I look forward to seeing the results of your political lobbying on behalf of the Australian aviation industry.

Seriously? You don't get "results". As a collective whole we stand a chance. I for one believe that what I pay to the ALAEA is worth every cent. I dare say it is the ONLY union who truly represents its members.

"few shekels" indeed?:cool:

"It's the Vibe".

A most relevant expression here you could say.

457 Visa sponsorship will be considered
 

And still more of this 457 Visa sponsorship will be considered This is just Bloody Madness in Australia today.:ugh:
SEEK - Are you an experienced Aircraft Engineer? Job in Sydney

SP, I know you're a bit frustrated but really?

Outside QF and Virgin Tech they're about the biggest employer going. They're financially safe as part of the Leighton group, they're keeping a facility going in Melbourne after QF have largely left, there are a whole bunch of people there who earn a living.

Yes they're trying to do things differently, I don't know exactly how but as an MRO they have to. They have to become more productive than the in house alternative in order to survive. It's a harsh reality that the world has moved on and the ideal Australian model is just too costly compared to the way others do things.

That's the challenge for you and your members, and it's a tough one, I'm not arguing it isn't. But unless you and your guys adapt then either JHAS or some other MRO is going to nip at your heels until someone at QF bites the bullet and outsources vast swathes of work to that MRO. That sort of powerful decision making takes guts, and given QF grounded themselves tough decisions with massive impacts have been made, no matter whether you think those decisions right or wrong.

As soon as someone provides a genuine alternative, and I agree JHAS doesn't have the right model at present, then it just takes one of the new CEOs to make it happen and the whole house of cards comes tumbling down.

I have worked in 5 different countries over the years and I can tell you that from my experience as soon as the going gets tough the expat gets going.....no if's, and's, or but's. They all look after the local staff first. That being said I always got paid a lot more than the locals.

Forget the ALAEA thay can do nothing about this. Accept that fact and move on. Whilst private (non government funding) is allowed to finance political parties in Australia situations like this will continue. Who has the money..?

GB

Romulus, your analysis that JHAS is financially safe due to its umbilical chord to Leightons is obscured optimism. Ansett was owned by that mob across the Tasman and their owners and Management team were the first ones to bail when it went belly up, remember that moment?
JHAS needs to stand on its own feet and whilst it continues to haemorrhage financially to the alleged tune of millions and millions, Leightons will microscope it for a little longer but the ruthlessness of business is just around the corner.
The current plan isn't working that's true, but the biggest worry is there seems to be no clue from its Senior Management on how to develop a plan that will work.
Jetstar, Virgin and Tiger will decide how long JHAS will continue to flicker on unless Leightons makes an early decision that the experiment failed and call it a day.

genxfrog - that's a fair call. What I was really driving at were people's entitlements etc were safe. If JHAS is to remain then yes it must become profitable and that fact needs to be understood by all involved.

Romulus, I think from memory, you are not an aircraft person. Bean counters are trying to run JHAS, not aircraft people. You fit that mould when you make comments like -

Aircraft people know the profitable model and it goes against the grain of everything bean counters are taught at their University courses. About two years ago a JHAS manager called me and asked to come for a coffee and chat. He said "Steve, we are losing money, how do we become profitable?". I told him how. He did the opposite.

Aircraft maintenance is a process that has been refined over 100 years. You need experienced people to make the most of the learned processes. JHAS and others for that matter have elected to promote idiots over experienced engineers because idiots do not argue. This is the flawed process that is losing JHAS money. Do you undrstand this or do you need further explanation?

Further explanation please SP. Airlines all over the world are changing how they do engineering and we're not seeing a flood of planes dropping out of the sky.

You're right, I'm not an aviation person, so I would be interested in hearing the advice you gave JHAS as to how they could make a go of it.

Yep

Ugly American: seats come loose on ‘Kafkaesque’ Qantas partner | Australian Aviation Magazine

It's really comforting to NOT have aircraft falling out of the sky and it's a testimony to the ingenuity of the designers of today's large wide bodied aircraft that have the built in redundancy and safety that we need.
These aircraft are very forgiving in what can happen to them before they finally "drop out of the sky"

Pilots and engineers can make mistakes and and these aircraft will still operate albeit sometimes beyond their design limitations. But with inadequate maintenance or pilot skill, eventually it won't be enough.
The cause of a crash may be just a minor weakness in design not envisaged by the designer, a simple failure to remove static port protective covers or lack of experience by ground staff failing to identify a serious problem that is catastrophic in flight.
The probabilities of such an event just increase when good practices in maintenance decrease and so therefore risk also increases.

