The QANTAS thread
Join Date: May 2005
Location: maquarie fields
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R4P, you seem to have the enthusiasm but you made a few errors in your post.
You stated that the AKL crew work hard, NOPE, some do the vast majority are lazy with and attitude that astounds me!
Its well known joke among crew, 1 BKK crew equals 4 AKL.
R4P you seem still motivated, tell me exactly why that is! why do they have this disrespectful attitude and this desire to bludge.
From what I gather the interview process is long and strenuous, why ruin it like that!.
Well at least the visitors in SYD are aware of the AKL crew attitude and they are determined to do something about it, its easy to fire and replace over there!
You stated that the AKL crew work hard, NOPE, some do the vast majority are lazy with and attitude that astounds me!
Its well known joke among crew, 1 BKK crew equals 4 AKL.
R4P you seem still motivated, tell me exactly why that is! why do they have this disrespectful attitude and this desire to bludge.
From what I gather the interview process is long and strenuous, why ruin it like that!.
Well at least the visitors in SYD are aware of the AKL crew attitude and they are determined to do something about it, its easy to fire and replace over there!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: feet on the ground
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
where is the faaa?
the conditions of the akl based crews aren,t excatly great, but what keeps annoying me is that the faaa lh is not doing a thing about unrealistic tour of duties by akl based crews. lets be clear about one thing. akl/lhr/bkk based crew work under australian casa rules (once the door is closed the aircraft is australian territory). its sheer incompetence by the faaa not to take qf as well as casa on and put reasonable flight duty limitations on. if those girls just had b***s.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA is well aware of the duty hour limitations of the AKL and BKK based crew. The Fact that Qantas spends millions of dollars annually on lobbying the government and regulatory authorities and the david hawes and geoff dixon practically live in Canberra is a testimony to their success.
The FAAA does not have any where near the resources i would imagine to compete in that area. We flight attendants constantly work on the assumption that the regulatory authorities live in complete ignorance of what Qantas does...i think that is extremely naive.
The fact that the majority of the Kiwi based crew are not members of FARSA doesnt help their cause. The fact that the most recent recruits in NZ were those who trained as strike breakers a year of so ago doesnt make me want to help them too much either.
The real issue is for the NZ government to protect their citizens from being exploited by an australian company and i dont hear much from Helen Clarke on this issue???
The fact that they queue up for the low pay and conditions is a testimony to Qantas' sucessful offshoring of Aussie jobs....And the new legislations is about to make that 500% easier for Qantas!!
Short Haul actually have worse international flying conditions that lOng Haul too. In fact they dont get anywhere near the standown that LH crew do.
AKL, LHR, BKK, Short Haul and AO as well as Jetstar are all lower cost more efficient operations that Long HAul....the best thing that we can do is have a better standard of service than they do and do a better job and i think that what we currently do..
On our best day there is not another flight attendant in the Qantas Group that can compete with the experience and professionalism of the Long Haul Crew. I just wish qantas would recognise it and perhaps we would feel a little more like demonstrating it on a daily basis.
The FAAA does not have any where near the resources i would imagine to compete in that area. We flight attendants constantly work on the assumption that the regulatory authorities live in complete ignorance of what Qantas does...i think that is extremely naive.
The fact that the majority of the Kiwi based crew are not members of FARSA doesnt help their cause. The fact that the most recent recruits in NZ were those who trained as strike breakers a year of so ago doesnt make me want to help them too much either.
The real issue is for the NZ government to protect their citizens from being exploited by an australian company and i dont hear much from Helen Clarke on this issue???
The fact that they queue up for the low pay and conditions is a testimony to Qantas' sucessful offshoring of Aussie jobs....And the new legislations is about to make that 500% easier for Qantas!!
Short Haul actually have worse international flying conditions that lOng Haul too. In fact they dont get anywhere near the standown that LH crew do.
AKL, LHR, BKK, Short Haul and AO as well as Jetstar are all lower cost more efficient operations that Long HAul....the best thing that we can do is have a better standard of service than they do and do a better job and i think that what we currently do..
