NEW Australian Airlines (AO) EBA 2005 (merged)
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair enough Raggyman but we are talking about AO who's parent company is making record profit and managers awarding themselves 66% pay rises!
Its also fine to say 'you knew the pay and conditions when you joined' but my wage will drop at least 20% when the London base opens and I can't get European (good allowance) trips.
When I joined Qantas I didn't know my wage was going to drop due to the decision to open the London base and I will struggle financially because of it. Living in Sydney you just HAVE to factor allowances etc. into your wage otherwise the banks will not give you a home loan.
So although I agree the union and staff have to be reasonable, the companies have to be reasonable too and not treat as like a resource they can play with at will.
Its also fine to say 'you knew the pay and conditions when you joined' but my wage will drop at least 20% when the London base opens and I can't get European (good allowance) trips.
When I joined Qantas I didn't know my wage was going to drop due to the decision to open the London base and I will struggle financially because of it. Living in Sydney you just HAVE to factor allowances etc. into your wage otherwise the banks will not give you a home loan.
So although I agree the union and staff have to be reasonable, the companies have to be reasonable too and not treat as like a resource they can play with at will.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Worldwide
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry guys, my message might be not relevant to the topic but just want to say to Raggyman.
I agreed with you about "when you want to join an airline, you know what the pay and conditions are before you get into the Industry". But it just happened to me recently (very recently) that most of the information are not to be told before you've joined the company. Some parts of the world are still not so open minded and eventhough it may sound like you're not beig forced to follow the rules, but what choice have you out there at that time?
It did hurt me too that when I asked my cabin crew manager "Are we supposed to be informed of this matter before we joined,Sir?". He replied :
"No need for that.I am telling you right now that it has to be this way. We're .... airways,not Mickey mouse airways!"
Well... I thought it's because they're not Mickey mouse airways that we could have a discussion about our concern in a well-mannered conversation...
Or so I thought.
I agreed with you about "when you want to join an airline, you know what the pay and conditions are before you get into the Industry". But it just happened to me recently (very recently) that most of the information are not to be told before you've joined the company. Some parts of the world are still not so open minded and eventhough it may sound like you're not beig forced to follow the rules, but what choice have you out there at that time?
It did hurt me too that when I asked my cabin crew manager "Are we supposed to be informed of this matter before we joined,Sir?". He replied :
"No need for that.I am telling you right now that it has to be this way. We're .... airways,not Mickey mouse airways!"
Well... I thought it's because they're not Mickey mouse airways that we could have a discussion about our concern in a well-mannered conversation...
Or so I thought.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
uz32 - Couldn't agree more, management in alot of places are incompetent, it just depends on the type of business model that they operate, and how the incompetent management are weeded out. In alot of places incompetent managers choose other incompetent managers. I am of the strong belief that managers should be chosen from the bottom up, rather than the other way around. i.e you put forward who you would like to see as your upline manager. Not alot of businesses operate this way, but the model alot of them use is what is taught in Universities. I honestly don't believe that you can go to University, get a degree and automatically become a good and effective manager. I believe that for you to be a good manager you need to start at the bottom and feel what it is like to be managed horribly, and also hopefully along the way find a great manager to learn from. I think also alot of it has to do with the segmentation between management and the staff they manage. I find places where I work that have an open office plan, are more effective than ones where managers sit in an office of their own. Another point as well, is that a manager isn't going to make themselves willing redundant. While there needs to be some structure, some company's are extremely top heavy, and to a point where you wonder whether the company is made of chiefs and no little indians to do the work. Large outsourcing IT company's are some of the worst for this.
