Nihao

Hi

Sorry to side-track a bit here but does this mean Qantas German language speakers no longer fly to Germany? Are these flights without language speakers? I thought having a language speaker on these sort of flights was considered very important by Qantas.

Cheers

jettlager

Ah..................

Language requirements are NOT requirements when management performance bonuses are at stake.

This is clearly illustrated by qf's decision to have shorthaul operate to Hong Kong, Shanghai, Manila.

No language skills on those flights much to the consternation of local airport managers.

Jettlager

RaverFlaver

I don't think the below are the thought's you would want to be promoting to the public.....your campaign seems a little misguided and racially aggrivated.

Maybe your campaign should be more directed to QF managment. The above sound slightly intolerable.

Look onboard any other airline and you will find multi cultural crew. It's not as though the entire crews on QF are foreingers.

RaverFlaver

OZcabincrew

I met a girl the other day who flies for JAL based out of London and doesn't even speak Japanese!!!!!!

Oz

cartexchange

I think what OCCR meant was that the 4 AKL crew have been replaced by 4 BKK crew, the rest are all SYD based.

Im posting this info for those NON QF people.

However he/she makes a good point though, how come the difference in the pattern make up, the AKL crew really got screwed on that one.

Both are cheap labour,so why the difference! hmmmm makes you wonder.

west coast girl

I'm not trying to play the race card here ala John Howard. just trying to alert the Australian public as to what is actually going on inside one of its greatest ICON companies.
Manangement is extremely sensitive to anything that may detract from the Qantas brand. in their public affairs dept. they employ 10 full time journalists & public relations specialists to cover all contingencies.
the use of AKL based crew to blackmail the faaa to do the arduous LAX-JFK -LAX sector and the 'pre-condition' clause in the AO EBA clearly signal the ruthless business direction they are going to take in the future.
How can you have a 'pre--condition' in an EBA -where B stands for bargaining???...what is a pre-condition??
this is the angle that the faaa -or somebody who cares - has to take to the media.
how can you call a company" Australian Airlines "when you have indicated witha pre -condition allowing you to have no limit /cap on the number of crew engaged overseas that you intend to have minimal Australians on those flights( including perhaps tech crew....) any suburban lawyer will tell you that borders on false advertising and marketing and Joe Public needs to be alerted to this fact.
Australian shareholders do have morals even if senior management doesn't and they may just vote with their share options and what company they put their money into.
but they have to know and the union has to effectively use the media to convey this message for the next few years leading up to the next EBA negotiations.
The aim: to close the BKK & AJKL bases on moral & ethical grounds.ie they 're stealing Australian jobs. a simple fact and a simple message.

the campaign can be humorous without be racist.
"Why spend all those hard earned dollars flying to Thailand when you can have it all from a Qanats cabin Crew?"
Qantas are using New Zealand cabin crew on their flights, so make sure you only pay the fare in New Zealand dollars. That's what the company is paying the salariesi n!"
it has to be a sustainable campaign over time
the media angle is there with no cap to the AO EBA.
faaa should send out SOS to members who have media contacts and maybe secure long term mate rates.
its do able - and the only way to go,
management will notice and become very concerned about its public perception & possible damage to the brand.
all very legal - but more so - all very ethical...even Qantas management know they are selling jobs off shore forever, and just sometimes, even they have to sleep straight at night too.

lowerlobe

About the Kiwi's being replaced by the Thai's,I suggested that the company is getting ready for any problem with the JFK dispensation.
I don't know how accurate this is but at the very least QF would need over 100 AKL based crew just for the JFK run.

Do they have that many crew in AKL spare from their other flights?

Also where would they get the CSM's and CSS's from?

What is the maximum hours an AKL based crew can do?

as far as the overseas crew campaign is concerned,QF spends a lot of money(I have heard that the latest ads cost around 8 million in a 12 month period)
To do this telling everyone that we are the spirit of Australia and then give jobs to overseas workers instead of Australian and then play I still call Austarlia home is a bit hypocritical don\'t you think.That is part of the message I think we could portray

again sorry about my typing,I\'m like those immigration people you see,one finger typing ..sorry

OZ Cabin Crew

I think someone was having a lend of you.
Having done years of flights to Japan I know how the Japanese mentality is with their language and culture.
I find it hard to believe that JAL would hire anyone that does not speak Japanese.

keeperboy

JAL has bases in LHR and FRA. The LHR based crews also position all over europe to operate from european cities to Tokyo and Osaka. There are typically two to four LHR based crew on each flight.

I guess the difference between the LHR JL crews and QF crews is that JAL does not have the base as a cost saving measure. The LHR based crews are on-board for their (english/french/german) language skills as the japanese crews speak very basic english. They are also there to interact with the european passengers on JAL flights. The same as BA with our NRT based crew. Not to save money but just for the language/culture issue.

jettlager

Ah....................

Airlines making decisions based on criteria other than cost saving??????????

What a novel approach.

Jettlager

Mr Seatback 2

It's the same with ANA in Japan too. Nothing to do with cost savings, everything to do with 'service' for their European clients.

Part of the training for JAL and ANA for LHR/FRA based crews includes Japanese language training. Overseas based crews are required to be able to speak English and another European language (French or German usually) as part of the entry requirements. The company takes care of the Japanese language training requirements.

For the record, United Airlines and American Airlines also have (or maybe HAD now) overseas bases in LHR. Whilst these are cost saving measures also, the cost savings are derived from reduced hotel and allowance requirements in London only. Their employment contract, as I understand, mirrors that of their US counterparts (so there isn't as much of a gulf between the crew on board). In short, everyone works and gets paid to the same standard.

