PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific-90/)
-   -   Tigerair chief Merren McArthur warns on aviation industry’s lack of diversity (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/611847-tigerair-chief-merren-mcarthur-warns-aviation-industry-s-lack-diversity.html)

GWhizz 15th Sep 2018 07:00


Didn’t both unions endorse the agreement?
Its not the first time a union endorsed EA has been voted down. The first version of the recent Cobham EA was overwhelmingly supported to the verge of being forceabley promoted by the unions. There were promises made to the company that the unions simply couldn’t back up and it was subsequently voted down. Pilots are not going to listen to a union who doesn’t represent their best interests. This is bad for the employees and bad for the company.

davidclarke 15th Sep 2018 11:08


Originally Posted by PammyAnderson (Post 10249501)


oh wow. Didn’t both unions endorse the agreement?
What is it that the pilots were most unhappy about?
Genuine question as I don’t know.

Both unions endorsed it. Doesn’t mean it a good deal. The unions are more and more detached from their members than ever before. Unfortunately neither union is after the interests of Tiger pilots and only Tiger pilots. They will look after their majority and it’s not TT pilots!

machtuk 16th Sep 2018 02:12

Not a good outcome:-( What now?

Popgun 22nd Sep 2018 22:38


Originally Posted by GWhizz (Post 10249636)
Its not the first time a union endorsed EA has been voted down. The first version of the recent Cobham EA was overwhelmingly supported to the verge of being forceabley promoted by the unions. There were promises made to the company that the unions simply couldn’t back up and it was subsequently voted down. Pilots are not going to listen to a union who doesn’t represent their best interests. This is bad for the employees and bad for the company.

Anyone able to shed light on the main few reasons the Tiger EBA was voted down?

i’ve been told it wasn’t the base salary...any truth to that?

PG

Jetstarpilot 22nd Sep 2018 23:15

How many of the jocketts voted yes as a percentage of jockettes :}

wheels_down 23rd Sep 2018 05:27

Do those contracted pilots get a say also? There are quite a few currently on temp contracts.

Icarus2001 23rd Sep 2018 09:37


Not a good outcome:-( What now?
Not a good outcome for whom? Certainly good for the employees as they rejected an inferior offer. You must mean not a good outcome for the company. Oh well, they will survive. If the parent company can lose another $650 million in the last year a few million for employees cannot hurt.

zanthrus 23rd Sep 2018 10:35

Dear Tiger Airways.......From all the pilots in Australia....F*ck YOU!

mattyj 23rd Sep 2018 14:29

Seems to me Merren has got much bigger fish to fry than a push for gender equality. Start by sorting out the finances of the operation you run..then sort out the parent company’s finances (if she indeed is after that job) and then sort out the unhappy staff she has already got..only then she can worry about hiring more females if that’s a big concern for her! No use complaining about gender equality when you’re losing 650 mil per annum

morno 23rd Sep 2018 14:37


Originally Posted by zanthrus (Post 10256119)
Dear Tiger Airways.......From all the pilots in Australia....F*ck YOU!

Why exactly? What did they do wrong to you?

parabellum 24th Sep 2018 01:30


Whether its a complete lack of understanding of politics in Australia and NZ or an inability to influence decisions behind the scenes I don't know. When it comes to successful offshore partnerships they just don't have the runs on the board.
The failure of SQ to take over Ansett was entirely due to the board of Air NZ voting against it, nothing to do with a failure to understand Australian and NZ politics at all.

PPRuNeUser0198 24th Sep 2018 06:43


Originally Posted by Mattyj
losing 650 mil per annum

They're not losing $650M per year. Don't get caught up in non-cash impairments. Care about the business generating cash, which it is. It will deliver at an underlying and statutory level over the next fiscal.

Bula 24th Sep 2018 09:35

The market must feel the same, seeing the share price has returned to its status quo,

mattyj 24th Sep 2018 12:40

Is this the same company that twice went to its institutional investors looking for more cash in the last 18 months?!

Gate_15L 24th Sep 2018 23:10


Originally Posted by mattyj (Post 10257058)
Is this the same company that twice went to its institutional investors looking for more cash in the last 18 months?!

urgh, no, because the last captial raise was two years ago.

Don’t you have a A320 rating to pass rather than worry about an airline that you didn’t get into..?!

DutchRoll 24th Sep 2018 23:29


Originally Posted by FL11967 (Post 10220868)
LOL, ironically the majority of responses here justify McArthur's observations.

As an airline pilot married to a surgeon I have to agree.

Many responses here are typical of the attitudes which have really p*ssed her off over the years of fighting her way through the male domination of her profession (particularly the specialty she chose) to be a successful and in-demand surgeon, and seeing aspiring competent women crushed under the weight of blokes who just seem to enjoy being d*cks. The beautiful irony is that those same blokes simply can’t understand why more of the girls aren’t applying and aspiring to be like them.

It’s been 20 years from the time she first decided to break into her desired profession to where she sits now and it has been a fascinating - gob smacking on occasions - insight for me into the psychological workings, petty jealousies, double standards, and personal insecurities of these male dominated professions which I’ve been a part of my whole career. It has made me pick up on a lot of things I might otherwise have missed in my own interactions. But of course as we see repeatedly, those who are not one of these women, or not closely related to one, wouldn’t actually know.

PPRuNeUser0198 25th Sep 2018 00:09


Originally Posted by mattyj
Is this the same company that twice went to its institutional investors looking for more cash in the last 18 months?!

There is nothing wrong with raising capital from investors. It is much cheaper to do that than to borrow more money at market rates. And I am sure you know the significant capital investments VA had to make in order to transform its business into where it is today. You can't rely on waiting for free cash flow reserves to build up sufficiently to use for investing activities. VA also needs to keep cash reserves for when the hard times hit, so it does not collapse the moment headwinds occur.

The business is generating positive free cash flow. It is paying down debt, and its debt-to-equity ratio is within tolerence. This is what matters.


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:09.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.