More of what I was trying to say, is that if you know the Airline is in dire straights, then really is it realistic to ask for a pay rise? Not that AO is in dire straights, but this is more aimed towards the Ansett demise. I think that a big thing is to put in place profit share as part of your wage. The thing is though, everyone would be happy if the airline makes a profit, but should the airline make a loss, then you would feel it in your hip pocket. I would put it to the vote, that while everyone would be happy to take the money while the airline is in profit, then they probably wouldn't be too impressed if they actually lost money. While QF are making record profits, who is to say that they will make a bigger profit next year, if a profit at all. But they still would have to carry the 3% pay rise. I definitely don't want to come across as being trival, but more taking a simplistic view of a very complex industry. I am not saying that a pay increase is not warranted, and want to stress this. Very few companies take their staff's feelings seriously and some definitely have a low level of respect. I guess this gets reflected on how the company's treat's their employees, as how the employee's treat the company. If the employee's think that the company is great to work for, then most probably it is because they are treated with respect and want to see the company grow. Unfortunately very few company's have a KPI to measure how their employee's feel, and the ones that do generally just look at it as just another figure, and maybe things might get better. It is strange how when company's start having high staff turn overs they start doing survey's, but as soon as the turn over returns to normal all is forgotten. It almost seems that management think that while their market is dynamic and changes on a constant basis, that their employee's aren't dynamic and remain the same. Only industry that I can see what your customers aren't dynamic is in a morgue.
str - I also totally agree, I'm not saying that I agree that QF's manangement should be awarding themselves a 66% pay rise. I guess it shows how flawed the business model is that allows that to happen, especially it is because the management who are writing the rules.
I can see your point as to factoring in allowances, and well probably would have done the same thing myself. Although when you think about it, allowances aren't guaranteed money in the bank. I guess one lotto ticket is the same as another, except one is a winner and the other ain't. I agree that companies have to be reasonable, but unfortunately company's are managed by people, and things just don't happen. Behind every decision there is a person. It is a pretty sad thing that company's view their employee's as replaceable. Where there is one job, there are about 20 other people waiting. I am often amazed at people's greediness, and when you think about it, how few people there are in the world who do things because they want to make another person happy. Having moved from country Australia to the UK, the biggest thing I have noticed is how amazed people are when you do something nice for them. Often the reaction is, ok, you've done something nice, so you obviously want something, when it isn't the case at all.
One of the ideas that I was trying to say in regards to "you knew the pay and the conditions when you joined", was that generally people who are happy within their jobs, pay isn't the first factor in the choice of their jobs. ie., people who work in social services aren't doing it for the money, they are doing it because generally they want to genuiely help people and they find it rewarding. Going into a career in social services. people know that the pay isn't that great. I am definitely not saying that people shouldn't be paid fairly for what they do either. I guess I can only really talk from my own experience. I started out studing Aeronautical engineering, as I had a love of aviation, until I got into my forth year and actually found out how little money and jobs there were. A change in career to IT, which offered great rewards, a challenging job, but at the same time very little time for a social life, and pretty much zero time for relationships. It is a decision that you have to make, you either focus on the reward of the job, or the financial reward, and which one you consider to be the most important. If you are lucky enough to find a job that offers both, then I think you would be in the minority, rather than the majority of people.
Oscar - I guess it all comes from experience and researching as much as possible new jobs, and I guess alot about the company doesn't come to light until you join it. Alot of it comes down to the company's structure and the freedom of communication within the business. Large business is definitely alot different to smaller businesses. Having watched quiet a few company's grow from being a relatively small business to larger one's, cost control seems to be their largest problem. Smaller business who are successful tend to watch their cash flows alot more closely than when they become larger. It is hard sometimes for the smaller business's to structure themselves as if they were larger company's, and over time as they grow, they find that the smaller business model no longer applies, and yet, things that made them successful as a smaller business no longer apply to make them a successful larger company. A common thing is to split the company up into smaller business units when the company becomes larger, but while they work well as smaller cell's, there is alot of missed opportunity by having it not operate as larger cell. The way that I look at it, is that each person within the company should look at other people within the company as they would a potential customer. Unfortunately, alot of these business model's aren't very common, but I think that things are changing slowly as new businesses grow, and start to examine things outside the square.