On our best day there is not another flight attendant in the Qantas Group that can compete with the experience and professionalism of the Long Haul Crew. I just wish qantas would recognise it and perhaps we would feel a little more like demonstrating it on a daily basis.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: feet on the ground
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just a litlte reminder
peg47 you know that fatigue in the workplace is a hazard and part of the OH act. there is a another option for the OH committee. and it does not matter if casa is aware of the rosters akl/bkk base do. its the faaa which does nothing about it. dont forget it was the domestic and international faaa which negotiated the MAM/AO/J* awards.
dont forget it was the domestic and international faaa which negotiated the MAM/AO/J* awards.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interview with Geoff Dixon. Business Sunday 19/2/06
ALI MOORE: A nosedive for Qantas's profit this week, dragged down by a crippling increase in fuel prices, something no airline can avoid. But the ten percent drop in first half results, to $353 million dollars, wasn't the only thing the carrier announced. It's restructured its management and put workers on notice there's likely to be more job losses, with much talk about moving long haul maintenance overseas. It's a challenging time for the airline, and to discuss these issues, Qantas boss Geoff Dixon joins me now live in the studio.
MOORE: Good morning, Mr Dixon.
GEOFF DIXON, CEO, QANTAS: Good morning.
MOORE: Let's start with fuel. Certainly there's been a bit of a drop recently but it's made a big dent in profits. The forward curve is still looking high on the price front. Are we heading for another increase in the fuel levy?
DIXON: No, I don't think so at all. We are trying to do is make sure the company is able to manage at about a US$60 a barrel price. That is the challenge we have got ahead of us, I suppose.
MOORE: Indeed on the hedging front you're 100 percent hedged to the end of the financial year and … it falls to 25 percent.
DIXON: Yes, it does. But you have to remember that hedging doesn't cover everything. In the first half we had a $690 million increase in the hedging covered around about $215 million so there is still a big gap.
MOORE: But 25 percent for next financial year. You would like to see that up?
DIXON: Only if it is at the right price. I mean, to say if we can't do it — I mean we have it under US$60 a barrel now and the price has come down a little bit. But it is really a volatile situation. As I said, we have to make sure over the next two to 2.5 years to ensure the company can continue to be very viable, make good profits, grow its employment base, invest, at a fuel price that will be much higher than it has been over preceding years.
MOORE: In that context it has been maintenance that has been in the spotlight. You said that you're 20 percent below best practice. Is that both long haul and short-haul maintenance?
DIXON: Oh yes, look what happens here, that our people in the maintenance area have done a tremendous job. We have a lot six thousand nine hundred people in that area. But the ground keeps changing as it is in most of the rest of the industry as well. So, they have done a terrific job but we are around about 15 percent to 20 percent below what is happening around the rest of the world. That is mainly because of scale and movement to much lower cost operations in other countries.
MOORE: So how do you fix that? How do you fix that and keep things in Australia?
DIXON: Restructuring and we will be talking to our people about that. They have come to the party before and have restructured with us. I think our record speaks for itself. There is 7,000 more jobs in Qantas today than there was six years ago. So we're not a slash and burn company. We're not putting people off willy-nilly but we are restructuring and moving jobs around to where they are more needed. We hope they can restructure with us. If not and if other things take over which often does in this industry, we will have to do other things.
MOORE: And other things obviously would mean overseas. Could you send short-haul to Indonesia and long haul to China? Is it possible both…
DIXON: No. There is no suggestion we are looking at the moment at our short-haul maintenance operations. We are looking at our long haul, our wide body maintenance operations which are 747s principally and 767s. That is the issue that is being looked at now — whether we just leave it as it is, which I don’t think is an option, whether we restructure within Australia, and that is an option, or whether we go offshore, which obviously is an option as well.
MOORE: How many people is that if it is offshore?
DIXON: If it is offshore, it will be about 2,500 people.
MOORE: And if you restructure in Australia, it will be green fields? You’ve got to start all over again?
DIXON: No, we have some very good operations throughout Australia but it does mean a change in certain work practices and more investment for Qantas, which is a major issue for us as well. I mean to say we just invested $18 billion in new aircraft on top of another $12 billion that we did in 2000. So, and we managed to meet all our commitments I might add. But it does mean additional investment, if it is additional investment we have got to be very careful and very sure that we can get the restructuring for that investment.
MOORE: Even if you do keep it in Australia, is there going to be job losses anyway? 20% is a huge gap to make up.
DIXON: Yes, there will be. That is inevitable, but I repeat — and it is very important — where we have job losses in some areas we have got a record of putting jobs on in other areas. I mean we are investing huge amounts of money, and we are growing the airline. The airline is 60 percent bigger than it was five years ago. So our track record is there. There will be job losses, and occasionally I would love everybody to say ‘gee look at Qantas, a headline that says they increased jobs by 7,000, not that they took 200 jobs out. I feel for the people who lose their jobs, but we are still also creating I believe, a very viable business.
