EBA & IR Issues in Australia (Not for those easily offended!)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 3,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EBA & IR Issues in Australia (Not for those easily offended!)
Post your comments about EBA's and Industrial Relations issues in Australia on this thread - Other threads started about these issues will be merged into this one.
It is appreciated that these discussions can generate strongly felt opinions, and this thread will be moderated with as much discretion as possible. That said, pointless personal abuse and hateful or racist posts will be not be tolerated.
Everyone has a right to a point of view, even if it conflicts with yours: Contributors will not be banned if their posts are factual, so don't ask for this to happen.
It is appreciated that these discussions can generate strongly felt opinions, and this thread will be moderated with as much discretion as possible. That said, pointless personal abuse and hateful or racist posts will be not be tolerated.
Everyone has a right to a point of view, even if it conflicts with yours: Contributors will not be banned if their posts are factual, so don't ask for this to happen.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The following is a cut and paste from the D&G forum.
It illustrates a situation where an airline attacks it's own operational staff in an effort to force them from their jobs.
IS it a "window" into the situation now facing those of us at QANTAS????
If so it is a VERY dangerous ploy to use on the FRONTLINE staff of a FULL SERVICE carrier like ours.
I'm not going anywhere, anytime as I have a mortgage and a family to feed but the more I am kicked, bullied, intimidated and harrassed by my "management team" the MORE determined I will be to RESIST their efforts, WHATEVER THEY ARE, at EVERY LEVEL.
Food for thought for those of us at the rat?
---------------
Revealed: Aer Lingus 'quit or be pushed' plan
From Irish Independent:
(need to be registered)
http://www.unison.ie/irish_independ...&issue_id=12759
AER Lingus developed a 12-point plan to make life difficult for its employees in order to persuade 1,800 staff to accept voluntary redundancy.
The plan included:
* Suggesting the airline would introduce a tacky uniform for cabin crew.
* Tedious training programmes for some pilots.
* Deliberately changing shift patterns to make life at the company uncomfortable.
According to one informed source there was also a suggestion that cabin crew, including older air hostesses, would have to abandon their current uniform for jumpsuits and t-shirts.
The total plan is documented in a confidential Aer Lingus report called "Business Plan - HR (Human Resources) strategy 2004".
The 12 initiatives designed to make life difficult for staff are referred to in the documents as "environmental push factors".
A spokeswoman for the company acknowledged that the document had been drawn up by Aer Lingus but dismissed it as a "discussion document". She said: "Those tactics have never been embraced by either the past or present management team."
Nowhere in the 40-page report is there any suggestion that it is a draft or discussion paper.
It states that initiatives to make life uncomfortable for staff were essential to the success of the voluntary severance scheme which was, in turn, essential for the success of the business plan.
The report states: "Environment (sic) push factors are key to driving applications (for the voluntary severance scheme)". The document then details the 12 "push factors".
Top of the list is: " 'Tap on the shoulder' of all relevant superintendents." This is understood to be a reference to 200 supervisor-grade employees who were individually approached by senior management and told they had no future with the company.
The second "push" factor listed calls for performance improvement plans. Sources said these were designed to put staff under pressure at work. The third push factor listed is "attendance management".
One of the more controversial initiatives in the plan comes in at number four and is titled "adverse changes in work/shift patterns". Adverse shift changes would make life at Aer Lingus particularly difficult for employees with families.
The fifth of the strategies outlined is "called lack of availability of IWSL". This is a reference to "In Week Special Leave" which gives cabin crew the option of flexible working arrangements.
The ninth "push factor" is called "assignment to resource centre". It is understood this initiative was aimed at surplus pilots who would be assigned to the centre, known by some staff as 'Guantanemo Bay', where they would spend weeks on training modules which, according to one source, were considered by pilots to be boring and tedious.
A number of the 12 points have already been implemented. These include number 10, "no transport", which is a reference to the abolition of the special bus which ferried cabin crew working unsociable shifts to and from airport car parks.
Other initiatives include "closure/reduction of bases", "significantly reduced overtime" and "working contracted hours".
