|
Originally Posted by Berealgetreal
(Post 9843548)
You'd have to be more specific. Is this in reference to Pilots and/or Cabin Crew? I'll assume pilots given its a pilot forum.
What one of the unions had in their log of claims in 2011 and what was delivered and voted up was a vastly different thing. What was voted up and what exists today is also quite different today from 2011. I noted this line/tone in the Fin Review when ANZ pulled out last year. Something along the lines of "JB arrived and lavish hotels followed for the crew etc". The public would have loved that line! Good wind up. I suspect this argument would be shut down fairly quickly with a hotel and crew food comparison QF vs VA. It is what it is but to hear that the pilots are living in the lap of luxury bleeding the company dry is a bit over the top. I would suspect the increase in cost base possibly...juuuuust possibly might be due to maybe one or two other factors. Has the cost base risen? You bet. Is it the same as QF? Possibly, and might worsen as their fleet evolves. Is this due to pilots? Unlikely. Pilots if anything have become more efficient over the last 7 years. Anyway the topic is getting old, its not news anymore. |
Originally Posted by romeocharlie
(Post 9843874)
The most expensive direct cost for an airline is fuel - 49% (ish). JB and his band of merry men and women including the ex-chairman of Caltex couldn't hedge fuel correctly if their lives depended on it and thus that would probably be a good place to start. For the record, flight crew costs are around 8% of direct costs for a legacy carrier - you wouldn't know it thought JB seems to blame pilots for everything!
One can only hope that the influx of Chinese board members can influence improved decisions all round and eventually get the share price heading north of 17c again. For those of you playing at home, reference for the above here... Doganis, R 2012, Flying Off Course: The Economics of International Airlines. |
Originally Posted by AerialPerspective
(Post 9844406)
Of course, I have an earlier version of Doganis so am familiar with it... yes, hedging is not a capability within VA. Neither is negotiation. Of course one area where Crew are not costing the company is flying in Business Class... as that's only reserved for Jesus himself.
|
It's quite interesting that JB is still managing to hang in there despite the financially dire position that he has presided over for such a significant time now.
Given that he has not gone already, I guess he is unlikely to jump any time soon. Will it come down to being pushed by the Board? Or are they just 'giving him more time'? Will the deep-pocketed foreign benefactors continue to finance the buckets of haemorrhaging red ink? Nobody that cares about aviation in Australia wants to see Virgin fold. I truly hope there is an answer very soon. PG |
Originally Posted by AerialPerspective
(Post 9844406)
Of course, I have an earlier version of Doganis so am familiar with it... yes, hedging is not a capability within VA. Neither is negotiation. Of course one area where Crew are not costing the company is flying in Business Class... as that's only reserved for Jesus himself.
If a customer wants that seat in an otherwise full cabin and he/ she goes to another airline or travels in a lower class then I guess there is a dollar cost to the airline but other than that it is JBs version of class warfare. The trouble is that any real cost gets drowned in the principle bulls**t. In the 89 dispute it was one of the first things that the rebuilt Airlines did: get rid of pilots paxing in other than economy. JB didn't have such an opportunity and will carry the predjudice to the grave. |
JB and virgin are a dead duck. Staff are fleeing like video discs at the closing down sale at Brashs.
It has been good, best of luck to the next competitor Virgin out |
Originally Posted by AerialPerspective
(Post 9818701)
That is true and it has nothing to do with jealousy or anything but I quite frankly find the way he operates to be sickening. The way he breezes in and out of Australia now leaving a trail of glib sound-bites behind adds nothing.
