....I wonder how they feel about clause 11's now. |
Sorry Mods, I just couldn't resist.
The Lord High Executioners song from "The Mikado" by Gilbert and Sullivan. I've Got a Little List SONG--KO-KO with CHORUS OF MEN. As some day it may happen that a victim must be found, I've got a little list--I've got a little list Of society offenders who might well be underground, And who never would be missed--who never would be missed! There's the pestilential nuisances who write for autographs-- All people who have flabby hands and irritating laughs-- All children who are up in dates, and floor you with 'em flat-- All persons who in shaking hands, shake hands with you like _that_-- And all third persons who on spoiling tete-a-tetes insist-- They'd none of 'em be missed--they'd none of 'em be missed! CHORUS. He's got 'em on the list--he's got 'em on the list; And they'll none of 'em be missed--they'll none of 'em be missed. There's the banjo serenader, and the others of his race, And the piano-organist--I've got him on the list! And the people who eat peppermint and puff it in your face, They never would be missed--they never would be missed! Then the idiot who praises, with enthusiastic tone, All centuries but this, and every country but his own; And the lady from the provinces, who dresses like a guy, And who "doesn't think she waltzes, but would rather like to try"; And that singular anomaly, the lady novelist-- I don't think she'd be missed--I'm sure she'd not he missed! CHORUS. He's got her on the list--he's got her on the list; And I don't think she'll be missed--I'm sure she'll not be missed! And that Nisi Prius nuisance, who just now is rather rife, The Judicial humorist--I've got him on the list! All funny fellows, comic men, and clowns of private life-- They'd none of 'em be missed--they'd none of 'em be missed. And apologetic statesmen of a compromising kind, Such as--What d'ye call him--Thing'em-bob, and likewise--Never-mind, And 'St--'st--'st--and What's-his-name, and also You-know-who-- The task of filling up the blanks I'd rather leave to you. But it really doesn't matter whom you put upon the list, For they'd none of 'em be missed--they'd none of 'em be missed! CHORUS. You may put 'em on the list--you may put 'em on the list; And they'll none of 'em be missed--they'll none of 'em be missed! -- W. S. Gilbert |
It's just terrible that for many of you, you can't wait for the next couple of days. Like them or not (if you believe the talk), 100+ managers are about to lose their jobs. Many of them have been around for a long time and do a fantastic job, are passionate about their work and the airline. I have relatives at the company at some of these levels and I'd be absolutely gutted if they lost their job in the next couple of days. Imagine working for the same company all your life, in your fifties and looking forward to your last ten years of work at one airline you've given your heart and soul to - only to have the rug pulled out from under you. How gutting.
Unfortunately, there are a significant majority of people on this forum that are quick to slander whoever is in management at the time. As far as many are concerned - management is management and they all deserve to be slaughtered. Someone has to run the company and everyone thinks they can do a better job than the people that are there. To many that post here (and in aviation in general) it matters not whether they are old, new, from outside or from within - they are always useless, over paid, stupid, and greedy. You all want change but when it happens, you hate it, rebel against it, and continue to slander the new breed. Can't win with you lot. Most people in the airline have it very good indeed - so stop whining about it. We all have a choice. If you don't like it - move on. I tell you it is no different outside the industry (in fact it's much worse for most people). Snail |
Lowerlobe whats clause 11
|
Snail dave,
Many of those whom you say have been around for a long time and do a fantastic job are the same people who have no problem introducing and carrying out policies that result in others losing their jobs or reducing their pay and conditions. When the shoe is on the other foot it's a problem isn't it? I noticed in one of your previous posts. The report on The Age says the male instructor was 89 years old. Can that be right? You had no problem highlighting the age and therefore inferring the suitability of a flying instructor who no doubt has many friends,relatives and admirers and who has been around for a long time and has done a fantastic job as well. Yet you posted this as well. To many that post here (and in aviation in general) it matters not whether they are old, new, from outside or from within - they are always useless, over paid, stupid, and greedy. You all want change but when it happens, you hate it, rebel against it, and continue to slander the new breed. Can't win with you lot. The problem with QF is not only the attitude of some execs and management but the number of them.As Sunfish said,how many 'Group General Managers,Executive General Managers,General Managers does this airline need? Lobey is right and the writers of Yes Prime Minister would be very impressed with the many layers of management in QF.I think I'll visit the local video store and get a few episodes to watch as they were not only funny but very apt. |
I'm sorry Dave, but I think you have got it wrong. I don't work for Qantas, but I am a student of management, having worked as a heap of senior management positions and for a variety of businesses.
