|
Qantas Asia Business Model
A sneak peek at the Qantas Asia business model, how it'll effect cabin crew and the immorality of the Qantas group.
Jetstar accused of exploiting cabin crew - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) |
Great to see this has finally come out. Also great to see the pilots coming out to bat for their crew. :ok:
|
It's also great to see Senator Xenophon taking up the cudgels. He will surely get the air time!
(No pun intended.) |
Difference between Tiger & Thai Airways events are we can view the data on webtrack or QAR data.
As for the Jetstar case the precursor to an operational event is the crew self reports. Would CASA care to comment? |
Does this entire situation sit comfortably within the widely spruiked ICAO 'Just Cultue' policy ?
Is this situation 'wolds best practise' ? Is this truly safety first ? |
The truth is out there...
Well done Senator Xenophon! At least one pollie who actually looks after his constituents!:ok: |
AM - Jetstar rebuts fatigue claims 28/07/2011
Employees of this airline are now delivered to the aircraft by "suppliers" and "providers"and if they , "these people",have a problem with fatigue according to Buchanan can "write to me". This is a truely toxic outfit. |
You just need to see where management are coming from.
Best practice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Nothing in the accepted definition of best practice mentions treating staff in accordance with best practice. It's a buzzword of todays globalisation focused world. It's all about seeing who can cut the most and following that guy. If they able to get away with forcing staff to work potentially unlimited hours in a country, obviously that's Best Practice. Best Practice has got nothing to do with treating staff like anything else except a measurable number on a piece of paper. Why do we all think there is so many consultants like Bain & Co at Qantas. They're measuring all of us against the lowest common denominators out there, in Thailand, Phillipines, Mainland China etc. Management 101 - leave your morals at the door thanks. |
Listening to BB's response, leaves me with more unanswered questions:
1. In the senate inquiry, I was led to believe that J* had a very robust safety reporting system. Why is it then, that the first J* has heard of the fatigue report (Thai crew) was thru the media? 2. J* claim to have a "Just Culture" & Fatigue management system. However both have failed on this occasion. Do the service providers in Asia operate to the Just culture system"? 3. What has actually changed as a result of all the cabin crew "Oscar" reports, is fatigue being managed? Or are reports just filed away? 4. BB stated that AIPA wanted Qantas pilots in Jetstar jobs which is incorrect as per AIPA's claim. 5. Why is it that Jetstar employees feel compelled to go to the media as opposed to Jetstar management? Do they not trust the safety reporting system? 6. Didn't Jetstar learn from the "Toughen up princess" letter? More letters to staff bullying when reporting fatigued. 7. Does it not concern Jetstar, Qantas or CASA that they don't have "control" due minority stakes in their service providers? 8. BB stated he "encouraged" crew not to operate if fatigued. Should he have stated that J* don't permit as part of their policy any crew to operate who is fatigued? 9. BB response focussed on what happened to the crew after reporting fatigued. Why were the crew fatigued in the first place? Over worked / poor rostering / Long duties? MC |
I just posted this in another thread, thought it pertinent here as well;
Milgram http://www.socialsounds.net/milgram.gif VOLT S – 450 VOLT S” (Blass, 2004, p. 79). Initially, the “shocker” started giving a low voltage of what they believed was an actual shock, and they were then asked to gradually increase the voltage in response to suggestions from the experimenter, who would say things like: 1. Please continue. 2. The experiment requires that you continue. 3. It is absolutely essential that you continue. 4. You have no other choice, you must go on. The experiment was intended to show just how far the “shocker” would go, based on receiving commands from someone in authority. This was all part of an experiment done at Yale. Predictions on how many people would be willing to continue to shock at high voltage levels were low … about 3%. In actuality, however, 65% were willing to give them the juice at the maximum level. Milgram had the following to say about the results: “Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority” |
You mean one pollie more concerned about his constituents than retaining his Chairman's Lounge invitation!!!!
|
I was astounded by Buchanan's response to Nick Xenophon's allegations this morning. His opinion of Richard Woodward was to be expected but to launch in boots and all into Nick Xenophon, frankly one of the few politicians I've seen with character and integrity was appalling.