More of what I was trying to say, is that if you know the Airline is in dire straights, then really is it realistic to ask for a pay rise? Not that AO is in dire straights, but this is more aimed towards the Ansett demise. I think that a big thing is to put in place profit share as part of your wage. The thing is though, everyone would be happy if the airline makes a profit, but should the airline make a loss, then you would feel it in your hip pocket. I would put it to the vote, that while everyone would be happy to take the money while the airline is in profit, then they probably wouldn't be too impressed if they actually lost money. While QF are making record profits, who is to say that they will make a bigger profit next year, if a profit at all. But they still would have to carry the 3% pay rise. I definitely don't want to come across as being trival, but more taking a simplistic view of a very complex industry. I am not saying that a pay increase is not warranted, and want to stress this. Very few companies take their staff's feelings seriously and some definitely have a low level of respect. I guess this gets reflected on how the company's treat's their employees, as how the employee's treat the company. If the employee's think that the company is great to work for, then most probably it is because they are treated with respect and want to see the company grow. Unfortunately very few company's have a KPI to measure how their employee's feel, and the ones that do generally just look at it as just another figure, and maybe things might get better. It is strange how when company's start having high staff turn overs they start doing survey's, but as soon as the turn over returns to normal all is forgotten. It almost seems that management think that while their market is dynamic and changes on a constant basis, that their employee's aren't dynamic and remain the same. Only industry that I can see what your customers aren't dynamic is in a morgue.
str - I also totally agree, I'm not saying that I agree that QF's manangement should be awarding themselves a 66% pay rise. I guess it shows how flawed the business model is that allows that to happen, especially it is because the management who are writing the rules.
I can see your point as to factoring in allowances, and well probably would have done the same thing myself. Although when you think about it, allowances aren't guaranteed money in the bank. I guess one lotto ticket is the same as another, except one is a winner and the other ain't. I agree that companies have to be reasonable, but unfortunately company's are managed by people, and things just don't happen. Behind every decision there is a person. It is a pretty sad thing that company's view their employee's as replaceable. Where there is one job, there are about 20 other people waiting. I am often amazed at people's greediness, and when you think about it, how few people there are in the world who do things because they want to make another person happy. Having moved from country Australia to the UK, the biggest thing I have noticed is how amazed people are when you do something nice for them. Often the reaction is, ok, you've done something nice, so you obviously want something, when it isn't the case at all.
One of the ideas that I was trying to say in regards to "you knew the pay and the conditions when you joined", was that generally people who are happy within their jobs, pay isn't the first factor in the choice of their jobs. ie., people who work in social services aren't doing it for the money, they are doing it because generally they want to genuiely help people and they find it rewarding. Going into a career in social services. people know that the pay isn't that great. I am definitely not saying that people shouldn't be paid fairly for what they do either. I guess I can only really talk from my own experience. I started out studing Aeronautical engineering, as I had a love of aviation, until I got into my forth year and actually found out how little money and jobs there were. A change in career to IT, which offered great rewards, a challenging job, but at the same time very little time for a social life, and pretty much zero time for relationships. It is a decision that you have to make, you either focus on the reward of the job, or the financial reward, and which one you consider to be the most important. If you are lucky enough to find a job that offers both, then I think you would be in the minority, rather than the majority of people.
Oscar - I guess it all comes from experience and researching as much as possible new jobs, and I guess alot about the company doesn't come to light until you join it. Alot of it comes down to the company's structure and the freedom of communication within the business. Large business is definitely alot different to smaller businesses. Having watched quiet a few company's grow from being a relatively small business to larger one's, cost control seems to be their largest problem. Smaller business who are successful tend to watch their cash flows alot more closely than when they become larger. It is hard sometimes for the smaller business's to structure themselves as if they were larger company's, and over time as they grow, they find that the smaller business model no longer applies, and yet, things that made them successful as a smaller business no longer apply to make them a successful larger company. A common thing is to split the company up into smaller business units when the company becomes larger, but while they work well as smaller cell's, there is alot of missed opportunity by having it not operate as larger cell. The way that I look at it, is that each person within the company should look at other people within the company as they would a potential customer. Unfortunately, alot of these business model's aren't very common, but I think that things are changing slowly as new businesses grow, and start to examine things outside the square.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Things are not looking good. Now AO/QF are refusing to negotiate any further with the FAAA.
To make things better a certain Cabin Manager is emailing each employee individually ( not sure how he obtained our personal email address ) and is as asking us all to send our names to an email address in SUPPORT of signing off the agreement behind the back of the FAAA.
I find this behaviour totally threatning. Is he allowed to do this ?
So if I don't respond I get a black cross against my name for not supporting his move to rally the troups the way the company wants ?? I will not be bullied.
Can't believe all AO crew are now in this situation of individual bully tatics by company brown nosers.
Stick your threat where it fits sunshine. United we stand....Devided we fall.
