Silence is deafening
 

What I find extraodinary is managements time scales.
Here's but a few
New Roster implementation [2 years]
Email response important HR matter [8 weeks]
Official notice of failed redundancy applc's (30) [1.8 years]
Previous EBA agreement settlement [+1 year]
Current EA agreement [7 months and counting]
Pls add here......

They now have 2 unions (Pilots & Eng's) waiting settlemment of matters and all we hear is silence. Probably enjoying an extended Easter holiday, oh...how silly of me. I thought we were a 24/7 operation.

In the meantime the employees try to focus on their job at hand while the IR distractions just add RISK to their every minute at work while the sendentry style of management plods on.

I think the Stakeholders and Shareholders patience is runnning out. The share price is down 27% in six months and still hasn't found a floor price.

“Mate, it's about empowerment if you have ever flown Southwest and watched them work you will understand this.”

Yep, as a regular commuter for work I fly Southwest A LOT. And others.

“Qantas had that same spirit in the 1970's and at least half the 1980's.”

Really. Captains loaded bags? Fleet managers spent a week on the ramp? Check in staff dumped toilets? I doubt it.

The empowerment and work ethic you talk of is the result of very clever staff selection. It is extremely uncommon for legacy airlines to simply revolutionize the existing workforce from disenfranchised “job builders” to hard working empowered “line of sighters”.

Expect just about all would agree that Ownership at Southwest works exceedingly well and the United ESOP flopped dreadfully.

Why are the Soutwest and United experiences so different? Well, according to the National Center for Ownership in the US:
It seems to me, the difference is Southwest employees continue to work in teams to make decisions, full information on corporate and work unit performance is shared and employees are urged to use their judgment to make whatever decisions are necessary to please customers. Where as, at United, once the looming financial disaster was thought to be beaten, the Ownership culture was lost.

Further reading available at:"But What About United Airlines?" Answering Tough Questions

NEC Source:United Airlines, ESOPs, and Employee Ownership (Commentary on Current Issues, November 2002)

Will someone please explain which market QF are trying to compete in. At the moment they aren't good enough for the top end and aren't cheap enough for the bottom end.

If I want quality travel I'll go Singapore Airlines.

If I want convenient connections I'll go Emirates.

If I want to save money I'll try the airfare search engines and see what comes up. Guaranteed QANTAS won't be the cheapest.

Will someone please explain which market QF are trying to compete in. At the moment they aren't good enough for the top end and aren't cheap enough for the bottom end.

If I want quality travel I'll go Singapore Airlines.

If I want convenient connections I'll go Emirates.

If I want to save money I'll try the airfare search engines and see what comes up. Guaranteed QANTAS won't be the cheapest.

Metro man,

Do you think what you state is an accident?
Just poor planning?
A cunning plan to ensure failure?

I believe it is a long term strategy to shrink it until it is unviable on all but the most lucrative routes. I believe they have chosen not to compete on product, fares, routes & destinations.

I couldn't agree more Ampclamp!..

I think its pretty obvious to all that QF picked the wrong man for CEO..A man who has a great vision for a Low cost operation but when it comes to a premium service.."mmm, I dunno that one, to be sure to be sure..!"..

He leads us from one bungle to the next and drives this great company in no direction whatsoever, while our competitors race away with honours.
This is still a great brand but is a dinosaur in its methods and procedures and needs to change.

QF needs a Leader who has a vision to make this airline one of the greats again and then we can send our CEO back to the Emerald Isle once and for all!!:ugh:

Expect supporters of Qantas’ two brand strategy would say
· Joint service agreements and code sharing makes Mainline convenient,
· Jetstar is a very good LCC proposition, and
· Mainline provides good value for the premium prices it charges.

On the other hand, others would no doubt say that no hybrid airline can, simultaneously do both well enough. Interesting, BA and JAL have chosen not to implement a Premium/LCC two brand strategy and recall that DELTA recently reabsorbed its LCC spin off.

Qantas Mainline's declining international market share may well suggest that too many travellers are coming to the view that SIA and Emirates provide better value premium products than Qantas & its Code Share Partners, and that the two brand strategy is not delivering, but this is really a matter for shareholders.

Nevertheless, a Fosters’ style demerger might deliver greater value to Qantas Shareholders than the status quo and is a question that is likely to be increasingly asked, if QAN's share price continues to tank.