And in addition I think it's disappointing that Senator Xenophon, you know who I've reached out to a number of times saying I'm available to, if he's got any enquires. And he chooses to raise these sorts of allegations in the media rather than pick up the phone. And I think at this time more than any in Australia we really need some great political leaders and some real leadership and we're not getting it from our political leaders when they behave like this. Interesting to see a photo of Nick and Natasha Stott Despoja in the paper yesterday. I don't know if it's in the pipeline but any political party fronted by those two would get my vote. Oh and Bruce, you've just accused Richard Woodward of misleading the senate enquiry. To do so would be a serious offense under Australian law so I assume you'll be providing evidence of his misconduct to the AFP? No, didn't think so. |
Yes, we all know how BB has always made himself available to Nick Xenophon.
Like the time AJ & BB failed to show at the senate inquiry. :yuk: |
Maybe they'll get Travolta back to revoice the safety video:
In the event of an emergency it is the cabin crew that is most important to you. These people are paid $7 per hour and may not have slept for 24 hours. Good luck with that!! |
So the Thai cabin receive $258/month plus$7hr per flight hour. And BB tells the ABC that they earn up to $30k per annum:D without busting the, load of crap, FRMS that the QF group have been forced to embrace.
That means they fly 74hrs a week with no annual leave:\ I think Bruce is using Allan's faulty calculator:ugh: When will this End:oh: |
Contact Qantas | Contact Centres and Office Contacts
Qantas Bangkok Office IS Tour East Thailand. Arms length? Minority Interest? So the Jetstar Flight Attendant service provider is also the Qantas Office. |
Why is there an Asian dating advertisment at the bottom of this thread??:uhoh: And I'm being fair dinkum too! :bored:
|
When will this End:oh:
|
BB stated in the papers that the average hours worked by Thai crew was 24 hrs ,so if you do the maths total renumeration for the year is 11832 for the average worker.$258/month plus$7hr per flight hour.What did he tell the senate
|
BARBARA MILLER: Five Thai based crew though said that they'd felt too tired to operate a Sydney to Melbourne flight and were castigated for that and asked by their Thai based employer to give guarantees that they would not repeat that behaviour. That surely is unacceptable. BRUCE BUCHANAN: That is unacceptable. And that's why we've gone back to the supplier when we were aware of the allegations yesterday and said this is unacceptable. We've told TET who recruit cabin crew on our behalf, and there's a number of these sorts of suppliers in countries like Thailand and Singapore and Asian markets where they recruit crew for a number of airlines. And we've said, look that may be acceptable to other airlines where you chastise and intimidate them. But that's just not just part of the standards of the Qantas Group and we find it unacceptable that you've issued these letters. So here we are folks; Qantas is paying its senior management top dollars to implement a foreign labour hire strategy that any Two bit property developer could have done for almost nothing..... So much for grand strategy, this is pure, simple, stupid, pointless idiocy on behalf of Qantas. This folks is the "supplier/fulfillment" business model in all it sordid, **** covered, smelly glory. The theory goes that the value of Qantas is in the brand and nothing else. The theory goes that all the components that go to make up the airline are merely "business inputs" that can be provided by "suppliers" who will provide the required product or service for a simple fee. In this theory, you are not a "pilot" but a "provider of piloting services". Qantas simply pays someone to provide "piloting services" and that is the end of it. The folks who do all this are called "supply chain managers". The idea behind all this is that risk is systematically removed, or so Qantas management thinks. They don't have to worry about care and feeding of employees, retirement, training, rosters, etc. etc. One simple monthly fee to the supplier takes care of all that. The ultimate abstraction of this business model has the senior management and Board sipping champagne as the only employees of the business, with literally everything else being contracted out - pilots, engineering, cabin crew, wet leased aircraft - the lot. All the owners have to do is collect the money and pay the suppliers. The trouble with this wonderful concept is a little matter called "value added" Every one of your suppliers in this beautiful construct takes away a tiny little morsel of your value added. Furthermore, and what is worse, it denies you any chance of adding extra value - because that requires staff to do something more than they contracted for. This is where this model trips and falls flat on its face like Qantas is in the process of doing. So lets take our Thai Jetstar cabin crew.... When there is an over run, accident and fire at Darwin or Den Pasar, I will say right now that I expect that those Thai Cabin crew will be first off the aircraft and to hell with you and your family. Did they contract to die fighting bravely for the lives of their Qantas passengers? No way! They are simply contractors. Mother gets asthma and requires a drink of water in flight? No way, I'm just a contractor. Same with engineers and pilots - sorry fella, I just do as I'm told, fixing your problems is not covered by my pay grade. I've told my son I'll disinherit him if he flies Jetstar anywhere, and I mean it. The model was made to work by guys like Lindsay Fox, Toll and Patrick, but even some of their customers are taking their logistics back inside because they were losing control. |
It is interesting that the worm seems to be turning regarding the media and QF/JQ. Maybe they have noted the level of support the pilots are getting just from their PA campaign?