Dear Fellow Crew,
Expression of Support for the Enterprise Bargaining Agreement.
Australian Airlines management have given the FAAA an ultimatum to either accept or reject their offer as the matter has been outstanding for many months and is jeopardising the viability of our business. A rejection of their offer MAY lead to working under contract conditions. If you support the offer made by AO management, please email your name to moonlit@****.com.au so that a list of support can be presented. You may not have had prior opportunity to have your voice heard at a meeting, so please forward this email to other cabin crew in your address book to facilitate the process. As there is not much time left to express our view, please reply and forward this email as soon as possible.
To make things better a certain Cabin Manager is emailing each employee individually ( not sure how he obtained our personal email address ) and is as asking us all to send our names to an email address in SUPPORT of signing off the agreement behind the back of the FAAA.
I find this behaviour totally threatning. Is he allowed to do this ?
So if I don't respond I get a black cross against my name for not supporting his move to rally the troups the way the company wants ?? I will not be bullied.
Can't believe all AO crew are now in this situation of individual bully tatics by company brown nosers.
Stick your threat where it fits sunshine. United we stand....Devided we fall.
Dear Fellow Crew,
Expression of Support for the Enterprise Bargaining Agreement.
Australian Airlines management have given the FAAA an ultimatum to either accept or reject their offer as the matter has been outstanding for many months and is jeopardising the viability of our business. A rejection of their offer MAY lead to working under contract conditions. If you support the offer made by AO management, please email your name to moonlit@****.com.au so that a list of support can be presented. You may not have had prior opportunity to have your voice heard at a meeting, so please forward this email to other cabin crew in your address book to facilitate the process. As there is not much time left to express our view, please reply and forward this email as soon as possible.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Where people don't care
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Privacy concerns?
Sonique,
If your colleague has obtained e-mail addresses from AO or QF, then an outrageous breach of confidentiality and securty has taken place for which all parties are to be condemned. This issue needs to be addressed and pursued with great gusto by AO staff.
Don't waste time with the rabble that pretend to be AO management as they appear to be a group of lame stooges put there by Qantas as a front for their agenda. For example, why are the public statements coming from a Qantas exec (Brown) rather than from any of the AO people who bask in glory with the great and grandiose titles of CEO or Head of.... but who are powerless do do really much at all without Qantas's say-so????
If your colleague has obtained e-mail addresses from AO or QF, then an outrageous breach of confidentiality and securty has taken place for which all parties are to be condemned. This issue needs to be addressed and pursued with great gusto by AO staff.
Don't waste time with the rabble that pretend to be AO management as they appear to be a group of lame stooges put there by Qantas as a front for their agenda. For example, why are the public statements coming from a Qantas exec (Brown) rather than from any of the AO people who bask in glory with the great and grandiose titles of CEO or Head of.... but who are powerless do do really much at all without Qantas's say-so????
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sonique, the email was sent from a private computer not from the company, the email addresses come from email address books of crew EG, if you email a colleague they have your email address. as the email gets forwarded more addresses end up on the email. Allegations of misusing company information is serious and can be met with deformation of character charges being laid in return , so be careful what is alleged. It is just putting a view forward and trying to get the EBA signed off before missing the chance of keeping a great job and Lifestyle.
The whole thing is done with only the best intentions and sorry you dont see that.
See extract from Newspaper Below, the concern and interest is for QF crew only. AO need to find a Union who will look after them.
Airline tells cabin crew to sit down as talks hit turbulence
By Scott Rochfort Sydney Morning Herald
March 16, 2005
Relations between Qantas and its cabin crews have deteriorated sharply after the carrier\'s Australian Airlines subsidiary sidelined the Flight Attendants Association of Australia over enterprise agreement negotiations.
With Australian Airlines having recently trained a team of non-unionised strike-breaking crews, it now faces an increased threat of industrial action from its 300 Cairns-based flight attendants after cutting off discussions with the union.
Qantas\'s executive general manager of people, Kevin Brown, said yesterday the airline was now evaluating several alternatives to negotiating with the FAAA.
He declined to say whether this meant putting Australian Airlines\' flight attendants on non-union workplace agreements.