It might
 

create a short term boost to the share price and more bonuses to senior managers, but would be a disaster in the medium term for J*. no more subsidies, use of facilities of any kind. :ugh:

Not according to The Australian.
Foster's wine-beer demerger to clarify divisions' value | The Australian

I remember the days when the skipper was at the door, in full uniform at the end of the flight to farewell the passengers. AFAIK, the skipper wasn't required to do this, professionalism seemed to compel him to be there.
No company requirement made him be there.
I remember as a kid with brothers and sister getting a ride in the lift on the 747 courtesy of the cabin crew in the dead of night, and getting to go up to the cockpit at some stage. No-one had to do this, but the crew had great pride in their jobs. I don't think they overtly understood that they were promoting the brand and were the best advertisement Qantas had. They enjoyed their jobs. The Chief Steward(?) and PIC allowed this.
This was the Brand. You got on the Flying Kangaroo and you were already half way home. The people at the top end had the ability to pull their heads out of their spreadsheets (arse) and grasp the business.
We have for the last 25+ years, had the underperformers who have insinuated their way into the management levels, they have white-anted those managers who had that intuitive understanding of their work area but can't write a report to paint themselves in a super positive way.
On the whole we have ended up with a group of managers who have become skilled in manipulation of data and message. The actual doing of the job/s is secondary to the business of looking good.
In some places Corporate Communications (spin doctors) and HR/IR are now THE BUSINESS. This other stuff is just peripheral.
If one of these managers get a sniff that someone is doing something that is not mandated,or approved but promotes 'The Brand' or gets something done better, they'll be almost paralysed with indecision as they assess whether they should punish the individual for doing something outside the rules/procedures or find a self-advantage in adopting the difference.
Viva the 80's????????

Max1-
Bloody well said.
you are 110% correct in your observations re the company and especially re management types wanting to look good rather than be good/great at doing the actual job they are being paid the big bucks to do. :ugh::=
Same in many aviation companies today as well as in other industries.
All about show and style above substance and value.:ugh:

If the crew of QF32 had been working on those principles of operation that A380 and 450 plus people would have left a hole in the ocean and be resting on the bottom now.

The 'Jetstarising' of Qantas has left it stuck on the tarmac with a poor reputation
 

The 'Jetstarising' of Qantas has left it stuck on the tarmac with a poor reputation
This view is slowly becoming mainstream media, the word's out confirming what many have been saying on here, to be sure!

The Fosters Board just realised you can't be in the wine market and the beer market at the same time.

BHP realised that you can't be a steel producer and a miner/oil and gas producer at the same time.

Qantas will make the same discovery if it survives long enough because the mindsets of an LCC operator and a full service operator are different.

It was McKinseys the management consulting firm that taught this and makes big bucks out of teaching it still.

The reason that this conglomerate approach (ie: The Idea of the Qantas Group) never works is that it asks too much of the Board and CEO. It asks too much because ultimately the Board will have to decide on competing investment priorities and cannot give all their time to understanding just one business. - ie: Jetstar wants this aircraft, Mainline wants that aircraft, regional wants this, etc., etc. ???

BHP didn't wake up to itself (with the help of McKinseys) until after their disastrous decision to purchase Magma Copper in the U.S. which cost them a billion dollars. Fosters finally understood that there is nothing in common between the wine and beer industries apart from the act of drinking the product.

McKinseys teaches that the most long term profitable companies are those that focus on a single market segment and where everyone from the Board down is totally committed to thinking, eating and breathing that segment and product every waking moment.

It is not possible for the Qantas Board and CEO to get their heads around the cheese paring LCC strategy and the full service mainline strategy and back in a single Board meeting. They may think they can, but they will inevitably make bad decisions because they will be unable to deal with the competing priorities on their time.

To put it another way; asking them to do Two things at once means that they will do neither very well. The whole is less than the sum of its parts.