The HR strategy also deals with plans to reduce employment levels by outsourcing services such as catering and cleaning. Under the terms of an EU regulation written in to Irish law, the 1977 Transfer of Undertaking Protection of Employment (TUPE), the new contractor is obliged re-employ existing staff.
According to the report the way to avoid transfers is to make TUPE offers "unattractive". It states: "An 'unattractive' TUPE offer will give surplus staff the option to transfer to new service provider with no exit package, reduced pension rights and lessened security of employment."
Tom McEnaney
It illustrates a situation where an airline attacks it's own operational staff in an effort to force them from their jobs.
IS it a "window" into the situation now facing those of us at QANTAS????
If so it is a VERY dangerous ploy to use on the FRONTLINE staff of a FULL SERVICE carrier like ours.
I'm not going anywhere, anytime as I have a mortgage and a family to feed but the more I am kicked, bullied, intimidated and harrassed by my "management team" the MORE determined I will be to RESIST their efforts, WHATEVER THEY ARE, at EVERY LEVEL.
Food for thought for those of us at the rat?
---------------
Revealed: Aer Lingus 'quit or be pushed' plan
From Irish Independent:
(need to be registered)
http://www.unison.ie/irish_independ...&issue_id=12759
AER Lingus developed a 12-point plan to make life difficult for its employees in order to persuade 1,800 staff to accept voluntary redundancy.
The plan included:
* Suggesting the airline would introduce a tacky uniform for cabin crew.
* Tedious training programmes for some pilots.
* Deliberately changing shift patterns to make life at the company uncomfortable.
According to one informed source there was also a suggestion that cabin crew, including older air hostesses, would have to abandon their current uniform for jumpsuits and t-shirts.
The total plan is documented in a confidential Aer Lingus report called "Business Plan - HR (Human Resources) strategy 2004".
The 12 initiatives designed to make life difficult for staff are referred to in the documents as "environmental push factors".
A spokeswoman for the company acknowledged that the document had been drawn up by Aer Lingus but dismissed it as a "discussion document". She said: "Those tactics have never been embraced by either the past or present management team."
Nowhere in the 40-page report is there any suggestion that it is a draft or discussion paper.
It states that initiatives to make life uncomfortable for staff were essential to the success of the voluntary severance scheme which was, in turn, essential for the success of the business plan.
The report states: "Environment (sic) push factors are key to driving applications (for the voluntary severance scheme)". The document then details the 12 "push factors".
Top of the list is: " 'Tap on the shoulder' of all relevant superintendents." This is understood to be a reference to 200 supervisor-grade employees who were individually approached by senior management and told they had no future with the company.
The second "push" factor listed calls for performance improvement plans. Sources said these were designed to put staff under pressure at work. The third push factor listed is "attendance management".
One of the more controversial initiatives in the plan comes in at number four and is titled "adverse changes in work/shift patterns". Adverse shift changes would make life at Aer Lingus particularly difficult for employees with families.
The fifth of the strategies outlined is "called lack of availability of IWSL". This is a reference to "In Week Special Leave" which gives cabin crew the option of flexible working arrangements.
The ninth "push factor" is called "assignment to resource centre". It is understood this initiative was aimed at surplus pilots who would be assigned to the centre, known by some staff as 'Guantanemo Bay', where they would spend weeks on training modules which, according to one source, were considered by pilots to be boring and tedious.
A number of the 12 points have already been implemented. These include number 10, "no transport", which is a reference to the abolition of the special bus which ferried cabin crew working unsociable shifts to and from airport car parks.
Other initiatives include "closure/reduction of bases", "significantly reduced overtime" and "working contracted hours".
The HR strategy also deals with plans to reduce employment levels by outsourcing services such as catering and cleaning. Under the terms of an EU regulation written in to Irish law, the 1977 Transfer of Undertaking Protection of Employment (TUPE), the new contractor is obliged re-employ existing staff.
According to the report the way to avoid transfers is to make TUPE offers "unattractive". It states: "An 'unattractive' TUPE offer will give surplus staff the option to transfer to new service provider with no exit package, reduced pension rights and lessened security of employment."
Tom McEnaney
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Tightslot`s Place
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The future
Will things improve when "The Roo Rooter" leaves?