"We\'re still hopeful we can reach an agreement with our employees," he said. "We have withdrawn our offer. We told them [the union] that this was going to be the case on Friday."
The offer included permitting Australian Airlines access to lower-paid foreign flight attendants and the removal of restrictions that bar the airline\'s crews from working in business class and on aircraft other than 767s.
Following comments by the Qantas chief executive, Geoff Dixon, last month over the FAAA\'s poor skills in representing its members, Mr Brown said: "The last month has only reinforced our views about that group."
Mr Brown said the sidelining of the union was mainly a result of the FAAA\'s poor communication skills, noting that after last Friday\'s deadline the airline "had heard zip" from the union until yesterday afternoon when a fax was received.
When asked about the strikebreakers Australian Airlines trained in Melbourne and Sydney last month, Mr Brown said the airline had "contingencies in place" so its 50-odd weekly flights were not disrupted.
The head of the FAAA\'s international division, Michael Mijatov, said the Australian Airlines offer was a "dud deal", noting that the airline\'s cabin crew got 40 per cent less pay than their Qantas counterparts. He said the talks broke down due to Australian Airlines giving the union an ultimatum - without negotiating.
"We\'re not threatening any industrial action yet. We just want to talk to them," Mr Mijatov said
"We have to wait and see their next move. We\'re not going to sign off on this deal and our membership have told us not to sign off on it."
The union says it is concerned the rights of Qantas\'s 4000 long-haul flight attendants could be seriously eroded in the next round of enterprise bargaining talks in 2007 if it gives in to all of Australian Airlines\' demands. Mr Mijatov said Australian Airlines\' move to excommunicate the union displayed its "utter contempt for their cabin crew".
The whole thing is done with only the best intentions and sorry you dont see that.
See extract from Newspaper Below, the concern and interest is for QF crew only. AO need to find a Union who will look after them.
Airline tells cabin crew to sit down as talks hit turbulence
By Scott Rochfort Sydney Morning Herald
March 16, 2005
Relations between Qantas and its cabin crews have deteriorated sharply after the carrier\'s Australian Airlines subsidiary sidelined the Flight Attendants Association of Australia over enterprise agreement negotiations.
With Australian Airlines having recently trained a team of non-unionised strike-breaking crews, it now faces an increased threat of industrial action from its 300 Cairns-based flight attendants after cutting off discussions with the union.
Qantas\'s executive general manager of people, Kevin Brown, said yesterday the airline was now evaluating several alternatives to negotiating with the FAAA.
He declined to say whether this meant putting Australian Airlines\' flight attendants on non-union workplace agreements.
"We\'re still hopeful we can reach an agreement with our employees," he said. "We have withdrawn our offer. We told them [the union] that this was going to be the case on Friday."
The offer included permitting Australian Airlines access to lower-paid foreign flight attendants and the removal of restrictions that bar the airline\'s crews from working in business class and on aircraft other than 767s.
Following comments by the Qantas chief executive, Geoff Dixon, last month over the FAAA\'s poor skills in representing its members, Mr Brown said: "The last month has only reinforced our views about that group."
Mr Brown said the sidelining of the union was mainly a result of the FAAA\'s poor communication skills, noting that after last Friday\'s deadline the airline "had heard zip" from the union until yesterday afternoon when a fax was received.
When asked about the strikebreakers Australian Airlines trained in Melbourne and Sydney last month, Mr Brown said the airline had "contingencies in place" so its 50-odd weekly flights were not disrupted.
The head of the FAAA\'s international division, Michael Mijatov, said the Australian Airlines offer was a "dud deal", noting that the airline\'s cabin crew got 40 per cent less pay than their Qantas counterparts. He said the talks broke down due to Australian Airlines giving the union an ultimatum - without negotiating.
"We\'re not threatening any industrial action yet. We just want to talk to them," Mr Mijatov said
"We have to wait and see their next move. We\'re not going to sign off on this deal and our membership have told us not to sign off on it."
The union says it is concerned the rights of Qantas\'s 4000 long-haul flight attendants could be seriously eroded in the next round of enterprise bargaining talks in 2007 if it gives in to all of Australian Airlines\' demands. Mr Mijatov said Australian Airlines\' move to excommunicate the union displayed its "utter contempt for their cabin crew".
