QANTAS CABIN CREW DISCUSSIONS ( IV)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by speedbirdhouse
twigs,
no where near 17+ hours if they did it. Which they don't.
They overnight before paxing home.
no where near 17+ hours if they did it. Which they don't.
They overnight before paxing home.
FRA-SIN 13:30 transit say 1:15 SIN-BKK 2:25 plus 30 min is over 17.
Anyway my point was that such a duty like BOM-SYD then pax BNE is a walk in the park compared to the whole deal that the offshore bases get.
I am well aware that some of our patterns don't take into consideration fatigue and are quite arduous, but I don't think that one is in that category.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Straya
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There seems to be a lot of questions to the FAAA here about what action they are taking.
So what is the answer - are there any FAAA insiders here who can legitimately comment on what action is being taken? Do you still have a CCN or some such feedback from the FAAA on these issues?
Does the FAAA have the funds to engage a Professional PR company to get the message out to the ignorant public about their safety and the welfare of the QF staff? The reality is that everything these days is about spin - QF throw lots of money at advertsing and they know it is important. Whilst the FAAA could never match QF $4$ in a spinning competition, some dollars targeted in the right place to fightback will do a lot more for your cause than 'bitching in-house', which whilst sounding derogatory, is in fact the net effect unless you take the fight to your useless managers.
So what is the answer - are there any FAAA insiders here who can legitimately comment on what action is being taken? Do you still have a CCN or some such feedback from the FAAA on these issues?
Does the FAAA have the funds to engage a Professional PR company to get the message out to the ignorant public about their safety and the welfare of the QF staff? The reality is that everything these days is about spin - QF throw lots of money at advertsing and they know it is important. Whilst the FAAA could never match QF $4$ in a spinning competition, some dollars targeted in the right place to fightback will do a lot more for your cause than 'bitching in-house', which whilst sounding derogatory, is in fact the net effect unless you take the fight to your useless managers.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
****su_Tonka,
you make some valid comments and thanks for your input.
At the end of the day I wonder whether anyone would care about how QF treats it's staff ???
Sinali,
I'll give you a little example of our crew rest arrangements and how management treat us.
As has been mentioned our award entitles us to horizontal crew rest for flight duties that extend beyond 13 hours and 55 minutes.
We still operate a 300 series 747 which doesn't have bunks above the rear economy toilets.
During the late 80's our engineering department developed an underfloor "containerised" crew rest facility which is in effect two cargo containers bolted together.
We access it from the doors 2 galley through a hatch in the floor and although some find it claustrophobic, I love it.
Anyway, when it is loaded ex SYD for our 13.55+ sectors it is a god send, but here is the rub.
If the return leg, due to favourable winds etc is planned UNDER 13.55 it is company practise to turn it around in the hold so we can't access it.
It's in the hold and costs NOTHING to use but the lowlife that run this company deny us it's use out of nothing more than spite.
you make some valid comments and thanks for your input.
At the end of the day I wonder whether anyone would care about how QF treats it's staff ???
Sinali,
I'll give you a little example of our crew rest arrangements and how management treat us.
As has been mentioned our award entitles us to horizontal crew rest for flight duties that extend beyond 13 hours and 55 minutes.
We still operate a 300 series 747 which doesn't have bunks above the rear economy toilets.
During the late 80's our engineering department developed an underfloor "containerised" crew rest facility which is in effect two cargo containers bolted together.
We access it from the doors 2 galley through a hatch in the floor and although some find it claustrophobic, I love it.
Anyway, when it is loaded ex SYD for our 13.55+ sectors it is a god send, but here is the rub.
If the return leg, due to favourable winds etc is planned UNDER 13.55 it is company practise to turn it around in the hold so we can't access it.
It's in the hold and costs NOTHING to use but the lowlife that run this company deny us it's use out of nothing more than spite.
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote
"It's in the hold and costs NOTHING to use but the lowlife that run this company deny us it's use out of nothing more than spite."
it is this attitude that personifies the company and it's relationship with us ....
The ACTU believes that an ad campaign is worth doing but not the faaa and we have crew who post here ( at least they tell us that they are crew)that believe we should give in to the company....If only the public really knew what the real meaning of the "Spirit of Australia" means
"It's in the hold and costs NOTHING to use but the lowlife that run this company deny us it's use out of nothing more than spite."
it is this attitude that personifies the company and it's relationship with us ....