There cannot be ANY good reason, business or otherwise to increase risk at any time by an operator or MRO.

Sorry sunshine, unless you are part of one of the major airlines, the ALAEA has little or no bite at all. If you are stuck in a company where Australian citizens are definitely a minority, the ALAEA has even less influence; hence my negative cost/benefit analysis.:(

A loose seat is not an aircraft dropping out of the sky.

Not saying that it's right, but I have no doubt this has happened plenty of times before regardless of maintenance undertaken. I've flown on several Qantas flights with broken chairs where I spent the entire flight continually trying to pull my chair forward rather than fully recline into the person behind me because the damn thing wouldn't lock.

Aeromedic - if you don't want risk you don't do or achieve anything. Life has a degree of risk associated with it, it comes down to managing that risk.

Just as cars have gone from drum brakes to disks, engines are now good for 200K miles etc and servicing intervals have increased and actual time spent in servicing has decreased as newer technology has replaced old so it is for aircraft. New developments mean less maintenance is required, and new maintenance techniques reduce the time spent actually doing services.

It has always been thus ad hopefully ever will.

Clear example - ever used a borescope in anything? If so then you've just saved a motza in time and cost. Bringing all those developments to bear is what needs to happen to maintain a cost advantage over the competition and thus ultimately helping secure jobs.

Romulus
Therein lies the problem; the loose seats are what the passenger sees. They come to the conclusion that if the seats we are sitting on have been poorly maintained, remembering they are part of the particular airlines image, surely what else has been skimped or overlooked in the maintenance of that particular aircraft.
A major or catastrophic event is usually the sum of minor events which have not been attended to, and this fact alone is what the beancounters cannot comprehend.
I fear a major wakeup call is around the corner and as a regular traveller I hope I am not part of it, as we all do.
To quote Gobbledock........tick..tock.

There was a requirement under the previous Government that an employer must spend a minimum of 1.5% (I think?) of total payroll cost on staff training, or pay a penalty to the ATO.

I suspect that provision may have been rescinded?

Was there union action at JHAS prior to this decision being made? That would be an easy explanation for it.

The fundamental issue is that the industry is losing money and is exposed to international competition on their doorstep, like few others.

There has to be better returns for all the risks of running a business than putting your money in a bank. JHAS ownership aside, those with long track records in aviation are doing no better, look at how LHT gave up on LTQ. Virgin have $4B in assets, the bank would give u $200M in interst on that, no risk. Virgin actially earned $27M. Qantas have $21B in assets, that would earn a cool $1B in a bank. Qantas lost $350M. Many companies expect 20% return on assets. BHPB gets 23% and its been up to 38%. Do the math.

JHAS deserves every support to make a go of it an a tough industry. The heavy maintenance it does would be overseas now, were it not for them.

tail wheel....you are spot on. That requirement was abolished in the mid 90's because the Government decided that it was being rorted and was too hard to monitor and fix. Companies were using corporate social functions and claiming it as "training" in order to meet the 1.5% training expenditure. Boardroom meetings, weekends away at conferences whilst balancing a holiday attached to it, corporate boxes at sporting events etc.
Big business won the day and now they cry about skills shortages.

Romulus

Sure, we have better, newer and less labour intensive aircraft, but the risks are not the same in different industries.
Risk management in the aircraft industry is run by the carriers and MRO's, not the regulators.
Costs, unfortunately, dictate the level of engineer oversight and maintenance management. Pilots are under continual pressure to ensure on time schedules are kept and are treated like bus drivers along the way.
The carriers and MRO's in tough competitive times are under great economic pressure themselves, so it follows that risk increases to meet "on time under budget " milestones.
Management of that level of risk becomes the domain of the pilots and engineers by default when told "just do it !! "

Those companies that are under pressure have the pilots and engineers in this country to thank for being dedicated and committed to their jobs and we are lucky to have them.