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Where people don't care
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scrags..reread Sonique's post! She/he did not say a company computer was used. But it is good to know that the person he/she complained of is acting is good faith. Yes, you DO need another union as the FAAA has a massive conflict of interest, and that's what QF was hoping to show. It's called divide and rule. Good luck to you all, as the aggro and division is undeserved.
Why don't they target the pilots as well???
Why don't they target the pilots as well???
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well, well! It would seem Scrags has tripped up. A company computer may not have been used, but you do have access to the crew email addresses on the days you are in the office. (Yes we know who you are and the word is out there!)
Also it isn't defamation if it is true.
As for signing off on the current agreement, it is OFF THE TABLE so there isn't anything to sign. TOO LATE.
It is now just a wait and see what the company pull out of the hat next.
Also it isn't defamation if it is true.
As for signing off on the current agreement, it is OFF THE TABLE so there isn't anything to sign. TOO LATE.
It is now just a wait and see what the company pull out of the hat next.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas management are good at threats, that's all they understand. Give as good as you get you get I say.
The LAMES are getting fed up with the doom and gloom story and are not far off telling them where to stick their 3%.
Why can't different unions take turns at legitimate protected industrial action to further our own causes.(you don't have to strike to have industrial action!!!!!!!!)
The LAMES are getting fed up with the doom and gloom story and are not far off telling them where to stick their 3%.
Why can't different unions take turns at legitimate protected industrial action to further our own causes.(you don't have to strike to have industrial action!!!!!!!!)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey TCM Not, Just to set the record straight, That email was compiled by a group of concerned Cabin Crew who want to work under the protection of an EBA rather than maybe end up on contract, and trying to gauge how much support there would be to get it thru, but as you say it could already be too late. Email addresses were used from personal home computer address books and as each email gets forwarded, more addresses get added from different crew. Please note the intent is to try and protect all our futures, nothing more or less and would expect that to be obvious . Hope that clarifies things for you
Scraggie ....
Scraggie ....
Guest
Posts: n/a
You want to work under the "protection of the EBA"! Good luck!
If you continue with your email petition and harassing crew in the crew room to sign off, then there will be no protection, I can promise you that.
You will all find yourselves working under a Non-Union EBA with no union protection whatsoever. The company will dictate your terms and conditions for the rest of your flying career and there will be no scope ever to negotiate a better a deal. A Non-Union Agreement is just as bad as Individual Workplace Contracts.
The best thing you and your breakaway group can do is to encourage crew to pressure the company to restart talks with the FAAA.
You want this to end ASAP, but by introducing a 3rd group into the mix you are simply confusing people even further and this will just drag on and on.
If you continue with your email petition and harassing crew in the crew room to sign off, then there will be no protection, I can promise you that.
You will all find yourselves working under a Non-Union EBA with no union protection whatsoever. The company will dictate your terms and conditions for the rest of your flying career and there will be no scope ever to negotiate a better a deal. A Non-Union Agreement is just as bad as Individual Workplace Contracts.
The best thing you and your breakaway group can do is to encourage crew to pressure the company to restart talks with the FAAA.
You want this to end ASAP, but by introducing a 3rd group into the mix you are simply confusing people even further and this will just drag on and on.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Granite Belt, Australia
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FAAAAAAA has a conflict of interest... as I indicated on 13 Jan in this thread. They're also blinkered, tunnel visioned, not attuned to the QF way of thinking so that they can out-think QF. All the fights for non-QF airlines Cabin Crew are compared with QF. Why?
Although Aust A/L is owned by QF - Aust A/L staff work for Australian Airlines not QF. Aust A/L Cabin Crew need a different Union to fight for them. Needless to say it can be under the usual trade union umberella.
Although Aust A/L is owned by QF - Aust A/L staff work for Australian Airlines not QF. Aust A/L Cabin Crew need a different Union to fight for them. Needless to say it can be under the usual trade union umberella.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Attention all Australian Airlines Flight Attendants
17 March 2005
Attention all Australian Airlines Flight Attendants
Enterprise Bargaining Update
AO crew have contacted the FAAA office outraged that they have been asked to email their name to an email address to show their support for the current EBA offer from management. The recipients have not disclosed their email addresses to the sender of the email. The message also asks crew to forward the message on to crew in their email address books.