Will the network begin to expand when QF makes net gains in aircraft.?
Will someone realise that running any business on the basis of"incentive bonuses" is corporate suicide in the long term.?
Will the malice The Roo Rooter has injected into the Qantas landscape evaporate when he does?
Will we all be proud once again to work For QF.?
To plagiarize..will the "buzz"return?
God please,I hope so.
Will the network begin to expand when QF makes net gains in aircraft.?
Will someone realise that running any business on the basis of"incentive bonuses" is corporate suicide in the long term.?
Will the malice The Roo Rooter has injected into the Qantas landscape evaporate when he does?
Will we all be proud once again to work For QF.?
To plagiarize..will the "buzz"return?
God please,I hope so.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Dunrootin Retirement Village
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Geoffs Star
For those of you hoping for the imminent departure of our ceo I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news. An announcement today by company memo from Margaret Jackson says that he will continue in his role until at least the second half of 2007. An arrangement that has not changed since he signed a new employment contract a year ago ......... I believe the company will post its profit result sometime around the 25th of August, it should make for interesting reading!!! Standby for messages from our esteemed executives about the difficult times ahead, tighten our belts etc etc etc.......all the while as they're counting their obscene bonuses, share options etc.........enjoy the job guys n gals.......while we still can!!!
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Talking about the Roo Rooter and his efforts to destroy QF employees conditions whilst feathering his own nest,Some thoughts on the JFK dispensation vote.
It concerns me that a YES vote will create a precendent.
That means two things:
1: That the company can then argue in court that we should be able to operate other flights of similar nature.When the company gets (and it will happen sooner or later) new aircraft that have the ability to fly 19 or 20 hours then we should operate other flights such as MEL/SIN/MEL and the like.If they have set up appropriate crew rest and crew complement(suitable to QF I mean) ,they might have a legal case if we have created a precendent whether intentionally or by error through poor legal advice.
2: Why is the current faaa leadership so interested in tacitly aggreeing with everything the company chooses simply by saying "well they are legally entitled to do so". If that is the case ,we are entitled under our EBA to deny dispensation for the JFK trip. If the faaa is acting to protect Australian jobs,they are doing it in a funny way.We should be proactive and in that way make the company react to us instead of the other way around.
With crew amongst us like peanutnob bin laden who feel the company is so threatened and believes the rhetoric that the company delivers through roadshows etc...then we will have to act at faaa meetings.
I feel if we vote YES we will be opening a potential disaster.
It concerns me that a YES vote will create a precendent.
That means two things:
1: That the company can then argue in court that we should be able to operate other flights of similar nature.When the company gets (and it will happen sooner or later) new aircraft that have the ability to fly 19 or 20 hours then we should operate other flights such as MEL/SIN/MEL and the like.If they have set up appropriate crew rest and crew complement(suitable to QF I mean) ,they might have a legal case if we have created a precendent whether intentionally or by error through poor legal advice.
2: Why is the current faaa leadership so interested in tacitly aggreeing with everything the company chooses simply by saying "well they are legally entitled to do so". If that is the case ,we are entitled under our EBA to deny dispensation for the JFK trip. If the faaa is acting to protect Australian jobs,they are doing it in a funny way.We should be proactive and in that way make the company react to us instead of the other way around.
With crew amongst us like peanutnob bin laden who feel the company is so threatened and believes the rhetoric that the company delivers through roadshows etc...then we will have to act at faaa meetings.
I feel if we vote YES we will be opening a potential disaster.
Last edited by lowerlobe; 10th Aug 2005 at 10:44.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Dunrootin Retirement Village
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JFK Dispensation
Could'nt agree with you more LowerLobe, my sentiments exactly. We will all need to think about this one very carefully........the silence from the FAAA is alarming!!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The yearly profit will be posted on the 19th of August. So you got that bit wrong for starters! As for the rest, perhaps you would like to cut and paste that memo here, to back up your bullsh*t statement.
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bad Adventures:
Sorry ,but can you expand your thoughts a little,I don't follow you or are you replying to a post from the previous thread.
Jet Black Monaro:
Keep talking about our conditions and concerns because as I have mentioned before you will be wishing you were in a union when a Mr Corrigan is finished with yours.!!!