While I generally agree with Romulus, I need to make two points,

1", the work smarter not harder mantra doesn't work in aviation. It is not possible to do things differently in many cases.

There are a number of factors at work here:

- massive legal regulation of airworthiness that requires, among other things, complete traceability and time/event history for every aircraft, without which the aircraft is just scrap metal - this is what killed Ansett. There is no escape from this.

- the continuous search for aircraft performance which results in complexity and lethal penalties from failure to maintain. As someone told me, current designs are no longer fail safe, but the cheaper "damage tolerant" standard.

- the simple fact that bad or insufficient maintenance does not manifest itself for years, and when it does, it may have catastrophic and unrecoverable results. This fact is also a great temptation to bean counters and the unprincipled or lazy, since they will not have to wear the cost of the failure their Mal investment causes.

I view these matters as so important that I seriously doubt that anyone without a judeo Christian or Japanese work ethic is capable of building or maintaining a safe aircraft - there need to be motivations of fear, guilt, pride etc. to make sure the job is done right, and these do not obtain much on the Asian mainland in my opinion.


The second point is that the jhas facility is extremely valuable infrastructure because it's replacement cost is incalculable, or at least in the middle billions. The planning and approval costs for such a facility are stratospheric, not to mention the scarcity of real estate at international airports. Some may have noticed portable office structures inside the hangar - they have been there since at least as early as 1976 since it was regulatorily impossible to modify the original hangar design.

Sorry for the punctuation but it's difficult posting in bed with an iPad and a cat trying to sit on your chest.

Sunny 'posting', in bed, in a cat house, with a cat on your chest; is not only bad form, but a strict liability offence, if'n you get caught. :D :D


Sorry mate, irresistible.

I dont beleive "cat houses" are illegal in Victoria.:cool:

The sad fact here is that no one wants to do business with JHAS. They have managed to drive away just about every customer they have had and the ones that are there do it under sufferance due lack of alternative.

Unfortunately the staff on the floor wear the fallout. Those with the 457's just have a stay of execution at the moment.

Rudder, I haven't been there for a number of years so I have no idea about the specifics, can you enlighten me/us as to what it is JHAS do to alienate customers? I keep an interest in what they're doing as well as the overall scene because I found it a fascinating industry, as I've posted previously it's clear something isn't working.

But what is it that is driving customers away?

At the end of the day this is only an internet forum but if there's anything they can do to turn around their performance I'd say get it out on here and hope like heck somebody there is smart enough to read, digest and apply the relevant things to the business so it isn't lost for ever. Once it closes down it will be gone and with it a whole bunch of Australian jobs (regardless of 457 utilisation). And that would be a great shame.

Romulus, the problem stems from the fact that John Holland owned by Leightons is a construction company and JHAS is managed by people with a construction / infrastructure industry mentality. Leightons and John Holland only entered the Aviation MRO Industry for a quick dollar and didn't do enough to utilise industry expertise and knowledge from those who have worked and Managed in the Aviation MRO Industry. Senior Management given the role to run JHAS at its inception were ignorant, stubborn and refused to listen to the workers and middle level Managers who were desperate to make the business a long term success. John Holland and Leightons have always had a reputation for doing things their way with no room for input from their employees. I doubt anything has changed.

Genx, that doesn't actually say anything mate. That's not to say I disagree with you, just that your statement doesn't actually identify any problem at all other than a very broad view that people didn't listen.

What didn't they listen to? What could/should have been done? I'm asking the question that you're effectively saying initial JHAS management should have asked.

What do you think they should have done to make the business a success?

tone down the us vs them rhetoric on the 457 guys
 

I understand that the 457 visa issue is complicated and the situation is not good at JHAS, but I believe this us vs them argument put forward by some here is just way too simplistic, and has way to much of a zenophobic tone for me to say nothing.

Ive worked with a lot of these guys at one of these "457" companies that is mentioned, and very few of them were actually on 457's. Most were permanent residents through the skilled migration program. The few on the 457's were well on their way to getting PR. All of them were top guys, who were highly skilled, highly rated knew their stuff. They had families here and were trying to improve their families lives like everyone else.

