Qantas Employee Engagement
 

"One of our key objectives is to build a cohesive culture that engages all employees and facilitates lasting improvements across the organisation"
- This from todays Fin Review quoting Allan Joyce.-
Is this cause for re-joyce-ing ?

Back To The Future
 

This is the type of employee culture Qantas had before Old Scrotum Face declared war on staff.
It took Dixon ten years to screw it up.It will take Joyce at least five years to fix it.
Dont hold your breath...mainline is still shrinking and they are still parking jumbos in Nevada

QF management always make the right noises on this issue, but the staff have long since stopped listening. I guess 10 years of Dixon belting you over the head does that.

All these touchy feely phrases don't hide the fact that this company still engage the services of IR consultants, who's sole mission is to drive down wages and conditions by a never ending strategy of divide and conquer.

QF group staff at each others throats = happy QF management.

Whilst this remains the case, staff engagement at the rat is but a pipedream.

He must have been misquoted.

Surely he would have said this..

"One of our key objectives is to plan to build a cohesive culture that engages all employees and facilitates lasting improvements across the organisation"

Management have no intention of engaging mainline pilots. They simply view them as overpaid liabilities that have to be strung along until it doesn't matter anymore.

If they were serious they would make some effort to fix the things that are no cost or minimal cost items...like staff travel, jumpseats etc. They are good on the talk but long ago forgot about the walk.

So long as the Qantas pilots only whinge a lot but keep on beavering away why would they care?

The divide and conquer game is probably at checkmate already.

I Still Call Australia Home
 

Seems to be working well for the Qantas Choir ! They seem to be rather cohesive, all smiles and happiness in their workplace, good job perks and plenty of travel,I would even hazard a guess that they have been through a recent CRM training course judging by the 'positive culture' they exhibit ? That would be good for staff morale surely, as well as enabling QF to remain a highly sort after employer of choice.

P.S - Merry Xmas Darth and enjoy the New Year festivities from the Harbour.

What about all the suckholes that make up the Qantas Promotional Team. Fancy volunteering yourself for all that unpaid work to promote a once fantastic company that treats its staff so poorly. Obviously trying to move up the greasy pole. :ugh:

Engagement - what a load of management BS. What does it really mean??

Engagement?
 

Hmm... Back in a former life, "engaging" was something you did to the enemy with the objective of killing it...

Touche Gutso.

There can be no engagement whilst there is "under-employment". Under-employment is where people are employed at a level below their capabilities. It is different from being overqualified as it infers the problem is the fault of the employer.

Experienced pilots spending 5-10 years as a Second Officer (no takeoffs or landings)? 15-20 years to command (even at SQ a command is 5-7 years for ex-military and 8 - 10 for cadets).

There needs to be opportunity before there can be engagement.

Management couldn't give a stuff if you are "underemployed".

Leave and go to another airline would be our dear departed leaders advice if you feel that way.

As his disciple I am sure AJ would say the same.

Didn't Dixon once say this (or similar) in response to unhappy pilots....

"I don't see too many leaving"

kelly, airlines that have those sorts of numbers are either expanding rapidly or are seeing massive staff turnover. Keep in mind that SQ also have significantly more number of Captains than do QF for the a given airframe. Perhaps that's what you mean by 'under employed'. The fact that we have S/Os whilst the likes of SQ and so on have F/Os who they treat like S/Os.

Time to command in QF as at beginning of 2009 was 14 years. Anyone who took longer was there by choice or lack of aptitude. Time to F/O was no longer than 5 years. Anyone who took longer was there by choice. I haven't looked at those numbers in the last 12 months, perhaps they've blown out a bit more now. That said, you know all this and so your figure of 20 years for command and 10 years to F/O is an outright distortion.

Keg - hang on. You've just told me that time to command was 14 years but has maybe blown out now. I said 15 - 20 (now) and you've called that an outright distortion (you chose to leave out the 15 -).

There are plenty of SOs that are spending 5-10 years before promotional training - I'm sure you would agree with that. The fact that they are doing that of their own choice means that there must be a disincentive to take promotion (reduction in pay, reduction in conditions).

The benefits of promotion are where the opportunity lies. Normally this is very clear cut - I have more responsibility so I get more rewards. The disincentives need to be addressed by overhaulling an outdated system so that people choose career growth when it presents itself. In Qantas this might be a very long time (as we have established), especially when you look around at what else is on offer.

In the meantime there is under-employment - people working well below their ability and experience. These people will not be engaged until they see the possibility of real career growth.

You are correct in saying that such opportunities only exist in expanding airlines. The Qantas Group has had massive expansion over the last few years. Most of the resulting opportunities have not been made available to the people that, in general, have the most years of service and experience in the group. In my opinion a lot of Goodwill was passed up on that the company (perhaps hindered by the Union) could and should have extended its staff. This has not been engaging.

Yeah! You may have to work for a living! :E

Yeah right! Blank - Reserve - Blank - Reserve:bored:

Fair chance that the longhaul award in conjunction with seniorority based bidding may have a bit to do with this!:hmm:

I think that Kelly is having a shot at the seniority system.....

Maybe SO's in Qantas are paid to much! considering a DASH 8 Captain earns less......

Kelly, if you'd said 5 years to F/O and 15 years to command I wouldn't have had an issue. The 10 and 20 years quoted by yourself are an outright distortion. No one has taken 20 years to command in QF for about two decades...if ever. Even the former cadets you talk to who spent a decade as S/Os back in the late 70s and early 80s only spent 2-3 years as F/Os. I note too that you disregard the fact that some 737 drivers have recently picked up F/O slots in 3 years and commands in under 10 years. Why didn't those numbers figure in your burst?

Anyway, you continue to sledge the seniority system if you must. If you have to distort the numbers to make your case seem sound then those who actually know the numbers are going to see right through you.

All DASH 8 capts are free to apply. I guess it comes down to the individual as to what is more important to them.

As far as the seniority system goes:

The positive...

'the system was established to banish favouritism'

Important for somewhere like QF!

The negative

'the seniority system must ever persist if only because it is a protection of the weak, who are everywhere in the greatest number' Ernest K. Gann

Also applies to some of the deadweight at QF!!