Crew should be aware that if this email was sent using a database collected by Australian Airlines, the individuals involved and the company may be involved in a breach of privacy regulations.
If you have been involved in passing on of any email information, please contact either Matt Warburton or Victoria Skinner in the FAAA office for a confidential discussion. In the event that no one contacts the FAAA office by close of business on Friday, 18 March, the FAAA will be left with no alternative but to contact AO management and ask them to investigate this potential breach of privacy legislation. If the issue is not resolved satisfactorily, the FAAA will refer this issue to the Federal Privacy Commissioner with possible consequences against both those who distributed the information and AO management.
We urge all crew not have any part in this scheme which undercuts your ability to negotiate a fair agreement with the company. Furthermore, members should be fully aware that the email is factually incorrect and highlights the dangers of accepting industrial advice from people with no idea and who represent the interests of management, not their fellow crew members.
Rejection of the management offer will not lead to contract conditions unless people agree to sign contracts. No one can be forced to sign an individual contract – it's up to everyone to just say no. The current agreement continues to apply and continues to provide all the protection of your wages and conditions that it always has.
The only way that management can send jobs offshore is if you agree to it. This group of ill informed people are asking you to agree to sign away all your job security, as well as current working conditions all for a 3% pay rise. When you subtract inflation this equates to at best a 0.5% pay increase and if inflation increases, it amounts to a pay decrease. What a deal!!!!!!
The FAAA is a democratic organization and if the majority of our members instruct us to accept a bad deal that is what we will do. However we will ensure that all crew are informed of the real facts before this decision is made. We will not allow a vocal minority override the interests of AO cabin crew so they can further their careers.
Don't believe the management line that the FAAA is somehow representing the interests of Qantas flight attendants above that of Australian Airlines crew. It is pure nonsense. From the very beginning all decisions that will affect your wages and conditions for the next three years have been made by AO crew and the AO Special Projects Officers who represent AO crew. It is your decision and you have the power to make the difference.
Cabin crew who want the truth about these negotiations should contact the people who have represented their interests throughout these negotiations - their FAAA Special Projects Officers. Do not rely on ill informed and inaccurate emails.
The people behind this campaign ask you to express your view but only if your view accords with their view. Don't let a vocal minority undercut your ability to get a fair agreement.
Email the address this email was sent from to express your outrage at the abuse of your private information and at their attempts to intimidate crew into accepting the bad management EBA offer.
Written by Matt Warburton and Authorised by Michael Mijatov – Divisional Secretary - International
Attention all Australian Airlines Flight Attendants
Enterprise Bargaining Update
AO crew have contacted the FAAA office outraged that they have been asked to email their name to an email address to show their support for the current EBA offer from management. The recipients have not disclosed their email addresses to the sender of the email. The message also asks crew to forward the message on to crew in their email address books.
Crew should be aware that if this email was sent using a database collected by Australian Airlines, the individuals involved and the company may be involved in a breach of privacy regulations.
If you have been involved in passing on of any email information, please contact either Matt Warburton or Victoria Skinner in the FAAA office for a confidential discussion. In the event that no one contacts the FAAA office by close of business on Friday, 18 March, the FAAA will be left with no alternative but to contact AO management and ask them to investigate this potential breach of privacy legislation. If the issue is not resolved satisfactorily, the FAAA will refer this issue to the Federal Privacy Commissioner with possible consequences against both those who distributed the information and AO management.
We urge all crew not have any part in this scheme which undercuts your ability to negotiate a fair agreement with the company. Furthermore, members should be fully aware that the email is factually incorrect and highlights the dangers of accepting industrial advice from people with no idea and who represent the interests of management, not their fellow crew members.
Rejection of the management offer will not lead to contract conditions unless people agree to sign contracts. No one can be forced to sign an individual contract – it's up to everyone to just say no. The current agreement continues to apply and continues to provide all the protection of your wages and conditions that it always has.
The only way that management can send jobs offshore is if you agree to it. This group of ill informed people are asking you to agree to sign away all your job security, as well as current working conditions all for a 3% pay rise. When you subtract inflation this equates to at best a 0.5% pay increase and if inflation increases, it amounts to a pay decrease. What a deal!!!!!!