The ACTU believes that an ad campaign is worth doing but not the faaa and we have crew who post here ( at least they tell us that they are crew)that believe we should give in to the company....If only the public really knew what the real meaning of the "Spirit of Australia" means
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Straya
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is that true about the under florr crew rest getting turned around? Are you positive it isn't offloaded for freight upload?
If you can prove it, it would make a great advert for the vindictiveness of the one they call Darth - but only if you can prove it. I wonder what the Senate Commitee who made their recommendations on the Burning the Midnght Oil case would make of intentionally reducing the Cabin Crew rest to be at their most alert for the most safety cricitcal pahase of their duty - i.e. the arrival at the end of their flight duty. What would CASA have to say about it - officially. It would be a brave and 'courageous' CASA official that would condone it. If you can prove it, get your FAAA to make it as public as they can, and inform your membership.
If you can prove it, it would make a great advert for the vindictiveness of the one they call Darth - but only if you can prove it. I wonder what the Senate Commitee who made their recommendations on the Burning the Midnght Oil case would make of intentionally reducing the Cabin Crew rest to be at their most alert for the most safety cricitcal pahase of their duty - i.e. the arrival at the end of their flight duty. What would CASA have to say about it - officially. It would be a brave and 'courageous' CASA official that would condone it. If you can prove it, get your FAAA to make it as public as they can, and inform your membership.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: crew rest
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
crew rest container
Its true about the container.
I have been on many flights where the container was in the hold and It was turned around as it was not our entitlement for horizontal rest.
It didn't matter we have our ways of getting back at the "honest" "duty of care" management.
I wont mention our solution but it was a beauty and we were better off
I have been on many flights where the container was in the hold and It was turned around as it was not our entitlement for horizontal rest.
It didn't matter we have our ways of getting back at the "honest" "duty of care" management.
I wont mention our solution but it was a beauty and we were better off
Originally Posted by cartexchange
Its true about the container.
I have been on many flights where the container was in the hold and It was turned around as it was not our entitlement for horizontal rest.
I have been on many flights where the container was in the hold and It was turned around as it was not our entitlement for horizontal rest.
Do you really believe the ground staff have enough time on their hands to offload the container, turn it around, and then return it to the same position just just for kicks???
I think you will find the container, which, from a weight point of view, is virtually empty, is put into another position in order to trim the aircraft to optimum.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In years gone by the container was meant to stay with the aircraft as there are only a small number of them. Now on the AKL-LAX-AKL run it is sometimes offloaded in LAX for freight uplift on the way back. You will probably find most of the stock is now in LAX.
If they are being fitted and being turned around to not give crew access, either the ramp in AKL or LAX may not know which way it is to be fitted. Someone should ask a question of management about this. If it is being turned around on purpose on orders from management, then get the union involved.
If they are being fitted and being turned around to not give crew access, either the ramp in AKL or LAX may not know which way it is to be fitted. Someone should ask a question of management about this. If it is being turned around on purpose on orders from management, then get the union involved.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Straya
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am a bit suspicious on this one - not doubting what cabin crew may have been 'told', possibly to stir the crew up, but I can not for the life of me seeing such a vindcitive act being perpetrated - especially when this would present an opportunity to publically show the arhitect of such a policy to be literally anti-saftey in an environment where fatigue is close to the top of safety concerns.
As I said, if you can get proof, exploit it against the morons who have come up with this policy.
As I said, if you can get proof, exploit it against the morons who have come up with this policy.
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The main problem with the company is that each department cares very little for the others.
You only have to go back to the JFK snow bound aircraft to see this.
The cabin crew who worked from LAX were close to having a vote for extending their TOD.Knowing that the aircraft did not have the fuel required to taxi and then fly to LAX the tech crew and the local manager made the decision to push back.This was done with only one thing in mind and that was to prevent the cabin crew voting not to extend.
So much for CRM and fatigue considerations.......as far as the underfloor crew rest is concerned,it is certainly consistent with other actions by the company
You only have to go back to the JFK snow bound aircraft to see this.
The cabin crew who worked from LAX were close to having a vote for extending their TOD.Knowing that the aircraft did not have the fuel required to taxi and then fly to LAX the tech crew and the local manager made the decision to push back.This was done with only one thing in mind and that was to prevent the cabin crew voting not to extend.