MOORE: As well as job creation the other point that you do like to make is that 90 percent of Qantas's staff are actually in Australia at the moment, which is rare for an international global airline. In five years time, will it still be 90 percent?
DIXON: Let me tell you something else, there is 99 percent of our engineering operations are in Australia despite the fact we still do get engineering done offshore and have for many years, and people should realize that. I hope that it is still around about 90 percent,yes I would prefer that.
MOORE: Well, if you have upset the unions this week you have certainly upset the Singaporians. They think you have got double standards.
DIXON: This is the airline industry, everybody has got double standards, and they should not be saying that because I think they are in the same boat as we are, or the same aircraft.
MOORE: You are probably just a few weeks away from a government decision on whether or not Singapore Airlines will get access to that trans Pacific, the Sydney-LA route. What are you hearing from Warren Truss and co?
DIXON: They’ve given Margaret Jackson, myself, David Halls, who runs our government relations, we’ve spent all our time in Canberra, probably more than they would like us to. They've given us tremendous hearing. They know the situation, and all we are asking now is for a decision to give us some clarity. We need to know the policy settings that is being set for aviation in Australia over the next four or five years. When we know that we can make some of the other decisions. This is an industry like no other, and I know we always say that but I think most commentators now agree that is true. And what happens in Australia is not the same thing that happens in Singapore or not the same thing that happens in the UK. We are prevented from doing a lot of flying to a lot of places by regulatory regimes. Just give us the clarity and we will move on.
MOORE: Let's look at some of those other regimes. I guess you have said that new Jetstar joint ventures around the world are possible. Where, where are we talking — Indonesia?
DIXON: Yes we are talking about Indonesia.
MOORE: Would that be with Adam Air?
DIXON: No we have had discussions with Adam Air, there is no way that they've progressed to an extent that we would be making any decisions on it about we have very good meetings with them. They are a start-up carrier. They are very competent. It is a country with 250 million people close by. We are obviously interested in that. But we expect to have within the next four or five years at any rate — we have Jetstar Asia which is situated in Singapore. We have Jetstar in Australia. And we are going to start Jetstar to travel out of side Australia so we are putting a lot of dots together. Peter Greg is our CFO and he runs our strategy, is working on that. I think we have got some very, very good opportunities as we go forward.
MOORE: Lots of talk about Jetstar. Australian airlines — why keep it?
DIXON: Because it had done the job we want it to do. We need to consider all the options we have for flying. But we made it very, very plain last week that as we go forward the major investment and a major thrust of Qantas will be two flying brands — Qantas, which is one of the best in the world and continues to be and Jetstar, which has been a sensational success.
MOORE: You said this week that you would like to stay on at Qantas at the end of your contract. How long is long enough?
DIXON: I didn’t, how long is long enough? I think that depends on the board.
MOORE: But if you had your choice, another year? Another two years?
DIXON: Keep going.
MOORE: Another three years?
DIXON: No. Look, I don't know. My contract - and I don't like contracts like this, and I think Margaret and I have discussed this - it just creates a situation where people like you can say, "Look your contract is up in July."
MOORE: But you will be there in 08?
DIXON: I think I will be there for '08 but not just for the Beijing Olympics as someone said hopefully to do a bit of work as well.
MOORE: Geoff Dixon, thank you very much for talking to Business Sunday.
ALI MOORE: A nosedive for Qantas's profit this week, dragged down by a crippling increase in fuel prices, something no airline can avoid. But the ten percent drop in first half results, to $353 million dollars, wasn't the only thing the carrier announced. It's restructured its management and put workers on notice there's likely to be more job losses, with much talk about moving long haul maintenance overseas. It's a challenging time for the airline, and to discuss these issues, Qantas boss Geoff Dixon joins me now live in the studio.
MOORE: Good morning, Mr Dixon.
GEOFF DIXON, CEO, QANTAS: Good morning.
MOORE: Let's start with fuel. Certainly there's been a bit of a drop recently but it's made a big dent in profits. The forward curve is still looking high on the price front. Are we heading for another increase in the fuel levy?
DIXON: No, I don't think so at all. We are trying to do is make sure the company is able to manage at about a US$60 a barrel price. That is the challenge we have got ahead of us, I suppose.