First of all, there are Managers and there are leaders. The latter make it a pleasure to come to work each day, some of Ansett's old managers were like this and I'm sure so were a lot of QF's older ones. Managers on the other hand often have formal authority but don't know anything about the job itself and are not leaders. What happens in business is that without very strong leadership from the very top, which arguably has not happened at QF for some Eight years or so, the managers will identify and "weed out" leaders and potential leaders because they are a constant threat to their authority because, unlike the manager, they have actual hands on experience of that which the Manager is supposed to be managing. Unless they are experts at biting their tongue, eventually natural leaders expose themselves by challenging management stupidities, and from then on they are marked men, to be removed when it's convenient, especially if the manager is a narcissist because they are great haters who never forget even the smallest slight. Even helping a narcissistic manager by correcting their mistake is taken as an insult. It is a very brave and expert leader who says "I wish to be the stupidest man in the company and hire people who are brighter than me." Most can't and won't do that and from the sounds of numerous QF Pprune threads that's what Qf has been doing - weeding out the good guys and replacing them with psychophants. Time will tell if and when QF goes through it's list. If the narcissists are still in control, then good peoples names will be on that list and the deadwood will remain. |
Sunfish
I don't disagree with your analogy - I too have worked in the airlines and have seen the best and worst. What I get tired of is listening to all the experts here who know better, ALL of the time. If they were all that good, they'd be doing the job themselves. I just do feel sorry for people about to lose significant careers. Not all of the 100+ are deserving of that, surely? JJ You have managed to turn a simple and transparent question about a guy's age into something sinister, which is not the intent, and the only inference is created in your mind. I only asked about the guys age because I thought that there was an upper age limit on the issuing of a pilot's license. No query on the guy's ability to fly. Nothing more or less than a simple query - take it or leave it - I couldn't care less. Yeah, there probably are too many layers of management around the place but would you all knock back the opportunity to take up the role if it was offered to you? Or would you say 'no thanks sir, I think there are far too many managers as it is - it's not the best thing for the company'. What a crock! Good luck to the those who DON'T deserve to be tarred with the same brush and moved on to not-so greener pastures this week. Snail |
I started with QF in May 1970 at Tullamarine. That was before the airport had even opened.
Since then I have observed the regular 4-7 year cycles that QF and many other organisations go through. During a period of expansion people are appointed to fill various roles. Then comes a 'crunch' and a cleanout occurs. Then we have another slow buildup with people coming in to the organisation with fresh ideas (meaning NO idea) and try to re-invent the wheel. Depending which Uni and which subject matter was the flavour of the month reflect what these whizz kids try to impose. Eventually they get bored and either move on to greener pastures or there is another 'cleanout". Then it starts all over again, and again and again ad nauseum. It has been entertaining watching this re-occur if only because these 'whizz kids' take themselves so seriously and can't see their own lacking of any industry knowledge or credibility. The old boom and bust still keeps rolling along. Most companies and QF in particular survive inspite of management, not because of it. M acair and Sky Air World not included. It's been fun to watch. |
Snail Dave,
I only asked about the guys age because I thought that there was an upper age limit on the issuing of a pilot's license Your reply to me infers that you thought he should/would not have been an instructor at his age. Nothing more or less than a simple query - take it or leave it - I couldn't care less. However,when senior management who as you put it "have been around for a long time" are in line for the sack, you are quite happy to point out years of service. With the layers of management,it is the company we are talking about not the person who took the job.Just because someone takes a job offer does not mean they should keep it because to do otherwise would not be fair. Using your logic all those excess layers should keep their job because they were offered it fair and square. Now that is a load of crock as you put it. I agree with you that your posts are very transparent. |
100+ managers are about to lose their jobs. Many of them have been around for a long time and do a fantastic job, are passionate about their work and the airline. There would be some 450 engineers sacked from Sydney Heavy, all long timers doing their all for "The Company" that would not share your compassion for management & 100 more that resigned in frustration over where some of these managers were taking QE. |
Report Card
Are Qantas employees generally engaged?