I bet your not smiling at the moment,it's not funny when it's happening to you is it.!!!
Sorry ,but can you expand your thoughts a little,I don't follow you or are you replying to a post from the previous thread.
Jet Black Monaro:
Keep talking about our conditions and concerns because as I have mentioned before you will be wishing you were in a union when a Mr Corrigan is finished with yours.!!!
I bet your not smiling at the moment,it's not funny when it's happening to you is it.!!!
Last edited by lowerlobe; 10th Aug 2005 at 11:05.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Dunrootin Retirement Village
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rude Adventures
BA.......well I did say on or around the 25th!!......whatever date it WILL make for interesting reading!!! Read what you describe as bs as follows.
Wednesday 10 August 2005
MEDIA SPECULATION ABOUT QANTAS CEO
You may be aware of media speculation concerning our Chief Executive Officer, Geoff Dixon, leaving Qantas before his contract expires.
I would like to assure all staff that these rumours are wrong.
Geoff has agreed with the Board to continue in his role at Qantas until at least the second half of 2007 an arrangement that has not changed since he signed a new employment contract a year ago.
Geoff is an outstanding CEO and has led Qantas through what has been the most challenging period in aviation history. He will continue to provide leadership for the airline as Qantas enters a new era in the years ahead.
Margaret Jackson
Qantas Chairman
Qantas Group Broadcast Message, issued by Employee Communication
Ahhh yet another Bad Adventure to look forward to!!!!!!!!
Wednesday 10 August 2005
MEDIA SPECULATION ABOUT QANTAS CEO
You may be aware of media speculation concerning our Chief Executive Officer, Geoff Dixon, leaving Qantas before his contract expires.
I would like to assure all staff that these rumours are wrong.
Geoff has agreed with the Board to continue in his role at Qantas until at least the second half of 2007 an arrangement that has not changed since he signed a new employment contract a year ago.
Geoff is an outstanding CEO and has led Qantas through what has been the most challenging period in aviation history. He will continue to provide leadership for the airline as Qantas enters a new era in the years ahead.
Margaret Jackson
Qantas Chairman
Qantas Group Broadcast Message, issued by Employee Communication
Ahhh yet another Bad Adventure to look forward to!!!!!!!!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JFK Dispensation
At the end of the day you’re a fool if you vote no to this dispensation. Neither the company nor the general public give a rats who does the flying. If the kiwi’s get this flying we lose a lot of valuable LAX patterns a long with it. Not only that, New Zealand based crew will be taken off undesirable patterns such as Johannesburg and Mumbai in order to cover the New York shuttle flying. Have a think about the amount of long range and overtime pay that will be lost, not to mention $US allowances. I have operated one of these shuttles and let me tell you it was a lot easier then an LAX-SYD or a SIN-LHR sector. The flights are never full and the whole 7 day trip added up to over 10 hours overtime which equals a pay packet of well over $2000. Comparing us to US based carriers is absolutely pointless they are either bankrupt or on the verge being so. If the duty stretches to beyond 17 hours then you vote no and stay in New York, it’s not rocket science. If you don’t want to do them, then don’t bid for them! As for this setting a precedent to perform longer duties (i.e. MEL/SIN/MEL) that would be a total breach of CASA regulations and would be illegal regardless of how many crew were on board(check the regulations if you like). Yes the company will be purchasing ultra long range aircraft that can fly up to 19 hours (single sector) So when the company starts flying SYD-JFK, SYD-DFW or PER-LHR, what are going to say ‘nooo too long for us give it to short haul’ and gee do you think they’ll take it?! I’ve worked in a number of different areas in this company where I’ve had to work a lot harder and a lot longer then I am now and I wasn’t even getting close to the kind of money I’m earning now in Long Haul. We need to protect the flying we have by making sensible decisions and by looking at each and every case on its merits. We have lost enough great flying with the opening of the LHR base, let’s not lose anymore!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMHO we MUST say no to the JFK dispensation.
Not even the bankrupt US carriers make their crew operate this sector because as a multi sector it is totally INHUMANE.
The issue is about our welfare not money.
Given the greed of the trough feeders does anyone really believe that this DOESNT set a dangerous precedent?????