MOORE: Indeed on the hedging front you're 100 percent hedged to the end of the financial year and … it falls to 25 percent.
DIXON: Yes, it does. But you have to remember that hedging doesn't cover everything. In the first half we had a $690 million increase in the hedging covered around about $215 million so there is still a big gap.
MOORE: But 25 percent for next financial year. You would like to see that up?
DIXON: Only if it is at the right price. I mean, to say if we can't do it — I mean we have it under US$60 a barrel now and the price has come down a little bit. But it is really a volatile situation. As I said, we have to make sure over the next two to 2.5 years to ensure the company can continue to be very viable, make good profits, grow its employment base, invest, at a fuel price that will be much higher than it has been over preceding years.
MOORE: In that context it has been maintenance that has been in the spotlight. You said that you're 20 percent below best practice. Is that both long haul and short-haul maintenance?
DIXON: Oh yes, look what happens here, that our people in the maintenance area have done a tremendous job. We have a lot six thousand nine hundred people in that area. But the ground keeps changing as it is in most of the rest of the industry as well. So, they have done a terrific job but we are around about 15 percent to 20 percent below what is happening around the rest of the world. That is mainly because of scale and movement to much lower cost operations in other countries.
MOORE: So how do you fix that? How do you fix that and keep things in Australia?
DIXON: Restructuring and we will be talking to our people about that. They have come to the party before and have restructured with us. I think our record speaks for itself. There is 7,000 more jobs in Qantas today than there was six years ago. So we're not a slash and burn company. We're not putting people off willy-nilly but we are restructuring and moving jobs around to where they are more needed. We hope they can restructure with us. If not and if other things take over which often does in this industry, we will have to do other things.
MOORE: And other things obviously would mean overseas. Could you send short-haul to Indonesia and long haul to China? Is it possible both…
DIXON: No. There is no suggestion we are looking at the moment at our short-haul maintenance operations. We are looking at our long haul, our wide body maintenance operations which are 747s principally and 767s. That is the issue that is being looked at now — whether we just leave it as it is, which I don’t think is an option, whether we restructure within Australia, and that is an option, or whether we go offshore, which obviously is an option as well.
MOORE: How many people is that if it is offshore?
DIXON: If it is offshore, it will be about 2,500 people.
MOORE: And if you restructure in Australia, it will be green fields? You’ve got to start all over again?
DIXON: No, we have some very good operations throughout Australia but it does mean a change in certain work practices and more investment for Qantas, which is a major issue for us as well. I mean to say we just invested $18 billion in new aircraft on top of another $12 billion that we did in 2000. So, and we managed to meet all our commitments I might add. But it does mean additional investment, if it is additional investment we have got to be very careful and very sure that we can get the restructuring for that investment.
MOORE: Even if you do keep it in Australia, is there going to be job losses anyway? 20% is a huge gap to make up.
DIXON: Yes, there will be. That is inevitable, but I repeat — and it is very important — where we have job losses in some areas we have got a record of putting jobs on in other areas. I mean we are investing huge amounts of money, and we are growing the airline. The airline is 60 percent bigger than it was five years ago. So our track record is there. There will be job losses, and occasionally I would love everybody to say ‘gee look at Qantas, a headline that says they increased jobs by 7,000, not that they took 200 jobs out. I feel for the people who lose their jobs, but we are still also creating I believe, a very viable business.
MOORE: As well as job creation the other point that you do like to make is that 90 percent of Qantas's staff are actually in Australia at the moment, which is rare for an international global airline. In five years time, will it still be 90 percent?
DIXON: Let me tell you something else, there is 99 percent of our engineering operations are in Australia despite the fact we still do get engineering done offshore and have for many years, and people should realize that. I hope that it is still around about 90 percent,yes I would prefer that.
MOORE: Well, if you have upset the unions this week you have certainly upset the Singaporians. They think you have got double standards.
DIXON: This is the airline industry, everybody has got double standards, and they should not be saying that because I think they are in the same boat as we are, or the same aircraft.
MOORE: You are probably just a few weeks away from a government decision on whether or not Singapore Airlines will get access to that trans Pacific, the Sydney-LA route. What are you hearing from Warren Truss and co?