So much for CRM and fatigue considerations.......as far as the underfloor crew rest is concerned,it is certainly consistent with other actions by the company
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
****su_Tonka,
can't say what happens when it is used AKL-LAX as I have not operated this sector with the 300 but rammel is AKL based so he/she ought to know.
I do know for sure however that when it was used on the SYD-BOM sector it returned with the operating aircraft as it was needed outbound again.
It was always turned around so as to be inaccessable on the return leg which was "only" around 13 hours and outside our requirement for horizontal crew rest.
Flight attendant fatigue is a concept that has no bearing in qantas's present operation.
A cursory look at what we are being planned to do these days if proof enough of that.
How does PER-SYD red eye, transit SYD 3.40 operate SYD-DRW grab you???
Geoff Dixon aka "Dear Leader" is on record as confirming that as flight attendants we will have jobs in a few years time.
He suggested however that we won't like them.
can't say what happens when it is used AKL-LAX as I have not operated this sector with the 300 but rammel is AKL based so he/she ought to know.
I do know for sure however that when it was used on the SYD-BOM sector it returned with the operating aircraft as it was needed outbound again.
It was always turned around so as to be inaccessable on the return leg which was "only" around 13 hours and outside our requirement for horizontal crew rest.
Flight attendant fatigue is a concept that has no bearing in qantas's present operation.
A cursory look at what we are being planned to do these days if proof enough of that.
How does PER-SYD red eye, transit SYD 3.40 operate SYD-DRW grab you???
Geoff Dixon aka "Dear Leader" is on record as confirming that as flight attendants we will have jobs in a few years time.
He suggested however that we won't like them.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Straya
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crazy.
I do remember a (short lived) CNS-SYD-CHC-SYD day, which was the last day of a 7 day SIN pattern. Seems that things have only gone south since.
Have never understood what GD expects to be left at the conlusion of his 'reign'. Sounds simply like a war of attrition until he gets every cabin crew member on a short term casual contract - burn em out and turn em over. Well, I guess it is the philosophy of our national fuhrer after all.
I do remember a (short lived) CNS-SYD-CHC-SYD day, which was the last day of a 7 day SIN pattern. Seems that things have only gone south since.
Have never understood what GD expects to be left at the conlusion of his 'reign'. Sounds simply like a war of attrition until he gets every cabin crew member on a short term casual contract - burn em out and turn em over. Well, I guess it is the philosophy of our national fuhrer after all.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Dununda
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Makes Sense
Upset your front line staff.
The staff that spend more time with your customers than anyone else.
The staff that recover product failures.
That apologize for management stuffups(IFE!)
The staff that have the experience and know how...get rid of them or make them unhappy.
Makes perfect sense......to a bunch of idiots
You need 2 things in any customer service business.
1.Happy motivated staff.
2.Provide them with the resources to do their job well.
King Rat and Il Duce just dont get it
The staff that spend more time with your customers than anyone else.
The staff that recover product failures.
That apologize for management stuffups(IFE!)
The staff that have the experience and know how...get rid of them or make them unhappy.
Makes perfect sense......to a bunch of idiots
You need 2 things in any customer service business.
1.Happy motivated staff.
2.Provide them with the resources to do their job well.
King Rat and Il Duce just dont get it
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lowerlobe,
Seems like a pretty informed comment (accusation) you have there regarding the tech crew in New York. Did you happen to be sitting on the flight deck that day (obviously you must have in order to accuse people of what you just have)? On what fact do you base your claim?
Seems like a pretty informed comment (accusation) you have there regarding the tech crew in New York. Did you happen to be sitting on the flight deck that day (obviously you must have in order to accuse people of what you just have)? On what fact do you base your claim?
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bazzamundi...
There is no need to mention anyone by name regarding this example but just ask yourself a few questions…
It is fairly safe to say that the operating tech crew(Who slipped in JFK) would know that the cabin crew have operated from LAX to JFK and after the transit are also operating JFK/LAX.
The operating tech crew and local manager would also have been informed as to the approximate taxi time before take off given one runway was not being used because of an incident and the resultant backlog of aircraft trying to depart not to mention the problems associated with the weather.
If the aircraft had enough fuel for the taxi before take off and the flight to LAX then why did it not do it?
The tech crew and the local manager were also aware that given the scheduled flight time to LAX and the approximate taxing time the cabin crew’s TOD would have been over the 17 hour mark and that a vote to extend the TOD or not was about to be carried out.