This is a guy who said "The biggest mistake Qantas ever made was to let JB go" - really, no comment from him since then and certainly not now, comparing the relative profitability, share price, etc. I'd say it hasn't been raised again because he wouldn't have a leg to stand on. Yes, he did extremely well out of the original Virgin Blue and that would wipe out a lot of other failed ventures (although I don't imagine he gave any of it to the investors that lost money in his failed ventures) but his cynical visits always accompanied by a photo shoot and publicity shot of staff (always what the general public would consider attractive too, never otherwise) while talking up JB when in reality, he really doesn't care one bit nor does he probably have any real knowledge of how the company operates day to day and this must be an insult to loyal staff who turn up every day and take the brunt of face to face reaction to bad decisions, I thought his recent comments surrounding the take-over of VX by Alaskan were particularly sickening. He started the airline, he floated the airline which exposed it to potential take-over, he took his cut when it did and when he had secured from Alaskan the 40 or so years of license payments for the brand whether they use it or not, then he had a go at them publicly. It's all about the publicity shot and frankly some of the absolute excrement that came out of his mouth about the Australian market before he started here was laughable... "before we came and saved Australians from decades of high fares under Qantas and Ansett..." Firstly, Qantas only entered the domestic market in 1992/3 and there had been a number of smaller airlines and the majors offering low fares before he came along... all complete BS but he gets away with it, then flits off to his Island again. I may be wrong about Galactic but isn't there still some controversy surrounding the cause of the accident a year or two ago, wasn't there an inquiry??? Not suggesting any wrong-doing but seem to remember some accusations flying around at the time. |
From a QF guy, we are all hoping VA pulls through. No one wants to see the carnage a close down would cause. We were in the same position not that long ago, things can change very quickly. 'Managers' from CEO down to cabin crew and pilot managers come and go, but the core of the airline is made up of you guys, pilots, cabin crew. Ground staff, engineers etc etc. Chin up, stay positive, things will get better. There's plenty of room in Australia for 2 majors.
|
I think strategically it makes sense for VAs airline investors to let it occupy a space in the market running at a loss than let it fail and leave a vacuum that could allow competition to get ahead. So I wouldn't be worried unless I'd bought stocks in VAH hoping to turn a profit.
|
Jamie Marie.
Which airlines "get rid of pilots paxing in other than economy" past '89 |
Long John, as one who works there, I can assure you that hour for hour, we are still at least 10% cheaper than a QF 737 pilot. The reason the cost base has risen has a lot more to do with lounges, clubs, middle management size, pretty much everything EXCEPT the coal face personnel, both flying and ground. Like most others, keep believing the media, they're always right.........:rolleyes:
|
Originally Posted by Popgun
(Post 9844564)
It's quite interesting that JB is still managing to hang in there despite the financially dire position that he has presided over for such a significant time now.
Given that he has not gone already, I guess he is unlikely to jump any time soon. Will it come down to being pushed by the Board? Or are they just 'giving him more time'? Will the deep-pocketed foreign benefactors continue to finance the buckets of haemorrhaging red ink? Nobody that cares about aviation in Australia wants to see Virgin fold. I truly hope there is an answer very soon. PG |
Originally Posted by JamieMaree
(Post 9844957)
This is absolute bulls**t. When he was at Qf he had the same hang up. It was a point of principle for him. The problem was the horse had bolted long before he got to the mailroom. No pilot was going to give it up to a man who was hung up. It can be argued til the cows come home there is a real cost if pilots pax in first or business class as a right.
If a customer wants that seat in an otherwise full cabin and he/ she goes to another airline or travels in a lower class then I guess there is a dollar cost to the airline but other than that it is JBs version of class warfare. The trouble is that any real cost gets drowned in the principle bulls**t. In the 89 dispute it was one of the first things that the rebuilt Airlines did: get rid of pilots paxing in other than economy. JB didn't have such an opportunity and will carry the predjudice to the grave. Absolute bull****... it always was, even at the other operator. It was a concession that came from way back in the past. It's a form of OH&S... it's not because of an entitlement, it's because it's a logical thing to do. It's not like QF are the only airline in the world that does it, most do. This hangup of his has been around a long, long, long time and he obviously 'acquired' it from the small number of people who couldn't think of anything better to do than complain about other's perceived 'entitlements'. Those that aren't hung up about it are usually concentrating on other things like, say, ensuring the company makes a profit... Always suspicious of people like him that are fixated on 5c issues like this - it makes you realise why the bigger picture isn't being attended to. |
Originally Posted by goodonyamate
(Post 9845565)
From a QF guy, we are all hoping VA pulls through. No one wants to see the carnage a close down would cause. We were in the same position not that long ago, things can change very quickly. 'Managers' from CEO down to cabin crew and pilot managers come and go, but the core of the airline is made up of you guys, pilots, cabin crew. Ground staff, engineers etc etc. Chin up, stay positive, things will get better. There's plenty of room in Australia for 2 majors.
|
As an airline they try and convince other businesses to send their staff in Virgin business class, yet they don't see the hypocrisy in not allowing their own staff access to business class.