DIXON: They’ve given Margaret Jackson, myself, David Halls, who runs our government relations, we’ve spent all our time in Canberra, probably more than they would like us to. They've given us tremendous hearing. They know the situation, and all we are asking now is for a decision to give us some clarity. We need to know the policy settings that is being set for aviation in Australia over the next four or five years. When we know that we can make some of the other decisions. This is an industry like no other, and I know we always say that but I think most commentators now agree that is true. And what happens in Australia is not the same thing that happens in Singapore or not the same thing that happens in the UK. We are prevented from doing a lot of flying to a lot of places by regulatory regimes. Just give us the clarity and we will move on.
MOORE: Let's look at some of those other regimes. I guess you have said that new Jetstar joint ventures around the world are possible. Where, where are we talking — Indonesia?
DIXON: Yes we are talking about Indonesia.
MOORE: Would that be with Adam Air?
DIXON: No we have had discussions with Adam Air, there is no way that they've progressed to an extent that we would be making any decisions on it about we have very good meetings with them. They are a start-up carrier. They are very competent. It is a country with 250 million people close by. We are obviously interested in that. But we expect to have within the next four or five years at any rate — we have Jetstar Asia which is situated in Singapore. We have Jetstar in Australia. And we are going to start Jetstar to travel out of side Australia so we are putting a lot of dots together. Peter Greg is our CFO and he runs our strategy, is working on that. I think we have got some very, very good opportunities as we go forward.
MOORE: Lots of talk about Jetstar. Australian airlines — why keep it?
DIXON: Because it had done the job we want it to do. We need to consider all the options we have for flying. But we made it very, very plain last week that as we go forward the major investment and a major thrust of Qantas will be two flying brands — Qantas, which is one of the best in the world and continues to be and Jetstar, which has been a sensational success.
MOORE: You said this week that you would like to stay on at Qantas at the end of your contract. How long is long enough?
DIXON: I didn’t, how long is long enough? I think that depends on the board.
MOORE: But if you had your choice, another year? Another two years?
DIXON: Keep going.
MOORE: Another three years?
DIXON: No. Look, I don't know. My contract - and I don't like contracts like this, and I think Margaret and I have discussed this - it just creates a situation where people like you can say, "Look your contract is up in July."
MOORE: But you will be there in 08?
DIXON: I think I will be there for '08 but not just for the Beijing Olympics as someone said hopefully to do a bit of work as well.
MOORE: Geoff Dixon, thank you very much for talking to Business Sunday.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OCCR!
Just like any company with its employees there are lazy people everywhere but we cant say that about everyone now can we..
I can respect the fact that people out there do exist as you have described but that stands across all bases..
Lets take SYD base crews flying 20 to 30 years... R5 please! Now those people tend to get lazy and slack off while others including SYD base people pick up the slack but I am not one to accuse.
We all come across lazy people whether AKL BKK SYD BNE MEL or LHR base..
Funny however when AKL base were crewing all Economy on AKL LAX flights that the meal service was done in half the time.
Yes i remain positive as I enjoy my job and am using it as an opportunity to broaden my horizons and so are the rest of us.
Lets not act like children and say who is lazy and who is not..
Just like any company with its employees there are lazy people everywhere but we cant say that about everyone now can we..
I can respect the fact that people out there do exist as you have described but that stands across all bases..
Lets take SYD base crews flying 20 to 30 years... R5 please! Now those people tend to get lazy and slack off while others including SYD base people pick up the slack but I am not one to accuse.
We all come across lazy people whether AKL BKK SYD BNE MEL or LHR base..
Funny however when AKL base were crewing all Economy on AKL LAX flights that the meal service was done in half the time.
Yes i remain positive as I enjoy my job and am using it as an opportunity to broaden my horizons and so are the rest of us.
Lets not act like children and say who is lazy and who is not..
Join Date: May 2005
Location: crew rest
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i agree with OCCR, in general they are slack, very slack/
R4P have you wondered why they were taken off the AKL/LAX services!
too many complaints, ask the service centre next time you are in SYD.
Qcc2 what in the hell have the FAAA got to do with the AKL conditions, its totally out of their jurisdiction, its up to the NZ government to do something.
R4P have you wondered why they were taken off the AKL/LAX services!
too many complaints, ask the service centre next time you are in SYD.