With all this information the decision was made to push back from the terminal !!!
I’m not accusing anyone of anything but it’s reasonable to state that the aircraft was pushed back for a reason (or did the tech crew and company just want to taxi around jfk for hours and hours) and if the tech crew were not happy with that reason they would not have done it.
The intent of this example is not to start another tech/cabin crew fight but to say that each section of the company only seems to think of itself and not of the affect it's actions have on others.
There is no need to mention anyone by name regarding this example but just ask yourself a few questions…
It is fairly safe to say that the operating tech crew(Who slipped in JFK) would know that the cabin crew have operated from LAX to JFK and after the transit are also operating JFK/LAX.
The operating tech crew and local manager would also have been informed as to the approximate taxi time before take off given one runway was not being used because of an incident and the resultant backlog of aircraft trying to depart not to mention the problems associated with the weather.
If the aircraft had enough fuel for the taxi before take off and the flight to LAX then why did it not do it?
The tech crew and the local manager were also aware that given the scheduled flight time to LAX and the approximate taxing time the cabin crew’s TOD would have been over the 17 hour mark and that a vote to extend the TOD or not was about to be carried out.
With all this information the decision was made to push back from the terminal !!!
I’m not accusing anyone of anything but it’s reasonable to state that the aircraft was pushed back for a reason (or did the tech crew and company just want to taxi around jfk for hours and hours) and if the tech crew were not happy with that reason they would not have done it.
The intent of this example is not to start another tech/cabin crew fight but to say that each section of the company only seems to think of itself and not of the affect it's actions have on others.
There are certainly a lot of psychic people here.
Not only do they know what is in the cargo hold, and where and how it is positioned, they claim they also know what was said in discussions they were not privy to.
They also knew how much fuel was on board, but remarkably, were not too sure whether this was enough to get to their destination.
Lots of conspiracy theories here. The only thing missing would appear to be the FACTS!
PS. The aircraft will only push back once the doors are closed. The doors only close when the cabincrew are satisfied it is safe to do so and they are ready to go!
Not only do they know what is in the cargo hold, and where and how it is positioned, they claim they also know what was said in discussions they were not privy to.
They also knew how much fuel was on board, but remarkably, were not too sure whether this was enough to get to their destination.
Lots of conspiracy theories here. The only thing missing would appear to be the FACTS!
PS. The aircraft will only push back once the doors are closed. The doors only close when the cabincrew are satisfied it is safe to do so and they are ready to go!
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lowerlobe, have you ever sat up the front during a departure from NY and are you aware of the procedures there for being in the line up for departure? Please enlighten those of us who have done it many times but obviously don't know as much as you about taxying an aircraft for departure in NY.
More importantly, were you on the crew concerned and what was the discussion amongst themselves? Or are you just speculating on what transpired through tenth hand rumours? If the aircraft pushed back and was subsequently delayed during taxy before getting airborne, did the crew make a position known to the tech crew that they were unhappy with the tour of duty and make a request to return to blocks? And just how much fuel did they have, and what was the planned taxy fuel, speed to be flown back to LA, and the clearance/instructions received by ATC prior to the above? Your accusations suggest you know the answers to all the above.
You have made an allegation that the tech crew conspired to have the aircraft doors closed an pushed back in order to make the cabin crews tour of duty illegal. By all means push for a fix to the NY situation that all of us sympathise with your lot about. But to start throwing accusations against people that are potentially unfounded is really kicking yourself an own goal.
Back up your allegation with fact.
More importantly, were you on the crew concerned and what was the discussion amongst themselves? Or are you just speculating on what transpired through tenth hand rumours? If the aircraft pushed back and was subsequently delayed during taxy before getting airborne, did the crew make a position known to the tech crew that they were unhappy with the tour of duty and make a request to return to blocks? And just how much fuel did they have, and what was the planned taxy fuel, speed to be flown back to LA, and the clearance/instructions received by ATC prior to the above? Your accusations suggest you know the answers to all the above.
You have made an allegation that the tech crew conspired to have the aircraft doors closed an pushed back in order to make the cabin crews tour of duty illegal. By all means push for a fix to the NY situation that all of us sympathise with your lot about. But to start throwing accusations against people that are potentially unfounded is really kicking yourself an own goal.
Back up your allegation with fact.