Are they productive? Have service standards dropped? Have changes at Qantas been managed well by the hierarchy? Has the employer/employee relationship been generally adversarial? Research indicates that a highly engaged workforce are 50% more productive and contribute to a 33% increase in profitably. The research has been carried out by the "Right Management" Group. The only idea Qantas management has had over the last 10 years revolved around cost cutting.No service innovation,no employee engagement just cost cutting.They even screwed up that idea by cutting too far. Hundreds of loyal Qantas employees lost their jobs under this regime.The workforce was generally lied to and deceived. AJs task,should he be prepared to accept it,is to improve employee engagement.Costs are as low as they can go. Invest in your people and include them in the journey and the customer,the company and shareholder will reap the benefit. 100 executive job reductions should be the beginning of a purge not the end. |
Short Circuit
I understand - I started on the ground just like everyone else (the hangar floor in fact). I am happy to be the whipping boy here and put myself out there to be the 'anger sounding board' for everyone - I'm used to it and have a hard shell (hence, the snail). I just don't like seeing the 'tar all with the same brush' mentality that often gets the overwhelming gurnsey on the site and in aviation in general. I am sure some might feel differently if it were their parents or even their children (maybe even a 'whiz kid' as Sunfish puts it) about to get the axe. Maybe some of the whiz kids would do a better job if mentored by the more experienced people, rather than never being given a chance right from the get-go. I know I have always been willing to learn from my superiors in the industry - and continue to do so - always will - but what the hell do I know? Management is never as easy and simplistic as it seems when you're at the levels underneath it. And it sure is a bloody thankless job. Until you're in it up to your neck, it all seems obvious. Bash away. I'm just trying to highlight the fact that some are undeserving of what is about to come. Snail Dave |
Management is never as easy and simplistic as it seems when you're at the levels underneath it. And it sure is a bloody thankless job Dave,it doesn't matter how many years you put in but it does matter if you are doing a good job.It looks like you think managers should keep their job because they are good blokes regardless of how bad a job they are doing. AJ would not be getting rid of anyone if they were doing a good job. I am happy to be the whipping boy here |
Appears to have been given the green light.
Qantas to slash jobs | Business | News.com.au It will be interesting to see who goes and who stays. My fear is that the sycophants will use this as an opportunity to get rid of the leaders subordinate to them and that it will only exacerbate the situation. |
no bashing, but
having seen managers come and go i can honestly say its never been as bad as it is currently in our department. as i mentioned previously multiple layers with every piece of information controlled from the bottom up. no engagement with the workforce whatesoever and no leader/s who come and try to engage the teams. they are very quick to administer clause 11 (disciplinary investigation).the 10 million $ warehouse is the latest joke, add the millions wasted on the blackberry project and as usual no one is responsible for anything. they are very good in blaming the economy "thats why we have to take of a flight attendant off the a/c, but the two mentioned failed projects alone would have paid in keeping the F/A and providing consitency within the system.
my opinion make 200+ managers to leave the company and put the money back into the product. i totally agree with Cpt.Que on his assessment.:ok: |
Red
I think I am not good at getting my point across. Others just seem to pick out the quotes they want to jump on and run with it. All I'm trying to say is that, just as has happened to the guys on the hangar floor, and in many, many other departments in QF and other airlines, some will lose their jobs who don't deserve it. I am sure they will not just pick out the incompetent group. Is that not a reasonable statement? I agree that the useless ones should be dealt with (as in all business. God knows we have a good bloke sitting in the office next to me who has positively underperformed for lots of years - and should be 'relocated' regardless) but this sounds like it will be more a culling of layers in QF rather than individuals. Oh, and not all management positions are better paid with massive bonuses either. Again, we all have a choice. Anyway, I'm going out to commit exercise for an hour. I will come back to my office and mop up the blood from the slaughter I know I will receive. Snail Dave |
Direct Reporting
You see a problem and report it to your manager or supervisor.Nothing gets done.?
Go to their manager. Having worked for a company that encouraged this I saw efficiencies created and problems solved very very quickly.It made middle managers very accountable. AJ wants to know whats going on .Everyone should tell him.Blind CCs work a treat.Send your manager an email regarding a problem and BCC Alan Joyce |
How many of these executives have overseen job losses in cost cutting exercises. In every staff reduction it is inevitable that someone will lose a job who doesn't deserve to.
Unfortunately in a company like QF the term 'Live by the sword' seems apt. Any executive must realise, as the staff well do, that cost cutting will eventually claim some large scalps. It doesn't matter who you are! People that have been in the airline for years should understand the volatility this industry rides. Seen it at Western Mining, BHP, RIO and now QF. |
Nothing gets done.? Go to their manager. I am happy to be the whipping boy here and put myself out there Stop the LAMES & AME walking out the gate never to return, or is that the plan, make them walk? Sorry to be pushing QE, I know it is company wide. There is a common denominator and it is not the people at the coal face. |
Dixon and his managements ideology that the employees at the coalface, those actually doing the work
and presenting the face of qantas are a mere hindrance and liability to the company must be purged. Maybe the wheel will turn again, back to the times when managers like John Menadue and James Strong engaged staff and proclaimed that the employees were the companies greatest asset. Mr Joyce is heading in the right direction with this news... "Qantas' engineering and airline catering businesses, which became stand-alone operations under Dixon, will be brought back under the Qantas operations banner." Dixon left a blight on qantas which remains in the management culture. A 30% cull of that management is a great start to getting rid of it. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 20:02. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.