Qcc2 what in the hell have the FAAA got to do with the AKL conditions, its totally out of their jurisdiction, its up to the NZ government to do something.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: feet on the ground
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not really cart exchange
once the door is closed they are under australian legal system. that includes all relevant casa regs. they might be on a contract in nz but work under aussie rules. eg. e.p's and all relevant regs for cabin crew. i was refering to fatigue management which if beiing pushed by the faaa someone in canberra/qcc4 has to address. that does include a good aviation lawyer who knows his/her stuff.
peg747 well the OH committee is a bit of a toothless tiger these days
peg747 well the OH committee is a bit of a toothless tiger these days
Join Date: May 2005
Location: crew rest
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see what you mean QCC2
But if the AKL based crew wont get off their @rses and even join a union its hard trying to get anything done, anyway the sooner they wear out the better, it will show QF that these conditions cannot be sustained.
I just feel sorry for the few good ones that are there.
But if the AKL based crew wont get off their @rses and even join a union its hard trying to get anything done, anyway the sooner they wear out the better, it will show QF that these conditions cannot be sustained.
I just feel sorry for the few good ones that are there.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QCC2
you are so wrong about the fact that overseas based crew are under the Australian Legal System. its a legal minefield and nowhere near as simple as some think.
THey are not even covered for workers comp under australian law. They dont get super, or a whole range of benefits that australian based crew get.
Johanna and Troy paid one of the thais about 25k pa to unionise them up there. She is now totally paranoid and thinks that they spy on her. It was a totally fruitless excercise and a total waste of money as it would be with the Kiwis
you are so wrong about the fact that overseas based crew are under the Australian Legal System. its a legal minefield and nowhere near as simple as some think.
THey are not even covered for workers comp under australian law. They dont get super, or a whole range of benefits that australian based crew get.
Johanna and Troy paid one of the thais about 25k pa to unionise them up there. She is now totally paranoid and thinks that they spy on her. It was a totally fruitless excercise and a total waste of money as it would be with the Kiwis
Join Date: May 2005
Location: feet on the ground
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
read the law
peg47 read the regs. and as any aviation lawyer will advise there is a case. having said that i agree it is a legal nightmare one that has not been tested or even tried to be tested. i agree to spend money on setting up a union overseas is more then difficult and may not serve the prupose (as you mentioned). however i maintain the position that legally ALL QF cabin crew work under casa regs (remember one of the questions in e.p's.) and its applicable rules and regs, regardless of base.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: queensland
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R4P
I can understand you are embarrassed to have accusations made about laziness with the akl base. Unfortunately, it has become so prevalent it does not go un noticed by the crew that work with these individuals.
Unfortunately its not addressed by these crews for fear of being accused of being anti-basing against a base.
The problem is exascerbated by those individuals who work hard eventually go to airNZ(sooner rather than later) rather than continue with longer hours and no award.
If Singapore get rights across the pacific not only do we not have the numbers of crew to compete 747 against 747, we have a morale problem as well.
I can understand you are embarrassed to have accusations made about laziness with the akl base. Unfortunately, it has become so prevalent it does not go un noticed by the crew that work with these individuals.
Unfortunately its not addressed by these crews for fear of being accused of being anti-basing against a base.
The problem is exascerbated by those individuals who work hard eventually go to airNZ(sooner rather than later) rather than continue with longer hours and no award.
If Singapore get rights across the pacific not only do we not have the numbers of crew to compete 747 against 747, we have a morale problem as well.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: queensland
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Midnight,
your right there are imbeciles who from time to time post on here.Your also correct there are some lazy Oz based crew.
It seems ok if we are able to have a go at QF mgmt on here, Faaa and its officials, its ok for different people to push their own agendas but its not ok for us to sometimes have a look and be critical of our own behaviours and professionalism.
Any laziness from any base is unnacceptable, anything but the highest professionalism on board and off is also unnacceptable. It was and is being professionals of the highest standard is what sets QF apart from the rest.
Its where our reputation came from and its up to us - NOT mgmt, Not FAAA officials to get it right and do it right on board.
This isnt aimed at pointing out problems with a base. My mention of this is for us to accept the reality of bases and we all pull our socks up and stop whinging about what is hear to stay. What needs to go is bad attitude and performance.
Good suggestion midnight lets hope all CSMs and CSSs read this. Lets hope any poor performance is recognised and appropriately performance managed - IRRESPECTIVE of base or category!
Lets help maintain Qantas as the best airline in the world!
your right there are imbeciles who from time to time post on here.Your also correct there are some lazy Oz based crew.
It seems ok if we are able to have a go at QF mgmt on here, Faaa and its officials, its ok for different people to push their own agendas but its not ok for us to sometimes have a look and be critical of our own behaviours and professionalism.