from todays SMH
 

AS QANTAS stares down the barrel of some potentially explosive industrial action over the next few weeks, analysts have been taking the knife to their forecasts, particularly as oil prices continue to rise and speculation grows of an equity-raising.
With so much negativity, the company's shares drifted down to $2.11 on Friday, a whisker away from its $2 issue price when it listed more than 15 years ago.
Tough times have long been a recurring theme at Qantas and the latest round of challenges - rising oil prices, threats of industrial action and a string of mid-air emergencies last year - is nothing new.
Advertisement: Story continues below
What is new, and could be the biggest threat to the airline, is the damage to its brand.
Its chief executive, Alan Joyce, recently accused the unions of running a ''kamikaze'' campaign that was likely to drive customers to competing airlines. While this might be so, a bigger "kamikaze" campaign was the decision by the board and senior management to run down the Qantas brand and create confusion among customers about the two brands of Qantas and Jetstar.
When Joyce was appointed boss in November 2008, Qantas was the only airline in the world that had a successful two-brand airline strategy: Qantas and budget airline Jetstar. Back then Qantas was considered a premium brand that was so outstanding that there was no confusion between Qantas and Jetstar.
Fast forward to today and the concern is that Joyce has systematically "Jetstarised" Qantas, with the perception of Qantas as a premium full-service airline diminished.
Instead of trying to reverse this with strong marketing of the Qantas brand, it has done the reverse.
A key issue is its international unit, which loses money. Joyce recently ordered a review of the international arm of Qantas to see how to restore profitability. The most likely impact will be further route cuts for Qantas and a transfer to Jetstar.
Between 2003 and 2009, international capacity to Australia increased by 39 per cent, but inbound passengers increased by just 10 per cent. This trend was due to many factors, including airlines from the Middle East taking market share, as well as Qantas reducing routes and capacity on some of these routes, allowing Emirates and others to enter the market and lift capacity.
In terms of capacity, its latest half-yearly accounts indicate that Jetstar increased domestic capacity by 20 per cent and international capacity by 18 per cent. This pace is in contrast to Qantas, which expanded capacity by 3.3 per cent, with plans to increase it by 4.5 per cent.
Whatever surveys and customer service reports that Qantas brings up, mounting anecdotal evidence shows it has lost the mindshare of customers. The growing perception is Qantas doesn't care about safety, customer service or its employees.
Flights running late with little explanation, flight attendants with low morale, sour faces at check-in desks and poor IT systems have left a bad taste in many people's mouths about Qantas.
From my own experience, I took a flight to London in March, with a stopover in Hong Kong. The Qantas plane was old, the seat clapped out, food and service poor and on each leg of the trip the entertainment system failed and took at least two hours to re-boot.
I complained on March 21 and immediately received an automated response saying: "We are committed to always caring for our customers and responding to your valued feedback in a timely manner."
Besides getting told not to respond to this email as it was an "outgoing only" service that does not accept incoming messages, it took almost a month, April 15, before I received a response. The letter, titled "apologies", was another standard letter that didn't deal with the issues. Signed by a customer care executive called Josephine, it said: "We are concerned to learn of your experience and I would personally like to apologise that you did not receive the premium level of service expected from Qantas. Please be assured we are listening and that your feedback has been forwarded to the relevant management as part of this process… I hope we have the opportunity to welcome you aboard Qantas again soon."
The fob-off letter was disappointing from an airline that once prided itself on its high standard of customer service. It is part of the Jetstarisation of Qantas.
There is no doubt that Jetstar has a lot of advantages over Qantas, including fewer unions and different pay scales. These differences have caused a lot of consternation among staff and unions, who argue that younger pilots are being pushed into the lower pay and worse conditions at Jetstar. The argument is that Jetstar is getting the newer planes and the younger pilots, while the more experienced pilots are with the Qantas brand, which has the older planes.
In the past few weeks analysts have downgraded their profit figures for Qantas when it reports it full-year results, and on Friday Deutsche Bank's credit desk issued an update that the carrier's credit profile weakened further, reflecting oil prices and recent adverse market developments. It said downgrade risk could be reduced if the company implements opex/capex/dividend cuts. "We also think an equity-raising may be necessary depending on market conditions in the near term."
Joyce has been in the job for 2½ years and has done a good job during challenging times. But with a share price falling and some major issues he needs to address, he will need to decide whether Qantas is a growth stock or a yield stock, a full-cost carrier with a budget airline, or a budget airline with a full-service domestic business.
Right now it is neither.
[email protected]

At the time Jetstar was formed I repeated Robert Townsend's observation from "Up The Organisation" - his book about the saving and restructure of Avis.

When tempted to start a low cost car rental division to compete with emerging low cost competitors he asked one of his Vice Presidents for comment on the idea.

The response: "In Polish, we call that p1ssing in the soup."

That is exactly what Qantas is now belatedly realising it's done.

Is a big call Adele. :uhoh:

Is indeed a big call and probably something shareholders will eventually have to iron out.

It is spot on if you ask me.

And it just keeps getting worse.

Media reports today in Sydney from staff at Q Catering that meals are being frozen and stored well before before despatch to aircraft. This included J Class despite all the hype about fresh and master chefs. Guess this happens when you alienate staff.

Major competitors must be loving these guys endless efforts to alienate premium passengers in pursuit of bonuses.