|
Originally Posted by Sunfish
(Post 10652289)
Camelsquadron shoots himself in the foot again. Therefore management has 86 million reasons to screw you over. Are you saying you did not understand this most obvious of issues before getting into this battle? |
Oh good, everyones favorite management troll has made a return, after slinking away the first time when called out.
Still waiting for you to answer the questions posed to you Camel..
Originally Posted by Paddleboat
So, now that you've shown you're able to see my posts, I have written 2 in direct response to you, challenging the assertions you have made in this thread. I have repeatedly given you opportunity to respond to the points I've made, only to be met with silence. Stop ignoring arguments you don't like and address what has been said.
You can start here. Jetstar EBA 2019
Originally Posted by QF Management Troll
Its all about economics.
Get a 5% wage increase, then everyone else will be demanding a 5% increase instead of 3%. Not to mention of course that you lot certainly DO use the precedent set by your management peers at other companies to improve your salaries, again picking and choosing the precedents that suit you. Nor are you lot bound by this imaginary non existent 3% wage policy. But as usual with QF management, rules for thee not for me. Regardless, all of this is moot. I've watched the same rhetoric from the same style of brain dead airline management the world over, and in the last few years I've seen it fail one after the other.. O'Leary came on just as strong, with all the same bluster and in the end, ate every word of it. BA the same. Treat a pilot group poorly enough, for long enough, it'll cost you. |
Originally Posted by Ragnor
(Post 10651835)
Wow, everyone here should be airline CEOs, the amount of **** being said in the last few post. |
Originally Posted by The Bullwinkle
(Post 10652590)
Couldn’t possibly do any worse! Whilst gracing these pages are the usual mix of pilot types, there are some very interesting contributors. The problems that Jetstar face are not dissimilar to many low fare airlines; revenue margin (over cost) is difficult to achieve. As T-Vasis remarked ancillary revenue is very important for a unit elastic demand product is very susceptible to fluctuations in the broader macroeconomic narrative. The issue for Mr Evans to navigate is complex and has many moving parts. He must balance the operating economic reality of low fare airlines which are low margin businesses versus the real problem that pay freezes and management excess (self enrichment) have left all staff bitter and rightly incensed that Little Napoleon pockets $24 million and they suffer declines in real income compounded forever. Try as he may, Mr Evans with self interest never far away, must please the puppet master, sitting in the big chair at Fort Fumble. Jetstar is a business that needed scale to try to grow margins, but in doing so became a festering sore. It has a footprint and capital requirement that ought deliver far more revenue. That it doesn't is a problem. Self evidently, lower unit cost helps, but without a far more transparent approach to disclosure, QF must be trusted with their "exclamations" There is a reason Qantas management choose not to report Jetstar segments. There is a reason few airlines try an airline within an airline on the scale of Jetstar There is also a reason why Little Napoleon clings to the creation myth, that he created it. He didn't. |
Geoff Dixon created Jetstar didn't he? I thought Dixon bought Impulse off Gerry McGowan to have for a "rainy day". Bit of thread drift- Interesting to note Dixon is a board member of Airlineratings.com along with GT. https://www.airlineratings.com/categ...board-members/ |
You would be correct. Dixon forced Gerry's 'golden hand' to sell up as Impulse was sinking. It was Dixon who appointed Joyce to head up JQ as Joyce had some LCC experience over in Ireland, and Joyce, Boston Bruce and a few others set up shop on an office floor in North Sydney to birth the 'Margaret Jackson approved' Jetstar using the 5 min QantasLink (Impulse) business.
|
Originally Posted by T-Vasis
(Post 10652334)
Furthermore - increasing airfares creates its own problems. And that comes from the consumer and their sensitivity. The low-cost consumer (who is sensitive to the macroeconomic environment) in economic terms is 'unit elastic demand'. Putting up fares will see a decline in consumer uptake since leisure travel is discretionary. It won't work. An insignificant increase in airfares will fund the pilots reasonable requests, Joe blogs will not give a flying **** as to what's a high/low airfare for that route. Especially when Jetstar is more profitable than Qantas per Capita. |
Originally Posted by LostontheLOC
(Post 10652935)
I really can't see your point in this and your at the risk of looking like a management shill coming through with these sweeping statements.
An insignificant increase in airfares will fund the pilots reasonable requests, Joe blogs will not give a flying **** as to what's a high/low airfare for that route. Especially when Jetstar is more profitable than Qantas per Capita. What T-Vasis is referring to is simply economics. The type of passenger inclined to purchase Jetstar flights is (very) price sensitive. Unit elastic demand is the Achilles heel of Low Fare Airlines. It is the reason ancillary revenue is vital to their survival: The can't cover seat cost on the prices advertised. The problem for Mr Evans is that executive largess (insane salaries-his included, bonuses and greed) have been contrasted to the pay freezes, falling real wages and worsening conditions of the many staff. There is a reason why no airline has copied this "amazing strategy" on the scale of Fort Fumble. It is fortunate that accounting latitude allows selective reporting of the most favourable of figures! Kudos to the staff though, airlines do very well without executives; all around the world airlines are running just fine without whole floors of admin. Airlines do less well when pilots, cabin crew, engineers, check in staff etc are not present.. |
Perhaps the entire Qantas group needs to look at returning the missing 4.5% base pay lost to the entire EBA based work force (due 18 month pay freeze) if they want to maintain the 3% wages policy. Management have obtained quite a bennefit by going against their own 3% policy, and according to the financial review, the staff are rightly so requesting for a return on their investment as did management after bragging about years of record profits.