SAY NO and let them abuse the KIWIS. Not us.
Oh BTW, dixon is known by his "friends" at the Balmoral Pavillion as, "that viagra fuelled little dwarf"
Works for me.
Not even the bankrupt US carriers make their crew operate this sector because as a multi sector it is totally INHUMANE.
The issue is about our welfare not money.
Given the greed of the trough feeders does anyone really believe that this DOESNT set a dangerous precedent?????
SAY NO and let them abuse the KIWIS. Not us.
Oh BTW, dixon is known by his "friends" at the Balmoral Pavillion as, "that viagra fuelled little dwarf"
Works for me.
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually I think we would be foolish to vote YES to the dispensation.
We all know what the company is capable of and what their motives are so why would we risk our flying by creating a precedent.
We will be agreeing to new long range flights such as per/lhr and syd/jfk but that is single sector not multi sector as in LAX/JFK/LAX .To say if you don't want to do them you don't have to bid for them will not work if we have to accept Mel/Sin/Mel or Syd/Sin/Syd or Bne/Sin?bne to mention just a few
It is simplistic to say that the flights are easier than a LA direct but what if the loads are full and there are delays, they are still close to 17 hours and with the time problems a lot of crew are not getting adaquate rest before doing this sector . I feel as though a lot of crew only look at the short term gain from the overtime payments and the company knows this and appeals to it.
I think we should get independent legal advice just not from the faaa and the ACTU legal apprentices we have. I am concerned that the faaa gave the company temporary dispensation without a vote or any communication .Perhaps we should pay a surcharge and get a QC or someother legal rep with experience not just well meaning crew.
I personally do not think that they have enough Kiwi crew to do this without a lot of effort and AS at the faaa actually said to me that they had not worked out how many crew the company would need to do the JFK flights before giving the company the green light.So if the faaa had not done that basic piece of homework,how do we know if they do any other research.
This vote could be a critical to our future so let's tread carefully
We all know what the company is capable of and what their motives are so why would we risk our flying by creating a precedent.
We will be agreeing to new long range flights such as per/lhr and syd/jfk but that is single sector not multi sector as in LAX/JFK/LAX .To say if you don't want to do them you don't have to bid for them will not work if we have to accept Mel/Sin/Mel or Syd/Sin/Syd or Bne/Sin?bne to mention just a few
It is simplistic to say that the flights are easier than a LA direct but what if the loads are full and there are delays, they are still close to 17 hours and with the time problems a lot of crew are not getting adaquate rest before doing this sector . I feel as though a lot of crew only look at the short term gain from the overtime payments and the company knows this and appeals to it.
I think we should get independent legal advice just not from the faaa and the ACTU legal apprentices we have. I am concerned that the faaa gave the company temporary dispensation without a vote or any communication .Perhaps we should pay a surcharge and get a QC or someother legal rep with experience not just well meaning crew.
I personally do not think that they have enough Kiwi crew to do this without a lot of effort and AS at the faaa actually said to me that they had not worked out how many crew the company would need to do the JFK flights before giving the company the green light.So if the faaa had not done that basic piece of homework,how do we know if they do any other research.
This vote could be a critical to our future so let's tread carefully
Last edited by lowerlobe; 10th Aug 2005 at 14:02.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It appears the messages of difficult times ahead have already started. From www.travelbiz.com.au
9 August, 2005
200 Qantas management positions axed in two months
Qantas has axed 15 per cent of its management positions in the past two months.
The airline’s cfo, Peter Gregg, said at the Asia Pacific Aviation Summit at the Hilton Sydney Hotel today that Qantas had used redundancies and attrition to cut the 200 jobs.
Gregg said over the coming year the airline would cut 15 per cent of its remaining workforce of 38,000 in order to cut costs.
He said the job cuts came as the airline was looking to reduce non-fuel unit costs by 5 per cent.
Gregg said Qantas was considering raising the fuel surcharge for a fifth time after he revealed that the airline’s fuel bill would be $600 million higher than last year.
The airline’s “sustainable future” cost-cutting program is aimed at saving more than $500 million this financial year.