The FAAA is a democratic organization and if the majority of our members instruct us to accept a bad deal that is what we will do. However we will ensure that all crew are informed of the real facts before this decision is made. We will not allow a vocal minority override the interests of AO cabin crew so they can further their careers.
Don't believe the management line that the FAAA is somehow representing the interests of Qantas flight attendants above that of Australian Airlines crew. It is pure nonsense. From the very beginning all decisions that will affect your wages and conditions for the next three years have been made by AO crew and the AO Special Projects Officers who represent AO crew. It is your decision and you have the power to make the difference.
Cabin crew who want the truth about these negotiations should contact the people who have represented their interests throughout these negotiations - their FAAA Special Projects Officers. Do not rely on ill informed and inaccurate emails.
The people behind this campaign ask you to express your view but only if your view accords with their view. Don't let a vocal minority undercut your ability to get a fair agreement.
Email the address this email was sent from to express your outrage at the abuse of your private information and at their attempts to intimidate crew into accepting the bad management EBA offer.
Written by Matt Warburton and Authorised by Michael Mijatov – Divisional Secretary - International
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Follow your gut instincts and do what is best for YOU.
I have been made aware that the company is NOT backing down under any circumstances. There are only 300 of you and you can all be replaced very promptly. That is QF's view. The FAAA is intent on protecting the QF longhaul crew at your expense.
But make no mistake, QF will get what QF wants. They have had the FAAA on the back foot for some time now. Ofcourse QF want the AO crew to go further afield so they can do some of the QF longhaul flying at a much lower cost. It is cheaper to leave QF longhaul crew at home doing nothing than to fly them. Blind Freddy can see that and I hope you do too.
Unions are a much less relevant entity now than they were in past times. It's time to get selfish and consider YOUR future. Good luck to all of you, may you individually make the best decision for YOU and yours.
I have been made aware that the company is NOT backing down under any circumstances. There are only 300 of you and you can all be replaced very promptly. That is QF's view. The FAAA is intent on protecting the QF longhaul crew at your expense.
But make no mistake, QF will get what QF wants. They have had the FAAA on the back foot for some time now. Ofcourse QF want the AO crew to go further afield so they can do some of the QF longhaul flying at a much lower cost. It is cheaper to leave QF longhaul crew at home doing nothing than to fly them. Blind Freddy can see that and I hope you do too.
Unions are a much less relevant entity now than they were in past times. It's time to get selfish and consider YOUR future. Good luck to all of you, may you individually make the best decision for YOU and yours.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"It's time to get selfish".
Typical to form sentiment, as expressed by our resident management troll.
UNITED YOU STAND. DIVIDED YOU FALL.
What sort of job security do you guys at AO expect to have if you are on individual contracts, once Howard exercises his new Senate power ??????
Its a brave new world guys.
Think about it REAL hard.
Jettlager
Typical to form sentiment, as expressed by our resident management troll.
UNITED YOU STAND. DIVIDED YOU FALL.
What sort of job security do you guys at AO expect to have if you are on individual contracts, once Howard exercises his new Senate power ??????
Its a brave new world guys.
Think about it REAL hard.
Jettlager
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Perth
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
recruitment
on a rather different note, on the AO website it says they are accepting cabin crew applications through the website in April.
http://www.australianairlines.com.au/employment.html
http://www.australianairlines.com.au/employment.html
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: north
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TCM NOT: If you know who the person is, then why don't you give them a call, or have a chat to them aboutwhat they ment by sending out an e-mail.
I recieved an e-mail, and wasn't threatened by it at all. As for the patition going around, wasn't threatened by it either. I see it as a group of crew who are concerned with what's going on.
I'm a union member. I'm very dissapointed on how i've been represented. There has been a huge conflict of interest since day one.
Let's be adults, and talk to one another face to face and not use internet sites to express ones feelings.
I recieved an e-mail, and wasn't threatened by it at all. As for the patition going around, wasn't threatened by it either. I see it as a group of crew who are concerned with what's going on.
I'm a union member. I'm very dissapointed on how i've been represented. There has been a huge conflict of interest since day one.
Let's be adults, and talk to one another face to face and not use internet sites to express ones feelings.
Last edited by mid assist; 18th Mar 2005 at 04:03.