United (despite all of its' problems of late) had overseas bases all around the world (predominantly in foreign countries where English isn't the primary language). It has historically offered its' crew the ability to transfer to these new bases as part of a lifestyle benefit - with no detriment to the FA.

Perhaps QF could learn from this? ROFL!

Jet_Black_Monaro

Everybody is on about cheap labour.

What about considering the suggestion that the Australian crew have priced themselves out of a job.

No one here seems prepared to acknowledge that reality. You just don't and never will get it until you are all out on your arses trying to find a job in the real world.

GalleyHag

Well why dont you tell us what you think is the market value of a flight attendant employed with Qantas?

AO crew are 30% cheaper than QF long haul but that now appears to be to expensive with AO planning to source off-shore crew.

Jet* are cheaper than QF short haul but that now appears to be to expensive with Jet* planning to source labour from NZ for their Tasman services.

Jet_Black_Monaro

The market decides what any job is worth. There are LARGE amounts of people out there who are prepared to do it for considerably less money than the incumbents are prepared to, so that is what the job is worth. That is why they are doing all the flying and the incumbents are being stood aside.

I know it sucks, but that is free market economics at work.

GalleyHag

Oh please if it were up to the hundreds of wannbe's like yourself JBM Qantas would be crewed by 18 year olds on $19K salary packages.

Be more specific, what is the current market rate for a Qantas flight attendant?

If you want to make a constructive contribution to this thread, tell us, if you were being offered a position with Qantas what price would you put on your head knowing all the facts about the aircraft types, flying involved, product offering etc. I am really interested to know what you think the market value is.

Mr Seatback 2

Using your analogy then JBM, why doesn't Virgin Blue replace your flying with Pacific Blue crew?

They're cheaper - and less of them onboard. Or am I forecasting the future with Corrigan at the helm?

Jet_Black_Monaro

I say again, there are LARGE amounts of people prepared to do your job now for less. They are even prepared to relocate to another country to do it. They are prepared to leave their friends and country to do exactly the same job as you for less because to them it is a good deal. Doesn't that ring a bell in anybody's head? Hmmm, is that coffee I smell?

Compare that with the attitude of some incumbent QF LH crew that post on here.

lowerlobe

Thankyou Professor of economics at VirginBlue University JBM for your valuable insight into economics and description of market forces!

So using your definition you are being over paid at VirginBlue(as your new boss will undoubtedly be telling you shortly)

there is unfortunately one basic flaw in your argument,QF has made last financial year a record profit and by all accounts will do so even more this year

So what is the urgency for continually dropping employees conditions.Of course the answer is for continueing bonuses for the board,except for VirginBlue which has had a dramatic drop in profit over the last 12 months

If QF was in trouble then I would agree with cost cutting but these are not to compete with VirginBlue or anyone else really it is just give Darth Dixon and his mates bonuses not return to the shareholder

So instead of your incredible definition of market forces it is more about corporate greed .With Gordon Gecko leading us ,it will be the tech crew next to be hammered,then basically everone else except of course the board.

gigs

if anyone reads my poor typing youll recall im a mam casual who knows nz long haul/for qf/ virgin csm and fas also has been offered fa posit. with virgin. jbm mam, jet connect all earn more than virgin and by sense of comparison to the few virgin crew i work with are happier. you could debate that our existance denudes working conditions for main line but,thats in the long term a debate. this casual bs hasnt worked in other countries/us/ .but a debate of this nature seems out of your league. to sum up a girl told me months ago after joining mam from virgin that high hours at mam are a walk in the park compared to virgin fa position. so what is your motive what are you trying to say???????and pls dont expect me to respond to nonsense...

Jet_Black_Monaro

The last EBA vote from your colleagues was YES!

Overwhelmingly, YES, I agree!

lowerlobe

Qantas spares no expense to remind the world that it still calls Australia home


Qantas is in the final stages of shooting Australia's most expensive television commercial, with a production budget of more than $10 million topping the entire cost of making hit Australian feature-length films such as The Castle, Lantana and The Dish.

The airline has already flown dozens of members of the Australian Girls Choir and the National Boys Choir to exotic and iconic locations in Greece, Japan, France, New Zealand and the United States in what the film industry says is an all-singing cinematic blockbuster. Every Australian state will also feature in the commercial.

The production is so big the airline's chief executive, Geoff Dixon, is "a bit nervous", while John Singleton, whose agency is making the ad, says he is "terrified". "It's the biggest production I've been involved in," Mr Singleton said. "It's absolutely terrifying. It's costing about the same as two or three feature-length movies. It better be good or we're sacked."

Qantas would not comment on the campaign details, production budget or when it would be seen on Australian TV screens but claimed it would be "one of the world's greatest commercials".

"It's a very ambitious shoot," a Qantas spokesperson said. "I can't comment on what the budget will be but clearly it will be a significant investment. We believe it will be one of the world's greatest commercials."

There are suggestions Australians may have to wait for a peek at the new campaign until August, when the airline could launch it during the Athens Olympic Games.

Peter Allen's I Still Call Australia Home will remain as the jingle, along with the two children's choirs, an idea hatched by Qantas chief Mr Dixon after a phone call to his advertising mate, Mr Singleton.

Qantas has been taking only 20 children at a time on overseas shoots and rostering their involvement - aside from a couple of "hero children" - to ensure minimal disruption to schooling.

"It's a logistical bloody nightmare," Mr Singleton said. "The kids have got tutors and minders and all the other things that go with it. It's also bloody exciting."

Apparently it is ok to appeal to Australians loyalty to part with their savings to fly QF but employing Australians is going too far