The problem is, they dont know their rights and how they can improve their situation. Some companies pay under the award for these highly skilled engineers, and as such they dont get the pay and conditions that they should. this ends up undercutting local staff with the guys from overseas being treated like c$&p.

I believe that the union has a stong role to play in getting these guys onboard and letting them know how things can be improved through union protection and enterprise agreements. This would not only protect wages and conditions for Australian workers but also protect the interests of fellow engineers who come here who should enjoy the same rights and conditions as Australian workers.

I believe this to a be a position that exploits the fact that line maintenance will always have to be done here, without the us vs them ugliness postulated previously. It also recognises the globalised reality of aviation in 2012, where highly skilled engineers will always be sought after.

Romulus I know you want this place to be a success and the posters here did as well. I read their posts and understand exactly what they are saying, it is like you are also reading the same posts and just don't understand the problem. I do owe you a more in depth answer as well to explain as I offered last week. This is part of the conversation I had with management.

You talk about efficiencies or productivity/profitability, however you want to term it. Correctly we understand that a business must make money, no issue with that. To convert what I am talking about to examples you can undrstand I will put it a different way.

So say you have a business that is struggling, lets call it JHAS. You want to change somthing. You can either make the operation cheaper or make the operation better (more work output). Problem is, to make it better you need to spend some money. Now the accountants faced with this situaton always go for the cut costs model, it's simple for people who do not know a business to adopt. It creates problems later on, people who do know the business try to warn the decision makers who invariably do not listen, they just blame, lose more contracts, cut more costs until there is nothing left.

Alternatively, the business can fight for more work by selling their quality product. In order to do that, you need a quality product (JHAS has never had that but could have). When you have people delivering quality, others around them learn the methods to create what is being delivered. These people are proud of their work and if rewarded sufficiently will do anything for management because they would work together as a team. I've been part of a team like this before at Qantas (then some idiot went and changed it).

So at JHAS what does this mean. Early on there were Engineering mistakes. These occurred because management wanted to make it profitable from day one and did not employ enough experienced people. There were far too many unlicenced Engineers working alone and insufficient oversight. This is not a model for success in Aviation maintenance. I can assure you, an exprienced LAME may even be twice as expensive as an AME, they will nearly always deliver 2-3 times the work output if deployed correctly. This is no offence to AMEs, many of whom are fantastic. The LAME however works untethered, doesn't need to check with another to make a decision and in most cases just has greater exprience levels.

Qf Mel had a high ratio of LAMEs. They managed to drop the heaviest of 737 c checks from 42 days to under 20. Fastest time in the world by a mile. Now this is a market that could deliver something unique and JHAS could have done the same. Non aviation people are running fine businesses and the people there just will not listen. The wrong Engineers have been promoted to management positions. You (am talking Hr, IR non aviation persons) have selected leaders based not on their ability or knowledge but their promises of absolute loyalty to flawed models designd by buffoons.

So what will happen in Brisbane ,ratio of LAME too AME in a crew just like what they have in JHAS ,will the turn time get better with that model champion by the new Engineering boss they had to employed to change heavy maintenance ,most probably he came on a 457 too.

Romulus, there is no "one" answer that will fix the current problem at JHAS. My point is that had their business leaders worked as a unit with their employees, many of the problems that they now face may have been avoided. I will give you an example. I understand the current EBA expired in March 2010, and currently Im told it has not been renewed with their employees and Unions and negotiations continue. A customer to JHAS (Virgin, Tiger, Jetstar etc) would want certainty with their aircraft maintenance via industrial peace and a locked in EBA would provide this. No one in their right mind would want to hand over one of their aircraft or a long term maintenance contract to an organisation in the middle of their EBA negotiations. So what does JHAS do instead? It drags things out for almost 3 years and my sources tell me there is no end in sight for the negotiations to conclude soon.
One would think that it would be a priority at JHAS to lock in a new EBA and use this as a selling point to their existing and potential new customers but those who sit at the higher end of the John Holland bureaucracy just don't get it.

I dont particularly want to be too specific with instances as it will identify me, The List would be long though. However pretty much all of what has been said by ALAEA and more is the case.

His view is from a HR point of view. Mine is from the downstream affect of that and actual performance and dealing with them point of view.