9 August, 2005
200 Qantas management positions axed in two months
Qantas has axed 15 per cent of its management positions in the past two months.
The airline’s cfo, Peter Gregg, said at the Asia Pacific Aviation Summit at the Hilton Sydney Hotel today that Qantas had used redundancies and attrition to cut the 200 jobs.
Gregg said over the coming year the airline would cut 15 per cent of its remaining workforce of 38,000 in order to cut costs.
He said the job cuts came as the airline was looking to reduce non-fuel unit costs by 5 per cent.
Gregg said Qantas was considering raising the fuel surcharge for a fifth time after he revealed that the airline’s fuel bill would be $600 million higher than last year.
The airline’s “sustainable future” cost-cutting program is aimed at saving more than $500 million this financial year.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Dunrootin Retirement Village
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: OLD CODGERS
Bad Adventures..........please don't put yourself down!!......it's time to stop taking those angry pills................you must be hilarious to fly with as you're about as funny as a fart in a spacesuit...........that really would be a bad adventure.....
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to agree with Front Pit,
Bad Adventures,one day you will ,I hope get to our age and I don't expect you will stand aside and let other crew do some trips just because they are younger than you.!!!
Bad Adventures,one day you will ,I hope get to our age and I don't expect you will stand aside and let other crew do some trips just because they are younger than you.!!!
Last edited by lowerlobe; 11th Aug 2005 at 05:17.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too funny!!!
I knew I’d get an ear full from the old angry diggers on here! Little bit sensitive about our age are we boys?? Front Pit, love the line about the angry pills, you might want to take a look in the mirror. I am great to fly with, I love my job and am quite happy to do LAX/JFK/LAX shuttles because you blokes can’t do them without having a triple bypass mid sector. Hey at the end of the day if you don’t like the way the flying is headed, then leave! Bye Bye. I believe Sydney cabs are looking for night time drivers. Don’t worry lowerlobe I’ll be long gone by the time I get to your age and the seniority bidding system will be too, rumour has it, it will be going for the next EBA. Can’t wait! Cheers!
P.S Don’t forget your pills for your next trip lads. You know the ones for high blood pressure, arthritis, angina and of course the one’s for ‘I hate the company, I hate life, everyone and everything!
I knew I’d get an ear full from the old angry diggers on here! Little bit sensitive about our age are we boys?? Front Pit, love the line about the angry pills, you might want to take a look in the mirror. I am great to fly with, I love my job and am quite happy to do LAX/JFK/LAX shuttles because you blokes can’t do them without having a triple bypass mid sector. Hey at the end of the day if you don’t like the way the flying is headed, then leave! Bye Bye. I believe Sydney cabs are looking for night time drivers. Don’t worry lowerlobe I’ll be long gone by the time I get to your age and the seniority bidding system will be too, rumour has it, it will be going for the next EBA. Can’t wait! Cheers!
P.S Don’t forget your pills for your next trip lads. You know the ones for high blood pressure, arthritis, angina and of course the one’s for ‘I hate the company, I hate life, everyone and everything!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Dunrootin Retirement Village
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But Wait There's More!!!....
Wow BA it's working.........the angry pills are wearing off!!! What a tame response from the acid tongue. For your info I still love the job and the company even after thirty one years....it's the management I can't stand..... and sorry won't be leaving soon in fact I must go now as I'm packing for my next Japan trip......I really have a yen for those sorts of trips. Promise I won't forget the walking stick and you left out viagra in your list of pills...loosen up and you'll enjoy the job even more......maybe even flying with we old farts!!
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bad Adventures:Young,Dumb and full of c**
How unusual , someone who thinks of only themselves. Pathetic,just want the company wants.!!
Go ahead and do the JFK trips and don't think of what effect it has on the rest of our flying,good on you.
I bet you can't wait to have a BBQ with all your matse like JBM and peanutnob bin laden
How unusual , someone who thinks of only themselves. Pathetic,just want the company wants.!!
Go ahead and do the JFK trips and don't think of what effect it has on the rest of our flying,good on you.
I bet you can't wait to have a BBQ with all your matse like JBM and peanutnob bin laden
Last edited by lowerlobe; 11th Aug 2005 at 07:36.