If I was the CEO or responsible manager in a business that Virgin approached to get my business I would be asking what the Virgin staff travel policy was and if it didn't allow their staff to travel in business class why should I send my staff in their business class. |
Originally Posted by B772
(Post 9845597)
Jamie Marie.
Which airlines "get rid of pilots paxing in other than economy" past '89 Some of us were around during that strike and suggesting people were gotten rid of in 89 or after who had that entitlement is utter crap. ALL pilots were 'entitled' to it. |
Originally Posted by Snakecharma
(Post 9846399)
As an airline they try and convince other businesses to send their staff in Virgin business class, yet they don't see the hypocrisy in not allowing their own staff access to business class.
If I was the CEO or responsible manager in a business that Virgin approached to get my business I would be asking what the Virgin staff travel policy was and if it didn't allow their staff to travel in business class why should I send my staff in their business class. What does that say... all the BS with the Australian flag on the nose of the aircraft yet they trust foreigners more than they do Australians??? |
Originally Posted by AerialPerspective
(Post 9846488)
I clearly remember pilots from the US being interviewed about working in Australia and one of the things they said they loved was the paxing in First/Business class... they didn't get rid of the pilots that paxed in F/J, they got rid of ALL of them when they resigned en-masse.
Some of us were around during that strike and suggesting people were gotten rid of in 89 or after who had that entitlement is utter crap. ALL pilots were 'entitled' to it. Australian Airlines (TAA) and all Ansett companies To Aerial Perspective: There was no strike. There was a dispute and nearly all of the pilots resigned their jobs! To both: When those Airlines started rebuilding and recruiting pilots on individual contracts, duty travel entitlements was not included in the contracts... deliberately. The Airlines could then dictate what happened. Economy with a possible J class upgrade but down the list. Flight attendants still had their first/business entitlement. For the sake a accuracy, the individual contract quickly became the award. |
Originally Posted by JamieMaree
(Post 9846643)
To B772:
Australian Airlines (TAA) and all Ansett companies To Aerial Perspective: There was no strike. There was a dispute and nearly all of the pilots resigned their jobs! To both: When those Airlines started rebuilding and recruiting pilots on individual contracts, duty travel entitlements was not included in the contracts... deliberately. The Airlines could then dictate what happened. Economy with a possible J class upgrade but down the list. Flight attendants still had their first/business entitlement. For the sake a accuracy, the individual contract quickly became the award. Whether you think so or not, this is the very essence of what a 'strike' is - withdrawal of labor during a dispute. Just because they were prepared to work 'as normal' for 8 of the 24 hours in a day did not make it anything less than a strike. Then, in a stunningly dumb 'strategy' they on the advice of their industrial leadership resigned en masse. The airlines couldn't believe their luck. This is the thing and where they lost most of the Australian public who were at that time struggling and weren't interested when they couldn't get a 5% pay increase in someone asking for 30% (just under actually in total). It was a strike. Calling it anything else is just being pedantic. Despite what you say, working at Ansett, Pilots still got upgraded on just about every flight. So did TAA/Qantas Domestic Pilots. |
Crew dead-heading in the premium classes is a very circular argument with validity no matter which way you put it. From a Company's perspective, the loss of up to four seats for flight crew is a large commercial hit in a cabin of say 14 seats. It would also want to protect the exclusivity of its premium cabins without crew being there in uniform. Like it or not, it isn't good look. OTOH, a company certainly would want its people to be fully rested and as fit as possible prior to operating a flight. Thus, dead-heading in P or J prior to operating is desirable.
If a company doesn't want to jeopardise revenue, an acceptable alternative would be to upgrade on departure if seats were to be available. That costs nothing but would mean a lot to those being upgraded. A win/win situation? With the comfort now offered in J class with genuine lie-flat beds, can anyone justify dead-heading in First Class? |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 22:18. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.