|
Attention All Flight Attendants
If you are unfairly treated you Must fill this in!!!!!!!!!!!!!
REPCON - Aviation Confidential Reporting Scheme What is REPCON? REPCON is a voluntary confidential reporting scheme. REPCON allows any person who has an aviation safety concern to report it to the ATSB confidentially. Protection of the reporter's identity and any individual referred to in the report is a primary element of the scheme. REPCON - Aviation Confidential Reporting Scheme Please pass this on too all F/A's of J* here and abroad. |
CASA continiously refuses
to address Flight Duty Limitations for cabin crew. Australia and NZ appears to be the Only western countries which have no FTL for cabin crew.
A disgrace!!:ugh: |
I've told my son I'll disinherit him if he flies Jetstar anywhere, and I mean it. |
So the Thai cabin receive $258/month plus$7hr per flight hour. And BB tells the ABC that they earn up to $30k per annum:D without busting the, load of crap, FRMS that the QF group have been forced to embrace. |
|
What a load of shyte, the media coverage of what is happening here is absolutely shameful and diabolical.
I went from schoolboy to retired old goat at the rat and grew up believing in the values of Sir Hudson Fysh and Arthur Baird et al. These KPI driven lunatics have the hide to stand in front of the hard earned safety record built up by previous generations and blatantly snow the public by saying that safety is their only concern. Never before in the history of Qantas has risk management and acceptable hull loss been an accepted philosophy, NEVER!!! |
Protection of the reporter's identity and any individual referred to in the report is a primary element of the scheme |
If CASA had any balls, they would summons BB and question his suitability to hold any accountable position.
As for the good Senator, why doen't he seek to have him charged with contempr of the Senate, there is enough evidence. Niether of the above will happen. Sadly we will have a Royal Commision one day and it will find that we have never acted on known defects in our industry. The Politicians will sack the head of CASA, and express horror at not having been informed of the sorry state of the industry. Any life will go on because this is just a game of buck passing and not being in the firing line when sh!t happens. |
JST/JQ (and QFA/QF) SMS, FRMS and Just Culture?
You have to take your hat off to the JQ CEO who proudly claims the “90 years of QF unblemished safety reputation” as his own ( ref. ABC News). It was news to me, I had no idea that there was only one AOC for the parent and the hybrid LCC subsidiary. So it is true then that the QF and JQ SMS, FRMS and Just Culture are literally one and the same? QF being tarred with the same JQ safety brush? “Just culture”, or was JQ confusing it with “JIT” – Just In Time for flight and duty time limitations? So JQ management is not at fault and has no AOC responsibility for cabin crew performance or quality, and we can now blame the parent QF “owned” third party offshore Thai contract labour supplier? Anyway, according to JQ the "tucker chuckers" have no safety role, by definition cannot be fatigued, and can be summarily dismissed at any time. I just can’t wait, the sooner we outsource and offshore all the drivers as well, the better off we will be! At least then if anyone complains, makes a report, refuses to extend etc. etc. they can be threatened with dismissal. No, of course JQ will never force a fatigued crew member to work, but JQ is quite happy to dismiss the crew member if they so refuse. Did someone mention “slave labour” and a safety management system being compatible?