Any laziness from any base is unnacceptable, anything but the highest professionalism on board and off is also unnacceptable. It was and is being professionals of the highest standard is what sets QF apart from the rest.
Its where our reputation came from and its up to us - NOT mgmt, Not FAAA officials to get it right and do it right on board.
This isnt aimed at pointing out problems with a base. My mention of this is for us to accept the reality of bases and we all pull our socks up and stop whinging about what is hear to stay. What needs to go is bad attitude and performance.
Good suggestion midnight lets hope all CSMs and CSSs read this. Lets hope any poor performance is recognised and appropriately performance managed - IRRESPECTIVE of base or category!
Lets help maintain Qantas as the best airline in the world!
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: out of a suitcase
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mmmmmm...............take on foreign based crew for non performance??
CSMs and CSSs think very carefully before you do.
You will likely find YOURSELF on a clause 11 before you can blink........
Do the Kiwis get "assertiveness training" or is that just for the Thais?????
CSMs and CSSs think very carefully before you do.
You will likely find YOURSELF on a clause 11 before you can blink........
Do the Kiwis get "assertiveness training" or is that just for the Thais?????
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Planet Zog
Age: 66
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just let me think about QF's modus operandi for employing quality contract f'a's.
Apply a vigorous selection process that includes catching bouncing balls. Yep that'll get 'em.
Pay succesful applicants peanuts , give 'em lousy conditions and get 'em working side by side full pay F/A's. That'll encourage 'em.
Work them into the ground at 230 hrs plus.That'll do it.
Dumb down Ep's. Whoaaa , Keep your fingers crossed here.
Then expect CSM's and CSS's , to coach, empower, counsel and assist the non performers (that they will most likely never see again ),to achieve acceptable benchmark standards ,onboard .
And fix up the attitudinal problems while they are at it.
I don't get it.
I am writing to Mark Hassell .
Oh ........ hang on I forgot ..
He's gooooooooornnnnnnnnnnnnnn.
Apply a vigorous selection process that includes catching bouncing balls. Yep that'll get 'em.
Pay succesful applicants peanuts , give 'em lousy conditions and get 'em working side by side full pay F/A's. That'll encourage 'em.
Work them into the ground at 230 hrs plus.That'll do it.
Dumb down Ep's. Whoaaa , Keep your fingers crossed here.
Then expect CSM's and CSS's , to coach, empower, counsel and assist the non performers (that they will most likely never see again ),to achieve acceptable benchmark standards ,onboard .
And fix up the attitudinal problems while they are at it.
I don't get it.
I am writing to Mark Hassell .
Oh ........ hang on I forgot ..
He's gooooooooornnnnnnnnnnnnnn.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: queensland
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Franky,
your sarcasm actually highlights the problem which is out there.
Its alright fror me to make speeches from the heart. Many (the majority-at least 51%) already feel this way.
CSMs and CSSs can only do so much counseling, mentoring etc.
the attitude problem (specific to foreign bases) I believe stems from 2 areas. The selection process and the disparity between the 2 groups working side by side. The haves and the have nots.
That is a mgmt problem. They created it and they need to fix it.
your sarcasm actually highlights the problem which is out there.
Its alright fror me to make speeches from the heart. Many (the majority-at least 51%) already feel this way.
CSMs and CSSs can only do so much counseling, mentoring etc.
the attitude problem (specific to foreign bases) I believe stems from 2 areas. The selection process and the disparity between the 2 groups working side by side. The haves and the have nots.
That is a mgmt problem. They created it and they need to fix it.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Latest polling shows that Industrial Relations is rated least important to Australians in determining which party they will vote for at the next election.
Clearly what that says to me is that Flight Attendants would be no different to the rest of the community, and that's why they are conservative and vote for the liberal party.
it is against that conservative background that our unions have to find some balance. Crew whinge constantly about their conditions and the pressure on them and expect unions to be able to defend them and yet still vote for the parties that are attacking the very conditions they want the unions to protect.
i just dont get it !!!
Clearly what that says to me is that Flight Attendants would be no different to the rest of the community, and that's why they are conservative and vote for the liberal party.
it is against that conservative background that our unions have to find some balance. Crew whinge constantly about their conditions and the pressure on them and expect unions to be able to defend them and yet still vote for the parties that are attacking the very conditions they want the unions to protect.
i just dont get it !!!