To be fair they did offer some blood money to go towards compensating the staff with turn around cash bonuses, but that still doesnt cover the lost amount. Let them increase the base pay and deduct what they have paid to make it fair and transparent (but needs to be back dated to the time in whice the pay freeze was applied). |
So I guess it could be time to look for a new job? Joyce will inevitably close JQ due to increase operating cost, it will cost more than 3% to get any deal across the line. |
Originally Posted by tryhard1
(Post 10653147)
Perhaps the entire Qantas group needs to look at returning the missing 4.5% base pay lost to the entire EBA based work force (due 18 month pay freeze) if they want to maintain the 3% wages policy. Management have obtained quite a bennefit by going against their own 3% policy, and according to the financial review, the staff are rightly so requesting for a return on their investment as did management after bragging about years of record profits.
To be fair they did offer some blood money to go towards compensating the staff with turn around cash bonuses, but that still doesnt cover the lost amount. Let them increase the base pay and deduct what they have paid to make it fair and transparent (but needs to be back dated to the time in whice the pay freeze was applied). |
Originally Posted by Paddleboat
(Post 10652555)
Oh good, everyones favorite management troll has made a return, after slinking away the first time when called out.
Still waiting for you to answer the questions posed to you Camel.. In the meantime, love you wheeling out the tired 'precedent' argument. You don't get to pick and choose which precedents suit you. One one hand you want us to believe that slipping beyond 3% would instantly make all other EBAs indefensible against the same demands. On the other you wish to declare that the precedent being set by our peers in competitor and group airlines are irrelevant, and we should all be happy with being the considerably lowest paid pilots in the category, whilst doing the most work and holding the most responsibility. All while you lot pay yourselves industry leading bonuses of course. Not to mention of course that you lot certainly DO use the precedent set by your management peers at other companies to improve your salaries, again picking and choosing the precedents that suit you. Nor are you lot bound by this imaginary non existent 3% wage policy. But as usual with QF management, rules for thee not for me. Regardless, all of this is moot. I've watched the same rhetoric from the same style of brain dead airline management the world over, and in the last few years I've seen it fail one after the other.. O'Leary came on just as strong, with all the same bluster and in the end, ate every word of it. BA the same. Treat a pilot group poorly enough, for long enough, it'll cost you. Removing all the rambling stuff, you have covered the arguments of each side. Both sides think their argument is the defining one. You cant just ignore the arguments of the other side. You need to understand it and work out if and how you can overcome it. After considering the situation of the other side, are you asking for something that cannot be given? Its hard to remove the emotion when its your livelihood thats involved. |
your at the risk of looking like a management shill coming through with these sweeping statements. |
Didn’t the mainline pilots just agree in principal to their new agreement? Did they get any of that payfreeze back?
|
Originally Posted by Ragnor
(Post 10653164)
So I guess it could be time to look for a new job? Joyce will inevitably close JQ due to increase operating cost, it will cost more than 3% to get any deal across the line. |
Originally Posted by CamelSquadron
(Post 10653198)
Your comments are based on a false premise that I am a management troll.
https://www.pprune.org/showpost.php?p=10642534&postcount=430 Feel free for a refresher.
Originally Posted by CamelSquadron
(Post 10653198)
Remove that premise and a lot of of the above is just emotional rambling and finger pointing.
Originally Posted by CamelSquadron
(Post 10653198)
Removing all the
Originally Posted by CamelSquadron
(Post 10653198)
After considering the situation of the other side, are you asking for something that cannot be given?
And that question can just as ably be turned around and directed at the company. They are asking the hardest working, most productive and highest responsibility holding narrowbody pilots in the country to continue and indeed increase their productivity, whilst not just remaining the lowest paid pilots out of the entire category, but increasingly so over time, substantially. If only O'Leary had been smart enough to simply inform his UK pilots that Ryanair had a wage policy! Because thats all it takes right?
Originally Posted by CamelSquadron
(Post 10653198)
Its hard to remove the emotion when its your livelihood thats involved.
|
Don’t feed the troll Paddleboat, although I agree with you 100%. |
I should know better, but I can't help myself.
|
Originally Posted by The Bullwinkle
(Post 10652590)
Couldn’t possibly do any worse!
|
Originally Posted by Paddleboat
(Post 10653354)
Nothing false about it, your position and intentions have been known since the beginning, ably called out some time ago by Sunfish;
https://www.pprune.org/showpost.php?...&postcount=430 Feel free for a refresher. No, they are a direct rebuttal of the garbage you've been shoveling from the beginning. Over and over you have been challenged on specific points, and the false assertions you've made, and time and time again you have simply ignored them. This is yet another example of your inability to address the issues. Amusing, and demonstrates how completely you have failed to grasp the companies position. There is no 'overcoming' it through negotiation. There is 3%, or nothing. That is it. Their latest email confirms this, declaring that no meeting with AFAP will even be entertained unless they accept 3% and do not even bring up any proposals such as MDC which the company has simply dismissed. This isn't negotiation. Not at all. As I said and you of course chose to ignore, you don't get to pick and choose which precedents to suit. And that question can just as ably be turned around and directed at the company. They are asking the hardest working, most productive and highest responsibility holding narrowbody pilots in the country to continue and indeed increase their productivity, whilst not just remaining the lowest paid pilots out of the entire category, but increasingly so over time, substantially. If only O'Leary had been smart enough to simply inform his UK pilots that Ryanair had a wage policy! Because thats all it takes right? More like its difficult to negotiate in good faith when your bonus is involved. No doubt substantial KPI rewards are on offer to certain managers and others like LL if they can keep this to within 3%. Its disgusting. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 00:11. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.