It's just a shambles.

Well, the message has been repeated quite clearly for some time now and I'm sure that company managers either don't read these posts or couldn't give a toss.
The message......? "You get what you pay for"

If you want a check to be "on time and under budget" and high quality, you pay the money and get the BEST people.....AND you support them.

It never ceases to amaze me to see high cost projects start up and then have the value eroded away by poor staff selection whatever the category. Then the compounding effect of "band aid management" undermines the morale of those left followed by staff reductions and shutdown.
:ugh::ugh::ugh:

It would be helpful if the "new breed" of aviation management realised that when a Lame puts his/her signature and licence number to a job, that the "ownership" of responsibility lasts for the life of the aircraft. Maybe if they placed themself in our position - they would understand why undercutting and taking short cuts make LAME's nervous.

First up, I don't have a dog in this fight. I've been following this thread with interest, particularly the Romulus / Fed Sec debate.

This post by aveng screams out for an outsiders view (no slight on aveneg intended)
The "new breed" of [generic] managers understand exactly the point you have made, in fact, it is the cornerstone of the modern business model. It is the LAME and pilots who give them plausible deniability - in short you and I are their "bunnies". Its even worse for pilots, because, they are usually unable to defend their actions at the subsequent inquiry, and hence speculation about their performance can always be used to cast doubt.

By virtue of being licensed, we give managers cover to cut corners, take the bonuses whilst we bear the risk if it all goes wrong. How many times have you actually heard a senior manager or CEO stand up and say "actually, we the senior management made a mistake". It is always about finding a low level functionary to carry the can (QF Freight Cartel US prosecution is the classic case in point)

JHAS Keeps 457's over Local workers in new Redundancy round
 

Firstly, I am employed at JHAS, but am not in any position to be aware of redundancy selection criteria or any rumours surrounding it.

I do work with those on 457 visas and in most cases cannot question their competancy or resposibility.

What I do know from reading the above is :

These LAME's were brought in initially to provide a skill set not available at the time. A330 Mech and Avionics.
JHAS has trained numerous people in the meantime with A330 courses in both trades. At a rough count 20.

Currently the 457's work in a day/night 7 day shift environment, as do the majority of those trained.
As far as I am aware, no one willing to work in this same environment, is under threat of redundancy.
Whereas, the few who may be, with the same qualifications, have refused to work the shift pattern that actually makes them available when the majority of the A330 maintenance is carried out.

Wages, as far as I am aware - are comparable. I certainly can't go to JQ without losing money.

Whilst I am all for protecting the Local (having spent 5 years as an expat, I always knew I was in the gun first), this argument has been skewed.

Concerning JHAS, we are all aware that it was set up and originally managed by those out of their league.
This was followed by others more used to running a building site.
Now we've upgraded to the guy who brought us Myki.:rolleyes:

What I have noticed though, is there is now an intense focus on a quality product at the expense of short cuts. A focus on Safety with the employment of a QF person that takes it all seriously.

I have heard recently, that no longer will we be the whipping boy of the Customer and if rumours are true, recent events show this.

I can only hope that this trend upwards continues and the snide remarks of disaffected workers and former workers will fade to a whisper.

As for the ALAEA, good luck to you.

Pacific Marlin, It is an attitude like this that has caused problems with customers in the past.

When will JHAS learn that the customer wants a quality product delivered on time without issues.

Got it in one SRM.

JHAS is doomed while you have guys thinking like this working for them.

You only have to look at the number of aircraft now parked out the front to what is was just 12 months ago to see what effect the customers have. They are walking out the door and with them a lot of jobs.

You guys are really hardcore hehe. Please tell me what all the aircraft were doing out the front? Sounds like you're sitting on Jhas computers next to each other holding hands, hoping someone will come and save your incompetent asses. Maybe you're even some of the guys who sucked courses out of Jhas and now avoid the aircraft like the plague. Could you even be SP's message boys spreading fear to the masses who live in the good old days? Take a trip gentlemen and see the world. Maybe even try working somewhere else that gives you some real satisfaction.
Maybe you don't see aircraft at Jhas because you start (work?) after they have left and go home before they arrive.
You're too funny!