Could CASA assist and “work in a constructive and co-operative manner” with JQ to improve JQ's version of QF Safety Culture? Are these incredible JQ threats of dismissal acts of wilful and deliberate non-compliance by JQ? No one seems to be suggesting that the utilization of third party contractors by JQ was inadvertent. Maybe a CASA SCN is on the way to JQ? Or perhaps the CASA DAS only needs to invite the CASA nominated and approved JQ management: CEO, Head of Flight Ops, Safety etc. etc. in for tea and biccies and “unapprove” them! Perhaps some new restrictions on the JQ AOC if changes are not made? JQ would seemingly benefit from a little CASA enforced ( via provisions of Div 3A of the Civil Aviation Act ) “down” time ala TGW/TT. Has JQ engaged in, is engaging in, or is likely to engage in conduct that constitutes, contributes to or results in a serious and imminent risk to air safety? Are there reasonable grounds in perceiving a serious and imminent risk to air safety and therefore suspending the JQ AOC to protect public safety is justified? Such a suspension would bring some much needed breathing space at JQ and provide a really wonderful opportunity to give JQ a chance to re-focus on safety and get their house in order. Safety is no accident. And air safety is certainly far too important to be left to present JQ management. |
Where's Olivia (this is not a safety issue) Worth?
Missing in action. |
"It's not your hair Livvy, it's your voice"
Still cracks me up:} |
Bruce, you are a goose. If you did a little bit of homework you would find that Captain Woodward is the Vice President of AIPA, not the Secretary as you stated in your interview.
As far as credibility issues, and allegations of misleading the Senate, well... |
In fact if I was Captain Woodward (I'm not), I would be seriously considering a defamation lawsuit on the basis of your comments. :=
|
I did hear Bruce in an interview mention something about if any staff member is fatigued it's their responsibility to report to their manager so they can be relieved of duty.
I'm not too sure what the workplace laws are in Thailand, I'm sure they're not as strong as Australia. But I could just imagine the apprehension of a Thai flight attendant reporting they are too fatigued to work and the subsequent fear they might have of being relieved of their employment. |
HCMC
I am not sure if they have changed the crewing, but last time I was in the top end, the JQ crews would operate HCMC/DRW/SYD with a 3 hour layover in DRW. Disappointing thing was that the HCMC crews did not have a crewroom. The only place they had for the layover in DRW was to try and sleep on the aircraft
E |
Sorry to bring up the past but have a listen to JE from last year.
Skip forward to 3:25 Foreign bases of convenience Fatigue Safety concerns & AJ's response: No wonder they had to silence the guy! :suspect: |
The theory goes that the value of Qantas is in the brand and nothing else. The theory goes that all the components that go to make up the airline are merely "business inputs" that can be provided by "suppliers" who will provide the required product or service for a simple fee. In this theory, you are not a "pilot" but a "provider of piloting services". Qantas simply pays someone to provide "piloting services" and that is the end of it. The folks who do all this are called "supply chain managers". The idea behind all this is that risk is systematically removed, or so Qantas management thinks. They don't have to worry about care and feeding of employees, retirement, training, rosters, etc. etc. One simple monthly fee to the supplier takes care of all that. Upperlobe, 10/10 for your post. How true is that ! 90 years of a solid building of an enviable safety reputation slaughtered within a few short years. As for AJ's comments about employee policies not being a safety concern ? Me thinks somebody should explain SMS, Just Culture and current legislation to him. These are things that an operator is regulated too... |
What a load of shyte, the media coverage of what is happening here is absolutely shameful and diabolical. I went from schoolboy to retired old goat at the rat and grew up believing in the values of Sir Hudson Fysh and Arthur Baird et al. These KPI driven lunatics have the hide to stand in front of the hard earned safety record built up by previous generations and blatantly snow the public by saying that safety is their only concern. Never before in the history of Qantas has risk management and acceptable hull loss been an accepted philosophy, NEVER!!! Do you still own any Qantas shares Upperlobe? If so, would love to see you and a bunch of like-minded individuals attend the next Qantas AGM and really stick it up Clifford and Joyce!!! Would love to attend myself in full uniform and stand up and turn my back to those b*stards as they spoke, but I'm sure that that would be instant dismissal, so I guess I'll just have to keep on with the PAs for now. |
GT shows his bias
Capt Kremin
Geoff Thomas "aviation expert" was mouthing off on local radio yesterday stating the PA's are annoying pax who consider QF Pilots overpaid and have no sympathy for their current industrial push for higher wages...:ugh: |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 03:36. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.